Latin War

The (Second) Latin War (340–338 BC)[note 1] was a conflict between the
Latin War
Roman Republic and its neighbors the Latin peoples of ancient Italy. It ended in
the dissolution of the Latin League, and incorporation of its territory into the Part of the Roman unification of Italy
Roman sphere of influence, with the Latins gaining partial rights and varying and the Roman-Latin wars
levels of citizenship.

Contents
Sources
Background
Outbreak
Ancient account
Modern view
The South-Eastern campaign 340 BC
Roman subjugation of the Latins and the V
olsci 339 - 338 BC
Political aftermath
See also
Note on dates
Italy in 4th century BC
Notes
References Date 340– 338 BC[note 1]
Location Latium, Campania,
Result Roman victory, dissolution
Sources of Latin League

The most comprehensive source on the Latin War is the Roman historian Livy Belligerents
(59 BC – AD 17), who narrates the war in the eighth book of his history of Roman Republic, Latin League,
Rome, Ab Urbe Condita. Two other substantial narratives have also survived, a Samnites Campanians,
fragment from the Roman Antiquities of Dionysius of Halicarnassus (c. 60 BC– Volsci, Sidicini,
after 7 BC), a Greek contemporary of Livy, and a summary by the 12th century Aurunci
Byzantine chronicler Joannes Zonaras based on the Roman history of Cassius
Commanders and leaders
Dio (AD 150 – 235).[1] Modern historians consider the ancient accounts of the
Latin War to be a mixture of fact and fiction. All the surviving authors lived long Publius Decius -
after the Latin War and relied on the works of earlier writers. Several of the Mus
historians used by Livy experienced the Social War (91–88 BC) between Rome Titus Manlius
and its Italian allies and seem to have interpreted the Latin War in the terms of Imperiosus
that war, which has introduced anachronistic elements into the historical Gaius Maenius
record.[2]

Background
The Latins did not have any central government, but were divided into a number of self-governing towns and cities with a shared
language, culture and some legal and religious institutions.[3] In the 5th century BC, these city-states had formed a mutual military
alliance, the foedus Cassianum, primarily to resist the raids and invasions of two neighbouring peoples, the Aequi and the Volsci.[4]
As the largest Latin city, Rome naturally enjoyed a leading position in this alliance.[5] By the early 4th century BC, the Latins were
no longer threatened by invasions, but instead feared an increasingly powerful Rome. Several wars between Rome and other Latins,
now often found fighting beside their former enemies the Volsci, are recorded for the first half of the 4th century.[6] In the end, the
Latins and the Volsci could not prevent Rome from establishing control over the ager Pomptinus (the territory of the Pomptine
Marshes and the Monti Lepini) and in 381 annexing the Latin town of Tusculum.[7] The threat of Gallic invasion seems to have
convinced at least some Latin towns to resume their treaty with Rome in 358,[8] but these did not include Tibur and Praeneste,
Rome's chief opponents among the Latins, who only made peace with Rome in 354 after a lengthy war.[9] During the 340s, Roman-
Latin relations seem to have worsened again.[10] Livy records that, in 349, when again faced with a Gallic invasion, the Latins
refused to supply their share of troops,[11] and in 343 actually planned to attack Rome, but following news of Roman victories
against the Samnites instead decided to attack thePaeligni.[12]

The Samnites were a tribal federation living in the central Apennines. In 354, they had formed a treaty of friendship with
Rome,[13][14] probably fixing the river Liris as the border between their respective spheres of influence,[15] but despite this treaty, in
343 the First Samnite War broke out between Rome and the Samnites over the control of Campania. According to Livy, this war
originated in Samnite attacks on a smaller tribe, the Sidicini. Unable to resist, the Sidicini appealed to the Campanians, who were led
by the famously wealthy city-state of Capua, but these were also defeated and the Samnites invaded Campania. At this point the
Campanians decided to surrender themselves unconditionally into the power of Rome, following which the Romans felt compelled to
intervene to protect their new subjects against Samnite attacks.[16] Modern historians are in some dispute whether this surrender
really took place or was invented to absolve Rome of treaty breaking, but generally agree that Rome formed some kind of alliance
with Capua.[17]

