Why Did Romans Worship Gods?

[Lo-Lo]

I think another big part of it is that many of the Western religions (Christianity, but the different branches) are more control oriented. While the Roman religion was to "please the Gods and keep Rome safe and happy and victorious" the church at least in the earlier times wanted control. The control that they tried to achieve over society is what led them to create such strict behavioral codes (which seem to have stuck somewhat).

 

A good point, no doubt partly a reaction against earlier persecutions and a way of proving the 'truth' of their beliefs?

[Lost_Warrior]

Quite possibly. Also they had a nifty way of being able to control the whole government...so of course they stuck with it.

[Lex]

I just noticed that I posted my last topic in the wrong thread. Sorry about that, it was supposed to go in the topic dealing with the question whether Christianity had weakened the Roman Empire.

[Viggen]

Did the Romans worship the Gods out of fear or for respect from other Romans. I think this is a good issue of debate. This could explain a lot. I have read in some sources they openly blasphemied, does this show fear (NO!!!!!!!!) ?

 

Archaic Roman "mythology", at least concerning the gods, was made up not of narratives, but rather of interlocking and complex interrelations between and among gods and humans. Gods were not personified, unlike in Ancient Greece. Romans also believed that every person, place or thing had their own genius (such as "Lares Familiares" - the family guardian spirits). Therefore the early Roman cult could be described as polydemonism instead of polytheism.

 

via Wikipedia

[Ursus]

The "polydemonism" of archaic Rome might be overstated. They always honored major gods like Jupiter and Mars. Though there is no denying that Roman Religion has a lot of shadowy and ill-defined spirits that exist alongside those deities.

[HISTORICUS]

Hello

I'm not sure this forum is still going, but I will add my two cents anyway.

In order to understand the ancient Greeks and Roman one need only go to places that have not experience the monotheistic repression. A good example is Japan. Japan's original religion, Shinto, is very similar to the polytheistic religions of the Ancient World. Shinto believe in the existence of a multitude of divinities called Kami. Some Kami are elemental, for example trees (similar to the fauns, satyrs and other divinities of the forests), other are more complex (rivers, mountains, etc.), some have independant existence and assume a variety of shapes (O-Inari-San: the faxes, etc.) and lastly some assume a national importance (Japan, the Emperor). Some of these deities just exist, and can give you something if you simply offer them something they want (sacrifices), other require that you follow a moral code.

What's bewildering to the organized religious mind of someone who grew up in a monotheistic society is that there's no order in this, no authority as to which mythological story is right or wrong, no better or worse, just to each his or her own. Of course, one would not be wise to insult the local or national deity in its locality, so don't go and denigrate Japan in a Shinto shrine anymore than curse Jupiter at the Forum Romanum, but that's not by intolerance, simply by respect of the gods.

The result is a remarkable acceptance of all things spiritual, whether they make sense or not, and a complete lack of religious intolerance. In this matter, a Japanese might celebrate Christman, then offer a prayer to his local Kami at the Shinto shrine and then bury his or her relative in a Buddhist ceremony. Very infuriating to the monotheists, of course. Try to get Bin Laden, or the Pope, to pray at the altar of Jupiter, Ammon Ra or offering sacrifices to the spirits of the forest...

[Skarr]

Here is my 2 c.. on why the Romans worshipped various gods (of course, this is before all Romans worshipped only one God under Christianity)

 

The Romans, let us not forget, were made of various tribes that settled on some of the seven hills and I would presume that they already had some 'gods' that they worshipped at the time.

 

Under Numa Pompilius, one of Rome's greatest kings, the worship of gods was considered natural as it was believed that the gods (who were many and each of whom controlled a specific aspect of nature) were interested in the welfare of man and that they showed their interest through signs.

 

The Romans were practical and developed their auspices (or reading of signs) based on this simple belief and I think they did not really intend to know what the gods specifically thought or even what they were foretelling. It was not a fortune telling kind of worship but a more practical kind of worship where the Romans would look for a favorable sign from 'above', as it were, by looking at bird flight (augury) or haruspicy (an Etruscan custom, where they would examine the liver of a sacrificial animal - color, markings, condition, etc.) or other signs to give them a simple 'yes' or 'no' answer. If birds flew in the right direction, it was auspicious and the omens were good. I think the Romans knew that they could not influence the gods directly, all they could do was to look for signs that would help decide what to do for major events in their lives - marriage, birth of a child, undertaking a new business and so on.

