1. What, in your view, can we learn from Catiline and the Gracchi brothers? *

May.15^th lecture 4

First punic war: 264-241

–Result: 20 years of war

–Would need sth special from Rome or Carthage
to win

–Carthage: mercenaries, but good navy

–Rome: excellent army, no
well-established naval force

–Result: statement

Trireme

–3 banks of oars

–Corvus (boarding ramp)

Quinquereme is heavier, 5 banks of oars

Naval warfare in ancient world

n Rams

n Immobillisation

–roman idea: make it a land
battle, on water

–board using corvus/raven (but problems)

–grapnel

–physically seize enemy ships, or ram them

–armoured
sailors cannot swim very well

Polybius, on the corvus

–Roman shipbuilding
program-superhuman effort

–But now, had to learn how to
fight at sea-no real experience

–Would have plenty of upsets,
errors… (storms too)

— in the meantime:

–256: 2 consulsà
Africa; ambitious, war on Carthaginian territory

–Plunder of countryside; 1 cos.
Home, Other remained:

–Marcus atilius regulus

–255: defeated Carthaginians;
camped at Tunis

–Negotiations, rejected by Rome

–Spartan mercenary, Xanthippus-
replaced local commanders

–Romans crushed; regulus
captured

–romans crushed; regulus
captured

–With regulus- what is true and
what is legend?

–Deal with humiliation by
mythologizing it!

–Ex. Romans defeated b/c of
massive snake

–Legend- in captivity until 250

–Gave parole to Carthaginians;
sent to Rome to negotiate

–In his speech to senate- urged
no surrender

–Returned to Carthageà
met his end

–Regulus: reluctant here,
duty> personal need

–source: Horace-reliable?

–Ode 3.5; titled, no surrender

–Warning to lax romans of his own day

–Holds up regulus as ideal model

–Intensely
patriotic in period of civil war

–Regulus’ death

–Xanthippus, and the leaky ship

–All of this: Rome’s north
African invasion- not a success

–More setbacks for Rome

–254: fleet to Africa, rescue
survivors

–Defeated Carthaginian fleet,
but then massive storm

–Romans massive effort at
Panormus-Sicily

–250: lucius caecilius metellus,
army, crushed Carthaginian attack

–Huge triumph in rome, with 100
elephants

–But then chickens…

Drepanum, 249, western coast of
sicily

Publius Claudius pulcher

–Frustrated by progress of siege
of Carthaginian base at lilibaeum (western Sicily)

Decided to take offensive

Auspieces: the sacred chickens

Let them drink, since they don’t
want to eat

Result: romans suffered horrible
defeat

Pulcher accused of sacrilege for
killing scared chickens

–War dragged on to an end with
reverses/benefits for each side

–241: Romans finally achieved
naval victory, off Sicily

–Carthaginian commander: Hamilcar
– peace treaty

–Indemnity: triggered mercenary
revolt

–The “truceless war” – savage

–Rome took opportunity: Sardinia

–Carthage shattered

–Sent Hamilcar Barca (father of Hannibal)
to Spain – rebuild

èWould
lead to new struggle

Consequences of the war

Four main consequences

1. Carthage lost Sicily, Sardinia,
paid reparations

–Rome now held territory outside of Italian peninsula

–Lead
to garrisons on Sicily, Sardinia and also Corsica

–Needed
administrators: praetorshipexpanded, sent overseas

2. widescale change in conduct of
warfare

–Previously
Rome followed seasonal pattern: some experience

–Now
consistently kept armies in field all year round

–Polybius
– Romans ambitious more daring, thinking of conquest

3. Rome now a naval power

–Needed
too for control of ex. Corsica, Sardinia

–Allowed
Rome to project power outside Italy

4. Significant increase in public
spending: ships, armies

–Army
had logistical needs

–Spawned
rise of ‘contractor class’ – the publicani, paid by the state to build, supply,
house, procure, etc.

