Gaius Terentius Varro

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Gaius Terentius Varro († after 200 BC) was the Roman consul in 216 BC. BC and together with his colleague Lucius Aemilius Paullus commanded the Roman army in the battle of Cannae in the Second Punic War against the Carthaginian general Hannibal . Despite being numerically inferior, Hannibal was able to destroy the Roman army. In the further course of the war, Varro, who, in contrast to Paullus, survived the battle, no longer played a major role. In retrospect he was largely characterized negatively by the later Roman historiography and ascribed the main responsibility for the devastating defeat against Hannibal to him, as he mobilized against a war policy of the Senate that was supposedly cautious even before the defeat and, unlike his counterpart, for the event a decisive armed conflict with Hannibal had occurred. But traces of a more positive tradition also remained; so inter alia that Varro was treated with respect because of his efforts to stabilize the situation after the unfortunate outcome of the battle and he was even offered the office of dictator . Overall, relatively few reliable facts are known from Varro's life.

Life

Origin and early career

Gaius Terentius Varro came from the plebeian gens Terentia and, according to the Fasti Capitolini, was the son of Gaius Terentius and grandson of Marcus Terentius .

Perhaps the Roman historian Titus had already mentioned Livius in his earlier, lost books of his historical work Ab urbe condita Varro on the occasion of his attainment of the lower offices of the Cursus honorum . In any case, Livius catches up with the early life story of Varro on the occasion of his advocacy of the law for the equality of the Magister equitum Marcus Minucius Rufus in command with the dictator Quintus Fabius Maximus Verrucosus (217 BC) in the form of an invective . The source for this reviling introduction was perhaps Lucius Coelius Antipater . According to this account, Varro came not only from low, but from dirty backgrounds and was the son of a butcher. Varro himself initially practiced this trade. With the help of the money left by his father, he hoped to pursue a senatorial career. He was in because of his advocacy of slanderous trials of the assets and reputation of leading people plebs become popular and have so the lower magistrates of the Bursary and the plebeian and curule aedileship reached. In contrast to this hostile, one-sided characteristic, traces of a more positive, honorable representation have been preserved in the tradition, which probably go back to Varro's descendants, the Roman scholar Marcus Terentius Varro (see chapter "Appreciation").

Varro's participation in the first Illyrian war in 229/228 BC is not exactly certain . Both Friedrich Münzer and the American historian Jerome Arkenberg refer to his contribution. Arkenberg justifies it with the fact that Gaius Terentius was the first of his family to bear the name Varro.

According to Friedrich Münzer, Varro also held the office of mint master around the time of the first Illyrian war . In years that cannot be precisely determined, he held the bursary and then the plebeian (around 221 BC) and the curular aedility (around 220 BC). The story that Gaius Terentius Varro organized a festival in one of his Ädiln offices, and at the Pompa circensis carried out here , a strikingly beautiful boy on the chariot of Jupiter had the exuvia (attributes) of the Worn by God; According to popular belief, this made Juno jealous, which is why Varro was later defeated in the Battle of Cannae . So when Marcus Terentius Varro asserted that unintentionally evoked divine anger had caused the defeat of his ancestor at Cannae, he was probably trying to downplay the human guilt for the catastrophe that was later blamed on him. The next office held by Gaius Terentius Varro was in 218 BC. The praetur . 217 BC He was the only one in favor of the legislative proposal of the tribune Marcus Metilius, according to which Colonel Minucius Rufus should be equated with the dictator Fabius Maximus in decision-making authority (see above).

consulate

Consuls election; Armor; Tensions in the preparations for war

216 BC BC Gaius Terentius Varro reached the consulate . He was elected as Homo novus according to the very hostile portrayal of Livius with the help of his relative, the tribune of the people Quintus Baebius Herennius , while his nobility colleague Lucius Aemilius Paullus was only able to secure the other consulate post in the second ballot. Even the generally very reliable Greek historian Polybios is imprecise because he first mentions Paullus when citing the election.

In the opinion of the ancient historian Friedrich Münzer, the report of Polybios is almost exclusively credible and therefore historically useful for the preparations for war and especially for the initiation of war up to the decisive battle. Accordingly, the Senate decided, in agreement with the consuls, to fight against Hannibal with a strong superior force in open terrain, where the Punic general could not set ambushes, by which means he had been successful several times. The Romans hoped to achieve victory because of their significant troop strength. The total strength of their army to be achieved was set at eight legions and an equally numerous armed force of their allies. Varro and his colleague dug up the missing number of soldiers and handed over the troop command in the field to the consuls of the previous year, Gnaeus Servilius Geminus and Marcus Atilius Regulus , who were only supposed to get involved in smaller fights for the time being. The armaments lasted almost half a year.

