Humanitext Reader

Livy · History of Rome §40.55.1-40.55.8

Exposure of the Forged Letter and Philip's Grief

Passage 1558 of 1770 · Latin

Summary

While rumors spread in the palace that the letters framing Demetrius were forged, Antigonus captures Xychus and brings him before King Philip. Under pressure, Xychus confesses to the conspiracy, leaving the king in even greater grief over his remaining son.

§40.55.1falsas esse et a scriba vitiatas signumque adulterinum vulgo in regia fremebant.
People in the palace were commonly muttering that the letters were false, forged by a scribe, and that the seal was counterfeit.
§40.55.2ceterum cum suspecta magis quam manifesta esset res, forte Xychus obvius fit Antigono, comprehensusque ab eo in regiam est perductus.
However, since the matter was more suspected than proven, Xychus happened to meet Antigonus, and, having been arrested by him, was brought into the palace.
relicto eo custodibus Antigonus ad Philippum processit.
Leaving him with the guards, Antigonus went on to Philip.
§40.55.3“multis” inquit “sermonibus intellexisse videor magno te aestimaturum, si scire vera omnia posses de filiis tuis, uter ab utro petitus fraude et insidiis esset.
"From many conversations," he said, "I seem to have understood that you would value it highly if you could know the whole truth about your sons, which of them was targeted by the other with fraud and treachery.
§40.55.4homo unus omnium, qui nodum huius erroris exsolvere possit, in potestate tua est Xychus.
The one man of all who can untie the knot of this error, Xychus, is in your power.
forte oblatum perductumque in regiam vocari iube. ” §40.55.5regi adductus primo ita negare inconstanter, ut parvo metu admoto paratum indicem esse appareret.
Order him, who was met by chance and brought into the palace, to be summoned." Brought before the king, at first he denied it so inconsistently that it was clear, once a little fear was applied, he was ready to turn informer.
conspectum tortoris verberumque non sustinuit, ordinemque omnem facinoris legatorum ministeriique sui exposuit.
He could not bear the sight of the torturer and the whips, and exposed the entire course of the ambassadors' crime and his own service.
§40.55.6extemplo missi, qui legatos comprehenderent, Philoclem, qui praesens erat, oppresserunt: Apelles missus ad Chaeream quendam persequendum indicio Xychi audito in Italiam traiecit.
Immediately those sent to arrest the ambassadors seized Philocles, who was present; Apelles, who had been sent to pursue a certain Chaereas, having heard of Xychus's confession, crossed over into Italy.
§40.55.7de Philocle nihil certi vulgatum est: alii primo audaciter negantem, postquam in conspectum adductus sit Xychus, non ultra tetendisse, alii tormenta etiam infitiantem perpessum adfirmant.
Nothing certain has been made public concerning Philocles: some assert that, though at first boldly denying it, after Xychus was brought into his presence, he did not hold out any longer; others affirm that he endured even tortures, still denying it.
§40.55.8Philippo redintegratus est luctus geminatusque; et infelicitatem suam in liberis graviorem, quod alter superesset, censebat.
For Philip, his grief was renewed and doubled; and he considered his misfortune in respect to his children to be all the heavier because the other one survived.

Notes

  1. §40.55.1falsas esse — Accusative with infinitive clause where the subject accusative `litteras` (the letters), mentioned in the previous section (§40.54.9), is omitted.
  2. §40.55.3magno te aestimaturum — `aestimaturum` is a future infinitive with `esse` omitted, forming an accusative with infinitive clause with `te` as the subject, depending on `videor`. `magno` is an ablative of value, meaning "that you would value it highly."
  3. §40.55.5negare — Historical infinitive, functioning in place of an imperfect indicative (third-person singular). The subject is `Xychus`.
  4. §40.55.7non ultra tetendisse — `tetendisse` (perfect infinitive of `tendo`) here means "to hold out" or "to persist in denial." The omitted subject accusative is `eum` (Philocles), depending on `alii [adfirmant]` in indirect speech.

Cite this passage

Livy, History of Rome §40.55.1-40.55.8. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:40.55.1-40.55.8

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.