Humanitext Reader

Livy · History of Rome §45.23.1-45.23.19

Astymedes on Collective Responsibility and Individual Guilt

Passage 1749 of 1770 · Latin

Summary

The Rhodian envoy argues that if Perseus had won, Rhodes would have had no defense, distinguishes the state's collective responsibility from individual guilt, and contends that the arrogance of their embassy does not merit capital punishment.

§45.23.1“praemia et Philippo et Antiocho devictis amplissima accepimus a vobis.
“We received the most ample rewards from you when Philip and Antiochus were overcome.
si, quae vestra nunc est fortuna deum benignitate et virtute vestra, ea Persei fuisset, et praemia petitum ad victorem regem venissemus in Macedoniam, quid tandem diceremus?
If, by the favor of the gods and your own valor, the fortune which is now yours had been Perseus's, and we had come to Macedonia to the victorious king to seek rewards, what, pray, would we say?
§45.23.2pecuniane a nobis adiutum an frumento? auxiliis terrestribus an navalibus? quod praesidium tenuisse nos? ubi pugnasse aut sub illius ducibus aut per nos ipsos? si quaereret, ubi miles noster, ubi navis intra praesidia sua fuisset, quid responderemus?
That he had been assisted by us with money or with grain? With land forces or with naval forces? What garrison had we held? Where had we fought either under his generals or by ourselves? If he should ask where our soldier was, or where our ship had been within his lines, what would we reply?
§45.23.3causam fortasse diceremus apud victorem, quem ad modum apud vos dicimus.
Perhaps we would plead our cause before the victor, in the same manner as we are pleading it before you.
§45.23.4hoc enim legatos utroque de pace mittendo consecuti sumus, ut ne ab utraque parte gratiam iniremus, ab altera etiam crimen et periculum esset.
For by sending envoys to both sides to treat of peace, we have achieved this: that we entered into favor with neither side, and from the one side we even incurred guilt and danger.
§45.23.5quamquam Perseus vere obiceret, id quod vos non potestis, patres conscripti, nos principio belli misisse ad vos legatos, qui pollicerentur vobis, quae ad bellum opus essent; navibus, armis, iuventute nos nostra, sicut prioribus bellis, ad omnia paratos fore.
And yet Perseus might justly reproach us—which you cannot do, conscript fathers—with having sent envoys to you at the beginning of the war to promise you whatever was necessary for the war; and that we, with our ships, arms, and youth, just as in former wars, would be ready for all things.
§45.23.6ne praestaremus, per vos stetit, qui de quacumque causa tum aspernati nostra auxilia estis.
That we did not perform this was due to you, who then rejected our assistance for whatever cause.
neque fecimus igitur quicquam tamquam hostes, neque bonorum sociorum defuimus officio, sed a vobis prohibiti praestare fuimus.
We therefore neither did anything as enemies, nor did we fail in the duty of good allies, but we were prevented by you from performing it.
§45.23.7“quid igitur? nihilne factum neque dictum est in civitate vestra, Rhodii, quod nolletis, quo merito offenderetur populus Romanus?” hinc iam non, quod factum est, sum defensurus — non adeo insanio —, sed publicam causam a privatorum culpa segregaturus.
‘What then? Was nothing done or said in your state, Rhodians, which you would wish undone, by which the Roman people might deservedly be offended?’ From this point onward, I am not going to defend what was done—I am not so mad—but to separate the cause of the state from the guilt of private individuals.
§45.23.8nulla est civitas, quae non et improbos cives aliquando et imperitam multitudinem semper habeat.
There is no state which does not have both wicked citizens at times and an untutored multitude always.
§45.23.9etiam apud vos fuisse audivi, qui adsentando multitudini grassarentur, et secessisse aliquando a vobis plebem nec in potestate vestra rem publicam fuisse.
I have heard that even among you there were those who went about courting the multitude, and that at times the plebs seceded from you and the state was not in your power.
§45.23.10si hoc in hac tam bene morata civitate accidere potuit, mirari quisquam potest aliquos fuisse apud nos, qui regis amicitiam petentes plebem nostram consiliis depravarent? qui tamen nihil ultra valuerunt, quam ut in officio cessaremus.
If this could happen in this so well-ordered state, can anyone wonder that there were some among us who, seeking the friendship of the king, depraved our common people with their counsels? Who, however, had no power beyond making us slow in our duty.
§45.23.11non praeteribo id, quod gravissimum est in hoc bello crimen civitatis nostrae: legatos eodem tempore et ad vos et ad Persea de pace misimus; quod infelix consilium furiosus, ut postea audivimus, §45.23.12orator stultissimum fecit, quem sic locutum constat, tamquam C. Popilius legatus Romanus, quem ad summovendos a bello Antiochum et Ptolemaeum reges misistis, loqueretur.
I will not pass over that which is the heaviest charge against our state in this war: we sent envoys at the same time to you and to Perseus to treat of peace; which unhappy decision a madman, as we afterwards heard, and a most foolish speaker made utterly stupid, who is known to have spoken in such a manner as if Gaius Popilius, the Roman envoy whom you sent to ward off the kings Antiochus and Ptolemy from war, were speaking.
§45.23.13sed tamen ea sive superbia, sive stultitia appellanda est, eadem, quae apud vos, et apud Persea fuit.
But yet, whether that is to be called arrogance or foolishness, it was the same toward Perseus as it was toward you.
§45.23.14tam civitatium quam singulorum hominum mores sunt: gentes quoque aliae iracundae, aliae audaces, quaedam timidae, in vinum, in Venerem proniores aliae sunt.
States, no less than individual men, have their characters: some nations are angry, others bold, some timid, others more prone to wine or to love.
§45.23.15Atheniensium populum fama est celerem et supra vires audacem esse ad conandum, Lacedaemoniorum cunctatorem et vix in ea, quibus fidit, ingredientem.
There is a report that the Athenian people are quick and bold beyond their strength in attempting, while the Lacedaemonians are hesitating and scarcely entering upon those things in which they trust.
§45.23.16non negaverim et totam Asiae regionem inaniora parere ingenia, et nostrorum tumidiorem sermonem esse, quod excellere inter finitimas civitates videamur, et id ipsum non tam viribus nostris quam vestris honoribus ac iudiciis.
I would not deny that both the whole region of Asia produces vainer intellects, and that our speech is more inflated because we seem to excel among the neighboring states, and that very fact is due not so much to our own strength as to your honors and judgments.
§45.23.17satis quidem et tunc in praesentia castigata illa legatio erat, cum tam tristi responso vestro dimissa.
Indeed, that embassy was sufficiently chastised then at the time, when it was dismissed with so grim a response from you.
si tum parum ignominiae pensum est, haec certe tam miserabilis ac supplex legatio etiam insolentioris, quam illa fuit, legationis satis magnum piaculum esset.
If too little penalty of ignominy was paid then, this so miserable and suppliant embassy would surely be a sufficiently great atonement for an embassy even more insolent than that one was.
§45.23.18superbiam, verborum praesertim, iracundi oderunt, prudentes inrident, utique si inferioris adversus superiorem est; capitali poena nemo umquam dignam iudicavit.
Arrogance, especially of words, the angry hate, the wise laugh at, especially if it is of an inferior toward a superior; but no one has ever judged it worthy of capital punishment.
§45.23.19id enimvero periculum erat, ne Romanos Rhodii contemnerent.
For indeed there was danger lest the Rhodians should despise the Romans.
etiam deos aliqui verbis ferocioribus increpant, nec ideo quemquam fulmine ictum audimus. ”
Some even rail at the gods with rather fierce words, yet we do not hear of anyone being struck by lightning on that account.”

