New Discussion Forum Experiment

[Favonius Cornelius]

I think one of my downfalls is I rely on other authors, particularly modern, to tell me the tale of the ancients, rather than read the ancients themselves. I hope to rectify this some day, but my life what it is I barely have the time to read anything, and all this can only be a hobby. I think I'll withdraw my post (you can delete) because I honestly don't have the time to dig through Livy to back up my ideas, and don't even have a specific enough knowledge of the text to have general ideas on where to find what I am looking for.

 

Anyway, if I'm going to put that much work into a thing, might as well do it on one's own than surrender my libertas and resource to a tyrant!!

[Primus Pilus]

Anyway, if I'm going to put that much work into a thing, might as well do it on one's own than surrender my libertas and resource to a tyrant!!

 

LOL, well no worries. It's not like you sure as hell can't use your own conjecture in every other part of the forum. We'll see how this particular experiment pans out.

[P.Clodius]

I think one of my downfalls is I rely on other authors, particularly modern, to tell me the tale of the ancients, rather than read the ancients themselves.

That my friend is FAR from a downfall, those same authors use the ancients and more for their material. I for one will primarily be using modern authors for reference, including MPC's much vaunted Gruen (when I finaly get round to reading it). I read Livy's War with Hannibal and enjoyed it, I read Livy's History of Rome and found it to be akin to hammering nails through one's own testicle...Chill, you did a good job but just try to follow the guidlines, think of it as teaching your brother/son something but not being there personally so you leave a note with instructions.

[WotWotius]

I have been viewing this idea with great interest and curiosity. Though up until now I have chosen to remain silent on the matter, I cannot refrain myself from mentioning the following points:

 

When the moment requires it, I and many other forum members, tend to use contemporary sources to support issues raised.Additionally, during serious discussion, throwaway comments along the lines of

[Primus Pilus]

Fortunately, most ancient sources are available online. I can build a list if it would be beneficial.

 

And let me repeat again... this format discussion will be limited to this subforum only.

[WotWotius]

Fortunately, most ancient sources are available online. I can build a list if it would be beneficial.

 

Thank you, a list would be very much welcomed.

[Favonius Cornelius]

I had an idea to maybe help revitalize this section, seeing as how it does not seem to be doing much. How about starting something of a 'Mythbusters' theme, where we take some popular misconceptions and deconstruct them with fact and reasoning. It would be something we could probably mostly all agree on, and perhaps spawn a new kind of section in UNRV.

 

As a first I suggest the theory of lead pipes leading to the fall of the Roman Empire...

 

[Lost_Warrior]

haha and then I suggest we follow up with the well-known yet dubious: Ave Imperator! Moritori te salutant!

[Primus Pilus]

As a first I suggest the theory of lead pipes leading to the fall of the Roman Empire...

 

A sound enough suggestion FC. If you are up for it, feel free to start a thread. Or anyone on any subject for that matter.

[Pertinax]

As a first I suggest the theory of lead pipes leading to the fall of the Roman Empire...

 

A sound enough suggestion FC. If you are up for it, feel free to start a thread. Or anyone on any subject for that matter.

 

I did try!

 

http://www.unrv.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=2951

[M. Porcius Cato]

Yes, but the key is to cite sources so that interested parties can follow up and verify your claims for themselves.

 

For example, according to your post, the Romans ate lots of cabbage and cabbage prevents lead poisoning, therefore lead pipes posed no hazard. BUT, how do we know how much cabbage ordinary Romans ate? Cato the Elder recommends eating lots (you could cite that), but there were nearly a million people living in Rome--could they all really get enough cabbage? Here, too, citing something about the acreage required to support a million cabbage consumers would be relevant.

 

(Personally, I have my doubts--it took massive barges and tremendous infrastructure simply to provide Romans with their grain, which is much less perishable than cabbage and also much less voluminous. Without refrigeration, how could a city of a million obtain sufficient produce on a daily basis to ward off lead poisoning?)

 

There is a reason people do ancient history professionally--it's hard work to substantiate claims with evidence. But, as Spinoza says, all things excellent are as difficult as they are rare.

[Favonius Cornelius]

It's important to site sources Cato when you can, but I think it's possible to go overboard on the need to do so since so much of ancient history requires intuitive thought and common sense, and so much is unknown. Just because it is unknown does not mean that it is academically incorrect to conjecture plausible scenarios or construct pictures based on related knowns. Science itself would get no where if it were not capable of doing just this.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Common sense is a very low standard. In my view, far too low of a standard for the academia subforum.

[Favonius Cornelius]

Common sense is a very low standard. In my view, far too low of a standard for the academia subforum.

 

It's kind of amusing really, to have that view, considering how unreliable most of the ancients were anyway. Do you believe for face value everything Livy tells us? If we were to proceed like that then our conclusions would be rather gullible.

[M. Porcius Cato]

No one is arguing that the ancients should be taken at face value. The argument is that common sense is not sufficient--not that it's not necessary.