The Roman family was one of the ways that themos maiorum was passed along through the generations.
Themos maiorum (Classical Latin:[ˈmoːsmajˈjoːrʊ̃]; "ancestral custom"[1] or "way of the ancestors";pl.:mores, cf. English "mores";maiorum is thegenitive plural of "greater" or "elder") is the unwritten code from which theancient Romans derived theirsocial norms. It is the core concept of Roman traditionalism,[2] distinguished from but in dynamic complement towritten law. Themos maiorum was collectively the time-honoured principles, behavioural models, and social practices that affected private, political, and military life in ancient Rome.[3]
The Roman family (thefamilia, better translated as "household" than "family") was hierarchical, as wasRoman society. These hierarchies were traditional and self-perpetuating, that is, they supported and were supported by themos maiorum. Thepater familias, or head of household, held absolute authority over hisfamilia, which was both an autonomous unit within society and a model for the social order,[4] but he was expected to exercise this power with moderation and to act responsibly on behalf of his family. The risk and pressure of social censure if he failed to live up to expectations was also a form ofmos.[citation needed]
The distinctive social relationship of ancient Rome was that betweenpatron(patronus) and client(cliens). Although the obligations of this relationship were mutual, they were also hierarchical. The relationship was not a unit, but a network(clientela), as apatronus might himself be obligated to someone of higher status or greater power, and acliens might have more than one patron, whose interests might come into conflict. If thefamilia was the discrete unit underlying society, these interlocking networks countered that autonomy and created the bonds that made a complex society possible.[5] Although one of the major spheres of activity within patron-client relations was the law courts, patronage was not itself a legal contract; the pressures to uphold one's obligations were moral, founded on the quality offides, "trust" (seeValues below), and themos.[6] Patronage served as a model[7] when conquerors orgovernors abroad established personal ties as patron to whole communities, ties which then might be perpetuated as a family obligation. In this sense,mos becomes less a matter of unchanging tradition than precedent.[8]
Roman conservatism finds succinct expression in an edict of thecensors from 92 BC, as preserved by the 2nd-century historianSuetonius: "All new that is done contrary to the usage and customs of our ancestors, seems not to be right."[9] However, because themos maiorum was a matter of custom, not written law, the complex norms that it embodied evolved over time. The ability to preserve a strongly-centralised sense of identity while it adapted to changing circumstances permitted the expansionism that took Rome from city-state to world power.[10] The preservation of themos maiorum depended on consensus and moderation among the ruling elite whose competition for power and status threatened it.[11]
Democratic politics, driven by the charismatic appeal of individuals(populares) to theRoman people(populus), potentially undermined the conservative principle of themos.[12] Because thehigher magistracies and priesthoods were originally the prerogative of thepatricians, the efforts ofplebeians (theplebs) for access could be cast as a threat to tradition (seeConflict of the Orders). Reform was accomplished by legislation, and written law replaced consensus.[13] When plebeians gained admission to nearly all the highest offices, except for a few arcane priesthoods, the interests of plebeian families who ascended to the elite began to align with those of the patricians, creating Rome'snobiles, an elite social status of nebulous definition during theRoman Republic.[14] Theplebs and their support of popular politicians continued as a threat to themos and elite consensus into the late Republic, as noted in the rhetoric ofCicero.[15]
During the transition to the Christian Empire,Quintus Aurelius Symmachus argued that Rome's continued prosperity and stability depended on preserving themos maiorum, and theearly Christian poetPrudentius dismissed the conservative adherence to native Roman traditions as "the superstition of old grandpas"(superstitio veterum avorum) and inferior to the newrevealed truth of Christianity.[16]
The Latin wordfides encompasses several English words, such as trust/trustworthiness,good faith/faithfulness, confidence, reliability and credibility.[17] It was an important concept inRoman law, as oral contracts were common.[18] The concept offides waspersonified by the goddessFides whose role in themos maiorum is indicated by the history of her cult.[19] Her temple is dated from around 254 BC[20] and was located on theCapitoline Hill in Rome, near theTemple of Jupiter.
Pietas was the Roman attitude of dutiful respect towards the gods, homeland, parents and family, which required the maintenance of relationships in a moral and dutiful manner.[21] Cicero definedpietas as "justice towards the gods.”[22] It went beyond sacrifice and correct ritual performance to inner devotion and righteousness of the individual, and it was the cardinal virtue of the Roman heroAeneas inVergil'sAeneid. The use of the adjectival formPius as acognomen reflects its importance as an identifying trait. LikeFides,Pietas was cultivated as a goddess, with a temple vowed to her in 191 BC[23] and dedicated ten years later.
Related to the Latin verbreligare, "to bind",religio was the bond between gods and mortals, as carried out in traditional religious practices[24] for preserving thepax deorum (“peace of the gods”).Cultus was the active observance and the correct performance of rituals.[25] Religious practice, in this sense, is to be distinguished frompietas and its inherent morality. Seereligion in ancient Rome andimperial cult (ancient Rome).
