
Anthropologists Say Gladiators and Soldiers in Ancient Rome Were Vegetarian - Osiris30
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3761927/
======
umvi
An interesting hypothesis, but I have a hard time buying it. If everyone
around them is eating meat, where's the motive for them to abstain?

> Plants contain higher levels of strontium than animal tissues. People who
> consume more plants and less meat will build up measurably higher levels of
> strontium in their bones.

How can we rule out that they weren't just eating tons of strontium-rich meat
like seafood and less strontium-deficient meat like chicken? Or that they
weren't just eating WAY MORE plant carbs than your average person being
warriors and all? Maybe gladiators were like marathon runners and were always
carb-loading to pack calories. That would effectively multiply their plant
over meat intake by orders of magnitude. But just because marathon runners eat
way more grains than meat doesn't mean they are vegetarians.

~~~
tracker1
Agreed... given the training regimes, they were probably consuming more than
twice the amount of total food of people today. Which likely means they are
eating a lot of foods from barley, etc. That doesn't preclude the intake of
meat. Beyond that, it's 0.8-1.2g of protein are recommended _MINIMUM_ daily
intake to avoid diseases originating from protein deficiencies. At 220# that
means 80-120g protein as a minimum. That's a fair amount, and far more than
you're likely to get from vegetarian sources at the time alone.

There's also a minimum amount of essential fatty acids to consider... at the
time it's not like they had canola oil. So there was definitely animal
products in their diets. Revisionist theories in order to support a vegetarian
agenda are pretty annoying to me. A lot of it doesn't even pass a common sense
sniff test.

IIRC Barley + Lentils can give you a complete protein profile, and it's
possible that maybe 1/3-1/2 of their protein intake was from non-meat sources.
But I seriously doubt that even a significant minority were abstaining from
meat.

~~~
lambda
> Beyond that, it's 0.8-1.2g of protein are recommended MINIMUM daily intake
> to avoid diseases originating from protein deficiencies.

Eating below the minimum RDA of 0.8 g/kg is unlikely to cause diseases of
protein deficiency. The RDA minimum is fairly generous to allow for a certain
margin of error. Most of the studies cited by
[https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234922/](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK234922/)
indicate that 0.6 g/kg is likely a sufficient reference, and that a
recommendation of 0.75 g/kg allows for enough confidence to cover individual
variation. There was one study cited which found a 0.8 g/kg minimum, but most
of the rest found that lower values should be sufficient; it sounds like 0.8
was picked just to be on the safe side.

> At 220# that means 80-120g protein as a minimum. That's a fair amount, and
> far more than you're likely to get from vegetarian sources at the time
> alone.

I doubt that most Roman soldiers were 220#. The minimum height requirement was
5'5", and estimates are that the average height was 5'7".

> There's also a minimum amount of essential fatty acids to consider... at the
> time it's not like they had canola oil.

There's a certain vegetable oil that Rome and Italy are quite well known for.

I'm with you on being skeptical that they were vegetarian, but I think you're
overstating the requirements a little bit. I think it's fairly likely that
they ate a fairly low meat diet just due to the logistical difficulties of
obtaining fresh meat or carrying preserved meat.

~~~
dredmorbius
Olive oil is relevant:

 _The word "linoleic" derived from the Greek word linon (flax). Oleic means
"of, relating to, or derived from oil of olive" or "of or relating to oleic
acid" because saturating the omega-6 double bond produces oleic acid._

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linoleic_acid](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linoleic_acid)

------
strict9
Ethical and environmental debates aside, I chose to be a vegetarian 10 years
ago as a way of forcing myself to have diversity in what I consume. It was too
easy to fall into the trap of eating junk.

Giving up meat doesn't ensure health by any stretch, but it does force you to
consider and plan what you eat. It's worked out well for me.

aside: dietary preferences aren't an affront to someone else's lifestyle or
eating decisions. I don't judge meat eaters, I hope you won't judge those who
choose not to.

