Suicide

[M. Porcius Cato]

It was of practical importance to rescue any that could be rescued, however if one happened to die, despite everyone's best efforts, it was still a great honor to that person.

 

To the victors go the spoils, and to the vanquished go the honors?

[Lost_Warrior]

To the victors go the spoils, and to the vanquished go the honors?

 

I would assume not, lol Rome would hardly give her enemies honors

 

However considering it a great honor to die in battle for Rome serves several purposes: it increases moral (by *lessening* though not eliminating the fear of death in battle by making such death an honor) and by hailing those who died in battle as heros as well as those who lived, it paints a picture of "Roman army=hero" any way you look at it. So it becomes a rather practical viewpoint to be held, though how tightly it was held was up to the individual and the time period.

[M. Porcius Cato]

However considering it a great honor to die in battle for Rome serves several purposes: it increases moral (by *lessening* though not eliminating the fear of death in battle by making such death an honor) and by hailing those who died in battle as heros as well as those who lived, it paints a picture of "Roman army=hero" any way you look at it. So it becomes a rather practical viewpoint to be held, though how tightly it was held was up to the individual and the time period.

 

Again, I can't think of ANY Roman honors awarded for dying. Tributes were for killing. The various coronae were for saving Roman lives. You could get an award for being the first to jump over a wall--but there weren't anything like Purple Hearts and that sort of thing (were there?).

 

I think this notion that Romans believed that there was nothing so sweet as to die for one's country is a bit of Horatian death-worship that was not widely shared. The highest honors were reserved not for those who died for Rome, but for those who killed for Rome. And, ultimately, is what you want from your military anyway--not to go out and die heroically, but to go out and kill the enemy.

[Lost_Warrior]

I don't think there were any honors awarded, it was just a belief. They didn't hand out medals to the dead or anything.

[M. Porcius Cato]

I don't think there were any honors awarded, it was just a belief. They didn't hand out medals to the dead or anything.

 

So how do you explain that?

[Lost_Warrior]

Ok, it was believed that it was honorable to die for one's country...similar beliefs are held almost all over the world even now. (that's what I've been trying to say all along I guess I didn't quite make it lol)

[Horatius]

The highest honors were reserved not for those who died for Rome, but for those who killed for Rome. And, ultimately, is what you want from your military anyway--not to go out and die heroically, but to go out and kill the enemy.

Was reading the Paterculus account of the Teutoburg disaster and I came upon this "When the Germans were venting their rage upon their captives, an heroic act was performed by Caldus Caelius, a young man worthy in every way of his long line of ancestors, who, seizing a section of the chain with which he was bound, brought down with such force upon his own head as to cause his instant death, both his brains and his blood gushing from the wound." OUCH! thats gotta hurt! Just thought I would add this here since Paterculus at least seens to single out Caelius' suicide (who apparently surrendered) as more heroic than Varus of which he writes "The leader showed some spirit in dying, though none in fighting; for, imitating the example of his father and grandfather, he ran himself through with his sword." http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roma...rculus/2D*.html

Edited June 6, 2006 by Horatius