The Complete Works of Appian. Illustrated - Appian - E-Book

The Complete Works of Appian. Illustrated E-Book

Appian

0,0

Beschreibung

Appian of Alexandria was a Greek historian with Roman citizenship who flourished during the reigns of Emperors of Rome Trajan, Hadrian, and Antoninus Pius. His principal surviving work is Roman History. This history narrates the history of the Romans from the time of the Gracchan tribunates, through the civil wars of Marius, Sulla, Caesar and Pompey, to break off in the time of the Second Triumvirate. Contents: ROMAN HISTORY THE CIVIL WARS + The Greek Texts 

Sie lesen das E-Book in den Legimi-Apps auf:

Android
iOS
von Legimi
zertifizierten E-Readern

Seitenzahl: 2746

Das E-Book (TTS) können Sie hören im Abo „Legimi Premium” in Legimi-Apps auf:

Android
iOS
Bewertungen
0,0
0
0
0
0
0



The Complete Works of Appian

(c. AD 95 — c. 165)

Appian of Alexandria was a Greek historian with Roman citizenship who flourished during the reigns of Emperors of Rome Trajan, Hadrian, and Antoninus Pius.

His principal surviving work is Roman History.

This history narrates the history of the Romans from the time of the Gracchan tribunates, through the civil wars of Marius, Sulla, Caesar and Pompey, to break off in the time of the Second Triumvirate.

 

ROMAN HISTORY

THE CIVIL WARS

+ The Greek Texts

 

 

Contents:
ROMAN HISTORY
Translated by Horace White
AUTHOR’S PREFACE
CONCERNING THE KINGS Fragments
CONCERNING ITALY Fragments
THE SAMNITE HISTORY Fragments
THE GALLIC HISTORY Fragments
OF SICILY AND THE OTHER ISLANDS Fragments
THE WARS IN SPAIN
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
CHAPTER XVI
THE HANNIBALIC WAR
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
THE PUNIC WARS
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
CHAPTER XVI
CHAPTER XVII
CHAPTER XVIII
CHAPTER XIX
CHAPTER XX
MACEDONIAN AFFAIRS Fragments
THE ILLYRIAN WARS
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
THE SYRIAN WARS
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
THE MITHRIDATIC WARS
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
CHAPTER XVI
CHAPTER XVII
THE CIVIL WARS
Translated by Horace White
BOOK I
INTRODUCTION
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
BOOK II
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
CHAPTER XVI
CHAPTER XVII
CHAPTER XVIII
CHAPTER XIX
CHAPTER XX
CHAPTER XXI
BOOK III
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
BOOK IV
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
CHAPTER XV
CHAPTER XVI
CHAPTER XVII
BOOK V
CHAPTER I
CHAPTER II
CHAPTER III
CHAPTER IV
CHAPTER V
CHAPTER VI
CHAPTER VII
CHAPTER VIII
CHAPTER IX
CHAPTER X
CHAPTER XI
CHAPTER XII
CHAPTER XIII
CHAPTER XIV
The Greek Texts [1]
ROMAN HISTORY
ἐκ τῆς Βασιλικῆς
ἐκ τῆς Ἰταλικῆς
ἐκ τῆς Σαυνιτικησ
ἐκ τῆς Κελτικησ
ἐκ τῆς Σικελικησ και Νησιωτικησ
Ιβηρικη
Αννιβαικη
Λιβυκη
ἐκ τῆς Νομαδικησ
ἐκ τῆς Μακεδονικησ
Ιλλυρικη
Συριακη
Μιθριδατειοσ
THE CIVIL WARS
Book 1
Book 2
Book 3
Book 4
Book 5

ROMAN HISTORY

Translated by Horace White

Appian of Alexandria was a Roman historian of Greek origin, who flourished during the reigns of Trajan, Hadrian and Antoninus Pius. In AD c. 95 he was born in Alexandria, where he spent his early years, gradually moving up the political system. After having filled the chief offices in the province of Egypt, in c. 120 he went to Rome, where he practised as an advocate, pleading cases before the emperors. In AD 147 at the earliest time possible, he was appointed to the office of procurator, probably in Egypt, on the recommendation of his friend Marcus Cornelius Fronto, a well-known literary figure. Securing the position of procurator, which was only available to members of the equestrian order, he must have enjoyed a privileged family life.

Appian’s principal surviving work, Ῥωμαικά (History of Rome), was written in Greek in twenty-four books. It is mostly formed as a series of monographs, rather than a connected history, providing an informative account of various peoples and countries, starting with Romulus and Remus and progressing on to figures of the early Roman Empire. Appian began writing his history around the middle of the second century AD. Only sections from half of the original twenty-four books survive today. Eleven have come down to us mostly complete, including the sections on the Spanish, Hannibalic, Punic, Illyrian, Syrian and Mythridatic wars, while other parts survive in considerable fragments.

An honest admirer of the Roman Empire, though ignorant of the institutions of the earlier Roman Republic, Appian wrote in the simple common man’s dialect, narrating conquests, from Rome’s earliest beginnings to the times of Trajan (AD 98-117). Appian’s Roman History continues to be regarded as a valuable source of information on historical events that would otherwise have been lost long ago.

AUTHOR’S PREFACE

REDUCED FACSIMILE, VATICAN MS. GR. 141. XII CENTURY, FIRST PAGE OF AUTHOR’S PREFACE INTENDING to write the history of the Romans I have deemed it best to begin with the boundaries of the nations under their sway. They are as follows: In the ocean, the major part of those who inhabit the British Isles. Then entering the Mediterranean by the Pillars of Hercules and circumnavigating the same we find under their rule all the islands and the mainlands washed by that sea. The first of these on the right hand are the Mauritanians of the coast and various other African nations as far as Carthage. Farther inland are the nomad tribes whom the Romans call Numidians and their country Numidia; then other Africans who dwell around the Syrtes as far as Cyrene, and Cyrene itself; also the Marmarid? the Ammonii, and those who dwell by the lake Mareotis; then the great city founded by Alexander on the border of Egypt, and Egypt itself, as one sails up the Nile, as far as eastern Ethiopia; and as far as Pelusium by sea.

