Polybius, Histories

Translation

Book 10 - Chapter 13

<w lemma="%2A%28o">Ὁ</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="%2Apo%2Fplios">Πόπλιος</w> <w lemma="e%29di%2Fdou">ἐδίδου</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="au%28to%5Cn">αὑτὸν</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="ki%2Fndunon">κίνδυνον</w>, <w lemma="e%29poi%2Fei">ἐποίει</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tou%3Dto">τοῦτο</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="du%2Fnamin">δύναμιν</w> <w lemma="a%29sfalw%3Ds:">ἀσφαλῶς·</w>

<w lemma="ei%29%3Dxe">εἶχε</w> <w lemma="ga%5Cr">γὰρ</w> <w lemma="meq%27">μεθ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%28tou%3D">αὑτοῦ</w> <w lemma="trei%3Ds">τρεῖς</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fndras">ἄνδρας</w> <w lemma="qureoforou%3Dntas">θυρεοφοροῦντας</w>, <w lemma="oi%28%5C">οἳ</w> <w lemma="paratiqe%2Fntes">παρατιθέντες</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="qureou%5Cs">θυρεοὺς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="tei%2Fxous">τείχους</w> <w lemma="e%29pifa%2Fneian">ἐπιφάνειαν</w> <w lemma="skepa%2Fzontes">σκεπάζοντες</w> <w lemma="a%29sfa%2Fleian">ἀσφάλειαν</w> <w lemma="au%29tw%3D%7C">αὐτῷ</w> <w lemma="pareskeu%2Fazon">παρεσκεύαζον</w>.

<w lemma="dio%5C">διὸ</w> <w lemma="para%5C">παρὰ</w> <w lemma="ta%5C">τὰ</w> <w lemma="pla%2Fgia">πλάγια</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="u%28perdeci%2Fous">ὑπερδεξίους</w> <w lemma="to%2Fpous">τόπους</w> <w lemma="e%29pipariw%5Cn">ἐπιπαριὼν</w> <w lemma="mega%2Fla">μεγάλα</w> <w lemma="suneba%2Flleto">συνεβάλλετο</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="xrei%2Fan:">χρείαν·</w>

<w lemma="a%28%2Fma">ἅμα</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="ga%5Cr">γὰρ</w> <w lemma="e%28w%2Fra">ἑώρα</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="gino%2Fmenon">γινόμενον</w>, <w lemma="a%28%2Fma">ἅμα</w> <w lemma="d%27">δ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29to%5Cs">αὐτὸς</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntwn">πάντων</w> <w lemma="o%28rw%2Fmenos">ὁρώμενος</w> <w lemma="e%29neirga%2Fzeto">ἐνειργάζετο</w> <w lemma="proqumi%2Fan">προθυμίαν</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="a%29gwnizome%2Fnois">ἀγωνιζομένοις</w>.

<w lemma="e%29c">ἐξ</w> <w lemma="ou%28%3D">οὗ</w> <w lemma="sune%2Fbaine">συνέβαινε</w> <w lemma="mhde%5Cn">μηδὲν</w> <w lemma="e%29llipe%5Cs">ἐλλιπὲς</w> <w lemma="gi%2Fnesqai">γίνεσθαι</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="ki%2Fndunon">κίνδυνον</w>, <w lemma="a%29ll%27">ἀλλ᾽</w> <w lemma="o%28po%2Fte">ὁπότε</w> <w lemma="tin%27">τιν᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29tw%3D%7C">αὐτῷ</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="prokei%2Fmenon">προκείμενον</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="kairo%5Cs">καιρὸς</w> <w lemma="u%28podei%2Fceie">ὑποδείξειε</w>, <w lemma="pa%3Dn">πᾶν</w> <w lemma="e%29k">ἐκ</w> <w lemma="xeiro%5Cs">χειρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%29ei%5C">ἀεὶ</w> <w lemma="sunhrgei%3Dto">συνηργεῖτο</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="de%2Fon">δέον</w>.

