Wikipedia:Reference desk/Archives/Humanities/2018 May 22

= May 22 =

Who is with Lloyd George
Can anyone identify the gentleman pictured here with David Lloyd George please? The picture is from the rear dustjacket of Frank Owen's Tumultuous Journey - Lloyd George his Life and Times. DuncanHill (talk) 01:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Just to be sure, have you checked to see if the photo also occurs inside the book? --76.69.47.55 (talk) 02:32, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Yes I have. DuncanHill (talk) 09:14, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I sought, but found not. Sorry. Alansplodge (talk) 21:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Does the Greek sea god Triton have a counterpart in Roman mythology?
I can't find the answer to this on Google. Sphinxmystery (talk) 06:04, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Our article on Salacia, wife of Neptune, says they had three children. One of whom was Triton. So Triton is in both Roman and Greek mythology. The references for this fact are not online. Rmhermen (talk) 06:57, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The German Wikipedia claims that the relationship of Neptune and Triton is "disputed". Apparently Neptune had an independent mythology in Latin and also Etruscan cultures (as Nethune), so that not all features of Poseidon were taken over when the two where later identified. No clear sources are given, though. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 07:00, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

What does this sign mean?
What does this sign mean? It looks like it's saying H2O-KT 5. What does that mean? Bus stop (talk) 07:45, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Avocado in Spanish is aguacate. H2O = water/agua. So, H20KT is a reference to avocados (KT is pronounced "kah tay" in Spanish). 5 would presumably be the price in Dominican pesos. I only got the hint when I found this old blog. clpo13(talk) 07:58, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * (After Edit conflict) I'm not sure where you found it, but that image is actually used in our Avocado article, with the caption "Selling avocados in Santo Domingo, DR". It was uploaded by User:Caballero1967. Maybe you could ask that user. HiLo48 (talk) 08:05, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I think that Clpo13 explained it fully and well. Caballero / Historiador⎌ 13:03, 24 May 2018 (UTC)


 * According to the Real Academia website, aguacate is derived from náhuatl ahuacatl. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:06, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Here's a funny little illustration. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:08, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * And here's further info from EO. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 08:10, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Wow—nice. Bus stop (talk) 08:15, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * So it's a kind of rebus. AndrewWTaylor (talk) 09:12, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thank you for that reference. It is interesting that H2O needs no translation. Bus stop (talk) 12:52, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * I suggest adding this explanation to the photo caption in avocado. (It's semi-protected, so I can't.) --76.69.47.55 (talk) 13:28, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. Good idea. ←Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? carrots→ 15:15, 23 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Thanks and thanks. Could you subscript the 2, please? --76.69.47.55 (talk) 08:45, 24 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Done. — Kpalion(talk) 15:21, 24 May 2018 (UTC)

Schengen Area
A tourist from a developed country can do a four month long vacation in south-east asia: for example one month in Vietnam, one in Thailand, one in Philippines, one in Malaysia. Each of those countries allow 90 day long tourist visits to their country for citizens of most developed countries.

Pre-EU, a tourist can do a similar vacation in four different European countries, spending one month in each.

But after the establishment of EU and the Schengen Area, this is no longer possible as it is now the cumulative time spend in the Schengen Area that's counting towards the 90 days limit. This obviously hurts the EU tourism industry.

Has there been any hearings, proposals, or draft legislation in the European Parliament that deal with this issue? Or is this too niche of an issue for them to care about? (The number of tourists who can afford +90 days long vacations in the EU is probably small.) Mũeller (talk) 09:37, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I would object to "obviously hurts" - I think the number of candidates would be very small. Moreover, they are probably all from New Zealand, and New Zealand has an exception ;-). More seriously, the few affected can just apply for a long-stay visum, or they pop over to Britain for a shopping trip and then re-enter Schengen. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 13:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Why just New Zealand? Australia to Europe flights probably aren't much less expensive. Sagittarian Milky Way (talk) 14:50, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * As I understand it, New Zealand had already individual agreements with all or most of the Schengen countries, including the former Eastern Block members. So they got a special rule. --Stephan Schulz (talk) 15:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * @Stephan Schulz Thanks for the input. The actual Schengen Area rule is "90 days out of 180 days", so popping out and back in again won't work. Mũeller (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2018 (UTC)