[2] Here turning our course we take in Palestine-Syria, and beyond it a part of Arabia. The Phœnicians hold the country next to Palestine on the sea, and beyond the Phœnician territory are C?le-Syria, and the parts stretching from the sea as far inland as the river Euphrates, namely Palmyra and the sandy country round about, extending even to the Euphrates itself. The Cilicians come next to the Syrians, and their neighbors are the Cappadocians, and that part of the Armenian country called Lesser Armenia. Along the Euxine are other nations called by the common name Pontic, subject to the Roman rule. The Syrians and Cilicians border on the Mediterranean, the Armenians and Cappadocians extend to the Pontic nations and to the interior as far as Greater Armenia, which is not subject to the Romans in the way of tribute, but its people appoint their own kings. Descending from Cilicia and Cappadocia to Ionia we find the great peninsula bounded on the right by the Euxine, the Propontis, the Hellespont, and the?gean, and on the left by the Pamphylian or Egyptian sea, for it is called by both names. Some of the countries embraced in it look toward the Egyptian sea, namely: Pamphylia and Lycia and after them Caria extending to Ionia. Others look toward the Euxine, the Propontis, and the Hellespont, namely: the Galatians, Bithynians, Mysians, and Phrygians. In the interior are the Pisidians and Lydians. So many nations inhabit this peninsula and all are under Roman rule.

[3] Crossing from these coasts they rule other nations around the Euixine, the Mysians of Europe and the Thracians who border that sea. Beyond Ionia are the?gean sea, the Adriatic, the straits of Sicily, and the Tyrrhenian sea stretching to the Pillars of Hercules. This is the distance from Ionia to the ocean. Following the coast line we find the following countries subject to the Romans: all of Greece, Thessaly, and Macedonia, also the adjoining Thracians, the Illyrians, and Pannonians, and Italy itself, the longest of all, extending from the Adriatic and bordering the greater part of the Tyrrhenian sea as far as the country of the Celts (whom the Romans call Gauls), some of whom border the Mediterranean, others the Northern ocean, and still others dwell along the river Rhine; also all of Spain and Celtiberia on the Northern and Western oceans as far as the Pillars of Hercules. Of these I shall speak more particularly when I come to deal with each nation. But for the present let this suffice for the principal boundaries which define their empire along the sea.

[4] On the landward side the boundaries are a part of Mauritania lying against western Ethiopia and the remainder of Africa (having a very warm climate, or much infested with wild beasts) extending to eastern Ethiopia. These are the Roman boundaries in Africa. Those of Asia are the river Euphrates, Mount Caucasus, the kingdom of Greater Armenia, the Colchians who dwell along the Euxine sea, and the remainder of that coast. In Europe the two rivers, Rhine and Danube, for the most part bound the Roman empire. Of these the Rhine empties into the The Roman Empire at the Time of Hadrian Northern ocean and the Danube into the Euxine. On the other side of these rivers, however, some of the Celts beyond the Rhine are under Roman sway, and beyond the Danube some of the Get? who are called Dacians. These, with the nearest approach to accuracy, are the boundaries on the mainland.

[5] All the islands of the sea also, the Cyclades, Sporades, Ionian isles, Echinades, the Tuscan isles, the Balearic isles, and all the rest in Libyan, Ionian, Egyptian, Myrtoan, Sicilian, and Mediterranean waters, by whatever names called; also those which the Greeks by way of distinction call the great islands, Cyprus, Crete, Rhodes, Lesbos, Eub?a, Sicily, Sardinia, and Corsica, and whatever other isle there may be, large or small — all are under Roman rule. Crossing the Northern ocean to Britain, a continent in itself, they took possession of the better and larger part, not caring for the remainder. Indeed, the part they do hold is not of much use to them.

[6] Although holding the empire of so many and so great nations the Romans labored five hundred years with toil and difficulty to establish their power firmly in Italy itself. Half of this time they were under kings, but having expelled them and sworn to have kingly rule no longer, they adopted aristocracy, and chose their rulers yearly. In the two hundred years next succeeding the five hundred their dominion increased greatly, they acquired unexampled foreign power, and brought the greater part of the nations under their sway. Gaius [Julius] Cæsar having got the upper hand of his rivals possessed himself of the sovereignty, holding it in a firm grasp, and preserved the form and name of the republic but made himself the absolute ruler of all. In this way the government, from that time to this, has been a monarchy; but they do not call their rulers kings, out of respect, as I think, for the ancient oath. They call them imperators [emperors], that being the title also of those who formerly held the chief command of the armies for the time being. Yet they are very kings in fact.

[7] From the advent of the emperors to the present time is nearly two hundred years more, in the course of which the city has been greatly embellished, its revenue much increased, and in the long reign of peace and security everything has moved toward a lasting prosperity. Some nations have been added to the empire by these emperors, and the revolts of others have been suppressed. Possessing the best part of the earth and sea they have, on the whole, aimed to preserve their empire by the exercise of prudence, rather than to extend their sway indefinitely over poverty-stricken and profitless tribes of barbarians, some of whom I have seen at Rome offering themselves, by their ambassadors, as its subjects, but the chief of the state would not accept them because they would be of no use to it. They give kings to a great many other nations whom they do not wish to have under their own government. On some of these subject nations they spend more than they receive from them, deeming it dishonorable to give them up even though they are costly. They surround the empire with great armies and they garrison the whole stretch of land and sea like a single strong-hold.

[8] No government down to the present time ever attained to such size and duration. That of the Greeks, even if we count the mastery of Athens, Sparta, and Thebes successively from the invasion of Darius, which was the beginning of their glory, to the hegemony of Greece held by Philip the son of Amyntas, lasted comparatively but few years. Their wars were not for conquest abroad but rather for preeminence among themselves, and they were most distinguished for the defence of their freedom against foreign invaders. Those of them who invaded Sicily with the hope of extending their dominion made a failure, and whenever they marched into Asia they accomplished small results and speedily returned. In short the Greek power, although ardent in fighting for the Grecian hegemony, never advanced steadfastly beyond the boundaries of Greece, but took pride in holding itself unenslaved and seldom conquered, and from the time of Philip the son of Amyntas, and of Alexander the son of Philip, they seem to me to have done very badly and to have been unworthy of themselves.

