Rome versus Macedonia

Originally posted by bluestraggler
I'm now reading Historia Mundi on your recommendation. It was nice to see Sulla get the chop.
BTW - How come you never finished your Den Xiaoping not gains the power timeline ?

Well, it was a mixture of facts, principally caused that because familiar and work matters I make a break of appearing on the forum during 2-3 months, briefly reapearing during a week, when I finally return another time to the board I am lazy in ending the timeline (not only this in fact I begin 3 other), (you know making a TL could be an interesting matter but also sometimes you need patience, time and gains to continue)
I suppose also I had gains also to read the threads and other TLs, to give more time for read history books, novels, for read the TLs that I had not read in the board and in internet, etc.

In fact more than no finished is interrupted.

I recognise but that your question and also your example of making regular installments made me return the gains to continue with Den Xiaoping and also with the other TLs, this next week I have some days of holidays in the work, I will try to resume the installments on my TLs.

Also keep this alive, it is a good work :cool:
 
Alexander the Great would not tarry for 20 yrs before invading Italy.
Even assuming Alexander had some great desire to conqure all the Mediterranean surely the more profitable targets (i.e. Carthage, its colonies and the Greek cities of Sicily and southern Italy) will be higher on his list rather than various half-civilised backwaters. Hell, judging by some of his actions during his campaigns it is quite possible he would opt to leave Rome, the Samnites, etc. independent and play them off against each other.
 
Even assuming Alexander had some great desire to conqure all the Mediterranean surely the more profitable targets (i.e. Carthage, its colonies and the Greek cities of Sicily and southern Italy) will be higher on his list rather than various half-civilised backwaters. Hell, judging by some of his actions during his campaigns it is quite possible he would opt to leave Rome, the Samnites, etc. independent and play them off against each other.

Rome was recognised by Greek historians and had been recognised at Delphi for centuries. It was no uncivilized backwater.
 
Rome was recognised by Greek historians and had been recognised at Delphi for centuries. It was no uncivilized backwater.
Okay so I exagerated:D . But still Rome was small and -in comparison to Carthage et al- unimportant. Indeed at this stage the Samnites and Eutruscans were still reliably able to beat the stuffing out of Roman armies.
 
I will try to resume the installments on my TLs.
Nice to hear. I have been working on a similar ATL without a great deal of success.
For me, Deng Xiaoping was one of the great disappointments of the modern era, so it’s interesting to see what the world might have been like without him - better or worse.
 
Part 10

Like Part 6, this next section doesn't conatin a lot of action but is mainly exposition.

The Roman organization of Italia following the Latin revolt of AUC 414 was unique in the ancient world, long-enduring and largely congenial to both conqueror and conquered. Though recourse might be made to harsh and even cruel methods of dealing with recalcitrant subjects, the Roman system rewarded fidelity and gave hope of better treatment in expectation of future loyalty. One of the Consuls of 414, L. Spurius Camillus (son of the celebrated Dictator), had addressed the issue directly:
"We are growing weary of the Latins’ constant renewal of hostilities, and you can secure a lasting peace by cruelty or benevolence. You may wipe out the whole Latin nation and create desolation and solitude in a country that has furnished you with a splendid allied army which you have employed in many major wars. Or do you wish to follow the example of your ancestors and make Rome greater by conferring her citizenship on those whom she has defeated? The strongest empire is that whose subjects are pleased to render it their obedience."
The solution was to divide the Italian states into two classes, citizens (cives) and allies (socii, also known as foederati or civitates foederatae). The former enjoyed either full citizenship or partial rights (civitas sine suffragio). Local communities with full citizenship did not appoint magistrates with imperium; they came under the jurisdiction of delegates of the praetors and these towns came to be known as praefectures. The Roman colonies established as garrisons in conquered territories (coloniae civium Romanorum), though endowed with citizenship, were remote enough from the capital that their voting power was potential rather than real and thus differed in no important way from the municipia (the cives sine suffragio). Each of the allies was bound by a treaty (foedus) and obliged to furnish troops (or maritime communities, ships) but not to pay direct tribute.
The expansion of Roman power and territory beyond the traditional boundaries of Italia created a new imperative to reorganize the empire. A clear distinction, both geographical and political, was needed to be drawn between the confederated states on the peninsula collectively known as Italici, and the newly absorbed countries and peoples.
The Roman provincial system (provincia originally meant "jurisdiction" - a sphere of influence or control, as allotted to a magistrate) developed in the sixth century, as her conquests brought under Rome’s authority regions where the traditional policy, as applied in Italia, of citizenship grants and alliances, was deemed inappropriate. The Galles, for instance, could not be relied upon to meet the military commitments required of a formal ally. Strategic colonies had been established in Gallia Cisalpina following the conquest over the previous century, but in the wake of the revolt of 530-32, Rome annexed the territories of the Boii, Lingones and Insubres.
Via the lex Claudia of AUC 536, the Roman government took direct responsibility for administering the entire region. Instead of being incorporated into the ager publicus or added to the confederation. these lands were organized into four tribute- paying areas. Eleven years later, the annexation of Corsica (the lex Sempronia) added a second province governed, unlike Gallia Cisalpina, as a unitary area. In 590 the four districts of northern Italia were merged into two, Gallia Cispadana and Gallia Transpadana. These were in turn united with the territory of the other major northern Italian Galles, the Cenomani, as Gallia Citerior in 635. Of course, under the Emperors all the lands south of the Alpes were incorporated into Italia, which now became a province as well, albeit with special status.
The first three provinces, created in the sixth century, satisfied Roman security needs for the time being, and there were no further annexations for six decades. In the ninety years after 650, twelve more were added. This was partly a reflection of changes in Roman foreign policy, from essentially defensive to what might be called pre-emptive aggression. It was also an expression of the growing sophistication of the Roman state. The extent of overseas acquisitions was limited by the practical considerations of defence and administration. There were simply not enough armies nor sufficient qualified officials available for the task of administering a large empire.
The problem of tax collection illustrates the problems of reconciling the institutions of a city state with the demands of empire. The countries and peoples of the provinces were neither citizens nor allies but subjects of the Roman state, governed by Roman officials and subject to its taxes. Yet the Senate, constrained by the parochial outlook and the class prejudices of its members, did not take the necessary steps to create an effective machinery for governing the provinces, ceding considerable autonomy to the provincial officials and local elites. The result was not greater freedom for the native populations but, too often, corruption, inefficiency and exploitation. Taxes were not exorbitant, being to defray the costs of administration and defence rather than to remit large amounts to the Roman treasury.
On the other hand, in the absence of proper mechanisms of government, the right to collect taxes was leased to contractors, private entrepreneurs or stock companies who tendered for the lucrative contracts. These publicani, concerned only for profits and subject to very little active supervision, were motivated by greed and could be brutal in their methods. Senators, forbidden to engage directly in such business, were often the hidden partners in these companies, exercising considerable behind-the-scenes influence and using their political status for self-enrichment. Tax collection and investment banking, screened from proper scrutiny and enforced by military power, were little more than forms of legalized extortion in the provinces. As a result of a series of scandals, a senatorial court was established to try cases of extortion and corruption, in place of trial by the assembly; but verdicts could be biased or even bought. While in general provincial government was honest and fair, in the end there was no means of redress of grievances except through armed resistance, which inevitably failed and led to even harsher impositions.
The republican system of provincial administration was not uniform. Building on the experience of the legates and quaestors who represented Roman interests in the subject states in Italia proper, each province was governed under a unique charter (lex provinciae).
To ensure the collection of taxes and the maintenance of law and order, ex-consuls or ex-praetors were appointed, initially by the comitia in consultation with the Senate but later exclusively by the Senate. The employment of promagistrates was partly a recognition of the need for experienced administrators, but also a result of the reluctance of the senatorial elite to create new positions and thus enlarge the circle of office-bearers. To cope with the demands of both provincial and domestic administration the number of praetors was raised to six, and eventually to twelve; but otherwise there was no systematic attempt to create an imperial bureaucracy.
Although they theoretically exercised full imperium, civil and military, within their jurisdiction, only governors of proconsular rank were assigned army commands (which motivated the Senate to appoint propraetors). As a result, the proconsular provinces were the most prestigious, but also the most troublesome. Under the Emperors, however, governors might be proconsuls or propraetors or praefects or procurators or legates, appointed by and responsible directly to the Emperor and in turn supported (and supervised) by an extensive bureaucracy.
The governor enjoyed broad prerogatives and virtually unbounded authority within his province, being subject to few of the limitations of office in Rome itself - no collegiality, no veto and no right of appeal (except for Roman citizens). On the other hand, tenure was generally of short duration and he might face prosecution for mismanagement or corruption. It was forbidden for a governor to take his army outside the borders of his province (as it was illegal for a general to operate outside the assigned area of his command) without the express permission of the Consuls, or effectively the consent of the Senate (later, of course, exclusively of the Emperor). He had a small staff of aides, whom he nominated and were therefore his friends, family, business associates and political allies. Thus was the system prone to patronage and nepotism.
To prevent a governor becoming too powerful, postings were rotated on a frequent basis and provinces were routinely subdivided. Yet because his term was relatively brief, the governor had little incentive to develop his province, to promote the welfare of the native peoples or to establish close relations with local communities. Instead, provincial commands and governorships were opportunities for political aggrandizement and personal enrichment.
The provincial capital (oppidum) was usually sited with strategic military factors in mind although it might be a major commercial centre or a traditional seat of government or even a town rewarded for some display of loyalty. Because the system was inherently inefficient, under the Emperors the provinces were grouped into eight regions, later increased to eleven. The senior official in each of the regions held the rank of praefect or procurator, actually below that of the provincial governor. This meant that he was dependent on and thus loyal to the Emperor. Senators were barred from the regional-level posts, which were usually held by men from the equestrian order.
 
