Attalus Comes to Rome
ATTALUS, brother of king Eumenes, came to Rome this
B.C. 167. Coss. Q. Aelius Paetus, M. Junius Pennus. Attalus, at Rome, is persuaded to try by the Roman help to supplant his brother.
year, pretending that, even if the disaster of the
Gallic rising had not happened to the kingdom,
he should have come to Rome, to congratulate
the Senate, and to receive some mark of its
approval for having been actively engaged on
their side and loyally shared in all their dangers;
but, as it happened, he had been forced to come
at that time to Rome owing to the danger from
the Gauls. Upon finding a general welcome from everybody,
owing to the acquaintance formed with him on the campaign,
and the belief that he was well disposed to them, and meeting
with a reception that surpassed his expectation, the young
man's hopes were extraordinarily raised, because he did not
know the true reason of this friendly warmth. The result was
that he narrowly escaped ruining his own and his brother's
fortunes, and indeed the entire kingdom. The majority at Rome
were thoroughly angry with king Eumenes, and believed that
he had been playing a double game during the war, keeping up
communications with Perseus, and watching his opportunity
against them: and accordingly some men of high rank got
Attalus under their influence, and urged him to lay aside the
character of ambassador for his brother, and to speak in his
own behalf; as the Senate was minded to secure a separate
kingdom and royal government for him, because of their displeasure with his brother. This excited the ambition of
Attalus still more, and in private conversation he signified his
assent to those who advised this course. Finally, he arranged
with some men of position that he would actually appear
before the Senate and deliver a speech on the subject.
Stratius Sent to Attalus
While Attalus was engaged on this intrigue, Eumenes,
Stratius is sent to dissuade Attalus from his meditated treason.
fearing what would happen, sent his physician
Stratius to Rome, putting him in possession of
the facts, and charging him to employ every means
to prevent Attalus from following the advice
of those who wished to ruin their kingdom. On arriving at
Rome and getting Attalus by himself, he used a great variety
of arguments to him (and he was a man of great sense
and powers of persuasion), and at length, with much trouble,
succeeded in his object, and in recalling him from his
mad project. He represented to him that "he was already
practically joint-king with his brother, and only differed from
him in the fact that he wore no diadem, and was not called
king, though in everything else he possessed an equal and
identical authority: that in the future he was the acknowledged
heir to the crown, and with no very distant prospect of possession;
as the king, from the weak state of his health, was in constant expectation of his departure, and being childless could
not, even if he wished it, leave the crown to any one else."
(For in fact that natural son of his, who afterwards succeeded
to the crown, had not as yet been acknowledged.) "Above all,
he was surprised at the hindrance Attalus was thus interposing
to the measures necessary at that particular crisis. For they
ought to thank heaven exceedingly if they proved able, even
with hearty co-operation and unanimity, to repel the threatened
attack of the Gauls; but if he should at such a time quarrel
with and oppose his brother, it was quite clear that he would
ruin the kingdom, and deprive himself both of his present
power and his future expectations, and his other brothers also
of the kingdom and the power they possessed in it." By these
and similar arguments Stratius dissuaded Attalus from taking
any revolutionary steps.
Attalus At Rome
Accordingly, when Attalus appeared before the Senate,
he congratulated it on what had happened; expatiated on the
loyalty and zeal shown by himself in the war with Perseus; and
urged at some length that the Senate should send envoys to
restrain the audacity of the Gauls, and compel them to confine
themselves once more to their original boundaries. He also
said something about the cities of Aeneus and Maronea, desiring
that they might be given as a free gift to himself. But he said
not a single word against the king, or about the partition of the
kingdom. The senators, supposing that he would interview
them privately on a future occasion upon these points, promised to send the envoys, and loaded him lavishly with the
customary presents, and, moreover, promised him these cities.