The First Samnite War ended in 341 with a negotiated peace and renewal of the former treaty between Rome and the Samnites. Rome
retained her Campanian alliance, but accepted that the Sidicini belonged to the Samnite sphere.[18][19] According to Livy, once peace
with Rome had been concluded, the Samnites attacked the Sidicini with the same forces they had deployed against Rome. Facing
defeat, the Sidicini tried to surrender themselves to Rome, but their surrender was rejected by the senate as coming far too late. The
Sidicini then turned to the Latins who had already taken up arms on their own account. The Campani joined the war as well, and led
by the Latins a large army of these allied peoples invaded Samnium. Most of the damage they dealt there to the Samnites was done
by raiding rather than fighting, and although the Latins got the better in their various encounters with the Samnites, they were happy
to retire from enemy territory and fight no further. The Samnites sent envoys to Rome to complain and demand that if the Latins and
Campani really were subject peoples of Rome, Rome should use her authority over them to prevent further attacks on Samnite
territory. The Roman senate gave an ambiguous reply, being both unwilling to acknowledge that they could no longer control the
Latins and afraid of alienating them further by ordering them to stop their attacks on the Samnites. The Campani had surrendered to
Rome and must obey her will, however there was nothing in Rome's treaty with the Latins preventing them from going to war against
whomever they wanted.[20] The result of this reply was to completely turn the Campani against Rome and encourage the Latins to
take action. In the guise of preparing a Samnite war, the Latins plotted in secret with the Campani for war against Rome. However,
news of their plans got out, and at Rome the sitting consuls for 341 were ordered to leave office before the expiry of their term, so
that the new consuls could enter office early in preparation for the major war that was brewing. The consuls elected for 340 were
Titus Manlius Torquatus, for the third time, and Publius Decius Mus.[21] The annually elected consuls were the chief magistrates of
the Roman Republic, and responsible for commanding Rome's armies in times of war
.

Modern historians have not put much credence in these events supposed to have taken place following the end of the First Samnite
War, believing them to be largely invented. There are several similarities with the events supposed to have started the Samnite War,
the Samnites are once again at war with the Sidicini and a surrender offer is made to Rome, and this duplication is unlikely to be
historical.[22] This time the surrender is refused, showing the moral superiority of the Roman senate.[23] The supposed secret plotting
between the Latins and Campani are also likely to be inventions, inspired by similar secret talks held by the Italians before the
outbreak of the Social War, news of which were also leaked to the Romans.[24]

Outbreak

Ancient account
Livy writes that when the Romans learnt of the Latins' secret talks with the Campanians they sent for the ten leading men among the
Latins to come to Rome and receive instructions, pretending to be concerned for the Samnites. At this time, the Latins had two
praetors, L. Annius of Setia and L. Numisius of Circeii, both colonies. Through their efforts, the colonies of Signia and Velitrae and
also the Volsci were convinced to take up arms against Rome.[25] As there could be no doubt what the real reasons for summoning
these men to Rome were, the Latins held a council meeting to decide what their leaders should reply to the questions they expected
the Romans to ask.[26] At the meeting, Annius complained that Rome was treating the Latins as subjects rather than allies and
proposed that the Latins should demand that henceforth one consul and half the senate should be elected from among the Latins, and
so give Latins and Romans an equal share in the government. This measure was adopted and Annius was appointed spokesman for
the Latins.[27] The Roman senate received the Latin delegation in an audience in the temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the
Capitoline Hill, where they advised the Latins not to make war on the Samnites with whom the Romans had a treaty. In a speech to
the senate, Annius presented the demands of the Latins to which he received a furious reply from the consul, T. Manlius
Torquatus.[28] Livy writes that, according to tradition, while the senators were invoking the gods as guardians of their treaties with
the Latins, Annius was heard dismissing the divine power of the Roman Jupiter. However, when storming out of the temple, Annius
slipped on the stairs and was knocked unconscious in the fall, or, according to some, killed. When Torquatus saw Annius lying there,
he vowed to strike down the armies of the Latins just as the gods had struck the Latin envoy. This speech was wildly cheered by the
people of Rome and war was declared.[29]

