Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D. (Editor), Frank Gardener Moore (Editor), Evan T. Sage, Ph.D. (Editor), Alfred C. Schlesinger, Ph.D. (Editor), 35.16

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

View: By Section

← Previous Next →

[1] Sulpicius had now recovered, and so both came to Ephesus. Minnio apologized for the king's inability to be present, and in his absence the discussion began.

[2] Then Minnio opened the debate with a prepared speech.

I see, Romans,

he said,

that you employ the plausible pretext of liberating Greek states, but your actions are inconsistent with your words, and you lay down one rule of conduct for Antiochus but yourselves follow another.

[3]

For how are the people of Zmyrna and Lampsacus more Greek than the men of Naples or Rhegium or Tarentum, from whom you exact tribute, from whom you exact ships in accordance with treaty-stipulations?

[4]

Why do Syracuse and other Greek cities of Sicily receive every year a praetor with the imperium and the rods and axes? Assuredly you make no other assertion than that you have imposed these conditions upon cities that have been conquered in battle.¹

[5]

Learn from Antiochus that the case is the same with Zmyrna and Lampsacus and the cities which are in Ionia or Aeolis.

[6]

Conquered² in war by his forefathers³ and made tributaries and vassals, he restores them to their ancient status; therefore I wish that he be answered on these points, if this is a discussion based on equity and not a search for a pretext for war.

[7] To this Sulpicius replied:

Antiochus has acted modestly, who, if there is nothing else to be said on his behalf, has preferred that anyone else should say this rather than himself.

[8]

What likeness is there in the status of the states which you have mentioned? From the people of Rhegium and Naples and Tarentum we demand what they owe in accordance with the treaty from the time they came under our sovereignty, with one unbroken continuity of right, always recognized, never interrupted.

[9]

Pray, can you say that as those peoples have changed the treaty neither through themselves nor through anyone else, so the Asian cities, when once they came into the possession of Antiochus' forefathers, have remained in the

[10]

continuous possession of your empire, and that some have not passed under the power of Philip, some into the hands of Ptolemy, and some have enjoyed liberty with none to challenge them?

[11]

For if the fact that they have once been slaves, constrained by the injustice of the times, is to confer the right of reasserting control and forcing them into slavery after so many generations, how does this differ from saying that our labours have been fruitless, in that we have freed Greece from Philip and that his descendants may again demand Corinth, Chalcis, Demetrias, and the whole state of the Thessalians?

[12]

But why do I plead the cause of these cities, which it is fairer

[13]

that both we and the⁴ king should learn from their own pleadings?

⁵

Ab urbe condita. Titus Livius (Livy). Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D. (Editor), Frank Gardener Moore (Editor), Evan T. Sage, Ph.D. (Editor), Alfred C. Schlesinger, Ph.D. (Editor). Medford, MA. .

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The National Endowment for the Humanities.

Current edition Perseus

History of Rome (English) (Foster, Benjamin Oliver; Moore, Frank Gardener; Sage, Evan T.; Schlesinger, Alfred C., translators. Cambridge, Mass.; London: Harvard University Press; William Heinemann, Ltd., 1919-1959. (Loeb Classical Library))

Editions (3)

Ab urbe condita Perseus (Pars I-IV, Libri I-XL. Editio Stereotypica. Weissenborn, Wilhelm; Mueller, Moritz, editors. Leipzig: Teubner, 1884-1911.) — 35.16 focus

[1] iam convaluerat Sulpicius; itaque ambo Ephesum venerunt rex a Minnione excusatus, et absente eo agi res coepta est.

[2] ibi praeparata oratione Minnio “specioso titulo” inquit “uti vos, Romani, Graecarum civitatium liberandarum video, sed facta vestra orationi non conveniunt, et aliud Antiocho iuris statuitis, alio ipsi utimini.

[3] qui enim magis Zmyrnaei Lampsaceniquc Lampsacenique Graeci sunt quam Neapolitani et Regini et Tarentini,

[4] a quibus stipendium, a quibus naves ex foedere exigitis? cur Syracusas atque in alias Siciliae Graecas arbes urbes praetorem quotannis cum imperio et virgis et securibus mittitis? nihil aliud profecto dicatis quam armis superatis vos iis has leges imposuisse.

[5] eandem de Zmyrna, Lampsaco civitatibusque, quae Ioniae aut Aeolidis sunt, causam ab Antiocho accipite.

