A Geek History of Time - Episode 364 - That Time When Livy Wrote a What If Issue for Ab Urbe Condita Part II

Episode Date: April 10, 2026

You know, the thing is, you have reached farther for less good. To be blunt, the money in tabletop games isn't great. We have to wind up with the Church of England because obvi, I'll start. I mean, you're here to be the expert, but in the pale... But that doesn't stop it. That one oddly doesn't make me angry. Because, you know, who's the boss? You know what?

I'm going to keep my head down and be as inoffensive as I can to many. to everybody possible. And that's it. You want to fight? I'm going to dry hump your leg until we're friends. Of course, reminded me of that one woman that I went on a single date with who said, you know, the downside about my job is that we don't show kids drowning anymore. To the real world.

My name is Ed Blaylock. I'm a world history teacher here in Northern California. And just a few days ago, we had the opportunity to get together in person. for the first time in a little while and hang out. And I had my son with me. And I was very impressed with the way that you managed to consistently, positively engage with and consciously direct his, I don't want to say manic, but his very energetic, let's say, curiosity.

about things. And I very much appreciated it. Because taking him anywhere, my internal anxiety becomes an issue because, you know, he wants to look at and touch everything. And I wind up in the business being, and, oh, hey, no, dude. Yeah. No, no, no. No, no, no, no, no, hey, come here, you know. And it was, it was, it was very, very refreshing to not feel as much like I had to do that at your place.

So I appreciate that. And thank you. Yeah. So, yeah, that's, that's the biggest thing I had going on recently. How about you? Hey, man, that sounds lovely. First off, thank you for giving me my flowers on that. That's really sweet of you.

I'm Damien Harmony. I am a U.S. history and government teacher at the high school level up here in Northern California. And I just want to give an example. So I have a 3D printer. It's well within reach of a child of that age and size. And I don't know if it was printing at the time. I think it might have been, the moving parts and all that. It was.

Okay. And he went over and said, oh, what's that? And I was like, yeah, if you look to your right and like right next to it, I'm like, you know, you look to your right, the hand that you're right with, go ahead and pick that up. And like, I saw the nervousness on your face. And I was just like, no, no, go and pick that up and bring it over. He's like, oh, wow. And it was just, you know, one of the things that I'd already printed. And I was like, see, I'm printing two more of those. And and yeah, it's, you know, having two kids, having to play one on two defense for the last, you know, you know, 10 plus years. Yeah. You get certain skills. And it's one of those. So here's the thing. You and your wife have one child, and that means you can play two-on-one defense, which means he can never have the ball.

You could make it so he never has the ball. If he has the ball, something has gone wrong in your defensive sphere. Right. I can only play zone. I can only play one-on-two, and that means they always. always have the ball. So how do I do it in such a way that I am not just exhausted? And so it was very much learning how to, you have a curiosity. I want to validate that and I'm going to use that. I'm going to put water through that empty hose and then turn it back around this way to water

these flowers, you know. So anyway, your son's always been a delight. I mean, hell, I well, thank you. Hung out with him for, I think, five or six hours one day. And I had a throwing things at me from the top of the stairs and I'd close the gate so he wouldn't fall and we just had a lovely time that day. Yeah. Yeah. But as far as me, I would just like to point out that friend of the show from the early, early episodes, in the like low 20s episodes, the history of pinball, Derek Lipkin. Yeah.

Was recently interviewed by Conan O'Brien. Nice. And he like every chance Derek gets to talk Somehow the camera finds him Yeah somehow he ends up on highlight reels somehow There was a comedian who who crowd worked with And Derek was the guy he crowd worked on and Derek just handled it wonderfully Yeah

And it became like you know many many thousands of views kind of thing Yeah There are just some people who are blessed with goddess fortuna you know right and uh and um and and derrick is one of them so uh yeah he was interviewed by conan about uh pinball um and uh he quoted himself quite well so uh shout out to derrick yeah yeah it was yeah congratulations to him that's awesome yeah but anyway uh you know last time we were talking about livi uh the roman historian um and uh i think i stopped off by talking about what Livy's books

wrote or what his books contained even though we don't have all of his books, right? Right. And so just to reset, we've basically got Livy's writings from Aeneas through part of the third Samnite War. Yeah.

And then it picks up again at the Second Punic Wars. And then after that, there's nothing. Right. So in order to get to the thing that he did that I'm actually interested in telling you about, which is his counterfactual. I want to give you the context leading up to that counterfactual.

So we're going to start talking about the second Sam Night War. And of course, to the Second Sam Night War, we're going to talk about the first. So Livy's discussion of Second Sam Night War is largely going to be my focus for this episode. And I will annotate so you know who the hell all these different marks. Carcassiz are. Oh, no. Okay. Yeah.

So Rome had been working its way down the boot of Italy from about the mid-300s BCE. It's kind of an interesting thing because it started. Rome as a founding through the seven kings had not really expanded much. They just defended themselves against all comers and had kind of like relationships with nearby towns. Rome was largely ruled by Etruscan rulers. That's who the seven kings were. The kings would be Sabines, chosen by the Romans. That's how they did it after Romulus died.

And Romulus himself was not a Roman because you can't be when you found the city of Rome. Fair. Yeah. So it took Rome restructuring. their whole government to throw off the yoke of Etruscan rule. These were in many ways foreign kings.

Right. Okay. The Etruscans were to Rome's northwest. Okay. Romulus himself wasn't Roman. Like I said, during the kingdom times, there's lots of attacks by other city states and other kingdoms, largely Rome holding them off, sacking their neighbors,

creating alliances. And by the time you get to the fourth king, Ancus Marcus Markius Which the fucking The The spell chat Kept changed

to Angus Oh hi All right Me and my brother Marcus I came from the Sabins Right Didn't I

Yeah not a Roman Like you all You didn't I think I did You didn't think so Yeah So And then I'm going to be the Dot to the next one

Yeah But so Ancus Ancus, Ancus Markus. He was a part of the group that murdered Hostilius and all of Hostilius's heirs. Hostilius was the third king. So what you're saying is the promotion scheme for emperors was already well established. Yeah, they needed real go-getters. Yeah. Okay.

Honestly, there's only a couple of kings who die naturally. Wow. Numa is the first one to die naturally because Romulus was torn to pieces during a storm or a dust storm. Or he ascended. Okay. So hostilius. Yes. That's a hell of a name.

Prophetic as hell, isn't it? For a guy who got murdered along with his family for his job. Well, okay. So you remember, Numa, like, Romulus is like a fighter. rogue. Right. Numa is a cleric. Emphasis on the rogue. Yeah. Numa's a cleric. And I mean a cleric through and through. Yeah.

Maybe one level in fighter, but like he's a cleric. Yeah. Hostilius, and Numa said, like, we will not be a society if we don't learn to live with our neighbors. So too much war will turn us into barbarians. And he made Rome at peace for 40 years. Right. Did all kinds

of cool shit. Hustilius, when Numa dies, Hostelius is chosen And he's like Man If we don't fight in the next 40 years We're not going to exist We're going to be

Pousous Wow Yeah okay So Yeah so Toulos Hostilius Who clearly was a fighter barbarian And And yeah

So Ancus Marcius Was part of the group of guys Who killed him Rome had been engaged for like all of it's during the reign of hostilius that we have Mukyu Skywola my favorite guy good old lefty um you have the host uh the horati and the koriati you have um

uh horatius cocles the guy threw himself in the river you got like a lot of legends because this guy goes around starting fights fucking everywhere okay so rome is engaged in wars with the latins who I think are yeah no they are they are southern neighbors to the Romans okay okay so the Etruscans are

the northern neighbors the Latins are the southern neighbors if you think like of Rome as a boot or as Italy as a boot and everybody does go further down the shin but okay these are not wars of expansion so much as they are just bloodying their neighbors to get them to leave them

alone okay so during this Ancus Marcus he kills he's part of the group that kills Hostelius he becomes king he actually did stretch Rome's holdings to the coast they had colonies

they had like we have friendly relations with these people and we have Roman interests here so he stretched their own their holdings to the coast which basically means Ostia which is about 15 miles

to the west of Rome and he took over the forests that were north of the Tiber River from the Vaii, the Weii. And there's just largely a lot of reshuffling who gets to live where, who has influence over whom. And Ancus, I think, was the last king to die of natural causes. So one murder, two natural causes, three, murder, four natural causes, five, six, seven, death, murder, murder, murder, murder. Okay. So when he dies of natural causes, then comes the first of the last three kings, which is fun to say.