–Currency
expanded, more issues: coins now also used to advertise Roman power (ex.
Coin of prow of ship) –propaganda

The second Punic war 218-201

The triumph of duty over individualism

–Defining event of the roman republic
before the civil wars

–Significant and far-reaching
consequences

–Main sources: Polybius, Livy

–Livy

–Lived
59 BC –AD 17-200 years after events f

–From
Padua

–Knew
personally Rome’s first emperor, Augustus

–Whole
work: cover beginning of Romeà own
day ex. 753-19, in 142 books- only 36 survive

–Livy looked to various traditions

–Oratory and fine writing: Cicero a
model

–Livy famously lazy, would not cross
Rome to see a document

–Sources? Other writers- make major use
of Polybius

–Selected and compiled info to suit his
agenda

–Often never mentions who he is using

–Livy writing after gut-wrenching civil
war

–Aim: react to this dislocation by
concentrating on values which made Rome great

–Superior
virtue, morality

–Nobility

–Character
and courage of Romans

–Other sources

–Hannibal’s court historians – lost

–Letters
and treaties, copied by Polybius

—
Writings of Scipio family?

Major players in story… dramatis
personae

The Scipios

The Barcids

–NB: multiple Scipios

–Publius
Cornelius Scipio

–Consul
218; died 211

–Gnaeus Cornelius Scipio ‘Calvus’ (the
bald)

–Brother
of Publius Cornelius Scipio

–Consul
222, died 211

–Piblius Cornelius scipio ‘africanus’

–Son
of Publius Cornelius Scipio, nephew of Gnaeus

–Ultimate
victor in second Punic war

–The other tem- the Barcids

–Hamilcar Barca, general of 1^st
Punic war, d. 228, Spain

–Father
of Hannibal

–Husdrubal “the fair”

–Son-
in law of Hamilcar, d. 221

–Husdrubal Barca, general

–Brother
of Hannibal, d 207, Italy

–Mago Barca, general

–Brother
of Hannibal, d 203, on board ship

Hannibal- not a crazed demon

–Had read memoirs of Pyrrhus

–Barcid dynasty in Spain – Hellenistic
style dynasty

–Closer to Greek king than monster

–Adept at Greco-Roman propaganda

–Temple of Melqart (Hercules) in Grades
(Cadiz, Spain)

–12labours of Hercules: drove oxen of
Geryon though Spain and Gaul over the Alps

–Cacus (giant) on Aventine hill- steal
oxen, Hercules killed him

à Punishment of Rome – grounded in Greek
myth

àPosed as liberator of oppressed Greeks
in Sicily, Italy

–And: epic journey- like Alexander?

–War broken down in phases:

1, background to war- Barcids in Spain

2, period between 218-216: Roman defeats

3. period between 216-207: revival

–War
in Italy, propaganda campaigns by Hannibal

–War
in Spain

–War
in Africa

And in this: the triumph of duty, but …
the rise of the individual… Scipio Africanus

Background- the interwar years, 241-218

–End of 1^st Punic war

–Hamilcar surrendered Mt. Eryx in Siciy

–Mass resentment

–And ‘Truceless war’ (mercenary
revolt)- future damage

–Barcids powerful, choose Spain, new
lease on life

–Mines. Manpower, new beginning – nova Carthage

èSpain
would revive Carthage

–228: Hamilcar dead; Hasdrubal “the
fair” took over

–At some point: Hasdrubal, treaty with
Rome

–Boundary of interests: river Ebro

–clues: Romans preoccupied with Gauls
(“Italian Celts”)

–And also: war in lllyria (pirates,
death of ambassador- and now new protectorates)

–Lllyrian war= first protectorates in
Greece

–Romans at lsthmian Games

–So: Roman policy – curb Carthaginians
in Spain, secure lllyria, hammer Gauls?

–Before, during, after treaty- fateful decision

–Some kind of agreement, based in
fides, with Saguntum

–Hannibal attacked Saguntum, south of
Ebro river- not in violation of treaty

–But – quandary for Romans

–Friendship bounded by fides with Rome

–What to do? Honor treaty to far away
people, or let them face fate?

