Speaker 1: Welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind production of My
Speaker 1: Heart Radio. Hey, welcome to Stuff to Blow Your Mind.
Speaker 1: My name is Robert Lamb and I'm Joe McCormick, and
Speaker 1: we're back with part two of our series on the
Speaker 1: Fall of Valerium. Rob, can you cut us up? But
Speaker 1: of course, if you haven't heard part one yet, you
Speaker 1: should go back and listen to that first. But uh,
Speaker 1: if you're assuming you have, Rob, can you do a
Speaker 1: brief refresher? Yeah, yeah, I'll refresh everybody on the basics here.
Speaker 1: So when are we well, we are during this is
Speaker 1: all taking place during the Crisis of the third century. Uh,
Speaker 1: this was a period between two thirty five and two
Speaker 1: eighty four c E. In which the Roman Empire is
Speaker 1: facing all sorts of internal problems just about following apart
Speaker 1: lots of of warfare between different would be emperors. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's near there's almost an emperor every year or during
Speaker 1: this period. Meanwhile, in in Persia we have the strong
Speaker 1: and united Sasanian Empire, and so in the last episode
Speaker 1: we talked about the background, especially on the Sasanian Empire,
Speaker 1: background on how Rome reaches the state, why it's in
Speaker 1: such crisis, and who some of the major players are
Speaker 1: and what some of the short imperial reigns consisted of.
Speaker 1: Uh and so the key conflict though that the episode
Speaker 1: revolved around, was on one side the Roman Empire under
Speaker 1: Emperor Valerian and then on the other side of the
Speaker 1: Sasanian Empire under a Shapur the first And so we
Speaker 1: talked about the Battle of Edessa. We talked about this,
Speaker 1: this enormous military disaster in which not only are Valerians
Speaker 1: forces defeated, but Valerian himself, the Emperor of Rome, is
Speaker 1: dethroned and captured by enemy forces. He he is a
Speaker 1: prisoner of war under the Sasanians. And so this is
Speaker 1: this is ultimately you know what drew me into into
Speaker 1: this whole topic here, like what are the ramifications of
Speaker 1: such a defeat, Because again, while this does not compare
Speaker 1: to say, the complete taking of a kingdom or the
Speaker 1: destruction of its capital, the enslavement of the people, that
Speaker 1: sort of thing, it's still an unthinkable occurrence in many
Speaker 1: respects because the emperor is the very apex of the
Speaker 1: imperium and now here he is in the hands of
Speaker 1: the enemy. So for starters, yes, one is no longer
Speaker 1: emperor if one is an enemy hands so instantly, once
Speaker 1: Valerian is gets captured, the title of Roman emperor immediately
Speaker 1: passes on to his son Galileinus. Galilenus was already essentially
Speaker 1: co emperor with his father, and in two sixty he
Speaker 1: becomes sole emperor, and ultimately he's going to reign till
Speaker 1: two sixty eight eight year reign. Then he has assassinated,
Speaker 1: that is, Master of to sixty greatly undermined him, and
Speaker 1: he almost immediately had to deal with other usurpers within
Speaker 1: the Roman ranks. Now on the other side of things,
Speaker 1: on the Sasanian side of things, this of course is
Speaker 1: a most momentous occasion, and Shahbour the first has it
Speaker 1: commemorated in rock relief. I think it more than one
Speaker 1: spot that survives. One of the key ones is this
Speaker 1: place called Naxi roust tom. It shows two Roman emperors
Speaker 1: subjugated by a figure mounted on horseback that is uh
Speaker 1: supposed to be the first. So the two emperors here
Speaker 1: are supposed to be Valerian, who of course has just
Speaker 1: been captured. Also Phillip the Arab, the soldier Emperor of
Speaker 1: Rome who followed the slain Gordian. This is the guy
Speaker 1: who signed a treaty with the Sasanians. And there's another
Speaker 1: rock relief elsewhere that also shows Valerian bowing before the
Speaker 1: Sasanian king. Now, one of the sources that I referred
Speaker 1: to a lot in the previous episode is Taraj Dairy,
Speaker 1: who wrote this wonderful book about the Sasanians. Go back
Speaker 1: and um and listen to that episode for for full
Speaker 1: citation on that source. And he's referring here to Shapu
Speaker 1: the first quote. No other person before could have claimed
Speaker 1: that he was able to kill a Roman emperor, make
Speaker 1: one a tributary, and capture and imprison a third. Spur
Speaker 1: was very much aware of this feat and did not
Speaker 1: hesitate to mention it in his inscription, and ultimately he
Speaker 1: also ends up commemorating this victory in his biography as well. Um.
Speaker 1: Now you'll remember the idea that he killed a Roman emperor. Uh,
Speaker 1: that is maybe a beefed up claim. Uh. The emperor
Speaker 1: in question uh may have just been killed by his
Speaker 1: own soldiers, which was of course a common fate for
Speaker 1: Roman emperors during this time of great unrest. Now Here
Speaker 1: we get into another really contested aspect of all of this,
Speaker 1: perhaps like the most contested aspect of the whole scenario,
Speaker 1: and that is what then exactly happens to Valerian? Uh?
Speaker 1: You know, we we know that he's not emperor anymore,
Speaker 1: he is a prisoner of war. But but then what
Speaker 1: does that mean? What what is going to happen to
Speaker 1: a supreme ruler in enemy hands during this time? And? Uh?
Speaker 1: We have various accounts of what happened. What happened we know,
Speaker 1: for instance, uh Derry says that the Iranian sources say
Speaker 1: that he and some senators and soldiers were deported uh
Speaker 1: into a Sasanian territory, But we don't really know for
Speaker 1: sure what happened. But the accounts range from the mundane
Speaker 1: to the horrific, and all told, none of it is
Speaker 1: truly out of the question during this time period, I
Speaker 1: guess one big question we might ask is just like
Speaker 1: what was standard treatment during the day for a captured
Speaker 1: ruler of an enemy group? And in fact, we might
Speaker 1: well look to the Romans for such an example. Oh yeah, sure,
Speaker 1: because so the export of a defeated ruler to the
Speaker 1: victorious metropol of the rival empire would not at all
Speaker 1: have been an unheard of concept in ancient Rome. As
Speaker 1: soon as we started talking about this subject, a couple
Speaker 1: of examples came immediately to my mind. These are by
Speaker 1: no means the only examples, but these are the first
Speaker 1: ones I thought of. One is fictional and the other historical.
Speaker 1: So the fictional example is a scene in William Shakespeare's
Speaker 1: play Tied to Sandronicus, which, now, to be clear, this
Speaker 1: is not like Shakespeare's other Roman plays, like Julius Caesar.
