Per un nuovo colonialismo

onclusione
Note:CONC@@@@@@@@@

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,877

non poteva non sbriciolarsi non appena l’economia britannica fosse crollata sotto il peso di due guerre mondiali. La grande creditrice divenne una debitrice.
Note:LA SORTE SEGNATA DELL IMPERO

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,880

E quanto allo slancio missionario che aveva inviato migliaia di giovani, uomini e donne, in tutto il mondo a predicare il cristianesimo e il vangelo della pulizia, anche questo si era indebolito, come si era indebolita la pratica religiosa.
Note:INDEBOLITO LO SLANCIO MISSIONARIO

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,885

Senza la diffusione del dominio inglese in tutto il mondo, è difficile credere che le strutture del capitalismo liberale sarebbero entrate a far parte con tale successo di tante diverse realtà economiche.
Note:IL CAPITALISMO

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,887

Gli imperi che adottarono modelli alternativi – il russo e il cinese – imposero una incalcolabile sofferenza ai popoli assoggettati.
Note:L ALTERNATIVA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,888

Senza l’influenza del dominio coloniale britannico, è difficile credere che le istituzioni della democrazia parlamentare sarebbero state adottate
Note:DEMOCRAZIA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,889

L’India, la più vasta democrazia mondiale, deve al dominio inglese più di quanto sia di moda riconoscere. Le sue scuole migliori, le università, la burocrazia, l’esercito, la stampa e il sistema parlamentare si basano su modelli inglesi
Note:INDIA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,892

Oggi 350 milioni di persone parlano inglese come loro prima lingua e circa 450 milioni la conoscono come seconda lingua.
Note:L ESPORTAZIONE PIÙ IMPORTANTE... LA LINGUA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,893

nessuno oserebbe affermare che il corso dell’Impero britannico sia stato senza colpe.
Note:SCHIAVISMO PULIZIA ETNICA...

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,895

l’Impero è stato indubbiamente un pioniere del libero commercio, della libera circolazione dei capitali, e, con l’abolizione della schiavitù, del lavoro libero.
Note:ASPETTO POSITIVO

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,897

una rete globale di moderne comunicazioni.
Note:cccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,897

Ha diffuso e imposto la forza della legge
Note:cccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,898

ha mantenuto una pace globale ineguagliata
Note:PACE

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,899

le alternative al dominio inglese rappresentate dalle potenze tedesca e giapponese erano chiaramente peggiori. E senza l’Impero, non è pensabile che la Gran Bretagna sarebbe riuscita ad affrontarli con successo.
Note:GIAPPONE E GERMANIA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,903

politiche fortemente protezionistiche attuate dagli Stati Uniti e dall’India dopo aver ottenuto l’indipendenza,
Note:CONTROPROVA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,907

Nessuno si è ancora avventurato a calcolare quale possa essere stato il vantaggio complessivo per l’economia mondiale; ma che si sia trattato di un vantaggio economico e non di un costo sembra innegabile,
Note:IL LIBERO COMMERCIO IMPOSTO

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,910

Né ci sarebbe stata tanta mobilità internazionale di forza lavoro
Note:LIBERA MIGRAZIONE

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,920

Consideriamo anche il ruolo dell’Impero britannico nel facilitare l’esportazione di capitale nel mondo meno sviluppato.
Note:MOBILITÀ CAPITALE

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,923

Nel 1996 soltanto il 28% degli investimenti diretti all’estero sono andati a paesi in via di sviluppo, mentre nel 1913 la percentuale era del 63.
Note:cccccccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,927

Investire in economie di questo tipo è rischioso: sono di gran lunga le più esposte a crisi economiche, sociali e politiche.
Note:cccccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,933

Per tutte queste ragioni, l’idea che l’imperialismo britannico tendesse a impoverire i paesi colonizzati sembra intrinsecamente discutibile.
Note:CONCLUSIONI

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,935

Oggi, per esempio, il PIL pro capite in Gran Bretagna è circa ventotto volte quello dello Zambia:
Note:GB ZAMBIA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,937

alla fine del periodo coloniale, la differenza tra il reddito britannico e quello dello Zambia era di molto inferiore. Nel 1955 il PIL pro capite britannico era soltanto sette volte superiore a quello dello Zambia.
Note:ccccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,944

ci sono buone prove che l’imposizione di istituzioni di stile britannico abbia in genere migliorato le prospettive economiche di un paese,
Note:IMPOSIZIONE ISTITUZIONALE

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,946

Dove gli inglesi, come gli spagnoli, conquistavano civiltà già molto sviluppate, urbanizzate, gli effetti della colonizzazione erano più frequentemente negativi, perché i colonizzatori erano tentati di abbandonarsi al saccheggio piuttosto che stabilire le loro istituzioni.
Note:CIVILTÀ AVANZATE PREESISTENTI

