- Sep 20, 2017
- 13,639
- 25,622
- 28,180
Apologies for the slight delay, I'm not at home this weekend. At least it wasn't for a more important stage.
A pointless transfer for what will normally be a pointless second parade to close out the race.
Map and profile
Start
For the sake of at least one of me and RCS providing some new content, I decided to finally write about the part of Ancient Roman history I skipped last year.
According to legend, Rome was of course founded by Romulus in 753 BC, a story that has been in circulation since at least the 3rd century BC. In reality, we know very little of Roman history until the 4th century, and to a lesser extent the 3rd century. One theory that this is because the city (then really still a town) was burned by the Gauls in (probably) 390 or 387 BC, destroying most records. The problem is that the Ancient Roman accounts of this sack are also steeped in fiction and the archaeological evidence is dubious (though the Gallic invasion certainly did happen). The earliest contemporary sources of real significance are actually Greek, and the Greeks did not really concern themselves with what the Romans were doing until the Pyrrhic War of 280-275 BC.
So here’s what we do know. The earliest evidence of settlement on Rome’s hills dates to the 10th and 9th centuries BC. The area that would later become the Forum was built on in the 7th century BC, and by this point we can probably start to speak of a town. What little evidence we have suggests that Rome was indeed ruled by kings at this time. Ancient Roman lists of magistrates (the future consuls) go back to around 500 BC, suggesting that the Republic had been founded by that point. In this case, the mythology of early Roman history more or less lines up, as the beginning of the Republic is traditionally dated to 509 BC. The divisions between patricians and plebeians that helped characterise the Republican era certainly emerged early, but the when and how remains a mystery.
In the second half of the 4th century BC, the power of Rome began to expand in earnest. At the time of the Gallic invasion, the area it controlled extended little further than its modern suburbs. However, between 343 BC and 290 BC, the Latin War and the three Samnite Wars saw them gain control over all of central Italy. Beyond transforming Rome into one of the major powers in the Mediterranean, these wars were also extremely important in the establishment of the first major infrastructural projects (such as the construction of the Via Appia) as well as the development of the military tactics that would prove to be superior to anything else in the Mediterranean.
These developments inevitably brought Rome into conflict with more powerful foes. The first were the Greek colonies of southern Italy. They called on the help of King Pyrrhus of Epirus, starting the Pyrrhic War (280-275 BC). Rome ran into multiple defeats early on, but given that this war spawned the phrase ‘Pyrrhic victory’, it should not come as a surprise that the tide turned, leaving Rome victorious once more and giving it control over southern Italy too. With that, the last buffer between it and Carthage, then the greatest power in the western Mediterranean, had disappeared, setting the scene for the Punic Wars. The first (264-241 BC) was mainly about control of Sicily. Rome came out on top, but Carthaginian power was nowhere near broken. The second (218-201 BC) would decide the course of Antiquity.
Famously, the war started very poorly for Rome, with Hannibal crossing the Alps and winning battle after battle in Italy, culminating in the crushing defeat at Cannae in 216. However, a lack of support from both Carthage itself, and the major cities in southern Italy (many of which had rebelled against Rome), combined with successful Roman tactics to win time, meant that the final blow was never dealt. Meanwhile, Rome poured everything it had into preparing a counteroffensive, eventually landing in Africa in 204 BC. Hannibal was recalled, but now had to deal with a military genius that was more than capable of matching his own in Scipio. Both armies met at Zama in 202 BC, and the Roman victory there broke the back of Carthage. The city was allowed to remain independent until the Third Punic War half a century later, but Rome now reigned supreme.
