SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...
SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...
SLC Thesis Template - ResearchSpace@Auckland - The University ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>The</strong>se differences arise in part from an author‟s intended depiction of Hannibal.<br />
<strong>The</strong>re is also an interesting tendency over time for authors to be increasingly direct in<br />
attributing the defence of Rome to divine intervention and in addition, to bring the<br />
Hannibal figure closer and closer to physical contact with the city. Admittedly these<br />
gradual exaggerations may very well be the result of survival in the record but that is by<br />
no means certain. In addition, Silius Italicus paradoxically provides one of the more<br />
pragmatic answers for the „defence of Rome‟ while aligning Rome with ancient Troy.<br />
<strong>The</strong> texts commonly explain Hannibal‟s non-appearance outside Rome before 211 as<br />
due either to his state of mind or to the intervention of natural forces in preference to<br />
other, more pragmatic, explanations. It will also be shown that where Polybius and<br />
Silius Italicus present Hannibal contemplating or discussing marching on Rome prior to<br />
211 from time to time, it is Livy who develops the notion into a major theme in books<br />
21-5 as part of a build-up toward his centrepiece of Rome resisting Hannibal‟s attack in<br />
211. Livy‟s treatment of this theme is summarised in the first subsection before the<br />
more general comparisons because it offers an explanation for certain differences<br />
between his representation and those of others.<br />
Given the Gauls‟ invasion of Rome in 390, some authors connect Hannibal‟s<br />
interactions with the Gauls after leaving Spain to the notion of marching on Rome. It is<br />
arguably a connection that depends to a large extent on an author‟s overall<br />
representation of Hannibal, for example, whether or not Hannibal acts alone.<br />
<strong>The</strong> final section of this chapter explores representations of post-Sullan Roman<br />
generals as Hannibalic. It would appear that for over a century following the Second<br />
Punic War, Roman armies returned to Italy from Spain and elsewhere without any<br />
suggestion that the generals heading these armies were considered a possible threat to<br />
the city or compared to Hannibal. Everything changed in 88 when the disaffected Sulla<br />
showed what could be achieved by marching an army against Rome. Connections<br />
between Sulla and Hannibal are extremely limited 196 but comparison to Hannibal is<br />
shown to be a problem for Sulla‟s protégé, Pompey, and for others thereafter, including<br />
Antonius and Julius Caesar.<br />
196 As noted in Chapter 2, Statius, Silv. 4.6.86 connects them through a statuette of Hercules.<br />
68