ASCLEPIADES

Salve, K. You must be kidding. It's clear the devastation brought by any war at any time haven't vilified War enough; finding the Helvetii carnage by Caesar's legions any different from Hiroshima's aftermath is just a matter of personal taste. It's precisely because war is always "undeniably destructive" that Epic has been, is and will forever be required, so any of us might willingly become cannon fodder. Strictly speaking, War never "creates"; certainly, you may rightly expect some change, even if more often than not, such change tends to turn on the negative side for most people, warmongers included. That's why War must always be seen as the last resource. Trying to justify any war in exchange of any perceived cultural benefit (let say Italy becoming Latin) must be seen as a controversial idea for many, extremely dangerous for some of us.

Possibly, but why should criminal or vengeful activity of other people be discounted, especially since they weren't standing in the spotlight. Obviously, it can't be proved that ANYONE had NOT provoked ANY fire at Ancient times, being either Nero, Tigellinus, the Christians, the Jews, Parthian agents, the Senate, Epictetus, Seneca's freedmen, Aggripina's ghost or whoever you like. BTW, you can said the same on Vitellius and any of the other purported pyromaniac ancient rulers. Nero was quite popular long after his death; Flavian and even Antoninian propagandists needed to counteract that popularity in some way. They used gossip, and I have to admit they made the right choice.

No argument there, however the reports of individuals fanning the flames and declaring they were under orders to do so must be considered. Further, the fire restarted on the grounds of Tigellinus, Nero's advisor, for no obious reason. There was no obvious reason besides Roman construction malpractices and lack of caution for any of the myriad fires at Rome and virtually any other Roman city (for some notorious examples, check on sompe previous posts in this same thread). Why would Nero want to start the Fire in his favourite's property? No better choice available? All those "reports" were basically acknowledged rumours from quite hostile Flavian sources; nuff' said.

I understood the Domus Transitoria was damaged, not destroyed, and in any case, Nero was not the sort of person to be satisified with something built for a lesser emperor. He was Nero, the living Apollo, a man who needed and deserved a statement of grandeur. Further, since the land clearance necessary for Domus Aurea and its grounds meant evicting large numbers of people from their property would Nero wish to risk unpopularity? He may have seen himself as a self-important celebrity, he was also very concerned about his public image, and as later events showed none to self confident in a crisis. No Rationale: Nero had no way to control the destruction of his personal property Besides ALL THE CITY was his property. The Empire (Nero's Empire) lost a lot of money with both the Fire and the reconstruction; Nero was notoriously greedy. Administratively, the Neronian rule was always quite sensible; not even his fiercest enemies could said otherwise.. Subsequent Emperors built far bigger palaces and architecture without any popularity concern; retrospectively, it seems they were right.

When that destructive war with Sparta ended at 404 BC, Athens had still a considerable intellectual future ahead.

Salve, Amici From Vicipedia, an example of an Insula: Schematic drawing of a single housing block in the ancient city of Olynthos, Chalkidiki, Greece (northern hill of ancient town).

If you mean an isolated senator (or a couple) illegally opposing the senate as a whole by force, I don't think that happened so often. That would basically mean open rebellion, therefore high treason. I can only think of a fistful of examples;ie, ME Lepidus (cos MCLXXVI AUC / 78 BC), LS Catilina and of course CJ Caesar at DCCX AUC / 44 BC; and not many more. At any other circumstance, we would be talking about a conflict between factions, senators vs senators; even at civil war (ie, Marius vs Sulla, Triumvirs vs Liberatores). Both of any such factions were an integral part of the senate; no one was "THE" Senate. Even the isolated Quintus Sertorius was one of the remains of a major senatorial faction at war. Then, when the Populares opposed the Optimates, they weren't opposing "the senate", but just another faction of the senate.

"technically" because certain Romans, though senators, acted independently of and often oppossed to the senate though they were members of the senate themselves, which any one who was elected queastor became. didn't use the term as opposed to "non-technical" senators so I can't name any. Technically, all senators were as senators as any other.

Here comes Marcus Tullius Cicero on the Lupa Capitolina and Jupiter's thunderbolt. Orationes In Catilinam: Or. III, cp. XIX: nam profecto memoria tenetis Cotta et Torquato consulibus compluris in Capitolio res de caelo esse percussas, cum et9 simulacra deorum depulsa sunt et statuae veterum hominum deiectae et legum aera liquefacta et tactus etiam ille qui hanc urbem condidit Romulus, quem inauratum in Capitolio, parvum atque lactantem, uberibus lupinis inhiantem fuisse meministis. "For you recollect, I suppose, when Cotta and Torquatus (*) were consuls, that many towers in the Capitol were struck with lightning, when both the images of the immortal gods were moved, and the statues of many ancient men were thrown down, and the brazen tablets on which the laws were written were melted. Even Romulus, who built this city, was struck, which, you recollect, stood in the Capitol, a gilt statue, little and sucking, and clinging to the teats of the wolf." And De divinatione, Liber II, cp. XX: Tum statua Nattae, tum simulacra deorum Romulusque et Remus cum attrice belua vi fulminis icti conciderunt, deque his rebus haruspicum exstiterunt responsa verissuma. "Then,' the poem goes on to say, 'the statue of Natta, the images of the gods and the piece representing Romulus and Remus, with their wolf-nurse, were struck by a thunderbolt and fell to the ground. The prophecies made by the soothsayers from these events were fulfilled to the letter.'" (*) Lucius Aurelius Cotta & Lucius Manlius Torquatus were consuls at DCLXXXIX AUC / 65 BC, two years before than MT Cicero himself.

