Humanitext Reader

Livy · History of Rome §35.45.1-35.45.9

Aetolian Debate and Antiochus Made Commander

Passage 1274 of 1770 · Latin

Summary

After Antiochus' departure, a dispute arose among the Aetolians between Phaeneas, who advocated employing the king as a mediator, and Thoas, who urged for immediate military mobilization; the latter's aggressive view prevailed, and the king was appointed commander-in-chief.

§35.45.1in hanc sententiam rex cum magno omnium adsensu locutus discessit.
Having spoken to this effect amidst the great approval of all, the king departed.
§35.45.2post discessum regis inter duos principes Aetolorum, Phaeneam et Thoantem, contentio fuit.
After the departure of the king, a dispute arose between two leading men of the Aetolians, Phaeneas and Thoas.
§35.45.3Phaeneas reconciliatore pacis et disceptatore de iis, quae in controversia cum populo Romano essent, utendum potius Antiocho censebat quam duce belli: §35.45.4adventum eius et maiestatem ad verecundiam faciendam Romanis vim maiorem habituram quam arma; §35.45.5multa homines, ne bellare necesse sit, voluntate remittere, quae bello et armis cogi non possint.
Phaeneas was of the opinion that they should employ Antiochus as a reconciler of peace and an arbitrator concerning those matters which were in dispute with the Roman people, rather than as a leader of war; his arrival and majesty would have greater power in inspiring respect in the Romans than arms; people voluntarily surrendered many things, lest it should be necessary to go to war, which could not be extorted by war and arms.
Thoas negare paci studere Phaeneam, sed discutere apparatum belli velle, ut taedio et impetus relanguescat regis et Romani tempus ad comparandum habeant: §35.45.6nihil enim aequi ab Romanis impetrari posse totiens legationibus missis Romam, totiens cum ipso Quinctio disceptando satis expertum esse, nec nisi abscisa omni spe auxilium Antiochi imploraturos fuisse.
Thoas, on the other hand, declared that Phaeneas was not studying peace, but wished to break up the preparations for war, so that the king's enthusiasm might languish through weariness, and the Romans might have time for making preparations; for it had been sufficiently proved, by so many embassies sent to Rome and by so many discussions with Quinctius himself, that nothing equitable could be obtained from the Romans; nor would they have implored the aid of Antiochus unless all hope had been cut off.
§35.45.7quo celerius spe omnium oblato non esse elanguescendum, sed orandum potius regem, ut, quoniam, quod maximum fuerit, ipse vindex Graeciae venerit, copias quoque terrestris navalisque accersat.
Therefore, since it had been offered more speedily than anyone expected, they must not grow cold, but rather entreat the king that, since—what was of the greatest importance—he had come in person as the champion of Greece, he would also summon his land and sea forces.
§35.45.8armatum regem aliquid impetraturum; inermem non pro Aetolis modo, sed ne pro se quidem ipso momenti ullius futurum apud Romanos.
A king in arms would obtain something; unarmed, he would be of no weight with the Romans, not only on behalf of the Aetolians, but not even on his own.
§35.45.9haec vicit sententia, imperatoremque regem appellandum censuerunt et triginta principes, cum quibus, si qua vellet, consultaret, delegerunt.
This opinion prevailed, and they voted that the king should be styled commander-in-chief, and chose thirty leading men with whom he might consult, if he wished in any matter.

Notes

  1. §35.45.3utendum potius Antiocho — Since the verb `utor` governs the ablative case, its gerundive construction expressing obligation is impersonal (`utendum` with `esse` understood), with the logical object expressed in the ablative `Antiocho`.
  2. §35.45.6nihil enim aequi — `aequi` is the genitive of the neuter adjective `aequum`, functioning as a partitive genitive with the pronoun `nihil` ("nothing of what is equitable", i.e., "nothing equitable").
  3. §35.45.6imploraturos fuisse — The apodosis of a past contrary-to-fact conditional sentence in indirect discourse. The direct form (pluperfect subjunctive `imploravissent` or indicative perfect `imploraturi fuerunt`) becomes the future participle with `fuisse` in the accusative with infinitive construction.
  4. §35.45.7quo celerius spe omnium oblato — The relative pronoun of connection `quo` (neuter singular ablative) combines with the perfect participle `oblato` to form an ablative absolute. `spe omnium` is the ablative of comparison depending on the comparative `celerius`.
  5. §35.45.8momenti ullius futurum — The genitive of quality (or value/importance) `momenti ullius` is used as the predicate of the future infinitive `futurum [esse]` (with `esse` omitted), meaning "would be of no weight".

Cite this passage

Livy, History of Rome §35.45.1-35.45.9. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:35.45.1-35.45.9

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.