But when, after receiving these marks of favour, he at once
left Rome without fulfilling any of its expectations, the
Senate, though foiled in its hopes, had nothing else which it
could do; but before he had got out of Italy it declared
Aeneus and Maronea free cities,—thus rescinding its promise,—and sent Publius Licinius at
the head of a mission to the Gauls.
instructions these ambassadors had given to them it is not easy
to say, but it may be guessed without difficulty from what subsequently happened. And this will be rendered clear from the
Rhodian Ambassadors Argue Against War
There also came embassies from Rhodes, the first headed
Fresh embassies from Rhodes, B. C. 167. See 29, 27.
by Philocrates, the second by Philophron
and Astymedes. For when the Rhodians received the answer given to the embassy of
Agesipolis immediately after the battle of Pydna,
they understood the anger and threatening
attitude of the Senate towards them, and promptly despatched
these embassies. Astymedes and Philophron, observing in
the course of public and private conversations the suspicions
and anger entertained towards them at Rome, were reduced to
a state of great discouragement and distress.
Terror of the Rhodian envoys at the threat of war.
But when one of the praetors mounted the
Rostra and urged the people to declare war
against Rhodes, then indeed they were beside themselves with
terror at the danger that threatened their country. They
assumed mourning garments, and in their various interviews
with their friends dropped the tone of persuasion or demand,
and pleaded instead, with tears and prayers, that they would not
adopt any measure of supreme severity towards them. A few
days afterwards Antony, one of the tribunes, introduced them
to the Senate, and dragged the praetor who advised the war
down from the Rostra. Philophron spoke first, and was
followed by Astymedes; and, having thus uttered the
proverbial "swan's song," they received an answer which, while
freeing them from actual fear of war, conveyed a bitter and
stern rebuke from the Senate for their conduct. Now Astymedes considered himself to have made a good speech on
behalf of his country, but did not at all satisfy
the Greeks visiting or residing at Rome.
A criticism on the speech of the Rhodian Astymedes.
he afterwards published the speech containing his argument in defence, which, to all those
into whose hands it fell, appeared absurd and quite unconvincing. For he rested his plea not alone on the merits of his
country, but still more on an accusation of others. Comparing
the good services done and the co-operation undertaken by
the others, he endeavoured to deny or minimise them; while
he exaggerated those of Rhodes as far above their actual
amount as he could. The errors of others, on the contrary,
he inveighed against in bitter and hostile terms, while those of
the Rhodians he attempted to cloak and conceal, in order
that, by this comparison, those of his own country might appear
insignificant and pardonable, those of others grave and beyond
excuse, "all of whom," he added, "had already been pardoned
before." But this sort of pleading can in no circumstances be
considered becoming to a statesman. Take the case of the
betrayal of secrets. It is not those who, for fear or gain, turn
informers that we commend; but those who endure any torture
and punishment rather than involve an accomplice in the same
misfortune. These are the men whom we approve and consider noble. But a man who, from some undefined alarm,
exposes to the view of the party in power all the errors of
others, and who recalls what time had obliterated from the
minds of the ruling people, cannot fail to be an object of dislike to all who hear of it.
The Rhodians Try To Excuse Themselves
After receiving the above answer Philocrates and his
Dismayed by this answer the Rhodians endeavour to propitiate the Senate. Livy, 45, 25.
colleagues immediately started home; but Astymedes and his fellows stayed where they were and
kept on the watch, that no report or observation
against their country might be made unknown
to them. But when this answer of the Senate
was reported at Rhodes, the people, considering
themselves relieved of the worst fear—that, namely, of war—
made light of the rest, though extremely unfavourable. So true
it ever is that a dread of worse makes men forget lighter misfortunes. They immediately voted a complimentary crown
worth ten thousand gold pieces1
to Rome, and appointed
Theaetetus at once envoy and navarch to convey it at the beginning of summer, accompanied by an embassy under Rhodophon,
to attempt in every possible way to make an alliance
with the Romans. They acted thus because they wished that,
if the embassy failed by an adverse answer at Rome, the failure
might take place without the people having passed a formal
decree, the attempt being made solely on the initiative of the
navarch, and the navarch having by the law power to act in
such a case.
The astuteness of the Rhodian policy.
For the fact was that the republic
of Rhodes had been administered with such
consummate statesmanship, that, though it had
for nearly a hundred and forty years been engaged in conjunction with Rome in actions of the greatest importance and
glory, it had never yet made an alliance with her. Nor
ought I to omit stating the reason of this policy of the
Rhodians. They wished that no ruler or prince should be
entirely without hope of gaining their support or alliance; and
they therefore did not choose to bind or hamper themselves
beforehand with oaths and treaties; but, by remaining uncommitted, to be able to avail themselves of all advantages as they
arose. But on this occasion they were much bent upon
securing this mark of honour from Rome, not because they
were anxious for the alliance, or because they were afraid of
any one else at the time except the Romans, but because they
wished, by giving an air of special importance to their design,
to remove the suspicions of such as were inclined to entertain
unfavourable thoughts of their state.
