Polybius, Histories

Translation

Book 1 - Chapter 6

<w lemma="%2A%29%2Fetos">Ἔτος</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="ou%29%3Dn">οὖν</w> <w lemma="e%29neisth%2Fkei">ἐνειστήκει</w> <w lemma="meta%5C">μετὰ</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="%2Aai%29go%5Cs">Αἰγὸς</w> <w lemma="potamoi%3Ds">ποταμοῖς</w> <w lemma="naumaxi%2Fan">ναυμαχίαν</w> <w lemma="e%29nneakaide%2Fkaton">ἐννεακαιδέκατον</w>, <w lemma="pro%5C">πρὸ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="%2Aleu%2Fktrois">Λεύκτροις</w> <w lemma="ma%2Fxhs">μάχης</w> <w lemma="e%28kkaide%2Fkaton">ἑκκαιδέκατον</w>,

<w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="w%28%3D%7C">ᾧ</w> <w lemma="%2Alakedaimo%2Fnioi">Λακεδαιμόνιοι</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="e%29p%27">ἐπ᾽</w> <w lemma="%2A%29antalki%2Fdou">Ἀνταλκίδου</w> <w lemma="legome%2Fnhn">λεγομένην</w> <w lemma="ei%29rh%2Fnhn">εἰρήνην</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="basile%2Fa">βασιλέα</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="%2Apersw%3Dn">Περσῶν</w> <w lemma="e%29ku%2Frwsan">ἐκύρωσαν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="presbu%2Fteros">πρεσβύτερος</w> <w lemma="%2Adionu%2Fsios">Διονύσιος</w> <w lemma="th%3D%7C">τῇ</w> <w lemma="peri%5C">περὶ</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29elle%2Fporon">Ἐλλέπορον</w> <w lemma="potamo%5Cn">ποταμὸν</w> <w lemma="ma%2Fxh%7C">μάχῃ</w> <w lemma="nenikhkw%5Cs">νενικηκὼς</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fan">Ἰταλίαν</w> <w lemma="%2A%28%2Fellhnas">Ἕλληνας</w> <w lemma="e%29polio%2Frkei">ἐπολιόρκει</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rh%2Fgion">Ῥήγιον</w>, <w lemma="%2Agala%2Ftai">Γαλάται</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="kra%2Ftos">κράτος</w> <w lemma="e%28lo%2Fntes">ἑλόντες</w> <w lemma="au%29th%5Cn">αὐτὴν</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rw%2Fmhn">Ῥώμην</w> <w lemma="katei%3Dxon">κατεῖχον</w> <w lemma="plh%5Cn">πλὴν</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="%2Akapetwli%2Fou">Καπετωλίου</w>.

<w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="ou%28%5Cs">οὓς</w> <w lemma="poihsa%2Fmenoi">ποιησάμενοι</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%3Doi">Ῥωμαῖοι</w> <w lemma="sponda%5Cs">σπονδὰς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="dialu%2Fseis">διαλύσεις</w> <w lemma="eu%29dokoume%2Fnas">εὐδοκουμένας</w> <w lemma="%2Agala%2Ftais">Γαλάταις</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="geno%2Fmenoi">γενόμενοι</w> <w lemma="pa%2Flin">πάλιν</w> <w lemma="a%29nelpi%2Fstws">ἀνελπίστως</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="patri%2Fdos">πατρίδος</w> <w lemma="e%29gkratei%3Ds">ἐγκρατεῖς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="labo%2Fntes">λαβόντες</w> <w lemma="oi%28%3Don">οἷον</w> <w lemma="a%29rxh%5Cn">ἀρχὴν</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="sunauch%2Fsews">συναυξήσεως</w> <w lemma="e%29pole%2Fmoun">ἐπολέμουν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="e%28ch%3Ds">ἑξῆς</w> <w lemma="xro%2Fnois">χρόνοις</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="a%29stugei%2Ftonas">ἀστυγείτονας</w>.

