Ana səhifə

Gcse ancient History


Yüklə 2.8 Mb.
səhifə20/28
tarix27.06.2016
ölçüsü2.8 Mb.
1   ...   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   ...   28

Discussion points


  • How accurate is his assessment?

  • What is the point he is making?

  • Does the rest of his speech support his argument?

Both sides were fairly evenly matched with between 35,000 and 40,000 troops; Hannibal had slightly more infantry but was weaker in cavalry, unlike at Cannae. Hannibal placed his veterans in the third line – the intention was to weaken the Romans having to fight through two lines before the veterans were brought into the battle; the first two lines were made up of foreign mercenaries and the native Carthaginian soldiers. The cavalry was on the wings. The 80 elephants were placed at the front to charge the Romans and disrupt their lines. The Romans were also drawn up in three lines with the maniples directly behind each other in order to allow the elephants to run through herded by the light-armed troops.


http://www.roman-empire.net/army/zama.html

http://www.unrv.com/empire/battle-of-zama.php

Livy describes the battle in three phases:
As soon as Scipio became aware of it, he ordered the recall to be sounded for the front rankers (hastati) to re-group, pulled out the wounded and sent them to the rear, and led the second and third rankers (principes and triarii) out to the wings, so that the front rank (hastati) could consolidate and secure the line. That was the beginning of a completely new battle.

Livy 30.34.11-12


It was the final demonstration of Hannibal’s brilliance as a military commander.

Livy 30.35.3


http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/15*.html

For Polybius’ account of the battle Polybius 15.11-16


According to Livy:
20,000 Carthaginians and their allies died that day; a similar number were taken prisoner, along with 132 military standards, and 11 elephants. The victorious Romans lost some 1500 men.

Livy 30.35.3




Factors which enabled Rome to succeed:


  • superiority at sea;

  • roads and fortresses;

  • the loyalty of her allies;

  • the stability and determination of the Senate;

  • the co-operation of the people and their desire to win;

  • the strategy of attrition against Hannibal despite the destruction of the countryside;

  • the blocking of reinforcements for Hannibal;

  • the success in undermining Carthaginian power in Spain;

  • the superior discipline, numbers and organization of the army of Rome;

  • the arrival of a military commander in Scipio who reformed the way the army fought in response to Hannibal.






Discussion points:

  • What evidence for these factors can you find in the sources you have read?

  • Which of these factors do Livy and Polybius think are most important?

  • Which of these factors do you think were most important and why?



Task 2Q

Make a list of the strengths and weaknesses of Hannibal as a general and leader. Use the sources as evidence for your views.

Polybius provides an assessment of his character in Book 9.22-26

http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/polybius-hannibal.html

Theme: Significance of the conflict against Carthage in the development of Rome



3.1 The results for Carthage
Hannibal first fled to Hadrumentum, then returned to Carthage. The Carthaginians sent a delegation to Scipio to ask for peace terms (Livy 30.37):


  • they could live as free men under their own laws;

  • they could keep their pre-war territorial possessions and trading centres along the coast;

  • deserters, runaway slaves, and all prisoners of war must be returned;

  • except for ten warships, their whole fleet were to be handed over along with all elephants;

  • without the permission of the Roman people, they were to make war on no nation within Africa; they were not to make war under any circumstances outside Africa;

  • They had to restore all lands and property to Masiniss and sign a solemn treaty with him;

  • a war indemnity of 10,000 talents, spread over 50 years in equal instalments, must be paid;

  • 100 hostages to be chosen by Scipio, aged between fourteen and thirty, must be handed over;

Carthage became a dependent ally of Rome and vulnerable to any aggressor in Africa, such as Masinissa.


3.2 The results for Rome
Rome, on the other hand, now controlled the Western Mediterranean; the Senate and the ruling men of Rome now had considerable power and opportunities. There was now no power in the Mediterranean which could challenge Rome. Even the Eastern kingdoms collapsed before Rome.

Rome’s people were war weary in 201 BC and the treasury was empty. Large parts of Italy were devastated, and provinces now needed to be organized and governed.





During the next 50 years Rome is occupied with the Kingdoms of Greece and Asia:
214-205 The First Macedonian war (Philip allies with Carthage: this brings him into conflict with Rome)

200-196 The Second Macedonian War

192-188 War with Antiochus of Syria

172-168 The Third Macedonian War

149 The Fourth Macedonian war

147 Macedon becomes a Roman province

146 The Achaean League War: Corinth destroyed. Carthage destroyed.


Rome’s initial policy was to avoid interference in Greek politics and she actually removed her forces from Greece in 194 BC. Reluctantly she became involved again in 189 BC but became increasingly dissatisfied with the behaviour of the Greeks. Finally in 149 to 146 BC she embarked on a conquest of Greece and an annexation of Macedon.
By 146 BC Rome’s provinces were Africa, Spain, Macedon, Greece, Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica.
This expansion brought wealth, and this itself brought problems. Sallust (Catiline Conspiracy 10) sees the fall of Carthage in 146 BC as the point from which the corruption of Rome’s leaders began. This wealth and luxury undermined the traditional values in his view. Changes took place in the agricultural organization of Italy. Slaves became more plentiful. There was a movement away from the countryside and traditional peasant farming towards the cities and towns. This had effect upon recruitment for the army which had depended upon the owners of small farms. The opening up of trade routes and trading and banking opportunities led to the growth of a wealthy business class (equites). They provided the organization for the collection of taxes from the provinces. The allies had born the brunt of the devastation of land and grew discontented. All this time, the power and wealth became concentrated in the hands of a ruling group of nobles, about 20 families. Therefore, the political, economic, social and cultural effects of Rome’s victory spread far and wide over the next century.

3.3 The destruction of Carthage
In Carthage in 196 BC Hannibal succeeded in breaking the power of the ruling class and re-organising agriculture and commerce so that Carthage could offer to pay off her indemnity in a lump sum in 191 BC. The ruling class appealed to Rome accusing Hannibal of plotting with Antiochus of Syria. Supported by some Romans, they succeeded in chasing Hannibal out of Carthage to Antiochus.
Over the next 50 years Masinissa consistently tried to expand his kingdom into Carthaginian territory (in 193, 182, 174, 172 BC) and Carthage responded only by appealing to Rome for arbitration. This occurred again in 153 BC, when Cato the Elder was sent to arbitrate. In 150 BC Masinissa tried to insist on the reinstatement of his supporters in Carthage who had been exiled. In response Carthage, against the treaty of Zama, declared war. In 149 BC Rome declared war on Carthage despite efforts to make peace. 80,000 men crossed over to Africa. Carthage made every effort to accept any terms Rome would offer, but in series of negotiations eventually Rome demanded that the Carthaginian left their city to be destroyed and settle where they liked at least ten miles from the sea.
Carthage was besieged for three years from 149 to 146 BC. In the spring of 146 BC Scipio Aemilianus finally succeeded and Carthage was destroyed and the land ploughed over. Its remaining citizens were sold into slavery.

Sources: Livy and Polybius as historians and the relationship between their works


4.1 Polybius
Who was Polybius?

(c.200-118BC): various dates are given for his birth e.g. 203 BC and 208 BC

Polybius was a Greek, from the city of Megalopolis. He was among 1000 Achaean nobles taken to Rome for possible trial in a purge of political opponents to Rome in 168 BC during a period when Rome was in conflict with Greece. He became a close associate of Scipio Aemilianus. He traveled widely, to many of the places he writes about including Spain, Africa and the Alps. He also saw the destruction of Carthage.
His aims as a historian

He wrote a history of the period 264-146 BC, effectively of Rome’s rise to power in the Mediterranean. This was to be a political and military history – what he called pragmatike historia. But it was also meant to provide a lesson (Book 1.35). He writes his History with the intention to explain to his Greek readers why it is they should accept Roman rule. He intends to instruct them by showing them the inevitability of Roman success.


This is how he expressed his aim:

No-one could be so unimaginative, so intellectually idle that he would not be fascinated to know how and under what sort of constitution in less than fifty-three years and all alone Rome came to conquer and rule almost the whole of the inhabited world. As an achievement it is totally unprecedented.

Book 1.5



Task 4A

Read Book 1. section 2 and section 4:

What further aims does he have?

To what does he compare the Roman achievement?




In Book 1.14 he states:


"For as a living creature is rendered wholly useless if deprived of its eyes, so if you take truth from history, what is left but an idle unprofitable tale?"
His Sources

Because of contacts in Rome and elsewhere, he was able to interview persons who were present at events. He was himself an eyewitness to some events, so much of his information is first hand and the result of his own personal investigation. He says (Book 4.2) that he expects to gain information from those who witnessed events themselves, if he himself was not an eye-witness of the events he records. Two whom he mentions were Laelius (Scipio’s second in command) (Book 9.25) and Masinissa (Book 10.23).


He also used documents and inscriptions such as treaties, as well as personal memoirs and letters which we no longer have. In Book 3.26 he refers to the treaties existing in the Treasury of the Aediles.

At 3.56.4 he says:

His surviving forces numbered 12,000 African and 8,000 Spanish foot soldiers, together with a maximum of about 6,000 cavalry. He himself has confirmed this on the column at Lacinium, which is inscribed with the statistics of his armed forces.
In Book 12.25 he says it is important for the historian to check available documents.
Writers he used were: Philinus of Agrigentum who was a supporter of Carthage and Quintus Fabius Pictor, the first Roman Historian, who was alive during the Hannibalic war. He also used the Memoirs of Aratus and the Histories of Phylarchus. He complains (Book 1.14) that Phuilinus and Fabius have failed to report the true version of events. This he claims was due to their bias towards either the Carthagnians or the Romans. He mentions Fabius in Book 3.8 when discussing the causes of the Hannibalic war. he warns against trusting him and asks his readers to test what he says against the fact (3.9.4). He criticizes Philinus in Book 3.26 for effectively falsifying a treaty that did not exist. In Book 3.47-8 he is very critical of writers who have exaggerated or mis-interpreted Hannibal’s action and motives in crossing the Alps or worse still, have introduced gods and religion to explain rational events.
In Book 1.14 he says:

An equally powerful motive with me for paying particular attention to this war is that, to my mind, the truth has not been adequately stated by those historians who are reputed to be the best authorities on it, Philinus and Fabius.  I do not indeed accuse them of intentional falsehood, in view of their character and principles, but they seem to me to have been much in the case of lovers;  for owing to his convictions and constant partiality Philinus will have it that the Carthaginians in every case acted wisely, well, and bravely, and the Romans otherwise, whilst Fabius takes the precisely opposite view.



http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/1*.html
He says that it is the task of the historian to record the truth of what happened and not to sensationalise events with vivid recreations and speeches that did not occur. The Historians task was to provide information which may instruct and guide future generations. (Book 2. 56)

However, he is not free from bias himself, towards Scipio for example. He also includes speeches in his work. This was the usual practice for historians in the ancient world. There are thirty seven speeches in his work as it survives, for some of which he used existing records; for others he had to rely on versions in other writers which may not be accurate.



http://www.livius.org/pn-po/polybius/polybius.html

4.2 Livy

He lived (c. 59 BC-AD 17). He wrote his History under the patronage of Augustus; he was not, as Polybius was, experienced in war or politics; he never visited the places he wrote about.

His work begins at the foundation of Rome and he wrote a year by year account (annalistic). It starts in 753 BC and ended in 9 BC. There were 142 books, and only 35 still exist. What remains covers 753-293 BC and 219-167 BC. In his Preface he makes it quite clear that he aimed to record the story of the greatest nation on earth. He also wanted to offer models of behaviour in the lives and achievements of the heroes of the Republic.
Sources

In writing his History he had to use earlier writers as his sources since he did not, as Polybius had done, search out eye-witnesses or documents. He used Polybius a great deal, and Fabius Pictor, Valerias Antias and Claudius Quadrigatus, as well as many others which have since been lost.


Sometimes he is vague about the sources:

Some authorities suggest that Hannibal in fact fled straight from the battlefield to the court of King Antiochus, and that when Scipio demanded his surrender as an absolute priority, he was told that Hannibal was no longer in Africa.

Livy 30.37.13
Sometimes he more precise:

The author Celsus tells us that as he (Scipio) spoke his whole stance and demeanour were so uplifted, so transported with happiness that you might have thought that he had already won the day.

Livy 30.32.10
And he admits that he cannot always find out the truth:

So he sent an envoy to Scipio to ask for a chance to hold discussions. Whether he did this on his own initiative or on the instructions of his government, I have no way of telling.. Valerius Antias records that he was defeated by Scipio in a preliminary encounter, in which he lost 12,000 men and a further 1700 taken prisoner. It was after this that he went to Scipio’s camp as an official envoy with ten other colleagues.

