Ancient Roman Timeline?
1.) who died first, Jesus or Julius Ceaser 2.) Which Roman era lasted the longest: the Roman monarchy, The Roman Republic, The Westen Roman Empire or The Byzantine Empire? 3.) Did Jesus live during the Roman republic or the Roman Empire 4.) Was Julius Caeser a Christian? How do u know
How have medicines changed since ancient time?
Medicines in ancient times were comparable to the homeopathic cures that are available today. Prescription medicines began in the late 19th century and many of today's hard core drugs were legal to use at that time. Bayer is one of the oldest pharmaceutical companies in America and sold prescription heroin, cocaine, morphine etc. Alongside the big pharmaceuticals elixirs' and tonics were created and sold by travelling doctors that promised fixes to every kind of ailment out there. They also used a lot of experimental equipment like blue lights to heal people with no proof of efficacy. Today's medicines go through rigorous testing phases before they are passed by the FDA for distribution through our network of doctors. Every bottle comes with a small leaflet of information about the drug's use, dosage and possible side effects. They seem so much safer to use, however, the disturbing side effects that may arise make people wonder if it's even worth taking. So, they turn to the homeopaths for a more earth friendly path to wellness. So medicines have come full circle since ancient times. But, the pharmaceutical companies will always be here.
Two outstanding contributions made by ancient Rome to Western civilization are:?
Definitely A, especially law. Roman public law wasn't very influential (customary law and religious law having more influence), but Roman private law was extremely influential. Especially the contractual law, whose institutes survive even today.
Who had better Public health and Medicine, Romans or Medieval Britain?
A lot of Roman medicine was based on Greek medicine, and a fair number of doctors in Rome were Greek and schooled in the precepts of Hippocrates and others. Unfortunately, a great deal of this knowledge was misplaced for centuries following the collapse of the Roman Empire in western Europe. To turn to the concept of public health, for the most part, doctors cared for the wealthy. The poor were dependent on folk remedies (which occasionally had some sound basis) based on plants and herbs. This state of affairs continued well into the Middle Ages. In medieval times, monasteries and convents often had an infirmary overseen by a monk or nun who had some skill in herbology, and these infirmarians often cared for the local populace as well as the members of their religious community. There were also many local residents in villages who practiced folk medicine, which was also largely based on herb lore. Often these people were older women who, when things got difficult, ended up being accused of witchcraft. Now, as to which was better than the other, I might be somewhat inclined toward the view that the doctors of antiquity might have had somewhat more extensive medical knowledge than their medieval counterparts; interestingly, it was the Muslims who kept this knowledge alive. The followers of Islam also had a high regard for the practice of bathing regularly, which most western Europeans weren't in the habit of doing. This lack of personal hygiene also contributed to the health problems in Europe.
What are the main differences between Ancient Roman and Medieval way of thinking?
One important piece of context that you need to know going into this line of thought is that while the Roman Empire was, in its heyday, more or less pretty Roman, European society and culture in medieval times had already supplanted many Roman ideas with ideas from the cultural groups in the areas they conquered (Franks, Gauls, Saxons, Iberians, Greeks, and Italians, to name a few).The most obvious difference is that Rome, in its early Republican days, was, as the name suggests, a more democratic and populist nation, while the fledgling kingdoms formed in the wake of the Roman Empire were chaotic despotisms.As far as military tradition went, early Rome would allow only Romans, and only wealthy Romans, to be in the military, as each man provided his own gear. The Imperial days saw these rules relaxed, and Rome relying more and more on foreigners and mercenaries. In medieval Europe, the peasantry became the backbones of armies. The wealthy were still the elites, but were not the bulk of the force as before.Roman military tactics also differed vastly from the successors. Cavalry were rare, and Roman legionnaires were generally well-armored and well-disciplined. More importantly, Rome had standing legions who were on duty most of the time, while medieval nations relied on conscription and bondage to supply fighting men. Cavalry, especially with the advent of the lance, became dominant forces on medieval battlefields on the fields of France, Germany and the rest of Western and Central Europe.Rome also moved from the pantheon they largely shared with Greece to monotheism, forming the Roman Catholic religion. This touches on another stark difference between Rome and medieval Europe--Rome was hardly as religiously fanatical as its successor states. Yes, they persecuted many Christians within the empire before they became Christians themselves, but I don't remember them fighting other nations ostentatiously for religious reasons, as in the case of the Crusades. Rome was also a nation based around laws in its early days, while medieval times saw rulers with absolute power, who were laws unto themselves. Slavery, I believe, was less prominent in medieval Europe as it was in Roman times, slaves in Roman times could buy their freedom, while medieval peasantry were "bonded" to the land they worked as a result of the feudal social contract.There are a lot more. I will add them when I remember.