<w lemma="geno%2Fmenoi">γενόμενοι</w> <w lemma="d%27">δ᾽</w> <w lemma="e%29gkratei%3Ds">ἐγκρατεῖς</w> <w lemma="a%28pa%2Fntwn">ἁπάντων</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="%2Alati%2Fnwn">Λατίνων</w> <w lemma="dia%2F">διά</w> <w lemma="te">τε</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29ndrei%2Fan">ἀνδρείαν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="tai%3Ds">ταῖς</w> <w lemma="ma%2Fxais">μάχαις</w> <w lemma="e%29pituxi%2Fan">ἐπιτυχίαν</w> <w lemma="meta%5C">μετὰ</w> <w lemma="tau%3Dt%27">ταῦτ᾽</w> <w lemma="e%29pole%2Fmoun">ἐπολέμουν</w> <w lemma="%2Aturrhnoi%3Ds">Τυρρηνοῖς</w>, <w lemma="e%29%2Fpeita">ἔπειτα</w> <w lemma="%2Akeltoi%3Ds">Κελτοῖς</w>, <w lemma="e%28ch%3Ds">ἑξῆς</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="%2Asauni%2Ftais">Σαυνίταις</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="pro%2Fs">πρός</w> <w lemma="te">τε</w> <w lemma="ta%5Cs">τὰς</w> <w lemma="a%29natola%5Cs">ἀνατολὰς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="ta%5Cs">τὰς</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Frktous">ἄρκτους</w> <w lemma="suntermonou%3Dsi">συντερμονοῦσι</w> <w lemma="th%3D%7C">τῇ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="%2Alati%2Fnwn">Λατίνων</w> <w lemma="xw%2Fra%7C">χώρᾳ</w>.

<w lemma="meta%5C">μετὰ</w> <w lemma="de%2F">δέ</w> <w lemma="tina">τινα</w> <w lemma="xro%2Fnon">χρόνον</w> <w lemma="%2Ataranti%2Fnwn">Ταραντίνων</w> <w lemma="dia%5C">διὰ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="presbeuta%5Cs">πρεσβευτὰς</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fwn">Ῥωμαίων</w> <w lemma="a%29se%2Flgeian">ἀσέλγειαν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="dia%5C">διὰ</w> <w lemma="tau%3Dta">ταῦτα</w> <w lemma="fo%2Fbon">φόβον</w> <w lemma="e%29pispasame%2Fnwn">ἐπισπασαμένων</w> <w lemma="%2Apu%2Frron">Πύρρον</w>, <w lemma="tw%3D%7C">τῷ</w> <w lemma="pro%2Fteron">πρότερον</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Ftei">ἔτει</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="%2Agalatw%3Dn">Γαλατῶν</w> <w lemma="e%29fo%2Fdou">ἐφόδου</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="te">τε</w> <w lemma="peri%5C">περὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Adelfou%5Cs">Δελφοὺς</w> <w lemma="fqare%2Fntwn">φθαρέντων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="peraiwqe%2Fntwn">περαιωθέντων</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29asi%2Fan">Ἀσίαν</w>,

<w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%3Doi">Ῥωμαῖοι</w> <w lemma="%2Aturrhnou%5Cs">Τυρρηνοὺς</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Asauni%2Ftas">Σαυνίτας</w> <w lemma="u%28f%27">ὑφ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%28tou%5Cs">αὑτοὺς</w> <w lemma="pepoihme%2Fnoi">πεποιημένοι</w>, <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fan">Ἰταλίαν</w> <w lemma="%2Akeltou%5Cs">Κελτοὺς</w> <w lemma="pollai%3Ds">πολλαῖς</w> <w lemma="ma%2Fxais">μάχαις</w> <w lemma="h%29%2Fdh">ἤδη</w> <w lemma="nenikhko%2Ftes">νενικηκότες</w>, <w lemma="to%2Fte">τότε</w> <w lemma="prw%3Dton">πρῶτον</w> <w lemma="e%29pi%5C">ἐπὶ</w> <w lemma="ta%5C">τὰ</w> <w lemma="loipa%5C">λοιπὰ</w> <w lemma="me%2Frh">μέρη</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fas">Ἰταλίας</w> <w lemma="w%28%2Frmhsan">ὥρμησαν</w>, <w lemma="ou%29x">οὐχ</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="u%28pe%5Cr">ὑπὲρ</w> <w lemma="o%29qnei%2Fwn">ὀθνείων</w>, <w lemma="e%29pi%5C">ἐπὶ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="plei%3Don">πλεῖον</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="u%28pe%5Cr">ὑπὲρ</w> <w lemma="i%29di%2Fwn">ἰδίων</w> <w lemma="h%29%2Fdh">ἤδη</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="kaqhko%2Fntwn">καθηκόντων</w> <w lemma="sfi%2Fsi">σφίσι</w> <w lemma="polemh%2Fsontes">πολεμήσοντες</w>, <w lemma="a%29qlhtai%5C">ἀθληταὶ</w> <w lemma="gegono%2Ftes">γεγονότες</w> <w lemma="a%29lhqinoi%5C">ἀληθινοὶ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Frgwn">ἔργων</w> <w lemma="e%29k">ἐκ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="%2Asauni%2Ftas">Σαυνίτας</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Akeltou%5Cs">Κελτοὺς</w> <w lemma="a%29gw%2Fnwn">ἀγώνων</w>.

