What Roman Law Can Teach You about Self-Acceptance
Remember how, a couple of years ago, the (female side of the) Internet was blown away by the discovery that Western men think about the Roman Empire a lot? Some daily, in fact? I did a quick Internet search of the reasons why people have the Romans on their minds so much and people talk about military tactics and strategic genius, architecture, roads, aqueducts etc etc. And I can’t help but feel that there’s not enough mention of one of my favourite Roman inventions: Roman law.
t wasn’t love at first sight for Roman law and me, but I blame that more on my very old-fashioned professor (may he rest in pace) and his somewhat deranged teaching assistant, who loved nothing more than to watch us squirm and refused to explain anything, on the basis that the only way to understand Roman law was to learn everything by heart first and then “maybe you’ll get it.” I did learn it by heart, and did eventually get it, and I also got that he was a sad little homunculus who couldn’t teach to save his life. But I digress.
One of the cool things we inherited from Roman law is the concept of a standard of behaviour. Sounds pretty judgy, I know, but stay with me. The self-acceptance bit is coming. Under Roman law, the objective standard for good behaviour was the bonus pater familias: literally, “the good family father”. The good family father didn’t have to be perfect; what we’re talking about here isn’t “gold standard” behaviour, but rather what an average—but prudent and responsible—Joe might do in a particular situation.
For my female readers: are you baulking at the OG patriarchy of it all, “why is the man always the yardstick” etc etc? I so get you, but here’s a way to look at it that might make more sense: close your eyes and imagine a “good enough dad.” Is a smile slowly spreading on your face, a warm fuzzy feeling in your heart? (Also, is he Scandinavian and wearing a baby carrier?) Ok, now try to imagine a “good enough mother.” Is your head spinning already? How many voices are there in your head, competing to tell you everything that you (or your own mother, in case you’re child-free) have done or failed to do that disqualify you/her from earning that “good enough, I have not traumatized my kids” badge of honour? Does it not make sense now why the Romans chose to go for a “good enough dad” standard? Imagine the length of the lawsuits if, in addition to everything else, the judges also had to figure out what makes a mother good enough!
For my male readers: hi there, so lovely to see you here! Yes, I was indeed joking, I (and the other girls) know that’s not why the Romans chose that standard but isn’t it a fun hypothesis? And I am also very aware that it was much easier to be a “good enough” dad in Roman times or, indeed, even twenty years ago. Big hug to all of you out there in the trenches of real-life parenthood who are trying to be great dads. And especially to those of you who weren’t lucky enough to experience it first-hand.
But if being a good dad feels like too much of a stretch, fear not. The Romans have your back. There’s also the subjective standard of behaviour, diligentia quam in suis rebus: the same level of care you apply when dealing with your own stuff. The Romans basically said that if you’re paid to do something, you need to channel your inner good dad when doing it. If you’re doing it for free, all people can expect is for you to be yourself, so you’re only at fault if you are even more careless with their stuff then you are with your own things.
Both of these concepts were imported into continental European (civil law) legal systems and Chat GPT would be thrilled to explain to you the fascinating contemporary legal aspects related thereto. Or, and I quote “Would you like a little fake Roman lawsuit in Latin with translation for full geek-out mode?”
But that is not the purpose of this note. Here’s the bit I think is worth maybe doing a longer cogitatio on: first, Roman law says it’s ok to just be yourself, warts and all, especially when it comes to your own stuff. So maybe the next time the urge hits to keep optimising our lives to Instagram reel-level, we can just shout “vade retro, Satanas!” to that thought and do something we actually enjoy instead? Second, even when a higher standard applies, that standard is not perfection. It’s just your average Joe. That’s all you need to aim for. Joe.
Note on use of AI: No bots were used in the writing. But I did use ChatBro to check the correct Latin expression for the subjective standard and then went down a rabbit hole that ended with the brilliant question of whether I wanted to geek out on a fake Roman lawsuit. Still so tempted to say yes to that one…
Leave a Reply