Speaker 1: Those are based on real historical events, at least to
Speaker 1: some extent, or events that were believed at Shakespeare's time
Speaker 1: to be real historical events. Tied to Sandronicus is wholly
Speaker 1: a fictional scenario, but individual elements from it and scenes
Speaker 1: in it are based on scenarios that really did happen.
Speaker 1: And the one I'm thinking of is the very beginning
Speaker 1: of the play. And so, in a scene in Act one,
Speaker 1: tit Us, the title character, is a Roman general. He's
Speaker 1: returning to Rome after a long or of conquest against
Speaker 1: the Goths, and with him he brings prisoners that he
Speaker 1: is parading through the streets, including Tamara, the queen of
Speaker 1: the Goths. And then a little bit further down, Lucius says,
Speaker 1: give us the proudest prisoner of the Goths, that we
Speaker 1: may hew his limbs, and on a pile at managed fratrum,
Speaker 1: sacrifice his flesh before this earthly prison of their bones,
Speaker 1: that so the shadows be not unappeased, nor we disturbed
Speaker 1: with prodigies on earth. Uh. And then later Tamara herself,
Speaker 1: the queen of the Goths, says, stay, Roman brethren, gracious conqueror, victorious,
Speaker 1: Titus rue the tears I shed a mother's tears in
Speaker 1: passion for her son. And if thy sons were ever
Speaker 1: dear to thee, oh, think my son to be is
Speaker 1: dear to me? Sufficeth not that we are brought to
Speaker 1: Rome to beautify thy triumphs and return captive to thee
Speaker 1: and to thy Roman yoke. But must my sons be
Speaker 1: slaughtered in the streets for valiant doings in their country's cause? Oh?
Speaker 1: If to fight for king and commonweal we're piety in thine.
Speaker 1: It is in these Andronicus, stain not thy tomb with blood.
Speaker 1: Wilt thou draw near the nature of the gods, draw
Speaker 1: near them? Then, in being merciful, sweet mercy is nobility's
Speaker 1: true badge. Thrice noble tyed us spare my firstborn son.
Speaker 1: So the scenario is the this is the queen of
Speaker 1: the defeated enemy nation that Rome has conquered. She has
Speaker 1: brought back with her sons, and they are going to
Speaker 1: do a human sacrifice of her captive son back here
Speaker 1: in Rome. And she's pleading with tit us, don't do it, please,
Speaker 1: don't do it, but they're going to do it again.
Speaker 1: Not not a story or an account directly from the
Speaker 1: time that we're talking about here and not from the Romans.
Speaker 1: This is Shakespeare, but still uh it paints uh it
Speaker 1: both a grim picture of what may have been the standard,
Speaker 1: but also, at least from in Shakespeare's voice, it's asking
Speaker 1: questions about like, is this really the way we should
Speaker 1: handle things with when it comes to captives? Uh? Is
Speaker 1: this really the way to go? Of course, as the
Speaker 1: morality of Roman practices is highly questionable to us today,
Speaker 1: I would say, even so is the implied morality of
Speaker 1: of of the play where I don't know, so Tamara
Speaker 1: eventually becomes the villain, right or I don't know. I
Speaker 1: guess it's kind of hard to say. Within a within
Speaker 1: a tragedy, hyper violent tragedy and revenge story like Titus Andronicus.
Speaker 1: But she eventually becomes the wife of the emperor Saturdayninists
Speaker 1: and then they end up. It's oh, it's a whole
Speaker 1: big battle there. There's a lot of like slaughtering sons
Speaker 1: and feeding them to people. But but but but to
Speaker 1: bring it to real history, I think clearly this scene
Speaker 1: in Shakespeare is based on real historical events. One example
Speaker 1: that came to my mind immediately is the story of
Speaker 1: Verse and Jettis, who was originally a nobleman of the
Speaker 1: Arverni tribe of the Galls. Uh So, in the fifty BC,
Speaker 1: Julius Caesar was engaged in a number of campaigns that
Speaker 1: came to be known as the Gallic Wars. It was
Speaker 1: a war, basically a war of conquest in Gaul, which
Speaker 1: Gaul is an area of western Europe that roughly corresponds
Speaker 1: to modern day France and uh It's complicated, but basically
Speaker 1: the aim of these wars was to bring the various
Speaker 1: tribes of the region under Roman domination. Now this is
Speaker 1: before Caesar was an emperor. At the time he was
Speaker 1: um I believe he was governor of Gaul. But but
Speaker 1: he he was he was a military commander, and he
Speaker 1: was practicing a form of divide and rule, showing favor
Speaker 1: on some Galic tribes and nobles in order to play
Speaker 1: them against the other Galic tribes and nobles. And uh,
Speaker 1: I think it is it's alleged that earlier in this
Speaker 1: effort verse in Jeerics, this one particular Gallic noble had
Speaker 1: been on relatively good terms with Rome and with Caesar.
Speaker 1: But sometime later in the campaign verse, Generics did a
Speaker 1: U turn and he ended up mounting an effort to
Speaker 1: unite the Gallic tribes in brotherhood to say, okay, let's
Speaker 1: stop squabbling with each other. We can't let them divide
Speaker 1: and rule us. We got a band together and fight back. Now,
Speaker 1: I know that initially under verse in Genderics, the goals
Speaker 1: were actually pretty effective at resisting Roman conquest verse and
Speaker 1: Generics apparently employed a sort of harass and deprive strategy,
Speaker 1: so uh kind of uh having having quick moving troops, uh,
Speaker 1: moving around and harassing the Roman column and then also
Speaker 1: practicing scorched earth tactics to deprive the Romans of food
Speaker 1: and other supplies. So you know, the Romans normally what
Speaker 1: they would do is they would move into an area,
Speaker 1: and then they would confiscate food and other important supplies
Speaker 1: from the locals in order to feed their army. Verse
Speaker 1: and Genderic said, Okay, now, what we're gonna do is
Speaker 1: just like burn and destroy and remove all of the
Speaker 1: food in whatever area the Romans are about to move into,
Speaker 1: so they can't feed themselves. And this actually was a
Speaker 1: very smart tactic. But ultimately the girls were defeated. Caesar
Speaker 1: surrounded and besieged Verse and Generics and and his forces
Speaker 1: at a battle called the Battle of Alicia and fifty
Speaker 1: two b c E. And, facing certain defeat, Verse and
Speaker 1: Generics made a bid for mercy, a bid for mercy
Speaker 1: for his troops by surrendering himself personally to Caesar. And
Speaker 1: this story is told in the work of the second
Speaker 1: and third century Roman historian Cassius Dio I think also
Speaker 1: sometimes called Dio Cassius, and Dio Cassius writes as follows,
Speaker 1: now Verse and Generics might have escaped, for he had
Speaker 1: not been captured and was unwounded, but he hoped, since
Speaker 1: he had once been on friendly terms with Caesar, that
Speaker 1: he might obtain pardon from him. So he came to
Speaker 1: him without any announcement by Harold, but appeared before him
Speaker 1: suddenly as Caesar was see it on the tribunal, and
Speaker 1: threw some who were present into alarm, for he was
Speaker 1: very tall to begin with, and in his armor he
Speaker 1: made an extremely imposing figure. When quiet had been restored,
Speaker 1: he uttered not a word, but fell upon his knees
Speaker 1: with hands clasped, in an attitude of supplication. This inspired
Speaker 1: many with pity at remembrance of his former fortune and
Speaker 1: at the distressing state in which he now appeared. But
Speaker 1: Caesar reproached him in this very matter on which he
Speaker 1: most relied for his safety, and by setting over against
Speaker 1: his claim of former friendship, his recent opposition showed his
Speaker 1: offense to have been the more grievous. Therefore, he did
Speaker 1: not pity him even at the time, but immediately confined
Speaker 1: him in bonds, and later, after sending him to his triumph,
Speaker 1: put him to death. And then I think after this
Speaker 1: event Caesar basically slaughtered everybody that the Roman behavior in
Speaker 1: the Gallic Wars was extremely brutal. Now coming back to
Speaker 1: what do Cassius says at the end of that passage
Speaker 1: that he was sent to Rome for for Caesar's triumph
Speaker 1: and then he was eventually put to death. Apparently what
Speaker 1: happened is he he was sent to Rome, where he
Speaker 1: was held in prison for about five or six years
Speaker 1: before being ritually executed. After he was displayed to the
Speaker 1: public in Caesar's Four Triumphs in forty six b C.
