Podcast Summary
Ancient Greek and Roman Influence on Manliness: Ancient Greeks and Romans presented contrasting models of manliness: physical strength vs self-control. Self-control emerged as a common theme in definitions of manliness across Eastern cultures, continuing to influence modern conceptions.
The ancient Greeks and Romans had a significant influence on the concept of manliness in the Western world, and their definitions of manliness can be traced back to the Homeric epics, particularly the Iliad. The Greeks presented two contrasting models of manhood: Achilles, who embodied physical strength and combat excellence, and Odysseus, who represented self-control and cunning. While the Athenian philosophers attempted to refine the Bronze Age notion of manliness by emphasizing self-control, the Romans adopted elements of Greek manliness and shaped their own culture of manhood. The virtue of self-control emerged as a common theme in definitions of manliness across various Eastern cultures, such as Japan and China, and we continue to live in an age that values self-control as a key aspect of manliness. Ted Linden, a classical scholar, provides further insights into these ancient notions of manliness in his book "Soldiers and Ghosts."
Ancient Greek Concept of Excellence: Cunning Intelligence vs. Courage: The ancient Greeks recognized two forms of excellence: cunning intelligence (Odysseus) and courage (Achilles). They later clarified the distinction by introducing the term 'andreia' for courage.
The ancient Greeks had a concept of excellence or virtues (arate) that encompassed both cunning intelligence and courage. Odysseus, known for his cunning, and Achilles, known for his courage, were two prominent figures who embodied these different forms of excellence in Homeric poetry. The language used in these texts allowed for ambiguity regarding the meaning of arate, but later Greeks clarified the distinction by introducing the term andreia for courage, which is derived from anair, meaning manliness. Hector, a Trojan hero, was also considered manly and courageous, and he shared other human qualities, such as love for his family, but these were not part of the definition of manliness during that period.
The Greek axial age shifted manliness from military courage to philosophical virtues: The Greek axial age transformed manliness from a military ideal to a more refined set of virtues emphasizing self-control, wisdom, and justice, while military courage remained important but secondary.
During the Greek axial age, the concept of manliness evolved from the Homeric ideal of military courage and excellence to a more refined set of virtues emphasized by philosophers. These virtues, known as the canonical or cardinal virtues, included intellectual wisdom, self-control, and justness. While military courage remained important, it became secondary to the philosophical virtues. The Greek philosophers, inhabiting a primarily civilian world, placed great emphasis on virtues necessary for everyday life. However, it's important to note that the more Homeric system of virtues continued to operate alongside the philosophical one. The philosophical emphasis on suppressing emotions and appearing calm made a significant impact on people's sense of manliness, leading to the belief that emotional expression was womanly. This shift from the highly emotional, violence-based Homeric conception to the everyday living in the city conception, heavily inflected with self-control, marked a significant change in ancient conceptions of manliness.
From Military Prowess to Self-Control in Greek Manliness: Greek manliness shifted from military strength to self-control or Sophrosune, as seen in figures like Pericles. Reasons for this change include social distinction, slave society, and global phenomenon.
The concept of manliness in Greek antiquity underwent a significant transformation from a focus on military prowess to an emphasis on self-control or Sophrosune. This shift can be seen in figures like Pericles, who was known for his unwavering self-discipline. The reasons for this evolution are still debated, with theories ranging from the need for social distinction to the existence of a slave society where self-control was a means of maintaining power. Another intriguing possibility is that this trend was a global phenomenon, as similar concepts emerged in other societies, such as ancient Spain and Japan. Despite the various explanations, it's clear that by the time of Thucydides, Plato, and Aristotle, manliness was primarily thought of in terms of self-control rather than combat skills. However, this evolution did not prevent figures like Alexander the Great, who was influenced by both the Homeric notion of manliness and the Aristotelian/Platonic idea, from embodying a synthesis of both ideals.
Ancient Greek vs. Roman notions of self-control and manliness: Greeks emphasized Homeric values of self-control while Romans adopted a more philosophical approach to manliness, rooted in their traditions and military context.
The notions of self-control and manliness in ancient Greek and Roman societies evolved differently, with the Greeks emphasizing Homeric values and the Romans adopting a more philosophical approach. Alexander the Great, a legendary Greek king, was portrayed as self-controlled by later historians, but in reality, he was known for his Homeric behavior, which included impulsiveness and love for wine. The Romans, on the other hand, adopted the concept of virtus, or manliness, from their early traditions, which emphasized service to the state, obedience to authority, and self-sacrifice. As the Roman ruling class became more philosophical during the time of Cicero, they began to incorporate Greek philosophical ideas, but the original Roman concept of manliness remained rooted in their traditions and military context.
