|
Where slaves were needed, to row galleys, the practice persisted long after it had largely disappeared otherwise in Europe. The slave raids of the Barbary pirates built up a fearsome reputation that made Europeans associate slavery with Muslims regardless of Christian fleets doing the same things on the other side of the Med.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2018 19:58
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
It's not slavery if you use convicts to do it, duh. Bonus points for "forgetting" to free the convicts at the end of their sentence.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2018 23:42
|
|
|
fishmech posted:They're using hot sand to attempt to cauterize the area. And then the people passing this story onto us are exaggerating it to the point where the kids are just being buried completely in burning hot sand for the hell of it. This makes sense and is obvious in hindsight.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 03:25
|
|
|
Is the mortality rate different in animals? I kinda doubt that they'd accept 90% fatalities every time they want to get a draft ox
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 08:33
|
|
|
Animal castration doesn't involve cutting off the penis. Just the testicles.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 08:38
|
|
|
Yowch. Okay.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 08:46
|
|
|
feedmegin posted:Caveat : only applies to slaves who convert to Islam. Yep, I said that. I think that was also how Christianity initially expanded IIRC. Nobles just went out and bought slaves and immediately manumitted them, or stuff like that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 10:51
|
|
|
I thought Christianity was originally most popular with slaves and poor people. The rich didn't start converting until later. It seems like a religion that would have much more appeal for the poor.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 14:35
|
|
|
OctaviusBeaver posted:I thought Christianity was originally most popular with slaves and poor people. The rich didn't start converting until later. It seems like a religion that would have much more appeal for the poor. The joke (?) I always see is that Christianity got its start among bored aristocratic Roman housewives.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 14:40
|
|
|
OctaviusBeaver posted:I thought Christianity was originally most popular with slaves and poor people. The rich didn't start converting until later. It seems like a religion that would have much more appeal for the poor. It was pretty egalitarian, with a few really specific "wealthy people are fuckers" parts to boot. It being a fully-revealed religion probably helped too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 14:42
|
|
|
OctaviusBeaver posted:I thought Christianity was originally most popular with slaves and poor people. The rich didn't start converting until later. It seems like a religion that would have much more appeal for the poor. Acts of the Apostles 4 and 5 (written late 1st century) suggests that landowners were starting to follow the apostles as early as the 30s (indeed within months of Jesus' death). The catch is that the behavior of the early Christians at this time was such that if you had property you were expected to sell it in order to fund the communal lifestyle of the faithful (and if you don't do it God will literally smite you dead). But by the time of Paul's letter to Philemon (maybe the 60s?) it was clearly considered acceptable for Christians to own slaves (i.e. be people of means) even if Paul suggests in this letter that it is better not to.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 14:55
|
|
|
I don't know that much about early Christianity, but I know that the 4th century Church Fathers spent a lot of time writing about wether or not you can be rich and a good Christian. The answers ranged from "no" to "yes, as long as you help the poor (and not just a token effort)". There are some bible verses that pretty unambiguously say you're going to hell if you're rich. Like The Parable of the Sheep and Goats* in Matthew 25 and famously the eye of a needle metaphor. But they can also be explained away in various ways. ed. *I was thinking of The Rich Man and Lazarus, but the Sheep and Goats sort of fits too. Grevling fucked around with this message at 15:06 on Aug 11, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 14:56
|
|
|
IIRC it was very popular with the provincial middle classes. """Poor""" enough to look outside the current system but rich enough to delve into odd mystery sects at their dinner clubs. Early Christianity had the same appeal as Mithraism. It's also easier to see why Rome cracked down so hard. A bunch of semi loyal local nobility meeting in private and celebrating some collective blood to wine covenant that they refuse to talk about? Hmmm  E: and riling up the poor with charity!?!?  
