Download Flora Sagers

Flo Sagers
Evans
‘Nothing is so productive of greatness of mind as the power to examine
methodically and honestly all the things that befall us in life’ (Marcus Aurelius
from ‘Meditations’). In your opinion, could a Greek ever have written this, or is
it an essentially Roman statement?
This quotation comes from a Roman soldier, writing, as the literal translation of the
book suggests, 'To himself’. It gives a valuable insight into the thoughts, values and
beliefs of a Roman soldier, and if we are to believe R. H. Barrow, also into the
mindset of the Roman civilization itself.
Barrow argues in his book, The Romans that the Roman mind was that of the ‘farmersoldier’ 1thus making this soldier’s Meditations an invaluable piece of classical
scholarship. Barrow believes the Roman mind is that of this farmer-soldier hybrid due
to the importance of both within Roman society; the soldier as the conqueror of
distant lands who works for the glory of Rome; the farmer as the cultivator of this
land, and also because of their essential similarities. Both the farmer and the soldier
know the value of routine, discipline and self-reliance, and there is an ‘incalculable
element2’ involved in both ways of life, the weather, in the case of the farmer, and
luck, in the case of the soldier. The most important similarity between the two is they
both believe that ‘knowledge born of experience is worth more than speculative
theory.3’ Indeed, I will also suggest that the Roman civilization can be defined by the
philosophical term ‘a posteriori’ (knowledge gained by experience). In contrast,
Ancient Greece, the stomping ground of the philosopher heavyweights, theoretical
mathematicians and tragedians, places a stronger emphasis on knowledge beyond
empirical evidence, and based upon logic, intellectual process and reasoning. Thus,
the title quotation does indeed seem to be an essentially Roman statement. However,
we must be careful not to oversimplify these two complex civilizations, and there are,
of course, many exceptions to this rule.
The grammar of Ancient Greek is full of exceptions to the rules, and the language
itself seems to lend itself to discussions of the metaphysical and abstract ideas due to
its rich vocabulary and expressive compounds. Where Latin is majestic, brief and
generally observant of its grammatical rules, Greek is expressive, well sounding, and
contains more exceptions to its rule than followers. To me, this helps to explain why
Greek literature is generally theoretical, fictional, or metaphysical in nature; the
language simply lends itself to these themes. It also demonstrates the ‘a priori’ nature
of the Greeks, making it difficult to believe that any Greek would have written in the
way of Aurelius.
The mathematical theories collected in Euclid’s Elements show the theoretical nature
of the Greeks and their continuing quest for knowledge outside of practical
application. Through their contact with Greece, the Romans gained mathematical
knowledge but only in terms of practical application. Vitruvius’ De architectura,
(essentially a guide on building methods and architecture) is an example of Roman
mathematic writing and only advocates practical application of mathematics. The
Romans seem to have no interest in the theoretical and have taken the practical
elements of Greek mathematics they know to work by experience, ‘a posteriori’. The
Romans exhibit this nature in their literature.
The Romans – by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 11.
The Romans –by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 11.
3 The Romans –by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 11.
1
2
Flo Sagers
Evans
The first examples of the epic genre are in Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey; both Virgil
and Ovid took over this genre, wishing to imitate Homer. Ovid particularly draws on
Greek inspiration in the Metamorphoses, which is largely based upon Greek myth.
The Iliad and the Odyssey created the ‘Homeric religion’4, which not only gave an
anthropomorphic religion which, according to Professor Murray was ‘not really a
religion at all5’, but gave a ‘picturesqueness’6 to Greek religion. Roman religion was
based on a ‘numen, power, or will,’7 and supported a strong morality – it was a
formless and cold religion. However, Greek myth influenced the Roman civilization
by furnishing their cold religion with the ‘picturesqueness’ of the ‘Homeric religion’
of Greece. The Roman did not strive to ‘speculate about [The gods] nature’, as the
Greeks did (see Plato’s theory of the Forms) but to ‘establish right relations with the
gods’. The Romans were less preoccupied with the metaphysical, and valued only
knowledge which could be gained through experience, it is in the nature of the Roman
‘to look backwards8’, rather than up and beyond, in the way of the Greeks. The
Greeks and Romans thus represent two different facets of classical culture. The
questioning and philosophical Greeks, striving towards knowledge are a stark contrast
to the ever-practical and militaristic Romans. This further evidences that the title
quotation is an essentially Roman statement, partly by apophasis, as it is essentially
not a Greek statement.
