NordWithaSword
NordWithaSword t1_ixlh92m wrote
Reply to comment by aaronupright in Might be a stupid question, but I've been watching a lot of stuff regarding the Spartan and Persians recently and I always wondered how would these people have communicated back then? Were there specific scholars in both countries that were trained in various languages? by herewego199209
Realistically both had plenty of people fluent in the language of the other, because they were neighbouring peoples with trade relations. Most people in the ancient world were multilingual and some languages were established as the main one for regional trade. For example during the Roman empire, any Roman officer/educated person spoke Latin and Greek, and all the peoples under them spoke their native language plus Latin or Greek.
NordWithaSword t1_ir4ks8o wrote
Reply to comment by TwoPercentTokes in Hercules statue, approximately 2,000 years old, discovered in Greece - The Jerusalem Post by DRKILLM0NGER
2nd century AD was Peak empire, we're talking Trajan/Hadrian times.
NordWithaSword t1_ixpqvrg wrote
Reply to Why Isn’t the New Testament in Latin? by ItaloSvevo111
Basically the answer is very simple: Rome was not a monolingual empire, even at state level. Learned people in rome, politicians, nobles, scholars, even high ranking army officers would be educated to speak both Latin and Greek. The entire eastern mediterranean had started using greek as a lingua franca after Alexander's conquests, and Greek also happened to be a "prestige language" among the Roman elite, so they never made any effort to dislodge or replace it. They simply adopted it as the secondary state language, and thus Greek continued it's dominance in the east.
As for why the Romans were so accepting of Greek to begin with, the answer to that is also fairly simple: The greeks colonized southern Italy long before Rome emerged as a major power, and thus they'd been in constant contact with the Greek language and culture since they were a tiny city state.