According to Polybius, a dispute between the consuls over the conduct of the war only broke out when the enemy came into contact with the decisive battle. On the other hand, Livy and most of the surviving reports by later authors claim that the differences as to whether a battle should be fought had already broken out before the army left Rome. Livy speaks of fierce party battles between the old nobility and new upstarts. Even in the election of the consuls there had been tensions between the People's Party and the patricians; the tribune Baebius Herennius accused the nobility of deliberately prolonging the war against Hannibal and even luring him to Italy. After his election to the highest magistrate, Varro had repeated the same allegations and assured him that he would end the war on the day of the first enemy contact. Above all, against the last-mentioned assertion of Varro, Livy puts a counter-speech in the mouth of the other consul, Paullus, before the people; and an alleged instruction given by the former dictator Fabius Maximus to Paullus, who is getting ready to start the war, and his answer should also be assessed. Friedrich Münzer considers all three counter-speeches to be unhistorical.

In fact, in Rome at that time, there were still violent differences between patricians and plebeians. So it happened as early as 217 BC. On domestic differences of opinion regarding warfare. Here, the defensive tactics of the patrician dictator Fabius had proven to be superior to the offensive fighting technique of the plebeian senior officials Gaius Flaminius and Marcus Minucius Rufus . In the later Roman tradition it was not taken into account that the campaign plan of the year 216 BC. B.C. intended to prevent military catastrophes like that of Flaminius by mobilizing a much larger army. Instead, it was only looked at the even more devastating outcome of the Battle of Cannae , and also that on the day of the battle, Varro held the command of command, which changed daily between the consuls, and survived the fight while Paullus fell and was thus relieved of responsibility for the defeat. Under the impression of these facts and the introduction of the domestic political mood of the previous year, Roman historiography presented the prehistory of the Battle of Cannae in such a way that it characterized Varro as the incapable general who was mainly responsible for the defeat, while Paullus continued to pursue the more successful tactics of Fabius let. But Polybius had already judged that the greatest expectation was placed in Paullus because of his already proven efficiency and his earlier victorious fight against the Illyrians .

Approach to the theater of war; Varro's role in the Battle of Cannae

The authoritative report of Polybius states that after their arrival at the Roman armed forces, the two consuls probably immediately set off with the army against Hannibal near Arpi and fought the decisive battle just eight days later. On the first day, Paullus took over the supreme command, which changed daily between the consuls, and gave a speech to the army, and the advance began on the following day. On the third day, on which again Paullus led the high command, the Roman units encountered the opposing main army after a further advance. Under Hannibal's command, this had moved from Gerunium to Cannae , a place on the Aufidus River (today Ofanto ) in Apulia .

The enemy contact took place at the end of July 216 BC. BC (according to the pre-Julian calendar). Paullus set up camp about 9 km from the enemy. Now, according to Polybios, there were clear differences of opinion between the consuls for the first time. So Paullus considered the terrain unsuitable for fighting a battle, since Hannibal could show his cavalry superiority in the wide plain. But Varro was - as Polybius thinks, out of inexperience - the opposite view. On the following day, the fourth day after the arrival of the consuls in the Roman army, he took over the command of command again and moved closer to the enemy despite the reservations of his official colleague. Hannibal sent lightly armed men and horsemen to meet the Romans, but in the end the Romans had an advantage in battle.

On the fifth day, Paullus, now again in command, had two camps of different sizes set up on both sides of the Aufidus. After a day of rest, on the seventh day, Paullus did not accept a challenge from Hannibal to fight, whereupon the Numidian troops advance against the smaller Roman camp and prevent the soldiers there from fetching water. This stimulated Varro to fight soon and the warriors were increasingly impatient because they had to wait and see. On the eighth day, when the Roman army was again under the command of Varro, the decisive battle took place. Despite the aforementioned differences between the consuls, Polybios does not speak of a fundamental statement by Paullus against and Varro in favor of fighting a field battle. Admittedly, the daily change of the high command in connection with the existing differences of opinion of the consuls about the conduct of the war had to at least tarnish their collegiality.

