Humanitext Reader

Livy · History of Rome §38.45.1-38.45.11

Ten Commissioners Accuse Manlius of Unauthorized War

Passage 1432 of 1770 · Latin

Summary

The commissioners of the ten legates vehemently accuse Manlius of attempting to disrupt the peace with Antiochus and of waging an unauthorized private war against the Gallograecians while extorting money from local rulers.

§38.45.1legatos sese Cn. Manlio datos pacis cum Antiocho faciendae causa foederisque legum, quae cum L. Scipione inchoatae fuissent, perficiendarum.
(They asserted) that they themselves had been assigned as commissioners to Gnaeus Manlius for the sake of making peace with Antiochus and finalizing the terms of the treaty which had been initiated with Lucius Scipio.
§38.45.2Cn. Manlium summa ope tetendisse, ut eam pacem turbaret, et Antiochum, si sui potestatem fecisset, insidiis exciperet; sed illum cognita fraude consulis, cum saepe colloquiis petitis captatus esset, non congressum modo sed conspectum etiam eius vitasse.
(They declared) that Gnaeus Manlius had striven with all his might to disrupt that peace, and to catch Antiochus in an ambush if he should place himself in his power; but that the king, aware of the consul's deceit, although he was often courted by requests for interviews, had avoided not only meeting him but even the sight of him.
§38.45.3cupientem transire Taurum aegre omnium legatorum precibus, ne carminibus Sibyllae praedictam superantibus terminos fatalis cladem experiri vellet, retentum admosse tamen exercitum et prope in ipsis iugis ad divortia aquarum castra posuisse. §38.45.4cum ibi nullam belli causam inveniret quiescentibus regiis, circumegisse exercitum ad Gallograecos; §38.45.5cui nationi non ex senatus auctoritate, non populi iussu bellum illatum.
Although he (Manlius) was eager to cross the Taurus, and was with difficulty restrained by the entreaties of all the commissioners, lest he should wish to experience the destruction predicted in the verses of the Sibyl for those who surpassed the fatal boundaries, he nevertheless moved his army forward and pitched camp almost on the very peaks, at the watershed. When he found there no pretext for war, since the king's forces remained quiet, he turned his army around toward the Gallograecians; against which nation war was waged not by the authority of the senate, nor by the command of the people.
quod quem umquam de sua sententia facere ausum?
Who had ever dared to do such a thing of his own judgment?
§38.45.6Antiochi Philippi Hannibalis et Poenorum recentissima bella esse; de omnibus his consultum senatum, populum iussisse, per legatos ante res repetitas, postremo, qui bellum indicerent, missos.
The wars with Antiochus, Philip, Hannibal and the Carthaginians were very recent; in all these cases, the senate had been consulted, the people had commanded, demand for redress had first been made through ambassadors, and finally, messengers had been sent to declare war.
§38.45.7“quid eorum, Cn. Manli, factum est, ut istud publicum populi Romani bellum et non tuum privatum latrocinium ducamus?
"Which of these things, Gnaeus Manlius, was done, that we should regard that as a public war of the Roman people, and not your private robbery?
§38.45.8at eo ipso contentus fuisti, recto itinere exercitum duxisti ad eos, quos tibi hostis desumpseras;
But were you content with that alone, and did you lead the army by a direct route to those whom you had selected for yourself as enemies?
§38.45.9an per omnes amfractus viarum, cum ad bivia consisteres, ut, quo flexisset agmen Attalus, Eumenis frater, eo consul mercennarius cum exercitu Romano sequereris, Pisidiae Lycaoniaeque et Phrygiae recessus omnis atque angulos peragrasti, stipem ab tyrannis castellanisque deviis colligens? quid enim tibi cum Oroandis? quid cum aliis aeque innoxiis populis?”
Or did you, through all the windings of the roads, standing at the crossroads so that, whichever way Attalus, the brother of Eumenes, turned his column, you, a mercenary consul, would follow with the Roman army, traverse all the recesses and corners of Pisidia, Lycaonia, and Phrygia, collecting tribute from off-route tyrants and chieftains? For what business had you with the Oroandians? What with other equally harmless peoples?
§38.45.10“bellum autem ipsum, cuius nomine triumphum petis, quo modo gessisti? loco aequo, tempore tuo pugnasti?
And the war itself, in the name of which you seek a triumph, how did you wage it? Did you fight on level ground, at your own chosen time?
§38.45.11tu vero recte, ut diis immortalibus honos habeatur, postulas, primum quod pro temeritate imperatoris, nullo gentium iure bellum inferentis, poenas luere exercitum noluerunt; deinde quod beluas, non hostis nobis obiecerunt.
You do indeed demand rightly that honor be paid to the immortal gods, first because they did not wish the army to pay the penalty for the rashness of a commander who waged war with no right of nations; and secondly, because they threw beasts, not enemies, in our way."

Notes

  1. §38.45.1legatos sese Cn. Manlio datos — An accusative-with-infinitive construction in indirect speech (Oratio Obliqua), continuing from the verb `contradixerunt` in the previous sentence (§38.44.11). The main verb of saying (e.g., `dixerunt`) is omitted; `sese` is the subject accusative, and `datos [esse]` is the perfect passive infinitive.
  2. §38.45.2si sui potestatem fecisset — The genitive of the reflexive pronoun `sui` refers indirectly to Manlius, the subject of the main indirect statement, rather than the subject of the conditional clause (Antiochus). The phrase `potestatem facere` with a genitive is an idiom meaning 'to put oneself in the power of/give access to someone.' `fecisset` is a pluperfect subjunctive, representing a future perfect indicative of the direct speech shifted due to the historical sequence of tenses.
  3. §38.45.3ne carminibus Sibyllae praedictam superantibus terminos fatalis cladem experiri vellet — The subjunctive clause `ne... vellet` is a noun clause explaining the content of the preceding `precibus` (entreaties). `carminibus` is an ablative of means/cause modifying the perfect participle `praedictam` (which agrees with `cladem`). The present participle phrase `superantibus terminos fatalis` ('for those crossing the fatal boundaries') functions as an adjectival modifier indicating the target of the predicted disaster.
  4. §38.45.5quod quem umquam de sua sententia facere ausum — A rhetorical question in indirect speech with the connecting relative pronoun `quod` ('which/this') as its object. A rhetorical question of the direct speech (`quis ausus est?` 'who dared?') is expressed in indirect speech by the accusative `quem` (representing `quis`) and the infinitive `ausum [esse]`.
  5. §38.45.7ut istud publicum populi Romani bellum ... ducamus — The `ut` clause with the subjunctive verb (`ducamus`) indicates result or purpose following the main question ('which of these was done, so that we should/may regard...'). The demonstrative `istud` ('that of yours') relates to the second person and carries a negative or contemptuous nuance.
  6. §38.45.8at eo ipso contentus fuisti — The particle `at` at the beginning of the sentence introduces an objection or a strong contrast. It is interpreted here as a rhetorical question in direct speech: 'But were you content with that itself? [No, you were not.]'

Cite this passage

Livy, History of Rome §38.45.1-38.45.11. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:38.45.1-38.45.11

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.