Rome at War: Actium and the Dacian Campaign

The winner builds the record

This option has taught you two positions already. Sparta wrote almost nothing about itself, so it is read through outsiders, and the objects Spartans left are the exception that escapes them. Athens wrote a great deal about its own victory, and its objects were made by Athenians for Athenians, so they share the account rather than checking it. Rome takes that one step further, and it is the step this module is about. The material your specification prescribes here is not a dedication at a sanctuary or a cup for a party. It is a carved column, a triumphal arch, a commemorative relief and a coin. Somebody with power commissioned each one. They were paid for out of the victory they commemorate. And they were put where people passed, at a size and permanence that made them hard to ignore. Athens shared a point of view with its own account. Rome built one and installed it. That does not make these objects useless, and calling them propaganda and stopping is not an answer. A monument is first-hand evidence of the claim its makers wanted accepted - which is a real thing you can establish, as long as you do not mistake it for a record of the fighting.

Words for the army and its monuments

Six terms your specification names. The last four are objects, and every one of them was commissioned by somebody with a reason.

Who paid, and who was meant to look

The same question asked of all three sets of objects on this option. The answers get further from independence each time.

Reading something built to be believed

There are three questions worth asking of any monument, and they will carry you through every question this topic sets. Who commissioned it and paid for it? Who was meant to see it, and could they avoid it? And what would it have been embarrassing to leave out? That last one is the useful one, because a monument is a set of choices about what to show, and the choices are the evidence. ⚠️ Two things to avoid. The first is describing the carving and stopping: a description is not an answer, and the marks are in what the carving was FOR. The second is calling it propaganda and stopping, which sounds critical but establishes nothing. A thing built to be believed is not thereby worthless. It is first-hand evidence of the claim, made by the people making the claim, which is stronger evidence of that claim than any later account could be. What it is not, and never becomes by being large or permanent, is a record of what happened.

Match each object to who had it made

The coin the losing side minted

Among the prescribed objects is a silver coin issued by Mark Antony naming individual legions. Antony lost at Actium. What makes the coin useful evidence even so?

• It shows what a commander thought would hold the loyalty of his troops, since he put their legions on the silver he paid them with
• It proves that Antony commanded more legions than Octavian did
• It is not useful, because the side that issued it was defeated
• It records the outcome of the battle

True of a state monument

Select the TWO statements that are fair about a monument commissioned by a ruler or the state.

• It is first-hand evidence of the claim its makers wanted accepted
• Its size and where it stands are part of what it was saying
• Being permanent and public makes it more likely to be accurate about events
• It is an independent check on the written accounts of the same war

The Roman army and its monuments in words

The main unit of the Roman army was the _____, a standing professional force in this period. At the sea battle of _____, the fleet of Mark Antony and Cleopatra was defeated by _____, which brought the civil war to an end. The campaign in Dacia is presented as a continuous carved relief on _____, and a triumphal arch honouring the same emperor stands at _____.

How a victory became a monument

Put these stages in the order they happened.

• A campaign is fought and won
• The spoils and the standing that come with victory arrive back in Rome
• A monument is commissioned, and what it will show is decided
• It is carved and set up in public, where people pass it
• Generations later it is read as the record of the campaign

Names and monuments at speed

The figures and objects your specification names. Answer from memory.

What the Column is arguing

Trajan's Column presents the campaign in Dacia as a continuous carved narrative, set up in Rome. The question: what does it tell us about that campaign? A weak answer: "It shows us what the fighting in Dacia was like." A strong answer: "It shows what the emperor who fought that campaign wanted Rome to understand about it. He commissioned it, it was paid for out of the victory, and it stands in the city he ruled. So it is first-hand evidence of the claim and no evidence at all of the events, because nobody carving it was reporting. It is also a set of choices about what to show, and the choices are the useful part." ⚠️ Now put it beside the other two objects on this option and the difference becomes sayable. The Spartan dedicated helmet could establish something no written account could, because Spartans left almost nothing written. The Athenian painted cup could not, because it belonged to the same society that wrote the accounts. A state monument is a third case and the strongest form of the problem: it does not merely share the winner's point of view, it was built to install it. So the question to ask is not whether it is biased. It is what it was built to make people believe, and who could not avoid seeing it. ⚠️ And one thing it cannot do at all. It cannot speak for the Dacians. They appear in it only as the emperor's designers chose to show them, and no source on your list is theirs.

Spot the true Roman war facts

Four statements about Rome at war. Select the TWO that are true.

• Actium ended the civil war with the defeat of the fleet of Mark Antony and Cleopatra
• A state monument is first-hand evidence of the claim its makers wanted accepted
• Trajan's Column is a reliable record of what actually happened in Dacia
• The Roman army of this period was raised only for the length of a single campaign

Say what a monument establishes

Assemble a sentence that states what a commissioned monument can and cannot be used for.

Weighing what the winners built

Four judgements about the Roman material. Choose the answer you could defend in writing.

• A student writes that Trajan's Column tells us what the campaign in Dacia was like. What is wrong with that?
• A question asks what the Mark Antony denarius can establish, given that Antony lost the war. What can it?
• A classmate says the Actium relief and the Athenian painted cup are the same kind of evidence, since both come from the winning side. What difference is worth stating?
• A question asks what can be said about the Dacians themselves from the prescribed material. What is the honest answer?

Write about what the winners built

A classmate has written that the Roman monuments are the best evidence on this option, because they were made at the time by the people who were there. Write the answer that corrects them without dismissing the monuments.

• Explain what the legion was and what kind of force the Roman army of this period was
• Explain what happened at Actium and name the figures on each side
• Explain what a state monument is first-hand evidence FOR, and what it cannot establish
• Explain why the coin issued by the losing commander is still useful evidence
• Finish with what the prescribed material lets you say about the Dacians, and what it does not