Ep. 11: Lessons from the Romans
What are you willing to throw your life away on? With Andrew Reed and The Liberation. It's a serious question, one worth pondering. Am I living the life I want, an intelligent life, or something else? How can I have a better experience of life?
Speaker 1:These are some of the questions explored in this series of messages without the brag and the advertisement. Getting beyond even human institutions and society into the wilderness, nature, the reality of how life actually operates on this planet. These messages range from intimate recordings from the awakened forest to concerts, national conferences, and broadcasts on a wide array of philosophical topics.
Speaker 2:There are many lessons to be learned from the Roman Empire. One might think that it's a irrelevant ancient culture that really has no significance today. Well, I think that's a very ignorant view. History is valuable. It gives us insight into the realities of the human condition, the greatness, and also the shortcomings of mankind.
Speaker 2:And there are patterns that repeat themselves over and over and over again. Therefore, there's value in studying history, and there's value in the analysis of the reasons why the Romans were successful. I mean, let's look at it this way. The Roman Empire lasted nearly a thousand years. Of course, depending upon where you want to start counting.
Speaker 2:I prefer to start with the Republic period and wish to conclude with the fall of the Western Roman Empire. The republic period was preceded by the regal period where kings ruled, which really wasn't very different from the surrounding peoples at that time. So to me, that's that's not significant. But when the republic was adopted, hey, that was something different, something unique. And it was during the republic period that Rome really began to ascend as a world power.
Speaker 2:The republic period, which runs approximately from 05/2009 to thirty one BC, that is until the imperial period, that's where the Caesars and the emperors appeared. This is the period we're gonna be concentrating on here. Now most people do not really grasp really how long the Roman Empire lasted. The empire, as we think of it, lasted approximately nine hundred years. And then the Eastern Roman Empire, that is the the Byzantine Empire, lasted another thousand years after what we think of as the fall of the Roman Empire or the fall of Rome.
Speaker 2:So it lasted a long time. So by any measure, this is a long season for a culture to exist. And I think you have to call it a success, if nothing else, just from the, standpoint of sheer endurance. Rome, the idea of Rome, it was the light or the center of the ancient world. It was known as being advanced and sophisticated.
Speaker 2:In fact, much more so than the dark ages that followed, when Rome fell to the barbarians, it ushered in really a step backwards from mankind, and it took a while, before mankind really caught up to where the Romans were. They were ahead of their time. And as we study the Romans, we'll find factors that led to their success, and we'll see principles and the identity that the Romans held that made them the people that they were. And as I'm speaking here, of course, one can find particular situations where the Romans may have deviated from the points that I'm conveying. After all, we're dealing with a time period of a thousand years approximately.
Speaker 2:However, these factors that I'm pointing out regarding the Roman success, I believe they're the dominant traits of the Romans, and this is how they would behave in a normal setting. The first point I'd like to discuss is that the Romans were proactive and aggressive people. Just as it is today, proactive people succeed. Now the Romans did not gain their empire by shaking hands and kissing babies. They did it through war and intimidation, through conquest, and they had a definite desire to expand their influence.
Speaker 2:Thus, they adopted a national policy that included the expansion of territory. So in short, they went for it. They conquered. The second point I'd like to make is that to understand why the Romans wanted to conquer other lands or at least partially lays in their belief that they were better than others, that they were more refined, they were more disciplined, more educated, and they were a tough people. You might say that they were somewhat elitist because as some of their stories indicate, even in death at the hands of what they'd think of as a lesser people, they would hold their heads high even as they're being chopped off.
Speaker 2:The Romans had just all kinds of very moralistic tales of their culture, of these defiant brave Romans that, again, when faced with an inferior people, even though there might be short term defeats, they would ultimately prevail. The important point to get here is that their belief is what made them great. They believed that they were great, and they became great. They acted according to the images that they held, and these powerful images shaped their behavior. They were a sophisticated people, far advanced over their contemporaries.