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,950

Spiega anche come la Gran Bretagna sia riuscita a battere la sua rivale iberica: proprio perché, come ultima arrivata nella corsa all’impero, dovette accontentarsi di colonizzare le poco promettenti distese della Virginia e della Nuova Inghilterra, e non le città ricche di potenziale bottino del Messico e del Perú.
Note:GB E SPAGNA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,953

Un recente esame di quarantanove paesi ha concluso che «nei paesi dove vige la “common law” inglese gli investitori hanno la maggior protezione legale, mentre questa scende al minimo nei paesi in cui vige il codice civile francese»,
Note:IL LASCITO DELLA COMMON LAW

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,962

elenco di misure che dovrebbe adottare un governo «ideale»
Note:ELENCO LANDES

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,963

proprietà privata,

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,964

libertà personale

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,965

obbligazioni contrattuali

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,965

governo stabile

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,966

governo onesto

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,967

governo moderato,

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,968

corrispondenza, in diversi punti, a ciò che, nel diciannovesimo e ventesimo secolo, i funzionari britannici dell’India e delle colonie pensavano di fare.
Note:CORRISPONDENZA... CON PROBLEMI SUI PUNTI 2 E 5 (DEMOCRAZIA RINVIATA SINE DIE)

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,973

Secondo studiosi di scienze politiche come Seymour Martin Lipset, i paesi che erano stati colonie britanniche avevano una possibilità notevolmente maggiore di raggiungere dopo l’indipendenza una democratizzazione durevole rispetto ai paesi dominati da altre potenze.
Note:LIPSET

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,977

in un campione di cinquantatré paesi ex colonie britanniche, quasi la metà (ventisei) erano ancora democrazie nel 1993.
Note:FATTO

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,978

il dominio inglese, soprattutto dove era «indiretto», incoraggiava la formazione di una élite;
Note:ÉLITE

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,985

ha certamente promosso una crescita economica, ma i frutti di tale crescita sono stati distribuiti in modo molto ineguale.
Note:LA GLOBALIZZAZIONE MODERNA

Yellow highlight | Location: 5,986

problemi di conflitti intestini e instabilità politica, che hanno avuto un ruolo molto importante nell’impoverimento dei paesi più poveri del globo.
Note:FRAMMENTAZIONE POLITICA INDOTTA DALLA GLOBALIZZAZION

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,001

Nel 1946 c’erano 74 paesi indipendenti; nel 1950, 89. Nel 1995 il numero era arrivato a 192,
Note:STATI

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,005

I piccoli paesi si formano spesso in seguito a guerre civili all’interno di una precedente realtà multietnica: la forma più comune di conflitto dal 1945.
Note:PICCOLO NON SEMPRE È BELLO

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,007

troppo piccoli per giustificare tutti gli attributi della condizione di Stato dei quali insistono a fregiarsi: posti di frontiera, burocrazie, eccetera.
Note:cccccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,009

sebbene rimanga la più attraente tra le culture mondiali, il liberalismo economico e politico anglofono deve sempre affrontare, dall’epoca della rivoluzione iraniana, una seria minaccia da parte del fondamentalismo islamico. Nell’assenza di un impero formale, è lecito chiedersi fino a che punto la disseminazione della «civiltà» occidentale – vale a dire di quell’insieme protestante-deista-cattolico-ebraico che emana dall’America moderna – possa venir affidata senza rischi ai signori Disney e McDonald. Queste tendenze offrono la spiegazione migliore al fatto che la storia non sia «finita» con il crollo dell’Impero sovietico
Note:FONDAMENTALISMO... LA STORIA NON È FINITA

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,015

Un nuovo imperialismo?
Note:ttttttt

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,022

Gli esempi del Kosovo e della Sierra Leone andavano chiaramente intesi come modelli di quello che si poteva ottenere con l’intervento; il caso del Ruanda come il triste esempio delle conseguenze di un non intervento.
Note:BLAIR E IL NUOVO INTERVENTISMO

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,038

Interventi abituali per rovesciare governi considerati «cattivi»; assistenza economica in cambio di un «buon» governo e di «sistemi commerciali, legali e finanziari corretti»;
Note:L IMPERO SOGNATO DA BLAIR

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,048

Proprio come nel 1999 l’aviazione statunitense bombardò la Serbia in nome dei «diritti umani», così la marina britannica negli anni Quaranta dell’Ottocento compiva raid sulla costa dell’Africa occidentale e addirittura minacciava guerra al Brasile come parte della campagna per porre fine al commercio degli schiavi.
Note:PARALLELISMI