Caunus, in Peraea, and Mylassa, in Caria, revolt.
For immediately after
the return of the ambassadors under Theaetetus,
the Caunians revolted and the Mylassians seized
on the cities in Euromus. And about the same
time the Roman Senate published a decree declaring all
Carians and Lycians free who had been assigned to the Rhodians
after the war with Antiochus.
The Senate declare Caria and Lycia free. See 2, 25.
The Caunian and
Mylassian revolts were speedily put down by
the Rhodians; for they compelled the Caunians,
by sending Lycus with a body of soldiers, to
return to their allegiance, though the people of Cibyra had
come to their assistance; and in an expedition into Euromus
they conquered the Mylassians and Alabandians in the field,
these two peoples having combined their forces to attack
Orthosia. But when the decree concerning the Lycians and
Carians was announced they were once more in a state of
dismay, fearing that their gift of the crown had proved in
vain, as well as their hopes of an alliance. . . .
Greek States and the War With Perseus
I have already directed my readers' attention to the
The three classes of men who in the various states got into trouble for their conduct during the Macedonian war.
policy of Deinon and Polyaratus. For Rhodes
was not the only place which experienced grave
danger and important changes. Nearly all the
states suffered in the same way. It will therefore be instructive to take a review of the
policy adopted by the statesmen in the several
countries, and to ascertain which of them will be proved to
have acted with wisdom, and which to have done otherwise:
in order that posterity in similar circumstances of danger may,
with these examples as models, so to speak, before their eyes,
be able to choose the good and avoid the bad with a genuine
insight; and may not in the last hour of their lives dishonour
their previous character and achievements, from failing to perceive where the path of honour lies. There were, then,
three different classes of persons who incurred blame for their
conduct in the war with Perseus. One consisted of those
who, while displeased at seeing the controversy brought to a
decisive end, and the control of the world fall into the power of
one government, nevertheless took absolutely no active steps for
or against the Romans, but left the decision entirely to Fortune.
A second consisted of those who were glad to see the
question settled, and wished Perseus to win, but were unable to
convert the citizens of their own states or the members of
their race to their sentiments. And a third class consisted of
those who actually succeeded in inducing their several states
to change round and join the alliance of Perseus. Our
present task is to examine how each of these conducted their
Examples of Three Classes of Statesmen
In the last class were Antinous, Theodotus, and Cephalus,
Antinous, Theodotus, and Cephalus of the Molossi are instances of the third class.
who induced the Molossians to join Perseus.
These men, when the results of the campaign
went completely against them, and they found
themselves in imminent danger of the worst
consequences, put a bold face upon it and met
an honourable death in the field. These men deserve our
commendation for their self-respect, in refusing to allow themselves to lapse into a position unworthy of their previous life.
Again, in Achaia and Thessaly and Perrhaebia several
Several instances of the first class in Achaia Phiotis, Thessaly, and Perrhaebia.
persons incurred blame by remaining neutral,
on the ground that they were watching their
opportunity, and were in heart on the side of
Perseus; and yet they never let a word to that
effect get abroad, nor were ever detected in
sending letter or message to Perseus on any subject whatever,
but conducted themselves with unexceptionable discretion.
Such men as these therefore very properly determined to face
judicial inquiry and stand their judgment, and to make every
effort to save themselves. For it is quite as great a sign of
cowardice to abandon life voluntarily when a man is conscious
of no crime, from fear of the threats of political opponents or
of the power of the conquerors, as it is to cling to life to the
loss of honour.
Again, in Rhodes and Cos, and several other cities, there
Instances of the second class in Rhodes, Cos, and other places.
were men who favoured the cause of Perseus,
and who were bold enough to speak in behalf
of the Macedonians in their own cities, and to
inveigh against the Romans, and to actually
advise active steps in alliance with Perseus, but who were not
able to induce their states to transfer themselves to alliance
with the king. The most conspicuous of such men were in
Cos the two brothers Hippias and Diomedon, and in Rhodes
Deinon and Polyaratus.