Speaker 2:They were bringing, quote, civilization to an inferior world. They were spreading their gospel. In fact, their image carried them far beyond where their armies did. One time, a single senator made a visit to a nation that was preparing to go to war against Rome, and the mere senator's presence and this senator's confidence so intimidated the army commanders of that nation that they conceded without a fight. Now that's what I call moxie.
Speaker 2:Now the third point I'd like to make, and it's an interesting point to me, is that the Romans were not much of a power until the adoption of the republic. The kings were removed and representatives of the people ruled with the people having very much say in matters of the state, much like modern democracies. The ideas of liberty and freedom were held in high regard with the Romans. At first, expansion was slow. They battled and fought really what I'll call local and regional engagements against the Etruscans and the Latins and the Sammonites, and it took really four hundred years just to conquer their region.
Speaker 2:However, once they had a base of experience under their belts, it only took them seventy years to conquer the remainder of Italy, and this all happened after the formation of the republic. Now the fourth point is that the Romans created a solid foundation from which to operate. This foundation was Italy. After all, in the beginning, Rome was only an idea, then it became a city, a city of ideals where a sophisticated people started, and the idea of Rome expanded and was really spread through the conquest of territories. All the little pieces of Italy were brought in section by section into the empire until all of Italy was under its governance.
Speaker 2:Now the important principle to grasp here is that they had a foundation of strength from which to draw resources in men so they could supply their armies or raise armies or the things that they needed to expand the empire. The Romans could suffer a truly devastating defeat, which is probably a point to make here that the Romans were not successful in all their battles. Sometimes the Romans would suffer tremendous defeats where whole armies were cut down. And after a defeat that would have ruined other countries or empires, The Romans just shrugged it off and raised new legions to replace the ones that were cut down. Having a great pool of resources is a good thing.
Speaker 2:We all need an Italy in our life to draw upon when we suffer those defeats. So it is a key to success. The fifth point is that the Romans were an incredibly persistent people. They were absolutely committed to victory with dogged determination. After a defeat, they would just shrug it off like they always did and then raise a new army to replace the one that was cut down.
Speaker 2:Like I noted earlier, the Romans paced defeat in battle. They were not invincible. However, opponents knew and feared the persistence of the Romans. Even in the unlikely defeat of a Roman army, opponents knew that Rome would send another, another, and another army until they were victorious. During this time, if a country or a nation was defeated in battle, normally, there would be some type of treaty signed or some type of concession agreement, but the Romans would have none of this.
Speaker 2:They were stubborn. There was no room for negotiation. And in the opponent's mind, all victories were really viewed as short term when facing the Romans because ultimately, they would keep coming at you until they prevailed, till they wore you down. This persistent quality was a hallmark of really Roman culture. Now the sixth point is that the Romans had a quote, what works mentality.
Speaker 2:Now the Romans believed in many pagan gods before they adopted Christianity as a national religion, or I should I say decriminalized it and favored it above all other religions and cults in approximately March. They believed that whatever works is what God or the gods were blessing. Therefore, they were always looking to what works. This what works mentality included the ability to adapt and change in order to be successful in their endeavors. Now the Romans were very practical people.
Speaker 2:For example, when they were defeated in a particular battle, they would compare notes, that is if anyone survived the battle, and then they would adopt a strategy or tactics to overcome the particular situation that they were facing. Now this was not the case for most of their opponents. The Romans were quick studies, and when you combine this dogged determination with the ability to adapt, the odds of success radically shifted in favor of the Romans. And of course, this is not just defined to military matters. All Roman society put a high value on what works, who's getting ahead, who's being successful.
Speaker 2:When the Romans visited other lands or when they conquered another territory, they would take what that land had to offer or the best, I should say, that territory had to offer and would adopt and adapt, those particular things to Roman culture. For example, the Romans were influenced by the Greeks and Greek culture, the former great society. Romans took the best of the Greek world and, for example, architecture and applied it to their own buildings. And there's definitely Greek influence in Roman architecture, but it still is Roman architecture, distinctly Roman. They would take the best and make it their own.