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,055

Se gli Stati canaglia «premoderni» diventavano «troppo pericolosi perché gli Stati costituiti potessero tollerarli» ha scritto, era «possibile immaginare un imperialismo di natura difensiva», poiché «il modo più logico di affrontare il caos e quello più spesso usato in passato era la colonizzazione».
Note:NEOCOLONIZZAZIONE

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,062

«un imperialismo di nuovo genere, un imperialismo accettabile per un mondo di diritti umani e di valori cosmopoliti
Note:cccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,064

estrapolata dal già esistente «imperialismo volontario dell’economia globale», vale a dire il potere del Fondo monetario internazionale e della Banca mondiale,
Note:LA NUOVA MODALITÀ IMPERIALISTA

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,076

La realtà è che né la comunità internazionale (Blair) né l’Unione europea (Cooper) sono nella posizione di poter svolgere il ruolo di un nuovo Impero britannico. Per la semplice ragione che né l’una né l’altra hanno le risorse fiscali e militari per farlo.
Note:IDEA VELLEITARIA

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,083

Il fardello dell’uomo bianco
Note:ttttttt

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,083

La lezione più ovvia è che l’economia di maggior successo nel mondo – quale era la Gran Bretagna per gran parte del diciottesimo e diciannovesimo secolo – può fare molto per imporre i valori che preferisce a società tecnologicamente meno avanzate.
Note:UNA LEZIONE DELLA GB AGLI USA DI OGGI

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,088

in teoria, mercati internazionali aperti sarebbero stati preferibili all’imperialismo, ma in pratica il libero commercio globale non si verificava e non si verifica spontaneamente.
Note:IL LIBERO MERCATO SPONTANEO È UTOPICO... BISOGNA IMPORLO

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,090

Nel 1913 la quota britannica della produzione mondiale era l’8%: la cifra equivalente per gli Stati Uniti nel 1998 era il 22%.
Note:GLI USA SONO PIÙ RICCHI IN PROPORZIONE

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,096

L’ipotesi, in altre parole, è un passo nella direzione della globalizzazione politica, in cui gli Stati Uniti passino da impero informale a impero formale,
Note:USA: DA IMPERO INFORMALE A IMPERO FORMALE

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,099

Abbiamo visto che il suo impero iniziò con una rete di basi costiere e di sfere informali di influenza, come l’«impero» americano del dopo-1945. Ma minacce, reali e percepite, ai loro interessi commerciali spinsero costantemente gli inglesi alla tentazione di passare da un imperialismo informale a uno formale.
Note:COME INIZIA UN IMPERO

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,103

Nessuno potrebbe negare l’estensione dell’impero americano informale
Note:cccccccc

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,111

il potere imperiale britannico si basava sulla massiccia esportazione di capitali e di individui. Ma dal 1972 l’America tende a importare capitali
Note:UNA DIFFERENZA CHIAVE

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,114

gli Stati Uniti – nati non da una guerra contro la schiavitù, come sembra suggerire Blair nel suo discorso, ma da una guerra contro l’Impero britannico – saranno sempre riluttanti a governare altri popoli.
Note:ALTRA DIFFERENZA: MENTALITÁ ANTI IMPERIALISTA

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,123

gli Stati Uniti si sono – lo ammettano o no – assunti una sorta di fardello globale, come insisteva Kipling. Sono convinti di avere la responsabilità non soltanto di fare la guerra al terrorismo e agli Stati canaglia, ma anche di diffondere oltremare i vantaggi del capitalismo e della democrazia.
Note:IL FARDELLO USA

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,126

l’Impero britannico, l’impero americano agisce sempre nel nome della libertà, anche quando a dominare è palesemente il suo interesse nazionale.
Note:EGOISMO E BENESSERE GLOBALE

Yellow highlight | Location: 6,138

Ma è un impero privo dello slancio di esportare il proprio capitale, la propria gente e la propria cultura in quelle zone arretrate che ne hanno più urgente bisogno e che, se trascurate, costituiranno la maggiore minaccia alla sua sicurezza. È, in breve, un impero che non osa chiamarsi tale.
IL FRENO

6. Grandi nemici, grandi civiltà SAGGIO

Grandi nemici, grandi civiltà

Born to Be Wolves The Origins of Rome – War and Peace and War: The Rise and Fall of Empires – Peter Turchin

***

Trigger warning: – lo scontro di civiltà come motore della civiltà – teoria della frontiere meta-etnica – la mostrificazione del nemico come fattore di crescita – la guerra tempra, la pace infiacchisce – la benedizione di avere i barbari alle porte – in guerra tutti più uguali e più integrati –

***

Roman achievement of peace across such a large area—Pax Romana-put an indelible stamp on how the peoples of western Eurasia imagined an ideal state. The very word empire comes from the Latin (imperium means “military power”).