Speaker 1: The Four Triumphs, it was a kind of victory parade
Speaker 1: and festivals, celebrating the conquest of the various nations who
Speaker 1: had come under Rome's heel Uh to read from Dio
Speaker 1: Cassius in a different section describing the Four Triumphs quote
Speaker 1: after this, he conducted the whole festival in a brilliant manner,
Speaker 1: as was fitting in honor of victories so many and
Speaker 1: so decisive. He celebrated triumphs for the Gauls, for Egypt,
Speaker 1: for for Nassis, and for Juba in four sections on
Speaker 1: four separate days. Most of it, of course, delighted the spectators.
Speaker 1: But the site of Arsenal of Egypt and Arsenal was
Speaker 1: U was a queen of the Ptolemaic dynasty of Egypt,
Speaker 1: and that that dynasty was unseated by Julius Caesar around
Speaker 1: forty seven b C. E UM. But to continue the quotes,
Speaker 1: saying of Arsenal, whom he led among the captives, and
Speaker 1: the host of lictors, and the symbols of triumph taken
Speaker 1: from the citizens who had fallen in Africa displeased them exceedingly.
Speaker 1: The lictors, on account of their numbers, appeared to them
Speaker 1: a most offensive multitude, since never before had they beheld
Speaker 1: so many at one time. And the site of Arsenal,
Speaker 1: a woman and one considered a queen in chains, a
Speaker 1: spectacle which had never yet been seen at least in Rome,
Speaker 1: aroused very great pity, and with this as an excuse
Speaker 1: they lamented their private misfortunes. She, to be sure, was
Speaker 1: released out of consideration for her brothers. But others, including
Speaker 1: Verse in Generics, were put to death. And I don't
Speaker 1: know what the source on this following detail is, but
Speaker 1: it seems like most historians agree that the way verse
Speaker 1: and Genderics was put to death was by garrotting, a
Speaker 1: kind of ritual strangulation. And I believe in a temple um,
Speaker 1: but this seems to be a ritual well known to
Speaker 1: the Romans, that like a leader of a subjugated nation
Speaker 1: would sometimes be brought back to Rome as a kind
Speaker 1: of souvenir of the returning conqueror's power and then put
Speaker 1: on public display in some fashion, probably sort of humiliated.
Speaker 1: And then after that it seems their fates were varied.
Speaker 1: Some were put to death, others were given a more
Speaker 1: merciful fate of some kind, and may be released or
Speaker 1: kept imprisoned, though I believe it's it's interesting that in
Speaker 1: that passage dou Cassius says that Arsenal was released. I
Speaker 1: think other historians right that after years of being imprisoned
Speaker 1: in a temple, Arsenal was executed on orders of Mark Antony,
Speaker 1: allegedly at the behest of Cleopatra. But that again, that's
Speaker 1: one of those things that you wonder if that's historically
Speaker 1: true or if that's just somebody who's like mad at
Speaker 1: Antony and Cleopatra trying to make them look bad. Right, right,
Speaker 1: there's certainly plenty of that to go around. By the way,
Speaker 1: this episode with verse and generics was depicted in the
Speaker 1: HBO series Rome. I'd kind of forgotten about this, but
Speaker 1: once you went through the description, I had to look
Speaker 1: it up. It was like, yes, yes, that was depicted
Speaker 1: at one point in that series. Oh, I don't think
Speaker 1: I've seen that, so what did they What do they
Speaker 1: do to him? And like that they strangle him in
Speaker 1: the temple? Did they put him on parade? Uh? They either?
Speaker 1: I think they might. It's been a long time since
Speaker 1: I've seen this, this show, and I'm not in a
Speaker 1: big hurry to watch it again, but it has a
Speaker 1: wonderful cast. I believe they have him depicted strangled, perhaps
Speaker 1: in in a cage in the street or on the
Speaker 1: steps of a temple. But again, my memory on this
Speaker 1: is foggy, so I don't know if this is true,
Speaker 1: but it seems like a common received interpretation that Verse
Speaker 1: and generics was was put to death here because he
Speaker 1: turned on Caesar and humiliated Caesar's forces in battle. That,
Speaker 1: you know, because he had been very successful in stopping
Speaker 1: them early on the lad to him being treated especially harshly.
Speaker 1: But in general Roman leaders were very cruel, very brutal,
Speaker 1: very into domination, and had a low tolerance for being
Speaker 1: embarrassed than Alright, So that leads us back to Valerian,
Speaker 1: and certainly it doesn't It doesn't look great for him
Speaker 1: at this point based on what we've covered thus far. Uh,
Speaker 1: for starters, he certainly died in captivity. There's no version
Speaker 1: of the history here in which he escapes that fate. Um,
Speaker 1: I guess it should be noted. As far as I know,
Speaker 1: there's there are no surviving accounts that he escaped that fate,
Speaker 1: And I guess there's no there's no like real reason,
Speaker 1: there was no real faction that had an interest in
Speaker 1: pushing that fiction. Um, you know, in which that version
Speaker 1: of of history serves some purpose or another. But we'll getna,
Speaker 1: you know, we'll get more into that. But you might
Speaker 1: remember in our Path stepisode we talked about Lea how
Speaker 1: how was the defeat at the Battle of the Deaths
Speaker 1: a framed? How are the particulars of that defeat passed down?
