Comments by "" (@neutronalchemist3241) on "Earliest Depictions of Jesus in Art" video.

  1. 151
  2. 72
  3. ​ @jmiquelmb  Many people talk of "most something" when trying to find a justification for their very personal beliefs. Actually that only the elites were literate (and used this as a "weapon" to keep the lower strata subjugated) is the old school, represented, IE, by W.Harris. Most modern historians refuted that view, exactly for what I said. There are too many surviving inscriptions specifically destined to the lower classes and/or written by them. Even the bricks were often numbered to mark their pre-planned place in the construction (many Roman buildings were "prefabricated"), but that means that the bricklayer could read numbers. In middle age, graffiti were the exception, and they were different kind of graffiti. Mostly left by people that were evidently educated to record their passage somewere. In Rome, like in the present world, graffiti on the most trivial matters were the norm. Martial wrote "There’s no place for a poor man to think or rest. Schoolmasters disturb life in the morning, the bakers at night, the coppersmiths hammer all day". Street schools were so diffused that the lessons disturbed people like the other artisanal activities. Harris counters these arguments by citing the poor quality of the graffiti, noting that quoting (or more often misquoting) Virgil’s Aeneid on a tavern wall does not make a man literate. Maybe, but it makes him able to read and write. That's the key. When stating that in ancient Rome the "literacy rate" was "only" from 10% to 20%. Scholars refers to something else than the simple ability to read and write. The ability to read and write at an elementary level (what Petronius in the Satyricon called the ability to "read stone letters") was MUCH more diffused.
    20
  4. 3
  5. 2
  6. 1
  7. 1
  8. 1
  9. 1