• Abstract and Figures
• Public Full-text

On colonial grounds : a comparative study of colonisalism and rural settlement in the 1st milennium BC in West Central Sardinia Dommelen, P.A.R. van Citation Dommelen, P. A. R. van. (1998, April 23). On colonial grounds : a comparative study of colonisalism and rural settlement in the 1st milennium BC in West Central Sardinia. Archaeological Studies Leiden University. Retrieved from https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13156 Version: Corrected Publisher’s Version Licence agreement concerning inclusion of doctoral thesis in the Institutional License: Repository of the University of Leiden Downloaded from: https://hdl.handle.net/1887/13156 Note: To cite this publication please use the final published version (if applicable). 6 Punic persistence. Romanization and local resistance in west central Sardinia Con la conquista della Sicilia, della Sardegna e della Cor- Punic Wars not only involved all regions of the western sica si fa da taluno incominciare l'insaziabile imperialismo Mediterranean basin from Spain to southern France and Italy dei Romani, che non avrebbero dovuto uscire dai confini at some point during this period but they also entailed devas- della Penisola. Ad essi è stato poi mosso rimprovero di tating consequences for several of these areas before the essersi accinti a guerre d'indole coloniale contro le lontane battle field was transferred to North Africa and Carthage genti d'Africa, che, per così dire, non conoscevano e che ad itself was eventually destroyed. essi non avevano recato molestia.1 The role of Sardinia in these developments remained E. Pais, Storia della Sardegna e della Corsica remarkably limited, as the main confrontations took place durante il dominio romano (1923), I elsewhere. The island even fell into Roman hands without a struggle in 237 BC, which was during the first interbellum. Yet, because of its central location in the middle of the 6.1 Carthage and Rome western Mediterranean, the strategic importance of Sardinia Roman involvement in the central and western Mediterranean was recognized by both sides. was for the first time signalled by the treaty concluded with Chronologically, this period is defined by the outbreak of Carthage in 509 BC. At that time — the year in which the the Carthaginian-Roman conflict and the consolidation of Roman Republic was inaugurated-, Roman influence in the Roman authority in the western Mediterranean. The starting central Mediterranean or on the Italian peninsula was still point is the turn of the 4th to 3rd century BC, when Roman limited to a tiny part of Latium, as it had only just managed expansion first came into conflict with Carthaginian colo- to extricate itself from Etruscan domination. A century and a nialism. The treaty of 278 BC, in which Carthage and Rome half later, when in 348 BC the second treaty with Carthage delimited their respective speheres of influence in Italy most was signed, Rome had already considerably expanded its explicitly (cf. p. 121), is an emblematic year in this respect. authority in central Italy. However, it still did not reach In Sardinia, however, Roman authority was not established beyond southern Etruria and northern Campania. The role before 237 BC and only became palpable in the course of assigned to Rome in this treaty was that of a local guarantor the 2nd century BC. A convenient and conventional upper of Carthaginian commercial interests in Latium and should chronological limit of the period under discussion is the not be stretched as implying substantial Roman overseas end of the Republic in 33 BC, when Roman rule was well power at that time (pp. 121-122). During the next century established thoughout the Mediterranean. In a less strict Roman influence in the Italian peninsula increased rapidly, sense the later 1st century BC can be taken as an appropriate as is well demonstrated by the reconfirmation of the second ending point. treaty between Carthage and Rome in 306 BC: given the The events of this period have been described at length by substantial Roman involvement in the confused and instable several classical authors, whose texts allow an interesting situation of Magna Graecia, both cities felt the need to define insight in the overall development and underlying reasons of their mutually exclusive territorial spheres of interest with the conflict. The principal sources are Polybius and Livy. The regard to southern Italy and Sicily (Scardigli 1991, 129-162). Greek historian Polybius (203?