Speaker 1: And you know, a lot of times it's about from
Speaker 1: the Christian perspective, it's about saying Valerian was punished by
Speaker 1: God because he was cruel to Christians back home and
Speaker 1: had a pope put to death. And then from the
Speaker 1: Roman standpoint, it's a it's about pushing the idea that well,
Speaker 1: he was weak and the Sasanians were deceptive, uh and
Speaker 1: and therefore sort of excuse the loss to some extent.
Speaker 1: But as we said earlier, there's a there's a lot
Speaker 1: of leeway and how we might actually interpret his death,
Speaker 1: and in how the various histories have mentioned the death
Speaker 1: of Valerian in Sasanian hands. Since we're already talking about
Speaker 1: the horrific side of things, let's stick with the horrific
Speaker 1: side of things, and then we'll come back to the
Speaker 1: more mundane possibilities towards the end. It's kind of a
Speaker 1: palate cleanser, I guess so. According to early Christian writer
Speaker 1: and Christian apologist Leuctonscious, who lived to fifty three five UM,
Speaker 1: things were pretty grim for Valerian. And we have to mention, though,
Speaker 1: that the thing about like Conscious is he has a
Speaker 1: whole acts to grind here on the survival of Christianity.
Speaker 1: And he wrote an entire work titled on the Death
Speaker 1: of Persecutors, in which he writes the following about Valerian.
Speaker 1: And this is of course at a translation here. And
Speaker 1: presently Valerian, also in a mood of like frantic, lifted
Speaker 1: up his impious hands to assault God, and although his
Speaker 1: time was short, shed much righteous blood. But God punished
Speaker 1: him in a new and extraordinary manner. That it might
Speaker 1: be a lesson to future ages that the adversaries of
Speaker 1: heaven always received the just recompense of their inequities. He,
Speaker 1: having been made prisoner by the Persians, lost not only
Speaker 1: that power which he had exercised without moderation, but also
Speaker 1: the liberty of which he had deprived others. And he
Speaker 1: wasted the remainder of his days in the violence conde
Speaker 1: shtion of slavery for support or the king of the Persians,
Speaker 1: who had made him prisoner, whenever he chose to get
Speaker 1: into his carriage or to mount on horseback, commanded the
Speaker 1: Roman to stoop and present his back. Then, setting his
Speaker 1: foot on the shoulders of Valerian, he said, with a
Speaker 1: smile of reproach, quote, this is true and not what
Speaker 1: the Romans delineate on board or plaster unquote and just
Speaker 1: a pause right there. I love how in this account
Speaker 1: Lectantius has uh the has the king of the Sasanians
Speaker 1: here basically turned to the reader and say, this is true.
Speaker 1: I'm not making this up. Don't believe those Romans. That's
Speaker 1: good anyway, Electanious continues here. Valerian lived for a considerable
Speaker 1: time under the well merited insults off his conqueror, so
Speaker 1: that the Roman name remained long the scoff and derision
Speaker 1: of the barbarians. And this also was added to the
Speaker 1: severity of his punishment, that although he had an emperor
Speaker 1: for his son, he found no one to revenge his
Speaker 1: captivity and most abject and servile state. Neither indeed, was
Speaker 1: he ever demanded back. Afterward, when he had finished this
Speaker 1: shameful life under so great dishonor, he was flayed and
Speaker 1: his skin stripped from the flesh, was died with remillion
Speaker 1: and placed in the temple of the gods of the Barbarians,
Speaker 1: that the remembrance of a triumph so signal might be perpetuated,
Speaker 1: and that this spectacle might always be exhibited to our
Speaker 1: ambassadors as an admonition of the Romans that beholding the
Speaker 1: spoils of their captived emperor in a Persian temple, they
Speaker 1: should not place too great confidence in their own strength. Okay,
Speaker 1: So it gets very clive barker at the end here,
Speaker 1: and they say that that after after his torment is
Speaker 1: in it, which again Lactantius is saying totally justified. Uh,
Speaker 1: we don't know if if what he's saying here has
Speaker 1: any basis in fact, but he's claiming that this he
Speaker 1: got his come up and for for being a persecutor
Speaker 1: of Christians. And when it was all done, his skin
Speaker 1: was removed from his body, was died red and then
Speaker 1: was placed in the temple of the gods of the barbarians.
Speaker 1: Right right, pretty horrendous. And and again I do love
Speaker 1: how he has U Sabu basically break the fourth wall
Speaker 1: and say, hey, Christians, this is the real story. Don't
Speaker 1: believe what anyone anyone else tells you, thus acknowledging that
Speaker 1: there are other accounts of what happened. So I was
Speaker 1: I was reading a little bit more about this. I
Speaker 1: found a source source here. This was published in Classical
Speaker 1: Quarterly in two thousand six from Erica Rhiner, titled The
Speaker 1: Reddling of Valerian, and according to Rhiner, Ryan Reiner writes
Speaker 1: that the like conscious account is by far the most
Speaker 1: detailed and the most disputed, and she she shares and
Speaker 1: weighs in on some of the other claims that come
Speaker 1: about in some case add more uh more more details
Speaker 1: to this particular count. She points out that only a
Speaker 1: single account, that of Agatheus, who lived five thirty through two,
Speaker 1: says that Valerian was flayed alive. Uh this is there
Speaker 1: is the only account where that extra detail is added
Speaker 1: almost in like a sort of like I can't just
Speaker 1: retail that story. I've gotta I gotta make it a
Speaker 1: little grizzlier. And so there's an upping of the anti here.
Speaker 1: Later some commentators, including Constantine, um add the detail that
Speaker 1: and then well, this is sort of the detail. I
Speaker 1: guess h that he was embalmed, that Valerian was embalmed,
Speaker 1: um that that there's some uh, you know, attempt to
Speaker 1: preserve the body. So it's interesting, I guess if we're
Speaker 1: getting u info about not info claims about this from Constantine,
Speaker 1: is Constantine trying to add on, like jump on the
Speaker 1: bandwagon of like, here's how Valerian got what he deserved
Speaker 1: because Constantine was of course the first Christian Roman emperor.
Speaker 1: I mean it basically falls, you know, it basically has
Speaker 1: to do with this, with the whole role that Valerian
Speaker 1: has after his fall in Christian power in the view
Speaker 1: of Christian oppression in the past. So yeah, like he
Speaker 1: remains a coin that maybe uh uh, you know, cashed
Speaker 1: in from time to time and speeches and so forth. Now,
Speaker 1: another account, this was from Peter the Patrician, who lived
Speaker 1: five through five. Uh. This this kind of backs up
Speaker 1: the whole idea of of the skin having been preserved. Uh.
