During the Macedonian and Syrian Wars the Romans were busy strengthening and extending their hold upon northern Italy and Spain.

*Cisalpine Gaul.* Cisalpine Gaul, which had been largely lost to the Romans since Hannibal's invasion, was recovered by wars with the Insubres and Boii between 198 and 191 B. C. A new military highway, the _via Flaminia_, was built from Rome to Ariminum in 187, and later extended under the name of the _via Aemilia_ to Placentia; another, the _via Ca.s.sia_ (171 B. C.), linked Rome and the Po valley by way of Etruria. New fortresses were established; Bononia (189) and Aquileia (181) as Latin colonies; Parma and Mutina (183) as colonies of Roman citizens. In this way Roman authority was firmly established and the way prepared for the rapid Latinization of the land between the Apennines and the Alps.

*The Ligurians.* In the same period falls the subjugation of the Ligurians. In successive campaigns, lasting until 172 B. C., the Romans gradually extended their sway over the various Ligurian tribes until they reached the territory of Ma.s.salia in southern Gaul. Roman colonies were founded at Pisa (180) and Luna (177).

*Spain.* The territory acquired from Carthage in Spain was organized into two provinces, called Hither and Farther Spain, in 197 B. C. But the allied and subject Spanish tribes were not yet reconciled to the presence of the Romans and serious revolts broke out. One of these was subdued by Marcus Porcius Cato in 196, another by Lucius Aemilius Paulus between 191 and 189, and a third by Tiberius Semp.r.o.nius Gracchus in 179 and 178 B. C.

The settlement effected by Gracchus secured peace for many years. In Spain were founded Rome's first colonies beyond the borders of Italy. Italica, near Seville, was settled in 206, and Carteia in 171; both as Latin colonies.

CHAPTER X

TERRITORIAL EXPANSION IN THREE CONTINENTS: 167133 B. C.

*Roman foreign policy.* The foreign relations of Rome from 167 to 133 B. C. fall into two distinct periods. In the earlier, Roman foreign policy is directed towards securing Roman domination throughout the Mediterranean by diplomatic means. War and annexation of territory are avoided as causing too great a drain upon the resources of the state and creating difficult administrative problems. In the later period this policy is abandoned for one more aggressively imperialistic, which does not hesitate to appeal to armed force and aims at the incorporation of conquered territory within the empire. This change of policy was largely due to the influence of that group in the senate which was eager for foreign commands, the honors of a triumph, and the spoils of war, as well as that of the non-senatorial financial interests which sought to open up new fields for exploitation. It was also felt that the prestige of Rome had suffered by the disregard of some of her diplomatic representations.

This policy of expansion resulted in prolonged wars in Spain, the annexation of Carthage and Macedon, the establishment of direct control over Greece, and the acquisition of territory in Asia Minor. The new tendencies become apparent shortly before 150 B. C.

I. THE SPANISH WARS: 154133 B. C.

*The revolts of the Celtiberians and the Lusitanians: 154139 B. C.* In 154 B. C. revolts broke out in both Hither and Farther Spain. A series of long and b.l.o.o.d.y campaigns ensued, which were prolonged by the incapacity, cruelty and faithlessness of the Roman commanders, and caused a heavy drain upon the military resources of Italy. The chief opponents of the Romans were the Celtiberians of Hither, and the Lusitanians of Farther Spain. The desperate character of these wars made service in Spain very unpopular, and levies for the campaign of 151 were raised with difficulty.

The tribunes interceded to protect certain persons, and when their intercession was disregarded by the consuls they cast the latter into prison. In 150 B. C. the pro-consul Galba treacherously ma.s.sacred thousands of Lusitanians with whom he had made a treaty. For this he was brought to trial by Cato, but was acquitted.

The ma.s.sacre led to a renewed outbreak under Viriathus, an able guerilla leader who defied the power of Rome for about eight years (147139 B. C.).

Forced eventually to yield, he was a.s.sa.s.sinated during an armistice by traitors suborned by the Roman commander. The complete subjugation of the Lusitanians soon followed.

