Customer Reviews

Swords Against The Senate: The Rise Of The Roman Army And The Fall Of The Republic

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

In a 1962 journal piece ("Waiting for Sulla" JRS, Vol. 52, pp. 47-61), classical scholar Ernst Badian noted that the age of Marius and Sulla (roughly 110-78 BC) is of critical importance to understanding the decline and collapse of the republic and the rise of Caesar and the empire, yet precious little energy had been devoted to re-examing this period with the critical eye of modern historiography.

One might also argue that this period was, until the publication of Erik Hildinger's "Swords Against the Senate", totally inaccessible to the layman. There are scores of popular histories and biographies on Caesar and the Roman Revolution - the commercial success of Anthony Everitt's "Cicero" is but one recent example - but the epoch that set the republic wobbling on its foundation and offered the precedent for Caesar's march on Rome has been largely ignored in popular history until now.

The author does a superb job of framing the issue by first providing an outline of the development of the Roman state with a particular focus on the army and the role it played socially and politically. Hildinger then provides a good general overview of the central figures and events of the period (the Gracchi, Marius and Sulla and the Jurgurthan, Cimbrian/Teuton, Social, Mithridatic and First Civil Wars) as related in the works of Appian, Sallust and Plutarch. There is no critical examination of the sources or revisionism to the traditional account of the events, such as the ones Badian provides in the article cited above.

In closing, if you are new to the subject and are looking for a crisp overview of this extremely important period preceding the rise of Caesar and the triumvirate "Swords Against the Senate" is highly recommended. If you are a rather serious student of Republican Rome (i.e. you've read all the ancient authors; you're familiar with the major arguments and works of Brunt, Badian, Gruen, Millar and Syme; you read the Journal of Roman Studies on occasion) there isn't much in this account that will inform, interest or challenge you.

I picked up both RUBICON and SWORDS AGAINST THE SENATE at the same time, for some reason thinking that SWORDS was about the fall of Roman Empire itself. Little did I know that I was reading two books on basically the same subject at the same time. However, this did give me a great insight into the time period and allowed me to do a good comparison of the information. I'm glad it worked out this way.

SWORDS AGAINST THE SENATE, by Erik Hildinger, doesn't cover quite the same ground as Tom Holland's RUBICON, as it covers a briefer time period. However, this gives it the opportunity to go a little deeper into the information it does present. It covers the first three decades in the 70 years it took for the Roman Republic to fall to pieces. It also gives a bit more information on the rise of the Republic to begin with, from its rise in the 400's BC to the sack of Rome by the Gauls in 386 and its subsequent recovery. Between this brief overview and the extensive look at the seemingly endless wars that brought down the Republic, this book is a great find. It's also fairly short, which adds to its attraction.

In his introduction, Hildinger remarks that his book will cover three aspects of Roman life: the army, the personalities, and the "gradual chipping away of the constitution" that led to the republic's demise. He expertly interweaves these branches of the story into a wonderful narrative that's interesting to read and hard to put down. At times, this does feel a bit disjointed, as he will introduce the characters involved and then go on a brief diversion to explain how the army was set up at that time. Once he gets back to the narrative, though, it's obvious why he diverted down the path as the knowledge is valuable to understanding what is happening. While this may sound boring, it really isn't. He rarely spends more than a couple of pages on the specifics of the army make-up before moving on.

One place where I have to give Hildinger a lot of credit is in his use of sources. He uses a variety of primary and secondary sources, along with some more modern interpretive sources (something Holland didn't really do) to back up his narrative. He also is not afraid to say when the sources are unclear on a subject, especially where casualty figures are concerned. He often states the given casualty figures and then reminds us that these figures were often exaggerated. If something was taken from Sulla's memoirs (for example), he'll remind the reader that this could very well have been included to make Sulla look good. He'll make informed suppositions about certain things, but he's always clear when something might not be true:

"Sulla took no direct hand in following up the killing, and *apparently* no one was punished." pg 184 (emphasis added)

I found that this added to the attraction of the book, giving me a feeling of piecing together history along with Hildinger.

The book does have a heavy concentration on the army and on military elements. Hildinger details the various wars (both external and civil) that took place in this 30 year period, how various Roman generals and consuls took their troops and marched them on Rome, or formed their own private armies and went campaigning in Asia. We get descriptions of the battles, some of the tactics (at least as much as is known), and the fight for who would get credit for various victories. We also get the politics behind the various wars, along with the personality conflicts that would ultimately sunder the republic, especially those between Marius and Sulla. Ultimately, Sulla would win out and become the appointed dictator while he got the constitution back in order.

The book ends with Sulla's victory, and the epilogue talks of how Sulla created a new constitution and then retired after three years as dictator, allowing the Roman Republic to reassume power, though the fissures were already in place to bring it toppling down again. This makes a good stopping point for Hildinger, as this book is really about how the army was involved in this conflict, and how the personalities used it. Once Sulla retires, it becomes much more of a personal battle between strong-willed men.

For those who wish a general overview of how the Roman Republic fell, SWORDS AGAINST THE SENATE isn't really a good place to start. It doesn't cover the whole thing and it's a little too detailed for that. It may, however, spark your interest so that you do want to go on to an overall account after you have read it. It also is a valuable source for military matters in this time period. In whatever order you decide to read it, you owe it to yourself to pick up a copy.

