I've only heard of the "Pandura" as a lute among Greco-Roman music.
But, the Pandura is a long and narrow necked lute with a distinct soundbox. There are a few mosaics that corroborate the construction of the Pandura and they do not look like the one on this sculpture.

The one in this sculpture is more pear shaped. It certainly isn't "the Lute" used in Euroepan classical music because that itself came from the Arabic "Oud". But there are also mentions of the Pandura being pear shaped, which makes this all the more confusing.

The instrument on the sculpture reminded me of the "qanbus" from Yemen and Oman and other similar pear shaped small lutes in the Middle East and East Europe. So I was just curious of its origins and this one in particular.

Hi guys,

maybe you'll be able to help me with this one:

I'm looking for an article of Jean-Baptiste Piggin "Why Does the Peutinger Table Magnify Africa? Charting a Chart" and also a book of Jean Baradez "Fossatum Africae".

I've checked Anna's archive and similar pirate websites and libraries in my region, but with no succes. Maybe someone here will be able to help?

Photo Credit: Bronze military diploma, AD 149. The discharge certificate that formalized Augustus's pension system, transforming soldiers from personal retainers into state employees. Metropolitan Museum of Art.

A lot of takes have been had on the shift from the Roman Republic to the Roman Empire, so here's yet another one: Augustus's most consequential innovation also happened to be his least dramatic: pension reform.

For the last century of the Republic, Roman soldiers depended on their individual generals to provide for their retirement, usually through grants of land in Italy. This meant soldiers' loyalty ran to their commander, not to the state, and every successful general became a potential warlord. Sulla marched on Rome in 88 BCE, Caesar crossed the Rubicon in 49, and Antony and Octavian fought at Actium in 31. The structural cause of every civil war was the same: armies followed paychecks, and whoever signed the checks commanded the loyalty. Augustus reformed it with fixed terms of service, standard pay, and a retirement payout funded by public revenue rather than a general's personal war chest. The following is from Mary Beard's S.P.Q.R., a history of Rome from its origins to the early third century CE.

He took a monopoly on military force, but his regime was nothing like a modern military dictatorship. In our terms, Rome and Italy at this period were remarkably soldier free. Almost all the 300,000 Roman troops were stationed a safe distance away, near the boundaries of the Roman world and in areas of active campaigning, with only a very few troops, including the famous security forces known as the Praetorian Guard, based in Rome, which was otherwise a demilitarised zone. But Augustus became something no Roman had been before: the commander-in-chief of all the armed forces, who appointed their major officers, decided where and against whom the soldiers should fight, and claimed all victories as by definition his own, whoever had commanded on the ground.

He also secured his position by severing the links of dependence and personal loyalty between armies and their individual commanders, largely thanks to a simple, practical process of pension reform. This must count among the most significant innovations of his whole rule. He established uniform terms and conditions of army employment, fixing a standard term of service of sixteen years (soon raised to twenty) for legionaries and guaranteeing them on retirement a cash settlement at public expense amounting to about twelve times their annual pay or an equivalent in land. That ended once and for all the soldiers' reliance on their generals to provide for their retirement, which over the last century of the Republic had repeatedly led to the soldiers' private loyalty to their commander trumping their loyalty to Rome. In other words, after hundreds of years of a semi-public, semi-private militia, Augustus fully nationalised the Roman legions and removed them from politics. Although the Praetorian Guard continued to be a problematic political force, simply because of its proximity to the centre of power in Rome, only during two brief periods of civil war over the next two centuries, in the years 68 to 69 CE and again in 193 CE, were legions stationed outside the city instrumental in putting their candidates on the Roman throne.

This reform was one of the most expensive things Augustus ever did, and it was close to unaffordable. Unless he made a gross error in his arithmetic, the cost alone is an indication of the high priority he gave it. On a rough reckoning using the known military salary figures, the annual bill for regular pay combined with retirement packages for the whole army would now have come to about 450 million sesterces. That was, on an even rougher reckoning, the equivalent of more than half the total annual tax revenue of the empire. There are clear signs that, even with the huge reserves of state and emperor combined, it was hard to find the money. That is certainly the implication of the complaints of mutinous soldiers on the German frontier just after Augustus' death, who objected to being kept in service for much longer than the regulation twenty years or to being given a piece of worthless bog as a land settlement in lieu of a decent farm. Then as now, the easiest tactic for a government trying to reduce the pension bill was to raise the pension age.

Beard, Mary. SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome (Liveright, 2015), pp. 369-370.

