During the 4th-1st century BC, Mediterranean polities, stateless formations and stronger powers fought for hegemony. Edited by Toni Ñaco del Hoyo and Fernando López Sánchez, this volume addresses interstate relations and warlordism according to classical studies and social sciences.

During the final four centuries BC, many political and stateless entities of the Mediterranean headed towards anarchy and militarism, while stronger powers -Carthage, the Hellenistic kingdoms and Republican Rome- expanded towards State formation, forceful military structures and empire building. Edited by T. Ñaco del Hoyo and F. López Sánchez, this volume presents the proceedings from an ICREA Conference held in Barcelona (2013), addressing the connection between war, warlords and interstate relations from classical studies and social sciences perspectives. Some twenty scholars from European, Japanese and North American Universities consider the scope of ‘multipolarity’ and the usefulness of ‘warlord’, a modern category, in order to feature some ancient military and political leaderships.

When the Roman Republic became the master of an overseas empire, the Romans had to adapt their civic institutions so as to be able to rule the dominions that were successively subjected to their imperium. As a result, Rome created an administrative structure mainly based on an element that became the keystone of its empire: the provincia. This book brings together nine contributions from a total of ten scholars, all specialists in Republican Rome and the Principate, who analyse from diverse perspectives and approaches the distinct ways in which the Roman res publica constituted and ruled a far-flung empire. The book ranges from the development of the Roman institutional structures to the diplomatic and administrative activities carried out by the Roman commanders overseas. Beyond the subject on which each author focuses, all chapters in this volume represent significant and renewed contributions to the study of the provinces and the Roman empire during the Republican period and the transition to the Principate.

This military history of Ancient Rome analyses the empire’s revitalized push against rising enemies to the East. In the century since Rome’s defeat of the Seleucid Empire in the 180s BC, the East was dominated by the rise of new empires: Parthia, Armenia, and Pontus, each vying to recreate the glories of the Persian Empire. By the 80s BC, the Pontic Empire of Mithridates had grown so bold that it invaded and annexed the whole of Rome’s eastern empire and occupied Greece itself. But as Rome emerged from the devastating effects of the First Civil War, a new breed of general emerged with it, eager to re-assert Roman military dominance and carve out a fresh empire in the east. In Rome’s Great Eastern War, Gareth C. Sampson analyses the military campaigns and battles between a revitalized Rome and the various powers of the eastern Mediterranean hinterland. He demonstrates how this series of conflicts ultimately heralded a new phase in Roman imperial expansion and reshaped the ancient East.

This book offers a distinctive take on the civil wars that unfolded in the Late Roman Republic. It frames their discussion against the backdrop of the Mediterranean contexts in which they were fought, and sets out to bring to the centre of the debate the significance of provincial agency on a traumatic and complex process, which cannot be understood through an exclusive focus on Roman and Italian developments. The study of the late Republican civil wars can be productively read as an exercise of ‘connected history’, in which the fundamental interdependence of the Mediterranean world comes to the fore through a set of case studies that await to be understood through a properly integrative approach. Our project brings together an international and diverse lineup of scholars, who engage with a wide range of literary, documentary, and archaeological material, and make a collective contribution to the reframing of a problem that requires a collaborative and interdisciplinary outlook, and can yield invaluable insights to the understanding of the Roman imperial project.

"The story of one of history's most decisive and yet little known battles, the Battle of Actium in 31 BC, which brought together Antony and Cleopatra on one side and Octavian, soon to be emperor Augustus, on the other, and whose outcome determined the future of the Roman Empire"--

“Taylor’s study critically compares the manpower and revenues of Republican Rome with those of Carthage and the Antigonid, Seleucid and Ptolemaic kingdoms.” —Dominic Rathbone, author of Civilizations of the Ancient World By the middle of the second century BCE, after nearly one hundred years of warfare, Rome had exerted its control over the entire Mediterranean world, forcing the other great powers of the region—Carthage, Macedonia, Egypt, and the Seleucid empire—to submit militarily and financially. But how, despite its relative poverty and its frequent numerical disadvantage in decisive battles, did Rome prevail? Michael J. Taylor explains this surprising outcome by examining the role that manpower and finances played, providing a comparative study that quantifies the military mobilizations and tax revenues for all five powers. Though Rome was the poorest state, it enjoyed the largest military mobilization, drawing from a pool of citizens, colonists, and allies, while its wealthiest adversaries failed to translate revenues into large or successful armies. Taylor concludes that state-level extraction strategies were decisive in the warfare of the period, as states with high conscription and low taxation raised larger, more successful armies than those that primarily sought to maximize taxation. Comprehensive and detailed, Soldiers and Silver offers a new and sophisticated perspective on the political dynamics and economies of these ancient Mediterranean empires. “An interesting read . . . Taylor has succeeded at clarifying an often-unclear topic with some fine scholarship.” —Ancient World Magazine “Taylor considers the systems of all of the major players in the Mediterranean state system . . . and that fact alone puts this study head and shoulders above similar older efforts.” —A Collection of Unmitigated Pedantry

Taking as a key turning point the self-fashioning of the first Roman emperor Augustus, author Jennifer Finn revisits the idea of “universal history” in Polybius, Justin, and Diodorus, combined with the Stoic philosophy of determinism present in authors like Plutarch and Arrian. Finn endeavors to determine the ways in which Roman authors manipulated narratives about Alexander’s campaigns—and even other significant events in Mediterranean history—to artificially construct a past to which the Romans could attach themselves as a natural teleological culmination. In doing so, Contested Pasts uses five case studies to reexamine aspects of Alexander’s campaigns that have received much attention in modern scholarship, providing new interpretations of issues such as: his connections to the Trojan and Persian wars; the Great Weddings at Susa; the battle(s) of Thermopylae in 480 BCE and 191 BCE and Alexander's conflict at the Persian Gates; the context of his “Last Plans”;” the role of his memory in imagining the Roman Civil Wars; and his fictitious visit to the city of Jerusalem. While Finn demonstrates throughout the book that the influence for many of these narratives likely originated in the reign of Alexander or his Successors, nevertheless these retroactive authorial manipulations force us to confront the fact that we may have an even more opaque understanding of Alexander than has previously been acknowledged. Through the application of a mnemohistorical approach, the book seeks to provide a new understanding of the ways in which the Romans—and people in the purview of the Romans—conceptualized their own world with reference to Alexander the Great.

In the past, most studies on Pre-Roman societies in Italy (1st millennium BCE) focused on the elites, their representation and cultural contacts. The aim of this volume is to look at dependent and marginalized social groups, which are less visible and often even difficult to define (slaves, servants, freedmen, captives, 'foreigners', athletes, women, children etc.). The methodological challenges connected to the study of such heterogeneous and scattered sources are addressed. Is the evidence representative enough for defining different forms of dependencies? Can we rely on written and pictorial sources or do they only reflect Greek and Roman views and iconographic conventions? Which social groups can't be traced in the literary and archaeological record? For the investigation of this topic, we combined historical and epigraphical studies (Greek and Roman literary sources, Etruscan inscriptions) with material culture studies (images, sanctuaries, necropoleis) including anthropological and bioarchaeological methods. These new insights open a new chapter in the study of dependency and social inequality in the societies of Pre-Roman Italy.

Argues that Roman expansion in Italy was accomplished more by means of negotiation among local elites than through military conquest.