Speaker 2:Now the seventh point is that the Romans were people that held to tradition, yet they were flexible. Now this may sound like a contradiction. However, if something worked, the gods must be blessing this activity, and the Romans would find some way to weave this new innovation into their tradition. They they were great about this. Thus, they would keep the good of the old and incorporate the new at the same time.
Speaker 2:The Romans were very good most of the time at honoring their traditions, their traditions of law and of precedent and, the word of the ancestors. Like the ideas of freedom and liberty and the pursuit of happiness, these were all, held in high regard and were passed down again from the ancestors. But these were very practical people, and they kept a close eye on the new innovations, the things that would make their world operate better. But just because they were advancing, they needed tradition and the way things were done, that's really a structure from which to innovate. Now the eighth point is that in battle, the Romans employed superior tactics and formations.
Speaker 2:For example, the Roman army was vastly more flexible than its counterparts. In fact, the Roman legions were so organized that they could pull small units of men out of the line and redeploy them to take advantage of opportunities or to strengthen positions, whereas their opponents had no such maneuverability and as they had attacked in mass. And also great leadership was employed. They had lots of, men directing these smaller units. These were noble men, educated men, experienced men, that were in command of the Roman armies.
Speaker 2:And back in Rome, in fact, the Senate was compromised, primarily of former military figures and generals and officers. And of course, they were not ignorant regarding the subject matter of war. So this proliferation of military men in the senate no doubt influenced Rome's imperial appetite. The ninth point is that the Romans had superior equipment and tactics. For example, Roman weaponry during the mid Republic, it was genius.
Speaker 2:The Romans would have this large shield and they'd have these two spears and a short dagger, and one of the spears was a long spear with a heavy spearhead, and the other was a shorter, lighter spear. And they would take this heavy spear and they would heave it at the opponent's line, which usually was a bunch of guys, in line with short swords and shields and maybe their own, pikes or whatever, And this heavy spearhead would come down and, as they would see this mass of of heavy spears coming at them, of course, they would hopefully, raise their shields. Otherwise, they'd probably be impaled or whatever. And this heavy spearhead would stick into the shield, and it had a barb in it so it couldn't easily be removed. Now can you imagine having this heavy spearhead coming at you?
Speaker 2:And of course, if you're swift in this enough, you bring your shield up to block it and it just sticks into your shields with this long pole, making it very hard to maneuver thereafter, making it really almost useless, maybe a liability even. Okay, so if you survive this, you weren't impaled by the initial salvo and you blocked it with your shield. Okay, at that point, the Romans would take their second spear, the lighter spear, and throw it. And of course, with the decreased maneuverability of the shield, more would be taken out by this second salvo of spears. Then with strokes one and two out of the way, the Romans would move in to close quarters with their own shield in front of them and they would deal death with their short dagger as they sliced and thrusted around their shields, which were highly movable and it was just a quite effective, technique and use of weaponry to say the least.
Speaker 2:Now the tenth point is that the Romans were organized. They were well trained and disciplined. In fact, the Roman culture was a culture of discipline really, and of course, military skills were highly valued. In fact, children were indoctrinated, in military doctrine relatively early. The eleventh point is that the Romans used classical symbols of power and strength.
Speaker 2:Marius, one of the great Roman generals, incorporated the use of eagles and bears and lions and other symbols in order to create individual unit identity. And he found that units would fight harder because they would take pride in their divisions and they would compete on the battlefield for glory and honor. And it was just very effective. Other armies were not doing that at the time. And Marius was quite an interesting figure.
Speaker 2:He was a new man. He came from no prominent family. He rose through the ranks by virtue of his spectacular military successes. And he really contributed a number of reforms that ultimately led to the professionalism of the Roman army. Now the twelfth point is that Roman citizenship was something of value.
