Being a Man
The Roman Virtus as a Contribution to Moral
Philosophy
By Juhani Sarsila
Review
"The Moral Power behind
Roman Civilisation"
I came to this book as a result of curiosity. First,
my University education in the late fifties in Aberdeen where I studied Moral
Philosophy under Professor Donald MacKinnon and next, a sense of wonder at -
along with the richness of their culture - what must have been the engine that
drove the Romans to the conquering of such vast tracts of the earth's surface
and their subjugation of so many civilisations and peoples. It had to be more
than a blind urge to trample and conquer: what was the philosophy that spurred
them on and held their vast empire together for so many centuries?
This
study by Juhani Sarsila, "Being A Man: The Roman Virtus As A Contribution to
Moral Philosophy" provides many intriguing answers to this. The notion of
"virtus" (literally, "manliness") is so much more than just the possession or
cultivation of warlike urges and valour - it encompasses a far wider spectrum.
Early on, we find that the idea of a single brutish driving force is entirely
inappropriate. "Virtus" has to be seen at many different levels in giving its
life-long commitment to Roman society. And where do women fit into this? Are
they totally sidelined by the driving male assumptions carried in this concept?
Seemingly not. Indeed the Roman "virtus" can be extended to include the
characteristics of woman - though here again, there are varying interpretations.
W. Eisenhut (1973) had referred to the "disturbing" etymological connection with
the root-word "vir" that long prevented "virtus" from being attributed to a
woman. According to him, it would not have been until a letter of Cicero's to
his wife that the meaning of "virtus" was extended to contain the
"characteristics of a woman". Yet here there is a suggestion that this
interpretation is solecistic. The terms "mulier" and "virtus" are in fact
purposely contrasted. Cicero is actually stating that "virtus" applied to a
woman does not really apply. The word indeed possesses purely masculine
characteristics. And so this argument progresses fascinatingly through the
interpretations of the works of Pliny the Younger, Juvenal and Ovid and many,
many more.
Then there is the interplay of the genders as revealed in
"Amphitruo" by Plautus where the thoughts of Alcmena dwell on the concept of
military valour. She highlights "virtus" as the fundamental socio-political and
individual value that ensures a safe and stable life for all members of (Roman)
society. Indeed her subservience to this concept even goes so far as to suggest
her own life's lack of real meaning without the presence of the all-powerful
male "virtus". This picture then is further complicated when Alcmena has been
praising the benefits of military valour for the whole of society - leading on
to the clash of "amor" and "virtus". Are these two incompatible? The former
emanating from and pertaining to the individual while the latter bonds and
cements society? But just when this conundrum looms all is resolved in the
further unfolding of events and we actually have "virtus" not contravening
"amor", but actually reinforcing it.
The foregoing can only be only the
tiniest glimpse into a fascinating study that covers a vast area of the
philosophy, the art and the whole society of this ancient world - as the
generous bibliography makes abundantly clear. The sheer complexity of this
concept of "virtus" takes us on a journey from the earliest times, with Gaius
Lucilius (2nd century BCE). Here we are shown the concept as something quite
different again. "Manliness - or virtue - is being able to pay in full a fair
price in our business dealings and in the affairs that life brings us; virtue is
knowing what each affair has within it for a man; virtue is knowing what is
right and useful and honourable for a man and what things are good and what are
bad, what is shameful, useless, dishonourable; virtue is knowing the limit and
the end of seeking a thing ......... and besides all this, thinking our
country's interests to be foremost of all, our parents' next and then, thirdly,
lastly our own". What an extraordinarily high - even unattainable - set of
values for any social grouping to set itself! And here lies the intriguing
feature of Sarsila's book - the revelation of the sheer scale of the concept of
"virtus" in the Roman psyche. What at first just might appear to be merely an
urge to conquer and expand by organised force of arms, takes on the mantle of an
all-encompassing philosophy with many and varied facets.
The text is
clear and crisp and to this monoglot anglophone this has to be viewed with a
degree of respect. Respect that an academic can not only marshal the arguments
of his thesis but can express them in so readable a manner in a language that is
not his first. An important point to stress for potential readers in the
English-speaking market, which might have a prejudiced tendency to look askance
at (to them) foreign authors.
Juhani Sarsila sets out to show that Roman
"Virtus" makes a contribution to Moral Philosophy. My conclusion is "quod erat
demonstrandum"
For all who wonder at the extraordinary thing that was
Roman Culture, this book is a must.
I recommend it highly.
Brian
Denoon
August 2006
