The Cultural Impact of the Roman Empire

The Cultural Impact of the Roman Empire The history of culture was impacted by THE Roman Empire in a number of largely distinct ways. Initially, there is the obvious influence of Rome on Hellenistic philosophy. This isn't really significant or deep. The impact of Greece and the East on the western portion of the empire comes in second. This was significant and longlasting because it dealt with Christianity. Third: the value of the protracted Roman peace in introducing culture and preparing people for the concept of a single civilization under a single ruler. The dissemination of Hellenistic civilization to the Mohammedans, and eventually to Western Europe, represents the fourth aspect. It will help to review the political history in very brief before looking at these impacts of Rome. The western Mediterranean remained unaffected by Alexander's conquests, and in the start of the third century B.C., it was ruled by the two strong City States of Syracuse and Carthage. Rome captured Syracuse during the first and second Punic Wars (264–241 and 218–201), wiping out Carthage. Rome subjugated the Macedonian monarchs in the second century; Egypt, it is true, continued as a client state until Cleopatra's death (30 B.C.). In the course of the conflict with Hannibal, Spain was subjugated; Caesar subjugated France in the middle of the first century B.C., and England was subjugated almost a century after that. During its golden age, the Rhine and Danube in Europe, the Euphrates in Asia, and the desert in North Africa served as the Empire's borders. In North Africa, which is significant to Christian history as the birthplace of Saint Cyprian and Saint Augustine, huge territories that had been uncultivated before and after Roman times were turned fruitful and sustained densely populated towns, making this region the epicenter of Roman imperialism. From the time of Augustus's accession (30 B.C.) until the tragedies of the third century, the Roman Empire was mostly stable and peaceful. Important changes had also been made to the Roman State's constitution in the interim. Rome was formerly a little city-state, much like others in Greece, particularly those that, like Sparta, were independent of outside trade. Similar to the monarchs of Homeric Greece, an aristocratic republic had supplanted them. Democratic elements were gradually added while the aristocratic element—embodied in the Senate—remained strong. Panaetius the Stoic, whose opinions are echoed by Polybius and Cicero, saw the resultant compromise as the perfect fusion of monarchical, aristocratic, and democratic elements. However, conquest broke the delicate equilibrium, greatly increasing the riches of the senatorial class and, to a lesser extent, the so-called "knights," or upper middle class. Previously controlled by small farmers who grew grain with their own labor and that of their families, Italian agriculture became the domain of vast estates owned by the Roman nobility, where slave labor was used to plant olives and vines. As a result, the Senate gained almost unchecked power that it openly utilized for personal gain, disregarding the needs of the people it served and the interests of the State. It is interesting to see the recurrence, on such a vast scale, of developments which, in Greece, had been confined to minute areas. A democratic movement, inaugurated by the Gracchi in the latter half of the second century B.C., led to a series of civil wars and finally, as so often in Greece, to the establishment of a "tyranny." Julius Caesar's adoptive son and successor, Augustus, ruled from 30 B.C. up to A.D. 14, ended internal conflicts and, with very few instances, exterior conquest wars. For the first time since the dawn of Greek civilization, peace and security prevailed across the ancient world. The Greek political system had been destroyed by two factors: first, each city's insistence on its own sovereign right, and second, the violent and acrimonious conflict between the affluent and the poor in the majority of cities. The first of these factors was eliminated from the globe once Rome was defeated by conquering Carthage and the Hellenistic kingdoms, since there was no way to effectively oppose Rome. However, the second reason persisted. During the American Civil War, one general proclaimed himself the senator's champion and the other the people's. The one who gave the soldiers the greatest prizes won. Each civil war concluded with the technically legal expulsion of several existing landholders, who were formally tenants of the State, to make space for the legionaries of the victor. This was because the troops demanded land concessions in addition to salary and loot. Rich men were put to death and their possessions seized in order to pay for the war's ongoing costs. Even though this system was terrible, it was impossible to overthrow; at finally, to everyone's amazement, Augustus emerged so triumphant that no rival dared to dispute his claim to the throne. The conclusion of the civil war was unexpected to the Roman world, and everyone rejoiced over it, with the exception of a tiny senatorial faction. For everyone