But basically, these last three Etruscans combined to expand Rome from a city to a city-state in a lot of really important ways. And also, they were all of the same line, the Tarquinus gains. Okay. Okay. Presqueous Tarquinius was advised by his wife, the prophetess named Tanakil, to move to Rome, because his ethnicity prohibited him from rising up very high in his hometown of Etruria, despite the fact that he was wealthy. So he comes down, he's a Truscan, he comes down from the Tuscan area. So Prescuse Tarquinus comes to Rome, and because of his courtesy and overall good vibe that people got for,

from him. He becomes a member of Ancus's inner court. Ancus had been the grandson of Numa. Okay. Okay. And so it makes sense that Ancus murdered the shit out of Hostilius. So, although some say that Hostilius's house was hit by lightning and burned to the ground. Very Livyish.

Yeah. I was going to say, so you're going with Livy here. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I'm going to go with like the people murdered him, not that lightning happened. Right. And by the way, remember, Rome is not founded by Jupiter. Right. Rome is founded by Mars and by deified Hercules.

Like they take him as their like main mascot. Right. Because he's the one that made it so they had cows in the area. Anyway, Ancus expands a little bit. And when he notes how awesome Priscus Tarquinus was, or Tarquinius. was, Ancus appoints him as the guardian of Ancus's own children as well. Oh, there's no way that could go wrong. Now Ancus dies, and Tarquinius, the regent, right, appeals to the people as a populace,

citing the tradition that no king has ever been the son of another king, and that the people of Rome should choose their king in the tradition of their dead king's grandfather. And in so doing, Ancus's kids were passed over in favor of this Etruscan. Tricunius immediately expanded the Senate by doubling it. Oh, wow. Yeah, which means he's putting in loyalists. Now, remember, Romulus, when he made the Senate, he picked the 100 best men. Right.

Or he picked the 100 guys that were standing around that seemed the best he could get. Depends on your tradition, right? Right. So then Tarkinius immediately sets about using a military to conquer territory. So there's a shift. Tarkinius went to war with the Latins first. Those are the ones down the shin a little bit. The Latins were a loose confederation of nearly three dozen different towns that lay barely to the southwest or southeast of Rome.

So basically the old treaties that bound them to Romulus and Riemus were defunct and Tarkinus went on the attack. The Latins then sought aid from the Sabines and the Etruscans. who were then, who were to the north and to the northeast of Romans. Kind of like Russia, England, France, surrounding Germany. Priscus Tarkinius didn't take the bait and he stayed focused on defeating the Latins.

He's like, yeah, no, it's cool that you guys are friends. I'm still beating shit out of you. And the Sabeinians to the Etruscans were attacking Rome from the north. Now, I believe it's during this time that the geese saved Rome, but I might be wrong. Now, once Tarkinius had Priscus Tarkinius had defeated the Latins in his own version of the Schleafim plan that actually worked.

He turned around and took on the Sabines, who were across the Anio River, not across the Tiber River. Right. Okay. The Etruscans were across the Tiber River, and Tarkinius evidently a favor of attacking the Sabines as quickly as he could. However, the Sabines put up a hell of a fight and it included street fighting in Rome itself. Oh, wow. Yeah. And from this victory came a treaty whereby the Sabines didn't just agree to stop fighting and let people move into different areas.

They had to cede several important cities to the Romans and provide hostages, you know, like you do. Right. So this is shifting Roman to being more than a city, but a little less than a city state yet. And having defeated the Latin's nearest allies, Priscus Tarquinius now controlled several Latin towns as well as strategically important. in Sabine towns, so north and south. Sabines to the north, the Latins to the south. And this expands Rome's reach, not just in influence. It's actually why the roads got started.

Okay, that makes sense. Yeah. So, okay, I may be getting ahead of us here. Sure. But a question occurs to me. How long did the distinction between Romans and, Sabines and Latins hang around.

It varies in a lot of ways because when the Romans and the Sabines combined via marriage, you remember the Sabine women stopped it. Right. Right. Stop the fighting. You know, do you want to make us,

do you want to make our unborn children into orphans? Do you want to make our unborn children not have grandparents? Like that move. Romulus said, okay now we're all the queerines there's no Romans

and there's no Sabines we're all just queerines and everybody's like all right cool and yet at the same time yeah it's one of the hills right yeah and yet at the same time they still retained that sense of Romanness and Sabineness and there were so it's kind of like

I would say it's I'm going to very clumsily plow through here it's kind of like in the Iroquois Confederation they were all Iroquois but all Also, there were the six different groups, right? Okay. So long as the treaty holds, you're all the queerides, but the treaty dies with Romulus.

Well, it dies with Hostilius. And then so people kind of go back to being their own things. Okay. Now, the town of Colatia was a Sabine town that Tarquinius had gotten, and this led to the Wia Coletina. which is about nine miles up the road from Rome. There's a bunch of other towns that he got from the Latin League to the south. The Latins were a league of people.

The farthest away from Rome proper was a place called Mentana, which was about 18 miles to the northeast of Rome. This was, and that basically means two nights journey, essentially, right? Because, like, you can get about seven or eight miles out of a good horse in a day. Okay. Yeah. So that means that they're expanding, though. Like, you can't just walk down the road to them, right?

And so this town, Mantana, was the most Sabine-Latin, blended town at the time. We're not talking about vast differences here, distances, vast difference. But we're not talking about vast distances here. We're talking about 18 miles. So now Tarkinius is ready to turn his attention. to the Etruscans. So Tarkinius sought to make peace with the Etruscans at first. Basically by saying, look, we beat up your friends.

Let's not fight. Right. But the Etruscans refused. So war it was. And 12 Etruscan cities declared war on Rome. And they captured Fidenei, which was a town that Hostilius had taken from them. And that Romulus had actually sent colonists to during his reign. So it's basically like Cologne, like going back.

and forth. And it became kind of the Stalingrad of the war, too, to be honest. And Rome ends up walking away with a victory. Priscus Tarkinius had defeated their biggest neighbors, subjugated the Etruscans, the Sabines, the Latins, all of them to Rome. And he was also the first to have a triumph in Rome. But in so doing, he used all of the Etruscan trappings because he himself was an Etruscan. Right.

Now eventually Ancus's sons murdered Preschus Tarkinus by way of an axe to the back of the dome. Like you do. Like you do, right? This is actually how Romulus and Remus killed their uncle. Same deal. So his wife, Tanakil, right? She was super savvy. This is the wife of Presqueuse Tarkinus.

She put out that he wasn't dead but merely injured. and she got the Senate to agree that his son-in-law, Priscus's son-in-law, the former slave who had married his daughter, Tarkinia, whose name was Seruius Tullius, he should be the regent for the king while the king convalesed. But the thing is, Priscus was dead,

so she basically weakened it burnied him. I love how you verbalized that. Yes. long enough that Ancus's sons didn't have a popular enough claim to the throne because the king wasn't dead and yet he was. Right.

And thus the Senate usurped power from the people to support the executive that they favored the most. This is a shift. Okay. Right. And according to Livy, when Seruius Tullius was born, again, the son of a slave,

he was born with a ring of fire around his head. now what does that mean i don't know like i i took it as being like you know those icons of jesus yeah i took it as being like that okay but i genuinely don't know it could have it like sometimes it's a crown sometimes it's a ring i i don't know i genuinely i wish i did but i don't um so i assume he just you know had a halo Yeah, that's, that's, that's, that's kind of what that sounds like. All right. Yeah.

