* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download RRP Rachel Rushing - 2010
Roman infantry tactics wikipedia , lookup
Cursus honorum wikipedia , lookup
Constitutional reforms of Sulla wikipedia , lookup
Roman economy wikipedia , lookup
Military of ancient Rome wikipedia , lookup
Roman army of the late Republic wikipedia , lookup
Food and dining in the Roman Empire wikipedia , lookup
Promagistrate wikipedia , lookup
Travel in Classical antiquity wikipedia , lookup
History of the Roman Constitution wikipedia , lookup
Berber kings of Roman-era Tunisia wikipedia , lookup
Factorum ac dictorum memorabilium libri IX wikipedia , lookup
Culture of ancient Rome wikipedia , lookup
Education in ancient Rome wikipedia , lookup
Romanization of Hispania wikipedia , lookup
Early Roman army wikipedia , lookup
Roman historiography wikipedia , lookup
Rushing 1 Rachel Rushing Ms. Bergen, Mrs. Downer, Mrs. Ibrahim English 10 – 6, Latin II – 3, World History – M/W/F 10 November 2010 Cato the Elder vs. Scipio Africanus When uncovering the ancient mysteries Rome left behind, it is important to remember the people who influenced these peculiar events and happenings. There are several political and military leaders who were important to the development of Roman history. Cato the Elder and Scipio Africanus, for instance, are two fine specimens of some of Rome’s greatest leaders, and they happen to have been archrivals. Cato had earned respect from his people because he was old-fashioned, hard-working, and cared about his homeland. Scipio was admired by others for his ingenious battle strategies and brave character. Cato, despite his political and oratorical skills, was often relentless in his punishment and disciplined his fellow citizens in an overbearing manner. Scipio was a military genius and a visionary who encouraged change, which Rome greatly needed. Though Cato was a well-rounded politician, Scipio contributed more to Roman society through his achievements and the changes he made as a political leader. Though he didn’t defeat one of the greatest enemies Rome ever knew, Marcus Porcius Cato was a natural-born leader. At age seventeen, Cato served his country in the army and helped fight in campaigns. The time he spent defending his country helped prove his loyalty to Rome. After four years of service, he returned to his house in Sabine, where he kept up his own farm. Having grown up in a family with no political background, Cato was used to manual labor and continued it as an adult. Still a young man, Cato quickly gained respect from his neighbors because of his trustworthy disposition and simple lifestyle. One of his neighbors happened to be Rushing 2 a man of great power, and Cato’s “…incisive oratory, combined with his rugged honesty, simple living, and dogged perseverance, attracted the attention of his noble neighbor L. Valerius Flaccus, consul in 195” (Scullard 187). Flaccus encouraged Cato to pursue a career in politics after noticing his genuine, hard work. The support that Cato was given by Flaccus went to good use, and “Cato’s rise henceforth was speedy, thanks no doubt to the political and financial help of his aristocratic patron” (Scullard 187). Because of this, Cato was then able to establish a reputation for himself as a trustworthy Roman citizen. He soon gained power, going from a novus homo, or a new man in politics, to a political leader in less time than most, as Romans were hesitant when it came to change. After working in the political field for a while, Cato was also given military responsibilities. He started out by serving under Scipio, assisting him with his finances and helping to command sections of his army. Later, Cato was considered an experienced field commander and his achievements were essential to the successes of Rome, such as in the battle at Thermopylae (Masson 69). Though he had more well-known achievements in the political arena, he was renowned for his military expertise. Cato was also praised for his speeches and literary works, of which there were many. In an attempt to preserve Roman culture, he was one of the first to write public works in Latin, a language primarily used by the lower-class, uneducated Romans. Despite the negative connotation associated with the language, Cato was acclaimed by the people of Rome and they seemed to regard him as their supporter. Being a political figure, he had the power to enforce the laws as he saw fit, which he did happily, and this continued to prove his strong ethics. However, he became very strict about moral obligations and what he believed was best for the community, Rushing 3 often giving out severe punishments for trivial offenses, so the people maintained a respectful fear of him. But for the most part, he was kept in high esteem. Scipio, like Cato, held the respect of his peers. He was born only a couple of years before Cato, yet he had accomplished much more in the same amount of time. Having had family in the political field, he used his advantages accordingly. With his power, he led the Roman army to victory on numerous occasions and even defeated Hannibal, one of Africa’s greatest generals and one of the biggest threats to Rome at the time. His leadership was almost flawless, and until Cato brought down his reputation with libelous speeches, he was wellrespected and liked by most everyone. Before he became a military hero, it is said that Scipio gained his reputation for bravery by saving his father from a difficult situation. His father had placed young Scipio with a strong body of cavalry to keep him safe, but was then put in harm’s path himself. At this time, “...Scipio saw his father wounded and cut off by the enemy, [and] failing to get those with him to go to the rescue, he charged forward alone; the others followed and the elder Scipio was saved” (Scullard 29). Other sources deny that Scipio was the one who saved his father, but the only evidence is the story itself. Regardless of its verity, the adventure earned Scipio new respect from his superiors, and he quickly rose to great heights. It is easy to see why Cato was probably jealous of Scipio. If Cato had been born into a political family as Scipio was, he may have risen to even greater heights. However, there seemed to have been reasons beyond family background for their less than amiable