else, the arrival of Augustus in Rome brought much-needed stability and order—things that the Greeks and Macedonians had long yearned for but had failed to establish before Augustus. The Roman Empire enjoyed prosperity under the reign of Augustus, but Rostovtseff noted that republican Rome had "introduced nothing new, except pauperization, bankruptcy, and a stoppage of all independent political activity" in Greece. At least, the provinces' administration was structured on people welfare rather than a merely predatory framework. In addition to being formally declared god after his death, Augustus was also revered as a god in many of the smaller communities. He was hailed by poets, the business classes found the world peace comfortable, and even the Senate, which he treated with every public show of deference, did not miss an occasion to bestow titles and positions upon him. The world was joyful, but since safety had been prioritized above adventure, part of the flavor had disappeared from life. Previously, all Greeks who were free had the chance to travel; however, this was stopped by Philip and Alexander, and only the Macedonian dynasty was allowed anarchic freedom throughout the Hellenistic era. The Greek world became older and more religious or cynical. The finest men lost their zeal when the chance of upholding values in earthly institutions dimmed. For Socrates, heaven was a place where he might continue to argue; for philosophers who came after Alexander, however, heaven represented something even more apart from their life on Earth. A less traumatic version of a comparable occurrence occurred later in Rome. Unlike Greece, which was subjugated, Rome experienced the positive effects of prosperous imperialism. Romans were to blame for the upheavals that persisted during the American Civil War. While both the Greeks and the Romans achieved peace and order by surrendering to Augustus, the Greeks had not achieved either by submitting to the Macedonians. In addition to his overwhelming authority, Augustus was a Roman who most Romans surrendered to voluntarily. He also made great effort to conceal the military origins of his rule and to establish it on Senate decisions. Despite the fact that the Senate's praise was mostly untrue, nobody felt degraded outside of the senatorial elite. The Romans had an air reminiscent of a young man swept away by passion in nineteenth-century France, who returns to a rational marriage after a life of amorous adventure. Despite being pleased, this mood lacks creativity. The great poets of the Augustan era were products of more turbulent times; Horace ran away from Philippi, and Vergil also lost his lands due to confiscations made for the advantage of winning armies. Augustus was inherently somewhat antagonistic to open inquiry since he began working, if somewhat insincerely, to revive old religiosity for the sake of stability. Stereotypes about the Roman world started to emerge, and they persisted under succeeding emperors. Augustus's immediate successors treated senators and potential rivals for the purple with abhorrent cruelty. The provinces were partially affected by the misgovernance of this era, but overall, Augustus' administrative structure held up very well. After Trajan took power in AD, things got better. 98, and went on until Marcus Aurelius passed away in AD. 180. The Empire's governance was as good as any tyrannical one could be at this time. In contrast, the third century was marked by terrible misfortune. The army became aware of its strength, created and unmade emperors in exchange for money and the assurance that there would be no more fighting, and as a result, was no longer a useful fighting force. North and eastwardmoving barbarians raided and pillaged Roman territory. The army lacked competence in defense because it was focused on personal benefit and racial strife. Due to the massive reduction in resources and the simultaneous surge in spending on an ineffective war and army bribes, the entire budgetary system collapsed. Along with conflict, pestilence also significantly reduced the population. The Empire appeared to be on the verge of collapse. Two charismatic leaders, Diocletian (A.D. 286-305) and Constantine (A.D. 1261–1325), prevented this outcome. 312–337. By that time, the difference between the Greek and Latin languages roughly corresponded to the division of the Empire into an eastern and a western half. Byzantium, which Constantine renamed Constantinople, became the capital of the eastern part of the empire. Diocletian temporarily restrained the army by changing its makeup. After his reign, the most formidable combat units consisted of barbarians, primarily German, to whom all top positions were accessible. This was clearly a risky expedient, and its inevitable results were realized in the beginning of the fifth century. The barbarians concluded that fighting for themselves would be more advantageous than fighting for a Roman lord. Still, it fulfilled its function for more than a century. The administrative changes of Diocletian were similarly harmful in the long run as they were successful for a while. The Roman system gave the towns