<w lemma=""></w> <w lemma="%2A%28ormhsa%2Fntwn">Ὁρμησάντων</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tai%3Ds">ταῖς</w> <w lemma="kli%2Fmaci">κλίμαξι</w> <w lemma="peri%5C">περὶ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29na%2Fbasin">ἀνάβασιν</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="prw%2Ftwn">πρώτων</w> <w lemma="teqarrhko%2Ftws">τεθαρρηκότως</w>, <w lemma="ou%29x">οὐχ</w> <w lemma="ou%28%2Ftws">οὕτως</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="plh%3Dqos">πλῆθος</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="a%29munome%2Fnwn">ἀμυνομένων</w> <w lemma="e%29piki%2Fndunon">ἐπικίνδυνον</w> <w lemma="e%29poi%2Fei">ἐποίει</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="prosbolh%5Cn">προσβολὴν</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="me%2Fgeqos">μέγεθος</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="teixw%3Dn">τειχῶν</w>.

<w lemma="dio%5C">διὸ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="ma%3Dllon">μᾶλλον</w> <w lemma="e%29perrw%2Fsqhsan">ἐπερρώσθησαν</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="ta%5C">τὰ</w> <w lemma="tei%2Fxh">τείχη</w>, <w lemma="qewrou%3Dntes">θεωροῦντες</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="dusxrhsti%2Fan">δυσχρηστίαν</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="sumbaino%2Fntwn">συμβαινόντων</w>.

<w lemma="e%29%2Fniai">ἔνιαι</w> <w lemma="me%5Cn">μὲν</w> <w lemma="ga%5Cr">γὰρ</w> <w lemma="sunetri%2Fbonto">συνετρίβοντο</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="klima%2Fkwn">κλιμάκων</w>, <w lemma="pollw%3Dn">πολλῶν</w> <w lemma="a%28%2Fma">ἅμα</w> <w lemma="dia%5C">διὰ</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="me%2Fgeqos">μέγεθος</w> <w lemma="sunepibaino%2Fntwn:">συνεπιβαινόντων·</w> <w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="ai%28%3Ds">αἷς</w> <w lemma="d%27">δ᾽</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="prw%3Dtoi">πρῶτοι</w> <w lemma="prosbai%2Fnontes">προσβαίνοντες</w> <w lemma="e%29skotou%3Dnto">ἐσκοτοῦντο</w> <w lemma="dia%5C">διὰ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="u%28%2Fyos">ὕψος</w> <w lemma="a%29na%2Ftasin">ἀνάτασιν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="braxei%2Fas">βραχείας</w> <w lemma="prosdeo%2Fmenoi">προσδεόμενοι</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="e%29k">ἐκ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="a%29munome%2Fnwn">ἀμυνομένων</w> <w lemma="a%29ntipra%2Fcews">ἀντιπράξεως</w> <w lemma="e%29rri%2Fptoun">ἐρρίπτουν</w> <w lemma="sfa%3Ds">σφᾶς</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%5Cs">αὐτοὺς</w> <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="klima%2Fkwn">κλιμάκων</w>.

<w lemma="o%28%2Fte">ὅτε</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="dokou%5Cs">δοκοὺς</w> <w lemma="h%29%2F">ἤ</w> <w lemma="ti">τι</w> <w lemma="toiou%3Dton">τοιοῦτον</w> <w lemma="e%29gxeirh%2Fsaien">ἐγχειρήσαιεν</w> <w lemma="e%29pirri%2Fptein">ἐπιρρίπτειν</w> <w lemma="a%29po%5C">ἀπὸ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="e%29pa%2Flcewn">ἐπάλξεων</w>, <w lemma="o%28mou%3D">ὁμοῦ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntes">πάντες</w> <w lemma="a%29pesu%2Fronto">ἀπεσύροντο</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="katefe%2Fronto">κατεφέροντο</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="gh%3Dn">γῆν</w>.

<w lemma="ou%29">οὐ</w> <w lemma="mh%5Cn">μὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29lla%5C">ἀλλὰ</w> <w lemma="toiou%2Ftwn">τοιούτων</w> <w lemma="a%29pantwme%2Fnwn">ἀπαντωμένων</w> <w lemma="ou%29de%5Cn">οὐδὲν</w> <w lemma="i%28kano%5Cn">ἱκανὸν</w> <w lemma="h%29%3Dn">ἦν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%5C">τὸ</w> <w lemma="kwlu%2Fein">κωλύειν</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="e%29pifora%5Cn">ἐπιφορὰν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="o%28rmh%5Cn">ὁρμὴν</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fwn">Ῥωμαίων</w>, <w lemma="a%29ll%27">ἀλλ᾽</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Fti">ἔτι</w> <w lemma="kataferome%2Fnwn">καταφερομένων</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="prw%2Ftwn">πρώτων</w> <w lemma="e%29pe%2Fbainon">ἐπέβαινον</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="sunexei%3Ds">συνεχεῖς</w> <w lemma="e%29pi%5C">ἐπὶ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="e%29klei%2Fpousan">ἐκλείπουσαν</w> <w lemma="a%29ei%5C">ἀεὶ</w> <w lemma="xw%2Fran">χώραν</w>.

<w lemma="h%29%2Fdh">ἤδη</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="h%28me%2Fras">ἡμέρας</w> <w lemma="probainou%2Fshs">προβαινούσης</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="stratiwtw%3Dn">στρατιωτῶν</w> <w lemma="tetrumme%2Fnwn">τετρυμμένων</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="th%3Ds">τῆς</w> <w lemma="kakopaqei%2Fas">κακοπαθείας</w>, <w lemma="a%29nekale%2Fsato">ἀνεκαλέσατο</w> <w lemma="tai%3Ds">ταῖς</w> <w lemma="sa%2Flpigcin">σάλπιγξιν</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="strathgo%5Cs">στρατηγὸς</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="prosba%2Fllontas">προσβάλλοντας</w>.

Scipio took part in the battle, but consulted his safety as far as possible;

for he had with him three men carrying large shields, who holding these close covered the surface exposed to the wall and thus afforded him protection.

So that passing along the side of his line on higher ground he contributed greatly to the success of the day;

for he could both see what was going on and being seen by all his men he inspired the combatants with great spirit.

The consequence was that nothing was omitted which was necessary in the engagement, but the moment that circumstances suggested any step to him he set to work at once to do what was necessary.

When the front rank advanced confidently to mount the ladders, it was not so much the numbers of the defenders which made the assault hazardous as the great height of the wall.

Those on the wall consequently plucked up courage when they saw the difficulties of the assailant.

For some of the ladders broke, as owing to their height so many mounted them at the same time, while on others those who led the way grew dizzy owing to their elevated position, and a very slight resistance on the part of the besieged sufficed to make them throw themselves off the ladders.

Also whenever the defers adopted the expedient of throwing beams or suchlike things from the battlements the whole of those on the ladders would be swept off and fall to the ground.

Yet in spite of all these difficulties nothing could restrain the dash and fury of the Romans, but while the first scalers were still falling the vacant places were instantly taken by the next in order.

The hour, however, was now advanced, and as the soldiers were worn out by fatigue, Scipio recalled the assailants by bugle.

