More info on Germania

As they visit the Batavii, the Heruskoz (Cherusci) erloz (Earl/magnate); Gêbáhárjáz will arrive with his following of 50 impressive Karloz (Free Men/Warriors). Accompanying him is his oldest son; Ingihárjáz a promising youth at 14.

The day after the feast, Gêbáhárjáz will want to talk with the Roman guests. He is curious about the political situation in Rome and what brings the Romans here. Basically he wants to keep up to date and if possible, make friends in Rome. The Heruskoz does not have a King, instead four families are the leading ones in the tribe and consists nine of the leading 13 chieftains in the tribe. Other magnates are usually allied to the leading four families in shifting alliances, but even within the family there are power struggles as its leading men strive to surpass one another in splendour, feats of arms and power so as to become the leader of the entire family and alliance. As you can probably deduce, this leads to a society with little peace and tranquillity, but also to a society of magnates and their warriors being combat-ready veterans.

The Swêboz (Suebi), is currently the mightiest confederation amongst the Germans, but there are ties between subtribes as well, across the confederations. Gebáhárjáz is here to try and create such a one, further, he wishes you to take Ingihárjáz with you to Kêmbroz (Cimbrii Chersonesos /Jutland, “On The Edge” i.e. of the world) to see if the youth can forge bonds there. In exchange he will gladly share his information on Kêmbroz and the tribes there.



The seven tribes of Kêmbroz are all allied as a subconfederation of the Swêboz, and is recognised by all to be a very powerful element. The militarily strongest part and core of the alliance is the Kêmbroz and Hárdároz (Charudes/Harudes/ Charoudes) and these two tribes have almost merged with neighbours (the Þeudanōz/Teutons and Eudoses/Jutes respectively), while economically the Eudoses dominate from their fertile lands in eastern Kémbroz and later give their name to the confederation and land.



The leader of the Kêmbroz until five years ago was Háuház, he survived supporting Hárjáweith (Ariovistus) as much of the Haerudi army survived intact and got home with their loot. What made his power vane is unknown amongst the Hêruskoz, but rumours of a failed alliance with the Suinoes and Hêrulii has been heard. Currently the tribe is being led by its former Hárjánáz (Warlord/War-leader); Hrothulf, a renowned warrior from but with few alliances outside Kêmbroz- which is why Gêbáhárjáz wishes to send his son there and form bonds. The current Hárjánáz of the Kêmbroz is Hrothulf’s nephew; Háriáwulf who is not well-known in the western Germanic tribes. What Gêbáhárjáz knows is that he is reputedly a warrior and leader of no little skill who has visited and fought with the Gutoni (Goths). Norica (whose King Voccio’s sister was married to Hárjáweith), Scordisci, Bastarnae and Getai (king Burebista) tribes and peoples.



Hrothulf is half Haerudii, half Eudosii and married to a Eudosii, Háriáwulf is half Haerudii half Kêmbroz and unmarried.



Just as amongst the Hêruskoz, power shifts in changing alliances amongst the tribes, families and within the confederation. Háuház was half Haerudii half Anglii (another significant tribe) and the Anglii is still almost as strongly allied to the Frisii as to the other tribes of Kêmbroz.



* Each subtribe is lead by its elected chief (Duginthiz- King)- except the Haerudii-Eudosii who is lead by a common chief for a generation now, currently Hrothulf.
* These are supported by 20- 35 erloz/subchiefs (the number varies as they kill some off, and others rise from the next level of power) who elect them by their support and who are tied to them by blood, marriage and alliances in an ever-shifting web.
* These again are supported by approximately 150 Herthaganautoz /Thegnoz on horseback, again tied by blood and marriage to their Erláz, but some of whom have direct ties to the top level.
* The standing force of all these powerful men are Hirds/followings/comitatus consisting a total of approximately 1500 full time warriors (Karloz) fighting on foot or as light horsemen. They either serve at the “noble’s” household or muster at his call. These too can change allegiance and the most successful warlords and politicians will attract the most followers locally just as regionally and even from other tribes. Hárjáweith had followers from all the Germanic tribes and many Celtic ones rallying to his call.
* Theoretically the Kêmbroz can call up approximately 25000 armed men as the tribal levy is about that size. This has never happened, but significant parts chose to follow their Erloz’ to Hárjáweith of their own volition.



The Dugunthiz and their nearest kinsmen and allies wear very fine, embroidered clothing and good quality armour and weapons imported from Celticum. Their armrings, finger-rings, neck-rings (Torque-like yet not) and spurs are heavy, numerous and of gold, their weapons, shield-bosses and helmets gold-inlaid or gilded. They cut a fine picture of barbarian splendour.



The Erloz is much the same, but less fine, less embroidered, less gold and gilt, more silver.



The Thegnoz again is a toned-down version of the above, but with only the rare one carrying anything of gold. Silver is the rule here.



The Karloz too try to look fine, but for them iron, silver and bronze inlays and jewellery must suffice, and their large number makes them vary much in quality and only few can afford a proper sword and armour.