<w lemma="u%28posta%2Fntes">ὑποστάντες</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="gennai%2Fws">γενναίως</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w> <w lemma="tou%3Dton">τοῦτον</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="teleutai%3Don">τελευταῖον</w> <w lemma="ta%2Fs">τάς</w> <w lemma="te">τε</w> <w lemma="duna%2Fmeis">δυνάμεις</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Apu%2Frron">Πύρρον</w> <w lemma="e%29kbalo%2Fntes">ἐκβαλόντες</w> <w lemma="e%29k">ἐκ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fas">Ἰταλίας</w> <w lemma="au%29%3Dqis">αὖθις</w> <w lemma="e%29pole%2Fmoun">ἐπολέμουν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="katestre%2Ffonto">κατεστρέφοντο</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="koinwnh%2Fsantas">κοινωνήσαντας</w> <w lemma="%2Apu%2Frrw%7C">Πύρρῳ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="pragma%2Ftwn">πραγμάτων</w>.

<w lemma="geno%2Fmenoi">γενόμενοι</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="parado%2Fcws">παραδόξως</w> <w lemma="a%28pa%2Fntwn">ἁπάντων</w> <w lemma="e%29gkratei%3Ds">ἐγκρατεῖς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="poihsa%2Fmenoi">ποιησάμενοι</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fan">Ἰταλίαν</w> <w lemma="oi%29kou%3Dntas">οἰκοῦντας</w> <w lemma="u%28f%27">ὑφ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%28tou%5Cs">αὑτοὺς</w> <w lemma="plh%5Cn">πλὴν</w> <w lemma="%2Akeltw%3Dn">Κελτῶν</w> <w lemma="meta%5C">μετὰ</w> <w lemma="tau%3Dta">ταῦτα</w> <w lemma="poliorkei%3Dn">πολιορκεῖν</w> <w lemma="e%29nexei%2Frhsan">ἐνεχείρησαν</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="to%2Fte">τότε</w> <w lemma="kate%2Fxontas">κατέχοντας</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rh%2Fgion">Ῥήγιον</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fous">Ῥωμαίους</w>.

It was, therefore, the nineteenth year after the battle of Aegospotami and the sixteenth before that of Leuctra, the year in which the Spartans ratified the peace known as that of Antalcidas with the King of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Persia&groupId=871&placeId=1571">Persia</a>,

that in which also Dionysius the Elder, after defeating the Italiot Greeks in the battle at the river Elleporos, was besieging <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rhegium&groupId=927&placeId=1659">Rhegium</a>, and that in which the Gauls, after taking <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> itself by assault, occupied the whole of that city except the Capitol.

The Romans, after making a truce on conditions satisfactory to the Gauls and being thus contrary to their expectation reinstated in their home and as it were now started on the road of aggrandizement, continued in the following years to wage war on their neighbours.

After subduing all the Latins by their valour and the fortune of war, they fought first against the Etruscans, then against the Celts, and next against the Samnites, whose territory was conterminous with that of the Latins on the East and North.

After some time the Tarentines, fearing the consequences of their insolence to the Roman envoys, begged for the intervention of Pyrrhus. (This was in the year preceding the expedition of those Gauls who met with the reverse at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a> and then crossed to Asia.)

The Romans had ere this reduced the Etruscans and Samnites and had vanquished the Italian Celts in many battles, and they now for the first time attacked the rest of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> not as if it were a foreign country, but as if it rightfully belonged to them.

Their struggle with the Samnites and Celts had made them veritable masters in the art of war, and after bravely supporting this war with Pyrrhus and finally expelling himself and his army from <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, they continued to fight with and subdue those who had sided with him.

When, with extraordinary good fortune, they had reduced all these peoples and had made all the inhabitants of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> their subjects excepting the Celts, they undertook the siege of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rhegium&groupId=927&placeId=1659">Rhegium</a> now held by certain of their compatriots.

