What do you think?
Rate this book
Cataclysm 90 BC: The Forgotten War that Almost Destroyed Rome
A dramatic account of a rebellion against the Roman republic—by a confederation of its Italian allies. We know of Rome’s reputation for military success against foreign enemies. Yet at the start of the first century BC, Rome faced a hostile army less than a week’s march from the capital. It is probable that only a swift surrender prevented the city from being attacked and sacked. Before that point, three Roman consuls had died in battle, and two Roman armies had been soundly defeated—not in some faraway field, but in the heartland of Italy. So who was this enemy that so comprehensively knocked Rome to its knees? What army could successfully challenge the legions which had been undefeated from Spain to the Euphrates? And why is that success almost unknown today? These questions are answered in this book, a military and political history of the Social War. It tells the story of the revolt of Rome’s Italian allies (socii in Latin), who wanted citizenship—and whose warriors had all the advantages of the Roman army that they usually fought alongside. It came down to a clash of generals—with the Roman rivals Gaius Marius and Cornelius Sulla spending almost as much time in political intrigue as in combat with the enemy. With its interplay of such personalities as the young Cicero, Cato, and Pompey—and filled with high-stakes politics, full-scale warfare, assassination, personal sacrifice, and desperate measures such as raising an army of freed slaves—Cataclysm 90 BC provides not just a rich historical account but a taut, fast-paced tale.
228 pages, Kindle Edition
First published September 1, 2014
74 people are currently reading
237 people want to read
About the author
Philip Matyszak
62 books281 followersPhilip Matyszak is a British nonfiction author, primarily of historical works relating to ancient Rome. Matyszak has a doctorate in Roman history from St. John's College, Oxford. In addition to being a professional author, he also teaches ancient history for Madingley Hall Institute of Continuing Education, Cambridge University.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews
March 18, 2017
In 91 BC, the Roman Republic found itself fighting a not-quite civil war, when a large part of Rome's allies and conquered peoples in Italy rebelled and tried to bring down the Roman Republic. Cataclysm 90 BC is about this conflict, and several directly related subjects.
The "Cataclysm" name is justified in the first chapter with the idea of 'cataclysmic adjustment'. This is an idea that if an unstable situation is left alone long enough, it will solve itself by turning into a different (generally more severe) problem. This is presented as a pre-existing concept, though I have not run into the phrase before, and while Matyszak is on solid ground in his assertion that the Social War was the opening act in the civil wars that brought about the Roman Empire, use of the word 'cataclysm' in the title still feels overly dramatic.
The subtitle 'The Forgotten War that Almost Destroyed Rome' is far more justified. As it happened, the two sides were fairly even for the first year or so, and it was quite possible that more of Italy would join the revolt against Rome, and Rome would fall. It might be worth wondering just what the Roman Republic would have been replaced with in such a situation? Likely, the various peoples involved would have tried going their own way, and return to the general situation before Rome dominated the peninsula. But they had just banded together to fight Rome, had adopted some of the forms of the Republic, and the actual cause of the conflict was a desire to be counted as Roman citizens. It is possible that some form of Italian Republic would have emerged, that would have explicitly included full rights for everyone involved, and gone on its business in much the same way as the Roman Republic—just without the Romans. Finally, it is very true that the Social War is not very well known. In popular knowledge, the period between the Punic Wars and Julius Caesar is silent. At the same time, it is somewhat ironic that the events covered here are also covered by two volumes of the fairly recent popular Masters of Rome series by Colleen McCullough, so it is not quite as forgotten as it has been.
Matyszak does a very good job of introducing the general situation, and showing the roots of the conflict. He takes a look at both sides, and shows how the recent history of the Republic had been rife with incompetence. This includes a rundown of reform attempts in the Republic, including the Gracchi brothers and Livius Drusus. The war is also handled well, and gives those details that are available, with appropriate asides about where sources are thin, or disagree. He also continues the narrative into the war between Marius and Sulla, and then Sulla's campaign in Italy after the Mithradatic War and his attempt to reform the Republic. This is largely there as it follows on so naturally to the main subject, but the fact is that it also saw the last bits of the Social War play out (in further fighting against the Samnites, one of the prominent rebel tribes of the war).