Levy fighters wear what they have, usually their most sturdy clothing and whatever armour they can improvise from skins or leather. Their weapons are spears, axes, clubs and bows as all these uses little or no metal, for indeed some of these warriors must do with bone arrow-spearpoints and wooden shieldbosses. They are still a hard and hardy people and to underestimate their effectiveness could be lethal…



1. The Suebi comprise the Semnones, who are "the oldest and noblest of the Suebi"; the Langobardi; the seven tribes of Jutland and Holstein: Reudigni, Aviones, Anglii, Varini, Eudoses, Suarini, Nuitones; the Hermunduri on the Elbe; three tribes along the Danube: Naristi, Marcomanni, Quadi; the Marsigni and Buri. Then there is a mountain range, and beyond that, in the drainage system of the Vistula, Tacitus places five tribes of the Lugii including the Harii, Helvecones, Manimi, Helsii and Naharvali; the Gothones, Rugii, Lemovii along the Baltic Sea; all the states of the Suiones, located in peninsular Scandinavia; and finally the non-Germanic Aestii, and the Sitones, beyond the Aestii along the Baltic yet "continuous with the Suiones". Says Tacitus then: "Here Suebia ends."
2. For Tacitus, a second criterion for being Suebian is residence in a territory recognized as Suebia, not identified by any linguistic coherence, apparently: Tacitus' modern editor Arthur J. Pomeroy concludes "it is clear that there is no monolithic 'Suebic' group, but a series of tribes who may share some customs (for instance, warrior burials) but also vary considerably." The Suebia of Tacitus comprises the entire periphery of the Baltic Sea, including within it tribes not identified as Suebi by modern historians: the Sitones, for instance, who must have resided where Lapland and Finland are now, where Finno-Ugrian has been spoken since Antiquity. In addition, on the south shore of the Baltic are the Aestii, in the territory of modern-day Baltic language speakers, or where they have been (Prussia), again equally as ancient as the Germanic-speakers.
3. The Suebi of Julius Caesar's De Bello Gallico live in 100 cantons of arable land, of which each canton retains ownership, parceling farm lots to individuals to use for up to one year. They wear animal skins, bathe in rivers, and prohibit wine. They allow trade only to dispose of their booty and otherwise have no goods to export. They are of a military disposition, drafting yearly 1000 men per canton for service of one year. With these troops they raid Gaul on the other side of the Rhine river frequently, thus involving Gaul's protector, the Roman Republic, whose agent in the field is one of its greatest generals, Julius Caesar. Lacking a central government and disrespecting all authority, they rely on the services of war chiefs. As to their location, they live next to the Cherusci, which places them between the Rhine river and the middle Elbe river. Their innermost refuge is Silva Bacenis, "Beech Wood", which various authors take to be some section of the Hercynian Forest, such as the Thuringian Forest, the Harz Mountains or the Black Forest. In ancient times Germany was heavily forested and these three forests were more or less continuous. They could not have farmed the forests, however, leaving the Main River bottom and the upper Elbe as the only possibilities.



The Batavii that you are currently at is not in the Suebi coalition. They were part of the Chatii until internal strife drove them out. In alliance with the Ubii, Tencterii, the Romans and the Heruskoz/Cheruscii, and under the protection of Rome.



The Heruskoz are seeking to further their relations with the tribes of Jutland though (as is hinted in archelogical evidence from early 1st Century BC to have succeeded) and allied to the Chatii, so the situation is complicated and fluid here. In the Cherusci fights with the Romans two generations after these events, the Chattii are on their side while the Batavians form the main local Auxilia element of the Roman armies.



Frisii are allied to the Chauci and loosely to the Anglii, but both are part of a larger and older Germanic group including the peoples of modern day Denmark and Sweden; the Ingaevones (“People/Friends of Ingwaz/Yngve/Yngve-Frey). These old tribal “families” have been broken up by population pressure, strife over land, the sudden close threat of Rome and the ascendency of the swēboz/swēbaz/Suebi. There are thus ties between them and they all share in raiding neighbours’ shores (later when trade grows they will all be infamous pirates).

Trevedunum (Titelberg)

The Treviri is a Gallic tribe with some Germanic blood living W of the Rhine. They speak Gallic, but are proud of their mixed heritage, believing that it makes them superior warriors.

They have taken to your ways since you first encountered them, but upheld independence until the time of Caesar's invasion.

The Treveri have a strong cavalry and infantry, and during the Gallic Wars would provide Julius Caesar with his best cavalry. Under their leader Cingetorix, the Treveri served as Roman auxiliaries. However, their loyalties began to change in 54 BCE under the influence of Cingetorix' rival Indutiomarus. According to Caesar, Indutiomarus instigated the revolt of the Eburones under Ambiorix that year and led the Treveri in joining the revolt and enticing Germanic tribes to attack the Romans. The Romans under Titus Labienus killed Indutiomarus and then put down the Treveran revolt; afterwards, Indutiomarus' relatives crossed the Rhine to settle among the Germanic tribes. The Treveri remained neutral during the revolt of Vercingetorix, and were attacked again by Labienus after it. Since they have been peaceable under Cingetorix and continue to provide their patron Caesar with fine Leuce Eupos cavalry and Rome with tribute.

Trevedunum, their main oppidum, is the seat of the chief and main administrative centre. About 5- 7000 people live in the Oppidum behind a Murm Gallicus and it is the main centre of trade and production in northern Gaul, Roman traders mingle here with a multitude of Gauls and Belgae colleagues, some of whom even venture into Germania.

Gaul is very peaceful these days. The Legions in Central Gaul and the subject rulers in the north generally keep the peace, and anyone remotely hostile to Rome has been killed in Caesar’s eight years of slaughter. It too is in a sort of vacuum, for only 15+ years later does new Roman forts and cities spring up.

These are the words of Caius Cominius Dolabra on the Suebi and Ariovistus

Well, it was much like Gaius Julius says in his book you know, except that there was only about twice as many of the Germans as of us and there when they isolated us to squeeze our supplies we thought they had us. Until Gaius Julius revealed that they were waiting because of some omen, then we were happy and wanted to fight them.