[6] bello superatas a maioribus, stipendiarias ac vectigales factas in antiquum ius repetit; itaque ad haec ei responderi velim, si ex aequo disceptatur et non belli causa quaeritur.”

[7] ad ea Sulpicius “fecit verecunde” inquit “Antiochus, qui, si alia pro causa eius non erant, quae dicerentur, quemlibet ista quam se dicere maluit.

[8] quid enim simile habet civitatium earum, quas comparasti, causa? ab Reginis et Neapolitanis et Tarentinis, ex quo in nostram venerunt potestatem, uno et perpetuo tenore iuris, semper usurpato, numquam intermisso,

[9] quae ex foedere debent, exigimus. potesne tandem dicere, ut ii populi non per se, non per alium quemquam foedus mutaverint,

[10] sic Asiae civitates, ut semel venere in maiorum Antiochi potestatem, in perpetua possessione regni vestri permansisse, et non alias earum in Philippi, alias in Ptolomaei fuisse potestate, alias per multos annos nullo ambigente libertatem usurpasse?

[11] nam si, quod aliquando servierunt, temporum iniquitate pressi, ius post tot saecula adserendi eos in servitutem faciet, quid abest, quin actum nihil nobis sit,

[12] quod a Philippo liberavimus Graeciam, et repetant posteri eius Corinthum Chalcidem Demetriadem et Thessalorum totam gentem?

[13] sed quid ego causam civitatium ago, quam ipsis agentibus et nos et regem ipsum cognoscere aequius est?”

Ab urbe condita Perseus (Livy in Fourteen Volumes. Foster, Benjamin Oliver; Moore, Frank Gardener; Schlesinger, Alfred C., editors. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press; London: William Heinemann, Ltd., 1919-1959 (printing).) — 30.16 focus

[1]

Scipio C. Laelio cum Syphace aliisque captivis Romam misso, cum quibus et Masinissae legati profecti sunt, ipse ad Tyneta rursus castra refert et quae munimenta incohaverat permunit.

[2] Carthaginienses non brevi solum, sed prope vano gaudio ab satis prospera in praesens oppugnatione classis perfusi, post famam capti Syphacis, in quo plus prope quam in Hasdrubale atque exercitu suo spei reposuerant, perculsi,

[3] iam nullo auctore belli ultra audito oratores ad pacem petendam mittunt triginta seniorum principes; id erat sanctius apud illos consilium maximaque ad ipsum senatum regendum vis.

[4] qui ubi in castra Romana et in praetorium pervenerunt, more adulantium—accepto, credo, ritu ex ea regione ex qua oriundi erant—procubuerunt.

[5] conveniens oratio tam humili adulationi fuit, non culpam purgantium, sed transferentium initium culpae in Hannibalem potentiaeque eius fautores.

[6] veniam civitati petebant civium temeritate bis iam ¹² eversae, incolumi futurae iterum hostium beneficio; imperium ex victis hostibus populum Romanum,

[7] non perniciem petere; paratis oboedienter servire imperaret quae vellet.

[8] Scipio et venisse ea spe in Africam se ait, et spem suam prospero belli eventu auctam, victoriam se, non pacem domum reportaturum esse;

[9] tamen, cum victoriam prope in manibus habeat, pacem non abnuere, ut omnes gentes sciant populum Romanum et suscipere iuste bella et finire.

[10] leges pacis se has dicere: captives et perfugas et fugitiuos fugitives restituant; exercitus ex Italia et Gallia deducant; Hispania abstineant; insulis omnibus quae inter Italiam atque ³ Africam sint, ⁴ decedant;

[11] naves longas praeter viginti ⁵ omnes tradant, tritici quingenta, hordei trecenta milia modium.

[12] pecuniae summam quantam imperaverit parum convenit; alibi quinque milia talentum, ⁶ alibi quinque ⁷ milia pondo argenti, alibi duplex stipendium militibus imperatum invenio.

[13]

his condicionibus

inquit

placeatne pax triduum ad ⁸ consultandum dabitur. si placuerit, mecum indutias facite, Romam ad senatum mittite legatos.

[14] ita dimissi Carthaginienses nullas recusandas condiciones pacis cum censuissent, quippe qui moram temporis quaererent, dum Hannibal in Africam traiceret, legatos alios ad Scipionem,

[15] ut indutias facerent, alios Romam ad pacem petendam mittunt, ducentes paucos in speciem captivos perfugasque et fugitivos, quo impetrabilior pax esset.

Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn Perseus (Weissenborn, W.; Müller, H. J., editors. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 1873-1883.) — 35.16 focus

[1]

iam convaluerat Sulpicius; itaque ambo Ephesum venerunt. rex a Minnione excusatus, et absente eo agi res coepta est.

[2] ibi praeparata oratione Minnio “specioso titulo“ inquit “uti vos, Romani, Graecarum civitatium liberandarum video, sed facta vestra orationi non conveniunt, et aliud Antiocho iuris statuistis, alio ipsi utimini.

[3] qui enim magis Zmyrnaei Lampsacenique Graeci sunt quam Neapolitani et Regini et Tarentini a quibus stipendium, a quibus naves ex foedere exigitis?

[4] cur Syracusas atque in alias Siciliae Graecas urbes praetorem quotannis cum imperio et virgis et securibus mittitis? nihil aliud profecto dicatis quam armis superatis vos iis has leges imposuisse.

[5] eandem de Zmyrna, Lampsaco civitatibusque, quae Ioniae aut Aeolidis sunt, causam ab Antiocho accipite.

[6] bello superatas a maioribus, stipendiarias ac vectigales factas in antiquum ius repetit: itaque ad haec ei responderi velim, si ex aequo disceptatur et non belli causa quaeritur.

[7] “ ad ea Sulpicius “fecit ¹ verecunde“ inquit “Antiochus, qui, si alia pro causa eius non erant, quae dicerentur, quemlibet ista quam se dicere maluit.

[9] potesne tandem dicere, ut ii populi non per se, non per alium quemquam foedus mutaverint,

[11] nam si, quod aliquando servierunt, temporum iniquitate pressi, ius post tot secula adserendi eos in servitutem faciet,

[12] quid abest, quin actum nihil nobis sit, quod a Philippo liberavimus Graeciam, et repetant posteri eius Corinthum Chalcidem Demetriadem et Thessalorum totam gentem?

[13] sed quid ego causam civitatium ago, quam ipsis agentibus et nos et regem ² ipsum cognoscere aequius est?

Translations (2)

History of Rome Perseus (Spillan, D.; Edmonds, Cyrus; McDevitte, William A., translators. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1849-1868. (Bohn's Classical Library)) — 35.16 focus

[1]

By this time Sulpicius had recovered his health; both himself and Villius, therefore, came to Ephesus. Minio apologized for the king not being present, and the business was entered upon.

[2] Then Minio, in a studied speech, said,

I find, Romans, that you profess very specious intentions, (the liberating of the Grecian states,) but your actions do not accord with your words. You lay down one rule for Antiochus, and follow another yourselves.

[3]

For, how are the inhabitants of Smyrna and Lampsacus better entitled to the character of Greeks, than the Neapolitans, Rhegians, and Tarentines, from whom you exact tribute, and ships, in pursuance of a treaty?

[4]

Why do you send yearly to Syracuse, and other Grecian cities of Sicily, a praetor, vested with sovereign power, and attended by his rods and axes? You can, certainly, allege no other reason than this, that, having conquered them in war, you imposed these terms on them.

[5]

Admit, then, on the part of Antiochus, the same reason with respect to Smyrna and Lampsacus, and the cities belonging to Ionia and Aeolia.

[6]

Conquered by his ancestors, they were subjected to tribute and taxes, and he only reclaims an ancient right. I would have you answer him on these heads, if you mean a fair discussion, and do not merely seek a pretence for war.

[7] Sulpicius answered,

Antiochus has acted with some modesty in choosing that, since no other arguments could be produced in his favour, any other person should utter these rather than himself. For, what similarity is there in the cases of those states which you have brought into comparison?

[8]

From the Rhegians, Neapolitans, and Tarentines we require what they owe us by treaty, in virtue of a right invariably exercised, in one uniform course, since they first came under our power; a right always asserted, and never intermitted.

[9]

Now, can you assert, that, as these states have, neither of themselves, nor through any other, ever refused conforming to the treaty, so the Asiatic states, since they once came under the power of Antiochus's ancestors, have been held in uninterrupted possession by your reigning kings;

[10]

and that some of them have not been subject to the dominion of Philip, some to that of Ptolemy; and that others have not, for many years, maintained themselves in a state of independence, no one calling it in question?

[11]

For, if the circumstance of their having been once subject to a foreigner, when crushed under the severity of the times, conveys a right to enforce that subjection again after a lapse of so many generations, what can be said of our having delivered Greece from Philip, but that nothing was accomplished by us; and that his successors may reclaim Corinth, Chalcis, Demetrias, and the whole nation of Thessaly?

