Humanitext Reader

Livy · History of Rome §30.23.1-30.23.8

Rejection of the Envoys and Vote to Continue the War

Passage 1004 of 1770 · Latin

Summary

Following the removal of the Carthaginian envoys, a heated debate takes place in the Roman Senate; while Livius urges summoning the consul and Metellus advocates leaving the decision to Scipio on the ground, the Senate ultimately adopts Laevinus's harsh proposal to expel the envoys as spies and instruct Scipio to continue the war.

§30.23.1Emotis deinde curia legatis sententiae interrogari coeptae.
The envoys having then been removed from the senate-house, opinions began to be asked.
M. Livius C. Servilium consulem, qui propior esset, arcessendum, ut coram eo de pace ageretur, censebat; §30.23.2cum de re maiore, quam quanta ea esset, consultatio incidere non posset, non videri sibi absente consulum altero ambobusve eam rem agi satis ex dignitate populi Romani esse.
Marcus Livius expressed the opinion that the consul Gaius Servilius, who was closer, should be summoned, so that the negotiation concerning peace might be conducted in his presence; since a consultation could not arise concerning any matter greater than this, it did not seem to him to be sufficiently consistent with the dignity of the Roman people that this business should be transacted in the absence of one or both of the consuls.
§30.23.3Q. Metellus, qui triennio ante consul dictatorque fuerat: cum P. Scipio caedendo exercitus, agros populando in eam necessitatem hostes compulisset, ut supplices pacem peterent, et nemo omnium verius existumare posset, qua mente ea pax peteretur, §30.23.4quam qui ante portas Carthaginis bellum gereret, nullius alterius consilio quam Scipionis accipiendam abnuendamve pacem esse.
Quintus Metellus, who had been consul and dictator three years before, argued that since Publius Scipio, by slaughtering their armies and devastating their fields, had forced the enemy into such necessity that they sought peace as suppliants, and since no one of all men could judge more truly with what mind that peace was being sought than he who was waging war before the gates of Carthage, the peace ought to be accepted or rejected by the counsel of no other person than Scipio.
§30.23.5M. Valerius Laevinus qui bis consul fuerat, speculatores, non legatos venisse arguebat iubendosque Italia excedere et custodes cum iis usque ad naves mittendos Scipionique scribendum, ne bellum remitteret.
Marcus Valerius Laevinus, who had been consul twice, argued that spies, not envoys, had come, and that they should be ordered to leave Italy, and that guards should be sent with them all the way to their ships, and that a letter should be written to Scipio not to relax the war.
§30.23.6Laelius Fulviusque adiecerunt et Scipionem in eo positam habuisse spem pacis, si Hannibal et Mago ex Italia non revocarentur.
Laelius and Fulvius added also that Scipio had placed his hope of peace on this condition, that Hannibal and Mago should not be recalled from Italy.
§30.23.7ceterum omnia simulaturos Carthaginienses duces eos exercitusque expectantes; deinde quamvis recentium foederum et deorum omnium oblitos bellum gesturos.
Otherwise, they said, the Carthaginians would feign everything while waiting for those generals and their armies; then, forgetting treaties however recent and all the gods, they would wage war.
§30.23.8eo magis in Laevini sententiam discessum.
For this reason, a decision was made all the more in favor of Laevinus's opinion.
legati pace infecta ac prope sine responso dimissi.
The envoys were dismissed with the peace unaccomplished and almost without a response.

Notes

  1. §30.23.1Emotis deinde curia legatis sententiae interrogari coeptae. — Emotis... legatis is an ablative absolute. interrogari is a passive infinitive depending on coeptae [sunt], which takes the passive form because its dependent infinitive is passive.
  2. §30.23.2non videri sibi absente consulum altero ambobusve eam rem agi satis ex dignitate populi Romani esse. — This indirect speech continues to be governed by censebat from the previous section. The subject of non videri is the infinitive clause eam rem agi... esse... (that it was... for this matter to be transacted). absente consulum altero ambobusve is an ablative absolute expressing condition or circumstance ("one of the consuls or both being absent").
  3. §30.23.4quam qui ante portas Carthaginis bellum gereret, nullius alterius consilio quam Scipionis accipiendam abnuendamve pacem esse. — quam qui... gereret is a comparative clause dependent on the comparative adverb verius in §30.23.3 ("more truly... than he who..."). The subjunctive gereret is due to indirect speech (or characteristic). nullius alterius... quam Scipionis limits consilio. accipiendam abnuendamve [pacem] esse is a passive periphrastic construction expressing necessity or obligation.
  4. §30.23.6Laelius Fulviusque adiecerunt et Scipionem in eo positam habuisse spem pacis, si Hannibal et Mago ex Italia non revocarentur. — in eo points forward to the conditional clause si... non revocarentur ("placed his hope of peace in this [condition], namely, if..."). positam habuisse (literally "to have had [it] placed") is an analytical perfect active infinitive, emphasizing the continuing state of the hope being placed.
  5. §30.23.7deinde quamvis recentium foederum et deorum omnium oblitos bellum gesturos. — quamvis functions here as an adverb modifying the adjective recentium ("however recent", "no matter how recent"). oblitos is the perfect active participle of the deponent verb obliviscor (which governs the genitives foederum and deorum), agreeing with the omitted subject of the future infinitive gesturos [esse], i.e., Carthaginienses.

Cite this passage

Livy, History of Rome §30.23.1-30.23.8. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:30.23.1-30.23.8

Please note the AI-draft status of the translation and the date accessed.

Translation, notes and summary are AI-generated drafts, revised through reader feedback.