Walbank Commentary

Overview

10.2.1 - 10.20.8

Scipio's character; the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> To succeed the two Scipios, killed in 211 (viii. 38 n., ix. 11), Publius' son, P. Cornelius P.f. L.n. Scipio (Africanus), was sent out with imperium pro consule by popular vote (Livy, xxvi. 18. 4–11, 19. 10–11); on the reasons for his appointment in place of Claudius Nero see Scullard, Pol. 66. Livy dates his arrival in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Spain&groupId=983&placeId=1735">Spain</a> to 211, and consequently <milestone unit="page" n="191">[191]</milestone> puts the fall of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> in 210; but in fact he arrived in 210, and took the Punic base in 209 (see above, p. 14). On Scipio's preparations during winter 210–9 see Livy, xxvi. 19. 12–20. 6. The account of Scipio's character, introduced at the point at which he harangues his troops before crossing the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Ebro&groupId=549&placeId=1031">Ebro</a> in spring 209 (cf. 6. 1 n.), does not aim at completeness (3. 1, where his beneficence and magnanimity are passed over as well known; cf. Bruns, 3). The digression is designed to counter popular views of how Scipio took <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a>, and is thus parallel to the polemic against the sensational historians who attributed Hannibal's crossing of the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Alps&groupId=313&placeId=609">Alps</a> to divine intervention (iii. 47. 6–48. 12); in both passages (11. 4, cf. iii. 48. 12) P. supports his version by the claim of autopsy. Consequently the origin and credibility of P.'s interpretation of Scipio's character cannot be disentangled from the question of the credibility of his account of the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a>. According to P., Scipio learnt, while still in winter quarters, of the existence of a shallow lagoon on the inside of the city, and of a fall in its level each evening (8. 7); and on arriving there, the day before the attack was due to begin, he harangued his troops, promising them inter alia the manifest intervention of Neptune (11. 7–8) on their side. When at the proper time the ebb came and the wading party was sent across the lagoon, the army was struck with the thought that this was <w lang="el-GR">μετά τινος θεοῦ προνοίας</w> (14. 11). This illustrates P.'s thesis that Scipio did not owe his success to 'the gods and Tyche' (9.2), but to his own foresight (2. 13); but that he, like Lycurgus (2. 8–11), deliberately represented the fruit of calculation as the work of divine powers (2. 12). What is the truth about the ebb? Although the Mediterranean is in general tideless, tides occur at some points. But if this ebb is a tidal phenomenon P. must be wrong in saying that it occurred daily <w lang="el-GR">ἐπὶ δείλην ὀψίαν</w> (though he may, of course, have generalized what was true for the day for which Scipio planned the attack). Alternatively the ebb had some other cause such as wind action. Livy (xxvi. 45. 8) mentions a north wind which assisted the tide; and Scullard (Scip. 76–9) quotes several examples of similar phenomena due to wind, from the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Red Sea&groupId=223&placeId=474">Red Sea</a>, the Crimea, the Suez Canal, and Geneva. It is also attested that north or north-east winds can lower the level of the water by one to one and a half feet in the neighbourhood of Cartagena (Mediterranean Pilot <emph rend="superscript">6</emph> , i. 69; Scullard, Scip. 78–79 n. 3). Scullard also considers (Scip. 79) the possibility of volcanic phenomena, but rightly dismisses this as unlikely. Tide or wind, either explanation of the ebb presents difficulties. If it was tidal (and so predictable) why did Scipio launch a violent attack in the morning instead of waiting for the ebb later in the day? Having promised Neptune's help (11. 7), why did he embark on an <milestone unit="page" n="192">[192]</milestone> operation the success of which would have made that help superfluous? And why did Mago do nothing to guard against an obvious danger? If on the other hand the ebb was caused by wind action, clearly Scipio could not be quite sure it would occur; how then could he, the previous day, promise the god's intervention? These difficulties would be evaded if the whole story of the ebb were a legend. But the character of P.'s sources virtually excludes this hypothesis. For his account of the capture of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> he used at least three, and possibly four, sources, apart from his own autopsy (11. 4 n.). He had the evidence of C. Laelius, Scipio's close friend (3. 2), probably oral (Laqueur, Hermes, 1921, 207–25, argues unconvincingly for a written account). He had also access to an account written by P. Scipio himself and sent (presumably after 190) to Philip V of Macedon (9. 3), in which he confirmed that his operations were based on the calculations expounded by P., including the information on the lagoon. Further, Silenus described the capture (Livy, xxvi. 49. 3), and P. may be assumed to have consulted him. The strong similarity between the accounts of P. and Livy points to a common tradition, but it is not easy to establish the relationship between the two versions. It has been argued that Livy used P., either directly or more probably via Coelius, and that the additional details which he gives (cf. Klotz, Appians Darstellung, 73) come from a secondary source like Silenus (added by Livy or again, more probably, by Coelius); cf. Kahrstedt, iii. 289 ff.; De Sanctis, iii. 2. 