Hannibal's continued successes in Italy, culminating in his massive victory at Cannae, encouraged Philip in his belief of Rome's current vulnerability. In 215 a delegation headed by an orator, Xenophanes of Athens, was sent to negotiate an alliance with Hannibal. The envoys seem to have had considerable difficulties in reaching their destination, and on the return trip were captured along with several Carthaginian officers by a Roman squadron. Xenophanes attempted to bluff his way out of the encounter, claiming that they were in fact a delegation sent by Philip to Rome, but the accents and dress of the Punic officers gave the game away. The group were arrested and a copy of the treaty as well as a letter from Hannibal to the king discovered. Later another embassy went from Macedonia to Hannibal in Italy, confirmed the alliance and returned safely. The treaty pledged mutual protection between Philip V, Macedonia and its allies in Greece and Hannibal, Carthage and its current and future allies in Italy, Gaul, Liguria, and North Africa. Each was to deal fairly and honestly with the other and be the enemy of the other's enemies. In particular, they were to be allies in the war with Rome until victory was achieved, and Hannibal should not make peace with Rome without ensuring that the Romans would not continue fighting Philip and would leave the king in possession of certain named cities along the Illyrian coast and restore territory to Demetrius of Pharos. If in future Rome made war on either Macedonia or Carthage, the other should come to its aid.11
The treaty is somewhat vague over precisely what sort of co-operation was envisaged between Hannibal and Philip during the war and, since nothing came of this, our sources' beliefs remain conjectural. Philip's main preoccupation was clearly with driving the Romans from Illyria. The treaty anticipated Rome emerging from the war with sufficient strength to attack either of the allies at some uncertain date in the future, a point we have already discussed in the context of Hannibal's war aims. The alliance with Philip and the assurance that he would attack Roman interests on yet another front offered a means of putting still more pressure on the embattled Roman Republic. What is clear is that Philip V saw this as a limited war to gain specific objectives. It was not to be a war to the death with Rome, ended only by the utter defeat of one or the other side. Cynically, the king took advantage of Rome's apparent vulnerability to further his own local ambitions.
Livy certainly believed that the Romans feared raiding or a direct Macedonian invasion of Italy. In the autumn of 215 a praetor, Marcus Valerius Laevinus, was sent to Brundisium to protect the coast, his province including the war with Macedon. Rome's Illyrian allies lay almost directly opposite Brundisium, separated by the narrowest part of the Adriatic. Laevinus had under his command two legions recently withdrawn from Sicily. By the next year, this was reduced to a single legion, but this was supported by the sizeable fleet which had been mustered, and Laevinus remained in command as a propraetor. He received reports sent by the city of Oricum that a Macedonian fleet consisting of 120 lemboi had launched a surprise attack on Apollonia and, having been checked there, had moved against Oricum and stormed it in a night assault. Laevinus embarked the majority of his legion and sailed to relieve the city, the small Macedonian garrison being rapidly defeated, and sent a detachment to the relief of Apollonia. These troops entered the allied city at night and then proceeded to sally out and surprise the poorly guarded camp of the Macedonian besiegers. Even if Livy's account may exaggerate the scale of the Roman success, Philip's offensive against the allied communities had been repulsed.12
Laevinus remained with his forces at Oricum for the next year, his command again being extended by the Senate. Philip V made no more aggressive moves against the Roman enclave and Laevinus' posture was entirely defensive so that no serious fighting occurred. In 211 the Romans concluded a treaty with the Macedonians' recent enemy, the Aetolian League, the terms of which are partially preserved on an inscription from Acarnania. The Aetolians agreed to begin operations against Philip V which were to be supported at sea by a fleet of at least twenty-five Roman quinqueremes. Detailed provision was made for the division of the spoils of success. All territory, cities and fortifications captured by the allies as far north as Cocyra, and in particular the region of Acarnania on the west coast, were to belong to the League. However, from these, the Romans were allowed to take movable booty. Both sides pledged not to conclude an independent treaty with Philip which would leave him free to attack the other. Provision was also made for other communities and leaders hostile to Philip and friendly to the Aetolians to join the alliance with Rome under precisely the same terms, and specific mention was made of Sparta, Elis, the kingdom of Pergamum, and certain Illyrian chieftains.13