Notes

  1. 45.23.1petitum — The accusative supine of the verb peto, expressing purpose after the verb of motion venissemus ('to seek').
  2. 45.23.2pecuniane a nobis adiutum — Ellipsis of esse from the perfect passive infinitive adiutum esse. It functions as an accusative-with-infinitive construction, representing a rhetorical question in indirect speech continuing from quid tandem diceremus? in the preceding sentence.
  3. 45.23.6per vos stetit, ne praestaremus — The impersonal construction stetit per aliquem followed by ne (or quominus) with the subjunctive, meaning 'it was due to you / on your account that we did not perform (our obligation)'.
  4. 45.23.11quod infelix consilium — The relative pronoun quod acts as a connective relative ('which'), taking the action of the preceding sentence (sending embassies to both sides) as its antecedent and modifying consilium, which is the direct object of the main verb fecit.
  5. 45.23.17insolentioris, quam illa fuit, legationis — The genitive legationis is an objective genitive depending on piaculum ('atonement / expiation for...'). It is modified by the comparative adjective insolentioris, expressing that 'this present miserable embassy' is a sufficient atonement for the 'even more insolent embassy' of the past.

Cite this passage

Livy, History of Rome §45.23.1-45.23.19. Humanitext Reader, https://reader.humanitext.ai/en/text/urn:cts:latinLit:phi0914.phi001.humanitext-lat2:45.23.1-45.23.19

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.