Walbank Commentary

Overview

1.5.0 - 1.12.0

<a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sicily&groupId=973&placeId=1724">Sicily</a> up to the First Punic War (cf. 5. 2)

Specifics

1.6.1 - 1.6.1

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἔτος . . . ἐνειστήκει κτλ</w>.:</emph> the year meant is apparently Ol. 98, 2 = 387/6 B.C.; and P.'s indications are intended to make the matter clear to Greeks, west Greeks, and Romans. The peace of Antalcidas fell in Ol. 98, 2, in fact in spring, 386; Leuctra was fought on 5 Hecatombaeum in the Attic archon year of Phrasicleides, and so in July <milestone unit="page" n="46">[46]</milestone> 371, at the very end of Ol. 102, 1 = 372/1 B.C.; and Aegospotami was in the archon year of Alexias (Arist. Ath. Pol. 34. 2), and so in the late summer of 405, in Ol. 93, 4. By inclusive reckoning Ol. 98, 2 is the nineteenth year after Ol. 93, 4, and the sixteenth year before Ol. 102, 1. Leuze (Jahrzhlung, 115 n.), apparently identifying the Olympiad year with the Attic archon year, puts Leuctra in Ol. 102, 2, and being unwilling to assume that P. reckoned inclusively in the case of Aegospotami and exclusively in that of Leuctra, assumes that he is reckoning from the actual day, and not by years; but this assumption seems both unsatisfactory and improbable. Leuze's criticism of Mommsen (Röm. Forsch. ii. 359) is, however, valid: it is highly unlikely that in dealing with this period P. was working with an Olympiad year which went down to the end of the campaigning season. These synchronisms suggest that the Gallic capture and occupation of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> fell also in 387/6. Leuze (op. cit. 115–16) has argued that because Dionysius (i. 74) dates the Gallic <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w> to the archonship of Pyrgion at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Athens&groupId=379&placeId=715">Athens</a> (388/7), P. must be distinguishing between the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> <w lang="el-GR">(ἑλόντες</w>?) in that year, and the occupation <w lang="el-GR">(κατέχειν)</w> in 387/6. It is true that in the previous clause <w lang="el-GR">νενικηκώς</w>? refers to an event of Ol. 97, 4 = 389/8, and <w lang="el-GR">ἐπολιόρκει</w> to a siege beginning in Ol. 98, 1 = 388/7 (see below); but the capture and occupation of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> form much more of a single episode than the battle of Elleporus and the siege of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rhegium&groupId=927&placeId=1659">Rhegium</a>, and it is difficult to believe in Leuze's distinction. P.'s date was not necessarily that of Dionysius; and the natural interpretation is that the Gauls seized and held <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> in Ol. 98, 2 = 387/6. P. probably had this synchronism from Timaeus (cf. Beloch, RG, 140; Stuart Jones, CAH, vii. 320–3); it appears again in Iustin. vi. 6. 5, 'hic annus non eo tantum insignis fuit, quod repente pax tota Graecia facta est, sed etiam eo, quod eodem tempore urbs Romana a Gallis capta est', and (dependent on him) in Oros. iii. 1. 1. Pdech, Mthode, 439 ff., argues that Aegospotami fell between 17 July (first new moon after the solstice) 405, and so in both the archon year of Alexias and Ol. 93, 3. Leuctra he dates on or just after 14 August 371 in Ol 102, 2; it was fought on 5 Hippodromios and this Boeotian month was wrongly identified with the Attic Hecatombaeum. By exclusive reckoning the Peace of Antalcidas falls on Ol. 98, 2 – 387/6. Note that Diod. xiv. 115 4–5 also dates the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> to 387/6 (archonship of Theodotus).

