The consul: his name is Aulus Manlius Vulso.
Nero: the cognomen of Tiberius Claudius. His respect for the proper attire here anticipates Gaius Claudius’ disregard for such matters in the following year (see below, chap. 10).
be put on trial immediately: consuls were immune from prosecution during their term of office, but could be prosecuted for their conduct when the term expired. The basis of the tribunes’ attack here is that Manlius had left Gaul, the province assigned to him, and started a war against the Istrians without the authorization of the Senate and Roman people (see below, chap. 7).
rewards owed to them: the temple of Bellona was in an area known as the Campus Martius (Map 1) which lay outside the sacred boundary (pomerium) of the city. Since a general lost his imperium (including the right to command troops) once he brought his army into the city, the Senate would meet outside the pomerium to hear the report of a victorious general and to decide whether his accomplishments merited a triumph.
Sardinia: the Romans had seized Sardinia from Carthage sixty years earlier and organized the southern part as a province. The Ilienses and Balari come from the interior of the island, which resisted Roman rule throughout the Republican period.
in whose control … by Lucius Cornelius Scipio: after Alexander’s conquest of the Persian empire, Lycia in Asia Minor (see Map 4) had passed into the control of various Hellenistic kingdoms. The Romans detached it from Antiochus in 189 after the battle of Magnesia and awarded it to Rhodes. Although Lucius Cornelius Scipio was the general who defeated Antiochus, in fact a ten-man commission carried out the Senate’s directions in reorganizing his territory (37.55 and 38.39). The nature of Rhodian control of Lycia had been an issue ever since. (See also Polybius 21.24 and 22.5.)
entrusted the Lycians with a letter: according to Polybius, Roman ambassadors delivered this message to the Rhodians (25.4–5).
the allies received the same as the Romans: it is impossible to give modern equivalents for ancient sums. Using Polybius (6.39), Walbank estimates that these donatives are generous; in each case they represent roughly 25 per cent of annual military pay (F. W. Walbank, A Historical Commentary on Polybius (Oxford, 1957–79), vol. 1, p. 722).
a great number of their fellow citizens were registered at Rome: those of Rome’s allies who had the juridical status of Latins (whether or not they belonged to the original Latin League, a group of surrounding communities allied from early in the fifth century) were entitled to move to Rome and acquire Roman citizenship by being enrolled in the census. This right appears to have been little exercised until the first half of the second century when extensive migration necessitated counteractive legislation. Livy records three occasions when Latins were forced to return home (39.3, here, and 42.10). The attraction of Fregellae for the Samnites and Paeligni was that it had Latin rights and thus more privileges than their home communities. Rome’s various relationships with the other communities on the Italian peninsula were complex, but in each case the primary tie was military. The allies had to supply troops to fight in Rome’s wars, and shifting populations complicated the recruitment of soldiers.
to become Roman citizens: although the text is incomplete and consequently the procedures here are unclear, the general point is that people used various legal dodges to obtain Roman citizenship. Some reference to adoption seems essential because of the wording of the Senate’s decree in chap. 9. For the Latin, see Appendix.
prodigies were announced: for prodigy lists, see the section on ‘Ancient Historical Writing’ in the Introduction.
supplication: a public religious ceremony where the Romans made a procession around the city to each of the main temples and prayed to representations of the gods, which were set out on special couches (pulvinaria).
Marcus Claudius and Titus Quinctius: censors in 189. Both Livy (38.28) and Plutarch (Flamininus 18) comment on the liberality with which they conducted the census.
The praetor Lucius Mummius: available for this duty since his province was reassigned to Sempronius.
forbade the manumission: one way to manumit someone formally in Roman law was a collusive action where the owner, the slave, and a third party came before a magistrate; the third party asserted that the slave was free, and the owner did not deny the claim. The decree is intended to prevent the Latin allies from using this procedure to obtain Roman citizenship for themselves and their sons.
rushed precipitately to his province: normally the consuls began their term of office with a ceremony on the Capitol where they offered prayers for the public safety. Each consul had twelve attendants called lictors. Like the magistrates, the lictors had both civilian and military attire. It was considered extremely bad conduct for a consul to leave the city without following the proper procedure. A notorious case is that of Gaius Flaminius, consul in 217. Hannibal’s victory over the Romans at Lake Trasimene was partially attributed to Flaminius’ hasty departure from Rome (21.58 and 22.9).
councils of war: the Romans and the Ligures fought regularly during the first quarter of the second century until the Romans eventually subdued the region.
fifty-one and a half iugera of land: these are generous plots by the standards of the time, and scholars have questioned the accuracy of this passage.
their resentment: it appears that in the past the allied troops received just as much as those with Roman citizenship (see chap. 7 above). So it is not surprising that Claudius’ stinginess caused bad feelings.
not to have a head: the Romans adopted from the Etruscans the practice of looking for omens in the entrails of animals. The ‘head’ of the liver was a swelling usually found on the right side, and its absence was considered a bad sign. During the Second Punic War the Roman general Marcellus also had to repeat a sacrifice when his first victim had a ‘headless’ liver (Livy 27.26 and Plutarch, Marcellus 29.5). In 1877 a bronze model of a sheep’s liver, marked into zones and labelled, was discovered near Piacenza (south-east of Milan), where it is now in the Archaeological Museum.
the conscript fathers: standard English term for the Latin patres conscripti and often shortened to ‘fathers’ (patres). Both terms are used apparently interchangeably with ‘members of the Senate’, ‘senators’, and ‘patricians’; and the precise meanings are a matter of scholarly debate.
sescenaris: apparently a technical religious term; since it appears here only, its precise meaning is unknown.
the performance of customary rituals: it is not certain which priesthood Licinius held or what these rites were. Some priests (e.g. the flamen Dialis, or priest of Jupiter who, according to the second-century CE writer Aulus Gellius (Attic Nights 10.15), was supposed to maintain a kind of ritual purity) were restricted in their activities; and Scipio Africanus won the command against Hannibal in 205 because his colleague in the consulship—who was the uncle of this Licinius—was pontifex maximus and had to remain in Italy to carry out his religious duties (28.44). It seems, however, that political motives may underlie the magistrates’ conduct in each case; just a few years later, when Licinius is consul, the Senate upholds his right to lead the campaign in Macedonia even after his colleague points out the inconsistency (cf. 42.32).
Aquae Cumanae … Cumae: Aquae Cumanae has not been located but was presumably a health resort near Cumae.
‘Letum’ would be his that day: the Latin word letum means death, so Petillius’ words have an ominous ring.
pullarius: the keeper of the sacred chickens. If the chickens ate greedily before a battle, their appetite was taken as a prediction of Roman success; failure to eat signified a defeat. The most famous defeat associated with disregard for this procedure is a naval battle in the First Punic War where the Roman commander, Publius Claudius, was eager to engage the enemy; informed that the sacred chickens refused to eat, he snatched them up and threw them overboard, saying, ‘If they won’t eat, let them drink.’ The story was well known: see Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods 2.6, Livy, Per. 19, and Valerius Maximus 1.4.3.
a suffect consul … hold the elections: a suffect consul was one appointed part-way through the year to fill a vacancy. Because of the gap in the text it is not known what procedure was used to elect the consuls for 175.
what sort of man he was: Livy’s judgement is based on the assumption that a man’s behaviour should be consistent with his status. Polybius, Livy’s source for this passage, gives more details about Antiochus’ preference for low company and unusual gifts (see the fragments of Polybius, 26).
this kind of show: traditional Greek entertainment consisted of athletic, musical, and theatrical competitions. The Romans adopted gladiatorial games from the Etruscans in the third century BCE, and they gradually spread throughout the empire.
quartan fever: a kind of flu with a fever that recurred every fourth day. Many Roman authors mention it as a common illness.
public priests: see Glossary for these different kinds of priests.
22: the text of chap. 22 is incomplete because the edge of the manuscript page is missing. As translated here, the first two and last three sentences of the chapter are affected by the gap. See Appendix for individual problems.
the envoys returned from Africa: as noted above, the extant text does not record the sending of these envoys.
the senate: Livy has substituted the Roman equivalent (senate) for the Carthaginians’ own word for their governmental council. This is his practice in general; chief magistrates and generals of other peoples are often referred to as ‘praetors’ though this is a Roman name for Roman magistrates.
Only this people … and the Athenians: the background to this animosity is lost. The Achaeans probably imposed the ban in 198 (cf. Archo’s speech below); and the Athenians may have done so in 200 (Livy 31.44).
<…> a letter: at least a verb such as ‘sent’ is missing here.
the Gauls: Callicrates refers here to an incursion of Gauls into Asia Minor in the third century that eventually led to Roman intervention and the successful campaign of Gnaeus Manlius, consul in 189 (see 38.12–27).
side with the Romans or Philip: in the two previous wars between the Romans and the Macedonians, the Achaeans were allied with Philip. But during the second of these conflicts, the Achaeans switched allegiance; despite Archo’s claim, the motivation was probably the proximity of the Roman fleet. On these events of 198, see 32.19–25.
the history of the Roman people: this sentence is typical of Livy’s approach to his subject: he prefers to keep his focus on the Romans and, as Luce observes, to give a full narrative of what he chooses to record, not simply to provide a brief summary (T. J. Luce, Livy: The Composition of his History (Princeton, 1977), p. 208). For similar statements acknowledging the way he delimits his subject matter, see 33.20, 35.40, and 39.48.
the second hour: the Romans divided every day into twelve hours of dark (night) and twelve hours of light (day). The hours were grouped into watches, of which there were eight altogether: two daytime watches before noon and two after, two night-time watches before midnight and two after. The length of an individual hour (and thus of the watches) shrank and expanded according to the actual amount of light and dark at any point in the year (though the difference in the Mediterranean is less extreme than for those of us who live farther from the equator). So the exact length and timing of ‘the second hour’ depend on when the sun rose. The emphasis here is on the brevity of the battle.
Valerius Antias: the first time we have seen Livy referring to one of his sources. The specific mention of Antias probably means that he was the only one who included the information.
Marcus Aemilius: an error. He was consul the preceding year. Livy might have mistaken the year or the consul’s name; or the copyist of the manuscript might have written the wrong name.
the people of Patavium: an example of an allied community ceding internal autonomy and seeking Roman intervention. Presumably it worked to the advantage of those who sought it. Livy may have a particular interest here since he came from Patavium (modern Padua).
egg-shaped markers: they served as lap-counters; one was moved every time a lap was completed.
for enumerating … <….>: because a page of the manuscript has a torn corner, the descriptions of the censors’ additions to the Circus here and the construction projects at Pisaurum and Sinuessa in the next paragraph are based on editors’ conjectures. It is not possible to reconstruct what was done on the Alban Mount. See Appendix for the Latin.
the senaculum: a place where the Senate gathered before meetings were convened in the Curia.
from the temple of Saturn … Curia: this route does not make sense since these buildings were not on the Capitoline; the text is probably corrupt.
but Fulvius Flaccus: Fulvius seems to have been an extremely ambitious politician: in 184 he tried to run for the praetorship while he was still an aedile (39.39), and in 179 the Senate limited his expenditure on public entertainments, generally a way of gaining popularity as is this generous building programme (40.44). His ill-fated attempt to build an unusually stupendous temple in Rome features early in Book 42.
treating it as their own: the task assigned to Postumius reflects the Senate’s awareness of a problem that manifested itself in different ways through-out Republican history: the administration of defeated territory. The Romans tended not to ‘micro-manage’ their conquests. One result in Italy was that large landowners could squeeze out their less prosperous neighbours. In this particular case, Capua’s punishment for siding with Hannibal in the Second Punic War had been the loss of its territory, Campania, which was then designated the property of the Roman people. The land, however, was never officially distributed, hence the disorder facing Postumius some forty years later.
a grudge against the citizens of Praeneste: Praeneste (modern Palestrina) was an old and important city in Latium, just over twenty miles south-east of Rome. It is not on the most direct route to Campania, so it looks as if Postumius went out of his way to use his magistracy to punish the Praenestini (Map 2).