Speaker 1: Peter writes, quote even after death with loathsome art, you
Speaker 1: kept his skin and inflicted an undying insult on his
Speaker 1: dead body. But then Reiner gets into questioning this whole
Speaker 1: thing about the red dying of the skin, because this
Speaker 1: instantly stands out like it's one thing. Okay, we can
Speaker 1: understand flaying, you know, horrific, but there are other accounts
Speaker 1: and history of things like this occurring. Um, and it
Speaker 1: continues to echo through our fantastic fiction and our you know,
Speaker 1: grizzly entertainments. But then the dying of it read what
Speaker 1: does that mean? Like? What is there something lost in translation?
Speaker 1: Is there some sort of a Uh, this is something
Speaker 1: you know, strange picked up in the telling of this tale. Uh.
Speaker 1: Rhiner mentions that there is at least one theory that
Speaker 1: this account of red dyed hides refers to Valerian having
Speaker 1: to set aside his purple robes and where the hide
Speaker 1: of a mere beast like a donkey or something in
Speaker 1: a captivity and this might have been dyed purple and mockery.
Speaker 1: But then again we're talking about purple in this case,
Speaker 1: and it seems like all these other accounts we're looking at,
Speaker 1: we're definitely talking about the color red. So, however, Rhyner
Speaker 1: does point out that as outrageous and fabricated as these
Speaker 1: accounts of the flame may very well be, they're also
Speaker 1: not altogether out of keeping with the ancient world. And
Speaker 1: in fact, Sargon the second of Assyria, who reigned through
Speaker 1: seven oh five b c. Is said to have inflicted
Speaker 1: such a fate on his enemies by his own recorded word.
Speaker 1: He boasted of having defeated King's flade and their skins
Speaker 1: dyed red as red wool, and Rhino discusses this for
Speaker 1: a bit and asking questions about that sort of the
Speaker 1: linguistics of the matter. You know, red as blood, red
Speaker 1: as sunset, red as the horizon, and it is it
Speaker 1: has remained a mystery than it is such a strange
Speaker 1: claim that this idea that the the the flade hide
Speaker 1: was dyed red. But Rob, you found an interesting little
Speaker 1: letter to a classics journal called Nimo Sign that's a
Speaker 1: journal published by Brill, which addresses this question of what
Speaker 1: this could be a reference to, if it's not just
Speaker 1: literally the skin being dyed red. Could this have another meaning?
Speaker 1: And I thought this was so interesting. So the letter
Speaker 1: was by a classics professor based in Ireland named David Woods,
Speaker 1: and the letter was called Lactantius Valerian and Hallow feel bacteria.
Speaker 1: Here's that science angle that we've been we've been mentioning.
Speaker 1: So Wood says, you know, there's really no clear explanation
Speaker 1: why Shebour would have died the skin of Valerian. Read
Speaker 1: he acknowledges Reiner's thoughts regarding the flaying tradition, but then
Speaker 1: says there's another possible explanation, and it goes like this.
Speaker 1: If Shebour actually wanted to keep the skin of the
Speaker 1: emperor as a permanent trophy of his victory rather than
Speaker 1: something that would just sort of rot away, he would
Speaker 1: of course have to preserve it somehow, and the standard
Speaker 1: way of preserving a hide at that time would be
Speaker 1: by curing. This assumption is given weight by a statement
Speaker 1: of again the later Roman emperor Constantine, who mentions that
Speaker 1: Shebour had ordered Valerian skin to be not only flayed
Speaker 1: but preserved. I think this comes back to what you
Speaker 1: said earlier about Constantine making claim that, uh that he
Speaker 1: was embalmed. Woods writes that the verb constantine uses here
Speaker 1: for preserve in this con text is the same word
Speaker 1: used for the preservation of fish at the time, which
Speaker 1: could refer to preservation by salting, pickling, or smoking. And generally,
Speaker 1: if you were going to cure a hide in the
Speaker 1: ancient world, this would have involved salt, you would use
Speaker 1: lots of salt. Uh now. Woods cites a couple of
Speaker 1: scholars named Land and Hoaxteing to point out that sometimes
Speaker 1: the salt curing of a hide would be compromised if
Speaker 1: the product was contaminated with a hallow felic bacteria hallow
Speaker 1: fhelic meaning salt loving bacteria that can survive in extremely
Speaker 1: salty environments. Apparently, these bacteria are well known pests in
Speaker 1: the leather industry, and they produce a side effect called
Speaker 1: red heat, just like the Arnold Schwarzenegger movie Um. And
Speaker 1: it's called that because the byproduct of the presence of
Speaker 1: these micro organisms is the reddening of surfaces that they colonize.
Speaker 1: In fact, if you've ever seen a salt lake turn red,
Speaker 1: this is caused by the same strains of hollow philic
Speaker 1: micro organisms. Robbi attached one picture for you to look
Speaker 1: at in their outline. Here, this is a photo I
Speaker 1: found of the Great Salt Lake in Utah taken and
Speaker 1: it's taken into place where the lake is divided by
Speaker 1: a railroad causeway. On one half of the causeway, the
Speaker 1: water looks like normal water, It's kind of blue green.
Speaker 1: And then on the other half the water is bright red. Yeah,
Speaker 1: indeed bright red almost almost leaning a little bit towards
Speaker 1: purple almost, but definitely. Uh, you get this this reddish
Speaker 1: vibe from it. Yeah, So I went to double check this.