–If go to war, could trigger wider war

–In do nothing, would allow Hannibal to
get stronger

–Or- part of the plan all along

–The polish Guarantee, 1939

–218: Saguntum surrendered

–Roman Senate: dithered; delegatin to
Hannibal

–Eventually, Roman envoysà
Carthatge

–Livy: Hannibal urged senate in
Carthage to give up their treaty to provoke a war

èSurrender,
sack of saguntm= plays into faous story
– Hannibal ‘oath to hate Rome

–War not roman fault, Hannibal’s falur’

–Carthaginians; rejected Roman demands
and war began 218

–Roman response: both consuls
dispatched for war

–Sent
Publius Cornelius Scipio (cos. 218; father of Scipio Africanus) to Spain

–Other
cos. Tiberius Sempronius Lougus, sent to Sicily: target, Africa, and Carthage

–Which did Hannibal do

–Understood
his own strengths, weaknesses

–Would invade Italy, over the Alps (new
Hercules/ Alexander)

–Very dangerous endeavor

–Navigation

–Food

–lack
of mechanized transport

–Precedence-
Alexander the Great, Khawak pass in Afghanistan

–Hannival would face huge problems, take
many losses of men, animals, equipment

–Some allies deserted, rather than
cross Alps

–Hostile tribes in Alps would add to
problems

–Scipio: would contest Hannibal’s
crossing of phone river, southern France

Unsuccessful

After this, way open to Alps

Again, problems with allies, more,
soldiers: more afraid of Alpine crossing than fighting Romans

Livy: took 5 months for entire journey;
15 days, for Alpa

Considerable losses

Cape lacinium inscription: 20,000
infantry, 6,000 cavalry- tiny

Floored Romans

First confrontation

Ticinus River, 218 BC, northern Italy

Hannibal: suborn Gauls, fight for him-
liberator of Italy

Ticinus 218

May.20^th Lecture 5

-Livy

Trebbia 218

Romans did best, but sempronius should
have waited

Tired; elephants; great pressure on
line; December rain muddled thins

Ambush by Mago

Romans were broken, although troops and
both consuls escaped

But, major military disaster

After the Trebbia, 218

Romans shocked

Enemy in Italy

Two engagements lost, significant parts
of army destroyed

But, what did romans have?

Allies

Resources

Product of early years, wars of
expansion, conquest of Italy

Polybius: Romans had huge manpower
reserves

Reports census figures for 225: 700K (or
634K)

Of Romans alone :

250000 adult males qualified for infantry
service

23000 adult males of ‘equestrian’ standing
–cavalry

table illustrates sources

other clues: the bronze plate at temple
of Hera Lacinia at Croto in S. Italy (Cape Lacinium): 20K infantry, 6K cavalry,
copied by Ploybius

Hannibal: major disadvantages

For Hannibal to win

Not destroy Rome

Crush it on battlefield – make peace (
norm in Hellenistic world)

Manpower advantage? Use propaganda …

Dismantle alliances

..nearly worked

217 new year, new consuls, new defeats

consuls for 217

Gnaeus Servilius Geminus (Servilius)

Gaius Flaminius Nepos (Flaminius)

Better job? Not to be

Why ?

Flaminius: populist, opposed Senate

Tried to curtail financial activities of
senators

Showed lack of respect for mos maiorum:
customs of the elders (i.e. respect your forefathers, they are older and wiser)

Tension between old and young a major theme in
Livy

They were right… would die in a very
famous Roman disaster

Livy uses Flaminius’ poor character to
explain his fate

Sempronius: showed hubris, lost

Flaminius: did not show Senate, elders.

What did Flaminius do?

Mad chase after Hannibal

No reconnaissance

Walked into trap

217 lake trasimene

Hannibal: well- prepared position;
plenty of time

Forced romans to fight facing lake or
mountains

Blocked exits: could only leave by
narrow paths

Romans advanced onto plain; no security;
did not notice Carthaginians; false camp to lure romans forward

Problems with fog

Romans in marching order; weapons slung;
not ready for battle

Attacked from all sides

Flaminius killed

Very serious

Romans in shock; consul dead; exits
blocked

Many drowned in the lake

Livy: 6000 escaped, only to surrender

Effect in Rome: terror at news of
consul’s death

Worse to come

Time of great emergency: what would
Senate do?

