Hacker News Reader

Comment by snowpid | Hacker News Reader

This is the reason I think about the Roman Empire at least once a week!

This has the be the funniest trend to come out of Tiktok. My SO point blank asked me how many times I thought about the roman empire and I replied "I don't know, once or twice a week".

Little does she know we get a post from acoup every week!

Reference (for those out of the loop): https://www.forbes.com/sites/conormurray/2023/09/18/how-ofte...

thanks for the reference. I mean i could have websearched around for a while, but i've been asking everyone that comments in my friends group, about this topic, and i'm getting "it was a trend" but not where or why it started.

when 1/8th of the planet knows about a trend and i'm out of the loop...

I was completely out of the loop as well, until my wife shot me a completely out of the blue text this morning asking me if I thought I could help land a plane in an emergency, and how often I thought about the Roman Empire. After I begged for context, she told me about the trend, and then about three minutes later I happened upon this thread and this comment chain was at the top lol.

my wife asked me and i said once per week. then she and my daughter cackled and asked me to repeat my answer and i knew i was about to become part of a trend so i refused. but isn't it fascinating how truly interested in the roman republic and emopire we are? people are coming up with theories about why this is the case but i'm not sure any of them resonate with me. i was always more of a greece person until i visited italy 7 years ago and i was thoroughly smitten.

My answer to my girlfriend was that I think about ancient Greece more often. Rome less. Greece was ahead of its time in philosophy and science. So many household names. Rome has a lot of political analogs to today though, which is what I find interesting about it.

Difference being Rome was an entity with government, military, etc. with which we can draw a lot of parallels to today, whereas Greece was more of a loose interconnection of cities that shape shifted over time. Both extremely interesting, of course.

> Greece was ahead of its time in philosophy and science

And some would say that, philosophically, while we have the potential benefit of hindsight and therefore the opportunity to exceed the Greeks (you just need to crack open the right books), our typical modern, academic philosophy, is in many ways, inferior to it.

This is a strange comment because not only is academic philosophy built from the Greek tradition, but it is formalized. Maybe one can say it stagnated for centuries but I find it difficult to say that the work in the 20th century is inferior.

I wouldn't say that about comparing Hilbert to Pythagoras, and this is not putting down history of knowledge.

Just the awareness of the scientific method makes us far superior to the ancient Greeks. Many still doesn't follow it, but basically no Greek followed it and it really shows in their works.

For problems where the scientific method doesn't help however we probably aren't that much better than the ancient Greeks, maybe we are even inferior there.

For things where the scientific process doesn't help we have no objective way to conclude anything. Thus debates about topics like Abortion or Gun control where different rights and belief system exist in conflict with each other. Typically neither side will acknowledge the others position as having any validity, but if you can find someone in a different tradition that supports (or seems to support) your position you will say they are authoritative despite there being no objective fact in the first place.

I've never been asked this question, but I think I'd respond similarly. In fact, when I think of Rome, I think of Greece. They are nearly inseparable for me, but that's probably because my understanding of history is the history of western philosophy. You start with the Socratics, then read about the neo-platonist in Rome.

> but isn't it fascinating how truly interested in the roman republic and emopire we are?

If you're in the US, how can you not be? It's everywhere! The fledgling US was desperately in need of authority and gravitas, so they essentially cosplayed as the inheritors of the ideals of Rome, and put that shit everywhere.

Why does Washington DC look the way it does? Why are there pillars and obelisks and domes and white marble everywhere? Why is there Latin on the money? Why does every US courthouse look like a Roman temple, and why is there a Roman goddess on it?

The trend is popular because it's laughing at men for being "nerdy", but I think it's sad how ignorant a lot of people in the US are for not knowing about or recognizing the absolutely enormous amounts of references to Rome that exists in modern US.

> Why does Washington DC look the way it does? Why are there pillars and obelisks and domes and white marble everywhere? Why is there Latin on the money? Why does every US courthouse look like a Roman temple, and why is there a Roman goddess on it?

This is all true for much or most of Europe, the West, and Western-affiliated countries. (Also, the marble in Rome, and Greece from whom the Romans took much of these styles) was generally painted, so not quite the austere white of DC.)

It is not a US thing.

Europeans also have Latin on our money too. Our alphabet is the Latin alphabet.

They were still teaching primarily IN Latin at universities around the war of independence. Yes, you read that right, you spoke and read Latin as your primary learning language. The American universities copied the practice from their home countries.

Until the 1960s in the UK you had to know Latin to learn Medicine or Law. It was still taught in many schools, and I think has been having a resurgence.

I was taught Latin at school.

The Americans didn't cunningly adopt it to lend themselves legitimacy. It's as simple as the European settlers brought it with them. It was the culture of European intellectuals.

But everyone tries to wear the clothes of Rome. The Russians, the Ottomans, unified Germany all played Roman dress up.

Edit: also Catholicism.

For Catholicism it wasn't a "dress up" - it was the official religion of Rome in the last couple centuries, and the Catholic Church was the only main institution of (Western) Roman Empire surviving its fall.

