Not as excited about Ancient Greek history. Why?

[guy]

I admire the logic, rationalism, and the humanism of Ancient Greece. I acknowledge that much of Ancient Roman culture is derivative of its Ancient Greek and Hellenistic predecessors. I can

[M. Porcius Cato]

I feel exactly the same way! Philosophically, the Greeks (or at least the Athenians, or at least the Athenians of the 5th century or so) were more rational and more humanistic. Scientifically, they were light years ahead of their Roman counterparts. Greek sculpture and theatre were vastly better than anything created originally by Romans. Frankly, the Romans knew it too: that's why they sent their sons to Greece for an education. When it comes to history, however, Roman history wins hands down. Why?

 

It's not because Roman writers were better stylists. Greeks like Polybius and Plutarch were not inferior writers to Livy and Tacitus. The reason, I think, comes down to two aspects about the substance of Roman history.

 

First, the rise and fall of Roman civilization took place over a longer period of time, over a larger part of the world, and with a greater difference between beginning and floruit than anything in Greek history. This tends to make Roman history more epic in scale and thus more interesting. (For a humble and somewhat nerdy example, it's like comparing The Hobbit to Lord of the Rings.)

 

Second, and I think this is the key, Roman history (and Romans in general) were more concerned with individuals and individual conflicts. Thanks in part to its republican system and in part to the many enemies of Rome, the epic backdrop of Roman history recedes behind captivating personal struggles--Romulus versus Remus, Brutus versus Tarquin, Dentatus versus Pyrrhus, Scipio versus Hannibal, Cato versus Scipio, Sulla versus Marius, Cicero versus Catiline, Pompey versus Caesar versus Cato, Brutus and Cassius versus Caesar, Antony versus Cicero versus Octavian, etc. This emphasis on individuals, I think, isn't unique to Roman history either. Although the Romans normally produced inferior (original) sculpture, there was one genre where the Romans bested the Greeks--portraiture. Moreover, in the Latin literature, we have masterpieces on the private lives of Romans by Cicero and Suetonius.

 

I don't want to oversell this last difference between the Greeks and Romans, though. For example, we have the Lives of Eminent Philosophers by Diogenes Laertius, which is a thoroughly enjoyable romp through the bedrooms and kitchens of Epikourous, Aristotle, etc. Plutarch, of course, preserved many great Roman lives as well (though very often from Roman sources). But, my guess is that anyone who likes these Greek exceptions to the rule will be attracted to Roman history over Greek history.

 

Anyway, that's my theory.

[Ursus]

Is there anyone else passionate about Roman history, but not moved by Greek history? And why?

 

 

I admire the aesthetics of Hellenic culture; the mythology, the architecture, the sculpture, pottery, literature, drama, etc. I believe the Roman Empire and thus Western Civilization would have been much poorer without them.

 

But I often have trouble identifying with them. I have little kinship with the Spartans. The over intellectualization of Athenian and Ionian philosophers can also leave me cold. The Greek contempt for anything not Greek, and the internecine wars the petty city-states fought amongst themselves, also seems myopic at best.

 

Its a pity we don't know more about the cultures of other city-states besides Athens and Sparta. Both those cities were in some sense exceptional and not truly indicative of the rest of Greece. What if the commercialism of Corinth had triumphed over the other city-states, for instance?

[Pantagathus]

One problem that I see is that the most exciting eras of the ancient Greeks is the Archaic (late 9th - 5th Centuries BC) which is not very accessible to the lay reader. It was a time when Corinth was a leader for a long time along with the Euboeans (Chalcis & Eretria) who were at the vangaurd of Greek exploration and colonization only to be forgotten about by the time of Athen's 'flash in the pan' glory during the Classical era.

 

The history surrounding the Greeks of Magna Graecia, especially the tyrannical conflicts of Sicily; both between each other and in regards to the conflicts with Carthage is also quite captivating in my opinion.

 

Different strokes for different folks I guess...

[M. Porcius Cato]

One problem that I see is that the most exciting eras of the ancient Greeks is the Archaic (late 9th - 5th Centuries BC) which is not very accessible to the lay reader.

 

What are the primary literary sources for the history of this period?

[Pantagathus]

One problem that I see is that the most exciting eras of the ancient Greeks is the Archaic (late 9th - 5th Centuries BC) which is not very accessible to the lay reader.

What are the primary literary sources for the history of this period?

That's just the trick it's mainly anecdotal via Herodotus, Thucydides, Diodorus Siculus & Dionysius of Halicarnassus. The majority of our current understanding of the age comes from archaeology which can be seen in the fact that most modern (commercial) scholarly treatments of the Archaic are written by archaeological specialists of the era like J.N. Coldstream, A.M Snodgrass, John Boardman, etc...

 

I personally have had to do serious digging in JSTOR to suppliment my understanding which is why I say it's not accesable to the lay reader. It's a shame because to me the Archaic Greeks derserve much admiration as they come across as a very spirited and venerable people (much like the Republican Era Romans!).