Provinces

Roman provinces under the Republic

Provinces.jpg
 
Part 11

The Gallic Revolt revived Roman fears that either Macedonia or Carthage might attempt to stir up trouble in Italia. In the 540s Rome resumed a programme of relentless annual campaigns - often just large-scale punitive raids - to pacify the restless peoples of the peninsula. However, where a softer line could be taken, generous grants of citizenship and the civitas sine suffragio were used to cement alliances and provide manpower for the armies. Rome’s generally enlightened treatment of the subject states, manifested in the leniency shown towards vanquished enemies and generosity towards loyal allies, contrasted sharply with the exploitative policies of the Carthaginians and the heavy hand of imperial rule in Macedonia’s eastern provinces. By calling on their foederati for military support but not imposing taxes or tribute, the Romans created not a conventional empire, but an association in which Rome may have been the senior partner but was a partner nonetheless. In the wake of further conquests, the allied states shared in the spoils of victory and were eligible for settlement on land confiscated from defeated communities.
As a result, even in the darkest days of crisis, such as in 530, or subsequently in 557, the core of Rome’s Italian confederation in Latium and Campania remained faithful to their treaty obligations, while even her traditional adversaries such as the Etruscans and Samnites were reluctant to take advantage of Roman woes. They had no desire to exchange a stern mistress for a tyrannical master.
To counter the Carthaginian navy as well as the problem of piracy, Rome also in the 540s embarked upon the construction and deployment of a substantial fleet - 200 triremes and quinqueremes, battleships and troop transports. The lack of seafaring experience was made up for by utilizing the skills and experience of the Hellenic allies and by applying Roman expertise on land to the new environment, employing, for instance, grappling and boarding tactics in place of conventional manoeuvring and ramming, essentially turning naval battles into land battles.
This inevitably provoked a naval confrontation in the Etruscan Sea. In flexing her new muscles, Rome began to contest Poenic control of the sea lanes around Corsica and Sardinia. The aim was not to be openly provocative, but an insecure Carthage could not countenance such a challenge to her naval supremacy in the western Mediterranean. Outnumbered, outclassed and inexperienced, the Romans were to be on the losing side in several major engagements in an undeclared war that cost many thousands of lives - largely as the result of storm damage and inept navigation.
In 542-3, however, the Romans wrested the island of Corsica from the Carthaginians, in a series of well-planned and well-executed forays against the coastal settlements. Reluctant to bring in the Macedonians, the Carthaginians resolved to win on their own, but the capture of Alalia (which the Romans called Aleria) by M. Valerius Laevinus in the late summer of 543 completed the conquest. The following year a new Poenic leader, Hanno, took command in Sardinia. He conceded Corsica but in 545 beat off a Roman attack on Sardinian Olbia. The destruction of the Roman fleet, off Nora at the southern end of the island, ended the maritime war, but Hanno made no immediate attempt to recover Corsica. This island became Rome’s second province in AUC 547, Aleria the capital and an important naval base.
The Macedonian Emperor, preferring an uneasy peace to unproductive warfare, mediated a truce between Rome and Carthage, generally disadvantageous to the latter. This kept the Carthaginians dependent on Macedonian patronage but caused deep resentment. Carthage was not strong enough to face Rome alone.
Posterity has tended to underestimate the Carthaginians. Reliant on mercenaries and her allies for the bulk of her land forces, Carthage nonetheless maintained a formidable citizen militia, highly disciplined and well-equipped (though not as skilled as Romans or Macedonians), supported by an elephant corps which was employed to good effect. However, the obvious strength of Carthage lay in her sea power. The Poenic fleet in the sixth century was unmatched in size and the quality of both ships and sailors, despite the loss of Corsica, which was a blow to Carthaginian prestige and had deprived her of naval bases. Hanno would not let either the Romans or Macedonians forget that Carthage was yet a force to be reckoned with.
 