[9] The mastery of Asia is not to be compared, as to labor and bravery, with that of the smallest of the countries of Europe, on account of the effeminacy and cowardice of the Asiatic peoples, as will be shown in the progress of this history. Such of the Asiatic nations as the Romans hold, they subdued in a few battles, though even the Macedonians joined in the defence, while the conquest of Africa and of Europe was in many cases very exhausting. Again, the duration of the Assyrians, Medes, and Persians taken together (the three greatest empires before Alexander), does not amount to nine hundred years, which that of Rome has already reached, and the size of their empire I think was not half that of the Romans, whose boundaries extend from the setting of the sun and the Western ocean to Mount Caucasus and the river Euphrates, and through Egypt to Ethiopia and through Arabia as far as the Eastern ocean, so that their boundary is the ocean both where the sun-god rises and where he sinks, while they control the entire Mediterranean, and all its islands as well as Britain in the ocean. The greatest sea-power of the Medes and Persians included either the gulf of Pamphylia and the single island of Cyprus or perhaps some other small islets belonging to Ionia in the Mediterranean. They controlled the Persian gulf also, but how much of a sea is that?

[10] The history of Macedonia before Philip, the son of Amyntas, was of very small account; there was a time, indeed, when the Macedonians were a subject race. The reign of Philip himself was full of toil and struggles which were not contemptible, yet even his deeds concerned only Greece and the neighboring country. The empire of Alexander was splendid in its magnitude, in its armies, in the success and rapidity of his conquests, and it wanted little of being boundless and unexampled, yet in its shortness of duration it was like a brilliant flash of lightning. Although broken into several satrapies even the parts were splendid. The kings of my own country [Egypt] alone had an army consisting of 200,000 foot, 40,000 horse, 300 war elephants, and 2,000 armed chariots, and arms in reserve for 300,000 soldiers more. This was their force for land service. For naval service they had 2,000 barges propelled by poles, and other smaller craft, 1,500 galleys with from one and a half to five benches of oars each, and galley furniture for twice as many ships, 800 vessels provided with cabins, gilded on stem and stern for the pomp of war, with which the kings themselves were wont to go to naval combats; and money in their treasuries to the amount of 740,000 Egyptian talents. Such was the state of preparedness for war shown by the royal accounts as recorded and left by the king of Egypt second in succession after Alexander, who was the most formidable of these rulers in his preparations, the most lavish in expenditure, and the most magnificent in projects. It appears that many of the other satrapies were not much inferior in these respects. Yet all these resources were wasted under their successors by warring with each other. By means of such civil dissensions alone are great states destroyed.

[11] Through prudence and good fortune has the empire of the Romans attained to greatness and duration in gaining which they have excelled all others in bravery, patience, and hard labor. They were never elated by success until they had firmly secured their power, nor were they ever cast down by misfortune, although they sometimes lost 20,000 men in a single day, at another time 40,000, and once 50,000, and although the city itself was often in danger. Neither famine, nor frequently recurring plague, nor sedition, nor all these falling upon them at once could abate their ardor; until, through the doubtful struggles and dangers of seven hundred years, they achieved their present greatness, having enjoyed the favors of fortune through wisdom.

[12] These things have been described by many writers, both Greek and Roman, and the history is even more copious than that of the Macedonian empire, which was the longest history of earlier times. Being interested in it, and desiring to compare the Roman prowess carefully with that of every other nation, my history has often led me from Carthage to Spain, from Spain to Sicily or to Macedonia, or to join some embassy to foreign countries, or some alliance formed with them; thence back to Carthage or Sicily, like a wanderer, and again elsewhere, while the work was still unfinished. At last I have brought the parts together, showing how often the Romans sent armies or embassies into Sicily and what they did there until they brought it into its present condition; also how often they made war and peace with the Carthaginians, or sent embassies to them or received the same from them, and what damage they inflicted upon or suffered from them until they demolished Carthage and made Africa a Roman province, and how they rebuilt Carthage and brought Africa into its present condition. I have made this research also in respect to each of the other provinces, desiring to learn the Romans’ relations to each, in order to understand the weakness of these nations or their power of endurance, as well as the bravery or good fortune of their conquerors or any other circumstance contributing to the result.

[13] Thinking that the public would like to learn the history of the Romans in this way, I am going to write the part relating to each nation separately, omitting what happened to the others in the meantime, and taking it up in its proper place. It seems superfluous to put down the dates of everything, but I shall mention those of the most important events now and then. The Roman citizens, like other people, formerly had only one name each; afterwards they took a second, and not much later, for easier recognition, there was given to some of them a third derived from some personal incident or as a distinction for bravery. In like manner surnames have been added to the names of certain Greeks. For purposes of distinction I shall sometimes mention all the names, especially of illustrious men, but for the most part I shall call these and others by the names that are deemed most characteristic.

[14] As there are three books which treat of the numerous exploits of the Romans in Italy, these three must together be considered the Italian Roman history; but on account of the great number of events in them the division has been made. The first of these will show the events that took place in successive reigns while they had kings, of whom there were seven, and this I shall call the history of Rome under the kings. Next in order will be the history of the rest of Italy except the part along the Adriatic. This, by way of distinction from the former, will be called the second Italian book of Roman history. With the last nation, the Samnites, who dwelt on the Adriatic, the Romans struggled eighty years under the greatest difficulties, but finally they subjugated them and the neighbors who were allied with them, and also the Greeks who had settled in Italy. This, by way of distinction from the former, will be called the Samnite Roman history. The rest will be named according to its subject, the Celtic, Sicilian, Spanish, Hannibalic, Carthaginian, Macedonian, and so on. The order of these histories with respect to each other is according to the time when the Romans began to be embroiled in war with each nation, even though many other things intervened before that nation came to its end. The internal seditions and civil wars of the Romans — to them the most calamitous of all — will be designated under the names of their chief actors, as the wars of Marius and Sulla, those of Pompey and Caesar, those of Antony and the second Caesar, surnamed Augustus, against the murderers of the first Caesar, and those of Antony and Augustus against each other. At the end of this last of the civil wars Egypt passed under the Roman sway, and the Roman government itself became a monarchy.

