Vesuvius: he must have been a very great man, and would undoubtedly
have proved himself to be one in any other position. The volcano had at
that time quite burnt out: there was on it an old tumbled-down crater
very difficult of access, in which they hid themselves, and whither
immense crowds of slaves, of which there were then great numbers in
Italy, ran to join them. Spartacus at first formed a band of robbers;
and when troops were sent to surround and take him, he gave them the
slip, and defeated the Romans with much loss on their side. By this
means, the slaves began to be provided with good arms; hitherto they
had made their own weapons themselves, as well as they could. Spartacus
now proclaimed the freedom of the slaves. Lower Italy was in those
days either altogether lying waste, or it was overrun by slaves, all
of whom forthwith hastened to him: the freemen had so much dwindled
since the devastations of Sylla, that there was no one at hand to
check the insurrection. It is strange that among the slaves Germans
also are positively mentioned: of these there cannot now have been
many from the Teutones; they must have come thither from the Gauls
by _commercium_. The leaders ruled with dictatorial power; Spartacus
was a Thracian, Crixus and Oenomaus were Gauls. The war lasted until
the third year. Two consular, and three prætorian armies were utterly
routed; a great number of towns like Nola, Grumentum, Thurii, very
likely also Compsa in the country of the Hirpinians, were taken and
sacked with the atrocious cruelty which might have been looked for in
a horde of bandits; we know but the smallest part of these horrors.
Crassus defeated them in the third year. They had large forges for
making arms, and did not shrink from the mighty thought of conquering
the greater part of Italy, not to speak of destroying Rome itself. Rome
would have been obliged to concentrate her power from all quarters,
had not quarrels arisen among the rebels themselves, owing to which
they split into three different bodies, each of which was hostile
to the others; thus Crassus was enabled to defeat them one by one.
Near Petilia in Lucania, he gained the last decisive victory; and he
followed it up with the same cruelty which the German princes displayed
after the Peasants’ War in the sixteenth century. Every where prisoners
were seen speared, hung up mangled on the highways, and tortured to
death. The devastations of southern Italy have indeed never been so
completely repaired, as to restore it to the same condition as that to
which it had reached before the Marsian war; yet I fully believe, that
even its present wretched state is better, and that its inhabitants are
more numerous, than in the most prosperous times under the emperors.
The free population was quite rooted out, the towns were laid waste,
and the few places which are mentioned of Lucania in the itineraries,
were hardly anything else but posting stages; the whole country
moreover was turned into large estates which were used for the breeding
of cattle, especially of horses. The number of monuments which one
finds of the towns of that period, is incredibly small.
SECOND AND THIRD WAR AGAINST MITHRIDATES.
At the same time, Rome was carrying on a war in Asia, against
Mithridates. It was also in fact the third against him, and it had
sprung out of the one with Sertorius: others, however, call it the
second.
After Sylla had left Asia, Mithridates fulfilled most of the conditions
of the peace; he gave Bithynia to Nicomedes, and Paphlagonia to the
prince set up by the Romans; he also had delivered up ships, money and
prisoners; in Cappadocia alone, the surrender had not been complete.
Yet he had likewise yielded up the greater part of that country to
Ariobarzanes, the prince protected by Romans, and he had kept but a
small part of it; nor can we blame his motives for doing so. Having
faithfully performed every stipulation with the exception of this
single point, he now demanded that the Romans should exchange the
treaty in form, and that the peace should be ratified in a regular
written document by the senate and people, as Sylla had promised him;
for as yet he had but Sylla’s word. That he had not put forth these
claims at once, was very naturally owing to Sylla’s wishing first to
regain Italy himself. Afterwards, the blame lay not so much with Sylla,
who was not false in such matters, as with the senate, which flatly
refused to grant such a document.
L. Murena now proceeded to Cappadocia, and thence he made an inroad
into Mithridates’ territory, and plundered the rich temple of Anaitis
in Comana. Although Mithridates did everything in his power to avoid a
collision, Murena carried things so far that a war broke out, in which
he was worsted. After this, Mithridates still continued to declare with
perfect truth, that he was only acting in self-defence; and he begged
the Romans to ratify the treaty. Sertorius being still in arms, the
Romans held their peace and took his excuses; but the treaties seem
never to have been exchanged.