1.6.2 - 1.6.2

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τὴν ἐπ᾽ Ἀνταλκίδου λεγομένην εἰρήνην</w>:</emph> cf. iv. 27. 5, vi. 49. 5. The war between <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sparta&groupId=660&placeId=1208">Sparta</a> and the allied forces of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Athens&groupId=379&placeId=715">Athens</a>, Thebes, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Argos&groupId=361&placeId=689">Argos</a>, and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Corinth&groupId=493&placeId=928">Corinth</a>, instigated by <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Persia&groupId=871&placeId=1571">Persia</a> after the Spartan defeat off Cnidos in 394, ended in 387/6, when Tiribazus, on royal instructions, summoned the belligerents to Sardes to receive the conditions for a peace (subsequently described by Isocrates (Panegyr. 176) as <w lang="el-GR">προστάγματα)</w>, viz. all the Asiatic mainland and the islands of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Cyprus&groupId=119&placeId=356">Cyprus</a> and Clazomenae to be the king's; <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Lemnos&groupId=676&placeId=1237">Lemnos</a>, Imbros, and Scyros to remain Athenian; all other Greek states to be autonomous (cf. iv. 27. 5); the king, assisted by the signatories, to punish any breach (cf. Xen. Hell. v. 1. 31; Diod. xiv. 110). The precise relationship of the king to the treaty is a matter of controversy. The likeliest view is that of Wilcken (Abh. Berlin. Akad., 1941 (1942), no. 15; cf. S-B. Berlin, 1929, 292–3), who distinguishes a Sparto-Persian peace agreed on at <milestone unit="page" n="47">[47]</milestone> <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Susa&groupId=991&placeId=1749">Susa</a> from a subsequent <w lang="el-GR">κοινὴ εἰρήνη</w> of Greek states, sworn at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sparta&groupId=660&placeId=1208">Sparta</a> in accordance with Antalcidas' undertaking. In view of many passages, epigraphical and historical (including this one), which suggest that the king was a direct participant in some agreement, it is difficult to follow V. Martin (Mus. Helv., 1944, 13–30), who, on the basis of Diod. xv. 19. 1, <w lang="el-GR">τὰς κοινὰς συνθήκας τὰς ἐπ᾽ Ἀνταλκίδου γενομένας συνεπιλαβομένου τοῦ Περσῶν βασιλέως</w>, argues for a single peace, announced at Sardes and sworn at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sparta&groupId=660&placeId=1208">Sparta</a>, a <w lang="el-GR">κοινὴ εἰρήνη</w> of all Greek states, with the king as benevolent overseer. Whatever its precise legal form, this Diktat re-established <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Persia&groupId=871&placeId=1571">Persia</a> in the Greek cities of Asia Minor; and in Greece proper Spartan coercion soon nullified the 'autonomy' clause, and provoked a growing opposition which culminated in the Theban victory over <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sparta&groupId=660&placeId=1208">Sparta</a> at Leuctra in 371. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τῇ περὶ τὸν Ἐλλέπορον ποταμὸν μαχῇ</w>:</emph> after defeating <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> in 396, Dionysius I of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syracuse&groupId=994&placeId=1753">Syracuse</a> crossed into <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> and in 389, near the Elleporus (modern Stilaro; Nissen, It. Land. ii. 949), just north of Caulonia in Bruttium, defeated an Italiote army of 27,000 led by a Syracusan exile, Heloris (Diod. xiv. 104, "<w lang="el-GR">Ἔλωρος</w> by confusion with Heloris; Polyaen. v. 3. 2; below, ii. 39. 7). <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rhegium&groupId=927&placeId=1659">Rhegium</a> resisted Dionysius for almost a year (387): when it fell, its inhabitants were treated with severity (Diod. xiv. 106–8, 111, 112; Frontin. Strat. iii. 4. 3; [Arist.] Oec. ii. 2. 1349 b 17). These victories established Dionysius firmly on the Italian side of the straits. For Polybius they do not merely give Sicilian readers a useful synchronism, but as an example of how a strong power in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sicily&groupId=973&placeId=1724">Sicily</a> or <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> would eventually cross the straits they act as a pointer to the First Punic War. Timaeus linked up the Gallic catastrophe with the siege of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rhegium&groupId=927&placeId=1659">Rhegium</a> (Diod. xiv. 113. 1) and is therefore probably P.'s source here (Beloch, RG, 140–1). On the chronology see Meyer, v. 130–32. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Γαλάται . . . πλὴν τοῦ Καπετωλίου</w>:</emph> cf. ii. 18. 1–2 n., 22. 4–5 n. P.'s date for Brennus' seizure of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> (387/6) will be Timaeus' (above); the usually accepted Varronian chronology made it A.U.C. 364 = 390 B.C. For discussion see below, ii. 18. 6 n.