no one was ever … in any way: probably an overstatement. There is evidence from Livy himself that Roman magistrates used their position to take advantage of people under their control. For example, he notes that when Cato the Elder, who was notorious for parsimony and moral rectitude, was praetor of Sardinia in 198, he eliminated or reduced the various expenses his predecessors had placed on that island’s inhabitants (32.27). Here Livy may have in mind a distinction between allies in Italy and provincials. In any case the episode fits with the theme of abuse towards the allies that he weaves throughout Books 41–5.
on the road: this sentence refers to what is called guest-friendship, a well-established custom of reciprocal hospitality. For another example, note Perseus’ guest-friend Praxo at Delphi (42.15).
the ambassadors who had been sent to Aetolia and Macedonia: see 41.25 and 27 for the former and 41.22 for the latter.
a temple for Fortuna Equestris that he had vowed: in order to ensure success in battle, Roman generals regularly sought to obtain divine favour by promising a deity a temple or sacrifices or games in the event of victory. In a battle against the Celtiberi in 180 (which Fulvius won by a cavalry manoeuvre), he swore to build a temple to Fortuna Equestris (the goddess of good luck for cavalry) and to celebrate games in honour of Jupiter Optimus Maximus (40.40). The Senate attempted to circumvent aristocratic competition by limiting the amount that could be expended on the games but apparently did not anticipate that Fulvius might lavish his attention on the temple instead (40.44).
neither Pyrrhus nor Hannibal: Pyrrhus was a king from Epirus in the early third century. He was invited by Tarentum (originally a Greek city) to Italy, to help the Tarentines combat Roman expansion. Between 280 and 275 he won three major battles against the Romans, but in each he suffered such heavy casualties, without inducing the Romans to surrender, that he is said to have commented after the second one that ‘One more victory like that will cost us the war’ (Plutarch, Pyrrhus 21). Hannibal was the Carthaginian general who invaded Italy in 218 and waged war on the Italian peninsula for fifteen years before he was forced to return to Africa and was ultimately defeated in 202. Both Pyrrhus and Hannibal pillaged southern Italy, but while Hannibal stayed away from the temple of Proserpina at Locri, Pyrrhus stole the temple treasures. A storm at sea carried them back ashore (29.28).
his wife …. Apelles: Livy is the only surviving source for Perseus’ murder of his wife; his second marriage is mentioned at 42.12. For Apelles’ involvement in Demetrius’ murder, see 40.20, 54, and 55.
scorned the newly created kingdom: although Eumenes’ ancestors had controlled the fortress of Pergamum since the beginning of the third century, it had become a powerful state only under his father (Attalus I). The latter consistently sided with the Romans and in 188 received a large amount of the territory that the Romans took from Antiochus after the battle of Magnesia.
The Aetolians … the Thessalians: very little is known or understood about these financial troubles in Aetolia and northern Greece. The Aetolians had sided with this Antiochus’ father, also named Antiochus, in his war with Rome. In their treaty, they agreed to pay indemnity over six years, so the Roman peace demands may underlie the debt there. The same explanation, however, cannot hold for Perrhaebia and Thessaly. Our ignorance here results from the sources’ focus on Rome.
tardy payment of tribute: apparently the rest of the indemnity Antiochus’ father agreed to in 188 after being defeated by the Romans; the payments were originally scheduled to be made within twelve years. For the terms of the peace settlement (known as the treaty of Apamea), see Polybius 21.42 and Livy 38.38.
Antiochus’ stay in Rome: Antiochus had been kept in Rome as a condition of the treaty of Apamea for twelve or thirteen years before a nephew took his place. His reign began in 175.
a gift of 100,000 asses: the as (plural asses) was a bronze coin. In this period the Senate regularly gave some money to each member of an embassy; unusual here are the size of the amount and the fact that it all went to Apollonius. Perhaps he was expected to share it or, as the next sentence implies, perhaps the Senate was aware of his unusual value for good relations between Rome and Antiochus (see Loeb edn., trans. E. Sage and A. C. Schlesinger (Cambridge, Mass., 1938), 310).
Corsica: the Romans seized Corsica from the Carthaginians in 259; it was administered as a province together with Sardinia. According to a historian contemporary with Livy, the Corsicans paid an annual tribute of honey, resin, and wax (Diodorus Siculus 5.13.4). Beeswax was used for candles.
abuse of the crushed: the last time Livy reported on Roman–Ligurian fighting (41.17–18), the Ligures were cast as the barbarians in their savage treatment of Roman colonists. Here the Ligures are the victims, and Livy uses some of the same vocabulary to describe the way Popillius abuses them. This reversal is typical of his willingness to criticize Romans and of the subtlety with which he constructs his narrative. A careful reader of the Latin would see that here the consul is the barbarian and the barbarians are civilized.
in accordance with Gaius Claudius’ decree: see 41.8–9.
The census … the common good: a puzzling sentence that seems to gloss over some obvious tensions between the two men. When Livy first discusses their censorship, he focuses on public works and makes it explicit that the men diverged in their attitudes towards spending public money (41.27). Livy notes also in that initial discussion that nine men were expelled from the Senate. This is a large number, and one of the victims was Fulvius’ own brother. So it is hard to believe that the censors shared their duties in complete harmony, even though Livy says here that their decisions were unanimous. As a class, aerarii are somewhat obscure, but the demotion is significant.
most historians: this passage is a good example of the tendency among ancient historical writers to discuss sources only when they conflict. Having indicated the discrepancy, Livy then uses the version he wants to endorse. As will become obvious from Eumenes’ speech, Livy, like his source Polybius, favoured Eumenes’ version of events, which represents the Roman interpretation. The charges Eumenes makes correspond to what was apparently an official litany of complaints since they appear in a contemporary inscription found at Delphi. (For the text, with translation and commentary, see R. K. Sherk, Roman Documents from the Greek East (Baltimore, 1969), 233–41).
Abrupolis: the leader of a Thracian tribe who apparently tried to seize the mines of Mount Pangaeus, a major source of Macedonian wealth. Traces of the story can be found in ancient sources going back to Polybius (22.18). Arthetaurus: an otherwise unknown Illyrian leader.
Eversa and Callicritus: also otherwise unknown. In chap. 41 below, Livy has Perseus ascribe their death to a shipwreck.
a curule chair and an ivory staff: the symbols of the highest Roman magistracies.
the plot: this episode joined the rest of the charges conventionally made against Perseus and can be found in the inscription at Delphi. Scholars have argued, however, that Eumenes invented the attempt on his life from an entirely coincidental landslide. Many of the details Livy provides, including the nature of the terrain, the use of boulders as weapons, the subsequent cascading of rocks, and the disappearance of the assassins, support this interpretation. For a sceptical account of the episode, see N. G. L. Hammond and F. W. Walbank, A History of Macedonia, vol. 3 (Oxford, 1988; repr. 2001), p.499.
dragged across the neck of the Isthmus: in antiquity, ships could be hauled across the Isthmus on a special track. Although various attempts were made (from Periander in the sixth century BCE to Nero in the first century ce) to put in a canal, the idea was not realized until the end of the nineteenth century.
Aegina: an island in the middle of the Saronic Gulf (Map 3). At the time of these events it was under the control of Pergamum and so a safe place to take the injured Eumenes.
courting his wife with unseemly speed: Livy has chosen to give a condensed version of a story other authors found rather juicy. According to Plutarch (Moralia 184B and 489 E–F), Eumenes’ ‘widow’ Stratonice and Attalus actually married. Despite indications of rivalry between the brothers, which Livy develops, they reigned as co-monarchs. Attalus succeeded Eumenes in 158 and married Stratonice upon his brother’s actual death. Eumenes’ son (Attalus III) succeeded his uncle in turn in 138.
King Ariarathes: king of Cappadocia and father-in-law of Eumenes; he became a Roman ally after the war with Antiochus.
a ward of the state: this brief notice about Ariarathes illustrates Livy’s pro-Roman bias and sources. By contrast, the account found in the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus makes the Romans into incidental pawns rather than world leaders. According to Diodorus, the boy (also named Ariarathes) was not the biological child of his parents, but one of two pseudo-heirs Ariarathes’ wife procured when she could not have children of her own. When she subsequently produced two daughters and a son (originally named Mithridates), she had the first two boys shipped off to Rome and Ionia respectively to make way for Mithridates. In fact, the son sent to Ionia turned out so well that he ultimately won his ‘father’s’ heart and inherited the kingdom (Diodorus Siculus 31.19). Prusias of Bithynia also sent a son to Rome, ostensibly for the upbringing he would receive but more probably to eliminate him as a rival. (See 45.44 and Appian, Mithridatic Wars 4.) A comparison with other sources thus reveals the many sides of Hellenistic diplomacy.
columna rostrata: this victory monument was a column decorated with the prows (Latin rostra) of ships taken in a battle off the coast of Sicily in 255. Shortly after this signal victory, almost the entire Roman fleet was destroyed in a storm (Polybius 1.36–7).
the consulship of Quintus Fulvius and Lucius Manlius: 179.
the treaty established by Publius Scipio: the peace settlement at the end of the Second Punic War in 201.
having met with … on their departure: there seems to be a pointed contrast here with the Romans’ generous and even-handed treatment of the embassies from the Carthaginians and Gulussa as described at the end of the previous chapter. For Livy, one of Perseus’ ‘barbaric’ characteristics is ignoring the rules of hospitality. Note also the interaction between the Senate and the Illyrians in the next chapter.
worthy of record: Livy’s curt dismissal of the consuls’ diplomatic achievements in this year epitomizes the Roman attitude towards ‘foreign affairs’. Consuls earned recognition from military success and conquest, not responsible diplomacy.
envoys from Issa: Issa is an island off the coast of Illyricum (Map 2); the Greek city there was under Roman protection.
at least 150 senators … at the time: the Republican Senate traditionally consisted of 300 men, but the actual size at any point in time may have been smaller, and full attendance was in any case unlikely, given the occupations and duties of the senatorial class. The general silence in the ancient sources suggests that there was no fixed quorum. The only two explicit references to a quorum in the second century occur here and in the regulations governing the worship of Bacchus, in which the Senate chose to interfere rather aggressively in 186: people seeking exemptions had to do so at meetings attended by at least 100 senators (39.8–19, confirmed by an inscription of 186 containing the text of the decree, the Senatus Consultum de Bacchanalibus, now in the Kunsthistorische Museum in Vienna).
a shameful end: Roman attitudes towards suicide varied with the circumstances: hanging was an ignoble route.
Coele Syria: in the Hellenistic period Coele (the Greek word for ‘hollow’) Syria comprised the valley running south-east from Tripolis (in modern Lebanon) to Damascus (in modern Syria). The area was a source of dispute between the Ptolemaic and Seleucid kings for centuries. This particular campaign (of Antiochus IV against Ptolemy VI) is known as the Sixth Syrian War (171–168).
for the better part of the year: the lectisternium is most frequently referred to as a discrete ceremony. From this passage and one other in Livy (36.1), however, it appears that some divinities were worshipped with semipermanent lectisternia.
comitia centuriata: in origin, the military assembly of the Roman people, which alone had the power to declare war.
in his absence: see 41.15.
in order of arrival rather than by experience: in this period, centurions were officers selected from and by the ranks and received their positions according to their abilities. (For the different levels of centurions, see the note to p. 61 on the divisions of the army.) The objection here is that the military tribunes are not distinguishing among the different ranks of centurions when in fact—as will be illustrated in Spurius Ligustinus’ speech in chap. 34—a centurion’s position reflected his experience, skill, and achievement.
the official seats of the tribunes: in the Forum, near the Curia.
of the Crustuminian tribe: Roman tribes were voting districts, and to state one’s tribe was a way of identifying oneself as a Roman citizen. The use of the word ‘tribe’ to translate Latin tribus is unfortunate since the English derivative connotes a political and social entity based on ethnicity. This meaning is anachronistic for Rome.
toga virilis … toga praetexta: see Glossary. By identifying which kind of toga his sons wear, Spurius Ligustinus is indicating their ages.
in the consulship of Publius Sulpicius and Gaius Aurelius: 200.
hastati: one of the main divisions of the Roman legion. In his history of Rome’s conquest of the Mediterranean, Polybius describes in detail the army’s organization. In ascending order of age, experience, and importance were the hastati, the principes, and the triarii. Each of these was subdivided into ten companies or maniples, each of which had two centurions. A centurion of the tenth company of the hastati was thus the least prestigious, and the first centurion of the first company of the triarii the most important in that tier of the legion. Spurius eventually became the highest-ranking centurion of all, the primus pilus (or chief centurion), who commanded the company of the triarii that stood on the right end of the line. For a longer account, see Book 6 of Polybius and L. Keppie, The Making of the Roman Army, rev. edn. (London, 1998), chap. 1.
the consul Marcus Porcius: in 195.
the praetor Quintus Fulvius Flaccus … the praetor Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus: Fulvius was governor of Nearer Spain in 182–180. (In 180 he vowed the temple to Juno that was subsequently his undoing.) Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus held the position for 180–178.
six civic crowns: a civic crown was the reward for saving a Roman citizen’s life in battle.
four soldiers to take my place: i.e. his four sons.