 * While you may be right on that point, I don't see what's stopping people applying for a long-stay visa. It's true that this involves a lot more work and could be denied and also doesn't allow free movement (as I believe the NZ exemption), but the nature of visas and visa-exemptions means they are always a balance of different demands. (I mean you can probably find one individual who would like to be a genuine tourist in the EU for 2 years and would be more likely to do it if they could and without all the hoopla that may be involved.) In this case, the maximum of 90 days would likely have been seen as the best balance of differing demands, especially as the likely small negative effect was likely seen as considerably outweighed by the benefit to tourism of having a single system and the reason for limiting it to 90 days (I presume to reduce the possibility of visa misuse). Nil Einne (talk) 07:04, 23 May 2018 (UTC)

Christianity
Is Christianity going to be a propaganda site or the historical reality of a false religion? For now it is propaganda. No Christian has ever established the existence of a human Jesus Christ. He is a literary creation. Sahansdal (talk) 11:35, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * We do not predict the future here. 209.149.113.5 (talk) 12:03, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Sahansdal apparently objects to the contents of the article Christianity. Wikipedia has a neutral point of view and should not claim that religious beliefs are true or false in articles about religion. Christianity makes a lot of formulations to show it is about the beliefs of the religion, e.g. these in the lead: "They believe that Jesus is the Son of God", "These professions of faith state that Jesus suffered, died, was buried, descended into hell, and rose from the dead", "The creeds further maintain that Jesus physically ascended into heaven". Jesus and Sources for the historicity of Jesus discuss Jesus from a historical perspective. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:24, 22 May 2018 (UTC)

Quote origin
When I originally learned this quote (back in the 80s), it was attributed to Nietzsche, but I cannot find it documented anywhere. "Life is a vast black plain upon which blind brutes grope for rocks with which to crush the skulls of their fellows."

My google-fu has failed me. Can anyone confirm its origin? Tdjewell (talk) 12:21, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * The only Nietzsche quote I can find on "blind brutes" is "Such a change can begin only with individuals, for the masses are blind brutes, as we know to our cost." -- Jayron 32 17:55, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * I looked for some possible original German language keywords for your quote at nietzschesource.org (digital critical edition of Nietzsche's complete works and letters), but found nothing even remotely fitting. (e.g. I searched "blind", "Schädel", "Steine" etc.) If Nietzsche did indeed write this, it should be findable there, maybe someone else will have more luck than I did ... ---Sluzzelin  talk  18:22, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * There is something vaguely along those lines in a D H Lawrence Poem, "Know Thyself, and that Thou art Mortal." https://books.google.co.uk/books?id=BCz46VmE3ZcC&pg=PA68&lpg=PA68&dq=blind+brutes+%2B+rocks&source=bl&ots=NfcNthHlcw&sig=SexcC7FF7Y_6Gbxfj3kBDYnA69k&hl=en&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjY87P4nprbAhUpIcAKHUqHAkAQ6AEIUDAJ#v=onepage&q=blind%20brutes%20%2B%20rocks&f=false Wymspen (talk) 21:20, 22 May 2018 (UTC)
 * Those Google links tell the world God knows what about your IP/MAC address/GPS/sexual orientation/etc. Plus, clicking on one got me straight to a "restricted page fuck off" result.  But  (the same link cut after the first page number) gets me to a page I can read. Wnt (talk) 22:18, 22 May 2018 (UTC)


 * Related: "Love is a snowmobile racing across the tundra and then suddenly it flips over, pinning you underneath. At night, the ice weasels come." --Matt Groening, from before the time when The Simpsons became Zombie Simpsons (Google it). --Guy Macon (talk) 02:30, 23 May 2018 (UTC)