They left him in possession of that part of Cappadocia, and he
affianced to Ariobarzanes one of his daughters who at that time was
still a child. This is to be considered as the second Mithridatic War.
The last great war against Mithridates, a war which lasted even to the
twelfth year, was brought about by Sertorius, who sent two proscribed
persons (L. Marius, probably a Campanian new-citizen, and L. Fannius)
to Mithridates, and made an alliance with him. It was stipulated that
the latter should aid Sertorius with his naval forces, and place at
his disposition the Cilician pirates, who were under his influence;
Sertorius, on the other hand, was in the event of success to give up
the whole of Asia to Mithridates.
END OF VOL. II.
FOOTNOTES:
[1] Monte Pellegrino.--Germ. Edit.
[2] This number is stated in the Lex. Rhetoricum (Bekker Anecd. I. p.
298). Herodotus (VII. 184.) mentions eighty as the number of the crews
of the penteconters. The number given in the text, rests only on one
Manuscript of the lectures, but on a very trustworthy one.--Germ. Ed.
[3] One hundred quinqueremes, and twenty quadriremes. R. H. III, note
1053.--Germ. Edit.
[4] The elephants might perhaps have been introduced but a short
time before from India, where they were in use from time immemorial:
the Carthaginians had not yet employed them against Dionysius and
Agathocles.
[5] The _legiones urbanæ_ likewise were only phalangites.
[6] This remark that the story of the horrid death of Regulus
originated with the poem of Nævius, was not repeated by Niebuhr in
the year 1829, which may perhaps justify the surmise, that he had
afterwards abandoned this conjecture; yet it is not to be forgotten,
that at that period he treated this point on the whole much more
concisely.--Germ. Ed.
[7] Thus the Romans always learned from their enemies; they are also
said to have told the Carthaginians in the beginning of the struggle,
not to compel them to a war by sea, as they had always learned from
their enemies, and then surpassed them.
[8] In some MSS. _grandson_, which is in contradiction to the Fasti,
but seems more appropriate, as 58 years intervene between the
consulship of the two.
[9] By this is to be understood that, previous to the fourth decade,
the office itself is not yet mentioned at all in our Livy, but from
thence, and in the fifth, more frequently. See Sigonius ad Liv. XXXIII.
21, 9.--Germ. Edit.
[10] In Suidas there is a touching story. When Antigonus Gonatas took
Athens, which made a stout resistance, and was only compelled by famine
to surrender, the old poet Philemon was still living in the Piræeus,
whither he had removed, though not perhaps till after the downfall of
the city. He was hoary with age, but still a hale old man, and his
poetical powers had not yet left him. His last comedy was finished,
all but one scene. He lay half dreaming on his couch, when he saw
nine maidens in the room before him, who were just going away. Being
asked who they were, and why they were leaving, they answered that he
might well know them. They were the Muses: turning round towards him,
they left him. Then he got up, finished his comedy, and died. Greek
literature received its death-blow at the time of the loss of the
Piræeus: the spirit may indeed be said to have fled from Greece.
[11] According to Justin, XLIII, extr., Trogus Pompeius was a
Vocontian, from south-eastern Gaul. Conf. Niebuhr’s Lectures on Ancient
History, p. 9.--Germ. Edit.
[12] Montepulciano. (Lectures of 1826)--Germ. Edit.
[13] XXI, 38. R. H. II, 589.--Germ. Edit.
[14] Mistake, instead of, “in Lacinium.” Polyb. III, 33, 18; 56,
4.--Germ. Edit.
[15] _Forschungen auf dem Gebiet der Geschichte._
[16] When Bohemond, to check the Turks in the crusades, had corpses
roasted, and shown to the ambassadors, this was a necessity. (See
Wilken, History of the Crusades I, 87.)--Germ. Edit.
[17] Zonaras IX, 2. (from Dio Cassius). Appian. Pun. 63.--Germ. Edit.
