Latin War
Latin War | |||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Part of Roman-Latin wars | |||||||
Italy in 4th century BC | |||||||
| |||||||
Belligerents | |||||||
Roman Republic Samnites |
Latin League Campanians Volsci Sidicini Aurunci | ||||||
Commanders and leaders | |||||||
Titus Manlius Imperiosus Gaius Maenius | unknown |
The (Second) Latin War of 340–338 BC[note 1] was a conflict between the Roman Republic and its neighbors, the Latin peoples of ancient Italy. It ended in the dissolution of the Latin League and incorporation of its territory into the Roman sphere of influence, with the Latins gaining partial rights and varying levels of citizenship.
Sources
The most comprehensive source on the Latin War is the Roman historian
Background
The Latins did not have any central government, but were divided into a number of self-governing towns and cities with a shared language, culture and some legal and religious institutions.
The Samnites were a tribal federation living in the central
The First Samnite War ended in 341 with a negotiated peace and renewal of the former treaty between Rome and the Samnites. Rome retained her Campanian alliance, but accepted that the Sidicini belonged to the Samnite sphere.
Modern historians have not put much credence in these events supposed to have taken place following the end of the First Samnite War, believing them to be largely invented. There are several similarities with the events supposed to have started the Samnite War, the Samnites are once again at war with the Sidicini and a surrender offer is made to Rome, and this duplication is unlikely to be historical.[22] This time the surrender is refused, showing the moral superiority of the Roman senate.[23] The supposed secret plotting between the Latins and Campani are also likely to be inventions, inspired by similar secret talks held by the Italians before the outbreak of the Social War, news of which were also leaked to the Romans.[24]
Outbreak
Ancient account
Livy writes that when the Romans learnt of the Latins' secret talks with the Campanians they sent for the ten leading men among the Latins to come to Rome and receive instructions, pretending to be concerned for the Samnites. At this time, the Latins had two
Modern view
Modern historians consider Livy's account of the outbreak of the Latin War unhistorical fiction, filled with invented speeches written, as was common practice among ancient historians, so as to present the arguments of both sides.[30] There is a general resemblance between the rhetoric of the speeches Livy has written for L. Annius and the complaints and demands made by Rome's Italian allies in the years before the Social War.[31] Several of the writers Livy is known to have used for Roman history during the 4th century lived through the Social War, and it would have been natural for them to see parallels between the Latin War and contemporary events.[32] Like the Roman senate rejected an embassy from the Italian insurgents in 90 BC, so the Latin embassy of 340 BC is also rejected.[33] Later, in his account of the Second Punic War, Livy mentions that some of his sources claimed that the Capuans, after the Battle of Cannae, had similarly sent an embassy and demanded to receive an equal share in the government of the Roman Republic. He, however, rejected this as a duplication of the demands made by the Latins at the outbreak of the Latin War. Modern historians do not believe that the Latins made any demand for a consul and half the senate in 340. It is possible that Capua really did so in 216, but most likely Livy was correct to consider this a duplicate of accounts of the Latin War.[34] Instead, they have proposed that historically these were political demands made by the Italians at the outbreak of the Social War.[35] However, no ancient attestations of such demands exist today.[36] By the early 1st century BC, Rome had risen to become the dominant power in the Mediterranean and Roman citizenship was a highly desired favour. However, such sentiments are considered anachronistic for the 4th century. In 340, Rome was still only a local power in Latium, but whose aggressiveness and recent expansion into Campania was an increasing threat to the independence of the smaller Latin communities who risked becoming entirely surrounded by Roman territory.[37] Rather than being caused by the Roman refusal to share their government with the other Latins, the Latin War was a final bid by the Latins to preserve their own independence. In this endeavour they were joined by the Volsci, who were in much the same situation as the Latins, and the Campani, Sidicini and Aurunci, three peoples who all risked being squeezed between the growing powers of Central Italy, Rome and the Samnites.[38]
The South-Eastern campaign 340 BC
The Latins entered
Roman subjugation of the Latins and the Volsci 339–338 BC
One year later, Manlius defeated the Latins at the
Political aftermath
The Latins, forced to leave Campania, moved to Latium, where they put up a long yet unsuccessful resistance against the Roman forces. The defeated Latin peoples were obliged to recognize Roman suzerainty. Some of the Latin towns were Romanized, others became partially Roman, adopting Roman
See also
- Roman-Latin wars
Note on dates
- ^ Varronian chronology, those years become 340 and 338 BC. However, modern historians have shown that the Varronian chronology dates the Latin War four years too early because of inclusion of unhistorical "dictator years". Despite that known inaccuracy, the Varronian chronology remains in use by convention also in academic literature and so is also the chronology used in this article. Forsythe(2005), pp. 369-370
Notes
- ^ Oakley (1998), pp. 425-426
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 410
- ^ Forsythe (2005), p. 184
- ^ Forsythe (2005), pp. 186-188
- ^ Forsythe (2005), p. 187
- ^ Cornell (1995), pp. 322-323
- ^ Cornell (1995), p. 322; Forsythe (2005), p. 258
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 5; Forsythe (2005), p. 258
- ^ Oakley (1998), pp. 5-6; Forsythe (2005), p. 258
- ^ Oakley (1998), pp. 13-15
- ^ Livy, vii.25.5-6
- ^ Livy, vii.38.1
- ^ Diodorus, xvi.45.8
- ^ Livy, vii.19.3–4.
- ^ Salmon (1967), pp. 187-193
- ^ Livy, vii.29.3-32.1–2
- ^ Salmon (1967), p. 197; Cornell (1995), p. 347; Oakley (1998), pp. 286–9; Forsythe (2005), p. 287
- ^ Livy, viii.1.8-2.3
- ^ Salmon (1967), p. 202; Forsythe (2005), p. 288
- ^ Livy, viii.2.4-13
- ^ Livy, viii.3.1-5
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 394; Forsythe (2005), p. 289
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 394
- ^ Forsythe (2005), p. 289
- ^ Livy, viii.3.8-9
- ^ Livy, viii.3.10
- ^ Livy, viii.4.1-12
- ^ Livy, viii.5.1-12
- ^ Livy, viii.6.1-7
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 409
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 409
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 410; Forsythe (2005), p. 289
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 409
- ^ Oakley (1998), pp. 410-411
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 411; Salmon (1967), p 207
- ^ Oakley p. 410
- ^ Oakley (1998), p. 409; Forsythe (2005), p. 289
- ^ Salmon (1967), p 207
- ^ Smith 1867, p. 896.
- ^ Livy viii. 13.
References
- Cornell, TJ (1995), The Beginnings of Rome — Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic Wars (c. 1000–264 BC), New York: ISBN 978-0-415-01596-7
- Forsythe, Gary (2005), A Critical History of Early Rome, Berkeley: ISBN 0-520-24991-7
- Theodor Mommsen, History of Rome (through Classic Literature)
- William C. Morey, Outlines of Roman History, New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: American Book Company (1901) (through Forum Romanum)
- Oakley, SP (1998), A Commentary on Livy Books VI–X, vol. II: Books VII–VIII, Oxford: ISBN 978-0-19-815226-2
- Salmon, ET (1967), Samnium and the Samnites, ISBN 978-0-521-13572-6
- Smith, William (1867). Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology. Vol. II. Boston: Little, Brown & Co.