Βι¶ΉΤΌΕΔ

Ancient and ArchaeologyΒ  permalink

Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

• Message 1.Β 

  Posted by Tyrone_taggart (U1919625) on Tuesday, 14th December 2010

  "Archaeologist and historian Richard Miles examines the phenomenon of the Roman Republic."
  
  Richard Miles did a interesting program on the Roman Republic but I disagree with the line that he took in regard to they being particularly civilised.
  
  The was good at War and built in stone after that they were a particularly barbaric lot.
  
  
  

  Link to this forum: Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

  Report message1

• Message 2

  , in reply to message 1.

  Posted by giraffe47 (U4048491) on Wednesday, 15th December 2010

  BUT -
  were they any more barbaric than the other people around at the same time?
  We should not judge them by the moral standards of our own 'enlightened' times.
  
  And anyway - somebody looking at western civilization a thousand years hence may examine the holocaust, the World Wars, the Empires in Africa and Asia, etc, and conclude that we were a pretty nasty bunch as well!

  Link to this forum: Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

  Report message2

• Message 3

  , in reply to message 2.

  Posted by somewhatsilly (U14315357) on Wednesday, 15th December 2010

  Surely the difficulty here is in what we mean by 'civilisation'. When we today talk about people being civilised or uncivilised we are often imbuing these terms with value judgements which they do not really carry. A civilised society is one where there is complexity; a bureaucracy, justice system, organisation, direction and urbanisation are usually the signifiers.
  By this definition the Romans were indeed a great civilisation, whether or not we approve of them or their methods is irrelevant.

  Link to this forum: Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

  Report message3

• Message 4

  , in reply to message 3.

  Posted by islanddawn (U7379884) on Wednesday, 15th December 2010

  Well said ferval, I was just about to compose something along similar lines but you've said it so much more eloquently than I could have.
  
  Any society or "civilisation" can only be judged according to the accepted behaviour of their time and of their contemporaries. Any attempt to impose today's Christian code of behaviour on a pre-Christian society can only lead to a complete misunderstanding of the subject.
  
  Perhaps it would be helpful if the OP were to define his/her meaning of "civilised" and er "barbaric"?

  Link to this forum: Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

  Report message4

• Message 5

  , in reply to message 4.

  Posted by fascinating (U1944795) on Wednesday, 15th December 2010

  islanddawn, I would not go that far.
  
  There is no law that says we cannot judge history. You say that it might lead us to misunderstand them; I say that there is a danger of that, yes, but it does not necessarily follow.
  
  If we are to use the widely-accepted definition of civilisation, a well-regulated society with some degree of urbanisation, then the Roman republic was certainly a civilisation. They were capable of terrible cruelty, but so was just about every other people in the ancient world.
  
  We can say that the Romans were cruel and unjust, and the majority of them would probably have agreed with us, if they heard us say that. They were prepared to impose cruelty and injustice, because by that means they could get what they wanted. For example we condemn slavery but they accepted it, nevertheless they were aware that it was "against natural law" as Ulpian wrote. They were prepared to break natural law, because it suited them to do that, it was not a case of believing that slavery was actually "right".

  Link to this forum: Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

  Report message5

• Message 6

  , in reply to message 5.

  Posted by shivfan (U2435266) on Thursday, 16th December 2010

  I think we're missing a crucial point that Richard Miles made in his programme....
  
  Under the Roman Empire, and the Republic before it, there was, by and large, a peaceful existence. Augustus implemented the Pax Romana, didn't he? this meant that if you lived within its boundaries, paid your taxes, and observed the imperial laws and gods, even alongside your own, you could enjoy the relative peace and security offered by being a member of the Roman Empire.
  
  Now, compare that to what life was like living outside of the boundaries of the Roman empire. Constant warfare, ravaging and pillaging. It's not surprising that so many non-Romans were quite happy to be a part of the empire!

  Link to this forum: Was the Roman Republic a high point of civilization?

  Report message6

Back to top