guidoLaMoto

OK. You win. It was obviously much better to live in the filth and squalor, starving in a Romam slum, needing to rely on the public dole because jobs were taken by the slaves than to live as an enslaved bus boy in a villa on the Palatine hill. https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Hirt.+Gal.+6+13&fromdoc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.02.0002. "For the pleb is held almost in the place of slaves, who dares nothing for himself...."

Differences in each of those categories between north and south can be more plausabley attributed to differences in climate, urbanization, topographical & economic factors, rather than the mere coincidence that Rome had a presence in the south.

Apparently not all of us here are famiiiar with the rhetorical device of alllusion ...Beyond that... Perhaps you have a false impression of how difficult life was in an agrarian society, let alone a hunter-gstherer society. There's a reason humanity progressively self-organized into a more urban way of life, a process still going on today with generalized abandonment of the rural areas. The poor of Rome lived in six story tenements. Food was not always available. The streets were filthy. Street crime was rampant. ...Slaves lived in palaces or in the agrarian villae. Food was no doubt always available. A certsin amount of social & economic security comes with slavery.. Had they not been taken captive, those slaves, for the most part coming from the lower end of the socio-economic ladder, living in the frontier, "barbaric" regions, would have continued living their insecure subsistence lifestyle.....Perhaps giving up freedom for security was a good trade. And, to re-iterate, the jobs performed by slaves were not WPA style "make work" jobs. They were jobs that needed to be done. Someone had to do them. Without slavery, all those extra poor would have taken those jobs for low pay, then paid it back to the company store....Net flow of money the same with or without slavery.......The cotton still needed to be picked, so to speak, after 1863.

I'm not defending slavery.....I:m suggesting that freedom of choice denied by law is really no different than freedom of choice prrevented by economics. The life of a free Roman peasant was not much different than that of most slaves, maybe worse. The slave at least could count on timely meals....The Hollywood impression that slaves were regularly starved, beaten and worked to death is illogical. Is it common for a farmer to starve, beat or over work his plow horse? The original question posed was how would things be different had the Romans not used slaves....I'm pointing out that certain jobs needed to be done, and there were large numbers of people who needed work to pay for the bare necessities of life The expenses of maintaining slaves would probably have been about the same as paying wages for menial work. ...I can see how things may not have been much different had there been no slavery..... ....and is an uprising by Spartacus really any different than French peasants storming The Bastille?

In response to your obserstions, let us merely ask how different was the life of a slave from that of a Roman peasant? Not really any different. Maybe worse. A family of eight living in a 400 sq ft insula apartment? Were slaves serving dinner in a Senator's triclinium treated any differently than those in servce in an episode of Upstairs Downstairs? In regards the economic impact of slavery, compare the flow of money in, say, 19th century American coal mine towns, where miners were paid low wages, and then paid rent to live in company housing and bought food & merchandise in company stores. ....Not fundamentally different than slavery with no wages but no expenses. Much of what we know about American slavery comes from a famous book, Twelve Years a Slave https://docsouth.unc.edu/fpn/northup/northup.html The author describes his life as a slave to an owner who he described as being usually good but having moments of cruelty. He reports that a few owners were very harsh, but lost as a fleeting comment early in the book is that most owners generally treated their slaves well. After all, most people don't abuse their valuable possessions. In regards health issues- .life expectancy in Roman times was only ~25 yrs- foreshortened mainly by high infancy/childhood infectious diseases and death in childbirth Iit's been said that a pregnancy in those days was practically a death sentence. Perhaps we could make the argument that a female slave kept out of the reproductive pool benefited by slavery.

Whoops-- I have to throw the red flag on myself.....After further review, soldi is Italian for money or currency. Spicioli is small change.....Now where did I leave those Alzheimer's pills?

For some reason, a "reply" option does not appear after that original post, but it's an interesting question deserving of contemplation. We could present a plausable arguement that a tendency to take captives is a behavior pattern innate to humans and helped improve chances of survival for our species when our numbers were few, helping to avoid the pitfalls of inbreeding. Concerning ancient Rome and slavery- a few thoughts-- Hollywood has tainted our views. While Romans had the legal power & rights of "paterfamilias," the ultimate power of life or death was rarely exercised. Slaves were generally treated well, often playing integral roles in the household, including companionship as well as nursemaid/governess/teacher. Roman slaves were often given wages/"spending money"above and beyond room & board, and were oftrn in a position to take on extra work for pay outside the household. It was not at all unusual for slaves to buy their own freedom. Freedmen wore a felt hat (the pileus) somewhat like a modern fez.....The largest, most ostentatious tomb sitting in a very prominent position just outside the gates of Pompeii was built for a freedman who became quite wealthy. The more menial tasks including construction work was accomplished by slaves as well as by citizens. Cf- recent discoveries showing that the Great Pyramids of Egypt were constructed mostly by citizens, not slaves as previously thought....Those jobs needed to be done by large numbers of people whether they were paid or not. Either way, their room & board needed to be covered, so it's really just a paper shuffle of how that got done and the poor masses needed to earn a living.

