History and Political Science - Assignment Example

? History and Political Science History and Political Science Answer The Importance of Asia (Asia Minor) to the Romans was because it connected the Eastern and Western part of the empire via a land route. This was an important trade route for the Romans for commerce, cultural activities and for their military to move to various territories that the Romans had conquered in Asia. The western region Asia was also very fertile, and it was a great source of supplies and manpower for the empire. The Eastern region was infertile, unproductive and sparsely populated. Its significance lay in the fact that it was a natural buffer zone that secured the western, fertile region from invasions and raids. During this period, Asia was inhabited by many different communities who were quite progressive and developed. The dyes and woolen textiles made in this region were quite famous and in tremendous demand. The Romans saw this region as a rich place for collection of taxes so that they could live lavishly and in style. The area also was quite rich in natural resources. Spices were grown in Asia which seasoned the food of the Romans, and was a crop that had worldwide commercial value.1 The larger cities of Asia were important centers for education and culture. In fact, Asia had everything that the Romans desired and wanted. Riches from Asia allowed them to indulge in a luxuriant life style, build their cities and have the largest armies in the world. Their large armies helped them to control and manage the territories they conquered.2 During the Roman peace period, trade and other cultural activities flourished in Asia Minor. Roman emperors acknowledged the importance of this region and travelled to different cities in Asia to help and encourage in the development and progress of this province. The Romans were quite adept in constructing roads, and a vast network of roads was built here to connect this part of Asia to the rest of the Roman Empire. During this time many enormous temples and other public construction such as libraries, sewerage systems, fountains etc. were designed by Roman architects and built by the local populating. Answer 2 The Third Mithridatic war fought during 73-63BC was the longest of the three Mithridatic conflicts. It started because the ruler of Bithynia was a puppet of the Romans, and Mitrhridates tried to overthrow him. Consequently, the ruler of Bithynia declared war on Pontus because of encouragement and support provided to him by the Romans advisors. The two legions of Roman soldiers allied with the army of Nicomedes IV proceeded to invade Mitrhridates’ kingdom of Pontus in 89 BC. Nicomedes and his Roman allies were completed routed.3 Although Mitrhridates was welcomed in Anatolia, his hatred against the Romans persisted, and in 88 BC, he instigated a massacre campaign against the Romans and their Italian allies and eliminated them throughout the entire region. Tigranes the Great, who ruled neighboring Armenia became an ally of Mitrhridates and consolidated his alliance by marrying Mitrhridates’ daughter. Both kingdoms supported each other against Rome.4 The conflict in Asia Minor reflected Mithradte’s desire to defeat the Romans and include Asia in his rule. The second conflict was different because it reflected the ambitions of the Roman general Murena. Since both wars were inconclusive, it was apparent that there was going to be another war because Sulla who had discussed the terms and agreement of the first conflict had died. Sulla was a staunch proponent of peace. 5 Most of Sulla’s allies thought that the peace terms that he had negotiated were too soft, and when Sulla died the Roman Senate firmly refused to approve the agreement. In this war, the Romans defeated Mitrhridates VI of Pontus which ended the Pontic Kingdom and created the Kingdom of Armenia as an allied client of Rome. The importance of these wars was that the Romans gained power and influence in absolutely new territories. The precise dates of the initial happenings of Third Mithridatic War are not absolutely clear with some historians stating that the first skirmishes of the conflict were fought in 74 B.C. Recent research has proved of battles at Chalcedon and the military operation in Cyzius because Cicero reports that Lucullus was in Rome in the month of November 74 B.C. 6 This means that he was in Asia in 73 B.C. and was planning to invade Pontus when he was he came to know about Cotta’s defeat at Chalcedon. Lucullus was a very ambitious Roman general who was famous for both his victories and his lavish life style. During the Third Mithridatic conflict, which proved to be conclusive, Lucullus was quite successful against Mitrhridates. He combined with Roman forces that were already fighting in Asia and led them against Tigranes, king of Armenia. Because of Lucullus’ brilliant leadership, the Romans completely destroyed the Armenian army despite