- 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-lat2:9.33.1-9.33.9
- Generated
- Humanitext Reader · reader.humanitext.ai · 2026-10-23
The consul of the following year, Fabius, takes over the war at Sutrium, while in Rome, a constitutional dispute arises between the tribune Sempronius and the censor Appius Claudius, who refuses to resign after his term has expired.
Q. Fabius, insequentis anni consul, bellum ad Sutrium excepit, collega Fabio C. Marcius Rutilus datus est.
Quintus Fabius, the consul of the following year, took over the war at Sutrium; Gaius Marcius Rutilus was given to Fabius as his colleague.
ceterum et Fabius supplementum ab Roma adduxit et novus exercitus domo accitus Etruscis venit. permulti anni iam erant, cum inter patricios magistratus tribunosque nulla certamina fuerant, cum ex ea familia, quae velut fatales cum tribunis ac plebe simultates exercebat, certamen oritur.1
Moreover, Fabius brought a reinforcement from Rome, and a new army, summoned from home, came to the Etruscans. Many years had already passed, during which there had been no contests between the patrician magistrates and the tribunes, when a contest arose from that family which, as if by fate, maintained feuds with the tribunes and the plebs.
Appi Claudius censor circumactis decem et octo mensibus, quod Aemilia lege finitum censurae spatium temporis erat, cum C. Plautius, collega eius, magistratu se abdicasset, nulla vi conpelli, ut abdicaret, potuit.
Appius Claudius the censor, although eighteen months had elapsed—the period of the censorship having been limited by the Aemilian law—and although Gaius Plautius, his colleague, had abdicated his office, could not be compelled by any force to abdicate.
P. Sempronius erat tribunus plebis, qui finiendae censurae intra legitimum tempus actionem susceperat, non popularem magis quam iustam nec in vulgus quam optimo cuique gratiorem.
Publius Sempronius was a tribune of the plebs, who had undertaken the action of ending the censorship within the lawful time—an action not more popular than it was just, and not more pleasing to the multitude than to all the best men.
is cum identidem legem Aemiliam recitaret auctoremque eius Mam. Aemilium dictatorem laudibus ferret, qui quinquennalem ante censuram et longinquitate potestatis dominantem intra sex mensum et anni coegisset spatium, “dic agedum” inquit, “Appi Claudi, quidnam facturus fueris, si eo tempore, quo C. Furius et M. Geganius censores fuerunt, censor fuisses.”2
Since he repeatedly read out the Aemilian law and praised its author, the dictator Mamercus Aemilius, who had forced the censorship, which had previously lasted five years and was tyrannical due to the duration of its power, within the space of a year and six months, ”Come, tell me,” he said, “Appius Claudius, what would you have done if you had been censor at the time when Gaius Furius and Marcus Geganius were censors?”
negare Appius interrogationem tribuni magno opere ad causam pertinere suam;
Appius denied that the tribune’s question had any great relevance to his case;
nam etsi tenuerit lex Aemilia eos censores, quorum in magistratu lata esset, quia post illos censores creatos eam legem populus iussisset quodque postremum iussisset, id ius ratumque esset, non tamen aut se aut eorum quemquam, qui post eam legem latam creati censores essent, teneri ea lege potuisse.3
for even if the Aemilian law had bound those censors during whose magistracy it was passed—because the people had ordered that law after those censors had been appointed, and what the people had ordered last was the valid law—yet neither he himself nor any of those who had been appointed censors after that law was passed could have been bound by that law.
- 9.33.2permulti anni iam erant, cum ... cum ... certamen oritur
The first cum-clause (cum ... fuerant) indicates the period of time elapsed ('since there had been no contests'), while the second cum-clause (cum ... oritur) is a 'cum inversum' (inverted cum) introducing a sudden event ('when a contest arose'), using the historical present (oritur) against the imperfect state of the main clause.
- 9.33.7quidnam facturus fueris, si ... fuisses
An apodosis of a past contrary-to-fact conditional sentence (si ... fuisses) embedded in an indirect question (quidnam ...). The past contrary-to-fact apodosis ('what would you have done', which would be fecisses in direct speech) changes into the active perfect subjunctive form 'future participle + fuerim' (facturus fueris) due to the subordination.
- 9.33.9non tamen aut se aut eorum quemquam ... teneri ea lege potuisse
The main clause in the indirect speech (Oratio Obliqua) introduced by the historical infinitive negare in the preceding section, structured as an Accusative with Infinitive (AcI). The subject accusatives are se and eorum quemquam, the governing infinitive is potuisse, which takes the passive infinitive teneri as its complement.