So you know, we lined up the army as usual, we were on the left, facing the Suebi themselves strengthened by selected warbands from the other tribes. That was no fun, those irrumatores are huge and fierce, and their blows shatter helmets and splits shields if not warded off right. We were hard pressed. Normally there would be skirmishing first and we would have time to throw our Pila, but not this time. They could not be restrained or they hoped to overwhelm us with their sheer size and force. First a wave of warriors charged with sword and shield, bare-chested and with incredible force to try and break our line. They almost succeeded, our line has never wavered such, but it held and then their second wave formed into Phalanxes as I am told Alexander and Pyrrhus used and pressed on. It was incredibly frustrating, for we could not reach them and they kept pushing. Some of us, myself included dived under the spears or jumped over them in an attempt to reach the wielders, but again our line wavered under the pressure, and again new warbands hurled themselves against us through gaps opening up in the phalanx for it. This time the bodyguards of the chieftains; huge, fierce men in chainmail and with long swords and shield. Some few of them used huge axes in two hands and others threw away their shield to chop better with two hands on their long swords. They towered above us and broke into our ranks in many places. I tell you, I almost wanted to flee then, I have never as an adult been so afraid, not even at Dyrrachium when Pompei beat us so bad and we fled with our tails between our legs. No, I was afraid, and some of the others even wet their pants. But then, when all looked worst, the reserves came streaming and saved our asses while the German left had broken so our cavalry was moving behind and the Legions flanking the Germans. That broke them and they routed, having committed their last reserves to break us. But contrary to what Gaius Julius says, the bodyguards that had not fallen stood their ground to the last. I saw none of them flee; they all had to be cut down to the last man. Not that many slaves were taken even from the fleeing, for they too would turn and fight when we came up, none surrendered. All those camp followers, wives and such that could not get away killed themselves as well.



There was a rumour that the Haerudes/Haerudi robbed loads of gold from the Aedui by, but none knows anything.

What you know of Germans.

You can read more details in Caesar’s Gallic Wars; look in the Links section and folder. Gaius Caecilius probably has them, so it is appropriate.

The Germans are the tribes living west and north of the Rhine. They are a savage, barbaric and disorganised people resenting any authority from Kings and government. According to the Gauls the Germans (Gallic “Neighbour”) values freedom over everything else and will rather plunder than till the land. They rely on livestock (mostly cattle) as their prime, and only grow the barest necessity of crops to supplement their husbandry.

Germany is a wild, forested and road-less wilderness, the weather is horribly rainy and cool in summer and cold during winter, hardening the people to such an extent as no others.

Every German tribe is ruled by a council of old men who are possibly also priests. These will sometimes be lead by a First-amongst-equals, a chief, and in case of war the best suited ise chosen as warlord.

Germans are men of huge stature, of incredible valour and practice in arms, and ofttimes the Italian traders in Germania, on encountering them, cannot bear even their countenance, and the fierceness of their eyes. Caesar’s Batavi bodyguard has been known to make senators quaver from fear by even looking at them. Not least of Caesar’s achievements is to defeat Ariovistus, cross the Rhine, and to make allies of the Batavi and Ubii.

Chimbri Chersonesos and the Cimbri;

All that is said of the Germans in general holds even truer for the Cimbri Chersonesos and its peoples. The largest defeat of Res Publica Romana, almost twice as bad as Cannae, was inflicted by these at Arausio and in total Rome lost more men in these wars than in the Punic wars.

Battle of the Vosges;

Caesar led his forces forward in the standard three line formation. Seeing that the German left was the weaker part of their line he concentrated his forces there. The Germans attacked in several columns, moving so swiftly that there was not time for the Romans to hurl their pila and battle was joined with swords. A fierce struggle occurred in which the German left was broken after a stiff fight.

On the other flank, the Roman left nearly cracked under severe pressure until reinforced by Publius Licinius Crassus. In command of the reserve cavalry, Crassus had the opportunity to move around the battlefield. Seeing the left wing in peril, Crassus led forward reserves from the third line, which first blunted and then broke the German attack.

Overwhelmed on both flanks, the Germans then fled for the Rhine closely pursued by the Romans. Slaughter in the 15 mile pursuit was heavy. Ariovistus was driven back over the Rhine and no Roman knows what happened to him. He was dead by late 54 BC, when his death caused indignation among the Germans. How he died is unknown.

Guard/Mercenary Prices in Rome

Classical historians regularly say that in the late Roman Republic and early Roman Empire the daily wage for an unskilled labourer and common soldier was 1 denarius without tax.

1 gold aureus = 2 gold quinarii = 25 silver denarii = 50 silver quinarii =100 bronze sestertii = 200 bronze dupondii = 400 copper as = 800 copper semisses = 1600 copper quadrans

Denarius: 3.9 gr. silver, drachmae 4.3 gr. silver, but worth x2.

Roman talent = 32.3 kg A talent of silver is thus app. 4150 denarii.

An aureus weighs 8 gr., but Caesar is revising its weight to 6 gr., again its worth is denoted as equal to about 15 gr. of pure gold bullion.



Scipio can raise 5000 denarii fast, Rufus 8000

We will assume that supplies are included in the price.



Mercenary and camp follower prices in denarii, they bring their basic kit.



Rome

Evocatus (5) 1750

Shepherd (6) 500

Slave (100+) 300

Slave Shepherd (10) 400

Gladiator (20) 1000

Bandit (10) 500

Eques (2) 3500

Commoner (100+) 350

Commoner Guard (10) 400

Toxatai Kretikoi (Cretan Archer) (1) 1750

Qala'im Balearim (Baleric Slinger) (2) 1500

Thrakian Falxman (1) 1500

Brihentin (Gallic Noble) (1) 3000

Fall of the Republic.

II Den magtpolitiske del af romersk ekspansion.

“Alle lande har en hær, deres egen eller naboens”, lyder et kendt citat. Det var og er besiddelsen af en effektiv hær og villigheden til at anvende den, der er forudsætningen for en stats overlevelse. Og det var den romerske hær og dennes anvendelse der skabte et verdensrige, men samtidigt udhulede republikken. Denne proces skal analyseres nærmere nedenfor.

