Polybius, Histories

Translation

Book 7 - Chapter 9

<head lang="la">III. Res Graeciae</head><w lemma="%2A%28%2Forkos">Ὅρκος</w>, <w lemma="o%28%5Cn">ὃν</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Fqeto">ἔθετο</w> <w lemma="%2A%29anni%2Fbas">Ἀννίβας</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="strathgo%2Fs">στρατηγός</w>, <w lemma="%2Ama%2Fgwnos">Μάγωνος</w>, <w lemma="%2Amu%2Frkanos">Μύρκανος</w>, <w lemma="%2Abarmo%2Fkaros">Βαρμόκαρος</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntes">πάντες</w> <w lemma="gerousiastai%5C">γερουσιασταὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fwn">Καρχηδονίων</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="met%27">μετ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%3D">αὐτοῦ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntes">πάντες</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdo%2Fnioi">Καρχηδόνιοι</w> <w lemma="strateuo%2Fmenoi">στρατευόμενοι</w> <w lemma="met%27">μετ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%3D">αὐτοῦ</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="%2Acenofa%2Fnh">Ξενοφάνη</w> <w lemma="%2Akleoma%2Fxou">Κλεομάχου</w> <w lemma="%2A%29aqhnai%3Don">Ἀθηναῖον</w> <w lemma="presbeuth%2Fn">πρεσβευτήν</w>, <w lemma="o%28%5Cn">ὃν</w> <w lemma="a%29pe%2Fsteile">ἀπέστειλε</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="h%28ma%3Ds">ἡμᾶς</w> <w lemma="%2Afi%2Flippos">Φίλιππος</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="basileu%5Cs">βασιλεὺς</w> <w lemma="%2Adhmhtri%2Fou">Δημητρίου</w> <w lemma="u%28pe%5Cr">ὑπὲρ</w> <w lemma="au%28tou%3D">αὑτοῦ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Amakedo%2Fnwn">Μακεδόνων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="summa%2Fxwn">συμμάχων</w>,

<w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="%2Adio%5Cs">Διὸς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%28%2Fhras">Ἥρας</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%29apo%2Fllwnos">Ἀπόλλωνος</w>, <w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="dai%2Fmonos">δαίμονος</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fwn">Καρχηδονίων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%28hrakle%2Fous">Ἡρακλέους</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%29iola%2Fou">Ἰολάου</w>, <w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="%2A%29%2Farews">Ἄρεως</w>, <w lemma="%2Atri%2Ftwnos">Τρίτωνος</w>, <w lemma="%2Aposeidw%3Dnos">Ποσειδῶνος</w>, <w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="qew%3Dn">θεῶν</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="sustrateuome%2Fnwn">συστρατευομένων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%28hli%2Fou">Ἡλίου</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Aselh%2Fnhs">Σελήνης</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Agh%3Ds">Γῆς</w>, <w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="potamw%3Dn">ποταμῶν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="lime%2Fnwn">λιμένων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28da%2Ftwn">ὑδάτων</w>,

<w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntwn">πάντων</w> <w lemma="qew%3Dn">θεῶν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Fsoi">ὅσοι</w> <w lemma="kate%2Fxousi">κατέχουσι</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdo%2Fna">Καρχηδόνα</w>, <w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="qew%3Dn">θεῶν</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntwn">πάντων</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Fsoi">ὅσοι</w> <w lemma="%2Amakedoni%2Fan">Μακεδονίαν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fllhn">ἄλλην</w> <w lemma="%2A%28ella%2Fda">Ἑλλάδα</w> <w lemma="kate%2Fxousin">κατέχουσιν</w>, <w lemma="e%29nanti%2Fon">ἐναντίον</w> <w lemma="qew%3Dn">θεῶν</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntwn">πάντων</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="stratei%2Fan">στρατείαν</w>, <w lemma="o%28%2Fsoi">ὅσοι</w> <w lemma="tine%5Cs">τινὲς</w> <w lemma="e%29festh%2Fkasin">ἐφεστήκασιν</w> <w lemma="e%29pi%5C">ἐπὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%3Dde">τοῦδε</w> <w lemma="tou%3D">τοῦ</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Frkou">ὅρκου</w>.

<w lemma="%2A%29anni%2Fbas">Ἀννίβας</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="strathgo%5Cs">στρατηγὸς</w> <w lemma="ei%29%3Dpe">εἶπε</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntes">πάντες</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fwn">Καρχηδονίων</w> <w lemma="gerousiastai%5C">γερουσιασταὶ</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="met%27">μετ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%3D">αὐτοῦ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntes">πάντες</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdo%2Fnioi">Καρχηδόνιοι</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="strateuo%2Fmenoi">στρατευόμενοι</w> <w lemma="met%27">μετ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%3D">αὐτοῦ</w>, <w lemma="o%28%5C">ὃ</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="dokh%3D%7C">δοκῇ</w> <w lemma="u%28mi%3Dn">ὑμῖν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w>, <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Frkon">ὅρκον</w> <w lemma="tou%3Dton">τοῦτον</w> <w lemma="qe%2Fsqai">θέσθαι</w> <w lemma="peri%5C">περὶ</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fas">φιλίας</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="eu%29noi%2Fas">εὐνοίας</w> <w lemma="kalh%3Ds">καλῆς</w>, <w lemma="fi%2Flous">φίλους</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="oi%29kei%2Fous">οἰκείους</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="a%29delfou%2Fs">ἀδελφούς</w>,

<w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="w%28%3D%7Ct%27">ᾧτ᾽</w> <w lemma="ei%29%3Dnai">εἶναι</w> <w lemma="sw%7Czome%2Fnous">σῳζομένους</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="basile%2Fws">βασιλέως</w> <w lemma="%2Afili%2Fppou">Φιλίππου</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Amakedo%2Fnwn">Μακεδόνων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fllwn">ἄλλων</w> <w lemma="%2A%28ellh%2Fnwn">Ἑλλήνων</w>, <w lemma="o%28%2Fsoi">ὅσοι</w> <w lemma="ei%29si%5Cn">εἰσὶν</w> <w lemma="au%29tw%3Dn">αὐτῶν</w> <w lemma="su%2Fmmaxoi">σύμμαχοι</w>, <w lemma="kuri%2Fous">κυρίους</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fous">Καρχηδονίους</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%29anni%2Fban">Ἀννίβαν</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="strathgo%5Cn">στρατηγὸν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="met%27">μετ᾽</w> <w lemma="au%29tou%3D">αὐτοῦ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fwn">Καρχηδονίων</w> <w lemma="u%28pa%2Frxous">ὑπάρχους</w>, <w lemma="o%28%2Fsoi">ὅσοι</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="au%29toi%3Ds">αὐτοῖς</w> <w lemma="no%2Fmois">νόμοις</w> <w lemma="xrw%3Dntai">χρῶνται</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itukai%2Fous">Ἰτυκαίους</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Fsai">ὅσαι</w> <w lemma="po%2Fleis">πόλεις</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Fqnh">ἔθνη</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fwn">Καρχηδονίων</w> <w lemma="u%28ph%2Fkoa">ὑπήκοα</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="stratiw%2Ftas">στρατιώτας</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="summa%2Fxous">συμμάχους</w>,

<w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fsas">πάσας</w> <w lemma="po%2Fleis">πόλεις</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29%2Fqnh">ἔθνη</w>, <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%28%2F">ἅ</w> <w lemma="e%29stin">ἐστιν</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="h%28%2F">ἥ</w> <w lemma="te">τε</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fa">φιλία</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fa%7C">Ἰταλίᾳ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Akelti%2Fa%7C">Κελτίᾳ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="th%3D%7C">τῇ</w> <w lemma="%2Aligusti%2Fnh%7C">Λιγυστίνῃ</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="ou%28%2Fstinas">οὕστινας</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="ge%2Fnhtai">γένηται</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fa">φιλία</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="summaxi%2Fa">συμμαχία</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="tau%2Fth%7C">ταύτῃ</w> <w lemma="th%3D%7C">τῇ</w> <w lemma="xw%2Fra%7C">χώρᾳ</w>.

<w lemma="e%29%2Fstai">ἔσται</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Afi%2Flippos">Φίλιππος</w> <w lemma="o%28">ὁ</w> <w lemma="basileu%5Cs">βασιλεὺς</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Amakedo%2Fnes">Μακεδόνες</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fllwn">ἄλλων</w> <w lemma="%2A%28ellh%2Fnwn">Ἑλλήνων</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="su%2Fmmaxoi">σύμμαχοι</w>, <w lemma="sw%7Czo%2Fmenoi">σῳζόμενοι</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="fulatto%2Fmenoi">φυλαττόμενοι</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fwn">Καρχηδονίων</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="sustrateuome%2Fnwn">συστρατευομένων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itukai%2Fwn">Ἰτυκαίων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="pasw%3Dn">πασῶν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flewn">πόλεων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29qnw%3Dn">ἐθνῶν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Fsa">ὅσα</w> <w lemma="e%29sti%5C">ἐστὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fois">Καρχηδονίοις</w> <w lemma="u%28ph%2Fkoa">ὑπήκοα</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="summa%2Fxwn">συμμάχων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="stratiwtw%3Dn">στρατιωτῶν</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntwn">πάντων</w> <w lemma="e%29qnw%3Dn">ἐθνῶν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="po%2Flewn">πόλεων</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Fsa">ὅσα</w> <w lemma="e%29sti%5Cn">ἐστὶν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fa%7C">Ἰταλίᾳ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Akelti%2Fa%7C">Κελτίᾳ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Aligusti%2Fnh%7C">Λιγυστίνῃ</w>, <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28po%5C">ὑπὸ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fllwn">ἄλλων</w>, <w lemma="o%28%2Fsoi">ὅσοι</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="ge%2Fnwntai">γένωνται</w> <w lemma="su%2Fmmaxoi">σύμμαχοι</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="kat%27">κατ᾽</w> <w lemma="%2A%29itali%2Fan">Ἰταλίαν</w> <w lemma="to%2Fpois">τόποις</w> <w lemma="tou%2Ftois">τούτοις</w>.

