|
Kaal posted:diets for expecting mothers (I hope you enjoy eggs and rice), etc. It's interesting stuff. Wait eggs and what? How did ancient Romans get rice? Were they buying in bulk from the South Asian trade routes? Surely they couldn't cultivate the stuff themselves in any part of their territory? 
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 06:12
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Wait eggs and what? idk about classical times but rice is grown in egypt today
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 06:17
|
|
|
It was second fiddle to wheat/barley but rice was still grown in northern Korea and Manchuria which has a way harsher climate than Italy, is there a reason they couldn’t have grown it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 08:13
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Wait eggs and what? Rice is grown all around the Mediterranean, maybe not Italy proper but I think in the Near East it was and is today cultivated in more than a few places like the Nile Delta. Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 08:21 on Dec 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 08:18
|
|
|
Jack2142 posted:Rice is grown all around the Mediterranean, maybe not Italy proper but I think in the Near East it was and is today cultivated in more than a few places like the Nile Delta. Rice is grown in Italy even today. They sell it as risotto rice. Probably mostly because they can put an Italian village name and a drawing ofa campanile on it rather than a pagoda and some fake Chinese characters
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 09:40
|
|
|
Fuschia tude posted:Wait eggs and what?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 09:51
|
|
|
I took a quick look at the UN statistics, and it looks like Egypt produces more rice than South Korea. None of the European countries are major producers, but Portugal is the only place I've actually seen rice paddies irl, and they sell Italian and Spanish rice in every shop here (Finland)
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 10:17
|
|
|
Nessus posted:The best specific origin guess seems to be that it was brought back by men from Alexander the Great's armies, who definitely got far enough East to encounter the plant. I've also read this, I'm not sure it's true but it smells right. There is African natively domesticated rice though, I don't know if they were growing African or Asian. Rice was a major crop in Europe and was one of the huge crops of the early American colonies, since there's way more land in the Americas good for growing it than in Europe. It has plenty of history in the west.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 11:39
|
|
|
They grow rice in Italy, they even made a movie about it in the 40s. https://youtu.be/hTj40E-0HbA
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 12:16
|
|
|
They grow rice in Italy and Egypt now. But I was under the impression that they really didn't in Roman times, and that most rice the Romans had access to came from India. And out friends at the UN say that rice cultivation started in Egypt in the 7th century, and in Italy in the 15th http://www.fao.org/rice2004/en/p4.htm http://www.fao.org/rice2004/en/p7.htm Epicurius fucked around with this message at 12:39 on Dec 12, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 12:35
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:idk about classical times but rice is grown in egypt today
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
Epicurius posted:They grow rice in Italy and Egypt now. But I was under the impression that they really didn't in Roman times, and that most rice the Romans had access to came from India.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 13:48
|
|
|
Koramei posted:It was second fiddle to wheat/barley but rice was still grown in northern Korea and Manchuria which has a way harsher climate than Italy, is there a reason they couldn’t have grown it?
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:31
|
|
|
Halloween Jack posted:I recall Marietti was mad about pasta in part because it required wheat imports. Was Italy just not big enough to grow enough wheat to feed its population by the early 20th century? I know we're getting far away from ancient stuff now. Italy has always had issues with getting enough wheat to feed the population. That's why Egypt was considered so important throughout the imperial era - that's where the food was made.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 16:49
|
|
|
Not just Egypt, North Africa was crucial as a grain supplier as well.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 17:04
|
|
Yes, it's like a lava lamp.
|
Ras Het posted:I took a quick look at the UN statistics, and it looks like Egypt produces more rice than South Korea. None of the European countries are major producers, but Portugal is the only place I've actually seen rice paddies irl, and they sell Italian and Spanish rice in every shop here (Finland) In Portugal it was probably introduced by the Moors in the 8th/9th century.its first mentioned in some writings from the 14th century and was considered a delicacy only for kings and nobles.mass plantations only started around the 18th century. sweet rice with cinnamon is delicious, apparently even the buddha recommended it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 22:25
|
|
|
There are also medieval English recipes for mawmenny using rice flour in addition to almond milk as the thickener.
|
|
#
?