With that, Roman power was greater than ever, and because the Greek world had gone into decline, there was no power left that had been greater than Carthage. The next two centuries would see Rome conquer almost without interruption, until it was finally halted by the logistical constraints of running such a massive empire in the early Imperial period. For centuries, the course of Roman history would now be driven by internal factors. The Republic also increasingly transitioned towards huge slave-run estates as the primary method of agriculture, paving the way for mass urbanisation. This would make Rome the largest city in the world, but also help pave the way for the endless internal strife of the Late Republic. Over the course of the 2nd century BC, tensions between the elite and the plebs started to increase as inequality rose due to the aforementioned agricultural changes. Naturally, the common people were less interested in the traditional republican system that had been designed on the one hand to prevent any individual from gaining too much power and on the other hand to benefit the elite, and more interested in their own basic rights. In addition, more and more of the poor joined the army (especially after a reform that I’ll get to shortly). As the number of poor swelled further and further, this cocktail drove the destabilisation and eventual collapse of the Republican system.
The signs of what was to come arose in 133 and 121 BC, with the election of the Gracchi brothers as plebeian tribunes (the most important role not tied to the patricians). Both pushed the boundaries of the republican system to pass land reform laws, and both were killed by their political opponents. With that, political violence increasingly became a feature of the Late Republic. At the end of the century, Gaius Marius, the most successful general of the period, effectively abolished property requirements to join the army. Due to the growing inequality, it was perhaps a necessary step to keep the size of the army intact, but it also made military service – and thereby the performance of the commander you served under – the main vehicle for social mobility.
The first man to take advantage of this was Sulla, who rose to power during the previously discussed Social War (90-87 BC). His rivalry with Marius’ reformist faction had already led to the military occupation of Rome before Marius’ death in 86 BC. The reformists took back over from the conservatives while Sulla was at war in modern Turkey, but when Sulla returned in 83-82 BC, he used his army to wrest back control once more and this time, have himself elected dictator. Sulla always intended for a temporary dictatorship (he resigned in 80 BC) and thought that his reforms and purge of opponents would restore stability. In practice, said reforms were so unsuccessful that his allies Pompey and Crassus would help repeal them after his death, and more importantly, he had proven that a popular general could seize power with the help of his army.
This was the backdrop for the establishment of the First Triumvirate, and I covered the period from then until the death of Caesar and the formation of the Second Triumvirate when talking about Cicero. After swiftly dealing with the other anti-Caesarean forces, rivalry between Octavian and Mark Antony slowly started to grow. Antony’s prestige was dealt a major blow with a failed campaign against the Parthians (in Persia), while Octavian secured his power base in the west by forcing Lepidus out of the alliance. After war broke out, Octavian won the decisive battle by defeating Antony and Cleopatra at Actium in 31 BC (although the fighting continued until their suicide the year after). With both the old system and his rivals dead, Octavian then had himself made Emperor Augustus in 27 BC.
The imperial system proved mostly successful at preventing civil war for the first two centuries of its existence (the exceptions coming when the emperor lost control of the army), and with limited external threats, Rome and the Empire entered an unprecedentedly peaceful era. This was Rome at its peak in all aspects – cultural, economic, you name it – and the city itself surpassed 1 million inhabitants. Expansionist ambitions slowed after a heavy defeat in modern Germany led Augustus to establish the Rhine and Danube as the northern borders. The maximum extent of the Empire was reached under Trajan (98-117), with his successor Hadrian marking the end of Roman expansion by giving up some of Trajan’s less defensible gains (he had pushed as far as the Persian Gulf) and focusing on defence (immortalised by Hadrian’s Wall).
Rome itself remained the centre of the Empire in every aspect. Much of the grandeur we now associate with Ancient Rome was developed during these two centuries, a development accelerated by the Great Fire of 64, under Nero. However, the city had also grown so large that it could not survive without subsidised grain shipments, contributing to the financial problems that started to creep in. This was already a problem before Rome actually went into decline, and although debasement of the currency was not yet happening on the scale of the third century, the fact that the practice of debasement started during Rome’s zenith is an example of the deep roots of what was to come.
(picture by Karelj at Wikimedia Commons)
The route
Almost the same as last year, except that the start is at the EUR campus rather than the Vatican which means the first 12 kilometres of the 2025 route are skipped. The only other changes are that the second intermediate sprint is no longer there with the changes to the ciclamino, and that the bonus sprint is a couple of laps earlier. They are still claiming a gradient of 5% for the finish, but given the elevation difference it’s clear that this is the maximum gradient.