Note:PAX ROMANA

Christian theologians imagined their kingdom of God as a better, cleaner, and more just version of the Roman Empire.

Note:CITTÀ CELESTE

In the eastern Mediterranean, we see the zone of old civilizations, dominated by the brilliant Achaemenid Persian Empire. Asia Minor, the Levant, and Mesopotamia are directly governed by the Achaemenids, Egypt is about to secede and regain its independence, and Greece is the only area that had successfully fought off Persian advances earlier in the century.

Note:LA VECCHIA CIVILTÀ…I PERSIANI

Some of this spread was accomplished by colonization of new areas by the seafaring peoples—the Greeks and the Phoenicians. In addition, the literate urbanized culture spread by diffusion to several formerly barbarian peoples, the most notable of which were the Etruscans of central Italy.

Note:COLONIZZAZIONE DEL MEDITERRANEO

The bulk of Europe and North Africa, by contrast, was inhabited by stateless and illiterate tribal peoples. A highly aggressive culture, known to archaeologists as the La Tène Celts, had been expanding from its homeland in northern Europe and had come in contact with the civilized areas in several places.

Note:CELTI… CONTATTO

The most interesting is the zone of contact between “civilization” and “barbarism” in Europe. It runs along the Mediterranean shore in southeastern Iberia, south France, central Italy, and northern Greece (see Map 5). This zone is a typical metaethnic frontier, where two very different kinds of people come in contact and conflict.

Note:ZONA DI CONTATTO

The metaethnic frontier theory predicts that new aggressive empires should originate from this contact zone. Indeed, the three “great powers” of the Mediterranean in the next two centuries will be Carthage, Macedon, and Rome.

Note:TEORIA DEGLI IMPERI

As far as we know, the Etruscans were never unified under a single central authority, but instead operated as a loosely confederated league of “12 cities,” united by common language and a shared religious cult. In the seventh century, the Etruscans dominated central Italy and expanded north into the Po Valley.

Note:ETRUSCHI

The Latins were a real nation, and they themselves were aware of it. Along the Tiber River, where the two nations came in contact, a cultural frontier formed between the more advanced civilization of the Etruscans and the Latins.

Note:LATINI

Rome began as a frontier town at the interface between the Etruscan and Latin cultures.

Note:NASCITA DI ROMA

From the evidence of the Roman chronicles, supported by archaeological data, it seems the Roman nation arose as a result of a classic process of frontier ethnogenesis. According to the Roman tradition, the population of early Rome was divided into three tribes—Ramnes, Tities, and Luceres. Their names come from Romulus, a Latin; Titus Tatius, a Sabine; and Lucumo, an Etruscan. Clearly a fusion of Latin, Sabine, and Etruscan ethnic elements led up to the rise of the Roman nation. The tale of the Rape of the Sabines, of Romans capturing wives from the Sabines and eventual unification of the two groups, also attests to the multi-ethnic origin of the Romans.

Note:CIVILTÀ DI FRONTIERA

Another indication of the openness to outsiders is the mottled ethnic origin of the Roman rulers during the Archaic period, who included the Sabine Titus Tatius and Numa Pompilius, and the Etruscan Tarquins.

Note:COSMOPOLITISMO

The ability to incorporate groups and individuals of foreign origin into the social fabric of their society served the Romans well when they expanded beyond the boundaries of Latium.

Note:L ARTE DI INCORPORARE

Note that Rome was located not in the center of Latium, but on its very edge

Note:MAI AL CENTRO, SEMPRE A MARGINE

If Rome achieved such preeminence in central Italy at the end of the regal period (509 B.C.), why didn’t it continue to expand during the fifth century and unify the Mediterranean centuries before it actually happened? The answer has two parts. First, the Etruscan-Latin frontier does not qualify as a true metaethnic fault line. Both cultures were heavily influenced by the urban Mediterranean civilization, which was transmitted to them by the Greeks and the Phoenicians. The somewhat mild nature of the frontier could produce at best a regional state, not a world-class empire.

Note:FRONTIERA DOLCE

The time of troubles began with the revolt of a part of aristocracy against the last king of Rome, Tarquin the Proud. They were successful in deposing Tarquin and establishing an oligarchic form of government (somewhat misleadingly called the Republic) that would rule Rome for the next five centuries.

Note:I GUAI DI ROMA

As a result of population growth during the sixth century, land became scarce and many people were impoverished. To feed their families, they borrowed heavily from the wealthy. Roman laws were very harsh to insolvent debtors. Creditors could enslave a debtor who could not pay what he owed.