Very different from Polybius, Livy and later authors tell the prehistory of the battle of Cannae in an implausible presentation. On his departure from Rome, Paullus is said to have been escorted by leading senators, Varro, on the other hand, would only have been adopted by the common people, but not by any dignitaries. The consuls would have already arrived at their army when it was still facing Hannibal at Gerunium. On a day when Paullus was in command, the Romans and their allies were victorious in a battle and had only 100 dead, but the opponents 1700 dead. Thereupon Hannibal set an ambush, and it was only through the caution of Paullus that Varro was saved from falling into this trap. On these occasions, Livy reprimands the alleged rash behavior of Varro. After describing Hannibal's march to Cannae, the Roman historian reports on the council of war held by the Romans, in which the consuls stuck to their previous opinion. Paullus was only supported by the proconsul Gnaeus Servilius Geminus, Varro by almost everyone else, which is why, according to the majority, the Roman army would also have set out for Cannae. In the further course Livius reports similarly to Polybius, but in brighter colors, how Hannibal incited the Romans to fight the day before the battle by skirmishing the Numidians and Varro was upset about the reluctance shown by his counterpart.

On the day of the decisive battle (August 2, 216 BC according to the pre-Julian calendar) Varro was in command and had the troops deployed in battle on the right side of the Aufidus at sunrise. He himself commanded the left wing, which comprised two legions and as many Roman allies on foot, and at the head of which stood the cavalry of the allies opposite that of the Numidians. Varro is not mentioned in the slaughter reports. The federal cavalry under his command was, according to Polybius, employed by the Numidians until the decisive battle began in the center. When the cavalry of the left Carthaginian wing led by Hasdrubal came to the aid of the Numidians, the riders commanded by Varro finally turned to flee. According to the unbelievable depiction of Livy, 500 Numidians presented themselves as defectors in the course of the fight and apparently surrendered to the Romans, but subsequently attacked them in the rear.

Organization of the withdrawal; Reception in Rome

After the complete defeat of the Romans, Varro was able to flee to Venusia with 70 riders and 300 more of his federal riders to neighboring villages. In later tradition, Varro's escape was portrayed as particularly shameful, while the heroic death of his colleague was praised. But there are also traces of a more favorable assessment of the Varro; Florus , for example , says that it is doubtful which of the two consuls showed the greater drive and courage.

In any case, Varro performed his duties after the disastrous battle. When about 4,500 men who had fled on foot and on horseback came to Venusia, the surviving consul gathered them around him; and the Romans were welcomed by the urban population. As a result, Varro led these soldiers to Canusium and united them with some 10,000 other men who had escaped there. Despite the difficult situation, he tried to instill new courage in them. He also informed the Senate of the current situation in an official letter that he sent to Rome. Thereupon the Praetor Marcus Claudius Marcellus went to Caunsium and replaced Varro in command; the consul, however, was asked to return to Rome. When he arrived in the capital, according to Livy, many people met him and thanked him for not having given up the state completely, despite his substantial share in the responsibility for the devastating defeat. In this way, the citizens, whose self-confidence was unbroken, showed their continued trust in the consul.

Valerius Maximus reports that Varro had been offered to take over the dictatorship, but the consul rejected the offer. This behavior was due to his modesty and could be counted among his honorable deeds. Even Sextus Julius Frontinus indicates that Varro had decided for him honor with the remark that the state happier than magistrates need him, rejected and his hair and his beard was unkempt henceforth grow. This news may go back to the antiquarian Marcus Terentius Varro, who probably took it from family tradition.

After his arrival in Rome, Varro immediately participated in the new armaments that the dictator Marcus Iunius Pera , newly appointed for the purpose of warfare , had carried out. Apparently Varro soon returned to his army stationed in Puglia, as he had to be called back to Rome to appoint another dictator, Marcus Fabius Buteo , ordered by the Senate . Buteo was given the task of completing the thinned ranks of senators. After completing his mission, Varro quickly returned to his troops without notifying the Senate, so as not to be held in Rome for the upcoming elections for the next year. Since the dictator Junius Pera took over the leadership of the elections, Varro could stay with his soldiers. However, as the war continued, his position as military commander was of a subordinate nature.