Part 12

Notwithstanding a century of relative decline, in AUC 553 the Macedonian Empire was still the greatest military and economic power in the world, spanning three continents and a multitude of subject peoples. In that year the enlightened, but largely ineffectual, Alexander IV died and was succeeded by his son, Archelaos III. Although, like his father, a patron of the arts and sciences, the new Emperor was also an accomplished statesman and diplomat. During the first few years of his reign, Archelaos was preoccupied with quelling revolts, in particular in Anatolia and Parthia. The ever-restless eastern provinces were pacified, recalcitrant allies and client kings brought into line. In the far east, the Mauryan empire had passed its peak, relieving pressure on the frontier and enabling Macedonia to absorb parts of northern India.
Nevertheless, in the year 557 events in the west forced the Emperor to turn his attention there. In Hispania and Africa, Carthage had been gradually reclaiming her former domains, but the loss of Corsica to the Romans in 543 and the pressure of the Galles in Massilia put that revival in jeopardy - and kept the Poenic state firmly attached to the Macedonian alliance. Therefore, the most urgent need for attention was here. The Gallic peoples of the hinterland had prospered through trade with the Massiliotes but were becoming restless. As Carthaginians, Macedonians and Hellenes - and, on the fringes, the Romans - competed for dominance, the fiercely independent tribes inhabiting the Rhodanus valley felt increasingly threatened.
In response to the Gallic menace and the heavy-handed methods of Carthaginian diplomacy, the Massiliote cities had been entering into commercial treaties and non-aggression pacts with Rome. Macedonian policy did not discourage such contacts, if these were made individually and did not directly oppose the interests of the Empire. However, the Romans were growing bolder, and although their tactics were aimed at neutralizing the Carthaginians and suppressing the Galles, their strategic moves inevitably impinged upon Macedonian prerogatives.
This delicate balance of affairs was upset in 555. With the Macedonians distracted by their perennial campaigning against Parthians and Scythians in Asia, a coalition of Gallic Arverni and Allobroges swept down the valley of the Rhodanus, plundering the coastal settlements and besieging the city of Massalia. The Carthaginians offered little assistance, and the inadequate Macedonian garrison was reluctant to appeal to Rome. The Emperor sent the ageing general Xanthippus, accompanied by the 22 year-old crown prince, Alexander, to Siracusa to assess the situation and, if need be, to organize a military coalition. The Carthaginians at first resisted the Macedonians’ return to Sicilia, which they now regarded as their own sphere of influence, but relented under pressure.
The untried Prince Alexander had as yet given no hint of the military genius that, combined with his youth, would earn him a reputation almost equal to that of his ancestral namesake. By the time he reached Siracusa, Massalia had fallen; but the Romans had successfully held the line against the Galles on the Italian frontier, where the Consul P. Sulpicius Galba had won a hard fought victory (at an unknown location near the city of Nicaea) and taken Massalia.
In the spring of 556, Alexander and his forces landed near the mouth of the Rhodanus, to find only devastation, from which the coastal cities would take a generation to recover. The Gallic alliance had, by this time, inevitably succumbed to petty rivalries, and the Macedonians advanced as far as the Averni stronghold of Gergovia. Rather than sack the town, Alexander made a peace offering to the chastened tribes. He realized that the turbulent Gallic peoples did not pose a serious long term threat to the Macedonian imperium. That menace, he knew, resided elsewhere.
His first objective, however, was to bring the Carthaginians into line. The Poenic state was at best an unreliable ally, having contributed nothing to the pacification of the Galles but inclined to take advantage of their mischief. The Carthaginians were ordered to supply troops for a new campaign, to be commanded by Xanthippus. In return, Carthaginian sovereignty in Sardinia and the Balearic Islands was recognized, and a trade monopoly conceded over all Sicilia. The obstreperous Hanno wanted more, demanding imperial intervention for the restoration of Corsica.
Rome eyed these developments with suspicion and uncertainty. A new consular army commanded by L. Valerius Flaccus attacked the Allobroges east of the Rhodanus, but fell back to Massalia to protect its base in the event of Macedonian aggression.
Alexander announced that he was prepared to allow the Romans to retain the city of Massalia but to advance no farther westwards than the Rhodanus. In fact, he knew that Rome could not comply while any vestige of the Gallic threat remained. He was aware that the Carthaginians were no match for the Romans on land and that, without an enduring Macedonian presence, all of Massilia would become a Roman province. Taking the initiative, when a Senate deputation balked at his proposals, he issued a peremptory demand that the Romans withdraw from Massalia and evacuate Corsica, restoring the island to Carthage. This was a premeditated casus belli, a bold challenge to which the Romans would not yield without a fight. Indeed, the prince had been mustering his land and naval forces in preparation for war long before he delivered his ultimatum. To his surprise, however, the Senate indicated a willingness to evacuate Corsica, conditional upon a suitable arrangement over Massilia. The offer was attractive. The Romans had genuine security concerns in the land they called Gallia Maritima, and Alexander had no desire to promote the special interests of Carthage.
Intent on war, the prince was thus compelled to provoke the Romans by presenting further unreasonable terms. The Senate, desirous of a peaceful settlement, attempted to keep the dialogue alive; but the popular assembly, stirred up by ambitious politicians known to posterity as populares, demanded that Roman honour be defended. The Consuls elected for 557 were consequently members of the war party. This group is first referred to as the populares by later historians in relation to these events. They were not the "men of the people" - reformers claiming a popular mandate to remedy the corruption and incompetence of the senatorial elite - who were to bring down the Republic in the eighth century. They were mainly aristocrats, political conservatives advocating an expansionist foreign policy, in contrast to the Senate majority’s more cautious line. Their alliance with the equestrians, the emerging middle class, was a marriage of convenience. The latter won enormous profits from business opportunities arising from Roman expansion, whereas the landowning Senators saw the rise of a wealthy commercial class as a threat to their own interests.
Expecting an attack on Corsica, which they now resolved to defend, the Romans dispatched an army commanded by the proconsul L. Valerius Flaccus (appointed in the first prorogatio since the crisis of 531) to the island. Instead, in April of 557 Alexander landed in southern Italia, capturing the city of Rhegium without encountering serious resistance. He then moved north to occupy the west coast town of Terina, to use as a forward base of operations. Thurium was besieged and the Roman garrison was forced to surrender when the townspeople revolted. In Rome, the Senate and People responded with fury, condemning the garrison commander in absentia and accusing the citizens of Thurium of treachery. The war which Rome embarked upon with reluctance was now to be prosecuted with the utmost vigour.
A Roman army under T. Quinctius Flamininus, marching south from Heraclea, came very close to surprising Alexander, who was encamped near Thurium and had lost contact with the enemy. His left flank threatened, the prince retired south across the River Crathis, using the cavalry to screen his withdrawal. Finding the level, open ground on the east bank of the Crathis more to his liking, he deployed his phalanx facing northwards, the bulk of his cavalry placed on the more vulnerable left wing, with most of the light infantry, closest to the river. Here, near the town of Cosentia, the course of the stream curved away to the west, allowing the Macedonian horses plenty of room to manoeuvre and yet avoid the marshes, while making a Roman assault upon the Macedonian left a virtual impossibility. The placement of his elephants on the right, rather than in the customary centre, suggests that Alexander had no intention of taking the offensive. On the other hand, his was such an ideal defensive position that it can be assumed that he did not anticipate an immediate Roman attack. His aim was most likely to gain enough time to regroup and bring up reinforcements. Of course, at this time, lacking adequate reconnaissance, he remained unaware of the approach of a second and larger enemy corps.
However, the Romans were undone by the collegiate nature of their command system. Flamininus led a composite force of Romans and allies, thirty thousand men in all and facing twenty thousand Macedonian heavy infantry, ten thousand light infantry, four thousand cavalry and fifty elephants. Against superior numbers arrayed on a classic defensive front, Flamininus should have waited for his colleague, M. Claudius Marcellus (son of the Consul of 531) coming up slowly with an army of forty thousand. On the other hand, the two Consuls were ambitious politicians eager for glory, members of the faction who had pressed for this war. Flamininus feared that his rival might steal his triumph.
At age 33, Flamininus was technically too young for the consulship, but he had earned a solid reputation as a military tribune in Corsica, and he was one of the leading populares. To elect him, his supporters in the assembly had the lex Valeria annalis annulled, then re-enacted the following year, a cynical expedient though not without precedent. Flamininus felt it necessary to prove himself as a great commander and so an impatient general played into the hands of his cautious opponent.
Battle commenced on 17 Martiae, the festival day of the Liberalia. Flamininus adopted the traditional Roman formation, placing two of his three legions in the centre, flanked by the allies, most of the cavalry deployed on the right to face their Macedonian counterparts. The third legion, held in reserve, was positioned on the left, opposite the Macedonians’ weaker flank. Having thus committed himself to battle, the Roman commander had no option but to launch an attack before Alexander’s co-ordinated infantry and cavalry began their advance. Yet the phalanx, in spite of its inherent weaknesses, was in full array still an awe-inspiring sight. Outnumbered and intimidated, Flamininus hesitated; and at that moment he lost any chance of victory.
Perhaps at this point Alexander learned of the approach of Marcellus, or possibly he had sized up his opponent. Whatever his reasons, he took the initiative. Relying on the conventional tactics of cavalry hammer and infantry anvil, Alexander ordered his army forward, at a measured pace. As the opposing centres engaged, the Romans faltered. Against the bristling mass of pikes, the legionaries fell back, in good order, but inexorably. As the phalanx pushed ahead, however, the terrain became more uneven and the line lost its cohesion. Flamininus ordered in his reserves to bolster his collapsing centre. The Macedonian cavalry, on the left flank, encountered soggy ground and were unable to outflank the Romans; but the elephants, advancing on the far right of the line, routed the allies, most of whom had never encountered the behemoths.
Flamininus had prescribed countermeasures, but the troops lacked the training and discipline to carry them out. He detached part of his cavalry to retrieve the situation on the left, in doing so weakening his right wing - to no good effect, for the horses balked at the sight and smell of elephants. The terrorized allies abandoned the field, exposing the entire flank of the hard-pressed Romans.
As the Roman lines dissolved, Alexander pressed the assault, determined that none of the enemy should escape to join up with Marcellus, now just a few hours’ hard marching away. In the ensuing massacre the legionaries fought nobly to the end. Only a handful survived. The body of Flamininus was never recovered. So impressed was he with the fighting spirit of the Romans that the prince ordered all prisoners freed at the conclusion of the campaign (a magnanimous gesture for which he was harshly criticized by a flustered Xanthippus).
On the banks of the River Crathis, the future Emperor had won a tremendous victory; but his men were exhausted, two thousand had fallen, and another Roman army, forty thousand strong, was ready to take the field. Rome might yet win the day. The prince understood the merits of expedient retreat, and he pulled back to his base at Terina, on the west coast. He was content at this stage to cede the initiative to the enemy. Hard-won gains were relinquished without hesitation, including Thurium, where the Roman commander, Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, exacted a savage vengeance for the city’s abject capitulation. Some two thousand of the leading citizens were executed and the rest of the population carried off and sold into slavery.
However, when news of the destruction of the army of Flamininus reached the capital, Marcellus was ordered to hold his ground and await reinforcement. It was a fateful misjudgement, due to a not unreasonable overestimation of Alexander’s strength. By the time the Roman army, by now sixty thousand in size, began moving south, the prince had received fresh troops, including several thousand cavalry, and forty more elephants.
The decisive battle was fought at Petelia, on the east coast north of Crotona. In spite of the larger numbers of troops involved on both sides, this engagement proved almost anticlimactic after the drama on the River Crathis. Maintaining a defensive posture in country unsuitable for offense, Alexander drew in the Roman legions onto the pikes of his phalanx, smashing the enemy’s wings with his cavalry and elephants and rolling up the Roman flanks. His victory was not as one-sided as that won on the Crathis, and the bulk of the Roman army escaped; but the Macedonians held the field and all of southern Italia. Marcellus and the remnants of his army fell back into Campania.
Roman power was now at its lowest ebb since the days of Philip III. The Senate recalled the army from Corsica, effectively ceding the island to Alexander, who fulfilled his promise to Carthage. In Rome, the populares had been discredited by their rush to war and the rash conduct of Flamininus. Still, the Senate conceded the depth of the crisis. An unprecedented sixteen legions were raised and the patrician Valerius Flaccus was elected to a second term. His appointment was a violation of the cursus honorum, yet this abrogation of the constitution, so soon after the Senators had decried the premature election of Flamininus, was warranted by the dire emergency. However, this precedent born of necessity would ultimately be used to subvert the Republic.
 
