4 ms·

I have this [uninformed/idealistic] view that Ancient Greece was generally a very peaceful place, where people discussed ideas and freedom of thought was paramo

I have this [uninformed/idealistic] view that Ancient Greece was generally a very peaceful place, where people discussed ideas and freedom of thought was paramount. I'm aware that there was of course still war within and around Greece, per the likes of Homer's Iliad, but it punctuated an otherwise highly enlightened society. (Beyond external influences, my reasoning is based on asking, "How could things like democracy, philosophy, mathematics, etc. flourish in an unstable environment?") Moreover, I also have the view that afterwards -- whatever that may mean -- things kind of went to pot! The Romans were obviously great engineers, etc. but my impression of them is more that they were the start of Europe's descent into imperialism and warmongering. Something that the West is still clinging on to thousands of years later. Is my view of Ancient Greece wrong and it actually was a politically unstable and bloodthirsty place to be, where all the good stuff was fostered out of luck? If not, what went wrong? Could we be a thousand-or-so years more advanced if we'd stayed on the right track?

notahacker 11y ago
I was also under the impression that the only difference between the Greeks and Romans when it came to warmongering was that the Romans fought fewer internal wars (an advantage of not being composed of local fiefdoms and direct democracies, perhaps?) and had greater superiority over the surrounding nations...
- tiatia 11y ago
  The Romans were a bunch of uncivilized Barbarians compared to the Greek. Name me one decent Roman Philosopher of writer that we still read today. Marcus? Wrote in Greek. Maybe Plotin. What else?
  - umanwizard 11y ago
    Seneca?
  - JimmyM 11y ago
    If you're saying "Philosopher or writer", Ovid, Virgil, Horace, Catullus, Tacitus, Pliny, Juvenal, Livy, Cicero and Martial. Of whom I suppose I find Ovid, Catullus, Livy, Cicero and Virgil enjoyable to read, others would disagree or choose different writers I am sure. In terms of philosophers alone, I suppose only Cicero or Seneca would spring to mind, and Seneca in particular followed closely in Epicurus' footsteps (I think, it's been a long long time, please correct if wrong). These are just people who I am aware are widely read today, I can say nothing for their barbarity or otherwise. I don't know anything about Plotinus, for example, and I don't even know which Marcus you refer to, so I am hardly a very reliable source.
    - tiatia 11y ago
      "I don't even know which Marcus you refer to" Are there so many Roman Philosophers named "Marcus" having written in Greek?
      - JimmyM 11y ago
        Well, this was my point - I can't even deduce the presumably well-known figure you are referring to, so I'm not a very knowledgeable or trustworthy commenter on this issue, and my opinions and thoughts should be treated with an appropriate amount of caution.
  - notahacker 11y ago
    Cicero. Philosophers are rather beside the point though: for every famous philosopher, ancient Greece had a million farmers, merchants, seafarers and slaves. I'm not persuaded medieval Britain was more enlightened than modern Britain because Shakespeare was a more insightful commentator on the human condition than JK Rowling, and the same applies to not unduly revering the societies of classical antiquity because some of the works of their educated elites have survived to the present day.
restalis 11y ago
"How could things like democracy, philosophy, mathematics, etc. flourish in an unstable environment?" Greeks had a developed (and wide available) writing system, Greeks had a not-so-restrictive religion, and (perhaps most importantly) - Greeks had a great economical advantage over a lot of other people around them. Yes, Greeks were good warriors, but they liked very much to just use others (mostly as mercenaries) in order to solve things, and trowed themselves in battles only as a last resort (like when the Greek cities fought among themselves and persuading others to join them was somewhat difficult). Greeks had a very large network of economic centers and all that value of connecting cheap worlds was primarily theirs. The flourishing of the arts and science was just a result of the general wealth flowing all around - life was cheaper and easier compared to other places, so what the average ἀνήρ was supposed to do with their spare energy? (Hint: connecting the dots here and there, just the way Greeks as a people used to do all the time.)
- atmosx 11y ago
  I disagree. The Persian empire was just as (if not more) wealthy than the Greeks although not as technologically advanced. I think what distinguished Athens (and Greece) was "tolerance" towards foreigners. Although they called them 'Barbarians' (meaning Not Greek - with a strong negative flavor), at the same time foreigners were welcome to study and teach in Athens. Most sophists (e.g. Protagoras and Gorgias) were not Athenians. Aristotle was not an Athenian citizen. Socrates was poor. But he was craved by the young because of his spirit. At the same time you have political Satire openly mocking Socrates and other major political (some extremely powerful) figures of the Athenian life. Euripedi's 'Trojan Women' play, was essentially a commentary on the capture of the Aegean island of Melos and the subsequent slaughter and subjugation of its populace by the Athenians earlier that year! It's incredible the fact that he dared to do so! Of course that's the reason we still watch his plays (2.500 years later...). IMHO it was tolerance that made Athens great.
  - restalis 11y ago
    The Persian Empire had a lot of subjugated populace. The worry of rebellion and other problems plagued them all the time. Greeks on the other hand were very laid back in comparison. The conditions for investment of available effort was very different between those two. The tolerance vs. discriminating attitude are in fact derived from the political relation which a group of people is with another group of people in such instance.
atmosx 11y ago
A good documentary is the following: (BBC - Who where the Ancient Greeks) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XU5TJoiJ0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XU5TJoiJ0w The answer goes both ways actually. Ancient Greece was a blood-thirty society and an extremely advanced society.
ableal 11y ago
> Is my view of Ancient Greece wrong I'd suggest a short read - Thucydides' Melian dialogue, there's a copy at http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Melian.html http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Melian.html
- walterbell 11y ago
  That was a dramatic read, thanks. We need more film dramatizations of ancient history, less comic book sequels. 94. Melians: But must we be your enemies? Will you not receive us as friends if we are neutral and remain at peace with you? 95. Athenians: No, your enmity is not half so mischievous to us as your friendship; for the one is in the eyes of our subjects an argument of our power, the other of our weakness. 96. Melians: But are your subjects really unable to distinguish between states in which you have no concern, and those which are chiefly your own colonies, and in some cases have revolted and been subdued by you? 97. Athenians: Why, they do not doubt that both of them have a good deal to say for themselves on the score of justice, but they think that states like yours are left free because they are able to defend themselves, and that we do not attack them because we dare not. So that your subjection will give us an increase of security, as well as an extension of empire. For we are masters of the sea and you who are islanders, and insignificant islanders too, must not be allowed to escape us.
  - ableal 11y ago
    The punchline is also rather stark: 116 [...] The place was now closely invested, and there was treachery among the citizens themselves. So the Melians were induced to surrender at discretion. The Athenians thereupon put to death all who were of military age, and made slaves of the women and children. They then colonised the island, sending thither 500 settlers of their own. Incidentally, that island later hosted one of the most famous statues in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_de_Milo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_de_Milo "And so it goes", as another writer more recently put it.
cafard 11y ago
http://blog.moonshadowecommerce.com/WEBLOG-NAME/Thing-Finder/2008/10/the_gloomy_academic_by_louis_m.html http://blog.moonshadowecommerce.com/WEBLOG-NAME/Thing-Finder... Your view of Greece is limited, I'd say. The Romans were pretty good at making a wilderness and calling it peace, but they were not more warlike than the Greeks, just more successful at war.
- restalis 11y ago
  I think the right quote written by Tacitus was "they make solitude and call it peace".
  - cafard 11y ago
    The root of the word is indeed solitudo, "ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant", but the dictionary (that is, the one on-line and in reach) supports "desert" or "wilderness": http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aalphabetic+letter%3DS%3Aentry+group%3D51%3Aentry%3Dsolitudo http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%...