*The war with Numantia: 143133 B. C.* Meantime, after an interval of some years, in 143 the war had broken out afresh in the nearer province where the struggle centered about the town of Numantia. In 140 the Roman general Pompeius made peace upon easy terms with the Numantines, but later repudiated it, and the Senate ignored his arrangements. Again in 138 the tribunes interfered with the levy, so great was the popular aversion to service in Spain. The next year witnessed the disgraceful surrender of the consul Mancinus and his army, comprising 20,000 Romans, to the Numantines.

By concluding a treaty he saved the lives of his army. But the Roman Senate perfidiously rejected the sworn agreement of the consul, made him the scapegoat and delivered him bound to the Numantines, who would have none of him.

At length, weary of defeats, the Romans re-elected to the consulship for 134 B. C. their tried general Scipio Aemilia.n.u.s, the conqueror of Carthage, and appointed him as commander in Spain. His first task was to restore the discipline in his army. Then he opened the blockade of Numantia. After a siege of fifteen months the city was starved into submission and completely destroyed. A commission of ten senators reorganized the country and Spain entered upon a long era of peace.

II. THE DESTRUCTION OF CARTHAGE: 149146 B. C.

*The Third Punic War: 149146 B. C. Its causes.* The treaty which ended the Second Punic War had forbidden the Carthaginians the right to make war outside of Africa, or within it without the consent of Rome. At the same time their enemy Masinissa had been established as a powerful prince on their borders. In such a situation future Roman intervention was inevitable. But for a generation Carthage was left in peace. A pro-Roman party was in control there and bent all its energies to the peaceful revival of Carthaginian commerce. And the Romans, after a period of suspicion which ended with the exile of Hannibal in 196, regarded Carthaginian prosperity without enmity. However, this prosperity in the end led to the ruin of the city, for it awakened the envy of the Senate and the financial interests of Rome, which became only too ready to seize upon any excuse for the destruction of their ancient rival.

*Cato and Carthage.* The opportunity came through the action of Masinissa.

This chieftain, knowing the restrictions imposed upon Carthage by her treaty with Rome, and sensing the change in the Roman att.i.tude towards that city after 167 B. C., revived old claims to Carthaginian territory.

Carthage could only appeal to Rome for protection, but in 161 and 157 the Roman commissions sent to adjust the disputes decided in favor of Masinissa. A member of the commission of 157 was the old Marcus Porcius Cato, who was still obsessed with the fear which Carthage had inspired in his youth, and who returned from his mission filled with alarm at the wealth of the city and henceforth devoted all his energies to accomplish its overthrow. In the following years he concluded all his speeches in the Senate with the words, "Carthage must be destroyed."

*The Roman ultimatum: 149 B. C.* A fresh attack by Masinissa occurred in 151 B. C. Enraged, the Carthaginians took the field against him, but suffered defeat. The Romans at once prepared for war. Conscious of having overstepped their rights and fearful of Roman vengeance, the Carthaginians offered unconditional submission in the hope of obtaining pardon. The Senate a.s.sured them of their lives, property and const.i.tution, but required hostages and bade them execute the commands of the consuls who crossed over to Africa with an army and ordered the Carthaginians to surrender their arms and engines of war. The Carthaginians, desirous of appeasing the Romans at all costs, complied. Then came the ultimatum. They must abandon their city and settle at least ten miles from the sea coast.

This was practically a death sentence to the ancient mercantile city.

Seized with the fury of despair the Carthaginians improvised weapons and, manning their walls, bade defiance to the Romans.

*The siege of Carthage: 149146 B. C.* For two years the Romans, owing to the incapacity of their commanders, accomplished little. Then disappointment and apprehension led the Roman people to demand as consul Scipio Aemilia.n.u.s, who had already distinguished himself as a military tribune. He was only a candidate for the aedileship and legally ineligible for the consulate. But the restrictions upon his candidature were suspended, and he was elected consul for 147 B. C. A special law entrusted him with the conduct of the war in Africa. He restored discipline in the Roman army, defeated the Carthaginians in the field and energetically pressed the siege of the city. The Carthaginians suffered frightfully from hunger and their forces were greatly reduced. In the spring of 146 B. C.

the Romans forced their way into the city and captured it after desperate fighting in the streets and houses. The handful of survivors were sold into slavery, their city levelled to the ground and its site declared accursed. Out of the Carthaginian territory the Romans created a new province, called Africa. The last act in the dramatic struggle between the two cities was ended.

