adriennemayor

Off the top of my head, here are 3 examples of accounts by ancient Roman writers that were once assumed to be mere fiction or myth but that are now explicable by modern science or archaeology. 1. In the first century AD, the naturalist Pliny the Elder and the geographer Pomponius Mela reported that fierce creatures combining the features of raptors and lions guarded gold deposits in the desert wilderness of Scythia. Pliny was the first to remark that in addition to a terrible hooked beak, Griffins had weird projections on their heads and upper bodies that looked something like pointed ears and wings. Despite these bird-like features, Pliny said that Griffins could not be real avians. Pliny also added a new detail about Griffins, based on travelers' descriptions of lands beyond Scythia: According to Pliny's informants, Griffins "toss up gold when they dig their burrows on the ground." This is the first ancient mention of Griffins making nests. A few centuries later, the natural historian Aelian mentioned Griffins defending their nests and young. Pliny's and Aelian's information was based on real but misunderstood evidence observed in Central Asia, where the desert is littered with the fossilized, fully articulated skeletons of Protoceratops dinosaurs and thousands of nests on the ground containing fossilized eggs and newly hatched baby dinosaurs. These rich fossil remains were conspicuous along the routes to gold deposits exploited by Scythian prospectors and very likely influenced the travelers' tales about Griffins that filtered back to Greece and Rome. 2. Ancient myths about Samos described the bizarre bones of enormous strange beasts called Neades that had once populated the island before the arrival of present day humans. In the first century AD, Plutarch revised the folk interpretation, suggesting that the stony bones had belonged to elephants. By Plutarch's day, the strange, huge bones of Samos were recognized as similar to those of living elephants, which had become familiar animals by the Hellenistic era. But how did elephants happen to come to Samos so long ago that they were turned to stone? Plutarch's account suggested that war elephants had been brought from India by the god Dionysus. This legend about gigantic bones of Neades, later revised and identfied as elephant bones from a myth about Dionysus arriving in Greece fro India, turns out to be based in scientific fact. The island of Samos contains abundant fossils of long extinct ancestral elephants that roamed and died out about 8 million years ago. By Plutarch's time, people had seen enough war elephants to compar the mastodon bones to living elephants. 3. In Tingis, ancient Morocco, in 81 BC, the local people told the Roman commander Sertorius that a great tumulus mound contained the bones of their enormous ancestor and city founder, the giant named Antaeus. According to myth, Antaeus had wrestled the Greek hero Hercules. The skeptical Sertorius ordered his soldiers to dig up the mound and to his great surprise they unearthed a huge skeleton, 60 cubits long, whose limb bones resembled those of a gigantic human. In fact, modern paleontologists excavate the fossil remains of many different species of very large extinct mammals of the Neogene epoch in Morocco, including ancestral elephant species. It seems that Sertorius was the first to excavate such a fossil, thought to be a giant of myth.

On my first visit to Greece, I traveled to the island of Samos, many years ago. I had read that large fossil bones had been unearthed there in the 1800s by Europeans and taken to museums in Switzerland and Paris. When I found out that some were still displayed in a room above the post office in the village of Chora in the center of the the island, I went there to view them. While I was there, some farmers hauled in some enormous thigh bones that they had jsut plowed up in their field not far away. The huge femurs, still encrusted with red dirt, were nearly as tall as me! That is when I realized that farmers and others in classical antiquity MUST have also plowed up real fossil bones of immense size. And then and there I decided to delve into the notion that observations of remarkable remains of extinct animals may have influenced ancient ideas about mythic creatures and the history of the earth.

Mithradates could have made himself immune to what would be a deadly dose of arsenic for anyone else. He did this by ingesting tiny amounts of arsenic on a daily basis, thereby causing his liver to create enzymes in larger and larger quantities to "mop up" the toxic arsenic. This allowed him to let his guests sprinkle a deadly amount of arsenic on his food or in his wine and then demonstrate his amazing invulnerability to a well-known and much feared poison used for assassination. He could also have demonstrated what appeared to be an immunity to snake venom, by daring to swallow venom with no ill effects. This was possible because of the little known fact that snake venom is only lethal if it enters the bloodstream--it is perfectly digestible as long as it only passes through the digestive tract without entering the bloodstream through small cuts or abrasions. Mithradates' formula for the "universal antidote" containing more than 50 ingredients is lost. But we do have a good idea of may of the ingredients and with modern technology residue in a vial or other container of versions of the famous "Mithridatium" may be analyzed. One such ancient terracotta pot used to concoct a version of Mithradates' notorious universal antidote has already been discovered near Herculaneum--it contained many diferent medicinal plants, opium and chopped-up reptiles. You can find many further details of the scientific principles behind Mithradates' antidote, the probable combination of ingredients, both toxic and beneficial, and modern ideas aobut how the antidote may have actually functioned to protect Mithradates from poisons and pathogens, in chapter 11 of my book "The Poison King"

I think it has been a common misconception, encouraged by modern scientists and historians, to assume that ancient accounts of giants, monsters, and other bizarre things were simply travelers' tales, superstition, or products of the storytellers' imagination. But I think, as Geomythology emerges as a valid field of study and gians credence from the scientific and scholarly communities, this misconception is being dispelled. Because ancient tales of mysterious creatures and events are expressed in mythological or supernatural or magical language, the significant "scientific" content has been overlooked. But that is changing as more and more geomythologists are able to reveal the scientific and historical germs of truth underlying some ancient accounts. The discoveries of toxic gases released from cracks in the earth at the site of the Delphic Oracle, therebay explaining the trances of the priestesses of Apollo is a good example.

