Hellenization Of Rome

[M. Porcius Cato]

One must look at it from Cato the Censor's point of view, not with the benefit of the big picture as we have.

Why not look at it from both points of view--from Cato's POV and from hindsight?

 

Even from hindsight, I don't see how the "Dionysian" elements of Greek culture harmed Rome. Her acquired taste for luxury spurred her to acquire more wealth--and that's a good thing!

[Pantagathus]

Her acquired taste for luxury spurred her to acquire more wealth--and that's a good thing!

 

That's just it, it all depends on the point of view.

[Rameses the Great]

Even from hindsight, I don't see how the "Dionysian" elements of Greek culture harmed Rome. Her acquired taste for luxury spurred her to acquire more wealth--and that's a good thing!

 

I'm sure the middle and lower class Romans saw it as 'corrupt.' I think Hellenism in my point of view, spurred an evolution of art and literature. Of course, Rome hated Greece if you look at other areas effected by Hellenism like Egypt it was said to be a marvelous thing.

 

Ursus you hit it right on the money, it depends on the way, period, and context it was used in. In my opinion however, how would the Roman government operate? Also Roman satire developed from Greek language and culture. The Romans were tired of beeing pushed around so they made Geece a mortal enemy, and called their ways corrupt.

 

Many say, 'Rome would have been better without the Greeks.' When in actuality it is 'Rome would not have been what it was without the Greeks.'

[Julia C]

A greater taste for wealth also means a greater desire for it at the expense of other things.

[M. Porcius Cato]

I'm sure the middle and lower class Romans saw it as 'corrupt.'

 

On what evidence is your certainty predicated? The middle and lower classes of Cato's day left no record of their opinions, so by what means do you divine their attitudes toward Hellenization?

 

[quote name='Julia C

Edited May 1, 2006 by M. Porcius Cato

[Rameses the Great]

On what evidence is your certainty predicated? The middle and lower classes of Cato's day left no record of their opinions, so by what means do you divine their attitudes toward Hellenization?

 

Did you know if they had knowledge of how Hellenization worked at that time? Only the upper class did. the uneducated class hated it, because they saw Greece as a tyrant. They felt that him excepting Greek ways as accepting Greek values which the middle and lower class would viemantly attest to. The upper calss had an appreciation of Greek art and theater. The middle class did not like the luxury at which the upper class was enjoying therefore they had deemed Hellenizm as a bad thing.

 

Thats why you see the future leaders as not taking on Cato's characteristics. That is how Rome as you think today tried to move away from Hellenism.

[Ursus]

Even from hindsight, I don't see how the "Dionysian" elements of Greek culture harmed Rome. Her acquired taste for luxury spurred her to acquire more wealth--and that's a good thing!

 

 

Well, for one thing, the need for unfettered individual mystical experience and personal salvation led to a plethora of private religious cults whose interests were not synonymous with the State, and whose values in some instances were completely incompatible to the State. To the degree one identifies and honors the Roman State, this was not a good thing. 'Tis why Augustus and Tiberius frowned on some of the things pouring out of the East.

[M. Porcius Cato]

On what evidence is your certainty predicated? The middle and lower classes of Cato's day left no record of their opinions, so by what means do you divine their attitudes toward Hellenization?

 

Did you know if they had knowledge of how Hellenization worked at that time? Only the upper class did. the uneducated class hated it, because they saw Greece as a tyrant.

 

Again, you make assertions without any supporting evidence at all--only further arbitrary assertions. Do you have any evidence or not?

[M. Porcius Cato]

[Well, for one thing, the need for unfettered individual mystical experience and personal salvation led to a plethora of private religious cults whose interests were not synonymous with the State, and whose values in some instances were completely incompatible to the State. To the degree one identifies and honors the Roman State, this was not a good thing. 'Tis why Augustus and Tiberius frowned on some of the things pouring out of the East.

 

The Roman people--not the shrines of old men--provided the source of Roman power. And Romans were historically very accommodating to Hellenic religion without any undermining of the Roman state. Indeed, the very diversity of Roman religious practices made Rome the cosmopolitan city that it was and allowed her to play host to business interests around the whole Mediterranean and thus to more easily govern foreign territories.

 

Augustus and Tiberius, like Cato the Elder, may have frowned on some of the things pouring out of "the East", but this was simply small-town snobbery. Whether mystical old women in Rome muttered prayers to Bona Dea, Minerva, or Mithras in no way affects whether they bless the shields of their sons.