Note:SCHIAVITÙ PER DEBITI

The fifth century saw that kind of urban class struggle between the wealthy aristocrats and the impoverished commons

Note:LOTTE INTESTINE

Dyonisius writes that during the plague of 463 B.C., the corpses of the very poor had to be thrown into the Tiber, and again in 451, when the corpses were thrown into the sewers as well.

Note:PESTE E CARESTIE

As a result of epidemics, famines, and ceaseless warfare, the population declined, freeing land for the landless. The aristocrats became poorer, and after a few generations their descendants became used to the less-ostentatious way of life.

Note:SPOPOLAMENTO E POVERTÀ RITEMPRANO E ARRICCHISCONO LA DISCENDENZA

Opulent burials disappeared. Wealth inequality decreased. The social system, so disturbed around 500 B.C., returned slowly and painfully to an equilibrium.

Note:CALO DISEGUAGLIANZE

Rome was subjected to a tremendous shock that would first bring it to the brink of precipice, but in the long run set it on the path to empire. The traumatic event, as terrifying as a Nazi blitzkrieg or a terrorist mass murder, was the Gallic sack of Rome in 390.

Note:SPARTIACQUE: SACCO GALLICO

The Etruscan cities in the Po Valley succumbed to the Gallic pressure, and the north of Italy became Gallic (and was henceforth known to the Romans as the Cisalpine Gaul, as distinguished from the Transalpine Gaul—modern France and Belgium).

Note:GALLIA CISALPINA

during the fifth century, the “barbarism-civilization” frontier shifted south to the Apennine hills dividing the Po Valley from Tyrrhenian Italy.

Note:LA GRANDE FRONTIERA: ROMA BARBARI

The intensity of the new frontier dwarfed ethnic divisions on the Italian Peninsula, such as that between the Etruscans and the Latins. …The “savage Gauls” were an entirely different kind of people. …

Note:GERANDE FRONTIERA

“When the [Roman] envoys asked by what sort of justice they [the Gauls] demand land, under threat of violence, from their rightful owners, and what business Gauls had to be in Etruria anyway, they received the haughty reply that all things belonged to the brave who carried justice on the point of their swords. Passions were aroused and a fight began.”

Note:L’INCONTRO/SCONTRO CON I BARBARI

The war leader of the Gauls, Brennus, first led his troops to attack and drive away the Roman reserves, and then fell on the main body with all his might. “… the main body of the army, at the first sound of the Gallic cry on their flank and in their rear, hardly waited even to see their strange enemy from the ends of the earth; they made no attempt at resistance; they had no courage even to answer his shouted challenge, but fled before they lost a single man. None fell fighting; they were cut down from behind as they struggled through to force a way to safety through the heaving mass of their fellow-fugitives.” After the defeat at the Allia, some of the surviving Romans escaped to Veii; others ran to Rome and locked themselves up in the Citadel on the Capitoline Hill. The Gauls entered Rome unopposed, pillaged it, and besieged the Citadel. One night they almost managed to capture the Capitol by stealth, but fortunately the geese sacred to the goddess Juno raised an alarm, and the Gallic assault was repelled.

Note:BRENNO SCONFIGGE I ROMANI

Marcus Furius Camillus (later esteemed as one of the fathers of the Roman nation) gathered troops from Veii, where a part of the defeated Roman army escaped, and from the Latins. He arrived in Rome just in time to put a stop to the shameful transaction, and drove the Gauls away after inflicting two defeats on them.

Note:ROMA LIBERATA

The Gauls were an alien and terrifying enemy. In several places, Livy stresses how different they were from people whom Romans knew: “outlandish warriors armed with strange weapons,” … The whole experience left deep scars on the Roman psyche. …

Note:ALIENI

Cicero said in one of his speeches, “In the opinion of all who have ever deliberated soundly about this Commonwealth of ours, Gaul has always been the greatest threat to this empire, ever since its inception.”

Note:CICERONE

Many modern historians tend to overlook the significance of the Gallic frontier during the formative period of the Roman state (which I call Roman ethnogenesis), and for the Roman success in unifying Mediterranean within a single empire.

Note:ETNOGENESI DELL’IMPERO

The importance that Polybius assigns to the formative influence of the Gauls in the rise of the Roman Empire is made clear at the beginning of his history: “The date I have chosen, then, to mark the beginning of the establishment of Roman power in Italy” is the year when “the Gauls captured Rome by storm and were occupying the whole city except for the Capitol.”

Note:POLIBIO

In a chapter titled “Rome and the Gauls,” Polybius describes the almost continuous wars the Romans fought against the Gauls during the fourth and third centuries, and concludes: “There were two great advantages which the Romans gained from these struggles. In the first place, once they become accustomed to suffering great losses at the hands of the Gauls, there was no more terrifying experience than this which they need expect either to undergo or fear. Secondly, by the time they had to meet Pyrrhus they came to contest like trained and seasoned athletes in military operations.

