Archeologists have found the oldest evidence of chemical warfare after studying the bodies of 20 Roman soldiers
Posted on 01/14/2009 8:37:02 PM PST by bruinbirdman
They gassed Roman soldiers with toxic fumes 2,000 years ago, researchers have discovered.
Archeologists have found the oldest evidence of chemical warfare yet after studying the bodies of 20 Roman soldiers' found underground in Syria 70 years ago.
Archeologists have found the oldest evidence of chemical warfare after studying the bodies of 20 Roman soldiers
Clues left at the scene revealed the Persians were lying in wait as the Romans dug a tunnel during a siege – then pumped in toxic gas – produced by sulphur crystals and bitumen – to kill all the Romans in minutes.
Dr Simon James, who solved the mystery, said: "It's very exciting and also quite gruesome. These people died a horrible death.
"The mixture would have produced toxic gases including sulphur dioxide and complex heavy petrochemicals. The victims would have choked, passed out and then died.
"I believe this is the oldest archaeological evidence of chemical warfare ever found. This is the beginning of a particularly nasty history of killing that continues up to the modern day."
Dr James, a researcher at the University of Leicester who presented his discoveries to a meeting of the Archaeological Institute of America, said the 20 soldiers died not by the sword or spear but through asphyxiation.
They had been part of a large Roman garrison defending the empire outpost city of Dura-Europos, on the Euphrates river in modern day Syria, against a ferocious siege by an army from the powerful new Sassanian Persian empire in around AD 256.
There are no historical texts describing the siege but archaeologists have pieced the action together after excavations in the 1920s and 1930s, which have been renewed in recent years.
Evidence shows the Persians used the full range of ancient siege techniques to break into
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
I have become jaded. Is this part of a movement to ‘de-stigmify’ chemical weapons?
“Oh those Iranians are just doing what armies have been doing for centuries.” No need to be alarmed!
News pieces came out about how Jefferson and other founding fathers were really just ordinary, sinning people like the rest of us during the Clinton era.
I’ll stop now!
They are muhammadans regardless, insane and cowardly.
Good for nothing, and must be forced to drink beer and appreciate Hooters girls or be wiped from the face of the Earth.
Yeah, it couldn’t be because of an archaeological discovery.
I hope that the Romans nuked the bastards in response.
They weren’t mohammedans in those days, the ancient Persians worshipped fire and were all for wine, women and dirty songs.
They certainly have degenerated since.
Yeah, but they're Indo/Aryans. They were always ticked when the Mohammadans conquered them. In fact, they chose the first opportunity of the question of Mohammed's linneage to create a rift.
These guys have never forgiven their conquerors and have taken every opportunity since to smite those guys.
Even today Sunni states blame Shit Iran, and the missing Imam in the cave, for their problems.
Egypt, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and others have proclaimed their own Axis of Evil: Iran, Syria (Alawhite), and Hizballah/Hamas.
yitbos
I have not seen this one before.
Reminds me of the time I decided to use specially sulfur-enriched homemade black powder fumes to kill off all the roaches in an old barn in the middle of censored to protect the perp, Texas.
It wasn't long before all the ladies in the surrounding houses ran out of spray insecticide... LOL!!!
(Hey, what would one expect from a budding physical chemist...?) '-}
The sassanids had a nasty habit of skinning Roman Emperors and stuffing the skin with straw. It was a Great conversation piece at the banquets.
Speaking of religion... of course the Persians were largely Zoroastrians back then (Islam didn't appear until the 7th century, when the Persians were defeated by the Arabs), however Shapur I. himself was close to the Manicheans, a gnostic religion, and a supporter of the Jews.
Roman Emperor Valerian on the other side, in A.D. 258 savagely murdered the clergy of the early Church, including Pope Sixtus, and put many more Christians into slavery, confiscating their property.
These Romans weren't squeaky clean either.
Regarding civilization... the Sassanian Empire was the inventor of countless superior military and civilian technologies that were copied by the Romans and found their way into the European Middle Ages. The medieval Knighthood was a follower of the Sassanians, as were heavy armored cavalry (the Clibanarii), the military rank system (from Persian "rang" (color)) and as a striking example on the field of agriculture, the invention of the wind mill.
The Sassanids also killed Gordian and Numerianus (flaying him as well). While it is true that Norman cavalry at Hastings resemble Sassanid heavy cavalry, it might be a stretch to say that Medieval Knighthood was a “follower” of the Sassanids or did you mean “successor”? It is better to say that the Romans copied the Sassanid cavalry model.
