Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
ROMA EROTICA
#31
Well said, Caius. No one's yet defined the parameters of this discussion even though I inferred that we're talking about Pagan Rome at its height (200 BC - 180 AD ?)

Even if we are restricting the discussion to this perod of Roman history I think Dan was right to point out what he said here :

Quote:One other thing to remember is we dont have the records or writings of the average person in the ancient world. Most of our written knowledge comes from the upper class. So the artsy literati types wrote and painted and expressed their sexuality. So most of our 'understanding' of the ancient greek and roman societies come from like 1% of the population.

Very true, I think we're just talking about the elite of the elite when it comes to vices supposedly practiced by the Romans like libertinism and homosexuality. It's logical to assume that the lower classes didn't engage in either one of those - their low economic status would render them oblivious to such practices. Debauchery isn't cheap. Degenerates need money to burn to sustain their "lifestyles."

Quote:Julius Caesar was insulted when people said he had surrendered his body to gain an alliance. He was not insulted when he was accused of penetrating men

But which "people" insulted him ? Commoners ? More likely the elite. I know his soldiers accused him of it in their songs but it seems they did it in jest.

Domitian was also a lover of Greek culture but he clamped down on homosexual activity in the name of enforcing the Lex Scantinia. This infuriated the governor of Upper Germany, one Saturnius, who found it sufficient provacation to start his own rebellion. Cassius Dio described Saturnius as an "notorious ans untrustworhty pervert." Did being penetrated make one a pervert ? I don't think Caesar was ever described with such a word.