Note:DINAMICA DELL’ETNOGENESI

THE ROMANS WERE FATED TO STRUGGLE against the Gauls for four centuries, finally triumphing over them only with the conquest of the Transalpine Gaul by Julius Caesar.

Note:GIULIO CESARE

In 218 B.C., Hannibal crossed the Alps with his African and Spanish troops and 20 elephants, and for the next 17 years he ravaged central and southern Italy. What is often not appreciated is that the troops that Hannibal brought with him were outnumbered by the Gallic troops he recruited in the Po Valley. …the Hannibalic war can be thought of as yet another episode in the struggle of Rome against the Gallic hordes. …

Note:ANNIBALE

Even in an age when atrocities were regularly committed by all sides, the Roman treatment of the Gauls was especially brutal. Unlike other Italian peoples who were frequently admitted as allies, or even citizens, in the Roman commonwealth after being defeated by the Romans (as discussed earlier in this chapter), this treatment was never extended to the Gauls.

Note:BRUTALITÀ

when the Romans definitively conquered the Po Valley, they “ethnically cleansed” Gauls from it. Such treatment of the inhabitants of a conquered territory was exceptional in Roman practice.

Note:PULIZIA ETNICA

the sack of Rome, which shocked both the aristocracy and the commons, and convinced them that they must cooperate to overcome the external threat.

Note:IL NEMICO CHE UNIFICA. NECESSITÀ DI UN NEMICOPER LA GRANDE IMPRESA

The Licinio-Sextian Laws of 367 ended all sorts of discrimination against the plebeians (for example, they opened the highest office of the Republic—consulship—to them) and merged the patricians and noble plebeians into a united ruling class.

Note:PLEBEI NON PIÙ DISCRIMINATI

In addition to increasing the internal cohesiveness of the Roman nation, the Gallic frontier also made the job of unifying Italy and eventually the Mediterranean much easier. …The Veneti, who were the most exposed to the Gallic pressure, proved to be the staunchest Roman allies. …

Note:IL NEMICO RENDE COESI

Polybius describes integrative effect of the Gallic threat. On learning that a Gallic invasion was imminent, the Roman authorities began to enroll the legions and summon the Italian allies. “Help was readily provided on all sides, for the other inhabitants of Italy were so terror-stricken by the invasion of the Gauls that they no longer thought of themselves as allies of Rome, nor regarded this as a war to uphold the Roman hegemony.

Note:POLIBIO SUL SERRATE LE FILE

The logic of metaethnic frontier aided not only Roman unification of Italy, but her expansion into the Mediterranean, too. By the second century B.C., the Celt became the chief kind of barbarian on the European frontier of the Mediterranean civilization.

Note:COESIONE => ESPANSIONE

Lesser civilized states on the Celtic frontier, such as Massilia and Pontus, never needed to be conquered by force. They first sought Rome’s protection against their enemies, then became faithful allies, and eventually were incorporated into empire in a consensual, noncoerced manner.

Note:CONQUISTA = RICERCA DI PROTEZIONE

WHAT KIND OF PEOPLE WERE THE ROMANS?

Livy often contrasts the rampant luxury and conspicuous consumption of his own times, the first century B.C., with the simpler, less-materialistic mores of the ancestors—and the archaeological record confirms that Roman aristocrats of the fourth and third centuries led very Spartan lives.

Note:LUSSO IN PACE AUSTERITÀ IN GUERRA

The early Romans developed a set of values, called mos maiorum (ancestral custom), which governed their private and public lives. Probably the most important value was virtus (virtue), which derived from the word vir (man) and embodied all the qualities of a true man as a member of society. Virtus included the ability to distinguish between good and evil and to act in ways that promoted good, and especially the common good.

Note:LA VIRTÙ

It also meant the devotion to one’s family and community, and heroism in war. Unlike Greeks, Romans did not stress individual prowess, as exhibited by Homeric heroes or Olympic champions.

Note:EROISMO… DIFFERENZA CON IGRECI

Other important Roman virtues included piety, faith, gravity, and constancy. Piety (pietas) was a family virtue—devotion and loyalty by men and women to the family group, willing acceptance of parental authority. It also meant reverence to the gods,

Note:PIETÀ

Faith (fides) meant keeping one’s word, paying one’s debts, and fulfilling obligations

Note:FEDE

Gravity (gravitas) meant discipline, absolute self-control—a dignified, serious, and calm attitude toward both good and bad fortune.

Note:SELF CONTROL

ROMAN VALUES WERE PART OF RELIGIONES

The ancients recognized the importance of religion in strengthening the state. Socrates reportedly said, “Those who honor the gods most finely with choruses are best in war.”