To a rather considerable degree! My three books, on fossil-related ancient accounts, biochemical warfare, and Mithradates, and other publications on ancient "science" testify to my strong belief that the ancient Greeks and Romans were keen observers of nature and practiced a kind of proto-science in their rational attempts to explain mysterious natural evidence and phenomena.

You are correct, unlike the structuralist-oriented classical scholars, who seek symbolic and metaphorical meanings in mythologies of monsters, hybridity, and other curiosities of antiquity, I am more interested in discovering kernals of genuine natural knowledge and rational speculation embedded in ancient myths, legends, traditions, and popular literature. Many unusual features of ancient culture, such as composite monsters, do flow from the imagination and structural approaches can help us understand antiquity. But I intend to continue to look for evidence of scientific and historical realities contained in ancient sources.

I have not read Ignasi Ribo's self-published novel "Mithridates is Dead" ("Mitr

Many strange and fantastic creatures from myth or folklore are not related to observations of fossils, of course. Tales of giants, monsters, and weird creatures arise in many lands without conspicuous fossils. In my book "The First Fossil Hunters' (and in "Fossil Legends of the First Americans," on Native American interpretations of fossils) I restricted myself to myths or historical accounts by Greek and Latin authors that directly refer to the physical remains of giants, monsters, unusual creatures, and larger-than-life mythic heroes. For example, the myths of the Battle between the Gods and the Giants specifially says that the Giants were buried under the earth, and many ancient authors described discoveries of gigantic or remarkable bones that were identified as mythic heroes, creatures, or giants. I think fossils influenced ancient ideas about Giants, Titans, and Griffins. Most of the other fabulous creatures of classical mythology appear to be results of the storytelling imagination, as you note. They are often impossible, symbolic combinations of humans and animals--such as the Minotaur, the Sphinx, the Harpy, and the Centaur, or a familiar animal with wings, like Pegasus the flying horse, or a horrifying multiplication of features, like the Many-headed Hydra. The most interesting mystery creatures from antiquity to me are not in ancient literature but in ancient art. There are some fantastic monsters depicted in Etruscan frescos and I have a collection of mystifying creatures in Greek and Roman art. One of the weirdest is a vase in the Boston Museum of Fine Art showing a spherical checkerboard body with two legs and a donkey's head, breathing fire. Another vase shows Heracles leading bizarre creature on a chain. I'd LOVE to know the stories behind these images! If I can figure out how to post images, I'll add some photos later

After Vitaliano (a geologist at Indiana University) invented the term "geomythology" for legends that contain genuine knowledge based on observation and rational speculation about volcanoes, earthquakes, floods, landforms, tsunamis and other catastrophic natural events. Until my book, "The First Fossil Hunters," came out in 2000, her term was not in general use, as far as I know. I first learned of her book " Legends of the Earth" (1973) when I began gathering fossil-related myths and legends in ancient Rome and Greece. In the mid-1990s, my friend William Hansen, a classical folklorist at Indiana University, told me about her work. Vitaliano's definition of "geomythology" did not include pre-scientific explanations of fossils, but it seemed obvious to me that such insights into paleontological evidence was another form of geomythology. It is very gratifying that geomythology is emerging as a respected field of study now and I'm happy to think that my research and publications have helped to bring attention to natural knowledge that is embedded in ancient accounts. I always thought the Romans and Greeks deserved a better grade in paleontology!

good question--Michael Hornum considers this association of Nemesis with griffins in his book "Nemesis, the Roman State, and the Games" (Brill 1993), pp 28ff. He gives many examples in art and literature, and discusses ancient Greek and Egyptian images of Griffins as Nemesis, avenger of injustice. As the goddess who personified Retribution and ruled the Wheel of Fortune, Fate, and Justice, Nemesis's earliest symbolism of divine capriciousness of fortune evolved into the abstract notion of divine justice. For the later Romans, Nemesis came to represent relentless punishment and merciless revenge. In mythology and popular belief, the Griffin, with the body of a wolf or lion and the head of a powerful raptor eagle, represented vigilance as fearsome guardians of gold. Ruthless defenders of precious treasures and feared predators, Griffins were natural companions for Nemesis. The idea of Nemesis and Griffins as intractable and dread enforcers of Justice developed into the imagery of a Griffin with its paw resting on Nemesis's inescapable Wheel of Fate.