[The Augusta]

OK, Guy - you've had the erudite replies from my esteemed colleagues here, but I will keep this very simple, and it will echo something that Cato said in his post. I love people. I love to study the men/women of history who actually sparkle as individuals - whether they be good or bad individuals is almost immaterial here. You used the word 'passionate' in your opening post and enquired why many of us were not as passionate about the Greeks as the Romans. I may be oversimplifying - and over-romanticising, but you've asked for our personal opinions - but I cannot quite equate the word 'passion' with anything Greek. Of course there are things to admire about their culture, but I find the shilly-shallying about of 5th century Athens quite irritating. There is only the odd colourful character - such as Alcibiades, and it would appear that anyone even attempting to show character or individualism in the Greek world was treated with disdain rather than lauded as a hero. Of course, I am not talking about the legendary heroes here - but even there: that sulky idiot Achilles, content to simmer in his tent due to hurt pride while his men died around him. Could you honestly imagine Scipio doing that?

 

The Greeks were thinkers and philosophers; the Romans were pragmatists and men of action. I know which I'd rather have. Rather like yourself, the Greeks only come alive for me with the 4th century and the rise of Macedon. But think of the wealth of Roman characters we have, regardless of our personal likes and dislikes (and I'll bet even Cato will agree with me here); from Scipio, Sulla, Cicero to Caesar, Augustus, Hadrian. These men not only stood out against the canvas of history but painted great swathes of it themselves with a very vivid brush! Rome - even in the Republic - always had time to applaud an individual. The Greeks, for much of their history, are grey in comparison.

 

But I daresay there'll be many who disagree.

[M. Porcius Cato]

Again, let's not toss the baby out with the bathwater here. Sokrates had a fascinating life story--a war hero, a philosopher, a political figure, and ultimately a martyr. Themistokles, Nikias, Alkibiades, Perikles--all great figures. The story about the courtesan Phryne was priceless. Nothing about the Greeks really leaves me "cold"; there's just not enough there there.

 

And I'll reiterate that I think that the Perikles funeral oration is the greatest speech of antiquity, perhaps the greatest speech in world history.

 

Basically, I'm enough of a Roman to love the Greeks, but just so much of a Roman that I love Romans most.

[guy]

The story about the courtesan Phryne was priceless.

 

On the subject of courtesans, I enjoy the relationship between the Athenian ruler Pericles and his mistress Aspasia. (Don

[Nephele]

If there were more stories like those of Aspasia and Phryne, I would become an Ancient Greek fan.

 

If that's all it takes to make you an ancient Greek fan, then along with Aspasia and Phryne you may want to consider a *cough* closer "examination" of the following noteworthy courtesans: Archeanassa, Lais of Corinth, Lais of Hyccara, Neaira, Tha

[Gladius Hispaniensis]

Salve

Ancient Greek history is arguably less well documented than Ancient Roman history. The Mycenean period in particular needs much elucidation. This might be one reason why Rome seems to exercise a greater fascination.

Speaking for myself, I was interested in history from the age of 8 and it was Roman history that got me started. I suppose a lot of it had to do with deriving a vicarious pleasure out of Rome's military might after reading about the campaigns of Caesar, Agricola, etc.

I must admit that that now, reading Greek history is like a breath of fresh air after all the sickening brutalities committed by the Romans in their illustrious career. The Peloponnesian War seems to have been an exception, but reading through the pages of Greek history, what strikes me is the relative humanism of the Greeks in dealing with their opponents, relative to their Roman neighbours that is. Once again there are exceptions like the sack of Tyre and Melos, but one has to admit that after the nauseating Gladiatorial combats, genocide of entire populations, sickening treatment of prisoners of war, bestial tortures, and the casual brutality of the Palace assassinations, all a hallmark of Roman history, reading the history of the Greeks is rather refreshing.

[docoflove1974]

For me, there is no real lack of interest in the Greeks. Because my academic endeavors are centered around the Romans (and their descendants), I'm more interested in Roman history/culture/literature/etc. But as I grow in my constant education, I want to explore Indo-European linguistics, which means I'll have to be knowledgeable in Greek and the ancient Greek cultures.

[ASCLEPIADES]

If there were more stories like those of Aspasia and Phryne, I would become an Ancient Greek fan.

 

If that's all it takes to make you an ancient Greek fan, then along with Aspasia and Phryne you may want to consider a *cough* closer "examination" of the following noteworthy courtesans: Archeanassa, Lais of Corinth, Lais of Hyccara, Neaira, Tha

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

It's not that I don't like Greek history or wouldn't like to learn more about it, the simple fact is that I just don't have the time learn another history as well as Rome's, every spare moment I get (which believe me, there aren't that many when you've got a couple of young kids pulling on your shirt every two minutes!) I'm reading up and trying to improve my knowledge of Ancient Rome and I've got a hell of a long way to go before I could even begin think myself knowledgeable enough about this subject to even consider learning another.

 

There's just so much to learn about ancient Rome, there's the larger than life characters dotted through out Rome's history, there's the military, political, cultural history of the Romans that I could spend the rest of my life reading and learning about this amazing race of people that were hugely responsible for creating the world that we live in today........and to be honest I probably will and I'll love every minute of it too!

 

So sorry Socrates, Aristotle, Plato, Alexander and the rest, the little bit of available head space that I have left is already reserved!

[M. Porcius Cato]

what strikes me is the relative humanism of the Greeks in dealing with their opponents, relative to their Roman neighbours that is. Once again there are exceptions like the sack of Tyre and Melos, but one has to admit that after the nauseating Gladiatorial combats, genocide of entire populations, sickening treatment of prisoners of war, bestial tortures, and the casual brutality of the Palace assassinations, all a hallmark of Roman history, reading the history of the Greeks is rather refreshing.

 

Fair point. Do recall, however, that the mortality rate of the gladiatorial combats was roughly 10%, making it roughly safer than childbirth.