A community for discussing events around the World
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
News !news@lemmy.world
Politics !politics@lemmy.world
World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
The article doesn't clearly explain it, but that means this guy's dying wish was to have his remains put inside a jug of wine? He must have been quite the character in life.
After he was killed at the Battle of Trafalgar, Admiral Horatio Nelson was sent back to England in a barrel of either brandy or rum (accounts differ) to preserve his corpse.
But this dude was cremated like a good Roman.
But this dude was cremated like a good Roman.
Yeah but then asked for his ashes to be decanted into an amphora?
"Did you put the ashes away like I asked you to?"
"Yeah, put them into that urn"
"Dude, that was my wine for tonight. wtf"
He was so mad he went on to invent Franzia
So it could never happen again
that's the biggest catheter bag I've seen so far
You've never seen post trans-urethral prostate resection continuous bladder irrigation before.
Bonum vinum laetificat cor hominis
"Good wine gladdens a person's heart."
All my hominis are bonum vinum.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sucking_the_monkey#Tapping_the_Admiral
That's how he started his journey, at least
maybe he had a Keith Richards family member who wanted to get drunk on their remains.
It's pretty clear imo, the seared bones were sealed in the urn full of wine and an additional unworn decorated golden ring. The researchers even talk about reluctance to try it, because while it is perfectly safe judging by the microbiological analysis: it's had contact with the bones and is quite murky.
I am a historian whose specialty is too recent to deal with anything like that (20th century), but also have a friend who, to be generic here, deals with a handful of a few centuries back. She found a baggie of a drug mistakenly stored with a letter in an archive (think 18th century) and on a whim, dipped their pinky into the powder and tried it. They regret that decision, but also, nothing happened:)
EDIT: Historians can be boring, but not always that tame
All of which raises a rather indelicate question. Was none of them tempted – even fleetingly – to sample this remarkable, historic wine?
Ruiz Arrebola admits he half-jokingly suggested to the lead archaeologist, Juan Manuel Román, that they have “a tiny little glass” to celebrate the discovery.
What's with this half-jokingly shit? Give me the glass, I'll drink it.
I bet they were remembering the story of the Egyptian Archaeologists who discovered a jar of honey and they all had a taste. Then they found a fetus in the jar.
Oh you know what- Snopes says it didn’t happen! It’s maybe just an urban legend.
Pussies. That just adds flavor.
I dunno, there's dead Roman bones in it.
Like you've never done a line of Grandma
Like you've never done a line off Grandma.
First one, then the other.
Nah, cremated remains. That'll just give it smoky undertones.
They’re correct, last paragraph of it article says there’s bone remains in it.
Your point being?
You’d die of some horrible malady surely
I'll take one for the team, and don't call me Shirley.
They called you ma'lady Shirley
“It’s not in the least bit toxic – we’ve done the microbiological analysis,” he said.
They’d be just fine.
“But I’d have qualms about that because this wine has spent 2,000 years in contact with the cremated body of a dead Roman. The liquid is a bit murky because of the bone remains. But I guess you could filter it and try it. I’d rather someone else tried it first, though.”
~~You might wanna rethink that, but without knowing you, maybe not.~~ Nope, you said you’re cool with it, so bottoms up.
Didn't Romans put lead in their wine to make it sweeter?
Lead acetate, yes, a common practice.
Yeah, should've put them in the pipes like modern people do.
Fun fact: the Romans used lead for water pipes too. They knew it had detrimental health effects, but the water caused a mineral buildup in the pipes that protected the water from lead contamination.
the Romans used lead for water pipes too.the Romans used lead for water pipes too.
Uh, late romans?
Somebody will take a sip.
How'd they fortify it? I thought they didn't do distillation until at least the 10th century and it was too warm to do fractional freezing.
You got downvoted but it's a valid question. They don't state that the wine was fortified, however, but the comparison to sherry does suggest that.
In my reading is only compared to sherry because it's from the same region.
Oh I had downvoted myself. I do that that for fun sometimes. It often results in a lot more downvotes and is funny.
Aha I see.
Downvoted :p
I wonder how it was sealed. Is glazed ceramic + wax that airtight? The article (nor many very similar ones from other sites) doesn't give specifics.
I got a few alcoholic friends who would loved to spend eternity mixed with their favourite booze.
id try it
Hmmm sweet forbidden wine!
Sounds rank af
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Analysis by experts at the University of Córdoba has established that the ancient tawny liquid inside the urn – which was found in a rare, untouched Roman tomb that was accidentally discovered in the Andalucían town of Carmona five years ago – is a local, sherry-like wine.
“It’s a sunken tomb that was excavated from the rock, which allowed it to remain standing for 2,000 years,” said José Rafael Ruiz Arrebola, an organic chemist at the University of Córdoba who led the analysis of the wine.
Although the tomb made headlines last year when researchers announced that they had found a crystal bottle in one of the urns that contained a 2,000-year-old patchouli-scented Roman perfume, it had not given up all its secrets.
Once Ruiz Arrebola and his team had established that the five or so litres of reddish liquid in the glass flask inside the urn hadn’t come from condensation or flooding, they set about analysing it.
The chemist and his team hope the techniques they refined and built upon during their investigations will help other researchers who study ancient food and wine.
Ruiz Arrebola admits he half-jokingly suggested to the lead archaeologist, Juan Manuel Román, that they have “a tiny little glass” to celebrate the discovery.
The original article contains 823 words, the summary contains 208 words. Saved 75%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!