Modern view
Modern historians consider Livy's account of the outbreak of the Latin War unhistorical fiction, filled with invented speeches written,
as was common practice among ancient historians, so as to present the arguments of both sides.[30] There is a general resemblance
between the rhetoric of the speeches Livy has written for L. Annius and the complaints and demands made by Rome's Italian allies in
the years before the Social War.[31] Several of the writers Livy is known to have used for Roman history during the 4th century lived
through the Social War, and it would have been natural for them to see parallels between the Latin War and contemporary events.[32]
Like the Roman senate rejected an embassy from the Italian insurgents in 90 BC, so the Latin embassy of 340 BC is also rejected.[33]
Later, in his account of the Second Punic War, Livy mentions that some of his sources claimed that the Capuans, after the Battle of
Cannae, had similarly sent an embassy and demanded to receive an equal share in the government of the Roman Republic. He,
however, rejected this as a duplication of the demands made by the Latins at the outbreak of the Latin War. Modern historians do not
believe that the Latins made any demand for a consul and half the senate in 340. It is possible that Capua really did so in 216, but
ar.[34] Instead, they have proposed that historically
most likely Livy was correct to consider this a duplicate of accounts of the Latin W
these were political demands made by the Italians at the outbreak of the Social War.[35] However, no ancient attestations of such
demands exist today.[36] By the early 1st century BC, Rome had risen to become the dominant power in the Mediterranean and
Roman citizenship was a highly desired favour. However, such sentiments are considered anachronistic for the 4th century. In 340,
Rome was still only a local power in Latium, but whose aggressiveness and recent expansion into Campania was an increasing threat
to the independence of the smaller Latin communities who risked becoming entirely surrounded by Roman territory.[37] Rather than
being caused by the Roman refusal to share their government with the other Latins, the Latin War was a final bid by the Latins to
preserve their own independence. In this endeavour they were joined by the Volsci, who were in much the same situation as the
Latins, and the Campani, Sidicini and Aurunci, three peoples who all risked being squeezed between the growing powers of Central
Italy, Rome and the Samnites.[38]

The South-Eastern campaign 340 BC

The Latins entered Samnium; the Roman-Samnite army moved to the Fucine Lake, then, avoiding Latium, entered the Campanian
territory and attacked the Latins and Campanians near Mount Vesuvius. In the Battle of Vesuvius, the Romans, under consuls Decius
Mus and T. Manlius Torquatus Imperiosus, defeated the Latins. According to Roman sources, Manlius reinstated army discipline by
executing his son for his unintentional disobedience, while Decius sacrificed his own life to the gods for the Roman victory
.

Roman subjugation of the Latins and the Volsci 339 - 338 BC

One year later, Manlius defeated the Latins at the Battle of Trifanum. The Latins were finally defeated in 338 BC at the Battle of
Antium[39] on the river Astura, whereGaius Maenius commanded the Roman naval forces which defeated the combined Latin armies
of Antium, Lanuvium, Aricia and Velitrae.[40]

Political aftermath
The Latins, forced to leave Campania, moved to Latium, where they put up a long yet unsuccessful resistance against the Roman
forces. The defeated Latin peoples were obliged to recognize Roman pre-eminence. Some of the Latin towns were Romanized, others
became partially Roman, adopting Romanmagistratures, while some others becameRoman colonies.

