The Roman Empire has consequently become the quintessential empire for purposes of comparative study of interstate predominance. The foregoing statements will not arouse much controversy; indeed, they represent nearly a scholarly consensus. But they do beg two important questions: What is an empire and what is imperialism?
Rome drew on the support of an alliance system - the Latin League, originally created by its kings - to repel the threat of Etruscan and other neighbors.
Eventually, the strength of this alliance enabled Rome to expand its network of friendships beyond its home region of Latium by offering security to neighbors in the Apennine Mts.
Conflict erupted with the bellicose Samnites, for example, when Rome welcomed Capua and the Campanian states into the confederacy in BC. The Samnites had long regarded central Italy as their immediate sphere of influence.
Despite repeated attempts at negotiation Rome was compelled to engage in a series of hard-fought conflicts BC to secure Samnite cooperation. Similar intervention in southern Italy the Bay of Tarentum resulted in the outbreak of conflict with Tarentum whose citizens turned for assistance to King Pyrrhus of Epirus BCa relative of Alexander the Great.
In this last instance Rome had to make a choice between its friendship with Carthage, which had cooperated militarily against Pyrrhus in Sicily, and the strategic needs of Italian commercial states that were leery of Carthaginian control of the straits of Messana through which all maritime trade between Italy and the Hellenistic East had to pass.
In each instance the Roman Senate attempted to negotiate an alternative to conflict; however, with each step forward Rome found itself dragged increasingly into conflict by the interests of its burgeoning network of allies.
Some scholars have identified this process as one of defensive imperialism, because Rome expanded its hegemony through warfare but only as a result of the liabilities it thus inherited.
According to this interpretation, Rome had no interest in conquest particularly overseas conquest and was concerned only with securing peace and stability on the Italian peninsula. Regardless of the correctness of this interpretation, the first conflict with Carthage resulted in Roman acquisition of territories beyond the Italian peninsula Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica and challenged the strategic outlook of the Roman hierarchy.
Some factions of the Roman aristocracy preferred to adhere to an isolationist policy of maintaining the peace in Italy while avoiding entangling alliances overseas.
Others saw the need to protect wider Italian interests, particularly commercial interests, by projecting Roman force overseas. Roman senators were still entrenched in this debate when renewed conflict with the Carthaginians erupted in Spain BCthis time commanded by a formidable general, Hannibal.
For 18 years the Hannibalic or Second Punic War, BC Rome found itself embroiled in a deadly struggle against a brilliant general and a well trained army. Despite repeated setbacks the network of the Roman confederacy in Italy held.
Most of the region Spain, southern Gaul, the western Mediterranean islands was tribal and non-urbanized.
As the definition of Parenti of Imperialism goes, Republican Rome was interested in expanding their territory for economic reasons. However, the events ushering imperialism in the Republic of Rome was also tainted by personal and political agendas, and not of a nationalistic agenda. Lecture Roman Imperialism. Within approximately years the city state of Rome expanded militarily to become the dominant power on the peninsula of Italy; in the following years the same military establishment rose to assume authority over the entire Mediterranean world. Wars of the Late Republic. , War with . In E. Badian's book, Roman Imperialism in the Late Republic, he discusses the actions of the Senate, consuls, Caesars, and other officials. The actions of many of these high ranking people are surprisingly not done with traditional imperialistic attitude and motive.
Although Republican authorities would endure centuries of native resistance, the populations of the region gradually assimilated a Roman way of life Romanization.
Threats posed by the kings of Macedonian successor states to wider Mediterranean security needed to be addressed, most particularly, the half-hearted decision of King Philip V of Macedonia BC to align with Hannibal during the Second Punic War. This and later provocations precipitated the repeated dispatch of Roman armies to the Greek East.
As powerful as they appeared, the Macedonian successor states of Antigonid Macedonia and Seleucid Syria were simply no match for the Roman military establishment that arguably stood at its highest state of readiness. Although Roman forces withdrew from the Aegean theater following each conflict, many have interpreted this behavior as a calculated attempt to maintain their welcome in anticipation of further intervention.
With each succeeding conflict came a discernible change in attitude. Early Roman interventionists such as T. Cornelius Scipio during the War with Antiochus III were Hellenophiles, that is, nobles educated in Greek language and culture and imbued with admiration for the heritage of this once great civilization.
These generals attempted to work together with Greek hierarchies to extend Roman security to the region in a cooperative manner.
Mummius were less tolerant, avaricious, and in some instances brutish in their treatment of Greek communities. As each Macedonian threat subsided, the Roman hierarchy grew more confident of its position. Early efforts at cooperation yielded to visible instances of Roman impatience; awe for the Greek past yielded to contempt for the perfidy of Greek contemporaries.
Most importantly, the patriotism and self-sacrifice exhibited during the long years of the Punic Wars gave way to open desire for conflict as a path to personal enrichment, particularly now that the cities being plundered housed centuries of accumulated cultural heritage.
This phase of Roman expansion can safely be interpreted as wars of outright conquest. With its armies invincible on the battlefield Rome absorbed most of the northern coast of the Mediterranean Sea into its hegemony.
Macedonia was incorporated as a province in BC, Carthage and Corinth were destroyed inand the Attalid kingdom of Pergamum was accepted as an inheritance in Unlike its dealing on the Italian peninsula, Rome incorporated overseas territories as provinces, to be ruled by Roman promagistrates governors and subject to annual payments of tribute.Lecture Roman Imperialism Within approximately years the city state of Rome expanded militarily to become the dominant power on the peninsula of Italy; in the following years the same military establishment rose to assume authority over the entire Mediterranean world.
Roman imperialism was characterized by Strategic fortification, road construction, and allied military support The chief executive officers of the Roman Republic who were responsible for leading the Roman army into battle and administering the government were the. Imperialism: Great Britain in Africa Essay - Throughout the late nineteenth century and early twentieth century, almost every country in Africa was imperialized by other countries in Europe.
To imperialize is to conquer another country, whether it be in the means of politics, economics and/or . First, this essay will examine early Roman imperialism in terms of the wars with King Pyrrhus of Epirus and the Carthaginians, at which time the wars of Rome were primarily economic in nature with undertones of personal glory, after which the Jugurthine War and Mithridatic Wars will be interpreted in terms of individuals working in the name of .
The war allowed for expansion, shifted policies and made the gap between rich and poor bigger. (Class was a huge factor in society after the wars.) Imperialism expanded more land and allowed for more people for the population.
After Rome conquered Carthage, Rome needed money to support their people and provide them with food and other necessities. The Political Decay of the Roman Republic - The Political Decay of the Roman Republic The fall of the Western Roman Empire was the first example in history on the collapse of a constitutional system which was caused by the internal decay in political, military, economics, and sociological issues.