Regarding Knights... well successor or follower... what I meant to say is that the Sassanians had a concept of Knighthood (savaran / asvaran) with many aspects (a caste of warrior-nobles, with advanced full body armor, with a code of conduct, chivalry, lance duels etc.) that found westwards over time it's way to the high medieval European knighthood. The Persian heavy armory (clibanarii, cataphracts) and many other military concepts and tactics was copied one-to-one by the late Romans and is the predecessor for medieval armor, the heavy cavalry merely being the most prominent.
Also ideological influences (not all being exactly positive) from Persia had a lasting influence on the Romans. Well known is the cult of Mithras which was widely popular among Roman soldiers. But also the very concept of sacred godlike Emperorship, was adopted from the Persians by Alexander and through the following Hellenistic Kingdoms found it's way to the Romans (who were better served with a Republic). During the Republican time, as Plutarch reports Persian priests had an influence on Lucius Cornelius Sulla (when fighting in Asia), and led him to believe himself to be a deity. The later Roman "divine" Emperorship was clearly an Eastern concept. Also "Augustus" is derived from the Avestic "aojishta" (possessor of the increasing forces).
George Lenczowski's book on Imperial Iran has a chapter on "Sacred Kingship", which covers numerous details of these influences on Roman Caesars.
The Persian Monarchs were never worshipped as divine by the priests of Ahura-Mazda as they were strict monotheists. Alexander borrowed the Court protocol of the Persians which was probably borrowed from Mesopotamians. As for the term "Augustus" being derived from Persian, I think that is a stretch. Both Latin and Persian are Indo-European and share certain root words. It is more probable that they developed independently from a common source.
Not quite correct. While they were not supremely divine as Ahura Mazda, and subordinate to him, they were spiritually clearly of (quasi)divine status. Shapur's inscription reads:
"Worshipper of Ahuramazda, the god Shapur, king of kings of the Aryans and non-Aryans, of divine descent, son of the Mazda worshiper, the god Ardashir (Artaxerxes), king of kings of the Aryans, grandson of the god-king Papak."
The king and his royal predecessors are subordinate to Ahura Mazda, but clearly divine.
The inscriptions for Shapur II and III say "from the divine race of God", although in this case it's debatable whether this could mean all Iranians, and not only the King.
Whether they were actually worshipped is another thing, but they saw themselves as godlike.
I didn't say that Augustus is Persian in origin, but Avestan, which is, as you correctly say, the common root. The "aojishta" was to the Zoroastrians the attribute of the Fravashi, the angel-spirits of great personalities (including the King). Maybe I should have contexted that point a bit more.
I think Alexander was influenced by the Oracle at Ammon-Zeus in Libya of his divinity than by any Persians.
This may be correct, the Egyptians (and the Greek oracle in Siwa obviously saw themselves as having authority to declare Alexander Pharaoh) gave their Pharaohs also divine status, however historical record shows clearly that Alexander tried to establish himself as legitimate heir of the Persian kings, adopting their role, marrying a princess, and taking over their traditions, dress etc. much to the chagrin of his Greek/Macedonian comrades... and this persianate hellenistic traditions were later emulated by the Romans. I.e. the "proskynesis" was again adopted by Diocletian.
Correction: meant to say that Latin and Avestic (which is the sacred iranian language) share roots. Not that the Avestan language IS the root.
The Oracle at Siwah did not proclaim Alexander as Pharoah. That was a prerogative of the Egyptian priests of Amun Ra. They just confirmed that he was son of a Zeus. The Temple of Erythrae had also proclaimed his divinity at this time.
Later, one of his successors, Seleucus, proclaimed himself a son of Apollo. Of course, he was following Alexander's example, not any other.
Thanks BBell and TXnMA!
I’ll have to check this one to see if it’s just similar, or an earlier version:
Early chemical warfare comes to light
ScienceNews | 11 Jan 2009 | Bruce Bower
Posted on 01/12/2009 7:37:48 AM PST by BGHater
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2163130/posts
|
|
|||
Gods |
Just adding to the catalog, not sending a general distribution. |
||
|
· Discover · Nat Geographic · Texas AM Anthro News · Yahoo Anthro & Archaeo · · The Archaeology Channel · Excerpt, or Link only? · cgk's list of ping lists · |
|||
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.