217 emergency measures

Livy

‘the defence of Italy had faied – the war
would now be at home to save the city’

senate appointed famous dictator

quintus fabius maximus

cunctator, the delayer

QFM emerges as literary foil against
upstart, impetuous, young politicians

Later ally: cato the elder (famous
conservative)

QFM’s strategy: harass supply lines;
pick fights carefully; avoid a repeat of Trebbia or Lake Trasimene

Meanwhile:

Servilius (other consul) helped to
defend Rome: implicit comparison with Flaminius

Livy: was QFM’s strategy working?

Frustrating for some not to fight. E.g.
minucius, master of cavalry (2^nd in command) for QFM

Elected as co-dictator, nearly loses
life

For Livy: minucius recalls Flaminius,
Sempronius: reckless, impetuous, arrogant, young, and stupid.

But QFM’ s strategy working

Tensions between Minucius and QFM

Livy & Polybius : character couplets

Old, wise vs young, foolish

Patient vs reckless

Previews: optimates vs populares in late
Roman society

Eventually QFM’s position ended: return
to consuls

Results? Good for Rome

Character: sold estates to ransom POWs

No major disasters, but people wanted
victory.

216 disaster

216 quintus fabius maximus retired; new
consuls

gaius terentius varro (varro)

Lucius Aemilius Paullus (Aemelius Paullus)

Varro: like sempronius, like Flaminius

Unpopular with patricians

Populist, left- wing

Anti-conservative

Did not like QFM

Aemilius paullus = opposite of varro –
political opponent older, wiser, ex-consul (IIIyrian war)

He and Varro are like gladiators:
competitors

Livy uses sour relations – presage a new
disaster

Away from senate, romans recruiting new
armies

But new omens

Statues weep blood

Cold springs become hot

And worse….

Warro did have initial success

Like sempronius….cocky, bold

Aroused in him the passion to defeat
Hannibal: make his name

Hannibal: knew he could lure varro into
an ambush

Use rome’s aggressive/impetuous
leadership against them

Eventually the two sides met at cannae,
in Apulia

Before Adrianople (AD 378) this was the
most notorious roman disaster in history

Aemilius paullus was killed in battle

Problem: rome’s maniples, bad leadership

More shook for rome: a consul killed,
80000 (?) soldiers killed in one day: eight legions and their allies – the size
of four entire consular armies

What else?

Servilius geminus, ex-consul, killed

Minucius, ex-master of horse to QFM,
killed

A large number of senators who had
volunteered to fight.. lost in the battle

Varro? He escaped

Survivors- punishment battalions

Famous escapee- scipio

For perspective : Ammianus Marcellinus,
on Adrianople (AD 378)

Death of emperor valens

Destruction of eastern field army

What did Hannibal do

Did not follow up by marching on rome

But: did he intend to capture it?

But the victory was, in any case, total

Cannae: had some important consequences

Some roman allies deserted them
(hennibal’s strategy)

Anti-roman sentiment

e.g. capua, treaty with carthage: would
share Italy as part of a Carthaginian protectorate

Tarentum, thurii- defected

Sicily: hiero of Syracuse died; Hannibal
fomented an uprising there – serious

Romans: cancelled festivls looked to
religious rites to appease the gods

Buried alive Greeks and Gauls

Fabius pictor ( famous roman historian)
sent to the oracle at Delphi

What did the gods want the romans to do

New legions

For the first time, boys under 17; 8000
slaves as well

How did rome get through all this

Strength of character

Loyalty of the majority of their allies

Support and courage of the people

Indefatigable senate: never gave up

Out of this calamity, rome’s identity
would be forged

Restoration and revival: 216-202

Rome rebuilds

New problems, but new leaders: including
Scipio Africanus

Would undertake the reconquest of Italy

Fight actions abroad, in spain and Africa

New tactics, new legions, new army

And threat: to heart of state

216-206

Hannibal: wanted rome’s allies

Achieved capua; failed elsewhere

Behind this: factional politics

In rome: a new dictator

Disasters continued: e.g. consul-elect
killed on campaign- Lucius postumius (L.23.24)