<w lemma="ou%29k">οὐκ</w> <w lemma="e%29pibouleu%2Fsomen">ἐπιβουλεύσομεν</w> <w lemma="a%29llh%2Flois">ἀλλήλοις</w> <w lemma="ou%29de%5C">οὐδὲ</w> <w lemma="lo%2Fxw%7C">λόχῳ</w> <w lemma="xrhso%2Fmeqa">χρησόμεθα</w> <w lemma="e%29p%27">ἐπ᾽</w> <w lemma="a%29llh%2Flois">ἀλλήλοις</w>, <w lemma="meta%5C">μετὰ</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fshs">πάσης</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="proqumi%2Fas">προθυμίας</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="eu%29noi%2Fas">εὐνοίας</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Fneu">ἄνευ</w> <w lemma="do%2Flou">δόλου</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29piboulh%3Ds">ἐπιβουλῆς</w> <w lemma="e%29so%2Fmeqa">ἐσόμεθα</w> <w lemma="pole%2Fmioi">πολέμιοι</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="%2Akarxhdoni%2Fous">Καρχηδονίους</w> <w lemma="polemou%3Dsi">πολεμοῦσι</w> <w lemma="xwri%5Cs">χωρὶς</w> <w lemma="basile%2Fwn">βασιλέων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="po%2Flewn">πόλεων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="lime%2Fnwn">λιμένων</w>, <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="ou%28%5Cs">οὓς</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="ei%29sin">εἰσιν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Frkoi">ὅρκοι</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fai">φιλίαι</w>.

<w lemma="e%29so%2Fmeqa">ἐσόμεθα</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="h%28mei%3Ds">ἡμεῖς</w> <w lemma="pole%2Fmioi">πολέμιοι</w> <w lemma="toi%3Ds">τοῖς</w> <w lemma="polemou%3Dsi">πολεμοῦσι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="basile%2Fa">βασιλέα</w> <w lemma="%2Afi%2Flippon">Φίλιππον</w> <w lemma="xwri%5Cs">χωρὶς</w> <w lemma="basile%2Fwn">βασιλέων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="po%2Flewn">πόλεων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29qnw%3Dn">ἐθνῶν</w>, <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="ou%28%5Cs">οὓς</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="ei%29sin">εἰσιν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Frkoi">ὅρκοι</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fai">φιλίαι</w>.

<w lemma="e%29%2Fsesqe">ἔσεσθε</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="su%2Fmmaxoi">σύμμαχοι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w>, <w lemma="o%28%2Fs">ὅς</w> <w lemma="e%29stin">ἐστιν</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fous">Ῥωμαίους</w>, <w lemma="e%28%2Fws">ἕως</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="u%28mi%3Dn">ὑμῖν</w> <w lemma="oi%28">οἱ</w> <w lemma="qeoi%5C">θεοὶ</w> <w lemma="didw%3Dsi">διδῶσι</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="eu%29hmeri%2Fan">εὐημερίαν</w>.

<w lemma="bohqh%2Fsete">βοηθήσετε</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w>, <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="xrei%2Fa">χρεία</w> <w lemma="h%29%3D%7C">ᾖ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="sumfwnh%2Fswmen">συμφωνήσωμεν</w>.

<w lemma="poihsa%2Fntwn">ποιησάντων</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="qew%3Dn">θεῶν</w> <w lemma="eu%29hmeri%2Fan">εὐημερίαν</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="kata%5C">κατὰ</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fous">Ῥωμαίους</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="summa%2Fxous">συμμάχους</w> <w lemma="au%29tw%3Dn">αὐτῶν</w>, <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="a%29ciw%3Dsi">ἀξιῶσι</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%3Doi">Ῥωμαῖοι</w> <w lemma="sunti%2Fqesqai">συντίθεσθαι</w> <w lemma="peri%5C">περὶ</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fas">φιλίας</w>, <w lemma="sunqhso%2Fmeqa">συνθησόμεθα</w>, <w lemma="w%28%2Fst%27">ὥστ᾽</w> <w lemma="ei%29%3Dnai">εἶναι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="u%28ma%3Ds">ὑμᾶς</w> <w lemma="th%5Cn">τὴν</w> <w lemma="au%29th%5Cn">αὐτὴν</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fan">φιλίαν</w>,

<w lemma="e%29f%27">ἐφ᾽</w> <w lemma="w%28%3D%7Cte">ᾧτε</w> <w lemma="mh%5C">μὴ</w> <w lemma="e%29cei%3Dnai">ἐξεῖναι</w> <w lemma="au%29toi%3Ds">αὐτοῖς</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Frasqai">ἄρασθαι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="u%28ma%3Ds">ὑμᾶς</w> <w lemma="mhde%2Fpote">μηδέποτε</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w>, <w lemma="mhd%27">μηδ᾽</w> <w lemma="ei%29%3Dnai">εἶναι</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fous">Ῥωμαίους</w> <w lemma="kuri%2Fous">κυρίους</w> <w lemma="%2Akerkurai%2Fwn">Κερκυραίων</w> <w lemma="mhd%27">μηδ᾽</w> <w lemma="%2A%29apollwniatw%3Dn">Ἀπολλωνιατῶν</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2A%29epidamni%2Fwn">Ἐπιδαμνίων</w> <w lemma="mhde%5C">μηδὲ</w> <w lemma="%2Afa%2Frou">Φάρου</w> <w lemma="mhde%5C">μηδὲ</w> <w lemma="%2Adima%2Flhs">Διμάλης</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Aparqi%2Fnwn">Παρθίνων</w> <w lemma="mhd%27">μηδ᾽</w> <w lemma="%2A%29atintani%2Fas">Ἀτιντανίας</w>.

<w lemma="a%29podw%2Fsousi">ἀποδώσουσι</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="%2Adhmhtri%2Fw%7C">Δημητρίῳ</w> <w lemma="tw%3D%7C">τῷ</w> <w lemma="%2Afari%2Fw%7C">Φαρίῳ</w> <w lemma="tou%5Cs">τοὺς</w> <w lemma="oi%29kei%2Fous">οἰκείους</w> <w lemma="pa%2Fntas">πάντας</w>, <w lemma="oi%28%2F">οἵ</w> <w lemma="ei%29sin">εἰσιν</w> <w lemma="e%29n">ἐν</w> <w lemma="tw%3D%7C">τῷ</w> <w lemma="koinw%3D%7C">κοινῷ</w> <w lemma="tw%3Dn">τῶν</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%2Fwn">Ῥωμαίων</w>.

<w lemma="e%29a%5Cn">ἐὰν</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="ai%29%2Frwntai">αἴρωνται</w> <w lemma="%2A%28rwmai%3Doi">Ῥωμαῖοι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="u%28ma%3Ds">ὑμᾶς</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w> <w lemma="h%29%5C">ἢ</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="h%28ma%3Ds">ἡμᾶς</w>, <w lemma="bohqh%2Fsomen">βοηθήσομεν</w> <w lemma="a%29llh%2Flois">ἀλλήλοις</w> <w lemma="ei%29s">εἰς</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="po%2Flemon">πόλεμον</w>, <w lemma="kaqw%5Cs">καθὼς</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="e%28kate%2Frois">ἑκατέροις</w> <w lemma="h%29%3D%7C">ᾖ</w> <w lemma="xrei%2Fa">χρεία</w>.

<w lemma="o%28moi%2Fws">ὁμοίως</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29a%2Fn">ἐάν</w> <w lemma="tines">τινες</w> <w lemma="a%29%2Flloi">ἄλλοι</w> <w lemma="xwri%5Cs">χωρὶς</w> <w lemma="basile%2Fwn">βασιλέων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="po%2Flewn">πόλεων</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="e%29qnw%3Dn">ἐθνῶν</w>, <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="a%28%5C">ἃ</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="ei%29sin">εἰσιν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Frkoi">ὅρκοι</w> <w lemma="kai%5C">καὶ</w> <w lemma="fili%2Fai">φιλίαι</w>.

