DHA, 50/2, 2024 – CC-BY Dialogues d’ histoire ancienne, 50/2, 2024, 39‑66 – CC‑BY Introduction Historians in the “Realist” school assume that the Mediterranean basin acquired the characteristics of a unipolar system during the period between the Treaty of Apamea (188 BC) 2 and the end of the ird Punic War (146). 3 e perception of the Republic as a hegemonic power converted the Vrbs into a focus for embassies, a diplomatic stage per se. 4 At the same time, the senate, the institution responsible for foreign policy, capitalised on Roman sovereignty during those years by commissioning legationes and supervising diplomacy abroad. 5 e patres efficiently implemented coercive mechanisms on allies and enemies. Spaces of negotiation were oſten instrumentalised to display Rome’ s superiority over others, a process that fits into the pattern of so‑called “compellence 1 is research has been undertaken as part of the Research Project “IANUA. Entornos para el diálogo: los espacios de la diplomacia en el ámbito provincial romano durante la República” (PID2022‑ 137408NBI00), funded by MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by “ERDF A way of making Europe”. 2 All dates in this work are BC. 3 is is an interpretative model created by Eckstein (2006, 2008, 2017), rooted in the foundations of contemporary political science, and which now has many followers. e unipolar period has been analysed recently by Brisson (2023). 4 Lecomte 1969, p. 229‑234; Auliard 1991, p.49; Linderski 1995, p. 454; Coudry 2004, p. 530‑533; Torregaray 2006, p. 224‑227; Buono‑Core 2010, p. 63; Westall 2015, p. 23. 5 Polybius, VI, 13, 6‑9; Torregaray 2006, p. 225; Westall 2015, p. 23. Diplomatic Space. Symbolism and Praxis in Contexts of Negotiation during the Third Punic War 1 Gabriel Rosselló Calafell ORCID 0000‑0002‑1150‑8235 Universitat de les Illes Balears, España gabriel.rossello@uib.cat