Suppose some scholar or pseudo-scholar announced that he had found an ancient manuscript containing a lost chapter of the Gallic Wars: that would be thrilling, at least for us pedants. But suppose the new chapter contained a sentence in which Caesar mentions drinking an orange soda in a tall glass with ice cubes while preparing his battle plans. Scholars would reject the soda as a blatant anachronism proving the passage a modern forgery.
Or perhaps some would not. There is nothing physically impossible in the idea that Caesar could drink an orange soda. It could theoretically have happened:
Of course, each of the necessary ingredients for a glass of orange soda with ice cubes, though not technically impossible, is so extremely unlikely in Caesar's time that the combination of all four is about a trillion times less likely than a simple hoax. Any passage such as I have imagined could in fact be dismissed as a forgery composed by some modern too ignorant to avoid even the grossest anachronisms.
Do I need to spell out the moral as if I were Aesop telling animal fables to little children?
Posted by Dr. Weevil at September 12, 2004 01:38 AMIt seems they actually used snow, so it might have been more like a slurpy. Pliny the Younger (letter 1.15) mentions having "halica cum mulso et nive" at a banquet, and A.N. Sherwin-White cites the elder Pliny's Natural History 19.54 on the question: "The use of snow , brought from the Appennines and kept in store to cool drinks, was a great extravagance." I'm not sure I follow this citation, though (http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/cgi-bin/ptext?lookup=Plin.+Nat.+19.54) but that's what I found.
Posted by: Evan McElravy on September 14, 2004 08:33 PMSo what's the moral, Unca Weevy? Is that where Orange Julius came from?
Posted by: Xboy on September 15, 2004 06:06 AM