The idea of a Roman grand strategy has been an often-debated topic. Edward Luttwak originally purported the idea that during the crises of the third century, Roman grand strategy began to shift to a defense in depth approach, stripping the borders of their defenses and creating a large mobile field army. Thereafter, the defense in depth approach remained the prominent Roman grand strategy employed throughout the third to fifth centuries. Arther Ferrill also corroborates this account of a shift in Roman grand strategy to a defense in depth approach. He cites Constantine as the emperor who created a mobile field army that constantly stayed with the emperor and removed the frontier defenses. Thereafter, several mobile field armies became necessary in order to really defend the empire. He argues that this shift in strategy greatly contributed to the ultimate destruction of the Roman Empire because defense in depth was essentially an admission that it was impossible to prevent foreign invasion.
Meanwhile, many other ancient scholars have argued against the idea that the Romans employed a traditional grand strategy at all. Benjamin Isaac argues against the assumption that Roman military strategy operated under a logical and well thought out plan. The idea of a grand strategy assumes that the emperors’ decisions to engage in battle were necessarily rational. Often, it seems that the emperors are acting on impulse, simply trying to prevent internal upset. This impulsiveness goes against the idea of a prescribed, long-term strategy.
In order to discuss the idea of a grand strategy, it is first necessary to admit the inevitable difficulties in finding and interpreting evidence for or against one. It is hard to talk of a Roman ...
... middle of paper ...
...defining Roman Grand Strategy." The Journal of Military History 70.2 (2006): 333-63. JSTOR. Web. 1 Apr. 2010.
Libanius, and A. F. Norman. Autobiography and Selected Letters. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1992. Print.
Libanius. Autobiography and Selected Letters. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1992. Print.
Luttwak, Edward. The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: from the First Century A.D. to the Third. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1979. Print.
Philostratus, Eunapius, Wilmer Cave France. Wright, and Eunapius. The Lives of the Sophists. Cambridge, Mass.: Harvard UP, 1989. Print.
Zonaras, Joannes, Thomas Banchich, and Eugene Lane. The History of Zonaras: from Alexander Severus to the Death of Theodosius the Great. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Zosimus, and Ronald T. Ridley. New History. Sydney: Australian Association for Byzantine Studies, 2006. Print.
From ages past, the actions of conquerors, kings and tyrants had brought the Roman Republic to a stance that opposed any idea of a singular leader, of a single man that held total power over the entirety of the state. Their rejection of the various ruthless Etruscan rulers that had previously dictated them brought the Republic to existence in 509 BC , and as a republic their prominence throughout the provinces of the world exponentially expanded. Throughout these years, the traditions of the Romans changed to varying degrees, most noticeably as a result of the cultural influence that its subject nations had upon the republic, as well as the ever-changing nature of Roman society in relation to then-current events. However, it was not until the rise of Augustus, the first of a long line of succeeding emperors, that many core aspects of the Republic were greatly changed. These were collectively known as the “Augustan Reforms”, and consisted of largely a variety of revisions to the social, religious, political, legal and administrative aspects of the republic’s infrastructure. Through Augustus, who revelled in the old traditional ways of the past, the immoral, unrestraint society that Rome was gradually falling to being was converted to a society where infidelities and corruption was harshly looked upon and judged. The Roman historian Suetonius states, “He corrected many ill practices, which, to the detriment of the public, had either survived the licentious habits of the late civil wars, or else originated in the long peace” . Through Augustus and his reforms, the Republic was transformed into an Empire, and through this transformation, Rome experienced one of its greatest and stabl...
Kazhadan, Alexander. Studies on Byzantine Literature of the Eleventh and Twelfth. NewYork: Cambridge University press, 1984. Print
“The Passions of Christ: A Journey Through Byzantine Art.” Kypros-Net: “The World of Cyprus”. 18 Oct. 2004 <http://kypros.org/Byzantine/>.