So: rome facing not just Hannibal, but
multiple enemies – but still they keep going

Stories in livy show: rome’s hold on
Italy thenuous

Hannibal: plans elsewhere

215: new front opened in IIIyria,
against Macedonia ( 1^st Macedonian war)

Hannibal and Philip V of macedon

Treaty copied by Polybius: curb Roman
power, not destroy it

Slowly, rome asserting itself

Rewards loyal allies; punish the ones that strayed

Campania

Sicily

Sardinia

War much wider in scope than anything
seen so far

213: rome began reconquest of Campania:
capua

capua: a terrible revenge

leaders executed

but even now, other problems

running out of cash

time of crisis- senate gave up property,
gold, silver

allies gave all they had

just enough to keep going

eventually, romans recovered Campania .

209: QFM captured and sacked Tarentum

30000 inhabitants: sold

capua and Tarentum showed: terrible
price of defiance

so by 209: capua, Campania, Tarentum,
Sardinia: all quiet

in sicily, Claudius Marcellus

siege of Syracuse famous: defence
orchestrated by Archimedes

military ideas – some seem to have
worked, others perhaps

finally, Marcellus prevailed

Archimedes famously killed by a roman
soldier

His legacy?

Archimedes palimpsest

Restoration and revival: 216- 202

Syracuse sacked brutally

Romans took agrigentum, other major city

Corn supply secured, sicily pacified

The final years

Spain

Long a sideshow to Italy

212: roman forces, led by scipo(father)

scipio killed; gnaeus scipio (calvus)
quickly followed

great shock

again, Romans able to take stock,
regroup: on the verge of annihilation, they survived

Romans still lacked a consular
commander…

who would take scipio’s place

Livy… no- one put name forward:

Another desperate situation: needs a bold
solution

Scipio

Too young; lacked experience to be a
consul

Major break with tradition

Elected as a private citizen with
imperium

What was scipio like?

Very pious; a performer; and
semi-legendary in his own lifetime

211: scipo went to spain

used his reputation, family authority,
to help him

210/209: captured new carthage

daring raid – soldiers crossed lake –
myth, helped by Neptune

follow up battles: llipa, baecula

major theme: new tactics, new
flexibility, new abilities

and, diplomacy: suborn massinissa,
syphax, numidian allies

208, at baecula – similar tactics

defeated Hasdrubal, fled to Italy

scipio – roman army now instrument to
beat Hannibal

specifically

competent generalship

innovative tacitics

use of cavalry (Laelius)

maniples as independent operators

Carthaginians: looked for a decisive
endgame in Italy

208 Roman consuls were Marcellus ( of
Syracuse fame) and crispinus

at venusia, in Apulia, han

May.22^nd
Lecture 6

Restoration and revival: 216-202

The final years

New dictator: Manlius

New consuls elected:

207: combined forces to faced Hasdrubal.
In northern Italy

Livy: dramatic evocation of scene

àforced
march of picked troops, to get to Hasdrubal (Hannibal brother) before message
could get to Hannibal

Hannibal stranded in S. Italy: defeat a
matter of time

Could not get reinforcements

No easy access to supplies

Could not duplicate Rome’s alliance
system

Could not detach allies permanently

Romans ascendant

Looked to the gods: went to Delphi: and
then brought cult of Magna Mater, The
Great Mother, to Rome

205-201

Scipio finally elected as consul in 205

Plunder: nearly 15,000 lbs of silver

Another result of the wars: enrichment

and, a further direct consequence:
the need to keep successful generals in field

—Pro-consuls,
pro-praetors

—Recognition
of need to change system

—Annual
commands counter-productive

—More
consuls, praetors needed

Scipio nursing great ambition

Asked to be sent to Sicily: to get him
to Africa

But, QFM

—Youthful
arrogance of Varro, Flaminius, Sempronius, Minucius

—Naked
ambition

—Dangerous
recklessness

Scipio finally got his way

Senate hampered him – withheld troops,
money

What did he do?