Furthermore, the Romans demonstrate their disregard for ‘a priori’ in their moral
philosophy. Whilst they Romans were prolific writers of moral philosophy, Cicero the
most easily recognizable, they never expanded to the metaphysical. Cicero has been
called by St Augustine; ‘Cicero…of supreme eloquence’, and his work has been said
to be a better introduction to moral philosophy than Plato. However, in Cicero’s own
words he ‘suppl[ied] only the words’9. Whilst Cicero wrote on moral philosophy, his
works are largely derivative, although selective of what they derive, and he has been
derided as a ‘mere middleman of no great intelligence10’. It is an important point for
Latin language that whilst Cicero was no original, he moulded Latin into a language
of learning that was for centuries the lingua franca of the intellectuals. During the
time at which Meditations was written, Greek was the language of the intellectual,
thus the copies of Meditations which we have now are in Greek. Perhaps this is
because the Greek language by its structure and compounds, lends itself more to
philosophical discussion than Latin, despite the efforts of Cicero. However, whilst the
title quotation may have originally been written in Greek it does not expand to
metaphysics, and advocates learning from experience, to me it is therefore, an
essential example of Roman philosophical thought- desperately practical. In fact, the
ways in which the Romans treated philosophy seem to add even more credence to this
theory, for when the Romans saw something in another culture that had been
successful, they adapted and modified it, and made it ‘Roman’. Stoicism, for which
The Greeks and the Irrational- by E.R. Dodds, (California, USA, University of California Press,
1951), page 2.
5 The Greeks and the Irrational- by E.R. Dodds, , (California, USA, University of California Press,
1951), page 2.
6 The Romans- by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 17.
7 The Romans- by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 14.
8 The Romans- by R.H.Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 26.
9 The Romans- by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 152.
10 The Romans- by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 152.
4
Flo Sagers
Evans
Aurelius is so famous, is a particular example of this clever adaptation. Roman
Stoicism is very different from Greek stoicism. Roman Stoicism was not concerned
with the deeper questions of existence, more with immediate and practical problems
of the everyday.
There is an exception to the Roman lack of interest in philosophy that is not practical,
moral, or based upon ‘a posteriori’- Epicureanism. Lucretius wrote a poem on
Epicureanism, which is an abstract philosophy. A philosophy therefore, which should
have been immediately unappealing to the Romans, as it is based upon atomic
determinism and cites man’s goal as happiness, although not over indulgence.
However, whilst we have this example of the Romans partaking in ‘a priori’ thought,
Epicureanism had ‘no great following in Rome11’. Virgil, and particularly Horace in
the famous carpe diem flirted with it, but Lucretius’ poem generally stands alone.
From the Greek and Roman attitudes to history, it would indeed seem that only a
Roman could have written Aurelius’ quotation. For the Romans, history was about
actions and deeds, they were a people who looked back whilst continuing to move
forward, they based decisions upon ‘a posteriori’, and history was known as ‘res
gestae’ meaning things done. The soldier imitated actions that they had seen to be
successful. For example, after the ‘Clades Variana’, as it came to be known, in 9 A.D
when Varus, a general in charge of the German province, lost the ‘sacred eagles of the
seventeenth, eighteenth and nineteenth legions12’ (and by some estimates up to 30,000
men, women and children) ‘the Romans never again attempted to colonize Germany
beyond the Rhine13.’ They learnt from their mistakes and misfortunes, a man was
judged by his deeds, and this is what history was made of- ‘things done’. Of course,
the Greeks had a rather different view on what history was, which can again be
demonstrated in their word for history ‘ἱ στορία’ meaning ‘inquiry’ or ‘knowledge
gained by investigation’. Whilst it is essentially about knowledge provided from
memory, it is made Greek by its harkening to an intellectual process and a questioning
nature-very different from the simple ‘res gestae’ of the Romans. To ‘examine
methodically and honestly all the things that befall us in life’, is I believe therefore,
essentially a Roman characteristic, and more Greek to ‘inquire’ and ask questions
about causation, fate and abstract concepts of a higher power. Aurelius’ quotation
therefore is essentially Roman in nature, despite supposedly being written in Greek.
On the other hand, it can be argued that until 212 AD the Romans used an abstract
concept to rule the empire-‘romanitas14’. ‘Romanitas’ is the sense of being Roman,
which was a heavily sought after commodity, as it was associated with Roman
citizenship, which was, until 212 AD, only selectively distributed. Thus, the Romans
conquered not only by Brute force and excellent military planning, but also by an
abstract and intangible concept –‘romanitas’. ‘Romanitas’ meant belonging to a whole
and enjoying all of the luxuries and conveniences of the Roman Empire whilst at the
same time retaining a sense of independence, something that the EU craves to
emulate. Thus, The Romans begin to seem a little more similar to the Greeks. The
Delian League, created in about 478 BC, as a league of allies to carry on the war
against Persia under the leadership of Athens, was also united in a single principleThe Romans- by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 150.
The Dream of Rome- by Boris Johnson, (Great Britain, Harper Perennial, 2007), page 19.
13 The Dream of Rome- by Boris Johnson, (Great Britain, Harper Perennial, 2007), page 21.
14 The Romans- by R.H. Barrow, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949) page 12.
11
12
Flo Sagers
Evans
destroying Persia. Athens gradually brought all of the members of the league under
her direct control, and meddled in their internal affairs, she created an empire from
very little bloodshed. Perhaps this seems to be in contrast to the brutal Romans who
ruthlessly attacked and drew back under her control, the allies which had failed to
help her in 390 BC when the Gauls sacked Rome. However, both of these empires
were attained, in part, by using a unifying principle- the principle of ‘romanitas’ is
certainly one to be admired. This similarity to the Greeks perhaps shows that the
mindset of the Roman is in some way similar, so perhaps a Greek could have written
the title quotation.
In conclusion however, it is my opinion that the title quotation is so quintessentially
Roman, a Greek could not have written it. Whilst there are exceptions to the two
civilizations being defined by the terms ‘a priori’ and ‘a posteriori’ these terms do
seem to be an interesting and succinct way to define and differentiate between the
civilizations. Classical philology has a lot to tell us about the differences between
these two cultures. The Latin language has a unique ability to condense ideas into an
impressively small amount of words. This has been demonstrated in the terms ‘a
priori’ and ‘a posteriori’, what other language can (arguably) summarise two complex
civilizations in four words? Greek, however, with its disregard for grammatical rules
and its compound nature is more free and relaxed- a language of philosophers and
theoreticians. Thus, despite the fact that this title quotation is written in Greek, and
perhaps could only have been so, it has to have been written by a ‘farmer-soldier’
Roman - a Greek would have complicated and intellectualized the statement; the
Roman is more pragmatic. As Sallust said ‘The best preferred doing to talking’- this
is certainly how the Roman viewed the world.
Word count – 1,997.
Flo Sagers
Evans
Bibliography
R.H. Barrow- The Romans, (Great Britain, Penguin, 1949).
E.R. Dodds- The Greeks and the Irrational, (California, USA, University of California
Press, 1951),
Boris Johnson- The Dream of Rome, (Great Britain, Harper Perennial, 2007)
Erik Bohlin – Part of a Ph.D dissertation (University of Gothenburg, Sweden, 2009)
link as belowhttp://gupea.ub.gu.se/bitstream/2077/19411/3/gupea_2077_19411_3.pdf
The British Museum.