Salve, I. After some research I was able to tentatively identify your pic with the Roman milestone on the Antioch Akko road, in nowadays northern Israel, but still in the Roman province of Syria. Admitting that's true, I think I was also able to complete the inscription using other pics from different angles. What I think is written would be: ...IMP(erator)... ...CAESAR-DIVI... ...VESPASIAN-FILIUM ...(domi)TIANUS-AUG(ustus)... ...MAX(imus)-TR(ibunicia)-P(otestae)-GERM(anicus).. ...III-P(ater) P(atriae)-CO(n)S(ul) IX-T(a)X(a)T(ionis)... ...LI(berta)-Q(uintus)-RVF(us)-CL(audius)-E(?)... ...T(ribunus) RO(mani) PR(aefect)-CCCIV... And in English, something like: "Emperor Caesar, Son of the God Vespasianus, Domitianus Augustus, (Pontifex) Maximus, with Tribunicial power and victorious over the Germans for the third time, Father of His Country, Consul for the ninth time, exempts from taxation (prob. Antioch); (being) Quintus Rufus Claudius E(?;may be "egregio", distinguished) Tribune of the Roman people and prefect, (at) 324..." The caption of those pics states (sic): "...In the inscription - The and title of emperor Domitian, the name of the governor who repaired the road and the distance of 304 miles from Antioch". Needless to say, all of this is totally amateur and unprofessional; just an interesting exercise. BTW, I haven't been able to find who was the Governor of Syria at 83 AD.

Thats not a good example compared to roman agriculture. The degradation of Easter island ecology was due to deforestation, but that was driven by obsessive and overly proud tribal/religious competition, not farming. Salve, C. We agree. I wasn't in any way comparing the Rapa Nui with the Romans. I was just giving some examples of cultures where ecological degradation has been proposed as an important contributing factor for their collapse.

I mean, I've read many times that Rome pretty much went down hill after the end of the republic. I've seen it many places (but for the life of me couldn't give you a list), including on these forums. Salve, Amici. I think the end of the Roman Republic (a change of political system) and the Fall of Rome (the collapse of a culture) are two quite different phenomena that we should not confuse.

Why "technically"? Who were the "non-technical" senators? Both the Optimates and the Populares factions were leaders of some portions of the "populace" (or "proud Roman people"; that's in the eye of the beholder). Both the Optmates and the Populares were Senatorial factions. Bibulus' "non"consulate showed one faction and one consul were stronger than the others.

I think MPC's expertise is urgently needed.

Salve, Amici. You know what? I think Klingan is completely right. Radiocarbon techniques are exclusively for organic material, simply because what you're actually dating is the death of the living source of such material (ie, the active Carbon uptaking from the environment). Here comes en.Wikipedia. "After plants die or they are consumed by other organisms (for example, by humans or other animals) the 14C fraction of this organic material declines at a fixed exponential rate due to the radioactive decay of 14C. Comparing the remaining 14C fraction of a sample to that expected from atmospheric 14C allows the age of the sample to be estimated". This article seems to be the original source of this note (in Italian). "Nuove analisi al radiocarbonio eseguite sulla Lupa Capitolina" are indeed mentioned ; "termoluminescenza" (thermoluminescence) is mentioned too, clearly not an equivalent method. There's of course possible that the explanation is just some confusion, like quoting radiocarbon for other radioisotope dating methods. Anyhow, I think we should be patient and cautious regarding this information.

This milestone was found in Israel (it's suppose to be from Domitianus era), it's is now display at the entrence to the Tel-Aviv University. I will try to get more picture when I can. Salve, I From your pic, I can read eight incomplete lines. The first four are relatively easy: ...IMP... ...CAESARDIVI... ...VESPASIANFILOA... ("A" is probably the beginning of another regnal title). ...TIANUSAUG... ie, Imp(erator), Caesar, Divi...Vespasian filo A(?)...(Domi)tianus Aug(ustus) In English: "Emperor (or Victorius), Caesar, Son of the God Vespasian, Domitianus Aug(ustus)". Most of the 5th and 6th lines are relatively easy too: ...PAXTRPCT... (too many possibilities for the last "T") ...

Oh, I knew I've forgotten something! Here's the homepage of this program.