The terms of the treaty were far more characteristically Greek than Roman and reveal far less determined objectives than was usual in Roman war-making. Clearly, in the same way that the alliance between Hannibal and Philip V had not envisaged the destruction of Rome, it was expected that Macedonia would survive the war with enough strength to represent a potential threat to either the Romans or the Aetolians on their own. The primary aim of the Aetolians was to extend their territory, adding other communities to the League. They were very much the dominant partner in the alliance, who would provide the bulk of the troops. The expectation that other powers in Greece and Asia Minor might wish to join the struggle against Philip V emphasized how much the Aetolians viewed this as the continuation of earlier conflicts. The clauses dealing with the distribution of plunder reflect its traditional importance in Roman campaigns. The prospect of loot seems to have been an important additional incentive for Roman legionaries, in addition to their fierce patriotism. The Senate also expected the defeated enemy to provide at least some of the funds to pay for the cost of the campaign waged against them, so that capitulating states were frequently obliged to supply considerable stocks of food, clothing or material for the Roman army. The need to fund his operations may have been a particular concern for Laevinus, who must have realized that his province was not the Senate's highest priority when it came to the allocation of resources.14
It had taken several years from the opening of hostilities between Rome and Macedon before the Aetolians were willing to ally with Rome, and it was not actually till 209 that the treaty was formally ratified by Rome, although co-operation between Laevinus and the League began immediately. Macedonia was its natural enemy, but the League had needed to be convinced of the value to them of an alliance with Rome. Similarly it was only after the Romans and Aetolians had won some victories that other likely opponents of Philip V and his allies felt that this was an opportune moment to enter the war. Elis joined the alliance in 210, Sparta soon afterwards, and King Attalus of Pergamum at the end of the same year. The Achaean League, threatened by both Sparta and the Aetolians, rallied to Philip's cause.15
The Aetolian and Roman campaign began with a series of raids against Philip and his allies, the Roman squadron making sudden descents on coastal communities. An early attack on Acarnania failed. Most of the successes, especially the capture of cities, were due to the speed and surprise of an attack, or as elsewhere the result of treachery by some of the defenders. Philip V was faced by many threats simultaneously, as chieftains in Illyria raided his lands and the Aetolians, Romans, and their growing number of allies attacked his adherents in Greece. The young king responded with tremendous energy, rapidly marching his soldiers to face one threat after another. Like the other Hellenistic kingdoms, Macedonia possessed a relatively large army of professional soldiers. Early in the second century, Philip was able to field a force of over 20,000 of these, its core being the well-trained infantry of the pike phalanx. We have far less detail about the army during this period, but it is highly unlikely that so many men were ever concentrated in one place. Cavalry, a far lower proportion of the total force than they had been under Alexander the Great, figure prominently in the brief accounts of these campaigns. On at least some occasions Philip V commanded in the same manner as his illustrious predecessor, charging spear in hand at the head of his cavalry, n
arrowly escaping death or capture on several occasions. The professionalism of the Macedonian army was reflected in a greater effectiveness in siegecraft, shown for instance in the capture of Echinous in 210.16
Philip V displayed great skill in these campaigns, winning a number of large skirmishes, but he could not be everywhere at once and the Aetolians and Romans continued to enjoy some limited successes. When Laevinus returned to Rome to hold the consulship in 210 he even recommended the demobilization of the legion he had left in Greece, and the Roman military presence in the area was certainly reduced under his successor, Publius Sulpicius Galba. In spite of this confidence, the balance of power steadily shifted in favour of Philip V. Livy claims that ambassadors from several powers including Ptolemaic Egypt, Athens and the wealthy island of Rhodes came to the king in 209 and attempted to persuade him to negotiate a peace with the Aetolians. They were concerned that he might soon achieve a complete military victory that would give him an overwhelmingly powerful position in Greece for the foreseeable future. A thirty-day truce, another common feature of wars between Greek states, was agreed, but no permanent setdement concluded and the war recommenced at the end of this period. Philip V continued to make every effort to protect his allies, either in person or by sending detachments of soldiers to their aid. In 207 Philip led a large and determined raid into the territory of the Aetolian League. In the Peloponnese, the newly trained and reorganized army of the Achaean League under the leadership of the gifted soldier and politician Philopoemen shattered the Spartan army at Mantineia, a battleground which had already witnessed several of the largest battles in Greek military history. These twin blows sapped the will of the Aetolian League to continue the struggle. Like any other Hellenistic state, they expected wars to be concluded by a negotiated settlement and in 206 the Aetolians agreed on peace terms with Philip.17
