Scipio’s downfall is superficially surprising: the charges were obviously invented, although he was not helped by his own arrogance. The disgrace and death in humiliating retirement of a successful, patriotic general seems a display of petty ingratitude. But in the Roman Republic, no individual, however gifted and successful, must be allowed to become too wealthy from booty or too politically powerful. The main agent of his disgrace (two phases, 187, 184), was Cato. Livy’s narrative is gripping but confused. Polybius treated the troubles of the Scipio brothers only as part of an anecdotal obituary. In 187, Cato put up two tribunes to demand an account of the money which Lucius received from Antiochus as part-payment of war indemnity. Publius, the real target, angrily tore up the account book which could have cleared him. He himself was prosecuted (184). It never came to trial. He died at his Campanian villa (183).

The perspective is not isolationist: the United States should be a constructive world citizen. Nor does it arise from pacifism, although sometimes it may be wise not to seek to win wars, but to end them. Given war aversion and the essential absence of threat, military spending is hugely excessive. However, even if the US should substantially disarm, it is probably wise to keep some military forces to carry out limited missions, to hedge a bit against the highly unlikely rise of an effective adversary, and to develop a capacity to rebuild. There would be risk if military forces were very substantially reduced, but experiences in Vietnam and Iraq suggest that there is risk as well in maintaining large forces-in-being that can be deployed in an under-reflective manner. It also facilitates misguided militarized assertiveness, fatuous political rhetoric, and arrogance. The American public has not become newly isolationist or militaristic. It has long been willing to engage internationally, but not to expend American lives in costly and questionable foreign adventures: the 9/11 wars are not indicators of change in this. Indeed, an Iraq Syndrome has taken hold, and military intervention, particularly with ground troops does not seem to have much of a future.

The two cases of royal illness examined in this chapter are framed by arrogance. First, Uzziah’s affliction with צרעת is preceded by his arrogance in attempting to take over the priestly duties at the temple (2 Chr 26:16–23). Second, arrogance plays a role in Hezekiah’s illness when the king provokes divine wrath by not responding with gratitude to being healed (2 Chr 32:24–25). This chapter shows how the Chronicler expands on the incident of Uzziah’s צרעת with the purpose of making a point about the destructive nature of sacrilege (מעל) and the limits of royal involvement in the temple cult. For Hezekiah’s illness, the Chronicler highlights the importance of humility (כנע) when faced with divine wrath. The respective portrayals of Uzziah and Hezekiah teach us about the correct response to divine anger while placing into sharper focus the danger of hubris that comes with power and success. Lastly, sacrilege (מעל) at the temple and a lack of humility (כנע) on the part of the king also play a role in the last days of Judah insofar as the events surrounding the illness of Uzziah and Hezekiah resonate with the eventual annihilation of Judah and Jerusalem.

Chapter 5 explores the violence of arrogant speech. If scheming was considered a hidden form of verbal violence, gloating and taunting are its public forms. I focus first on ways that enemies join themselves to – and thus become complicit in – acts of violence through gloating. Edom is an example. Edom joined in the Babylonian violence against Judah and was held liable. When describing violent acts, biblical writers also tend to fixate on the taunts that accompany them. They are the verbal dimension of public acts of violence. In taunting, the enemy brings another into a state of reproach and seeks recognition for that act of verbal violence. In turn, that verbal expression of violence plays an important role in characterizing the moral affront of the boastfully violent against the protective prerogatives of Yhwh, and against his rightful claims to power.