Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

talesoftimesforgotten.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 208 posts

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#11

Post by RcouF1uZ4gsC »

> Take Caligula as an example. We all know him as the mad emperor who supposedly once declared war on Neptune, then ordered his soldiers to attack the sea and take seashells as booty. The problem is that this story and the others like it all come from extremely late, hostile sources such as the biography Life of Caligula by Gaius Suetonius Tranquilus (lived c. 69 – after c. 122 AD) and Roman History by Kassios Dion (lived c. 155 – c. 235 AD).

Actually, I think Caligula was more trolling than insane. Reading about him, reminds me not so much of insanity, as if a 4chan poster was suddenly given absolute power.

It my view, he had the Roman Army march around collecting sea shells for the lulz.

Absolute power can be its own madness apart from lead.

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#12

Post by cryptoz »

AaronM wrote: post #9
Alex3917 wrote: post #6

In the U.S., lead was purposely added to food until 1988, so it’s not like this is an exclusively ancient problem.

That's a bold claim, do you have a source to back that up?

No OP and I don't know about 1988, but lead pipes are still common in the US, either many states have them or all states do. Flint, MI has a plan to eliminate them this year, maybe.

https://www.nrdc.org/lead-pipes-widespread-used-every-state

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#14

Post by dukeofdoom »

dralley wrote: post #7
comrh wrote: post #3

One thing I really got out of the History of Rome podcast by Mike Duncan is if anyone tells you there was ONE cause of the fall of Rome, they're full of crap.

And if you really want to boil it down to a single reason, the best candidate would be "becoming militarily dependent on hired mercenaries and then not paying them" rather than something more interesting

I can see that happening. Thinking about Canada. The other day I calculated it would take 25 hours of work for the minimum wage worker to afford a weekend camping. And I think that's a pretty good indication we're pretty close collapse. Workers not being paid enough, and out of control inflation is how the soviet system collapsed.

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#15

Post by Ekaros »

So often any of these single causal theories forget to look at timespan. Which was either decades or centuries... If system survived previously with mostly same things in place there is really no reason why such thing as lead pipes would be the cause of downfall part. By any reasonable conclusion the culprit in such case should be some disruptive innovation.

In the end gradual natural degradation of system is much more reasonable.

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#16

Post by narag »

comrh wrote: post #3

One thing I really got out of the History of Rome podcast by Mike Duncan is if anyone tells you there was ONE cause of the fall of Rome, they're full of crap.

That's very reasonable. But there was a slow collapse of the economy that is an intermediate cause in the chain of events that is central to the fall.

You can speculate what caused that collapse, that in turn caused the fall and there are also many causes to consider, but again, there is one intermediate cause that is Christianism. The religion altered several aspects of the economy: slavery, commerce and lending.

Now you can again speculate about what make them think it was a good idea to adopt Christianism as official religion. If a previous crisis existed that shook the foundations of the empire. Anyway, it seems the solution solved nothing.

So xxx --> Christianism --> Economy --> Fall

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#17

Post by RC_ITR »

AaronM wrote: post #9
Alex3917 wrote: post #6

In the U.S., lead was purposely added to food until 1988, so it’s not like this is an exclusively ancient problem.

That's a bold claim, do you have a source to back that up?

I think GP is referring to the ban on lead solder for tin cans that went into place in 1980.

A bit of a stretch to call it intentionally adding lead to food, but in practice, not that different.

Re: Lead poisoning probably did not cause the downfall of the Roman Empire

#20

Post by ch4s3 »

cryptoz wrote: post #12
AaronM wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a bold claim, do you have a source to back that up?

No OP and I don't know about 1988, but lead pipes are still common in the US, either many states have them or all states do. Flint, MI has a plan to eliminate them this year, maybe. https://www.nrdc.org/lead-pipes-widespread-used-every-state

Lead in pipes is only a problem if you have the wrong water chemistry. If the water is naturally or or treated to have the right pH then lead phosphates form and no lead leeches into the water.

Still, I wouldn't want lead pipes.

Post reply on HN