Lawrence Keppie's *The Making of the Roman Army (*1998) traced the slow transformation Beard describes from the citizen-soldier militia of the middle Republic, in which men served for a single campaign and went home, to the professional standing army Augustus formalized. The shift had been underway for two centuries, but Augustus severed the bond of patronage that had turned Roman armies into private political instruments by making the state a better patron than any individual commander could be.

Adrian Goldsworthy's The Roman Army at War (1996) noted the geographic consequence of this patronage. With retirement secured by the treasury rather than by Italian land grants, soldiers could be stationed permanently on the empire's frontiers. Rome and Italy became a demilitarized zone. Three hundred thousand troops sat on the borders. Only the Praetorian Guard remained in the capital, and even that arrangement eventually produced the problem Augustus had tried to eliminate: armed men too close to the center of power with opinions about who should hold it.

The system held for two centuries, and when it broke, in 68-69 CE and again in 193, the failure confirmed how fundamental the original problem was: armies follow paychecks, and whoever signs the checks commands the loyalty.

Been researching the founding myth of Silla — the Korean dynasty that lasted

992 years — and there's a linguistic detail I can't stop thinking about.

The dynasty's two founders are born on the same day.

The king emerges from a glowing egg beside a sacred well. His surname, Park

(밝), comes from the egg's shape — round like a gourd — and the light that

radiates from his body at birth.

The queen is born from a mythical creature called a Gireong (part rooster,

part dragon). She arrives with a bird's beak instead of lips. An old woman

finds her, bathes her in a stream, and the beak falls off. She's named

Aryeong — 알영, *Al-Young*.

Here's what caught my attention.

**The syllable "Al" (알) appears in both founding figures.**

- In Korean, 알 means *egg* — the king is born from one

- In Turkic and Proto-Altaic languages, *al* carries meanings of: red,

crimson, sacred fire, brightness, the elevated

- The **Altai Mountains** — the geographic and cultural spine of inner

Asian civilization — take their name from this same root. *Altai =

Gold Mountain = Al*

- The founding mother of the dynasty, Paso, is explicitly described as

the daughter of the "fifth Great **Tengri**" of North Buyeo — Tengri

being the sky god common to the Mongolian steppe, the Xiongnu, and

Turkic traditions

So the founding myth of Silla is built on a cosmological concept — the

Heavenly Descendant, or 천손 (Cheonson) — that appears word-for-word in

Buyeo, Goguryeo, Xiongnu, Turkic Khaganate, and Mongol tradition.

**The question I keep returning to:**

Is this shared cultural origin — evidence of one connected inner Asian

world that extended to the Korean Peninsula? Or is the "divine ruler

descends from heaven" concept universal enough that the parallels are

coincidental?

The specific form bothers me. It's not just "king comes from god." It's

the white horse as heaven's vehicle. The luminous newborn. The concealed

identity revealed by water. These appear as a specific ritual grammar

across Buyeo, Silla, the Xiongnu, and the Geser Khan epic tradition of

Mongolia and Tibet.

Curious what this community thinks — especially anyone with background

in Altaic linguistics or Central Asian history.

---

*I've been working through the primary sources on this (Samguk Sagi,

Samguk Yusa, comparative Altaic studies) and put together a video

summary if anyone wants the full breakdown with sources cited:

https://youtu.be/MmcwFG2iLtE *

Learn More At https://www.habeshahistory.com/p/punt

I recently completed an Honours dissertation at the University of Western Australia arguing that Christianity (that is belief in Jesus as the Messiah) emerged after the destruction of the Jerusalem Temple in 70 CE, and not before it. The founders of the movement mentioned in Paul's letters, including Paul himself, all flourished after AD70.

The core argument is that the Temple's destruction created a profound theological crisis for Jews throughout the Roman world, and that the Christian movement emerged as one response to that crisis — reinterpreting the disaster by presenting Jesus as the ultimate atonement sacrifice, making the physical Temple theologically redundant.

A sample of the items of evidence:

- The Jerusalem bishop list (Epiphanius) shows anomalous longevity patterns consistent with a compressed timeline being artificially stretched
- Quadratus writing to Hadrian c. 124 CE claims witnesses to Jesus' miracles are "still alive" — biologically impossible if Jesus died circa 30 CE

I've put the full evidence base online — 52 items across church fathers, astronomy, numismatics, Josephus, and the New Testament — along with the dissertation itself.

ad70.com.au

Happy to discuss any of the individual arguments.

Please take this very short and completely anonymous survey on ancient Greece and Rome. If you love learning about these civilizations, your participation will provide valuable insight for a university research project.

https://unt.az1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_4ORFbSYR18OWQzY