-ca 120 BC) wrote 40 books of Despite this agreement, continuing expansion was bound to Histories about the period between 220 and 146 BC, when bring Rome into conflict with Carthage's dominant position both Carthage and Corinth were sacked. It was his intention in the central Mediterranean. It did not remain limited to a to show how Rome managed to establish its power in the regional confrontation, however, but culminated in the three entire Mediteranean in such a short period of time. Only the Punic Wars which were fought throughout the western first five books have been preserved completely and cover Mediterranean on both land and sea. Together covering a the events preceding 220 BC (books I-II) as well as those period of over a century between the outbreak of the first leading to the outbreak of the second Punic War, Hannibal's war in 264 BC and the final fall of Carthage in 146 BC, the crossing of the Alps in 218 BC and the first year of the 161 latter's campaign in Italy until the battle of Cannae in 216 BC battle descriptions in order to enliven the account and (books III-V). Since Polybius regarded his work primarily as eventually became a distinct literary genre, historicity a practical manual for future statesmen (III.21.9-10), he (in a modern sense) was not always the first concern of the greatly valued personal experience and preferred (near-) annalists. Livy was exceptionally successful in these literary contemporary historiography. In this respect the first two ambitions and outdid all his predecessors. Apart from books must be distinguished from the later ones, as Polybius preceding annalistic works, Livy also made ample use of had no choice but to base his account of the first Punic Polybius' account. The originally 142 books described the War on previous historical work. An important source for history of Rome from the mythical arrival of Aeneas until these books appears to have been the Greek Sicilian Philinos the death of Drusus in 9 BC. The extant books XXI-XLV of Akragas (fl. 250 BC), who had written in great detail cover the period from 218 until 166 BC. Among these, the and probably as an eye-witness about the Carthaginian- so-called third decade (books XXI-XXX) describes the Roman struggle over Sicily, and who was outspokenly pro- second Punic War. The general contents of the lost books Carthaginian, perhaps because of the harsh Roman treatment are nevertheless known from the so-called periochae which of his city in 261 BC. It has for instance been argued that were added to the books as ‘extended contents’. Although Polybius' vivid description of the sack of Lilybaeum in undoubtedly less reliable than Polybius, these books are 250 BC goes back to a direct report by Philinos (Lazenby important because they largely fill the gap left by the loss of 1996, 2-3). Polybius' use of archival sources, as in the dis- Polybius' later books and often constitute the oldest available cussion of the Carthaginian-Roman treaties, must also be source for the later third and earlier second century BC. seen as an attempt to work with first-hand information. All other classical literary sources are (much) later and are Polybius has nevertheless also drawn on the early annalistic usually based on Polybius and Livy, sometimes with addi- tradition, in particular on the work of Q. Fabius Pictor tional information from earlier Greek historians or annalists. (fl. 216 BC), a prominent Roman aristocrate. The books Their only value often lies in the preservation of recogniz- about the period after 220 BC clearly demonstrate Polybius' ably older material. The most significant among these is pursuit of first-hand knowledge, as he repeatedly emphasized the Egyptian historian Appianus (fl. ca 140 AD), who wrote to have interviewed participants in the events described 24 thematically organized books about Roman history. (e.g. III.48.12). Being intimately acquainted with the Roman His Libyan History (book 8), which as part of a wider general Scipio Africanus, whom he accompanied on his Carthaginian History describes the Punic Wars, is particu- campaigns in Spain and North Africa during the second and larly useful, as it covers the third Punic War of which both third Punic War as a war correspondent avant la lettre, Polybius' and Livy's accounts are lost. Appianus' version is Polybius clearly favoured the Roman point of view; yet, he thought to have been largely based on the lost books of was by no means uncritical and in order to examine the Polybius: the detailed and lively description of the siege and Carthaginian version of events he frequently referred to sack of Carthage in 146 BC (Lib. 18-19) is assumed to authors such as Philinos of Akragas and Silenus of Calatia, recapitulate Polybius' eye-witness account as a participant who had accompanied Hannibal on his long expedition in Scipio Africanus' expedition. His Hannibal's History across the Alps and in Italy. Digressions about conflicting (book 7) about Hannibal's expedition in Italy nevertheless representations are consequently a recurrent feature of Poly- differs significantly from Polybius' or Livy's reports; it is bius' Histories. therefore assumed to be based on other sources or to repre- T. Livius (59 BC-17 AD) sharply contrasts with Polybius in sent a particularly free elaboration.

Load more

  50

Copy Link