Was Ancient Greece more advanced than Ancient India or China?
Depends on how you define great. If conquering and cnquests are termed great , then yes . If the self advancement is termed great then a big NO. The Rig Veda was way more enlightening than the Ancient Greek scriptures. Indian epics are far longer than Greek epics. History records show that Indian literature evolved before Greek Literature. India had scholars like Kautilya, Buddha, Mahavira before the Greeks had plato,archimedes or socrates in recorded history . Now I am going to give an evidence that will support my claim further. The oldest universities of the world were in Ancient India at a time when even the persians were busy fighting the greeks. Current dating suggest Taxilla and Nalanda to be atleast 200 years older than before. That would make these Iron Age universities during 800 to 900 BC and it existed till 7th century AD. By the time plato had formed his philosphies , Arthshastras ,upanishads were already written in India . It is much more possible that much of this spiritual knowledge travelled to Greece.Take a real life example. If you know the world’s best university is Oxford , would you go to Oxford or would Oxford come to you ? Do you realise why India never really went outside the subcontinent . Because they had everything here. This coincides with the Indain philosophy of know yourself first. The Greeks had a similar philosophy but they went outside . This shows that the philosophy formed much later.The Greeks are popular because the romans spread them forward and the greek revival scence. India got suppressed because of foreign muslim and christian invasions. Modern day Cognitive science implements Indian Yogasutras and the concept of Lucid dreaming also came from Indians and Chinese.Whether the Greeks are more advanced than Chinese , I do not know as the Chinese can only say that .
How do you treat someone in a Catatonic state?
I'm actually asking this for a fictional story I'm writing. One of my characters enters a catatonic state after torture and sleep deprivation/sensory overstimulation, but the story is set in Ancient Rome (no modern medicine) so I don't know how his rescuers will snap him out of it. Do people in a catatonic state naturally come out of it if they rest for a while? If no, are there any simple methods (like taking a cold bath or holistic medicine) that could be applied to help the catatonic person return to normal? How long would it take for them to get back to normal? Or would the catatonic person die without the treatment of modern medicine? Any additional info about catatonic states is welcome, but mainly I want to know how to treat my character without modern medicine!
Why did science not flourish in Ancient Rome the way it did in Ancient Greece?
You might think about it in another way, the Greeks flourished in what we know as the late ancient age when there was a huge thirst for knowledge ans power. The Greeks invented, discovered, understood a few basic things that had a huge impact later in the early medieval period. the Greeks were surely inventors, be it architecture, warfare or social inventions. Now if you look at the Romans, they were a war loving state. Greeks had never expanded their territories (Athenians, Spartans, Macedonians) except Alexander the Great like the Romans did. In fact a majority of Greece's warfare were defensive in nature, they fought the Persians and other princely states within. And any nation or kingdom that spend more time defending their borders are bound to be more innovative than the offensive ones. (Compare the Byzantines with the Mongols, while the Byzantines were amazing in defensive warfare innovations the Mongols had very little innovation to offer to the world.)Another point to be noted here is that Rome's need for innovation was met by the discoveries and inventions of the regions they had conquered. Egypt, Gaul, Western Europe, they had best of all the worlds. As Rome flourished information and intelligence came flowing in from all directions, from all the lands they ruled. So naturally the need for being innovative themselves was virtually negative for the Romans themselves.