What is sort of curious to think about is that all these monuments really shouldn’t be white. They should be painted many colors especially the friezes. There were never temples with big empty rooms with a white marble statue either. Done in proper roman tradition the Lincoln memorial would be this imposing giant, fully painted, with a pile of gold and other offerings right there in the room along with regular insence burning fronted by local patrons.

Of course by the time europeans got into the rennaisance all these temples had been pilfered and regular repainting had ceased for centuries. So because of this huge misunderstanding, neoclassical architecture is always boring and beige despite us knowing better today.

Why do people think that is funny?

Edit: Why downvote a genuine question? How else would I learn why people find that funny?

One might think that an individual who thinks about an empire that has been “dead” for nearly 1500 years is a bit strange. Why would anyone care about a dead empire, after all? The reason why it’s funny is because of how common people say they do think about the Roman empire (which for me is also quite often). It’s subverting expectations— you think no one thinks about the Empire— in reality, all of your family and neighbors do think about the Empire on a regular basis.

> Why would anyone care about a dead empire, after all?

Because it isn't dead culturally.

When you see a medieval castle you think about medieval things, when you see Roman architecture you think of Roman things, and since you see Roman architecture all the time in the news, like every time they show the white house etc, it makes sense your brain thinks about the Romans now and then.

See also: the Pope and the Catholic Church.

The question was rhetorical. And the article does go into detail about why people like Roman things-and-stuff.

For me, it's because it's true. I really do think about the roman empire all the time! and my wife couldn't believe it.

Most "trends" from TikTok are made up, stupid, fake, or highly exaggerated. This one is funny because it's actually kinda true for a LOT of people, and has nothing to do with TikTok.

Is it really that strange that people think about the Roman empire when things related to it are all around us? Even the white house is built to look Roman. Not to mention all the documentaries and games that touches on Roman stuff.

If you ask men how often they think about different manufacturing processes you will probably get similar numbers, or even higher, for the same reason.

I don't think it's funny because it's "strange". It's funny because it reminds people that they can have very different inner worlds to people they share their life with.

But people already know that? Everyone knows men and women think about very different things.

But I guess it is similar to the old meme where a woman worries why the guy is so distant that day and if he doesn't like her any longer, and the guy is just thinking hard about why his motorcycle isn't starting.

But that explains it: it is funny the first time you see it, but these differences aren't funny when you already are aware of them. Everything is a first to people. So I don't find it funny since I have seen similar things many times before and have grown tired of it, while others here finds it funny since it is new to them.

I find it interesting but for the diversity of “why”

I have an Italian American friend who weirdly into the Roman Empire, kind of in a weeb kind of way but he’s a tatted up (Roman Republic full back piece!) Army veteran who would Kimura my ass if I he sees this.

I have a friend just nerdy as shit and into history. He constantly talks about this podcast or that.

I have an ex-roommate / philosophy major, so it comes up a good bit.

I have a friend into Stoicism. Oddly not a philosophy major.

I have a friend rich in small arms, ammunition, and those rice ration buckets because we’re destined for a failure of the Republic as they had.

I have a friend with the same belief, except he just wants to fiddle so I’m pretty sure I won’t bother raiding his house if either of them are correct.

I think people find it humorous because it's an unexpected instance of sexual dimorphism. Like a "Men are from Mars [not Ares]" kind of thing.

Since when is making fun of sexual dimorphism a thing? I thought we stopped doing that.

Like, would it be funny if men asked women how often they think about celebrity relationships and drama? People just think about different things.

Maybe nerds on the internet stopped doing that but plenty of my coworkers and people I meet in everyday life aren’t competing for “woke” points.

The other day I was in a party with my wife and my friends. In some moment, we (all men) were in a corner talking about comics, movies, sports. My wife was sitting nearby, and she could hear us for 30 minutes straight talking about the same topics. At the end of the party, she asked me how were my friends' kids, jobs and family. I had no clue. She laughed at me and said "Typical men. We women always ask for the family, the school, the kids, the life of her friends, you boys talk for hours and know nothing new about your friends".

Is it typical? I don't know.

>> would it be funny if men asked women how often they think about celebrity relationships and drama?

No, that would be completely unsurprising to most men. Not funny. It would need to be something obvious to women and surprising to men, and surprising to women that it wasn't obvious to men. Then, yes it would be funny.

> Since when is making fun of sexual dimorphism a thing?

Since at least the days of the Roman Empire!

> I thought we stopped doing that.

Hollywood would love you to think so, but no, human nature is unchanging. This trend is huge exactly because it reminds us that men and women are different, and humans have derived humor from that fact since the dawn of time.

For at least 4000 years... there's actually an old Sumerian joke about how men and women flatulate differently (IIRC it's not based on physical differences but on cultural expectations for men vs women).

In the time since then you may have stopped thinking about sex/gender differences, but most people haven't.

I personally wouldn't find your proposal funny, but it might be more well received if you asked men vs women a question like "How often do you think about Taylor Swift's relationship with John Meyer?". That would probably get more views on your tiktoks. IMO part of the humor is that women are so surprised that men frequently think about the Roman Empire [and republic], but for the men it's a matter of course.

