- This topic has 4 voices and 6 replies.
-
Posts
-
How do you think the Romans viewed sexuality? Read this:
From where, then, did the western European emphasis on virginity....the horror of prostitution, and the danger of sexual profligacy come? The answer is: the pagan Romans and the pre-Christian Germans. Despite the wellknown stories of orgies at the imperial court and the supposedly Olympian sexual appetites of rulers like Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero?not to mention some of their wives and daughters?the Roman world was actually renowned for its sexual modesty. That, in fact, is why some of their writers paid so much attention to the sexual exploits of the ruling class: The rulers' actions were completely out of step with the values of the common culture.
Source: Clifford R. Backman, The Worlds of Medieval Europe [book on-line] (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, accessed 13 October 2008), 347; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=105142600; Internet.Assuming it's true, this is news to me. I had thought the Romans were quite unrestrained in their sexual mores. Has anyone else read anything consistent with the quote above?
How do you think the Romans viewed sexuality? Read this:
From where, then, did the western European emphasis on virginity....the horror of prostitution, and the danger of sexual profligacy come? The answer is: the pagan Romans and the pre-Christian Germans. Despite the wellknown stories of orgies at the imperial court and the supposedly Olympian sexual appetites of rulers like Tiberius, Caligula, and Nero—not to mention some of their wives and daughters—the Roman world was actually renowned for its sexual modesty. That, in fact, is why some of their writers paid so much attention to the sexual exploits of the ruling class: The rulers' actions were completely out of step with the values of the common culture.
Source: Clifford R. Backman, The Worlds of Medieval Europe [book on-line] (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003, accessed 13 October 2008), 347; available from Questia, http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=105142600; Internet.Assuming it's true, this is news to me. I had thought the Romans were quite unrestrained in their sexual mores. Has anyone else read anything consistent with the quote above?
I would say I agree with this assessment. Sexual freedom would have been something only the privileged classes could enjoy or exploit. Part of the reason is obviously the wealthy had more leisure time to engage in social deviancy, and also the fact that they had the money to buy whatever sexual pleasures or favors they wanted. The everyday plebe would be too busy tending crops or other labors to take on multiple sexual partners beside their spouses....nor would they have the allure to create such circumstances in their modest dwellings. Much of Rome was still traditional society steeped in very structured social and religious cultures. The nobles were just in a position to step outside the norm....the after effects of corrupting power.
So waht is being said here is that they would be just as deviant if they had the time and money. So their morality is not because they should be but circumstance dictates it.
So waht is being said here is that they would be just as deviant if they had the time and money. So their morality is not because they should be but circumstance dictates it.
Well no I didn't mean it quite that way, but I'm sure many commoners would have liked to have been in similar situations, but probably most did not. Human temptations are a given no matter the time or economic situations. We all have our darker desires and lusts, but most choose not to act upon them because 1) their upbringing overrides such impulses 2) they can't afford to realize all of their darker fantasies 3) the opportunities never arrive. Also, fear of the gods/God played a significant role in many not engaging in such behavior. The Roman nobles often thought themselves equal to the gods themselves and therefore not subject to human restrictions. Even Zeus participated in his dalliances did he not? Finally, one of the best ways to network in social circles is through sexual relationships. The wealthy have long since employed sex as a means to gain access to more prominence.
Well no I didn't mean it quite that way, but I'm sure many commoners would have liked to have been in similar situations, but probably most did not. Human temptations are a given no matter the time or economic situations. We all have our darker desires and lusts, but most choose not to act upon them because 1) their upbringing overrides such impulses 2) they can't afford to realize all of their darker fantasies 3) the opportunities never arrive. Also, fear of the gods/God played a significant role in many not engaging in such behavior. The Roman nobles often thought themselves equal to the gods themselves and therefore not subject to human restrictions. Even Zeus participated in his dalliances did he not? Finally, one of the best ways to network in social circles is through sexual relationships. The wealthy have long since employed sex as a means to gain access to more prominence.
I think you need to add other things to your list that undoubtedly played a part in the sexual mores among commoners - 1) social realities and 2) legal restrictions (which are linked to social realities). I think the same article I originally cited discussed some of this in the Middle Ages, but it would have applied to the ancient world as well. Children born out of wedlock or adultery had lineages which were somewhat murky, such as when it came to inheritance and other rights. Such activity could also spread disease. Also, when we think of how many women died in childbirth, we can imagine how extra-marital pregnancies that ended in death would could have brought double-calamity upon families of such women.
Yes quite right. I didn't even consider the biological concerns or the inheritance issues. Excellent points.
You guys know more about Roman society than I. I just based my comment on my belief that if given an opportunity without the threat of consequences people will do what they want to do, and given our inherant sinful nature, its usually not the right choice. I've always been a little too pessimistic for my own good. 🙂