Shameless Conduct of the Supporters of Perseus
And it is impossible not to view the policy of these
men with disapproval. To begin with, all their fellow-citizens
were aware of everything they had done or said;
in the next place, the letters were intercepted and made
public which were coming from Perseus to them, and
from themselves to Perseus, as well as the messengers from
both sides: yet they could not make up their minds to
yield and put themselves out of the way, but still disputed
the point. The result of this persistence and clinging
to life, in the face of a desperate position, was that they
quite ruined their character for courage and resolution,
and left not the least ground for pity or sympathy in the
minds of posterity. For being confronted with their own
letters and agents, they were regarded as not merely unfortunate, but rather as shameless. One of those who went
on these voyages was a man named Thoas. He had frequently
sailed to Macedonia on a mission from these men, and when
the decisive change in the state of affairs took place, conscious
of what he had done, and fearing the consequences, he retired
to Cnidos. But the Cnidians having thrown him into prison,
he was demanded by the Rhodians, and on coming to Rhodes
and being put to the torture, confessed his crime; and his
story was found to agree with everything in the cipher of
the intercepted letters, and with the despatches from Perseus
to Deinon, and from Deinon and Polyaratus to him. Therefore it was a matter of surprise that Deinon persuaded himself
to cling to life and submit to so signal an exposure.
Polyaratus of Rhodes
But in respect to folly and baseness of spirit, Polyaratus
The vain attempts of Polyaratus to escape,
surpassed Deinon. For when Popilius Laenas
charged king Ptolemy to send Polyaratus to
Rome, the king, from a regard both to Polyaratus himself and his country, determined not to send him
to Rome but to Rhodes, this being also what Polyaratus himself asked him to do. Having therefore caused a galley to
be prepared, the king handed him over to Demetrius, one of
his own friends, and despatched him, and wrote a despatch to
the Rhodians notifying the fact.
But touching at Phaselis in
the course of the voyage, Polyaratus, from some
notion or another which he had conceived,
took suppliant branches in his hand, and fled for safety to the
city altar. If any one had asked him his intention in thus
acting, I am persuaded that he could not have told it. For if
he wanted to go to his own country, where was the need of suppliant branches? For his conductors were charged to take him
there. But if he wished to go to Rome, that was sure to take
place whether he wished it or no. What other alternative was
there? Other place that could receive him with safety to himself
there was none. However, on the people of Phaselis sending
to Rhodes to beg that they would receive Polyaratus, and take
him away, the Rhodians came to the prudent resolution of
sending an open vessel to convoy him; but forbade the captain
of it to actually take him on board, on the ground that the
officers from Alexandria had it in charge to deliver the man
in Rhodes. When the vessel arrived at Phaselis, and its captain, Epichares, refused to take the man on board, and
Demetrius, who had been deputed by the king for that business, urged him to leave the altar and resume his voyage; and
when the people of Phaselis supported his command, because
they were afraid they would incur some blame from Rome on
that account, Polyaratus could no longer resist the pressure of
circumstances, but once more went on board Demetrius's galley.
But in the course of the voyage he seized an opportunity of
doing the same again at Caunus, flying for
safety there in the same way, and begging the
Caunians to save him.
Upon the Caunians rejecting him, on
the grounds of their being leagued with Rhodes, he sent
messages to Cibyra, begging them to receive him in their
city, and to send him an escort. He had some claim upon
this city, because the sons of its tyrant, Pancrates, had been
educated at his house; accordingly, they listened to his request, and did what he asked.
But when he
got to Cibyra, he placed himself and the
Cibyratae into a still greater difficulty than that which he
caused before when at Phaselis. For they neither dared to
retain him in their town for fear of Rome, nor had the
power of sending him to Rome, because of their ignorance of the sea, being an entirely inland folk. Eventually they were reduced to send envoys to Rhodes and the
Roman proconsul in Macedonia, begging them to take over
the man. Lucius Aemilius wrote to the Cibyratae, ordering
them to keep Polyaratus in safe custody; and to the Rhodians
to make provision for his conveyance by sea and his safe
delivery upon Roman territory. Both peoples obeyed the
despatch: and thus Polyaratus eventually came to Rome, after
making a spectacle of his folly and cowardice to the best of
his ability; and after having been, thanks to his own folly,
four times surrendered—by king Ptolemy, the people of
Phaselis, the Cibyratae, and the Rhodians.
