1. SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC UPHEAVAL IN THE ROMAN STATE AND IN ITALY AFTER 200 BC 1.The result of Rome’s heavy military involvement over half a century between 200 and 150 BC in Spain and, particularly, in the Eastern Mediterranean (which was more highly urbanized and wealthier) brought massive social and economic changes to the Italian peninsula (both to the Roman state and to its allies) because of the wealth that poured into the Italian Peninsula. 2.The most important changes were: a) The emergence of a new social and economic stratum in Roman society. b) The dispossession of many small, independent farmers throughout Italy (with consequences for military recruitment). c) The development of large landed property holdings.

2. d) The rapid growth of the use of slave labour. e) The major influx of Greek influences and ideas into Roman life. THE EMERGENCE OF A NEW ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL STRATUM 1.Ever since “the war with Hannibal” (in fact since 215 BC ), the Roman Senate, lacking adequate resources, had turned to “the private sector” to raise the funds to equip Rome’s armies with what they needed. 2.Those with wealth that was not totally tied up in land- ownership were encouraged to come forward and bid for state contracts to provide what was required.

3. 4.Wherever a loan to the Roman state by an individual or, more often, a consortium of individuals was involved, the state offered publicly-owned land as a security until such time as the state could repay the money loaned. 5. a) A new, identifiable stratum of private citizens (essentially money-lenders) vital to the smooth running of the state soon emerged – in short, ‘public contractors’. b) Such men often became very wealthy, but rarely, if ever, aspired to public office - their backgrounds tended not to make them have such aspirations.

4. Note: Ever since 218 BC, by decree of the Senate, senators and their sons had been prohibited (under the “Claudian Law”) from owning ships with a capacity of over 300 amphorae (300 x 6 gallons). As a result senatorial families tended to restrict their economic activities in Italy to land-holding (and enjoying profits from warfare). 5.This new (emerging) social stratum in Roman society would with time come to be known as “the EQUESTRIAN ORDER” (the EQUITES) - and would at times in the late 100s BC - play a ‘balancing role’ in the politics of the state..

5. THE DISPOSSESSION OF MANY SMALL INDEPENDENT FARMER 1.Between approximately 200 and 150 BC large numbers of small-scale, but independent, farmers in the Roman state and in many of the states in Italy which were allied to Rome sold or abandoned their farms and drifted to the cities – especially to the City of Rome. 2. The reason for this had much to do with the nature of military service – although not exclusively so. 3. a) When wars were being fought in Italy, it had not been difficult for troops to be demobilized and to return to their homes at the end of the fighting season.

6. b) The citizen (whether of Rome or of an allied state) who had been called upon to serve would usually return to work on the land for the remainder of the year. c) But now military service often involved a presence in SPAIN or in the EASTERN MEDITERRANEAN with no hope of returning to Italy every year. d) It seems that many farms suffered from such absences by vital family members: some were away for over six years. e) Families often found it difficult, too, to gain access to their fair share of ‘common land’.

7. 4.a) Many farming families abandoned, sold, or were forced from their land – especially at the hands of richer citizens. b) As they moved to the cities, they contributed there to crowding, unemployment and other social difficulties. 5.As landless citizens they no longer qualified for military service, since such service was based on those who met the minimum qualifications in terms of land ownership. 6.In its turn, this caused increasing difficulties in recruitment to the army. Note: By no means all of the small, independent farmers left the land, but enough did so for the change to be noticeable.

8. THE DEVELOPMENT OF LARGE PROPERTY HOLDINGS 1.When small-scale, independent farmers abandoned their farms, there was no lack of people with money which they could use to buy up their land: a) many senators had gained from the profits which came from warfare; also b) many members of the new emerging stratum of state- contractors had large sums of money from their contracting which was available to invest;

9. c) We know that huge quantities of booty had poured into Italy – especially from the eastern Mediterranean – in every conceivable form (including war-captives who were enslaved). AND land was the most “respectable” and “socially acceptable” form of wealth in which to invest money.

10. 2.The growth of large land holdings took two forms: i) in a limited number of areas, such as southern Italy and Sicily, senatorial families established very large estates (latifundia); ii) much more usually a senatorial family would acquire quite a number of modest estates in different parts of Italy. 3.Whatever sort of estates developed, the gap between the rich and the poor, the landed and the landless, grew massively in this half century (200 – 150 BC ).

11. THE DEVELOPMENT OF SLAVE LABOUR 1.a) While the use of slave labour was not, of course, unknown before 200 BC and seems to have increased significantly after the wars against the Samnites in the early 200s BC and during the “First Punic War”, b) it became almost “the norm” between 200 and 150 BC as huge numbers of slaves poured into Italy from Rome’s wars in Spain and, particularly, in the eastern Mediterranean. 2.i) Even poorer families who could do so acquired a slave or two to assist on the farm or in the household.

12. ii) Equally in towns small artisans would acquire one or two slaves to assist in the workshop. iii) The very wealthy, of course, acquired large numbers of slaves for their households and for their landed holdings. 3. In this way Roman (and Italian) society came to “depend” on slave labour in the sense that the main surplus in the economy came from the work of slaves. 4. a) Even so, except in state-owned mines and on some large ranches, we should not imagine large numbers of slaves being found in any one place.