1.6.3 - 1.6.3

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">εὐδοκουμένας Γαλάταις</w>:</emph> a ransom of 1,000 lb. of gold (Livy, v. 48; Diod. xiv. 116): other authorities said 2,000 lb., in either case a sum 'more probably dictated by later Roman pride than possible for Roman resources at the time' (Stuart Jones, CAH, vii. 565 n. 1). <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἀνελπίστως . . . ἐγκρατεῖς</w>:</emph> 'unexpectedly' because they were relieved by an unforeseeable Venetic invasion of Gallic territory (ii. 18. 3). Thus an element of fortune (cf. § 8, <w lang="el-GR">παραδόξως)</w> combines with Roman courage to secure the conquest of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>; cf. § 4, <w lang="el-GR">διά τε τὴν ἀνδρείαν καὶ τὴν . . . ἐπιτυχίαν</w>; §§ 6–7. This combination of rational and irrational factors is P.'s answer to the <w lang="el-GR">πῶς</w> of 5. 2; cf. Lorenz, 35–36.

1.6.4 - 1.6.6

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τῶν Λατίνων κτλ</w>.:</emph> cf. ii. 18. 5. After the Gallic invasion separatism appeared in the Latin confederation, Tibur and Praeneste tried <milestone unit="page" n="48">[48]</milestone> to form separate leagues, and the seceding cities called in Volsci, Hernici, and later Gallic mercenaries. In 358 <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> reconstituted the confederacy, and by 354 the last town submitted; but in 338, after a further revolt, they dissolved it and made separate settlements with the Latin cities, leaving some independent and incorporating others in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>. (See Adcock, CAH, vii. 589–94; Sherwin-White, 21–30; Göhler, 4–13; Beloch, RG, 373 ff.) The fighting against the Etruscans, Gauls, and Samnites was not in successive periods, as P. might suggest. By 387 (Varr.) southern <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Etruria&groupId=582&placeId=1089">Etruria</a> had been recovered and made into four tribes; and in 351 Tarquinii and Falerii received a forty years' truce. (Homo, CAH, vii. 574–5; Sherwin-White, 115– 16; Ghler, 19–20; Beloch, RG, 361 ff. (sceptical).) On the Gauls (whom P. calls <w lang="el-GR">Κελτοί</w> and <w lang="el-GR">Γαλάται</w> indiscriminately) see below, ii. 18–20. The Samnites fought (traditionally) three wars against <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>. Adcock, CAH, vii. 594 ff., rejects the first (343–341) as unhistorical (but cf. Beloch, RG, 369 ff.); the second and most important (327–304) brought substantial Roman gains; and in the third (298–290), which developed into a clash between a coalition, including Gauls and Etruscans, and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>, the Samnites were reduced to impotence. These wars consolidated the Roman position in central <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, and extended their power to the threshold of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Magna Graecia&groupId=728&placeId=1334">Magna Graecia</a>. P. uses <w lang="el-GR">Σαυνῖται</w> in a broad sense to include Marsi, Paeligni, and other minor Sabellian tribes (Philipp, RE, 'Samnites', cols. 2138–9), and therefore places them north as well as east of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Latium&groupId=673&placeId=1231">Latium</a>. (According to Ps.- Scylax, 15 (a corrupt passage) the Samnite League (in about 350) stretched from sea to sea; cf. De Sanctis, i. 103 n. 1.)