<w lemma="e%29a%5Cn">ἐὰν</w> <w lemma="de%5C">δὲ</w> <w lemma="dokh%3D%7C">δοκῇ</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="a%29felei%3Dn">ἀφελεῖν</w> <w lemma="h%29%5C">ἢ</w> <w lemma="prosqei%3Dnai">προσθεῖναι</w> <w lemma="pro%5Cs">πρὸς</w> <w lemma="to%2Fnde">τόνδε</w> <w lemma="to%5Cn">τὸν</w> <w lemma="o%28%2Frkon">ὅρκον</w>, <w lemma="a%29felou%3Dmen">ἀφελοῦμεν</w> <w lemma="h%29%5C">ἢ</w> <w lemma="prosqh%2Fsomen">προσθήσομεν</w> <w lemma="w%28s">ὡς</w> <w lemma="a%29%5Cn">ἂν</w> <w lemma="h%28mi%3Dn">ἡμῖν</w> <w lemma="dokh%3D%7C">δοκῇ</w> <w lemma="a%29mfote%2Frois">ἀμφοτέροις</w>. [<foreign lang="la">Cod. Urb. fol. 96 exc. ant. p. 193</foreign>.<w lemma=""></w>]

<head>Treaty Between Hannibal and King Philip V. of Macedon</head>This is a sworn treaty made between Hannibal, Mago,<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note13">Preamble of a treaty made between Philip and Hannibal, by envoys sent after the battle of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Cannae&groupId=430&placeId=797">Cannae</a>. Ratified subsequently to March 13. B. C. 215. See<bibl n="Liv. 23.33" default="NO" valid="yes">Livy, 23, 33</bibl>-39.<foreign lang="la">Ante</foreign><ref target="b3c2" targOrder="U">3, 2</ref>.</note>Barmocarus, and such members of the Carthaginian Gerusia as were present, and all Carthaginians serving in his army, on the one part; and Xenophanes, son of Cleomachus of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Athens&groupId=379&placeId=715">Athens</a>, sent to us by King Philip, as his ambassador, on behalf of himself, the Macedonians, and their allies, on the other part.The oath is taken in the presence of Zeus,<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note14">Gods by whom the oath is taken on either side.</note>Here, and Apollo: of the god of the Carthaginians, Hercules, and Iolaus: of Ares, Triton, Poseidon: of the gods that accompany the army, and of the sun, moon, and earth: of rivers, harbours, waters: of all the gods who rule <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>: of all the gods who rule <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Macedonia&groupId=723&placeId=428">Macedonia</a> and the rest of Greece: of all the gods of war that are witnesses to this oath.Hannibal, general, and all the Carthaginian senators with<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note15">Declaration on the part of Hannibal of the objects of the treaty.</note>him, and all Carthaginians serving in his army, subject to our mutual consent, proposes to make this sworn treaty of friendship and honourable good-will. Let us be friends, close allies, and brethren, on the conditions herein following:—(1) Let the Carthaginians, as supreme, Hannibal their<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note16">1st article sworn to by Philip's representative.</note>chief general and those serving with him, all members of the Carthaginian dominion living under the same laws, as well as the people of Utica, and the cities and tribes subject to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>, and their soldiers and allies, and all cities and tribes in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, Celt-land, and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Liguria&groupId=689&placeId=1259">Liguria</a>, with whom we have a compact of friendship, and with whomsoever in this country we may hereafter form such compact, be supported by King Philip and the Macedonians, and all other Greeks in alliance with them.(2) On their parts also King Philip and the Macedonians,<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note17">1st article sworn to by Hannibal</note>and such other Greeks as are his allies, shall be supported and protected by the Carthaginians<pb n="516" />now in this army, and by the people of Utica, and by all cities and tribes subject to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>, both soldiers and allies, and by all allied cities and tribes in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, Celt-land, and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Liguria&groupId=689&placeId=1259">Liguria</a>, and by all others in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> as shall hereafter become allies of the Carthaginians.<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note18">and the Cartha-ginians.</note>(3) We will not make plots against, nor lie in ambush for,<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note19">2d article sworn to by Philip's representative.</note>each other; but in all sincerity and good-will, without reserve or secret design, will be enemies to the enemies of the Carthaginians, saving and excepting those kings, cities, and ports with which we have sworn agreements and friendships.(4) And we, too, will be enemies to the enemies of<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note20">2d article sworn to by Hannibal.</note>King Philip, saving and excepting those kings, cities, and tribes, with which we have sworn agreements and friendships.(5) Ye shall be friends to us in the war in which we now<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note21">3d article sworn to by Philip's representative.</note>are engaged against the Romans, till such time as the gods give us and you the victory: and ye shall assist us in all ways that be needful, and in whatsoever way we may mutually determine.(6) And when the gods have given us victory in our<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note22">3d article sworn to by Hannibal.</note>war with the Romans and their allies, if Hannibal shall deem it right to make terms with the Romans, these terms shall include the same friendship with you, made on these conditions: (1) the Romans not to be allowed to make war on you; (2) not to have power over <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Corcyra&groupId=491&placeId=923">Corcyra</a>, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Apollonia&groupId=1066&placeId=1873">Apollonia</a>, Epidamnum, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Pharos&groupId=879&placeId=1586">Pharos</a>, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Dimale&groupId=539&placeId=1014">Dimale</a>, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Parthini&groupId=846&placeId=1527">Parthini</a>, nor <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Atitania&groupId=382&placeId=720">Atitania</a>; (3) to restore to Demetrius of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Pharos&groupId=879&placeId=1586">Pharos</a> all those of his friends now in the dominion of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>.(7) If the Romans ever make war on you or on us we will<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note23">1st joint article.</note>aid each other in such war, according to the need of either.(8) So also if any other nation whatever does so, always<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note24">2d joint article.</note>excepting kings, cities, and tribes, with whom we have sworn agreements and friendships.(9) If we decide to take away from, or<note anchored="yes" place="marg" id="note25">3d joint article. Mutual consent required for an alteration.</note>add to this sworn treaty, we will so take away, or add thereto, only as we both may agree. . . .<pb n="517" />

Walbank Commentary

Overview

7.9.2 - 7.9.3

List of deities guaranteeing the oath. Since Reiske's assumption that the deities were mentioned in alternate Greek and Punic triads, it was long believed that the list covered the gods of both sides. Ed. Meyer (Roscher, Ausfhrl. Lexicon, i (1890), 2872, 'Baal') first suggested that the list is one of Phoenician gods; and since the oath is Hannibal's it seems plausible that the gods invoked, despite their Greek names, should be the gods of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> (cf. iii. 25. 6). On 'the gods who possess Macedon and the rest of Greece' see below, § 3 n. In general cf. Gsell, iv. 223–4; Bickerman, TAPA, 1944, 90 n. 7; Benedetto, Riv. indo-greco-ital. 3 (fasc. 3–4), 1920, 101–4. Hitherto, however, not every deity named has been satisfactorily identified, partly because the Greek equivalents are not necessarily all the usual ones. Cronos and Asclepios, for instance, frequently occur as the Greek names of Punic gods, but neither is mentioned here. Moreover, gods familiar from their popularity in private life may not necessarily appear in a public treaty (cf. Benedetto, op. cit. 105). The arrangement in groups of three has been held to correspond to triads of deities actually worshipped together; but the grouping could equally well be for rhythmical, i.e. incantational, purposes, and need not correspond to recognized triads. Recently G. CharlesPicard has argued (Studi annibalici, 33–36) that the gods are the personal and family deities of Hannibal rather than those of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>. G. Charles-Picard has developed his view (referred to in ll. 20–23 of this note), that the gods are the personal gods of Hannibal's family, in Hannibal (Paris, 1967), 26–35; he takes Zeus to be Baal Samem (Shamim) and Ares to be Hadad, Poseidon Yam, and Triton one of Yam's assistants.

7.9.0 - 7.12.0

Philip V and Messene Philip's first intervention in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Messenia&groupId=760&placeId=1380">Messenia</a> may fall in either Ol. 141, 1 (216/15) or 141, 2 (215/14), and so may belong to the summer or autumn of 215 (Seeliger, 13 n. 12) or to the spring of 214 (Niese, ii. 471 n. 2, and Holleaux, 197 n. 4, both leaving the date open). What survives in P. can be supplemented from Plut. Arat. 49–51, which <milestone unit="page" n="56">[56]</milestone> derives from him (Walbank, Aratos, 19); this shows (Plut. Arat. 51. 1) that the first intervention preceded Philip's Epirote expedition of 214 (Livy, xxiv. 40. 1–17).

