Poll: Why Are You Interested In Rome?

[Julian]

I ticked a little bit of everything. Although to be honest, I don't really know. It began with me reading Greek philosophy as a youngster. That got me interested in Greek history. I remember well that I purposely held off from Roman history for a long time. I guess about 3 years. I knew that if ever I went in, I might never come out! Well, it seems I was right. I've been reading it for well over 20 years and love it as much today as I ever did. I have kind of moved on to Byzantium, but still keep in touch with Rome.

My problem is that I often can't keep track of the names as time passes. If somebody were to ask me a detailed question about Scipio, or the Claudian's, I'd have to look it up. Although I'd know where to find the answer. The entire empire interests me. I can read Josephus with as much enthusiasm as Michael Psellus or Ammianus. I love it all.

[Eckner]

Ive always really had an interest to Rome. Mostly the military and the way the empire established itself. I find it quite fantastic to read about all the events and famous battles.

[Gardapthia]

I am interested in every aspect of the Empire. As for why I am interested, that comes from my spiritual(it's not Christianity) beliefs .

[DanM]

I guess I wanted to look for the reasons the later Roman Empire fell and failed to really come back under Justinian. I suppose I want to learn enough about these reasons to imagine a real scenario where it could have survived the Islamic invasions of Syria, Egypt and the other North African provinces. That means a study of the economic, social and religous ascpects much more than the military ones.

 

The original islamic armies to hit Syria were more raiders than invaders, but the disaffection of the Syrian people towards Roman Imperial policy did much to enable the conquest of Syria and other Roman provinces possible. The monophysite church was part of the reason. The intense persecution of other heretical Christian movements in Syria was part of it. The corrupt Roman beaurocracy was part of it. The excessive taxation that fell disproportionately on the average men and women was part of it. The recent devestation resulting from the protracted wars with Persia was part of it. And I am sure there are several other components I have not even grasped yet that were also material to creating an Eastern Roman Empire that welcomed and facilitated an Islamic invasion. Also, for each of the general points I mention here, there are so many detailed questions under each one that are necissary to understanding what was happening.

 

Also I wanted to look at the state of the Western Roman Empire at the time of Justinian too. By now it had been carved up by a group of Germanic hosts, but they were just a thin military/leadership caste. The Roman church, governmental beaurocracy and economic system continued after the conquest. Most of these people still looked at themselves as Roman and the Emperor had great presitige. For a while, the Germanic kings would still pay lip service to the Roman Emperor and I believe this is telling as to the attitudes of the Roman populations under their rule.

[Maximus Caesar]

I voted for "Military Affairs." I was facinated how the Romans became masters of the Ancient World, how their brave legionnaries slashed through ranks of barbarians to establish law and order.

[paolo]

I picked the 'everything' button because we couldn't pick more than one. I enjoy learning about Italian history from Ancient times to the Renaissance. Oh yeah and the food is good too.

[Sulla]

I'm going for a little bit of everything. Though I am very interested in its history, poilitics, and military.

[TonyGee]

I picked Military, while most of Romes History interests me it is the Military aspect that got me hooked on the Empire and its people. The Only Subject i have no real interest in is the Religious aspect's.

[Fafnir]

I chose Military Affairs, its definately the reason why i believe the Romans were so great.

 

"Necessity knows no law except to conquer."

 

An off note, and i know im late to this, i happen to be a Neo-Pagan as well, though different from Zeke. I mentioned earlier that im part of the Asatru religion, which focuses on the Norse Gods. My screen name (Fafnir) is one of the less-famous Norse Gods.

 

Im not treated differently from Christians my age, though i have noticed that some of my friends' parents dont let me hang out with them much anymore.

[simplus]

I answered "History, Politics & famous people", but that's not really accurate. I'm interested in the political structures and laws - how they changed over time, to suit individual's ambitions and to react to new needs. And, then, how those piecemeal changes led to an entire change of government set-up - from res publica to empire.

 

So, I'm only interested in the people insofar as they made history and politics happen.

[Zeke]

Excelent Farnir I do not see many Astru' (Nordic Pagans) around anywhere...welcome to NURV Roman History. Or is is URVN? I always get confused.

 

Zeke

 

P.s Military intrested me alot when I first stepped aboard the history of the empire

[Ursus]

The poll is about what I expected.

 

If we combine the political and historical with the military (since there is no clear cut division between politicians and generals), then we have the overwhelming majority.

 

Which is fine. But I do find it a bit sad that the softer aspects of Roman culture - arts, literature, architecture, religion, law, government, daily life, - get lost in the clash of legions and politicos. If it hadn't been for Rome's achievements in these areas, I would consider it just another empire lost to the ashes of history.

[DanM]

Hey Ursus, I really have an interest in learning more about the "softer" aspects of Rome, but its not nearly so easy to find books on the subjects and its much, much harder to find anyone willing to talk about these subjects.

 

Right now I am on a 2 track study of the religous and economic aspects of latter Roman life. For the religous work, it seems a lot easier to find commentary on orthodox and gnostic forms of Christianity than it does to find anything that addresses the monophysites. Specifically their origins and their reasons for becoming so popular in Syria and Egypt.

 

Also, I am looking for evidence of anti-clerical movements in Syria and Egypt during this period. These areas seemed to be perpetually unhappy in the 4th -6th centuries and I am looking for a link between the intense economic exploitation of these regions and their rejection of an orthodoxy that seemed to be increasingly Hellenized.

 

For the economic side of things, I am in the middle of AMH Jones' 2nd volume. While its full of great information, it reads like a VCR manual so its taking a while to really digest it.

 

Any suggestions you have for reading about religous and economic life in the latter Roman Empire (4th to 6th centuries) would be greatly appreciated.

[Ursus]

I'd love to help but post-Constantine Rome is not my specialty. It falls a little outside my own academic interests. I did take a college course on early and eastern Christianity but it's been years.

 

 

A book with significant info on the Roman economy is: The Roman Empire: Economy, Society and Culture by Garnsey and Saller. You may find some good economic info there.

 

 

The website Beliefnet hosts a wide variety of Christian communities. Registration is free and I'm sure someone there might be able to help you.

[DanM]

Thats OK Ursus. Maybe you can help me on another question. I remember reading once that earlier Roman society had different ideas about virtue. Supposedly the upper classes held themselves to a higher standard than the masses (at least within their own minds) and this was somehow part of their creation of a sense of "otherness" that seperated them from the rest of the population.

 

According to a book I read, this involved all sorts of self denial with respect to sex as well as other things. It also seems to have played a role in the engenderment of civic duty. Things like giving large amounts of money to your city were ways of being acknowledged as being virtuous. Ditto for public service. Of course, public service often required large public gifts so its kinda hard to seperate the two items.

 

Maybe I am missing the point, but it almost seems like the upper classes were more comfortable with the lower classes not living a virtuous life. As such, schools of thought such as stocism and christianity with their democratizing influence on virtue would have been a disruption to the more conservative elements of early Roman society. It would have pierced the wall of otherness that the upper classes so carefully nurtured and possibly altered the upper class view of proper public behavior.

 

First question, do you think virtue as defined by early Romans was a way of defining otherness and, therefore, something that made public giving a public service a brass ring to reach for? Second, do you think there was an attempt by the upper classes to cultivate this otherness in other ways I am not describing here? Third, once other schools of thought brought the concept of a virtuous life to the masses, do you think this influenced upper class Roman attitudes towards things such as civic giving and service to the government?