When Reading Roman History - rozumem's weblog

← back

22 minutes ago

last update: 6 minutes ago

When Reading Roman History

I finished reading SPQR by Mary Beard a few months back. In this overdue post, I share things that are important to keep in mind when casual history nerds like myself read about Roman history and ancient history more generally.

No maps or formal dating system

Maps and dates are taken for granted when studying Roman history. But Romans, at least pre-empire, had no maps nor dates. They had no visual way of measuring how far their influence stretched relative to the world. Dating was not based on numbers but rather on who held consulship at that time. They wouldn't say, 'this wine is of the 212 BCE vintage'. Instead they would say, 'wine from when Pulcher was consul'.

Inaccurate death tolls

Death tolls in ancient texts should be taken with a grain of salt. There was no formal tally system for counting how many died in battle. In addition, there was a patriotic tendency to downplay Roman casualties and exaggerate foreign casualties.

All numbers in ancient texts have to be treated with suspicion, victims of exaggeration, misunderstanding, and over the years some terribly miscopying by medieval monks.

pg. 178

Retrospective generalship can be misleading

The Battle of Cannae is one of the most famous battles in history. It's in the syllabus of many modern military academies and paints Hannibal to be a force to be reckoned with. While Beard acknowledges that it was a turning point in the Second Punic War, she's doubtful whether the battle was as grand as it's perceived to be today. Historical accounts conflict each other on the details and even basic things like location of the battle.

Moreover, encircling the enemy to capture them in large numbers was not a novel strategy. It's also unclear how a general could have a comprehensive view of the battle to inform tactical decisions. Even if he could, how effective could a general be in issuing instructions to maneuver 100,000 men in real-time?

Talk of tactics, and all the splendid military diagrams that usually accompany it, offers a highly sanitised version of Roman warfare and suggests that we know more about the face of Roman battle than we actually do

pg. 182

Early Rome controlled 'people' not 'places'

We've all seen the time-lapse video of the Roman empire growing from a small patch of red in the center of Italy to eventually cover the entire Mediterranean. But early Rome didn't control 'places'. They didn't have government officials or boots on the ground in the places which they controlled. But they had influence. They could impose their will if they chose to, through bullying, force, or persuasion. The modern day parallel is the albeit waning 'soft power' of the USA.

Beard shares a compelling anecdote describing an encounter between King Anticochus Epiphanes and the Romans. King Anticochus was invading Egypt and Egypt asked the Romans for help. The Romans sent an envoy to meet with the king. The envoy handed him a decree asking him to withdraw his troops from Egypt. Antiochus asked for time to consult his advisors. The envoy picked up a stick and drew a circle in the sand around the king. Antiochus had to give his answer before he could step outside the circle. He meekly submitted to the Roman demands.

Cicero's influence

You're probably familiar with the maxim, 'History is written by the victors'. But several times while reading SPQR, I felt 'Roman history is written by Cicero'. Before reading this book, it never occurred to me how much influence Cicero has had in our understanding of Roman history. Beard draws on his version of the events at several points and rightfully acknowledges the risks with giving too much weight to one man's perspective. It is also telling that Beard titled the first chapter of her book, 'Ciceros' Finest Hour'.

Cicero rose to prominence by winning court cases. His speeches and arguments became the foundation for future generations studying Latin and rhetoric. He also knew how to market himself. He got his slaves to transcribe countless copies of his speeches and distribute them among the populace. Notable examples are his prosecutions of Catiline and Verres.

Cicero himself probably circulated copies of all these soon after they had been delivered, laboriously transcribed by a small army of slaves... they quickly became admired and much-quoted classics of Latin literature, and prime examples of great oratory to be learned and imitated by Roman schoolboys and would-be speakers for the rest of antiquity.

pg. 40

The case over, and keen not to waste his hard work, Cicero circulated in written form what he had said at the opening of the trial, along with the remaining speeches that he would have given against Verres had it continued. The full text of these still survives, copies and recopied throughout the ancient world and the Middle Ages as a model of how to denounce an enemy.

pg. 253

Even...