- Source
- Polybius. Vols. 1-4. Büttner-Wobst, Theodor, editor. Leipzig: Teubner, 1893.
- Translation
- AI-generated (gemini-3.5-flash) — machine translation; may contain errors
- Languages
- 日本語 · English · 简体中文 · 한국어
- CTS URN
- urn:cts:greekLit:tlg0543.tlg001.humanitext-grc2:5.67.1-5.67.13
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-09
Relates how the envoys of both empires met in Seleucia and engaged in intense legal disputes over the historical ownership of Coele-Syria, with further conflict arising over the treatment of Achaeus.
πλὴν καὶ τότε τῶν πρέσβεων ἀφικομένων οἱ μὲν περὶ τὸν Σωσίβιον ἕτοιμοι πρὸς πᾶν, ὁ δʼ Ἀντίοχος μεγίστην ἐποιεῖτο σπουδὴν εἰς τὸ καθάπαξ καὶ τοῖς ὅπλοις καὶ τοῖς δικαίοις ἐπὶ τῶν ἐντεύξεων καταπεριεῖναι τῶν ἐκ τῆς Ἀλεξανδρείας.1
Nevertheless, on this occasion also, when the envoys arrived, while Sosibius and his party were ready for any contingency, Antiochus was making the greatest effort to completely master the envoys from Alexandria during the interviews, both by force of arms and by right of argument.
ᾗ καὶ παραγενομένων τῶν πρεσβευτῶν εἰς τὴν Σελεύκειαν, καὶ συγκαταβαινόντων εἰς τοὺς κατὰ μέρος ὑπὲρ τῆς διαλύσεως λόγους κατὰ τὰς ὑπὸ τῶν περὶ τὸν Σωσίβιον ἐντολάς, ὁ μὲν βασιλεὺς τὸ μὲν ἄρτι γεγονὸς ἀτύχημα καὶ προφανὲς ἀδίκημα περὶ τῆς ἐνεστώσης καταλήψεως τῶν περὶ Κοίλην Συρίαν τόπων οὐ δεινὸν ἐνόμιζε κατὰ τὰς δικαιολογίας, τὸ δὲ πλεῖστον οὐδʼ ἐν ἀδικήματι, κατηριθμεῖτο τὴν πρᾶξιν, ὡς καθηκόντων αὐτῷ τινων ἀντιπεποιημένος,2 τὴν δὲ πρώτην Ἀντιγόνου τοῦ Μονοφθάλμου κατάληψιν καὶ τὴν Σελεύκου δυναστείαν τῶν τόπων τούτων ἐκείνας ἔφη κυριωτάτας εἶναι καὶ δικαιοτάτας κτήσεις, καθʼ ἃς αὐτοῖς, οὐ Πτολεμαίῳ, καθήκειν τὰ κατὰ Κοίλην Συρίαν·
Consequently, when the envoys arrived at Seleucia and entered into detailed discussions regarding the treaty of peace, in accordance with the instructions from Sosibius and his party, the king, in his legal arguments, did not consider the recently occurred misfortune and manifest injustice concerning the present occupation of the districts of Coele-Syria to be of serious consequence. Indeed, for the most part, he did not even reckon the action as an injustice, maintaining that he had merely laid claim to things that rightfully belonged to him. He asserted that the original occupation by Antigonus Monophthalmus and the sovereignty of Seleucus over these regions were the most valid and rightful possessions, by virtue of which the affairs of Coele-Syria belonged to them, not to Ptolemy;
καὶ γὰρ Πτολεμαῖον διαπολεμῆσαι πρὸς Ἀντίγονον οὐχ αὑτῷ, Σελεύκῳ δὲ συγκατασκευάζοντα τὴν ἀρχὴν τῶν τόπων τούτων.
for Ptolemy had waged war against Antigonus, not for himself, but to help establish the sovereignty of Seleucus over these regions.
μάλιστα δὲ τὸ κοινὸν ἐπιέζει3 πάντων τῶν βασιλέων συγχώρημα, καθʼ οὓς καιροὺς Ἀντίγονον νικήσαντες, καὶ βουλευόμενοι κατὰ προαίρεσιν ὁμόσε πάντες, Κάσσανδρος, Λυσίμαχος, Σέλευκος, ἔκριναν Σελεύκου τὴν ὅλην Συρίαν ὑπάρχειν.
Most of all, Antiochus pressed the joint agreement of all the kings, at which time, having defeated Antigonus, and all consulting together with one purpose, Cassander, Lysimachus, and Seleucus decided that the whole of Syria belonged to Seleucus.
