Sorry I missed class Tuesday. I hope your discussion of the Twelve Tables went well. Thanks to whoever passed around the "sign your name quiz"! On Thursday, I plan to finish up the struggle of orders and then talk about Roman warfare during the Republic. Since I am going to be condensing material, the readings below (and the material in the Africa book) are especially important.Times of war tend to bring out both the strengths and weaknesses of a society. This is particularly true of Republican Rome. Please read through one or two of the selections linked below. Pick out an incident/passage that shows either the surprising nature of Roman success or one of the characteristics of Republican Rome that makes that success not so surprising.
Selections you should find interesting include: Livy's description of the Roman method of declaring war, Livy's account of the war with and eventual destruction of Veii (Book V, sections 1-23), Livy's account of the Sack of Rome by the Gauls and Camillus' rescue of Rome (Book V, sections 33-55), Polybius' description of The Battle of Cannae, Polybius' comparison of the Roman maniple to the Macedonian phalanx, and Polybius' description of Roman government.
14 comments:
I think the firm resolve that the Romans showed in battle helped a great deal in their success. A "do or die" mentality, return with your shield or on it like the Greeks before them. Their military discipline was quite severe and reflected on the quality of an individual soldier's virtus, not living up to the standard meant the bastinado as Polybius describes. Getting stomped by your fellows with sticks and stones, thrown out of the army and ostracized at home meant every Roman had to fight and follow orders with zest. Even disasters like the Battle of Cannae could be overcome by the next legions put into the field with this sort of harsh camp life, a soldier would resent the conditions of the camp so much he would be eager to engage the enemy. Combine that with flexible maniple formations and Roman tenacity could eventually wear down someone as great as Hannibal.
-Louis Brown-
I believe one article which is the battle of cannae having two consuls who lead on alternate days shows a weakness in the roman military. They were forced into a battle because one consul Caius was eager for a fight while they other Aemilius was more cautious and looking for more advantages. But on the day that Caius led he pushed them to far and gave Aemilius no choice but to have to force a battle. If both consuls disagree on what should be done this among other things could happen and as a result they can lose the battle because of unfavourable conditions. One strength of the romans was how they declared war. By first sending someone to the country they want to demand restitutions from, and having him ask for the items or people, and then if no reply his given he can come home and they can say they gave the other country and chance and see it as an insult to them and in this way the gods would be on their side and justice which helps their soldiers believe they are doing the right thing and have more strength in their actions.
I believe that the Roman government was part of their major success. The consuls, senate, and the people al depended on each other to make their government work. The consuls were in charge of the armies and public affairs. The senate were in charge of money, The people had the power to annul or ratify treaties and dispense rewards or punishments. Their government also had a form of check and balances to make sure that no branch became to powerful like our democracy today. When a government works together in harmony it makes for a powerful nation.
I read on how the Romans declare war and I felt it could be looked at as both a strength and a weakness. The strength of it is that no war is waged without a long process and can avoid overreactions and things like that. Like how they first go to the country and make their greivances public and announce it multiple times and still they go back and ask each senator individually their opinion and after that they still go back and tell the nation they are mad at and make a formal declaration. I think this could also be a weakness because it gives the country a lot of time to prepare for a solid defense or even a surprise attack because the time it takes to tell the country you are thinking about war to when you actually declare war and then start fighting was a long time especially if the country is far away.
This practice definately reinforced their fear for the Gods and tradition...
-Ben Lickteig
I read the story about the Romans vs Hannibal. It was interesting to see the inspirational speech that the Romans were given. They were given the do or die speech which throughout history seems to work pretty good but apparently not in this situation. I think the main flaw in the Roman advance was the use of the two councils. It was to their disadvantage to have two different military strategies. Had they only had a single strategy they may have been able to better collect their efforts and concentrate on different collections of Hannibal's army. Then again that may not have made any difference because Hannibal was a great military leader and he may have adjusted to anything the Romans could have thrown at them.
I think eventual Roman success could be seen by what was said in the inspirational speech. The Romans were at that point fighting for their ideas and it is a lot harder to kill an idea than it is to beat an army. It reminded me of the Civil war and how Lincoln said we were fighting to maintain the "great experiment" the Romans probably felt similarly.
The section that I read was how the Romans declared war on others. It seems like this act would be more of a strength then a weakness because of how the Romans would need to get the senates vote to go to war, as well as going back to the country or place they are fighting against and giving them one final warning. This may seem a little odd, but the Romans didn't want to make any of the Gods mad so in thier eyes this needed to be done. With this strong religious motive as well it is easy to see why their success was not so surprising.
Eric Bengs
I found there devotion to religon and the firm beliefe that they are right in there cause very intresting. It allows there people to fight and give everything they have because they have no doubts. There certainty in there convictions is evident in how they declare war. They will praise the gods and with absolute conviction request what they believe is theirs. If not given they will consult and return and declare war because they did not recieve what was theirs. That is the first step to winning anything and the romans do not lack that
The first one I read was the Maniple vs Phalanx passage. I think that figuring out how to beat the phalanx was a pretty surprising feat. When we look back on it, it's obvious what you have to do, but back in those days when the phalanx is going around defeating all and then the Romans figured out it's weakness's and when not to engage one, that's a pretty surprising feat. When the main mentality is that you fight as a unit and you either return with your shield or on it, it's a genius breakthrough to realize that the real success lies in allowing your men to fight in a unit, but to have the flexibility to fight small skirmishes, or anything else that should arise. And I think coming up with the gladius to replace the spear for fighting flexibility was one of the greatest military moves of that time.
-Nik Aberle
Reading the seriousness with which they took their rituals when they declared war, I am reminded almost of the things athletes do before games, as if the fate of their game depends on how well they follow through with their particular routine.
I don't really see how this could be regarded as weakness, particularly when a war with Rome was so devastating (with few exceptions) for those upon which they declared.
Reading the seriousness with which they took their rituals when they declared war, I am reminded almost of the things athletes do before games, as if the fate of their game depends on how well they follow through with their particular routine.
I don't really see how this could be regarded as weakness, particularly when a war with Rome was so devastating (with few exceptions) for those upon which they declared.
Rome was a vast empire rich in tradition. It held itself up by pride and self honor. This can be seen in the first article about declaring war on another nation. They have details up to the very words they say. These words are ceremonial and carry a great tradition for the Roman empire. Over and over again I see this overall theme of tradtion and that may be on eof the reasons this empire was so succesful.
I read the selection about why the Roman fighting unit is better than the Macedonian Phalanx. I think that its quite clear that the Roman fighting units were superior to the Phalanx in battle because they were better equipped in all situations. They could manuever way better than the phalanx could. The phalanx was very successful if they battle was on flat ground with no rivers or anything like that, but if you have hills and rivers to cross the phalanx sas not very successful. The Romans on the other hand could fight more as individuals and together. Also, the Romans could flank armies that fight with the phalanx unit. I think that overall the Romans used their manueverability to outflank the phalanx and overcome them in many battles.
As the Roman generals placed more reliance on a blockade than on an assault, they began to build huts for winter quarters, a novelty to the Roman soldier. Their plan was to keep up the war through the winter.
By what I read, it seems like war is just an everyday occurance in Rome. It is clearly not their last resort by any means. It seems that they are more willing to declare war than most. I mean they do go through the Senate process with a majority opinion, so that's pretty solid. I just hope that the demands they want met are worth sacrificing lives of their citizens for. I guess I just think that they should put more consideration into play before they decide to go to war.
Post a Comment