[12]

But why do I plead the cause of those states, which it would

[13]

be fitter that both we and the king should hear pleaded by themselves?

History of Rome Perseus (Volumes 1-2. Roberts, Canon, Rev, translator. London, New York: J. M. Dent and Sons; E. P. Dutton and Co., 1912.) — 35.16 focus

[1]

.Minnio apologised for the non-appearance of the king and the negotiations proceeded in his absence.

[2] Minnio opened the discussion in a carefully prepared speech, in which he said: "I see that you Romans claim the fair-sounding epithet of 'Liberators of the cities of Greece.' But your acts do not correspond to your words; you lay down one law for Antiochus, and another for yourselves.

[3] For how are the inhabitants of Smyrna and Lampsacus more Greek than those of Neapolis and Regium and Tarentum, from whom you demand tribute and ships by virtue of your treaty with them?

[4] Why do you send year by year a quaestor with full powers of life and death to Syracuse and the other Greek cities of Sicily? The only reason that you could give would, of course, be that you imposed these terms upon them after subjugating them by force.

[5] Then accept the same reason from Antiochus in the case of Smyrna and Lampsacus and the cities of Ionia and Aeolis. They were conquered by his ancestors and made to pay tribute and taxes, and he claims the rights which have come down to him from ancient times.

[6] I should be glad, therefore, if you would answer him on these points, if, that is, you are prepared to discuss them fairly, and are not simply seeking a pretext for war."

[7] Sulpicius replied: "If these are the only arguments that can be advanced in support of his case, Antiochus has shown a discreet modesty in letting them be brought forward by anybody rather than by himself.

[8] For what possible resemblance can there be between the circumstances of the two groups of cities which you have mentioned? From the day when Regium, Tarentum, and Neapolis passed into our hands we have demanded the fulfilment of their treaty obligations by an unbroken tenor of right which has always been asserted and never intermitted.

[9] Those communities have never, either of themselves or through anyone else, made any change in those obligations; would you venture to assert that the same holds good of the cities of Asia, and that after once becoming subject to the ancestors of Antiochus they have remained in the uninterrupted possession of your monarchy?

[10] Can you deny that some of them have been subject to Philip, others to Ptolemy, others again have for many years enjoyed an independence which no one has ever challenged?

[11] Granting that they at some time or other under the pressure of misfortune lost their freedom, does that give you the right after so many ages to claim them as your vassals?

[12] If so, we accomplished nothing when we delivered Greece from Philip; his successors can reassert their right to Corinth, Chalcis, and the whole of Thessaly.

[13] But why do I defend the cause of States which they themselves should more properly defend in the hearing of the king and themselves?"

Notes on the current edition

Ab Urbe Condita With An English Translation, books 1-10, 21-45, with periochae 11-20

1. The argument of the Macedonian ambassadors in XXXI. xxix should be compared.

2. B.C. 193

3. See the note to sect. 13 below.

4. B.C. 193

5. While there is a manifest fallacy in the argument, from our standpoint, it is sound from the Roman view-point. Roman law recognized possessio, the unchallenged occupancy of property for a certain definite period (cf. the note to xii. 2 above), as a means of acquiring a good title to it. The Greek cities of Italy and Sicily, once conquered, had never effectively established their independence or transferred their allegiance to another state, i.e. had never challenged Roman possessio. Zmyrna, Lampsacus, Miletus, Ephesus, and other cities on the coast had at various times effectively asserted their independence or transferred their allegiance after their conquest by Seleucus about 281 B.C.: cf. XXXIII. xxxviii-xl. They had therefore challenged the possessio of Antiochus, and this partially accidental circumstance constitutes the basis for the distinction. A non-Roman might not accept the premise. Sulpicius is clear-headed enough to see that the acceptance of the position adopted by Antiochus would jeopardize the liberation of Greece, for if Rome granted to the successors of Seleucus the right of reconquest she would be compelled to grant it also to the successors of Philip, and this would undo her work in Greece and threaten her ascendancy.

Titus Livius (Livy) Ab urbe condita 35.16

Benjamin Oliver Foster, Ph.D. (Editor), Frank Gardener Moore (Editor), Evan T. Sage, Ph.D. (Editor), Alfred C. Schlesinger, Ph.D. (Editor)

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition Perseus

Notes on the current edition

Stable identifiers