Dec 12, 2019 22:28
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:you have to consume a ridiculous amount of alcohol to count as a binge drinker (think multiple bottles of wine per day). Where are you getting this from? It sounds like you’re confusing binge drinking with alcoholism. Binging implies occasionally drinking way too much, not doing it consistently.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 01:17
|
|
|
chitoryu12 posted:you have to consume a ridiculous amount of alcohol to count as a binge drinker (think multiple bottles of wine per day). Wafflecopper posted:Binging implies occasionally drinking way too much, not doing it consistently. Also, the "definition" of binge drinking used by the CDC is actually 5 drinks (men) / 4 drinks (women) in 2 hours, which is well below "multiple bottles of wine per day". Some people call that "watching football." https://www.cdc.gov/alcohol/fact-sheets/binge-drinking.htm
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 05:50
|
|
|
ulmont posted:Also, the "definition" of binge drinking used by the CDC is actually 5 drinks (men) / 4 drinks (women) in 2 hours, which is well below "multiple bottles of wine per day". Some people call that "watching football." 5 drinks according to this is 25 fl oz, which is about 1 bottle of wine. drinking a bottle of wine in 2 hours is about what I'd expect from someone who drinks multiple bottles of wine a day (although it's also consistent with drinking a smaller amount faster, of course)
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 08:02
|
|
|
Also, CDC is one thing, but the textual definition is just off to me as an alcoholic: "the consumption of an excessive amount of alcohol in a short period of time." Like, what even is that? People have different tolerances, and most folks just drink till they feel good and stop. Alcoholics drink as much and as fast as they can, usually. I get that it describes an act, but what is it excessive in regards to? Physical health? If so, almost everyone binge drinks. Surgeon General warnings? Same as before. In comparison to most people? Okay, then they're probably alcoholics.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 12:00
|
|
|
Jeb Bush 2012 posted:5 drinks according to this is 25 fl oz, which is about 1 bottle of wine. drinking a bottle of wine in 2 hours is about what I'd expect from someone who drinks multiple bottles of wine a day (although it's also consistent with drinking a smaller amount faster, of course) The amount of liquid you consume will also vary greatly with the alcohol content, and lower alcohol content generally slows the consumption of anyone but a dedicated alcoholic trying to get drunk immediately and for a long period of time. That bottle of wine could also be 5 beers or 5 shots, and it's a lot easier to do 5 shots over 2 hours than it is 5 beers considering the carbonation and liquid filling your stomach over time. I did an experiment with drinking the Royal Navy daily grog ration for two days and found that while my mug contained 2.5 ounces of high-proof rum, I was forced to slow down while drinking it because of the amount of liquid diluting it. Two mugs didn't have the same effect on me as if I had just downed three shots of the rum in one go because there was more time for my body to process it as I drank. You can also drink over twice as much as the "official binge drinking governmental standard" over the course of an entire day pretty easily. It takes roughly 1 hour for the effect of 1 drink to wear off, so a dedicated drinker with a large supply can easily surpass 10 drinks in a day with little drunkenness to show for it; this was actually a common amount of consumption through the 19th century, which is one of the reasons temperance started taking hold at that time.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 15:06
|
|
|
Two questions! Is there an accessible version of Marcus Aurelius' meditations somewhere? I know it was just written to and for himself, but I've heard Penguin Books had a good one, I just can't find it :noob: I keep playing this game about being Also, as a hastati (which you're expressly stated to be), do you not wield a spear at this point? The game has one using Italic Xiphos or Gladius Hispaniensis type short swords.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 16:54
|
|
|
Tias posted:
Hastati were originally equipped with long spears (hence the name), but at the time of the First Punic War, they were usingpilate, which were throwing spears, and a gladius, which was a shirt stabbing sword. Hastati generally wore chain armor, but they were responsible for bringing their own armor, so it's not unthinkable that a poorer soldier would have just a padded tunic. If by plate armor, you mean lorica segmentata, that was probably 2nd century AD at the earliest.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:12
|
|
|
There’s a Penguin Classics version of Meditations, but a number of English texts are also available on wikisource, such as Farquharson’s, which includes an exhaustive commentary. Romans made quite a lot of chainmail, or “lorica hamata”. We even have some complete shirts of it. The idea that Roman soldiers all wore plate armor at all times is a Hollywoodism: the iconic style of plate armor, aka “lorica segmentata” was worn by at least some legionaries from around the time of the birth of Christ till the end of the third century AD. But it was not in use during the Punic wars and never totally superseded the use of mail and scale armor (“lorica squamata”).
