There have been previous discussions about the possible way victims of Pompeii died (see thread below). There are several possible mechanisms: asphyxiation (lack of oxygen), pyroclastic flows (a fast-moving current of hot gas and volcanic matter), falling or collapsing buildings, and even a tsunami.

Another mechanism has been suggested about the cause of death: an earthquake. Two male victims aged at least 55 were found in the Casti Amanti at Pompeii beneath a wall that had collapsed before the area was covered in volcanic material. One of the victims appeared to be shielding his face from the falling wall.

https://www.aljazeera.com/amp/news/2023/5/17/pompeii-excavations-reveal-two-new-skeletons

Pompeii had experienced earthquakes before the fateful volcanic eruption in AD 77. Increasingly, the relationship between earthquakes and volcanic activity has become appreciated. Both involve disturbances of the tectonic plates. 
 

There is now a possibility that a destructive earthquake occurred simultaneously with the volcanic eruption, causing at least two fatalities that day.

https://australian.museum/learn/minerals/shaping-earth/how-are-volcanoes-and-earthquakes-interrelated/

Here is an excellent article on the complicated role of the fasces throughout history.
 

https://antigonejournal.com/2023/07/roman-fasces/

One of my "special interests" is the issue of incest, the definition and ban of it or lack thereof in all societies. I usually work mostly with secondary sources (expert books compiling quotes) but whenever possible I go back to the primary source.

Could you explain this ? First off my knowledge of Roman culture is on a need-to-know basis (or rather it grows organically as I find bits that interest me), and secondly English is not my mother tongue so sometimes I don't get the logic of some sentences, what it's supposed to convey.

Could you paraphrase these sentences so that It makes sense to me ?

> Or do they fear the disagreements which arise in marriages of near kin, on the ground that these tend to destroy natural rights?
Or, since they observe that women by reason of their weakness need many protectors, were they not willing to take as partners in their household women closely akin to them, so that if their husbands wronged them, their kinsmen might bring them succour?

Plutarch has something specific in mind with "destroy natural rights" but I don't get it. Jealousy male relatives about who gets to marry and s∃x a hot daughter ?
And in the second sentence, am I right that Plutarch finds strange that Romans, knowing the vulnerability of women and their eternal dependency on their family, did not reach the logical conclusion that they would be safer not leaving it at all ?

Thanks

On the military front, the technological gap between various tribes and the Romans shrank. My layman's understanding is that after the period of around 0-100 the introduction of new devices and technologies vastly reduced. If anything, the quantity of slave labor available seems to have reduced the drive for innovation.

What about mathematical and other scientific studies after 0 AD?

So i was watching some youtube videos and than I came across a video about the emperor Claudius. The video said that Claudius could have conspired against Caligulla and the argument was that the story of Claudius being saved by a soldier named "Gratus" was too much coincidence. So could this be true? Or even better: does someone know the historian that made this argument? Or does this argument make no sense?

Thanks! I'm curious.

https://www.mdpi.com/1911-8074/15/12/547 

In Russia the Orthodox church was also renowned for its wide-scale investments in tobacco imports in the past .. 

ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Табачный_скандал

More info can be found at the below link for someone who reads Russian

ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/Экономическая_деятельность_Русской_православной_церкви

n the mid-3rd century AD Roman Britain's regional fleet, the Classis Britannica, disappeared. It was never to return. Soon the North Sea and English Channel were over-run by Germanic pirates preying upon the east and south coast of Britain, and the continental coast up to the Rhine Delta. The western augustus (senior emperor) Maximian turned to a seasoned naval leader called Marcus Aurelius Mausaeus Valerius Carausius to restore order. Dubbed the pirate king, he initially thrived, seeing off early attempts by Maximian to defeat him. Here, for the first time, historian and broadcaster Dr Simon Elliott tells the full story based on his most recent book. Join us to find out more.
 

https://www.eventbrite.co.uk/e/online-roman-britains-pirate-king-tickets-410399464847

As some of you may already know, I have decided to hang up my quill after writing one more book. The main reason for this is that, for me and many like me, writing books is no longer worth the effort regarding financial rewards.  On a personal level, writing is wonderful:  the ability to discover new aspects of subjects during research and then share them with readers has always filled me with excitement.  BUT .... I can earn more in a fortnight working two hours a day as a tutor than I receive in six months in royalties from all of my books.

This is not due to my books not selling.  It is due to the onset of the digital age.  When amazon sells 2,000 digital copies of only one of  my books and I receive 2.5 pence (for American readers, that's about 3.5c) per book, it is unsurprising that I can no longer justify sitting at home and writing.  Each book take c.18 months of research and composition, and such small reward is more than slightly insulting.  Of more importance, I need money to live, and it is simply no longer worthwhile.

I often wonder how many other writers have entered the publishing world in hope and excitement and been discouraged and so stopped writing simply because financially it is no longer viable.

Part of the problem, of course, is that few high schools now offer instruction in either Latin or Ancient Greek. 
 