Livy 30.29.5-7
Livy is capable of vividly creating an atmosphere and psychology for his readers?:

As they explored such terrors in their minds, people simply increased their own general level of anxiety. For many years they had grown used to seeing war waged before their very eyes in different parts of Italy, without much hope of any near likelihood of a finish to the fighting; but now, it added to their anxieties and raised the whole level of public expectation that the two generals, Scipio and Hannibal, were getting ready for their final showdown. Those who had the greatest confidence and hope that Scipio would win were the ones who were the most on tenterhooks, the closer they imagined victory to be.

Livy 30.28.8-9
He has no problem with presenting speeches which he has invented or updated ones from his sources.


Task 4B

Find examples of his speeches from the sources you have read – how likely is it that he had copies of these?





Discussion:


  • Why does Livy include speeches in his work?

  • Does this make him a good or bad historian?

He does include mistakes which he fails to correct from his sources and fails to check the truth of what they say. He does expand upon his material imaginatively, especially where it gives him the chance to praise Romans or condemn their enemies, such as the Carthaginians. In describing the places and topography of events he is inclined to be inconsistent or vague. He has limited understanding of military and political matters and this leads him to biased accounts. However, he provides considerable detail, facts and figures of senatorial meetings, assemblies, administrative organization and individual contributions to events.




Task 4C

For more information and an assessment, read:



http://www.livius.org/li-ln/livy/livy.htm

  • Read this comparison of accounts of Hannibal’s crossing of the Alps from both Livy and Polybius: what are the strengths and weaknesses of each author?

http://www.livius.org/ha-hd/hannibal/alps.html


Timeline:

218-201 2nd Punic War

218         Hannibal marches on Italy

   Hannibal victories at Rivers Ticinus and Trebia



217         Hannibal victory at Battle of Lake Trasimene; Quintus Fabius named dictator

216         Hannibal victory at Cannae. Capua joins Hannibal 

215- Philip V allies with Hannibal

215         Spain: the Scipios defeat Hasdrubal at Ibera;

214         Rome prevents Philip V of Macedonia gaining support in Greece.

213         Rome besieges Syracuse

212         Tarentum, Herakleia, Metapontum, Thurii join Hannibal. Roman siege of Capua

  1. Hannibal fails to save Capua; he pretends to march on Rome to divert Rome from Capua but fails.

Syracuse captured.

               The two Scipios are killed in Spain



210         P. Cornelius Scipio (Africanus) given procunsular imperium of Spain. Winters in Tarracco

  1. Rome takes back Tarentum.  Scipio captures New Carthage in Spain

208 Scipio defeats Hasdrubal at Baecula

207         Battle of Metaurus River, Death of Hasdrubal, Hannibal’s brother, while trying to reinforce Hannibal.

   Spain: Battle of Baecula; Hasdrubal loses half his cavalry



206         Scipio victorious at Battle of Ilipa

205         as consul Scipio moves to Sicily

               End of Macedonian war; Rome withdraws from Greece



204         Scipio lands in Africa. Carthage allies with Syphax of Numidia; Scipio with Masinissa. Hanno ambushed by Scipio and Masinissa at the Tower of Agathocles.

203         Siege of Utica. Scipio tricks Syphax and Hasdrubal with negotiations and then destroys their camps in a night attack. Battle of the Great Plains: Hasdrubal and Syphax (20,000 men) defeated by Scipio (12,000). Defeat of Mago inItaly. Hannibal recalled.

   Syphax defeated and captured; Masinissa given the Numidian kingdom



  1. Battle of Zama;

201 Peace: end of the 2nd Punic War. Carthage becomes a client state of Rome.

195         Hannibal exiled from Carthage and goes to Antiochus III of Syria; Masinissa starts to raid Carthaginian lands.

183         Deaths of Scipio Africanus and Hannibal

173         Rome arbitrates between Masinissa and Carthage

  1. Rome sides with Numidians;

151 Carthage declares war on Masinissa

150         Numidians massacre Hasdrubal’s army at Oroscopa

149         Rome declares war against Carthage: 3rd Punic War

        Carthage surrounded by Africans, Romans, and private army of Hasdrubal.



148-46   Achaean War

146         Destruction of Carthage and Corinth; Africa becomes a Roman province
1   ...   16   17   18   19   20   21   22   23   ...   28


Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©atelim.com 2016
rəhbərliyinə müraciət