IIa Romersk udenrigspolitik/holdning til krig.

Efter Verdenskrigenes blodbad og Vietnam er der en tendens til at vi vesteuropæere væmmes ved krig, det er svært for os at retfærdiggøre især offensiv krig. Således forstår vi også historien. Vi glemmer, at ikke alle, til alle tider, har tænkt som vi, græske og Roms bystats-borgere tøvede ikke med at gå i krig, ofte årligt og ofte offensivt.

I perioden som bystat hvor Rom stredes med de andre bystater i Latium grundlagdes et ideal om at en krig skulle være retfærdig (Ius Bellum) for at kunne føres og vindes.[2] Dette afspejler at hovedparten af Roms soldater var bønder, og bønder foretrækker at dyrke jorden.[3] Men allerede fra 327 f.v.t. frem til Anden Puniske Krig i 218 f.v.t. var romerne i felten stort set hver sommer mod Italiens andre beboere, Kong Pyrrhos af Epeiros, og Karthago. Derefter var legioner i garnision og kamp hele året på fjerne steder som den Iberiske halvø og Makedonien.[4]

Derudover opstod i Latium en vigtig doktrin; ”den romerske Del og hersk”- politik. Romerne knyttede de forskellige bystater til sig med traktater, der belønnede hver enkelt med egne privilegier efter hvor meget de havde støttet eller kæmpet imod romerne.[5] Dette gjorde de enkelte allierede (Socii) mere loyale, så længe Rom havde fremgang.

Det sidste er en vigtig pointe. Romerne blev stædigt ved at kæmpe, i med- og modgang til de var modstanderen overlegen, og de sejre Pyrrhos vandt over dem har siden lagt navn til en sejr med så store tab at den ikke kan bruges til noget, en ”Pyrrhos-sejr”.[6] Ligesom de nægtede at forhandle med Pyrrhos’ ellers fremragende diplomat Kineas om fred. Rom forhandlede aldrig fra et svagt standpunkt.[7] Den samme tendens kan følges fremefter, ikke mindst under Anden Puniske Krig hvor romerne trods nederlag efter nederlag til Hannibal bliver ved at stampe nye legioner op af jorden. Romerne var som en terrier, når de først havde bidt sig fast slap de ikke igen.

Dette var sandsynligvis betinget af nødvendigheden af fasthed, hvis ikke forbundsfællerne skulle falde fra, og kunne kun lade sig gøre fordi de ikke faldt fra.[8] Og med legionærer i kamp hvert år var fastheden til at tage og føle på. Hvis romerne oprindeligt var bønder og mod at forlade markerne, var de nu vænnet til at en stor del af dem var i felten hvert år[9].

I den af os primært behandlede periode, var Rom reelt den eneste magtfaktor i det vestlige Middelhav og fastheden var blevet nærmest til arrogance. Min vurdering er at de krigeriske og krigsvante (men tilsyneladende ikke krigstrætte) romere var opsat på ikke igen at skulle ud i en eksistenskamp med en ligeværdig modstander som de lange og udmarvende krige mod Karthago. Derfor blev enhver potentiel trussel mødt hårdt mod hårdt.[10]

To eksempler skal tjene til at illustrere dette, begge angår de tre andre stormagter omkring Middelhavet. Diadokerne/diadokerrigerne (efterfølgerne, altså de riger Alexander d. Stores generaler byggede på ruinerne af hans imperie efter hans død), Makedonien, Seleukiderriget (Persien) og Ptolemaierriget (Ægypten). Disse havde siden Alexanders død holdt hinanden i skak i en art magtbalance, og var virkelige stormagter.[11]

• Den første indtraf da Ptolomaierriget var svagt og Phillip V af Makedonien i 204- 201 f.v.t. angreb deres besiddelser, Thrakien og Samos. Han bekymrede dermed de græske byer,[12] som sendte flåder mod ham og en gesandt til Rom med bøn om hjælp. Philip havde ydet Karthago støtte, men ikke meget. Og det kan undre at Rom omgående sendte et gesandtskab til Makedonien og forlangte at han indstillede sine krigshandlinger. Dette afslog Philip, og fik overrakt en krigserklæring. Philip var lamslået, Rom havde ingen vitale interesser på spil og havde lige overstået en overlevelseskamp, alligevel erklærede de en mægtig modstander krig.[13] Den faste politik var reel trods den krigstræthed der må have eksisteret i Rom efter store tab og ødelæggelser i kampene mod Hannibal. Fire år efter kunne konsulen Titus Quinctius Flamininus 196 f.v.t. på de Isthmiske Lege i Korinth erklære de græske byer frie. De romerske legioner havde besejret den frygtede makedonske phalanks, og grækerne jublede. Dette fik ende, efter flere trakasserier, intriger og oprør nedkæmpede romerne brutalt al modstand, knuste et Seleukid invasionsforsøg, og gjorde områderne til provinser.
• Den anden minder om den første, blot var det en endnu mægtigere modstander og en endnu mere berømt begivenhed. I 170 og 168 f.v.t. førte Seleukiderriget krig mod Ptolomaierne, det første felttog var en succes, men det andet mødtes på marchen mod Alexandria af en ældre herre, Gaius Popillius Lænas. Han overrakte kong Antiochus IV, der kaldte sig selv Theos Epiphanes("Gud Manifesteret") af andre kaldet Epimanes ("Den Gale"), et ultimatum. Senatet instruerede ham til øjeblikkeligt at trække sig tilbage og lade Ægypten i fred. Kongen udbad sig tid til at diskutere det med sine rådgivere, men Lænas trak med sin stok en cirkel i sandet omkring ham og krævede svar inden han trådte ud. Antiochus bøjede sig. Samtidens største og måske rigeste rige med en ambitiøs konge skulle ikke have noget af at bide skeer med romerne. Og metaforen om en ”streg i sandet” gled ind i vort sprog.[14]

Vi kan således se at romernes faste politik i det andet århundrede f.v.t. havde udviklet sig til, at man nu satte hårdt mod enhver trussel, reel eller potentiel. Inden vi ser på holdningen til krig i Senrepublikken (tiden efter 133 f.v.t.), er det på tid at vende blikket mod romernes hær.

