Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
Ancient Roman Objects
- Thread starter Pacifica
- Start date
www.facebook.com
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
A sidenote to this, linguistically speaking,
- 'eid'
- Old Norse 'eið' (neck of land)
'-ide' in English a grouping suffix
and
- "I'd"
have an interesting connection. Something close to center/middle/group. Namely with regard to catching someone's attention in speech.
Log into Facebook
Log into Facebook to start sharing and connecting with your friends, family, and people you know.
www.facebook.com
I don't know whether that article is right or wrong, but the blue pigment doesn't prove much by itself; it could still be that they would have regarded this blue as just one shade of the "green-blue" color.
I was thinking of that, however according to the description, green pigment was used as well. I am not sure how accurate that is.
Yes but, again, it could be that the green and blue pigments were shades of the same for them.
Caeruleus is how we usually translate "blue" (and it's the best word for it that I know of) but if you look at the definition, it's ambiguous; it ranges from "dark" to "blue" to "green": https://alatius.com/ls/index.php?met=up&ord=caeruleus
I was going to say that viridis seemed to have been unambiguoulsy "green", but Lewis & Short actually claims it could also mean "bluish green"... I don't know if it's right, but that's what it says: https://alatius.com/ls/index.php?met=up&ord=viridis
(Overall, though, it was green; not nearly as ambiguous as caeruleus.)