Later career

Towards the end of 216 BC A more precise determination of the military units under Varros' command in Apulia was made, but Varro received his authority over these units for 215 BC. Chr. Extended. The strength of his troops was also left unchanged. During the year 215 BC He gave up command of this army, which from then on was stationed near Taranto . Varro himself went to Picenum , where, in the position of proconsul, he was given the task of recruiting soldiers capable of military service and of taking care of border protection. With a legion at his disposal, he stayed until 212 BC. In this position. Perhaps this promagistrature is an invention of late annalist historians.

From 208-206 BC Varro served as a private citizen with a proprietary empire in Etruria , where dangerous unrest had broken out. To suppress this revolt, Marcus Claudius Marcellus, who had already been appointed the fifth consulate, was selected. Afterwards this task was taken over by the propaetor Gaius Hostilius Tubulus , to whom Varro was put aside. Later Varro was solely responsible for the longer surveillance of the region.

203 BC Chr. The Senate sent Varro together with Gaius Mamilius Atellus and Marcus Aurelius to Macedonia to see King Philip V to protect the Greek allies of the Romans against Philip's attacks. 200 BC After the victorious end of the war against Hannibal, Varro went to North Africa as head of an embassy, ​​where he had three assignments to fulfill. First, the envoys complained against the Carthaginians because they had not fully implemented the peace conditions. Second, they conveyed congratulations to the Massinissa , at the same time asking him for his support in the war against Philip that was then declared. Third, they dictated a peace treaty to Vermina , the son of the West Numid king Syphax .

The last time Varro is mentioned in the sources is also in the year 200 BC. As head of a commission ( triumvir coloniae deducendae ) to strengthen the colony Venusia, which was badly affected by the Second Punic War. Subordinate to him were the two younger commissioners Titus Quinctius Flamininus and Publius Cornelius Scipio Nasica . The assumption of Jerome S. Arkenberg that Varro 219 to 197 BC is controversial. Was responsible for the local coinage there.

Appreciation

Theodor Mommsen writes about him in his Roman History :

"[...] an incompetent man who was only known for his dogged opposition to the Senate and especially as the main initiator of the election of Marcus Minucius as co-dictator, and whom nothing recommended to the crowd except his humble birth and his raw insolence."

Wilhelm Ihne contradicts his colleague Mommsen in his work From the First Punic War to the End of the Second (Punic War) :

“It is not likely that the Varro 'recommended nothing but his low birth and his raw impudence' (Mommsen, RG I, 603). See Valerius Max. 3, 4, 4 and 4, 5, 2. Frontinus 4, 5, 6 "

- 231

In view of Varros' continued somewhat successful career even after his defeat in the Battle of Cannae, Mommsen's view is considered outdated in research. Friedrich Münzer describes Livius' formulation on Varro ( Ab urbe condita , Book XXII 25, 18 - 26, 4 and 34, 2-3) as "one-sidedness and spite". In his article on Gaius Terentius Varro in Paulys Realencyclopadie der classical antiquity he notes the following:

"However, his memory remained in honor of his descendants, and although only two of them also rose to the Consulate, namely those who were born of the noble Licinian family and only became Terentii Varrones through adoption [...], Another of them was the greatest Roman archaeologist [...], and this seems to have taken care of him, so that in addition to the hateful and falsified presentation of the history of T. there are also traces of an honorable family tradition. "

The aforementioned Roman archaeologist is Marcus Terentius Varro . His work had a positive influence on the image of his ancestor in the works of the two historians Florus and Sextus Iulius Frontinus .

