Pax Romana #2: Driven by Self-Interest

In this blog, we’ll see some of the entirely selfish reasons why peace suited Rome and also at some of the checks and balances to minimize excesses and violations.

 

Negotiations for peace are always tricky, points out Adrian Goldsworthy in Pax Romana. Even more so in ancient times. A side that surrendered always worried whether they’d be enslaved or killed. Rome wanted its enemies to trust them in such scenarios. Not out of any goodness of heart, but just practical calculations. Wars were costly, and a quick surrender was preferable. Additionally, the animosity generated by acts of savagery and trickery post-surrender hurt in the long run. Revenue via empire, remember, was the goal.

 

Inevitably though, individual commanders and governors sometimes did not follow these rules. The wrath of Rome would usually follow major violations. Mostly because it hurt the long-term prospects of Rome. Political opponents of the offender would seize the opportunity to imprison or exile a rival. And lastly, the prosecutor in Rome in such cases got very positive visibility as an upholder of the law and ensuring the good of the empire, so he went about his job with full enthusiasm and sincerity. Cynical reasons can sometimes produce positive outcomes.

 

Goldsworthy’s point is not that such a system of long-term thinking and checks and balances was perfect – it wasn’t. Rather, his point is that it kept the savagery by the conquering Roman army in check most of the time.

 

Given the vast distances and kind of communication systems in that age, regional governors and commanders had to be given a lot of operational freedom (If every decision had to be made or checked with Rome, it would never work). While this meant some could and did abuse their power, it also limited the area over which any one man could do damage. Even a mad emperor in Rome could not inflict savagery across the entire empire.

 

That takes us back to the eternal debate - if the outcome is good, should one really care about the reasons behind it?

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Student of the Year

Image
As a toddler, my daughter loved Alia Bhatt’s songs, esp. the ones from Student of the Year . (That movie did have many good songs and well-choreographed dances). Fast forward to present day, when she is 12 yo. She rarely watches Hindi movies now, but one of the few ones she likes of late, Raja aur Rani ki Prem Kahani has, yes, Alia Bhatt.   If I had any hopes that there was anything to be read in the name of her toddler-time favorite ( Student of the Year ), they have been dashed. Our conversations come exam time are perfectly captured by this photo and its caption: In fact, the pic below captures how she and I look at her answer sheets – me intently, she with an expression of “It’s over, so why are you even looking at it?”   Of late, we pull her leg and tell her that she isn’t showing any signs of academic prowess, she’d better find a rich guy to marry. Some time later, she showed us this meme on the Internet: “Me No Study, Me No Care Me Go Marry Millionaire If He Die
Read more

Why we Deceive Ourselves

In their book, The Elephant in the Brain , the authors describe this weird aspect of deception that we practice: deceiving ourselves! That is so weird: “If our minds contain maps of our worlds, what good comes from having an inaccurate version of these maps?” The Sigmund Freud school of thought treats self-deception as a defense mechanism, “a way for the ego to protect itself”. The mind seeks to protect itself from anxiety and other negative emotions. Many object to this reasoning: since accurate information is so critical to our survival, surely distorting information would be dangerous. Wouldn’t the goal of protecting our self-esteem have been better achieved by making the brain’s self-esteem mechanism stronger instead? The new school of thought explains self-deception as “primarily outward-facing, manipulative, and ultimately self-serving”. This is based on Thomas Schelling’s work on game theory: “In a variety of scenarios, limiting or sabotaging yourself is the winn
Read more

Handling of the Satyam Scam

The Satyam scam. How does that fit into Montek Singh Ahluwalia’s book on reforms in India, Backstage ? The reason is that, as both NASSCOM and the government of India felt: “(Satyam’s) collapse would create a great deal of disruption for clients worldwide and seriously damage India’s reputation as a reliable source of software services.”   Therefore, the government decided to work with the private sector to “organize a quick takeover by a reputable new buyer, who would quickly restart the company”. But that could not be done overnight. In the meantime, the new board would have to reach out to Satyam’s clients and “reassure them that the company would survive”.   For the new board to have credibility when it made that statement, it had to be staffed with people who understood the private sector, the IT sector in particular, and commanded respect and trust. Deepak Parikh from HDFC was made chairman, and other members of the board included a former NASSCOM chairman, CII member,
Read more