372. On this hypothesis, the Roman point of view in both P. and Livy derives from P.'s use of Scipio and Laelius. Klotz has argued, however, that Livy's additions form an integral part of the narrative and are only to be explained as coming from a source common to P. and to Livy (again, used probably via Coelius); cf. Klotz, Livius, 178 f.; Hermes, 1952, 334–43. On this view the Roman colouring must derive from this common original source, who will hardly be other than Fabius Pictor. P. will have made Fabius his main source, checking him from Laelius and Scipio's letter. To choose between these hypotheses is not easy. But it weighs against Klotz that in xxvi. 45. 9, 'hoc cura ac ratione compertum in prodigium ac deos uertens Scipio . . .', Livy echoes P.'s own attitude towards Scipio's exploitation of the gods; and though this phrase occurs in Livy's account of Scipio's speech just before the crossing of the lagoon, which has nothing corresponding in P. and owes a good deal to Livian rhetorical elaboration, nevertheless its ultimate origin in P. seems unquestionable. If, as Klotz argues, the additions in Livy read like an integral part of his narrative, this could merely be evidence of Livy's skill rather than an argument for the use of a common source from which P. omitted them. Further, at two points (9. 7 and 11. 1–3), where P. seems to have combined two sources with <milestone unit="page" n="193">[193]</milestone> less than his usual skill, Livy (xxvi. 42. 6, 42. 9) faithfully reproduces what he says. Klotz's theory is therefore to be rejected. P.'s source will be most likely Silenus, modified by information from Laelius and Scipio; but though conclusive evidence is lacking, he may well have made use of Fabius too, for a Roman source could have obtained information on Mago's dispositions (12. 2–3) from Mago himself when a prisoner at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> (cf. 19. 8) perhaps more easily than Silenus in the camp of Hannibal. Livy's account will go back ultimately to P., probably through Coelius; but he gives information not in P. which is not always due to elaboration (e.g. xxvi. 42. 5, 43. 1, and 44. 10 on the part played by the fleet) and may have been added by Coelius from elsewhere. With all these sources to draw on P. will hardly have described a purely imaginary ebb. On the other hand, some of the difficulties which it creates and which have been mentioned above are perhaps less serious than they seem. If the ebb was due to wind action (and this is on the whole more likely, despite P.'s use of <w lang="el-GR">ἄμπωτις</w>, 14. 2 and 14. 7) the risk that it might not occur on the day in question could be very considerably reduced if Scipio had his local informants with him to confirm that weather conditions made its occurrence reasonably certain. Moreover, the morning attack was probably designed to exhaust the enemy (as P. indicates, 12. 7) rather than to capture the city by direct assault. As attacker Scipio had the initiative and could contrive the time-table of the operation; and if things went especially well, it was always possible to send the wading-party across the lagoon even before the ebb, since, as Scullard observes (Scip. 80–81), it was fordable without it (8. 7). Scipio was counting on using the ebb; but he was not wholly dependent on it for the success of his strategy. There is then no good reason to doubt P.'s assertion that an ebb took place at the critical moment and that its appearance was foreseen well in advance and counted on by Scipio as part of his plan; for in view of the fact that P. had access to Scipio's own account of the attack and that he assures his readers (9. 3) that this account confirms his own version of Scipio's calculations, the fall in the level of the water can scarcely be regarded as an act of Tyche on which he was not primarily relying. However, some difficulties still remain unexplained. In particular, P.'s statement that on the previous day Scipio promised his men Neptune's help has been regarded as hardly credible; and it has even been suggested that when Livy (xxvi. 45. 9) makes Scipio refer to Neptune's guidance in a speech delivered just as the attack is about tobe launched, this order of events is the right one, and P. has transposed Scipio's speech to the earlier position to support his picture of Scipio's unscrupulous rationalism (Scullard, Scip. 81–82). On this hypothesis what were originally mere words of <milestone unit="page" n="194">[194]</milestone> encouragement to the men about to cross the lagoon have been twisted into a prophetic claim to supernatural help. Such a view would carry serious implications for P.'s integrity as a historian. But if the speech was movedand one must accept the view that it is taken from P.'s original source, not invented (cf. Vol. I, pp. 13–14)then surely it is Livy (or his immediate source) who has moved it for rhetorical effect, along with the reference to the information given by Tarraconese fishermen, which now comes in awkwardly in this context (cf. Meyer, Kl. Schr. ii. 450 n.). Delivered at the very moment of the attack, the speech is more rhetorically effective than it would be delivered the previous day (as in P.); cf. Klotz, Appians Darstellung, 74: 'wenn Livius diese Tatsache in die sptere Erzhlung einfgt, so tut er dies aus knstlerischen Rcksichten' (though for 'er' read perhaps 'er selbst oder seine Quelle'). In fact, the reference to Poseidon the previous day is perfectly credible if the risk of the prophecy's not being fulfilled is