Ancient Roman Objects

[Pacifica]

Facebook

www.facebook.com

 

[Pacifica]

Facebook

www.facebook.com

 

[Pacifica]

https://www.facebook.com/104559349043509/photos/a.104997238999720/150569297775847

 

[Pacifica]

Facebook

www.facebook.com

 

[Pacifica]

https://www.facebook.com/museum.of.artifacts/photos/a.1314194605266685/6248137358539027

 

[Pacifica]

https://www.facebook.com/museum.of.artifacts/photos/a.1314194605266685/6253132781372818

 

[Pacifica]

https://www.facebook.com/museum.of.artifacts/photos/a.1314194605266685/6263211390364957

 

[zionysus]

Who knew about this? I didn't!

https://www.facebook.com/HistoryLeak/photos/a.420297328467014/1290576391439099

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.

 

[rothbard]

Foldable metal table from Pompeii, decorated with horses' heads, and still in working order. Naples, Museo Archeologico Nazionale:

 

[rothbard]

Boiler and drink dispenser shaped like a city wall, also from Pompeii:

 

[rothbard]

Another boiler:

 

[rothbard]

These are part of an exhibition in which stuff from Pompeii is shown which is usually held in storage.

 

[Pacifica]

Facebook

www.facebook.com

 

[rothbard]

Bowls with paint pigments, from Pompeii:

This reminded me of the article according to which the ancient Romans didn't "know" the color blue, or distinguish it from green. However the blue pigment in the second picture is clearly visible. This is what the museum says:

 

[Pacifica]

This reminded me of the article according to which the ancient Romans didn't "know" the color blue, or distinguish it from green.

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.

 

[rothbard]

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.

 

[rothbard]

Ostrogoth helmet (6th century). From the Byzantine exhibition at the museum in Naples.

 

[Pacifica]

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

 

[rothbard]

Young magistrate, from the Horti Liciniani in Rome (late IV or early V century). This indicates that the toga was still worn at the time, at least on special occasions. I wonder what he holds in his hand.

 

[Pacifica]

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.)