One girl learning her dad and boyfriend are both history geeks who think about the Roman Empire all the time is not funny.

Hundreds of thousands of women realizing that unbeknownst to them ALL the men in their lives secretly think about the Roman Empire all the time is hilarious.

Of course, the more specific this phenomenon is, the funnier it is: all men think about history isn't fun. All men are thinking about the Roman Empire is pretty funny. All men are thinking about Pliny the Elder and none of the women in their lives had any idea much funnier.

This is classic benign violation https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theories_of_humor#Benign_viola... The reason I think its a hit because it scales and its totally silly/fun/harmless, relatable beyond expectations, and a welcome distraction to the usual hellscape that is the internet in 2023.

---

So the next question is why is it happening, and I have two theories for this:

1. History is stranger than fiction. There's a lot of history geeks out there and there always have been. See stereotype about dads reading WWII books.

2. The Roman Empire is a gateway drug to history for a lot of people. And why not? It's a fascinating period full of whacky characters, and there's been so many movies/shows/plays/games about it that you probably already know enough to dive in and generally know to expect some togas and a dude shouting "I'm Spartacus."

Thanks, that explains it even better! Basically many women all over the world realized this 'weird' thing now together and that shared experience creates something magical.

Maybe with all that sudden interest, we'll get some progress on the "Rome Sweet Rome" movie. For context, and going by my memory, circa 12 years ago somebody on Reddit asked who would win, a bunch of Marines or the army of the Roman Empire; in response, one redditor wrote a short story about Marines being thrown back through time into the Roman era - it became viral (for ~2011 levels of "viral"), and the author ended up making a movie deal with some producers. I've been waiting for over a decade now for said movie to happen...

It was indeed August 2011: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rome,_Sweet_Rome

If it's been in development hell that long, I don't know how likely it is that it'll ever see the light of day.

Our release tool is called "Roderick", as-in the Monty Python "Life of Brian" sketch. TBH I don't think about the Roman Empire much apart from that, I mean, what did they ever do for us?

It's all about the Roman Empire and World War II. The other day, while I was taking my son to school, we were talking about the Maginot Line. He knows that story better than I do, even though my son is only 8 years old. But he likes history and yes, he has a nice illustrated book about Rome.

"I'm thinking about it right now!"

Only a Barbarian would think of Rome any less than that frequency.

Why would I stop thinking about something that never ended?

That is one of the great ironies of the meme…

Most people self-identifying that they think about the Roman Empire don’t seem to know the difference between the Roman Republic & Roman Empire (much less the period of Kings)…it’s all just the Roman Empire.

Well, the Roman Republic had an empire so you can see where it gets confusing.

If you want to get technical, the Roman Republic controlled provinces and ally states. Emperor was the title of a victorious general, and a notion of a "Roman Empire" is an artifact of modern scholarship.

I don’t think there’s much difference between our concept of empire and what Polybius called “ἀρχή” in his Histories (“dominion”, perhaps). He compares Rome to Persia and yes, some smaller states like Sparta, but it’s clearly in the context of acquiring and controlling large territories. That the Roman war machine had a particularly efficient and (for the most part) inclusive manner of absorbing territories doesn’t really change the nature of the resulting entity even if we use different words.

Any abstraction on concrete concepts of public administration across millennia (especially involving translations from ancient/dead languages) is very lossy.

> I don’t think there’s much difference between our concept of empire and what Polybius called “ἀρχή” in his Histories (“dominion”, perhaps)

Yes there is. You could write a doctorate thesis on the differences.

> That the Roman war machine had a particularly efficient and (for the most part) inclusive manner of absorbing territories doesn’t really change the nature of the resulting entity even if we use different words.

What is 'the Roman war machine'? How did it absorb territories? Which territory? Are we talking italic peninsula, client kingdoms, consular provinces or imperial dominions? From which time specifically? Efficiency is an entire topic in itself. The levels of corruption, the predatory nature of the tax collection enterprises (it was typically farmed out to private investors), were all very inefficient.

Saying Roman Empire and Persian (Seleucid?) Empire is a didactic simplification and I don't think there's any grounds to equating ἀρχή (which is also the root in archaic, archaeology, archetype, among others) to the modern concept of Empire or the the ancient concepts used in ancient polities to handle the intricacies of moving around troops, collecting taxes and dispensing justice across millions of square miles in Roman, Persian, or any Hellenistic state contemporary to Polybius for that matter.

Instead of getting into the weeds, let's rewind a bit. Do you believe the Roman Republic was ever in possession of something _we_ should recognise as an empire? You seemed to imply that you don't, so I'm interested in where our definition might fall short (and how would _you_ translate Polybius?) And then beyond that, what do you think is most interesting about how the Romans (or their subjects or enemies) perceived their many conquests and the vast territories that they acquired? What's the difference between their conception and ours? Genuine questions, hoping to learn!

I wouldn’t have thought so, but apparently even here on HN people aren’t familiar with the Period of the Kings, the Roman Republic & the Roman Empire. Ancient Rome is all just the Roman Republic.

I havent read the article. Im still stuck at work. also there was a senate during imperial time.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com