 

Moreover, even the "Dionysian" elements of Greek society appear rather benign. So universal was this attitude in Rome that Cicero, in his defense of Archias, could list the import of Greek mysteries alongside all the other goods that came from Greece.

[Rameses the Great]

Again, you make assertions without any supporting evidence at all--only further arbitrary assertions. Do you have any evidence or not?

 

M Porcius Cato I just stated it. It was well documented that the upper class society respected Hellenism and the middle class did not. I have this book made by Erich Gruen and it states that upper class Romans viewed it differently than middle class and peasentry. The rich Romans who had connections to the Greek city states embraced the culture. The middle class thought that the Greeks treated them like 'barbarians.' You should probably read the book, if you are really interested on the topic.

[Skarr]

Most religions evolved as a result of humans' inability to explain the mysteries of life, especially their own mortality. Humans are the only species to become conscious of their own mortality and were probably the first to honor the dead and commemorate their lives in some form, through tombs, monuments or simple ritual that eased the pain, the grief and the suffering by those who had lost someone.

 

From these simple rites evolved the need for a greater understanding of the world and to a certain extent, Greek philosophy is based on direct observation. Not so empirical as science but nevertheless, it attempts to look at the natural world and environment around us and seeks to explain some of the mystery behind it. The more mystical aspects in Greek religion were probably the close relationships that the Greeks shared with the Persians and there was a cultural and religious exchange of sorts with some form of Persian beliefs also finding its way into Greek culture. For example, there were temples dedicated to the goddess Anahita, a Persian deity, that were found in Greece. There is also the mystery of prediction, the priestess of Apollo at Delphi, who was sought after by not only Greeks but also the Romans and other cultures.

 

I think Christianity, being a state sponsored creation, sought to homogenize hundreds of other religions and faiths, adopting rituals from Mithraic practices and other religions of the time. I would tend to agree with some posters that philosophical aspects found in Greek philosophy must have been borrowed and then morphed to fit the overall emphasis that Christianity has on the holy trinity and the concept of redemption, purging of one's sins and other purificatory rituals, which were always associated with some form of extreme ascetiscm or violence (self flagellation, starvation and so on - more in keeping with the Greek hermits, who pursued similar ascetic lives but with vastly different motives and goals).

 

For obvious reasons, the "one size fits all" approach does not work well with either religion or philosophy and what we have today is a hodge podge of beliefs that baffle the mind and lead to more confusion than anything else. One god, one human being, what could be simpler than that, one may well ask ? However, what religion has become today is not one human being with his or her personal "God" but a charter membership with a club that dictates how you should think and what you should believe in as also what rituals need to be performed to ward off "the evil eye", or promote good health, long life, good luck, etc.

 

I think we are still gripped by the fear of the unknown and as long as people fear or want / desire something badly enough, we will be stuck with a variety of beliefs and will have to muddle our way through.

[M. Porcius Cato]

M Porcius Cato I just stated it. It was well documented that the upper class society respected Hellenism and the middle class did not.

No--we have evidence of some successful men respecting Hellenism, and we have no evidence about the attitudes of the 'middle class'.

 

I have this book made by Erich Gruen and it states that upper class Romans viewed it differently than middle class and peasentry. The rich Romans who had connections to the Greek city states embraced the culture. The middle class thought that the Greeks treated them like 'barbarians.' You should probably read the book, if you are really interested on the topic.

 

Well, this is a start towards presenting evidence I guess. What is Gruen's evidence?

[Rameses the Great]

Well, this is a start towards presenting evidence I guess. What is Gruen's evidence?

 

He showed the difference between the perception of Hellenenizm in Cato's time. You should read it, it is very interesting.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Well, this is a start towards presenting evidence I guess. What is Gruen's evidence?

 

He showed the difference between the perception of Hellenenizm in Cato's time. You should read it, it is very interesting.

 

What is the book? Do you have any recollection of how Gruen established that there was a difference in the perception of Greek culture at the time of Cato?

[Rameses the Great]

Yes, it was based on Cato's strong Hellenezation beliefs. Erich Gruen compares the perception of the upper class to the lower class.

 

Just to clarify something, Hellenization is not about rich and educated people. It is the culture the Greeks created and were embroidered in.