1.6.5 - 1.6.5

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Ταραντίνων . . . ἐπισπασαμένων Πύρρον</w>:</emph> in 282, following the sending of help to Thurii against the Lucanians, ten Roman ships appeared off Tarentum. The Tarentines, alleging a treaty <note type="footnote" id="note1">For different views of its date see Adcock, CAH, vii. 544; Frank, ibid. 640 (334); De Sanctis, ii. 347 (302but it will scarcely have been later than the planting of the colony at Luceria in Apulia in 314 (Livy, ix. 26. 1–5)).</note> which pledged the Romans not to sail east of the Lacinian Promontory, sank four and seized one; they then expelled the Roman garrison from Thurii. Envoys sent to demand satisfaction were insulted <w lang="el-GR">(τὴν. . . ἀσέλγειαν)</w>; the incident was much exaggerated in the annalistic tradition (e.g. Dion. Hal. xix. 5; App. Samn. 7; Livy, ep. 12). When in 281 the consul L. Aemilius Barbula was sent to harry the Tarentines, they invited in Pyrrhus of Epirus, who accepted their offers and crossed with 25,000 men. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τῷ πρότερον ἔτει τῆς τῶν Γαλατῶν ἐφόδου</w>:</emph> <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w> is used of the Gauls in Syll. 398, l. 8, and an inscription in Klio, 1914, 276, no. 5; it is not peculiar to P. (as Laqueur, 156 n. 1.) The synchronism recalls ii. 20. 6 (Pyrrhus' crossing two years before the destruction of the Gauls at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a>) and ii. 41. 11 (events of Ol. 124 (284/3–281/0) are <milestone unit="page" n="49">[49]</milestone> <w lang="el-GR">κατὰ τὴν Πύρρου διάβασιν εἰς Ἰταλίαν)</w>. Pyrrhus crossed in May 280 (Ol. 124, 4): for the month cf. Plut. Pyrrh. 15. 1, <w lang="el-GR">βορέᾳ ἁνέμῳ παρ᾽ ὥραν ἐκραγέντι</w> (preferable to Dio's statement (fg. 40. 6; cf. Zon. viii. 2) that 'he did not wait for the spring'). The destruction of the Gauls at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a> was in Ol. 125, 2 (Paus. x. 23. 14) = 279/8, hence late autumn 279 or early spring 278, for at the time there was snow at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a> (FD, iii. 2. 138 ll. 31 ff.); autumn 279 is the more likely, as the Gauls would hardly begin their expedition in winter. Unfortunately the <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w>, i.e. the first Gallic irruption into Macedon (in which Ptolemy Ceraunus met his death), is not to be dated with any certainty. It is here dated the year after the Tarentine appeal to Pyrrhus (not, it should be noted, after Pyrrhus' crossing); but although this appeal took place in the consulship of L. Aemilius Barbula and Q. Marcius Philippus (A.U.C. 473 = 281 B.C.), it is uncertain if it fell in Ol. 124, 3 or Ol. 124, 4. Hence for all the evidence this passage offers, the <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w> (and Ceraunus' death) may have fallen before or after midsummer 280. New evidence from a Babylonian king-list (cf. A. J. Sachs and D. J. Wiseman, Iraq, 1954, 202–12) has established that Seleucus I perished at Ceraunus' hands between 25 August and 24 September 281; <note type="footnote" id="note1">The text from Uruk which suggested that Seleucus' death was still not known there in December 281 (cf. Beloch, iv. 2. 108–9) must therefore be regarded as anachronistic (Sachs and Wiseman, op. cit., 205).</note> and since Corupedium, where Seleucus defeated and destroyed Lysimachus, occurred seven months earlier (Iustin. xvii. 2. 4), this battle was evidently fought c. February 281. This new information, however, gives no basis for calculating when Ceraunus perished. Eusebius (following Porphyry) allots him a reign of one year and five months; but even though the lists omit the seven months of Seleucus, it does not necessarily follow that Ceraunus' reign is to be calculated from Corupedium. According to Plutarch (Pyrrh. 22. 1), Pyrrhus heard of Ceraunus' death shortly after Ausculum in summer 279. If Ptolemy's one year and five months are dated from Seleucus' death in Aug./Sept. 281, he will have died in Jan./Feb. 279, which (allowing for some delay in sending a message across the Adriatic in late winter) would fit Plutarch's statement. On the other hand, January or February does not seem a very likely time of the year for the Gallic <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w>. A further piece of evidence is the name '<w lang="el-GR">Ἐτησίας</w>, given to Antipater who reigned for forty-five days 'as long as the Etesians blow' after Meleager had followed Ceraunus' death with a reign of two months (Euseb. i. 235). If Antipater's reign coincided with the Etesians (and did not merely last as long as they, which would make the point a poor one), it fell in July/August; and Ceraunus perished in May (279). But in that case no significance can be attached to the figure of one year and five months accorded to Ceraunus' reign; and Beloch (iv. 2. 109), <milestone unit="page" n="50">[50]</milestone> who argues for May as the date of Ceraunus' death, attempts to dispose of it by adding the seven months of Seleucus' rule, and so making two years, which can be dismissed as a round figure. But this is violent, and the figure of one year five months, like the two months given to Meleager and the forty-five days of Antipater, seems to deserve some respect. Finally, it may be noted that in ii. 41. 2 P. places Ceraunus' death in Ol. 124, which would make it earlier than summer 280; but here the synchronism is very general, and merely seeks to relate Ceraunus' death to those of Ptolemy I, Lysimachus, and Seleucus, which did in fact occur within that Olympiad. No solution covers all this evidence. The outside dates for the <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w> remain July 280 (if one reckons one year five months from Corupedium) and May 279 (if one attaches weight to Plutarch's report of Pyrrhus' receipt of the news, and to the nickname assigned to Antipater). A closer dating must await further evidence. For discussion see Beloch, iv. 2. 107–11, 485–9; Corradi, 67–71 (preferable to Niese, ii. 15 f.; De Sanctis, ii. 390–2 n. 2). The Gauls destroyed at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a> and those who crossed into Asia (cf. iv. 46. 1) were separate detachments (Paton's translation misses this): cf. M. Segre, Historia, 1929, 596. It was Brennus' small force which marched on <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a>, and the Tolistoagii and Trocmi (along with the Tectosages, who left the main body in Greece after the Delphic catastrophe) who first plundered the coastal districts of Asia Minor, and later settled down in the interior as Galatians (Livy, xxxviii. 16). Two armies had invaded Macedon in the original <w lang="el-GR">ἔφοδος</w>. That of Bolgius withdrew after destroying Ceraunus, the other under Brennus and Acichorius continued south into Greece (without the Tolistoagii and Trocmi). The body under Brennus was a mere raiding party; but P. already follows the tradition fostered by the Aetolians, who identified its defeat with the preservation of Greece and the destruction of the main Gallic army. A contemporary Coan inscription (Syll. 398, ll. 8–9) confirms the oldest tradition that <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Delphi&groupId=534&placeId=363">Delphi</a> was preserved. The Aetolians compelled the Gauls to withdraw, and legend embroidered their exploits with a report of the epiphany of Apollo, fighting for his sanctuary. The story of its partial pillage (in Livy and Strabo) probably goes back via Timagenes or Poseidonius to a second-century Italian story (Flacelire, 101). See S. Reinach and R. Herzog, CRAI, 1904, 158–73; M. Segre, Historia, 1927, 18–42; 1929, 592–648; Tarn, AG, 439–42; C A H, vii. 101–6; Flacelire, 94–104; Launey, RE A, 1944, 217–36; and below, ii. 35. 7 n.

