Valorizing the Barbarians: Enemy Speeches in Roman Historiography

4. "Nothing at All Has Been Left to Us, Except That Which We Defend with Arms": Livy's Hannibal

“nothing at all has Been left to Us, excePt that which we defend with arms”: liVy’s hanniBal liVy, the roman annalistic tradition, and PolyBiUs Livy, like his fellow Roman annalists, supposedly maintains a consistently pro-Roman outlook in his history, at least in the portions that survive from antiquity.1 After all, the annalists, beginning ca. 200 B.c. with the work of Q. Fabius Pictor, aimed to champion Rome’s arrival on the Mediterranean scene and shine a spotlight on its grand history, hoping to prove that Rome well deserved its lofty position in the ancient world.2 It was supposedly embarrassing to the Romans, so powerful after their victory in the Second Punic War, that they did not possess any written histories cataloging their state’s dramatic rise. The annalists, we are told, hoped to supply the world—at first, particularly the Greek intellectual world—with a compelling narrative of these events. Hence the annalists, who understandably knew little about Rome’s remote history, purportedly created and elaborated on versions of the Roman past that would emphasize the Romans’ grandeur and courage. Although there has been some recent speculation about Livy’s purported hyper-patriotism,3 there are good reasons to suggest that this portrait of the Roman annalistic tradition is largely correct. Even so, as we shall see in this chapter, Livy seems capable of using his speeches to glorify Hannibal, Rome’s dire enemy, who actually appears to have been an unexpected recipient of Livy’s sympathy. In fact, Livy’s orations of P. Scipio and Hannibal before the Battle of Ticinus (21.40–44) and those of Hannibal and the man who would come to be known as Scipio Africanus before the Battle of Zama (30.30.3– 31.1–9) offer surprisingly sympathetic portraits of Rome’s quintessential antagonist and, through him, of the Carthaginian people. Although Livy, much like Polybius, in part criticized Hannibal and the Carthaginians in these orations , a careful exegesis of them reveals that Livy was fully capable of broaching the subject of criticism of Rome. We need not trouble ourselves too much here with the matter of these Chapter 4 84 hanniBal and carthage speeches’ historicity. In the previous chapter we addressed the reasons allowing us to conclude that Polybius’ pre-Ticinus and pre-Zama orations were likely to be the product of their author’s invention.4 Virtually all these arguments hold true for Livy’s versions as well.5 In addition, we should note that modern scholars almost without exception deem Livy’s orations essentially ahistorical.6 Even so, we must still concern ourselves with a related matter: Livy’s potential sources for these harangues. To be sure, while we ought not to get tangled up in overlong discussions of Livian Quellenforschung, we still should take up the possibility of Livy’s use of Polybius as a source for his preTicinus and pre-Zama orations. If we could demonstrate that Livy merely copied Polybius, we would be left with less faith in his concern for the shortcomings of Roman imperialism.7 Unfortunately, even in the case of Livy’s use of Polybius, there are numerous reasons to conclude that definitive answers remain elusive. The matter of Livy’s source material—and particularly his potential use of Polybius throughout his Third Decade—has for much time been the subject of considerable debate.8 In regard to what we might now deem “original research” done by Livy, we can safely conclude that he did none: scholarly consensus (not to mention time considerations on Livy’s part) strongly suggests that Livy did not consult the Annales maximi, senatorial records, or other “primary sources.”9 Still, even in regard to Livy’s use of Polybius, we find ourselves on shaky ground. In his landmark work on the subject, Heinrich Nissen argued that Livy directly consulted Polybius only as far back as the material for Livy’s twenty-fourth book.10 According to Nissen, then, Livy did not employ Polybius for his pre-Ticinus harangues, since they appear in book 21. Though numerous modern critics have agreed with Nissen’s view,11 others find it dubious.12 In regard to the speeches before the Battle of Ticinus, there have been only a few guesses about the probability that Polybius was a direct source for Livy.13 One detects, however, a bit more of a consensus regarding Livy’s potential use of Polybius for his rendition of the conference between Hannibal and...