- cross-posted to:
- roughromanmemes
- cross-posted to:
- roughromanmemes
You must log in or register to comment.
I mean, doesn’t every society attempt to morally justify their wars of conquest within the framework of their own social mores?
I can’t exactly think of a society who thought of themselves as evil for expanding their holdings…
It’s less about good and evil, and more about justification. You have to remember that the pre-modern period was still very much a time of naked self-interest (as opposed to obfuscated self-interest) - it wasn’t so much that the non-Roman peoples thought of themselves as evil (or that the Romans thought of non-Roman peoples as thinking of themselves as evil), but that they saw less need to create elaborate justifications for participating in what was a common behavior of society at the time.
When the Gauls and Germanics went on raids, their thinking wasn’t “Dohohoho, time to commit some CRIMES”, but rather, “This is the way the world works, I’m taking an opportunity”, the way that a merchant might eye a good deal. The Romans, if you will, saw there as being an additional ‘barrier’ of a need for justification to go and murder and plunder their enemies without the slightest hint of conscience - typically “They broke a specific clause in a treaty” or “They refused to deliver justice to a Roman citizen”.
I can’t exactly think of a society who thought of themselves as evil for expanding their holdings…
Well, what about… the Galactic Empire under Emperor Palpatine?
I only fight just wars, therefore all my enemies are ontologically evil therefore all actions against them are justified
Explanation: The Romans placed a relatively high value on the idea of Iustum Bellum - just war. Now, this was certainly not always adhered to - and furthermore, was often very far from ‘just’ as we would recognize it. But the Romans regarded the process of morally justifying their wars as something that made them superior to barbarian polities.
Huh. TIL. Ty.
