- Source
- Titi Livi ab urbe condita libri editionem priman, Pars I-IV, Libri I-XL. Editio Stereotypica. Weissenborn, Wilhelm; Mueller, Moritz, editors. Leipzig: Teubner, 1884-1911.
- 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:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:34.6.1-34.6.18
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-11-08
Valerius divides laws into permanent and temporary types, arguing that the Oppian law was a temporary measure born solely out of the extreme poverty and crisis of the Second Punic War, and therefore should be repealed now that circumstances have improved.
venio nunc ad id, de quo agitur. in quo duplex consulis oratio fuit; nam et legem ullam omnino abrogari est indignatus, et eam praecipue legem, quae luxuriae muliebris coercendae causa lata esset. et illa communis pro legibus visa consularis oratio est, et haec adversus luxuriam severissimis moribus conveniebat;
I come now to the matter under discussion. In this, the consul’s speech was twofold; for he was indignant both that any law at all should be repealed, and especially that law which had been passed for the purpose of restraining female luxury. And that former part of his consular speech, in defense of laws in general, seemed appropriate, and this latter part against luxury suited his most severe character;
itaque periculum est, nisi, quid in utraque re vani sit, docuerimus, ne quis error vobis offundatur.1
therefore, unless we show what is groundless in both matters, there is a danger that some error may be poured over you.
ego enim quem ad modum ex iis legibus, quae non in tempus aliquod, sed perpetuae utilitatis causa in aeternum latae sunt, nullam abrogari debere fateor, nisi quam aut usus coarguit aut status aliquis rei publicae inutilem fecit, sic, quas tempora aliqua desiderarunt leges, mortales, ut ita dicam, et temporibus ipsis mutabiles esse video.
For just as I admit that of those laws which have been passed not for some particular time but for eternity for the sake of perpetual utility, none ought to be repealed, unless experience has refuted it or some state of the republic has made it useless, so I see that those laws which certain times required are mortal, so to speak, and changeable with the times themselves.
quae in pace lata sunt, plerumque bellum abrogat, quae in bello, pax, ut in navis administratione alia in secunda, alia in adversa tempestate usui sunt.
War usually repeals what was passed in peace, and peace what was passed in war, just as in the management of a ship, some things are useful in favorable weather, others in adverse.
haec cum ita natura distincta sint, ex utro tandem genere ea lex esse videtur, quam abrogamus? quid? vetus regia lex, simul cum ipsa urbe nata aut, quod secundum est, ab decemviris ad condenda iura creatis in duodecim tabulis scripta, sine qua cum maiores nostri non existimarint decus matronale servari posse,2 nobis quoque verendum sit, ne cum ea pudorem sanctitatemque feminarum abrogemus?
Since these things are so distinguished by nature, from which of the two classes, after all, does that law we are repealing seem to be? What? Is it an ancient royal law, born together with the city itself, or, what is second, written in the twelve tables by the decemvirs created for establishing laws, without which since our ancestors did not think that matronly dignity could be preserved, we also must fear lest with it we repeal the modesty and sanctity of women?
quis igitur nescit novam istam legem esse, Q. Fabio et Ti. Sempronio consulibus viginti ante annis latam? sine qua cum per tot annos matronae optimis moribus vixerint, quod tandem, ne abrogata ea effundantur ad luxuriam, periculum est?
Who then does not know that this law of yours is new, passed twenty years ago when Quintus Fabius and Tiberius Sempronius were consuls? Since without it for so many years the matrons lived with the best character, what danger, after all, is there lest, if it is repealed, they abandon themselves to luxury?
nam si ista lex vetus aut ideo lata esset, ut finiret libidinem muliebrem, verendum foret, ne abrogata incitaret; cur sit autem lata, ipsum indicabit tempus.
For if that law of yours were ancient, or passed for the purpose of limiting female desire, it would have to be feared lest its repeal should incite it; but why it was passed, the time itself will show.
