Polybius on Rome's Rise: Bias and the First Punic War

Introduction to Polybius and His Histories

In his Histories, Polybius outlines the beginning of the Roman Empire and describes the early period during which Rome came to power and became the dominant empire in the known world. Polybius was a Greek historian who knew Rome intimately and was writing to a Greek audience. In the first book of his Histories, he discusses the early days of Roman power. In particular, in the opening chapters of Book I, he outlines how and why the Romans came to take power in Sicily and defeat the Carthaginians. His account of history is largely military in focus and proceeds through events primarily by tracing the course of action that determined military outcomes. He does so while often reflecting on other historians' views as well as his own viewpoint, written largely from a pro-Roman perspective. Furthermore, the causes behind the events, as Polybius presents them, point to the inevitable rise of Rome. While he gives credit to the Carthaginians, he holds a deep respect and belief in Roman destiny, yet leaves out causes for the conflict that a modern perspective would take into account.

Polybius begins his history of the rise of the Roman Empire with an introduction on history itself, expressing his belief that history deserves "praise" (Polybius 5). He explains that the history he is about to recount is of the utmost importance and should hold great value for those who care — specifically, how the Roman Empire rose to power in fewer than fifty-three years. He writes that people are "so worthless or indolent" if they do not care about how the Romans accomplished such an admirable feat, in which they became the greatest power in the known world (Polybius 5). He calls this "a thing unique in history," thereby reflecting his view of the Roman Empire's singular significance (Polybius 5). He then sets out to explain how the Romans came to power, a major theme for historians of his era, given that mighty empires of the past — including his own people, the Greeks — had given way to Rome.

The First Punic War: Facts and Framing

Polybius' history begins with the Punic Wars and tells of the Roman conflict with Carthaginian forces. Looking at the history he presents, he gets many of the details correct. The Romans and Carthaginians clashed beginning in 264 BC in what was largely a naval conflict, with Sicily as a central focus (UNRV History). In particular, Messina and Syracuse were the original sources of the conflict; Messina had requested Carthaginian support but then betrayed Carthage by turning to Rome for help instead. The causes of the conflict as they unfolded in reality are therefore largely those which Polybius relays, and in comparing his account to the historical record, he appears to do justice to the story.

However, to Polybius the causes of the conflict that produced the Punic Wars are treated as purely factual. He relays military events and their causes with accuracy but does not explore them in greater depth. For example, he writes about Hiero II, the Mamertines of Messene, and Rome's involvement in the conflict as a local dispute that escalated. Furthermore, he makes an effort to ensure that other historians do not inaccurately portray the Roman invasion or suggest that the Romans were routed. He explicitly states: "An equally powerful motive with me for paying particular attention to this war is that, to my mind, the truth has not been adequately stated by those historians who are reputed to be the best authorities on it," suggesting that his goals extend beyond a simple factual account of the war (Polybius 37). This does not mean his account is not factual, but rather that he holds a perspective he intends to express — and he is candid about that intention. This is consistent with how he begins his history by underlining the importance and value of what he is about to write, making clear to the reader the magnitude of the events he is portraying.

Polybius' Pro-Roman Perspective and Its Origins

This means that Polybius' treatment of historical causation is, in some respects, fairly superficial. He does not evaluate the events of history at a deeper level, and when he does gesture toward a deeper explanation, it is the conviction that the Romans were destined to fight and win the war. He opens his history by declaring that it describes how the Romans came to power, and the rest of his narrative must conform to that framing. He does not invoke divine intervention or superstitious reasoning for Roman successes, but he strongly implies that Rome was destined to succeed and that its success was justified. In reality, Rome was a rising empire broadly on par with Carthage, and the conflict was a struggle between two capable and successful world powers competing for ultimate dominance. While Polybius does consider the role of individuals in the conflict, his history is shaped more by the arc of two empires and the inevitable ascendancy of Rome. He writes not only as a believer in Roman destiny but as an active participant in Roman life, which further colors his justification of Roman world domination.

As a Greek living in Rome, and as a member of a people conquered by Romans, Polybius needed to make sense of Roman domination. This means he frequently emphasizes Roman strength and righteousness, and his history envisions no alternative outcome other than Roman supremacy. For example, he writes that "King Hiero having placed himself under the protection of the Romans," went on "treating the Greeks in such a way as to win from them crowns and other honours" (Polybius 43). The Romans' policy toward the Greeks clearly mattered to Polybius, and a fair treatment of the Greeks translated into a more than favorable portrayal of Rome. He writes of King Hiero that he should be regarded "as the most illustrious of princes and the one who reaped longest the fruits of his own wisdom in particular cases and in general policy" — a direct interjection of personal opinion shaped by his relationship to the parties involved in the Punic Wars (Polybius 43).

Conclusion: Destiny, Bias, and Historical Value

In his Histories, Polybius writes about the early days of Rome's rise to power in the known world. He does so from the perspective of the victor, which means that to him, Rome's accomplishments are destined, great, and worthy of celebration. His perspective on history is a direct reflection of this viewpoint. Looking in particular at his introduction to the first book and his subsequent retelling of the military events of the First Punic War, the perspective of Polybius on history is somewhat superficial. He sees things for what they are on the surface, but he also sees them through a Roman lens. A modern historian might view the conflict between two powers in the same region as inevitable on structural grounds, but Polybius recounts the facts as though they are the only thing that matters.

While he strives for impartiality, there may be ulterior motives behind that impartiality. Ultimately, his history is accurate, but it lacks important details that could have contributed to a fuller understanding of the conflict. A modern perspective would attend to realistic concerns of international security, territorial expansion, and political competition. Rome may also have been expanding economically and seeking new markets or areas of production. There could have been a wide range of factors driving a war between two powers in this zero-sum contest for Mediterranean dominance. Polybius does not see it this way, however, because he is writing to Greeks about Rome, and framing Roman expansion as driven by greed or political ambition would reflect poorly on the fact that his own people were conquered for such motives. Instead, he portrays Roman expansion as inevitable destiny — which means that Rome had a right to its conquests, and that it is therefore justified for the former power of Greece to now live under Roman influence.

Works Cited

Polybius. The Histories. LacusCurtius. 18 Apr. 2007 <http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Polybius/home.html>.

"Roman History Timeline." UNRV History. 2007. 18 Apr. 2007 <http://www.unrv.com/empire/early-roman-timeline.php>.