III Den romerske hær.

Den hær romerne brugte til deres magtpolitik var usædvanlig effektiv og opbygget omkring det tunge infanteri i legionerne, suppleret med lettere allierede tropper og rytteri.

Den romerske stædighed afspejlede sig også her, som Pyrrhos måtte konstatere, måtte man selv i sejr over romerne regne med svære tab. Harris har påvist at romerne var usædvanligt krigeriske og ”hårde” selv for en krigerisk samtid.[15] Og selv hærdede makedonske phalangiter (arvtagerne til korpsånden hos Alexanders hær) frygtede legionerne.[16] Disse var formeret på Ca. 5000 mand organiseret i underafdelinger, men med legionen som den primære administrative og operative enhed. For at gøre tjeneste i disse legioner skulle man (forsimplet) være romersk borger over en hvis formue og i alderen 17- 46. Hovedparten var bønder, men officer var fra overklassen.[17] Havde Rom en svaghed var det mangel på rytteri, men med tiden viste der sig også en anden.

Når den romerske bonde nemlig pludselig var i felten flere år i træk gik hans gård hårde tider i møde.[18] Småbønderne havde ikke råd til slaver, og det var så op til kone og børn at dyrke jorden, ofte stod den så udyrket hen.[19] Lægger man dertil ødelæggelserne i krigene og evt. chikane fra stormænd med interesse i at overtage jorden, er det naturligt at vi ser en nedgang i småbøndernes antal fra Anden Puniske krig. Mange blev daglejere eller flyttede til Rom hvor de indgik i et stadigt større og mere ustyrligt byproletariat. Dermed var der færre og færre potentielle soldater til tjeneste. At det tog så lang tid før det gik galt skyldes uden tvivl at romerne tog mange slaver som dyrkede jorden på stormændenes brug. I og for sig godt nok, da man så kunne holde legionerne i felten året rundt i de seks år der var gennemsnit i senrepublikken.[20] Men når de små bondebrug blev færre faldt rekrutteringsgrundlaget, og selvom de små landbrug ikke forsvandt fra Italien, så blev de færre. Forsøg på at sikre rekrutteringsgrundlaget blev centralt for de sidste Ca. 100 år af republikken, og flere politikere forsøgte forgæves løsninger.

Før vi ser på disse kritiske år er det for at forstå udviklingen nødvendigt at se på det politiske system i Rom.

IV Det politiske System i Rom.

Res Publica Romana blev groft sagt styret af to Konsuler med noget nær samme magt som kongerne havde haft.[21] Disse tjente et år af gangen og blev valgt på Centurieforsamlingen, hvor de to øverste klasser havde overvægt af stemmer. For at være valgbar til embedet skulle man have en hvis alder og undtagen i særtilfælde tilhøre senatet og have gennemgået en foreskrevet karierre gennem de andre romerske embeder (Cursus honorum). Senatet var i teorien kun rådgivende, men det var reelt herfra republikken blev styret.

Dog havde Folkeforsamlingen stor magt. Denne valgte ti Folketribuner med vetoret overfor alt. Oprindeligt havde dette været plebejernes talerør og beskyttere overfor patricierne i Stænderkampen (509 f.v.t. – 367 f.v.t.), men embedet blev efterhånden endnu et redskab for patriciernes magtudøvelse. Mere om dette nedenfor.

Patricierne var aristokraterne, resten af folket var plebejere og selvom ridderstanden blev umådeligt rige, kunne de ikke vælges til Senatet. Kun i sjældne tilfælde lykkedes det en ”Ny Mand” at opnå konsulembedet, der gjorde ens efterkommere til patriciere.

Konsulatet var højdepunktet enhver patriciers karierre. Med kun to embeder til 300 senatorer var konkurrencen intens. Da umådelige rigdomme for begyndte at strømme til Rom fra erobrede områder begyndte ambitiøse patriciere derfor at spendere enorme summer for at skabe sig et navn gennem byggerier, gladiatorlege, kornuddelinger O.L.. Dette krævede større indtægter end deres jord kunne give og de måtte låne. Den eneste vej ud af gælden var at blive Prætor eller Konsul, da disse embeder kunne føre til administration af en provins efter embedsperiodens afslutning, og en provins kunne give endog meget store indtægter.[22]

Den intense konkurrence bleb skarpere og skarpere, og metoderne til at vinde den mere og mere ryggesløse. Samtidigt med de store problemer med det dalende rekrutteringsgrundlag for hæren.

Den første der forsøgte at løse det var T. Gracchus i 133 f.v.t., ved på meget kontroversiel vis at gennemtvinge et forslag om at uddele store dele af ”Ager Publicus” til jordløse borgere i Folkeforsamlingen.[23] Dette skulle finansieres gennem indtægterne fra Pergamon, der var testamenteret til Rom af sin sidste konge. Da han søgte genvalg som Plebejertribun for at sørge for det blev gennemført gik han for vidt for sine standsfæller og en sammensværgelse anført af hans fætter slog ham og flere af hans tilhængere ihjel under uroligheder på valgdagen.[24] Men dermed var det ikke slut, ti år senere blev Tiberius’ lillebror Gaius valgt som Plebejertribun og fortsatte samme linie. Med endnu mere radikale forslag, hvoraf de to sidste ville styrke rekrutteringsgrundlaget.