This is a good short overview (only ~160 pages) of about a decade, and would only really benefit from perhaps some further reading suggestions and better maps. The one map provided is quite serviceable, but by no means exceptional. The editing seems fairly good with the only flub I noticed being Marius being introduced as 'Caius Marius' the first time, and then called 'Gaius Marius' for the rest of the book (both are correct; interestingly, he's listed as Caius in the index). Speaking of Marius, Matyszak takes a dim view of him, seeing him as overly ambitious and jealous, and seems unconvinced of his military ability, in contrast to McCullough's glowing depiction. As such, I wish he'd spent a bit more time on the man, because while he's on solid ground with other historians on the first part, he is bucking the trend in his judgement of military ability.
The "Cataclysm" name is justified in the first chapter with the idea of 'cataclysmic adjustment'. This is an idea that if an unstable situation is left alone long enough, it will solve itself by turning into a different (generally more severe) problem. This is presented as a pre-existing concept, though I have not run into the phrase before, and while Matyszak is on solid ground in his assertion that the Social War was the opening act in the civil wars that brought about the Roman Empire, use of the word 'cataclysm' in the title still feels overly dramatic.
The subtitle 'The Forgotten War that Almost Destroyed Rome' is far more justified. As it happened, the two sides were fairly even for the first year or so, and it was quite possible that more of Italy would join the revolt against Rome, and Rome would fall. It might be worth wondering just what the Roman Republic would have been replaced with in such a situation? Likely, the various peoples involved would have tried going their own way, and return to the general situation before Rome dominated the peninsula. But they had just banded together to fight Rome, had adopted some of the forms of the Republic, and the actual cause of the conflict was a desire to be counted as Roman citizens. It is possible that some form of Italian Republic would have emerged, that would have explicitly included full rights for everyone involved, and gone on its business in much the same way as the Roman Republic—just without the Romans. Finally, it is very true that the Social War is not very well known. In popular knowledge, the period between the Punic Wars and Julius Caesar is silent. At the same time, it is somewhat ironic that the events covered here are also covered by two volumes of the fairly recent popular Masters of Rome series by Colleen McCullough, so it is not quite as forgotten as it has been.
Matyszak does a very good job of introducing the general situation, and showing the roots of the conflict. He takes a look at both sides, and shows how the recent history of the Republic had been rife with incompetence. This includes a rundown of reform attempts in the Republic, including the Gracchi brothers and Livius Drusus. The war is also handled well, and gives those details that are available, with appropriate asides about where sources are thin, or disagree. He also continues the narrative into the war between Marius and Sulla, and then Sulla's campaign in Italy after the Mithradatic War and his attempt to reform the Republic. This is largely there as it follows on so naturally to the main subject, but the fact is that it also saw the last bits of the Social War play out (in further fighting against the Samnites, one of the prominent rebel tribes of the war).
This is a good short overview (only ~160 pages) of about a decade, and would only really benefit from perhaps some further reading suggestions and better maps. The one map provided is quite serviceable, but by no means exceptional. The editing seems fairly good with the only flub I noticed being Marius being introduced as 'Caius Marius' the first time, and then called 'Gaius Marius' for the rest of the book (both are correct; interestingly, he's listed as Caius in the index). Speaking of Marius, Matyszak takes a dim view of him, seeing him as overly ambitious and jealous, and seems unconvinced of his military ability, in contrast to McCullough's glowing depiction. As such, I wish he'd spent a bit more time on the man, because while he's on solid ground with other historians on the first part, he is bucking the trend in his judgement of military ability.
May 9, 2020
It was interesting and definitely worthwhile to read this after Lynda Telford’s blatantly favourable Sulla biography, for although Matyszak is more concerned with the Social Wars, the events leading up to them, and their aftermath, this book too has a strong focus on the career of Sulla, and represents a take from the more mainstream historical field.