[18] Cicero (de Oratore II, 18), in the anecdote of the rhetorician who
expatiated before Hannibal on the excellencies of a general, says that
Hannibal did not speak Greek well (_non optime Græce_).
[19] J. A. de Luc, Histoire du passage des Alpes par Annibal. Genève,
1818.
[20] See Leon. Aretino’s description of the roads and inhabitants of
Tyrol in the fifteenth century, in his journey to Constance, which
quite reminds one of the times of the Romans.
[21] So in the MSS. Probably Niebuhr made a slip of the tongue.
According to Polybius, Lilybæum is the place.--Germ. Edit.
[22] In the year 1828, this assertion is expressed quite positively,
“Sempronius came from Africa to Genoa,” in which of course the soldiers
taking their oath that they would be at Rimini by an appointed time, is
left out.--Germ. Edit.
[23] There seems to be a mistake here; but the MSS. agree in giving
“Apennines.” What is to be placed instead, seems to me difficult to say
for certain; perhaps “Ariminum.”--Germ. Edit.
[24] This name also seems incorrect; yet all the MSS. have either this,
or another of a similar sound.
[25] The following account is borrowed from the lectures of 1826-7,
which I think I ought not to suppress. “Whether Hannibal now marched
along the Arno into the upper valley of that river, or whether he
turned towards the district of Siena, is not to be decided. I believe
that he did the latter, although Livy talks of a devastation of the
upper valley of the Arno (very likely a figment of Cœlius Antipater);
but in that case, Flaminius could not have executed his hapless march.
Hannibal’s object must have been, not the laying waste of some Etrurian
districts, but to gain the road to Rome; and that he also did. I
believe therefore that on getting out of the swamps, he threw himself
into the mountains of Chiusi. Flaminius heard of this movement, and
tried by forced marches to reach the road to Rome. If my opinion be
correct, even the description of Polybius is wrong; for according to
his account, as well as that of Livy, Hannibal had passed by Cortona,
and thrown himself between the mountains and the lake Trasimenus, and
Flaminius had followed him: here Hannibal stopped, occupied the hills,
and placed an ambush for Flaminius. In my opinion, both the generals
went round the lake, but from different sides; otherwise it would be
impossible that Flaminius had allowed himself to be surprised. If
Hannibal had marched by that road, he would have passed within only a
few leagues of Arezzo, and then Flaminius must have long known of his
march; if, on the contrary, he went through the district of Siena by
San Gemignano and Colle, all may be accounted for. We understand then,
that Flaminius, who started in pursuit, was not able to catch him; that
Hannibal came to the south side of the Trasimenus, whilst Flaminius
imagined that he was already much further advanced on the road to Rome,
and that he only intended to cut him off. Then it could happen that
Hannibal took up his position on the south side of the lake, and placed
his light troops around on the hills, between which and the lake the
road lay. This could be done unknown to Flaminius, only when he was
not aware, that Hannibal had taken this road.” Whilst elsewhere there
is reason to presume, that wherever the later lectures differ from the
earlier ones, Niebuhr had changed his views, and therefore, generally
speaking, his last opinions only are given, the present case seems to
have been different; and on this ground, the detailed discussion on the
march of Hannibal has been inserted in this note.--Germ. Edit.
[26] V, 17. from Q. Claudius (_Quadrigarius_, _Annalium_ l. V.) and
Macrob. Saturn. I, 16.--Germ. Edit.
[27] In the same manner there exist three different accounts of the
death of Marcellus.
[28] According to Appian, they were 48,000 foot, 8,000 horse, and 15
elephants.
[29] Liv. XXXVIII, 56. Valer. Max. IV, I. 6. According to both
passages, he was, however, to be appointed consul and _dictator_ for
life.--Germ. Edit.
[30] Here follows in the lectures of 1829 a very brief review of the
state of things in Italy after the war of Hannibal, which, however, to
avoid repetitions, I have made into one with the more explicit account,
which follows after the war of Antiochus.--Germ. Edit.