Hannibal in Italia erat, victor ad Cannas; iam Tarentum, iam Arpos, iam Capuam habebat;
Hannibal was in Italy, victorious at Cannae; already he held Tarentum, already Arpi, already Capua;
ad urbem Romam admoturus exercitum videbatur; defecerant socii; non milites in supplementum, non socios navalis ad classem tuendam, non pecuniam in aerario habebamus; servi, quibus arma darentur, ita ut pretium pro iis bello perfecto dominis solveretur, emebantur;
he seemed about to move his army to the city of Rome; the allies had revolted; we had no soldiers for reinforcement, no naval allies to protect the fleet, no money in the treasury; slaves, to whom arms were to be given, were being bought on the condition that the price for them should be paid to their masters when the war was finished;
in eandem diem pecuniae frumentum et cetera, quae belli usus postulabant, praebenda publicani se conducturos professi erant; servos ad remum numero ex censu constituto cum stipendio nostro dabamus;
for the same day, the publicans had declared that they would contract to provide money, grain, and other things which the use of war demanded; we were giving slaves for the oar, according to the number determined by the census, with our own pay;
aurum et argentum omne ab senatoribus eius rei initio orto in publicum conferebamus; viduae et pupilli pecunias suas in aerarium deferebant; cautum erat, quo ne plus auri et argenti facti, quo ne plus signati argenti et aeris domi haberemus3 —
we were contributing all gold and silver to the public treasury, a start having been made by the senators; widows and orphans were carrying their money to the treasury; precautions had been taken that we should not keep more fashioned gold and silver, nor more stamped silver and bronze at home —
: tali tempore in luxuria et ornatu matronae occupatae erant, ut ad eam coercendam Oppia lex desiderata sit, cum,4 quia Cereris sacrificium lugentibus omnibus matronis intermissum erat, senatus finiri luctum triginta diebus iussit?
at such a time, were the matrons occupied in luxury and adornment, so that the Oppian law was needed to restrain it, when, because the sacrifice of Ceres had been intermitted owing to all the matrons being in mourning, the senate ordered the mourning to be ended within thirty days?
cui non apparet inopiam et miseriam civitatis, quia omnium privatorum pecuniae in usum publicum vertendae erant, istam legem scripsisse, tam diu mansuram, quam diu causa scribendae legis mansisset?
To whom does it not appear that the poverty and misery of the state, because the money of all private citizens had to be turned to public use, wrote that law of yours, destined to remain only so long as the cause of writing the law remained?
nam si, quae tunc temporis causa aut decrevit senatus aut populus iussit, in perpetuum servari oportet, cur pecunias reddimus privatis? cur publica praesenti pecunia locamus?
For if what at that time the senate decreed or the people ordered because of the circumstances of the period ought to be kept forever, why do we return money to private citizens? Why do we lease public contracts for cash?
cur servi, qui militent, non emuntur? cur privati non damus remiges, sicut tunc dedimus?
Why are slaves not bought to serve in the war? Why do we not, as private citizens, provide rowers, just as we did then?
- 34.6.3nisi, quid in utraque re vani sit, docuerimus, ne quis error vobis offundatur
The main impersonal expression periculum est (there is a danger) governs the subjunctive ne clause (ne quis error vobis offundatur), with the conditional clause nisi... docuerimus (future perfect) inserted in between. Within this conditional clause, quid... vani sit is an indirect question featuring the partitive genitive vani modifying the neuter pronoun quid.
- 34.6.8sine qua cum maiores nostri non existimarint decus matronale servari posse
A nested structure where the causal subjunctive clause cum... non existimarint is embedded inside the relative clause introduced by qua (referring to ea lex). This entire phrase qualifies the main clause of the lengthy rhetorical question, nobis quoque verendum sit, ne... (must we also fear lest...), which begins with vetus regia lex....
- 34.6.14cautum erat, quo ne plus auri et argenti facti... haberemus
The impersonal passive cautum erat (precautions had been taken) is followed by a subjunctive clause introduced by the negative purpose/preventive conjunction quo ne (equivalent to ut eo ne) with the imperfect subjunctive haberemus, meaning 'precautions had been taken so that we should not keep...'.
- 34.6.15tali tempore in luxuria et ornatu matronae occupatae erant, ut... desiderata sit, cum...
This is a powerful rhetorical question combined with a circumstantial/concessive cum clause (cum... iussit). It exposes the absurdity of the consul's assumption by contrasting it with historical facts: it is impossible that women were absorbed in luxury and required a restrictive law at a time when the state was in such crisis that even the rites of Ceres had to be suspended due to universal mourning.