FYI: distance measurements

In this OTL, I have used the Roman measurement "milles" so I should explain it.
The word "mile" comes from the Latin mille passum, "thousand paces", approximately 0.92 of a modern mile, 1480 metres.
In the Roman system, one mille (mille passum or millarium) consisted of 8 stages (stadia, sing. stadion), 1000 paces (passi, sing. passus), 2000 steps (gradi, sing. gradus), 5000 feet (pedes, sing. pes), 60,000 inches (unciae, sing. uncia). One stage equals 125 paces or 625 feet.
The pes was shorter than our foot, and the Roman inch just short of a modern inch (0.97 inches or 24.6 mm). The pes measured 0.971 modern feet, 0.296 metre, and had 12 unciae.
That is all. As you were.
 
Finally I know your secret....

You are a citizen from a Roman-Macedonian ATL:D or you are a civil servant from the Interdimensional Authority:D

I think probably these are one of the most quick and detailed updates of the history of the board, truly a good work:cool:
 
I may have missed it, but in your ATL did the Alexandrian leadership field the 'new model army' of Alexander against Rome? If they did, how did Rome defeat it?
 
Finally I know your secret....

You are a citizen from a Roman-Macedonian ATL:D or you are a civil servant from the Interdimensional Authority:D

I think probably these are one of the most quick and detailed updates of the history of the board, truly a good work:cool:
No... But one morning I was in my lab manipulating magnetic fields, and suddenly there was this bright purple flash. A strange book appeared...
 
I may have missed it, but in your ATL did the Alexandrian leadership field the 'new model army' of Alexander against Rome? If they did, how did Rome defeat it?
I'm not sure if by "Alexandrian leadership" you mean one of the two Alexanders (Magas Alexandros or Alexander V) or the Macedonian Emperors in general. There is certainly a lot more to come, but I won't reveal the outcome. Except to say that Macedonian resources in this ATL are much greater than the Macedonians' of OTL or the Carthaginians', and they are therefore more formidable. However, they also suffer the diisadvantage of having to maintain a strong presence in the eastern empire.
By the way, I like your use of the term "new model army" in this context.
 
Chapter 3: Republic and Empire

A century and a quarter of virtually uninterrupted success had not made Rome complacent, but it did cultivate in the Romans a sublime confidence in their destiny and in their republican traditions and institutions. So two major defeats at the hands of the supposedly effete Macedonian Empire in AUC 557 came as a rude shock. Yet the Roman setback and Macedonian revival were to prove, in the long term, illusory - just as the victory of the phalanx over the legion can be seen as the final triumph of the old order. Prince Alexander’s campaign in southern Italia prolonged Macedonian command of the central Mediterranean, but was more of a diversion from the troubles in the east than a solution to the Empire’s problems.
Despite the advice of Xanthippus and the entreaties of his Carthaginian allies, the prince had no intention of pressing forward against Rome itself, nor of permanently occupying all of southern Italia. Inheriting his father’s political instincts, he understood that while Rome’s allies remained loyal, the Macedonian foothold on the peninsula would remain tenuous. Indeed, a commitment to guarding large tracts of Italian territory would require a heavy investment of money and manpower; while the continued existence of pro-Roman enclaves in the south meant that Alexander could not advance too far north without endangering his bases and supply lines. He occupied the peninsula as far north as the deserted cities of Thurium and Tarentum, but he realized that only a sustained diplomatic effort to detach the allies would loosen Rome’s grip on the region. To achieve this he would have to convince the Italians that Roman domination was permanently broken. A long-term offensive of this nature meant a protracted stay in Italia and a major diversion from affairs in the east.
Xanthippus had been a strong advocate of a western strategy, and his death early in 558 cleared the way for a change in policy. The diplomatic effort had failed. Alexander’s abandonment of Thurium the previous year and that city’s subsequent fate were proof enough to the Italiotes that he was not fighting for their liberty. So they would be neither pro-Roman nor anti-Roman, neither pro-Macedonian nor anti-Macedonian. As no one knew how things would turn out, their only viable course of action was to wait and see, supporting neither this side nor the other, and trying not to make an implacable foe of either. The prince could not rely on them to support his cause.
Characteristically, the Romans were not prepared to wait upon Alexander’s next move. In response to his cautious offers of a negotiated settlement, they adopted the usual position, that of no compromise while the enemy remained on Italian soil. In the spring of 558, P. Claudius Pulcher marched south with six legions through Apulia, to protect Brundisium. He was defeated in a short but ferocious engagement at Canusium on the Aufidus River but escaped with most of his army intact, while Alexander’s phalanx took heavy losses. Not a general to be deterred by any kind of setback, the prince invested Brundisium and swayed most of the wavering Italiote cities to his cause. For the first time, he was able to recruit substantial numbers of troops from the region.
With a second consular army under P. Licinius Crassus advancing through Campania, Alexander left part of his army at Brundisium and dashed across the Apennines, in an audacious bid to strike the Romans in the flank. Crassus’s failure to secure the mountain passes cannot be dismissed as sheer negligence, for he could hardly have foreseen Alexander’s bold move. Nevertheless, the consequence was disaster. Ambushed near Eburi, a small town south-east of modern Salernum, the four legions were routed and twenty thousand men killed or captured. Crassus escaped the slaughter but was killed in rearguard skirmishing a few days later. Claudius, having regrouped and fallen back into Samnite country, quick-marched his men and shortly reached Tarracina in southern Latium, to prepare to defend Rome itself. Alexander, however, withdrew into Lucania to establish a line at the Silarus River (this being the conventional boundary between Campania and Lucania).
Besides the destruction of a Roman army, Alexander’s victory at Eburi signified a major and permanent change in Macedonian tactics. Abandoning the phalanx, Alexander adopted a legion-type formation, deployed in echelon to prevent the Romans reforming their lines after the initial shock of the Macedonian attack. He would make further good use of the more flexible arrangement in the east, where his attention was turned once more. Having secured southern Italia by making alliances with the Lucanian and Bruttian tribes of the region, he established garrisons and rebuilt the naval base at Tarentum, which had been virtually deserted since the devastation of the city in AUC 450. He thereafter set out for the eastern provinces, where new threats had emerged in central Asia. He would not return to the west for fifteen years.
On the semi-arid plainlands north and east of the Euxine Sea, the Scythians, already challenged by Galles to the west, had been supplanted by the Sarmatians, a related people but if anything even more primitive and ferocious. The nomads overran most of the Macedonian strongholds in the region and threatened the existence of the Bosporan province. Summoned by his father, the Emperor, to deal with these new incursions, Alexander was reportedly more than happy to exchange the stolid single-mindedness of the Romans for the pugnacious volatility of the barbarians. Unfortunately, the accounts of the prince’s campaigns have been lost to history, but it is known that he restored the northern and eastern borders and campaigned between the Oxian and Hyrcanian Seas, where Orestes had come to grief half a century before.
Back in Rome, the "war party" won the backing of the popular assembly, against the wishes of the Senate, to launch a new offensive in southern Italia. The Senators were not averse to ridding the peninsula of the Macedonians but understood that without an intense diplomatic effort to win back the support of the Italiote cities, the Roman task would be indeed formidable.
As it happened, the populares were outmanoeuvred when the conservatives engineered the appointment of a dictator, Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus. Though by no means a pacifist nor an appeaser, Ahenobarbus saw the folly of engaging the Macedonians in pitched battle. He sent two legions commanded by proconsul L. Valerius Flaccus to hold Venusia on the Via Appia, so as to deny the Macedonians free use of the great road across the Apennines. Another four legions under P. Cornelius Scipio were dispatched north to keep the Galles in check. The expected uprising there did not occur, but Scipio campaigned against the troublesome Ligurians, capturing Genua, which became a Roman port, and establishing a colony at Clastidium.
(There is some confusion in our sources concerning the foundation of this colony, historically a Gallic town inhabited by either the Insubres or a tribe identified by the Roman-Hellenic historian Aristion as the Anamari. Certainly, it lay in the very westernmost territory of the Cisalpine Galles, and in 559 it had possibly been taken over by the Ligurians. It seems unlikely that Scipio, or the Senate which had to have approved the settlement, would have provoked the Galles at such a critical time if the town was indeed still Gallic. Under Roman occupation, Clastidium became a major link on the road north from Genua.)
There were to be no further large-scale engagements at this time, but the Roman strategy put the Macedonians on notice that there would be neither comprehensive peace nor all-out war, just a grinding campaign of manoeuvre and attrition, for as long as the latter remained in Italia.
 