Specifics

7.9.1 - 7.9.1

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὅρκος, ὃν ἔθετο Ἀννίβας</w>:</emph> cf. § 4; for the unusual phrase Bickerman (AJP, 1952, 6 n. 10) quotes 2 Kings xxiii. 5: <w lang="el-GR">διαθήκην . . . ἔθετο</w>, and argues that 'the solecism covers a Phoenician formula'; but cf. Aesch. Agam. 1570, <w lang="el-GR">ὅρκους θεμένη</w>, not to be dismissed as a poetical figure, for <w lang="el-GR">ὅρκον</w> occurs several times after <w lang="el-GR">προστίθεσθαι</w>. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Μάγωνος, Μύρκανος, Βαρμόκαρος</w>:</emph> these co-jurors are probably representatives of the Carthaginian government present in camp as members of Hannibal's council (cf. iii. 20. 8, <w lang="el-GR">οἱ μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ σύνεδροι</w>, 34. 8, 71. 5, 85. 6, ix. 24. 5). Mago is not Hannibal's brother (cf. iii. 71. 5, 79. 4, 114. 7), for he was now in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> (Livy, xxiii. 32. 5–7), but the Mago who accompanied Xenophanes back to Philip and was captured along with him by the Romans (Livy, xxiii. 34. 2 ff.); <milestone unit="page" n="44">[44]</milestone> Myrcan and Barmocar are otherwise unknown. Bickerman (AJP, 1952, 7) argues that the three men were 'probably members of his concilium, that is, the higher officers, responsible for the conduct of operations'. Were this so, it is unlikely that they would never appear elsewhere in our account of the war (Meltzer, ii. 475–6). Whether, as Movers argued (ii. 1. 498), the three named co-jurors were members of the smaller, and <w lang="el-GR">πάντες . . . γερουσιασταί</w> members of the larger, council (cf. i. 21. 6 n., x. 18. 1)while <w lang="el-GR">πάντες . . . γερουσιασταὶ οἱ μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ</w> (§ 4) covers both categoriesis uncertain, but the absence of a special mention of the named co-jurors in § 4 suggests that they are included there in the <w lang="el-GR">γερουσιασταί</w>, and is against Bickerman's hypothesis that they are merely members of Hannibal's staff-council (though as government representatives they were no doubt also members of this). Their separate mention here requires explanation. That they are named as having sworn on behalf of the rest is not possible, since an oath bound only the man swearing it (Steinwenter, RE, 'iusiurandum', col. 1254); the oath will have been sworn by all the gerousiastae and indeed by all the Carthaginians serving in the army (perhaps in a vast assembly, but more probably administered by officers; for Roman practice cf. vi. 21. 1–3). Chroust (Class. et med. 1954, 77) suggests that the three had been empowered to ratify the treaty, which would normally (cf. ii. 13. 7 n. (b); iii. 21. 1) have to be ratified at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>. Bickerman, who regards the treaty as a 'covenant' which did not commit the Carthaginian government (AJP, 1952, 18–19), thinks there is a lacuna before <w lang="el-GR">Μάγωνος</w>, and that the other 'members of the council' were named in the complete text; of this there is no evidence. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">πάντες Καρχηδόνιοι στρατευόμενοι μετ᾿ αὐτοῦ</w> :</emph> probably all swore (see the last note). Bickerman (AJP, 1952, 7) argues that the citizen army, 'as in every ancient city, is qualified to represent the whole city', and he quotes Punic coins, minted in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sicily&groupId=973&placeId=1724">Sicily</a>, inscribed <w lang="el-GR">ἀ</w>m manat, 'the people of the camp' (Head, 877). This is hardly consistent with his thesis that the treaty did not commit <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> as a state. There is nothing in favour of Chroust's view (Class. et med. 1954, 76 n. 96) that the army was included at the request of the Macedonians 'to make the treaty more acceptable'. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Ξενοφάνη Κλεομάχου Ἀθηναῖον</w>:</emph> Philip's envoy, captured on the return journey (cf. Livy, xxiii. 33. 16–34. 9; App. Maced. 1) and otherwise unknown; cf. Ferguson, 254. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Φίλιππος ὁ βασιλεὺς Δημητρίου</w>:</emph> this word-order is without parallel in Hellenistic royal formulae (on which see A. Aymard, REA, 1948, 232–63; RIDA, 1950, 61–97; Rev. hist. de droit franais et tranger, 1949, 579–90; Rel. Sci. Stor. ii. 222–3). Bickerman (TAPA, 1944, 98 n. 62) plausibly suggests that it reflects the Punic word-order, and quotes a parallel, 'Hilleshabal, the suffete, son of Bodtanit'. <milestone unit="page" n="45">[45]</milestone> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὑπὲρ αὑτοῦ καὶ Μακεδόνων καὶ τῶν συμμάχων</w>:</emph> for the juridical distinction between King and Macedonians cf. §§ 5 and 7 (where the Greek allies are also separately mentioned), xviii. 46. 5 (the Isthmus proclamation), two Latin inscriptions commemorating Perseus' defeat at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Pydna&groupId=919&placeId=1647">Pydna</a> (ILS, 8884; CIL, i <emph rend="superscript">2</emph> , p. 48, xxvii (acta triumph. Capitol.); OGIS, 283 (Attalus' dedication after <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Chios&groupId=462&placeId=863">Chios</a>); and Syll. 518, <w lang="el-GR">βασιλεὺς Ἀντίγο[νος βασιλέως] Δημητρίου κ[αὶ οἱ Μακεδόνες] καὶ οἱ σύμμαχοι [ἀπὸ τῆς περὶ] Σελλασίαν μά[χης? Ἀπόλλωνι</w> . See Walbank, Philip, 4 n. 1; Dow and Edson, Harv. Stud. 1937, 128 ff. The <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sellasia&groupId=966&placeId=1714">Sellasia</a> inscription provides an exact parallel for the three categories: King, Macedonians, and allies (i.e. the Greek Symmachy). It is not to be supposed that the Symmachy had been dissolved after the Social War (so Heuss, Stadt und Herrscher, 162–3); cf. 12. 6, 13. 1, xi. 5. 4 etc.

