Sample Solution

empire. However, it seems more likely that for the most part the Romans did not make war frivolously. War was seen as an honorable and sacred act, proven by the temples built to celebrate victory and the accumulation of new gods from places they conquered. All of these traditions support the idea that Romans held war in high regard and would typically need a purpose before going to war. Their commitment to the army was so ingrained and the fear of punishment so severe that soldiers would not abandon their group even when death was certain. Polybius writes, “Men in covering forces often choose certain death, refusing to leave their ranks even when vastly outnumbered, owing to dread of punishment they would later face.” (Polybius 376) Soldiers were also a valuable asset to Rome, the power and size of the army gave Rome legitimacy to deter foreign powers from invasion but also gain support from the people of Rome. Often when a new territory was conquered their taxation would be in the form of able men to act as soldiers in the Roman army. Using the time of a valuable general or losing soldiers lives without a worthy cause would have not made sense, and therefore pointless war is an unworthy expense. This idea is supported by the rigorous requirements that go into war preparation as well as the general disposition of the Romans. Polybius says about the Romans, “they do not want them to make attacks or initiate hostilities as much as to be ready and willing, when the battle is going against them and they are being hard pressed, to stand their ground and die on behalf of their country.” (Polybius 369) This gives one a good sense that Rome by no means was a victim but also cannot be considered an active aggressor or bully.

An issue that arose from expansion was the new pressure that was put on the Roman government to successfully maintain control and govern new provinces that they