So, Servius Tullius expanded Rome proper to include even more hills and made life a lot better for the people at the bottom of Rome's economic and social structures. So that's cool. And so he, he did this. It probably had to do with the fact that he had been enslaved. Serwius. I mean, hell, his name is Seruius. Sarah was continued to beat up on the Etruscans and that made him more popular in Rome

because fuck those guys to the north and he really focused on reforming a lot of systems in Rome and while I love talking about this stuff I'm mostly just trying to get at the expansion under the king so that you can see how slowly and how unevenly Rome grew for the first 400 years all right so I showed you a short video

of Rome's expansion and you ended the period I told you to stop watching out with, whoa. So. Yeah. Yeah. I hit the pause button at 335 BC. Okay.

Or BCE. And all of a sudden, territory exploded down the shin of Rome. And so we've got the dictator is I. Emilius Manerchumus Preaks. Uh-huh. Dictator. Okay. Yeah.

Now that is under the time of What do you call it? The Republic, right? So the kingdom. Yeah. Yeah, the kingdom ends Yes. With,

Yeah, with the Tullians and the Turquina superibus specifically. Yeah. Sorry, with Superbuss. And like, there's not much difference. Like,

it's kind of like a scab or a blood clot around. Yeah. around Rome and leading to the coast. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. So anyway, so yeah, it's uneven growth. And then suddenly it explodes.

Now, eventually, Serius Tullius would be murdered by one of his sons, which is its own fascinating thing. But time. So I'll shorten it really quickly. Seruius Tullius, the fifth king of Rome, had his son, Lucius Tarkinius. Lukeus Tarkinius threw him down the stairs and then had his wife Tullia run over Sarawius Tullius with a chariot. Wow.

Yeah. And his argument was basically that he, Lukius Tarkinius, was far more qualified to be king since he was the son of a king, whereas Seruius Tullius was the son of a slave. I've always had such cognitive dissonance with that argument.

Like, what the fuck? Wait. Yeah. That's the argument of a sociopath. Yeah. Like no shit. Yeah. And in the translation, he seized his father around the middle.

So he basically picked him up by the waist and just hurled him down the stairs. And apparently that was enough to kill him. Like, and this is in like the, you know, we're not even to the 500s. were like, you know, yeah. Yeah, you know, early 500 or 590s maybe. Yeah. So it's not like it was marble. It couldn't have been that big.

Like the road couldn't have been much paved. I mean, maybe a bit, but like, holy shit. Damn. So, yeah. Also, uh, uh, uh,

Lukius Tarkinius was and his wife, Tulia had previously been married to each other's siblings. Okay. But then they murdered them so they could be together. So weird. Sociopath. Yeah. Okay.

So Tarquinius Superibus is the one who's the son of Lukius Tarkinus. If I recall correctly, we'll say that that's true and people can correct me. So Tarkinio Superibus conquered the Wolsky, we'd pronounce it Volsci now, who were to the south of the Latin League and the Gobi-E, directly to the east of Rome, next to a lake through really tricky and cunning methods. And all of these victories and conquest led to peace treaties and renewals of treaties and so on. And it was during Tarkinio Superbuss's campaign against the Routouli, a powerful and wealthy group of people about 20 miles down the shin,

that the rape of Lucretia happened, right? Okay. Shortest story, Tarkinius went into exile amongst his allies to the north. Rome became a republic, and the failed attempt at winning back his kingdom left Tarkinus in exile until his death in 495 BCE.

Right. Rome hadn't really expanded much beyond about a 20-mile radius, and in 250 years, that's how far they had gotten. Now, once Rome was in a republic, things began to shift, albeit slowly, almost immediately Rome had to defend itself against Truskins and Sabines and separate wars again and then an invasion by the Latin League and so it's kind of rinse and repeat over and over again

and then the Iquois or Iqui and that's where Cincinnati's you've heard of him where Kinkinatus was made famous yes and then eventually the Vae the Vaei the Waii and then the Senones the Gallic tribe that sacked Rome which I think they're the ones that the geese defended them against brings us to about 390 BCE. Now, now I can bring you to the Samnite Wars. Okay. Okay.

Rome had not expanded much at all. By the way, what was the year that you stopped? Like 355. Right. So that's where we're talking about. It all moved real fast. Real fast. And these wars were why.

Yeah. Rome had not expanded much at all beyond the kingdom's territories in the prior 150 years. and the Samnites were a people who lived in the central and lower shin of Italy. Their territory went from shin to calf, just above the ankle, and they were possibly an exiled group of Sabines, though they also lived close enough to the Umbri

that they could have also been an offshoot of that group. Greek historians seem to think so that it's the Umbri, and the Samnites spoke an Oscan dialect, and they were a loose confederation of four larger tribes, but they broke down into different structures as you get more granular. They kind of reminded me of the Iroquois Confederation, which I brought up earlier,

but less cohesive when they needed to be. Okay. The Samnites were livestock-driven folk. Several different groups claimed to have followed different animals to get there. Some folks followed a bull, others followed a woodpecker, and other folks followed a wolf.

The Samnites seem to have come into the vacuum that was left behind in Campania by the Etruscans. So they came south from the north. For the entirety of the Roman kingdom and for the first hundred plus years of the republic, the Romans and the Saminites had no real knowledge of each other. They were just outside of each other's orbits. There was a treaty between the two around the 350s, but it was kind of a loose, we know each other and don't want to fight treaty.

And it didn't have any real restrictions beyond that. Okay. But the Saminites were looking to expand and conquer a town called Coppies. Pua. Okay. Which, if you know your Spartacan history, that's where he's from. Right. Or that's where, you know, the thing started. This was a town that the Romans had recently become interested in by way of their own

southward conquest of the Wolski down to the River Liris and their interactions with the companions. This led to the first Samnite War, which was fought from 343 to 341 BCE. Okay. Now remember, Rome like England tends to get into a war everywhere whenever they get into a war anywhere. Right. They go to war on one side and all of the people they've been, you know, holding off intimidating whatever in some other part of their territory go, now's our chads, guys. Yep.

Yeah. And because the first Sam Night War and the Latin War and the second Latin War are going to happen one right after the other, boom, do to boom, do to boom. Okay. Now, according to Livy, the first Samnite War wasn't due precisely to the fight over Capua. It was over the Companions who were offering their wealth to the Roman Senate and to help to defeat the Wolski once and for all if they would just help the Componians against the Samnites. So, hey, you need to outfit your men. We'll help you beat the Wolski forever. And then you'll help us with the Samnites. But the Romans, they had their treaty. So they're like, well, we'd like. to help but we can't. Sorry. The Componians then pointed out how fertile the land was and offered it as a Roman breadbasket,

which was really tempting, but sorry, we've got a treaty. The Componians then surrendered themselves and specifically surrendered Capua to the Romans, which means now that the Romans, by right of conquest, had to defend the people who had just surrendered to them. Oh. Yeah. Okay. So sorry Sam Nights, we had a treaty, but these folks are who submitted to us.

Now, keep in mind, this is Livy. So if Rome sounds like they were reluctant saviors, it's because he wanted Rome to sound like reluctant saviors. Well, yeah. Now, that leads us to Marcus Valerius Corvus, Aulus Cornelius Kosus Arwina, and Publius Decuus, Mus. These were the big movers and shakers in the war.

The three victories that the Romans claimed in the first war were very much snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. And after these victories, Carthage sent their congratulations to Rome, and Valerius and Cornelius got triumphs. And right after this, though, the second Latin War popped off, and Rome found itself in yet another sad but necessary war of conquest. It's so weird how that keeps happening. Hmm, yeah, odd.

Now, the second Latin War... Especially in a history being written by an overt nationalist. The second Latin war was due the Cedicini who had asked Rome for help against the Samnites prior to the first Samnite war. The Romans said no because they had this treaty with the Samnites, you see. And then the Cedicini didn't do like the Componians quickly enough. So when the Samnite war was over, the Samnites turned and attacked the Cedicini. And the Cidicini tried to pull a Campan surrender to Rome, but Rome was like, no, I'm sorry, you're a little late. And we've got the Samnite treaty, so you see.

Yeah, you see how it is. Yeah. But the Cedicini went to the Latins and asked them for help. And the Campanians also went to the Latins, and all three went ahead and fought against the Samnites. And then the Samnites told Rome what was going on. And after all, they had this treaty, you see. Right.