7.9.2 - 7.9.2

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Διὸς καὶ Ἥρας καὶ Ἀπόλλωνος</w>:</emph> Zeus often appears as a Punic deity (cf. Iustin. xviii. 5. 1; Livy, xxi. 22. 6) and is normally identified with Baal Samem (cf. iii. 1. 5 n.), the 'lord of the heavens'; cf. Augustine, Quaest. in Heptat. vii. 16, 'solet dici Baal nomen esse apud gentes illarum partium Iouis; nam Baal Punici uidentur dicere dominum, unde Baalsamen quasi dominum caeli intelliguntur dicere; samen quippe apud eos caeli appellantur'; on Baal Samem see Gsell, iv. 293 ff. For Hera as a Punic goddess see Apul. Met. vi. 4; Pliny, Nat. hist. vi. 200; Virg. Aen. i. 441–3; Minuc. Felix, <milestone unit="page" n="46">[46]</milestone> Oct. 25. 9 and the other evidence quoted by Gsell, iv. 255–6. Augustine (loc. cit.) records that 'Iuno sine dubitatione ab illis Astarte uocatur'. Hence Winckler (i. 443) here takes Zeus and Hera to be Baal Samem and Astarte. But the principal goddess at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> was Tanit Pen Baal (Gsell, iv. 258), consort of the great god Baal Hammon; and though the latter was usually called Cronos in Greek, the later identification with Ammon of the oasis of Siva made the equation with Zeus easy, since at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Cyrene&groupId=521&placeId=985">Cyrene</a> Ammon was identified with Zeus. Hence there is a good case for regarding Zeus and Hera as Baal Hammon and Tanit; cf. Gsell, iv. 282, 286–7, 293: 'il se peut donc que dans le trait d'Hannibal et de Philippe, la prsence de Zeus explique l'absence de Cronos'. (This conclusion would not, of course, imply that the Zeus before whom Hannibal swore his more famous oaths (iii. 11. 5 n.) was also Baal Hammon and not Baal Samem, since the present equations are those of Hannibal's chancellery.) Gsell's argument has not gone unquestioned. Fvrier (Cahiers de Byrsa, 1956, 14–20) has argued that in the late third century Baal Hammon could not have preceded Tanit; and he returns to the equation of Zeus with Baal Samem, arguing that Baal Hammon is Apollo. This latter, very unusual, equation he supports with the hypothesis that Baal Hammon is 'Baal of the hamman' or 'incense-brazier'; if 'brazier' rather than 'incense' is the primary meaning, Baal Hammon will then be a solar deity. Whatever the validity of the argument on the precedence of Tanit and Baal Hammon (and Fvrier admits that at an earlier date Baal Hammon would come first), the identification with Apollo is clearly very hypothetical. Apollo has often been identified with Eshmoun (Winckler, loc. cit; E. Vassel, Revue tunisienne, 1913, 214 ff.). Against this is the common equation of Eshmoun with Asclepios and the fact that <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> had two separate temples, to Asclepios (on the hill of Byrsa: App. Lib. 130) and to Apollo (near the agora: App. Lib. 127); cf. Gsell, iv. 317. Moreover, Apollo appears identified with Reshef, the god of war, in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Cyprus&groupId=119&placeId=356">Cyprus</a>; cf. C.I.Sem., i. 89, where Reshef–M–k–l is equated with <w lang="el-GR">τῷ Ἀπόλωνι τῷ Ἀμυκλοῖ</w> on a bilingual inscription. Further, an <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Apollonia&groupId=1066&placeId=1873">Apollonia</a> in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Palestine&groupId=207&placeId=455">Palestine</a> was called Arsouf (= Reshef) in the Middle Ages (Gsell, iv. 327); and Clermont-Ganneau (Rec. arch. or. vii. 173) has drawn attention to the Arcadian Asclepios, who is the son of an otherwise unknown Arsippus, who looks like Reshef (or Apollo) (Cic. de nat. deor. iii. 57; cf. Joh. Lyd. de mensibus, iv. 142 Wuensch); cf. Gsell, iv. 318 n. 4. Dussaud (CRAI, 1947, 218) therefore regards this first group as Baal Hammon, Tanit, and Reshef, (who were never, as far as we know, worshipped together); he will be correct in adding (<a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a>, 1946–8, 224) that Reshef 'sous le nom d'Apollon . . . est rattach plus ou moins arbitrairement Baal Hammon et Tanit'. <milestone unit="page" n="47">[47]</milestone> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">δαίμονος Καρχηδονίων καὶ Ἡρακλέους καὶ Ἰολάου</w> :</emph> the identification of these three deities is equally controversial. Winckler (i. 341–2, 443) took the Daemon to be Dido, but Gsell (i. 393) demolished his philological arguments; De Sanctis (iii. 1. 67 n. 166) made it Tanit, which cannot hold if Hera is Tanit. Cumont (RE, 'Gad', cols. 433–5) takes it to be the 'Gad' or Tyche of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>, after the Hellenistic fashion, an identification found in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a>, and possible at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> (though Gsell, iv. 335 n. 3, underlines the absence of all evidence for a cult of Gad in that city), and Fvrier (Cahiers de Byrsa, 1956, 20–22), adducing a fourth-century Punic inscription (C.I.Sem. i. 3778), which mentions Baal Samem, Tanit, Baal Hammon, and an obscure Baal M–g–n–m (which may, he thinks be M–g–n–n and so Baal m <emph rend="superscript">e</emph> gannn or m <emph rend="superscript">e</emph> gnn, 'the Lord Protector') argues that this fourth figure is to be identified with the Daemon, and both with Eshmoun, whose temple (i.e. of Asclepios) Appian, Lib. 130, describes as the finest in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>. However, independent evidence exists of a deity specially charged with watching over <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>. The formula of euocatio used by the Romans against the city ran: 'si deus si dea est, cui populus ciuitasque Carthaginiensis est in tutela, teque maxime, ille, qui urbis huius populique tutelam recepisti, precor etc.' (Macrob. iii. 9. 7); and this may well refer to the Daemon. Benedetto (Riv. indo-greco-ital. 3 (fasc. 3–4), 1920, 115–30) draws attention to a lionfaced goddess, perhaps the most ancient and local form of Tanit, who is identified on a coin of Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio, struck between the battles of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Pharsalus&groupId=880&placeId=1587">Pharsalus</a> and Thapsus, with the genius terrae Africae; but whether she is the genius Carthaginis found in a late dedication from Apulum in Dacia (CIL, iii. 993), 'Caelesti augustae et Aesculapio augusto et genio Carthaginis et genio Daciarum', and attacked by St. Augustine as more than a mere genius (cf. Sermo 62. 6. 10, 'nam et illi quod numen habeant et pro numine accipiant illam statuam, ara testatur'), and whether there is continuity from the daemon to this genius, remain highly speculative matters. The equation of Heracles with Melqart seems certain; see the evidence in Gsell, iv. 301 ff. and, generally, Dussaud, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a>, 1946–8, 205–30. Dussaud (ibid. 211) draws attention to a triad of Astarte, Melqart and Eshmoun at Iamneia, brought (he believes) from <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Tyre&groupId=1053&placeId=1855">Tyre</a> to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> at the time of colonization. But there is no reason to equate the Daemon with Astarte; and indeed if we were concerned here with a Tyrian triad the title 'daemon of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>' would be out of place. As argued above, there is no reason to assume that we are dealing with a triad here. The evidence, too, for identifying Iolaus with Eshmoun is slender. Eudoxus of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Cnidus&groupId=481&placeId=902">Cnidus</a> (Athen. ix. 392 D–E) reported that Iolaus restored Heracles to life, thereby proving his close connexion with Asclepios-Eshmoun; and Eshmoun and Melqart figure together on many Cypriote inscriptions (C.I.Sem. i. 16, 23 ff.) <milestone unit="page" n="48">[48]</milestone> in a form which Dussaud (<a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a>, 1946–8, 228) interprets as 'Eshmoun son of Melqart', and which might therefore support the equations Melqart-Heracles and Eshmoun-Iolaus. As Gsell observes (iv. 324), 'il est inutile d'insister sur la fragilit de ces hypothses'. Benedetto (Riv. indo-greco-ital. 3 (fasc. 3–4), 1920, 122–4) has an alternative suggestion: Iolaus closely resembles Sardus, son of Maceris (whom Egyptians and Libyans called Heracles: Paus. x. 17. 2; i.e. he is Melqart); Sardus colonized <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sardinia&groupId=947&placeId=1685">Sardinia</a>, like Iolaus who led the Thespiads there (Diod. iv. 30. 2). Perhaps then IolausSardus is the patron of the western lands ruled by <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>. A plausible thesis; but we have no independent evidence of the worship of such a patron of the west at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>, and it is odd if Eshmoun (who, as we saw, is hardly to be equated with Apollo) figures nowhere in the oath. The case for equating Iolaus-Eshmoun is perhaps not seriously damaged by the fact that a bilingual inscription from <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Sardinia&groupId=947&placeId=1685">Sardinia</a>, where the cult of Iolaus predominates, identifies Eshmoun with Asclepios (not Iolaus); cf. Benedetto, Riv. indogreco-ital. 3 (fasc. 3–4), 1920, 123–4. No other plausible equivalent for Iolaus has been proposed. Movers' theory of a god Iuba or Hiarbas (i. 536, ii. 2. 505), and the evidence quoted by Gsell (iv. 323 n. 4) for a god Iol, homonymous with the town Iol and mentioned on Tunisian inscriptions, fail to provide satisfactory equivalents for Iolaus. Provisionally then, and with some caution, Dussaud's theory that Iolaus is Eshmoun may be accepted. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Ἄρεως, Τρίτωνος, Ποσειδῶνος</w>:</emph> in an ingenious rapprochement between the story recorded in Philo Bybl. ii. 21–22 (FHG, iii. 568) and a myth found in a <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Ras&groupId=32&placeId=153">Ras</a> Shamra tablet (Virolleaud, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a>, 1935, 29 ff.; 1944–5, 1 ff.; CRAI, 1946, 498 ff.), Dussaud (CRAI, 1947, 201–24) has tried to identify this group as Baal Hadad, Kousor, and Yam. In Philo Damouras kills Pontos, the father of Poseidon; in fg. IIIAB from <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Ras&groupId=32&placeId=153">Ras</a> Shamra Baal Ben Dagon, aided by Kousor, destroys the sea-god Yam. Dussaud concludes that Yam is Pontos and Damouras Baal; for Damouras is a son of Dagon, and the river Damouras in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a> (cf. v. 68. 9), modern Nahr Damur, probably takes its name from a contraction of Hadad-Amourou (cf. Dussaud, Rev. hist. rel. 1932, 284), while Baal Ben Dagon is Baal Hadad. In Philo, ii. 24 (FHG, iii. 569), Gruppe had already suggested reading <w lang="el-GR">Ζεὺς Δημαροῦς</w> 〈<w lang="el-GR">ὁ</w>〉 <w lang="el-GR">καὶ Ἀδώδος</w>. Yam is to be identified with the ichthyomorphous deity portrayed on the coins of Aradus, often wrongly called Dagon, and with the Poseidon who rides a chariot drawn by four hippocamps on the coins of Berytus; he is therefore the Pontos of Philo, or Poseidon who, in Philo, is Pontos' son. Without criticizing Dussaud's theory in detail one may query its relevance here; for whatever the relationship between Damouras and Baal Hadad, he has made no attempt to equate either with Ares. Further, the equation <milestone unit="page" n="49">[49]</milestone> Triton-Kousor is ill-based, since whatever the resemblances between Kousor as sea-god (cf. Virolleaud, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Syria&groupId=995&placeId=502">Syria</a>, 1932, 153–4) and Triton frankly, they are fewin the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Ras&groupId=32&placeId=153">Ras</a> Shamra myth Kousor assists Baal against Yam, whereas Triton, though perhaps originally an earlier sea-god than Poseidon, is represented as his son and is never in conflict with him (cf. Herter, RE, 'Triton (1)', cols. 248–9). For the worship at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> of a god identified with Poseidon cf. Diod. xi. 21. 4, xiii. 86. 3; Periplus of Hanno, 4 (GGM, i. 3) and Ps.-Scyl. 112 (GGM, i. 93), both referring to a temple on C. Soloeis outside the Pillars of Heracles; coins of Hadrumetum; Philo Bybl. ii. 25 (FHG, iii. 569); and Herodotus (iv. 179, 180) records the worship of both Poseidon and Triton by the indigenous inhabitants of Lake Tritonis (though there is no indication that this is Phoenician). Fvrier (Cahiers de Byrsa, 1956, 19) suggests that Ares is Reshef because Reshef is originally a warrior god (cf. J. Vandier, La religion gyptienne <emph rend="superscript">2</emph> (Paris, 1949), 218 and 229 for evidence from <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Egypt&groupId=556&placeId=368">Egypt</a> from the end of the first millennium). But this will be ruled out if Reshef is Apollo (above, p. 47). On present evidence the identity of Poseidon, Triton, and Ares remains uncertain. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">θεῶν τῶν συστρατευομένων</w>:</emph> Winckler's suggestion (i. 443–4) that this phrase renders something like the Hebrew 'the whole host of heaven' may be disregarded. These <w lang="el-GR">θεοί</w> accompany the Punic army, though in what way they are distinct from the gods <w lang="el-GR">ὅσοι τινὲς ἐφεστήκασιν ἐπὶ τοῦδε τοῦ ὅρκου</w> (below) is not clear. The various nationalities represented in Hannibal's camp would have their separate gods (cf. F. Zucker, Abh. Berlin. Akad. 1937, no. 6, 23), and these may be included here, though not gods of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>. Further, the dii castrenses would be portrayed on the standards present when Hannibal took the oath (Bickerman, AJP, 1952, 7 n. 12). For an altar and <w lang="el-GR">ἱερὰ σκηνή</w> in a Punic camp cf. Diod. xx. 65. Launey (ii. 921–2) discusses the divine escort of a Hellenistic army, but in many of the passages he cites (e.g. v. 14. 8, 24. 9; Plut. Dem. 29. 2) the reference to gods is very imprecise. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Ἡλίου καὶ Σελήνης καὶ Γῆς</w>:</emph> since these are not translated by the names of the Greek deities associated with them, they probably appeared in this form in the original Phoenician. Gsell (iv. 232 n. 1) argued that the Phoenicians distinguished sharply between natural objects and their controlling deities; but such proper names as Abdshemesh, 'servant of the sun', and Shemeshshilleh, 'the sun has freed him', suggest that the sun was conceived of as a deity, as among the Babylonians and Aramaeans. For a temple to Shemesh see Fvrier, Cahiers de Byrsa, 1956, 18–19 (but his reference to C.I.Sem. is incorrect). Hence there is no need to suppose 'qu'il s'agit . . . des dieux qui rgnent sur le soleil, la lune, etc.' <milestone unit="page" n="50">[50]</milestone> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ποταμῶν καὶ λιμένων καὶ ὑδάτων</w>:</emph> <w lang="el-GR">λιμένων</w> is Gronovius' emendation of the MS. <w lang="el-GR">δαιμόνων</w> (FS). <w lang="el-GR">δαιμόνων</w> is not wholly impossible: cf. Syll. 527 (= IC i, Dreros, 1), ll. 33–35 (from <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Crete&groupId=505&placeId=949">Crete</a>, about 220 B.C.), <w lang="el-GR">καὶ ἥρωας καὶ ἡρωάσσας καὶ κράνας καὶ ποταμούς</w> (adduced by Benedetto, Riv. indo-greco-ital. 3 (fasc. 3–4), 1920, 125 n. 5); but it is unlikely, and Casaubon suggested <w lang="el-GR">λειμώνων</w>, Reiske <w lang="el-GR">λιμνῶν. λιμένων</w> is unsatisfactory. Naber (Mnem. 1857, 236) defends it, quoting vi. 17. 2 and xxxvi. 4. 3 for the conjunction of rivers and harbours; but these passages are irrelevant to the inclusion of harbours in a context such as this. (Paton prints <w lang="el-GR">λιμένων</w>, but both here and at xii. 25 e 1 he translates <w lang="el-GR">λιμήν</w> as 'lake', a meaning it cannot have.) On the whole, Reiske's <w lang="el-GR">λιμνῶν</w> gives the best sense. The worship of waters among Semitic peoples is widely attested; see W. Baudissin Studien zur semitischen Peligionsgeschichte (Leipzig, 1876–1911), ii. 145–84; W. Robertson Smith Religion of the Semites <emph rend="superscript">3</emph> (London, 1927), 169–79 (with notes by S. A. Cook, 555–7). Such natural objects appear in the treaty between \?\attuil and Ramesses II, which appeals to 'the mountains and rivers of the land of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Egypt&groupId=556&placeId=368">Egypt</a>, the sky, the earth, the great sea, the winds, the clouds' (S. Langdon and A. H. Gardiner, JEA, 1920, 195); and that between ubbiluliuma and Tetti, king of the Na\?\ae, states that 'mountains, rivers, springs, the great sea and the earth, winds and clouds for this treaty and curse are witnesses (E. F. Weidner, Politische Dokumente aus Kleinasien (Leipzig, 1923), 68–69).

