Latest news with #PlinyTheElder
The Sun
15-07-2025
- Science
- The Sun
Lost Roman city mentioned in ancient text that has baffled historians for centuries is FOUND on Brit hols hotspot island
A LONG-LOST Roman city that has baffled historians for centuries has finally been found on a Brit holiday hotspot island. A team of archaeologists believes it has discovered the one of two elusive Roman sites on the Spanish island of Majorca. 5 5 A celebrated Roman author called Pliny the Elder was the original source to write about two major cities, Tucis and Guium, which have never been found. The settlements are repeatedly referenced in historical texts, but there were never any clues as to where they actually lay. Now, however, a team of archaeologists believes their excavations at a 5,000-square-metre site on Majorca will finally turn up one of them. Beatriu Palomar, one of the researchers on the team, said: "The structures that are beginning to be seen respond to a perfectly planned urban development plan. "We would not be surprised if, when the centre of the explored area is excavated, we find one of the municipalities mentioned by Pliny the Elder that were never located. "It does not seem unrealistic to us to think that Tucis or Guium are hidden beneath these structures; we would even bet on the former." Guium and Tucis are the two most mysterious Roman cities, because almost all the others have been subject to close analysis. The absence of any physical evidence on their whereabouts up to this point had caused some researchers to question whether they ever even existed. But there are very encouraging signs coming out of the dig site called Son Fornés - next to the town of Montuïri in the centre of the island. Cristina Rihuete, researcher and director of the Son Fornés Archaeological Museum, said: "After what we've seen, and the amount of imperial material on the surface, as well as the tegulas (which clearly date high-ranking buildings, as they were purchased, just like amphorae and tableware), I'm very convinced that we have a very significant site in Roman times." There are two thousand years of culture and heritage preserved at the Montuïri site. Within the soil are buried relics from 1,500 BC, during the time of the pre-Talayotic culture, through to the end of the Roman period shortly after the first century AD. The team said: "There is no other site that we can say has endured so long and contains such long-standing evidence." Research at Son Fornés began in 1975. The identity of the site has never been confirmed - but may soon become clear. 5 5 Intriguingly, the breakthrough has come in a year when there no excavations have been carried out. Rather, progress has been made through clearing, refurbishing and restoring relics discovered beneath the dirt. Beatriu said: "The buildings that have been discovered show us a panorama that has exceeded all expectations. "An entire urban planning process from the Roman Republican and Imperial periods has been revealed, opening up unprecedented perspectives for understanding the indigenous settlement of those times and the transformations that occurred following the Roman occupation of the island." But one vital question remains: is the site Tucis or Guium? Beatriu said: "Tucis was a Latin oppidum, a city under Latin law integrated as a civitas stipendiaria, which gave it its own administrative and political organization within the Roman system. "It developed during the 1st century and could well have found its place in Son Fornés," and is therefore considered the more likely option.
Yahoo
07-07-2025
- General
- Yahoo
What did ancient Rome smell like? BO, rotting corpses and raw sewage for starters ...
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. The roar of the arena crowd, the bustle of the Roman forum, the grand temples, the Roman army in red with glistening shields and armor — when people imagine ancient Rome, they often think of its sights and sounds. We know less, however, about the scents of ancient Rome. We cannot, of course, go back and sniff to find out. But the literary texts, physical remains of structures, objects, and environmental evidence (such as plants and animals) can offer clues. So what might ancient Rome have smelled like? In describing the smells of plants, author and naturalist Pliny the Elder uses words such as iucundus (agreeable), acutus (pungent), vis (strong), or dilutus (weak). None of that language is particularly evocative in its power to transport us back in time, unfortunately. But we can probably safely assume that, in many areas, Rome was likely pretty dirty and rank-smelling. Property owners did not commonly connect their toilets to the sewers in large Roman towns and cities — perhaps fearing rodent incursions or odors. Roman sewers were more like storm drains, and served to take standing water away from public areas. Professionals collected feces for fertilizer and urine for cloth processing from domestic and public latrines and cesspits. Chamber pots were also used, which could later be dumped in cesspits. This waste disposal process was just for those who could afford to live in houses; many lived in small, non-domestic spaces, barely furnished apartments, or on the streets. A common whiff in the Roman city would have come from the animals and the waste they created. Roman bakeries frequently used large lava stone mills (or "querns") turned by mules or donkeys. Then there was the smell of pack animals and livestock being brought into town for slaughter or sale. The large "stepping-stones" still seen in the streets of Pompeii were likely so people could cross streets and avoid the assorted feculence that covered the paving stones. Disposal of corpses (animals and human) was not formulaic. Depending on the class of the person who had died, people might well have been left out in the open without cremation or burial. Bodies, potentially decaying, were a more common sight in ancient Rome than now. Suetonius, writing in the first century CE, famously wrote of a dog carrying a severed human hand to the dining table of the Emperor Vespasian. In a world devoid of today's modern scented products — and daily bathing by most of the population — ancient Roman settlements would have smelt of body odor. Classical literature has some recipes for toothpaste and even deodorants. However, many of the deodorants were to be used orally (chewed or swallowed) to stop one's armpits smelling. Related: How did people clean themselves before soap was invented? One was made by boiling golden thistle root in fine wine to induce urination (which was thought to flush out odor). The Roman baths would likely not have been as hygienic as they may appear to tourists visiting today. A small tub in a public bath could hold between eight and 12 bathers. The Romans had soap, but it wasn't commonly used for personal hygiene. Olive oil (including scented oil) was preferred. It was scraped off the skin with a strigil (a bronze curved tool). This oil and skin combination was then discarded (maybe even slung at a wall). Baths had drains — but as oil and water don't mix, it was likely pretty grimy. The Romans did have perfumes and incense. The invention of glassblowing in the late first century BCE (likely in Roman-controlled Jerusalem) made glass readily available, and glass perfume bottles are a common archaeological find. Animal and plant fats were infused with scents — such as rose, cinnamon, iris, frankincense and saffron — and were mixed with medicinal ingredients and pigments. The roses of Paestum in Campania (southern Italy) were particularly prized, and a perfume shop has even been excavated in the city's Roman forum. The trading power of the vast Roman empire meant spices could be sourced from India and the surrounding regions. There were warehouses for storing spices such as pepper, cinnamon and myrrh in the centre of Rome. In a recent Oxford Journal of Archaeology article, researcher Cecilie Brøns writes that even ancient statues could be perfumed with scented oils. Sources frequently do not describe the smell of perfumes used to anoint the statues, but a predominantly rose-based perfume is specifically mentioned for this purpose in inscriptions from the Greek city of Delos (at which archaeologists have also identified perfume workshops). Beeswax was likely added to perfumes as a stabiliser. Enhancing the scent of statues (particularly those of gods and goddesses) with perfumes and garlands was important in their veneration and worship. RELATED STORIES —Roman-era 'fast food' discovered in ancient trash heap on Mallorca —How is Roman concrete still standing after 2,000 years? —Does charcoal toothpaste really whiten teeth? The ancient city would have smelt like human waste, wood smoke, rotting and decay, cremating flesh, cooking food, perfumes and incense, and many other things. It sounds awful to a modern person, but it seems the Romans did not complain about the smell of the ancient city that much. Perhaps, as historian Neville Morley has suggested, to them these were the smells of home or even of the height of civilization. This edited article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Yahoo
02-07-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Researchers reveal what Ancient Rome smelled like – and it's disgusting
The roar of the arena crowd, the bustle of the Roman forum, the grand temples, the Roman army in red with glistening shields and armour – when people imagine ancient Rome, they often think of its sights and sounds. We know less, however, about the scents of ancient Rome. We cannot, of course, go back and sniff to find out. But the literary texts, physical remains of structures, objects, and environmental evidence (such as plants and animals) can offer clues. So what might ancient Rome have smelled like? Honestly, often pretty rank. In describing the smells of plants, author and naturalist Pliny the Elder uses words such as iucundus (agreeable), acutus (pungent), vis (strong), or dilutus (weak). None of that language is particularly evocative in its power to transport us back in time, unfortunately. But we can probably safely assume that, in many areas, Rome was likely pretty dirty and rank-smelling. Property owners did not commonly connect their toilets to the sewers in large Roman towns and cities – perhaps fearing rodent incursions or odours. Roman sewers were more like storm drains, and served to take standing water away from public areas. Professionals collected faeces for fertiliser and urine for cloth processing from domestic and public latrines and cesspits. Chamber pots were also used, which could later be dumped in cesspits. This waste disposal process was just for those who could afford to live in houses; many lived in small, non-domestic spaces, barely furnished apartments, or on the streets. A common whiff in the Roman city would have come from the animals and the waste they created. Roman bakeries frequently used large lava stone mills (or 'querns') turned by mules or donkeys. Then there was the smell of pack animals and livestock being brought into town for slaughter or sale. The large 'stepping-stones' still seen in the streets of Pompeii were likely so people could cross streets and avoid the assorted feculence that covered the paving stones. Disposal of corpses (animals and human) was not formulaic. Depending on the class of the person who had died, people might well