disadvantages corresponding to magnanimity are: presumption (vanity – chaunotes) – when one considers himself worthy of great things, not being worthy of them, not having real achievements, and exaggerated humility (pusillanimity – mikropsychia) – when someone does not demand the reverence at all or regards himself as worthy of smaller things than what he deserves; and ←55 | 56→therefore he does not regard himself as worthy of something great, even though he has the features due to which he can be duly considered to be worthy of them; he is too shy.194 Pusillanimity is thus associated with cowardice and a lack of trust to one another, whereas vanity is associated with presumptuousness.
For Aristotle, magnanimity was a typical virtue from the group of valour, characterized by striving for good associated with difficulties. It stems from the tradition dating back to the times of Homer, in which the feeling of the aristocratic pride forced one to undertake the greatest efforts in order to achieve fame, and the fame was for the Greeks some sort of immortality in a human dimension, it was the greatest thing. Magnanimity was a model of moral perfection; however, it was not accessible to everyone; it could be achieved only by few – nobly born individuals.195 It was the consequence of the ethical system by Aristotle for whom the aim (happiness) of man was to act in compliance with nature – to act rationally. Living according to the precepts of reason guarantees the implementation of human potentialities and a self-improvement by a proper good. Therefore, someone deprived of intellectual development in any way would also be deprived of virtue, and even more, of absolute happiness.196 The indicated problem could be solved only with the advent of Christianity. The proper perspective for the indicated issues was introduced by the concept of the personal God, the creation ex nihilo, providing the basis for the understanding of a human being as a person.197
←56 | 57→
2. From paidéa to humanitas – the way of the Romans
2.1. CULTURE AS ANIMI CULTURA – TOWARDS HUMANITAS
Although both Plato and his disciple Aristotle strongly stressed the association between the term paidéia and politeia, their followers departed from that type of thinking. They did not subordinate education to the interests of the state any more, but above all emphasized the comprehensive education and the improvement of an individual according to a specified pattern. Paidéia gained the status of a specific way of human existence, facilitating the development of the entire spiritual and intellectual potential of man, leading to full humanity. This very concept of paidéa was absorbed by the culture of ancient Rome: “The idea of paidéa understood in this way was developed in the works of the disciples of Aristotle and the stoics, spreading throughout the whole Greek world of that time and recovering through the ideas of Cicero and the Roman humanitas.’198
The meeting of the Greek paidéa with the Roman ideal of education took place at the end of the fourth century BC, when Athens lost the political power. As a result, the Athenians scattered all over the then world, spreading the Hellenistic culture and contributing to the emergence of new centres of philosophical thought. What the ancient Greeks called paidéia, understood as a universal “cultivation,” a rational human education in the individual and social aspect, found its continuation in the ancient Rome under the name “culture.’199 Cicero was the first to describe philosophy as the soul cultivation: cultura animi philosophia est.200 From Cicero, therefore, the term animi cultura started to be ←57 | 58→used, understood as the “culture of the spirit” – refining the human mind, basically through philosophy.201
The theory developed by Cicero in his Tusculan Disputations had its origins in the thought of Panaetius of Rhodes – a stoic philosopher who lived in the second century BC. He impacted the circle of the philhellene aristocrats centred around Scipio Africanus the Younger (the so-called Scipionic Circle). The group played a major role in the adaptation and assimilation of the Greek culture. Its activity was an important stage in the development of the Roman idea of humanitas.202 In the works of Panaetius himself, the terms and ideas taken from the earlier period of the Greek thought, such as anthropinos (human), received additional meaning as elements of paidéa. Moreover, Panaetius often replaced the word paidéia by a new word: anthropismos (humanity). In this sense, the word was also used by his disciple, Poseidon, who, in turn, was to become a teacher of Cicero. Cicero was called one of the most brilliant successors of the Scipionic Circle.203 He personally knew the last members of that congregation and he felt obliged to familiarize the Roman society with the ideal of humanitas. Thus, due to Cicero, the Greek paidéia, through anthropismos of Panaetius and Poseidon, became humanitas (from Latin homo – man, humanus – human).204
From the semantic point of view, the term is difficult to define, at least due to the fact that it was perceived differently over the centuries.205 In Latin, the ←58 | 59→indicated word has a variety of meanings, depending on the context: 1) “human nature,” “humanity;” 2) “nobility of customs, culture, civilization, elegance;” 3) “being human with respect to someone, kindness, graciousness, courtesy;” 4) “education, good manners, culture, polish, elegance, aesthetic taste.” In the post-classical period, the following terms were added: 1) “mankind, humanity, people;” 2) “equity, rationale;” 3) “generosity;” 4) “treat, hospitality’.206 These are elementary explanations that raise awareness on the broad meaning of the term, for which it is difficult to find a precise synonym in both Greek and in modern languages.207
Apart from the Greek word paidéia, the Latin word humanitas corresponds in meaning to the Greek concept of philanthrôpía (love for what makes us human). The indicated terms express many qualities which make up the Romanian traditional, unwritten code of conduct (mos maiorum – the custom of the ancestors). Cicero stressed the indicated fact at the beginning of his Tusculan Disputations: “[…] our countrymates gained an advantage through valour or even more through discipline. Finally, what they attained due to the features of character and not by virtue of scholarship could not be compared with either Greece or any other nation. What nation was distinguished by such dignity, stability, magnanimity, reliability and fidelity glowing with such wonderful qualities of all kinds that could be compared with our ancestors?’208 Thus, the Greek words philanthrôpía and paidéia were close in meaning to the term humanitas. The first term referred more to ethical (virtus) and social values and was closer to today’s humanitarianism, whereas the second term was associated with intellectual values (doctrina) and a later notion of “humanism.’209 However, as Wiesław Pawlak indicates, none of the words –philanthrôpía or paidéia, because of a narrower meaning, can be treated as a synonym of humanitas. Although he admits that in structural terms (association with homo) humanitas is closer to the Greek philanthropy.210 Originally, philanthropy referred to deities and their particular friendliness towards people. The adjective philántropos was first used ←59 | 60→in the tragedy Prometheus Bound, attributed to Aeschylus. There was a reference there to the main protagonist’s spirit that was friendly to people (mortal). Similarly, Plato used the indicated adjective primarily with reference to gods. Then, philanthropy was used to define the virtue of the high-ranked people, especially the rulers who showed their mercy to the subjects. Philanthropy understood in this way was praised by Xenophon and Isocrates who thought that “who wants to reign, should be a philanthropist (philántropos) and should love his city-state (philópolin).’211 Additionally, Isocrates stressed the high culture of Athens that affected others, which was also a manifestation of philanthropy: “Now, our city has so far surpassed all the rest of mankind in political prulence and artful persuasions […] our city has caused the name of Grecian no longer seems to be a mark of a nation, but of good sense and understanding: those are called Greeks that have the advantage of our education, rather than the natives of Greece.’212 He thereby focused on the fact that the ideal of paidéa was realized in Athens and was understood as a constant striving for wisdom and knowledge and as a higher level of education or culture