[15] Thus, the foreign wars will be divided into books according to the nations, and the civil wars according to the chief commanders. The last book will show the present military force of the Romans, the revenues they collect from each province, what they spend for the naval service, and other things of that kind. It is proper to begin with the origin of the people of whose prowess I am about to write. Who I am, who have written these things, many indeed know, and I have already indicated. To speak more plainly I am Appian of Alexandria, having reached the highest place in my native country, and having been, in Rome, a pleader of causes before the emperors, until they deemed me worthy of being made their procurator. And if any one has a great desire to learn more [about my affairs] there is a special treatise of mine on that subject.

CONCERNING THE KINGS

Fragments

“ÆNEAS, the son of Anchises, the son of Capys, flourished in the Trojan war. After the capture of Troy he fled, and after long wandering arrived at that part of the Italian coast called Laurentum, where his camping-place is shown to this day, and that shore is called, after him, the Trojan beach. The Aborigines of this part of Italy were then ruled by Faunus, the son of Mars, who gave to?neas his daughter Lavinia in marriage, and also a tract of land four hundred stades in circuit. Here?neas built a town, which he named after his wife, Lavinium. Three years later, at the death of Faunus,?neas succeeded to the kingdom by virtue of his marriage relationship, and he called the Aborigines Latins, from his father-in-law, Latinus Faunus. Three years later still,?neas was killed by the Rutuli, a Tuscan tribe, in a war begun on account of his wife Lavinia, who had been previously betrothed to their king. He was succeeded in the government by Euryleon, otherwise called Ascanius, the son of?neas and Creusa, a daughter of Priam, to whom he had been married in Troy. But some say that the Ascanius who succeeded to the government was the son of?neas and Lavinia.

[2] Ascanius died four years after the founding of Alba (for he also built a city and gave it the name of Alba, and settled it with a colony from Lavinium), and Silvius succeeded to the throne. They say that this Silvius had a son named?neas Silvius, and he a son named Latinus Silvius, and he a son named Capys, and he a son named Capetus, and he a son named Tiberinus, and he a son named Agrippa, who was the father of the Romulus who was struck by lightning, and who left a son Aventinus, who was the father of Procas. All of these bore the surname of Silvius. Procas had two sons, the elder named Numitor, and the younger Amulius. When the elder succeeded to the throne on the death of the father, the younger took it away from him by force and violence. He also killed Egestus, his brother’s son, and he made Rhea Silvia, his brother’s daughter, a vestal, so that she might remain childless. Notwithstanding a conspiracy against his life, Numitor himself was saved because of the gentleness and clemency of his manners. Silvia having become pregnant contrary to law, Amulius cast her into prison by way of punishment, and when she had given birth to two sons he gave them to some shepherds with orders to throw the babes into the neighboring stream called the river Tiber. These boys were Romulus and Remus. Being of the lineage of?neas, on their mother’s side, for their father’s lineage was unknown, they always boasted their descent from the former.”

FROM PHOTIUS

“My first book contains the deeds of Rome’s seven kings, viz.: Romulus, Numa Pompilius, Tullus Hostilius, Ancus Marcius (a descendant of Numa), Tarquinius, Servius Tullius, and Lucius Tarquinius, a son of the other Tarquinius. The first of these was the founder and builder of Rome, and although he governed it rather as a father than as an absolute monarch, he was nevertheless slain, or, as some think, translated. The second, not less kingly, but even more so than the first, died at the age of… The third was struck by lightning. The fourth died of a disease. The fifth was murdered by some shepherds. The sixth lost his life in a similar manner. The seventh was expelled from the city and kingdom for violating the laws. From that time kingly rule came to an end, and the administration of government was transferred to consuls.”

FROM PHOTIUS

“Having kept careful watch against her father’s return, she (Tarpeia) promises Tatius to betray the garrison.”

FROM SUIDAS

“At the command of Tatius they threw pieces of gold at the girl until she succumbed to her wounds and was buried under the heap.”

FROM SUIDAS

“When Tatius waged war against Romulus, the wives of the Romans, who were daughters of the Sabines, made peace between them. Advancing to the camp of the parents they held out their hands to them and showed the infant children already born to them and their husbands, and testified that their husbands had done them no wrong. They prayed that the Sabines would take pity on themselves, their sons-in-law, their grandchildren, and their daughters, and either put an end to this wretched war between relatives, or first kill them in whose behalf it was begun. The parents, moved partly by their own difficulties and partly by pity for the women, and perceiving that what the Romans had done was not from lust but necessity, entered into negotiations with them. For this purpose Romulus and Tatius met in the street which was named from this event Via Sacra and agreed upon these conditions: that both Romulus and Tatius should be kings, and that the Sabines who were then serving in the army under Tatius, and any others who might choose to come, should be allowed to settle in Rome on the same terms and under the same laws as the Romans themselves.”

FROM “THE EMBASSIES”

“The general, learning this fact from one of his personal friends, communicated it to Hostilius.”

FROM SUIDAS

“Some blamed him [Tullus Hostilius] because he wrongly staked everything on the prowess of three men (the Horatii).”

FROM SUIDAS

“[The Romans thought] that peace might be made [by Tarquinius] on the terms that the Gabini considered just.”

FROM SUIDAS

“[Tarquinius] bought three books [from the Sibyl] at the price [previously asked] for the nine.”

FROM THE ANONYMOUS GRAMMARIAN

“Horatius [Cocles] was a cripple. He failed of reaching the consulship, either in war or in peace, on account of his lameness.”