The capitulation and withdrawal from the war of Rome's main ally did not mean the end of the fighting. Roman forces in the area were increased, the command given to a proconsul rather than a propraetor. This man, Publius Sempronius Tuditanus, brought 11,000 soldiers and thirty-five quinqueremes with him in 205. Some aggressive moves were made by both sides, Philip repeating his earlier attack against Apollonia, but the Romans refused the king's challenge to fight a pitched battle. The operations at this stage were confined to the western coastal area of modern Albania where the conflict had first originated, since without major allies in Greece it was impractical for the Romans to operate there. Ambassadors from Epirus approached both sides and successfully negotiated a peace treaty, the Peace of Phoinike. Under the terms of this Philip V gave up some of the towns he had captured, notably those allied to Rome, but retained many of his other conquests. Unlike other Roman treaties to end a conflict this was negotiated between equals. Macedonia was recognized as a fully independent power, in no way absorbed into Rome's dominion of subordinate allies."
The outcome of the First Macedonian War was unlike that of any other conflict fought by the Romans in the third century BC. Dissatisfaction with the failure to defeat Philip V, combined with the strong legacy of hatred and mistrust resulting from his unprovoked attack on Rome during its worst crisis, ensured that a new war with Macedonia followed almost immediately after the eventual defeat of Carthage. In the context of the Second Punic War, the fighting with Macedonia had allowed the Romans at minimal cost to prevent Hannibal from gaining any tangible benefit from his alliance with Philip. It had essentially been a Greek conflict, fought mostly by the Hellenistic states according to their own military conventions and concluded in the normal manner of Hellenistic warfare.
Sicily 215-210 BC
Sicily was divided into two, the west and north being governed directly by Rome and the remainder under the control of Hiero's Syracuse. In 218 Sempronius Longus had been sent there to prepare the planned invasion of North Africa and had been involved in some naval fighting as the Carthaginian fleet began to raid the island, before he was recalled to face Hannibal in Cisalpine Gaul. In subsequent years the Senate maintained a garrison, usually of at least two legions, and strong naval forces in Sicily. In late 216 the two legions formed from the survivors of Cannae replaced the existing garrison of the island, their ranks later replenished by the troops defeated in the two battles at Herdonea. In 215 a Carthaginian attempt to reclaim Sardinia failed due to a mixture of bad luck, when storms delayed the fleet, and the rapid response of the Roman Senate, who sent an army to the island under the command of one of its original conquerors, Titus Manlius Torquatus. Manlius had first been consul in 235 and was another of the experienced men, like Marcellus and Fabius Maximus, who were given commands despite their advanced years during the crisis of the Hannibalic War. The Punic fleet returning from Sardinia was harried by Roman squadrons operating from Sicily.19
Another reminder of the past was Rome's old ally, Hiero, who was in his seventies at the beginning of the Second Punic War, but proved just as loyal as he had in the First War, sending a strong force of mercenary light infantry, including Cretan archers, and supplies of grain to support the
Roman war effort in 217 or 216. Either in late 216 or early 215, the old man died and with him perished the political stability which had endured for over fifty years during his tyranny. His son having died some years before, Hiero was succeeded by his 15-year-old grandson, Hieronymus, guided by a council of advisers. Almost immediately the fierce factionalism which so often bedevilled the internal politics of Greek cities gripped Syracuse. Hieronymus was young, lacked the experience, achievements and ability of his grandfather and failed to control events. His advisers competed to control the youth, whilst other groups plotted to end the monarchy and restore some sort of Republic. It is tempting but mistaken to characterize these groups primarily on the basis of their attitude towards Rome and Carthage, since it is unlikely that this was the dominant factor in these disputes. More often a group simply sided with the opposing group to rival factions. In 215 Hieronymus began negotiating first with Hannibal and then with the authorities in Carthage itself, his demands increasing so that eventually he demanded the rule of all Sicily once the combined might of Syracuse and Carthage had driven the Romans from the island. However, no formal break with Rome actually occurred and, after a thirteen-month reign, Hieronymus was murdered by a faction at Leontini, one of the cities controlled by Syracuse. His uncle Adranodoros became one of the elected magistrates which replaced the monarchy, but he too, along with most of the rest of Hiero's descendants, was murdered by another group bidding for power.20
