Salvete
(repost)
I was pondering over the aspects of several civilizations as a whole, and
while of course simplified, I think there are for each civilization a few
virtues and vices that more or less determine their character throughout
history. Of course everyone is free (and welcome) to disagree with me, but here is my little list of what made Rome great, and what made it not so
great.
Virtues...
Industria: Hard work. No one can deny that Romans were not a lazy people. Whereas the modern day Italians carry the burden of the "dolce far niente" (spelling?) cliché, as do most other romanic people (save for the Rumanians, perhaps), this cliché would most certainly be unbefitting of the Romans. With an almost comical industry they were able to take over and adapt the best of their surrounding civilizations, and I think if you look at their army alone, you see their tremendous talent for work. Some hellenists who have a dislike for Romans say that they were "mere farmers", but I think that should be no insult at all. The Romans' industry may be one of the things that kept the (western) empire alive for so long.
Simplicitas: Of course, purists will remark that ludicrous personages such
as Caligula, or excessive orgiastics such as Apicius can barely be noted for
their simplicity, most Romans (especially the aristocracy) supported the
virtue of simplicitas. Romans were always very interested in the practical
use of things, and were often no real theorizers. Their laws had a
considerable transparency, and most of them did really serve a public use.
This focus on practicality and business-like character even appears in their
religion. The "do-ut-des" ("I give [to you] for you would give [to me])
principle is a famous one, and while extremely reverent (more so than the
Greeks, for example), they approached their gods in an almost legal kind of manner.
Vices...
Superbia: One cannot think of the Roman Era without thinking of perhaps the most common human fault of all (with the exception of greed, perhaps), namely pride. Romans were so attached to their "dignitas" (dignity), that at given points, they felt trodden upon their soul too quickly. Most Roman emperors, especially in the later period, went down because of this very characteristic, which may have inspired Shakespeare when he wrote his many royal and imperial tragedies. Had they not been so focused on their image, the Roman civilisation might have surivived longer as a whole...
Crudelitas: Everyone will agree that Roman bloodsports are, although
spectacular, not something that is morally accepted today, or even accepted by other people living in the same age as the Romans. Some claim that their nobles were so cruel because of the high lead-concentrations in their drinking water, but I believe that this need for bloody mass spectacle has a less innocent origin. It's one of the most sadistic characteristics of man to see another man die while he is (supposed to be!) watching it. Perhaps it had to do with the need of the lower classes to feel powerful, and to decide over the fate of another person.
Any thoughts?
Scorpio