FROM SUIDAS

“The Consuls tendered the oaths [by which they bound themselves], and said that they would yield everything rather than take back Tarquinius. (Y.R. 250)”

FROM SUIDAS

“Tarquinius incited the Sabines against the Roman people. (B.C. 504) Claudius, an influential Sabine of the town of Regillus, opposed any violation of the treaty, and being condemned for this action, he took refuge in Rome with his relatives, friends, and slaves, to the number of five thousand. To all these the Romans gave a place of habitation, and land to cultivate, and the right of citizenship. Claudius, on account of his brilliant exploits against the Sabines, was chosen a member of the Senate, and the Claudian gens received its name from him.”

FROM PEIRESC (Y.R. 256) (B.C. 498)

“The Latins, although allied to the Romans by treaty, nevertheless made war against them. They accused the Romans of despising them, although they were allied to them, and of the same blood.”

FROM SUIDAS

[Here follow, in the Teubner edition, four detached sentences, or parts of sentences, which, without their context, convey no meaning.]

CONCERNING ITALY

Fragments

“The Volsci, in nowise terrified by the misfortunes of their neighbors, made war against the Romans and laid siege to their colonies.”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 263) “The people refused to elect Marcius (Coriolanus) when (B.C. 491) he sought the consulship, not because they considered him unfit, but because they feared his domineering spirit.”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 265) “Marcius being inflamed against the Romans when they (B.C. 489) banished him went over to the Volsci, meditating no small revenge.”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 266) “When he arrived there, having renounced his own country (B.C. 488) and kin, he did not meditate anything in particular, but intended to side with the Volsci against his country.”

FROM SUIDAS

“When Marcius had been banished, and had taken refuge with the Volsci, and made war against the Romans, and was encamped at a distance of only four hundred stades from the city, the people threatened to betray the walls to the enemy unless the Senate would send an embassy to him to treat for peace. The Senate reluctantly sent plenipotentiaries for this purpose. When they arrived at the camp of the Volsci and were brought into his presence and that of the Volscian chiefs, they offered oblivion and permission to return to the city if he would discontinue the war, and they reminded him that the Senate had never done him any wrong. He, while accusing the people of the many wrongs they had done to him and to the Volsci, promised nevertheless that the latter would come to terms with them if they would surrender the land and towns they had taken from the Volsci and admit them to citizenship on the same terms as the Latins. But if the vanquished were to keep what belonged to the victors, he did not see how peace could be made. Having named these conditions, he dismissed the ambassadors and gave them thirty days to consider. Then he turned against the remaining Latin towns, and having captured seven of them in the thirty days, he came back to receive the answer of the Romans.

[2] They replied that if he would withdraw his army from the Roman territory they would send an embassy to him to conclude peace on fair terms. When he refused this, they sent ten others to beg him that nothing should be done unworthy of his native country, and to allow a treaty to be made, not by his command, but of their own free will, for he should regard the honor of his country and the principles of his ancestors, who had never done him any wrong. He replied merely that he would give them three days more in order that they might think better of it. Then the Romans sent their priests to him wearing their sacred vestments to add their entreaties. To these he said that either they must obey his commands or they need not come to him again. Then the Romans prepared for a siege and brought stones and missiles upon the walls to fight off Marcius from above.

[3] Now Valeria, the daughter of Publicola, brought a company of women to Veturia, the mother of Marcius, and to Volumnia his wife. All these, clad in mourning garments and bringing their children to join in the supplication, implored that they would go out with them to meet Marcius, and beseech him to spare them and their country. The Senate allowed these women to go alone to the camp of the enemy. Marcius admiring the high courage of the city, where even the women were inspired by it, advanced to meet them, sending away the rods and axes of the lictors, out of respect for his mother. He ran forward and embraced her, brought her into the council of the Volsci, and told her to tell what she wanted.

[4] She said that, being his mother, she was as much wronged as he in his banishment from the city; that she saw that the Romans had already suffered grievously at his hands, and had paid a sufficient penalty, so much of their territory had been laid waste and so many of their towns demolished, and themselves reduced to the extremity of sending their consuls and priests, and finally his own mother and wife, as ambassadors to him, and offering to rescind the decree and to grant him forgetfulness of the past and a safe return to his home. “Do not,” she said, “cure an evil by an incurable evil. Do not be the cause of calamities that will smite yourself as well as those you injure. Whither do you carry the torch? From the fields to the city? From the city to your own hearthstone? From your own hearthstone to the temples of the gods? Have mercy, my son, on me and on your country as we plead.” After she had thus spoken Marcius replied that the country which had cast him out was not his, but rather the land which had given him shelter. Nothing was dear to him that was unjust, nor was anybody his enemy who treated him well. He told her to cast her eyes upon the men here present with whom he had exchanged the pledge of mutual fidelity, who had granted him citizenship, had chosen him their general, and had intrusted to him their private interests. lie mentioned the honors bestowed upon him and the oath he had sworn, and he urged his mother to consider his friends and enemies hers also.

[5] While he was still speaking, she, in a burst of anger, and holding her hands up to heaven, invoked their household gods. “Two processions of women,” said she, “have set forth from Rome in the deepest affliction, one in the time of King Tatius, the other in that of Gaius Marcius. Of these two Tatius, a stranger and downright enemy, had respect for the women and yielded to them. Marcius scorns a like delegation of women, including his wife, and his mother besides. May no mother, unblessed in her son, ever again be reduced to the necessity of throwing herself at his feet. This I must submit to. I must prostrate myself before yours.” So speaking she flung herself on the ground. He burst into tears, sprang forward and lifted her up, exclaiming with the deepest emotion: “Mother, you have gained the victory, but it is a victory by which you have lost your son.” So saying he led back the army, in order to give his reasons to the Volsci and to make peace between the two nations. There was some hope that he might be able to persuade the Volsci, but on account of the jealousy of their leader Attius he was put to death.”

