TancredTheNorman
06-21-2010, 21:31
When Cato the Younger went to visit his client Deiotorus in 66 bc he may have had many things on his mind that had nothing to do with Rome. Did the now hellenized and starting to become romanized Galatians who worship Cybele really come all the way from long haired Gaul and did they really practice Human Sacrifice? How dependable could the people of his client really be when they deserted Mithradates at the first opportunity and provided Lucullus with his cavalry to fight their former dominators? Was it right for he Cato the stoic who took stances that were so ahead of his times even other philosophers found him excentric to have a client who's own father or maybe even of the records had himself shed blood on behalf of the man who killed 80,000 Romani? He could also have been thinking what Augustus thought, that maybe in light of the tendency of some conquered people to rise again it could be a good idea to tie them to Rome with more than just a patron, didn't the Socii of Italy need more? Besides he like everyone else saw the Dying Gaul and must have known that after Antiochus the Savior had destroyed a massive Galatian army with the intention of conquering Asia Minor they had simply pulled another one out of thin air to try the same thing again, this time being stopped only by the brilliance of Attalus Soter.
Maybe most alarming to him would be the fact that the Galatians then turned around and determined that the very man who defeated them could give them favor and sided with him against the Greek Black Sea Colonies. Although this was not against Rome, Cato must have known about the villainy of Carthage, returning from defeat to challenge Rome again not long after, and then trying to win Rome's favor when they suffered another defeat, perhaps that is why an expedition was sent against Galatia in 186, but then again why is it Galatia had not just become another socii or province? Why was he visiting a client in a state that had only recently betrayed a different master? Fortunately Cato the Younger was not the man his ancestor was, his daughter was amongst the most educated people in Rome and he didn't believe in the destruction of people just because they might in a hundred years rise again, so the client was safe from the patron, although some survivals of Galatia's barbarian past must have made Cato think about this.
Galatia like Bithynia, Pontus and others lost any independence with the Third Mithradatic War, however at least Deiotorus benefited from his connection and his lands increased.
How Deiotorus must have wished that Attalus had lost his life at the river Caïcus when he found himself indebted to an arrogant Roman who considered himself a philosopher yet let his family run wild, and his wife to act as a prostitute.
But maybe you could do better with your chance? The year is 272, those around yous till must pay the Galatia Tax, your feared forces are unmatched and Antiochus Soter can not stop you, or can he? The future is open, will it be enjoying the scraps from the table of Lucullus and Pompey or will you crush your neighbors and and replace the Dying Gaul with the Triumphant Cyble crafted by Greek slaves?
Sources for the introduction (on things that are controversial)
On Cato meeting Deiotorus before Pompey see "Aato the Younger in the East" by Jane Bellemore
On the adoption of Cybele over their own pantheon and merging with native Phrygians see the opposing view "A Celtic Cult and Two Sites in Roman Galatia" by Anderson that concedes the point while emphasizing the cultural survivals
On Pompey giving more lands to Deiotorus but not giving Lesser Armenia see "Lesser Armenia and Galatia after Pompey's Settlement of the East" by Adcock
Part two coming tommorow, I know I didn't entirely make the case with this so far, but we could all agree that the Galatians were at least important for the first 30 years of the Europa Barbarorum time period, and they did not take the results of the River Caïcus lying down, and did determine some important conflicts, not just as mercenaries but as friend and foe to Rome.
Maybe most alarming to him would be the fact that the Galatians then turned around and determined that the very man who defeated them could give them favor and sided with him against the Greek Black Sea Colonies. Although this was not against Rome, Cato must have known about the villainy of Carthage, returning from defeat to challenge Rome again not long after, and then trying to win Rome's favor when they suffered another defeat, perhaps that is why an expedition was sent against Galatia in 186, but then again why is it Galatia had not just become another socii or province? Why was he visiting a client in a state that had only recently betrayed a different master? Fortunately Cato the Younger was not the man his ancestor was, his daughter was amongst the most educated people in Rome and he didn't believe in the destruction of people just because they might in a hundred years rise again, so the client was safe from the patron, although some survivals of Galatia's barbarian past must have made Cato think about this.
Galatia like Bithynia, Pontus and others lost any independence with the Third Mithradatic War, however at least Deiotorus benefited from his connection and his lands increased.
How Deiotorus must have wished that Attalus had lost his life at the river Caïcus when he found himself indebted to an arrogant Roman who considered himself a philosopher yet let his family run wild, and his wife to act as a prostitute.
But maybe you could do better with your chance? The year is 272, those around yous till must pay the Galatia Tax, your feared forces are unmatched and Antiochus Soter can not stop you, or can he? The future is open, will it be enjoying the scraps from the table of Lucullus and Pompey or will you crush your neighbors and and replace the Dying Gaul with the Triumphant Cyble crafted by Greek slaves?
Sources for the introduction (on things that are controversial)
On Cato meeting Deiotorus before Pompey see "Aato the Younger in the East" by Jane Bellemore
On the adoption of Cybele over their own pantheon and merging with native Phrygians see the opposing view "A Celtic Cult and Two Sites in Roman Galatia" by Anderson that concedes the point while emphasizing the cultural survivals
On Pompey giving more lands to Deiotorus but not giving Lesser Armenia see "Lesser Armenia and Galatia after Pompey's Settlement of the East" by Adcock
Part two coming tommorow, I know I didn't entirely make the case with this so far, but we could all agree that the Galatians were at least important for the first 30 years of the Europa Barbarorum time period, and they did not take the results of the River Caïcus lying down, and did determine some important conflicts, not just as mercenaries but as friend and foe to Rome.