Tell me about the use (very good use) of diplomacy by the Romans.Here's a short list I compiled:-made sure they had enough praetors to govern new territory-allowed some non-Romans to have full Roman citizenship-made alliance with some Spanish cities to fight against the Carthaginians (that's kind of like counterinsurgency too, well, counterinsurgency is diplomacy)-king of Pergamom deeded his kingdom to Rome (Why? Did he give in to Rome's overwhelming power or did he just want Rome's protection? Or a combination of both?)Internally- they compromised with the Plebeians by creating the council of pleb (sp?)- they allowed self-governance

In a nutshell Rome spoke softly while carrying a very big spear.  In the beginning, Rome created a confederacy of city-states and employed this combined strength to secure total hegemony over the Italian Penninsula and Sicily (Syracuse).  The Romans knew that war kept their allies occupied so that they would not have the time to plot against them or question their role as hegemon.  Also, the Romans were wise to share the spoils of their early victories with their allies to quell any other discontent that might arise.  When Rome felt she was strong enough, she challenged Carthage for supremacy of the Western Mediteranean world.  Once Hannibal and the Carthaginians were finally defeated, Rome then chased Hannibal to the Seleucid Kingdom and made war with the Greeks further expanding at the expense of the Hellenistic Kingdoms and thus bringing an end to the Hellenistic Age.  Egypt fell soon thereafter and eventually became the granary of the Republic.  The conquered territories were reorganized into provinces and their lot was to feed Rome with their goods, services, and slaves from then on.  Other enemies such as Jugurtha and the Gauls were subdued as well until the reign of Marcus Aurelius, where there were no more external enemies to fight.  Then the internal decay began as Commodus ascended to power.By the Christian era, the provinces were reorganized again into Dioceses and they were taxed heavily and overburdened with bureaucratic bloat.  The Empire had two capitals and Latin remained the primary language in the West and Greek in the East.  The Empire became so disjointed that eventually the barbarian hordes sacked Rome and ended the Western Empire thus shifting things to the East with the Byzantines.  To make a long story short, Rome prospered while she was at war, and she disintegrated once she settled into domestic peace...a long death to be sure, but she died nevertheless...a victim of her own successes.

Tell me about the use (very good use) of diplomacy by the Romans.Here's a short list I compiled:-made sure they had enough praetors to govern new territory-allowed some non-Romans to have full Roman citizenship-made alliance with some Spanish cities to fight against the Carthaginians (that's kind of like counterinsurgency too, well, counterinsurgency is diplomacy)-king of Pergamom deeded his kingdom to Rome (Why? Did he give in to Rome's overwhelming power or did he just want Rome's protection? Or a combination of both?)Internally- they compromised with the Plebeians by creating the council of pleb (sp?)- they allowed self-governance

This issue came up in a lecture I was just watching.  By granting rights to the defeated, the Romans gained new "friends" from which they could draw resources and avoid internal strife.  This is in contrast to the brutal tactics, such as those used by the Assyrians, towards people who had just been conquered.  Also, the conquered territories were not all treated the same; rather, terms of their surrender may differ depending on the conquered kingdom's situation.  As far as Pergamom giving his kingdom over to Rome, it may have been the case that it was a realization that Rome had rolled through the rest of Italy, Carthage, and the Balkan Peninsula.  Perhaps Attalus was wise to this and didn't want to enter into a war that he knew he could not win.

In fact, I reckon we could go further than that: at least from the beginning of the Empire ‘Rome’ was in essence a Common Market favouring the rich and powerful in every territory that would accept membership, and gradually extending the citizenship to more and more people. We tend to think of the Roman Empire as analogous to the British or French Empires, but where was the ‘metropolitan country’ – not the city of Rome, surely, which was eventually dropped as the capital? Roman diplomacy consisted of offering a choice to the powerful: join or else. Most joined and became Roman, wherever they happened to live.

I imagine the choice to become a Roman citizen was not as difficult or drastic as it may seem, even if one were rich/powerful.  True, one would be giving up some autonomy, but one would also be gaining security from the Mediterranean’s most powerful security force, not to mention access to things such as public baths, arenas, markets…  I imagine that most of the rich could flourish more under the Romans than they could under their own rule.