local self-government and left it to its officials to collect taxes; the central authority simply set the total amount owed from any one town. This system had served the empire's needs well during its more affluent periods, but it was now in its worn-out state and the revenue expected was more than could be met without undue hardship. The local government was directly in charge of the taxes and ran away to avoid paying them. Diocletian outlawed flying and forced wealthy residents to assume municipal office. He converted the rural populace into serfs, tying them to the land and forbidding them from moving, for identical reasons. It was continued by succeeding emperors. Adopting Christianity as the official state religion was Constantine's most significant innovation, perhaps due to the fact that a sizable section of the army was Christian. As a result, when the Germans overthrew the Western Empire in the fifth century, their newfound prominence led them to embrace Christianity, saving for Western Europe the majority of the ancient culture that the Church had appropriated. The area attributed to the eastern part of the Empire developed in a distinct way. With the exception of Justinian's brief conquests in the sixth century, the Eastern Empire remained in existence until the Turks captured Constantinople in 1453. However, the majority of the former Roman provinces in the east—as well as those in Africa and Spain in the west—were taken over by Mohammedans. Unlike the Germans, the Arabs accepted the culture of the people they had subjugated but rejected their faith. Because the Eastern Empire's civilization was Greek rather than Latin, Greek literature and whatever remained of Greek, as opposed to Latin, civilization were maintained by the Arabs between the seventh and the eleventh century. After the eleventh century, the west progressively regained the Grecian legacy it had previously lost, initially as a result of Moorish influences. I now turn to the four ways that the Roman Empire impacted cultural history. I. Rome's direct influence on Greek philosophy. Two persons, the Stoic philosopher Panaetius and the historian Polybius, are involved in the beginning of this in the second century B.C. The Greeks had a natural distrust and scorn for the Romans; while they felt more sophisticated, they lacked the political might of the Romans. Politics is an ignoble pursuit, as evidenced by the Romans' greater political success. A Greek of the second century B.C. on average. was a joy to be around, quick-witted, cunning businesswoman, and dishonest in everything. But there were still guys capable of philosophy. Some of these had allowed ingenuity to supplant earnestness, most notably the sceptics like Carneades. Some had completely retired into a tranquil private existence, such as the Epicureans and a segment of the Stoics. However, a select minority, with a deeper understanding than Aristotle had demonstrated about Alexander, saw that Rome's magnificence sprang from certain attributes that the Greeks lacked. Born in Arcadia in 200 B.C., the historian Polybius was taken prisoner at Rome and had the good fortune to make friends with the younger Scipio, whom he followed on several expeditions. While most educated Romans understood Greek, it was rare for a Greek to be fluent in Latin; Polybius's circumstances, on the other hand, brought him a deep acquaintance with the language. He chronicled the history of the Punic Wars, which had allowed Rome to dominate the world, for the advantage of the Greeks. Even though he was writing at a period when the Roman constitution was becoming antiquated, up until that point it had fared very well in terms of efficiency and stability when compared to the constantly shifting constitutions of the majority of Greek towns. Naturally, the Romans enjoyed reading his history; it is less certain that the Greeks felt the same way. The previous chapter has already covered Panaetius the Stoic. He was a protégé of the younger Scipio and a companion of Polybius. Scipio visited Rome often while he was alive, but after his passing in 129 B.C. He continued to lead the Stoic school at Athens. What Greece had lost was the optimism that came with having political action opportunities. Rome still had this. As a result, compared to early Stoics, Panaetius's beliefs were less similar to Cynic philosophy and more political in nature. It's likely that the respect that refined Romans had for Plato encouraged him to break from the dogmatic exclusivity of his Stoic forebears. The more devout Romans found great attraction in stoicism in the expanded form that he and his successor Posidonius gave it. Even though he was Greek, Epictetus spent the most of his life in Rome at a later time. The majority of his drawings come from Rome; he is always warning the prudent man not to shudder in the Emperor's presence. Though it's difficult to pinpoint Epictetus' influence on the Greeks, we do know that he had an impact on Marcus Aurelius. In his Lives of the Noble Grecians and Romans, Plutarch (c. 46–120 A.D.) drew comparisons between the greatest figures in the two nations. He was honored by Emperors Hadrian and Trajan during his extended stay in Rome. Apart from his Lives, he authored other publications on philosophy, theology, ethics, and natural history. Clearly, the goal of His Lives is to bring Greece and Rome into harmony with human thought. Apart from these few individuals, Rome mostly operated as a curse on the Greek-speaking portion of the Empire. Both art and thought declined. Up to the end of the second century A.D., the wealthy had a nice and carefree existence with few opportunities for significant success and no motivation for exertion. The renowned philosophical schools—the Academy, the Peripatetics, the Epicureans, and the Stoics—persisted until Justinian closed them in the year A.D. due to Christian intolerance. 