David Roy

The rise of the Roman army in the second and first centuries BC, and its increasing use as a tool of various warlords in the final decline of the Republic, means that I had high hopes for this book. Although there is much of interest (particularly because Hildinger, quite rightly, focuses intently on Gaius Marius and his eventual war with Sulla), in a period usually ignored by historians for later events involving Caesar, I put the book down with a slight sense of disappointment. Perhaps it is simply that there isn't all that much ancient information about the changes in the army between, say, 130 and 75 BC, but this ends up being an in-depth history of the aborted reforms of the Gracchi, Marius' wars in Africa, and other events up to the final victories of Sulla after the first civil war. Related changes in the army are touched on, but without helping me much with the theme of the book.

Not to mention, after Sulla finally wins as Dictator, having destroyed all his enemies, the book just seems to stop, as if someone pulled the plug! A summation would have been helpful.

Use this book to broaden your knowledge, but it doesn't fulfill the promise of its title as being an illuminating book about Republic v. Legions.

Erik Hildinger ties together the rise of professional armies and the downfall of the Roman Republic in a cohesive, encompassing narrative. He does make reading more challenging to those without a working knowledge of Latin, but not particularly difficult as he defines the key terms and translates the lengthy quotes. Nevertheless, this book is well worth the time and effort.

I really enjoyed Swords Against the Senate. As a new reader of Roman history I really appreciated Hildinger's writing skills--unlike some other historians I've read he's a good storyteller and presents the material in a gripping way.

the brief introduction was a little fluffy, talking about what it means to have constitution. but my interest was immediately piqued with chapter 1 when that philosophizing was left behind.

the first several chapters do a good job of setting out the social and political atmosphere at the outset of this period and describing (importantly) what exactly the roman army consisted of at the time.

as the book proceeded I saw it as consisting of two interwoven threads: accounts of actual military campaigns (Jugurthine War, the Northern campaign, Itialian and Civil Wars) and accounts of political and constitutional developments in the republic. I found the political accounts--for instance, land reforms, the erosion of senatorial power, the rise of plebes--much more interested and the wars pretty boring. the book jumps back and forth between these. where they are shown to intersect is very interesting.

overall, the book offers a very thorough look at the important developments of 140 - 80BC. a more brief but still helpful glance is offered in the first chapter of Gelzer's Caesar, Politician and Statesman.

it is worth mentioning that Hildinger's explanation of the Roman political structure is not totally lucid on the first read. Gelzer's chapter was a helpful addition for me.

This book seemed to be largely a retelling of Plutarch's Fall of the Roman Republic with selected thoughts and quotes from Appian to offer a counter point or descriptive text from the original Latin source. There were several chapters that were informative and had some good comments and observations. The chapter on the formation of the legion was pretty good over all a reading of Plutarch's Fall of Rome can convey the same information.
I would recommend From the Gracchi to Nero: A history of Rome from 133BC to AD 68 as a better book on the subject.

Great book. It made me understand on how the great of the Senate used the Roman Army for their own gain and how their actions started the Roman Republic on the path to becoming the Roman Empire.

I read Sallust's Civil War just before reading this book so I had all this information already present in my head.
I was expecting more of a book about the army, instead I had mostly a general synopsis of the events from the Gracchi to Sulla's death. There was little or no commentary or personal opinion from the author.
However, I did learn a little bit about battle formations, but I wish I could have seen the occasional picture of the forces involved since it's always been hard for me to visualize actual battle scenes. I also gained some terms regarding the actual structure of the Roman army. I just wish that there was a separate chapter about army life instead of just random blurbs here and there in the midst of a historical timeline. A small glossary wouldn't have hurt too bad either.
Plus, the author compressed alot of information in such a short space of time, especially in regards to Sulla, who was the actual reason I read this book. I'm still going to use some of the author's statements as an opinion of Sulla counter to Keaveney's.
Hopefully, Rubicon will be a better read.
kittie

"Swords Against the Senate" is one of a number of books ("The Assassination of Julius Caesar - A People's History of Ancient Rome" by Michael Parenti is another.)to take a hard look at what went on in ancient Rome and challenge the idea that Rome was a genuine republic. The "republic" story line has been pushed throughout history and is still taught in American schools. It would be much more accurate to describe ancient Rome as an oligarchy, with the oligarchs being the patricians who made up the Roman Senate. This book does so. It also thoroughly examines the consulships of those two doomed idealistic brothers, the Gracchi, who, if they had survived, might have turned Rome into something very different from what it became. Instead, when they on two separate occasions attempted land reform that would have restored the Roman yeoman-farmer class, they were murdered - by members of the Senate.

The through-line of the book is how the plebeians, or common people, obtained more political power (largely as a result of military catastrophes suffered by Roman armies commanded by senators), and by doing so gradually perverted the Roman constitution. This came to a head with the consulship of Gaius Marius, an event which ultimately led to Rome's first full-fledged civil war. The first, but by no means the last.

The writing is crisp, and the perspective interesting, particularly in view of the story-line that was pushed for centuries by "gentlemen" historians, including Gibbon. This is an excellent book in my opinion, and makes a good companion to Parenti's book mentioned above.

An excellent study of an important period of Roman history.