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 15:05
|
|
|
Reading between the lines, essentially as soon as Christianity became anything other than apocalyptic Jewish sect (that is to say, as soon as Paul got crackin') it was obvious the communism stuff would have to go
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 15:22
|
|
|
Strategic Tea posted:IIRC it was very popular with the provincial middle classes. """Poor""" enough to look outside the current system but rich enough to delve into odd mystery sects at their dinner clubs. Early Christianity had the same appeal as Mithraism. Mystery cults were nothing new, though. It's hard to say precisely why the Christians got the crackdown while others didn't, but I suspect it's a combo of 1) being new, 2) being aggressively monotheistic, and c) needing a scapegoat for the Great Roman Fire
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
sullat posted:Mystery cults were nothing new, though. It's hard to say precisely why the Christians got the crackdown while others didn't, but I suspect it's a combo of 1) being new, 2) being aggressively monotheistic, and c) needing a scapegoat for the Great Roman Fire It's likely to be this one. Not acknowledging and worshipping the official Roman gods (to include Emperors) alongside one's own was considered a direct rejection of the authority of the Roman state. The Jews repeatedly got in a ton of poo poo for this one too.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 15:50
|
|
|
the romans varied dramatically in their attitudes toward christians over time and space. the level of crackdown is exaggerated, though - while certainly there were emperors, governors, etc. interested in a violent purge, most of the time it was a matter of asking someone to affirm that the emperors are divine. some christians refused, others simply cooperated and were let go without hassle. this sort of system is exactly why islam permits muslims to lie about their beliefs - christians faced a conflict between their theology and their survival. nobody cared about whether you acknowledged the roman gods - it was the imperial cult that was the sticking point, that the romans expected to be integrated into any and all belief systems in their territory
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 16:58
|
|
|
That was the big cause of the Decian persecution in 250. Decius passed a decree that said that everybody, except for Jews, who were exempt, because Judaism forbade sacrificing to the gods, had to offer a sacrifice, in front of a government witness, to the gods of Rome and the well being of the Emperor It wasn't targeted against Christians, but was part of Decius's morality campaign, along with bringing back the Censorate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 19:41
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:That was the big cause of the Decian persecution in 250. Decius passed a decree that said that everybody, except for Jews, who were exempt, because Judaism forbade sacrificing to the gods, had to offer a sacrifice, in front of a government witness, to the gods of Rome and the well being of the Emperor It wasn't targeted against Christians, but was part of Decius's morality campaign, along with bringing back the Censorate. How much of that was about morality, and how much was about getting folks to give bribes to their nearest government witness, to be passed up the chain?
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 21:15
|
|
|
My Imaginary GF posted:How much of that was about morality, and how much was about getting folks to give bribes to their nearest government witness, to be passed up the chain? Hard to say, partly because we don't have the original edict itself. We do have surviving copies of the sacrificial certifications, though. Earlier interpretations of the decree see it as specifically directed against Christians, but nowadays, the general consensus is that he was concerned about the pax deorum, and was worried that the problems that were facing Rome were due to immorality and the displeasure of the gods. So the edict is seen as part of his attempt to please the gods, and also to recreate a common "Romaness" that he considered had been weakened by Caracalla's decree giving citizenship to everyone. So it was seen as a unifying act.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2018 21:44
|
|
|
going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 04:14
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood? What sort of thing are you looking to make? Apperizer, main course, dessert? Cato the Elder had a cheesecake recipe that adapts itself well to modern tastes.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 04:42
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood? boiled cabbage
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:Hard to say, partly because we don't have the original edict itself. We do have surviving copies of the sacrificial certifications, though. Earlier interpretations of the decree see it as specifically directed against Christians, but nowadays, the general consensus is that he was concerned about the pax deorum, and was worried that the problems that were facing Rome were due to immorality and the displeasure of the gods. So the edict is seen as part of his attempt to please the gods, and also to recreate a common "Romaness" that he considered had been weakened by Caracalla's decree giving citizenship to everyone. So it was seen as a unifying act. Do we have any records of Romans persecuting any pagan religions, prior to christianization? I know they didn't like human sacrifice or druids, but I don't ever remember hearing them doing anything specific. StashAugustine posted:going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood? Does your local pet store happen to carry dormice?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 04:47