13. b) The estates of the rich tended to be places where specialized agricultural produce was grown and slaves were acquired for their skilled knowledge and employed in such areas as olive-growing and as vine- dressers in vineyards. 5.a) The massive influx of slave labour also goes a long way to explaining why free agricultural labourers are not really found in Italy as wage-earners. b) Independent farmers (as we have seen) upon becoming landless drifted to the cities.

14. THE INFLUX INTO ITALY OF GREEK INFLUENCES AND IDEAS 1.The Roman state had, of course, long had contact with Greek states – from the later 300s BC in Campania and in the 280s BC in the far south of Italy, but Greek influence on the Roman way of life appears to have been limited. 2. BUT the warfare in the eastern Mediterranean from the 190s BC onwards brought large numbers of ordinary Romans fighting as legionary soldiers into contact with “things Greek”.

15. 3.Greek artefacts (as part of the booty), educated Greeks (as slaves), Greek concepts (in philosophy and the liberal arts) all found their way back in quantity to Italy and, inevitably, began to have a considerable influence on Roman practices and thinking. 4. a) Some members of the Roman elite, under the leadership of Marcus Porcius CATO (the Elder), tried to resist this “Hellenization” - as we have noted before; b) others, especially those in the circle of SCIPIO THE YOUNGER, embraced new thinking and practices – again as we have noted before.

16. 5.The influx of Greek ideas gave, as an example, a particular stimulus to literary activity at Rome, which had not had an extensive literature until now. DIGRESSION ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF ROMAN LITERATURE 1.It was, it seems, influences from the Greek states of southern Italy which gave rise to the first literary works in Latin from about 240 BC (at the end of the First Punic War): a) The first figures are LIVIUS ANDRONICUS (who died about 200 BC), his contemporary GNAEUS NAEVIUS and the slightly younger TITUS MACCIUS PLAUTUS (ca 250 to 184 BC) : i) Livius Andronicus (dramatist and epic poet) put on his first play in 240 BC. He translated Greek works into Latin, including Homer’s Odyssey, and wrote tragedies and comedies (based on Greek ‘New Comedy’ – the ‘comedy of manners’).

17. ii)GNAEUS NAEVIUS (died 201 BC ), again an epic poet and dramatist, ran foul of the powerful Cecilii Metelli and was forced into exile. He too adapted Greek ‘New Comedy’ to the Roman stage, but extended tragedy to deal with national Roman figures and incidents from Roman history. iii)TITUS MACCIUS PLAUTUS (254 – 184) [the earliest Roman writer any of whose works survive intact] staged almost exclusively comedies – ‘comedies of manners’. b) More or less contemporary with Plautus was QUINTUS ENNIUS (ca 239 – ca 169); and his somewhat younger nephew MARCUS PACUVIUS (220 – 130 BC): i) Ennius wrote Rome’s first great epic (his “Annals” – from the end of the Trojan War [1184 BC] to the censorhip of Cato the Elder in 184 BC ). Coming from Calabria, he had experienced three types of culture, language and milieu: Oscan, Greek, Latin;

18. ii) PACUVIUS was one of Rome’s great tragic poets too. 1.Latin prose-writing was later getting under way, the first Roman historian, QUINTUS FABIUS PICTOR (fl. about 200 BC) writing in Greek. 2.About the earliest and most important Latin prose-writer was CATO THE ELDER [234-149 BC ] (already mentioned for his stand against Greek influences). His principal works (which belong mainly to the period after 200 BC) included a) his “Origins” (seven books on the history of Italian towns, with special reference to Rome) and b) his extant De Agri Cultura (“On Farming”).

19. A surviving quotation from his Praecepta ad Filium (“Maxims addressed to his son”) makes clear Cato’s attitude to Greek influences affecting Roman ways may be of interest: “In due course, my son, I will explain what I found out in Athens about Greeks and demonstrate what advantage there may be in looking into their writings (while not taking them too seriously). They are a worthless and unruly tribe. Take this as a prophecy: when those folk give us their writings they will corrupt everything. All the more if they send their doctors here. They have sworn to kill all barbarians with medicine – and they charge a fee for doing it, in order to be trusted and to work more easily. They call us barbarians, too, and opici [‘stupid oafs’], a dirtier name than the rest. I have forbidden you to deal with doctors.”

20. 1. All the changes that affected the Roman state and the states of Italy between 200 and 150 BC - namely 1.The emergence of the new social and economic stratum at Rome 2.The dispossession of many Roman and Italian small, independent farmers 3.The growth of large property holdings in the hands of wealthy citizens 4.The massive extension of the use of slave labour throughout society 5.The influx of Greek influences and ideas into the Roman state had a huge impact on society, the economy, and on politics. 2. The SENATE at Rome, which had guided the state well for decades, especially during the ‘Second Punic War’, proved itself, well before 150 BC, incapable or unwilling to deal with all the problems society was facing – because of the acquisition of an empire. 3. For the next 100 years after 150 BC, Romans seemed to be constantly searching for a solution to their problems – a period often called the period of “the Roman Revolution”.

21. ROME’S EMPIRE BY 133 BC ROME’S EMPIRE IN 200 BC