Jump to content
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 872 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

This post has been here for a whole hour and nobody has posted this yet?! *tsk*  

If you played SL, instead of procrastinating on the forums, then you would have SL things to discuss! Of course you will reply "I am studying, and don't have time to play video games" as you have

I..I..*shuts up*

Posted Images

34 minutes ago, Callum Meriman said:

No maize, but corn started in mexico 7000 years or so ago with zea mays parviglumis, then as it was crossbred it headed south to the great empires down there.

" Corn was first domesticated about 10,000 years ago in what is now Mexico.[3] Archaeologists discovered that people have known about popcorn for thousands of years. In Mexico, for example, remnants of popcorn have been found that date to around 3600 BC "

 

At least what Wikipedia tells

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popcorn#History

 

+ chocolate coated popcorn is good

Edited by Ansiri
+ coated popcorns
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, KathrynLisbeth said:

Ad respondendum quaestio originale. Ego puto illic es duos valde sapidum cibum.  Sed secundum Wikipedia.  Orange Iulium et Caesar Salad non Romanus sunt.  Ita... eh? 

I haven't had an Orange Julius in ages

Edited by LittleMe Jewell
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Love Zhaoying said:

Fun Fact: in many translated ancient writings, “corn” meant grain. Not maize.

How do you define ancient? Using corn as a synonym for maize is an americanism and wasn't very common elsewhere in the world before the internet.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Etymologies
from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 4th Edition
Middle English corne, from Old French, horn, from Latin cornū; see ker-1 in Indo-European roots.

Yes, it seems it's root is the Latin "Horn" as in cornucopia.

TIL

 

4 minutes ago, Ansiri said:

They had fish sauce in Rome, if not popcorns.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garum

Fish sauce on popcorn is even worse then chocolate... and just furgedaboudit on icecream. Blerch.

 

Edited by Callum Meriman
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Ansiri said:

" Corn was first domesticated about 10,000 years ago in what is now Mexico.[3] Archaeologists discovered that people have known about popcorn for thousands of years. In Mexico, for example, remnants of popcorn have been found that date to around 3600 BC "

 

At least what Wikipedia tells

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Popcorn#History

 

+ chocolate coated popcorn is good

10,000 years ago, when two central american Indians were arguing, a third Indian took out a bag of popcorn and began eating, thus starting the popular popcorn meme.

  • Haha 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, ChinRey said:

America wasn't invented back then either so there was no maize. And neither wheat nor rye pop very well. They did have hamburgers though

Wait...the Romans had hamburgers???  Wikipedia doesn't list any claims prior to 1768, and it seems that the hamburger sandwich per se didn't appear until around 1890 or so.

Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, Lindal Kidd said:

Wait...the Romans had hamburgers???  Wikipedia doesn't list any claims prior to 1768, and it seems that the hamburger sandwich per se didn't appear until around 1890 or so.

Oooooh, look... https://museumcrush.org/the-1500-year-old-recipe-that-shows-how-romans-invented-the-beef-burger/

Link to post
Share on other sites

We wouldn't have had Spartacus,Crixus or the OMG Soo Hawt Gannicus,if it were not for Rome to inspire..

Anyone not familiar with the series and blood makes you wheezy,you may not wanna watch..

Gannicus was the bestest most hawtest Gladiator ever...

 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no opinions on the Roman Empire except for one thing.  No matter how good or bad a historical situation or event was at the time, we are all beneficiaries of that history simply because we were born, which we might not have been if history had been different.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Conifer Dada said:

I have no opinions on the Roman Empire except for one thing.  No matter how good or bad a historical situation or event was at the time, we are all beneficiaries of that history simply because we were born, which we might not have been if history had been different.

It's a pretty nonsensical question. It's a bit like asking one's opinion of the Black Death:

"Yeah, that made things a bit rough for people, didn't it?"

"Sure, but it helped end serfdom! Yay for the Bubonic Plague!"

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Conifer Dada said:

I have no opinions on the Roman Empire except for one thing.  No matter how good or bad a historical situation or event was at the time, we are all beneficiaries of that history simply because we were born, which we might not have been if history had been different.

Isn't this a sort of survivorship bias? Can you imagine a past that had something better than the Roman Empire, which would produce a present that's remarkably better than the one we have now?

I think stupid luck could have produced an alternate Maddy, better in every way, living in a humanity that's better in every way. While imagining a better past won't change anything, imagining better futures might, even with the omnipresent threat of stupid luck.

 

Edited by Madelaine McMasters
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

It's a pretty nonsensical question. It's a bit like asking one's opinion of the Black Death:

"Yeah, that made things a bit rough for people, didn't it?"

"Sure, but it helped end serfdom! Yay for the Bubonic Plague!"

And the Plague doctors had such cool masks!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plague_doctor

 

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Scylla Rhiadra said:

It's a pretty nonsensical question. It's a bit like asking one's opinion of the Black Death:

"Yeah, that made things a bit rough for people, didn't it?"

"Sure, but it helped end serfdom! Yay for the Bubonic Plague!"

I certainly wouldn't have been born if it wasn't for the Black Death. It wiped out much of the Norwegian population, making room for German and Danish immigrant, including several of my ancestors.

And I wouldn't have been born if the Spanish Armada hadn't been beaten and some of the ships hadn't ended up shipwrecked way up north with some of my ancestors among the crew.

And if some poor English fishermen hadn't been shipwrecked too...

And if the Romani people hadn't been driven away and harrassed everywhere, forcing some of them to flee all the way to Norway...

Now I really feel I have the right to say "Excuse me for living".

Edited by ChinRey
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
You are about to reply to a thread that has been inactive for 872 days.

Please take a moment to consider if this thread is worth bumping.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...