Speaker 2:To be a Roman citizen was no small thing. It gave a person rights and privileges that did not extend to noncitizens of the empire. For example, in court proceedings, you were given due process. And if you were found guilty of a crime, your your sentence would be less than if you were not a citizen. If you weren't a citizen, just prepare for the worse.
Speaker 2:It could be quite severe. The thirteenth point and the final point that I'm going to be talking about is the Roman success in conquered lands, and it can be in no small part attributable to their treatment of conquered people. During this time or this era, it was not uncommon for all the males of a conquered land or territory to be slaughtered and the rest of the population carted off as slaves. The Romans didn't do this, that is unless they were provoked. If they were provoked, they would do it as well.
Speaker 2:Instead, the Romans offered varying levels of recognition and citizenship to communities and individuals. The aristocracy and wealthy members of society would be grafted into Roman culture, and thus they could represent Rome in their respective communities. And, of course, the people would follow suit. Communities might be granted less or no taxes if they were, quote, good boys and girls, and if they went along with the Roman program. If their men did well in the Roman army in in battle and displayed, courage and and brought honor, their community would be given special recognition from Rome and perhaps its citizens granted full Roman citizenship.
Speaker 2:That was the goal. In fact, the whole concept of these levels or steps in the recognition process is very important, something that really set the Romans apart from other societies at that time, because this these steps or these levels fostered a desire to advance within the empire. When the statements heard all eyes are upon Rome, that was the truth at that time. If you wanted to advance, you wanted Rome to look kindly on your area or your community, and you would compare your community with that of Rome. That was the standard, the center of ideas, the aspirations for most communities.
Speaker 2:Now let's compare what the Romans did with what Hitler did in World War two. Now, when, Hitler and Germany went into the Soviet Union, they could have had a tremendous asset in the aid of the people who hated Stalin, But yet Hitler blundered and turned, really all the people against him, and it became a nightmare as they became partisan forces that really created havoc with his supply lines. So the Romans, very forward thinking about how they were going to do this. Now let's just kind of debrief some of these factors of success because they do have direct application in our lives. For example, you'll have more success if you are proactive and aggressive.
Speaker 2:Passive and reactionary people don't achieve very much. You need to have a positive and powerful view of yourself, in order to be strong like the Romans. They had a very a definite idea of who they were in the world. You need to have your own Italy, a foundation for which you can expand even after you suffer defeats. For example, if you get one business that's working and going well, that can be your staple or what the foundation you use to fund new ventures and explore new opportunities.
Speaker 2:And if these other ones go bust and something happens to them, you still have your core business to keep you going. You must have the same dogged determination in order to prevail, ultimate victory through persistence. You must have a what works mentality, and you need to be smart enough to observe what works and what's a waste of energy and resources. We need to be quick to adapt to situations and to be flexible. We should hold on to time tested principles, like you cannot spend more than you make and divide and conquer when you're facing a very large opponent or situation.
Speaker 2:Think about your life and your business and create superior tactics and weapons, a superior sales approach, or a more efficient production system, or etcetera. Use powerful symbols to get yourself and your team in the mindset to achieve. We need to understand that as a citizen of The United States, that we have similar freedoms and liberty, and we have rights that people of other nations long for. In victory, treat people well, not as conquered people. Give people a clear path of advancement.
Speaker 2:Treat people well. This brings us to the fall of the Roman Empire, which occurred in fourteen seventy six AD. If the Romans were so great of a civilization, why did it end? There are many simpleton explanations about this. There's the moral decay theory that says that the Romans were given to sexual perversions and appetites.
Speaker 2:Of course, this isn't the case, after all the fall of Rome came during the the Christian period. And, of course, that leads us to another theory which says that the Roman empire fell due to the introduction of Christianity as, the most favored religion under, Constantine. However, this doesn't explain why the Eastern Roman empire did not fall, but in fact lasted another thousand years. Another theory is that the barbarians were just too powerful. And again, this does not explain why the Eastern Roman Empire was able to fight off the barbarians and again, last another thousand years.
