Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender?
In Republican and Imperial Rome, weeping often accompanied private or public events. To embellish their speeches and establish their authority, senators, emperors and outstanding soldiers did not hesitate to shed tears when the situation was serious. The effect of such sobbing in public depended on...
Guardado en:
| Publicado en: | URI:https://journals.openedition.org/cliowgh, |
|---|---|
| Autor principal: | |
| Formato: | Article ou chapitre numérique |
| Lenguaje: | Anglais |
| Publicado: |
Clio
2022
|
| Materias: | |
| Acceso en línea: | Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM Accès Université d'Orléans et IFPM |
| id |
openedition-oai:revues.org:cliowgh_984 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
openedition |
| spelling |
openedition-oai:revues.org:cliowgh_984 https://doi.org/10.4000/cliowgh.984 urn:doi:10.4000/cliowgh.984 en https://journals.openedition.org/cliowgh/984 2022-10-11T02:00:00Z info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess article info:eu-repo/semantics/article urn:handle:20.500.13089/e3tv All rights reserved Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? Clio Belin info:eu-repo/semantics/reference/issn/2554-3822 URI:https://journals.openedition.org/cliowgh Rey, Sarah women tears Rome authority repentance femmes larmes Rome autorité pénitence In Republican and Imperial Rome, weeping often accompanied private or public events. To embellish their speeches and establish their authority, senators, emperors and outstanding soldiers did not hesitate to shed tears when the situation was serious. The effect of such sobbing in public depended on their social positions and their fame: an aristocrat’s laments had more influence than a simple soldier’s. For women, on the contrary, tears were often prohibited (except in mourning), even though their “nature” and their imbecillus animus (Livy, 3, 48, 8) were assumed to predispose them to cry. Emotional blackmail was generally considered a female phenomenon by the Romans. Despite its insistence on composure, the philosophy of the time, particularly that of the Stoics, was unable to prevent this major recourse to tears, which was gradually diverted and given renewed value by Christian authors in their praise of repentance. Dans la Rome républicaine et impériale, les pleurs accompagnent des événements de la vie privée et publique. Pour agrémenter leurs discours et asseoir leur autorité, des sénateurs, des empereurs et de brillants chefs d’armes n’hésitent pas à verser des larmes quand l’heure est grave. L’effet de leurs sanglots dépend de leur position sociale et de leur renommée : les plaintes d’un aristocrate ont plus de portée que celles d’un simple soldat. Aux femmes, en revanche, les larmes sont souvent interdites (hormis dans le deuil), quand bien même leur « nature » et leur imbecillus animus (Tite-Live, 3, 48, 8) les prédisposent aux pleurs. Le chantage à l’émotion est surtout féminin, pense-t-on. Malgré ses prescriptions de retenue, la philosophie, notamment stoïcienne, n’arrive pas à contrevenir à ce grand usage des larmes, qui est progressivement détourné et revalorisé par les auteurs chrétiens dans leur éloge de la pénitence. |
| collection |
OpenEdition Journal |
| language |
Anglais |
| format |
Article ou chapitre numérique |
| building |
0/Bibliothèque numérique/ 1/Bibliothèque numérique/OpenEdition Journals/ |
| topic |
women tears Rome authority repentance femmes larmes Rome autorité pénitence |
| spellingShingle |
women tears Rome authority repentance femmes larmes Rome autorité pénitence Rey, Sarah Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| description |
In Republican and Imperial Rome, weeping often accompanied private or public events. To embellish their speeches and establish their authority, senators, emperors and outstanding soldiers did not hesitate to shed tears when the situation was serious. The effect of such sobbing in public depended on their social positions and their fame: an aristocrat’s laments had more influence than a simple soldier’s. For women, on the contrary, tears were often prohibited (except in mourning), even though their “nature” and their imbecillus animus (Livy, 3, 48, 8) were assumed to predispose them to cry. Emotional blackmail was generally considered a female phenomenon by the Romans. Despite its insistence on composure, the philosophy of the time, particularly that of the Stoics, was unable to prevent this major recourse to tears, which was gradually diverted and given renewed value by Christian authors in their praise of repentance. |
| author |
Rey, Sarah |
| author_facet |
Rey, Sarah |
| author_sort |
Rey, Sarah |
| title |
Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| title_short |
Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| title_full |
Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| title_fullStr |
Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| title_sort |
roman tears and their impact: a question of gender? |
| publisher |
Clio |
| publishDate |
2022 |
| container_title |
URI:https://journals.openedition.org/cliowgh |
| url |
https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://doi.org/10.4000/cliowgh.984 https://ezproxy.univ-orleans.fr/login?url=https://journals.openedition.org/cliowgh/984 |
| _version_ |
1877293054490050560 |