Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, D. Spillan, A.M., M.D. (Translator), Cyrus Edmonds (Translator), William A. McDevitte (Translator), 1.40.4

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

View: By Chapter

← Previous Next →

[4] But both resentment for the injury done to them incensed them more against Tarquin himself, than against Servius; and (the consideration) that a king was likely to prove a more severe avenger of the murder, if he should survive, than a private person; and moreover, in case of Servius being put to death, whatever other person he might select as his son-in-law, ¹ it seemed likely that he would adopt as his successor on the throne. ² For these reasons the

Ab urbe condita. Titus Livius (Livy). D. Spillan, A.M., M.D. (Translator), Cyrus Edmonds (Translator), William A. McDevitte (Translator). Medford, MA. .

Sponsored by Perseus Project, Tufts University.

Funding provided by The National Endowment for the Humanities.

Current edition Perseus

History of Rome (English) (Spillan, D.; Edmonds, Cyrus; McDevitte, William A., translators. London: Henry G. Bohn, 1849-1868. (Bohn's 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.) — 1.40.4 focus

[4] ferro igitur earn eam arcere contumeliam statuunt. sed et iniuriae dolor in Tarquinium ipsum magis quam in Servium eos stimulabat, et quia gravior ultor caedis, si superesset, rex futurus erat quam privatus, turn tum Servio occiso quemcumque alium generum delegisset, eundem regni heredem facturus videbatur,

Ab urbe condita Perseus (Conway, Robert Seymour; Walters, Charles Flamstead; Johnson, Stephen Keymer, editors. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1914-1935. (Oxford Classical Texts)) — 1.40.4 focus

[4] ferro igitur eam arcere contumeliam statuunt; sed et iniuriae dolor in Tarquinium ipsum magis quam in Seruium eos stimulabat, et quia grauior ultor caedis, si superesset, rex futurus erat quam priuatus; tum Seruio occiso, quemcumque alium generum delegisset, eundem regni heredem facturus uidebatur; ob haec ipsi regi insidiae parantur.

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).) — 1.40.4 focus

[4] ferro igitur eam arcere contumeliam statuunt. sed et iniuriae dolor in Tarquinium ipsum magis quam in Servium eos stimulabat, et quia gravior ultor caedis, si superesset, rex futurus erat quam privatus, tum Servio occiso quemcumque alium generum delegisset eundem regni heredem facturus videbatur, ob haec ipsi regi insidiae parantur.

Translations (2)

History of Rome Perseus (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)) — 1.40.4 focus

[4] They therefore determined to repel that insult with the sword. But resentment at their wrong urged them rather against Tarquinius himself than against Servius, not only because the king, if he survived, would be more formidable to avenge the murder than a subject would be, but because if Servius should be dispatched it seemed probable that the kingdom would be inherited by whomsoever else Tarquinius might choose to be his son-in-law. For these reasons they laid their plot against the king himself.

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.) — 1.40.4 focus

[4] But it was on Tarquin rather than on Servius that they sought to avenge their wrongs; if the king were left alive he would be able to deal more summary vengeance than an ordinary citizen, and in the event of Servius being killed, the king would certainly make any one else whom he chose for a son-in-law heir to the crown. These considerations decided them to form a plot against the king's life.

Notes on the current edition

History of Rome, books 1-10, 21-45

1. Son-in-law. Why not one of his two sons, Lucius and Aruns? Dio. iv. 1. If these were not his grandchildren rather, they must have been infants at the time. Dio. iv. 4, 6. —At this time infants could not succeed to the throne. — Ruperti.

2. This sentence has given some trouble to the commentators. —Some will have it that three distinct reasons are given for assassinating Tarquinius rather than Servius Tullius, and that these are severally marked and distinguished by et —et —trum, the second only having quia. —Stroth will have it that only two reasons are assigned, one, why the king should be killed, and the other, why Servius Tullius should not be killed, arising from the danger and uselessness of the act —the former has not a quia, because it was a fact, ( et injuriae dolor, &c.,) while the latter has it in the first part (the danger, et quia gravior, &c., quia being understood also before the other, the uselessness, turn, Servio occiso, &c.) because it contained the reasoning of the youths. Doering says there were only two powerful reasons, revenge and fear, and a ratio probabilis introduced by tum; which has the force of insuper. According to Dr. Hunter, there are two formal assertions, one, that resentment stimulated the sons of Ancus against the king himself; the other, that the plot is laid for the king himself upon two considerations, of reason and policy.

Titus Livius (Livy) Ab urbe condita 1.40.4

D. Spillan, A.M., M.D. (Translator), Cyrus Edmonds (Translator), William A. McDevitte (Translator)

Search the Perseus Catalog for:

Current edition Perseus

Notes on the current edition

Stable identifiers