Finish
What to expect?
Spumante, scenery, and a sprint.
A pointless transfer for what will normally be a pointless second parade to close out the race.
Map and profile
Start
For the sake of at least one of me and RCS providing some new content, I decided to finally write about the part of Ancient Roman history I skipped last year.
According to legend, Rome was of course founded by Romulus in 753 BC, a story that has been in circulation since at least the 3rd century BC. In reality, we know very little of Roman history until the 4th century, and to a lesser extent the 3rd century. One theory that this is because the city (then really still a town) was burned by the Gauls in (probably) 390 or 387 BC, destroying most records. The problem is that the Ancient Roman accounts of this sack are also steeped in fiction and the archaeological evidence is dubious (though the Gallic invasion certainly did happen). The earliest contemporary sources of real significance are actually Greek, and the Greeks did not really concern themselves with what the Romans were doing until the Pyrrhic War of 280-275 BC.
So here’s what we do know. The earliest evidence of settlement on Rome’s hills dates to the 10th and 9th centuries BC. The area that would later become the Forum was built on in the 7th century BC, and by this point we can probably start to speak of a town. What little evidence we have suggests that Rome was indeed ruled by kings at this time. Ancient Roman lists of magistrates (the future consuls) go back to around 500 BC, suggesting that the Republic had been founded by that point. In this case, the mythology of early Roman history more or less lines up, as the beginning of the Republic is traditionally dated to 509 BC. The divisions between patricians and plebeians that helped characterise the Republican era certainly emerged early, but the when and how remains a mystery.
In the second half of the 4th century BC, the power of Rome began to expand in earnest. At the time of the Gallic invasion, the area it controlled extended little further than its modern suburbs. However, between 343 BC and 290 BC, the Latin War and the three Samnite Wars saw them gain control over all of central Italy. Beyond transforming Rome into one of the major powers in the Mediterranean, these wars were also extremely important in the establishment of the first major infrastructural projects (such as the construction of the Via Appia) as well as the development of the military tactics that would prove to be superior to anything else in the Mediterranean.
These developments inevitably brought Rome into conflict with more powerful foes. The first were the Greek colonies of southern Italy. They called on the help of King Pyrrhus of Epirus, starting the Pyrrhic War (280-275 BC). Rome ran into multiple defeats early on, but given that this war spawned the phrase ‘Pyrrhic victory’, it should not come as a surprise that the tide turned, leaving Rome victorious once more and giving it control over southern Italy too. With that, the last buffer between it and Carthage, then the greatest power in the western Mediterranean, had disappeared, setting the scene for the Punic Wars. The first (264-241 BC) was mainly about control of Sicily. Rome came out on top, but Carthaginian power was nowhere near broken. The second (218-201 BC) would decide the course of Antiquity.
Famously, the war started very poorly for Rome, with Hannibal crossing the Alps and winning battle after battle in Italy, culminating in the crushing defeat at Cannae in 216. However, a lack of support from both Carthage itself, and the major cities in southern Italy (many of which had rebelled against Rome), combined with successful Roman tactics to win time, meant that the final blow was never dealt. Meanwhile, Rome poured everything it had into preparing a counteroffensive, eventually landing in Africa in 204 BC. Hannibal was recalled, but now had to deal with a military genius that was more than capable of matching his own in Scipio. Both armies met at Zama in 202 BC, and the Roman victory there broke the back of Carthage. The city was allowed to remain independent until the Third Punic War half a century later, but Rome now reigned supreme.
With that, Roman power was greater than ever, and because the Greek world had gone into decline, there was no power left that had been greater than Carthage. The next two centuries would see Rome conquer almost without interruption, until it was finally halted by the logistical constraints of running such a massive empire in the early Imperial period. For centuries, the course of Roman history would now be driven by internal factors. The Republic also increasingly transitioned towards huge slave-run estates as the primary method of agriculture, paving the way for mass urbanisation. This would make Rome the largest city in the world, but also help pave the way for the endless internal strife of the Late Republic. Over the course of the 2nd century BC, tensions between the elite and the plebs started to increase as inequality rose due to the aforementioned agricultural changes. Naturally, the common people were less interested in the traditional republican system that had been designed on the one hand to prevent any individual from gaining too much power and on the other hand to benefit the elite, and more interested in their own basic rights. In addition, more and more of the poor joined the army (especially after a reform that I’ll get to shortly). As the number of poor swelled further and further, this cocktail drove the destabilisation and eventual collapse of the Republican system.