Note:RELIGIONE E STATO

Religion was the glue that cemented the people together and gave the early Roman society an extremely high degree of asabiya. The cohesiveness of the society was so high that until the first century B.C. Romans did not need a police force to keep public order.

Note:IL CEMENTO DELLA RELIGIONE

Note how the Roman virtues served to limit individualism (gravity and constancy), strengthened ties within family (piety) and community (faith), and sacrifice for the common good (virtus).

Note:VIRTÙ E INDIVIDUALISMO

The typical sequence of any war between the Romans and their numerous opponents was to lose battles early in the war, but then, nevertheless, win the war.

Note:PERDERE LE BATTAGLIE E VINCERE LE GUERRE

Perhaps the best illustration is the Second Punic War. Hannibal was a brilliant general and inspired leader. With his heterogeneous army, half of which was brave but undisciplined Gauls, he smashed one Roman army after another—at the Ticinus, at the Trebia, at lake Trasimene, and the worst one, at Cannae. Fifty thousand Romans died at Cannae, one third of the senate was wiped out. “No other nation in the world,” says Livy, “could have suffered so tremendous a series of disasters and not been overwhelmed.” What distinguished the Romans from their adversaries was that they were able to overcome such disasters.

Note:ESEMPIO GUERRA PUNICA

Perhaps the ultimate expression of this sacrificial spirit was the Roman ritual of “devotion.” If a battle was going against the Romans, the Roman commander could devote himself and the enemy army to the gods of the underworld. The basic idea was to place a potent curse on oneself and carry it in the midst of the enemy, thus saving the Roman legions. …Devotion, thus, was a kind of suicide bombing. … The Romans, after losing their general (which on other occasions is generally a cause for alarm), checked their flight and wanted to renew the fighting; …

Note:RITO DELLA DEVOZIONE… PROTO KAMIKAZE

VERTICAL INTEGRATION OF A SOCIETY

the degree of solidarity felt between the commons and aristocracy, is one of the most important characteristics explaining its success at empire building.

Note:COESIONE ARISTOCRAZIA E PLEBE

social structure, which was intimately connected to Rome’s military organization. It was no accident that the original meaning of the Latin word “people”—populus—was “army.”

Note:WARFARE

Citizens with property valued at 50,000 to 100,000 asses (an as was a bronze coin; during this period Romans did not use silver or gold coinage) served as hoplites—infantrymen armed with helmet, shield, spear, and sword. These heavily armed infantrymen were the mainstay of ancient Mediterranean armies, and are familiar to us from many Greek depictions. Poorer citizens with property valued at 11,000 to 25,000 asses served as light infantrymen (armed with a sling or javelin).

Note:FANTERIA

At the bottom of the social scale were those who did not serve—propertyless citizens (proletarii), foreigners, and slaves.

Note:NIENTE GUERRA PER I POVERI

Wealthier citizens served as cavalry, and for this reason the Roman aristocratic class was known as equestrians or knights.

Note:RICCHI A CAVALLO

At the top of the Roman hierarchy were the senatorial families, who served as cavalry and top officers.

Note:IL TOP

the richest 1 percent of the Romans during the early Republic was only 10 to 20 times as wealthy as an average Roman citizen. …Economic inequality in a typical ancient or medieval state was much greater than in the early Rome, or even in the United States today. …

Note:DISEGUAGLIANZE RIDOTTE

The frugal lifestyle of the senatorial aristocracy in early Rome also did not distinguish them greatly from the common citizens.

Note:IN GUERRA TUTTI UGUALI

when Cincinnatus was summoned to be dictator, while working at the plow, he reportedly exclaimed: “My land will not be sown this year, and so we shall run the risk of not having enough to eat!”

Note:CINCINNATO

When Alexander was conquering the Persian Empire, he wore homespun clothes made by his sisters. During the campaigns, Alexander ate the same food and slept under the same conditions as his soldiers.

Note:ALESSANDRO

When 50,000 Romans, a staggering one fifth of Rome’s total manpower, perished in the battle of Cannae, as mentioned previously, the senate lost almost one third of its membership.

Note:MORTI IN GUERRA DIVISI PER CENSO

The wealthy classes were also the first to volunteer extra taxes when they were needed.

Note:EXTRA-TASSE

When the leaders do not hide behind rank and shoulder their share of the common burden, the common people are much more likely to fall in line. This is perhaps why the plebs and the aristocracy had coexisted in rather harmonious relations

Note:ARMONIA

Two FACTORS EXPLAIN THE RISE of the Roman Empire: the high degree of internal cohesiveness of the Roman people, or asabiya, which reached a peak c. 200 B.C.; and the remarkable openness of the Romans to the incorporation of other peoples, often recent enemies.

