previous next
3. Commissioners were sent to Africa, three each to the Carthaginians and to Numidia, to solicit [p. 163]grain to be shipped to Greece, for which the Roman1 people would pay. [2] And so absorbed was the state in the preparation and provision for this war that Publius Cornelius the consul issued an edict to the effect that, of [3??] those who were senators and those who had the right to vote in the senate2 and those who held the lesser offices, no one should be so far distant from the city of Rome that he could not return the same day, and that five senators should not be away from Rome at one time. In his zealous collection of a fleet Gaius Livius was delayed for a while by a dispute which arose with the colonists on the coast. [4] For when they were drafted for naval service they appealed to the tribunes of the people; by them they were referred to the senate. [5] With such unanimity that all the members to a man agreed, the senate voted that no exemptions from naval service should be granted to these colonists. [6] Ostia, Fregenae, Castrum Novum, Pyrgi, Antium, Terracina, Minturnae and Sinuessa were the colonies which disputed with the praetor over exemptions. Then the consul Manius Acilius, with the authorization of the senate, laid the question before the college of fetials whether the declaration of war should be delivered to King Antiochus himself directly or whether it sufficed that it be proclaimed at some of his military stations; [7] and also whether they ordered the war to be formally announced to the Aetolians independently, and whether the alliance and friendship with them should be formally broken off before the declaration of war.3 [8] The fetials replied that they had already [p. 165]earlier decided, when they were consulted regarding4 Philip,5 that it made no difference whether the declaration was delivered to him in person or at a military post; [9] the friendship seemed to be already broken off since they had voted that restitution had not been made after ambassadors had so often demanded it nor fair satisfaction given;6 the Aetolians had taken the initiative in declaring war upon them when they had seized Demetrias, [11??] a city belonging to the allies, by violence, had proceeded to invest Chalcis by land and sea, and had invited King Antiochus to Europe to make war upon the [12] Roman people.7 All arrangements having been satisfactorily made, the consul Manius Acilius issued an edict to the soldiers whom Lucius Quinctius [13??] had enlisted and those whom he had requisitioned from the allies of the Latin confederacy, whom he was to take with him to his province, and to the military tribunes8 of the first and the third legions, that they should all assemble at Brundisium on the Ides of May. He himself left the City in uniform on the fifth day before the Nones [14] of May. About the same time the praetors too set out for their provinces.

1 B.C. 191

2 Persons who had held the offices which conferred eligibility to sit in the senate but had not yet been formally admitted by the censors were granted in the interim the ius sententiam dicendi.

3 Here, as in XXXV. xxxiii. 4, it is assumed that the alliance with the Aetolians was in effect, even though there is no mention of any formal renewal after the war with Philip. There is also no record of any declaration of war upon the Aetolians, except as they were included among the partisans of Antiochus (i. 5 above).

4 B.C. 191

5 Cf. XXXI. viii. 3.

6 The etiquette of declarations of war was a special function of the fetials, and the importance of proper ceremonial was very great, not only because of the Roman fondness for punctiliousness but because of their desire to have justice and the gods on their side. The traditional form of the fetial ritual [10] — probably little changed in later times —is described by Livy in I. xxxii; it put especial stress on the demand for restitution (res repetere) of stolen property, as would be natural in early times. The same phraseology is used here: the immediate cause for complaint on Rome's part was Antiochus' attempt to recover the Greek cities on the Asian coast (XXXV. xvi. 3). The “restitution” demanded of him was the abandonment of the attempt to take away their liberties. The Aetolians were involved with him in this offence.

7 These actions on the part of the Aetolians were good enough causes for war, even though they were not, literally, the specific offences contemplated by the fetial institution. Possibly these overt acts justified the Romans in omitting a formal declaration of war upon them.

8 The military tribunes were elected by the assembly (XXVII. xxxvi. 14).

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.

An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.

load focus Notes (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1911)
load focus Notes (W. Weissenborn, 1873)
load focus Notes (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1873)
load focus Summary (English, Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus Summary (Latin, W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1911)
load focus Summary (Latin, Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus English (Rev. Canon Roberts, 1912)
load focus Latin (W. Weissenborn, 1873)
load focus Latin (Evan T. Sage, PhD professor of latin and head of the department of classics in the University of Pittsburgh, 1935)
load focus English (Cyrus Evans, 1850)
load focus Latin (W. Weissenborn, H. J. Müller, 1911)
hide References (53 total)
  • Commentary references to this page (22):
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 31-32, commentary, 31.44
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 31-32, commentary, 31.8
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 33.13
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 33.24
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 33.39
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 34.32
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 33-34, commentary, 34.50
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 35.23
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 35.32
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 37.3
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 38.31
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 35-38, commentary, 38.46
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 39.16
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 39.22
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 39-40, commentary, 39.5
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 41-42, commentary, 42.25
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 41-42, commentary, 42.pos=60
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 43.11
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 43.12
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 44.37
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, books 43-44, commentary, 44.40
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita libri, erklärt von M. Weissenborn, book 45, commentary, 45.37
  • Cross-references to this page (23):
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Menturnensibus
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Ostiensis
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Pyrgi
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Senatores
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Sinuessa
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Tarracina
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Antias
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Antium
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, M'. Acilius
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Castrum Novum
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Coloni
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Colonia
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Consul
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Fecialium
    • Titus Livius (Livy), Ab urbe condita, Index, Fregenae
    • The Princeton Encyclopedia of Classical Sites, MESSENE or Ithome (Mavromati) Messenia, Greece.
    • Harper's, Fetiāles
    • A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890), FETIA´LES
    • A Dictionary of Greek and Roman Antiquities (1890), SOCII
    • Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854), A´NTIUM
    • Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854), CASTRUM NOVUM
    • Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854), PYRGI
    • Dictionary of Greek and Roman Geography (1854), TARRACI´NA
  • Cross-references in general dictionaries to this page (8):
hide Display Preferences
Greek Display:
Arabic Display:
View by Default:
Browse Bar: