Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-vpsfw Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-18T18:20:26.657Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Caudine Forks: Topography and Illusion

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  09 August 2013

Nicholas Horsfall
Get access

Le forche caudine: topografia e illusione

Il sito della sconfitta romana alle Forche Caudine non viene messo seriamente in dubbio; il dubbio semmai viene dalla lettura del resoconto di Livio. La sua descrizione delle mosse tattiche non trova corrispondenza nelle caratteristiche del terreno. Livio racconta un tipo di battaglia molto diverso, essenzialmente un agguato, posto in una stretta valle montuosa. E' evidente che il resoconto di Livio non indica un'analisi in prima persona ma ha il carattere di una formula, contiene numerosi particolari calcolati per minimizzare la sconfitta romana ed è forse influenzato da dettagli copiati dalle desscrizioni delle campagne di Alessandro.

Type
Research Article
Information
Papers of the British School at Rome , Volume 50 , November 1982 , pp. 45 - 52
Copyright
Copyright © British School at Rome 1982

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Kromayer, J., Ant. Schlachtfelder4 (Berlin 1924–1931), 481Google Scholar, an historical bibliography; see most recently Sommella, P. in Antichi campi di battaglia in Italia (Quad. Ist. Top. Ant., Roma 1967), 49 ff.Google Scholar; Salmon, E. T., Samnium and the Samnites (Cambridge 1967), 225 ff.Google Scholar

2 Salmon, plates 3 a, b; Sommella, figures 33, 35, 37: details of height and orientation not given.

3 Maiuri, A, Saggi di varia antichità (Venezia 1954), 216–7Google Scholar beggars belief.

4 Notably the question of how much ground a given number of troops, marching in a column of given width, occupies: Sommella, 58 (with older bibliography), de Sanctis, G., Storia critica di Roma 4 (Roma 1920), 471.Google Scholar

5 Sommella, 57 f., refers to just such an invisible Capuchin convent—not on his map and the 1:25,000 is required; otherwise his discussion is admirable, in traditional terms.

6 Even if Livy's account is rejected and the value of toponymy impugned (Sommella, 65 n. 14, against the material collected most conveniently by Salmon, loc. cit.), strategic and tactical considerations point strongly to the Arienzo-Arpaia valley.

7 Sommella, 50, 65 n. 16; Kromayer, 498; Pais, E., Storia critica di Roma 4 (Roma 1920), 472Google Scholar; Maiuri, 219 (but note a more cautious position in Passeggiate Campane (Firenze 1957), 350Google Scholar). Livy's accuracy: Kromayer, 469, and notably de Sanctis, 311.

8 For recent bibliography, see Astin, A. E., Scipio Aemilianus (Oxford 1967), 132Google Scholar n. 4; Crawford, M., PBSR 41 (1973), 2Google Scholar.

9 Cf. Pais, 128 n. 1 on Livy 7. 34. 1, and in general Frederiksen, M. W., JRS 58 (1968), 226Google Scholar.

10 Pareti, L., Storia di Roma 1 (Torino 1952), 691 f.Google Scholar; Bruckmann, H., Die röm. Niederlagen (Bochum 1936), 3 ff.Google Scholar

11 De Sanctis, 311 n. 1; Pais, 129; Niebuhr, , Lectures (London 1848), 1. 456 f.Google Scholar; but see Livy IX ed. Anderson, (Cambridge 1912), 246Google Scholar; Livy 9. 1. 1 (clades), Cic., Sen. 41Google Scholar, Off. 3. 109, App. Samn. 4. 2, Chron. Oxy. 320/319, Dio fr. 36. 9–14, Zon. 7. 26.

12 Cf. Salmon, 224 f. for the strategic context.

13 Cf. Virg., Aen. 1, 159 ff. (‘est in secessu longo locus …’), 3. 163 ff., etc.Google Scholar

14 Nissen, H., RhM 25 (1870), 7Google Scholar; Kromayer, 484, 486, 497.

15 If Salmon is right in suggesting (226 n. 1), that the first fauces were near S. Maria a Vico, then the picture becomes faintly grotesque: the Samnites would have had to block the valley floor for over 2 km.