The reason of my having dwelt at some length on the
story of Polyaratus and Deinon is not that I have any desire
to trample upon their misfortunes, for that would be ungenerous in the last degree; but in order that, by clearly showing
their folly, I might instruct those who fall into similar difficulties
and dangers how to take a better and wiser course. . . .
Statue-bases for Perseus Used by Aemilius
The most striking illustration of the mutability and
The columns constructed at Delphi for statues of Perseus used by Aemilius. Autumn of B. C. 167. Livy, 45, 27.
capriciousness of Fortune is when a man, within
a brief period, turns out to have been preparing
for the use of his enemies the very things which
he imagined that he was elaborating in his own
honour. Thus Perseus was having some columns
made, which Lucius Aemilius, finding unfinished,
caused to be completed, and placed statues of himself on
them. . . .
He admired the situation of the city, and the excellent
position of the acropolis for commanding the
districts on both sides of the Isthmus.
Having been long anxious to see Olympia,
he set out thither.
Aemilius entered the sacred enclosure at Olympia, and
was struck with admiration at the statue of the god, remarking that, to his mind, Pheidias was the only artist who had
represented the Zeus of Homer; and that, though he had had
great expectations of Olympia, he found the reality far surpassed them.
The Greek Prisoners In Italy
The Aetolians had been accustomed to get their livelihood from plundering and such like lawless
The disturbed state of Aetolia
occupations; and as long as they were permitted
to plunder and loot the Greeks, they got all
they required from them, regarding every country as that of
an enemy. But subsequently, when the Romans obtained the
supremacy, they were prevented from this means of support,
and accordingly turned upon each other. Even before this,
in their civil war, there was no horror which they did not commit; and a little earlier still they had had a taste of mutual
slaughter in the massacres at Arsinoe;2
they were, therefore,
ready for anything, and their minds were so infuriated that
they would not allow their magistrates to have even a voice in
their business. Aetolia, accordingly, was a scene of turbulence, lawlessness, and blood: nothing they undertook was
done on any calculation or fixed plan; everything was conducted at haphazard and in confusion, as though a hurricane
had burst upon them. . . .
Epirus Also In Turmoil
The state of Epirus was much the same. For in proportion as the majority of its people are more
The disturbed state of Epirus. See 27, 15.
law-abiding than those of Aetolia, so their chief
magistrate surpassed every one else in wickedness and contempt for law. For, I think, there never was
and never will be a character more ferocious and brutal than
that of Charops. . . .
The Romanising Party Takes Command Throughout Greece
After the destruction of Perseus, immediately after the
The selection of suspected Greeks, especially Achaeans, to be sent to Italy, B. C. 167.
decisive battle, embassies were sent on all sides
to congratulate the Roman commanders on the
event. And as now all power tended towards
Rome, in every city those who were regarded
as of the Romanising party were in the
ascendant, and were appointed to embassies
and other services. Accordingly they flocked into Macedonia—from Achaia, Callicrates, Aristodamus, Agesias, and
Philippus; from Boeotia, Mnasippos; from Acarnania, Chremas; from Epirus, Charops and Nicias; from Aetolia, Lyciscus
and Tisippus. These all having met, and eagerly vieing with
each other in attaining a common object; and there being no
one to oppose them, since their political opponents had all
yielded to the times and completely retired, they accomplished
their purpose without trouble. So the ten commissioners
issued orders to the other cities and leagues through the
mouths of the strategi themselves as to what citizens were to go
to Rome. And these turned out to be, for the most part, those
whom the men I have named had made a list of on party grounds,
except a very few of such as had done something conspicuous.
But to the Achaean league they sent two men of the highest rank of their own number, Gaius Claudius and Gnaeus
Domitius. They had two reasons for doing so: the first was
that they were uneasy lest the Achaeans should refuse to obey
the written order, and lest Callicrates and his colleagues should
be in absolute danger from being reputed to be the authors
of the accusations against all the Greeks,—which was about
true; and in the second place, because in the intercepted
despatches nothing distinct had been discovered against any
Achaean. Accordingly, after a while, the proconsul sent the
letter and envoys with reference to these men, although in his
private opinion he did not agree with the charges brought by
Lyciscus and Callicrates, as was afterwards made clear by
what took place. . . .