 

Interestingly enough, Numa did not anthromorphize the gods by giving them human faces or attributes. His temples were simple and open to the sky. An altar would be placed in an open space and that was enough.

 

I think the specific images and other gods were adopted later on, as Romans became more familiar with Greek culture and began their process of 'romanizing' their Gods. They admired the Greeks for their art, their culture and so many other things - why not the gods ?

[Tytonidae Alba]

I think the Romans worshiped gods because they could blame them if a war was lost, or the crops failed to grow. They also instilled a sense of hope that if you pleased them they would bless and protect you.

[Tiberius Sylvestius]

Roman religion was a 'bartering' religion. Per say.

 

The best way to think of it (this is a well used example amongst modern polytheists);

 

Deity (whichever one you prefer to follow) = Human

Human follower of that deity = Cat

 

 

Observe the relationship between cats and humans. Cats can see things in their lower field of vision that humans can miss (i.e mice) and thus cats can be of use to humans. Humans can also take great pleasure and be proud of having a loyal and devoted pet. So humans get something out of the bargin.

 

Humans are alot taller than cats and can see father afield and of course they feed the cats, sure the cat could feed itself if it must but it's easier to have someone bring it you.

 

 

Between cat and human there is a benefitial relationship on both sides. Watch what happens if the human doesn't feed the cat though... it'll go elsewhere and switch allegiences.

 

 

Well the same relationship works between humans and gods, humans can inform gods of things they might have missed (this requires the belief that gods are not omniscient or omnipotent as monotheistic traditions teach). And gods can help humans by letting them arrive where they have to be in a better fashion. As gods can see further ahead they can help followers overcome obstacles that they cannot see until they are almost on them. If the human keeps their side of the bargin then the gods will generally keep theirs. If the god decides not to bother then the follower will dissassociate themselves from that god and go and find another one.

 

So why did the Romans follow their religion? Out of fear? Perhaps... perhaps it was also due to things they did not understand, science was not as advanced as it is today and religion is a useful tool to explain things.

 

Butin this modern cynical world it is important to realise that many people at the time followed the religion because they believed in it, it brought them comfort and it worked.

 

Boring night in, ask Bacchus to relieve you of the bore an hour or two later someone knocks at the door telling you they're throwing a party? Mere coincidence, maybe, but who are you to argue?

[Favonius Cornelius]

One of my views on all this can be wisely summed up by another man:

 

"In my opinion, the area in which the Roman constitution is most conspicuously superior is their concept of the gods. It seems to me that the very thing that is a matter of reproach among other peoples is what holds the Roman state togeather: I mean deisidaimonia.

 

Religious matters are dramatized and introduced into their public and private life to such an extent that nothing could exceed them in importance. Many people may find this amazing. My own opinion is that they have adopted these practices for the sake of the common people. For if you could form a state entirely from wise men, this approach perhaps would not have been necessary. But since every mass of people is fickle, and full of lawless desires, irrational passion, and violent anger, its is essential that they be controlled by invisible terrors and suchlike pagentry."

 

--Polybius

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

I simply believe the quintessential idea of what man can't physically explain in nature, man out of natural curiosity tries to explain it through human intuition and perception. Also when a culture is deeply influenced by the culture of its conquerers, the people simply try to adapt to the main beliefs. Who knows, what if the Etruscans never had any kind of relations with Rome. What significance would religion have in Roman culture.

In a political point of view, worshipping the ideas and beliefs of a god that is a common consensus among the Romans may help the ambitions person lay claim to be the peoples patron because he might say that he is an descendant or that it was the mandate of the gods.

[M. Porcius Cato]

The best way to think of it (this is a well used example amongst modern polytheists);

Deity (whichever one you prefer to follow) = Human

Human follower of that deity = Cat

Observe the relationship between cats and humans. Cats can see things in their lower field of vision that humans can miss (i.e mice) and thus cats can be of use to humans. Humans can also take great pleasure and be proud of having a loyal and devoted pet. So humans get something out of the bargin.

 

This is a cute analogy. Still, cats don't burn other cats at the scratching post for being heretics!