Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
For obvious reasons, I've never willingly eaten lead salts, but I now wonder what they tasted like. Do we have evidence that they seasoned their food with lead acetate? They can't have cooked with lead pots, of course, and I'm not sure what the melting point of pewter is or whether they had it. I'd think the lead would melt right out of it. But I can see them using lead storage containers as a form of primitive tupperware, though one of my first thoughts is how heavy those suckers would be. That lead was used heavily in Roman cosmetics, of course, is well established.
Do you also know if there was scale on the lead water delivery systems in Italy?
From WIkipedia - I'm sure there are better sources, but this gives the jist of it:
"Lead acetate has a sweet taste, which has led to its use as a sugar substitute throughout history. The ancient Romans, who had few sweeteners besides honey, would boil must (grape juice) in lead pots to produce a reduced sugar syrup called defrutum, concentrated again into sapa. This syrup was used to sweeten wine, and to sweeten and preserve fruit. It is possible that lead acetate or other lead compounds leaching into the syrup might have caused lead poisoning in anyone consuming it."
From WIkipedia - I'm sure there are better sources, but this gives the jist of it:
"Lead acetate has a sweet taste, which has led to its use as a sugar substitute throughout history. The ancient Romans, who had few sweeteners besides honey, would boil must (grape juice) in lead pots to produce a reduced sugar syrup called defrutum, concentrated again into sapa. This syrup was used to sweeten wine, and to sweeten and preserve fruit. It is possible that lead acetate or other lead compounds leaching into the syrup might have caused lead poisoning in anyone consuming it."
Sorry. I checked to find out what sugar of lead was, but didn't read far enough to find out about taste. I'd always assumed that 'sugar' referred to a clear crystalline appearance like that of sugar. After all, butter of antimony (SbCl3) doesn't imply that people spread it on their toast (pretty bad idea).
Romans dumped unwanted newborn childs in the pile of trash at the corners of the street. Children were eaten by dogs or rats or picked by beggars, that crippled them to inspire pity.
Roman children employed months and even years to master Roman calendar and time.
Romans used as the master solar clock a solar clock stolen far away, so solar time indications were way delayed.
Vulgar Latin, the language employed by soldiers and low class, was very similar to modern day Italian, Spanish or Catalan. Possibly mutually intelligible.
The place of meeting of common people were "popinas" or "taverns" where you could eat pickle foods, and pickled snacks, meat cuts preserved in honey and drink wine favlored with resina or species, and those places always had one or two slave girls or boys on a little stance besides or upstairs to "satisfy" patrons.
The "panem" given to Roman "plebs" was only given to males. That's why in Rome, female life expectancy was far shorter that male life expectancy.
Last edited by Leovigildo; 07-06-2009 at 12:47 PM..
1. Over 99% of Romans lived in Apartment buildings. Only 1% lived in private homes.
[URL="http://www.historyforkids.org/learn/romans/architecture/insulae.htm"]Roman Insulae (Apartments) - History for Kids![/URL]
2. Very few single family Roman homes had exterior windows. Most had a large opening in the ceiling which let in light and rain water
[URL="http://library.thinkquest.org/10098/romanhouse.htm"]A Roman House[/URL]
3. The mortality rate among wealthy Romans was high due to the fact that their water came in via Lead Pipes
[URL="http://penelope.uchicago.edu/%7Egrout/encyclopaedia_romana/wine/leadpoisoning.html"]Lead Poisoning and Rome[/URL]
4. Julius Caesar was NOT an emperor - he was a dictator but not an emperor
[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Roman_Emperors"]List of Roman Emperors - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/URL]
5. During the height of the Roman Empire life expectancy only averaged 25 years
[URL="http://www.uwyo.edu/WINWyoming/bullets/2004/bullets11-04.htm"]Thought Bullets--November 2004[/URL]
The romans biult statues to show there emperors but nocked them down after they died!
You really should READ that paper, then, to see if what you blathered on about was even what is recorded.
The Gospel writers make it perfectly clear that the TRIAL - such as it were - of Jesus was done by the Sanhedrin. Jews.
There was no Roman trial. It was nothing more than Pilate trying to quell a riot.
Get your information straight.
You are in error. Jesus had a hearing before the Sanhedrin on the charge of claiming that he had the power to forgive sins. This was a violation of Jewish law which held that only Yahweh could forgive sins. It called for the death of the blasphemer, but Rome denied the power of life and death to the Sanhedrin, reserving it for themselves.
Roman law had no interest at all in Jewish theology and would not sentence someone to death for the violation which had so troubled the Sanhedrin. Consequently, when Jesus was brought before Pilate, the charge was altered to be telling people not to pay Roman taxes and claiming the secular authority of a king. That was something for which the Romans would employ the death penalty.
It worked, Jesus was executed by the Romans, with the encouragement of the Sanhedrin.
It is all there in Luke if you wish to check on the above.
You have advanced a self canceling position. If you accept the Luke account as accurate, then Jesus certainly had a trial before the Romans, one which ended with his death sentence. If you insist that there was no trial, then you appear to be agreeing with me that we cannot trust the gospel accounts.
So, how about you making up your mind where you stand, and then coming back something a bit more coherent?
Both are right.
Jesus was executed by Romans instigued by Jews, as said here, they took a political decision to avoid insurrection.
If it were for Romans, he would have lived since they viewed him sympathetically, just as another crazy and not dangerous Jewish crackpot with Roman friends.
Romans did not give a crap anout theology, but they held in high respect "older cultures", and certainly Romans granted many provileges to Jews for that reason, and because they wanted Pax Romana and the place was always about to explode.
Later, when Christianism became Roman, the guilt was shifted entirely to Jews....
You are in error. Jesus had a hearing before the Sanhedrin on the charge of claiming that he had the power to forgive sins. This was a violation of Jewish law which held that only Yahweh could forgive sins. It called for the death of the blasphemer, but Rome denied the power of life and death to the Sanhedrin, reserving it for themselves.
Roman law had no interest at all in Jewish theology and would not sentence someone to death for the violation which had so troubled the Sanhedrin. Consequently, when Jesus was brought before Pilate, the charge was altered to be telling people not to pay Roman taxes and claiming the secular authority of a king. That was something for which the Romans would employ the death penalty.
It worked, Jesus was executed by the Romans, with the encouragement of the Sanhedrin.
It is all there in Luke if you wish to check on the above.
You have advanced a self canceling position. If you accept the Luke account as accurate, then Jesus certainly had a trial before the Romans, one which ended with his death sentence. If you insist that there was no trial, then you appear to be agreeing with me that we cannot trust the gospel accounts.
So, how about you making up your mind where you stand, and then coming back something a bit more coherent?
Hahahahaha - what a pile of agenda-driven manure!
This "trial" of which you speak was nothing but crowd control. Riot suppression. If you think, even for a moment, that this "trial" of Jesus was in any way a typical Roman trial - or even remotely resembled the Law of Twelve Tables - you are living in your own little self-made bubble.
This "trial" of which you speak was nothing but crowd control. Riot suppression. If you think, even for a moment, that this "trial" of Jesus was in any way a typical Roman trial - or even remotely resembled the Law of Twelve Tables - you are living in your own little self-made bubble.
You provide much bluster and no substance. You do not provide any reason to think that your opinions on these matters are of any interest or founded in facts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
roman