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:18
|
|
|
Tias posted:I keep playing this game about being Lorica segmentata, the fancy plate cuirass looking kind, is what people picture when they imagine a Roman legionary, but most legionaries would have actually worn chainmail (lorica hamata) or a type of scale male (lorica squamata). Actually, during the first Punic War none of them would have worn the segmentata since it doesn't show up for a few hundred more years, and even then it's use was probably not widespread. The Romans could make their own chainmail, yes. It's actually a lot easier to make and maintain than lorica segmentata. Hastati did not use spears (hasta) anymore by the time of the first Punic war, although they did originally which is how they get their name. Until the Marian reforms a legionary was expected to supply their own equipment, which means that while there was a more-or-less standard kit for each type of soldier, you might see some minor differences which I guess could be how someone might have a xiphos instead of a gladius.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:21
|
|
|
As usual, I assumed things with half a wind (appropriate, as I am full of fermented kale and in a fever)! Thanks, everybody!
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 17:51
|
|
|
For further detail, since I'm in an airport and bored, gonna do some big time phone posting, so also please excuse any errors "Hastati" means "Spearman" and is derivative of the Roman term for a spear, a Hasta. Under the Servian legion system, the army fought as Greek style hoplites, and was divided into 5 classes of soldier based on wealth, due to the equipment requirements. Class 1 was a full hoplite with helmet, greaves, breastplate of bronze or linen (many layers glued together, think thick rawhide not cloth texture), a shield, spear, and sword. Class 2 subtracted the breastplate, class 3 the greaves, and class 4 the helmet. Class 5 were skirmishers. After or during the Samnite wars in the 300's BC, Rome shifted to the manipular legions. This is when the fighting style associated with Rome was developed. They retained a class system of their soldiers, but now it's divided by experience as well as wealth, and the equipment changes. Now you have 4 classes. Velites are the skirmishers. Next you have the heavy infantry, the youngest being the hastati. Men aged 16-24 or so and equipped with a small square bronze breastplate, helmet, 2 pilum (javelins), and the big Roman scutum shield. Principes were the next class, men from 25-40 who were veterans. They had the same stuff as the hastati, but wore lorica hamata, chain mail. This chain mail was likely derived from Gallic designs, and was the standard armor for the legions going forward. Triarii were the last class, veterans 40-55 who had the same armor and shield as the principes, but also the good old Hasta and fought similar to hoplites, so super heavy infantry. So for the punic wars, that is the equipment set being used. And I'm sure lots of hastati had hamata, but it was not standard. So it makes sense your character scrounges it up as soon as they can. The lorica hamata, the famous plate armor, first shows up under Augustus, so first century AD. It does not really become common until we see tons of it on Trajan's column, so likely around 100AD it's common to see it. It was never the standard, and the hamata never stopped being used. It was preferred cause it can feel lighter to wear as the weight is more well distributed, and easier to make with Roman economies of scale. As well as being more protective from spear thrusts. Chain is normally cheaper because you need less material, it's true cost is in the labor to make it, but you can get nearly anyone to link the rings (slaves). WoodrowSkillson fucked around with this message at 18:34 on Dec 13, 2019 |
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 18:29
|
|
|
My understanding also is that hamata actually provided better protection, but segementata was way faster to mass produce. However, Armor Nerds are a special kind of nerd and it's hard to find any agreement.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 21:18