III. WAR WITH MACEDONIA AND THE ACHAEAN CONFEDERACY: 149146 B. C.

*The Fourth Macedonian War: 149148 B. C.* The mutual rivalries among the Greek states, which frequently evoked senatorial intervention, and the ill-will occasioned by the harshness of the Romans towards the anti-Roman party everywhere, caused a large faction among the h.e.l.lenes to be ready to seize the first favorable opportunity for freeing Greece from Roman suzerainty.

Relying upon this antagonism to Rome, a certain Andriscus, who claimed to be a son of Perseus, appeared in Macedonia in 149 and claimed the throne.

He made himself master of the country and defeated the first Roman forces sent against him. However, he was crushed in the following year at Pydna by the praetor Metellus, and Macedonia was recovered. The four republics were not restored but the whole country was organized as a Roman province (148 B. C.).

*The Achaeans a.s.sert their independence.* The Achaean Confederacy was one of the states where the feeling against Rome ran especially high. There the irksomeness of the Roman protectorate was heightened by the return of the survivors of the political exiles of 167, 300 in number. The anti-Roman party, supported by the extreme democratic elements in the cities, was in control of the Confederacy when border difficulties with Sparta broke out afresh in 149 B. C. The matter was referred to the Senate for settlement, but the Achaeans did not await its decision. They attacked and defeated Sparta, confident that the hands of the Romans were tied by the wars in Spain, Africa and Macedonia.

*The dissolution of the Confederacy: 146 B. C.* The Roman Senate determined to punish the Confederacy by detaching certain important cities from its membership. But in 147 the Achaean a.s.sembly tempestuously refused to carry out the orders of the Roman amba.s.sadors, in spite of the fact that the Macedonian revolt had been crushed. Their leaders, expecting no mercy from Rome, prepared for war and they were joined by the Boeotians and other peoples of central Greece. The next year they resolved to attack Sparta, whereupon the Romans sent a fleet and an army against them under the consul Lucius Mummius. Metellus, the conqueror of Macedonia, subdued central Greece and Mummius routed the forces of the Confederacy at Leucopetra on the Isthmus (146 B. C.). Corinth was sacked and burnt; its treasures were carried off to Rome; and its inhabitants sold into slavery.

Its land, like that of Carthage, was added to the Roman public domain.

Like Alexander's destruction of Thebes this was a warning which the other cities of Greece could not misinterpret. A senatorial commission dissolved the Achaean Confederacy as well as the similar political combinations of the Boeotians and Phocians, The cities of Greece entered into individual relations with Rome. Those which had stood on the side of Rome, as Athens and Sparta, retained their previous status as Roman allies; the rest were made subject and tributary. Greece was not organized as a province, but was put under the supervision of the governor of Macedonia.

IV. THE ACQUISITION OF ASIA

*The province of Asia.* In 133 B. C. died Attalus III, King of Pergamon, the last of his line. In his will he made the Roman people the heir to his kingdom, probably with the feeling that otherwise disputes over the succession would end in Roman interference and conquest. The Romans accepted the inheritance but before they took possession a claimant appeared in the person of an illegitimate son of Eumenes II, one Aristonicus. He occupied part of the kingdom, defeated and killed the consul Cra.s.sus in 131, but was himself beaten and captured by the latter's successor Perpena in 129.

Out of the kingdom of Pergamon there was then formed the Roman province of Asia (129 B. C.). The occupation of this country made Rome mistress of both sh.o.r.es of the Aegean and gave her a convenient bridgehead for an advance further eastward. The question of the financial administration of Asia and its relation to Roman politics will be discussed in a subsequent chapter.

CHAPTER XI

THE ROMAN STATE AND THE EMPIRE: 265133 B. C.

The conquest of the hegemony of the Mediterranean world entailed the most serious consequences for the Roman state itself. Indeed, the wars which form the subject of the preceding chapters were the ultimate cause of the crisis that led to the fall of the Roman Republic. In the present chapter it will be our task to trace the changes and indicate the problems that had their origin in these wars and the ensuing conquests. Such a survey is best begun by considering the character of the Roman government during the epoch in question.

I. THE RULE OF THE SENATORIAL ARISTOCRACY

*The Senate's control over the magistrates, tribunate, and a.s.semblies.*