have been left out in the open without cremation or burial. Bodies, potentially decaying, were a more common sight in ancient Rome than now. Suetonius, writing in the first century CE, famously wrote of a dog carrying a severed human hand to the dining table of the Emperor Vespasian. In a world devoid of today's modern scented products – and daily bathing by most of the population – ancient Roman settlements would have smelt of body odour. Classical literature has some recipes for toothpaste and even deodorants. However, many of the deodorants were to be used orally (chewed or swallowed) to stop one's armpits smelling. One was made by boiling golden thistle root in fine wine to induce urination (which was thought to flush out odour). The Roman baths would likely not have been as hygienic as they may appear to tourists visiting today. A small tub in a public bath could hold between eight and 12 bathers. The Romans had soap, but it wasn't commonly used for personal hygiene. Olive oil (including scented oil) was preferred. It was scraped off the skin with a strigil (a bronze curved tool). This oil and skin combination was then discarded (maybe even slung at a wall). Baths had drains – but as oil and water don't mix, it was likely pretty grimy. The Romans did have perfumes and incense. The invention of glassblowing in the late first century BCE (likely in Roman-controlled Jerusalem) made glass readily available, and glass perfume bottles are a common archaeological find. Animal and plant fats were infused with scents – such as rose, cinnamon, iris, frankincense and saffron – and were mixed with medicinal ingredients and pigments. The roses of Paestum in Campania (southern Italy) were particularly prized, and a perfume shop has even been excavated in the city's Roman forum. The trading power of the vast Roman empire meant spices could be sourced from India and the surrounding regions. There were warehouses for storing spices such as pepper, cinnamon and myrrh in the centre of Rome. In a recent Oxford Journal of Archaeology article, researcher Cecilie Brøns writes that even ancient statues could be perfumed with scented oils. Sources frequently do not describe the smell of perfumes used to anoint the statues, but a predominantly rose-based perfume is specifically mentioned for this purpose in inscriptions from the Greek city of Delos (at which archaeologists have also identified perfume workshops). Beeswax was likely added to perfumes as a stabiliser. Enhancing the scent of statues (particularly those of gods and goddesses) with perfumes and garlands was important in their veneration and worship. The ancient city would have smelt like human waste, wood smoke, rotting and decay, cremating flesh, cooking food, perfumes and incense, and many other things. It sounds awful to a modern person, but it seems the Romans did not complain about the smell of the ancient city that much. Perhaps, as historian Neville Morley has suggested, to them these were the smells of home or even of the height of civilisation. Thomas J. Derrick is a Gale Research Fellow in Ancient Glass and Material Culture at Macquarie University This article was originally published by The Conversation and is republished under a Creative Commons licence. Read the original article
The Independent
02-07-2025
- General
- The Independent
Researchers reveal what Ancient Rome smelled like – and it's disgusting
The roar of the arena crowd, the bustle of the Roman forum, the grand temples, the Roman army in red with glistening shields and armour – when people imagine ancient Rome, they often think of its sights and sounds. We know less, however, about the scents of ancient Rome. We cannot, of course, go back and sniff to find out. But the literary texts, physical remains of structures, objects, and environmental evidence (such as plants and animals) can offer clues. So what might ancient Rome have smelled like? Honestly, often pretty rank. In describing the smells of plants, author and naturalist Pliny the Elder uses words such as iucundus (agreeable), acutus (pungent), vis (strong), or dilutus (weak). None of that language is particularly evocative in its power to transport us back in time, unfortunately. But we can probably safely assume that, in many areas, Rome was likely pretty dirty and rank-smelling. Property owners did not commonly connect their toilets to the sewers in large Roman towns and cities – perhaps fearing rodent incursions or odours. Roman sewers were more like storm drains, and served to take standing water away from public areas. Professionals collected faeces for fertiliser and urine for cloth processing from domestic and public latrines and cesspits. Chamber pots were also used, which could later be dumped in cesspits. This waste disposal process was just for those who could afford to live in houses; many lived in small, non-domestic spaces, barely furnished apartments, or on the streets. A common whiff in the Roman city would have come from the animals and the waste they created. Roman bakeries frequently used large lava stone mills (or 'querns') turned by mules or donkeys. Then there was the smell of pack animals and livestock being brought into town for slaughter or sale. The large 'stepping-stones' still seen in the streets of Pompeii were likely so people could cross streets and avoid the assorted feculence that covered the paving stones. Disposal of corpses (animals and human) was not formulaic. Depending on the class of the person who had died, people might well have been left out in the open without cremation or burial. Bodies, potentially decaying, were a more common sight in ancient Rome than now. Suetonius, writing in the first century CE, famously wrote of a