Pantagathus
-
Posts
2,168 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Static Pages
News
Blogs
Gallery
Events
Downloads
Posts posted by Pantagathus
-
-
funny how cultures seem to prefer cats over dogs. *thinks of Egyptians* I could be wrong on that, but is it the majority? There could easily be cultures I don't know about who go the other way around, with dogs instead of cats.
Typically it seems the alignment went more that domestic dogs came from hunter-gatherer partnerships (as they are a social-pack animal) and cats more with farming communities (keep the mice away from grains). Dogs became less self supportive and could be more of a tax on resources out side of the hunter-gatherer frame work.
Off the top of my head, the Persians were one of the only large civilizations of antiquity that seemed to revere dogs in the highest esteem.
I've read in may ancient anecdotes that the Phoenicians (more often than not) kept pet cats on their ships to keep rats & desease at a minimum.
-
There have been Celtic swords found that date as early as the 1st century BC which have blades of about 90cm without the handle. That rivals many great swords from the medieval era. The quality of the iron nears that of steel in some cases.
Even in the late Bronze Age and early Iron Age the folks of Western Europe were using big, long swords.
e.g.: 'Carps Tongue' Sword (~1300BC-~750BC)
-
Favonious, you'll be fine...
When I was in the Navy they ripped all 4 of mine out with only local anesthesia and then sent me home with only Motrin. It was not fun to say the least but endurable. I imagine your experience will be much more humane and much better in the long compaired to enduring the pain they can cause by pressure on your molars.
The 2 bad things about my experience was being able to hear the pliers crushing the teeth as he was pulling them out and then getting rice stuck in the gaping holes in my jaw before they healed shut...
-
I've mentioned this before in the 'Pelasgian' thread but it's seeming increasingly likely that the Etruscans were in fact part of a diaspora from Asia Minor due to climatic issues ~3000 BC.
It was this diaspora that apparently sowed the seeds for the Minoans, Pelasgians, Illyrians, Thracians, Nuragic people of Sardinia, and of course the Etruscans. Though it's correct that the language hasn't been decifered per se, it has been shown to be from the same linguistic tree as Lydian & Pelasgian (and though I haven't read the paper yet, Illyrian now seems to be grouped in there as well).
From all I've read, It seems likely that what the Greeks and Phoenicians sought out in regards to trade with the Etruscans was more to the effect of access through them to the Gaulish & Germanic hinterland; where the Etruscans performed the role more of brokers than true suppliers.
It seems quite likely that their reputation as pirates stems from their tight policing of what they considered their soveriegn trade routes. It really wasn't until the Phocaeans founded Massalia in ~600BC that this starts to loosen up. I suspect though that this was more because the Etruscans started to become overwhelmed with the scope of maintaining any sort of regionalistic monpoly when faced with Rome growing into a Republic, the Celtic pressures on their land from the north, the Assyrian pressure on the Phoenician economy (with Carthage trying to shore up control over the western Med) and the Greeks trying to make sure they weren't left in the cold & vulnerable...
As for their religion and religious imagery, I personally feel it's wrong for scholars to continue maintaining that it was 'orientalized' by their contact with the Greeks or Phoenicians. If we consider the most likely origins of them as a people & then if you accept the great antiquity of much of the common 'Pelasgian' pantheon one should consider that the similarities were already there due to a common origin; not because the Phoenician & Greeks from the east offered anything new or better for the Etruscans to adopt in favor of whatever they were doing in the Bronze Age.
Therefore, the 'orientalizing' that is claimed to have occured after the 8th Century BC should be seen more as a 're-syncing' for lack of a better term.
-
I've always gotten the impression from different texts that the Haruspices were highly esteemed whether official or not.
It is clear from anecdotes in Livy especially that they were summoned from Erturia to all parts of Roman territory to make judgements on particular omens.
-
"the statue of Jupiter was laid in a reclining posture on a couch"
You know I have always wondered how exactly they pull that one off without it looking ridiculous. I mean, a statue is a statue, so if it was sculpted in a standing stance, then it will look like a standing stature laid down on a couch...
It's pretty hilarious in my minds eye as well...
-
No, actually, what I meant was an actual staff or wand, a symbolic ornament to signify an imperator or general's power. I didn't put my question out properly, sorry. I meant the same thing as a standard signifying a legion. That type of thing.
I don't think so but I could be mistaken.
Remeber, the general often fought by the side of their troops. They would more than likely be distinguished by their armor or helmet.
I'll check a few places that may have the answer and will post if I find anything.
-
"Sacrifices being of the nature of feasts, the Greeks and Romans on occasion of extraordinary solemnities placed images of the gods reclining on couches, with tables and viands before them, as if they were really partaking of the things offered in sacrifice. This ceremony was called a lectisternium.