Speaker 1: I was looking, okay, leather industry sources. I wanted to
Speaker 1: see about hollow philic bacterial contamination there, and it looks
Speaker 1: like yes, this absolutely is in fact a problem in
Speaker 1: the the leather industry. I found an article on how
Speaker 1: to prevent it, or at least addressing the signs of it,
Speaker 1: on a trade website called Leather International. I think this
Speaker 1: is some kind of leather trade magazine. I don't know,
Speaker 1: but the article is just called putrefaction. To read from
Speaker 1: it here, they write quote, sometimes even when hides have
Speaker 1: been well salted or brind bacteria can still grow. These
Speaker 1: are a particular type of bacteria which are hollophilic or
Speaker 1: salt loving and are commonly colored red or purple, affecting
Speaker 1: hides that are said to have red heat. Under normal
Speaker 1: storage conditions. For raw hides or skins, red and purple
Speaker 1: heat bacteria take a relatively long time to grow, around
Speaker 1: two to three months. Therefore, their presence is an indication
Speaker 1: that the hides or skins have been in storage for
Speaker 1: some time. However, at higher temperatures around thirty to forty
Speaker 1: degrees celsius, growth will be more rapid. The warm humid
Speaker 1: conditions favored by red heat bacteria are also favored by
Speaker 1: other non colored spoilage bacteria, so if salt levels are
Speaker 1: not high enough, putrefactive bacteria may also be present. It
Speaker 1: was once thought that red heat bacteria caused no harm
Speaker 1: to the hide, but it is now known that some
Speaker 1: types of bacteria do produce proteolytic enzymes which are capable
Speaker 1: of damaging collagen. Proteolytic enzymes I think would be um
Speaker 1: enzymes that dissolve proteins. Now, this article also offers preventative
Speaker 1: measures to to keep away putrefactive bacteria, the kind of
Speaker 1: bacteria that would cause leather to actually rot. But they say,
Speaker 1: you know, for red heat there they're not really as
Speaker 1: many things you can do. I guess maybe it's harder
Speaker 1: to keep out um. But anyway, I kept looking more
Speaker 1: into the idea of these red halophiles, the salt loving bacteria,
Speaker 1: and one interesting thing I found is that while many
Speaker 1: older sources, including the ones I was just looking at,
Speaker 1: refer to red halophiles as bacteria, it seems that most
Speaker 1: of the prominent examples of of red colored halophiles are
Speaker 1: actually now classified as archaea. Now, Archaea are very similar
Speaker 1: to bacteria in many ways. They're both lineages of single
Speaker 1: celled organised ums without a true nuclear membrane, but they're
Speaker 1: distinct from each other. They split off from one another
Speaker 1: extremely early in the history of life on Earth, probably
Speaker 1: something like four billion years ago, and there are some
Speaker 1: common structural differences between them, even though they're they're both
Speaker 1: single celled organisms. For in a lot of ways, Archia
Speaker 1: are just sometimes referred to as a type of bacteria UM.
Speaker 1: But yeah, they're these different clades, and some of the
Speaker 1: structural differences that are found between them have to do
Speaker 1: with things like cell walls and membranes, like the chemical
Speaker 1: characteristics of the lipids in their cell membranes, are different.
Speaker 1: But another common feature relevant to this discussion is that
Speaker 1: archia are most often found in extreme environments that are
Speaker 1: less friendly to other earth life. So archia are abundant
Speaker 1: in extremely hot environments such as around deep sea vents
Speaker 1: or hot springs, or deep underground, in low oxygen, high
Speaker 1: pressure geological deposits like around fossil fuel deposits, or in
Speaker 1: extremely chemically unfriendly environments such as the various salt hells
Speaker 1: of the world. Now, I was curious why there would
Speaker 1: be a tendency for the microbes that battle for life
Speaker 1: in these salt hells to be red in color. Uh,
Speaker 1: And I found a paper that at least identifies a
Speaker 1: common biochemical factor. So uh. This paper was by Harran
Speaker 1: Orn and Francisco Rodriguez val Era, published in f e
Speaker 1: MS Microbiology Ecology in two thousand one, called the contribution
Speaker 1: of halophilic bacteria to the red coloration of saltern crystallizer ponds.
Speaker 1: So in this article, the authors start by looking at
Speaker 1: natural hypersaline environments like salt lakes, but also at human
Speaker 1: constructed environments like these saltern crystallizer pools. Assaultern is essentially
Speaker 1: a factory for harvesting sea salt. And in the old
Speaker 1: school process, what you do is you leave a bunch
Speaker 1: of sea water out in these pools and you leave
Speaker 1: it under the hot sun, so the water content can evaporate,
Speaker 1: leaving crystallized sodium chloride behind and you can harvest it.
Speaker 1: Uh Rob Again, I attached some pictures for you to
Speaker 1: look at. These pools are often kind of arranged in
Speaker 1: these big reflective rectangles out by the ocean side. And
Speaker 1: an interesting thing is that if you look up pictures
Speaker 1: of saltern pools occasionally you will find that they are
Speaker 1: red in color. And I was reading another paper that
Speaker 1: claimed that testing of the microbial communities in solar saltern
Speaker 1: pools usually reveals that there's very little microbial diversity. They
Speaker 1: tend to be dominated almost entirely by hallow feel like
Speaker 1: archia like we're just talking about. But hallo feel like
Speaker 1: archia are not the only things in there. So to
Speaker 1: read from a section of or in at all the
Speaker 1: paper I referenced a minute ago quote, two types of
Speaker 1: carotenoid rich micro organisms have literally been implicated in causing
Speaker 1: the red coloration. You've got hallophilic archaea of the family
Speaker 1: hallo bacteria sy and the unicellular green alga Dunaliella selina.
Speaker 1: The main pigments of the hallow bacteria cy r C
Speaker 1: fifty carotenoids mainly alpha bacteria rubrin and derivatives, while Dunaliella
Speaker 1: accumulates massive amounts of beta carotene under suitable conditions. The
Speaker 1: relative contributions of red archaea and beta carotene rich Dunaliella
Speaker 1: cells to the coloration of saltine crystallizer ponds have been studied.
Speaker 1: In the past, beta carotene was often found in quantities
Speaker 1: greatly exceeding the archaeal bacteria ruberns. In spite of this,
Speaker 1: the optical properties of the salter and brines were determined
Speaker 1: primarily by the archaeal community. This apparent discrepancy was explained
Speaker 1: by the extremely small in vivo optical cross section of
Speaker 1: the beta carotene in dunali La cells. As the carotenoid
Speaker 1: is densely packed in granules within the algal chloroplast, the
Speaker 1: presence of even large amounts of this pigment may contribute
Speaker 1: much less to the overall red color than the archaeal pigments,
Speaker 1: which are distributed evenly on the cell membrane and The
Speaker 1: study also did find a small presence of halophilic bacteria
Speaker 1: in some salt terns, but not others like it found uh,
Speaker 1: actual halophilic bacteria of a type called saline bacter that
Speaker 1: was present in the crystal in the crystallizer ponds that
Speaker 1: were sampled from California, but not the ones that were
Speaker 1: sampled from Israel. So it seems there's some geographic variation there.