• Ridderstanden (Roms næstrigeste, og meget rige, men plebejere) fik sæde i domstolene.
• Gratis uddeling af korn til Roms underklasse.
• Oprettelse af en koloni af jordløse hvor Karthago havde ligget, disse ville så have jord og dermed kunne tjene i legionerne, og de ville udbrede Roms kultur.
• Det romerske borgerskab med dettes privilegier skulle udbredes til Forbundsfællerne.

Dette gik imod patriciernes interesser og da disse ikke havde taleret i Folkeforsamlingen benyttede de en anden Plebejertribun. Denne fik forpurret de to sidste og det kom til uroligheder med regulære gadekampe i Rom. Senatet indførte undtagelsestilstand og Gaius med 3000 af sine tilhængere blev dræbt. Uroligheder og gadekampe blev en fast bestanddel af politik frem mod Republikkens fald, de sidste år forhindrede væbnede bander lovlige valg og terroriserede modstanderne.

Det er svært at sige om Graccherne forsøgte at afhjælpe problemerne med en stor jordløs underklasse og få styr på den meget store og urolige underklasse i Rom (der på dette tidspunkt har nærmet sig en million indbyggere), eller de udnyttede det i et ambitiøst forsøg på at udvide egen magt i konkurrencen om embeder. Men én ting er sikkert, Graccherne viste folket at det havde magt, noget hverken folket eller senere ambitiøse patriciere glemte.

Nu er vi ved at have lagt det puslespil, der er Republikkens fald, blot mangler de to sidste, personificeret ved Marius og Sulla, de forståes bedst ved at vende tilbage til hæren.

V Marius’ hærreform.

Republikken var i krise, slaveoprør hærgede Sicilien hvor meget af Roms korn kom fra, og i Numidien ryddede Jugurtha i åben trods sine regerende fætre af vejen og blev kronet. Imens var Rom præget af voldsomme politiske kampe og korruption. Jugurtha skal have kaldt byen ”En by til fals og dømt til udslettelse hvis den finder en køber”.[25] Ser vi på holdningen 150 år før hvor Kineas kom tilbage fra Rom og berettede at senatorerne havde afslået gaver han havde tilbudt som en naturlig del af græsk diplomati. Senatorerne ”tog ikke mod bestikkelse”,[26] kan vi se at den skærpede konkurrence havde ændret denne.

Utilfredshed med dette gav sig i 107 f.v.t. udtryk i at en ”Ny Mand” blev valgt fra ridderstanden til det ene konsulembede, Gaius Marius. For at få soldater mod Jugurtha lod han alle frivillige indrullere uden skelen til indkomst. Jordløse (primært bondesønner- ikke Roms proletariat[27]) fik dermed mulighed for bytte og jord. Frivillige strømmede til, og Marius førte Jugurtha i Triumf 104 f.v.t.. Samtidigt truedes Rom af den første germanske folkevandring. Kimbrer og Teutoner havde tilføjet en konsulærhær et ødelæggende nederlag ved Arausio. Barbarfrygten bredte sig i Rom, der ikke havde glemt gallerstormen i 387 f.v.t., og Marius blev år efter år til 100 f.v.t. valgt til konsul til han i en særkommando havde besejret dem. Modstand fra senatet hindrede gennemførelsen af Jorduddeling til veteranerne i Plebejertribunalet.[28] Men Marius havde skabt en ny slags hær, hvor soldaterne ikke længere var loyale overfor staten, kun overfor sin hærfører hvis succes kunne sikre dem et udkomme.[29]

Lucius Cornelius Sulla så og udnyttede dette i striden om kommandoen mod Kong Mithridat af Pontos. [30] 89 f.v.t. havde denne benyttet romernes krig med Forbundsfællerne (der krævede Borgerskab eller selvstyre) til at erobre det meste af det moderne Tyrkiet. Her og i 88 f.v.t. da han invaderede Hellas blev et stort antal romerske borgere slagtet (forskellige kilder angiver 40.000- 150.000) og Rom måtte reagere. Senatet gav kommandoen til den ene Konsul, Sulla, men Plebejertribunalet gav det i stedet til den aldrende Marius.

Sulla havde hvervet en hær af den nye type, og da den kun var loyal overfor ham, rykkede han mod Rom selv og gennemtvang senatsbeslutningen. Derefter slog han Mithridates og vendte tilbage belæsset med bytte. Her havde hans modstandere taget magten og undertrykt hans støtter. Sullas hævn blev uhørt, tusinder blev slået ihjel af hans hær og 4700 proskriberet (offentliggjort på en liste, frakendt liv og ejendom), uden dom blot ved den magt hans legioner gav. Den konfiskerede jord fik disse legionærer og Sulla blev valgt som Diktator uden tidsbegrænsning (et embede, valgt med absolut magt for et halvt år i nødssituationer).[31]

Der var intet på spil i denne blodige affære, blot magt og Sulla opnåede den. Herefter gennemførte og omstødte han love med henblik på at styrke senatet, Bl.a. mistede Ridderstanden sæde i domstolene. I 79 f.v.t. trak han sig tilbage og døde året efter. Men ingen romersk patricier glemte igen at en særkommando kunne give rådighed over en privat hær og Absolut magt.

Som Graccherne viste folket dets magt og Marius skabte ”private” hære havde Sulla vist hvad disse kunne gøre. Scenen var sat for republikkens fald, de kommende år afventede den blot at en stærk mand skulle træde op på scenen og tage hovedrollen...

VI Opsummering og delkonklusion, Res Publica Romanas fald.