FROM “THE EMBASSIES”

“Marcius did not think proper to gainsay either of these [demands].”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 275) “(The Fabii) were as much to be pitied for their misfortunes (B.C. 479) as they were worthy of praise for their bravery. For it was a great misfortune to the Romans, on account of their number, the dignity of a noble house, and its total destruction. The day on which it happened was ever after considered unlucky.”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 283) “The army was incensed against the general (Appius Claudius) (B.C. 471) from remembrance of old wrongs, and refused to obey him. They fought badly on purpose, and took to flight, putting bandages on their bodies as though they were wounded. They broke up camp and tried to retreat, putting the blame on the unskilfulness of their commander.”

FROM SUIDAS

“Bad omens from Jupiter were observed after the capture of Veii. The soothsayers said that some religious duty had (Y.R. 359) been neglected, and Camillus remembered that it had been (B.C. 395) forgotten to appropriate a tenth of the plunder to the god that had given the oracle concerning the lake. Accordingly the Senate decreed that those who had taken anything from Veii should make an estimate, each one for himself, and bring in a tenth of it under oath. Their religious feeling was such that they did not hesitate to add to the votive offering a tenth of the produce of the land that had already been sold, as well as of the spoils. With the money thus obtained they sent to the temple of Delphi a golden cup which stood on a pedestal of brass in the treasury of Rome and Massiliat until Onomarchus melted the cup during the Phoc?an war. The pedestal is still standing. (Y.R. 363)

[2] Camillus was afterwards accused before the people of (B.C. 391) being himself the author of those bad omens and portents. The people, who had been for some time set against him, fined him heavily, having no pity for him although he had recently lost a son. His friends contributed the money in order that the person of Camillus might not be disgraced. In deep grief he went into exile in the city of Ardea, praying the prayer of Achilles that the time might come when the Romans would long for Camillus. And in fact this came (Y.R. 365) to pass very soon, for when the Gauls captured the city, the (B.C. 389) people fled for succor to Camillus and again chose him Dictator, as has been told in my Gallic history.”

FROM PEIRESC

“When Marcus Manlius, the patrician, saved the city of Rome from a Gallic invasion, he received the highest honors. (Y.R. 370) At a later period when he saw an old man, who had often (B.C. 384) fought for his country, reduced to servitude by a money lender, he paid the debt for him. Being highly commended for this act, he released all his own debtors from their obligations. His glory being much increased thereby, he paid the debts of many others. Being much elated by his popularity, he even proposed that all debts should be cancelled, or that the people should sell the lands that had not yet been distributed and apply the proceeds for the relief of debtors.”

FROM PEIRESC

THE SAMNITE HISTORY

Fragments

(Y.R. 411) “WHEN the Roman generals Cornelius and Corvinus, and (B.C. 343) the plebian Decius, had overcome the Samnites they left a military guard in Campania to ward off the Samnite incursions. These guards, partaking of the luxury and profuseness of the Campanians, were corrupted in their habits and began to envy the riches of these people, being themselves very poor and owing alarming debts in Rome. Finally they took counsel among themselves to kill their entertainers, seize their property, and marry their wives. This infamy would perhaps have been carried out at once, had not the new general Mamercus, who was marching against the Samnites, learned the design of the Roman guard. Concealing his intentions, he disarmed some of them and dismissed them, as soldiers entitled to discharge for long service. The more villanous ones he ordered to Rome on the pretence of important business, and he sent with them a military tribune with orders to keep a secret watch over them. Both parties of soldiers suspected that their design had leaked out, and they broke away from the tribune near the town of Terracina. They set free all those who were working under sentence in the fields, armed them as well as they could, and marched to Rome to the number of about 20,000. (Y.R. 412)

[2] About one day’s march from the city they were met by Corvinus who went into camp near them on the Alban mount. He remained quietly in his camp while investigating what the matter was, and did not consider it wise to attack these desperadoes. The men mingled with each other privately, the guards acknowledging with groans and tears, as among relatives and friends, that they were to blame, but declaring that the cause of it all was the debts they owed at (B.C. 342) Rome. When Corvinus understood this he shrank from the responsibility of so much civil bloodshed and advised the Senate to release these men from debt. He exaggerated the difficulty of the war if it should be necessary to put down such a large body of men, who would fight with the energy of despair. He had strong suspicions also of the result of the meetings and conferences, lest his own army, who were relatives of these men and not less oppressed with debt, should be to some extent lacking in fidelity. If he should be defeated he said that the dangers would be greatly increased; if victorious, the victory itself would be most lamentable to the commonwealth, being gained over so many of their own relatives. The Senate was moved by his arguments and decreed a cancellation of debts to all Romans, and immunity also to these revolters. The latter laid down their arms and returned to the city.”

FROM PEIRESC

(Y.R. 414) “Such was the bravery of the consul Manlius Torquatus. (B.C. 340) He had a penurious father who did not care for him, but kept him at work with slaves in the fields and left him to partake of their fare. When the tribune Pomponius prosecuted him for numerous misdeeds and thought to mention among others his bad treatment of his son, young Manlius, concealing a dagger under his clothes, went to the house of the tribune and asked to see him privately as though he had something of importance to say about the trial. Being admitted, and just as he was beginning to speak, he fastened the door and threatened the tribune with instant death if he did not take an oath that he would withdraw the accusation against his father. The latter took the oath, dismissed the accusation, and explained the reason to the people. Manlius acquired great distinction from this affair, and was praised for being such a son to such a father.”