Republic and Empire, Part 2

In the following year, AUC 560, Roman conservatives were to be confounded by their own intransigence. Domitius Ahenobarbus had earned the respect and support of the assembly with his policy of keeping pressure on the Macedonians without returning directly to the offensive. However, the obduracy of the tradition-bound Senate prevented the retiring Dictator's election as Consul. Meanwhile the populares flexed their muscles by electing L. Quinctius Flamininus, brother of the fallen Consul. Virtually ignoring his conservative colleague, Flamininus took the initiative. Marching down the east coast, he re-crossed the Aufidus River and advanced rapidly on Brundisium, taking the city without a fight. The previous year’s occupation of Venusia by Valerius Flaccus was critical to this success. The Macedonian commander, Antiphilus, led his army up the Via Appia to contest the Roman movement but with the Romans holding the key town and Flamininus now in a position to outflank him, he fell back to Tarentum.
On reading the reports from Italia, the prince was as furious as the Emperor was complacent. With the Romans again in control of Brundisium, not only was the Macedonian hold over south Italia and Sicilia endangered; the southern approaches to the Hadriatic Sea were once more threatened. Preoccupied in the east, Alexander was not ready to return to the Mediterranean and resume his war against the Romans. Nevertheless, circumventing his father’s prerogatives, he sent his personal envoy to Rome, demanding a clear and formal declaration of the Senate’s intentions. The imperious Alexander would not have considered treating with the popular assembly, which had effectively taken over foreign policy; or perhaps he understood the fickle nature of the Roman populus and the caprices of wartime politics.
In any case, Alexander received no satisfactory response from the Romans. The recent success of Flamininus had inflamed the ambition of other would-be commanders. When he prudently resisted the temptation to immediately follow up his victory with an attack upon Tarentum, Flamininus lost favour with the people. However, one of his deputies in the field, M. Claudius Marcellus, campaigned on a war agenda as did other, lesser lights.
Under such circumstances did the Senate reveal its collective experience and political savvy. To outflank Marcellus and to win over Flamininus, the Senators offered the latter a prorogatio. This also preserved the intent of the lex Valeria annalis, for the Senators controlled the prorogations and the disposition of the legions. Marcellus, who was duly elected Consul, took command of four legions and set out immediately for southern Italia. Flamininus, with an equal number of troops, advanced slowly down the west coast, crossing the Silarus and fortifying Velia, a Roman ally in Lucania.
To cut off Tarentum, Marcellus launched his army at Heraclea, on the coast to the south-west. Here he was met by the general Asclepiodotus (by coincidence from Thracian Heraclea). Rather than stay on the defensive, Asclepiodotus opted for a pre-emptive strike at Pandosia (in Lucania, not the Bruttian Pandosia where Alexander of Epirus met his end 138 years before). Marcellus took up a relatively strong position anchored on the River Siris, but the Macedonian cavalry forded up-stream and was in a position to turn the Roman flank. However, before the cumbersome phalanx could engage, Marcellus extricated his legions and withdrew to the west, then across the River Aciris and north to his safe haven at Venusia. In order to protect his flank, he pulled the garrison out of Brundisium, ceding the port city once more to the Macedonians. Meanwhile, having learnt of the debacle at Pandosia, Flamininus retreated across the Silarus.
The events of 561 had done nothing to enhance Roman prestige. With neither protagonist willing to resume the struggle, the fourth war between Rome and Macedonia petered out in desultory skirmishing and posturing along the frontier. There was no formal declaration of a truce, but for the next decade hostilities virtually ceased in southern Italia. Instead the Romans took the opportunity to expand their fleet and to probe for fault lines in the Macedonian hegemony. The weak spot was judged to be Carthage.
Having reoccupied Corsica, the Carthaginians were once more flexing their muscles in the western Mediterranean; but the wily strongman Hanno never lost sight of the fact that Poenic power rested uneasily upon a Macedonian foundation. He had sent troops in support of Alexander in 557 and to assist Antiphilus after the prince’s departure for the east. Carthage thus prospered from the Macedonian revival. In 568, however, Hanno died, and his city now entered a period of rapid and terminal decline. Within two years of his death, Hanno’s nephew Adherbal declared himself king and Carthage independent. He made an alliance with Rome in defiance of the Carthaginian senate, which he thereupon disbanded.
Inevitably, in 571 the Macedonians declared war, quickly capturing Olbia and other bases in Sardinia. The Poenic fleet responded with an offensive, destroying its Macedonian counterpart off Panormus, in north-western Sicilia. The Roman navy engaged a second Macedonian fleet in the Bay of Tarentum with less tangible success, but Rome had signalled her clear intention of aiding her new ally.
In fact, Rome profited immediately from the renewal of war. Via a lightning campaign in the early summer of 572, the Macedonians were expelled from southern Italia. At the battle of Buxentum, on the Pyxus River in western Lucania (south of the Silarus), Q. Fulvius Flaccus routed the phalanx. He then struck eastwards, following the River Siris to the Gulf of Tarentum and destroying another Macedonian force at Pandosia, cutting the line of communication between Calabria and Bruttium. The Macedonians were now obliged to evacuate Brundisium, while Tarentum was besieged and eventually forced to surrender. Rhegium, on the southern tip of Italia, fell soon after. In the meantime, the Carthaginians regained Sardinia, virtually uncontested by the shaken Macedonians.
By the time Prince Alexander had arrived in Sicilia to take charge, the imperial army was in disarray. Antiphilus and Asclepiodotus were both dead and Alexander’s best lieutenants had been with him, pacifying the eastern frontiers. The Empire was paying the price for a debased aristocracy which could no longer provide sufficient inspirational or even competent leadership to maintain a strong presence in all theatres of conflict.
Nevertheless, the prince’s arrival bolstered the Macedonians. In the early summer of 573, a Roman attack on Messana by land and sea (the Romans having crossed the straits opposite Rhegium, south of Messana) was beaten back. The Macedonian fleet attempting to cut the Carthaginians off from Africa was destroyed off Cape Hermaeum; but Alexander recaptured Sardinia after a second fleet defeated the Roman navy off Olbia. The Carthaginian garrisons on the island, small and scattered, could offer no serious resistance.
The following year, landing in Massilia, Alexander routed the Carthaginians in a series of rapid engagements culminating in an overwhelming victory at Luteva, a small town guarding the approach road to Hispania. In response, the Roman proconsul L. Aemilius Paullus advanced from Massalia with two legions and various allied contingents. When the prince marched into northern Hispania, the Romans pursued. Alexander doubled back, racing northwards via Tolosa to hit Aemilius in the flank, forcing him to retreat, though in good order, to Beteris. Here the Roman army was annihilated, after one of the legions had broken, trampled by an elephant charge.
This latest disaster did not deter the Romans, as four new legions were sent to help in the defence of the Carthaginian port cities of Gades (Poenic Gadira) and Massia. Nevertheless, a generation after Titus Quinctius Flamininus had begun devising countermeasures, Roman commanders finally made serious efforts to implement effective methods for dealing with elephants. In fact, Beteris was to be the last major battle in the west in which the noble behemoths played a decisive role.
Resolved on victory at all costs, despite the setbacks in Sicilia and Gallia Maritima, the Romans widened their war effort. A consular army under A. Postumius Albinus was landed on the east coast of Sicilia, to assist the Carthaginians in besieging Siracusa. In the high summer of 575, the city of Messana was taken by storm, but the Macedonians continued to hold out in Siracusa. The bulk of the Roman fleet was subsequently wrecked in a storm off Cape Palinurus on the Lucanian west coast, with the loss of at least 150 ships and thousands of men. However, rather than being discouraged, Rome constructed a new fleet with the raising of an emergency public loan.
The war continued to go badly for the allies. In Hispania, Alexander defeated the Romans and Carthaginians at Hispalis and laid siege to Gades. In the spring of 576, leaving operations in the far west in the hands of capable deputies, the prince returned to Sicilia. His reputation alone was enough to inspire the hard-pressed troops, and within six weeks of his arrival the siege of Siracusa had been lifted. On the other hand, in Rome’s first important naval victory, the Macedonian fleet was scattered off Cape Ecnomus in its bid to attack Agrigentum, a Poenic stronghold, from the sea. Undeterred, Alexander marched his army from Siracusa to besiege the city. Located in a secure position on the south coast, Agrigentum was sited on a hill the steep sides of which permitted an attack only from the south. A Poenic relief force occupying an adjacent hill cut the Macedonians’ lines of supply, and with control of the seas between Africa and the great island, the Carthaginians could prevent the enemy from reinforcing his position except by an arduous and hazardous overland march. Even so, because of the double vallation constructed by the Macedonians they were unable to break the siege.
After four months, Agrigentum fell, but the Carthaginian garrison was evacuated by sea. In the meantime, the Romans had captured Panormus on the north coast. However, maintaining the virtual deadlock, Alexander took the west coast city of Lilybaeum. The energetic prince then made a return to Hispania, defeating a Roman-Poenic army at Saguntum (most southerly of the Hellenic cities in Hispania) and ejecting the Carthaginians from their east coast bastions. In the late summer of 578, he took the port of Gades, ending more than nine centuries of Poenic occupation. Early in 579, once more sailing from Hispania, Alexander landed in northern Sicilia and stormed Messana. The Romans were taken completely by surprise, and their humiliation provided the Carthaginians with an opportunity to extricate themselves from a war that was going badly for them.
Facing the prospect of a revolt among her Numidian-Mauretanian subject allies, with her forces overextended, Carthage was in turmoil. In 580, a revolution overthrew Adherbal. The king died defending his palace from the furious mob. The senate of the restored republic now appealed for peace with Macedonia, effectively breaking the alliance with Rome. Alexander, despite his personal disgust with the perfidious Carthaginians, understood the practical benefits of magnanimity and offered generous terms. His approval of the treaty was also motivated by his distraction due to recent developments in the far east.
Taking advantage of partisan strife between Brahmins and Buddhists, in 577 the general Heliocles, a Hellenized Bactrian, had invaded northern India. The Macedonian army was welcomed by the Buddhists as liberators, but lacking authorization from the Emperor, Heliocles was starting to act imperiously.
With Alexander preoccupied in the west, he set himself up as a virtually independent ruler in India. However, in 580, his Bactrian domain was taken over by another renegade general, Antimachus. The Emperor felt obliged to recognize the latter, but such free-wheeling behaviour from his garrison commanders undermined his authority and detracted from Macedonian successes in the west.
In the meantime, the resolve of the Roman people was beginning to falter. War-weariness had set in, combined with a growing sentiment that this latest conflict was an unnecessary one, an overseas campaign that had little to do with the defence of the homeland. Yet there was also a determination that the struggle should not yet be given up. Patriotic Romans raised a new public loan, repayable only after victory or an honourable peace. The fleet was reinforced and the number of legions was increased to twenty, though most of these would not be ready to face the Macedonians in the field for many months. Then came news from Pella that was to help change the course of the war.
 