Theo
~~~~~jaime~~~~~~
Fathers of the Church
[Image: CRShield02.png]
Reply
#32
Re: Adultery

Just a thought here. Why would a culture be interested in outlawing adultery or "legislating sexual morals"?

As was pointed out above, the family was perhaps the most powerful and important "institution" in this era. The continuance of the family was most importatnt. The continuation of whatever was deemed to be "pure family lines" was also of great importance. In the modern era of blood-typing and DNA, it is not too difficult to know who the true father of a child is. What about for the ancient Romans? The mother is always obvious. People can attend a birth to witness that a certain mother did give birth to this child. But who was the father?

Perhaps, in their desire to continue the desired family lines, they found it neccessary to crack down on adultery. The Romans did not fear eternal damnation. They did fear the Manes, and spirits of their ancestors (if the two can be seperated). Perhaps laws against adultery would keep the family "pure" and the Manes or Di Parentes happy.

Just a thought.

Kevin
Reply
#33
Quote:Pater Familias is a major factor in Republican and early Imperial Rome that the writers and films neglect.

I am reminded of the scene in HBO's Rome where Vorenus has come home to find this baby, which his wife says is his daughter's by her boyfriend. In a confrontation where he's wearing a toga and they both stand in front of him he says "You know I could have you both killed for this" which sounds very pater familias.
That's the only instance I can think of for pater familias in the movies.
Richard Campbell
Legio XX - Alexandria, Virginia
RAT member #6?
Reply
#34
I'm quite aware of the legal status of the paterfamilias, but to what extent was the right of summary execution actually practiced? Does anyone know of recorded instances? In one instance an early Brutus had his sons executed for conspiring against the state, and in another a commander had his son executed for disobeying orders, but these were offenses against the state and the army, and were regarded in later years as great tragedies. Was the power of life and death over one's children more of a legal fiction?
Pecunia non olet
Reply
#35
Roman Law and Paterfamilias...
I actually have several (5-7) books on this topic; they are out in a storage shed, in one of 50-60 boxes. While execution was not often practiced, lessor punishments were, including having the persons under the control of the Father of the Family receive corporal punishment, imprisonment in family estates, loss of freedom, loss of patrimony, loss of dowry, loss of pecuniam, and many other punishments that were not taken to a law court, simply because the people had no status before the law. I just finished another book "[amazon]Slavery in the Roman Empire[/amazon]" by Barrow, which lightly touched on this, in passing, and was a quick read. [amazon] Family and Familia in Roman Law and Life[/amazon] by Gardner is a bit more dear.
[amazon]Sons, Slaves and Freedmen in Roman Commerce[/amazon] by Kirschenbaum deals mainly with who could own, and the law, and the status of various people under the law.....
Caius Fabius Maior
Charles Foxtrot
moderator, Roman Army Talk
link to the rules for posting
[url:2zv11pbx]http://romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=22853[/url]
Reply
#36
Actually, virtually all of those punishments have been within the power of fathers (and mothers) here in the states in modern times. Threat of disinheritance is a great controlling tool for the wealthy, and until recently truly brutal corporal punishment was allowed, although now even spanking is frowned upon. About the only one not allowed was selling one's child into slavery, but that was because slavery itself was banned (unless you were African, until 1865). But actual killing of offspring has always been a criminal offence.
Pecunia non olet
Reply
#37
What moral standards were expected of legionaires on campaign?

I know (from some military sources) that sexual conduct used to be very tightly policed in our (US) armed forces, but that they have been rather lax of late.

Any idea what the Roman opinion was on this?
Theodoros of Smyrna (Byzantine name)
aka Travis Lee Clark (21st C. American name)

Moderator, RAT

Rules for RAT:
<a class="postlink" href="http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?Rules">http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?Rules for posting

Oh! and the Toledo helmet .... oh hell, forget it. :? <img src="{SMILIES_PATH}/icon_confused.gif" alt=":?" title="Confused" />:?
Reply
#38
Quote:Actually, virtually all of those punishments have been within the power of fathers (and mothers) here in the states in modern times. Threat of disinheritance is a great controlling tool for the wealthy, and until recently truly brutal corporal punishment was allowed, although now even spanking is frowned upon. About the only one not allowed was selling one's child into slavery, but that was because slavery itself was banned (unless you were African, until 1865). But actual killing of offspring has always been a criminal offence.


John are you sure? I think I have read a case where a father killed his "disobediant" son in the 17th century, and he had the full support of the community.
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."


a.k.a. Paul M.
Reply
#39
I have just finished watching a show on the history channel, called Roman Vice. Have any of you watched it?
it was saying some really awful things about the ancient romans that I really dont want to accept, and I am making this reply to get some real answers and opinions. What were the roman morales, and virtues like.
That show was saying some awful tales of debauchery. Are the romans any diffrent from a modern person, isnt it just about the same?
I mean we have prostitutes in this world too.
How were the romans diifferent? were they?
Are the things said in that show a bit exaggerated?
were there good morale people in the empire?
was claudius really the only heterosexual emperor in romes entire history?
was gambling really illegal?
what was sexuality liken in the ancient world?
Reply
#40
Francis, I personally think some of these are questions you need to consult with your parents about before anyone here can answer some of them, and are not actually the place of people here to answer. :wink:
TARBICvS/Jim Bowers
A A A DESEDO DESEDO!
Reply
#41
Quote:What were the roman morales, and virtues like. [...] what was sexuality liken in the ancient world?
I think it helps when you read the answers posted above first. That being said, I think you are right to have some question marks about the TV show you saw. From your description, I deduce that it is all a bit exaggerated.

Quote:was claudius really the only heterosexual emperor in romes entire history?
No, he was not; most of them were what we call heterosexual, although the Romans would bot have used this label.

Quote:was gambling really illegal?
Of course it was not illegal.
Jona Lendering
Relevance is the enemy of history
My website
Reply
#42
Thank you Jim!
"...quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est."


a.k.a. Paul M.
Reply
#43
why do we need to stop talking about this , whats wrong with it, it has to do with romans right?
what do you know of my parents, or how old I am?

I will read ever reply made on this board, and then ill get abck to you guys ok
Reply
#44
Quote:why do we need to stop talking about this , whats wrong with it, it has to do with romans right?

Frankly, I don't see any ground that's been left uncovered. I thought Travis' first post (on page 1) was fairly comprehensive with regard to various practices and their likeliest practictioners.

I, too, saw the same TV program (well, parts of it anyway - it's a rerun) and thought it sensationalized more than it educated. It focused heavily on Pompeii, a city for Rome's affluent citizens, and tried to extrapolate about Roman sexual practices from the frescos found in the brothels :roll: . IMO, that would be like someone from the future who excavated the bathhouses of San Francisco and came to the conclusion that most Americans were morally depraved perverts. This city is a world unto itself and isn't representative of the country at large or even the state of California for that matter. Rome had it's perverts but most Romans (including the emperors) were not (in all likelihood). Now the Greeks and Etruscans are a different story...

Anyway, the History channel is a poor medium to learn about history. I recommend reading about it either here on RAT or from books. Of course, I don't believe everything I read because some 'historians' are either popularizers who oversimplify facts or, worse, are revisionists with an agenda beyond being objective about history.


Theo
~~~~~jaime~~~~~~
Fathers of the Church
[Image: CRShield02.png]
Reply
#45
Quote:I will read ever reply made on this board, and then ill get abck to you guys ok

You WILL read them? You mean you didn't read them before you asked MORE questions?
See FABRICA ROMANORVM Recreations in the Marketplace for custom helmets, armour, swords and more!
Reply


Forum Jump: