Two important concepts:

 

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

THE ROMAN CONQUEST/"UNIFICATION" OF CENTRAL ITALY (to 287)

This is the first of two complementary presentations that deal with the first major phase of Roman expansion (in Italy). The division is artificial, for Roman expansion was based on strategic as well as constitutional factors that were interrelated. And we will come back to the 'complementarity' on Tue next.

 

The Problem: in 509 Rome was still an insignificant state, one that was very much threatened by powerful neighbors to the north (the Etruscans), to the east (the Italic tribes), and to the south (the Greek states). Yet by 287, that is within two centuries, Rome had become the dominant power in Italy. How had this happened? Naked aggression / imperialism /brutality are not sufficient as explanations.

Consider that Italy was a dangerous place, not unlike early Medievel Europe. Seasonal raids from the highlands, invasion from Greece, North Africa [Carthage], from the north [Gallia/Gaul] all posed real problems for Rome and other relativeively more agrarian and relatively more urbanised city-states in Latium and Campania... It was by no means self-evident that Rome would become the dominant power. The major players.

Chronlogy of Expansion.

The archaeological record: Material culture: the arx, early walls and gate, pottery in the Greek style, pottery in the native style,  temple (Cosa), model temple, temple (Rome), Apollo. What is suggested about these structures?

Mapping the Expansion.

  1. Introduction
    1. Little in the way of authentic record survives of this period beyond the tradition of continuous warfare (on a seasonal basis) and the gradual extension of Roman domination first through Latium and then to all of central Italy (509; 380).
    2. The chief interest lies development of techniques of self-defense, not only in military sense, but also and especially in the diplomatic sphere. By providing for common defense (of the urbanized populations) against more distant and dangerous semi nomadic foes (the Italic tribes and the Gauls), by sharing dangers and rewards, and by reducing barriers between herself and her allies [inclusion], Rome not only won the cooperation of those nearest and most similar to her (urban communities), but became the dominant power in central Italy.
    3. Crucial to her military and diplomatic efforts was the allowance for the settlement of colonists drawn jointly from her Latin allies and Romans. E.g., colonies at Cosa and at Norba and at Torreastura. And also
    4. In brief: Rome succeeded because
      1. at no time (actually, at one time, but it was already too late) did her enemies combine against her. That is, Rome was often the least unattractive choice. A diplomatic success.
      2. her inclusive and cooperative policies (vertical and horizontal integration) made Rome the 'least unattractive' of the competing powers.
  2. Important Events in the Unification Process:
    1. Events to 390. Significance of Cincinnatus.
    2. Consequences of Gallic disaster: Rome's willingness to learn the lessons of disaster, to change her tactics and retain the loyalty of close allies establish a pattern we will see again and again.
    3. After the Great Latin Revolt (338) new treaty offered
      1. Local autonomy whether Roman or half-citizenship.
      2. Some of those who had been loyal and were culturally the closest, given full Roman citizenship
      3. other communities made separate agreements with Rome, but had no formal relations with one another (Rome becomes the true 'hub' of the Latin world. The Latins received a "half-citizenship" or "civitas sine suffragio" (i.e., they had protection could not vote).
  3. The Evidence
    1. §§14 and 16: on the character of Rome's less urbanized enemies
    2. §19: unconditional surrender; but §§ 20 and 21: on treaties. => patronage, gift.
    3. § 22: incorporation
    4. §13 The treaties with Carthage
  4. Roman Success ...Analysis of the Problem noted above.
    1. In two phases: from 509 to 340, slow but steady extension of hegemony throughout Latium. Many setbacks [aka revolts], but evolution of a defensive and administrative policy that would serve Rome well. From 340-264, rapid and dramatic extension of hegemony, building on the lessons and resources developed in the first phase. By 264, she is the dominant power in Italy [a summary map] south of the Po.
    2. Success in short term due to several factors
      1. Tactics of interior lines with military road (viae Appia and Valeria enormous investments), field camp, colony, legion. Superior weapons? Probably not until after 200. That is, Roman military superiority was not based on technological improvements.
        • After 200 surely, but much depends on the date that the Gladius Hispaniensis, or Spanish sword was adopted. It was a shortsword developed on the Iberian peninsula. It's superior strength and deadly effectiveness was noted by ancient contemporaries, and by 200 BC it was fast becoming the standard sword in Rome's legions.
        • It was straight bladed, double-edged and tapered to an abrupt point. Despite being short, it was longer than most contemporary Greek swords. Although used primarily for stabbing, it was superbly balanced and, in skilled hands, could lop off limbs and heads. It was forged from pure Spanish iron, and smiths reputedly tested a blades flexibility by resting the flat against the top of their heads and pulling down with both hands at the hilt and tip, until the two ends touched their shoulders. Abruptly released, the blade sprang back into it's original straight form.
      2. Dividing enemy, taking advantage of the fact that each of the enemy states found Rome a 'less fearsome' enemy than other potential 'allies' ..a diplomatic success and one based on restraint.
      3. No respect for treaties if advantage to be won (relations with Samnites are instructive)
      4. Superior manpower and organization. Rome now [ca. 300] has army of 40- 50,000 men in comparison to the 6,000 of 480.
    3. Success in long term and of critical value in conflict with Carthage and the Hellenistic World were her policies of cooperation and inclusion; specifically, Rome generally gave very easy terms; she took some land, but:
      1. No direct rule or taxation, instead local autonomy and troops for common defense (evidence that her first concern was defense).
      2. Some confiscation of land of defeated, but the land became ager publicus and as leased back to the original owners, more on this subject later.
      3. Extension of share in her citizenship where appropriate (revolutionary!)
      4. As an aristocratic state, Rome also confirmed aristocratic rule elsewhere; many aristocrats were willing to sacrifice some autonomy of their state in order to have their positions secured by alliance with Rome and perhaps access to Roman magistracies.

      Conclusion: Former enemies became firm friends and committed to a state that organized the common defense, guaranteed order and operated in an inclusive manner; in a manner that eventually promoted assimilation.

  5. Attitudes and values
    1. The reality of war: walls and gates, yet still seasonal
    2. And there were benefits of to be gained by waging war successfully.

Program for 3 February:

Some review:

historiography: recall that the major emphasis was on great events, great wars and heroic actions, and also in Herodotus and Homer, the war between 'East' and 'West'. Hence we will see the emphasis on the Great Men, Scipio and Hannibal; and on major battles with catastrophic losses. But it also means that we will not be encountering the mundane. How did the Roman raise taxes? pay their troops? compensate families for their losses? regulate their currencies?

on the Roman alliance system: we looked at two features last week.