That said, I found myself disagreeing with Matyszak a fair bit. Cataclysm is a whistle-stop tour of the events it describes – a page turner, easy to understand, and easy to read in just a day or two – but that also meant I found that I had previously already gleaned far more detail about these events from Telford. Unfortunate, but not a detriment to Matyszak’s book for few will approach it having just come off a more detailed biography, and indeed as a popular history Matyszak’s very objective is to explain for the laymen in a clear and accessible manner, which he does.
But I had other issues with his scholarship. I noticed that he accepted at face value the accusation by the ancient sources that Sulla was ‘debauched’ and ‘decadent’. I admit it was reading Telford that raised a flag on this for me; she spends time actually examining whether or not this was true, or merely founded in ancient snobbery about Sulla keeping company with poor people – something we would view with very different eyes today. Obviously as a newcomer to this subject I hesitate, as any historian would, to say definitively that Sulla was or wasn’t ‘debauched’ or ‘decadent’, but at the very least critical examination of the sources is usually in order.
I get the impression that because Matyszak’s objective in this book was repackaging and presenting the Social Wars in a more public-friendly way, he may have taken some of the sources for granted. And this impression was reinforced when I saw Matyszak describe Sulla’s final year of life, spent in retirement, as being made happy by a wife, Caecilia Metella, who had just given him twins. Except this is incorrect. The twins were born some years before, and his third wife had died by this time. In his final year, Sulla had a fourth wife, who was pregnant and gave birth after his death. This mistake suggests to me a rather sloppy skimming of the necessary sources, at least in regard to Sulla. I grant, Sulla is not the main purpose of the book, the Social Wars are, but spotting this error made me very wary.
In regards to the leading figures of the age, Matyszak appears to have equal disdain for both Gaius Marius and Sulla – apart from readily acknowledging their military prowess. I found it amusing that the partisan Telford is in fact more generous in her assessment of Marius. I have to wonder if Matyszak’s perspective on the two rivals is mainstream. At the very least, however, I did appreciate his perspective in one regard; Matyszak highlights Sulla’s opposition to extending citizenship to the Italians, the very cause of the devastating Social War, and difficult to explain away if you’re painting Sulla as the reasonable and decent man that Telford tries to. Matyszak shifts focus away from the notion that Sulla’s executions were the bare minimum necessary to guarantee the state’s security, and on to their full horror. I think this is much needed when considering this era, and the characters of its leading figures. Despite having some problems with Matyszak’s book, it is absolutely valuable to read these different interpretations and perspectives in order to form a critical and well-rounded picture.
7 out of 10
March 7, 2019
A concise history of the Social War and the Sullan civil wars, excluding the Sertorian War in Hispania (evidently covered in a separate volume) but including the first two Mithraditic Wars in Asia Minor. Matyszak is a great writer with a fine command of the sources; evidently, he does his own translation of primary source material, to boot.
I suspect this is an under-appreciated period in Roman history, which is too bad – it’s completely insane. The Roman Republic nearly goes off the rails over a political tussle about citizenship, and the entire Mediterranean basin is up in arms, literally and figuratively. The only way to restore order? Kill everything that moves, more or less.
This book did quite a bit to cool my impression of Marius, and improve my impression of Sulla (who, don’t get me wrong, wasn’t a nice guy).
I also learned what ‘epitomator’ means. I had to look it up – minus one point, Matyszak – but that’s a bonus for me.
If you’re looking to understand why the Roman Republic eventually fell, don’t read about Caesar or Augustus. The seeds were sown well before their time. I’d read about this time period, instead. Recommended. See highlights for interesting passages.
I suspect this is an under-appreciated period in Roman history, which is too bad – it’s completely insane. The Roman Republic nearly goes off the rails over a political tussle about citizenship, and the entire Mediterranean basin is up in arms, literally and figuratively. The only way to restore order? Kill everything that moves, more or less.
This book did quite a bit to cool my impression of Marius, and improve my impression of Sulla (who, don’t get me wrong, wasn’t a nice guy).
I also learned what ‘epitomator’ means. I had to look it up – minus one point, Matyszak – but that’s a bonus for me.
If you’re looking to understand why the Roman Republic eventually fell, don’t read about Caesar or Augustus. The seeds were sown well before their time. I’d read about this time period, instead. Recommended. See highlights for interesting passages.
July 31, 2016
Imagine if you will a democracy that has become the most powerful nation in the world. A nation built on liberty and an immigration policy that created a vital citizenry. Then picture this same nation's politics sinking into turmoil, and the nation ruled by the wealthy and the bankers. Of course I am speaking of the Roman Republic after the Gracchi. This Roman History is very detailed, and thankfully short as it is a bit of a wade, albeit, well worth it. As I read this, the old saw about History repeating itself kept coming to my mind. Democracy is fragile, and after the fall of the Roman Republic, it did not return until the 1700s. The question for us, is can we prevent our own cataclysm.
September 24, 2015
entertaining and flowing like a novel - mostly about the social war, but also the backstory and the Marius and Sulla conflict; marred by tons of typos and by occasional inconsistencies (mostly due to the original sources used)
June 19, 2019
In this brief, yet densely packed, book, Philip Matyszak details the story of the first of Rome's terrible civil wars.
He spends a good portion of the first third of the book detailing the senatorial infighting that fractured the validity of the Republican system. In short, the rule of law began to break down, and more and more mob violence began to be a tool in the bag of Roman politicians. Much of this violence centered around the idea of more enfranchisement for common citizens, and expanding citizenry and all rights attendant to the Italians of the peninsula.
Rome had set up a three tiered system in terms of citizenship: Romans, Latins and Italians in descending order. The Italians, who had fought in Rome's wars, wanted equal representation and an equal say in legislation and a chance at the Cursus Honorum. The old aristocratic families of Rome were loath to give the Italians such citizenship, and when more than one Roman senator tried to extend to the Italian people what they wanted, the legislation was blocked and or said senator was met with violence.
Needless to say, the Italians decided that the sword was their only option.
The Italians fought in the Lectionary style as the Romans did, and had for centuries. And their forces performed brilliantly in the first year and a half of the war. Enough to convince the Roman Senate to cave, and give them what they wanted.
However, this did not end the fighting.
There were too many Senators with armies, and passions and ambitions got the better of them, specifically those between Gaius Marius and Sulla. When Mithradites launched his ambitious war of conquest (and genocide) against Roman and Italian possessions in Asia Minor and Greece, Sulla was given command of the forces tasked with gaining bloody vengeance against Pontus.
However, Marius used political wrangling to stab Sulla in the back, and tried to wrest control from Sulla. Sulla went anyway, and consequently smashed the Pontic forces, regaining all lost Roman territories, punished the locals for defying Rome, and forces Pontus to come to heel.
Meanwhile Marius and his allies closed Sulla off from Rome.
This only ensured Sulla would seek bloody vengeance against his foes in the Senate. This he did, landing his small, yet veteran army in southern Italy, and proceeded to whip every government force sent against him.
The Samnites, the last of the semi-independent Italian peoples, allied themselves to Rome's cause to ensure the continuance of what liberties they had, and transposed their army between Sulla and Rome itself. Sulla met this Samnite army at the Battle of the Coline Gates, and demolished them, winning the first Roman Civil War and seizing Rome itself.
Sulla began a reign of terror, establishing a list of proscriptions (contractual political murders) of his enemies, and reordered the law as he saw fit. Sulla became a dictator, assuming the title legally, and then relinquished his rule after he felt he had ordered Rome back to the control of the old elite families.
He even ran for Consul, and won, and then retired from public life where he died a couple of years later (albeit quite horribly of an internal infection).
However, by then, the Republic had essentially ceased to exist. The genie was out of the bottle, and military force was now a factor in determining Roman political discourse. And one can draw a direct line from Sulla, to the Triumvirate, to Julius Caesar and Pompey, to Augustus and Imperium.
The book was wonderfully written, a true joy to read. I had heard of Matyszak, and this was my first taste of his works. Will definitely be reading more of him in the future.
Very highly recommended.
He spends a good portion of the first third of the book detailing the senatorial infighting that fractured the validity of the Republican system. In short, the rule of law began to break down, and more and more mob violence began to be a tool in the bag of Roman politicians. Much of this violence centered around the idea of more enfranchisement for common citizens, and expanding citizenry and all rights attendant to the Italians of the peninsula.