The Latin Festival … earlier for their provinces: the Latin Festival did not have a predetermined date, but was set each year by the consuls. As they were the main participants, the ceremony normally took place before they left Rome for the campaigning season.
city legions: reserve troops.
envoys from King Perseus arrived: Livy describes this embassy again in chap. 48 below. Here his source is annalistic; there it is Polybius. The Polybian version is more reliable.
He brought forward as accusations … setting into motion: this is a pro-Roman version of events. Perseus’ invasion of Perrhaebia, in northern Thessaly, is described as taking place only later (chaps. 53 and 54), and in the previous account of his trip through Thessaly (41.22 and 23), there was no mention of any towns being taken. Further, in chaps. 42 and 67 below Perseus appears to have alliances with three towns in Thessaly.
as spoils of war: in the first third of the second century, the Achaean League was the dominant political force in the Peloponnese. The Messenians and the Eleans became members in 191, after Antiochus III was defeated at Thermopylae.
the Orestae: these people lived on the borders of Epirus and Macedonia and had been under Macedonian control. They were granted autonomy by the Romans in 196, in the wake of the war against Philip; their freedom was a reward for having been the first to rebel against him (Polybius 18.47 and Livy 33.34). It is quite possible that the Romans wanted to hamper the Macedonians by supporting neighbours likely to be hostile to them.
the Acarnanians: they had sided with first Philip and then Antiochus against the Romans.
Boeotian exiles: Livy gives the background of these men in chap. 43. They and Ismenias, mentioned below, represent two different factions at Thebes.
to grant each city autonomy: Boeotia comprised multiple distinct city-states. These had been in a league of one kind or another almost continuously since the sixth century. Thebes was the largest and frequently most dominant city-state. In fostering autonomy among the cities, Marcius’ desire was not to promote the liberty of the smaller ones, but to dissolve the league. The date of the formation of the alliance with Perseus is uncertain, but it was probably during the magistracy of Ismenias.
the gift of their freedom: in 196, after the war with Philip, the Thessalians were among the people declared free by the Romans.
the bond of amity and of the guest-friendship with Philip: there is almost certainly some confusion here. The guest-friendship was probably established between Philip and Marcius himself, not his father (as just noted).
to go into exile: neither the Greeks nor the Romans used long prison sentences to punish criminals. Exile or death served to remove wrongdoers from their community.
Grant that I was justified in fighting: according to Appian’s summary of the events leading up to the war, the Romans renewed their treaty with Perseus after he defeated Abrupolis, so it appears that previously they had not regarded Perseus’ behaviour as a violation of the treaty (Appian, Macedonian Wars 11.6).
had been made public: a reference back to chap. 38, where the Romans told the representatives of the Boeotian exiles that the cities in their league would soon be able to act independently and thus it would be clear whether they had supported the making of a treaty with Perseus.
a different factional quarrel: Livy gives a compressed and almost unintelligible account of a complicated political battle at Thebes that had consequences for the entire Boeotian League. There appear to have been pro-Macedonian and anti-Macedonian factions in the city. At the elections for the leading magistracies (the ‘praetor’ and the ‘boeotarchs’ or magistrates of the Boeotian League), the pro-Macedonians won. Some of their opponents managed to convince an assembly of the voters to pass a measure banning the victorious contestants from entering any population centre (effectively a vote of exile). Then public opinion swung back, and the newly elected officials were recalled. They retaliated by exiling the men responsible for driving them out. Consequently the Romans had two groups of Boeotians to deal with: Ismenias and his party, who supported a united Boeotia and the alliance with Perseus, and the ‘exiles’, who had initially resisted the election of Ismenias and who did not favour the alliance. The Romans backed the latter group.
Coronaei and Haliarti: Coronea and Haliartus are cities in Boeotia (Map 3).
tainted with the suspicion of having taken bribes from the Illyrian kings: unfortunately, there is no other evidence pertaining to Decimius’ conduct.
Thebes: here a misreading for Thisbe, another Boeotian city; the mistake goes back to the text of Polybius (27.5).
they could not recognize Roman practices in this embassy: the passage that follows has interested students both of Roman history and of Livy’s interpretation of it. To see the episode as marking a literal turning point is probably simplistic, but both Livy and Polybius (the source here) traced what they saw as the decline of Roman national character. Philippus’ behaviour presents an excellent opportunity to moralize about that decline.
even to announce … to fight: Polybius praises the Romans for their honourable conduct in war (13.3). Traditional phalanx warfare generally required the opponents to determine when and where they would fight. Starting with the Peloponnesian War, Greek armies made increasing use of light-armed infantry, with its greater ability to manoeuvre. From Paris’ archery in the Iliad on, however, men whose equipment (such as bows and arrows or the javelin) allowed them to fight from a distance were regarded as cowardly. It is possible that the style of warfare attributed to the Romans of ‘the good old days’ is simply a way of reinforcing the moral commentary and is not a literal account of tactics. (On the moral implications of Greek land warfare, see chapter 2 of Victor Hanson’s The Western Way of War: Infantry Battle in Classical Greece, second edn., Berkeley, 2000.)
Pyrrhus’ doctor … the Falisci: for Pyrrhus, see the note to p. 35. The attempt to betray him to the Romans was famous. Livy’s fullest version occurs in one of the now lost books (Book 13). In the story of the Faliscan schoolmaster, as told by Livy, the teacher leads his pupils to the Romans and offers them as bargaining chips in the Romans’ war against the neighbouring city of Falerii. Under the leadership of Camillus, the Romans nobly reject his offer and return the children to their families; the Falisci are so impressed that they surrender their city (5.27). See also 24.24.
artifice: Livy uses the word ars three times in this passage: Marcius boasts of breaking up the Boeotian League arte (skilfully); the old men reply that they cannot recognize Roman artes (practices) in his double-dealing; then they conclude that a true victory cannot be won arte (by artifice). Like its English cognate ‘art’, the Latin word has both positive and negative connotations, and Livy seems to be playing with them here.
Perseus’ envoys: another version of the embassy Livy describes in chap. 36. Here he follows Polybius.
a more belligerent cast of mind: the paragraph that follows is an excellent example of Livy’s ability to present events from a non-Roman perspective. The Macedonian war party is critical of Rome, regarding it as too oppressive and pointing out its vulnerability. Yet, at the same time, this anti-Roman view ends up revealing Rome’s greatness: Macedonia is the last major power within striking distance of Rome, and it too will fall.
Samothrace: an instance of foreshadowing; this island became Perseus’ last refuge. See the beginning of Book 45.
attempt to take over the kingdom: Perseus’ rivalry with his younger brother Demetrius is related in Book 40. Philip used his second son as an ambassador in his dealings with the Romans. Demetrius, however, became a Roman sympathizer and apparently wanted to supplant his brother as their father’s heir. With Philip’s connivance, Perseus had Demetrius killed in 180.
Alcidemos: an epithet meaning ‘strength of the people’. Athena (Roman Minerva) appears as a warrior on Macedonian coinage.
courtiers: the Latin word is purpurati, or ‘men dressed in purple’. Because the colour is hard to produce with natural dyes, it was expensive and associated with wealth and monarchy.
all the soldiers in a plain: the following list of forces is considered accurate and authoritative, deriving ultimately from Macedonian sources, specifically the so-called ‘King’s Journal’, a daily record of what the Macedonian king said and did. (See Hammond and Walbank, History of Macedonia, vol. 3, pp. 18 and 515.) There are two types of infantry: the phalanx, consisting of heavily armed foot soldiers with long spears that could be wielded from a distance, and ‘peltasts’, who had lighter armour and were consequently more mobile.
‘agema’: a Macedonian king’s bodyguard.
Eulyestae: this name is almost certainly wrong (since it is otherwise unknown). Editors and translators have suggested and sometimes printed other names.
the young Demetrius: for Didas’ role in Demetrius’ death, see 40.21–4; Livy sets up the rivalry between Perseus and his brother in Book 40 partly as an introduction to the Romans’ war against Perseus.
a misleading conference: Livy again gives a foreigner’s perspective on Roman behaviour. Perseus’ characterization of the negotiators reinforces the view of the older senators and so reminds Livy’s audience of the theme of Roman degeneracy.
the Red Sea: this is the usual term in Roman sources for the Persian Gulf and the modern Red Sea; but it could be applied, as here, to bodies of water even farther east.
Larisa: it had a Roman garrison at this point (chap. 47).
a major reverse: although Polybius’ text for this period survives in fragments only, there is enough to show that he is Livy’s main source for the campaign that follows. Livy chooses to represent the consul, Publius Licinius Crassus, and Perseus as foils for one another. Here the Roman avoids a major defeat through Perseus’ lack of initiative; in chap. 66 he shies away from inflicting one on the king. Crassus is about to go on the offensive because he hears that the Macedonians are raiding fields in Thessaly; in chap. 64 Perseus reacts in a similar fashion upon learning of Roman foraging. Throughout, the men’s responses to success and failure constitute an underlying message about the essential strength of the Roman character and the corresponding weakness of the Macedonian.
with his ships: in chap. 47 Quintus Marcius Philippus was sent to Greece with a contingent of ships and a vaguely worded remit to do what ‘seemed to him to be in the best interests of the state’.
‘Hanging’ Larisa: Larisa ‘Cremaste’ overlooks the northern shore of the entrance to the Euripus, the strait between Euboea and the mainland; it should not be confused with Larisa, one of the main Thessalian cities, which features elsewhere in the narrative.
the enemy cavalry came into view: i.e. the Romans.
a small hill called Callinicus: in modern treatments of the war, the ensuing cavalry battle is generally referred to as Callicinus, in accordance with the name that appears in V; Callinicus was conjectured by the nineteenth-century editor Madvig.
the Sacred Squadron: the men wore heavy armour and fought in formation with spears or lances, as opposed to the regular Macedonian cavalry which had lighter equipment and weaponry.
with his first assault: the apparently abrupt shift to Perseus’ decisive cavalry charge results from the partially illegible condition of this section of the manuscript.
the Aetolians: according to Polybius, the Roman-backed leader of the Aetolians (see chap. 38) engineered the downfall of at least three of these men to enhance his position with the Romans (Polybius 27.15).
the king went … camp there: in contrast to this rousing speech that Livy has Perseus deliver, the king does not attack the Roman camp. The gap between word and deed implicitly undermines Perseus’ credibility.
spread through Greece: almost all of the previous chapter and the first part of chap. 63 correspond closely to Polybius (27.8–9). The variations, however, add up to significantly different presentations. Livy, for example, intuits Perseus’ motivation, saying that he was always receptive to advice and that he continued to negotiate with Crassus out of fear. These motives do not appear in Polybius. Together they portray Perseus as weak. Further, while Livy has adopted Polybius’ explanation of the general reaction to the Romans’ defeat, his version is considerably condensed. Polybius goes on to describe exactly how spectators respond at a boxing match and gives a particular example involving two famous boxers. Their names and the competition would have meant nothing to Livy’s audience, and he omits them.
the fields lay untouched: as this section of the narrative makes evident, maintaining a food supply in hostile territory was a major undertaking for the Romans.
The cestrosphondene … like a missile: Livy’s description is abbreviated and not easy to follow. According to Polybius (27.11), the firing device and the missile were each two hands (c.12 inches) long. The missile was, as Livy describes it, armed with three spines of wood like feathers on an arrow, and the main shaft had two straps, which held the missile in place. They were twisted taut, and then one was released sending the missile to its target. A Thessalian coin from the period has been identified as representing the cestrosphondene. (See J. Warren, ‘Two Notes on Thessalian Coins’, Numismatic Chronicle (1961), 1–8 and plate 1.)