The military character of Roman society suggests the importance ofdisciplina, as related to education, training, discipline and self-control.[citation needed]
Gravitas was dignified self-control.[26]Constantia was steadiness or perseverance.[27] In the face of adversity, a good Roman was to display an unperturbed façade. Roman myth and history reinforced this value by recounting tales of figures such asGaius Mucius Scaevola,[28] who in a founding legend of the Republic demonstrated his seriousness and determination to the Etruscan kingLars Porsenna by holding his right hand in a fire.
Derived from the Latin wordvir ("man"),virtus constituted the ideal of the true Roman male.[29]Gaius Lucilius discussesvirtus in some of his work and says that it isvirtus for a man to know what is good, evil, useless, shameful or dishonorable.[29] The Roman concept of liberty (libertas), for the male citizens, was predicated in part on the right to preserve his body from physical compulsion, and this translated to a refusal to be dominated and a type of "conquest mentality" within Roman manhood (virtus).[30] In extension, it was accepted for freeborn Roman males to engage inmale-male intercourse only if he took the active penetrative role (otherwise hisvirtus would be in question or violated).[31] Romans relatedly described both sexual and imperial domination in terms of transgressing the recipient'svirtus.[32] One of Rome's most important ethical rubrics,sexual morality, was therefore heavily associated withvirtus and its varied implications for freeborn Roman males.[31][30]
Dignitas andauctoritas were the result of displaying the values of the ideal Roman and the service of the state, in the forms of priesthoods, military positions and magistracies.Dignitas was reputation for worth, honour and esteem. Thus, a Roman who displayed theirgravitas,constantia,fides,pietas and other values of a Roman would possessdignitas among their peers. Similarly, by that path, a Roman could earnauctoritas ("prestige and respect").[33]
^Karl-J. Hölkeskamp,Reconstructing the Roman Republic: An Ancient Political Culture and Modern Research (Princeton University Press, 2010), p. 17online.
^Erich S. Gruen, "Patrocinium andclientela," inThe Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome (University of California Press, 1986), vol. 1, pp. 162–163.
^See, for instance, Hölkeskamp's reference to the Republic's "capacity for self-regulation",Reconstructing the Roman Republic, p. 18.Erich S. Gruen,The Last Generation of the Roman Republic (University of California Press, 1974), p. 535.
^Hölkeskamp,Reconstructing the Roman Republic, pp. 29, 41–42et passim.
^Hölkeskamp,Reconstructing the Roman Republic, p. 42.
^Gruen,The Last Generation of the Roman Republic, pp. 258, 498, 507–508.
^TheSecond Samnite War was a crucial period in the formation of this new elite; see E.T. Salmon,Samnium and the Samnites (Cambridge University Press, 1967), p. 217, and Erich S. Gruen, "Patrocinium andClientela," inThe Hellenistic World and the Coming of Rome (University of California Press, 1984), p. 163online.
^T.P. Wiseman,Clio's Cosmetics (Leicester University Press, 1979), pp. 67–69, 85,et passim.
^Clifford Ando, "The Palladium and the Pentateuch: Towards a Sacred Topography of the Later Roman Empire,"Phoenix 55 (2001), p. 388.
^Hölkeskamp,Reconstructing the Roman Republic, p. 34.
^abCantarella,Bisexuality in the Ancient World, p. xi; Marilyn B. Skinner, introduction toRoman Sexualities (Princeton University Press, 1997), p. 11.
^abCraig A. Williams,Roman Homosexuality (Oxford University Press, 1999), p. 18.
^Davina C. Lopez, "Before Your Very Eyes: Roman Imperial Ideology, Gender Constructs and Paul's Inter-Nationalism," inMapping Gender in Ancient Religious Discourses (Brill, 2007), pp. 135–138.
Fredericks, S. C. 1969.Mos maiorum in Juvenal and Tacitus. University of Pennsylvania Pr.
Hoffmann, Zsuzsanna. 1982. "The Parody of the Idea of mos maiorum in Plautus."Oikumene, III, 217–223.
Hölkeskamp, Karl-Joachim. 2010.Reconstructing the Roman Republic: An Ancient Political Culture and Modern Research (translated by Henry Heitmann-Gordon; revised, updated, and augmented by the author). Princeton/Oxford: Princeton University Press.
Kenty, Joanna. 2016. "Congenital Virtue: Mos Maiorum in Cicero's Orations."Classical Journal 111.4:429-462
Segal, Erich. 1976. “O tempora, o mos maiorum.” InThe Conflict of Generations in Ancient Greece and Rome, Edited by Bertman, Stephen S., 135–142. Amsterdam: Grüner.
Tröster, Manuel. 2012. "Plutarch andmos maiorum in theLife of Aemilius Paullus."Ancient Society 42, 219–254.
