Humanitext Reader

Livy · History of Rome §37.15.1-37.15.9

Rejection of the Harbor Blockade and Decision on Patara

Passage 1340 of 1770 · Latin

Summary

King Eumenes opposed Livius' plan to block the harbor, warning that such a blockade would restrict the movement of the Roman fleet. Instead, the proposal of Epicrates the Rhodian to bring Patara in Lycia into alliance was favored, though it was still decided to sail the fleet to Ephesus to display power.

§37.15.1nulli ea placere sententia.
This opinion pleased no one.
Eumenes rex quaesivit, quid tandem? ubi demersis navibus frenassent claustra maris, utrum libera sua classe abscessuri inde forent ad opem ferendam sociis terroremque hostibus praebendum, an nihilo minus tota classe portum obsessuri?
King Eumenes asked, what then? when they had blocked the passages of the sea by sinking ships, whether they were going to depart from there with their fleet set free to bring aid to their allies and cause terror to the enemy, or nonetheless to besiege the port with their entire fleet.
§37.15.2sive enim abscedant, cui dubium esse, quin hostes extracturi demersas moles sint et minore molimento aperturi portum, quam obstruatur? sin autem manendum ibi nihilo minus sit, quid attinere claudi portum?
For if they should depart, who could doubt that the enemy would drag out the sunken obstructions and open the port with less effort than it had been blocked? But if, on the other hand, they had to remain there nonetheless, what was the use of the port being closed?
§37.15.3quin contra illos, tutissimo portu, opulentissima urbe fruentis, omnia Asia praebente quieta aestiva acturos; Romanos aperto in mari fluctibus tempestatibusque obiectos, omnium inopes, in adsidua statione futuros, ipsos magis adligatos impeditosque, §37.15.4ne quid eorum, quae agenda sint, possint agere, quam ut hostis clausos habeant.
On the contrary, the enemy, enjoying a very safe port and a most wealthy city, with Asia supplying everything, would pass a quiet summer; while the Romans, exposed to the waves and storms on the open sea, destitute of everything, would be in constant blockade duty, being themselves rather bound and hindered, so that they could perform none of the things they ought to do, than keeping the enemy shut up.
§37.15.5Eudamus praefectus Rhodiae classis magis eam sibi displicere sententiam ostendit, quam ipse, §37.15.6quid censeret faciendum, dixit.
Eudamus, the commander of the Rhodian fleet, showed that this opinion displeased him more than he himself stated what he thought ought to be done.
Epicrates Rhodius omissa in praesentia Epheso mittendam navium partem in Lyciam censuit, et Patara, caput gentis, in societatem adiungenda.
Epicrates the Rhodian proposed that, leaving Ephesus aside for the present, a part of the fleet should be sent to Lycia, and Patara, the capital of the nation, should be brought into alliance.
§37.15.7in duas magnas res id usui fore, et Rhodios pacatis contra insulam suam terris totis viribus incumbere in unius belli, quod adversus Antiochum sit, §37.15.8curam posse, et eam classem, quae in Cilicia compararetur, intercludi, ne Polyxenidae coniungatur.
This would be of use for two great purposes: first, that the Rhodians, with the lands opposite their island pacified, would be able to apply themselves with all their forces to the care of the single war against Antiochus; and second, that the fleet being prepared in Cilicia would be cut off, lest it should join Polyxenidas.
§37.15.9haec maxime movit sententia; placuit tamen Regillum classe tota evehi ad portum Ephesi ad inferendum hostibus terrorem.
This opinion moved them most; nevertheless, it was decided that Regillus should sail out with the whole fleet to the port of Ephesus to strike terror into the enemy.

Notes

  1. §37.15.1nulli ea placere sententia — The historical infinitive placere is used with sententia as its subject, vividly describing the past event: "this opinion pleased no one."
  2. §37.15.1abscessuri inde forent — forent is an alternative form of essent; abscessuri forent forms the imperfect subjunctive active periphrastic (future participle + esse), functioning as the predicate in the indirect question (utrum... an...).
  3. §37.15.2cui dubium esse, quin — A rhetorical question in direct speech ("who would doubt...?" = "no one would doubt") becomes an accusative with infinitive construction (cui... esse) instead of the subjunctive when transferred into indirect speech. The clause introduced by quin indicates the negative idea associated with dubium.
  4. §37.15.3ipsos magis adligatos impeditosque, ne quid eorum, quae agenda sint, possint agere, quam ut hostis clausos habeant — In the context continuing from Romanos futuros [esse], the accusative subject ipsos is followed by the predicate magis adligatos impeditosque [fore / futuros esse] ("they themselves would be more bound and hindered"). The degree or result is expressed by the comparative structure magis ... quam ut ... ("rather than keeping the enemy shut up, to the extent that they can do nothing of what they ought to do").
  5. §37.15.5magis eam sibi displicere sententiam ostendit, quam ipse, quid censeret faciendum, dixit — The comparative magis ... quam ... indicates that the degree to which he showed his displeasure (ostendit) was greater than the degree to which he himself stated what he thought ought to be done (dixit).
  6. §37.15.7in duas magnas res id usui fore — usui is a dative of purpose forming a double dative construction with an implied dative of person (us/the Romans). id refers to the proposal mentioned in the previous sentence (bringing Patara into alliance), and fore is the future infinitive (futurum esse).

Cite this passage

Livy, History of Rome §37.15.1-37.15.9. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:37.15.1-37.15.9

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.