History Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for historians and history buffs. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

I don't know a lot of Roman history, but I noticed in some of their statues, naked people. Their sexual organs are shown and obivious to people. Here's a simple google search.

Was it normal back then for citizens to show their sexual organs? Was it a symbol of strength? Could someone walk naked in the summer?

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by coleopterist, Mark C. Wallace, Kobunite, Tea Drinker, Lennart Regebro Aug 27 '13 at 2:05

This question was marked as an exact duplicate of an existing question.

1  
Here's a good place to start. – called2voyage Aug 26 '13 at 16:06
    
they simply weren't the hypocritical prudes that we are and showed the body like it really is rather than a version with the bits some zealots get excited about cut off to "protect vulnerable souls from temptation". – jwenting Aug 26 '13 at 16:23
    
Possible duplicate – Mark C. Wallace Aug 26 '13 at 16:33
    
@MarkC.Wallace That is a good point, for this question to be worthwhile (rather than being flagged as a duplicate) it will need to address significantly different reasons for non-male nudity or address reasons for nudity in general (equally applicable in male and non-male instances). – called2voyage Aug 26 '13 at 16:39

No, they did not walk naked, they just created these statues.

The Roman statues follow the tradition of the Greeks.

share|improve this answer
    
I have to downvote this: No substantiation whatsoever - not even a wiki! This kind of thing might be appropriate for a comment - a hunch you have without evidence - sometimes we see that. But this by no means qualifies as an answer. – user2590 Aug 27 '13 at 2:09

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.