Noisy Scene In A Roman Theatre
Lucius Anicius, who had been praetor, after his victory over the Illyrians, and on bringing Genthius
Triumph of L. Anicius Gallus over the Illyrians at the Quirinalia, February 17, B. C. 167.
prisoner to Rome with his children, while
celebrating his triumph, did a very ridiculous
thing. He sent for the most famous artists
from Greece, and having constructed an immense theatre in the circus, he brought all the
flute players on the stage together first. Their names were
Theodorus the Boeotian, Theopompus and Hermippus of
Lysimacheia, the most celebrated of the day. He placed them
on the proscenium with the chorus, and bid them all play at
A scene in a Roman theatre.
But on their beginning to play the
tune, accompanied by appropriate movements,
he sent to them to say that they were not playing well, and must put more excitement into it. At first they
did not know what to make of this, until one of the lictors
showed them that they must form themselves into two companies, and facing round, advance against each other as
though in a battle. The fluteplayers caught the idea at
once, and, adopting a motion suitable to their own wild strains,
produced a scene of great confusion. They made the middle
group of the chorus face round upon the two extreme groups,
and the fluteplayers, blowing with inconceivable violence and
discordance, led these groups against each other. The members of the chorus
meanwhile rushed, with a violent stamping which shook the stage, against those opposite them, and
then faced round and retired. But when one of the chorus,
whose dress was closely girt up, turned round on the spur of
the moment and raised his hands, like a boxer, in the face of
the fluteplayer who was approaching him, then the spectators
clapped their hands and cheered loudly. Whilst this sort of
sham fight was going on, two dancers were brought into the
orchestra to the sound of music; and four boxers mounted
upon the stage, accompanied by trumpeters and clarion
players. The effect of these various contests all going on
together was indescribable. But if I were to speak about
their tragic actors, I should be thought by some to be
. . .
How to Hold Good Games
It requires the same sort of spirit to arrange public
games well, and to set out great banquets and wine with fitting
splendour, as it does to draw up an army in presence of the
enemy with strategic skill. . . .
Aemilius in Epirus
Aemilius Paulus took seventy cities in Epirus after the
conquest of the Macedonians and Perseus,
most of which were in the country of the
Molossi; and enslaved one hundred and fifty
thousand men. . . .
Reaction of the Egyptian Kings
In Egypt the first thing the kings did after being
relieved from the war with Antiochus was to send Numenius,
one of their friends, as an envoy to Rome to
return thanks for the favours received; and
they next released the Lacedaemonian Menalcidas, who had made active use of the occasion against the
kingdom for his own advantage; Gaius Popilius Laenas asked
the king for his release as a favour to himself.4
. . .
Cotys, King of the Odrysae
At this period Cotys, king of the Odrysae, sent ambassadors to Rome, asking for the restoration
of his son, and pleading his defence for having
acted on the side of Perseus. The Romans,
considering that they had effected their purpose by the successful issue of the war against Perseus, and that they had no
need to press their quarrel with Cotys any further, allowed
him to take his son back—who, having been sent as a hostage
to Macedonia, had been captured with the children of Perseus,
—wishing to display their clemency and magnanimity, and with
the idea at the same time of binding Cotys to themselves by
so great a favour. . . .
Prusias and Eumenes
About the same time king Prusias also came to Rome
The abject conduct of king Prusias.
to congratulate the Senate and the generals on
their success. This Prusias was in no sense
worthy of the royal title, as we may judge from
the following facts: When the Roman envoys first appeared
at his court, he met them with shorn head and wearing a cap,
toga, and shoes, and in fact exactly in the garb worn by those
recently manumitted at Rome, whom they call liberti:
greeting the envoys respectfully, he exclaimed, "Behold your
freedman, who is willing to obey you in all things and to
imitate your fashions!" than which a more contemptible
speech it would be difficult to imagine. And now, again,
when he reached the entrance of the Senate-house he stopped
at the door facing the senators, and, dropping both his hands
he paid reverence to the threshold and the seated Fathers,
exclaiming, "Hail, ye gods my preservers!" seeming bent
on surpassing all who might come after him in meanness of
spirit, unmanliness, and servility. And his behaviour in the
conference which he held when he had entered the Senatehouse was on a par with this; and was such as might make
one blush even to write. However this contemptible display
served in itself to secure him a favourable answer.