Bury, J. B.; Russell Meiggs (2000). A History of Greece to the Death of Alexander the Great
Hunt, Lynn and Thomas R. Martin, Barbara H. Rosenwein and Bonnie G. Smith. “ The Greek golden age,” in the making of the west volume 1 to 1750 2012, edited by Denise B. Wydra, 75-108. Boston: Beford/St. Martin’s, 2012.
Livy’s The Rise of Rome serves as the ultimate catalogue of Roman history, elaborating on the accomplishments of each king and set of consuls through the ages of its vast empire. In the first five books, Livy lays the groundwork for the history of Rome and sets forth a model for all of Rome to follow. For him, the “special and salutary benefit of the study of history is to behold evidence of every sort of behaviour set forth as on a splendid memorial; from it you may select for yourself and for your country what to emulate, from it what to avoid, whether basely begun or basely concluded.” (Livy 4). Livy, however, denies the general populace the right to make the same sort of conclusions that he made in constructing his histories. His biased representation of Romulus and Tarquin Superbus, two icons of Roman history, give the readers a definite model of what a Roman should be, instead of allowing them to come to their own conclusion.
Morey, William C. "Outlines of Roman History, Chapter 19." Forum Romanum. 1901. Web. 24 Apr. 2011. .
In the early first century AD, the Roman Empire was subject to autocratic rule and the old Republic was long dead. Augustus had been ruling for forty years and most of that time he was loved and praised by the Senate and the people of Rome. Throughout his reign, Augustus had the one lingering problem of finding a successor to take over the role of Emperor. He had chosen 3 different heirs in his time of rule; however, they all passed before they had the chance to inherit Augustus’ esteemed power. His fourth choice, Tiberius, was the one to succeed Augustus. He was often referred to, by Augustus, as an outstanding general and the only one capable of defending Rome against her enemies. The statement, ‘Tiberius is condemned by many ancient historians (including Tacitus), and his reign is often portrayed as being detrimental to the welfare of the Roman Empire’ is invalid as he treated the senate fairly, created strong economics and security in the state and boosted the empire into an unprecedented state of prosperity. This hypothesis will be proven through this essay by analyzing factors such as Tiberius’ administration of the Empire, his relationship with the senate, his financial control, the effect of Sejanus over his rule and why were his last years as Emperor referred to as a ‘reign of terror’ by Tacitus.
The Roman army became much stronger under the guidance of Julius Caesar and was a key element in the expansion of Rome (Roman-Empire). The Roman people believed that it was necessary to follow a specific method of declaring war so as not to anger the gods, "It was highly needful to observe all the necessary formalities in beginning hostilities, otherwise the angry gods would turn their favor to the enemy" (Halsall). For example, if their demands were not met after thirty days, then they could declare war, "If the persons he demands are not surrendered after thirty days, he declares war," (Halsall). This set the precedent for how Rome would declare war for centuries to come.
Dio, Cassius. "Roman History - Book 50." 17 June 2011. University of Chicago. 31 October 2011 .
Marcel Le Glay, Jean-Louis Voisin, Yann Le Bohec. A History of Rome. West Sussex, UK: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009.
Heichelheim, Fritz, Cedric A. Yeo, and Allen M. Ward. A History Of The Roman People. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall Inc., 1984.
3)Gwynn, David M. The Roman Republic: A Very Short Introduction. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2012. Print.
The development of an empire is a change strongly emphasized in the Archeology as a radical departure from the Hellenic tradition, and consequently a major source of conflict among the Greeks. Prior to the adven...
Rome, even at its beginnings, proved to be a force to be reckoned with. It’s rapid growth and accumulation of power and repeated victories over powerful neighbors set Rome in a position of great authority and influence. As the leader of early Rome, Romulus’ effective command of his men and governance of his people provided the foundation for the building of a great city. Livy emphasizes Romulus’ possible divine origins and strong ties to deities as a validation and reinforcement of his ability to rule. A nation’s sole defense cannot be just bricks and mortar, it requires an army and a will and Romulus was able to successfully take action against the aggressors when action was needed.