See also
Roman-Latin wars

Note on dates
1. The Romans customarily dated events by noting the consuls who held of fice that year. The Latin War broke out in
the year that Titus Manlius Imperiosus Torquatus and Publius Decius Mus were consuls and ended in the year that
Lucius Furius Camillus and Gaius Maenius were consuls. When converted to the western calendar using the
traditional Varronian chronology, those years become 340 and 338 BC. However , modern historians have shown that
the Varronian chronology dates the Latin War four years too early because of inclusion of unhistorical "dictator
years". Despite that known inaccuracy, the Varronian chronology remains in use by convention also in academic
literature and so is also the chronology used in this article. Forsythe(2005), pp. 369-370

Notes
1. Oakley (1998), pp. 425-426
2. Oakley (1998), p. 410
3. Forsythe (2005), p. 184
4. Forsythe (2005), pp. 186-188
5. Forsythe (2005), p. 187
6. Cornell (1995), pp. 322-323
7. Cornell (1995), p. 322; Forsythe (2005), p. 258
8. Oakley (1998), p. 5; Forsythe (2005), p. 258
9. Oakley (1998), pp. 5-6; Forsythe (2005), p. 258
10. Oakley (1998), pp. 13-15
11. Livy, vii.25.5-6
12. Livy, vii.38.1
13. Diodorus, xvi.45.8 (http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/T
exts/Diodorus_Siculus/16C*.html)
14. Livy, vii.19.3–4.
15. Salmon (1967), pp. 187-193
16. Livy, vii.29.3-32.1–2
17. Salmon (1967), p. 197; Cornell (1995), p. 347; Oakley (1998), pp. 286–9; Forsythe (2005), p. 287
18. Livy, viii.1.8-2.3
19. Salmon (1967), p. 202; Forsythe (2005), p. 288
20. Livy, viii.2.4-13
21. Livy, viii.3.1-5
22. Oakley (1998), p. 394; Forsythe (2005), p. 289
23. Oakley (1998), p. 394
24. Forsythe (2005), p. 289
25. Livy, viii.3.8-9
26. Livy, viii.3.10
27. Livy, viii.4.1-12
28. Livy, viii.5.1-12
29. Livy, viii.6.1-7
30. Oakley (1998), p. 409
31. Oakley (1998), p. 409
32. Oakley (1998), p. 410; Forsythe (2005), p. 289
33. Oakley (1998), p. 409
34. Oakley (1998), pp. 410-411
35. Oakley (1998), p. 411; Salmon (1967), p 207
36. Oakley p. 410
37. Oakley (1998), p. 409; Forsythe (2005), p. 289
38. Salmon (1967), p 207
39. Smith 1867, p. 896.
40. Livy viii. 13.

References
Cornell, TJ (1995), The Beginnings of Rome — Italy and Rome from the Bronze Age to the Punic W ars (c. 1000–264
BC), New York: Routledge, ISBN 978-0-415-01596-7
Forsythe, Gary (2005),A Critical History of Early Rome, Berkeley: University of California Press, ISBN 0-520-24991-
7
Theodor Mommsen, History of Rome (through Classic Literature)
William C. Morey, Outlines of Roman History, New York, Cincinnati, Chicago: American Book Company (1901)
(through Forum Romanum)
Oakley, SP (1998), A Commentary on Livy Books VI–X, II: Books VII–VIII, Oxford: Oxford University Press,
ISBN 978-0-19-815226-2
Salmon, ET (1967), Samnium and the Samnites, Cambridge University Press,ISBN 978-0-521-13572-6
Smith, William, Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology , Vol. II, Little, Brown & Co., Boston, 1867

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Latin_W

ar&oldid=855644631"

This page was last edited on 19 August 2018, at 20:45(UTC).

Text is available under theCreative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License ; additional terms may apply. By using this
site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. Wikipedia® is a registered trademark of theWikimedia
Foundation, Inc., a non-profit organization.