οἱ δὲ παρὰ τοῦ Πτολεμαίου τἀναντία τούτων ἐπειρῶντο συνιστάνειν· τό τε γὰρ παρὸν ηὖξον ἀδίκημα καὶ δεινὸν ἐποίουν τὸ γεγονός, εἰς παρασπόνδημα τὴν Θεοδότου προδοσίαν καὶ τὴν ἔφοδον ἀνάγοντες τὴν Ἀντιόχου, προεφέροντο δὲ καὶ τὰς ἐπὶ Πτολεμαίου τοῦ Λάγου κτήσεις, φάσκοντες ἐπὶ τούτῳ συμπολεμῆσαι Σελεύκῳ Πτολεμαῖον, ἐφʼ ᾧ4 τὴν μὲν ὅλης τῆς Ἀσίας ἀρχὴν Σελεύκῳ περιθεῖναι, τὰ δὲ κατὰ Κοίλην Συρίαν αὑτῷ κατακτήσασθαι καὶ Φοινίκην.
But Ptolemy’s envoys attempted to establish the very opposite of these claims; for they magnified the present injustice and made a serious matter of what had happened, attributing the treachery of Theodotus and the invasion of Antiochus to a breach of treaty, and they also brought forward the possessions of Ptolemy, son of Lagus, asserting that Ptolemy had joined Seleucus in the war on the condition that, while they should invest Seleucus with the sovereignty of all Asia, Ptolemy should acquire Coele-Syria and Phoenicia for himself.
ἐλέγετο μὲν οὖν ταῦτα καὶ παραπλήσια τούτοις πλεονάκις ὑπʼ ἀμφοτέρων κατὰ τὰς διαπρεσβείας καὶ τὰς ἐντεύξεις, ἐπετελεῖτο δὲ τὸ παράπαν οὐδέν, ἅτε τῆς δικαιολογίας γινομένης διὰ τῶν κοινῶν φίλων, μεταξὺ δὲ μηδενὸς ὑπάρχοντος τοῦ δυνησομένου παρακατασχεῖν καὶ κωλῦσαι τὴν τοῦ δοκοῦντος ἀδικεῖν ὁρμήν.
These and similar arguments were frequently urged by both parties in the course of their embassies and interviews, but absolutely nothing was accomplished, since the negotiation was conducted through common friends, and there was no mediator between them who could restrain and prevent the impulse of the party deemed to be acting unjustly.
μάλιστα δὲ παρεῖχε δυσχρηστίαν ἀμφοτέροις τὰ περὶ τὸν Ἀχαιόν· Πτολεμαῖος μὲν γὰρ ἐσπούδαζε περιλαβεῖν ταῖς συνθήκαις αὐτόν, Ἀντίοχος δὲ καθάπαξ οὐδὲ λόγον ἠνείχετο περὶ τούτων, δεινὸν ἡγούμενος τὸ καὶ τολμᾶν τὸν Πτολεμαῖον περιστέλλειν τοὺς ἀποστάτας καὶ μνήμην ποιεῖσθαι περί τινος τῶν τοιούτων.
What caused the greatest embarrassment to both sides was the question of Achaeus; for Ptolemy was anxious to include him in the treaty, while Antiochus would not even tolerate a single word on the subject, thinking it monstrous that Ptolemy should even dare to protect rebels and make mention of any such person.
- 5.67.2εἰς τὸ καθάπαξ καὶ τοῖς ὅπλοις καὶ τοῖς δικαίοις ἐπὶ τῶν ἐντεύξεων καταπεριεῖναι τῶν ἐκ τῆς Ἀλεξανδρείας
The infinitive καταπεριεῖναι governs the genitive object τῶν ἐκ τῆς Ἀλεξανδρείας (the envoys from Alexandria). καὶ τοῖς ὅπλοις καὶ τοῖς δικαίοις are datives of instrument or respect.
- 5.67.5ὡς καθηκόντων αὐτῷ τινων ἀντιπεποιημένος
The conjunction ὡς combined with the perfect middle participle ἀντιπεποιημένος expresses the subjective claim of the subject (Antiochus). The phrase καθηκόντων αὐτῷ τινων (things belonging to him) is in the genitive case, governed by the verb ἀντιποιέομαι (to lay claim to).
- 5.67.8ἐπιέζει
An indicative present, used here as a historical present to vividly represent the insistence of Antiochus during the negotiations, or the ongoing persuasive force of the historical agreement.
- 5.67.10ἐφʼ ᾧ
The construction of ἐφʼ ᾧ followed by infinitives to express a condition ("on the condition that"). Here it introduces two infinitives, περιθεῖναι and κατακτήσασθαι, specifying the mutual conditions of the past military alliance.