FROM PEIRESC

“With jeers he challenged him to single combat. The other [Manlius, the consul’s son] restrained himself for a while; but when he could no longer endure the provocation, he dashed on his horse against him.”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 432) “While the Samnites were raiding and plundering the territory (B.C. 322) of Fregell? the Romans captured eighty-one villages belonging to the Samnites and the Daunii, slew 21,000 of their men, and drove them out of the Fregellian country. Again the Samnites sent ambassadors to Rome bringing the dead bodies of the men whom they had executed as guilty of causing the war, and also gold taken from their store. Wherefore the Senate, thinking that they had been utterly crushed, expected that a people who had been so sorely afflicted would concede the supremacy of Italy. The Samnites accepted the other conditions, or if they disputed any, they either entreated and begged for better terms, or referred the matter to their cities. But as to the supremacy, they could not bear even to hear anything on that subject, because, they said, they had not come to surrender their towns, but to cultivate friendship. Accordingly they used their gold in redeeming prisoners, and went away angry and resolved to make trial for the supremacy hereafter. Thereupon the Romans voted to receive no more embassies from the Samnites, but to wage irreconcilable, implacable war against them until they were subjugated by force. (Y.R. 433)

[2] A god humbled this haughty spirit, for soon afterwards the Romans were defeated by the Samnites and compelled to pass under the yoke. The Samnites, under their general Pontius, having shut the Romans up in a defile where they were oppressed by hunger, the consuls sent messengers to him and begged that he should win the gratitude of the Romans, such as not many opportunities offer. He replied that they need not send any more messengers to him unless they were prepared to surrender their arms and their persons. There-upon a lamentation was raised as though a city had been captured, and the consuls delayed several days longer, hesitating to do an act unworthy of Rome. But when no means of rescue appeared and famine became severe, there being 50,000 young men in the defile whom they could not bear to see perish, they surrendered to Pontius and begged him either to kill them, or to sell them into slavery, or to keep (B.C. 321) them for ransom, but not to put any stigma of shame upon the persons of the unfortunate.

[3] Pontius took counsel with his father, sending to Caudium to fetch him in a carriage on account of his age. The old man said to him: “My son, for a great enmity there is but one cure, — either extreme generosity or extreme severity. Severity terrifies, generosity conciliates. Regard this first and greatest victory as a treasure-house of good fortune. Release them all without punishment, without shame, without loss of any kind, so that the greatness of the benefit may inure to your advantage. I hear that they are very sensitive on the subject of their honor. Vanquished by benefits only, they will strive to surpass you in deeds of kindness. It is in your power to attain this state of kindly action as a security for everlasting peace. If this does not suit you, then kill them to the last man, not sparing one to carry the news. I advise as my choice the former, otherwise the latter is a necessity. The Romans will avenge themselves inevitably for any shame you put upon them. In that case you should strike the first blow and you will never deal them a heavier one than the slaughter of 50,000 of their young men at one time.”

[4] When he had thus spoken his son answered: “I do not wonder, father, that you have suggested two plans absolutely opposed to each other, for you said in the beginning that you should propose extreme measures of one kind or the other. But I cannot put such a large number of men to death. I should fear the vengeance of a god and the opprobrium of mankind. Nor can I take away from the two nations all hope of mutual accommodation by doing an irreparable wrong. As to releasing them I myself do not approve of that. After the Romans have inflicted so many evils upon us and while they hold so many of our fields and towns in their possession to this day, it is impossible to let these captives go scot free. I shall not do that. Such unreasonable leniency is insanity. Now look at this matter, leaving me out of the account. The Samnites, whose sons, fathers, and brothers have been slain by the Romans, and who have lost their goods and money, want satisfaction. A victor is naturally a haughty creature and our men are greedy of gain. Who then will endure that I should neither kill, nor sell, nor even fine these prisoners, but dismiss them unharmed like meritorious persons? Therefore let us discard the two extremes — the one because it is not in my power, the other because I cannot be guilty of such inhumanity. Yet, in order to humble the pride of the Romans to some extent, and to avoid the censure of others, I will take away the arms they have always used against us, and also their money (for even their money they get from us). Then I will make them pass safe and sound under the yoke, this being the mark of shame they are accustomed to put upon others. Then I will establish peace between the two nations and select the most illustrious of their knights as hostages for its observance until the entire people ratify it. In this way I think I shall have accomplished what belongs to a victor and to a humane man. I think also that the Romans themselves will be content with these terms, which they, who lay claim to such excellence of character, have often imposed upon others.”

[5] While Pontius was speaking the old man burst into tears, then seated himself in his carriage and went back to Caudium. Pontius then summoned the Roman envoys and asked them if they had any fetial priest with them. There was none present because the army had marched to undertake an irreconcilable, implacable war. Accordingly he commanded the envoys to make this announcement to the consuls and other officers of the army and to the whole multitude: “We had concluded perpetual friendship with the Romans, which you yourselves violated by giving aid to the Sidicini, our enemies. When peace was concluded again, you made war upon the Neapolitans, our neighbors. Nor did it escape us that these things were part of a plan of yours to seize the dominion of all Italy. In the first battles, where you gained the advantage on account of the unskilfulness of our generals, you showed us no moderation. Not content with devastating our country and occupying towns and villages not your own, you planted colonies in them. Moreover, when we twice sent embassies to you and made many concessions, you treated us disdainfully, and demanded that we should yield you the supremacy and obey you, as though we were not a nation to make terms with but a conquered race. Thereupon you decreed this irreconcilable, implacable war against your former friends, descendants of the Sabines whom you made your fellow-citizens. On account of your insatiable cupidity we ought not to make a treaty with you. But I, having regard for the divine wrath (which you despised), and mindful of our former relationship and friendship, will permit each one of you to pass under the yoke safe and sound with the clothes you stand in, if you swear to give up all of our lands and strongholds and withdraw your colonies from the same, and never wage war against the Samnites again.”

[6] When these terms were communicated to the camp there was wailing and lamentation, long and loud, for they considered the disgrace of passing under the yoke worse than death. Afterwards, when they heard about the knights who were to be held as hostages, there was another long lament. Yet they were compelled by want to accept the conditions. Accordingly they took the oaths, Pontius on the one side, and the two consuls, Postumius and Veturius, on the other, together with two quæstors, four division commanders, and twelve tribunes, — all the surviving officers. When the oaths had been taken, Pontius opened a passage from the defile, and having fixed two spears in the ground and laid another across the top, caused the Romans to go under it as they passed out, one by one. He also gave them some animals to carry their sick, and provisions sufficient to bring them to Rome. This method of dismissing prisoners, which they call sending under the yoke, seems to me to serve only to insult the vanquished.