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:boiled cabbage  quote:Of the medicinal value of the cabbage: It is the cabbage which surpasses all other vegetables. It may be eaten either cooked or raw; if you eat it raw, dip it into vinegar. It promotes digestion marvellously and is an excellent laxative, and the urine is wholesome for everything. If you wish to drink deep at a banquet and to enjoy your dinner, eat as much raw cabbage as you wish, seasoned with vinegar, before dinner, and likewise after dinner eat some half a dozen leaves; it will make you feel as if you had not dined, and you can drink as much as you please.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 06:34
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Do we have any records of Romans persecuting any pagan religions, prior to christianization? I know they didn't like human sacrifice or druids, but I don't ever remember hearing them doing anything specific. I remember reading that in Gaul they cut down every tree--including oak trees--next to their roads. This served two purposes: it created abatis, which protected caravans and columns of troops; and it was the psychological equivalent of burning every church throughout the countryside. It was a military art class rather than a history class, so the story may be apocryphal.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 12:16
|
|
|
Squalid posted:Do we have any records of Romans persecuting any pagan religions, prior to christianization? If anything they absorbed pagan religions.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 15:31
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood? https://www.allrecipes.com/recipe/186428/ancient-roman-cheesecake-savillum/ My wife made this once, says it's actually good, but it hardens as it cools.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 16:37
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood? Lark's tongues Oh, and I have a question on a related topic: is it possible that Roman garum influenced Asian fermented fish sauces, or vice-versa, through trade? Or is it just a matter of seaside cultures independently coming up with similar ways to prepare and preserve seafood? SerialKilldeer fucked around with this message at 19:11 on Aug 12, 2018 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 18:46
|
|
|
StashAugustine posted:going to a vaguely roman themed potluck, any ideas for food with the caveat that i hate seafood?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 19:30
|
|
|
SerialKilldeer posted:Lark's tongues Yikes at this av/post combo!
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2018 23:52
|
|
|
SerialKilldeer posted:Lark's tongues Probably independent invention but it's possible, Romans spent time in SEA. No way to know.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 00:48
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:What sort of thing are you looking to make? Apperizer, main course, dessert? Cato the Elder had a cheesecake recipe that adapts itself well to modern tastes. Hieronymous Alloy posted:https://www.allrecipes.com/recipe/186428/ancient-roman-cheesecake-savillum/
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 01:23
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:I like the Chinese description of the Roman government: Sorry this is ages ago but can you share original language source on this so I can
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 06:25
|
|
|
It's Gan Ying as quoted by vol. 88 of the Book of Later Han.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 06:44
|
|
|
So did the Romans think of other gods as equivalents to their own gods or did they see the world more as "my God can beat up your God"? I'm sorry if this is an obvious question but I've been having trouble figuring out how the Romans saw religion.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 07:32
|
|
|
Don Gato posted:So did the Romans think of other gods as equivalents to their own gods or did they see the world more as "my God can beat up your God"? As far as I can tell the romans didn't have their "own gods". They worshiped spirits but had no pantheon or creation myths on their own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 08:04
|
|
|
My impression was that Romans saw gods as kinda the apex of the patron/client system, so it wasn't about which god was best, but more about what can this god do for me/Rome.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 08:07
|
|
|
Alhazred posted:As far as I can tell the romans didn't have their "own gods". They worshiped spirits but had no pantheon or creation myths on their own.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 08:18
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 24, 2024 01:50 |
|
|
He's being very specific. The native Roman religion has no named gods. What we think of as the Roman gods are one of the many branches of the old pan-Mediterranean religion, likely first adopted from Etruscan forms. Anyway Romans seemed to accept all gods as real, either as foreign names/aspects of more familiar ones or as deities from elsewhere.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2018 08:25
|
|