—Volunteers,
Cannae legions

—Fleet
from Rome’s allies

—Took
them to Sicily

Africa:

Scipio ravaged countryside

With Massinissa, beat Carthaginian
levies

Peace agreed, then scupper

Hannibal recalled, along with Mago

‘Livy, 30.20: Hannibal furious’

Before the final flight at Zama:

Livy has the 2 meet: a very famous
speech

Hannibal

–Appeals
to Scipio, compares himself to him

–Hannibal
old, Scipio young

–Hannibal
wiser: needs peace

–Lost
his brothers; defending his native city; asking for peace

Scipio

–Carthage
is the aggressor

–Too
late to ask for peace

–You’re
finished

Scipio and Hannibal prepared their
forces

àScipio innovative

àDifference at Zama- Laelius and
Massinissa, with cavalry

‘Hannibal lost his first battle’

Zama a resounding Roman success

Scipio – treated Hannibal well, let him
stay in politics

Carthage sued for peace in the aftermath

Negotiations – including Philip V- Mac.
Soldiers at Zama

And the Romans told Philip:

The answer received from the roman
senate was anything but favorable. They were told that their king was looking
for war, and if he went on as he was doing, he would very soon find it.

An omen of things to come

Eventually, Carthage made peace

Terms harsh

—Gave
up elephants, warships, most of army

—Scipio
burned the fleet in vies of the Carthaginians

—Allied
deserters beheaded; Roman deserters crucified

—Huge
indemnity: crippled Carthage for good

Roman allies (ex. Massinissa) were
rewarded

Scipio: triumphant return to Rome

What did he do?

Scipio set an ominous precedent

Paid a huge war bounty of 123,000 lbs of
silver to his troops

Idea: loyalty to commander, not to state

Took epithet “Africanus”

Scipio: 3^rd c. BC celebrity –
imperator, a victor with assent of the gods

Dangerous idea:

—Loyalty
to commander > loyalty to state

—Beginning
of individualism > duty

—Shape
of things to come

Hannibal:

—Eventually
fell out in Carthage

—Romans
came for him… he fled to Antiochus, Hellenistic ruler of Syria

Consequences
of second Punic War

Carthage was crippled

Rome: new, stronger version of itself:
on brink of Med domination, fuelled by militaristic ideology and flush with a
hard-won victory

All overseas Carthaginian territory now
Roman – and new admin needed – so new praetors, new campaigning to pacify
Spain, new settlements: definite expansion

Rome’s constitution changing: new
praetors, pro-consuls, pro-praetors: the beginnings of the imperial
administration

Rome’s reputation increased

In 216, Rome was on brink of extinction.
How was this avoided?

–Resourced
(think Pyrrhus)

–Allies
(think Pyrrhus)

–Spirit

–Courage

–Good
commanders

–Core
of resilience in the Senate, the people: the SPQR

The 2^nd Punic War is a major
event in understanding how Rome became an Empire later on, and understanding
Roman ‘Identity’ – confident, militaristic

Livy:

–Rome
defeated Hannibal by:

–Staying
strong

–Honoring
the gods

–Staying
true to the state

–Following
its moral principles

–Rome
was threatened by young, arrogant, impious men

–L.
admires Africanus, he sees in him some of the traits of his own time…

‘Starship troopers’

Tension: duty vs. life, liberty and the
pursuit of happiness

Society of citizens and civilians

Roman imperialism

Expansion and creation of a world empire

Deliberate?

Accidental?

Combination?

Imperialism in 2014 has an image problem
– can we avoid a negative judgment?

Imperium

Would Romans understand our idea of
imperialism?

Roman expansion: deliberate acquisition
of territory for commercial gain?

Land-grab rush incompetition with
others?

Think of France, England, Belgium,
Germany, in Africa, for ex…

Romans would probably be perplexed if we
assigned our idea of imperialism onto them

How should we understand it?

Influential perspectives:

V.I. Lenin: Imperialism. The highest state of Capitalism

Come down to “Defensive Imperialism” vs.
“Expansionism”

Accidental vs. Deliberate

Take a look at each

Defensive Imperialism

Until recently: dominant idea

Wars conducted in self-defense

Can we find justification in ancient
texts? Sure!

