Each answer should be not more than about *
May.15th lecture 4
First punic war: 264-241
![](http://researchvine.blog/wp-content/uploads/2023/09/homework-deadline.jpeg)
Having Trouble Meeting Your Deadline?
Get your assignment on Each answer should be not more than about * completed on time. avoid delay and – ORDER NOW
–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 1st
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 1st 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.20th 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 (2nd 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 ( 1st 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.22nd
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: 3rd 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 2nd 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: 19th 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 2nd
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 2nd
Punic War
Interaction with Philip V, of Macedon
(Antigonid)
During 2nd Punic War, Romans
and Rhodes, Pergamum
Pergamum: old kingdom in western Turkey
Rhodes: powerful island state, south of
Turkey
à2nd 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