ASCLEPIADES

Salve, guys! I would think this is a common concept among many unrelated cultures (vg, some american "indians"); you don't have to establish a link (which may or may not have existed) between Celtics and Hindu (true indians) to explain it. Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys! Indeed, here comes Tacitus, Annals (Book 15, Ch.41) "Some persons observed that the beginning of this conflagration was on the 19th of July, the day on which the Senones captured and fired Rome. " and the original Latin version: "fuere qui adnotarent XIIII Kal. Sextiles principium incendii huius ortum, quo et Seneones captam urbem inflammaverint" Some modern sources state the 18 of July; I don't know if it's a further chronological adjustment or simply a mistake. Cheers and good luck!

Salve, GPM. "It just goes to show that as good as the TV series was it was after all just a TV series and not historical fact therefore it should be enjoyed but where the truths concerned should be taken with a pinch of salt." That was certainly not my point. The main idea of the series (and the books) was to depict Claudius as a benevolent and almost harmless human being. His score with senators and knights is hardly compatible with that nice image, and at less for me, that's bigger than a pinch of salt. "But also I must point out that when it comes to the truth, Suetonius was as guilty as a modern day journalist for stretching and distorting the truth, so I guess that although Suetonius is one of the great classic historians, his writings did sometimes read a bit like a novel." I totally agree. In fact, maybe you were not harsh enough. Suetonius was a a crude negative propagandist for his patrons (Trajan and Hadrian) and loved gossip intensely. But as far as I know, the figures I quoted are commonly accepted by most historians. "Does any of the other Classic historian mention the deed mentioned by Suetonius in their writings I wonder?" For one, here comes one of Claudius contemporaries, Seneca the younger (Apocolocyntosis, sec. XIV) "Senators killed, thirty-five; Roman knights, two hundred and twenty-one" Many Emperors got Damnatio Memoriae for far less than that. Claudius' exception was presumably because he was deified by Nero (for his own benefit, of course). Having said that, this TV series is my favourite by far regarding ancient Rome; you can't even compare it with HBO's Rome. Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys! My humble opinion is that if you don't get rigorous enough with your sources, History will equate Fantasy, as any stuff would become plausible: UFOs, Atlantis, Lemuria, et Cetera...... (A common -but erroneous- euphemism for that is "Alternative History") Cheers and good luck!

Salve, AC! For matters like this, you should check Medical sources first. Saturnism hardly ever causes psychosis. As Caldrail and others rightly stated it, it's almost impossible to get a defined psychiatric diagnosis from the available sources, mainly because all of them are heavily mixed with negative propaganda. And if you still considered him psychotic ("crazy"), you have a myriad possible origins. There is a post in a ongoing thread where I write up the main signs and symptoms of lead toxicity. I hope this may be useful. Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys! Here's a recent thread of a related topic. MARCUS AEMILIUS LEPIDUS

Doesn't sound very modest to me..... Salve, GPM! All in life is relative... Suetonius worked for Hadrian, whose Palace was far bigger than Nero's: Hadrian's villa was a complex of over 30 buildings, covering an area of at least 1 square kilometre (c. 250 acres) of which much is still unexcavated. The villa was the greatest Roman example of an Alexandrian garden, recreating a sacred landscape. The complex included palaces, several thermae, theatre, temples, libraries, state rooms and quarters for courtiers, praetorians and slaves. The Villa shows echoes of many different architectural orders, mostly Greek and Egyptian. Hadrian, a very well travelled emperor borrowed these designs, such as the caryatids by the Canopus, along with the statues beside them depicting the Egyptian dwarf and fertility god, Bes. A Greek so called "Maritime Theatre" exhibits classical ionic style, whereas the domes of the main buildings as well as the corinthian arches of the Canopus and Serapeum show clear Roman architecture. Hadrian's biography states that areas in the villa were named after places Hadrian saw during his travels. Only a few places mentioned in the biography can be accurately correlated with the present-day ruins. But of course, even this would sound "modest" if you compare it with Diocletian's Palace. Cheers and good luck.