Vi har set hvordan den efterhånden aggressive romerske udenrigspolitik og konstante krigsførelse udtyndede rekrutteringsgrundlaget for hæren og delvist erstattede frie bønder med slaver. Vi har set at dette skabte problemer for hæren og hvordan de jordløse mobiliseredes i kampen for agrarreformer, såvel som i hæren. Og hvordan senatet bekæmpede jordreformer.

Vi har også set hvordan det efterhånden blev nødvendigt for en politisk karierre med en provinskommando og hvor stor konkurrencen om disse var. Og at jordløse soldater kun var loyale overfor deres hærfører, samt hvor villige de var til at vende sig mod selve Rom.

Her er det, ti år efter Sulla om hvem han ofte udtalte at denne havde været tåbelig at nedlægge sit diktatur, trådte en intelligent og ambitiøs mand op på scenen, for aldrig at blive glemt igen, Gaius Julius Cæsar.

På sin vej mod magten spillede han på alle beskrevne faktorer. Folkets opbakning for at kunne fastholde sine særkommandoer og konsulater, og legionærernes loyalitet til at vinde enorme rigdomme i Gallien, som kunne fremme karierren mere. Ligesom han vendte legionerne mod Rom selv, vandt borgerkrigen med dem og opnåede en endnu større magt end Sulla.

I den lå også kimen til hans fald, ved sin absolutisme spærrede han vejen for næste generations opstigen, og i en sammensværgelse blev han 15 marts 44 f.v.t. dolket ihjel. Morderne forsøgte at genoprette republikken, men de samme problemer dominerede den stadig og der var politisk kaos efter mordet, en ny hovedaktør og stærk mand var nødvendig for at tøjle alt dette:

”19 år gammel samlede jeg på eget initiativ og for egne midler en hær, med hvilken jeg befriede republikken, der var undertrykt af klikevælde” skrev Octavian i levnedsbeskrivelsen på sit Gravmæle.[32] Han var Cæsars grandnevø, arving og adoptivsøn og han erobrede den magt Cæsar havde haft. Han blev ”Augustus”, ”Den Ophøjede”. Klogeligt belært af sin ”fars” fejl opretholdt han et skin af Republik. Embeder stod stadig åbne for patriciernes ambitioner, men Augustus havde i kraft af sine mange embeder og kommandoen over hæren i virkeligheden uindskrænket magt. I augustæisk retorik var republikken stadig sund og levende, men sandheden var at den var stendød.

Republikken blev således som det forhåbentlig fremgår dræbt af sin uvillighed til at reformere sin politik og kere sig om underklassens ve og vel, og af de enorme rigdomme den erobrede. Ambitiøse mænds magtbegær drev dem til at benytte rigdommene, folket og hæren i kampen om magten, og denne kamp dræbte Res Publica Romana. Eller som Ørsted formulerer det var Roms bystatsforfatning/organisation ikke i stand til at kapere udfordringerne i at sprænge rammerne for bystatens udstrækning og blive et verdensrige.[33]

---

[2] Ørsted, 2006, s. 78f og 83ff, Christiansen, 1995, s. 80.

[3] Ørsted, 2006, s. 78ff.

[4] Harris, 1979, s. 9f, Christiansen, 1995, s. 78ff.

[5] Christiansen, 1995, s. 77f, Ørsted, 2006, s. 83ff.

[6] Plutark citerer Dionysius,”The armies separated; and, it is said, Pyrrhus replied to one that gave him joy of his victory that one other such would utterly undo him. For he had lost a great part of the forces he brought with him, and almost all his particular friends and principal commanders; there were no others there to make recruits, and he found the confederates in Italy backward. On the other hand, as from a fountain continually flowing out of the city, the Roman camp was quickly and plentifully filled up with fresh men, not at all abating in courage for the loss they sustained, but even from their very anger gaining new force and resolution to go on with the war.”, fra The Internet Classics Archive, http://classics.mit.edu/Plutarch/pyrrhus.html.

[7] Ibid, Christensen, 1995, s. 81.

[8] Christiansen, 1995, s. 78f påpeger symbiosen at støtten er betinget af romersk fasthed, men også en betingelse for den.

[9] Harris, 1979 og og Brunt, 1971a & 1971b når frem til at mellem 8 og 25 % af den krigsduelige og tjenesteberettigede befolkning var i felten årligt fra Første Puniske Krig og til Res Publica Romanas fald.

[10] Christiansen, 1995, s. 89 opremser forskellige mulige grunde, men jeg tror ganske simpelt at romerne ville imødegå enhver potentiel trussel, og at hver ny generation fra de store familier nærede et ønske om at leve op til forfædrende.

[11]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Seleucid-Empire_200bc.jpg

[12] Pergamon, Rhodos og Athen.

[13] Kilden her er primært Christianden, 1995, s. 88ff, suppleret med Wikipedias artikel om 2. Makedonske Krig, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Macedonian_War.

[14] Igen er kilden til dette primært Christiansen, suppleret af Wikipedias artikel om Antiochus og Lænas, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antiochus_IV_Epiphanes og http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Popillius_Laenas.

[15] Harris, 1979, s. 47ff.

[16] Harris, 1979, s. 52, citerer Livius, som desværre ikke endnu er fuldt tilgængelig på ”The Internet Classics Archive”

[17] Afsnittet om den romerske hær bygger hovedsagligt på Christensen, 1995, s. 60f, 69, 77 og 92.

[18] Oplysningerne i dette afsnit bygger på Christensen, 1995, s. 95ff, og Ørsted 2006, s.92ff. Uddybning findes i Brunt, 1971a og Brunt 1971b. 1971b er på 716 sider og jeg har ikke nået at læse det hele, 1971a, derimod er en kort og fremragende behandling af emnet.

[19] Det er vigtigt at huske at fortidigt landbrug var fysisk meget hårdt, krævende og umuligt for kvinder og børn at passe,det er en medvirkende grund til at bondesoldater i fortiden ofte var hårdføre.