feelings toward one another. It is said by some that upon meeting, they immediately took a dislike to each other. This is highly unlikely, as neither had a reason initially to hate one another. It seems that “most scholars have rightly concluded that the whole episode is a fabrication designed to extend Rushing 4 the animosity between Cato and Scipio back to their first (known) public encounter…” (Ruebel 163). However, there were several collateral reasons that could have caused tension rather quickly between the two. Cato and Scipio were about the same age, fought through the same battles, lived in the same area, and ruled over the same people, yet Scipio had much more success. And to make matters worse, their personalities were polar opposites. Striving to maintain the status quo, Cato refused to take part in anything having to do with Greek culture, though his fellow citizens often tried to compile many Greek customs with their own. Scipio, on the other hand, promoted Greek culture and welcomed it into his own life. Cato simply did not understand his reasoning and felt Scipio was, in a sense, betraying his Roman heritage. This “…probably reflects the cause of his hostility. Cato could not understand Scipio’s culture and love of a Greek way of life, nor perhaps did he appreciate so well the art of timing the relaxation or stiffening of military discipline” (Scullard 187). Because he was not able to understand him, Cato began to distrust Scipio and eventually learned to hate him. Cato brought up points in argument, such as saying that Scipio was acting like a master of a festival rather than the commander of an army, in order to denigrate him. Cato the Elder, who was known for despising Greek culture, constantly worried about preserving the Roman Empire. He often stated that allowing Greek culture to influence Rome would result in its downfall, and he tried to convey this uneasiness in his speeches. And even after the defeat of Hannibal and the taking over of Carthage, Cato insisted that Carthage should be completely and utterly destroyed, for fear of its uprising and its apparent ability to resurface to prosperity. Thus, Cato proceeded to exaggerate the threat Carthage posed, and he ended every public speech he made, regardless of its content, with the phrase “Carthago delenda est!” By Rushing 5 repeating this on numerous occasions, Cato incited fear and a lust for war in the Roman citizens, and shortly after his death, the Romans engaged in the Third Punic War. Scipio Africanus, who had defeated the great Hannibal, was not nearly so worried about the comeback of Carthage, and he seemed to believe that Rome could take care of herself. Since the war did help Rome to remain in power, it could arguably be seen as a positive experience. However, the war was not exactly a delay to the fall of the Roman Republic; on the contrary, it seemed to quicken its coming about. Taking this into consideration, it seems as though Cato did not really help Rome, but hinder her. Thanks to some of Cato’s more dramatic (and sometimes hypocritical) claims, Scipio earned a reputation of being irresponsible and brutal. While some accusations may have held some amount of truth behind them, the majority were exaggerated or distorted forms of the truth. But since Cato was an experienced speaker, his claims against Scipio were taken seriously and influenced the people greatly on how they viewed Scipio. They began to believe he was someone that Rome shouldn’t rely on so heavily, though it was really Cato that the Romans should have been wary of. It is apparent, though, that Cato did somewhat regret dirtying the name of Scipio Africanus, because when his motives were publicly questioned, he became embarrassed of the deeds he had done and stepped down from his position in Roman politics. He was still civil to the heirs of Scipio, and evidently did not hold bitter feelings. In the dialogue of Cato the Elder: On Old Age, which takes place between Cato and Publius Scipio Africanus Minor, who was the adopted grandson of Scipio Africanus, he even went so far as to call him and the other guests “my friends” (Cicero). This suggests that Cato perhaps forgave Scipio before his death, or that he never truly hated Scipio in the first place, which is important to take into account when Rushing 6 considering Cato’s motives. Cato did seem to have good intentions, but it is only fair to hold him accountable for what he actually did. He did put his country before everything else, and he made sure there were no major threats. But Scipio, unlike Cato, was not hasty when giving orders for the Roman army. Cato (arguably) caused the Third Punic War to get rid of a potential threat, and instead quickened the Roman Empire’s demise. Scipio was clever and dependable, leading his people from one victory to the next. He encouraged change, which is exactly what the Romans needed. These, among other qualities, made him a better leader than Cato the Elder ever was. Rushing 7 Works Cited Cicero, Marcus T. "M. Tullius Cicero, Cato the Elder: on Old Age, section 1." Perseus Digital Library. Ed. William A. Falconer. Web. 6 Oct. 2010. <http://www.perseus.tufts.edu/hopper/text?doc=Perseus:text:2007.01.0039>. Masson, Georgina. Ancient Rome, from Romulus to Augustus. New York: Viking Press, 1974. Print. Ruebel, James S. "Cato and Scipio Africanus." The Classical World 71.3 (1977): 161-73. JSTOR. Classical Association of the Atlantic States. Print. Scullard, H. H. Scipio Africanus: Soldier and Politician. Ithaca, NY: Cornell UP, 1970. Print. Rushing 8 Since accurate sources from the time are not always possible to differentiate from the fictional works of emerging authors, it is hard to know for sure every feat Scipio is thought to have achieved is not a figment of someone’s imagination. Some scholars explain why it is likely that Scipio at least partook in the major events he is known for in the passage, “But why was Scipio as well known at this time as Livy and Polybius suggest? It is unlikely that his bravery… was by itself still the reason for his fame. If, however, he had indeed… [the assumption] makes more sense” (Gabriel 14). It is safe to assume that Scipio is rightfully known for his achievements. Gabriel, Richard A. Scipio Africanus: Rome's Greatest General. Washington, D.C.: Potomac, 2008. Print.