~~~
malikNF
I recently started preferring the vegetarian option over the non-veg one. And
what you say exactly is the same problem I am facing, having to come up with
what to eat. With meat its really easy to come up with what to eat, but
whenever I try to think of something vegetarian it gets hard.

Do you have any tips for someone starting to switch to a vegetarian diet?
Especially when it comes to variety and how I can do this a bit easier?

~~~
InGodsName
Look into Indian cooking. They've lots of delecious vegetarian cuisines.

~~~
magic_beans
This is certainly true, but Indian cooking is a commitment. You need to have
several spices on hand (turmeric, cumin seeds, mustard seed, both coriander
seed and powder, fenugreek, kashmiri chili, cinnamon bark, asafoetida, a
decent garam masala, fresh or frozen curry leaves); you will need to
understand how to grind these spices and then temper them in oil or ghee; you
will need to have a variety of legumes (split dried chickpeas, split dried
mung bean, red lentils); you will also need basmati rice and yogurt; you might
like to have tamarind and mango pickle; you will need the ability to
constantly mash together ginger, garlic, and fresh chili; you must have the
capacity to finely chop onions.

Indian food has subtleties, and it's not easy for the beginner.

~~~
r00fus
South indian food is super simple at the core level - heat oil, add mustard
seeds, when they pop, add asefoteda/fenugreek & curry / spices (I buy them at
a local Indian store - usu. curry + cayenne), then whatever veggies you want
(green beans or potatoes are nice)

~~~
maxxxxx
You forgot cumin seeds. Add some coconut milk and you get an excellent dish.

------
LoSboccacc
The real issue with meat was that it spoils easily on a military campaign and
it's hard to be cured on campsites. That's logistic 101, the nutritionist
angle is not needed and borderline revisionistic.

If you prefer citations instead of logic "The logistic of Roman army at war"
by Roth also gives out all the needed information and points to the
archeological evidence.

The provided food was what could be transported, while the foraged included
game and other meats, in moderations because of costs, spoiling, and other.

------
peterwwillis
The article says the higher levels of strontium in their bones is from
vegetables, but this source[1] says it's from consuming a tonic of plant ashes
after their fights. They're trying to then correlate this to vegetarianism,
but it's unrelated: they were artificially increasing their strontium-calcium
ratio.

It's pretty well documented that bread and porridge were the staple foods of
the Roman world[2]. You could mix anything into your porridge, from vegetables
and dried fruits to expensive things like olive oil, meat and fish. Garum, a
fish-based condiment, was put on everything.

Their higher carb intake is probably not because they were avoiding meat or
protein, but because they just _needed more calories_ , and carbs like grains
and beans are a cheap plentiful source of them. There were many different
kinds of gladiator from all walks of life, so it's insane to think at least
_some_ didn't eat meat. In fact, in the bone studies quoted, at least 2 of the
22 gladiators analyzed showed elevated consumption of meat.

If you're a slave gladiator and your owner is a cheap bastard, then your
dinner (like the rest of the poor people of Rome) will be mostly carbs. But if
you're a well-off gladiator, you probably ate meat when you felt like it.

[1]
[https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141020090006.h...](https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/10/141020090006.htm)
[2]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_cuisine](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ancient_Roman_cuisine)

~~~
Balgair
>Garum, a fish-based condiment, was put on everything.

Aside: It's always been so interesting to me to learn about the smells,
flavors, and real life of people back then. Garum is a perfect example of
this. The Romans really did put the stuff on _everything_. It's not just a
fish based condiment, it was a very integral part of Roman food and life. You
make it by fermenting fish in salt in the Mediterranean sun for a few _months_
and then go about straining the 'pulp' until it runs clear (there is a LOT
more to it than that, but thems the basics). Think something like fish sauce.
Modern versions are very savory and deep in flavor; super umami sauce. Such
things are, today, very foreign seeming.

[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLDlUGXJMFY](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLDlUGXJMFY)

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garum](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garum)

[https://www.amazon.com/Nettuno-Colatura-Anchovy-Sauce-
Campan...](https://www.amazon.com/Nettuno-Colatura-Anchovy-Sauce-
Campania/dp/B000CRIFGM) (a modern type of Garum)

------
downrightmike
A large part of being a soldier was that you had your own land that you could
produce enough food to survive and buy equipment go to war. War where you
could capture slaves to work your land and and riches to afford more land. The
idea of the state providing the means and equipment to send soldiers to war
only happened in the later era where men couldn't get land because of the
artistocrats owning it all and the state had to outfit them so they could go
to war.