only very slight; and this was so. For even if it proved necessary to send the men across the lagoon before the ebb occurred, this manoeuvre could without too much difficulty have been attributed to Neptune. In any case, in the moment of victory no one was going to ask too many questions about Scipio's promise; an epiphany could always be conveniently reported from some other part of the field, and in the last resort only the successful prophecies are remembered. By saying that Neptune would give his help, when he was in fact proposing to use the ebb water to cross the lagoon Scipio lies open to a charge of using religious terminology to deceive. Reluctance to believe this has been due to a reluctance to follow P. in his characterization of Scipio as a man who cynically exploited religion to gain his ends; and it has been pointed out that the other story recounted to support this thesis, viz. that of Scipio's election to the aedileship, must be rejected for the reasons given below (4. 1–5. 8 n.), and that there is little evidence from the rest of Scipio's career as P. describes it (Haywood, 33–34). The origins of P.'s interpretation have been much debated. Ed. Meyer argued that it went back to C. Laelius, whom he took to be a Stoic rationalist (Kl. Schr. ii. 423–57 = S.-B. Berlin, 1916, 1068–85); but, as Laqueur has shown (Hermes, 1921, 151 ff.), rationalism was no part of Stoic doctrine before Panaetius, and there in no evidence that Laelius was either a Stoic or a rationalist. Scullard (Scip. 12) therefore seems to be right when he claims P.'s rationalism as his own, not that of Laelius. P. approves Scipio's supposed policy of attributing his achievements to the gods in order to impress the masses, just as he expresses his willingness to allow false stories of miracles in order to instil piety into the populace (xvi. 12. 9). His picture of Scipio is his answer to the 'legend' which in some form must already have existed when he wrote and which <milestone unit="page" n="195">[195]</milestone> probably appeared in his main source, whether Silenus or not; for discussion of the development of the 'legend' see below, 2. 3 n. This does not however mean that Scipio's speech at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> is to be rejected as part of the 'legend'. Even if P. drew largely on Silenus, he had access to Scipio's letter (9. 3) and Laelius' recollections. It has been argued that Laelius did not fully understand P.'s questions (Haywood, 35–38) and indeed the two men may have made quite different assumptions about religious matters. But unless we are to dismiss Laelius as a dotard, we must surely assume that he confirmed Silenus' account that the men were promised Neptune's help and that in the ebb the next day this 'prophency' was fulfilled. However, Scipio was not necessarily the rationalist that P. describes. De Sanctis (Riv. fil. 1936, 192–3) argues that the existence of the 'legend' implies that Scipio believed in it. This is surely going much too far. On the other hand, Scipio may well have made the 'prophecy' attributed to him at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=New Carthage&groupId=791&placeId=1430">New Carthage</a> and yet have believed sincerely in the gods; he may even have taken the existence of the ebb as a sign that Neptune was favouring his enterprise. Scullard (Scip. 19) regards the 'legend' as a proof of Scipio's genius: 'a pure rationalist or a smaller man would never have gained such a romantic halo'. Scipio was certainly a great man, and he can hardly have been a rationalist of the Polybian stamp. He was probably religious as Romans of that age understood religious orthodoxy; but, as Haywood (44) points out, even extreme piety is not identical with mysticism, and there seems to be no reliable evidence that Scipio believed himself to be divinely inspired or thought that he could count on divine help to a greater extent or more regularly than anyone else who observed true piety. See for discussion of the problems touched on above: Kahrstedt, iii. 502–11; Ed. Meyer, Kl. Schr. ii. 423–57; Laqueur, Hermes, 1921, 131–225; Scullard, Scip. 6–19, 56–99; R. M. Haywood, 9–44; De Sanctis, Riv. fil. 1936, 189–93; H. Bengtson, HZ, 168, 1943, 487–508; F. W. Walbank, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc., 1966–7.

Specifics

10.13.1 - 10.13.1

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">κατὰ δύναμιν ἀσφαλῶς</w>:</emph> cf. 3. 7 n. Livy omits this, presumably as discreditable.

10.13.3 - 10.13.3

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τοὺς ὑπερδεξίους τόπους</w>:</emph> Livy's source, evidently supplementing P. from elsewhere (perhaps directly from Silenus), adds the detail that this was 'the hill of Mercury' (Livy, xxvi. 44. 6)evidently the Castillo de los Moros. There is good evidence for the identification of a Phoenician god with Hermes, but his Phoenician name is uncertain; see Gsell, iv. 330.

10.13.11 - 10.13.11

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τῆς ἡμέρας προβαινούσης</w>:</emph> 'as the day was now advancing' (cf. ii. 72. 5 of the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Trebia&groupId=1044&placeId=1838">Trebia</a>, where the action had also begun in the early <milestone unit="page" n="214">[214]</milestone> morning). Livy (xxvi. 45. 8) has medium ferme diei, perhaps his own false deduction from this phrase in P., or perhaps derived by Coelius from a supplementary source. 8. 7 shows that P. believed it to be near evening (see next note).

Polybius, Histories

Bibliography

Archaeology

Places

Walbank Commentary

Commentary