06b: Why Rome?

The influence of Rome can be felt all around America to this very day. Just start with our government: our nation's Founders were very well read in Greek and Roman classical literature, and particularly their political thought. While the Greeks undoubtedly established democratic traditions long before the Romans did, the Romans actually made democracy work on a consistent basis. Our Founders recognized this Roman tradition when they claimed America's right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They recognized it even further when they invented the American government. The senior house of the United States legislature is named the Senate,the same as the Romans' senior legislative body. The chief executive of the United States is the president, a term derived from the Latin verb praesidio, "to sit at the front." The chief executive of each state is the governor, derived from the Latin noun gubernator, itself derived from the Greek noun kubernetes, or "steersman." The democratic ideals developed (even if they were not always actually practiced) by the Romans and ancient Greeks form the basis of American citizenship.

Questions of "cultural influence" aside, it's not hard to see a common bond betwen the ancient Romans and modern Americans. From ancient Roman literature, primarily poetry, we know that the Romans enjoyed the ancient form of "situation comedies," that they were fond of watching contact sports, and how they took great pride in their nation's military achievements. Archaeology teaches us that the ancient Romans built roads and buildings to last, and that they were fond of a sauce called garum - made from the squeezings of rancid fish guts. The ancient Romans were very skeptical of their politicians, and later on, of their emperors. That did not, however, keep Roman politics from being a blood sport, often complete with rioting in the streets. No matter how downtrodden the Roman lower classes might be, Roman politicians and emperors who didn't take them seriously often came to a bad end. On the one hand, the ancient Romans were fixated on the importance of upholding their glorious national traditions - the so called mos maiorum, or "ways of the ancestors." On the other hand, the ancient Romans were almost always quite tolerant of new peoples and new ways and especially of new religions - provided the religions didn't offend the mos maiorum too much.

Rome's two millenia of growth, decline and fall have fascinated historians to this very day. Over its more than 2,000 years of existence,  Rome passed from near utter insignificance to a regional power, from a regional power to a world power, and from a world power to the most powerful nation of its day. Perhaps of any time. Upon becoming the most powerful nation of its day, internal distress forced Rome to change from democracy to monarchy. For nearly two centuries, the new Roman monarchy maintained its status as the world's sole superpower, until internal and external pressures began to tear Rome apart, again. The so-called decline and fall of Rome, a concept popularized by the Enlightenment historian Edward Gibbon, has been held up as a warning for civilizations ever since. To this day, right here in Springfield, Missouri's local newspaper, you can read letters citing the fall of the Roman Empire to predict America's future fall due to one of a wide range of flaws: militarism, immorality, apathy, or even overtaxation. From the very beginning, Americans have been fixated on overtaxation.

The ancient Romans' style of running an Empire has also fascinated monarchs and other empire builders for to this very day. After the Western Roman Empire fell in 476 AD (or some other year), the kings of the so-called "Holy Roman Empire" (962-1806 AD) routinely referred to themselves as "Kaiser" - the German form of the name Caesar. Farther east, the people of the so-called Byzantine empire, would deny that they had ever stopped being Romans - even though they would tell you this not in Latin, but in Ancient Greek.  They would insist on being called Romaioi - the Ancient Greek word for "Roman."  After the fall of the Byzantine empire in 1453, Grand Prince Ivan III of Muscovy married a princess of Byzantine royal blood and began using the title "Tsar" - a Russian form of the name Caesar. In 1721 Ivan's successor, Tsar Peter I "The Great" began using the title "Imperator." When the German Empire reunified under the Hohenzollerns in 1871, its rulers once more claimed the title "Kaiser." To this day, British coinage contains the Latin phrase ELIZABETH II DEI GRATIA REGINA: Elizabeth the Second, by the Grace of God Queen. Whoever said Latin was dead needs to get out a little bit more.

But most fascinating of all to your instructor is the idea of one nation assigning itself an imperial mission of maintaining world peace. The Romans first accomplished this with the Pax Romana - also known as the Pax Augusta - which lasted from just before the time of Christ well into the second century AD. Russia dreamed of bringing about a pax Russica; Britain tried to impose a pax Britannica. You and I live in the times of a pax Americana, with consequences which affect every American in every part of his or her life. The ultimate purpose of this course is to make you decide whether a pax Americana is worth the work and the sacrifice or not. To answer that question intelligently, we must begin with the ancient Romans.