~~~
z3phyr
This is true for The early and middle republic Rome, but after the Marian
Reforms, and especially during the Principate, Rome maintained a state
sponsored standing army, with standardized arms.

Of course after the crisis and eventual fall of Rome, it went back the older
way

------
diego
> previous reviews of the scientific literature have concluded that a well-
> planned and varied vegetarian diet can meet the needs of athletes, as it was
> for Roman gladiators or legionnaires.

What does this even mean? "Meet the needs" is relative to a certain quality of
life. Even if the gladiators or legionnaires were vegetarian (questionable
even with the paper's assumptions), who knows what their quality of life was.
Probably not acceptable to our standards.

------
nerpderp82
Vegetarian diets were easier to transport, so it could be a primarily
logistical issue. An Army moves on its stomach. Much of Napoleons speed over
land was due to how quickly and stably they could move food due to canning.

[https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/03/01/147751097/why-...](https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2012/03/01/147751097/why-
napoleon-offered-a-prize-for-inventing-canned-food)

------
imgabe
> Considering the modern diets of strength athletes, we should expect that
> gladiators had a high protein diet.

Why should we expect that? Gladiators were slaves. I would expect slave owners
to feed their slaves as cheaply as possible. What evidence is there that they
even considered diet to be a factor in athletic performance and that they
would try to maximize nutrition if they did?

------
empath75
Meat was expensive, grain was cheap.

------
alisson
A good resume from Nutrition Facts with a few other related papers:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9sLsCowaE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9sLsCowaE)

~~~
zefe563s
Ah yes Michael Greger the plant-based quack M.D

[https://i.imgur.com/Bl5Kq4w.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Bl5Kq4w.jpg)

------
spraak
Dr. Greger just released a video about this, too --
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9sLsCowaE](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2e9sLsCowaE)

------
marshray
The reasoning I heard was that since most gladiators were unlikely to make it
past the first few fights, why waste expensive food on them?

For celebrity gladiators I imagine the calculation was different.

------
bryanrasmussen
All the time, never any deviation? I understand it was expensive, so they
never got a treat for doing good?

------
21
> _The legionnaire 's daily ration consisted of 78% carbohydrates, mainly from
> wheat or barley_

While calling that "vegetarian" is technically correct, it's not really what
people understand by "vegetarian".

~~~
1024core
What, wheat and barley are not vegetarian?

~~~
umvi
GP's point was:

Maximus's diet consists of 78% cereals and grains and 22% meats. Is Maximus a
vegetarian?

~~~
simias
I don't understand, where does it say that the remaining 22% are from meats?

~~~
sdinsn
It also doesn't say that the remaining 22% aren't from meat.

------
msiyer
I am not surprised at all. I am from India. Most people I knew in my childhood
were vegetarians. I knew a few wrestlers who practiced in the "akhadas" of
Varanasi. Big guys, all "Hanuman" devotees, celibates (Brahmacharis) and
vegetarians. Sushil Kumar the wrestler, Olympics medal winner, is a
vegetarian: [https://www.petaindia.com/blog/sushil-
kumar/](https://www.petaindia.com/blog/sushil-kumar/)

EDIT: People are getting triggered left and right. Man, this is the truth in
the East. We were\are mostly vegetarians. Only recently did we start eating
western food. Only recently did we see people getting terribly obese and
chronically sick.

~~~
InGodsName
What's surprising?

You can get enough protein from milk based products and eggs.

One scoop (40g) whey contains 25-30g protein

~~~
msiyer
Eggs are not vegetarian.