529. With the exception of the Neoplatonists in the third century A.D., who we will discuss in the next chapter, none of them, however, shown much life during the period after Marcus Aurelius; even these guys were little affected by Rome. The Latin and Greek portions of the Empire were further divided; after Constantine, knowledge of Greek became uncommon in the west while Latin persisted primarily in the army and the law in the east. II. the Eastern and Greek influences on Rome. Here, there are two very distinct factors to take into account: first, the impact of Hellenic philosophy, literature, and art on the most learned Romans; and second, the dissemination of non-Hellenic superstitions and faiths over the Western world. (1) The Romans realized they were rather uncivilized and barbaric when they first saw the Greeks. In manufacturing, agricultural techniques, the sorts of knowledge required of a competent official, conversation, the art of living, literature, philosophy, and art, the Greeks were unquestionably better to them in many areas. The only areas where the Romans excelled were social cohesiveness and military strategy. The relationship between the Romans and the Greeks was comparable to that between the Prussians and the French in 1814 and 1815, although the former relationship was more lasting. Young Romans developed an affection for the Greeks following the Punic Wars. They engaged Greek sculptors, learned Greek, and imitated Greek architecture. The Greek gods were equated with the Roman gods. To establish a link with the Homeric mythology, the Romans fabricated a Trojan origin story. Greek meters were adopted by Latin poets, while Greek doctrines were absorbed by Latin thinkers. Rome was ultimately a cultural parasite on Greece. The Romans produced no new philosophical systems, no artistic creations, and no scientific breakthroughs. They turned to Greece for the rest and built effective armies, orderly judicial systems, and good roads. The older Cato detested the certain softening of manners that came with Rome's Hellenization. The Romans had been a pastoral people up to the Punic Wars, possessing the hard work, brutality, stubbornness, and stupidity of farmers along with their austerity. The patria potestas had provided stability and a strong foundation for their family life, with women and youth being fully subservient. This was all altered by the rapid inflow of riches. Little farms vanished and were progressively replaced by vast estates that used slave labor to practice new, scientific forms of agriculture. A vast class of dealers emerged, and many men became wealthy via looting, akin to the nabobs of eighteenth-century England. Previously virtuous slave women became free and dissolute; divorce increased in frequency; and wealthy people stopped having children. The Greeks, who had experienced a comparable evolution centuries prior, fostered, via their own example, what historians refer to as the moral deterioration. The typical Roman continued to view Rome as the defender of a higher moral standard against the decadent corruption of Greece, even throughout the most dissolute periods of the Empire. From the third century A.D. forward, Greece's cultural influence on the Western Empire drastically declined. later, mostly as a result of the general decline in culture. There were several reasons for this, but one in particular has to be brought out. During the final years of the Western Empire, the army typically chose a victorious general to be the emperor, and the government was more overtly military than it had ever been. However, even at the highest levels of the army, the soldiers were no longer composed of civilized Romans but rather of semi-barbarians from the frontier. These uncultured troops saw civilized people only as ways to get money; they had no need for culture. Private citizens were too poor to afford much education, and the government thought education was superfluous. As a result, only few persons of great intelligence continued to read Greek in the West. On the other hand, non-Hellenic superstition and religion gained ground throughout the West over time. As we've previously seen, Alexander's conquests brought Egyptian, Persian, and Babylonian beliefs to the Greek world. In a similar vein, the Western world became acquainted with these and Jewish and Christian teachings as a result of the Roman conquests. I will address Jewish and Christian issues