The signs of what was to come arose in 133 and 121 BC, with the election of the Gracchi brothers as plebeian tribunes (the most important role not tied to the patricians). Both pushed the boundaries of the republican system to pass land reform laws, and both were killed by their political opponents. With that, political violence increasingly became a feature of the Late Republic. At the end of the century, Gaius Marius, the most successful general of the period, effectively abolished property requirements to join the army. Due to the growing inequality, it was perhaps a necessary step to keep the size of the army intact, but it also made military service – and thereby the performance of the commander you served under – the main vehicle for social mobility.
The first man to take advantage of this was Sulla, who rose to power during the previously discussed Social War (90-87 BC). His rivalry with Marius’ reformist faction had already led to the military occupation of Rome before Marius’ death in 86 BC. The reformists took back over from the conservatives while Sulla was at war in modern Turkey, but when Sulla returned in 83-82 BC, he used his army to wrest back control once more and this time, have himself elected dictator. Sulla always intended for a temporary dictatorship (he resigned in 80 BC) and thought that his reforms and purge of opponents would restore stability. In practice, said reforms were so unsuccessful that his allies Pompey and Crassus would help repeal them after his death, and more importantly, he had proven that a popular general could seize power with the help of his army.
This was the backdrop for the establishment of the First Triumvirate, and I covered the period from then until the death of Caesar and the formation of the Second Triumvirate when talking about Cicero. After swiftly dealing with the other anti-Caesarean forces, rivalry between Octavian and Mark Antony slowly started to grow. Antony’s prestige was dealt a major blow with a failed campaign against the Parthians (in Persia), while Octavian secured his power base in the west by forcing Lepidus out of the alliance. After war broke out, Octavian won the decisive battle by defeating Antony and Cleopatra at Actium in 31 BC (although the fighting continued until their suicide the year after). With both the old system and his rivals dead, Octavian then had himself made Emperor Augustus in 27 BC.
The imperial system proved mostly successful at preventing civil war for the first two centuries of its existence (the exceptions coming when the emperor lost control of the army), and with limited external threats, Rome and the Empire entered an unprecedentedly peaceful era. This was Rome at its peak in all aspects – cultural, economic, you name it – and the city itself surpassed 1 million inhabitants. Expansionist ambitions slowed after a heavy defeat in modern Germany led Augustus to establish the Rhine and Danube as the northern borders. The maximum extent of the Empire was reached under Trajan (98-117), with his successor Hadrian marking the end of Roman expansion by giving up some of Trajan’s less defensible gains (he had pushed as far as the Persian Gulf) and focusing on defence (immortalised by Hadrian’s Wall).
Rome itself remained the centre of the Empire in every aspect. Much of the grandeur we now associate with Ancient Rome was developed during these two centuries, a development accelerated by the Great Fire of 64, under Nero. However, the city had also grown so large that it could not survive without subsidised grain shipments, contributing to the financial problems that started to creep in. This was already a problem before Rome actually went into decline, and although debasement of the currency was not yet happening on the scale of the third century, the fact that the practice of debasement started during Rome’s zenith is an example of the deep roots of what was to come.
(picture by Karelj at Wikimedia Commons)
The route
Almost the same as last year, except that the start is at the EUR campus rather than the Vatican which means the first 12 kilometres of the 2025 route are skipped. The only other changes are that the second intermediate sprint is no longer there with the changes to the ciclamino, and that the bonus sprint is a couple of laps earlier. They are still claiming a gradient of 5% for the finish, but given the elevation difference it’s clear that this is the maximum gradient.
Finish
What to expect?
Spumante, scenery, and a sprint.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram