The low life expectancy in ancient Rome was due to infant mortality and illness/disease caused by living in a congested area.The life expectancy in Nepal is 68.73 years. The life expectancy in ancient Rome was around 20-30 years. One cannot assume the physical fitness of ancients was anywhere close to the the physical fitness of third world contemporary people.
The lifetime of people who reached 10 years old was about 45-47 in the Roman empire (see top of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expec ... ite_ref-14 and note 14 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Life_expec ... te_note-14).
And many were reaching adult age because then the Roman empire population was increasing (1st century AD).
You forgot to mention that people in ancient civilizations were able, with primitive technology, to carve out and transport and place many huge stones to build pyramides, temples and other huge structures. That involved many people which were not weaklings.
According to your thinking about marathons, a good athlete running it in 50 AD would take about 17 hours (about 2.5 km/h)!!!In the 1896 Summer Olympics, Greek runners Kharilaos Vasilakos (3:18:00) and Ioannis Lavrentis (3:11:27) won the Marathon. In 2013, Wilson Kipsang, won the Berlin Marathon in 2:03.28. In 117 years the record was lowered by over an hour knocking off a full 1/3 of the time. Just as the physical abilities of athletes have improved drastically in the past hundred years, we must imagine that the physical abilities of average people have improved drastically over the last 2000 years.
It is well known the improvements of performance of athletes along the ages (more so last 300 years) is due to more, better and longer training (and drugs!!!).
Plus the fact that generally, in modern times, due to better nutrition, the size of the human body increased.
BTW, walking 30 km a day is not a marathon, but just a very moderate effort. Traveling by boat does not require any physical aptitude.
So again, your points about mortality and athletes performance are just digressions not relevant about Paul & helpers traveling in the 1st century AD.
We went through that before: between Corinth and Ephesus, in May, a bit more than 2 days of salary of a painter or carpenter, per person (according to Orbis, Diocletian's edict and inflation affecting the cost of traveling the same way than wine, wheat and silver content of the denarius).The trip is 1472 kilometers by road and 455 kilometers by sea.
1. Chloe's people travel 2944 kilomers by road or 910 kiometers by sea.
These people could be well-to-do with their own money or unemployed ones, financed by the Christian community for the trip.
No big deal. Not a huge expenditure. Multiply by 2 for the return trip (carrying the first letter of Paul to the Corinthians).
According to my research, based on the Pauline epistles (reconstructed for the Corinthians) & Acts http://historical-jesus.info/appp.html and Orbis and Diocletian's edict:
Paul's "first journey" (with Barnabas in southern Galatia, Cilicia And Cyprus): most likely financed by the church of Antioch (fairly important then according to Acts).
Paul's "second journey" (with Silas, then Timothy): From Antioch, up to Corinth, through Macedonia, again most likely financed by the church of Antioch, plus the converts made along the way.
From Corinth to Jerusalem (likely by sea): likely financed by the Corinthian converts. Cost: about 10 days of salary of a semi-skilled worker.
Paul's "third journey":
- From Jerusalem to Antioch: 9 days by boat. 6 days of daily salary of semi-skilled worker (likely financed by church of Antioch).
- From Antioch to Ephesus through northern Galatia (by land): likely with Paul own money. However he made converts in northern Galatia, who probably helped.
- More than 2 years later, from Ephesus to Corinth through Macedonia (and return likely direct): 8-9 days of daily salary of semi-skilled worker. Probably from Paul's own resources but he made converts in Ephesus and was getting money from the Philippians. Approximation if return trip done mostly by sea: 22 days of daily salary of semi-skilled worker.
- One year later, from Ephesus to Macedonia and return: Approximation by sea: 10 days of daily salary of semi-skilled worker.
Finally, 2 years later, the last trip: From Ephesus to Macedonia to Corinth to Jerusalem: Approximation by sea: 20 days of daily salary of semi-skilled worker.
The trips of Paul (not financed by the Church of Antioch) during the second & third journey (as related by Acts & epistles) by sea amount to about 71 days of daily salary of semi-skilled workers.
The cost of the overland trip through northern Galatia (with a stay there by a sick Paul) depends essentially on the cost of inns if done afoot (approximation: duration 46 days (in two parts)). BTW, according to Orbis, traveling by mule or carriage is not much faster than afoot.
Overall we have to add the food cost during these trips, or rather the added costs as compared to the ones when eating at home.
Anyway, that does not seem extravagant when those traveling costs were spread over 6 years.
Later I'll try to estimate the cost for traveling of Paul's helpers (Timothy and Titus and Chloe) for the "second & third journey". I'll leave out visitors to Paul (who might carry a Paul's letter on the way back) because not called (& financed) by Paul through his converts. Also I'll leave out companions of Paul during his last trip (Troas to Jerusalem) because Paul was very likely not financing them (their community or themselves did).
Cordially, Bernard