By Toby Olson
In the three days that I was home over the long weekend, my sister asked me how often I think about the Roman Empire. In asking this question, she was laying a trap.
I’m taking two classes this semester that deal directly with the Romans and their legacy, so my readiness to say, “yeah all the time” to that question was immediately ridiculed.
I immediately jumped in defense of my fascination with Roman history and its various phases over the course of, like, a whole millenia (cool!).
I then started to mansplain the various distinctions between Early Rome, The Roman Republic, The Roman Empire and the impact of Christianity on the whole equation. This only made my case significantly worse, as I had accidentally revealed the fact that I’m not just thinking about Rome because of the classes I’m taking; it turns out that for whatever reason I’ve established a personal association with Roman history ever since I first encountered it.
Apparently I think about the Roman Empire quite a lot. Perhaps, even when I’m not thinking about it directly, Roman history is a classic reference point that informs the way I think about the contemporary. “It feels like the Pumpkin Spice Latte of history.” This is likely because the basis for an education in “The Liberal Arts” (Cicero? I think?) is rooted in classical tradition that has strictly informed universities’ curricula for millenia. Though there are notable gaps in a cultures’ interests in the classics, it’s a written history of thought that has been repeatedly referenced since its unfolding. It seems as though this fascination comes in part from the desire to interact with and replicate the past. To some extent, my interest in the classics comes from my own innate desire to be remembered. Just like the vast collection of thinkers before me, I like to talk with my friends about human nature, competition and collaboration, objectivity and subjectivity. Naturally, just like these thinkers, my ego wants my opinion to be preserved throughout history, read by hundreds of millions if not billions of people over thousands of years. That would be cool I think.
There are obvious problems with this: It takes a whole lot of naivete to decide that the opinion one supports is an absolute. For the most part, the continuity of the Western Canon sheds light on the human need to preserve both personal and cultural identity.
How does masculinity function into the desire to be remembered? To what extent is it inherent to masculinity? To what extent is the patriarchal layout of Ancient-to-Christian Rome responsible for our notions that these things are masculine? Since it was only free, land-owning men who were fortunate enough to have their opinion propagated for centuries by other free, land-owning men, we’re bound to have a very narrow perspective to which only land-owning men can relate. To what extent does our current understanding of “homoeroticism” play into this? With all these fun, funky questions in the air, I decided to make a fool of myself in the Union Marketplace on Monday afternoon and ask people “How often do you think about the Roman Empire?”
There were three general outcomes to my interviews. The first group consists of people that were uncomfortable with my choice to pull up a chair and ask them questions with my voice memos open and recording. They did not want to take any stance at all. “I don’t know anything, oh god,” said one, “I don’t think I ever thought about the Roman Empire outside of like high school,” said another. My favorite response of this category was, “It’s interesting but I don’t think about it at all. What’s this for?”
This last response is notable because the person in question admits that they find the Roman Empire to be interesting, and yet they claim not to think about it “at all.” Even more interesting is their desire to know why I want to know. It seems to be that discussing Roman history has become a charged subject, where people are uncomfortable to make any statement for fear of some personal judgment.
This brings me to the next category of people I interviewed. Most people I asked knew that I was asking this question because it’s been popping up here-and-there in social media as something that brings to light the interplay between the homoeroticism-and-or-toxicity of masculinity. I got answers like, “I’m deceased… never… I see the memes,” “Recently because of the TikTok trend I think of it more for sure,” or “My girlfriend asked me this.”
The trend goes as follows: A woman asks a man how much he thinks about the Roman Empire (or more broadly, Roman history). Based on the man’s answer, people render judgments about him and about masculinity as a whole. The assumed conclusion is that men think about the Roman Empire a lot because it’s linked to some masculine fantasy around power and status (apparently gained by homoerotic celebratory displays and personal relationships—teehee).
Regardless of how much they claim to think about the Roman Empire, this portion of the interviewees had ideas about the way in which notions of Roman culture should (or shouldn’t) inform contemporary society, typically in regards to masculine image.
I won’t attempt to establish anything definitive, but based off conversations I’ve had with some friends and the above VoxPop interviews (Latin origins btw: Vox Populi translates directly to “voice of the people”), I maintain that a fascination with the Roman Empire should neither be designated as masculine nor feminine. Rather, Roman history presents a breadth of customs that can become templates that inform a person’s masculine identity and fantasy.
This is quite obvious in looking at the statements from Binghamton students.
I asked the question: “What’s the first thing that comes to mind when I mention the Roman Empire?”