being outnumbered two to one.7 During 68-67 BC, his influence over his army was challenged by his brother in law Publius Cloudious Pulcher who was paid by Pompey the Great. Pompey wanted to take over Lucullus’ army, and he instigated rebellion in the army who then refused to obey Lucullus. The Roman Senate sent Pompey takeover from Lucullus. During this time, Mitrhridates and Tigranes retook some of the territory taken from them by Lucullus. Here, a mention of the two most powerful groups in the Senate “The Optimates” also called the “Best ones” or “Aristocrats “and the “Populares” or Demagogues or “Populists”. Both groups belonged to the wealthy and privileged class.8 The Optimates were more powerful than the Populares. They exerted great influence and usually did not allow any notions to be passed in the Senate which were not to their liking. The two groups had different ways of exerting influence against the small groups at the helm of affairs of the government. However, the authority of the Senate was not based upon the law, but on tradition and approval. It could only give advice, but could not enforce the law. Until 133 BC, there was virtually challenge to its authority, but later this authority was challenged by Populares such as Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus and then by the army commanders from the provinces.9 Later Pompey replaced Lucullus and finished the war by winning it. Pompey knew that his best power base and chances of obtaining the maximum amount of wealth. When Pompey started to pursue Mitrhridates, he faced confrontation from Caucasian tribes. In Phasis at Colchis, he came upon Servilius who commanded the Euxine fleet and spent the winter at Pontus which he annexed as a Roman province.10 Answer 3 The relationship between the Romans and Parthian was a dominant factor in the formulation and implementation of international policy. Most other tribes that bordered Rome’s eastern borders were not as well organized and as sophisticated as rich or sophisticated as the Parthians. The Parthian cities were among the largest in the world, and they had accumulated enormous wealth from their trading activities. The wars between the Romans and Parthian Empire were different from any other wars or battles in history. The war was fought in and around 53 BC. Although Rome had conquered and taken over most of the known civilized world of that period, they never conquered Parthia.11 By the time that the Romans had conquered all the territory up to Mesopotamia, the Parthian Empire was already quite rich because its trade routes went into most of China. When the Roman Empire reached Parthia, they undertook war and diplomacy, which was a war of different cultures and ways of fighting. The Parthian and Romans initiated diplomatic contact in 96 BCE. The Roman general at that time was Sulla who was discourteous to the Parthian envoy. However, an agreement was signed defining the borders between the Roman and Parthian Empires. This treaty ensured peace for the next thirty years mainly because the Parthians were expanding their influence in the east while the Romans also had a lot to do in their territories.12 When the Romans were settled down and had taken care of their affairs, their intentions turned to conquering Parthia. In 64, Galbinus a Roman governor of Syria entered Parthian territory with his army, but withdrew almost immediately. He proposed to the Roman Senate to undertake a full scale invasion, but his proposal was rejected. The Roman Senate was not as powerful as it had been because politics in Rome were controlled by Caesar, Pompey and Crassus who comprised the First Triumvirate. Crassus was the first to initiate hostilities against the Parthians. Crassus was a part of the first Triumvirate only because of his wealth. He was already suspicious of Pompey because Pompey was the greatest Roman general of that time. When Caesar scored many successes in Gaul, Crassus knew that wealth alone was not enough and that he needed extra leverage like Caesar. He needed fame, and he thought that the conquest of Parthia would ensure his fame and another valid reason for his being part of the First Triumvirate.13 To launch his war, Crassus obtained the province of Syria. The Senate did not ratify his invasion and it was known as Crassus’ private war. Crassus was defeated and his son and Crassus himself was killed in the war with the Parthians. He was captured by the Parthians and molten gold was poured down to his throat which was an ironic death for his greed. The private war of Crassus radically changed the relationship between the two nations. The Parthians knew that the war had not been sanctioned by the Senate, but they also understood the danger posed by Rome’s ambitions. Two years after this war, the Parthians Prince Pacorus invaded Syria with the help of a rebel Roman Labienus. Together they defeated the Roman governor or Syria, and made Antigonus the governor of