[31] The second war of Philip against the Romans is generally reckoned
as the first Macedonian War; we more correctly so call the one which
coincides with the war with Hannibal.
[32] See above, p. 48.
[33] When we read that Hannibal had changed the _ordo judicum_, this
means without a doubt not the Suffetes, whom the Greeks always call
βασιλεῖς, but the hundred or hundred and four of Aristotle, a power
which was quite distinct from that of the constituted authorities of
state, and was very like the state-inquisition at Venice.
[34] Diod. XVI. 91. Just. IX. 5.--Germ. Edit.
[35] A dollar (Prussian) = 3 shillings.--TRANS.
[36] St. Jerome, as he says, heard the same language in Phrygia which
he had heard in Treves. This does not, however, refer to the Galatians;
but St. Jerome probably had seen Germans, who at different times,
especially Gothic ones under Theodosius, had settled in Phrygia. For it
is to be considered as an undoubted fact, that Treves was German, and
the Gallic language could have scarcely maintained itself in Asia to
such a late period as his.
[37] II, 9.
[38] Ulixes was Siculian: in a temple in the island of Sicily, there
was found some connexion with him. (Plut. Marc. c. 20.--Germ. Ed.)
[39] Circe was quite correctly placed in Circeii, which is the most
ancient form of the fable.
[40] If this be meant for _S. C. de Bacchanalibus_, the quotation is
a mistake, as that decree is not later than Plautus: probably instead
of “_senatus consultum_” it ought to be said inscription, or a similar
word, as undoubtedly the inscription of the _columna rostrata_ is
meant.--Germ. Edit.
[41] See on the other hand vol. i., p. 17.--Germ. Edit.
[42] Niebuhr uses the English word.--Transl.
[43] Jul. Victor, p. 224. Or., and in the same place. Ang.
Maius.--Germ. Ed.
[44] Fabr. Bibl. Gr. IV. 461.--Germ. Edit.
[45] Polyb. X. 9, 3.
[46] Gall. 12. A. U. C. 631. Appian.--Germ. Ed.
[47] P. Cornelius Cethegus and M. Bæbius Tamphilus, in the year of the
city 571.--Germ. Ed.
[48] De Colon. ed. Goës, p. 106.--Germ. Ed.
[49] Plut. Æmil. Paull. 19.
[50] Schneider in his Latin grammar has a whole chapter on the name of
_Perseus_. But all the Greek names ending in εύς had in the old Latin
the termination _-es_, and were in the genitive case declined after
the second declension. _Piraeeus_ makes in the genitive _Piraei_,
(_Piraeei_ being a barbarism which is not to be met with in any MS.).
_Perseus_ differs from the rest, in afterwards getting into the third
declension. Its accusative is _Persen_: _Persum_ does not occur, but
certainly _Piraeum_ does.
[51] This original opinion on the work of Polybius, which Niebuhr
repeated several times (see R. H. III. p. 49.) is probably to be
understood thus, that he makes the first edition reach to the
conclusion of the thirtieth book, (one MS. states in this passage,
books I. to XXVIII., in which very likely the first two books
are not included,) and considers the rest as added in the second
edition.--Germ. Edit.
[52] This remark dates from 1826, and was therefore anterior to the
emancipation of the Roman Catholics.--Germ. Ed.
[53] Liv. Epit. 48.
[54] Liv. Epit. 55.
[55] Schol. Bob. in Orat. pro Sulla. (Orelli vol. V. P. 2. p. 361.) In
Liv. XL, 19, the reading is very doubtful, see the commentators, whence
the supposition, that the law dates from Sulla. Others refer this _Lex
Cornelia_ to the consul Cn. Cornelius Dolabella (595), quoting Liv.
Epit. 47.--Germ. Edit.
[56] In several very good MSS., there is here the following reading,
“but probably later than is generally assumed; it must have been
shortly before the last war with Rome.” The editor quotes this, since
there are no arguments given, for deciding the question; yet the
reading inserted in the text, seems to be more correct, as the general
belief places the war of Masinissa very close indeed to the outbreak of
the third Punic war.--Germ. Edit.
