The war of the Allies

[richsc]

In reading Everitt's book "Cicero" he mentions that the War of the Allies cost a staggering 200,000 dead in Italy. What is a good history of this struggle? I would think that would be an interesting last gasp of the Etruscan, Samite other cultures before being subsumed into Rome.<br>
Not to mention some epic battlefields. What and where would some of these have been?<br>
<br>
Was this the first war after the reforms of Marius? Was the shift in loyalty (from this war) to the general from the Senate why Sulla was able to march soldiers across the Pomerium? <p>Richard Campbell, Legio XX.
http://www.geocities.com/richsc53/studies/ </p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showLocalUserPublicProfile?login=richsc>RichSC</A> at: 8/24/02 1:16:51 pm<br></i>

[Catiline]

My dissertation last year was on this, well a closely related subject, the Tribunate of Marcus Livius Drusus the younger in 91 BC. It's not top drawer, but it should be a reasonable introduction if you want it to hte themes and tensions that lead to the war. It was written in a week before the deadline tho' so it's a bit, well, superficial. Mail me if you want a copy.<br>
<br>
Basically the Social war was caused by the refusal of Rome to extend her citizenship to the allies. Drusus' legislative programme had as one of it's aims the extension of the citizenship, but he was undermined by other pressures, notably senatyorial interference designed to use him to keep as much power as possible out of the hands of the Equites. The Roman people were also loath to share the benfits of empire, especially the wealth of the East that was flooding into Rome.<br>
<br>
Marius' reforms were largely responsible for the shift in loyalty from SPQR to general, afterall given the intimate tie in between political and military careers it was the general in his political role who could provide the financial rewards suh as land settlement. Sula was able to march on Rome due to this increased loyalty, plus the fact that the transfer of command for the war against Mithridates (who had been implicated in the Social war through support for the samnites) to Marius meant that Marius would take his own legions. Sulla's men wanted their share of the wealth of Asia. Sulla justified the march through the slight to his dignitas, and in the name of libertas, which is a very difficult word, political or personal freedom through to outright independence as possible meannings. To quote Crawford 'It could justify anything, and eventually it justified monarchy'<br>
<br>
I know Sulla marched on Rome, but did he actually have soldiers cross the pomerium in 88BC? <p><BR><a href="http://pub45.ezboard.com/fromanarmytalkfrm6.showMessage?topicID=53.topic" target="Rules For Posting"></p><i></i>

[StrategyM]

As far as I recall, yes. <p>Strategy<br>
Designer/Developer<br>
Imperium - Rise of Rome</p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

This might be coming a bit late since this topic was discussed but . . .<br>
<br>
I dont believe there is any in depth study of this struggle, but then again very little has come down from the ancient sources. Arthur Keaveney's 'Rome and the unification of Italy' 1987 is a good discussion of the war and even has a couple appendices on the commanders during the social war, as is his 'Sulla, the last republican'. E.T. Salmon's 'The making of Roman Italy' 1982 is also useful.<br>
<br>
Mike Burns <p></p><i></i>