Active at the time were two brothers, Hippocrates and Epicydes, descended from a Syracusan exile who had settled in Carthage. They had been sent as part of Hannibal's delegation to Hieronymus, having served with his army in Spain and Italy. In 214 the brothers were elected to two of the senior magistracies left vacant by the massacre of the royal family, but their power was challenged by other leaders more disposed to maintain the treaty with Rome. Hippocrates was sent to garrison Leontini with 4,000 troops, a mixture of mercenaries and deserters from the Roman army in the west of Sicily who were fiercely opposed to Rome and threatened the stability of the state. Later joined by his brother, Hippocrates declared the city independent and began raiding the Roman province. The recently arrived Roman commander, Marcellus, currently holding his second consulship, was informed by Syracuse that they no longer controlled Leontini, so advanced and stormed the city in his first assault. Most of the garrison was captured. The Roman deserters suffered the traditional punishment of citizens who had turned against the State, being first flogged and then beheaded. Hippocrates and Epicydes escaped from the disaster and met up
with a body of 8,000 Syracusan soldiers, who had been sent to support the Roman attack on Leontini on the condition that the rebellious city should be returned to their rule. Aided by rumours of widespread massacre of Leontini's entire population, the brothers were able to win over these troops and led them back to Syracuse where, after a brief fight, they killed their rivals and ga
ined unchallenged control of the city. War with Rome was now inevitable.21
Probably in early spring 213 the Romans launched a full-scale assault on Syracuse. Marcellus as proconsul was in overall charge, supported by the propraetor Appius Claudius Pulcher. Marcellus had four pairs of galleys specially prepared, removing the starboard oars from one and the port from the other, before lashing the two together. On their bows were mounted solid scaling ladders which could be lowered against a wall by pulleys attached to the mast, earning the devices the nickname sambuca after their similarity to the musical instrument. With these the Romans were able to attack the city walls from the sea, whilst another assault was mounted from the landward side. This was to be one of the very few attempts to take a well-fortified major city by direct attack during the course of the three wars. The result was an utter failure. The walls of Syracuse had been strengthened over the years by various tyrants, and the city had a tradition of producing some of the most advanced siege engines in the world. Many of those used to repulse the Romans had been designed by Archimedes, the renowned geometrician. A relative of Hiero, the ageing philosopher played a major role in organizing the deployment of his artillery and other machines. As the Romans approached the city walls they were bombarded with missiles fired with great power, catapults of different sizes firing at each range. Archimedes had also designed other machines, which lowered hooks to lift the Roman ships out of the water and then drop them, shaking the crewmen out and dashing the ship to pieces. Much later sources even claimed that he invented some sort of mirror device to concentrate the rays of the sun and direct them onto an enemy ship, setting it on fire. However, Plutarch tells us that Archimedes did not bother to write down the details of his designs, considering the practical uses of his studies far less important than theory itself, so it is hard to know how accurate the descriptions of his engines are, but Polybius writing less than a century later certainly believed in the devices called 'claws' which smashed the sambucae and others which lifted ships out of the water. Plutarch tells the highly plausible story that the Roman besiegers became so nervous of Archimedes' contraptions that the sudden appearance of any beam or pole on the city walls was liable to cause a panic. Eventually, after suffering heavy casualties, Marcellus abandoned any hope of direct assault and resolved to blockade the city into submission. There is no doubt that the genius of Archimedes had contributed significantly to the successful defence of Syracuse, but it is worth remembering that direct assaults on strong fortifications were so rare precisely because they seldom succeeded and risked heavy casualties.22
The Fall of Carthage Page 34
