Can we think like Romans?

[richsc]

One thing underlying all Caroline's points is that we don't know if Roman vocabulary was much bigger than the existing Latin dictionary, or if it were way bigger. Crayons and their predecessor of the 19th century, tube paint, gave names to color which had not been needed before. If there is no common agreement on what a song is called, musicians will refer to the opening notes. We have not just words, but the means to disseminate the meanings of words and enable common understanding.

There are so many concepts we take for granted that were not standard that underpin our societies. A common description of time and calendar; laws and currency, the concept of standards, the language of mathematics and geography, the expectations of the duties of government; take these away and see how you think of the world.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

They would just have different perception based on the laws, governments, calenders, etc etc of their time., However, we can all empathize with that, given the correct understanding of these things.
They were, regardless of the time differential, still modern humans...

I see little difference in the ambitions and greed of modern men and women to theirs.
Just the ways and means of achieving things were different.

[Frank Anthony]

Hello everyone,

I'm not sure but I believe this is my first post on this site and if it is, then "Thank you and it's nice to be here.

An important thing to remember in Ms Lawrence's article is that she writes for children and brings up some good points for those of us exposing children to this alien time and place.

"1. No internal monologue.
How did Romans think about themselves? We know that most (literate) Romans only read out loud. To read silently, in your head, was considered strange. So did they have internal monologues in their heads? Did they have the same kind of constant self-commentary that we do?"

I can't remember the name or author but I had read a linguistics book a couple of years ago which made an interesting point. It discussed the fact that what we think of as out 'internal monologue' is not actually in the language we speak, but that we precieve it in this way because we DO speak a language. By monitoring brain waves of varying subjects, including those who were deaf an dumb, people tend to have thoughts even if they don't have a language. It was an interesting book and I'll have to ask my friend, of whom I borrowed it, the name and authour.

When teaching children how to read, it's important for them to real out loud so we, the educator, can understand if they've got it right. We also want children to think about the words at the same time as part of the process so that they can recall the words on sight rather than the sounding out all the words. Ms Lawrence probably wants to think about this when writing for children to help them identify with kids of the roman time.

"2. No satellites.
Romans had no idea where they were on the map. The only map we have from the first century doesn’t even look like a map. The most educated might have had some idea, but even the great travellers like Julius Caesar and Strabo had not a tenth of the concept of the world that we do with our Google earth and desk globes. Most Romans probably never budged more than a few miles from where they were born and had no idea what lay beyond. That's why even Romans as intelligent as Pliny the Elder believed in bizarre races of men in far away places."

Once again children today see the whole word around them with maps before ever going to these places. They've also grown up with cellphones constantly in use from the day the were born.I agree about Romans visualizing the world as an itinerary or 'London underground' map. Ian Mortimer in his Time Travelers Guides Talks about travel in England, being similar to this in the 14th century and Elizebethian time and I think we do this in modern times as well. Think about giving someone directions to your house: Take the I-5 toward Sacramento, exit at 'this city' at McDonald's and so forth. I personally like giving precise directions but so many of my friends are just bad at directions and can only use visual clues. I can get them to my house with ease but they have no clue, on a map, where they are in relation to their starting point.

"5. No chocolate."/ "8. No crayons."

What can I say? These things are important to children. You may have noticed that all children's books talk a lot about food. Tolken, Pullman, Rowlings, and Lewis's talk at great lengths about feasts in their books. And First and second graders have serious conversations about their favorite colors.

"10. Division by gender not age. "

A child reading about a prince their age telling an adult servant what to do is 'soooooooo kewwwwel'. Once again it's hard to get into specifics to kids about the way things were but you can give them a little exposure.

All in all, I think we might have a little more similarities with roman thinking than we'd realize. Maybe we don't think real violence for entertainment is cool but in our movies(theater) we want a lot of blood and for it to look so real we want it in 3D. We might not want our president to be a czar or a king but it's amazing what people in the states expect a man, whose job it is to have veto power, to solve every problem with total power. We don't have nobility but we certainly have a class of people whose great and vast wealth pay to influence democratic process in their favor.

I'm starting to ramble so I'll stop.

[Kegluneq]

An important thing to remember in Ms Lawrence's article is that she writes for children and brings up some good points for those of us exposing children to this alien time and place.

Actually you raise some very excellent points, thank you! It's easy to take this sort of argument personally when she was writing from an educational perspective.

[Vindex]

Welcome Frank! That's a very good first contribution (one of many I hope); thank you! mile:

[Flavivs Aetivs]

I'd actually disagree about the map part. This 15th Century Re-constitution of Ptolemy's map, assuming it's accurate, shows they had an Idea at least:

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/co...rldMap.jpg

I'm still skeptical of it ofc.

[falcons1988]

The Romans not having music?! That statement and subsequent explanation is ill-informed and preposterous, especially as it does not take into consideration ethnomusicological and anthropological perspectives. Every culture in the world has music and from place to it differs extensively, from instruments and technologies, to associated rituals and traditional cultural practices. Music is also a reflection of society, the structural organisation of music is similar to that of a society. The technologies involved in making the instruments, the difficulties of playing instruments, how the instruments themselves work.

Further music is always developing whether it is a literate or an aural tradition.The Romans would have developed the music from the Greeks and Etruscans, but that is not say they didn't develop it and make it their own. Our own music that we listen today in Western Europe and America was developed from Pythagoraean tuning systems. Those mosaics in lepcis magna of a Roman Brass ensemble performing for the pre-match entertainment, is that not music?