Syria. The Romans sent Ventidius a prominent Roman general to avenge this disgraceful defeat. The Romans changed tactics for this conflict and succeeded in completely destroying the Parthian army. The Parthians again attacked the army of Ventidius under Pacorus. Once again, due to the superior tactics of the Romans they were victorious and Pacorus was killed.14 Answer 4 Just before he was assassinated, Caesar had plans to invade Parthia. This was to both increase his wealth and avenge the defeat and death of his old friends Crassus. Those who were planning to assassinate Caesar realized that they had precious little time to carry out their plans because if Caesar left and had success with the Parthia campaign, it would have been impossible to kill him or otherwise depose. Caesar never did get to invade Parthia, but the outcome was difficult to predict. He was a much better and more experienced general than Crassus. Caesar was quite astute, and would not have started a war that he knew that could not win. This was quite different from the campaigns he had undertaken in Gaul. The possibility of achieving moderate success was possible, but the conquest of the entire empire of Parthia was next to impossible. In the history of all the wars against Parthia, the Romans could not subdue the Parthians despite being at their height of their power.15 Answer 6 Antony’s Parthian Campaign was a disaster with more than 20,000 soldiers killed and no material or military gains. Caesar had named Gaius Octavius Thurinus as his successor. He was his great nephew, and Caesar’s adopted son. Antony did not initially like this, but after much discussion and intercession by friends and relatives he accepted Octavius. Octavius, Antony and Lepidus formed a three man government which was the “second triumvirate”. So as not to have any opposition to their rule they executed some prominent members of the senate executed which included the great speaker Cicero who Antony disliked. When Antony met Cleopatra, he divorced his Roman wife, which was not well received with the Romans. The Senate proscribed Antony and declared war on Cleopatra. Octavia had a very capable general, and his soldiers deserted him because of the presence of Cleopatra on her flagship a fact they highly resented. Agippa forced Antony and Cleopatra to flee with 60 of their ships. Plans to regroup failed because most of Antony’s soldiers left to join Octavius because of their dislike for Cleopatra. Antony committed suicide with his own sword, and breathed his last in the arms of Cleopatra. This was the breakup of the second triumvirate. Cleopatra lived for several weeks after Antony’s death, and committed suicide when Octavius had plans to parade her as his prisoner of war. Octavius relinquished his power voluntarily to the Senate, which was returned to him as the “leading citizen” instead of a dictator of king or triumvir. He was renamed “Augustus” or the honored one. In essence, total power was in Augustus’ hand, but was hidden by his using old governmental laws. Augustus’ rule was termed as the beginning of the Roman Empire. List of References Beard, M. & Crawford, M., 1985. Rome in the late Republic : problems and interpretations. London: Leeds University Library. Bispham, E. & and, T.H., 2006. The Edinburgh companion to ancient Greece and Rome. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press. Caesar, C.J., 1996. Julius Caesar's War Commentaries. New York: Harper's Classical Library. Cluet, R., 2013. From Cicero to Mohammed Atta. Frontier Journals, pp.17-39. Czech, K.P., 1994. Spartacus and the Slave Rebellion. History Net Magazines, April. Goldsworthy, A., 2004. In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire. London: Phoenix; New Ed edition. Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History , 2013. Trade between the Romans and the Empires of Asia. [Online] Available at: http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/silk/hd_silk.htm [Accessed 29 March 2013]. Kamm.Antony, 1995. The Romans: An Introduction. London: Leeds University Library. Kyle, D.G., 1998. Spectacles of Death in Ancient Rome. London: Routledge. Lendering, J., 5013. Mithridates. [Online] Available at: http://www.livius.org/ap-ark/appian/appian_mithridatic_00.html [Accessed 29 March 2013]. Lomas, K., 1993. Rome and the Western Greeks, 350 BC-AD 200: Conquest and Acculturation in Southern Italy. London: Routledge. Scullard, H.H., 1963. From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 B.C. to A.D. 68. 2nd ed. London: University Paperbacks. Sommer, M., 2011. Aspects of Greek History. The Classical Review, 61(2), pp.496-98. Southern, P., 2001. The Roman Empire from Severus to Constantine. London: Routledge. Swain, H. & Davies, M.E., 2010. Aspects of Roman History 82 BC-AD 14. London: Routledge. UN RV History, 2013. Asia Minor. [Online] Available at: http://www.unrv.com/provinces/asia-minor.php [Accessed 29 March 2013]. Read More