Quote

“Classics majors at Princeton University will no longer be required to learn Greek or Latin in a push to create a more inclusive and equitable program, an effort that was given “new urgency” by the “events around race that occurred last summer.” Last month, faculty members approved changes to the Classics department, including eliminating the “classics” track, which required an intermediate proficiency in Greek or Latin to enter the concentration, according to Princeton Alumni Weekly. The requirement for students to take Greek or Latin was also removed.”

https://www.nationalreview.com/news/princeton-removes-greek-latin-requirement-for-classics-majors-to-combat-systemic-racism/

Her new book does look interesting:

Quote

 Her new book, tentatively titled “Getting by Under the Roman Empire: An Economic History of the 90%,” will look at the opportunities and stresses experienced by working people through research studies at the household level.

Her research has uncovered some interesting insights:
 

Quote

We found peasants eating a good amount of meat, the same kind rich people eat, namely lots of pork, along with beef and lamb. So, animals were important for agriculture, and they were an important part of peasant diet.

I would caution her against being too doctrinaire in her approach, however:

Quote

“Integrating the working majority into our histories of the ancient world decenters what has been an elite, male-centered vision of that world, with implications for what this means for us today."

This is the kind of politically correct gibberish that detracts from potentially useful research and insights. I am willing to wager that we know far more about the lives of Julius Caesar’s wives and lovers than we do about the lives of any of the millions of men, women, and children from Gaul killed or enslaved by Caesar.

Nevertheless, we can hope to learn more about the non-elite (the vast majority of individuals) in Ancient Rome.

https://penntoday.upenn.edu/news/regular-folks-roman-empire-kimberly-bowes-archaeology-economics

So my question is: is there any discussion about the number of Vandals and the way this invasion / migration took place?

An interesting conference In Basel, Switzerland. (I guess see Zoom attendance is available):

“Palaeoclimatologists believe to have identified a period of unusually warm and humid weather in Europe and the Mediterranean that expanded from roughly 200 BCE to 150 CE, which they called the ‘Roman Climate Optimum’ or the ‘Roman warm period’. Some historians have linked this overall perseverance of unusually stable and favorable climatic conditions to the expansion of the Roman Empire to its greatest height, and argue that these predominantly warm and humid conditions in large parts of the Empire enabled the delivery of sufficient supply to the growing urban population around the Mediterranean and to the Roman army.”

”This international conference will be the first that is specifically devoted to the notion of a Roman Climate Optimum and its impact on the fate of the Roman Empire.”

https://ancientclimate.philhist.unibas.ch/en/event/the-end-of-the-roman-climate-optimum-and-the-disintegration-of-the-roman-empire/

Constantius III

Cheers

Quote

 

“More than 4,000 people have signed a petition urging a university to reconsider closing its archaeology department.

The University of Worcester said it would no longer offer courses from September because of "very low" numbers of applications over recent years.“

 

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-hereford-worcester-58297752

Here’s a previous thread on the subject of archaeology program closures:

Quote

“Dr. Kagan was a Lithuanian native, raised in New York City, who studied ancient Greece in college and was inspired by the “remarkable assumption that the human being is not trivial.” Regarding himself as Greek to his very soul, he wrote several books either entirely or partly about the rise and fall of Athens’ golden age, notably an acclaimed and popular four-volume series on the devastating Peloponnesian War between Athens and Sparta and their respective allies.”

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/obituaries/donald-kagan-dead/2021/08/12/c0824674-fa29-11eb-8a67-f14cd1d28e47_story.html

Here is a part of a lecture of his:

Is one really that different from the other?  In a book "Heroes and Hero Worship" we see a great man or woman's feats and their exploits recorded by reporters and witnesses.  Yet often in less than a generation, these 'great feats' become legendary.  He didn't knock out a big man, me slew a giant. Instead of using bread for bait and netting a bunch of fish to feed friends, the person multiplied the meager for all the masses.  Then when modern researchers look for the mythical legend, they find fictions...overgrown facts.

This is then used to claim the individual(s) never existed at all.

King Arthur, Beowulf, Budda, Yeshua, Achillies, Caesar, Aragorn...who were they, really?  Pure fictions, or overgrown legends turned myths?

A man named Heinrich Schliemann took Homer's "fictions" and found a real Troy.  Does that make Homer's work a history?  How many accurate facts are required for Literature to become History?  

The more I read, research, and find, the more I conclude that these two studies should be combined.

Quote

“The UK government recently announced plans to cut its subsidy for English university teaching of the subject (along with many arts courses) by 50% because it is not part of the government’s “strategic priorities”.

Education secretary Gavin Williamson framed this in terms of encouraging more students to study subjects in the sciences rather than “dead-end courses that leave young people with nothing but debt”, implying he thought archaeology was among these courses .“

https://theconversation.com/six-reasons-to-save-archaeology-from-funding-cuts-161465

I'm fortunate to have an in-law that is an accomplished silk embroiderer and would like to get her to make a banner, however time is short as she's 86. 

Quote

Herodotus’ Histories and Thucydides’ Peloponnesian Wars transcended chronicle and became history because their authors tried to explain the causes and outcomes of the wars of which they wrote, because they were linking events, acts, and motives causally and for a purpose.

https://www.laphamsquarterly.org/roundtable/first-revisionist-historian/?ca_key_code=FB3LQA3