Klingan

Seems like good fun, I might give it a try!

First of all, thank you for posting this, It's a beautiful mosaic! It's good to see that important finds are made and I'm very much looking forward to see this fully uncovered!

The price of gold was changing rapidly during ancient times as well, take as example when Alexander found the treasury in Persia.

Translating sums of Roman money into modern ones is just not working, the numbers won't give you any real picture. This is because the value of our currencies change very rapidly and due to the fact that most services and materials had very different values back then compared to today. Most things are very much cheaper today (as how much bread you can buy for one hours work) I prefer to compare Roman sums of money to how many kilos of say pork or how many sandals you could by for one hours decently skilled labour. Now these kind of numbers are difficult to find (Unless you use Diocletianus price edict from the early 4th century) but it's worth the trouble in my opinion. I would post a more elaborated argument if I had the time, I'll try after my exams next week. Do you think it's cheaper now ? Surely it would have been cheaper then, you had slaves and all you had to do was feed and water them. Slaves are not that efficient from an economical perspective, they don't generate much more profit then a paid worker. The idea that Roman economy was being based on a slave economy with parasitical owner have been abandoned since the late 80's. As an example on how much a slave would make for it's master, changing into Greek history but it's still relevant, was a slave paid as much (to the owner of course) as a free worker when constructing the Parthenon. Considering how expensive a slave was (Maybe comparable to a car today, one or a few years salary) and that a slave have exactly the same needs as a free man (You didn't treat most slaves too badly as you needed them to be profitable. A dead, wounded or sick slave make no money.) it'll even take a great deal of time, even years, until you are dealing with green numbers in the calculation. And yes, I do know that basic livestock is much cheaper now.

Translating sums of Roman money into modern ones is just not working, the numbers won't give you any real picture. This is because the value of our currencies change very rapidly and due to the fact that most services and materials had very different values back then compared to today. Most things are very much cheaper today (as how much bread you can buy for one hours work) I prefer to compare Roman sums of money to how many kilos of say pork or how many sandals you could by for one hours decently skilled labour. Now these kind of numbers are difficult to find (Unless you use Diocletianus price edict from the early 4th century) but it's worth the trouble in my opinion. I would post a more elaborated argument if I had the time, I'll try after my exams next week.

Happy birthday! I hope you've had a great day!

The recent one is absolutely terrible. Caesar appointing Crassus and Pompeius Co-consuls in the end to settle their dispute.... Brrrr.

Wasn't Nero's father a Domitius Ahenobarbus ("bronzebeard")? Suet. Nero 1, tell us that many of this forefathers had red beards.

Actually choosing his horse for consul (If this even ever did happen, I guess my theory would nothing but be silly if it's only a myth) is not even closely as mad as it may seem - It's merely a way to point out how worthless the consular position was by this time compared to the power of the princeps. On the question of literature, I actually thing you would find your best evidence in Suetonius working your way back from what seems to be reasonable and what seems to be rumours. The topic sounds very interesting by the way! A Urban Myth indeed. Our main gossipy source, C. Suetonius T. goes no farther than suggesting that "it was said" Caius (aka Caligula) even planned to award Incitatus a consulship in the cp LV of his biography, from almost a century later. Writing after an additional century, L. Cassius Dio told us more or less the same on his Romanika Historia (Liber LXIX, cp XIV); both authors presumably quoted from a common source (maybe Cluvius Rufus). And of course, Incitatus never appeared on any consular fasti. I'm not convinced that it's just a myth, in my opinion might it be a political move by a very arrogant young man. It was possible in the imperial times for the princeps (I reckon) to appoint consuls as he wished and it was sometimes a honour granted for a very short timespan if say a consul had died earlier during the year. This would not be noted in the fastii consularii.

Actually choosing his horse for consul (If this even ever did happen, I guess my theory would nothing but be silly if it's only a myth) is not even closely as mad as it may seem - It's merely a way to point out how worthless the consular position was by this time compared to the power of the princeps. On the question of literature, I actually thing you would find your best evidence in Suetonius working your way back from what seems to be reasonable and what seems to be rumours. The topic sounds very interesting by the way!

You could probably use the OCD (Oxford Classical Dictionary) for that. It's absolutely invaluable.

I truly wish that I could make it, but it'll be difficult. I hope you guys get a great meeting!

Well I would prefer that they kept the British accent, I agree with The Augusta to a great deal, unless they take the full step and go or a film in full Latin (Then preferably with actors from Romance language countries) which would be terrific.

Martial There are lots more on that page though.

I send my best wishes to the beaver in his brave escape! May be find what he is looking for!

Merry Christmas everyone!

Damn that storeroom!

I do not know, but I would guess that before would be the norm. However it may be changed with personal taste.

Very true, I've got a photo of that mosaic in my album from my trip to Pompeii this summer. I would still argue though that most mosaics were made to be decorative.

Well good fortune and protection against evil would make sense to go hand in hand I guess. Sounds very much possible to me.

1) How many different types of rooms were in the biggest of bath houses? Cold, Warm, Hot, changing room? Any others? Counting rooms would be an almost endless endeavor. If you are interested in taking a closer look in the plans of roman baths I would recommend; Nielsen, I., Thermae et balnea, catalogue and plates,

I would say that it was essentially decorative, commonly with religious or daily motifs. A special meaning though? I wouldn't think so. The art I have in my room doesn't go very well with my religious views, it's purchased because I find it beautiful. Correct me if I'm wrong but I'm quite sure that the phallus was seen as a protection of the evil eye? There's a lot of literature on that subject.

Last thing I read is that the Vatican gave permission to open the tomb. Then it all went quiet....suspiciously quiet By some strange reason that happens from time to time when religious artifacts are examined.

Congratulations

Well correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't it be possible to nail the hands to the tufa? it's a quite soft stone.