←back to thread

What is the origin of the lake tank image that has become a meme? (2021)

(history.stackexchange.com)
544 points napolux | 6 comments | 20 Nov 24 13:30 UTC | HN request time: 0.437s | source | bottom
Show context
mxfh ◴[20 Nov 24 16:51 UTC] No.42195789[source]▶
Since Know Your Meme doesn't give the reference for why it's a lake, maybe not everybody is familiar with british lore:

The mythical Lady of the Lake:

Probably best known via Monthy Python:

Strange women lying in ponds distributing swords is no basis for a system of government. Supreme executive power derives from a mandate from the masses, not from some farcical aquatic ceremony.

In short: She teaches Lancelot arts and writing, infusing him with wisdom and courage, and overseeing his training to become an unsurpassed warrior.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lady_of_the_Lake

https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EnigmaticEmpower...

replies(5): >>42196519 #>>42196534 #>>42197574 #>>42197985 #>>42201196 #
mrandish ◴[20 Nov 24 17:58 UTC] No.42196519[source]▶
This reminds me that Monty Python and the Holy Grail contributed actual historical knowledge about Arthurian legends to my knowledge base while growing up. Other examples of Python unintentional education include knowing the names of a myriad of obscure cheeses (the cheese shop skit), a shocking number of anachronistic synonyms for death (the parrot skit) and notable contributions of the Roman Empire (Life of Brian 'What have the Romans ever done for us?' skit).

While it didn't contribute to my GPA at the time, I'm sure I could name more notable philosophers than any other 8th grader in my school (philosopher's song skit). However, in high school it did spark the interest to look up and read about each of the philosophers in the song.

replies(1): >>42197622 #
graemep ◴[20 Nov 24 20:08 UTC] No.42197622[source]▶
The problem is that comedy is frequently not factually accurate.

Roman Imperial contributions? Was Roman wine better than pre-Roman wine in that region? Did they improve sanitation, irrigation, medicine etc.? Rome was an oppressive slavery based society.

Then what about the Spanish Inquisition sketch? It keeps repeating "fanatically devoted to the Pope"" The Spanish inquisition was an arm of the Spanish monarchy, at least two Popes tried to shut it down, and some historians have suggested one of its aims was to reduce the power of the Papacy.

I do like the Philosopher's Song, the Dead Parrot and Cheese Shop.

Other comedies are no better. Black Adder has a witchfinder (an early modorn innovation) in a Medieval setting.

Pop culture is not historically accurate!

replies(6): >>42197874 #>>42198101 #>>42198580 #>>42198841 #>>42199176 #>>42202006 #
inglor_cz ◴[20 Nov 24 22:04 UTC] No.42198580[source]▶
In a pre-industrial agricultural society, slavery or something similar (serfdom etc.) tends to be widespread, as human and animal muscles are the only reliable and ubiquitous source of energy. Humanity only really started getting rid of unfree backbreaking work by adopting steam engines. 300-400 years ago, most of us forists here would be unfree people working the fields in unfavorable conditions, with maybe 5 per cent being burghers and 1 per cent nobility.
replies(1): >>42198920 #
astrange ◴[20 Nov 24 22:45 UTC] No.42198920[source]▶
It's not that pre-industrial society causes slavery, it's closer to the other way round. If you're pre-industrial then everyone has to do farm work, yes, but slavery is /economically inefficient/ because the slaves don't provide demand (since you don't pay them) and don't grow the economy.

This is why economics was called "the dismal science" - economists told people to stop doing slavery and the slaveowners called them nerds. They wanted to own slaves because they wanted to be mini-tyrants, not because they were good at capitalism. Adam Smith did not go around telling people to own slaves.

replies(2): >>42199372 #>>42200075 #
1. alexey-salmin ◴[20 Nov 24 23:44 UTC] No.42199372[source]▶
Nope. If the only kilowatts at your disposal are the ones that you, your slaves and your horses can digest, you cannot just upscale the production of goods (or anything else) arbitrarily. The whole economy is bottlenecked on production which is bottlenecked on energy supply. Increasing the demand when supply is the problem would only make things worse.

However once you're burning coal (or harness the wind in case of dutch) things are very different, kilowatts flow freely and all the things you say above start to be true.

replies(2): >>42199519 #>>42200090 #
2. astrange ◴[21 Nov 24 00:03 UTC] No.42199519[source]▶
I would say that inventing new technologies is one of the things that isn't possible when you've enslaved the inventors and made them farmworkers.

I mean, making them do research might work. That's a command economy, aka actually existing communism. Should be able to invent the waterwheel and crop rotation.

I do think it's hard to invent antibiotics and the Haber-Bosch process, and without that you are still in a Malthusian economy where everyone's going to die if they slack off farming.

replies(1): >>42199768 #
3. alexey-salmin ◴[21 Nov 24 00:36 UTC] No.42199768[source]▶
Well yes, but how is this even relevant to the conversation? No one says innovation thrives with slavery. The point made is very simple, it's about commandable energy and EROI in particular. No amount of antibiotics can change that.
4. wbl ◴[21 Nov 24 01:28 UTC] No.42200090[source]▶
From 1000-1700 there was increasing wealth in Europe not through serfdom intensifying (but see Poland) but through increased trade, fishing, agricultural improvements and culminating in the steam engine. Watermills were medieval inventions.

Smith's pin factory has no steam engine. Nor did Slaters mill which created US industrialization. Steam required institutions to grow, institutions that had created growth earlier.

replies(2): >>42201840 #>>42202527 #
5. alexey-salmin ◴[21 Nov 24 07:02 UTC] No.42201840[source]▶
Agreed, and that is aligned with the point I'm making: bottleneck was the production, not consumption. Saying that increased consumption of freed slaves would somehow pull you out of pre-industrial age (the comment I was replying to) is just bonkers.

The increased production was indeed a result of centuries of incremental improvements. You're right to point out that some of them were not about energy, but I would argue that all of the big ones were.

Slaters mill put hydropower to work and even though watermills were medieval, the machines that poured that energy into cotton weren't. Same with the windmills during the Dutch Golden Age which I mentioned above. Increased trade happened through massive wind-powered ships, not slave galleys. (Though the Smith pin factory unlike the Slaters mill is not a real factory but a criticized thought experiment, I wouldn't consider it too influential)

But yes, indeed the steam appeared at the right time, only when there was enough technology to put it to use down the line.

6. inglor_cz ◴[21 Nov 24 09:26 UTC] No.42202527[source]▶
Watermills are pretty limited technology, though. It is advantageous to build them on rivers in hilly terrain, which is usually far from the seaports that are used for trade. Hilly terrain is also often agriculturally subpar, therefore you need to import food for the workers from the lowland, making the operation more expensive.

Finally, medieval watermills cannot produce heat, which is absolutely necessary for production of iron and steel. Which means that you cannot increase production of iron and steel beyond pre-modern levels, a major obstacle in development of technical civilization.