7.9.3 - 7.9.3

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">πάντων θεῶν ὅσοι κατέχουσι Καρχηδόνα . . . ὅσοι Μακεδονίαν καὶ τὴν ἄλλην Ἑλλάδα κατέχουσιν</w>:</emph> this passage was one of the main reasons for the false belief that the list of deities included those of both sides (see above, 2–3 n.). The gods of the other party appear here, almost at the end of the invocation, for the sake of completeness (Benedetto, Riv. indo-greco-ital. 3 (fasc. 3–4), 1920, 103), a procedure which is strange to Greek and Roman practice, but can be paralleled in the treaty between Esarhaddon and Ba'alu of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Tyre&groupId=1053&placeId=1855">Tyre</a> (cf. Luckenbill, ii. 229), in which Ba'alu, invoking a curse on himself, should he break the treaty, calls upon the gods of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Phoenicia&groupId=894&placeId=464">Phoenicia</a> and 'the gods of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Assyria&groupId=375&placeId=707">Assyria</a> and Akkad'. Similarly, both Hittite and Egyptian deities are invoked in the treaty between \?\attuil and Ramesses II (cf. Langdon and Gardiner, JEA, 1920, 179–205). Gsell (iv. 223 n. 1) suggests that if the gods already mentioned could be held to be, by syncretism, both the Punic gods and their Greek equivalents, the present clause might be taken as a form of rsum. But, apart from the fact that another clause follows, this is specifically Hannibal's oath, the gods were Punic, and this was no occasion for syncretism, which would have made no impression on Philip (for his orthodox religious beliefs cf. Walbank, Philip, 267–8). <milestone unit="page" n="51">[51]</milestone> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">θεῶν πάντων τῶν κατὰ στρατείαν</w>:</emph> apparently distinct from the <w lang="el-GR">θεοὶ συστρατευόμενοι</w> (above, § 2).

7.9.4 - 7.9.4

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὃ ἂν δοκῇ ὑμῖν καὶ ἡμῖν</w>:</emph> an awkward phrase. Reiske thought <w lang="el-GR">δοκεῖν</w> had dropped out after <w lang="el-GR">ἡμῖν</w> and Casaubon changed <w lang="el-GR">ὃ ἂν</w> to <w lang="el-GR">ἐάν</w>; Schweighaeuser kept the MS. reading, but hesitated how to take it. In the translation he has 'ex animi uestri nostrique sententia', but in the (later) note 'quidquid tandem uobis nobisque (de aliis rebus) uideatur, amicitiam iungemus his legibus'. The meaning appears to be: 'in respect of whatever shall seem good to you and us'; as in §§ 6, 7, and 15 there is a conditional idea included. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τὸν ὅρκον τοῦτον θέσθαι</w>:</emph> cf. § 1. The infinitive is that normal in decrees after <w lang="el-GR">εἶπεν</w>, e.g. <w lang="el-GR">ὁ δεῖνα εἶπεν δεδόχθαι τῇ βουλῇ κτλ</w>. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">περὶ φιλίας καὶ εὐνοίας καλῆς</w>:</emph> 'in friendship and goodwill.' Bickerman (AJP, 1952, 8) quotes the phrase 'good peace and good brotherhood' in the Accadian text of the treaty between \?\attuil and Ramesses II as a parallel for the unusual adjective <w lang="el-GR">καλῆς</w> here (cf. Langdon and Gardiner, JEA, 1920, 200), and he mentions a suggestion of H. L. Ginsberg that the Phoenician original of <w lang="el-GR">εὐνοίας καλῆς</w> was ekel na'im, 'so that <w lang="el-GR">καλή</w> is tautological in Greek, but not in the Semitic original'. <w lang="el-GR">φιλία</w> will render the Phoenician alom (cf. aloma, 'peace', in the treaty between \?\attuil and Ramesses II). <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">φίλους καὶ οἰκείους καὶ ἀδελφούς</w>:</emph> the words are 'strange and ungrammatically assembled' (Bickerman, loc. cit.), but one need not follow Reiske: <w lang="el-GR">ὡς πρὸς φίλους κτλ</w>. The terminology recalls that of other near eastern treaties (Bickerman, loc. cit): e.g. 'brotherhood' in the treaty between \?\attuil and Ramesses II, 'peace and brotherhood' in a letter from Ramesses' queen Naptera to Pudu\?\epa, the queen of the Hittites, after the conclusion of that treaty, and 'brotherhood and kinship' referring to \?\attuil's relations with the king of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Babylon&groupId=387&placeId=320">Babylon</a> (cf. Meissner, ZDMG, 1918, 59–60). In Greek contexts <w lang="el-GR">ἀδελφοί</w> is used only of kinship between nations (cf. Syll. 591, l. 25), not individuals (Bickerman, TAPA, 1944, 97); <w lang="el-GR">οἰκεῖοι</w>, 'close friends', is found in Greek formulae (cf. Wiegand, Milet, i. 3. nos. 143 B l. 1, 146 B l. 2.