Rome had set up a three tiered system in terms of citizenship: Romans, Latins and Italians in descending order. The Italians, who had fought in Rome's wars, wanted equal representation and an equal say in legislation and a chance at the Cursus Honorum. The old aristocratic families of Rome were loath to give the Italians such citizenship, and when more than one Roman senator tried to extend to the Italian people what they wanted, the legislation was blocked and or said senator was met with violence.
Needless to say, the Italians decided that the sword was their only option.
The Italians fought in the Lectionary style as the Romans did, and had for centuries. And their forces performed brilliantly in the first year and a half of the war. Enough to convince the Roman Senate to cave, and give them what they wanted.
However, this did not end the fighting.
There were too many Senators with armies, and passions and ambitions got the better of them, specifically those between Gaius Marius and Sulla. When Mithradites launched his ambitious war of conquest (and genocide) against Roman and Italian possessions in Asia Minor and Greece, Sulla was given command of the forces tasked with gaining bloody vengeance against Pontus.
However, Marius used political wrangling to stab Sulla in the back, and tried to wrest control from Sulla. Sulla went anyway, and consequently smashed the Pontic forces, regaining all lost Roman territories, punished the locals for defying Rome, and forces Pontus to come to heel.
Meanwhile Marius and his allies closed Sulla off from Rome.
This only ensured Sulla would seek bloody vengeance against his foes in the Senate. This he did, landing his small, yet veteran army in southern Italy, and proceeded to whip every government force sent against him.
The Samnites, the last of the semi-independent Italian peoples, allied themselves to Rome's cause to ensure the continuance of what liberties they had, and transposed their army between Sulla and Rome itself. Sulla met this Samnite army at the Battle of the Coline Gates, and demolished them, winning the first Roman Civil War and seizing Rome itself.
Sulla began a reign of terror, establishing a list of proscriptions (contractual political murders) of his enemies, and reordered the law as he saw fit. Sulla became a dictator, assuming the title legally, and then relinquished his rule after he felt he had ordered Rome back to the control of the old elite families.
He even ran for Consul, and won, and then retired from public life where he died a couple of years later (albeit quite horribly of an internal infection).
However, by then, the Republic had essentially ceased to exist. The genie was out of the bottle, and military force was now a factor in determining Roman political discourse. And one can draw a direct line from Sulla, to the Triumvirate, to Julius Caesar and Pompey, to Augustus and Imperium.
The book was wonderfully written, a true joy to read. I had heard of Matyszak, and this was my first taste of his works. Will definitely be reading more of him in the future.
Very highly recommended.
December 19, 2019
Great read!
While I had read about Rome's first Civil War from other sources, it was always to give some context to the events that concerned that work in particular (Caesar's biography, for example) and not as a full fledged study on the Civil War itself. This book is a perfect read for those that want to get acquainted with what truly led to the downfall of the Roman Republic, and is yet another shining example of why I find Ancient Rome so fascinating; the drama and the action never stops!
While I had read about Rome's first Civil War from other sources, it was always to give some context to the events that concerned that work in particular (Caesar's biography, for example) and not as a full fledged study on the Civil War itself. This book is a perfect read for those that want to get acquainted with what truly led to the downfall of the Roman Republic, and is yet another shining example of why I find Ancient Rome so fascinating; the drama and the action never stops!
December 24, 2017
"Aristocracy by its very nature degenerates into oligarchy. Then the common people become infuriated with this government and take revenge on it for its unjust rule. So we get the development of democracy. In due course the permissiveness and lawlessness of this type of government degenerates into mob-rule giving the opportunity for Aristocracy to rise, and the cycle is complete."Polybius, Histories 6.3
Any parallels in our 'modern' world?
Any parallels in our 'modern' world?
April 11, 2021
Another solid, interesting book from Philip Matyszak. This time he examines the brutal period leading up to the end of the Roman Republic and the rise of Caesar and Pompey (both of whom are minor characters in this book). Lots of memorable figures like Marius, Mithridates and Sulla. This was a time period wracked with internal conflict as well as the inevitable foreign wars that came close to destroying Rome altogether.