And so the Roman Senate tried to just shrug about it. And then the Latins and their allies were emboldened by this, and now they're attacking, you know, now the Campani, the Cedicini. and the Latins are all plotting to attack the Romans, not just the Samnites. Now, because of Rome's system of being deathly afraid of kings, they kicked out the two consuls who'd won against the Samnites and elected two different guys.

Titus Manlius Torquatus and Publius Decu's Mus. Okay. These guys were in charge for what would become the second Latin war, and it didn't go well for the Latins who had been smelling themselves or as what they thought they were. or allies of Rome. The Romans saw them as junior members in a partnership, and the Latins were like, no, we're allies, we're equals.

And it's like, no. No. That's not how we do things. And it came down to one prior tour of the Latins, basically denying the importance of the gods in a conference with the Roman Senate to discuss their treaties who should go to attack whom in the Temple of Jupiter.

I kind of need you to literally read the room. Yeah. Like not the people in it. The room itself. I think the Romans kind of tricked him into it too, because they were saying, look, we have these treaties and the gods uphold these treaties.

And Anius is like, uh-uh. And then he slipped and fell on the floor and died in the temple of Jupiter. Right. And then Torquados. And that's what every senator present said, even when questioned separately. Yes. He slipped and fell and hit his head 44 times after cursing Jupiter.

Right. Right. Right. Cursed Jupiter so much as deny him. Denying after denying Jupiter. Yeah. Yeah. Now, Torquatus had said that since the gods had.

struck and down on eus, Rome was going to have to do the same thing to the same thing to the Latin's because after all, the gods have spoken. Okay. So even if we take the story that he denied Jupiter and slipped and, you know, hit his head. Whoopsy poopsie. Yeah. Whoops.

Whoops. Whoopsy daisy. Yeah. Like, okay, even if we accept that. Yeah. There's a stretch involved in saying, well, because that's, happen. Obviously we got to go conquer you now. Well, because we

honor the gods and you sent us a representative who doesn't. No, I think Jupiter pretty much took care of business himself there. Oh, no, no. He just opened the door. Did he though? Yeah. Did he though? So in many

ways, these two wars were kind of the coming out party of Rome being more than just a local strong man and turned into an actual regional power of no. Okay. Now, Rome was in a massive state of flux in the mid-300 BCE. There's a lot of growth, a lot of change, lots of power, kind of feeling invincible, seeming invincible to their neighbors.

And the second Samnite War would go from 326 to 304 BCE. It's fucking long as hell. Most wars were like a campaign season. Right. And this war was born of the very same tensions that had caused the first war. It started off as an uneasy piece to begin with. The Romans continued to expand into Campania, which wasn't exactly against the Samanite Treaty, but it certainly made the Samanites uneasy as hell about these continued incursions right next door into territory that we might want to expand into.

Yeah. And the war wasn't an ongoing war for all those years. There had been ongoing tensions and skirmishes and bad feelings from about 326 to 321, largely surrounding the town of Neapolim. Okay. Now, oddly enough, I'm going to need to rewind about seven years. Remember, Neapolim was a major port city, an important site for the Romans, the Latins, the companions, the Samnites, and the Greeks, actually, right? It had been a huge part of Magna Grychia for a long time. Hell, the name is a Greek name. All sorts of alliances and assurances were swirling around, drawing the Samnites and the Romans into another conflict eventually. And the

Samnites and the Westini, an Adriatic coastal people, so over off of the calf, they allied with each other, expanding the areas that would be part of this conflict. And a part of that Magna Grychea Confederation asked a man named Alexander of Epirus, the uncle and the brother-in-law to Alexander the Great, and the uncle to Pyrrhus of Epirus himself. You've heard of Pyrrhic victories, I assume. Yes. Yeah. He asked both of them to help defend them against the Lucanians and the Brutii. Now, the Lucanians were an on-again-off-again allies of both the Samnites and the Romans, and the Brutae also were sometimes allies to the Samnites. And if people are lost at this point, I totally get it.

Yeah, I'm swimming. Yeah, yeah. So the Lucanee and the Bruti are people who are down the shin. Everything's happening in the south now. It's south mostly over on the shin because you've got Magna Grychea just below that. So it's kind of the buffer zone between Magna Grychia, which is kind of the foot of the boot, and then like the ankle up to the shin. Okay. Okay.

And stretching over into the center and over to the calf. So that's where we're talking about. Now, the Brutti, again, folks in the ankle area, right? Right, right. They were also sometimes allies of the Samnites, but not always. And thus Alexander of Epirus, the father, the uncle and brother-in-law to Alexander the Great,

he fought the Samnites and Luchanians, another group. Okay. On behalf of the Tehrans, these are the Magna Grykia folks, the ones in the shoe area, who had asked for his help. And he won, after which he treated with the Romans in 322 BCE. But because the Lucanians didn't appreciate their exile after defeat, they enticed Alexander to go to the toe of Italy, where he was then killed by a Lucan exile

while trying to escape a siege by taking his horse across the river Archeron, or Acheron. Okay. The Lucanian exile through a javelin and impaled Alexander of Epirus. And this ended the Greek influence on the boot of Italy right then and there. Really? That was it. That was it.

Wow. It also interestingly showed the Romans how to defeat the Greek phalanx as the Lucanians and the Samnites use smaller and more maneuverable manipoles. Okay. Yeah. Now that was 331 BC. So I said I had to rewind, okay? Right. So with all these hard feelings and a bit of a power vacuum at the bottom, right?

There were several skirmishes, a year-long armistice from 324 to 323, and then more provocative skirmishes for the next two years with shifting alliances on the margins. And then came the battle of the Cowdine Forks where the Romans got their asses handed to them. Okay. Now, basically, according to Livy, the Samnite leader trapped the Roman armini, by tricking them into marching through a mountain pass to relieve a light-about siege of Lucera. The Romans chose speed over wisdom, got trapped in the past, and had to negotiate a humiliating defeat. It wasn't even a battle. It was just the Romans getting caught with their Kaliga down.

Now, here's where Livy gets fun. He loves to present things as two possibilities. The Samnites didn't expect such a victory over the army. so many Romans. So Gaius Pontius, the Samnite leader, wrote a note to his own dad, Herenius, asking, what do I do with all these prisoners? Hereneus said, let them go, because then the Romans could be persuaded to negotiate and end to the war before it really gets started. Because it would show them, see, these Samnites are pretty chill.

Right. Pontius said, nah. and then he said, but give me more advice. And Heronius said, fine, kill them all. Because if you don't want to make friends of the Romans, you need to destroy their ability to take vengeance completely. Fuck up their army in a massive way. And then they'll have to negotiate a peace from a position of weakness.

Right. Horanius was like, look, get the Romans to the table, whether as buddies who are like, man, you got the better of us. Thanks for being gracious. Or as defeated foes who are at. Now powerless because they lost a whole army. Herenius said, look, pick one or the other because anything in the middle would not weaken the Romans enough, nor would it make them friendly. So just pick one.

Right. Now here's what Livy actually said. Here's the translation of it anyway. Okay. When he learned that the Roman armies were confined between two passes at the Forcula Caudina, he, consulted by his son's messenger, decided that all should be released from there as soon as possible unharmed. when this opinion was disregarded and he was consulted again by the same messenger on his return, he unanimously decided that all should be killed. And when there was such discord among them, the answers were given as if from dubious oracle,

although the son himself at first thought that his father's mind had also grown old in his afflicted body, yet he was prevailed upon by the consent of all to summon him to counsel. nor is it said that the old man burdened with uh that's hernius we're talking about burdened was brought to the camp in a cart and called to the council and spoke in such a way that he did not change his opinion at all but only added reasons his hereneus's first advice was that he would establish a perpetual peace he being uh hernius's son uh... pontius um that he would establish a perpetual peace and friendship with a most powerful people by means of great benefaction i.e. let them the fuck go. His second advice, Heranius's second advice to Gaius Pontius,

was to postpone the war for many ages during which the Roman state would not easily recover its strength after the loss of two armies. His third was that there was no advice. When his son, that's Guyus, and other leaders were asked what if a middle course of action were taken so that they were both released unharmed and the laws imposed on those who had been defeated by the law of war, this opinion, he said, is one that neither makes friends nor takes away enemies. Only preserve those whom you have angered with ignominity. Ignominy. Ignominy, yes. That is the Roman nation, which, when defeated, does not know how to rest. Now, this is Livy putting words into this guy's mouth.