Note:DUE FATTORI DI SUCCESSO: 1 INTEGRAZIONE 2 INCORPORAZIONE

The internal organization of the Spartans shows that the great degree of internal solidarity characterizing Rome was not unique. Of all Greek nations, the Spartans appear to be most similar to the early Romans. The grave demeanor of the Spartans, their abhorrence of excesses and luxury would have met with approval in Rome. More importantly, the two ancient nations had similar ideas about service to the country, up to and including giving up life. One does not need to go further for an example than the sacrifice of the 300 Spartans in the Thermopylae Pass.

Note:SPARTA E ROMA

How did the Spartans develop this unusual but highly effective social organization? …The turning point occurred toward the end of the eighth century when Sparta conquered the neighboring area of Messenia. The Spartans divided the land into allotments and turned the Messenians into serfs (helots) who were required to work the land. The rent from each allotment supported an individual Spartan household. In other words, the Spartans turned themselves into a ruling class with leisure (if it can be called that) to devote to military training. The helots were not particularly happy with this state of affairs, and during the succeeding centuries periodically revolted in an attempt to free themselves from the Spartan subjugation. The perpetual threat of helot rebellion (who were ready to rise any time Sparta would encounter military difficulties) was a constant reminder to the Spartan masters not to slacken off on their training and relax their discipline. …

Note:ORIGINI DI SPARTA

Note here the great difference between the arrangements that Sparta made in Messenia and Rome’s treatment of her defeated enemies. Through the fourth, third, and second centuries, Rome continued her policy of admitting former adversaries to the commonwealth. At the end of the last Latin war in 338, Rome absorbed all Latin communities. By the end of the fourth century, Latium and Campania were merged together into a Roman-Campanian state,

Note:DIFFERENZA CON ROMA: CAPACITÀ DI INCORPORARE

There were, however, limits to the Roman willingness to incorporate aliens. Most significantly, their openness did not extend across the metaethnic divide. Although the definition of Romanitas (“Romanness”) was gradually extended to include Latins, Campanians, Etruscans, and Greeks, the Gauls were most definitely beyond the pale, and were likely to be treated quite harshly.

Note:LIMITI: GLI ALIENI SONO FUORI

The Spartans treated the Messenians as a race to be enslaved—because Sparta was not located on a metaethnic frontier. The absolute ethnic difference between a Spartan and a Messenian was much less than between a Roman and a Tarentine.

Note:SPARTA NON EBBE IL GRANDE NEMICO

The Athenian Empire started as a cooperative venture—the Delian League, put together by lonians to better resist the Persian Empire. Note that it was the overwhelming external threat of Persian invasion in the early fifth century B.C. that briefly united the Greeks.

Note:INIZIO DELL’ IMPERO ATENIESE E MINACCIA PERSIANA

however, the Persians withdrew from the Greek heartland after they lost the naval battle of Salamis. When the external threat was gone, the Athenians proceeded to use the Delian League for their own selfish purposes rather than for the common good.

Note:RITIRO DEI PERSIANI DOPO SALAMINA. L’INIZIO DELLA FINE

In contrast to Sparta and Athens, Rome was not abandoned by all her allies when she found herself in desperate straits during the Hannibalic war. Hannibal was able to detach various Italian communities from Rome only by threatening them with overwhelming force. Only the Bruttians, a hill tribe of southern Italy, went over to Hannibal wholeheartedly (and were later brutally punished by Rome for this). Many Italian cities fought loyally for Rome, and suffered greatly from Hannibal as a result.

Note:GLI ALLEATI DI ROMA FURONO FEDELI

The final comparison in this chapter is between the Macedonians and other Greeks. Macedon arose as a typical frontier state on the periphery of the Hellenic civilization.

Note:MACEDONIA

The Macedonians were first confronted with the nomadic Thracians, and then they were conquered by the Persians. After a brief stint as the marchland of the Persian Empire, they regained independence, and immediately came under strong pressure from the expanding Celts.

Note:CELTI E PERSIANI I LORO NEMICI METAETNICI

Macedon from its inception was a territorial state. It is a telling distinction. When the Athenians acquired the island of Salamis, they did not incorporate it into Attica (“Athenian land”). Instead, they planted some colonies of Athenians on the best land and treated the natives of Salamis as inferiors. Salamis continued to be a separate unit from Attica. The Spartans, similarly, did not expand the definition of Laconia when the conquered Messenia, but continued to call the two regions …By contrast, every time the Macedonians conquered any land, they incorporated it into Macedon. …

Note:UNO STATO TERRITORIALE

World empires arise from regions where civilizations clash.

È LO SCONTRO DI CIVILTÀ A CREARE GLI IMPERI E LA PAX IMPERIALE