At the Epulum Jovis, which was the most noted lectisternium at Rome, and which was celebrated in the Capitol, the statue of Jupiter was laid in a reclining posture on a couch, while those of Juno and Minerva were seated on chairs by his side; and this distinction was observed in allusion to the ancient custom, according to which only men reclined and women sat at table (Val. Max. ii.1
-
Would I be foolish in suggesting that the Assyrian war machine represented a serious radicalisation of warfare, both in duration and deadliness of combat and that therefore the logistical tools needed ( of whatever nature) would need to be radicalised and streamlined? If your client now fights in winter as well as other seasons you have a seriously expanded logistics train, (indeed a constant one, with the abolition of a campaign season).If your goal is commerce then " your salesmen drive the business". If you are a good businessman you might have some technical tools saved for a rainy day-so maybe id say the Phonecians assimilated , synthesised and then deployed as clients upped the pace.
But I am no linguist!
Well the Assyrians did adopt the new writing style in the form of early Aramaic as early as the 10th Century so that is a possibility. But that early on, the pressure on Phoenicia from Assyria was light and Phoenician trade was focused more on Egypt at the time (but not for long due to Hiram I's reorganizations)
For the sake of exploring possibilities, let's step out of the Near Eastern vacuum for a second and consider the reach of the Phoenicians even at that early of a date. Though the date assigned to the founding of Cadiz by men of Tyre is constantly debated (~1000BC-~800BC), one thing most scholars agree on is that at least a form of silent trade between the Iberians & traders of Tyre had gone on for sometime. Coincidentaly during the exact time that Phoenicians introduced the alphabet to all their neighbors in the east.
Now consider that the earliest examples of utilizing elements (characters) later found in the Phoenician alphabet occur in Magdalenian Culture art from northern Iberia (12000BC-9000BC).
Then consider Plato's 'Critias' account and his literate "Atlantics", 'Beyond the Pillar of Hercules'
Then consider Strabo's anecdote about the Turditani; that they alleged to have laws & poems written in verse that were 6000 years old.
And of course, Iberians both in the north (Celtiberia) & south (Tartessus) utilized an alphabet that has always been said to be 'based on the Phoenician and/or Greek'. Simple enough. But, the northern form was utilized early on in areas of Celtiberia that were not in direct contact with the Phoenicians or Greeks though the two were present on the peninsula. Of course it's more than possible that the internal Iberian trade network was the agent of that diffusion. However, in the context of the time, the Iberian Peninsula was a very big place.
With that in mind, why did the alphabet not have a similar diffusion into Gaul from Massalia if it was so beneficial to trade for the indigenous population in the interior? Ogham remained their dominant writing system for some time.
So, given all that is it not possible for the Phoenicians, during one of their early trade expeditions to the west to have learned this different approach to writing which they then brought back and introduced to their neighbors?
On the other hand, one potential issue has to do with the use of vowels. Phoenician, like Hebrew wrote only consonants. Though knowledge of ancient Iberian languages is lost to us and all Iberian inscriptions sit undecifered, it is apparently clear that their alphabets incorporated limited use of vowels which is accepted as the Greeks addition to its use. Regardless, given our limited knowledge on the issue and that our accepting the use of vowels comes from Roman era documents only listing names, it is by no means a show stopper
-
10th century B.C...
That's right after the time of Solomon right?
-
Forgive my ignorance, but looking at the Phoenician originals I even see some startling similarities to Germanic runes. Considering the relatively young age of the runic languages I suppose that isn't surprising but it certainly attests to the influence of the original.
That was actually one of my choices in the vanished poll: Celtic-Germanic Runes. For this very reason it's a great thought provoking point. Almost all the letters found in Phoenician & Etruscan are found in Runes.
Obvioulsy, the Phoenicians are well deserved in their credit for the changeover from laborious cuniform & heiroglyphic systems that spread from the Levant to the rest of the western world.
But, when confronted with the existence of the letter-symbols utilized by the Phoenicians in far distant locals that pre-date the Near Eastern change over (in some cases thousands of years) from cuniform & heiroglyphic writing systems, does it not feel a little suspect?
As merchants, they would obviously like to have a system that was not as laborious or bureaucratic as cuniform or heiroglyphics but the Mesopotamian & Egyptian civilizations had got along for quite along time with those systems...
Why the sudden drive to radically change the method? Especially when so many scholars also maintain that the Phoenician economy at the time (early Iron Age) was driven by the need to feed the Assyrian & Egyptian machines? Did the Bronze Age collapse scare them that much?
And forget for the moment that this whole cloth invention is attributed to the mythical King Cadmus."Men tell us . . . that the Phoenicians were not the first to make the discovery of letters; but
that they did no more than change the form of the letters; whereupon the majority of mankind
made use of the way of writing them as the Phoenicians devised." - Diodorus Siculus, Book V
-
I added the poll now...
cheers
viggen
Thanks Viggen,
I had a bunch of poll choices to provoke certain aspects of the discussion but this will do quite fine.
-
As you may or may not know, symbolic elements of the Phoenician alphabet (which gave rise to everything since) are found in various places around Europe & the Near East before it's "invention" during the Iron Age.
Given the appearance of signs almost exactly the same as 'heth' & 'samekh' in Magdalenian cave paintings and on tablets from the Vinca Culture in Neolithic Romania, out of curiosity, who do you think actually invented it first?
Were the Phoenicians just brokers of this profound improvement in writing?
Note: This was supposed to have a poll attached... Don't know where it went?
