Heads up: I have a mental illness and right now my mind is extremely scattered. As a result, I may ramble and this post may not make total sense, but I'd really appreciate the help of some clear-minded peeps, so please bear with me!

I'm writing a paper looking at the successes of Roman diplomacy and Roman warfare... I'm not sure how to articulate this point, and by extension, I'm having trouble searching for keywords and finding writing on the subject. But I've always been curious about the extent to which a sort of culture of violence/aggression played into Roman expansion.

I first thought of this when I read about their triumphs, and how their reaction to conquered prisoners in chains was to rejoice and celebrate... And the Roman soldiers, they must have felt this amazing sense of brotherhood and purpose at camp and on the battlefield... And how proud one might have felt showing the severed head of an enemy to their commander... And the passing under the yoke. All of these 'Roman' practices just seem sooo... testosteroney? I can't help but wonder if there is some link between a shared ideology or mindset and the fact that these guys eventually controlled the whole Mediterranean.

I can't imagine that there isn't anything on this subject. Maybe this is already understood by many, and I'm just slow to catch on. But I can't really find any sources. I found W. V. Harris' Restraining Rage: The Ideology of Anger Control in Classical Antiquity to be helpful because it discusses how the Romans kind of ran with the Greek concept of sophrosyne, but I want to explore the effects of this weird Roman ideology on their diplomatic and military relations, especially when it comes to their expansion.

Any input is appreciated! This idea that I can't seem to articulate is what interests me the most about the Romans! It would be cool to hear what other people think.