Chronology

Rome vs. Macedonia so far...
and a preview of what’s to come...

244 - Traditional date for the founding of the Roman Republic.
247 - Modern accepted date for the founding of the Roman Republic.
365 - Sack of Rome by the Galles.
404 - Treaty between Rome and Carthage (renewed and strengthened in 437).
414 - Roman defeat of rebellious allies leads to the establishment of an Italian Confederation.
418 - Alexander III of Macedon (Megas Alexandros) begins his campaign in Asia.
422 - Alexander of Epirus is killed in southern Italia, a casus belli for Macedonian intervention.
426 - First Roman use of prorogation, the extension of a (pro)consular command.
430 - Second phase of Alexander’s conquests commences with his expedition against Arabia.
431 - Romans suffer a humiliating defeat at Caudium, at the hands of the Samnites.
434 - Macedonian conquest of the Euxine seacoast.
435 - Alliance between Macedonia and the Sicilian city of Siracusa.
439 - The lex Poetelia (date uncertain) abolishes debt-slavery, a landmark reform in Rome.
440 - Romans and Italiote allies attack Tarentum in southern Italia.
441 - Alexander lands in Sicilia but delays the planned Italian campaign.
444 - Alexander’s conquest of North Africa and the surrender of Carthage.
445 - Carthaginian Bomilcar establishes an anti-Macedonian stronghold in Hispania.
447 - Alexander returns to Aegypt; his son Philip takes command in the Mediterranean theatre.
449 - Motivated by distrust of growing Roman power, Philip prepares for war in southern Italia.
450 - First Macedonian War; Macedonian victory at Tarentum, Romans defeat the Samnites.
451 - Philip triumphs at the Volturnus River but retreats south after the battle of Aquinum.
452 - The death of Alexander precipitates civil war; Macedonians expelled from south Italia.
453 - Conclusion of the War of the Half-Brothers; Philip consolidates his rule.
454 - Philip campaigns in Sicilia, subduing rebellious Hellene cities.
455 - Rebellion and foreign incursions in the east distract Philip from his Italian campaign.
459 - Prince Pyrrhus of Epirus campaigns successfully in Hispania and the Baleares.
460 - Roman victory at Saepinum effectively ends the war against the Samnites.
470 - Second Macedonian War; Roman Sicilian expedition fails; Macedonians take Rhegium.
471 - The lex Aelia gives resolutions of the Roman plebeian assembly the force of law.
472 - After Roman successes and failures, a peace treaty is concluded with Macedonia.
473 - The Macedonian general Demetrios defeats a Gallic invasion across the Danuvius.
474 - Romans conquer Gallia Cisalpina.
476 - Rome and Macedonia sign a twenty-year peace treaty.
477 - The Euxine coastal regions are consolidated as a Macedonian province.
478 - Philip III Nicephoros is assassinated; Pyrrhus fails in a bid to seize the Macedonian throne.
479 - Emperor Archelaos II launches a campaign to subdue rebellious eastern provinces.
485 - Archelaos encircles the Euxine Sea, earning the appellation Nikator (Conqueror).
488 - Archelaos captures Babylon and executes the usurper Antiochus.
494 - Rome consolidates her hold on Italia with military successes in Campania and Calabria.
495 - Rome and Macedonia extend their treaty for a further fifty years.
511 - Archelaos II is killed fighting the Parthians; ineffectual Alexander IV becomes Emperor.
513 - Third Macedonian War; Roman victory at Medma; Macedonians expelled from Italia.
522 - Macedonian general Diodotus completes the pacification of the Parthians and Scythians.
523 - Renewed Roman-Macedonian peace treaty prompts Carthage to expand her dominions.
530 - The Gallic Revolt breaks out in the north, threatening the Italian peace.
531 - Gallia Cisalpina is pacified and the Gallic threat to Rome eliminated.
532 - The first consulship of Gaius Flaminius, Roman general, visionary and political reformer.
536 - Gallia Cisalpina becomes Rome’s first province (initially divided into quarters).
537 - The lex Valeria Annalis establishes a cursus honorum (career path for public office).
540 - Rome begins construction of a large fleet to challenge Carthaginian naval supremacy.
541 - The undeclared First Poenic War takes place at sea with several engagements.
542 - Rome avenges her naval defeats with a successful attack on Corsica.
543 - Rome completes the conquest of Corsica.
545 - The destruction of the Roman fleet off Sardinia ends the First Poenic War.
547 - Corsica become the first Roman overseas province.
553 - Emperor Archelaos III Sophistes succeeds his father Alexander IV.
555 - Gallic incursions in Massilia expose Macedonian and Carthaginian weakness.
556 - Macedonian Prince Alexander campaigns in Massilia and threatens the Roman presence.
557 - Fourth Macedonian War; spectacular victories by Alexander at Cosentia and Petelia.
558 - Alexander wins more victories in Italia, but the Empire faces renewed threats in the east.
561 - The war peters out, with no formal declaration of peace. Alexander campaigns in the east.
570 - Treaty of alliance between Rome and Carthage.
571 - Fifth Macedonian War, with early Roman successes.
573 - Roman army destroyed at Beteris by Prince Alexander.
576 - First Roman naval victory, off Cape Ecnomus (Sicilia).
578 - Prince Alexander captures Gades, ending Carthaginian occupation of Hispania.
579 - Carthaginian king Adherbal overthrown; alliance with Macedonia renewed.
-----------------------

"You think you know what is to come. It has only just begun..."