notahacker 11y ago

I was also under the impression that the only difference between the Greeks and Romans when it came to warmongering was that the Romans fought fewer internal wars (an advantage of not being composed of local fiefdoms and direct democracies, perhaps?) and had greater superiority over the surrounding nations...

tiatia 11y ago
The Romans were a bunch of uncivilized Barbarians compared to the Greek. Name me one decent Roman Philosopher of writer that we still read today. Marcus? Wrote in Greek. Maybe Plotin. What else?
- umanwizard 11y ago
  Seneca?
- JimmyM 11y ago
  If you're saying "Philosopher or writer", Ovid, Virgil, Horace, Catullus, Tacitus, Pliny, Juvenal, Livy, Cicero and Martial. Of whom I suppose I find Ovid, Catullus, Livy, Cicero and Virgil enjoyable to read, others would disagree or choose different writers I am sure. In terms of philosophers alone, I suppose only Cicero or Seneca would spring to mind, and Seneca in particular followed closely in Epicurus' footsteps (I think, it's been a long long time, please correct if wrong). These are just people who I am aware are widely read today, I can say nothing for their barbarity or otherwise. I don't know anything about Plotinus, for example, and I don't even know which Marcus you refer to, so I am hardly a very reliable source.
  - tiatia 11y ago
    "I don't even know which Marcus you refer to" Are there so many Roman Philosophers named "Marcus" having written in Greek?
    - JimmyM 11y ago
      Well, this was my point - I can't even deduce the presumably well-known figure you are referring to, so I'm not a very knowledgeable or trustworthy commenter on this issue, and my opinions and thoughts should be treated with an appropriate amount of caution.
- notahacker 11y ago
  Cicero. Philosophers are rather beside the point though: for every famous philosopher, ancient Greece had a million farmers, merchants, seafarers and slaves. I'm not persuaded medieval Britain was more enlightened than modern Britain because Shakespeare was a more insightful commentator on the human condition than JK Rowling, and the same applies to not unduly revering the societies of classical antiquity because some of the works of their educated elites have survived to the present day.