later; for now, I will limit my discussion to superstitions held by the pagan people. Every sect and prophet was represented in Rome, and occasionally they gained favor in the highest echelons of the government. Despite the widespread belief of his day, Lucían, the champion of reasonable skepticism, shares a humorous tale about Alexander the Paphlagonian, a prophet and miracle worker, which is mostly believed to be genuine. This guy, who occasionally engaged in blackmail, both cured the ill and predicted the future. Marcus Aurelius, who was at the time battling the Marcomanni on the Danube, learned of his reputation. When the Emperor asked him for advice on how to win the war, he was informed that a tremendous victory would come from tossing two lions into the Danube. He followed the instructions of the seer, but it was the Marcomanni who gained the great triumph. Despite this setback, Alexander's notoriety grew. Renowned Roman consular Rutilianus sought him counsel on a number of issues before turning to him for help selecting a spouse. Similar to Endymion, Alexander too benefited from the moon's favors and produced a daughter via her, whom the oracle suggested Rutilianus marry. It is more significant to consider the reign of Emperor Elogabalus or Heliogabalus (A.D. 21822), who was a Syrian priest of the sun until his elevation by the army's choice, than the career of Alexander the Paphlagonian. "Rutilianus, who was sixty years old at the time, at once complied with the divine injunction, and celebrated his marriage by sacrificing whole hecatombs to his celestial mother-in-law." His image, which had been sent to the Senate as a gift, preceded him on his plodding journey from Syria to Rome. "His sacerdotal garments, made of silk and gold, echoed the free-flowing style of the Medes and Phoenicians. A magnificent tiara crowned his head, and many bracelets and collars held priceless stones. His cheeks were artificially painted red and white, and his eyebrows were colored black. He was backed by a sizable portion of the army and proceeded with fanatical zeal to introduce Eastern religious practices into Rome. His name was that of the sun-god worshipped at Emesa, where he had been chief priest. The grave senators confessed with a sigh that Rome had finally been humbled beneath the effeminate luxury of Oriental despotism. Seeing that he had gone too far, his mother, or grandmother, who was actually in charge, removed him and installed her nephew Alexander (222–35), whose Oriental preferences were more restrained. Placing the statues of Christ, Abraham, Orpheus, and Apollonius of Tyana in his private chapel, he demonstrated the diversity of beliefs that were acceptable in his day. Mithras, a religion with Persian roots, was a fierce rival of Christianity, particularly in the second part of the third century A.D. The emperors, in a desperate attempt to maintain control over the army, believed that religion might provide the much-needed stability; but, because the troops preferred the newer religions, the religion had to be one of them. The religion was first established in Rome and had a lot to offer the military intellect. As a solar god, Mithras was less feminine than his Syrian counterpart, but he was nevertheless preoccupied with war—the grand struggle between good and evil that had been a staple of Persian belief since Zoroaster. By reproducing a bas-relief depicting his devotion that was discovered in an underground sanctuary at Heddernheim, Germany, Rostovtseff A demonstrates that his followers must have been numerous among the troops in both the East and the West. Earlier attempts to impose a new religion were unsuccessful, but from a governmental perspective, they were quite comparable to Constantine's successful political adoption of Christianity. Everyone's chance of success was drawn from the hardships and exhaustion of the Roman world. Men who were curious about the material world and hoped to find happiness there would find comfort in the classical religions of Greece and Rome. Asia, having experienced more sadness for a longer period of time, had developed more effective countermeasures in the shape of otherworldly hopes; of these, Christianity was the most successful in providing comfort. However, Christianity had already borrowed heavily from Greece by the time it was declared the official religion, and it also carried over the Jewish element into later Western centuries. III. The integration of culture and governance. The fact that the accomplishments of the Greek Golden Age survived and are not lost to history, unlike the Minoan era, is first due to Alexander and later to Rome. If a Genghiz Khan had emerged in the fifth century B.C., he might have destroyed everything significant in the Hellenic world; conversely, Xerxes, with somewhat greater skill, could have severely damaged Greek culture, preventing it from progressing to its current state after his defeat. Think about the time between Aeschylus and Plato: a small portion of the populace in a few major towns accomplished anything throughout this period. The future proved that these towns were not very resilient to foreign invasion; yet, via