Salve, GH! There is considerably confusion between the Curia and the theatre of Pompey. This comes from the Topographical Dictionary of Ancient Rome by Samuel Ball Platner (1929): "Porticus Pompei: built in 55 B.C. by Pompeius at the same time as his Theatre (q.v.), and adjoining its scaena. The purpose of the porticus was to afford shelter for the spectators in case of rain. It is represented on the Marble Plan (frgs. 30, 110, and p22), and was a rectangular court, about 180 metres long and 135 wide, in which were four parallel rows of columns. The central area was laid out as a garden with shady walks and contained various works of art . Among these was a painting of Cadmus and Europa by Antiphilus, which is not to be identified with the representation of Europa which gave its name to the Porticus Europae (q.v.) described by Martial, which, A. Reinach maintains, was a bronze group made by Pythagoras of Rhegium for Tarentum . The Curia Pompei (q.v.) in which Caesar was murdered was probably an exedra in this porticus : propterea et in curia Hostilia et in Pompeia et post in Iulia, cum profana ea loca fuissent, templa esse per augures constituta ut in iis senatus consulta more maiorum iusta fieri possent). That the porticus was one of the most popular in the city is clear from the numerous incidental references. The porticus was burned in the reign of Carinus, and restored by Diocletian , under the direction of Aelius Helvius Dionysius, the prefect of the city, who called one side of the restored structure porticus Iovia, and the other porticus Herculea, in honour of the two emperors Diocletian and Maximian. It may be referred to as the portica Nova, which was ruined by the earthquake of 442. No remains of this building are visible, and the discoveries on its site have been unimportant." I believe the place of this Curia has been identified near the "Area Sacra di Torre Argentina". FOLLOW THIS LINK. I HOPE THAT THIS MAY BE USEFUL.

Salve, guys! The original link is no more. Then, here is an image of the Cairo Toe. The problem with the datation of this baby is its extremely wide range;1069 to 664BC!

Salve, guys! "At its annual meeting, held in early July in Wellington, New Zealand, UNESCO added the complex located 11km east of Zajecar to the world list of the protected sites under the name "Gamzigrad -Romuliana, Palace Of Galerius"... Galerius was born in the then Romanian province of Dacia Aureliana to a mother named Romula, after whom the palace was named... The complex at Romuliana sprawls over six-and-a-half hectares, surrounded by a defensive system of 20 towers, within which lie the remains of vestibules, atriums, hot baths, multi-coloured floor mosaics, marble panels and objects and sculptures made of purple granite and green porphyry from the Peloponnese." The whole story in UNESCO Puts Spotlight on Eastern Serbia's Lost Palace. Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys! This is the same story as it was reported by Reuters. What's new is that they identify the owner of this baby "This is a very impressive, very well preserved bath complex that belonged to a certain Quintus Servilius Pudens who was a billionaire friend of Emperor Hadrian," Dig reveals "billionaire's" Roman villa with baths Good luck!

Salve, guys! The link goes to the same story as it was reported by National Geographic. The main conclusion: "Comparing the new genome with that of other animals in the elephant family also provides evidence that the elephant family diverged on roughly the same timeline that primates separated, suggesting there may have been a common cause for the splits" Elephants, Human Ancestors Evolved in Synch, DNA Reveals Good luck!

Salve, guys! A difficult way for Turkey to EU

Salve, CO! The only reference of Justinian (I, the great) in popular culture that I know is his appearance as a main villain in the famous comic strip of Hal Foster "Prince Valiant" when the stories were written by Cullen Murphy Jr. after 1980. The historicity was extremely poor. I hope that may be useful.

Salve, guys! Now, another question. Before we try to explain the "how", we should set the "when". When did lead lead to the Fall of the Roman Empire? Death of Theodosius I in 395 (last time the Roman Empire was unified)? Crossing of the Rhine by Germanic tribes in 406? (should we suppose those tribes weren't affected?) Romulus Augustus deposed by Odoacer, September 4, 476 (the traditional one)? Death of Justinian I, (last Emperor who tried to reconquer the west) 565? Arrival of Islam, 632? (Any relationship between lead toxicity and religion?). Any of those above if we are talking about the Western Empire, as the Eastern ("Byzantine") Empire continued until the Fall of Constantinople (29 May 1453). Were the effects of saturnism limited to the West? Or the lead is the culprit of the East becoming "Byzntine"? Was the lead also related to the Byzantine demise?

Salve, guys! Do you agree with those statements? And why do you think it happen that way? Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys and Ladies. My condolences, A. PS: That was a superb explanation, S.

Salve, guys! From what we have read in this thread, we can also make a case against ML Crassus and any of the other greedy landowners of the Late Republic for arson, as it always would be an easy profit. As the Principate was established, the Emperor (any Emperor) became the main and only suspect. I think Caldrail has made a brilliant argument of why any conflagration in Rome would have been more problems that advantages for Nero (or any other Emperor, BTW). However, I simply can

Salve, CO! Self-survival, ambition and Darwinism. Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys! It would have spoken well of Augustus if he had punished himself for his own morality. Methinks we would have to be extremely naive to believe we are really talking of morality here. Julia was in the eye of the storm of a political turmoil. The case of her daughter Julia the younger was even worse and more illustrative, as Augustus not only punished his own granddaughter and her "lovers", but also her husband L Aemilius Paulus, put to dead on a charge of conspiracy (since that of adultery was clearly inappropriate). Cheers and good luck!