Right, right. But damn, whatever present necessity has instilled in them will always live in their hearts, nor will it allow them to rest before the manifold punishments demanded of you. Neither opinion being accepted, Hereneas was carried home from the camp. So. Oh, geez. Guyus Pontius went with option three. Embarrassed the Romans by forcing them to march under the yoke and then send them home.

What? And the consuls agreed to this because starvation's a fucking thing. How? Okay. Yeah. Okay. Like, how do you think as a leader when presented with, okay, let them go. Right.

You know, come to the table as a buddy, right? Yeah. Like, you know, let's, let's nip this thing in the bud. We don't, you know, I've just demonstrated that I am totally willing. Yeah. To, to look for the longer term solution. Right. That's option one.

Option two is, well, you know, if you must hurt your enemy, hurt them so thoroughly. Yes. And we'll never contemplate striking back. Okay. Yeah. You decide you don't like either one of those options. Citty twister them. Yeah.

You're going to give them a wet willy. And then send him home like, yeah, see, we kicked your ass. You're going to piss on their socks and then make them march home in their boots. Yeah. And how do you think, like when they get home, like obviously those two, those two consoles are, you know, out of luck because you allowed this to happen. Yeah. But how do you think the people of Rome are going to respond to that? Right.

Like what do you, what, where? Like, what do you, what, what is the motivation for that solution? I'm going to humiliate them and then send them home. I think it's a fecklessness. I can't believe we got this. How do we maximize this? And then you just, you don't listen to anybody because you're smelling yourself. Like, there's so many pieces that are in play there.

use of smelling yourself. Yeah. Like, like, I just, yeah, it, it makes it really, it underlines for me the reality that, that we modernly tend to overlook

that almost nobody in the ancient world was a professional military strategist. Yeah. Like, you know, You know, for me, for me, like, all of these things that I've told you about this episode and last, yeah, the most effective is not the best.

Right. It's usually a gang of really dumb guys who accidentally succeed. And because they're dumb, they never think past that. Like, what did you think was going to happen when you, when you, like, threw your dad down the stairs? Yeah. How did you think that was going to? go. Yeah. And then you had your wife run him over with a chariot. Well, I mean, okay, look, that's, that's planning out how to finish the job thoroughly. She happened to be going, I wish.

She happened to be coming down the road to acclaim her husband because she knew he was going to throw his dad down. And then he like pointed out his dad like kind of crawling around in the mud. He's like, get him. Like. So what you're saying is it was literally a scene out of Cohen Brothers movie. Yeah. It had all the strategy of race stance when they see the ghost. Get her. That's your plan, Ray.

Get her. Yeah. Real scientific. Oh, my God. But then you send away the guy who actually is giving you good counsel. Yeah, because he's old. Yeah. Like, okay, old man.

It's like, why do you ask him for advice? Like, I swear to God, they all, they all, they all. They're all so dumb. Well, they all sound like 14-year-olds. Yeah, well, because I think they kind of are. Like, I mean, honestly, in our modern history, right? Like, you look at, like, the worst people and, like, you dig a little deeply into them. They're all idiots.

Well, yeah. Like, they're, like, like, how did, how did the whole world? like think that they were competent like what the why did it take 60 million to get rid of this band of morons yeah like there were a couple smart guys in there but like but it was the charisma yeah yeah um it reminds me of uh glass onion mm-hmm the yeah you know it's just so dumb wait you have a google alert for the word movies like these are the people yeah it's just so dumb dumb, it's genius. No, it's just dumb.

Yes. Like, yes. Oh my God. All of that. Yeah. Wow. Now, here's the thing, though. All of this comes from Livy. And Livy never went anywhere to study stuff. And nobody wrote down quotes. So he could have made this up whole cloth. Well, you know, if he did, it's a bitch and story.

Yeah. And it, and it makes a point. Yeah. Well, he really does make a point. And that's the thing, right? Like the further away you get, the more there's lessons because I made them up. Like, yes, yes. This is, yeah, okay. Because historians, actual historians have pointed out that the Kaudine Forks, that area is a kilometer wide. There's no fucking way an army would have been so trapped with such a wide escape path.

They just couldn't have. Yeah,000 meters on foot. Yeah. Shields. Yeah. one. Like, yeah, and, you know, you might say something in a more modern context if we're talking about like an armored column or something.

But even then, a kilometer, a kilometer. That's still, yeah, pretty good maneuvering room right there. You're going to get a relief party, you know. Now, Livy said, quote, two roads led to Luceria, one along the coast of the upper sea, open and wide, but the safer it is, the longer it is. The other, through the Cowdine Forks, shorter, but the place is thus formed. There are two high, narrow, and wooden ravines, wooded ravines, joined together by mountains all around. Between them lies a fairly open, grassy, and watery plain closed in the middle, through which is the middle of the road.

But before you come to it, you must enter first the narrow passages and either retrace the same path by which you entered, or, if you continue to go further, escape through a road. another narrower and more difficult ravine. When the Romans, having sent their column down another road into that plane, were to proceed directly to other narrow passages, they found them blocked by fallen trees and huge rocks, with a mass of stones blocking the way. Okay, cool. But again, they didn't expect to catch them either. So, but, okay, so he's setting up that there's an ambush, right?

When the enemy's deception had become apparent, a garrison was also seen at the top of the ravine. Called back from there, they continued to retrace the path by which they had come. They found it also blocked by their own barrier and weapons. They stopped at the foot of the mountain without anyone's command, and a kind of unusual stupor seized the minds of all, and a kind of unusual torpor seized their limbs, and looking at each other, each one leading the other more in control of his mind and counsel. They remain silent for a long time, motionless.

So, I mean, I... I kind of feel like he's describing getting to a place where none of them knew what to do. Yeah. Yeah. And that's kind of what he's, they kind of froze up. They kind of froze up just because they didn't know what to do. Yeah. The language makes it sound like there's almost a supernatural component to it in the way that he's describing it.

Yeah. But that could just be the narrative device. translating to us a particular way and also this is in 321 when this supposed battle happened Livy was drawing parallels

to Alexander the Great's victories and campaigns that were happening at the same time almost Livy then claims in two different spots that the Romans kept the piece until 316 and then in another they immediately rejected this piece so he's all over the place

and what followed in Livy was about 15 books of talking about the war that followed. And he finishes it in book 9-16. So the way that Livy's books go, it's book 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, 1.4, and on and on. So this is book 9.16. So I'm just going to, everything I'm talking about is going to be in book 9. So I'm just going to say it's 916. Okay. Quote, the rest of the war was now completed.

So I'm one, two, skip a few. The rest of the war was now completed by the consuls. Aulius defeated the Ferentani in a single battle, and the city itself, where the battle line had dispersed, was taken by order of hostages. The other consul had a similar fate with the Satrikani, who were Roman citizens who had defected to the Samnites after the defeat at Cowdine and had taken their garrison into the city. for when the army was brought up to the walls of the Satriki and the ambassadors were sent to ask for peace with the entreaties, the consul gave a sad answer, saying that unless the Samnite garrison was killed or handed over, they would not return to him. And he struck terror into the colonists more by word than by use of arms. Therefore, the ambassadors who followed him asked the consul how he could believe that any, or how he could believe that they, few and weak, could bring violence against so strong

and armed a garrison and were ordered to seek advice from the same people from whom they had received the garrison into the city. They departed and having obtained with difficulty that the Senate and answers on this matter should be reported to the consul. They returned to their own people. Two factions distinguished the Senate, one whose leaders were the authors of the revolt from the Roman people, the other of the loyal citizens. However, both strove to assist the consul in reconciling the peace. One party, since the Sam Knight Garrison, because it was not sufficiently prepared to withstand the siege,

was to depart the following night, was content to inform the consul at what hour of the night and what gate and on which road the enemy would be going out. The other, who had deserted to the Samnites against their will, opened the gate to the consul that same night and secretly received the army and the armed enemy into the city. Thus, by double treachery, both the Samnite garrison having encamped in the wooded places about the road, was unexpectedly overwhelmed, and the clamor of the enemy was raised from the city

full of them. And in the space of an hour, the Samnites were slain. The Satricans were captured, and everything was in the power of the consul, who, having inquired into the means by which the revolt had been brought. brought about, found them guilty, beat them with rods and axes, and having set up a strong garrison, took away the weapons of the Satricans. I'm going to pause there. There's another paragraph to go.

