Roman conquest of Greece and Asia Minor motivations

¶ … BCE

Reasons for the Roman Conquest of Asia Minor and Greece in the Second Century BCE

Romans, like all other imperialist powers, always claimed that their wars were fought for defensive purposes only. However, the reasons for their conquest of Greece and Asia Minor in the second century BC were at best only partially defensive. It is true that Rome had no compelling reason for intruding into the neighboring Greece and Macedon in 200 B.C. As it had been recently engaged in exhausting wars with Carthage led by Hannibal. Hence one theory among the historians about Rome's entanglement with Macedon is that the wars were forced on the Romans by the provocative acts of King Philip V of Macedonia such as his treaty with their arch enemy, Hannibal, in 215 BC. This is only partially true since after the Punic Wars and their triumph over the Carthaginians, the Romans had become an established Imperialist power and had developed an insatiable appetite for expansion. Such, almost unintended momentum for further expansion is a characteristic of most dominant powers of their time, e.g., Britain in the 19th century or the United States currently. (Muhlberger, 1998)

We have seen time and again in history that whenever a country or nation-state becomes a predominant world power, as Rome had become after its victories against Carthage, it (read, the ruling elite) starts to believe that their way of life and civilization was superior to all others. Such self-righteousness coupled with overwhelming military prowess is an intoxicating brew; forcing their way of life on others, usually "for the good of such less developed societies" is the next logical step. In case of Rome's annexation of Greece and Asia Minor, the desire of the Roman aristocratic elite for personal glory was also an important factor.