7.9.5 - 7.9.5

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐφ᾿ ᾧτ᾿ εἶναι κτλ</w>.:</emph> 'the amity between the partners is conditioned by the fulfilment of the stipulated obligations' (Bickerman, AJP, 1952, 9): cf. iii. 22. 4, <w lang="el-GR">ἐπὶ τοῖσδε φιλίαν εἶναι Ῥωμαίοις . . . καὶ Καρχηδονίοις</w>. Though not common, Greek parallels exist: xxi. 43. 1 (treaty between <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> and Antiochus III); OGIS, 229 ll. 34 ff. (treaty between <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Smyrna&groupId=981&placeId=1733">Smyrna</a> and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Magnesia&groupId=729&placeId=1336">Magnesia</a>); Syll. 627 l. 1 (treaty of 183 between Eumenes II and thirty Cretan communities). <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">σῳζομένους</w>:</emph> cf. § 7, <w lang="el-GR">σῳζόμενοι καὶ φυλαττόμενοι</w>. Bickerman (AJP, 1952, 9) recalls that 'the first duty of a vassal of the Hittites is to preserve (naru) the overlord and his empire'; he quotes the pledge of mutual preservation in the treaty between the Hittite king <milestone unit="page" n="52">[52]</milestone> Mursil and an Asian prince (V. Koraec, Hethetische Staatsvertrge (Leipziger rechtswissenschaftliche Studien, 66, 1931), 66; Luckenbill, AJSemL, 1920–1, 181). The present instance is parallel, though the parties are not overlord and vassal. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Φιλίππου καὶ Μακεδόνων καὶ . . . τῶν ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων</w>:</emph> cf. § 1 n. The phrase <w lang="el-GR">ἄλλων Ἑλλήνων</w> probably reflects the Macedonian claim (since at least the fourth century) to be counted Greek. Cf. Arrian, ii. 14. 4, <w lang="el-GR">εἰς Μακεδονίαν καὶ εἰς τὴν ἄλλην Ἑλλάδα</w> (letter from Alexander to Darius); and in Lyciscus' speech to the Spartans (ix. 37. 7) the Achaeans and Macedonians are said to be <w lang="el-GR">ὁμόφυλοι</w> with the Spartans. Similarly, in Syll. 680 = Insch. <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Olympia&groupId=809&placeId=1462">Olympia</a>, 325, Q. Caecilius Metellus, cos. 143, is honoured by a Macedonian of Thessalonica <w lang="el-GR">ἀρετῆς ἕνεκεν καὶ εὐνοίας ἧς ἔχων διατελεῖ εἴς τε αὐτὸν καὶ τὴν πατρίδα καὶ τοὺς λοιποὺς Μακεδόνας καὶ τοὺς ἄλλους Ἕλληνας</w>. See further Kornemann, Aegyptus, 1933, 647. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">κυρίους Καρχηδονίους</w>:</emph> cf. iii. 24. 3 n.; perhaps the translation of a Punic expression. Kahrstedt (Gött. Nachr. 1923, 99) thinks this is Baalim, i.e. 'citizens' (of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>); so too Ed. Meyer, Kl. Schr. ii. 297 n. 2; but W. Baudissin (Kyrios, ii (Giessen, 1931), 33, 287; iii. 53; cf. Bickerman, TAPA, 1944, 97 n. 57) suggests adon or some similar word. Ehrenberg (Karthago, 25) thinks that after the fall of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Tyre&groupId=1053&placeId=1855">Tyre</a> the Carthaginians substituted this title for something like 'the Tyrians of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>' (cf. iii. 24. 3). An alternative suggestion, proposed by Bickerman (TAPA, 1944, 97 n. 54), is that <w lang="el-GR">κύριοι Καρχηδόνιοι</w> are citizens optimo iure. But, as he admits (following L. Robert, Rev. arch. 7, 1936, 235), to a Greek <w lang="el-GR">κύριοι</w> would be simply an expression of politeness'messieurs'not a political category; moreover, this theory implies that <w lang="el-GR">ὑπάρχους</w> indicates citizens of an inferior status, and there is no evidence for this at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> (cf. vi. 51. 2 n.)though, of course, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> contained many non-citizens, metics, freedmen, and slaves, a different matter; cf. Gsell, ii. 226–8, and for the Libyphoenicians see the next note. An objection of G. L. della Vida, quoted by Bickerman, that in Kahrstedt's view one would expect 'Lords of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>' and not 'Carthaginian lords' is not very serious; and on the whole Kahrstedt's view seems the most convincing. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὑπάρχους</w>:</emph> these 'dependants of the Carthaginians who use the same laws' will be the Libyphoenicians (cf. i. 10. 5 n.), who enjoyed <w lang="el-GR">ἐπιγαμία</w> with the Carthaginians (Diod. xx. 55. 4), perhaps the private rights of Carthaginian citizens and even the right to acquire full citizenship (like the Latins at <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>) if they came to reside in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> (Livy, xxv. 40. 5, where Hannibal's officer Muttines is a native of Hippou Acra); see Gsell, ii. 227. For the view of della Vida see the last note. <w lang="el-GR">ὕπαρχος</w> is normally 'subordinate governor' and has its present sense only here; this may reflect the vagaries of Hannibal's translators (Bickerman, TAPA, 1944, 97–98). <milestone unit="page" n="53">[53]</milestone> <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">Ἰτυκαίους</w>:</emph> Utica had a privileged position among the Phoenician towns (cf. i. 70. 9 n.; Meltzer, ii. 75 ff.) and is also separately mentioned in the second treaty between <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> (iii. 24. 1, 24. 3 n.). <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ὅσαι πόλεις καὶ ἔθνη . . . ὑπήκοα</w>:</emph> the <w lang="el-GR">πόλεις</w> of i. 72. 2, 86. 1, simple settlements, occasionally fortified, and established for defence and control among the native Libyans, who are referred to under <w lang="el-GR">ἔθνη</w> (cf. i. 72. 2 n., and for the size of Punic territory i. 10. 5 n.).

7.9.6 - 7.9.6

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">πόλεις καὶ ἔθνη, πρὸς ἅ ἐστιν . . . φιλί?α</w>:</emph> the MS. <w lang="el-GR">ἅς</w> was changed by Reiske (cf. Naber, Mnem. 1857, 236), but unjustifiably: cf. § 9, <w lang="el-GR">βασιλέων καὶ πόλεων καὶ ἐθνῶν πρὸς οὓς κτλ</w>. These fluctuations in gender are a mark of the translator. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐν Ἰταλίᾳ καὶ Κελτίᾳ καὶ Λιγυστίνῃ</w>:</emph> <w lang="el-GR">Κελτία</w> is probably Cisalpine <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Gaul&groupId=598&placeId=1108">Gaul</a> (cf. Egelhaaf, HZ, 53, 1885, 460). <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> is therefore still the peninsula proper (Bickerman, TAPA, 1944, 94 n. 36), whereas for P. (ii. 14. 4–12, iii. 54. 2) it extends to the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Alps&groupId=313&placeId=609">Alps</a>. On the successive changes in what the word '<a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italia&groupId=656&placeId=1198">Italia</a>' covered see Nissen, It. Land. i. 63 ff. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐν ταύτῃ τῇ χώρᾳ</w>:</emph> in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>, Cisalpine <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Gaul&groupId=598&placeId=1108">Gaul</a>, and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Liguria&groupId=689&placeId=1259">Liguria</a>; cf. § 7, <w lang="el-GR">ἐν τοῖς κατ᾿ Ἰταλίαν τόποις τούτοις</w>.

7.9.7 - 7.9.7

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">σῳζόμενοι καὶ φυλαττόμενοι</w>:</emph> cf. § 5. As a parallel for this unusual phrase Bickerman (TAPA, 1944, 98) mentions a Punic formula found on amulets, nr wmr (cf. M. Lidzarski, Eph. sem. Ep. 1, 1901, 172). <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τῶν ἄλλων, ὅσοι ἂν γένωνται σύμμαχοι</w>:</emph> this avoids the ambiguity which existed on what allies were covered by the treaty of 241 (iii. 21. 4–5), an issue prominent in the negotiations of 218 (Bickerman, AJP, 1952, 13–14).