Pteleum: Roman spelling of Pteleon, mentioned at chap. 42.
The Senate … to so many peoples: the Senate’s reaction here sheds light on Roman governance. Magistrates had wide discretionary power while away from Rome, and no written provision precluded Cassius’ action. His senatorial peers, however, clearly perceive his conduct as an abuse of his position and dereliction of duty.
Marcus Porcius Cato … Gaius Sulpicius Galus: at least three of these men had significant experience in Spain and may have been known personally to the members of the embassies. Cato was consul there in 195 and proconsul the following year. This Scipio was praetor for Farther Spain in 194, but in addition, his father, uncle, and famous cousin Africanus had all commanded Roman armies there. Paullus was praetor for Farther Spain in 191, and a promagistrate there the two subsequent years. Although there has been conjecture about a connection between Galus and Spain, it cannot be documented.
the consulship of Aulus Manlius and Marcus Junius: 178.
the consulship of Spurius Postumius and Quintus Mucius: 174.
the consulship of Lucius Postumius and Marcus Popillius: 173.
to exact money: an interesting episode in Roman provincial relations. On the face of it, Canuleius colluded with the accused, and they got off lightly: Praeneste and Tibur are both only about twenty miles outside Rome. At the same time, the public careers of both men came to an abrupt halt, and the Senate instituted measures to protect the Spaniards in the future. The passage epitomizes Livy’s advantages and disadvantages as a historical source from a modern perspective. This is the first explicit reference to the fact that the Spaniards were required to sell 5 per cent of their grain to the Romans, but the practice almost certainly goes back to the 190s. Livy, however, mentions it only because he is tracing the increasingly corrupt behaviour of the Romans. This interest in morality, rather than the modern desire to understand provincial administration, accounts for his inclusion of the episode.
marriages recognized by Roman law: a critical point. The women, as foreigners by birth, did not have what the Romans termed conubium, the right to make a marriage whose offspring automatically received Roman citizenship.
a Latin colony: i.e. the inhabitants have the juridical status of Latins. They were partially enfranchised Roman allies with the right to make contracts under Roman law, the right to form a Roman law marriage (such as was unavailable to their parents), and possibly the right to move to Rome and be registered as Roman citizens in the census. The last component was problematic, as is apparent in 41.8–9. The creation of Carteia was a revolutionary step in Roman legal and constitutional history. For the first time the concept of Latinity was transported overseas. In addition, it appears from this passage that any former slaves of the colonists (the freedmen referred to) and current occupants of the city also could enrol as Latins and receive land and rights. Carteia was a unique foundation. (See J. S. Richardson, The Romans in Spain (Oxford, 1996).)
some Carthaginians: Livy here picks up a narrative thread last treated in 42.23 and 24.
Antium: modern Anzio, less than thirty-five miles from Rome, on the western coast of Italy (Map 2).
the same decree: in practical terms, this response probably means that the pro-Roman faction was put in charge of Abdera. Coronea was one of the three Boeotian cities not to cooperate with the Romans in this period. Somewhere in the lost section of Book 43 is the description of how Licinius attacked and took it. The Senate then issued a decree about its reorganization. A copy of part of this has been found. As an editor of the decree suggests, the Senate gave control of the city to Roman sympathizers (Sherk, Roman Documents, 32–3).
he gave satisfaction: there is no evidence Cassius ever had to face these accusations; he went directly from his consulship to service as a military tribune under Hostilius, the consul assigned to Macedonia for the following year (as noted at the beginning of this chapter and at 44.31).
that divinity: Alabanda, modern Arabhisar, in western Asia Minor (Map 4). This is the second earliest example (after Smyrna in 195, as noted in Tacitus, Annals 4.65) of a Greek community honouring Rome by recognizing the personified spirit of the state as a deity. Cults for individuals, cities, and abstractions were a regular part of Hellenistic religious practice. For Alabanda to honour Rome in this way does not mean that the inhabitants thought Rome was an actual goddess, but rather that it was important enough to be celebrated with a temple and a festival. In the Hellenistic world, establishing cults was a way of creating a bond with another community.
his request had been denied: any kind of severe physical handicap was considered an acceptable explanation for not undertaking public service.
for the freedom of Greece: by this point in Greek and Roman history, it was commonplace to claim freeing others as an explanation for war. The liberation of a people usually meant simply the exchange of one overlord for another. The liberation of the Greeks became a rallying cry in the late fifth century, but the idea probably goes back to the Ionian Revolt a century earlier. The Romans’ use of the slogan illustrates their familiarity with the language of Greek diplomacy.
Uscana: about thirty miles north of Lychnidus (Map 3).
the fourth watch: the last quarter of the night, presumably here just as day broke.
the Terminalia: a festival for Terminus, the god of boundaries and thus of ends. He signified permanence and stability for the Romans because, according to a tradition reported by Livy (1.55), when the last king of Rome, Tarquinius Superbus, wanted to deconsecrate the Tarpeian Mount in order to dedicate it to Jupiter alone, Terminus’ shrine was the only one which the auguries would not allow to be relocated. His festival took place on 23 February.
the augur, died <…>: there is no indication of his successor, and editors have posited that the manuscript is missing some text.
meritorious of public attention: one of the more famous passages in Livy. It has generally been cited to illustrate his traditional outlook and empathic (rather than analytical) attitude towards his subject. Levene has argued, however, that the passage must be read in its context, not as applying to the entire text. It introduces an unusually long and developed prodigy list at a time when Roman public morality was deeply flawed. Since Livy’s stated intention is to trace the rise and fall of the Romans’ greatness as expressed in their character and conduct, it makes sense that he dwells on signs of divine disapproval when the Romans are behaving deplorably. As Levene concludes, Livy relates the momentary moral decline in this period to the worse and more intractable collapse to come (D. S. Levene, Religion in Livy (Leiden, 1993), 113–16).
impluvium: a large basin set in the middle of the atrium (the central room of a Roman house); the atrium was open to the sky, and the impluvium was designed to catch and store rainwater. As this passage suggests, the word may sometimes refer not just to the basin itself, but also to the central area of the atrium.
wreaths: an extra measure, presumably to communicate to the gods just how seriously the Romans regard the prodigies. For example, at a two-day supplication in 180 the people wore wreaths and carried laurel branches (40.37).
their censors: here begins the first of three descriptions of these censors’ activities (43.14–16, 44.16, and 45.15). This one concerns their efforts to promote conscription and the severity with which they handled the letting of contracts; the latter subject leads to their own trial for treason. The second is a more conventional summary of their actions. The third deals with the shifting of freedmen into a single urban voting district. Livy’s decision to distribute the material in this manner is indicative of the free manner in which he treats so-called ‘annalistic material’. The censors’ term lasted one and a half years; Livy weaves their activities in at the relevant points in his narrative.
the younger men: (iuniores) those between 17 and 46. Ordinarily, they were the ones to perform military service. In this war, however, those over 46, the ‘older men’ (seniores), also served (see 42.31 and 32).
the consulship of Publius Aelius and Gaius Popillius: 172.
father or grandfather: a reference to the institution of patria potestas (paternal power). The paterfamilias or ‘head of household’ was the only person fully recognized by Roman law. He represented anyone under his power, ordinarily his children and their issue, and sometimes his wife (depending on the type of marriage). It is difficult to draw firm general conclusions about the evidence for the age at which most children, male and female, were likely to become legally independent, either by a formal ceremony or by the death of their paterfamilias. An adult male might well still be under his father’s power; if so, the grandchildren were represented by the grandfather.
Caepio: Gnaeus Servilius Caepio, the consul just mentioned.
princeps senatus: leader of the Senate. It was an honorary title, with symbolic rather than constitutional significance. The censors conferred it on the man whom they listed first on the roll of the Senate.
the equestrians: for this class, see the Glossary. It is not known why the censors of 169 wanted to exclude men who had held contracts under their predecessors.
Tiberius Sempronius: up to this point Livy mostly calls the censor Tiberius Sempronius. His full name, however, was Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus, and in the following episode he is referred to as Gracchus and Tiberius Gracchus as well.
suppliants: presumably members of the Senate, whose rings and tunics with broad purple stripes distinguished them from ordinary citizens. By removing the visible signs of their status, they are putting themselves on the same level as the people whose mercy they seek.
Conquerors: Livy’s word is ‘Nicatores’; it apparently refers to an elite corps.
for <…> days: one, two, and three days have been conjectured.
a single day’s march for someone lightly equipped: Livy consistently treats thirty or thirty-five miles as the distance that can be covered in one day by someone travelling light. As he describes Marcius’ campaign in Book 44, it is useful to keep this figure in mind as a comparison point; the regular army can advance about seven miles a day, depending on the terrain, while lighter-armed troops can cover twice that distance.
treated the allies … maltreatment: a favourable version of Hostilius’ consulship. Because of the incomplete state of Book 43, he is relatively obscure for a consul. The information in Livy mostly concerns his dealings with the allies (e.g. 43.4, 9, and 17). Other sources record significant episodes of his consulship: Perseus’ failed attempt to have him kidnapped, Perseus’ victory over him at Elimea, and a subsequent challenge to combat that Hostilius declined.
the gods smiled on dutifulness and constancy: while Livy himself rarely invokes the gods as agents in human affairs, his characters do, and the gods certainly have a place in his world view and his understanding of historical explanation. It is always important to have the gods’ favour. Here, since Livy is showing the war beginning to swing in the Romans’ direction, it is appropriate to have an explicit reminder that the gods are on their side.
which way each of them would take: Marcius begins in southern Thessaly and must either cross mountains or go a long way to the west to reach Macedonia (Map 3). Geography favours Perseus, except that he cannot know the Romans’ route in advance and must prepare for as many eventualities as possible.
a base between Azorus and Doliche: at this point Marcius was joined by Polybius, who came as part of an embassy from the Achaean League and ended up participating in the Roman invasion of Macedonia (Polybius 28.13). Thus the details of the invasion are based on an eyewitness account, but Livy was highly selective in his use of Polybius, omitting the diplomatic activity recorded by the Greek historian. For example, according to Polybius, in this period Rhodian envoys approached Marcius and were encouraged by him, on the sly, to continue their attempts to end the war between Perseus and Rome (Polybius 28.17). Livy says nothing about the episode, and scholars continue to debate whether it happened.
around Dium: Asclepiodotus is protecting a major pass through the Cambunian Mountains; Hippias is guarding the south side of Mount Olympus; and Perseus is blocking the coastal path.
before returning to Dium by the same route: Livy depicts Perseus as irrational but, as has been noted, Perseus may have been making systematic sweeps with the cavalry in order to intercept the Romans whenever and wherever they reached the coast (see Loeb edn., trans. A. C. Schlesinger (Cambridge, Mass., 1951), 97).
where one of Perseus’ generals had established his camp: the Lake Ascuris route, monitored by Hippias.
a course of action … in the end: as Livy’s language here and in subsequent passages reveals, Marcius’ decision was not necessarily the most prudent one. He was in a difficult position since retreating would presumably have damaged his reputation and given him no tactical advantage. It is worth noting that a similarly rash campaign in his previous consulship resulted in defeat and 4,000 casualties (39.20). Apparently, Marcius did not learn enough from that experience. Livy, however, chooses to describe Marcius’ decision in positive terms as part of his larger agenda of showing improvement in Rome’s fortunes.
had boldly undertaken: Livy’s analysis of the two leaders is moral rather than strategic. Philippus’ advance has been considered both courageous and foolhardy; it was at least more effective than Hostilius’ cautious approach the year before. As for Perseus, he simply did not foresee that the Romans would attempt such a difficult route.
the more horizontal terrain of the valley floor: although some of the mechanical details have been omitted or garbled, this feat of engineering is apparently factual. Scullard notes that elephants cannot bend their legs sufficiently to descend at steep angles, and Polybius, Livy’s source, was with the Romans on this march. As remarkable as it sounds, the Romans forced their way over the shoulder of Mount Olympus and brought more than thirty elephants down to the Macedonian coast (see H. H. Scullard, The Elephant in the Greek and Roman World (Ithaca, NY, 1974), 182–4).
the enemy was nearby: the Romans were within thirty miles of Perseus, and their desperate push across the mountains must have been quite a shock.
through Tempe … into Macedonia: in other words, barring a retreat back over the mountains, the Romans would have met Macedonian forces whether they attempted to continue to invade north along the coast or decided to withdraw to the south through Tempe.
stolen the king’s wits: another reference to the gods to indicate that the Romans again enjoy divine favour.
any violation of its sacred area: Marcius’ instructions emphasize Roman piety.
