05-09-2010, 06:56 PM
A recent article in the Washington Examiner, dealing with Federal Government plans to reduce lead poisoning, raises once again the old canard about lead poisoning and ancient Rome.
Historians and scholars have also linked lead poisoning to some of the ancient Roman emperors.
"Symptoms of 'plumbism' or lead poisoning were already apparent as early as the first century B.C.," wrote Jack Lewis in the EPA Journal. "Julius Caesar for all his sexual ramblings was unable to beget more than one known offspring. Caesar Augustus, his successor, displayed not only total sterility but also a cold indifference to sex."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local ... 64274.html
I wonder what "scholar" it is that said Augustus was "totally sterile" ...?
Have I been mistaken all this time in believing that Augustus had a daughter named Julia? Was that not his daughter by Scribonia? Or is the inference here that he was not really the father?
Actually, I thought the concept of lead poisoning via the water system had finally been laid to rest.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostempire ... ring2.html
NOVA: Did they have no sense, then, for the dangers of lead?
AICHER: Actually, they did. At least Vitruvius did. He makes his point by saying, "Hey, look at the people who make these lead pipes!" Apparently, these workers weren't in the best of health.
NOVA: What do you think of the theory that the Roman Empire collapsed because the Romans suffered from lead poisoning?
AICHER: Not much. The Romans did use lead in their pipes. However, two things about the Roman water supply mitigated the unhealthy effects of lead. The first is that the water in the Roman aqueducts rarely stopped running. They had shut-off valves, but they didn't use them much. The water was meant to move. It would flow into a fountain or a basin. Overflow would pour into the gutter and then flush the city.
Today, if you have lead pipes, they tell you to let the water run for awhile before you drink it. That prevents water from sitting in the lead pipes and becoming contaminated. That flushing out happened naturally in the Roman system.
Secondly, a lot of the water, especially in Rome, was hard water. It had lots of minerals in it that would coat their pipes. We often use filtration systems to take some of the minerals out. The Romans didn't have that, so these minerals would encrust and coat the inside of the pipe. That layer of minerals served as a buffer. In fact, the aqueduct channels would gradually accumulate these deposits. Periodically, they would have to chip out all the encrustations.
Ah well, some myths die hard. :?
:wink:
Narukami
Historians and scholars have also linked lead poisoning to some of the ancient Roman emperors.
"Symptoms of 'plumbism' or lead poisoning were already apparent as early as the first century B.C.," wrote Jack Lewis in the EPA Journal. "Julius Caesar for all his sexual ramblings was unable to beget more than one known offspring. Caesar Augustus, his successor, displayed not only total sterility but also a cold indifference to sex."
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/local ... 64274.html
I wonder what "scholar" it is that said Augustus was "totally sterile" ...?
Have I been mistaken all this time in believing that Augustus had a daughter named Julia? Was that not his daughter by Scribonia? Or is the inference here that he was not really the father?
Actually, I thought the concept of lead poisoning via the water system had finally been laid to rest.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/lostempire ... ring2.html
NOVA: Did they have no sense, then, for the dangers of lead?
AICHER: Actually, they did. At least Vitruvius did. He makes his point by saying, "Hey, look at the people who make these lead pipes!" Apparently, these workers weren't in the best of health.
NOVA: What do you think of the theory that the Roman Empire collapsed because the Romans suffered from lead poisoning?
AICHER: Not much. The Romans did use lead in their pipes. However, two things about the Roman water supply mitigated the unhealthy effects of lead. The first is that the water in the Roman aqueducts rarely stopped running. They had shut-off valves, but they didn't use them much. The water was meant to move. It would flow into a fountain or a basin. Overflow would pour into the gutter and then flush the city.
Today, if you have lead pipes, they tell you to let the water run for awhile before you drink it. That prevents water from sitting in the lead pipes and becoming contaminated. That flushing out happened naturally in the Roman system.
Secondly, a lot of the water, especially in Rome, was hard water. It had lots of minerals in it that would coat their pipes. We often use filtration systems to take some of the minerals out. The Romans didn't have that, so these minerals would encrust and coat the inside of the pipe. That layer of minerals served as a buffer. In fact, the aqueduct channels would gradually accumulate these deposits. Periodically, they would have to chip out all the encrustations.
Ah well, some myths die hard. :?
:wink:
Narukami
David Reinke
Burbank CA
Burbank CA