restalis 11y ago

"How could things like democracy, philosophy, mathematics, etc. flourish in an unstable environment?" Greeks had a developed (and wide available) writing system, Greeks had a not-so-restrictive religion, and (perhaps most importantly) - Greeks had a great economical advantage over a lot of other people around them. Yes, Greeks were good warriors, but they liked very much to just use others (mostly as mercenaries) in order to solve things, and trowed themselves in battles only as a last resort (like when the Greek cities fought among themselves and persuading others to join them was somewhat difficult). Greeks had a very large network of economic centers and all that value of connecting cheap worlds was primarily theirs. The flourishing of the arts and science was just a result of the general wealth flowing all around - life was cheaper and easier compared to other places, so what the average ἀνήρ was supposed to do with their spare energy? (Hint: connecting the dots here and there, just the way Greeks as a people used to do all the time.)

atmosx 11y ago
I disagree. The Persian empire was just as (if not more) wealthy than the Greeks although not as technologically advanced. I think what distinguished Athens (and Greece) was "tolerance" towards foreigners. Although they called them 'Barbarians' (meaning Not Greek - with a strong negative flavor), at the same time foreigners were welcome to study and teach in Athens. Most sophists (e.g. Protagoras and Gorgias) were not Athenians. Aristotle was not an Athenian citizen. Socrates was poor. But he was craved by the young because of his spirit. At the same time you have political Satire openly mocking Socrates and other major political (some extremely powerful) figures of the Athenian life. Euripedi's 'Trojan Women' play, was essentially a commentary on the capture of the Aegean island of Melos and the subsequent slaughter and subjugation of its populace by the Athenians earlier that year! It's incredible the fact that he dared to do so! Of course that's the reason we still watch his plays (2.500 years later...). IMHO it was tolerance that made Athens great.
- restalis 11y ago
  The Persian Empire had a lot of subjugated populace. The worry of rebellion and other problems plagued them all the time. Greeks on the other hand were very laid back in comparison. The conditions for investment of available effort was very different between those two. The tolerance vs. discriminating attitude are in fact derived from the political relation which a group of people is with another group of people in such instance.

atmosx 11y ago

A good documentary is the following: (BBC - Who where the Ancient Greeks) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XU5TJoiJ0w https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0XU5TJoiJ0w The answer goes both ways actually. Ancient Greece was a blood-thirty society and an extremely advanced society.

ableal 11y ago

> Is my view of Ancient Greece wrong I'd suggest a short read - Thucydides' Melian dialogue, there's a copy at http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Melian.html http://www.shsu.edu/~his_ncp/Melian.html

walterbell 11y ago
That was a dramatic read, thanks. We need more film dramatizations of ancient history, less comic book sequels. 94. Melians: But must we be your enemies? Will you not receive us as friends if we are neutral and remain at peace with you? 95. Athenians: No, your enmity is not half so mischievous to us as your friendship; for the one is in the eyes of our subjects an argument of our power, the other of our weakness. 96. Melians: But are your subjects really unable to distinguish between states in which you have no concern, and those which are chiefly your own colonies, and in some cases have revolted and been subdued by you? 97. Athenians: Why, they do not doubt that both of them have a good deal to say for themselves on the score of justice, but they think that states like yours are left free because they are able to defend themselves, and that we do not attack them because we dare not. So that your subjection will give us an increase of security, as well as an extension of empire. For we are masters of the sea and you who are islanders, and insignificant islanders too, must not be allowed to escape us.
- ableal 11y ago
  The punchline is also rather stark: 116 [...] The place was now closely invested, and there was treachery among the citizens themselves. So the Melians were induced to surrender at discretion. The Athenians thereupon put to death all who were of military age, and made slaves of the women and children. They then colonised the island, sending thither 500 settlers of their own. Incidentally, that island later hosted one of the most famous statues in the world: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_de_Milo https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Venus_de_Milo "And so it goes", as another writer more recently put it.

cafard 11y ago

http://blog.moonshadowecommerce.com/WEBLOG-NAME/Thing-Finder/2008/10/the_gloomy_academic_by_louis_m.html http://blog.moonshadowecommerce.com/WEBLOG-NAME/Thing-Finder... Your view of Greece is limited, I'd say. The Romans were pretty good at making a wilderness and calling it peace, but they were not more warlike than the Greeks, just more successful at war.

restalis 11y ago
I think the right quote written by Tacitus was "they make solitude and call it peace".
- cafard 11y ago
  The root of the word is indeed solitudo, "ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant", but the dictionary (that is, the one on-line and in reach) supports "desert" or "wilderness": http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%3A1999.04.0059%3Aalphabetic+letter%3DS%3Aentry+group%3D51%3Aentry%3Dsolitudo http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus%3Atext%...