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:My understanding also is that hamata actually provided better protection, but segementata was way faster to mass produce. However, Armor Nerds are a special kind of nerd and it's hard to find any agreement. If hamata offered better protection, Trajan's guys would have been in it, since they were extremely concerned about uparmoring for the Dacian campaigns. That is when they added extra reinforcement to the tops of the helmets, issued "manica", the plate arm guards, and greaves were also used. Chain rarely is "better" than plate as inherently mail can be more easily pierced, as links can be broken. I guess you can shove blades up into the segments, but that's real hard to do to a legionary actively defending with his shield. Roman steel was not as good as the later plate used on the medieval period, so I assume it could be broken more easily as well if it had impurities and was brittle in spots. However that goes for the mail as well, which likely could be more easily penetrated by a spear thrust than later medieval mail as well. Given that the trend was to use segmentata during the height of Roman wealth and power, with it mostly disappearing after the Crisis of the Third Century, it stands to reason that it was preferred. However to your point, it cannot have been THAT much better, as hamata never stopped being used at any point, and had huge advantages as it was far easier to repair a few broken links than replace plates, as well as being far easier to ship around the empire in wagons and baggage trains.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
Yeah I always figured they had to be roughly equivalent or one would have vanished. I assume lorica squamata sucked and that's why it seems to be rare in comparison. We talk about silk a lot but I hadn't realized until recently that a lot of eastern trade was buying Chinese or Indian steel to make arms and armor, since both places produced superior metal. The Romans produced decent steel specifically in Noricum but it was limited. Medieval steel was vastly superior, not even comparable. A 1400s plate armor would probably just shatter every Roman weapon that hit it.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 23:31
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Yeah I always figured they had to be roughly equivalent or one would have vanished. I assume lorica squamata sucked and that's why it seems to be rare in comparison. Scale armor is normally weak to upward thrusts from enemy weapons, and that's easy to grasp for literally anyone, so every grunt you encounter will be specifically trying to do that to you. Better made designs limit this, but in general it's always a problem compared to plate or mail. As for steel, that was the trend until the Spanish steels started being readily available in the 1400s, which was a factor in plate becoming far more prevalent. The famous Viking Ulfbert swords were local, poorer quality local steels as the core, with Indian crucible steel for the edges, just like a katana.
|
|
#
?
Dec 13, 2019 23:52
|
|
|
Wear your scale upside down duh
|
|
#
?
Dec 14, 2019 23:46
|
|
|
WoodrowSkillson posted:Scale armor is normally weak to upward thrusts from enemy weapons, and that's easy to grasp for literally anyone, so every grunt you encounter will be specifically trying to do that to you. Better made designs limit this, but in general it's always a problem compared to plate or mail. Ulfberts are extremely diverse, though, and composition depends a lot on time period and area. The first are pattern welds, but at least one is a hypoeuctectoid alloy that came from.. I want to say China.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 00:02
|
|
|
LingcodKilla posted:Wear your scale upside down duh Two sets Put the first one on upside down Invulnerable!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 00:40
|
|
|
Grand Fromage posted:Yeah I always figured they had to be roughly equivalent or one would have vanished. I assume lorica squamata sucked and that's why it seems to be rare in comparison. the point about importing eastern steel sounds interesting to me, and it makes a lot of sense. obviously Damascus steel was famous in the Medieval period and would have been a major trade good in Byzantine times, but I wonder if there were significant imports of steel in the classical period? I'm also curious to read more about Chinese steel in Europe, since that's something new to me
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 01:54
|
|
|
Is there a good book intended for a casual non-linguist reader about the history of studies of Proto-Indo-European?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 02:11
|
|
|
The poor Aryans, it's not their fault linguists and archeologist had to saddle them with that cumbersome name. Though to be fair they spent a lot of time riding around on chariots being mean to people.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 04:04
|
|
|
Tbh if I had a chariot that’s how I’d send my time too
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 04:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 10, 2024 08:59 |
|
|
This may have already been asked but 800 pages is a lot to search through. How did things from antiquity get buried so far underground? Especially entire buildings
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2019 07:18
|
|