[7] When the news of this calamity reached the city there was wailing and lamentation like a public mourning. The women mourned for those who had been saved in this ignominous way as for the dead. The senators discarded their purple-striped tunics. Feasts, marriages, and everything of that kind were prohibited for a whole year, until the calamity was retrieved. Some of the returning soldiers took refuge in the fields for shame, others stole into the city by night. The consuls entered by day according to law, and they wore their usual insignia, but they exercised no further authority.”

FROM “THE EMBASSIES”

(Y.R. 464) “On account of admiration for his bravery a multitude of (B.C. 290) chosen youths numbering eight hundred were in the habit of following Dentatus, ready for anything. This was an embarrassment to the Senate at their meetings.”

FROM SUIDAS

(Y.R. 471) “Once a great number of the Senones, a Celtic tribe, aided (B.C. 283) the Etruscans in war against the Romans. The latter sent ambassadors to the towns of the Senones and complained that, while they were under treaty stipulations, they were furnishing mercenaries to fight against the Romans. Although they bore the caduceus, and wore the garments of their office, Britomaris cut them in pieces and flung the parts away, alleging that his own father had been slain by the Romans while he was waging war in Etruria. The consul Cornelius, learning of this abominable deed while he was on the march, abandoned his campaign against the Etruscans, dashed with great rapidity by way of the Sabine country and Picenum against the towns of the Senones, and devastated them with fire and sword. He carried their women and children into slavery, and killed all the adult youth except a son of Britomaris, whom he reserved for awful torture, and led in his triumph.

[2] When the Senones who were in Etruria heard of this calamity, they joined with the Etruscans and marched against Rome. After various mishaps these Senones, having no homes to return to, and being in a state of frenzy over their misfortunes, fell upon Domitius [the other consul], by whom most of them were destroyed. The rest slew themselves in despair. Such was the punishment meted out to the Senones for their crime against the ambassadors.”

FROM “THE EMBASSIES”

(Y.R. 472) “Cornelius went sight-seeing along the coast of Magna (B.C. 282) Gr?cia with ten ships with decks. At Tarentum there was a demagogue named Philocharis, a man of obscene life, who was for that reason nicknamed Thais. He reminded the Tarentines of an old treaty by which the Romans had bound themselves not to sail beyond the promontory of Lacinium. By his passion he persuaded them to excitement against Cornelius, and they sunk four of his ships and seized one of them with all on board. They accused the Thurini of preferring the Romans to the Tarentines although they were Greeks, and held them chiefly to blame for the Romans overpassing the limits. Then they expelled the noblest citizens of Thurii, sacked the city, and dismissed the Roman garrison that was stationed there under a treaty.

[2] When the Romans learned of these events, they sent an embassy to Tarentum to demand that the prisoners who had been taken, not in war, but as mere sight-seers, should be surrendered; that the citizens of Thurii who had been expelled should be brought back to their homes; that the property that had been plundered, or the value of what had been lost, should be restored; and finally, that they should surrender the authors of these crimes, if they wished to continue on good terms with the Romans. The Tarentines made difficulties about admitting the embassy to their council at all, and when they had received them jeered at them because they did not speak Greek perfectly, and made fun of their togas and of the purple stripe on them. [The text here describes an indignity put upon Postumius, the chief of the embassy, by one Philonidas, which will not bear translation.] This spectacle was received with laughter by the bystanders. Postumius, holding out his soiled garment, said: “You will wash out this defilement with plenty of blood — you who take pleasure in this kind of jokes.” As the Tarentines made no sort of answer the embassy departed. Postumius carried the soiled garment just as it was, and showed it to the Romans. (Y.R. 473)

[3] The people, deeply incensed, sent orders to?milius, who was waging war against the Samnites, to suspend operations for the present and invade the territory of the Tarentines, and offer them the same terms that the late embassy (B.C. 281) had proposed, and if they did not agree, to wage war against them with all his might. He made them the offer accordingly. This time they did not laugh for they saw the army. They were about equally divided in opinion until one of their number said to them as they doubted and disputed: “To surrender citizens is the act of a people already enslaved, yet to fight without allies is hazardous. If we wish to defend our liberty stoutly and to fight on equal terms, let us call on Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, and designate him the leader of this war.” This was done.”

FROM “THE EMBASSIES”

(Y.R. 474) “After a shipwreck, Pyrrhus, king of Epirus, arrived at the (B.C. 280) harbor of Tarentum. The Tarentines were very much put out with the king’s officers, who quartered themselves upon the citizens by force, and openly abused their wives and children. Afterwards Pyrrhus put an end to their revels and other social gatherings and amusements as incompatible with a state of war, and ordered the citizens to severe military exercise, under penalty of death if they disobeyed. Then the Tarentines, tired out by these most unusual exercises and orders, fled the city as though it were a foreign government and took refuge in the fields. Then the king closed the gates and placed guards over them. In this way the Tarentines gained a clear perception of their own folly.”

FROM PEIRESC

“Some Roman soldiers were stationed in Rhegium for the safety and protection of the city against enemies. They, and their leader Decius, envying the good fortune of the inhabitants and seizing an opportunity when they were observing a public festival, slew them and violated their wives. They offered an excuse for this crime, that the citizens of Rhegium were about to betray the garrison to Pyrrhus. So Decius became supreme ruler instead of a prefect of the guard, and he contracted an alliance with the Mamertines, who dwelt on the other side of the strait of Sicily, and who had perpetrated the same kind of an outrage on their hosts not long before.

[2] Suffering from an affection of the eyes and distrusting the physicians of Rhegium, Decius sent for a medical man who had migrated from Rhegium to Messana so long before that it was forgotten that he was a Rhegian. The latter persuaded him that, if he wished speedy relief, he should use certain hot drugs. Having applied a burning and corrosive ointment to his eyes, he told him to bear the pain till he should come again. Then he secretly returned to Messana. Decius, after enduring the pain a long time, washed off the ointment and found that he had lost his eyesight.