[57] In the received editions of the Capitoline Fasti, the name
_Æmilianus_ at the year 618 (19) seems genuine, we also meet with
_Æmiliano Scipioni_, Cic. Phil. XIII. 4, 9.--Germ. Ed.
[58] There have been published of him, “J. E. Humbert, Notice sur
quatre cippes sepulcraux, et deux fragmens decouverts en 1817 sur le
sol de l’ancienne Carthage, à la Haye 1821.” The papers of Borgia,
which seem to be at Naples, are made use of in H. F. J. Estrup _Lineæ
topographicæ Carthaginis Tyriæ Hafn._ 1821. 8.--Germ. Ed.
[59] _Literally_, “villages as large as Sinzig.”
[60] Thonium in Locris 1829, probably a _lapsus linguæ_.--Germ. Ed.
[61] If in the Epitome of Livy the time of his war is stated as being
fourteen years, one is to add the former war, in which he already
distinguished himself in a separate command among the Lusitanians.
[62] See above, p. 60.
[63] Zumpt’s annals are very recommendable in their way.
[64] I know of no passage where this is stated. May this not
perhaps have been a mistake for Blæsus, who has written Rhintonian
pieces?--Germ. Edit.
[65] See vol. I., p. 251.
[66] Ibid. p. 398.
[67] These words are in the original.
[68] In Liv. XXXI, 4. Lucania is not mentioned.--Germ. Edit. II.
[69] I have supplied this name merely from conjecture: the MSS. have
_Solino_, a place which I do not find.--Germ. Ed.
[70] This English word is in the original.
[71] A mistake, very likely from misreading the academical shorthand of
the MSS. It should be, _the queen_, the quotation being from the mock
tragedy “Esther” in the _Jahrmarkt Zu Plundersweilern_.--TRANSL.
[72] Olive plantations especially are only productive after a long
time, so that an ejectment renders entirely fruitless a very great
amount of labour bestowed upon them.
[73] For Niebuhr reads Liv. Epit. LVIII, _ne quis ex publica agro plus
quam M jugera possideret_. R. H. vol. II., p. 150.--Germ. Edit.
[74] See vol. I., p. 401.
[75] This is one of the instances, when Niebuhr was cut short by the
close of the hour in the middle of an idea, the thread of which he did
not carefully take up at the beginning of the next lecture.--Germ. Edit.
[76] In Plutarch, _Vit. C. Gracch._, on the contrary, it is stated,
ἐνέστησαν _οἱ πολλοὶ_ καὶ κατέλυσαν τὴν κρίσιν ὑπὲρ τοῦ Γαΐου φοβηθέντες,
μὴ περιπετὴς τῇ αἰτίᾳ τοῦ φόνου ζητουμένου γένηται, which, when
applying to C. Gracchus, is hardly substantiated.--Germ. Ed.
[77] It is now printed in _Auctores classici e Vaticanis Codd. editi,
cur. Ang. Majo_, _Vol._ II. _Rom._ 1828. (_Schol. Bobiensia in Cic.
Milon. c. 7. in Orelli V._ 2. p. 283.)
[78] This is perhaps to be modified thus, that this formula here occurs
for the first time since the abolition of the dictatorship (in the
middle of the sixth century): it is, on the whole, very old, and we
meet with it for the first time in the year 290. Liv. III, 4.--Germ.
Edit.
[79] _Cantharidas sumpsisse dicitur._ _Cic. Fam._ IX. 21: it was
another Cn. Papirius Carbo, who put an end to himself by means of
_atramentum sutorium_. _Cic. ibid._--Germ. Edit.
[80] I cannot answer for the correctness of the name; it occurs,
indistinctly written, only in one of my MSS. of 1826-7.--Germ. Edit.
[81] See Bentl. ad Hor. Carm. IV, 8, 17; who, however, strikes out that
line, from metrical reasons also. Others conjecture that there is a
hiatus in that passage.--Germ. Edit.
[82] In vol. I, p. 258, and R. H. II, 195, the Cassii are considered
as plebeians: our passage dates from 1826-7; the former one from
1828-9.--Germ. Edit.