dog carrying a severed human hand to the dining table of the Emperor Vespasian. Deodorants and toothpastes In a world devoid of today's modern scented products – and daily bathing by most of the population – ancient Roman settlements would have smelt of body odour. Classical literature has some recipes for toothpaste and even deodorants. However, many of the deodorants were to be used orally (chewed or swallowed) to stop one's armpits smelling. One was made by boiling golden thistle root in fine wine to induce urination (which was thought to flush out odour). The Roman baths would likely not have been as hygienic as they may appear to tourists visiting today. A small tub in a public bath could hold between eight and 12 bathers. The Romans had soap, but it wasn't commonly used for personal hygiene. Olive oil (including scented oil) was preferred. It was scraped off the skin with a strigil (a bronze curved tool). This oil and skin combination was then discarded (maybe even slung at a wall). Baths had drains – but as oil and water don't mix, it was likely pretty grimy. Scented perfumes The Romans did have perfumes and incense. The invention of glassblowing in the late first century BCE (likely in Roman-controlled Jerusalem) made glass readily available, and glass perfume bottles are a common archaeological find. Animal and plant fats were infused with scents – such as rose, cinnamon, iris, frankincense and saffron – and were mixed with medicinal ingredients and pigments. The roses of Paestum in Campania (southern Italy) were particularly prized, and a perfume shop has even been excavated in the city's Roman forum. The trading power of the vast Roman empire meant spices could be sourced from India and the surrounding regions. There were warehouses for storing spices such as pepper, cinnamon and myrrh in the centre of Rome. In a recent Oxford Journal of Archaeology article, researcher Cecilie Brøns writes that even ancient statues could be perfumed with scented oils. Sources frequently do not describe the smell of perfumes used to anoint the statues, but a predominantly rose-based perfume is specifically mentioned for this purpose in inscriptions from the Greek city of Delos (at which archaeologists have also identified perfume workshops). Beeswax was likely added to perfumes as a stabiliser. Enhancing the scent of statues (particularly those of gods and goddesses) with perfumes and garlands was important in their veneration and worship. An olfactory onslaught The ancient city would have smelt like human waste, wood smoke, rotting and decay, cremating flesh, cooking food, perfumes and incense, and many other things. It sounds awful to a modern person, but it seems the Romans did not complain about the smell of the ancient city that much. Perhaps, as historian Neville Morley has suggested, to them these were the smells of home or even of the height of civilisation.
The Independent
12-06-2025
- Science
- The Independent
Archaeologists uncover fast food ancient Romans frequently snacked on
Commoners in the Roman Empire frequently snacked on inexpensive fried songbirds at roadside shops, archaeologists said after analysing an ancient trash pit in Spain. Such fast-food joints, known as popinae and tabernae, frequently served fried small thrushes, once considered a luxury dish, according to a new study published in the International Journal of Osteoarchaeology. Researchers analysed animal bones found at a cesspit in the ancient Spanish city of Pollentia and dated to between the first century BC and the first century AD. During this time, the ancient city expanded quickly to become an active port with a forum, temples, cemeteries, and several roadside shops called popina serving snacks and wine. Archaeologists excavated a trash pit at a commercial area linked to a forum and a network of food shops via underground drainage. The cesspit was found to include remains of mammals, fish, reptiles, and birds, of which thrushes were 'most abundant', researchers said. They found 165 thrush bones, challenging the previous belief that such songbirds were mainly eaten by wealthier Romans. 'Classical sources frequently describe these small birds as a delicacy served in elite banquets, often prepared with elaborate culinary techniques,' scientists wrote. Some ancient texts, including ones written by Pliny the Elder, described fattening songbirds with figs before roasting them with different sauces. The new find provides valuable insights into the preparation and consumption of these small birds. Researchers found signs that the bird sternum was removed to flatten it before cooking in oil at these fast-food shops. In comparison, bird remains found near ancient household settings typically included more complete carcasses. 'The removal of the sternum to flatten the birds would have facilitated rapid cooking while maintaining meat moisture, making it especially suitable for busy food vendors serving immediate consumption needs,' scientists wrote. 'Given that Roman culinary practices often involved frying small birds in oil rather than grilling, it is plausible that at Pollentia, thrushes were not grilled but rather pan-fried, as suggested by historical recipes.' The latest evidence also suggests food shops followed a 'standardised approach' optimised for commercial food service. 'This evidence suggests that thrushes were commonly sold and consumed in Roman urban spaces, challenging the prevailing notion based on written sources that thrushes were exclusively a luxury food item for elite banquets,' researchers wrote. 'Furthermore, their seasonal availability suggests that urban vendors capitalised on migratory cycles to enhance food diversity and economic stability.'