Pieria: the district of Macedonia between the mountains to the south and the Thermaic Gulf to the east (Map 3). Marcius advances through it at a rate of approximately ten miles a day.
no safe way to proceed far beyond it: the emphasis on Marcius’ difficulties with supplies probably reflects Polybius’ first-hand experience. Here Marcius makes what appears to be a sound choice: he cannot guarantee a supply of food, and the penetration of Macedonia does not seem to bring him any strategic or military advantage.
in extremely short supply: Livy is not concerned with noting the duration of the invasion, but the narrative has enough references to the passage of time for a rough count to show that the troops must have nearly consumed the rations they were originally directed to bring.
arms, siege-works, and machines: Livy specifies three kinds of weaponry here. One type (arma) seems to be hand-held while the other two are larger artillery (machinae and opera). The latter two, however, are regularly paired in his narrative and are apparently used generically rather than to refer to particular siege engines. Equipment of this kind was highly specialized in ancient warfare, and technical treatises were written on the subject. See, for example, the discussion in Livy’s contemporary Vitruvius, who concludes his 10-volume work on architecture with seven chapters on offensive and defensive machines (Vitruvius, On Architecture 10.10–16).
testudo: a Latin word meaning turtle or tortoise in particular and shell in general. To assault walls, troops of Roman soldiers encased themselves in their shields, thus forming a protective shell. Part of Polybius’ description of the manoeuvre here survives (28.11). Where the Greek historian regards the testudo as a curiosity, Livy adapts its deployment on this occasion to fit into his tracing of the historical contours of Roman morality.
Gaius Marcius: a cousin of the consul (Quintus Marcius Philippus) and the praetor in charge of the fleet. Livy now turns to naval operations, and in chaps. 10–12, ‘Marcius’ refers to the praetor, not the consul.
Cassandrea: a city on the site of archaic and classical Potidaea, which was originally founded by Corinthians. In Thucydides’ account of the Peloponnesian War, the city was a major source of friction. In the generation after Alexander the Great, the Macedonian king Cassander refounded it and named it after himself. The site is strategically located at the neck of the peninsula of Pallene (Map 3).
King Eumenes: he last appeared in the narrative when the Romans won their minor victory at Phalanna in 171 (42.65–7). He then returned to Pergamum. Elaea, on the coast of Asia Minor, was the port of Pergamum (Map 4).
decked vessels: warships; the term indicates that Livy has a Greek source (Polybius); when the source is Roman, this type of craft is called a ‘long ship’.
Archways were pointed out to him: the relationship between the missing dirt and the archways—and between the praetor’s question and the answer given—is unclear. Apparently the soil was made into bricks, and the arches were constructed from them.
set out for Demetrias: a radical change of direction. The fleet is returning to the Gulf of Pagasae in Thessaly (Map 3).
at the first assault: a striking and no doubt intentional contrast with Perseus’ reaction to the Romans’ arrival. Livy uses some of the same language to describe Perseus’ fear and that of the Meliboeans. The Romans’ siege of the city fails, thereby implicitly showing the rewards of fortitude (as opposed to Perseus’ cowardice).
did withdraw from the city: Livy does not explore the question of whether or not Eumenes attempted negotiations. Polybius, on the other hand, discusses at length the relationship and motives of Perseus and Eumenes (29.5–9). Livy evidently still wants to maintain Eumenes’ reputation (as is apparent in the following paragraph; see the next note) while Polybius thinks it is essential to understand the consequential actions of leaders, even if information about those actions is incomplete.
completely different stories about King Eumenes: an effective use of a variant tradition to influence the way the audience perceives events. After three chapters where Eumenes and Marcius Figulus have been coordinating efforts, Livy draws attention to a version where Eumenes was uncooperative and his brother Attalus assisted the Romans. This alternative version probably reflects the fact that Eumenes eventually lost the Romans’ favour while Attalus remained a loyal ally. By mentioning it, Livy maintains the favourable presentation of Eumenes which is central to the attack on Perseus’ character, but also prefigures his loss of popularity.
philippei: valuable coins introduced by Philip II of Macedon in the fourth century.
from the Rhodians: the Roman annalistic version of an embassy to Rome in 167. Livy relays Polybius’ version at 45.3 below. Given the stunning conclusion here, it seems that Livy found the patriotic version too good to omit. It is also possible that he failed to recognize and/or reconcile information in two different sources.
the liberation of the Carians and the Lycians: Livy twice notes the Lycians’ resentment of their position (41.6 and 42.14), but the Senate’s action, which actually happened after the war (Livy 45.25 and Polybius 30.4), was designed to punish the Rhodians and to demonstrate the Romans’ power over them, not to redress wrongs done to the Carians and Lycians.
Publius Rutilius … in his capacity as tribune of the plebs: see 43.16 and note to p. 109.
Publius Africanus: Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus, the Romans’ victorious general in the war against Hannibal a generation earlier; Tiberius Sempronius married his daughter after Africanus’ death.
the statue of Vortumnus: an Etruscan god whom the Romans associated with trade; the general area referred to is south of the Forum (Map 1).
which allies seemed faithful to us: unlike the other major Roman historians, Livy rarely aligns himself verbally with the Romans and tends to refer to them in the third person. The switch to the first person here makes the summary of Paullus’ request more vivid.
the twelfth of April: in chap. 22, Livy reports that the Latin Festival was celebrated on 31 March. That is the day before the Kalends of April; 12 April is the day before the Ides of April. There is no way to judge the source of the error.
clutching olive branches: the untidy garments, the unkempt hair, and the olive branch all indicate suppliant status. In Livy’s time defendants routinely tried to look as shabby as possible. At 29.16, the carrying of olive branches is referred to as a Greek practice.
the Quinquatrus: a festival lasting from 19 to 23 March. It celebrated both Mars and Minerva. See H. H. Scullard, Festivals and Ceremonies of the Roman Republic (Ithaca, NY, 1981), 92–4.
our side … to force an engagement: here again Livy switches from the third to the first person to convey the perspective of the commissioners as they address the Senate.
Eumenes … Attalus’ resolute constancy was remarkable: earlier, when Livy narrated the campaigning in 169, Eumenes was depicted as a full participant in the naval war (chaps. 10–13); here, the historian has shifted to endorsing Attalus over Eumenes; see note to p. 130.
nourish rumours … responsibility: here Livy has Paullus introduce explicitly a theme that runs throughout Books 44 and 45, the misleading nature of rumour and talk as opposed to solid information and actions. The idea is already implicit in Paullus’ insistence on getting a field report before deciding how to conduct his campaign. Throughout his consulship, the ability to evaluate accurately words and deeds distinguishes sensible and admirable figures from fools.
as Quintus Fabius did: an early hero of the Second Punic War. He pursued the unpopular but successful strategy of avoiding a major engagement with Hannibal after the Carthaginian general had defeated the Romans multiple times. In the traditional version, the Roman people voted to give equal power to Fabius’ second-in-command, Marcus Minucius Rufus. Minucius was lured into a trap by Hannibal and rescued by Fabius. At that point Minucius surrendered the power he had been voted and resumed his position as Fabius’ subordinate. See Book 22. Livy uses Fabius as a model for Paullus in the campaign of 168, mostly tacitly; but the episode with Minucius is invoked explicitly again at 45.37.
Meanwhile, because Perseus … king of the Illyrians: this sentence introduces a lengthy section (chaps. 23–7) on Perseus’ diplomatic manoeuvres in the second half of 169 and early 168 when he was actively pursuing allies. According to Livy, these were the Illyrians under Gentius, Eumenes, Antiochus, and a group of Gauls (the Bastarnae, cf. Perseus’ previous dealings with them at 41.19). These chapters are organized thematically rather than chronologically: Livy uses the ultimate failure of all of Perseus’ initiatives to illustrate his avarice.
the Romans had entered the pass: a reference to Marcius’ surprise invasion in 169.
a reciprocal exchange of hostages: the first time Livy refers to Hippias’ successful embassy to Gentius. Perseus’ dealings with Gentius in this chapter are a selective version of Polybius (29.3–4). Perseus had been trying to win the Illyrian king’s support for at least a year, but previously had been unwilling to pay for it (43.20 and 23).
oaths, hostages, and money: the ancient sources offer little insight into Pantauchus’ influence over Gentius. Gentius was apparently willing to throw in his lot with the Macedonians, but his motivation is never made clear. He was cautious enough to want to wait until Perseus had fulfilled his part of the bargain: hence the Illyrian king’s instructions to his men to delay their departure for Rhodes until after Perseus had complied with the agreement.
Metrodorus … from Rhodes: a Rhodian representing the pro-Macedonian faction in that city. His arrival in Thessalonica indicates prior communication between Perseus and the Rhodians.
greater regard for Prusias than for Eumenes: apparently a reference to the fact that Prusias had provided the Romans with at least minimal support in the war (the five ships mentioned at the end of chap. 10).
openly to Antiochus: nothing is known about Antiochus’ response, if there was any. Presumably he was occupied with his attempt to take over Egypt.
a rivalry of trickery and greed: here Livy embarks on the history of the alleged negotiations between Eumenes and Perseus. This section is particularly difficult to follow because Livy groups all of Perseus’ diplomatic efforts together. Although the focus at Rome has already shifted to Paullus and the imminent campaign of 168, Perseus and Eumenes’ intermediaries started meeting while Eumenes was still with the Romans the year before.
Cydas: mentioned previously at chap. 13. He is introduced here as a key figure in Perseus and Eumenes’ dealings.
generated nothing but disrepute: the material covered in the previous three paragraphs is a condensed version of Polybius (29.6–9). There are disadvantages and advantages to Livy’s brevity. Without Polybius, it would be harder to understand that Cydas, Menecrates, and Antimachus are agents for Eumenes and Perseus. At the same time, since Polybius is interested in the relationship between the two kings, he pauses to analyse it at some length. Livy prunes away Polybius’ commentary to summarize the kings’ interactions and to highlight their weaknesses, especially Perseus’ avarice. Here he follows Polybius in seeing it as a decisive factor in the Macedonian’s downfall. Modern scholars, on the contrary, have pointed out that Perseus may have been wise not to waste precious resources on unreliable allies (Hammond and Walbank, History of Macedonia, vol. 3, p. 535). Ancient historians, however, invoked moral explanations, not economic ones. Perseus’ fatal flaw is his character. The problem of whether Eumenes really did try to sell his loyalty has been a matter of longstanding scholarly debate. Livy does not question the story; for him it meshes with Eumenes’ loss of favour at Rome.
Gallic auxiliaries, who had streamed down through Illyricum: Plutarch identifies these Gauls as the Bastarnae (Aemilius Paullus 12). Livy has not mentioned the alliance previously, but there must have been negotiations since both parties acknowledge the validity of the Gauls’ demand to be paid for their services.
Marcus Perperna and Lucius Petillius, who happened to have come to him in that period: according to Appian, Petillius and Perperna were sent to Gentius after he made an incursion into the part of Illyricum under Roman control (Macedonian Wars, 18.2).
the person who was transporting the money: just above Livy refers to multiple bearers of the money; here he may mean the person in charge. The reason for the inconsistency is unclear.
cutters: smaller ships, with pointed prows; the term is Greek and was used for various kinds of large marine life with sharp noses. Chaps. 28 and 29 concern the war at sea.
Antenor promptly sailed around the island: with this sentence, Livy switches to the singular, and although Antenor’s name does not appear here, he subsequently seems to be the officer giving the commands.
