Subject: Re: (urth) Immortals and Archaic Rome
From: matthew.malthouse@guardian.co.uk
Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2003 08:29:13 +0100

On 17/06/2003 21:24:23 James Jordan wrote:

>>
>>Crush recants:
>>Hmmm. Herodotus 7:83 says that the Immortals were "all Persians". So 
either
>>Latro was not an Immortal, or Wolfe is engaging in literary license in
>>presuming that Latro somehow gained a special honor. There *were* 10,000 
of
>>them so I guess it is not inconceivable that a Latin slipped in.
>
>         Or maybe that "Persian" does not refer to race per se, but to
>those considered part of Persia, which was pretty multifarious racially.
>Latro could have been an adopted "Persian," since adoption of various 
kinds
>was quite common in the ancient world.

The ancient historians had a pretty clear idea of what were Persians and 
what were other nations conquered by the Persian Empire.  Just as they 
made the distinction between Romans by origin, Roman citizens and subjects 
of Roman Empire.  I don't know but I suspect that Medes, Parthians, 
Assyrians etc in the Immortal Guard would have been worth of comment.

Of course I'm assuming that Herodotus didn't just make it up.  ;-)


Matthew

--