Theme here:

Romans concerned about aggressive stance
of neighbors ex. Carthage

Defensive imperialism thesis very
popular: ground

Idea held sway until 1970s

New ideas

W.V. Harris: war and imperialism in republican Rome, 327-70 BC

Basic idea: Rome accustomed to
continuous war… benefits from war accrued, kept war going

Cf. Schumpeter… keep fighting, keep
winning, keep fighting to keep winning…

Expansionism?

Evidence?

Art, slaves, influence, power, money,
land… all came with victory in war

Evidence in ancient sources? Of course!

Expansionism? Or Accidental/ Defensive?

So: which idea do we favor?

Harris’ideas:

—Romans
placed value on martial activities

—Cursus honorum included vital military
steps

—Supreme
civil authority = supreme military authority

—Warfare
central to functioning of state

What about moder historians, their
views?

Mommsen: 19^th cent. German…
interested in German nationalism

Saw Romans: united Italy – like Germany
was being united

Gave Roman conquest a positive spin

And Harris? Deeply affected by Vietnam War
– overseas adventures are bad, and lead to serious problems

Difficult to know which 1 we should
favor

Rome: bad enemies – Gauls, Carthage

90 serious defeats recorded in the republic

Almost became extinct in 2^nd
P.W.

Romans: can we understand their fear,
apprehension? Does this justify pre-emptive strikes?

But…history of late republic is full of ambitious
men, looking for military glory – Pompey, Caesar, Sulla, Marius: we will meet
them all

No clear answer… some case studies!

Background:

Main powers in Mediterranean

Created in aftermath of Alexander’s
death in 323

‘Hellenistic’ kingdoms

East (Iraq/Iran – all the way to
Afghanistan, India): Seleucids (after Seleucus Nikator)

Macedonia: Antigonids (after Antigonus
II ‘Kneecap’)

Egypt: Ptolemies (after Ptolemy Soter)

Seleucus, Antigonus, Ptolemy: all
generals of (or descended from generals of ) Alexander’s army who founded
kingdoms after 323 BC

Rome is a tiny speck on the world map

Entering a world of great antiquity:

Will conquer almost all of it

In the conquest, Rome itself will be
conquered – change in centre of gravity

Rome – fade out and become irrelevant

Revolution – Republic to monarchy

Trade; fame, news of victories over Hannibal
spread by Greek traders

Wars in Illyria before 2^nd
Punic War

Interaction with Philip V, of Macedon
(Antigonid)

During 2^nd Punic War, Romans
and Rhodes, Pergamum

Pergamum: old kingdom in western Turkey

Rhodes: powerful island state, south of
Turkey

à2^nd Punic War leads to war
with Macedon

The second Macedonian War: 200-196 BC

Rhodes trading centre, emporium,
crossroads East/West

Rumor: Philip V (Antigonid) of
Macedonia, Antiochus the Great of Syria (Seleucid) joining forces…

Threatened Rhodes and Pergamumàcomplained
to Rome

Invitation to intervene: looks defensive

Romans were alarmed

Remember: Romans and Philip, treaty with
Carthage

Why did Rome attack Philip?

—Macedon
is close to Italy

—Concerned
about security of Italian peninsula

Romans defeated Philip at Cynoscephalae
– “Dog’s head pass” in 197

But… actions afterwards are illuminating

Romans did not take any territory

Architect of roman victory is Titus
Quinctius Flaminimus – famous admirer of Greek culture and learning

196, TQF: ‘frees the Greeks’ – idea that
Rome had protected them from Philip

Were the Greeks really free? No

Or a protectorate, under influence of
Rome?

Clients – owned their patrons – the
Romans

—Wider
version of traditional patron – client relationship typical in Rome

Romans had other thoughts on Greece…good
place for espionage… keep an eye on Hellenistic monarchs… provide a buffer

Romans as patronsàwould
guarantee further interference

Roman operations in Greece

Factional politics:

Achaean
league (Peloponnese: Corinth; Polybius)

–Threatened
by Sparta

–Occasional
friends of Macedonia

Aetolian
league (NW Greece)

–Friends
of Rome

–Anti-Macedonian

Aft