Sigeum: in Asia Minor, at the southern end of the Hellespont, and less than forty miles from the island of Tenedos (Map 4).
protected them from one another: Delos had a long history as holy ground. The sanctuary of Apollo was the most important, but there were shrines to many divinities.
a favourable response was given to the kings: Polybius (29.11) reports that there was a vigorous debate at Rhodes between the pro-Macedonian and the pro-Roman factions. Apparent indications of Perseus’ success—the galleys, Roman cavalry losses, and the alliance with Gentius—wore down the pro-Roman group, and the ruling council decided to intervene to stop the war. The contrast between Polybius’ and Livy’s accounts suggests at least two of Livy’s objectives. First, the Romans punished the Rhodians severely after the war, and the suppression of any debate here makes the Rhodians look more culpable. Secondly, Livy substitutes the story of the Gauls’ arrival for the cavalry losses to which Polybius refers. Since the Gauls’ help never materialized, the story is effectively a rumour, and the Rhodians’ ill-fated choice can be seen as another example of the unreliability of hearsay.
Gentius: Livy now narrates Anicius’ campaign against Gentius to dispose of it before his more extended treatment of the confrontation between Paullus and Perseus, which dominates the end of Book 44 and most of Book 45.
before word reached Rome that it had begun: the residual operations were administrative (45.26); the capture of Gentius effectively ended the campaign in Illyricum.
the Illyrian hostages: an obscure sentence. It seems more likely that the hostages referred to are the Macedonians left with Gentius, rather than the Illyrians handed over to Perseus; but this interpretation stretches the meaning of ‘Illyrian’ hostages.
the garrulity of the king’s underlings: with this comment, Livy points again to the danger of loose talk.
occupied by strong garrisons: Livy has not previously indicated that Roman troops successfully assailed any Macedonian fortifications in 169. The claim may be intended merely to illustrate the character of the younger men (see the edn. by W. Weissenborn and H. J. Müller (Berlin, repr. 1967), ad loc.). Their combination of eagerness and poor judgement stands in implicit contrast to Paullus’ deliberate approach to warfare.
his own son, Quintus Fabius Maximus: Paullus married twice and had four sons and two daughters. The sons from the first marriage were both adopted into important families: the son mentioned here, Quintus Fabius Maximus Aemilianus, was adopted by a son or grandson of the great dictator in the war against Hannibal; the younger of the two, Publius Cornelius Scipio, was adopted by a son of Scipio Africanus, who ultimately defeated Hannibal. Both of Paullus’ older sons fought at Pydna and feature later in the narrative (chaps. 44 and 45). Adoption for dynastic purposes was not uncommon among the Roman elite, nor do Paullus’ family connections end here: his sister (Aemilia) married Scipio Africanus; one of his daughters married the son of Cato the Elder, and the other married Quintus Aelius Tubero (mentioned at 45.7), whom Plutarch praises for his noble character (Aemilius Paullus 5). Paullus’ niece Cornelia, who was the oldest daughter of Scipio Africanus and Aemilia, was married to Scipio Nasica Corculum. Livy generally does not give biographical details, but the fate of the two younger sons is an important part of his characterization of Paullus and is foreshadowed by the attention paid to the older sons during the campaign. (For the younger sons, see 45.40–1.)
lightweight shields or the Ligurian type: the first kind of shield is the parma, which was small and round and usually used by cavalry and light infantry. The Ligurian shield was a four-foot oblong that covered nearly the whole body.
after the summer solstice: in fact, the Romans arrived at Pydna just before the summer solstice. The battle itself took place on 22 June; the date is established by the lunar eclipse described in the next chapter. Since Livy’s date for the eclipse is 3 September, the official calendar was more than ten weeks ahead of the natural year in 168.
the consul needed no less skill outwitting his own men than his opponent: Livy’s description of this scene reflects his own positive view of Paullus, which is shared by almost all ancient sources. What Livy depicts here as shrewd procrastination was probably absolute necessity: as Hammond points out, the Romans were not expecting to come upon the Macedonians and were totally unprepared for battle (Hammond and Walbank, History of Macedonia, vol. 3, pp. 549–51).
from the second to the fourth hour: see the note to p. 30
Fortune … precipitated the battle: the first reference to Fortune in this section of the text. Although no corresponding passage survives from Polybius, Livy was probably influenced by the Greek historian, who was interested in the role of chance and fate in history. The motif resurfaces in Book 45 as part of Livy’s portrayal of Paullus.
a mule … towards the far bank: the sources are not consistent about whether a horse or a pack animal started the battle or just how it did so. Plutarch reports the tradition that Paullus precipitated the battle by having a horse driven towards the enemy so that when the Romans pursued it, fighting necessarily began (Aemilius Paullus 18). After his victory, Paullus erected a monument at Delphi with a frieze of scenes from Pydna; one includes a stray horse that has been taken to represent the animal Plutarch refers to. Plutarch says also that Paullus sacrificed twenty-one oxen to Hercules before receiving a favourable omen; it indicated, however, that the side that started the fighting would lose.
Paullus: I have supplied his name from the context.
more than sixty years old: Paullus’ energy in spite of his advanced years makes him similar to Marcius Philippus, the most successful commander to date in the war against Perseus (see chap. 4).
the phalanxes: the core of the Macedonian infantry. Designed to fight as a tight unit, a phalanx’s main offensive power consisted of the sarissa, a pike with a standard length of twenty-one feet at the time of Pydna. A well-trained and well-drilled phalanx on level ground was nearly invincible since the sarissas prevented close combat. At the same time, the strengths of the phalanx were also its weaknesses, as the battle at Pydna shows. An insufficiency of even terrain and any disruption to the phalanx’s formation rendered it inoperable and vulnerable. Polybius discusses the advantages and disadvantages of the Macedonian phalanx and the Roman legion in the context of the battle of Cynoscephelae in 197, the most recent occasion when the two forces met (Polybius 18.28–32).
the ‘Bronze Shields’: simple description of the colour of the unit’s equipment, as with the ‘White Shields’ in the next sentence.
useless—a mere name: the moralizing about novelties is translated and adapted from Polybius (29.17). Although Livy does not mention it, other sources report that Perseus tried to train his men to face the elephants. These ‘elephant-fighters’ had helmets and shields with special studs on them. Further, Perseus attempted to accustom horses to fight around elephants by constructing artificial ones imbued with an unpleasant odour (see Scullard, The Elephant, 184).
the force of a phalanx is irresistible: both Polybius (29.17) and Plutarch (Aemilius Paullus 19) report that in later years Paullus spoke of how terrifying he found the sight of the Macedonian phalanx. The passage in Polybius is preserved out of context but according to Plutarch, Paullus hid his fear and tried to inspire courage in his men by riding in front of them without his helmet and breastplate. There are so many textual gaps in Livy’s description of the battle that it cannot be determined whether he included this apparently well-known story and if so, how he handled it.
by far the majority of them were Paeligni: while the astounding difference in the number of Macedonian and Roman casualties may seem implausible, there are parallels in ancient warfare, as Hammond has pointed out (N. G. L. Hammond, ‘The Battle of Pydna’, Journal of Hellenic Studies, 104 (1984), 41 n. 32). Based on the accounts of the battle in Livy and Plutarch, the circumstances were right for slaughter: once the phalanx was broken apart, the individual fighters were vulnerable to the Romans’ training and style of weapons.
Euctus and Eulaeus: according to Plutarch, fair-weather friends who criticized Perseus so much after Pydna that Perseus stabbed them himself (Moralia 70 a).
Royal Pages: Livy explains who they are at 45.6.
the women rushed to the temple of Diana (whom they call Tauropolos) to implore her aid: the appearance of women in public is generally for Livy a sign of disorder: for example, the women of Rome pour into the streets after the defeats at Trasimene and Cannae in the early years of the war against Hannibal (22.7 and 55), and Cato the Elder points to their demonstrating against a sumptuary law as an indication of moral decay (34.2–4).
The Roman Diana was assimilated to the Greek Artemis, who was worshipped widely among the Macedonians. The epithet Tauropolos has been interpreted as having to do with Tauris the place or tauros the animal (the bull). According to the first-century Greek historian Diodorus Siculus, when Alexander the Great died in 323, among his plans was the construction of a temple to Artemis Tauropolos at Amphipolis, but none of the plans were carried out (18.4). The temple Livy refers to has not been identified in excavations.
the stronghold of Phacus rises like an island: the storehouse for Perseus’ treasury, a small fortification on a hill just south-west of the main city. The topography of the region around Pella has changed considerably since antiquity: the city now sits in a low plain while in Livy’s day it could still be reached by water (Map 3).
its presentiment in their minds: this dramatic opening has clear thematic connections with Paullus’ admonition to the Romans not to trust information from anyone but himself (44.22).
an equal appearance of truth: this phrase reflects a crucial standard of ancient historical writing: plausibility. As it remains today, the subject matter of history was past events. The historian’s job was to explain the past so that it made sense. While historians were not supposed to lie or fabricate, their modes of explanation could be inventive and still regarded as valid. This sentence also indicates that Livy was treating his sources selectively here, and indeed comparison with other authors (such as Cicero, On the Nature of the Gods 2.6, and Valerius Maximus 1.8.1b) reveals that he is suppressing the version where immortal beings, sometimes specified as Castor and Pollux, brought word of the victory. For Livy, the theme of reliable information is more important than the indication of divine favour.
summoned the Senate there: ordinarily the Senate met in the Curia or a temple; this impromptu gathering appears to take place outside.
men who had taken the oath of loyalty: their identity is uncertain; the context makes clear that they are a different category from forces that were part of regular conscription.
Illyricum was under the control of the Roman people: at the conclusion of the Illyrian campaign, Livy says that Marcus Perperna brought the news to Rome (44.32). While the statement here may contradict the earlier notice and indicate that Livy was using two sources and repeated both of them, it is also possible that this is a second, fuller, and official communication from the praetor to the Senate.
Some sources report: Polybius’ version (29.19) of the Rhodians’ embassy described at 44.14–15. Polybius is regarded as the more reliable source; the previous, annalistic account has more patriotic appeal.
as was noted above: this information must have been reported in the lost text at the end of Book 44.
a letter from Perseus: with this letter begins Livy’s use of Perseus as a direct foil for Paullus. Throughout Book 45, each of Perseus’ shortcomings—e.g. vanity, lack of self-knowledge, absence of dignity—is matched by a strength in Paullus’ character.
Quintus Aelius Tubero: Paullus’ son-in-law. Characteristically, Livy does not mention the family connection.
King Syphax: a Numidian king who supported first Rome, then the Carthaginians in the Second Punic War. For his arrival at the camp of Scipio Africanus, see 30.13.
in Greek: as seems to have been the case with most educated Romans by the first half of the second century, Paullus was functionally bilingual. The shift here from Greek to Latin is pointed. It shows Paullus’ erudition and his ability to choose the appropriate language, based on the audience and content of his remarks.
winter quarters: at this point it was probably August and so on the surface early to send the army into winter quarters, but the fighting was over for the year, and there was no reason to perpetuate the expense and logistical challenges of keeping forces in the field.
in the consulship of … and Aulus Manlius: Quintus Fulvius Flaccus and Lucius Manlius Acidinus were consuls in 179; Marcus Junius Brutus and Aulus Manlius Vulso were consuls in 178.
its ultimate demise: in this account of the rise and fall of Macedonia Livy is following Polybius, who found the subject a striking illustration of a treatise on Fortune written by Demetrius of Phaleron, an Athenian statesman (Polybius 29.21).
Antenor: Perseus’ admiral (44.28).
When Gaius Popillius: it is generally agreed that Popillius’ timing is not coincidental and that Roman intervention in the warring between the Seleucid and Ptolemaic dynasties was postponed until after the Macedonian defeat at Pydna.
a capital sentence: either exile or death.
taken over the rest of Egypt: Antiochus’ Egyptian campaign was based on his alliance with his nephew Ptolemy VI. At the time of the alliance, this Ptolemy had been sharing power with his sister/wife Cleopatra and his younger brother, Ptolemy VIII. They were both in Alexandria. What prompted the older brother to ally with his uncle against his siblings is uncertain. The alliance lasted less than a year. All three siblings were in their teens at the time.