Interesing find. "Solidus" is Latin for solid, as in "not hollow." Apparently the name was applied to gold coins first issued by Constantine....and in modern Italian vernacular, "soldi' is the term for "loose change." I guess inflation has always been a problem.

It makes more sense to have the new year start with spring- the beginning of the new growing season.....IIRC, our years in the west began with March (? Spring equinox) until some time late in the 18th century.

I dunno-- I think Philipson is right......The study of Latin obviously helps in understanding western culture, whose roots lie with the Romans, and no doubt makes the study of Romance languages a little easier for those of us who don't speak a Romance language.....but.... I don't think knowing Latin helped much at all in studying anatomy- the only discipline in med school using Latin at all........ ...and many Latin terms used in Law make no sense at all...Eg-- habeas corpus (might you have a body... What the heck does that mean?) should be habes captivum-- do you have the prisoner

R.Those prehistoric pachyderms sure got around. The great pyramids in Egypt had already been built when the last of them went extinct. For an interesting discussion of the natural history of the Italian peninsula, search "Italia 100,000 anni fa" for YouTube presentstions.

Livy mentions several episodes of pestllence affecting the early republic, but never describes signs nor symptoms. Other authors frequently used the words pestilentia, contagio or plaga (from which we obviously get the word plague, but actually translates as wound or blow) but, again, no description of signs nor symptoms. httgps://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/searchresults?q=Pestilentia https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/searchresults?q=Contagio https://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/searchresults?q=Plaga

Not to belabor the point, but pemphigoid is rare enough, but even more rare under the age of 60, and always associated with some other, usually debilitating condition. Leishmaniasis is another infectious dermatitis causing ulcerations which could get infested secondarily with maggots. It's a protozoal parasite spread by the sandfly-- that fits Sulla's situation. When you hear hoof beats coming down the road, it's probably a horse and not a zebra (unless you're in sub-Saharan Africa). The most likely situation is that Sulla had a nasty, pruritic allergy, scratched himself raw and the open sores got infested.., Pemphigus occurs in 1 in 500,000 people; pemphigoid in 1 in 50,000; leishmaniasis in 1 in 1000 (but very rare in industrialized nations) allergic dermatitis 1 in 5.....I'm putting my money on allergic dermatitis.

Interesting old thread-- To summarize Plutarch- Sulla had a generalized skin condition that seemed to start as a severe red rash, became ulcerated and the open sores became infested with worms... Any skin ulcerstions, given the conditions of hygiene of an ancient military operation, would be susceptible to infestation by flies\maggots. It seemed to have started with a severe sunburn....probably that just meant a generalized red rash or a blistering skin condition that looked like a sunburn. Pemphigus (cleverly mentioned above) is a blistering condition that covers large areas of skin, but was fatal within a year in 90% of cases without modern treatment....."Red Man Syndrome," a form of lymphoma affecting the skin is very itchy leading to destructive scratching and then infestation, is another uncommon possibility, and has a longer course. Plutarch also mentions "ulcerstion of the bowels" Who knows what he means? Celiac disease is quite common and can show Dermatitis Herpetiformis, although pruritus severe enough to cause generalized ulcerstion is not typical. Any allergic dermatitis would cause redness, pruritis, scratching and open sores. A severe allergy to wool garments may be the most likely explanation. Secondary syphylis causes odd rashes, but not usually pruritic. It does not seem to be described in Europe prior to 1500AD...(Consorting with harpists and transvestites is bad enough, but MIMES? Sulla, how could you sink so low?)

--did some minor research: This site gives numerous examples from the lit (without giving reference info) for dictionary entries- https://www.online-latin-dictionary.com/latin-english-dictionary.php?parola=Imperium. As you can see, the vast majority for the word as I described above. A few refer to "sub imperio populi Romani"- under the command or domination of the roman people. The term Imperium Romanorum is listed, but according to Wiki- it's a term used in the Charlemagne era referring to plans to restore the Roman Empire-- Renovatio imperii Romanorum. Don't forget that we're walking about a millennium of language (not to mention, political) evolution.....I wonder if troubadors of the Dark Ages went thru a phase where "mala" meant "bona?"....Dona mihi alta cinque! ...Aliquis?

The author must have a lot of time on his hands. I can't comment on the Greek, but for Latin, he could have summarized his examples to make some sense to the article-- adjectives take case endings to match the noun they modify. Verbs take endings to match their subjects.....and whether the singular or plural is used may not follow rules of grammar but may be idiomatic.....and context may help solve the riddle. Cf- in English, we can wear a pair of pants, but who has ever put on a single pant?.....or "to re-iterate" is to repeat yourself once, but in math, "to iterate" is to repeat a calculation over and over again....WUWT?

