Roman Morals based off of Polybius, Virgil, and Juvenal

As one reads the works of Roman poets and other storytellers, a quick assumption of what Roman culture was like could be made. Some surface level characteristics that describe the morals of the Roman society would be the importance of honor, valor, courage, and a deep respect for the Gods. As the works of historians from both Greek and Roman societies are studied, different definitions of Roman morals are brought to light that give us a deeper understanding of Roman culture and morals, more importantly how they were developed and why they changed.

In The Portable Greek Historians, Polybius writes about the Roman government and their constitution. While the majority of the responsibilities of the government are controlled by the senate and the consul, the most important role was held by the Roman citizens of making the decisions regarding honor and punishment. Polybius wrote,

“For the people is the sole fountain of honor and of punishment, and it is by these two things and these alone that dynasties and constitutions and, in a word, human society are held together…it also has the absolute power of passing or repealing laws, and most important of all, it is the people who deliberate on the question of war or peace” (485-486).

The Romans experienced much success because their government was revolved around the people. Success brings unity and the Romans had success at this time. Like Polybius noted, it is honor and punishment that a society is held together. That is a large responsibility that was placed on the people. This responsibility was motivation to live a high standard of life with high morals because every decision that was made effected each one’s personal life.

Virgil relates a similar moral code held by the Romans in The Essential Aeneid. Like the Romans described by Polybius, Virgil highly emphasizes the importance of honor played in the moral code of the Roman citizens in the epic simile in the first book. Virgil says, “Riots will often break out in a crowded assembly when the rabble are roused. Torches and stones are soon flying-Fury always finds weapons-But then all eyes light upon a loyal citizen, a man of respect”(5). While Polybius talked about the honor received by the people in governmental affairs, Virgil talks about the heroic honor that is held by those who arise to the occasion and bravely defend against threats. There is much to reward for someone who stands for what is right.

In contrast, Juvenal has an extremely different outlook on the morals of Roman society in Juvenal: Satire III. The overall feelings and opinions of the morals of the Roman society seem to be constant if the citizen has connections with the right people. But if they are just an average Joe, it is nearly impossible for them to survive and gain respect. Juvenal says, “It is no easy matter, anywhere, for a man to rise when poverty stands in the way of his merits: but nowhere is the effort harder than in Rome” (164). Life does not seem to be as gloriously depicted in Rome as it has been previously. This stains the image of Roman morals and puts into question if they have them at all.

An answer as to why the Roman morals seemed to have changed may be answered by who it was reporting on the morals and not inherently the entire society changing. All of the records have a personal bias to them. For instance, Polybius had very positive things to say about the morals of Rome probabaly because he was a transplant from Greece. Virgil also glorified the Roman man by showing the praise granted for heroic acts that also carried on cultural stories and tradition. Juvenal on the other hand, had little motivation to boost the image of Roman morals, which resulted in a negative report. While societies are constantly evolving, these three instances are from one extreme to the other which is why the change of view in Roman morals in based off of personal experience and opinion of the authors writing.