‘I will do as the Senate decrees’: the confrontation between Popillius and Antiochus is a famous moment in Roman history. Now known as the ‘Day of Eleusis’, the episode was recounted for centuries afterwards. While Popillius seems to have had a strong personality, more noteworthy are the extent and power of the Roman Senate’s authority. In comparison with other versions, Livy’s is fairly understated. Though he is careful to depict Popillius’ character consistently, the episode is narrated in context and without much commentary or judgement, except for the summary in the final sentence.
without having taken the auspices: as we have seen, the consuls had rituals to follow before they left on campaign. Compare Gaius Claudius at 41.10. Licinius seems to have committed the error inadvertently. It is, however, a mark of the Romans’ renewed piety that the augurs are consulted and their opinion followed.
Pisa and Luna: Pisa was an old and formerly independent city. Luna was founded as a Roman colony (i.e. the inhabitants retained Roman citizenship) in 177 (41.13).
the people who conferred it on him: Roman law distinguishes between ownership and possession: Masgaba is saying that Masinissa recognizes that he has some kind of usufruct or lifetime-interest in property that technically belongs to the Roman people. Since it is highly unlikely that Masinissa was familiar with Roman law, Masgaba’s speech is an easy example of Livy’s Romanocentric perspective. It is more interesting, however, as a reflection of what the historian could assume about his audience’s knowledge of civil law.
asked that … in place of <…>: any reconstruction of this sentence requires considerable speculation.
the four urban tribes: traditionally, when slaves were manumitted, they were assigned to one of the four ‘urban’ voting districts as opposed to one of the thirty-one ‘rural’ districts. Votes in the rural districts were more valuable because there were fewer people in them than in the urban ones. As this passage suggests, recent censors had, in some cases, departed from established practice. Because of the missing text at the beginning and the lacuna at the end of this sentence, there is no way to ascertain exactly what happened. For further discussion, see S. Treggiari, Roman Freedmen during the Late Republic (Oxford, 1969), 43–7.
The Esquilina was chosen by lot: from other sources it is clear that freedmen were assigned to all four urban tribes. Livy or his source may be wrong, or the procedure may have undergone further discussion and change.
The censors … previous censors had: Livy describes this part of the census earlier, at 43.15 and 16 and 44.16.
the Macedonian mines … the rural estates: these belonged to the Macedonian kings. Since the Roman settlement eliminated the monarchy, some provision had to be made for these sources of income. This initial plan, subsequently modified, shut down these resources entirely.
revenue-collector: the Latin word is publicanus, which became the English word ‘publican’ (meaning both tax-collector, as in Latin, and the operator of a public house, or pub for short). The Romans’ original mechanisms for managing conquered territory were minimal, and the most powerful Roman presence in a province was often that of the publicans, who had government contracts to collect taxes.
a federal council of the people: although the text in the manuscript does not contain the necessary negative, most scholars believe that the Romans did not install a federal council linking all four regions. The translation follows that interpretation.
the son who subsequently ruled: see 42.16 with the note to p. 46 on the complex domestic relations of Eumenes and Attalus after the supposed attempt to assassinate Eumenes at Delphi.
impious brothers, as handed down by myth: e.g. Polynices and Eteocles, the sons and brothers of Oedipus, and Atreus and Thyestes, the father and uncle of Agamemnon. Livy rarely refers to Greek myth and history, but the allusion is appropriate here because, as Macedonians, Stratius and Attalus are heirs to Greek culture.
(if there were any): an observation not found in Polybius’ summary of Attalus’ speech (30.2). The addition contributes to the doubts about Eumenes’ role in the war. Livy started qualifying the portrayal of Eumenes back at the beginning of Book 44 (chap. 13, with note to p. 130).
when he left: Polybius’ version of Attalus’ trip is rather different. Most notably, he claims that the Senate expected Attalus to return to ask for more; in addition, the Senate promised him the two cities he requested, but then did not confer them when he failed to return (30.3). Livy’s streamlined version makes both Attalus and the Senate appear more noble.
rendered the Carthaginians your foes: reference to the trigger for the First Punic War (264–241). Initially, three parties were involved: the Carthaginians, who controlled south-western Sicily, a group of mercenaries who had taken over Messana, directly across the straits from Italy, and the king of Syracuse. The Romans allowed themselves to be drawn in when the mercenaries requested their help. Because of that request, they could claim that they were not the aggressors in the war that resulted. For a fuller account, see Polybius 1.7–12.
made Philip your enemy: here the speaker refers to the ostensible causes for the Romans’ war with Philip (the Second Macedonian War, 200–196). Livy gives a detailed account in Book 31.
he attempted to dislodge you from control of your empire: the war against Antiochus (192–189).
as it approached from Syria: the battles near Samos and Pamphylia are highlights of the Rhodians’ contribution to the naval component of the war against Antiochus. Hannibal commanded part of Antiochus’ fleet in the second battle (Livy 37.8–24).
that the Republic was not under your control: in the Roman historical tradition, the plebeians seceded three times (494, 449, and 287), physically removing themselves from the city in their struggles with the patricians. (See Livy 2.32–3, 3.50–4, and Per. 11).
The Athenian people … total confidence: Astymedes is paraphrasing a famous passage in Thucydides, where the Corinthians sketch the respective natures of the Athenians and the Spartans (Thucydides 1.70).
our manner of speaking is inflated: Livy may be alluding here to a mid-first-century BCE literary debate over ‘Attic’ speech, which was associated with the best of fifth- and fourth-century Athenian prose, and ‘Asiatic’ speech, which was loosely connected to the more elaborate style used by the Greeks in Asia Minor during the Hellenistic period. Cicero, who was engaged in the debate (Orator 25), and Quintilian, who offers a later overview (Institutes 12.10.16–18), classify the Rhodians as using a rhetorical style in between the two perceived extremes.
a man of harsh temperament: the same phrase Livy used for Popillius earlier (chap. 10).
his Origines: comprising seven books, Cato’s Origines was the first work of history written in Latin. Only fragments remain. Livy’s refusal to reproduce Cato’s speech is interesting. The only time he composed a speech for Cato is the lex Oppia debate at the beginning of Book 34. In that case, no trace of the original survives, and it looks as if Livy composed speeches only when the original (or a version of it) could not be known. The author of the Periochae notes when speeches of Cato do or do not survive. Passages from Cato’s defence of the Rhodians are preserved in Aulus Gellius (Attic Nights 6.3.1–55); his style differs markedly from Livy’s.
treaty of alliance: Livy here uses two terms (amicitia, or ‘position of friendship’, signifying an unofficial, mutually beneficial relationship, and foedus, or ‘treaty of alliance’, a more technical term for a treaty) that are often regarded as significant for understanding Rome’s relations with other states.
In the same period: the following paragraph refers to cities and territories that Rhodes, for over a century an Aegean powerhouse, controlled in Asia Minor.
the Illyrians should be free: there is of course a paradox in ordering people to be free. In practical terms the Romans preferred not to create an administration for conquered peoples, but to leave them to look after themselves, provided that they did not interact with other states independently of Rome.
victory statues of himself instead: traces of Paullus’ victory have survived at Delphi. In addition to a series of scenes from a frieze depicting the battle of Pydna, there is an inscription stating ‘Lucius Aemilius, son of Lucius, general, took [this] from King Perseus and the Macedonians’. For the Latin, see H. Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae Selectae, vol. 3, pt. 2 (Berlin, 1954), no. 8884.
whose shrine is there: the second-century CE Greek travel writer Pausanias gives a detailed description of the shrine, its history, and the procedure for consulting Trophonius. After an elaborate sacrifice and ritual purification, the supplicant descends into a twenty-foot pit and then is sucked feet first through a hole from which he emerges feet first also. Pausanias states that he consulted the oracle and went through this process (9.39).
the Euripus and the island of Euboea: Artemisium, the beach on the northern tip of Euboea, at the end of the Euripus (the strait between Euboea and the mainland), was the site of a naval battle between the Persians and the Greeks in 480.
his daughter … as an offering: a reference to Agamemnon’s sacrifice of his daughter Iphigenia.
the ancient prophet is worshipped as a god: Amphiaraus, a seer from Argos. He was one of the ‘seven against Thebes’ in the Argive campaign against that city. After the expedition was defeated, Amphiaraus was swallowed up by the earth, near Thebes. Enquirers at his shrine sacrificed a ram, slept in its hide, and were supposed to have a dream revealing the future. The shrine has been excavated and can be visited.
the walls linking Piraeus to the city: the famous Long Walls, originally built in the fifth century so that Athens would be connected by defensible walls to its port, Piraeus.
before its destruction: Corinth was destroyed by the Romans in 146 to punish the Achaean League for the revolt it staged against Rome that year. The punishment was also supposed to warn others against attempting to rebel. Carthage was razed that same year. Although there is no evidence to suggest a direct connection, the orders given by Lucius Mummius, the Roman commander at Corinth, and Scipio Aemilianus, the Roman commander at Carthage (and Paullus’ companion on this trip), are often viewed together and regarded as emblematic of a new level of brutality in Rome’s relations with others in the Mediterranean. It is interesting that Livy mentions the city’s destruction, because he rarely adumbrates future events.
memorable … for its educational system and its institutions: apparently another echo of Thucydides. He contrasts the material grandeur of Athens with the paucity of monumental buildings at Sparta and comments that if one were to judge from the physical remains, it would not be possible to tell how powerful Sparta was (Thucydides 1.10).
as if the god were present: the statue of Zeus (Jupiter) at Olympia was one of the Seven Wonders of the World.
the tiles to be returned and the exposed areas to be repaired: this episode is not found in other sources, but its appeal to Livy is clear. Earlier in the pentad (42.3), Fulvius Flaccus stole the roof-tiles from the temple of Juno Lacinia. The Senate censured the act, but no one could reaffix the tiles. Paullus, by directing the soldiers to undo the damage to the walls of Amphipolis, and thus looking out for the local community, is a counterexample to Fulvius, showing how a Roman commander should behave.
translated Paullus’ words into Greek and repeated them: the fact that Paullus announced the policy in Latin and then had Octavius translate it when Paullus himself could have used Greek shows the complexity of Roman attitudes towards Greek culture in this period. This episode seems to be a display of power: official discourse, as opposed to the private interrogation of Perseus, takes place in Latin to remind the Macedonians that they are now subject to Roman policy.
Pelagonia: almost certainly shorthand for the region of the Pelagones, according to N. G. L. Hammond, A History of Macedonia, vol. 1 (Oxford, 1972, repr. New York, 1981), 74–5.
the Aetolians were called in: see chap. 28.
Callicrates … would be endangered: Callicrates was last mentioned in Book 41, where he speaks in favour of respecting the Achaeans’ alliance with the Romans (chap. 23). From Polybius it is clear that Callicrates maintained his pro-Roman stance during the war. Since Polybius was one of the 1,000 Achaeans sent to Rome, an unintended consequence of this witch-hunt was his monumental history.
There was so much plunder: this one-day assault on Epirus resulted in the pillaging of seventy towns and 150,000 captives being sold into slavery. Livy minimizes its brutality and emphasizes Paullus’ efficiency and the amount of booty. The latter point is important for subsequent events. There is a noteworthy contrast with Plutarch: he deplores the extent of the devastation, especially relative to the amount each soldier garnered (Aemilius Paullus 29); Livy offers considerably higher totals and indicates that the soldiers should have been satisfied.
the law was to be presented: while the text in the manuscript is continuous, editors concur that words have been omitted; the relationship between the troops’ anger and their attitude towards the voting is not entirely clear. The idea seems to be that the soldiers were too exasperated to bother casting their votes for Paullus’ triumph, which the Senate had already approved.
consul: his consulship was in 202, so he was presumably in his seventies in 167.
shed his apprenticeship and to put his eloquence on display: according to Polybius, in this period a Roman had to serve in the army for ten years before he was eligible for political office, and military tribunes (such as Galba was at Pydna) had to have at least five years of military service (6.19). Thus at the time of this debate Galba occupied the Roman equivalent of an entry-level position in public life. He went on to become praetor (151) and consul (144) and to achieve fame as an orator. Cicero identifies him as the first to draw on the full range of oratorical tricks (Brutus 82).
he led you immediately in pursuit of the enemy: while it is possible that Livy somehow forgot how he presented the sequence of events in Book 44, this seems unlikely since he makes rather a lot of the soldiers’ eagerness to fight, Paullus’ restraint, and the explanation the general offers. It seems more likely that Livy is making Servilius undermine Galba’s credibility by repeating his misrepresentations; note that Servilius goes on to say that Paullus made the soldiers go directly from the battle to pursuing the enemy, while in Book 44 the Romans do not chase the survivors because it is dark and they are not familiar with the territory. I think we are supposed to remember Livy’s presentation of events in Book 44 and see that the soldiers and/or Galba—as represented by Servilius—are lying.
in the most recent Punic war: see the note to p. 139.
imitate the Athenian people, who make accusations against their leading men out of spite: Servilius is probably referring to the fifth-century Athenian practice of ostracism, a publicly voted exile for ten years. The purpose seems to have been to limit the influence of outstanding individuals in the democracy, but the procedure was easily manipulated and was used for less than a century. As noted previously (note to p. 186), references to Greek history are rare in Livy. He may be adopting material from Polybius, who did not admire the Athenian democracy (e.g. 6.44), but it is not known whether or not Polybius gave Servilius a speech here.