Going on, they write that Papyrus, a Papyrus cursus departed from Rome in triumph. He was the consul. And they are the authors of the fact that Luceria was taken under his leadership and the Samnites, were put under the yoke. And he was a man undoubtedly worthy of all military praise, excelling not only in vigor of mind, but also in physical strength. He had a special agility of foot, which also gave him his surname, Kursuros. They say that he was a victor in running of all his age, and either by force of strength

or by much exercise, and the most capable of food and wine, and that neither infantry nor cavalry were more rigorous than any other because he himself was invincible to physical labor. Even Calvary sometimes dared to ask him to relieve them of some of their labor for a well-done affair, to whom he said, quote, do not say that nothing is relieved, I relieve you, end quote, and certainly do not pat your back when you dismount your horses, end quote. And there was in that man a great power of command, both over his comrades and citizens. The Prytor, Prynestine, through fear, had led his reserves more slowly into the front line. When he had ordered him to be called as he was walking in front of the tent, he ordered the Lictor to draw out his axe, at which voice standing lifeless,

Pristinio said, come now, lictor, cut off this route, which is an inconvenience to those walking. And filled with fear of the final punishment, he dismissed many of his words. undoubtedly in that age when no virtue was more fruitful and there was no single man on whom the Roman state could stand more firmly indeed they destined him to be a leader equal to Alexander the Great if he had turned his arms having subdued Asia to Europe and that brings us to Livy taking a break in his discussion of the Second Sam Night War to spend three books on Alexander the Great

literally stopping in the middle of his discussion on a 20-year war to simply ask, what if? Yeah, all right. Livy literally goes on until book 946 to discuss the Sam Knight War. Wow. But smack dab in the middle, almost. He just stops, takes a break, and asks,

what would have happened if Tony Stark had attacked American militias instead of cut out Taliban militias? Yeah, nice. And it's right at the story of Rome when Rome suddenly starts expanding like it's a compulsion. Remember the map video that I sent you, right? Yeah. It's now coast to coast, and within less than a hundred years of that time, Rome had expanded

all the way to the Arnus River, now called the Arno. Right. Okay. So all the context is done. And before we get to the text, I have to address the grammar and bring you up to speed on a tonal thing that is happening in Livy's writings. And I think that's where I'll end it. Um, so the Romans reading Livy would have completely gotten the tone, but no translation can honestly do it justice. Okay. Okay. In Latin grammar, there's a specific construction for conditional statements. Okay.

For instance, in English, we use conditional statements as if-then statements, right? If you listen to this podcast, you'll learn something or then you'll learn something. And we'll leave out the then, okay? it's always if then. Right. And that's a pretty standard condition, right? Yeah. But if you had grown wings when you were four, then you would have been elected Pope.

Grammatically, that works as a condition, right? Right. Right. We have imaginations. We understand all of those words, but would you say that it's physically impossible as a condition? Yes. Yeah, right. So for Latin grammar, there are six layers of reality for conditional statements.

each one governed by different moods and tenses to signal to the reader how realistically they should take the statement. It doesn't work too well in English, but I'm going to do my best to get us close. So every conditional statement has two parts. If such and such, then so and so. Okay. If is called the protossus. Okay. The then statement is called the apodosis.

In English or Latin, you can actually flip-flop them, right? Either order and still have it work. For instance, you would punch me if I felt up your wife. Yes. Okay. So the then starts off, and that's a fair statement, right? And we could reverse it to the standard construction. If I felt up your wife, then you would punch me.

Yeah. Okay. And yes, I know she'd punch me too. First. Yeah. And repeatedly. and deservedly. Still, the apodicis is the then statement and the protosis is the if statement.

Right. That matters. Okay. And we can flip and flop it and the Romans could too. If a conditional statement is very, very likely, like you expect it to happen, like it's 90% likely, you would use what's called a simple condition construction. I'm sorry, it's a simple present. condition. Okay.

And that is you're going to use the indicative mood and the present tense. So here's an example in English. If it is Saturday night, then we record podcasts. Okay. All right. All right. I'm there. Very likely, right?

And what's really cool about this is if I use this construction, you will know how likely I think the condition is to be fulfilled by saying that condition in this construction. So you use this specific construction, the simple present, to talk about shit that you know is going to happen or you know it is happening, right? So if, so in the previous one, right, if, if, what was it? If I felt up your wife, you would punch me. Right. That calls into question, right? So if we wanted to make that seem very, very likely, if I feel up your wife, then she punches me.

Yeah. That sounds like it's going to happen, right? And in English, it doesn't carry across as well, but in Latin, that tells you exactly how likely the condition is. Right. Now, if I wanted to tell you something that would likely have happened, I would use what's called the simple past conditional construction. It's still in the indicative mood, okay, but now it's using the perfect or the imperfect tenses. I did or I was doing. Right.

And this lets you know that something has already passed and thus a condition was met as expected. or it was not met, but it totally would have had it happened, right? So here's an example. I'm trying to generate examples. Right. If Robert celebrated his birthday last month, then he was surrounded by loved ones. Okay. Okay.

Again, the only intrusion into whether or not it was to happen was if the condition actually was started off, right? So if he did this, then this thing was happening. Okay. But once the apotheosis happens, then the protosis happens, then the apotheosis happens, then the apodicist is almost certain to follow, right? Right. So once started, A leads almost certainly to B. Okay.

Right. Now it's a little less realistic than the simple present. Right. Okay. Because we don't know when this releases, so we don't know what month we're talking about and something. Right. But if that happened last month, then, yes, this other thing was happening too.

Now sometimes conditions are still up for grabs as to whether or not they're going to occur. For this, we're going to use something called, and I love the terms for it, but it's boring in construction, but that's okay. It's grammar. It's called the future more vivid. Okay. It sounds fun. Yeah. This is still in the indicative mood, but it exists purely in the future and the future perfect in its constructions.

the way, there is such a thing as the future perfect. Okay, the future is I will walk. Future perfect is I will have put on my shoes. Right. Right. And then I will walk. I will have. Yeah.

It's the future before the future. Right. Oh, my Lord. Yeah. Yeah. But it makes sense. Yeah. It does.

Right? Yeah. No, it does. And this is the stuff that can be either really fascinating or can cause entire classrooms to roll their eyeballs back Oh yeah your skull especially when you're trying

to teach it in English Yeah yeah Oh in Latin it's like hey it's this ending But they're still struggling with What do you mean the future before the future And I have like a timeline drawn out With circles and dots and

Yeah and and within the context of learning A second language or a third language This stuff is There's like it's easier to stay interested in it Because you're trying to to learn how to do the tricks in that language. In English, there's the subconscious for native English speakers anywhere. There's the subconscious bias that I do this already.

Why do we need to, you know. Yeah. And yeah, I can, as we were talking about it, because we're both also language nerds. Yeah. I'm imagining trying to teach this in an English class. And like, I've lost two thirds in the classroom at least. I used to have so much fun with it. I would make them draw the same timeline.

I would make them draw timelines. Yeah. And I would do a cloud in the present. And then I would have them do a cloud in the past and a cloud in the future. And then we would do dots. There was a dot inside of the cloud in the past. And there was a dot on the other side of the cloud, like going further into the past. And then there was a dot before the future cloud as well.