~~~
warent
Eggs are not vegan, but they are vegetarian ("ovo-vegetarian")

~~~
msiyer
Please read the definitions clearly. How can an animal product be vegetarian?
Does it even make sense?

Ovo-vegetarianism = eggs + vegetarian food. This is certainly not eggs =
vegetarian.

~~~
marshray
Different diets are practiced by all manner of different communities in the US
for many different reasons. There are more possible variations than we could
ever agree upon terms for.

Some people consider honey non-vegetarian because it comes from animals. Some
don't eat the crackers shaped like goldfish. Some will eat dairy, but only if
it's known to be processed without certain animal-derived additives. I once
met someone who had a simple rule: he didn't eat anything with opaque eyelids.

(Personally, I just aim for 99.9% vegan and I don't worry if some sauce has a
tiny bit of fish dust in it.)

------
brahmwg
Isn't it more likely they were vegetarians not by choice but because they were
essentially slaves, being fed the cheapest food possible (grains, etc)?

Though I'm sure many will use this as evidence in favor of vegetarianism...
"Yeah but even the mighty gladiators were vegans!"

Anecdote storytime; I was actually born and raised into a vegetarian
household, and spent the first approx 22 years of my life as a vegetarian.
Then I switched to eating meat (really, just chicken and fish, maybe red meat
once a year) and for me I feel healthier this way. When eating meat I can just
eat less total volume of food to get the same amount of calories and nutrients
compared to fueling up on a plant based diet. I love running, hiking and rock
climbing, and nothing quite hits the spot like a nice protein rich chicken
sandwich after a day in the mountains. YMMV, but for me, for now, I think I
will continue with my consumption of animal flesh. I think to pull off the veg
diet you have to carefully measure and monitor things, you can't just omit
entire food groups from your diet and expect to be healthy. It's very naive
but many vegan and vegetarians think this way; As long as the food has that
VeganTM label, it must be good, why bother even checking the ingredients?

Tldr; ex-vegetarian since birth prefers chicken sandwiches for climber fuel

~~~
warent
> "It's very naive but many vegan and vegetarians think this way; As long as
> the food has that VeganTM label, it must be good, why bother even checking
> the ingredients?"

This has not been my experience. The vegetarians and vegans I meet are
typically very conscious of what they're putting into their bodies.

The evidence is that you can be a great climber (the world's greatest free-
solo climber Alex Honnold is a vegetarian.) or a gladiator without meat , and
the humans' insatiable meat consumption is ruining the environment even more
quickly than oil.

But I wish more people who ate meat had your disposition--at least have it in
moderation rather than every single kind of meat piled on a plate 3 times a
day 7 days a week which is basically the norm and sadly barely hyperbolic.

~~~
brahmwg
You're right, I'm sure there are alot of very health conscious vegetarians who
actively monitor their health. Perhaps that's actually more common. My
experience has been, perhaps contrarily, that the vegan/vegetarians I've met
think that by simply omitting meat they don't need to be concerned about
monitoring their health. Since that was my observation and was counter
intuitive I thought I'd share.

~~~
warent
I appreciate your experience. For what it's worth I didn't downvote you, but
my guess is it happened because your post comes across as mildly aggressive
toward veganism even though that probably wasn't your intention.

------
loourr
Bullshit. Maybe they were forced to be a vegetarian when they couldn't get
meat.

Also, it's not like they had modern vegetarian protein powders and supplements
which are most likely being used in their assessment of the modern vegetarian
athlete.

And it's super flawed reasoning to assume that because they have markers of
eating plant-based food, they therefore only ate plant-based food.

This just seems like vegetarian propaganda masquerading as science.

~~~
cmrdporcupine
It's not even new information -- it has been known by historians for decades
that most non-elite Romans had no ability to regularly consume meat and they
existed on a heavy carbohydrate diet supplemented by seafood when they could
get it.

It's one of the things remarked on by contemporary Romans about their Germanic
and Celtic foes -- that they ate so much meat, that they used 'disgusting'
animal fats (lard and butter) instead of olive oils in their cooking. And that
they were much taller. Likely because of higher meat and dairy consumption
over several generations.

The Roman agricultural economy could not support high meat consumption.