December 10, 2020
Superbly written. Gripping, telling. As far as the actual narrative, it's outstanding.
However, expanded maps, timelines, a glossary, and lists of dramatis personae would have helped.
But overall, a scintillating book, rife with power, territoriality, greed, runctions, factionalism, not unlike our present era around the world.
However, expanded maps, timelines, a glossary, and lists of dramatis personae would have helped.
But overall, a scintillating book, rife with power, territoriality, greed, runctions, factionalism, not unlike our present era around the world.
October 30, 2017
A really solid read on the civil wars that ravaged the Roman Republic in the decades immediately preceding Julius Caesar's (rather more famous and less interesting) rise. The book is focused on the Social War and the conflict between Marius and Sulla and could use some more Gracci and Catiline.
March 22, 2019
A splendid account of a turbulent decade!
A thoroughly authoritative but enjoyable account, luckily written. I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the Roman Republic and it's often violent politics.
A thoroughly authoritative but enjoyable account, luckily written. I would recommend this book to anyone with an interest in the Roman Republic and it's often violent politics.
April 5, 2019
Excellent Histoory
I immensely enjoyed the book as a lover of Roman History. This is how popular history books should be written - simple narration of events followed by in depth analysis.
I immensely enjoyed the book as a lover of Roman History. This is how popular history books should be written - simple narration of events followed by in depth analysis.
January 8, 2022
In addition to an account of the Social War, author Matyszak explores in satisfying detail the social and political forces that led to it and then carried Rome on to the era of the Strong Men.
My favorite read of 2021
My favorite read of 2021
December 30, 2019
Because the most dangerous army the Roman Republic faced was itself
June 17, 2021
Easy read
For those who want to learn the basics of the collapse of the republic, this is a great place to start.
For those who want to learn the basics of the collapse of the republic, this is a great place to start.
September 16, 2021
A good discussion of Rome's "Social War"
June 10, 2023
good easily to read history, far from being boring.
December 26, 2023
A fascinating book that looks at the social, economic, and political issues impacting the Roman Republic in the years leaving up to the Social War. The author’s writing style is simply enjoyable and the information provided was very intriguing. I loved how his argument is based around politics putting off larger issues for quick political gains would shape Roman politics for future generations. My favorite quote from the book has to be, “‘Corruption’ implies an alternative system to be corrupted. In ancient Rome nepotism, back-scratching, and the exchange of favours did not corrupt the system – they actually were the system.” Simply phenomenal and very gripping when speaking of the war itself and what occurred in the cleanup.
December 8, 2021
Good book for anyone interested in Roman history. It covers the Italian War, where the Italian cities revolted against Roman rule, and the Civil War basically between Marius and Sulla. Explodes the myth that there was some glorious Roman Republic full of free men that was destroyed by Caesar, etc. Whatever was good about the Roman republic had been dying a long time by 49BC.
October 30, 2016
I knew nothing about this war until I read Colleen McCullough's superb 'First Man in Rome' series. The Social War is not usually part of the Ancient Rome story so I found it fascinating to uncover it in McCullough’s superb novels. All credit to McCullough that Cataclysm did not add a ton of knowledge to what I knew, but then there is so little hard fact from this period I guess that is not to be surprised about. I suspect the fact that Rome did not fare too well in this war makes it one many of the period were not too keen to document in detail.
What did interest me were the closing stages of the ‘rebellion’ and just how tough the Samnites were and the bloody fighting that took place before Sulla finally came out supreme.
All in all, a good concise read about the period that I would recommend to anyone wanting to understand the ‘Social Wars’ a little better.
What did interest me were the closing stages of the ‘rebellion’ and just how tough the Samnites were and the bloody fighting that took place before Sulla finally came out supreme.
All in all, a good concise read about the period that I would recommend to anyone wanting to understand the ‘Social Wars’ a little better.
December 12, 2024
Informative review of an overlooked episode
Very informative well argued history. except it's use of polybius' constitutional evolution as a framing device, which is abandoned early on.
Very informative well argued history. except it's use of polybius' constitutional evolution as a framing device, which is abandoned early on.
Displaying 1 - 22 of 22 reviews