The ancients were apparently big on the dative of possession-. We don't have that construction in English, so I have trouble dealing with it....Ecclesiastical Latin doesn't seem to use it, as I recall, so I would go with "meam "....If you use mihi it could also translate "light the way for me." I was joking about The Saints. I figure God must have a good sense of humor-- Have you ever watched people at Walmart?

Welcome, John,.....Thanks for bumping this old thread up and into our attention. You make some interesting points about the later years. I'm not sure the ancient Romans even referred to their empire by a name.....Many English words are obviously derived from Latin counterparts but have different meanings in the two languages (eg- in English, family refers to a group of blood relatives, but Latin familia is better translated as "household"- referring to not only blood relatives but also servants/employees living in the villa/domus/farm.)..... Our "empire" is derived from imperium, but imperium is better translated as "power." Eg- a dux assumes the power or command of an army and is called imperator by the soldiers.....or a consul takes office and assumes the imperium. The Romans had names for geographic entities (Italia, Britania, etc, but did they have a concept of "country" as we do today? I doubt they used the term Imperium Romanorum (empire of the Romans)....Maybe they used the term Imperium Romanum (Roman Empire)....As mentioned above, SPQR was more of a trademark used on public works and documents. BTW-- in regards the formality of the toga-- remember the episode when the delegation of senators crossed the Tiber to seek out Cincinnatus on his farm to recruit him as dictator. They found him in a dirty tunic digging ditches and told him to go into the house to put on his toga so they could conduct official business.... ...The toga was the business suit of its day and Suetonius says they were always wet and soiled from walking Rome's filthy streets ....Candidates for office wore the toga bleached white (toga candida) to signify their candidacy. (I work in the Dept. of The Office of Redundancy Dept )

Why a surprise? Estimates are that maybe up to 30% of the Roman population was foreign born slaves..... ...and why pander to the LBGTQ crowd?....We can deduce from authors such as Catullus that homosexuality was politely "accepted" with a nod and a wink just as it is by most today. ..Just because two people, one of whom is a male, happen to suddenly drop dead due to a poisoned air supply and fall in close proximity to each other doesn't make the odds very great that they were lovers--> the odds are 0.5 that the second guy is male and 0.005 that he is gay. That calculates to odds that this is a gay couple about 0.00025....25 out of 100,000.....With the population of Pompeii somewhere greater than 10,000 at the time, we would expect at least a handful of gay couples.

After further cogitation, I thought maybe it would be a tad presumptuous to make a demand (imperative mode) of a saint, so maybe the more supplicative mode (subjunctive) would be in order-- illumines viam meam (may you light my way)-- but then I recalled my youth-- "Ave Maria......ora pro nobis peccatoribus....." The imperative is used there. (I'm so old, we didn't have History Class in school, only Current Events.) So your translation is good. When begging a favor, I always pray to the lesser known saints. I figure they're not very busy and would appreciate the attention.

Optime!......Hoc verum est.....although an ancient Roman may have used the dative of possession- mihi- instead of meam.

I wonder if he refused to play on Jewish holidays like Sandy Koufax did 1900 yrs later? That helmet is remarkably well preserved snd so ornate- almost like it's intended for ceremonial, not utilitarian purposes.

One has to wonder how much the German air raids were intended not so much for strategic purposes to soften British air power, but for psychological pressure hoping to induce a surrender without need for a costly invasion? I have to second Guy's praise of The Greatest Generation. If he failed German class and they had won, they would be giving orders he couldn't understand......I like to point out that if we Yanks hadn't won our war for independence, we'd all still be mumbling British like Nigel Bruce. Pip pip and eh whot?

Interesting supplemental references. Thanks.....I only read the abstract of the pdf on psych factors involved in spectator sports. I had to laugh. It seems the author is over thinking a simple situation in order to show off his command of four cylinder words. "It's fun and they like the vicarious experience," would have sufficed. Augustus is known to have provided for the large naumachia mentioned on an artificial lake located across the river from the Campus Martius. IIRC, in Res Gestae he states that biremmes & triremmes were used. Given that the arena of the Colosseo is only about 80m x 50m (smaller than a football field) any naval battle staged there must have been with canoes. As far as the pollice verso thing goes, one can easily imagine it to mean "slice the throat," as the gesture still signifies today.

It's no secret that 95% of drugs available today were discovered in or derived from chemicals made by plants....but I wonder how much Yew tree bark a woman would have to chew to cure her breast cancer....or what the other 50,000 chemicals in the bark would be doing to her?