Romans vs Greeks: Expressions of Manliness: Romans valued manliness or virtus, but differed from Greeks in their expressions. Romans admired uncontrollable wrath but saw it negatively, while Greeks did not. Romans refused Greek athletics and focused on military training. Romans eventually adopted Greek virtues, but their understanding of virtus remained complex.
While both the Greeks and Romans valued the concept of manliness or virtus, their expressions of it differed significantly. Romans admired the uncontrollable wrath of Homeric heroes, but considered it a negative quality, unlike the younger Romans who saw it as part of their Virtus. Romans also refused to adopt Greek athletics, even under heavy Greek influence, and instead focused on military training. The concept of virtus in Rome was not clearly defined, with figures like Catos the Elder and Younger being considered virtuous despite their obdurate and litigious nature, or their tendency towards harsh punishment. Romans eventually adopted the Greek canonical virtues, but it's unclear how well they fit into the Roman understanding of virtus, and whether they truly superseded the old military virtues. Despite these differences, the Romans took Greek philosophy seriously, but their translations were not always accurate, and the degree to which these translations stuck is uncertain. The concept of self-control or Temporantia, which was important to both cultures, became particularly significant to the Romans.
Roman virtues and gladiators: Roman virtues valued military self-control and bravery, showcased through gladiatorial combat. Gladiators were admired but held a social stigma.
Roman virtues, as opposed to the Greek, placed a greater emphasis on military self-control, with an ever-evolving sense of bravery. Gladiatorial combat, an idiosyncratic Roman practice, showcased this ancient excellence, despite the legal infamy of gladiators. Romans admired their bravery, and some even chose to become gladiators themselves. However, their infamy also carried a social stigma, and attempts were made to restrict their access to freeborn women. Despite their controversial status, gladiators remained a significant part of Roman culture, even influencing the Greeks under Roman rule. This complex admiration and disdain for gladiators reflects the unique and paradoxical nature of Roman virtues.
Gladiatorial culture's impact on Roman Stoicism: The gladiatorial arena reminded Romans of their virtues, elevating even the lowly to hero status, contributing to the appeal of Stoicism's emphasis on self-control and indifference in a declining military society.
The gladiatorial culture in ancient Rome, rooted in the Roman concept of manhood and heroism, continued to captivate the Roman audience even as the opportunity for military service declined. This fascination with gladiatorial combat may have contributed to the rise of Stoicism in Roman culture, which encourages indifference to the outside world and aligns with Roman temperance. However, the Roman expression of Stoicism seems peculiar compared to its Greek origins, as it did not entirely disregard external circumstances. The gladiatorial arena served as a reminder of Roman virtues, elevating even the most abject individuals to hero status. As the Roman Empire expanded and the availability of soldiers dwindled, the gladiatorial games became a symbolic representation of Roman Virtus, making Stoicism's emphasis on self-control and indifference an appealing philosophical choice for many Romans.
Exploring the Differences Between Greek and Roman Stoicism: Greek Stoicism promotes detachment, while Roman Stoicism emphasizes engagement and self-mastery. Both philosophies have shaped Western notions of manliness, with Roman Stoicism's emphasis on restraint and emotional suppression becoming the dominant norm.
Greek and Roman Stoicism, two philosophies rooted in ancient wisdom, offer distinct perspectives on manliness and self-control. While Greek Stoicism encourages detachment from the world and indifference to external events, Roman Stoicism emphasizes engagement and self-mastery. Both philosophies have influenced Western culture, shaping our notions of courage, intelligence, and emotional expression. However, since the 16th century, Western society has primarily embraced the self-controlled aspects of Roman Stoicism, defining manliness as a matter of restraint and emotional suppression. This norm has become so ingrained that it is no longer perceived as a conscious choice but an expected standard. A deeper exploration of these philosophies can provide valuable insights into the historical development of manliness and its contemporary manifestations.
Understanding the historical roots of cultural norms: Exploring the historical origins of cultural norms, such as those related to manliness in ancient Greece and Rome, can provide valuable insights and promote continued learning and growth.
This norm, which has been passed down through centuries, is strongly rooted in our culture and is most notably seen in the conceptions of manliness in ancient Greece and Rome. If you're interested in learning more about Professor Linden's research on this topic and others, you can find his books on Amazon.com under the author name J.E. Linden, or search for his articles on academia.edu. Additionally, check out the show notes at aom.is for more resources on this topic. Overall, this conversation highlights the importance of understanding the historical context of our cultural norms and the value of continued learning and exploration.