a remarkable twist of fate, the Macedonian and Roman conquerors were of the Philhellenes, and they spared what they had won, unlike Xerxes or Carthage. We are aware of the achievements made by the Greeks in philosophy, science, art, and literature because Western invaders brought stability to the area and showed admiration for the culture they controlled while making every effort to preserve it. Alexander and the Romans were the forerunners of a superior philosophy, both political and ethical, than any of the Greeks claimed throughout their era of liberty. As we've seen, the Stoics extended their sympathy beyond the Greeks and had a belief in the fraternity of mankind. People were acclimated to the concept of a single civilization ruled by a single government throughout Rome's lengthy rule. We know that there were significant regions of the world—China and India, in particular—that Rome did not rule. However, it appeared to the Romans that the only barbarian tribes outside of their empire were small, inconspicuous groups that might be subjugated whenever it would be worthwhile to exert the necessary force. The Romans believed that the empire was, in essence, global in scope. The Church, which was "Catholic" despite Buddhists, Confucians, and (later) Mohammedans, inherited this idea. The motto "Securus judicat orbis terrarum," which the Church adopted from the later Stoics, derives its appeal from the Roman Empire's seeming universality. Although everyone understood that the Church and the Holy Roman Empire were not really global throughout the Middle Ages, following the reign of Charlemagne, this was not the case. Since Rome's approximate fulfillment of the idea of a single human family, a single Catholic religion, a single international culture, and a single global state, it has plagued men's ideas. Rome was instrumental in spreading civilization, and its contribution was enormous. Roman armies used force to conquer northern Italy, Spain, France, and portions of western Germany, resulting in their civilization. These areas all demonstrated that they were capable of achieving a high degree of culture on par with Rome. Gaul produced persons in the last days of the Western Empire who were on par with or better than those of their contemporaries in previous civilizations. Rome's cultural spread is what allowed the barbarians to create a transient eclipse rather than a lasting darkness. One may argue that civilization was never again as high-quality as it was in Pericles' Athens, but in a world of conflict and devastation, quantity ultimately matters more than quality, and Rome was responsible for a great deal of that amount. IV. The Mohammedans as carriers of Hellenism. The Prophet's followers conquered Syria, Egypt, and North Africa in the seventh century, and Spain in the next century. The combat was light, and their wins were straightforward. They were not fanatics, until maybe in the early years, and Jews and Christians coexisted peacefully as long as they paid their tax. The Arabs quickly absorbed the Eastern Empire's civilization, but they did so with optimism for a growing state rather than a sense of exhaustion from a declining one. Their men of learning read Greek and composed commentary. They are mostly responsible for Aristotle's fame; in antiquity, he was not considered to be on the same footing as Plato and was seldom cited at all. Examining some of the words we use every day that we derived from Arabic, such algebra, alcohol, alchemy, alembic, alkali, azimuth, and zenith, is informative. With the exception of "alcohol," which referred to a chemical compound rather than a beverage, these terms paint a clear picture of some of the things we owe the Arabs. The Greeks of Alexandria had created algebra, but the Mohammedans advanced it. Words like "alchemy," "alembic," and "alkali" refer to the endeavor that the Arabs adopted from the Greeks, converting base metals into gold while drawing on Greek philosophy in the process. Astronomical words like "zenith" and "azimuth" are mostly helpful to Arabs in relation to astrology. The etymological approach hides the understanding of Greek philosophy that we owe the Arabs since, when it was studied in Europe again, Greek or Latin was used for the technical words. The Arabs were less of original philosophers and more of commentators. For us, the reason they are significant is that they were the direct heirs of the portions of Greek heritage that had only been preserved by the Eastern Empire, not the Christians. Through interactions with the Mohammedans in Spain and, to a lesser degree, Sicily, the West became familiar with Aristotle as well as Arabic algebra, chemistry, and numerals. This interaction marked the start of the eleventh-century intellectual renaissance that gave rise to Scholastic philosophy. Studying Greek only made it possible for mankind to directly access the writings of ancient Greek authors like Plato and Aristotle considerably later, starting in the thirteenth century. However, the men of the Renaissance might not have realized the potential benefits of the return to classical study if the Arabs had not kept up the tradition.