7.9.8 - 7.9.8

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐσόμεθα πολέ?μιοι τοῖς πρὸς Καρχηδονίους πολεμοῦσι</w>:</emph> after <w lang="el-GR">οὐκ ἐπιβουλεύσομεν ἀλλήλοις</w>, where 'we' includes both parties ('we' and 'you'), the transition here to Philip and the Macedonians is awkward. Bickerman (TAPA, 1944, 100 n. 73) argues that 'in Greek, as well as in Punic, "you and we" could not be spoken of together except in the third [read "first] person plural', and he therefore rejects any emendation here. But there is much to be said for inserting <w lang="el-GR">ὑμεῖς μὲν</w> after <w lang="el-GR">πολέμιοι</w>, so as to balance the Punic undertaking in § 9 and changing <w lang="el-GR">ἡμῖν</w> to <w lang="el-GR">ὑμῖν</w> in the clause <w lang="el-GR">πρὸς οὓς . . . φιλίαι</w> (so Reiske), or alternatively Engers' emendation (Mnem. 1938, 137 n. 1), <w lang="el-GR">ἐσόμεθα</w> 〈<w lang="el-GR">τιμωροῦντες ἀλλήλοις ὑμεῖς μὲν ἔσεσθε</w>〉 <w lang="el-GR">πολέμιοι</w>. Groag (84) takes the sense to be 'we (Macedonians) will be enemies . . .'; but the subject cannot switch to the Macedonians in the middle of Hannibal's oath. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">βασιλέων καὶ πόλεων καὶ λιμένων</w>:</emph> <w lang="el-GR">λιμένων</w> can hardly be right. Even a Punic translator would scarcely envisage establishing <w lang="el-GR">ὅρκοι καὶ φιλί?αι</w> with a <w lang="el-GR">λιμήν</w>. However the corruption arose, the reading must be <w lang="el-GR">ἐθνῶν</w> as in § 9. For the gender of the following relative cf. § 9 and above § 6 n. <milestone unit="page" n="54">[54]</milestone>

7.9.10 - 7.9.10

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἔσεσθε δὲ καὶ ἡμῖν</w></emph> 〈 <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">σύμμαχοι</w></emph> 〉 <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">πρὸς τὸν πόλεμον</w>:</emph> so Schweighaeuser, who changed <w lang="el-GR">ἔσεσθαι</w> and added <w lang="el-GR">σύμμαχοι</w>. But in Hebrew, and so probably in Punic, the verb 'to be' 'with a personal dative (expressed by a preposition) could imply the idea of assistance rendered to the person indicated' (Bickerman, TAPA, 1944, 100); Bickerman quotes the use of <w lang="el-GR">εἶναι</w> with the dative in the LXX to render this Hebrew expression, e.g. Gen. xxxi. 42, <w lang="el-GR">εἰ μὴ ὁ Θεὸς . . . ἦν μοι, νῦν ἂν κενόν με ἐξαπέστειλας</w>. Perhaps then the text can stand without <w lang="el-GR">σύμμαχοι</w>. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">εὐημερίαν</w>:</emph> 'victory'; for the sense see the decree of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Iasus&groupId=643&placeId=1177">Iasus</a> on the Pergamene Nicephoria, Rev. Arch. 1929, 107 l. 17 and the examples there quoted (p. 113) by S. Lambrino; L. Robert (BCH, 1930, 339 n. 1) adds Sosylus (FGH, 176 F 1, § 11 l. 7) and Diodorus, passim.

7.9.11 - 7.9.11

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">βοηθήσετε δὲ ἡμῖν, ὡς ἂν . . . συμφωνήσωμεν</w>:</emph> it was argued by Holleaux (183 n. 3; tudes, v. 299, which now shows that the version in CAH, viii. 219, represents a modification of his real view) that this clause implied a later military convention regulating the help to be sent (cf. Thiel, 67–68; Chroust, Class. et med. 1954, 91–92). Undoubtedly <w lang="el-GR">βοηθεῖν</w> here refers to military aid; cf. 4. 2, 4. 7, x. 37. 5, and other examples assembled by P. Grtzel, De pactionum inter graecas ciuitates factarum ad bellum pacemque pertinentium appellationibus formulis ratione (Diss. Halle, 1885), 52–56. But <w lang="el-GR">συμφωνεῖν</w> is a common word for 'to agree' and there is no independent evidence for such a separate convention. The clause can equally well be a general provision for the sending of military aid by Philip if and when Hannibal asked for it, for such aid was normally sent only on request (cf. Thuc. v. 61. 1, 79; below, xxviii. 13. 5, where the Romans reject Achaean aid) since the recipient footed the bill (Bickerman, AJP, 1952, 16). To this extent Niese (ii. 467 n. 3) and De Sanctis (iii. 2. 407) seem wrong in claiming that the treaty did not envisage sending Macedonian troops to <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a>. But there would have been a big difference between the sending of such auxiliaries to Hannibal and the Italian expedition Philip originally planned (v. 101. 10–102. 1, 108. 4–5). This clause is an unessential part of the treaty; vaguely worded, it reserves even such limited collaboration for some unspecified future time at Hannibal's discretion, and Bickerman (AJP, 1952, 15) rightly underlines his reluctance to see Philip too deeply involved in the main conflict. In fact, this clause was never operated. Whether Philip's side of the compact contained a similar undertaking by Hannibal (so Hallward, CAH, viii, 62 n. 1) is unknown, but seems unlikely, since had it been given, it must surely have appeared in Hannibal's oath. Philip's quid pro quo was to come rather in the terms of the peace (§§ 12–14) and the subsequent protection of Hannibal (§§ 15–16).

7.9.12 - 7.9.12

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἂν ἀξιῶσι Ῥωμαῖοι συντίθεσθαι . . ., συνθησόμεθα</w>:</emph> i.e. we, the Carthaginians. This clause recognizes Hannibal's principal status; <milestone unit="page" n="55">[55]</milestone> Philip as auxiliary was not entitled to share in the making of peace, but Hannibal undertakes to include the Macedonians in the treaty (as the Lampsacenes sought inclusion in the peace between <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> and Macedon in 196: Syll. 591 l. 65 (see now Robert in Holleaux, tudes, v. 141–2)); cf. Bickerman, Phil. 1932, 277–9; Rev. Phil. 1935, 66; AJP, 1952, 15 n. 30, on the technical term <w lang="el-GR">συμπεριλαμβάνειν</w>.

7.9.13 - 7.9.13

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">μηδ᾿ εἶναι Ῥωμαίους κυρίους . . . Ἀτιντανίας</w>:</emph> of the states here mentioned <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Corcyra&groupId=491&placeId=923">Corcyra</a>, <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Apollonia&groupId=1066&placeId=1873">Apollonia</a>, Epidamnus, the <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Parthini&groupId=846&placeId=1527">Parthini</a>, and the Atintanes passed under Roman control as a result of the First Illyrian War (229–228); see ii. 11. 5–12 n. for their status. <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Pharos&groupId=879&placeId=1586">Pharos</a> and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Dimale&groupId=539&placeId=1014">Dimale</a> (iii. 18. 1 n.) became Roman after Demetrius' revolt and defeat in the Second Illyrian War (219): iii. 18–19. The future status of these places is not defined; but Philip would hope to be in possession of them when the Romans agreed to relinquish their claim.

7.9.14 - 7.9.14

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">τοὺς οἰκείους πάντας</w>:</emph> 'all his friends'; evidently friends of Demetrius detained in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Italy&groupId=656&placeId=1199">Italy</a> since 219 (Badian, BSR, 1952, 87). There is no reason to think they were hostages (so Bickerman, AJP, 1952, 16), since there is no record of any being deposited in <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> either in 229 or later; nor does it seem probable that these <w lang="el-GR">οἰκεῖοι</w> are 'die Unterthanen des Demetrios . . . die in der römischen Bundesgenossenschaft stehen' (so Kromayer, HZ, 103, 1909, 245; contra, Holleaux, 184 n. 1).

7.9.15 - 7.9.15

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐὰν δὲ αἴρωνται Ῥωμαῖοι . . . πόλεμον</w>:</emph> i.e. after the peace mentioned in § 12. Thus the alliance is to continue as a defensive alliance. This clause indicates that Hannibal was not envisaging the extinction of <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>. See iii. 25. 3–5 n. discussing a similar provision in the third treaty between <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a> and <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a>, should Pyrrhus later attack either; Livy, xxvi. 24. 8 ff. <emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">καθὼς ἂν ἑκατέροις ᾖ χρεία</w>:</emph> cf. § 11. Here again the recipient of aid would judge of its necessity.

7.9.16 - 7.9.16

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἐάν τινες ἄλλοι</w>:</emph> the defensive alliance was to cover attacks from others besides <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Rome&groupId=935&placeId=1669">Rome</a>: this would give Philip a claim on <a class="linkToPlace" target="_blank" href="/place?placename=Carthage&groupId=441&placeId=820">Carthage</a> should he be attacked by any Greek power.

7.9.17 - 7.9.17

<emph rend="bold"><w lang="el-GR">ἀφελεῖν ἢ προσθεῖναι</w>:</emph> such provision for later amendments of a treaty was common Greek practice; cf. Thuc. v. 23. 6, <w lang="el-GR">ἢν δέ τι δοκῇ Λακεδαιμονίοις καὶ Ἀθηναίοις προσθεῖναι καὶ ἀφελεῖν</w>, v. 47. 12; IG i <emph rend="superscript">2</emph> . 71, ii <emph rend="superscript">2</emph> . 112 (= Tod, 144), ll. 35–36 (restored).

Addenda & corrigenda

7.9.2 - 7.9.3

G. Charles-Picard has developed his view (referred to in ll. 20–23 of this note), that the gods are the personal gods of Hannibal's family, in Hannibal (Paris, 1967), 26–35; he takes Zeus to be Baal Samem (Shamim) and Ares to be Hadad, Poseidon Yam, and Triton one of Yam's assistants.

Polybius, Histories

Bibliography

Archaeology

Places

Walbank Commentary

Commentary