[20] Harris, 1979, s. 48ff.

[21] Igen henvises til Christiansen, 1995, 63ff, for dette afsnit. Han går mere i detaljer i den komplicerede romerske forfatning, klassedeling og klassekamp. For mere information henvises desuden til Wikipedias artikel om samme, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comitia_Centuriata, eller den generelle fremstilling Ørsted giver gennem hele sin Cæsar-biografi, Ørsted, 2006.

[22] Ørsted, 2006’s beskrivelse af Cæsars karierre illustrerer fint den onde cirkel man som patricier af en slægt med store traditioner var fanget i, det samme gør McCulloughs romanserie, ”Den romerske familie”.

[23] Igen henvises til Christiansen, 1995, s. 95ff. Ager Publicus var jord ejet af Rom efter erobringerne i Italien, men benyttet af overklassen, som jo ikke ville miste dette privilegie.

[24] Graccherne var de mest kendte såkaldte ”Popularer”, politikere der førte og talte folkets sag.

[25] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jugurtha

[26] Christiansen, 1995, s. 81.

[27] Christiansen, 1995, s. 104, men alle nyere forskere fra Badian til Brunt og Harris er enige.

[28] Christiansen, 1995, s. 104.

[29] Ibid.

[30] Se Bilag I for placering af Pontos.

[31] Christiansen, 1995, s. 105 og Brunt, 1971a, 105ff.

[32] Augustus, Res Gestae, gengivet i Christensen, 1995, s. 108.

[33] Ørsted, 2006, s. 28ff.

Roman brutality and attitude to others around 45 B.C.

Roman brutality and attitude to others around 45 B.C.

In a brutal time, Rome surpassed many other so-called civilised people with their hard edge. I shall cite a few examples and try to conclude what that means for the player characters in a Roman campaign.

• Slavery, slaves are property, “Talking Tools” and as with other tools, some care well for them, others not. Some get a relationship to some slaves, but mostly not. The marked difference is those Greeks who sold themselves into slavery in order to become teachers in Rome.
• Pater Familias had the right to kill any member of his family who broke his rules. No one could or would interfere or question him.
• Gladiatorial Games, while the Greeks had theatre and while martial arts are popular in any culture. The Romans in general loved the bloody spectacle of Gladiators killing each other in showy ways. Yes favourites could be saved by the grace of the audience, but many died. When a Slave dies well, how much better will a true Roman die?
• Annual warfare, all through the Republic the Romans went to war almost annually, and only in a few instances did they have trouble recruiting troops even for dangerous campaign, and if loot was in the offing…
• Decimation. A punishment used against units that had shown cowardice, every tenth man, drawn by lot, was clubbed to death by the rest.
• Torture, was frequently used to obtain evidence. In fact a slave was not a valid witness unless subjected to torture.
• Total annihilation of enemy territory and cities. All through antiquity many cultures wiped out enemy cities if they did not surrender before “the ram touched the gate”. The Romans, however, did it frequently and with a brutality where even pets and animals were hacked to death.
• Livy relates how even hardened Macedonian Phalangati was horrified by the brutality of the Gladius Hispanensis and those wielding it as they encountered the remains of their compatriots that had fought them in 199 B.C.
• Even the soft and civilised Cicero led a campaign in Asia Minor.
• One last example will suffice. During the conduct of the war against the Latins in 340 BC, Manlius and his co-consul, Publius Decius Mus, decided that the old military disciplines would be reinstated, and no man was allowed to leave his post, under penalty of death. Manlius's son, seeing an opportunity for glory, forgot this stricture, left his post with his friends, and defeated several Latin skirmishers in battle. Having the spoils brought to him, the father cried out in a loud voice and called the legion to assemble. Berating his son, he then handed him over for execution to the horror of all his men. Publius Decius later performed Devotio and thus won The Battle of Vesuvius.
  

There is much more, but lest it be tedious(-er) I better sum up.

Playing a Roman character you have to remember that you do not flinch at death or killing. It is but natural, vanquished foes are yours to do with as you please, ransom, sell as slaves or kill and to you it is all the same.

Roman attitudes to others.

• Greeks are civilised and you can learn from them. But they are soft and until ROME enforced order their constant bickering was all they did besides thinking. “Greeks, valiant in words rather than in deeds” as either Plutarch or Livy says (I cannot recall which). It is good that Rome enforced Pax Romana on those Graeculi (small-greeks).
• Gauls and Celtiberians are barbarian and uncivilised. They have yet to be really touched by softening civilisation, but they have also to yet attain culture and be fully pacified. Caesar’s recruitment and enfranchisement of Gauls for his Legions in Gallia Cisalpina has recently caused uproar. Just as it took a bloody civil war a generation ago for the Italian Allies to gain citizenship.
• Parthians are decadent eastern despots, they are dangerous and so is their nasty despotism and religions. They got Crassus and though Publius Ventidius Bassus would inflict a like defeat on a Parthian Prince in 40 or 39 BC only Augustus would even the score and get back the Eagles.
• Germans are the ultimate barbarians, huge, bellicose and violent beyond belief, the greatest praise you can give a legionnaire is to call him “Brave as a German”, the Germans embodies the barbarian fright in Romans as well as their ultimate picture of the Noble Savage. Untouched by civilisation, living in villages under chiefs and despising monarchs as well as civilisation, Germans are to be feared and if possible defeated and conquered. Not much is known about them, and this just adds to the fear and awe. A few traders have ventured from Gaul and have found the Germans interesting in trading luxury items and weapons for amber and skins. One of Caesar’s largest accomplishments is to have defeated Ariovistus and he intimidates Rome with his German bodyguard as well as his hardened legions.