|
 In Roman times slaves that had been sentenced
to death were crucified on both sides of the Appian Way. Crucifixion is a form of
execution that the Romans had learnt from their Punic enemies, the ancient
Carthaginians. When the rebellion of the slave leader Spartacus had been put
down in 71 BC six thousands followers were executed. Crucifixes were erected
along the Appian Way all the way from Rome to Capua. If the number of a total of
six thousand crucifixions between Rome and Capua is true to fact passers-by had
to face a crucifix every seventy meters on either side of this two-hundred-twelve-
kilometre stretch of the Appian Way. Google Image Search of Animal Husbandry Pg 1 Image 4
The very duration of the Spartican war provides a hint that there may be something more to tell.
It took another book to tell it, Spartacus, written in 1931 by Scottish writer Lewis Grassic
Gibbon (James Leslie Mitchell).
Mitchell belonged to that rare category of socialist authors who can write entertainingly about
the things they believe in.
What is particularly striking about Mitchell's account is the way in which he manages to place
the tensions inside the slave camp rather than between Spartacus and the Roman leader,
Crassus. In Mitchell's book the group of around 70 gladiators, who had managed to secure
their escape to a defensible position on Mount Vesuvius and repulsed the local Roman troops,
quickly became a rallying point for all manner of slaves from the surrounding territories. Their
attempt to secure personal freedom rallied together a small army of Thracians, Germans, Gauls
and Roman-born slaves, not all of them pulling in the same direction.
The course of the revolt shows the tremendous tensions which this created within the slave
ranks. For the Germans and Gauls `home' lay to the north and over the Alps. Others in the
slave camp were already `home' and had nowhere else to run to. For almost two years the
slaves wavered between a policy of holding on to southern Italy and one of breaking out
through the north and into freedom.
In Mitchell's book, and in the various Roman accounts of the revolt (notably Plutarch's Crassus
and Appian's Civil Wars), the slave army managed to destroy legion after legion of Roman
troops, inflicting five humiliating defeats upon the previously undefeated forces of Rome. Then
the slave army aimed for an assault upon Rome itself.
The reasoning behind the attempt upon Rome is a matter of debate. Were they simply a
predatory force drunk with their own success and hungry for an impossible plunder? Were they
inspired by some primitive notion of `liberty' or `freedom' which is lost to us? For what it's
worth, my own belief is that given the composition of the slave army, the conquest of Rome
was the only possible resolution of the conflict which could satisfy the aspirations of the whole
body of the slaves, by destroying both the domestic masters and allowing a return to their
homelands for those who still harboured such desires.
Yet this too is conjecture. Fresh Roman Legions, the advance of autumn and the threat of
winter drove the slave army back down into the south leaving them trapped in the peninsula of
Bruttium. Their subsequent escape from the peninsula, through the snows and their
outmanoeuvring of the Roman Legions gave them a stay of execution but only until the spring.
The end, in Mitchell's version, came when Gauls and Germans split off from the main force to
try and break out through the north. Instead they quickly found themselves trapped and were
defeated by Crassus. The truth is probably simpler. The slave forces were continually having to
split up to secure forage. Crassus had been exploiting this for months, by picking off small
bands of slaves.
Mitchell doesn't shy away from the brutality of ancient slavery and the related brutality of the
slave army. The central focus is on the tension between the half-articulated notions of `liberty'
and `freedom' which he gives to the slaves, and the brutalizing reality of slavery. The course of
the rebellion is itself a passage from brutality to hope, hope which is at its peak in the last
desperate throes of rebellion.
|
|
Spartacus: leader of an army of runaway slaves that infested Italy in 73-71 BCE. He was
defeated by the Roman general Crassus.
The Roman economy was based on agriculture and war. For centuries, a Roman citizen was a
peasant and a soldier. During the Second Punic war (218-202; against the Carthaginian general
Hannibal), this started to change. The Romans had to fight their wars overseas: in Spain, and,
after 200, Greece and Macedonia. Often, the soldiers had to stay abroad for a long time, and it
often happened that on their return, they found that their farms had gone bankrupt. Under these
circumstances, there was only one solution: sell the farm and move from the country to the city.
The Italian cities were rapidly growing, and the countryside also changed.Slowly, the small
farms were replaced by large plantations (often called latifundia), where the work was done
by slaves, who could not be recruited for military service. The Greek historian Appian of
Alexandria(c.95-c.165) describes the results:
The rich [...] used persuasion or force to buy or seize property which adjoined their own,
or any other smallholdings belonging to poor men, and came to operate great ranches
instead of single farms. They employed slave hands and shepherds on these estates to avoid
having free men dragged off the land to serve in the army, and they derived great profit
from this form of ownership too, as the slaves had many children and no liability to military
service and their numbers increased freely. For these reasons the powerful were becoming
extremely rich, and the number of slaves in the country was reaching large proportions,
while the Italian people were suffering from depopulation and a shortage of men, worn
down as they were by poverty and taxes and military service. And if they had any respite
from these tribulations, they had no employment, because the land was owned by the rich
who used slave farm workers instead of free men.