16 No word of scouts in Livy's text, but it is hardly credible that the Romans employed none.

17 Cf. Livy 9. 3. 6, ‘inter duos saltus clausos esse exercitus Romanos’.

18 Lectures 1, 456Google Scholar; cf., closely, History of Rome 3 2 (London 1851), 211Google Scholar.

19 Op. cit. (n. 4 above), 311.

20 See for example my discussion at CJ 76 (1981), 307 f.Google Scholar

21 Kromayer, 469; Bruckmann, 6 (note).

22 Walsh, P. G., Livy (Cambridge 1961), 153 ff.Google Scholar, and comm. on (e.g.) Livy 21. 47; Anderson, 247 f.; no rational answer offered by Maiuri, , Passeggiate, 348 ff.Google Scholar and Saggi, 219. Kroll, W., Studien zum Verständnis der röm. Literatur (repr. Stuttgart 1964), 291CrossRefGoogle Scholar says tersely all that is necessary, as so often.

23 Cf. also 35. 11. 2 f., 21. 34. 8, 22. 15. 3 and 11, 25. 16. 18, 33. 17. 7, 29. 32. 4, 44. 5. 9.

24 The parallel was noted by Mackail in his Virgil commentary; cf. also Rehm, B., Das geographische Bild des alten Italien in Vergils Aeneis (Philologus Supplementband 24, Heft 2, Leipzig 1932), 79 fGoogle Scholar, who also compares Aen. 5. 287, 8. 597 ff.

25 A much neglected topic: see Bruckmann, 6 (note) and the material collected in Stürenburg, H., Relative Ortsbezeichnung (Leipzig 1932)Google Scholar and by Wistrand, E. in Nach innen oder nach aussen (Göteborg 1946)Google Scholar.

26 Bruckmann, 6; Livy 21. 54. 7 f. is striking.

27 On Livy 9. 16. 19 ff., see Treves, P., Il mito di Alessandro (Milano 1953), passimGoogle Scholar; Wardman, A. E., CQ n. s. 5 (1955), 96 ff.Google Scholar; Luce, T. J., TAPA 96 (1965), 218 ff.Google Scholar; Balsdon, J. P. V. D., Romans and Aliens (London 1979), 183 ff.Google Scholar

28 Cf. Ogilvie, , Comm. on Livy 1–5 (Oxford 1965), 315, 359Google Scholar; Wiseman, T. P., Clio's Cosmetics (Leicester 1979), 23 f.Google Scholar

29 Rawson, E., CQ n.s. 29 (1979), 338 f.Google Scholar

30 Q. Curt. 3. 4. 11 f. (see Atkinson's commentary), cf. Xen., Anab. 1. 2. 20Google Scholar; Fox, R. Lane, Alexander the Great (London 1973), 154 f.Google Scholar; Fuller, J. F. C., The Generalship of Alexander the Great (London 1958), 97Google Scholar; SirRamsay, W., Geographical Journal (1903), 22Google Scholar.

31 Q. Curt. 5. 3. 18–19. Cf. Arr., Anab. 3. 18Google Scholar, Diod. Sic. 17. 68. 2; Lane Fox, 255: ‘A particularly narrow gorge’. On the Tang-i-Khas passes see further SirStein, Aurel, Old Routes of Western Iran (London 1940), plate 4, 24–5Google Scholar; Hansman, J., Iran 10 (1972), 11 ff.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

32 And if the argument above is valid, then the inadequacies and complexities of the description are Livy's own, rather than an inheritance from his sources.

33 Miss R. M. Gulino (University of Minnesota) roused my interest in Samnite topography and enabled me to visit the site under ideal conditions. Luciana Valentini and Susanna Armani of the British School at Rome provided the appropriate I.G.M. sheet for me with remarkable speed. Robert Ogilvie discussed the theme of this paper with me shortly before his death; though clearly very unwell, he remained as warmly encouraging as he had been to me for nearly 20 years, and this paper may stand as a tribute, however inadequate, to his memory. John Briscoe and the anonymous reader for PBSR offered valuable comments.