Presumably in Crete, at least for some time. This can be inferred from Aristotle of Stagira, Politica, Book II, sec 1272: "The Cretan institutions resemble the Lacedaemonian. The Helots are the husbandmen of the one, the Perioeci of the other, and both Cretans and Lacedaemonians have common meals, which were anciently called by the Lacedaemonians not phiditia' but andria'; and the Cretans have the same word, the use of which proves that the common meals originally came from Crete. Further, the two constitutions are similar; for the office of the Ephors is the same as that of the Cretan Cosmi, the only difference being that whereas the Ephors are five, the Cosmi are ten in number. The elders, too, answer to the elders in Crete, who are termed by the Cretans the council. And the kingly office once existed in Crete, but was abolished"

Salve, Amici. It seems the Nesilim (Hittites) rulers were true believers of a controlled economy, with fixed wages and prices; their monetary unit was the shekel, but it seems they still used barter to some extent. Here come extracts from their Code: 158. If a man go for wages, bind sheaves, load it into carts, spread it on the straw barn and so forth "till they clear the threshing floor, for three months his wages are thirty pecks of barley. If a woman go for wages in the harvest, for two months he shall give twelve pecks of barley. 159. If anyone harness a yoke of oxen, his wages are one-half peck of barley. 160. If a smith make a copper box, his wages are one hundred pecks of barley. He who makes a copper dish of two-pound weight, his wages are one peck of emmer. 178. A plow-ox costs fifteen half-shekels of silver, a bull costs ten half-shekels of silver, a great cow costs seven half-shekels of silver, a sheep one half-shekel of silver, a draft horse twenty half-shekels of silver, a mule one pound of silver, a horse fourteen half-shekels of silver. 181-182. Four pounds of copper cost one half-shekel of silver; one tub of lard, one half-shekel of silver; two cheese one half-shekel of silver; a gown twelve half-shekels of silver; one blue woolen garment costs twenty half-shekels of silver; breeches cost ten half-shekels of silver. . . 200. If anyone give a son for instruction, be it a carpenter, or a potter, or a weaver, or a tailor, or a smith, he shall give six half-shekels of silver for the instruction.

Salve, Tellgryn It's not "my book"; the highlighted text was part of a literal transcription from Prof. Knohl's article in Ha'aretz. Prof. Knohl was talking about his own book. Please accept my apologies for my misleading redaction.

Salve, Amici. Let me see if I got it straight on the Greek culture spread. Practically all the Eastern half of the Roman Empire, southern Italy (Magna Graecia), Sicily and the area surrounding Massalia and other Greek colonies (ie, in eastern Spain) were, by definition, Hellenized previous to the Roman conquest. At least to some degree, that was probably also the case for Carthage and its dependences. Do you consider the spread of their culture to the remaining Roman territories conferred any particular benefit or advantage to the Greeks?

Sorry for my last post. I had to wait until the emission finished to posted it rightly. Next emission (repetition) will be: 21:30 (Greewich time; 16:30 Eastern Time) In Our Time Tacitus and the Decadence of Rome Melvyn Bragg and guests Catherine Edwards, Ellen O'Gorman and Maria Wyke discuss the Roman historian Tacitus, banquets, orgies, Hollywood epics and the process of making history. The emission lasts 45 minutes. Its summary:

Salve, Amici I'm currently hearing the life edition of this program. There will a repetition within 12 1/2 hours, and you could hear it again from their archive (unfortunately, only for the next week). I would like to know your opinions on this emission.

I'm glad to know you find the information useful. "Circa 1275-1325" means an estimation for the oldest documents where "soccage" is first attested in (Middle) English. Magna Carta, as you rightly point, was first written in Medieval Latin (not English). The three times you find "sokage" in this document is in its clause #37: Si aliquis teneat de nobis per feodifirmam, vel per sokagium, vel per burgagium, et de alio terram teneat per servicium militare, nos non habebimus custodiam heredis nec terre sue que est de feodo alterius, occasione illius feodifirme, vel sokagii, vel burgagii; nec habebimus custodiam illius feodifirme, vel sokagii, vel burgagii, nisi ipsa feodifirma debeat servicium militare. "If any one holding of us by fee-farm or by socage or by burgage holds land of some one else by military service, on account of that fee-farm or socage or burgage we are not to have the wardship of the heir or of the land that is another's fee, unless the said [land held by] fee-farm owes military service". Note the Germanic "k" and not the Latin "c" is used, denouncing its origin. The original word (its stem) was "soke", attested in many Germanic languages, as old as oral tradition goes (Nordic sagas) and an almost direct descent from a Proto-Indo-European root. "Soke" got into Old French presumably via Old English; the French just added the latin suffix "-age". "Sokage" is what is "soked" (sought) by a "sokeman", just as many other gallicisms like "marriage", "leverage", "assemblage", "carnage", "sabotage", "collage", "coverage" and so on. Gratiam habeo for such extensive explanation; I would really like to know your main sources, even if they are almost surely wrong. Again: "Soccage" or "Sokage" is the french derivation from the Germanic (Old English) word "soke" or "sok", directly related to nowadays "seek". Nothing to do with the Romans in the dictionaries that I've checked so far. After Hastings, England lived in an effective triglossia; Medieval Latin for the elite, a Norman dialect of the Langue d'Oil (Old French) for the nobles, Middle English for the common people. We don't agree on this one; Feudalism (land for military service) is fundamentally a medieval (postclassic) developement. It only got into the Eastern Roman Empire ("Byzantine" for some) as late as the XI century (Pronoia). I would really appreciate more information on this matter and discussion too.