584 - The fall of Siracusa ends Macedonian occupation of Sicilia.
637 - The migration of the Cimbri and Teutones begins in northern Europe.
644 - Alexander VI, the last of the Argead dynasty, assassinated; disaster at Nemausus.
655 - Sixth Macedonian War.
658 - Roman frontier advanced to the Pyrenaeus Mountains.
664 - Carthage becomes a subject ally of Rome.
683 - Rome completes the conquest of Hispania.
740 - Seventh (and last) Macedonian War.
 
Chapter 3, Part 3

In AUC 581, Archelaos III died. At age 46, the new Emperor Alexander V had lost none of his energy, but imperial responsibility weighed heavily upon him. The eastern territories had again become a distraction which drew his attention from the Roman threat to the west. He immediately embarked on a campaign to pacify the restless peoples of central Asia, and in 583 he invaded the breakaway province of Bactria. Antimachus was defeated, but Alexander acknowledged his ability and usefulness. The repentant general submitted to imperial authority, assisting in the castigation of Heliocles and the restoration of Macedonian rule in India. Since Heliocles was technically not in rebellion and he had actually extended the imperial domains, Alexander allowed him also to continue in his position, although under strict supervision. In 585, however, it became necessary to have the obstreperous general put to death. The Emperor’s personal agent, Polybius of Tegea, was made the new governor, and in 591, upon the death of Antimachus, he added Bactria to his province.
However, while Alexander was in the east, a crisis erupted closer to home. In 583 the Hellenes rose in revolt, led by Corinth and Athens, joined shortly by Thebes, aroused by rapacious taxation and heavy-handed interference in their affairs. In the Peloponnesus, Argos and Sparta (much diminished from the once-great military state) remained aloof, but in Arcadia and Aetolia the rebellion gathered momentum. With the Emperor so far away and his lieutenants distracted in Sicilia, the rebel alliance was initially successful. A Corinthian leader calling himself Periander (very likely an alias, this being the name of the powerful second century tyrant) urged an attack on Argos to force the city into what had become the Achaean League. True to the fractious nature of Hellene politics, however, the Athenians had grown suspicious of Corinthian intentions and withdrew from the Peloponnesian enterprise, nevertheless sending a force to intimidate the Thebans, who were themselves beginning to waver.
Aristodemus, the Macedonian governor left in charge by Alexander, was oddly lethargic in dealing with the crisis, prompting speculation of bribery or even a conspiracy to undermine the Emperor’s authority in his absence. Aristodemus contented himself with ravaging the lands of Boeotia, Attica and the northern Peloponnese, ensuring a legacy of bitterness without bringing the rebels to heel, whether in pitched battle or by siege. The allies, on the other hand, besieged Chalcis, a Macedonian stronghold on the island of Euboea. This impelled Aristodemus to belated action. He sent a force to relieve the city but thereafter became once more inert.
The events in Hellas coincided with simultaneous Roman attacks on Messana and Siracusa. On the Ides of Maius, 583, a Macedonian foray north of Siracusa caught the Romans off guard, due to a reconnaissance oversight, on the open plains near Leontini, north-west of Siracusa. This was to be the last major victory of the classical phalanx over the legion; though had the Romans been led by a more competent commander the outcome would likely have been different. Already Alexander had experimented with a legion-style formation, and in the east he relied almost exclusively on cavalry and mobile infantry.
The Macedonian victory at Leontini was not sufficient to relieve the pressure on Messana, which surrendered early in 584. Meanwhile, an attempt to relieve Siracusa by sea failed. The Romans were becoming more adept at naval warfare, and before the year ended Agrigentum and Lilybaeum had been taken. In recognition of the tactical and strategic merits of combined land-and-sea operations, one of the Consuls for 585, Marcus Valerius Messalla, was given command of the army on the island, while his colleague, M. Popillius Laenas, commanded the fleet.
In the new year, the Romans resumed the offensive, anxious to finish off the Macedonians in Sicilia while the Emperor was preoccupied in the east. Valerius launched a frontal assault on the walls of Siracusa with four legions and as many auxiliaries, using artillery and whatever siege machinery his engineers could devise. At the same time, Popillius breached the port’s defences and landed a contingent on the peninsula of Ortygia, which dominated the harbour entrance. Sustaining heavy losses, the Romans broke through on the northern front and occupied the plateau of Epipolae. In response, the Siracusans fought back with fierce determination, overrunning and annihilating the Romans on Ortygia but in so doing decimating their own forces.
After weeks of savage combat, Valerius established a strong position in the very heart of the city, between the suburbs of Tyche and Neapolis. Calling a truce, he offered the Macedonian garrison safe passage, but its commander refused, expecting any day that the Emperor would arrive with reinforcements. Valerius and Popillius now launched a final, desperate joint effort, and Siracusa fell. The Roman losses of the previous few years had been reversed, and by the end of 585 only a few pockets on the entire island remained under Macedonian control.
By now, Alexander had returned and easily crushed the Achaean League. Periander was defeated and killed. Corinth was razed (the city ceasing to exist until refounded under Roman rule). Thebes was stripped of much of its territory and its leaders executed. On the other hand, Athens got off lightly, by virtue of her cultural attainments, which the urbane Alexander, for all his martial prowess, fervently admired. Sparta and Argos were rewarded for their loyalty, although the latter had been devastated by the Corinthian and Macedonian assaults, and it would take generations to recover. The Spartans were awarded the titular leadership of a Peloponnesian League. Sparta was, in reality a relic of a former glorious age, but her name still inspired respect among Hellenes. The ineffectual Aristodemus was given an obscure eastern posting and was eventually executed for plotting against his superiors.
The Romans braced for a renewed onslaught. While Alexander was preoccupied in subduing the Hellenes, the last vestiges of a Macedonian presence on Sicilia had been erased; but the Emperor was now free to turn his attention westwards, and in a long military career he remained undefeated in battle. However, middle age and the gravity of the imperium had tempered him, and in 586 he sought a compromise with Rome. Peace without total victory was unpalatable to the Romans, but the settlement was, in fact, a one-sided arrangement. Rome occupied Sicilia and Corsica, while Macedonia retained Sardinia and the small but strategic islands of Melita.
Sardinia was to prove a poisoned chalice, as the natives of the interior continued to offer stiff resistance, confining the Hellenic settlements to a few coastal strongholds. The Empire’s occupation of Gallia Maritima west of the city of Massalia and of Hispania was confirmed, but these territories had already been won by force of arms, and Rome was in no position to reverse that decision. In return for a pledge from Macedonia not to initiate diplomatic contacts with Italian cities without informing Rome, nor to recruit mercenaries in Italia, the Romans agreed not to interfere in the Macedonian territories.
The treaty thus entailed implicit Macedonian recognition of Roman hegemony in Italia but also an acknowledgement that Rome’s dominion in the peninsula was not purely a master-slave relationship. Alexander, the realist, knew he could not break the solidarity of the Italian confederacy except by means of a comprehensive victory over the Romans on Italian soil. This, in turn, could only be achieved with a massive investment in manpower and resources that would drain the treasury and the Empire’s military capacity in the east. In effect, Alexander traded power in Europe for security in Asia.
In Africa, however, the issue remained unsettled. The Carthaginians, although ostensibly allies of Macedonia, fared badly in the new arrangements. Having lost Sicilia and Sardinia, they were now expelled from Hispania and the Baleares, once more confined to North Africa but facing increased resistance from Libyans in the east and Numidians and Mauretanians - erstwhile allies but resentful, ambitious and untrustworthy - to the west.
In Sicilia, Rome attempted to create an Italian-style confederation. A local collaborator who had rendered assistance during the siege of Siracusa, named Hieronymous, was installed in Messana. Claiming to be a descendant of the great third-century tyrant, Gelon of Siracusa, he governed as a Roman puppet; but the harshness of his rule and his aggressive posturing towards neighbouring cities provoked numerous revolts. His behaviour so embarrassed the Roman administration that, in 588, Hieronymous was deposed. He was subsequently killed in an abortive bid to occupy Himera, where he had enjoyed some support.
The Senate abandoned the Sicilian experiment and created a province organized along the lines of Gallia Cisalpina and Corsica. This is turn prompted reform of the entire provincial system. In 590, the four districts of the Padus region of northern Italia were merged into two, Gallia Cispadana and Gallia Transpadana. These provinces would, in their turn, be united with the territory of the other major northern Italian Galles, the Cenomani, as Gallia Citerior in the year 635.*
In AUC 598 Rome was obliged to intervene in Gallia Maritima when the people of Massalia called for assistance against Ligurian tribesmen, the Oxybii and Deciates, who were besieging the towns of Nicaea and Antipolis. The Ligurians were swiftly dealt with but Massalia had now become, without question, a dependency of Rome. In the meantime, native resistance was on the increase in Corsica. By 602, the Consul L. Licinius Lucullus had brutally crushed most opposition, but after his death in an ambush his colleague L. Postumius Albinus rushed to the island. He also was caught by surprise, and barely escaped. The island and its unruly inhabitants continued to plague the Roman provincial government for decades.
* The provincial names derive from cis- ("this side of") and trans- ("beyond"), in reference to the Alpes and the Padus; citerior ("nearer", cf. ulterior, "farther"); maritima ("on the sea"). The use of these terms naturally became less common as the empire became less Italian-centric.
 