[83] Conf. vol. I, p. 367.
[84] Bonn is here spoken of.--TRANSL.
[85] Cicero does not seem to say this quite so explicitly in Brutus 62,
224. Longe autem post natos homines improbissimus C. Servilius Glaucia,
sed peracutus et callidus imprimisque ridiculus--homo simillimus
Atheniensis Hyperboli, cujus improbitatem veteres Atticorum comœdiæ
notaverunt. Conf. de Orat. II, 61, 249; 65, 263.--Germ. Edit.
[86] Cic. ad Att. III. 23. pro Cæcina 33. Walter’s History of the Roman
law (_Geschichte des Römischen Rechts_), 2d edit., vol. II., p. 12,
notes 45 & 46.--Germ. Ed.
[87] Valer. Maxim. III, 4, 5. Whether M. Peperna, who was consul in
the year 622 is the same person as the consul of the year 660, who
was censor in 666, is no more to be made out; yet it is possible, as
according to Plin. _H. N._ vii, 49, he reached the age of eighty-nine
years. But in that case the censorship would be later than the _lex
Licinia et Mucia_, and the proposition would be untenable. If they be
two different persons, the words “and the censorship” in the text are
to be cast out. But the matter is not quite certain, as in Valerius
Maximus it is said, _lege Papia_, which altogether clashes with the
account as given above.--Germ. Edit.
[88] Vol. I., p. 167.
[89] De Orat. I, 7, 24.
[90] Diod. Exc. Vatic., p. 128., Dind.--Germ. Ed.
[91] In the year 1827, Niebuhr had remarked, “Now we shall probably
know soon some further details about it, thanks to the fragments of
Diodorus discovered by Maï, if they be really new ones.”--Germ. Ed.
[92] See above, p. 130.
[93] The prænomen is not to be made out with certainty. See _Orellii
Onomast. Tull._ _s. v._ p. 256.--Germ. Edit.
[94] In Terence, in the Eunuchus and the Adelphi, the name indeed
occurs, but not in the character which it had afterwards.--Germ. Edit.
[95] Mistake instead of Diodorus Siculus (Fragm. l. xxxvii).--Germ. Ed.
[96] Vol. I, p. 450.
[97] Appian 1, 49. In the year 1827, Niebuhr made the emendation
δεκατρεῖς, explaining the number VIII from XIII.--Germ. Edit.
[98] Dio Cass. fragm. I. 27. CLXVI. App. I. 68.--Germ. Ed.
[99] This passage, which is of the year 1827, and is given with the
same conciseness in all the MSS. which are at my disposition, is only
to be interpreted by conjecture. Probably it is _Epist. Cœl. ad Cic._
(Fam. viii.) 14, 3. _In hac discordia video Cn. Pompeium senatum,
quique res judicant, secum habiturum: ad Cæsarem omnes_, QUI CUM TIMORE
AUT MALA SPE VIVANT, _accessuros: exercitum conferendum non esse
omnino_.--Germ. Ed.
[100] Appian I. 84.--Germ. Edit.
[101] Two thousand six hundred according to App. I, 103, in which
number, however, all the knights who perished in this war are
included.--Germ. Ed.
[102] Cic. Cat. III. 6. § 14. On the other hand, Frontin. de colon.
p. 112. Goes. Colonia Florentina deducta a III viris assignata lege
Julia.--Germ. Ed.
[103] H. N. XIV. 8. 2?--Germ. Ed.
[104] This is evidently a slip of the memory, the passage of Asconius
(in Pisonianam, p. 3, Orellii) running thus, _Magno opere me hæsitare
confiteor, quid sit quare Cicero Placentiam municipium esse dicit.
Video enim in annalibus eorum qui Punicum bellum scripserunt tradi,
Placentiam deductam pridie Kal. Jun., primo anno eius belli, P.
Cornelio Scipione, patre Africani prioris, Ti. Sempronio Longo Coss._
&c.--Germ. Ed.
[105] Conf. vol. I, p. 523.
[106] The _Pontifex Maximus_ was included among these.