[Appian, Civil wars 1.7;
tr. John Carter]
In this way, the countryside became crowded with slaves: usually prisoners of war, but often
simply bought from slave traders, who bought them from pirates. (A modern estimate: there
were two million slaves on an Italian population of six million.) Strong captives were sometimes
forced to fight as gladiators in the arena. The ancients really loved this bloody spectacle,
something we could expect from the bellicose Romans (although gladiatorial contests were just
as popular in the Greek world).
One of those was Spartacus, the leader of a rebellion of gladiators and slaves that escalated to
a full-scale war in the years 73-70. We have two main sources:Plutarch of Chaeronea(46-
c.122) describes this war in his Life of Crassus (click here), and one generation later, Appian
told the story in his History of the Civil wars (click here). Both accounts describe more or
less the same events in exactly the same sequence, and it is tempting to see the same source
behind their stories, probably the Histories of Sallust or (less likely) Livy's History of Rome
from its foundation. It seems that Appian has abridged his account, whereas Plutarch has left
out several stories about Spartacus' cruelty.
In 73, seventy-eight gladiators managed to escape from the fighting school of Cnaeus Lentulus
Batiatus at Capua. According to Plutarch, they were only armed with choppers and spits,
which they had found in a kitchen. However, they soon discovered a transport of gladiatorial
weapons. From now on, they were heavily armed, and they occupied a mountain.
Appian informs us that this was the Vesuvius, and that the gladiators elected three leaders:
Spartacus, Oenomaus and Crixus. Probably, they represented ethnic groups: a Thracian, a
Greek, and a German. According to Plutarch,
Spartacus was a Thracian from the nomadic tribes and not only had a great spirit and great
physical strength, but was, much more than one would expect from his condition, most
intelligent and cultured, being more like a Greek than a Thracian.
[Plutarch, Life of Crassus 8;
tr. Rex Warner]
This last remark is a well-known cliché from ancient literature. Any non-Greek/Roman who
had done something special, was said to be more intelligent than other barbarians. Other
sources say that Spartacus could have so much success because he had once fought in the
Roman auxiliaries.
Already at this stage of the revolt, runaway slaves, shepherds, and herdsmen must have joined
the band of gladiators (our sources mention this at a later stage). We have to assume this,
because otherwise, it is impossible to explain how the gladiators were able to overcome a
militia sent by the Capuan authorities to deal with the runaways. The only result was that the
gladiators now had real arms. Their numbers quickly swelled, because, as Appian tells us,
Spartacus "divided the spoils in equal shares".
The central government at Rome now had to intervene, and it sent the propraetorCaius
Claudius Glaber with an army of 3,000 hastily conscripted and untrained soldiers. Perhaps this
was an underestimation of the power of the gladiators, but it is more likely that Rome was
unable to send a stronger force. The empire was involved in two large wars: general Pompey
was fighting against Sertorius in Spain and his colleague Lucullus against king Mithradates of
Pontus in the east. The city itself was restless because, due to these wars, grain had become
scarce.
Although he had a small and untrained army, Claudius came close to success. He isolated the
gladiators on a hill-top which was covered with vines, and it looked as if they were chanceless.
However, the besieged made ladders from the branches of the vines, descended from the hill
during the night, and managed to get behind the enemy lines. The Romans panicked and fled,
and their camp was looted by the gladiators. They could start to give weapons to the runaway
slaves who had joined them.
"Rome" launched a second expedition against the gladiators, this time commanded by the
praetorPublius Varinius. For reasons that are unknown to us, he divided his forces, and the
divisions were easily defeated by the army of the gladiators. Varinius himself was humiliated: he
lost the very horse that he rode, his lictorswere taken prisoner, and Spartacus paraded their
fascesthrough his camp.
The Roman author Publius Annius Florus, who published a summary of the great History of
Rome from its foundation of Livy, mentions that the army of gladiators and slaves "laid waste
Nola, Nuceria, Thurii and Metapontum with terrible destruction" (click herefor the complete
story). These towns are all situated in the southern half of Italy. The shepherds of this region,
real cowboys, joined the army of Spartacus. From now on, he could also employ cavalry.
Next year, the Senate understood that this war was serious. According to Appian, Spartacus
now commanded some 70,000 people, and although we do not know how he obtained this
figure, we can be sure that the wealthy land-owners in the Senate understood that their slaves
could also run away. Therefore, the senators ordered both consuls, Lucius Gellius Publicola
and Cnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus, to proceed against the bands of Spartacus. |
|
Spartacus: leader of an army of runaway slaves that infested Italy in 73-71 BCE. He was
defeated by the Roman general Crassus.
This is the second part of an article; the first one can be found here.
According to Appian of Alexandria,
Spartacus had used the winter to manufacture weapons.
His army must have controlled the countryside of the entire Campania. It was his plan to cross
the Apennines and move to the north, where his people could return to their homelands in Gaul,
Germania, or the Balkans. It would be difficult to lead 70,000 people out of Italy, and it was
necessary to march in separated columns.
This offered an opportunity to the Romans. In the spring of 72, consulLucius Gellius Publicola
unexpectedly attacked a division that is called "the German contingent" by Plutarch of
Chaeronea, and "the force of Crixus" by Appian. The latter states that Crixus lost two-thirds of
his 3,000 men in a battle, which took place in the neighborhood of modern Foggia. At the same
time, consul Cnaeus Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus intercepted the main force of Spartacus'
army somewhere in the Apennines. It was his task to wait for his colleague, so that their enemy
would be under attack from two sides. But Spartacus defeated both armies separately, took
their equipment, and continued his march to the Adriatic Sea.
At this point, there is a remarkable difference between the accounts of Plutarch and Appian.
Plutarch tells how Spartacus "pushed on towards the Alps", Appian adds another detail.
In the aftermath the consuls retreated in confusion, while Spartacus, first sacrificing 300
Roman prisoners to Crixus, made for Rome with 120,000 foot soldiers after burning the
useless equipment and putting all the prisoners to death and slaughtering the draught animals
to free himself of all encumbrances.
[Appian, Civil war 1.117;
tr. John Carter]
It is likely that Plutarch ignored this cruel story because it did not suit in his description of
Spartacus as "intelligent and cultured, being more like a Greek than a Thracian". The story is
also told by Publius Annius Florus(and, in a slightly different form, the Christian author Orosius):
He also celebrated the obsequies of his officers who had fallen in battle with funerals like
those of Roman generals, and ordered his captives to fight at their pyres, just as though he
wished to wipe out all his past dishonor by having become, instead of a gladiator, a giver of
gladiatorial shows.
[Florus, Epitome 2.8;
tr. E.S. Foster]
The two consuls were not defeated yet. They marched their armies back to Rome, briefly
pursued by Spartacus, who may have wanted to create panic. But it was not his intention to
march on Rome, and he brought his army to the Adriatic, continuing his march to the Alps. The
consuls understood what was going on and the legionsmarched to the Adriatic as well. There
were several excellent roads, and they arrived there first. Somewhere south of Ancona, the two
armies fought again, and again Spartacus was victorious.
The gladiators and slaves now could escape, but there was one last obstacle: the army of Gallia
Cisalpina, the Roman provincealong the river Po. At Modena, governorCaius Cassius Longinus
and his provincial army were defeated.
And now, something strange happened. Spartacus had reached his aim: his people could cross
the Alps and go back to their homelands in Gaul, Germany, and the Balkans. And yet, this is
not what happened. Instead, the enormous army turned south. Plutarch offers a lame excuse:
Spartacus' view was that they should cross the mountains and then disperse to their own
homes [...]. His men, however, would not listen to him. They were strong in numbers and
full of confidence, and they went about Italy ravaging everything in their way.
[Plutarch, Life of Crassus 9;
tr. Rex Warner]
This is incredible. Nobody wanted to prolong the war. In fact, we simply do not know why
Spartacus and his army returned to the south. Probably, many refugees did not join this march,
and did in fact cross the Alps and return to their homes.
Crassus
Meanwhile, in Rome, the consuls were told to return to civilian life, and a new commander was
chosen for the war: Marcus Licinius Crassus. The remains of two consular legions seem to have
stayed in the neighborhood of Ancona, and Crassus ordered their commander, Mummius, to
join him further to the south. He was not to make contact with the enemy. However, Mummius
believed that he saw a good opportunity, offered battle and was defeated. Crassus was angry,
and punished the defeated soldiers harshly. They were to be decimated: every tenth soldier was
to be killed by his comrades. The result was that the Roman soldiers learned that they had
more to fear from their commander than from the runaways, and discipline was restored.
In the winter of 72/71, Spartacus arrived in Bruttium, the "toe" of Italy, and captured Thurii. (It
was the only time he settled his people in a town.) This time, his intention was to conquer Sicily.
There had been several major rebellions of slaves on the island: between 135 and 132, a Syrian
slave named Eunushad ruled as a king, and more recently, in 104, a certain Salvius had been
able to do the same, calling himself Tryphon. When he had died, his revolt had been continued
by a man named Athenio; it had lasted until 101.
Spartacus may have had the same plan, or an even better one, because he collaborated with
the Cilician pirates. To them, a base on Sicily would be a great asset, because the Romans
had
not much naval experience and the Cilicians could loot and plunder the Italian coast without
meeting opposition.
But apparently, something went wrong, because the Cilicians did not appear. Who did appear,
was Crassus, and he ordered his men to build a large wall across Bruttium, from the Tyrrhenian
to the Ionian Sea. It was sixty kilometers long, but his army consisted of eight legions or 32,000
men, and the job was done quickly. Spartacus was trapped.
A first attack of the gladiators was repulsed without difficulty: the Romans lost three men and
killed 6,000 enemies (or so it was said). Now Spartacus decided upon smaller actions, and did
his best to improve morale.
He crucified a Roman prisoner in no-man's land to demonstrate to his own troops the fate
awaiting them if they were defeated.
[Appian, Civil wars 1.119;
tr. John Carter]
At first, Crassus was not in a hurry to attack the gladiators. They were trapped and it was
winter, so that their supplies would run out. In the spring, he would attack the hungry runaways.
However, the Senate felt that this was not an honorable way to conduct a war, and they called
upon Pompey, the Roman general who had been fighting in Spain and had just concluded the
war. This forced Crassus into action. He was lucky, because Spartacus decided upon an
attack, and although he managed to break through Crassus' lines, he had only one third of his
men with him. The remaining two thirds were an easy target for the legions. Even better still, the
gladiators who had broken through the Roman lines, were divided, and Crassus could inflict
serious losses on one of the groups. However, Spartacus appeared just in time to prevent the
annihilation of this contingent.
From now on, the Romans were superior in numbers. Crassus attacked Spartacus in a full-
scale battle. After the defeats of the consular armies, this seemed a dangerous course and
fighting was tense. The gladiators knew that they had to win or die, and fought bravely. After
all, the death on the battlefield was preferable to crucifixion. But they were defeated. According
to Crassus' body- count, 12,300 were killed, and only two of them were wounded in the back.
(In the Periochaeof Livy's History, the number is given as 60,000.)
Spartacus now moved to the "toe" of Italy again, to Petelia. He was hunted down by the
Romans, but the gladiators were able to defeat two of Crassus' lieutenants, Quintus Marcius
Rufus and Cnaeus Tremellius Scrofa. This was their last victory. According to Plutarch
this success turned out to be the undoing of Spartacus, since it filled his slaves with over-
confidence. They refused any longer to avoid battle and would not even obey their officers.
Instead they surrounded them with arms in their hands as soon as they began to march and
forced them to lead them back through Lucania against the Romans.
[Plutarch, Life of Crassus 11;
tr. Rex Warner]
It is likely that the gladiators were not over-confident, but simply wanted one single battle, and
find a glorious and quick death.
Crassus was only too willing to offer battle, and camped close by the enemy. He can not really
have been surprised when the gladiators suddenly appeared and attacked his army. Fighting
was heavy again, but the outcome was never in doubt. The remaining 35,000 rebels were
defeated and the Romans recovered five legionary eagle- standards, twenty-six other
standards, and five fasces. Spartacus' body was never found.
This was the end of the war. There were still many fugitives in the mountains of Bruttium, and
they organized themselves into four groups. This is the ultimate tribute to Spartacus' genius as
an organizer: even after his death, his men were able to continue a disciplined struggle.
However, they were eventually defeated, some by Pompey, others by Crassus.
Six thousand gladiators were captured alive. They were crucified along the Via Appia, the road
between Rome and Capua. For years, travelers were forced to see the crosses: every thirty,
forty meters, they saw how a body of a former slaves was rotting away, a prey for the vultures
and dogs.
All ancient sources show Spartacus as a criminal and bandit, even worse than the other arch-
enemy of Rome, Hannibal. (The exception is Varro, who states that Spartacus was innocently
condemned to the arena.) This black image remained unchallenged in the Middle Ages and
Renaissance.
However, in 1760, the French tragedy Spartacus by Bernard-Joseph Saurin presented him as
a noble hero. This play, which was based on the story of Plutarch, is the origin of the modern,
positive image of the slave leader. Karl Marx, after reading Appian, was equally impressed by
the Thracian gladiator. Since then, Spartacus has often been used as a symbol of emancipation:
of the poor, of repressed nationalities (e.g., Bulgaria), and of the working class - especially in
the Communist countries during the Cold War. After Kirk Douglas' heroic nudity in Stanley
Kubrick's sentimental movie Spartacus (1960), the gladiator became a symbol of the
emancipation of male homosexuals. |
|
|
|
|
|
1. Tales of Rabbi Nachman Monday,...