Republic and Empire, Part 4

Apologies for the inconsistent section headings.
Just to clear up matters:
Chapter 2, Rome and Macedonia - contained in posts # 1-49
Chapter 3, Republic and Empire - posts 55, 56, 59
From this point, I will employ the heading format used in this post.
There's not a lot of action in this section, which concerns internal Roman politics.

In Rome itself, the exigencies of war and provincial administration were further transforming the ancestral constitution. Yet for the next generation, Rome would be in a state if not of peace then of non-belligerence. With the security of Italia guaranteed, there was no specific desire to challenge Macedonian supremacy in the eastern Mediterranean or in North Africa. This suited the ruling elite. They needed breathing space to consolidate their land holdings in Italia and organize - and exploit - the provinces. The Senators had no strong interest in the acquisition of overseas territories, as there was still plenty of vacant land in Italia. At the other end of the social scale, the peasant farmers who comprised the backbone of the Roman and allied armies welcomed the respite. For the nature and duration of war had changed. Instead of fighting close to home to protect his farm and family, a small landholder conscripted into military service might be away for years at a time. When he returned home it was to a farm in ruins. As a result, entire communities were being depopulated. Neglected estates and deserted towns and villages were becoming a feature of the Italian rural landscape.
There was, furthermore, no major economic advantage to be gained from profligate imperialism. Treaties negotiated by the Senate rarely contained commercial clauses unduly favouring Rome, since it was not in the landowning Senators’ interests to include such terms. Thus, for the ruling class at least, the expense of long campaigns outweighed the benefits of overseas conquest.
On the other hand, the almost continuous state of warfare in which Rome had found herself since the inception of the Republic had created classes for whom a resumption of hostilities offered opportunities for personal advancement and enrichment. Within the oligarchy, where competition for office was the highest expression of a man’s dignitas, the potential for fama and gloria, as well as for profitable returns, in the form of plunder, indemnities and tribute, beguiled would-be generals. In pursuit of their ambition, these individuals forged an unofficial political alliance with members of the equestrian order resentful of the privileges and arrogance of the senatorial elite.
The aristocracy clung to their ancient traditions, extolling landed wealth and public service, stifling the aspirations of those outside their closed circle and curbing over-ambitious members within. Yet on the whole, their social values were shared by the equestrians. Successful businessmen reinvested their wealth in land, settling onto country estates and adopting the lifestyle and standards of the nobiles. One or two even broke through the layers of snobbery and prejudice to become a novus homo, or "new man". Wealth bought status and respectability. As a result, it was the rising middle class which derived the greatest benefit from Rome’s expanding empire. War and annexation meant not just an extension of trade. Lucrative contracts were to be won, for supplying the armies, collecting rents and taxes and extracting the natural resources of the new provinces.
The lower classes were also well served by imperialism. Revenue from the provinces eased the tax burden on Roman citizens. So the populares, who advocated an expansionist foreign policy and promoted social reform at home, found a receptive audience in the assembly. The upshot was that the lure of empire was growing stronger; while at the same time Rome was becoming more like Carthage and Macedonia in her exploitation of the provinces. When territorial expansion resumed in the 640s, it would be less defensive and pre-emptive, more aggressive and acquisitive.
Inevitably, overseas conquest and the acquisition of empire generated internal political tensions. The Roman government had been a senatorial oligarchy since the foundation of the Republic. The Consuls, though in theory embodying the executive power, were in practice members of that oligarchy and agents of the Senate, which exercised the real authority in the state. The sovereignty of the People existed only in romance and rhetoric. Even when the populus did make itself heard, it was usually the voice of the nobility speaking on its behalf.
While the Senate was not a legislature, the senatus consultum being a recommendation, not a law in and of itself, it had provided Rome’s political and military leadership since the founding of the Republic; but as the machinery of state became more complex, the Senators accumulated executive and judicial authority, as well as control of financial policy and foreign affairs. The Senate sent and received ambassadors, appointed officials including the provincial governors to manage public lands, conducted wars and appropriated public funds.
The Senators jealously guarded their prerogatives and adjusted the constitution to do so. Traditionally, the Senate could authorize the Consuls in times of dire emergency to nominate a dictator, and did so on numerous occasions, most famously after the Gallic sack in AUC 365. However, in the middle Republic, it avoided recourse to the dictatorship by application of the prorogatio imperii, and in the late Republic by resort to a senatus consultum de republica defendenda, in effect a declaration of martial law which empowered the Consuls to "see that the Republic should come to no harm" and had the effect of making the Consuls direct agents of the Senate’s collective will.
In 603, the Tribune Q. Claudius proposed a law that one Consul should remain in Rome at all times and thus the two Consuls should rotate in command of the army. The measure was designed to prevent the further erosion of the civil government by the military, but in so doing it strengthened the proconsular system by removing one of the chief executives from the army roster. Although there were occasions when the lex Claudia would be overridden (the first being in AUC 647), it reinforced the power of the Senate, which controlled the allocation of the promagistracies, and made ambitious politicians who looked beyond the limited horizons of the annual consulship more dependent upon senatorial favour.
The Roman oligarchy was also elitist, maintaining its solidarity, dispensing patronage, protecting its prerogatives and privileges and preserving its exclusivity. The Senators were conservative and oftentimes reactionary, but on the whole they brought concord and stability to the state, and they promoted unity in the face of external threats and challenges. On the other hand, the elite was not a monolithic nor harmonious entity. Factions and cliques emerged. As there were no formal parties, the political system evolved into an elaborate, sometimes disorderly mesh of political schisms, fluid alliances, personal enmities, petty jealousies and venomous rivalries.
The novi homines might occasionally be admitted to this narrow circle, but effectively the government of Rome and the empire remained in the hands of a handful of great families. The most important of the noble gentes in the middle Republic were the Aemilii, Claudii, Cornelii, Fabii and Valerii. While individuals of singular brilliance, such as Gaius Flaminius, might break though, this was a rarity. A successful candidate for political office had to be wealthy and yet was forbidden to engage in trade. He had to attract public attention, but without a famous name or the family and social connections which eased passage through the lower-level offices and enabled him to make a name for himself, this proved an almost insurmountable obstacle.
The most obvious pathway to pre-eminence was through a military command. Continual warfare provided the opportunity. The inclination of the Senators was to avoid war wherever possible, not because they were in any sense pacifist, but to prevent an upsetting of the social order. As a consequence, the war party - ambitious politicians who pushed an aggressive, expansionist agenda - tended to do so via the popular assembly. Men such as C. Flaminius might even, out of frustration, take the radical step of bypassing the Senate and submitting a proposal directly to the comitia. By necessity, they promoted military reform, which often entailed social and political reform as well.
The reformers thus became known as populares, men of the people, though most came from the elite, shared its values and prejudices and formed a pragmatic alliance with the wealthy equestrians. With honourable exceptions such as Flaminius and Gaius Aurelius Cotta (q.v.), the populares were, as a class, politicians on the make, radical in their youthful pursuit of prestige and power, retreating into temperance in middle age and conservatism in old age. They epitomized the republican ethos of competition. While social revolution was as far removed from their agenda as it was anathema to the Senate, nevertheless in their pursuit of gloria and fama they posed a serious challenge to the old order.
In 636 the Consul L. Opimius led a counterattack against the populares, prosecuting several of their most prominent members for perduellio, treason. The charges, plotting the overthrow of the sovereign power of the state, were largely fabricated but nonetheless pursued with excessive zeal. As the reaction gained momentum, the purge became so far-reaching that the morale and leadership of the army were in danger of being altogether enfeebled. None of the victims were executed but several were exiled. Then one of the Tribunes, Manius Aquilius, made a stand, taking the bold step of initiating a prosecution of Opimius himself on a charge of perduellio - undermining the Roman army and thus endangering the state. Opimius and his supporters backed off, the bulk of their work in any case completed. Aquilius’s action likely forestalled a conservative reign of terror which could easily have spiralled out of control. It also proved prescient, as at this moment an ancient threat had reappeared north of the Alpes.
 
Top