I said music is a reflection of culture and technologies available. For instance traditional music of Uganda and celebratory piece called "Ssematimba ne Kikwabanga", and they wooden flutes of excellent craftsmanship, drums with animal skin membrane. The flute is used to replicate it is used to replicate language and nature and birdsong, The complexity of the rhythmic structure is fantastic. Just because it does not conform and is perhaps 'primitive' compared to modern Western European ideas of music (that were challenged by John Cage), it does not devalue their music in any shape or form, it is STILL Music.

Back to ancient Rome, as I am sure you are all aware by now I have strong (perhaps fanatical at times) fascination and a huge ego on Roman music and complete love of music. (who was taking bets on when my post was going to appear?)

[falcons1988]

Take the Buccina/Cornu, an instrument was found in Pompeii and the length of tubing was around 3.5m (12ft). Brass instruments work solely on the harmonic series, even modern instruments with valves. The longer piece of tubing, the more notes become available without the need for valves and keys, hence why Baroque trumpet music is written so high. I got a mouthpiece manufacturer (schilke) to analyse a Roman Trumpet mouthpiece for me, (it is on display at the Colchester museum and castle, Essex). Schilke, got back to me with a verdict of perfect for high register playing and that ties with length of an instrument such as Buccina or Cornu. Hence I vehemently believe that it is possible to Baroque trumpet music with a Roman Brass Ensemble. If as I believe the Roman instruments had that sort of capabililty, why would they have not had music?

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Ver y good points Peter!
I believe they had stringed instruments too!
What were these used for if not music!
And water organs!

[falcons1988]

Yes you are absolutely correct, stringed instruments such as the Kithara which they did inherited from Greeks as they did the Hydraulis (Water Organ)

Now the water organ went under some serious development in the Roman period, Nero supposedly commissioned a new design or significant new developments with the idea of a big concert to celebrate, much like the musical traditions of the 18th century and indeed today, where new instruments are premiered in concert!
In Budapest is a surviving Hydraulis and a replica it sounds beautiful, search Anquincum Water Organ.

The Romans also had woodwind instruments such as the tibia, aulos and flute. There is iconography of different families of instruments playing together in ensemble.

[richsc]

There is the evidence of the instruments and their capabilities, but I don't believe there is much in the way of any evidence of written Roman musical notation?

[M. Demetrius]

Some Greek plays' music has survived, and somewhere on RAT is a thread about the tablature and "sheet music". For those plays, which were performed at many different cities having their own musicians, it was needful to construct a common notation system so the music could be the same from place to place. I think a few bits of that music still survive.

[Buster]

Although many Roman things were originally more colorful than they are now, I'm not sure a Roman city was necessarily more colorful than a modern city, or even as colorful.
San Diego is full of color, Balboa park, San Diego zoo, and Sea world for example. You can go to the harbor and see massive cruise ships, or colorful restaurants and shops on the water. Sleek interior spaces abound, while glass, polished surfaces and greenery are everywhere.
Compared with the Romans, we live in an era of unprecedented wonder, prosperity, and near limitless variety. You can take a vacation to the Cayman islands and be back in a week. Art and music come in as many varieties as are imaginable. Giant, multi-level indoor shopping malls contain restaurants, toy shops and huge department stores. Even smaller cities seem to stretch on forever, an endless collection of neighborhoods and businesses. A modern western city is also a much cleaner and healthier environment than it's Roman counterpart. People can follow starwars, wwe, or any of the other countless media franchises that exist.
In contrast, the Roman world was generally much more localized and rigid for the average person. All this no doubt has a huge effect on the way we think and view the world compared to the way the Romans viewed it.

[Timianus]

Long time lurker, newly registered. Thought I would weigh in on this as my first post.

Another large aspect of the Roman mindset that is often forgotten is the patronage system. I often tell my non-history buff friends that to understand the later years of the republic in Rome, you have to picture every aristocrat as Vito Corleone in the opening sequence of The Godfather. For most citizens, their success was tied to that of their patron, as were their obligations. This sense of relational duties and obligations exists informally today, but was much more prevalent during the republic and shaped how people interacted with one another and their loyalties. Indeed, I would argue that the system of patronage is was ultimately led to the fall of the republic, as the great generals became patrons of the armies they commanded.

Also, while the Romans had a concept of freedom, it was quite different than ours and was linked to their machismo culture. They did not harbor the notion that freedom was a natural right of all people. Rather, it was something you took or established through force, such that conquered people "deserved" to be slaves because they allowed themselves to be conquered.

Finally, the notion of divine favor, "lady luck", and fate played a large role in society. This is why generals had to keep conquering new lands, as their success proved that they were anointed by the gods to rule. This explains much of Caesar's cult of personality. Conversely, there was a fatalistic sense that you had to be what you were born to be. "Adapt yourself to the things among which your lot has been cast and love sincerely the fellow creatures with whom destiny has ordained that you shall live." Marcus Aurelius

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes those are good points to remember, and a very good comparison
Which I think has not been lost on most of the members here! mile:

I was fortunate to have spent a good part of my childhood in a part of the world where TV
Was not easily accessible, so mos of thoses years were spent
Totally immersed in the local environment, and the news supplied by
Newspapers and the occasional visit back to Canada!
I think it allowed me a small window into the older mindset,
which eventually was swallowed up when we returned to the "civilised"
World!
:neutral: :-|