SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...
SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...
SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
characteristic that Polybius notes in two literary portraits of Hannibal, albeit qualified<br />
with the remark that the accusations of greed for personal wealth largely derive from<br />
Hannibal‟s enemies (Hist. 9.22; 9.25.1-4).<br />
In Livy‟s versions of events, Capuan wealth is not an over-riding factor, nor do the<br />
Capuans invite Hannibal to their town. Livy emphatically describes the Capuans as<br />
surrendering when Mago announces to the Carthaginian senate, in direct speech, that the<br />
Capuans surrendered, se tradidisse, and Mago clearly distinguishes Capua from the<br />
communities which defect to Hannibal after Cannae:<br />
Bruttios Apulosque partem Samnitium ac Lucanorum defecisse ad<br />
Poenos. Capua quod caput Campaniae modo sed post adflictam rem<br />
Romanam Cannensi pugna Italiae sit, Hannibali se tradidisse.<br />
Livy, 23.11.10-11.<br />
That the Bruttians and Apulians and some of the Samnites and<br />
Lucanians had revolted to the Carthaginians, that Capua, which was<br />
the capital not only of Campania, but, since the Roman defeat by the<br />
battle of Cannae, of Italy also, had surrendered to Hannibal.<br />
Moore, 1951, 37.<br />
Surrender, from the Roman point of view, is considered worse than defeat. Thus Livy<br />
presents to his audience a different example to Polybius of Capuan moral degradation.<br />
On the other hand, Livy‟s use of Mago to announce the surrender in a speech to the<br />
Carthaginian senate allows his Roman audience to read the statement as a lie. Many<br />
modern scholars read se tradidisse (Livy, 23.11.11) and se traditurum (Livy, 23.1.1) as<br />
„handing over‟ or „delivering‟ rather than the possible „surrendering‟ in order to fit<br />
Livy‟s text more closely to Polybius‟ presentation and promulgate the notion that the<br />
Capuans defected. 329 Any historical circumstances of force majeure are rarely, if ever,<br />
considered.<br />
329 Rossi, 2004, 368; Heurgon, 1942, 115: „pour châtier sa défection;‟ 144; De Sanctis, iii, 2,214;<br />
Warmington, 1969, 205; Sherwin-White, 1973, 41; Salmon, 1957, 153; Mankin, 1995, 247; Crawford,<br />
2001, 1974, 30; Watson, 2003, 491. Frederiksen, 1977, 183 notes Hannibal‟s camp above Capua but<br />
Frederiksen, 1984, 227, 238, 241, consistently refers to defection, only once conceding the Capuans may<br />
have been unable to resist; von Ungern-Sternberg, 1975, argues that Capua‟s revolt was the act of a united<br />
state seeking independence. This means that the Capuans were prepared to risk the lives of all those<br />
Capuans serving in the Roman army including 300 equites based in Sicily (Livy, 23.5.1). Lancel, 1998,<br />
114 argues that these men effectively became hostages once the siege of Capua began. Yet it seems that<br />
they remained loyal to Rome after Hannibal took control of Capua. Sicily was strategically critical to<br />
prevent supplies from Carthage reaching Hannibal and not a location for soldiers of doubtful loyalty to<br />
Rome, as acknowledged when these men were later granted Roman citizenship and had their residency<br />
transferred from Capua to Cumae, backdated to the day before Capua came under Hannibal (Livy,<br />
23.31.10).<br />
138