Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2018 March 11

= March 11 =

Has anyone evaluated whether the Black Stone at Mecca could be a piece of the Elagabalus stone?
Superficially, the Black stone and the stone of Elagabalus (deity) are both baetylus objects. The stone of Elagabalus was brought to the Elagabalium in Rome, but then returned to Emesa, i.e. Homs in Syria, after Elagabalus the emperor was deposed. There it was "probably smashed to pieces when the temple was converted into a Christian church, some time in the 4th century." That church was later (half) converted to the Great Mosque of al-Nuri, where the Caliphate was announced by ISIS leader al-Baghdadi, and which was subsequently destroyed; the site above notes the mosque (then extant) was "never excavated" but theoretically it might be excavatable now. Our article says there was a raised spot in the courtyard thought to have been the original pagan shrine.

Anyway, the Black Stone was brought to Mecca by pagan Nabataeans, who according to the latter article had a strong network of trading routes all up through Syria. So I'm thinking it's entirely plausible that the Black Stone the hajj celebrants kiss might be a piece of the much larger stone, somehow spirited away by pious or rapacious traders for shipment to pagan points south, that the Roman Empress Elagabalus (really, she was a transsexual, so let's not be offensive by using male pronouns...) would walk backward in front of leading a team of horses.

Question is, has any reliable source (i.e. that could be cited in our article) ever explored this modestly amusing line of inquiry and come to a positive or negative conclusion? Wnt (talk) 03:19, 11 March 2018 (UTC)


 * Simply searching for both sets of terms shows you aren't the first person to suggest that the two objects might be connected. However, all I can see are various speculations on message boards and the like, and nothing that looks like legitimate scholarship on the topic.  Maybe someone else can find something. Dragons flight (talk) 07:52, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

closest lighthouses
Which lighthouse is the closest to where the RMS Titanic sank? Which lighthouse is the closest to where the LZ 129 Hindenburg burst into flames? Which lighthouse is the closest to where the SS Andrea Doria sank? Anyone know?2604:2000:7113:9D00:E8C6:B8A:1BBA:ACA3 (talk) 06:37, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Not offhand, but I looked and it seems the nearest to the Titanic would be the Cape Race Lighthouse in SE Newfoundland. The one for the Hindenberg will be one of the ones on the Jersey Shore but I can't be bothered to figure it out when you can quite easily.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:18, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Note that "The Titanic sank 400 miles (640 kilometres) off the coast of Newfoundland", so well out of sight - you can see a lighthouse 10 to 20 miles away depending on how high up the light and the viewer are.  Apologies if that wasn't the purpose of your question. Alansplodge (talk) 21:47, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Assuming the OP is aware the Hindenburg caught fire over land, that doesn't seem to be the purpose of the question.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:06, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * Sea Girt Light seems to be the closest at roughly 17 miles, on the Hindenburg.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:11, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * As to the Andrea Doria, Wikipedia shows the distress message with the coordinates "LAT. 40.30 N 69.53 W". I don't know if those numbers are in decimal degrees (40.30°N) or in degrees and minutes (40°30'N, but sometime written 40.30), but it doesn't matter; either way the position is south and somewhat east of Nantucket.   Several sites such as this one say that Nantucket has three lighthouses, and Wikipedia's list of National Register of Historic Places listings in Nantucket County, Massachusetts, lists the same three, so I think those are all the ones we need to consider and clearly Sankaty Head Light is closest to the position. --69.159.62.113 (talk) 11:17, 11 March 2018 (UTC)

Charley Farley
Was there a real Charley Farley after whom other Charley's are nicknamed? DuncanHill (talk) 20:46, 11 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I looked for "Charley" in Newspapers.com (a pay site) and the earliest reference I saw was from 1749, in a London newspaper (not the Times). The earliest reference I saw to a "Charley Farley" was in a Brooklyn newspaper in 1860, seemingly an actual person. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 04:43, 12 March 2018 (UTC)

Are you referring to The Two Ronnies character, Charley Farley? --Dweller (talk) Become old fashioned! 09:17, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * No, the nickname goes back well before that. DuncanHill (talk) 13:53, 12 March 2018 (UTC)
 * I am under the impression that the name "Charley Farley" is based on the English custom of charivari, and is merely one of those redoubled names or words the English so love in our language (like higgledy-piggledy, heebie-jeebies, that sort of thing.). Someone called Farley might get the nickname "Charley" even if it isn't a given name, much as someone called Clarke might get the nickname "Nobby" or someone called White might get the nickname "Chalky". I have no documentary evidence for this though. --TammyMoet (talk) 13:28, 12 March 2018 (UTC)