Right. And so all the dots represented perfects. Okay. So the dot in the cloud is the perfect. The dot before the cloud is the plu perfect, the past before the past. It's a completed action that occurred before. And then the cloud is the imperfect because it was going on. We don't quite know when it started.

We don't quite know when it stopped. We just know that it was going on. Right. Same thing for the future, right? The future is a cloud. It will happen. I don't know when. but we know that the future perfect will occur before the future.

Yeah. So, okay. So. Yeah. And then they're like, well, why doesn't the president have a perfect? I'm like, it doesn't need one. Because it's just kind of ongoing. And then I would run them through like the space balls thing like about.

Oh, yeah. Then I just like I can't really talk about the present because by the time I talk about the president is in the past. Yeah, I just tried to talk about the president. And I'm already talking about the past. Has already and, and, you know, oh, God, it was fun. Yeah. I miss it.

Okay. So the future more vivid, okay? Still in the indicative mood. The indicative mood is the one where you're pointing out what's happening. Right. But exists purely in the future, like I said. Now, the apodicist can only be for the future indicative, okay? But the protosis could be future or future perfect.

So because it's future tense, it's specifically not real yet, but it could very well come to past. Okay. Okay. If Bilbo will have given the ring to Gandalf, then Gandalf will hand it over to Frodo. Okay. All right. Yeah.

If Bilbo will give the ring to Gandalf, then Gandalf will hand it over to Frodo. Both of those work, but if Bilbo will have done it, lets us know how, like, that has to be completed before. Yeah. Yeah. And the thing is, it's not real because it's in the future, right? We don't know if Bilbo will actually give the ring over at his birthday or not. We cannot claim with any certainty what the future holds.

Okay. However, if that event, which is maybe 50 to 60% likely, happens, then we will know what will be most likely to happen next. Right. Okay. You see how this is getting farther and farther from reliable reality? Right. So. Yeah.

Now, I always would draw a black line after this one. Like, I would have the layers of reality and I'd have percentages next to it and stuff. So if we genuinely don't know if it's going to happen or if there's a good amount of doubt as to whether or not it will happen, but it's still possible. It's just maybe not probable anymore. We're maybe 40% sure at best. Then we would use the future less vivid conditional statement. Okay. All right.

That is, we would leave the indicative mood behind entirely. and enter into the subjunctive mood lets us know what is. And now we enter into this ethereal realm of the subjunctive, what could be, what can be. The subjunctive mood notably only has four tenses, whereas the indicative has six, because the subjunctive does not have future tenses, because the future is already ethereal,

and you can't double dip. Okay. So there's no future in the subjunctive. So for future less vivid, you're going to use a subjunctive mood and you're going to go back to the present tense. So it's kind of a repeat. Okay. And so it's possible. It's just not probable.

So if you and I should fight with medieval weapons, then we would see which is superior between the spear and the sword. Okay. Now, is it possible that we would engage in such a fight? Sure. Yeah. Is it probable? Not really. Right, much less so.

And if that condition gets started, could we actually determine this superiority of the weapons in question? It is possible. It's possible. But always in motion the future is. Yeah. Because we didn't take into account training or the taller guy has the reach weapon. Like, all we've proven is that, you know, there's a few things here, right? But it is possible.

Right. Now, then we get to the last step before we get to the truly. impossible. So the last step is unfucking likely as hell. Okay. I'd say that this is stuff that's possible, but only just possible, right? Like 10%

likely. Okay, barely possible. Yes. Okay. It's called the contrary to fact present. Okay. And it again uses a subjunctive, but now specifically the protosis and the apodotosis exist in

the imperfect subjunctive. which is probably my favorite subjunctive tense. Okay. Because of the construction of it is just so bone-ass simple. It looks like a Latin one student didn't listen. It's so good. You just take the infinitive and add on a personal ending. That's it.

Like, just so fucking dumb. So here's in English, the best way I could do it. If I were to feel up your wife, then she would slap me. Okay. Okay. Now speaking of it in those terms, you, I'm already signaling to you how this is really only possible on this plane, but so thoroughly unlikely as to be dismissed out of hand. Right. Right.

Or my favorite, it says a Janet Jackson lyric, actually. Yeah. If you were my lover, then the things I do to you. Okay. And I would use this all the time in my class. and I would tell the kids what layer of reality is this? Consider me being the one she's singing to. And I would go through all the reason.

I invite you to roast me. Yeah. And I had one kid who actually said it was like future more vivid. I'm like, you give me that much of a chance? Wow. Thank you. You have an A. But then we looked into it.

It's like, do we hang out in the same social circles? Are we in the same zip code at all? Does, do her hours match up with mine? Have we ever met? Like, is it possible? Sure. That's it, right? Yeah.

Now, you contrast that with the much more hopeful spice girls lyric. If you want to be my lover, then you've got to get with my friends. Okay. Now, interestingly enough, if you want to be, then you've got to get, right? Right. This actually is using the infinitive, which is its own mood technically. but it's honestly best expressed using the future more vivid, right? If you will be my lover, then you will get with me.

Right. If you hope. Yeah. You know, you got 50-50 odds here, you know? Janet, she already knows I'm unavailable and she's merely fantasizing about something that's possible on this plane for her, but it's so thoroughly unlikely as to just not be worth thinking about. So. And then we get to the impossible.

Okay. Gramatically sound, but realistically unsound, right? This is called the contrary to fact, past conditional. Wow. That is, we understand the words, but that's fucking it. Like, that's, that's it. This is just air moving. Yeah.

Yeah, okay. And it uses the PluPyprivix subjunctive, which is actually another favorite of mine, to signal that the reader knows that it's impossible beyond the words themselves, right? Right. I also really like the PluPerfect's. conjunctive for the same reason. It's a different infinitive that you just added on personal endings. It's so lazy.

It's fun. So back to you growing wings. Now, the past, you and I can both agree. You were four years old a while back, right? Right. So that's already happened, right? Right. Did you grow wings at the age of four?

No. Okay. Then this conditional is fucking stupid. Right. If the things that have already happened had happened differently than other things that have already happened would have turned out differently. Okay. If you had grown wings at four years old, then you would have been elected Pope.

Okay. Okay. Again, beyond the words being spoken, nothing. Yeah. Now, what this means, though, is that you could, using Latin grammar, read sarcasm. Got it. Okay. You can read the level of sarcasm in these statements, by the law.

the way okay yes not like not fucking likely man you know that kind of stuff yeah yeah across millennia if you had asked that lady out then she would have said yes right now there's plenty of times where you could have asked a lady out and she would have said yes but if i used this contrary to fact past like if you'd ask her out she would have said yes okay you know yeah total sarcasm right if you write it in the contrary of fact past we're telling you there's no possible way in hell that she would have deigned to let you ask her out. The gods would not have allowed it. Right.

And we can take the mundanely possible and place them into contrary to fact, past constructions to get our point across as to how fucking impossible it is. That just not going to happen, right? Yeah. Dream on. Yeah. And we can also like beef you up and that kind of stuff. Yeah.

If you ask her out, she will, you know, if you do ask her out, she says yes. Yeah. Like, wow. Me and Janet? Dude. Damn it. So, when it comes to whether or not Alexander could have beaten the Romans, the entire text engages in contrary to fact past conditional constructions.

Wow. Because not only did it happen or did it not happen in the past, but there's no fucking way it could have happened in the past, given who he was and who the Romans already were. Wow. And with that, on the next episode, we'll actually get to the text. All right. What have you gleaned?

That the first time I heard that the Romans didn't need to invent codes. Because on the battlefield, they just gave all of their orders in Latin and their enemies couldn't figure out what the fuck they were trying to say. Right. It, it, you know, that sounds like,

no, that's apocryphal. That's just because of, you know, generations of British school boys being vexed by their, by their Latin teachers. Right. No.

No. Like the, the, every time you talk about the grammatic structure of Latin. Mm-hmm. It, it is, I don't know if I want to,

to say an elegant system because I don't think it's elegant because they have so many moving parts. But it is, it is an amazingly, it is an amazingly versatile. Yes. Tool that is, that is, uh, linguistically capable of doing some incredible shit. Yes. That we can only dream of. Yeah. In English, having stolen some of our tricks from Latin.

