Login

**richsc** · 03-11-2003, 03:53 PM

Interesting article documenting lead pollution in the Greenland ice from Greek and Roman mines 
 
www.science.uwaterloo.ca/...epack.html Richard Campbell, Legio XX

03-12-2003, 06:24 AM

So, how exactly did the Lead get from the mediterranean world to greenland?

Jeroen Pelgrom · 03-12-2003, 09:02 AM

according to the article, the lead was an airpollution sideproduct of the Greek and Roman silvermines. The air was blown to Greenland were it fell on the earth. 
 
gr, jeroen Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=pelgr003>pelgr003</A> at: 3/12/03 10:03:06 am

03-12-2003, 11:20 AM

The figures in the article are impressive. It shows the importance and the great development of metal related industries in the graeco-roman world. 
In the heyday of Etruria, the smoke from the iron furnaces obscured the skies over the area and if I recall there are some testimonials of air pollution from Britain (Lead?). 
Let's face it, the ancients didn't even have a remote grasp of what pollution and preserving the environment meant. 
Besides lead emissions, they also killed forests. The greek forests were all but cut off and turned into war galleys leaving Greece the quite barren country we know now. The same occurred in Lebanon were the national emblem, the cedar, became nearly extinct due to its use for building temples, palaces, war machines and galleys. During the siege of Jerusalem, the Romans cut off every tree around the city to such an extent that timber had to be imported from quite distant places. 
A few centuries later, a sizeable proportion of the spanish forests were turned into the ill fated Invicible Armada. 
Animals were a prime target too. The north african elephant, used for war, was litterally drafted to extinction. Of course, huge numbers of animals as well were destroyed in the amphitheaters and several species or sub-species were certainly wiped off the face of the Earth. 
The figures in that article demonstrate once more that industry during the heyday of the Roman Empire was far more developed than we think. And as I said in another post (or several others..) I think were are not through with big surprises on this issue.

TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS · 03-13-2003, 04:12 PM

Yes, impressive... 
 
About the forests destruction, was it diffuse in all the roman territory or just in a limited part of it? I know that the Romans loved the nature as sacred and expressed their love in the gardens art. 
 
Do you know if there was a sort an envinroment control by a sort of specialized foresters corp, or was it one of the many roman Army duties? Or no control at all? 
 
It could be said that some roman Army units checked the territory to defend the envinronment? 
 
Valete, 
 
Titus Sabatinus Aquilius 
 
"Desilite, inquit, commilitones, nisi vultis aquilam hostibus prodere" D.B.G. (4.25)

06-20-2003, 09:07 PM

I would not think that the Romans cared for the environment enough to employ people to look after the land. However they may not have destroyed sacred areas of woodland, or places with a strong divine presense. Although this may not be relevant it was said in the Aeneid that Aeneas' men destroyed a sacred tree to Faunus to make way for their camp. Maybe sometimes practicality took over from religious reverence. 
 
Skamandrios

06-21-2003, 03:18 PM

There was a sort of private environment control. A decent villa for instance was supposed to have fields, pastures and woodland, giving a pretty balanced scenery. 
On the other hand some groves were indeed sacred. I think it's during the siege of Massilia that Caesar had to take the axe himself to convince his frightened legionaries to cut off a grove believed to the home of a local deity. Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=antoninuslucretius@romanarmytalk>Antoninus Lucretius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://localhost:1094/Homesteads/_1750094854/files/Cesar_triste.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 6/21/03 5:21 pm

TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS · 06-23-2003, 08:47 AM

So, if it's supposed that: sacred places, forests and woods, villas territories, and imperial property territories envinronment were also controlled and well balanced (and cared with through the "Ars Topiaria" too), we can argue that the "whole" roman territories were "controlled" and not abandoned. 
Maybe, that Romans took care of the envinronment (except for the estinction of some animals for the circus games and the air pollution) better than us? I begin to think YES. And I think that the legions were heavily involved in this control (with the veterans too), about both: practical and religious reasons. 
 
The envinromental function of the Army has to be lighted better and with new eyes... Any suggestions? 
 
Valete, 
 
Titus Sabatinus Aquilius

06-23-2003, 10:09 AM

Well, given the technological gap I don't think we cannot compare with today. 
The ancients were not that conscious about preserving their environment, or preserving Nature, since at that time, Nature was everywhere. They were more concerned about making that environment safe and exploitable. 
And whenever possible, nice to look at, too. 
But deforestation, for instance, was practiced in some areas in a grand scale. the "Hairy Gaul" (Gallia Comata) was not as forested as one may think. In his commentaries Caesar never mentions difficulties in moving around. 
Basically they couldn't have like we do a global view of pollution and its long term consequences. 
But since they were much less numerous than we are today, I suppose there was enough room for everyone and that, lead pollution or not, the air and water were definitely cleaner with the exception of localized areas. 
The emperor Julian, in the fourth century AD, judged that the water of the Seine river had a very good taste. It certainly still has a taste but I don't think it's that good any longer.

TITVS SABATINVS AQVILIVS · 06-25-2003, 08:21 AM

Sure Antonine, but the point is also: were the Romans the first people in the World to "take care" (with the due proportions and differences) of the envinronment? 
 
Did they understand for the first time that the envinronment of a civilized territory had to be "controlled" and not "wild" at all? 
 
Were they the first people to dedicate a regular and large scale organization like the Army to work on it(we know that the legions had more peace periods than war periods, so the "dedicate" term could have room in such case...)? 
 
Valete, 
 
Titus sabatinus Aquilius

Login
Username:
Password:	Lost Password?
	Remember me