Speaker 1: But ultimately they say yes to create this red color,
Speaker 1: the most important components are these extremophile archaea, the salt
Speaker 1: loving archaea. And I thought it was interesting that what's
Speaker 1: causing the red color here are these carotenoids, which are present,
Speaker 1: of course throughout all different kinds of life. If you
Speaker 1: eat red or orange colored vegetables or fruits, uh, those
Speaker 1: red and orange orange colors are generally going to be
Speaker 1: a result of carotenoid pigments and uh. And of course
Speaker 1: you know when you eat a red carrot. Uh. People
Speaker 1: talk about carrots being a good source of vitamin A,
Speaker 1: which they are, But what's actually happening metabolically there is
Speaker 1: you're eating them and they contain these red orange pigments,
Speaker 1: the carotenoids, which then through your metabolism are turned into
Speaker 1: vitamin A. So if woods idea is correct, that actually
Speaker 1: what this, you know, this dying red of the of
Speaker 1: the high of Emperor Valerian. If that is actually some
Speaker 1: ancient commentator looking at the skin seeing it's red and
Speaker 1: then mistaking it being colonized by hallophilic Archaea for it
Speaker 1: being dyed red on purpose, then what's causing that red
Speaker 1: color is probably part of the same family of pigment compound,
Speaker 1: the carotenoids that make your carrots red or orange fascinating.
Speaker 1: So so yeah, it seems very uh biologically possible that
Speaker 1: you could have an attempt to preserve the hide like
Speaker 1: this uh flamed skin of human being, and then lo
Speaker 1: and behold it ends up taking on this red color,
Speaker 1: which ultimately makes me really potentially feel for this um,
Speaker 1: the centner of this hide worker that's suddenly called in
Speaker 1: one day to the palace and you and you find
Speaker 1: out you have a particular task ahead of you, you
Speaker 1: need to preserve the skin, and then it ends up
Speaker 1: turning red like how do you how do you spin that?
Speaker 1: How do you sell that? I? Yes, or your majesty, um,
Speaker 1: might this look better if it were red? Think about it.
Speaker 1: I think they think about all the connotations of the
Speaker 1: of the color um really really get him on board
Speaker 1: with this, make you think it was his idea before
Speaker 1: presenting him with this hide that uh ended up turned
Speaker 1: in this color on you, right? So anyway, that's what
Speaker 1: would Woods argues in this letter that maybe the ancient
Speaker 1: reports are mistaken. It was not actually dyed red. Shubar
Speaker 1: didn't do that on purpose. Instead, somehow tried to cure
Speaker 1: it with salt, and then it was colonized by halophilic
Speaker 1: bacteria or actually, more likely halophilic archaea, causing the red
Speaker 1: heat phenomenon that's been known to the leather industry actually
Speaker 1: since ancient times. Woods rites quote the importance of this
Speaker 1: discovery is that it confirms that the ultimate source of
Speaker 1: lactantious information in this matter must have seen Valerian skin firsthand.
Speaker 1: He then made the understandable but erroneous assumption that Subber
Speaker 1: had ordered the skin to be dyed red. A humble
Speaker 1: leather producer would not have made such a mistake, but
Speaker 1: few diplomats, ancient or modern, have a background in the
Speaker 1: leather industry. Now, I think that's all pretty well put,
Speaker 1: except I don't think I agree that it confirms Lactantius
Speaker 1: as source would have seen it firsthand, but I'd agree
Speaker 1: it makes it more like yeah, yeah, absolutely, um and uh.
Speaker 1: And again, on one hand, we have, of course the
Speaker 1: older account from Sargon that that you know, reminds us
Speaker 1: that such horrendous things did occur in the ancient world
Speaker 1: and uh. And then this is something that Rehiner gets
Speaker 1: into a little bit as well, you know, pointing out that, okay,
Speaker 1: we have we have these two alleged incidents of flaying
Speaker 1: and the reddening of a of a skin, but they
Speaker 1: occur about a thousand years apart um. But Rehiner contends
Speaker 1: that either perhaps there is some truth to the le
Speaker 1: conscious account, or perhaps there's this kind of cultural memory
Speaker 1: of Sargon's deeds. Ultimately, I think you could spend this
Speaker 1: is see this is kind of a trope about the
Speaker 1: evil things that Eastern kings do to defeated emperors. Um. Uh,
Speaker 1: there's you know some memory of also Sargon did this,
Speaker 1: and then it gets sort of wrapped into the account
Speaker 1: if you need perhaps something horrible to happen to Valerian
Speaker 1: in your history to again prop up the idea that
Speaker 1: that God has punished Valerian, then perhaps you draw in
Speaker 1: this historical detail and it becomes part of your story.
Speaker 1: Now on the more mundane side of things, we do
Speaker 1: have some some other accounts. Uh. There's the the writer Eutropiusts,
Speaker 1: who was writing between three sixty four and three seventy eight,
Speaker 1: and he contended that quote Valerian, while he was occupied
Speaker 1: in a war in Mesopotamia, was overthrown by Shapoor, king
Speaker 1: of Persia, and being soon after made made prisoner, grew
Speaker 1: old in ignominious slavery among the Parthians. So in that account,
Speaker 1: it's like basically, well they took him away, they locked
Speaker 1: him up, and yeah, he he died there. Uh. He
Speaker 1: was already by you know, by many accounts, an older man,
Speaker 1: he was in his sixties. And how long is he
Speaker 1: gonna live in captivity? Uh? In enemy captivity? Now to
Speaker 1: Rajdari also gets in on this and seems to side
Speaker 1: with this interpretation as well, Uh, that that he the
Speaker 1: Valerian and some of his men were sent back uh
Speaker 1: into Sasanian territory, into Bishopur and modern Iran, where one
Speaker 1: of the card reliefs there show him kneeling before the
Speaker 1: mounted king. In this area would become known as Valerians prison.
Speaker 1: And I also can't help but wonder this is just
Speaker 1: me here that this isn't anything any of these authors
Speaker 1: were discussing. But again we have these rock reliefs showing
Speaker 1: Valerian bowing uh in Roman Emperor's bowing before the the
Speaker 1: king of the Sasanians who has mounted on horseback. I
Speaker 1: wonder if if it's possible that you can have a
Speaker 1: situation where it's like some sort of misunderstanding of the
Speaker 1: visuals here that lead to the idea of him being
Speaker 1: a footstool to mount a horse. I don't know. Anyway,
Speaker 1: there's not really any consensus on when Valerian dies in captivity.
Speaker 1: It may have been the same year. So sometimes you
Speaker 1: see him list is having lived till two sixty Uh.
Speaker 1: He might have been executed more or less immediately or
Speaker 1: within that year. Other times you see a date of
Speaker 1: two sixty four mentioned saying that he lived about four
Speaker 1: years in enemy captivity before he either dies of some
Speaker 1: natural causes, is just sort of uh removed, or some
Speaker 1: more extravagant means of execution. Uh. Either way, Yeah, you
Speaker 1: tend to see two sixty or two sixty four Uh. So, yeah,
Speaker 1: he might have just lived out the rest of his
Speaker 1: life in prison. Uh, he may have been made a
Speaker 1: maker off. He may have been tortured to death or
Speaker 1: flayed following a quicker execution. And of course the different
Speaker 1: versions of the tale again, they kind of fulfill different needs,
Speaker 1: both in the turbulent years following the Battle of Edessa,
Speaker 1: but also for years to follow. So we almost end
Speaker 1: up in this kind of quantum state where where anything
Speaker 1: any of these accounts seem possible, you know. Uh, And
Speaker 1: and ultimately we'll never know what actually became of Emperor Hilaire.
