Greek influence on Roman culture

[CiceroD]

In Josiah Ober's essay "Conquest Denied, the premature death of Alexander the Great"

 

The author puts forward that without trade contact with a hellenized world, Rome wouldnt have adopted nearly so many Greek conventions.

 

Then again one shouldnt entirely accept conterfactual history as Gospel.

[Pertinax]

The column is a device giving a "sacred" element to the space that it defines (or indicating a sacred/public defined space( where the interaction is "controlled and overseen " by religious "weight")-in terms of social intercourse).The adoption of the greek motif (even as a an artifice-columns in semi relief for example ) in domestic architecture at Pompeii indicates a desire to make a particular space "dignified"

 

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Society-Pompeii-He...8&s=gateway

 

refers accordingly. So we could take the position that the Romans were keen to use the idea of greek sacredness of a locality by happily assimilating a greek "device" (the column) to indicate sophistication and gravity.

 

In Josiah Ober's essay "Conquest Denied, the premature death of Alexander the Great"

 

The author puts forward that without trade contact with a hellenized world, Rome wouldnt have adopted nearly so many Greek conventions.

 

Then again one shouldnt entirely accept conterfactual history as Gospel.

and as CD says-perhaps these symbols would not have had common currency without constant familiarity, but a culture so keen on acculturation just cant keep its hands off other peoples "motifs!"

[CiceroD]

"Conquest Denied" is a good essay. Ober maintains that with the lack of a hellenistic world Rome would have picked up cultural aspects from an undefeated Persian Emipire.

 

Hmm a temple to Ahuru-Mazda in the forum?

 

what do you guys think?

[Pertinax]

"Conquest Denied" is a good essay. Ober maintains that with the lack of a hellenistic world Rome would have picked up cultural aspects from an undefeated Persian Emipire.

 

Hmm a temple to Ahuru-Mazda in the forum?

 

what do you guys think?

 

Why not? The cultural borrowings of Rome as regards religious and architectural themes (with a deep internal legitamacy in their indigenous settings ) can reasonably be described as "catholic" , could we not see an alternative history with other themes and ideas readily adopted? I venture to suggest that neither the trappings of an "enemy" culture nor ideas of obscure origin would be discarded- the main legitimizing strand would be the cultural weight of a symbol in its original locale.

Perhaps Rome would have arrived at a dualistic religious world view some way ahead of Christianity (Zurvan -Ahriman) .

[Maladict]

So basically it was more or less the close proximity of Greece to Rome that allowed the Greeks to have an impact on Roman culture?

 

I was reading that some of the influence may have been a result of Romans having Greek slaves.

 

Don't forget that Southern Italy was, for all intents and purposes, Greek territory. They, especially the traders and craftsmen, mized easily and freely with the Etrurians and Latins to the north.

But also remember that it was not a one-way process. The Greeks were not superior, even though some Romans seemed to feel that way.

[CiceroD]

While there were Greek colonies in sothern Italy, hence Magna Graecia, they would have much less to give to Rome without a Hellenistic wolrd behind them.

 

sure Greece would still exist. But Greek wouldn't be the lingua franca of the ancient world

 

but Egypt and Asia Minor would still be under the control of Persepolis.

[Maladict]

While there were Greek colonies in sothern Italy, hence Magna Graecia, they would have much less to give to Rome without a Hellenistic wolrd behind them.

 

sure Greece would still exist. But Greek wouldn't be the lingua franca of the ancient world

 

but Egypt and Asia Minor would still be under the control of Persepolis.

 

Actually I was responding to the original question, not the 'what if' scenario.

[Enigma]

So trade (which I suppose would be related to proximity) is more or less the main reason why Greek culture was able to rub off on the Romans?

[FLavius Valerius Constantinus]

What I took Attic Greek and Latin, let's just say that was more than enough proof that the Greeks and Romans had just about the same makeup in language and grammar.

[docoflove1974]

What I took Attic Greek and Latin, let's just say that was more than enough proof that the Greeks and Romans had just about the same makeup in language and grammar.

 

Well, they're both (relatively) close-descendants of Proto-Indo-European. When I took my first Indo-European course, we would line up the lexicon and the grammars of Latin (Old Latin when possible), Ancient Greek, Hittite, Sanskrit, Avestan, as well as reconstructions of Old Celtic and Old Germanic...and it was clear that these were related languages. Indeed, a good read of Carl Darling Buck will show that.

 

My dad taught me a good lesson in life: follow the money, and you'll follow the behavior of humankind. We humans always act so as to obtain 'the money'--be it coinage, trade, or anything in between. Trade makes the world go 'round. Two groups of people who trade goods also trade ideas...from there anything is possible. And given the great proximity of the two territories, on top of the naval capabilities and trade agreements with other cultures...of course there was a swapping of ideas! And being that, at the time, the Greek culture and civilization was well-established and the Roman culture/civilization was only starting, the Romans would want to learn what they could from the Greeks, and felt that they could improve upon it. At least, that's how I tend to observe human behavior...I have no factual data to back this up.

[Maladict]

So trade (which I suppose would be related to proximity) is more or less the main reason why Greek culture was able to rub off on the Romans?

 

I'd say it was the catalyst, yes.

[gavinator15]

I was also curious if there was a particular aspect of Roman culture that the Greeks had the most influence on?

 

Mainly the language, Gods, and some governing methods.

 

Well, with regard to language, be careful here. Yes there were Greek words which entered the Latin language, but I don't know of any examples where the Greek grammar entered into the Latin grammar. They are related Indo-European languages, to be sure, but I don't believe that the grammar of one influenced the other.

 

 

Actually, during the Roman expansion the Greeks had a colossal impact on Roman culture. They acquired from Greece knowledge of scientific thought, philosophy, medicine, and geography. Roman writers and orators used Greek history, poetry, drama and oratory as models. Wealthy Romans retained Greek tutors, poets, and philosopher in their households and sent their sons to Athens to study. By the late Republic, educated Romans could speak and read Greek. They influenced much more than languae, gods and some governing methods. They highly influenced art, architecture and especially the influence of Stoicism on the development of Roman law. Theatre also was a big one, originating in Greece; Roman playwrights adopted Greek theatre styles and were influenced by Greek playwrights. So much that roman playwrights started off "remaking" original plays by Greeks. Any ways I'm not undermining your thoughts, just some of my own to add on.

[Ursus]

So trade (which I suppose would be related to proximity) is more or less the main reason why Greek culture was able to rub off on the Romans?

 

I'd say it was the catalyst, yes.

 

 

Oh, definitely. In fact, the official Roman pantheon expanded as gods were introduced by Greek traders from the South. Herakles the strong was a protector of traders, and came to Rome (as Hercules) by Greek traders. Castor and Pollux were protectors of seamen and horsemen and came to Rome through travellers from Great Greece. Minerva, the patron of skilled labor, was introduced by Etruscans, but the Etruscans themselves had probably modeled her on the Greek Athena. Then came Tyche (Latin: fortuna). Mercury and Neptune were recognized by the state to protect its trading interests on land and sea, respectively. And so on, etc, until Apollo came in under his own name.