In about 99/98 BCE, King Mithradates was in his early 30s when he met with Marius, age about 58. Marius visited Cappadocia and Galatia, ostensibly to fulfil his vow to consult the oracle of the great mother goddess Cybele at her sanctuary at Pessinus. Marius was accompanied by a small entourage, which included his Syrian prophetess Martha, who was usually carried about in a fancy litter with tall slaves from Syria; she would have been dressed as usual in a scarlet robe with a large golden brooch and she liked to brandish a little spear wrapped in ribbons--her attire and behavior had propaganda value. In contrast, Marius, a veteran soldier with ramrod posture, permanent scowl, commanding presence, and disdain for luxury, would have dressed and spoken very simply. On most official occasions, Mithradates would have held a luxurious banquet with many meat and fruit courses, a drinking contest, gymnasts, dancers, and musicians, etc, and generous gifts, but in this case, Mithradates would have dressed and acted accordingly, leaving his sumptuous royal robes and accoutrements behind. Perhaps he and Marius parleyed on Mithradates' exercise grounds--both men liked to show off their athletic skills. The sources say only that Mithradates received Marius with great attention and respect." Mithradates liked to give out rings with gemstones engraved wtih his portrait to friends, allies, and ambassadors, so it's likely he gave one to Marius. Colleen Mccullough, The Grass Crown, describes their meeting with a novelist's imagination. The scene was very different in 85 BCE, when Mithradates met with Sulla to agree to the Peace of Dardanus, after his defeat in the First Mithradatic War, the king arrived in all his glory. Mithradates, dressed in Persian finery, was accompanied by 200 warships, 20,000 foot soldiers, and 6,000 cavalry with a contingent of scythed chariots. Sulla, the victor, awaited him with 1,000 men and 200 cavalry. With his hand outstretched, he walked toward Sulla, standing at attention in officer's attire. Sulla asked if Mithradates accepted the treaty terms, and when Mithradates did not reply immediately, Sulla barked "It is the victor who has the right of silence, the suppliant should ask forgivenes!" Mithradates instead justified his cause and accused the Romans of greed and aggression, Sulla castigated him for war crimes. All this was done to impress the surrounding audience of officers, soldiers, and officials. Mithradates stated, "I consent to the terms," and the two men embraced and sealed the treaty with the traditonal kiss. Romans usually sealed treaties with the "osculum pacis," mutual kiss on the cheek. But Persians kissed equals on the mouth, accepting a kiss from an inferior on the cheek. It's amusing to imagine that Mithradates received Sulla's kiss on the cheek as that of an inferior. For a description from the sources of the magnificent pomp and circumstance in Antioch, when Lucullus's envoy Appius had an audience with the KIng of Kings Tigranes the Great of Armenia, see "The Poison King," p 293. Tigranes arrived wearing a fine crimson and white tunic, purple mantle decorated with golden stars, and a tiara studded with comet designs, mounted on a large white Nissaean horse, with four vassal kings running alongside. Tigranes arranged himself on his throne on a dias, while his bodyguards stood with arms folded across their chests. He presented Appius with piles of splendid gifts (Appius only accepted a simple silver bowl).

It is interesting that Pliny the Elder, writing in the first century CE, remarked on a folk etymology linking Latin "toxica" (poison) to "taxus" (yew tree), because the first poison arrows had been dipped in the toxic juice of yew-berries. Pliny also commented that belladonna (deadly nightshade) known as "strychnos" also had an old folk name, "Dorycnion," which he translated as "spear drug." According to Pliny, this old word for the plant indicated that in the long-distant past, people in Italy had treated the points of their spears with belladonna, which can remain toxic for at least 30 years. But Romans of the Republic prided themselves on valor and fighting prowess rather than ruses and sneak attack. In gathering research for "Greek Fire, Poison Arrows & Scorpion Bombs" I combed Latin literature for historical accounts of biochemical weapons and tactics. Roman historians described numerous examples of poison weaponry wielded by their enemies, but I found scant evidence for Roman generals using such underhanded arms or tactics in the 1st century BCE. Part of the reason could be bias, of course, but I believe that the Romans generally adhered to what they considered honorable rules of engagement and relied on their overwhelming numbers, superior military training and technology--and courage--to pursue victory. Pompey, Crassus, and Pontius Pilate were not implicated by any sources for use of toxic tactics (Pompey did win his great victory over Mithradates VI in 66 BCE by a surprise attack at night, exploiting a full moon to his advantage; whereas both he and Lucullus were subjected to several biochemical weapons during the Third Mithradatic War. Sertorius, the Roman general who led the revolt in Spain, used noxious clouds of choking, blinding dust to overcome the cave-dwelling Characitani in about 80 BCE. He waited for favorable wind and had his horses churn up caustic lime powder he had heaped in front of their caves (Plutarch) The most serious incident on the part of a Roman commander occurred n 131-129 BCE, when Manius Aquillius resorted to poisoning the water supplies of several besieged Anatolian cities during the revolt of Aristonicus. Notably, the historian Florus condemned the general's actions. His swift victory was clouded by disgrace: Aquillius had "sullied Rome's reputation by the use of foul drugs, violating the laws of heaven and the practices of our forefathers." In 9 CE, Tactius reports that a Chatti chief offered to poison the rebel leader Arminius after the Teutoburg Forest disaster, but Tiberius replied: "Romans take vengeance on their enemies, not by underhanded tricks, but by open force of arms."