Speaker 1: Now here's a possibility you probably haven't considered. What if
Speaker 1: he was fully externally colonized by hollow fili Archia before
Speaker 1: he died, so he was already read. Maybe he's just
Speaker 1: rubbing salt on his skin all day long and I
Speaker 1: don't know it's getting in there. I'm not sure. Or
Speaker 1: here's another possibility. Uh, maybe Valerian removes his own skin,
Speaker 1: then escapes and has someone else to wear that skin
Speaker 1: after he has left. You know, it kind of does
Speaker 1: a little Hannibal Lecter thing there, or reverse Hannibal Lecter. Well,
Speaker 1: it's like face off. Yeah, yeah, Yeah, it could be
Speaker 1: like face off, except it's like whole skin off. Next
Speaker 1: Nicolas Cage role playing Valerian. You know. In in thinking
Speaker 1: about these accounts of rulers being treated in some cases
Speaker 1: horrifically or in other cases, perhaps you know, more politely,
Speaker 1: but generally horrifically by by these various rulers, I was
Speaker 1: reminded of all. I kept being reminded of this line
Speaker 1: in Dune. In the novel Uh, this is a depicting
Speaker 1: a scene that is in the recent part one film
Speaker 1: that came out. Uh. Though this exact line of dialogue
Speaker 1: I don't think is present. But basically, the Harconans have
Speaker 1: moved against the Treedes, and we have that scene where
Speaker 1: the baron has Leto trades captive, and in the book
Speaker 1: there's this bit of dialogue it goes like this quote,
Speaker 1: this is not a child's game we play. The baron rumbled.
Speaker 1: You must know that he leaned towards Leto studying the face.
Speaker 1: It pained the baron that this could not be handled
Speaker 1: privately just between the two of them. To have others
Speaker 1: see royalty in such straits, it sets a bad example.
Speaker 1: And I kept thinking about that because so many especially
Speaker 1: on the Roman side. I mean, you have these these emperors,
Speaker 1: these absolute rulers whose position is actually rather precarious, and
Speaker 1: and death is never that far away, and the shadow
Speaker 1: of of uprising and dethronement, you know, is always present
Speaker 1: in the mind of any ruler, even one who enjoys
Speaker 1: a rather secure rain. Uh. You know it's it's say,
Speaker 1: um take Otashir the first you know, he he was
Speaker 1: able to retire and uh and die a natural death,
Speaker 1: but he didn't do that by not keeping an eye
Speaker 1: out for all those who tried to rise up against him.
Speaker 1: And so it makes me think about that, like in
Speaker 1: and I guess you get into some of that Shakespearean
Speaker 1: morality as well, like the mistreatment of of other rulers,
Speaker 1: Like there has to be this moment where you realize,
Speaker 1: like this, this could easily be me, And what kind
Speaker 1: of example do we continue to set for those around
Speaker 1: us who may one day be the ones to rise
Speaker 1: up against us. Uh. And it's it's an interesting moment
Speaker 1: in in Herbert's doone as well, because you know, obviously
Speaker 1: the baron harkonan or or or hearkening to be more
Speaker 1: authentic here. You know, he's not if he doesn't feel
Speaker 1: any actual mercy towards Letto. But it's the idea that well,
Speaker 1: the lesser people, the commoners, the soldiers, they shouldn't see
Speaker 1: this between us like there there's this and and of
Speaker 1: course in the world of June, you know, these great
Speaker 1: houses are are connected in various ways as well. All right, well,
Speaker 1: I guess we're gonna go and close this out here.
Speaker 1: But I greatly enjoyed this examination of of history and
Speaker 1: histories concerning the fall of Emperor Valerian. Um. I I
Speaker 1: apologize if I messed up any pronunciations in this. We
Speaker 1: had to to to juggle uh two different tongues here, uh,
Speaker 1: and I hope that I didn't get anything wrong to
Speaker 1: try to try to make sure we hit the pronunciations correctly.
Speaker 1: You're a lot of names today. We I think you
Speaker 1: did good well. Thanks uh oh. And by the way,
Speaker 1: that taraj Dari. That book is Sasani in Iran too
Speaker 1: through six fifty one, a d portrait of a late
Speaker 1: antique empire from Mazda Publishers, who came out in two
Speaker 1: thousand and eight. Uh. It's it's a really good read.
Speaker 1: I recommend it for anyone's interested in this time liime
Speaker 1: period in this particular dynastic Um rule. Uh. It's it's
Speaker 1: a not a very not a very thick book, very readable,
Speaker 1: has some some nice illustrations and maps in it. All Right, well,
Speaker 1: we're gonna, yeah, we're gonna go and close the book
Speaker 1: here on old Emperor Valeria. But we'd love to hear
Speaker 1: from everybody out there if you have any thoughts on
Speaker 1: the histories at play here, If perhaps we have some
Speaker 1: folks out there who have some experience uh, preserving hides
Speaker 1: and leather and so forth, and perhaps you can weigh
Speaker 1: in on this reddening that we've discussed. Uh and uh, hey,
Speaker 1: let us know if there are there are other episodes
Speaker 1: in history you'd like us to cover. I don't know,
Speaker 1: maybe there's some some other dethroned emperors of note in
Speaker 1: the history books that would make for a good episode.
Speaker 1: Let us know. In the meantime, you'll find core episodes
Speaker 1: of stuff to blow your mind on Tuesdays and Thursdays.
Speaker 1: On Mondays we do listener mail. On Wednesdays we do
Speaker 1: short form artifact or monster fact episodes, and on Fridays
Speaker 1: we do Weird how Cinema. That's our time to set
Speaker 1: aside most serious concerns and just focus on a weird film,
Speaker 1: and you'll find all of this in the Stuff to
Speaker 1: Blow Your Mind podcast feed huge thanks as always to
Speaker 1: our excellent audio producer Seth Nicholas Johnson. If you would
Speaker 1: like to get in touch with us with feedback on
Speaker 1: this episode or any other, to suggest a topic for
Speaker 1: the future, or just to say hello, you can email
Speaker 1: us at contact at stuff to Blow your Mind dot com.
Speaker 1: Stuff to Blow Your Mind is production of I Heart Radio.
Speaker 1: For more podcasts for my heart Radio, visit the iHeart
Speaker 1: Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you're listening to your
Speaker 1: favorite shows.