Camillus … rescued our city from the Gauls: Camillus directed the successful conclusion of the Romans’ campaign against Veii in the 390s. He was subsequently accused of distributing the booty inappropriately and went into exile. Nonetheless, when the Gauls occupied Rome, Camillus mustered an army and rescued the city. See 5.19–55.
it is Liternum where his grave is to be seen: Scipio Africanus was responsible for defeating Hannibal, but an alleged financial scandal compromised his reputation towards the end of his life, and he retired to Liternum. (Scipio’s involvement in the Second Punic War is spread throughout Books 21–30; Livy covers the so-called ‘Trials of the Scipios’ at 38.50–60.)
we preordained them for him: see the end of 44.22.
his swollen testicles provoked laughter in those closest to him: Servius presumably had a herniated scrotum. As this passage suggests, generally speaking, public nudity was not acceptable in the first half of the second century. There was, however, also a long tradition of displaying wounds as proof of one’s valour.
when the amount was announced: in fact, the bonuses Paullus distributed were extremely large by the standards of recent campaigns. As Scullard notes, in 194 Titus Quinctius Flamininus gave the infantry twenty-five denarii apiece, as did Lucius Scipio Asiaticus in 188 and Marcus Fulvius Nobilior in 187. Subsequent generals raised the stakes somewhat: in 186 Gnaeus Manlius Vulso distributed forty-two denarii per man, and in 180 Quintus Fulvius Flaccus gave out fifty denarii each. In each case the centurions and cavalry received higher amounts on the same scale proportionally (see 34.52, 37.59, 39.5, 39.7, and 40.43, and H. H. Scullard, Roman Politics, 220–150 B.C. (Oxford, 1951), 218 n. 2). Thus Paullus’ troops got twice as much as their most immediate predecessors. The bonuses were also larger than those given to the men serving under Octavius (chap. 42) and Anicius (chap. 43) in the same campaign.
King Perseus with his son Alexander to Alba for safekeeping: there is no trace of Perseus’ subsequent fate in Livy, but other sources provide more information. The king and his family were initially imprisoned in a dungeon, and Perseus was encouraged to commit suicide (with first a sword and then a rope lowered to him). Eventually either Paullus or another Aemilius (the sources are not consistent) put pressure on the Senate to improve the king’s situation, and he was relocated. He died two years later, reputedly because his guards grew angry with him and tortured him to death by keeping him awake (Diodorus 31.9). Plutarch notes this version but says that Perseus starved himself (Aemilius Paullus 37).
Bithys … the hostages: Livy has not mentioned Bithys or these Thracian hostages before, at least not in the extant text. The editorial supplement of his name here depends on the reference at the very end of this chapter. Cotys was Perseus’ ally from early on and fought with him both at Callinicus (42.56–8) and at Pydna (44.42).
Lucius Anicius … on the festival of Quirinus: according to an inscribed list of triumphs surviving from the Augustan period, Paullus’ triumph occurred on 27, 28, and 29 November. The festival of Quirinus fell in the middle of February, two and a half months later. Regardless of whether Livy knew the actual dates, his interest is in juxtaposing the triumphs to highlight Paullus’. (The celebration for Octavius, which did occur immediately after Paullus’ triumph, was too small to serve the same purpose.)
care … over the sons of allied kings: the reference is to the current Ptolemy, whose interests the Senate had protected against Antiochus with the famous embassy of Gaius Popillius.
the total given to Masgaba: 100 pounds of silver; see chap. 14 above.
degrade him: see Polybius 30.18–19. By including Polybius’ unflattering description here, Livy may be laying the groundwork for his own subsequent (apparently) critical depiction of Prusias. Nicomedes eventually overthrew his father, and according to Appian, Prusias’ motive for depositing Nicomedes with the Roman Senate was his preference for his other sons (Mithridatic Wars 4). From the Periocha for Book 50, it appears that Livy’s ultimate appraisal of Prusias was close to Polybius’ view as reported here.
1a: there are two summaries for Book 1. This first one is noticeably more telegraphic; the second one begins with the reign of Ancus Marcius, Rome’s fourth king (1.33).
spolia opima: the spoils taken by a Roman general who defeats the enemy leader in single combat. This happened only a handful of times: see Per. 4 and Per. 20. The precise qualifications for achieving the honour came under debate in 29 BCE. when Marcus Licinius Crassus killed the leader of the Bastarnae; Octavian blocked his attempt to dedicate the spoils, probably wanting to deny him the concomitant glory of such an unusual distinction. One of the rare references to Octavian/Augustus in the extant books occurs when Livy discusses the dedication of the spolia opima by Aulus Cornelius Cossus (4.20).
Ancus Marcius: name supplied from context.
vindicta: a rod used in the ceremony for manumission.
In the three hundred and second year after Rome was founded: 448; the standard modern date is 451, but the epitomator uses 750 BCE instead of 753 for Rome’s foundation.
this type of magistrate: the military tribunes with consular power, who, according to the tradition represented in Livy, replaced consuls as the chief magistrates for the years 448–368 BCE.
the dictator Quintus Cincinnatus: a mistake; this is Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus.
thrown from the Rock: the Rock is the Tarpeian Rock, a steep cliff on the Capitoline Hill; being thrown from it was an ancient form of execution at Rome.
the name of Corvus: corvus is the Latin word for crow.
devoted himself: Decius offered himself and the enemy to the gods of the underworld and entered the battle intending to kill as many men as possible before dying himself, in exchange for a Roman victory.
the Forum claque: a derogatory way of referring to freedmen.
Triumviri capitales: a board of three men in charge of prisons and executions.
watched the games in his toga praetexta: i.e. he appeared at a public event in the garb of the office from which he had been compelled to step down.
a sacred spring: the practice of sacrificing everything born in the spring of one year; this dedication was limited to animals (though the full ritual involved exiling the human offspring of that year once they reached adulthood).
Marcian verses: prophecies attributed to one Marcius; see 25.12.
Archimedes: the great mathematician, a native of Syracuse, born around 287, and killed when the Romans took the city.
the initiation rites: the ceremony during which new members were inducted into the cult of Demeter (Roman Ceres) and Persephone at Eleusis, about thirteen miles from Athens in north-western Attica.
before all the rest: the dialogue is reproduced virtually verbatim from Book 35; it must have caught the epitomator’s attention since it is just one passage in Livy, but roughly half the Periocha for 35.
the praetor of the Achaeans: here, as in Livy’s text, the epitomator uses a Roman term for a foreign leader. The Greek title is strategos, or general.
the Mother of the Gods: another name for the Idaean Mother (Per. 29) and the Magna Mater.
The books of Numa Pompilius: Numa was Rome’s second king; these books supposedly contained his sacred and philosophical writings.
against his household instead: in Livy, this sentiment is not expressed until 45.41.
In the five hundred and ninety-eighth year from the founding of the city: 153 BCE, i.e. 157 by standard modern reckoning.
funeral masks: elite Romans made masks of family members when they died; these masks were worn at subsequent family funerals to show the relationship between the deceased and his ancestors.
in the six hundred and second year from the founding of the city: 150; 149 is the usual date.
judged the best by the Senate: the epitomator has confused this Scipio Nasica with his father, the consul of 191; for the arrival of the Magna Mater in Rome, see 29.14.
Following an indication from the books: i.e. the Sibylline books.
games for Father Dis were held at the Tarentum: these are known as the ‘Secular Games’ because they were supposed to take place once in a saeculum (one hundred years). In Roman religion, Dis rules the underworld; the Tarentum referred to here is in the Campus Martius.
in the five hundred and second year from the founding of the city: 249 BCE by modern counting.
the cognomen ‘Serapio’: according to Valerius Maximus (9.14.3), this name derived from Nasica’s physical resemblance to a sacrificial attendant of that name.
placed under a furca: a Y-shaped piece of wood; it sat on the condemned man’s neck, and his arms were bound to its arms.
the optimates: in the late Republic, people were identified as populares (populists) and optimates (the best men); the latter group overlapped with the Senate for the most part. These groups were not organized political parties; the terms indicate rather public stances, whether in favour of the privileged or of the general population.
marriage among the orders: ‘orders’ are similar to classes; in Augustus’ time these included senatorial families, equestrians, Roman citizens in general, freedmen, and slaves. Legislation passed under Augustus regulated marriage between members of different orders. Other initiatives concerned raising the birth rate and punishing adultery. Augustus’ social legislation was controversial during his lifetime and has greatly interested historians of his reign.
whom the Greeks call the Gymnesians: gymnos is the Greek word for naked; since Greek athletes trained naked, the original meaning of ‘gymnasium’ was a place where people exercised in the nude.
the trajectory of a missile: the Greek verb ballo means throw, and the related noun belos means something thrown.
Aquae Sextiae: modern Aix-en-Provence.
a new man: generally, someone who was the first in his family to become a member of the Senate, and, more narrowly, the first in a family to be elected consul.
the shields: twelve shields with a figure-of-eight shape. According to tradition, Mars sent the first one to Numa Pompilius. They were guarded and used by the Salii, special priests of Mars.
forbade him water and fire: an interdiction accompanying voluntary exile.
the Social War: the name given to the conflict between Rome and most of the rest of the Italian peninsula between 91 and 88 BCE. The Latin word socius means ally and is cognate with the English word ‘social’. By the ancient meaning, however, a ‘social’ war is a war with allies.
nobiles: not a hereditary aristocracy per se, but individuals whose ancestors had held an important magistracy (typically the consulship).
the city of Ilium: this city claimed to be Troy and traded on its august heritage.
Gnaeus Pompeius: generally referred to in English as Pompey.
the Civic Villa: the oldest public structure in the Campus Martius, used for various activities (such as taking the census).
proscription list: Sulla invented the practice of proscriptions: a form of bounty-hunting where a magistrate posted a list of people who could be killed with impunity; their property was then at the disposal of the magistrate.
Marcus: from other sources we know that the epitomator must mean Marcus Perperna and not Marcus Antonius.
the Senate changed its attire: i.e. wore mourning, to protest the use of the tribunician veto to prevent the functioning of a Republican institution.
Gnaeus Pompeius: I have departed from Jal’s text here by not translating the word legato.
<happened>: Jal uses this conjecture in his translation, but not in his text of the Latin.
Pompeius Magnus: one of two instances where the epitomator refers to Pompey with his honorific cognomen ‘the Great’.
Marcus Antonius: generally known as Mark Antony.
his own client: a pervasive Roman social structure was the relationship between a patron (a more powerful, influential, and wealthy person) and his clients (people of lesser importance). Reciprocity was assumed, so there is an implication of betrayal here.
sacrosanct: inviolability of person was traditionally a right of the tribunes of the plebs.
running with the Luperci: priests who celebrated the Lupercalia, a fertility festival that involved nearly naked young men running around the Palatine Hill.
he assumed the name of Caesar: a crucial step for Octavius/Caesar/Augustus. As is apparent in this Periocha, Octavius’ adoption of his greatuncle’s name had outstanding tactical consequences. He conflated his identity with that of his great-uncle, and the resonance of the name gave him the backing of Caesar’s army. The author of the Periochae refers to him as Caesar until the summary for Book 134, where he receives the name Augustus.