Primary:
Josephus, F. (n.d.). The Jewish War.
In this text, Josephus gives us a detailed description of the events leading up to the Jewish War of 66-73 CE and those of the war itself. Including the period beginning with the capture of Jerusalem by the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes (in 164 BC), and up to the fall and destruction of Jerusalem. The causes of this war are a great example of the greed involved in Roman imperialism as the Romans had been taxing the Jews for 60 years before the Roman emperor Nero needed money and demanded Gessius Florus (a representative in Judaea) to confiscate it from the Temple treasure. This and underlying class divisions contributed the most to the actual cause of the war. Josephus as both a general (elected by temple authorities) and a historian looking with hindsight gives an account of the causes of the war, events of the war, and the horrific destruction of Jerusalem.
Livius, T. (n.d.). Chapter 6. In T. Livius, The History of Rome, Book 31.
Livy’s “History of Rome” gives an exhaustive account of Roman history. Livy writes about various aspects of Roman history and culture such as arguments in the senate concerning issues like extending a commanders term or granting a triumph. This chapter takes a closer look at the assembly’s authority in declaring war and Livy gives only one account of the assembly raising objections (during the 2nd Macedonian War). The tribune Q. Baebius convinces the people to reject the proposal for war, but the consul then convinces the assembly to reverse their decision soon after. This helps display how factors such as politics complicated the process of war and how Roman imperialism was not as simple as following an aggressive or defensive strategy.
Cicero, M. T. (n.d.). Secondary Orations Against Verres. In Book 4.
Cicero takes a unique approach to his first case and spends much of his time convincing his audience of Verrus’ “evil” nature, but also tries to make him look ridiculous. Cicero begins by reviewing Verrus’ history before being named governor of Sicily, avoiding the main charges of extortion against him. Cicero focuses much of his attention on the theft of statues, paintings, and other art. Though odd at the time, this gives us the basis for ethical acquisition of art and what should be considered unethical.
Secondary:
Harris, W. (1979). War and Imperialism in Republican Rome 327-70 B.C. OUP Oxford.
Harris shatters the conventional image of Roman imperialism being defensive in nature. He suggests a theory of “aggressive imperialism” and makes the argument “that the most important of the factors which brought about the wars was the Romans’ desire for the glory and economic benefits which successful warfare conferred.”
Malamud, M. (2009). Imperial Consumption. In M. Malamud, Ancient Rome and Modern America (pp. 229-252). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
An interesting article on the comparison and relation of the imperial consumption found in ancient Rome and the comsumption of modern america. In particular, Malamud examines the consumption exhibited in Las Vegas by the casinos.
An interesting article on the comparison and relation of the imperial consumption found in ancient Rome and the comsumption of modern america. In particular, Malamud examines the consumption exhibited in Las Vegas by the casinos.
Perkins, J. (2004). Confessions of an Economic Hit Man. Berrett-Koehler Publishers.
Perkins describes the imperialistic strategy of our nation in the modern world along with his personal experience carrying out our country's missions of conquest. In the book, Perkins describes how we use debt to conquer nations and force them into acting in our best interest. The underlying mechanics of the strategy work by us first identifying a nation of interest (with desired resources for instance), then a loan to the nation (typically from the World Bank etc. and these are very large loans), the large loans will end up going to an american corporation to develop infrastructure etc., the nation clearly cannot pay off the loan and is then forced to accept terms such as access/rights to resources we desire. This presents an interesting contrast between Roman imperialism based upon greed and glory and the modern form of imperialism with greed at its heart (but taking a more subtle form).
Rich, J. (2004). Fear, Greed, and Glory. In C. B. Champion, Roman imperialism: readings and sources (pp. 46-62). Blackwell Publishing.
Rich takes a look at the applicability of roman imperialism theories, including a defensive theory and an aggressive theory (as presented by William Harris). Roman society was thought to be a militaristic culture which valued military achievements and was geared towards fighting wars continuously to maintain the flow of opportunities and profits that result from war. War generated a cheap supply of slaves, slaves which transformed Italian agriculture. In addition, one of the main benefits ordinary Romans received as a result of war was land. Although Harris’ categorization of Roman imperialism as “aggressive imperialism” is more intuitive than the previously held notion of “defensive imperialism”, the assumption of constant warfare and expansion is inaccurate. In all reality, Roman conquest was irregular and not constant by any means. Many expansive opportunities were passed up and in many cases warfare was avoided all together.
Woolf, G. (1992, February). Imperialism, Empire and the Integration of the Roman Economy. World Archaeology, 23, 283-293.
This article explores the relationship between Roman imperialism and the Roman economy. The two main arguments provided are that of a locally/regionally based economy and a completely integrated economy in which politics were important. Support for the notion of an integrated Roman economy can found in evidence of wide spread trade throughout the empire. Looking at the remains of trade such as the amphorae (a ceramic jar commonly used by Romans to store goods like wine and olive oil), the extent of Roman trade and the rate of trade throughout different periods of the Roman Empire are explored. The basic conclusion reached by the article is that while trade within the empire rarely took an integrated form above the regional level, the integration of trade throughout the empire during the last two centuries BC was created not by the infrastructure of a staple Roman Empire but by the imperial expansion at the time.
(2009). The Pleasures of Empire. In M. Malamud, Ancient Rome and Modern America (pp. 150-185). Oxford: Wiley-Blackwell.
Hazewell, C. C. (1857, November). British India. The Atlantic Monthly, 1, pp. 85-93.
This article is a juxtaposition of the Roman Empire and the British Empire, specifically British ruled India. The scale of the British Empire outweighs that of the Roman Empire, a fact that is not well-known. While both empires differ greatly, they share the resemblance of conquering a multitude of divided nations who failed to unite against them.
(2008). Conquests and Glories, Triumphs and Spoils: Caesar and the Edeology of Roman Imperialism. In W. J. Tatum, Always I Am Caesar (pp. 42-60). Wiley-Blackwell.
Caesar represents the height of Roman greed and Conquest, giving us an example of how greed played a role Roman culture and how it helped to fuel countless Roman conquests. Rome can easily be identified as an imperialistic state, but Rome was the result of a grand transformation with a humble beginning in a small village along the Tibur. Much of this is due to Roman imperialism which was at the heart of Roman ideology.
Other:
Apted, M. (Director). (2005). "The Stolen Eagle" Rome (HBO Series) [Motion Picture].
Tykwer, T. (Director). (2009). The International [Motion Picture].
Lendering, J. (n.d.). Wars between the Jews and Romans: the subjugation of Judaea (63 BCE). Retrieved March 2011, from Livius: http://www.livius.org/ja-jn/jewish_wars/jwar01.htm
