Rome perverted by hellenism: myth or reality

[eugene]

Many Roman authors wrote that at first Romans were people of high morality, but later Roman moral degradated and declined as the result of contcts with hellenistic culture. How true was this opinion about pervertion of Rome by hellenism?

[Lucius Rabirius]

Of course it is one myth but like every myth half- true. Not Greece or other provinces perverted Rome (like the decadence- theory of Sallust tells us), but the power of some Roman generals. The Generals were bound to the troops and could spend years in the same region to collect power and money with legions loyal to them but not to the republic.
So the whole republican system couldnt work with many provinces, because some important persons with charisma could collect more and more ressources to be dictator.
So persons like Marius, Sulla, Pompeius, Crassus, Caesar, Marcus Antonius and at last Augustus could destroy the republic.

So to wrap it up, it was not the decadence of provinces, but the possiblitiy to get much power there and some ambitious men without controll, that destroyed the republic.
Hope you could follow me (my English is a bit strange sometimes and I just waked up). If you are interested into the part, where Sallust tells this theory, I can search for it. But it is really one interesting question, you asked.

Greetings,
Lucius Rabirius

[Epictetus]

Rome had contacts with Greeks from the earliest times. In the words of T.J. Cornell (emphasis mine):

The arrival of the Greeks in Italy had a profound impact on the social, economic and cultural life of the native peoples. The hellenisation of Etruria, Latium and Campania began in the eighth century [B.C.] and had a major influence on the structural changes that occurred in the orientalising period... From now on Hellenism was to be a pervasive influence, the single most important factor of change and development in Roman (and Italian) history.

Cornell, The Beginnings of Rome

Even some of the earliest archaeological finds in Rome may point to Greeks being present. In the Forum Boarium excavations have found Euboean, Pithecusan, Corinthian and Cycladic pottery from the eighth century B.C. This has led some to believe that there was actually a "Greek quarter" there during the period.

Later Romans knew of this very early Greek influence (see Dion, for instance, who tried to say that Rome was settled by Greeks), but many later commentators looked at the social currents of their own times they did not like and blamed it on Greek influence. Cato helped with romantising earlier times and "pure" Roman ideals. However, some of those complainers ignored the fact that Greek influence on Rome was very deep and very old.

[john m roberts]

Remember also that Roman historians tended to be moralists. Men like Cato the Censor thought that Romans could be ruined by too much Sophocles. Personally, I don't think that the Romans were corrupted by Hellenism. They simply became more sophisticated. But to Roman moralists, sophistication was itself corrupting. They always praised the "simplicity" of their ancestors. Simplicity usually translates as poverty and ignorance. Take note that these historians never wanted to actually live the way their noble ancestors had lived. They just wanted to look back upon it nostalgically.

[SigniferOne]

Remember also that Roman historians tended to be moralists. Men like Cato the Censor thought that Romans could be ruined by too much Sophocles.

That would be the Sophocles whom Pericles told to stop fantasizing about sex with children?