1.6.6 - 1.6.6

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὡ?ς ὑπὲρ ἰδίων . . . πολεμήσοντες</w>:</emph> cf. ii. 20. 10. The Pyrrhic War led the Romans to envisage the conquest of all <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, just as the Hannibalic War led them to turn to the conquest of the whole <milestone unit="page" n="51">[51]</milestone> world (cf. 3. 4 n.). This is P.'s interpretation of Roman imperialism, simple and rationalistic, and in conflict with the Roman <w lang="el-GR">προαίρεσις</w> which sought, from the time of Fabius Pictor, to interpret all Roman expansion as defensive action. See Gelzer, Hermes, 1933, 137.

1.6.7 - 1.6.7

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Πύρρον ἐκβαλόντες ἐκ τῆς Ἰταλίας</w> :</emph> from autumn 278 to spring 275 Pyrrhus was fighting <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sicily&groupId=973&placeId=1724">Sicily</a>. Upon his return to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> his depleted forces were defeated by the Romans, traditionally near <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Beneventum&groupId=398&placeId=742">Beneventum</a> (but perhaps near <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Paestum&groupId=1088&placeId=1912">Paestum</a> in Lucania: Beloch, iv. 2. 475–6), in autumn 275, whereupon he returned with 8,500 men to Epirus (Plut. Pyrrh. 26. 2). See De Sanctis, ii. 415; Frank, C A H, vii. 652–3. From 270 the Roman federation embraced all <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, excluding Cisalpine <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Gaul&groupId=598&placeId=1108">Gaul</a> <w lang="el-GR">(πλὴν Κελτῶν)</w>; for its organization see Frank, ibid. 658–64; Sherwin-White, 91–125.

Addenda & corrigenda

1.6.1 - 1.6.1

Pdech, Mthode, 439 ff., argues that Aegospotami fell between 17 July (first new moon after the solstice) and 30 July (second full moon after the solstice) 405, and so in both the archon year of Alexias and Ol. 93, 3. Leuctra he dates on or just after 14 August 371 in Ol. 102, 2; it was fought on 5 Hippodromios <milestone unit="page" n="628">[628]</milestone> and this Boeotian month was wrongly identified with the Attic Hecatombaeum. By exclusive reckoning the Peace of Antalcidas falls in Ol. 98, 2 = 387/6. Note that Diod. xiv. 115. 4–5 also dates the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> to 387/6 (archonship of Theodotus).

Polybius, Histories

Bibliography

Archaeology

Places

Walbank Commentary

Commentary