Well, and because we use all the helping verbs and shit like that. Yeah. There's so many extra words that we put in there. And the Romans didn't put those extra words in because they had these constructions. They had grammatical constructions to take the place of them. Yeah. And like in one way, yes, that's elegant. In another way, any single verb has 132 forms.

Wait. Like a ridiculous number of conjugations. And and like There's there's an argument that that is elegant And then there's an argument It's like but holy shit How do you know What I'm what I'm struck by

Is the length of time That it would have taken For a native speaking child To really learn how to be eloquent in Latin. You know, you can learn to be like my son is pretty well spoken and pretty eloquent at eight years old. Right. As a Roman, like, I don't know if you'd be able to get to that comparative level of power with the language until you'd had at least four or five more years of life experience.

you know, just being exposed to enough of it, if that makes sense, you know, based on the organic way in which we learn how to speak. Mm-hmm. You know what I mean? I do. I think, okay, so in defense of Latin grammar, so there's two constructions that are like my first and second favorite constructions. One is called the Abilative Absolute. And in Latin, it makes perfect sense. You take a subject and you take something that describes the subject, right?

Okay. Now that something could be, it's usually a participle. Okay. Particibles exist in two voices, active or passive participles. Right. Okay. Ed, having been loved, that's passive. Ed being a lover, that's active.

Right. And then they exist in three tenses. Past, present, and future, right? Okay. Ed about to be loving. Okay. Right. Or Ed who is loving.

Right. Or Ed who was loving. Right. And again, we could do Ed who was loved or Ed who is being loved or Ed who will be loved. Right. Right. But six possibilities there, right? Okay.

Yeah. Two words. Your name and that participle in the ablative case. And that could be translated into English for us. right? It could be translated as Ed, who is about to be loved, Ed, about to be loved, the about to be loved Ed. Like, you could translate it in all these different ways. And in Latin, it means all of them at once. And you just go with the most appropriate for the tone of whatever you're doing. Right. In translation, obviously, there's a problem. That gave us the problem that we have in our Second Amendment. Yeah.

A well-regulated militia being necessary to the defense of the state or something to those effects, right? Yeah. It's Latin grammar that fucked us because we can't translate it very well, because militia and well-regulated, right? Yeah. So those are paired together. It's being necessary to blah, blah, blah, blah. That being necessary and the militia, those are your ablative absolute. It could also translate as since a well-regulated militia is necessary to it.

Because a well-regulated mission, as we all know, a well-regulated or just in the presence of. And the Abil of Absolute can say seven words in two, and I love it. Right. It is so elegant. And oh, my God, is it effective rhetorically? The other one is called an indirect statement. And it's indirect discourse. I love indirect discourse in Latin.

But essentially, you take the accusative, which is typically used as a direct object or the object of most prepositions, but most often it's a direct object. So you take the accusative case and then you take the infinitive of the verb that you're reporting upon, right? Okay. So I heard that you were talking shit, right? So talking shit is the verb. That's going to be in the infinitive. Okay. I heard that you, you are the accusative.

And the word for that, we have put that in in English. So literally in Latin, it's, you know, Aoudiwi, I heard, Tay, I heard you to be talking shit. So literally, if you translated it across it's, I heard you to be talking shit. Okay. Which is the same as saying I heard that you were talking shit. Yeah. Now, what's really cool is if you change the tense of the infinitive, you change a little bit. I heard you to have been talking shit.

I heard you to be talking shit. I heard you about to be talking shit. Right. And again, I could use passive versions of all the infinitives too. Because infinitives exist in two voices and three tenses. And it's so wonderful because you can put, I heard that you were singing a song that was once sung to your brothers on the eve of battle.

I heard that you, that starts the indirect statement, word for singing is going to bookend it all the way at the end and we fill everything else in there. And now, yeah, it's beautiful. It's this basket that holds everything. But we know that all of that's contained

in the indirect discourse. It's really neat. And I think that if you grow up with that, it's kind of like, you know, our kids grow up. They start by saying, I catched and, you know, it's I caught. And we don't even necessarily correct them. Yeah. It just organically happens.

They learn irregular verbs. Yeah. Because of that, I think that Roman children would have had no problem with indirect discourse. He said that he was going to hit me. I mean, these are shit you need to know. So I think actually, you know, kids growing up in any language. how complex they're going to grow up with that complexity just built in okay fair so and the roman children would go off and learn rhetoric by studying greek anyway true but anyway yeah uh i yeah so is it possible

that they used uh latin as as as you know just talking normally as battlefield code maybe but it's it's it's not like they had radios or any fucking need they had trumpets and they had standards yeah You didn't need to worry about spies getting into your ranks. Yeah. But, yeah. But yeah. So the very grammar of Livy's story is his counterfactual. Let us know how goddamn impossible it would have been for Alexander to stand any chance against the Romans.

And you don't even need to read the text to get there. Because as soon as you start seeing the conditional statement, statements and the constructions. You're like, oh, oh, yeah, this is impossible. Nice. Yeah. So, anyway, boy, did I go on that. So is there anything else you wanted to add to what you've gleaned or?

No. Okay. What would you like to recommend to people to read or watch or imbibe or whatever? I am going to very strongly recommend the Vikings by Robert Ferguson which is a total departure from what we're talking about here but it is something that I had the chance to briefly revisit recently and it's a really approachable

and very entertaining, easy read that covers the Viking age and gets into the ways in which Viking piracy, Viking, Viking, Viking, the verb Viking, yeah. Was in some ways a response, a cultural response within Nordic society to the encroachment of Christianity.

And the ending of the Viking Age being an accommodation between Norse paganism and the growing Christian population in Nordic civilization. So it's a great read. It goes pretty quickly, but it's, uh, it goes pretty quickly. but it's it has meat on the bone. It's not just, you know, fluff kind of stuff. So very highly recommended for anybody interested in that stuff. How about you? I'm going to recommend a book by Karen Elizabeth Gordon

called The Deluxe Transitive Vampire, the Ultimate Handbook of Grammar for the Innocent, the Eager, and the Doom. It's a style book, and it's kind of like this person found a way to make it more accessible English grammar. Okay. Why we use whom instead of who, you know, stuff like that. Yeah. Yeah. What a direct object actually is.

Stuff like that. You know, it's a good book. I've had a copy for years and years and years, the deluxe transitive vampire. All right. So, yeah, go out and get that if you're struggling with grammar in any way, shape, or form. And after this podcast, you probably will.

So where can they find us? We collectively can be found on our website at wauwobo waubawoba. gikhistorytime.com Where we have our archive of going on 300 episodes now or over. Oh, way past. By the release of this, we're probably close to 370s. Oh, shit. Okay.

Yeah, nearly going on 400 episodes now. And, you know, find any topic that caches your interest. and give it a listen. We are also findable, if that's properly grammatical, on the Apple podcast app, on the Amazon podcast app, and on Spotify. And wherever it is that you have found us, please take the time to subscribe

and give us the five-star review that you know we deserve. And where can you be found, sir? Well, on the first Friday of every month, you could find me at the Sacramento Comedy Spot in Sacramento, slinging puns at 9 p.m. with the crew from Capital Punishment. Myself, Justine, and Emily have been doing it. By the time of this release, well-nigh, 10 years. I think we're about, if you miss the April show, then the May show,

the May 1st show, and the June 5th show. The June 5th show, I believe, is our 10-year anniversary. So, yeah, it's been a hell of a ride. Anyway, come see those shows, please. or it could be that the July show is. I'm going to have to check my records. But either way, come see those shows. June 5th, July 3rd, May 1st, if you're still there.

But $15 at the door, but you really want to get your tickets ahead of time. SackComedy Spot.com. Go to the calendar section, find our show, and buy your tickets. Nice. Yeah. Well, for a geek history of time, I'm Damien Harmony. And I'm Ed Blaylock. And until next time, Romans go home.

20s should be rolled. 20s having been rolled. 20s about to be rolled. 20s, those which have been rolled by those who were doing the rolling. 20s.