For the most part people did not identify masculinity as foundational to their understanding of Roman history. People mentioned architecture (Aqueducts!) and some… clothing? (Romans wore skirts and togas. I’d wear a skirt if you did, kidding… unless?) Literature came up, “I don’t love Italy… I do love Augustine.” Another fellow “was thinking about cheese, for some reason” and “was like, I wonder what types of cheese ancient Romans ate?” (He just like me fr).
Three people mentioned masculinity directly. “The whole army was gay. It’s no surprise that they topped every other nation. There is definitely something that can be said about Romans being idolized as the pinnacle of masculinity, when most of them slept with their homeboys,” said the first. “The gladiator shit. That’s true masculinity. If I had a man do that for me I would fumble.” said the second. “If so many men are thinking about it, there must be some correlation,” said another. One person said one word “soldiers” and I’m gonna count that in here too.
Another two people mentioned power directly. (I don’t think the concept of power should be tied into masculinity. Power is felt and experienced differently between men and women and everything in between. Consider slogans like “Girl Power or this power or that power; these all refer to different traits that different people identify with the idea of power.)
“It was an unjust power structure… if you’re not in power you want it, if you’re in power you want more. It’s greedy, it’s very human,” said one. “The power vacuum left at the fall of the Roman Empire,” said another.
With the information I gathered from my brief encounter with the public (spooky), I’ll address my questions again. How does masculinity fit into the desire to be immortalized through action? I don’t know man. It does seem that wealthy, land-owning men made a concerted effort to keep their opinions exalted over other (equally worthy and potentially more interesting) opinions through recorded history. What came first, the chicken or the egg? Something about Hegel?
To what extent does thinking about Roman culture inform one’s masculinity? Not too much. As seen above, most people thought about architecture, literature or cuisine. There are definitely conclusions to be made about Roman masculinity and its impact, but people are equally thrilled by fun facts about aqueducts. (Water all the way from Gaul? No way!) and the historical trajectory of cheese preparation.
To what extent is the patriarchal layout of Ancient-to-Christian Rome responsible for our notions that these things are masculine? It’s just as responsible as any patriarchal republic or empire. As most U.S. students learned at some point in middle school, the Roman Republic is foundational to our current legislative system. This Roman Republic was brought to you courtesy of slavery and misogyny. It’s not fun to address the fact that ours is too! We should though. We can point fingers at Roman culture (and boy did they contribute) but we should first point to ourselves and our friends. “Let he who is without sin cast the first stone,” or something.
To what extent does our current understanding of homoeroticism play into this? If you’re really into history, you’ve probably had to think about Roman history, that’s totally cool man. If you’re really into Roman history you probably know that at the very least they grappled with each other, in thongs, smothered in oil. If you’re really into that specific fact, (and to most people who are into Roman military history—this probably applies to you even if you’re repressing your knowledge of their homoeroticism and skirt wearing), that right there might be an indicator of something.
You may notice that I’ve abstained from gendering any of the above interviewees. I wanted to gauge a couple people’s opinions without making what they had to say about their gender. That being said, below is a list of all quotes and the gender of their speaker. There is absolutely nothing valid to be established empirically here, enjoy.
“I don’t Love Italy… I do love Augustine” – Man
“Fall and rise of civilizations, power structures” – Man
“It was an unjust power structure… if you’re not in power you want it, if you’re in power you want more. Its greedy, it’s very human.” – Man
“I do think about Rome a lot” – Man
“The power vacuum left at the fall of the Roman Empire” – Man
“I really like the outfits I think we should bring that back, like the short skirts” – Woman
“The gladiator shit. That’s true masculinity, I had a man do that for me I would fumble” – Man
“That feminine look on a man especially when they have muscles” – Man
“I don’t know anything, oh god” – Woman
“Recently because of the tiktok trend I think of it more for sure” – Woman
“Remember history, sure” – Woman
“I used to know more like in sixth grade” – Man
“You know I was actually thinking about it last night. I wonder what Roman emperors ate.” – Man
“I was thinking about cheese, for some reason, and I was like I wonder what types of cheese did ancient Romans eat?” – Same dude (goat)
“My girlfriend asked me this” – Man
“Like the big horse… trojan horse” – Man
“I don’t think I ever thought about the Roman Empire outside of like high school” – Man
“It’s interesting but I don’t think about it at all. What’s this for?” – Man
“Maybe like once a week” – Woman
“The columns, the outfits… that’s about it” – Woman
“I’m deceased… never… I see the memes” – Man
“Uhmmm, like the colosseum I guess” – Woman
“It feels like the pumpkin spice latte of history, thinking about the roman empire.. I’d probably say like once a month” – Man
“If so many men are thinking about it there must be some correlation” – Woman
“The whole army was gay. It’s no surprise that they topped every other nation. There is definitely something that can be said about Romans being idolized as the pinnacle of masculinity, when most of them slept with their homeboys,” – Man