Salve, guys! I liked the books, and I loved the TV series, not surprisingly like most of the people who gave his/her opinion here. The TV series in particular was an endless procession of outstanding performances. At first, I thought of this stuff as some kind of discovering of a hidden history. Later, the inconsistencies were progressively more evident to me; I found especially hard to swallow the descriptions of poisoning, so abundant and critical for the story. But what finally made me face what appears to be the plain facts was a brief quote of Suetonius (Life of Claudius, ch. 29): "He condemned to death five and thirty senators, and above three hundred Roman knights," Not a bad score.

Salve, guys! Here comes the impressive account by Tacitus in Annals (Book XV, Ch. 38): A disaster followed, whether accidental or treacherously contrived by the emperor, is uncertain, as authors have given both accounts, worse, however, and more dreadful than any which have ever happened to this city by the violence of fire. It had its beginning in that part of the circus which adjoins the Palatine and Caelian hills, where, amid the shops containing inflammable wares, the conflagration both broke out and instantly became so fierce and so rapid from the wind that it seized in its grasp the entire length of the circus. For here there were no houses fenced in by solid masonry, or temples surrounded by walls, or any other obstacle to interpose delay. The blaze in its fury ran first through the level portions of the city, then rising to the hills, while it again devastated every place below them, it outstripped all preventive measures; so rapid was the mischief and so completely at its mercy the city, with those narrow winding passages and irregular streets, which characterised old Rome. Added to this were the wailings of terror-stricken women, the feebleness of age, the helpless inexperience of childhood, the crowds who sought to save themselves or others, dragging out the infirm or waiting for them, and by their hurry in the one case, by their delay in the other, aggravating the confusion. Often, while they looked behind them, they were intercepted by flames on their side or in their face. Or if they reached a refuge close at hand, when this too was seized by the fire, they found that, even places, which they had imagined to be remote, were involved in the same calamity. At last, doubting what they should avoid or whither betake themselves, they crowded the streets or flung themselves down in the fields, while some who had lost their all, even their very daily bread, and others out of love for their kinsfolk, whom they had been unable to rescue, perished, though escape was open to them. And no one dared to stop the mischief, because of incessant menaces from a number of persons who forbade the extinguishing of the flames, because again others openly hurled brands, and kept shouting that there was one who gave them authority, either seeking to plunder more freely, or obeying orders".

Salve, guys! I found this in History Channel. I know nothing about their sources. Unedited (SIC) : "The first unit of cataphracts for Rome were formed apparently under Trajan. They reached their days of glory under Belisarius/Narses (reign of Justinian) and were intstrumental in Heraclius' heroic campaigns to reclaim the empire from the resurgent Persians. The Cataphracts disappeared about the 800s AD so they lasted about 3 centuries. Their height of power seems to have lasted from Belisarius to Heraclius and they slowly decayed in quality until they disappeared. I don't think there is much to distinguish them apart from Mongol heavy cavalry. As heavy horsemen and horse archers they were basically equal. The cataphracts were capable of fighting effectively on foot, which I have not read the Mongol were capable of. Overall I'd give the slight advanage to the Mongols for superb tactical, operational and strategic abilities. Their mobility, given that each Mongol had a string of around 5 horses, was superior to all other cavalry. In a head to head charge they would have disadvatage against the presumably heavier cataphracts, but as I pointed out in another post they would not receive a charge from heavier cavalry in such a way and would defeat it through tactical guile" What do you think about it?

Salve, guys and Ladies! Vipsania Marcella Agrippina or Marcellina (born 27 BC) was the only daughter to Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa from his second wife Claudia Marcella Major. She was the first grandchild to Octavia Minor and first great-niece to Roman Emperor Augustus. About 14 BC, she married Publius Quinctilius Varus. Tacitus hints that she did not die in childbirth or of natural causes. The date of her death is uncertain. Good luck!

Salve, K! It is interesting that you mention ML Crassus the triumvir, as you are indeed right about him. Here comes the "Life of Crassus" by Plutarch: "...before he went upon his Parthian expedition, he found his possessions to amount to seven thousand one hundred talents; most of which, if we may scandal him with a truth, he got by fire and rapine, making his advantages of the public calamities. ...Moreover, observing how extremely subject the city was to fire and falling down of houses, by reason of their height and their standing so near together, he bought slaves that were builders and architects, and when he had collected these to the number of more than five hundred, he made it his practice to buy houses that were on fire, and those in the neighbourhood, which, in the immediate danger and uncertainty the proprietors were willing to part with for little or nothing, so that the greatest part of Rome, at one time or other, came into his hands." Anyway, for more information about the relationship they found between building height and fire risk, you can read all the chapter of Strabo quoted in my last post, and even better, youi can read a very good analysis in Z. Yavetz's Latomus. Good luck!