-
I was wondering if someone couold give me a lot of information about prostitution in rome during ancient times, and about prostitution in general in italy from ancient times, relating to pompeii and such. I know of the penii on the streets leading sailors to whore houses and of the pictures on the walls of different positions. But i was wondering whether or not someone could give me a long detailed explanation that i can put into a paper im writing.
If you are interested enough in a subject to do a paper on it, I believe you would benefit much more from doing your own research than from relying on somebody else's point of view in a forum...
-
yes -did they actually say what might happen if it did touch the ground?
As you will see below, they did not say:
"No sooner were men's fears allayed by these expiatory rites than a fresh report came, this time from Frusino, to the effect that a child had been born there in size and appearance equal to one four years old, and what was still more startling, like the case at Sinuessa two years previously, it was impossible to say whether it was male or female. The diviners who had been summoned from Etruria said that this was a dreadful portent, and the thing must be banished from Roman soil, kept from any contact with the earth, and buried in the sea. They enclosed it alive in a box, took it out to sea, and dropped it overboard." - Livy 27.37
If only Hannibal had known to intercept it and let it touch the ground... Maybe he would have won the war?
hehehehe -
To meet & shake their hands: Octavian-Augustus, Trajan & Hadrian (especially)
To observe from a distance: Caligula, Nero & Commodus
-
My use of the cognomen Pantagathus has nothing to do with St. Pantagathus of the post Roman period and was chosen for it's literal latin meaning:
"Bird of Good Omen"
-
Yeah Pertinax,
The Romans loved their Congers!
I believe the most sought after ones were imported from Iberia.
-
Live in:
Atlanta, Georgia - USA
Grew up in:
Charlotte, North Carolina - USA
Heart is still in:
Seattle, Washington - USA (where I lived in during the 90's)
-
Heh ya I agree. They were usually an assortment of lightining stuck buildings and malformed animal offspring.
One that made me laugh out loud was during the 2nd Punic War. Apparently, a child was born that was as large as a four year old (or something like that) so they summoned the Haruspices to make a judgement on the thing...
To paraphrase the Haruspices: "Get rid of it, and get rid of it quick! Oh, and don't let that thing even touch the soil or we're all in big trouble..."
So they put it in a box, carried it to Ostia, put it on a ship and dumped it overboard
-
One of the things I love about Livy is that he documented the major omens for a given year...
-
Yeah there's not much money in archaeology, certainly not in field archaeology as the job is not what you'd call regular (it's more seasonal). However, in museums and university departments there's is always demand for people conserving artefacts. The other route to go down is to take archaeology and teach it. I already have a degree in medieval history though so i can always default to teaching history at an advanced level in colleges.
Most archaeologists do indeed teach it. The drive is of course to get published and be supported by the university/college one works for. Your ideas and theories, if compelling enough will fuel more grant money and get you positions at higher paying (+ more prestigous) universities.
Hopefully someday I will switch gears with those goals in mind: Teaching+Writing
However, right now I have a great job but I honestly can't divulge any detail on what that is other than to say I work in Civil Service.
-
Did anyone else catch this?
Content wise it was relatively weak, no new revelations and it was sort of the reader's digest on Hannibal. (Scipio was not discussed in any level of detail whatsoever) However, style was excellent...
This NGC special utilized correct ethic affinities and had the Carthaginians actually speaking a semitic tounge! From this aspect it was very engrossing.
Made me think of our discussions on the upcoming Hannibal Movie. After seeing this special, I'd love to see it done in Latin & Punic w/subtitles...
-
Oh don't get me wrong... I agree with the general concept. I do however fear that over indulgence in the use of language can alienate some. I'm not talking about your example (salacious vs. 'hot') as that is a perfect substitution, but I'm sure we've all read those texts where the language is forced and doesn't feel natural. Or maybe its just me.
In that regard I completely agree.
A perfect example of a modern writer that throws around big words and you know it wouldn't work any other way is Tom Robbins. I about fell out of my chair when (in Fierce Invilads in Hot Climates) he said the dust from a moth's wings was a "libidinous", sexual dust...
A writer trying to force a big vocabulary is like stepping in an elevator with a man or woman wearing too much cologne or perfume...
Did The Romans Have Crowns?
in Imperium Romanorum
Posted
I'm amazed that no one brought up the gold crowns given to soldiers for being the first to mount the walls during the taking of a town...
"In the capture of a town those who are first to mount the walls are presented with a gold crown. So too those who have covered and saved any citizens or allies are distinguished by the Consul with certain presents; and those whom they have preserved present them voluntarily with a crown, or if not, they are compelled to do so by the Tribunes.
For the recipients of such rewards not only enjoy great glory among their comrades in the army, and an immediate reputation at home, but after their return they are marked men in all solemn festivals; for they alone, who have been thus distinguished by the Consuls for bravery, are allowed to wear robes of honour on those occasions: and moreover they place the spoils they have taken in the most conspicuous places in their houses, as visible tokens and proofs of their valour. No wonder that a people, whose rewards and punishments are allotted with such care and received with such feelings, should be brilliantly successful in war." - Polybius, 6.39
Also see: Corona