literature

Individual evidence

  1. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 25, 18-26, 3 and 22, 34, 2; then Valerius Maximus , Facta et dicta memorabilia 3, 4, 4; Silius Italicus , Punica 8, 246 ff .; Plutarch , Fabius 14, 2; Cassius Dio , Roman History , Fragment 57, 24; Commentary on Livius by Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen antiquity science (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 681 f.).
  2. ↑ a b Friedrich Münzer : Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertumswwissenschaft (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 681).
  3. ↑ a b Jerome S. Arkenberg: Licinii Murenae, Terentii Varrones, and Varrones Murenae: I. A Prosopographical Study of Three Roman Families . In: Historia: magazine for ancient history . tape 42 , no. 3 , 1993, ISSN  0018-2311 , pp. 326-351 , JSTOR : 4436295 .
  4. ^ Thomas Robert Shannon Broughton : The Magistrates of the Roman Republic . New York 1951, ISBN 0-89130-812-1 , pp. 234-236 .
  5. ↑ Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia 1, 1, 16, Lactanz , Divinae institutiones 2, 16; Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswwissenschaft (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 683).
  6. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 25, 18 and 22, 26, 4.
  7. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 34, 2-35, 7.
  8. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 106, 1.
  9. ↑ Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen antiquity science (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 683).
  10. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 106 and 3, 107.
  11. ↑ a b Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertumswwissenschaft (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680–690 (here: Col. 684) ..
  12. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 34, 4.
  13. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 38, 6 f .; similar to Plutarch, Fabius 14, 2; u .a.
  14. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 38, 8-12.
  15. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 38, 13-39, 22; Plutarch, Fabius 14, 4-6; Silius Italicus, Punica 8, 297-326.
  16. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 40, 1-4; Plutarch, Fabius 14, 7; Silius Italicus, Punica 8, 327-358.
  17. ↑ Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen antiquity science (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 685).
  18. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 107, 8.
  19. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 108 f.
  20. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 110, 1.
  21. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 110, 2-4.
  22. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 110, 4-7.
  23. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 110, 8-11.
  24. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 112, 1-5.
  25. ↑ Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen antiquity science (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 686).
  26. ↑ Serge Lancel: Hannibal , German translation 1998, ISBN 3-538-07068-7 , p. 176.
  27. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 40, 4 ff.
  28. ^ Livius, Ab urbe condita 22, 41 f .; similar to Zonaras , Epitome Historion 9, 1.
  29. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 43, 7-9; similar to Appian , Hannibalike 18.
  30. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 44, 4-45, 5; also Silius Italicus, Punica 9, 1-65 and Appian, Hannibalike 19.
  31. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 114, 4 and 114, 6; Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 45, 8; Silius Italicus, Punica 9, 249 ff. And 267 ff .; different Appian, Hannibalike 19.
  32. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 116, 5-7.
  33. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 48, 1-4.
  34. ↑ Polybios, Historíai 3, 116, 13--117, 2.
  35. ↑ Plutarch, Fabius 16, 6 and 18, 4; Appian, Hannibalike 23 and 25; among others
  36. ^ Florus, Epitoma de Tito Livio 1, 22, 17.
  37. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 54, 1-6; Appian, Hannibalike 26; Cassius Dio, Roman History , Fragment 57, 29.
  38. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 56, 1-3; Zonaras, Epitome Historion 9, 2.
  39. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 57, 1.
  40. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 22, 61, 14; see. Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia 3, 4, 4; Sextus Iulius Frontinus , Strategemata 4, 5, 6; Silius Italicus, Punica 10, 609-639; Plutarch, Fabius 18, 4 f .; among others
  41. ↑ Valerius Maximus, Facta et dicta memorabilia 3, 4, 4 and 4, 5, 2; Sextus Iulius Frontinus, Strategemata 4, 5, 6; Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen Altertumswwissenschaft (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Col. 680-690 (here: Col. 689).
  42. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 23, 14, 1.
  43. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 23, 22, 10 f.
  44. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 23, 23, 9.
  45. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 23, 24, 1-5.
  46. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 23, 25, 6 and 23, 25, 11.
  47. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 23, 32, 16 and 23, 32, 19.
  48. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 24, 10, 3; 24, 11, 3; 24, 44, 5; 25, 3, 4; 25, 6, 7.
  49. ^ So Tassilo Schmitt : Terentius [I 14]. In: The New Pauly (DNP). Volume 12/1, Metzler, Stuttgart 2002, ISBN 3-476-01482-7 , column 146.
  50. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 27, 24, 1-9.
  51. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 27, 35, 2; 27, 36, 13; 28, 10, 11.
  52. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 30, 26, 4.
  53. ↑ Livy, Ab urbe condita 31, 11, 4-17 and 31, 19, 1-6.
  54. ^ Livy, Ab urbe condita 31, 49, 6.
  55. ↑ Friedrich Münzer: Terentius 83. In: Paulys Realencyclopädie der classischen antiquity science (RE). Volume VA, 1, Stuttgart 1934, Sp. 680-690 (here: Sp. 680 f.).
personal data
SURNAME Varro, Gaius Terentius
ALTERNATIVE NAMES Terentius Varro, Gaius
BRIEF DESCRIPTION Roman consul
DATE OF BIRTH 3rd century BC Chr.
DATE OF DEATH 2nd century BC Chr.