Speaker 2:Another theory is that, the intermingling of the Germans into Roman, culture weakened the Roman empire. Again, the Eastern empire had even more of a mixture of peoples and remained again for a thousand years. I don't think that you can boil it down to one cause. I think that the simpleton explanations are not sufficient. I think it's a complex explanation.
Speaker 2:I think that the, at least based on my study, the fall of the Western Roman Empire was the result of several factors. The first, which was there was unstable leadership in the Western Roman Empire, and there was a series of leaders in the different regions, wanted to have their own, territories and they had very divisive political ambitions and extremely poor judgment. This combined, with just allowing German settlements within, the Gaul area that were sympathetic towards the invading barbarians. That didn't help. And this is where we get the term barbarization, where the Germanic people were allowed to settle in Roman lands and they did not absorb Roman culture and thus weakened and added to the decline of the cities as the aristocrats, in these cities were displeased with their changing neighborhoods and thus they moved out in favor of large villas in the country.
Speaker 2:So there we have the decline of the cities. And also speaking in strictly physical terms, the West had a much more difficult border to defend than the Eastern Roman Empire. It wasn't that the barbarians were that much better than, the Western Romans because after all, the barbarians were beaten back by the Eastern Empire. But there is just too much open area to defend for the West, and given the disunity among the leaders, it's no wonder that, they succumbed eventually to the barbarians, and it actually took quite a long time. Also, barbarians must be given some credit as they found it necessary to unite, en masse and adopt really tactics of the Romans in order to beat them.
Speaker 2:And they were very aggressive, though not very sophisticated, but they were a teachable enemy. Rome was an idea. It was an idea of freedom and liberty. And when the Republic period ended and the Caesars began, that is with Julius Caesar and then Augustus and all those that followed, liberty and freedom were highly valued. Now to some, this may sound contradictory given our modern ideas of freedom and also given that the Romans embraced slavery.
Speaker 2:In the Roman view, it was the citizen that was entitled to freedom and liberty, and of course slaves were not. Slaves were employed as teachers and servants doing the mundane, those things, to serve Romans, usually the aristocrats. And of course, some became gladiators for entertainment purposes and other things. So therefore, being a Roman citizen again was something of great value, something to be pursued. The subject of public entertainment usually always arises when the subject of Rome, is brought up.
Speaker 2:Firstly, chariot racing was the number one form of entertainment as portrayed in the movie Ben Hur. These were grand events, sometimes having, hundreds of thousands of people. It was a big deal. And then comes the gladiatorial games, and I'll say they ranked a very close second. We modern people may say to ourselves, you know, how could, this supposedly sophisticated people be entertained by such violence?
Speaker 2:However, I'll put the question back at us. Why do we watch auto racing? Many people watch it in the hope that there's gonna be a wreck. And currently, there's scores of all these quote reality shows where people are struggling and they're doing all kinds of bizarre things, things that are gross. And we watch this stuff.
Speaker 2:We watch people in pain. As a society, we are interested in death. We are interested in violence. We like to see the hard hitting tackle and the title fight, though we restrain ourselves somewhat. But I would bet that if there were public executions that were broadcast, there would be a sizable portion of the view in public that would watch.
Speaker 2:So the question is, are we so different today? Do you think that some people in Roman times chose not to go to the games but to stay home, enjoy themselves, while those with the appetite for this type of entertainment obviously went? And if you had the opportunity to go back in time, back into the Roman period, and you had a chance to go to the game, you had tickets, would you go just to see it? These are interesting questions to contemplate. The Romans provide us with some highly practical lessons from a highly practical people that were successful as a society.
Speaker 2:Ignorant people either by their own self imposed ignorance or because they don't know any better fail to educate themselves about what happened in the past, and this is a shame because it's in the study of the past that we can find advice and insight to help us avoid the same mistakes and shortcomings that led to the fall of other societies.
Speaker 1:Thank you for listening. If you need anything further, just go to mbi.life.