Eumenes Prevented from Visiting Rome
Just as he had got his answer, news came that
To prevent a visit from Eumenes the Senate pass a decree forbidding all kings to visit Rome.
Eumenes was on his way. This caused the
Senators much embarrassment. They were
thoroughly incensed with him, and were entirely fixed in their sentiments towards him;
and yet they did not wish to betray themselves.
For having proclaimed to all the world that
this king was their foremost and most esteemed friend, if they
now admitted him to an interview and allowed him to plead
his cause, they must either, by answering as they really thought
and in harmony with their sentiments, signalise their own
folly in having marked out such a man in past times for
special honour; or if, in deference to appearances, they gave
him a friendly answer, they must disregard truth and the
interests of their country. Therefore, as both these methods of
proceeding could have consequences of a disagreeable nature,
they hit upon the following solution of the difficulty.
Eumenes stopped at Brundisium.
ground of a general dislike of the visits of kings, they published
a decree that "no king was to visit Rome." Having been
informed subsequently that Eumenes had landed
at Brundisium in Italy, they sent the quaestor to
convey the decree to him, and to bid him to
communicate with himself if he wanted anything from the
Senate; or, if he did not want anything, to bid him depart at
the earliest possible opportunity from Italy. When the
quaestor met the king and informed him of the decree, the
latter, thoroughly understanding the intention of the Senate,
said not a single word, except that "he wanted nothing."
This is the way in which Eumenes was prevented from
coming to Rome. And it was not the only important
result of this decree. For the Gauls were at that time threatening the kingdom of Eumenes; and it was soon made
apparent that by this repulse the king's allies were all greatly
depressed, while the Gauls were doubly encouraged to press
on the war. And it was in fact their desire to humiliate him
in every possible way that induced the Senate to adopt this
These things were going on at the
beginning of the winter: but to all other ambassadors who arrived—and there was no city
or prince or king who had not at that time sent an embassy
of congratulation—the Senate returned a gracious and friendly
answer, except to the Rhodians; and these they dismissed
with displeasure, and with ambiguous declarations as to the
future. As to the Athenians again the Senate hesitated. . . .
The Athenians and Rhodians
The first object of the Athenian embassy was the
The Athenians ask for the restoration of Haliartus; failing that, to have its territory, with Delos and Lemnos themselves.
restoration of Haliartus;5
but when they met
with a refusal on that point, they changed
the subject of their appeal and put forward
their own claim to the possession of Delos,
Lemnos, and the territory of Haliartus. No
one could properly find fault with them for this,
as far as Delos and Lemnos were concerned, for
they had of old laid claim to them; but there
is good reason for reproaching them in respect to the territory
of Haliartus. Haliartus was nearly the most ancient city in
Boeotia; had met with a heavy misfortune: instead of endeavouring in every possible way to restore it,—to contribute
to its utter annihilation, and to deprive its dispossessed inhabitants of even their hopes for the future, was an act which
would be thought worthy of no Greek nation, and least of
all of the Athenians. They open their own territory to all
comers; and to take away that of others can never appear
consonant with the spirit of their State. However, the Senate
granted them Delos and Lemnos. Such was the decision in
the Athenian business. . . .
As to Lemnos and Delos they had, according to the proverb, "got the wolf
by the ears:"
The possession of these places a misfortune to Athens. See 32, 17.
for they suffered much ill fortune from their
quarrels with the Delians; and from the
territory of Haliartus they reaped shame rather than
profit. . . .
Death of Theaetetus of Rhodes
At this time Theaetetus being admitted into the
Senate spoke on the subject of the alliance.
The Senate, however, postponed the consideration of the proposal, and in the meantime
Theaetetus died in the course of nature, for he was more than
eighty years old.
Caunus and Stratoniceia in Caria.
But on the arrival in Rome
of exiles from Caunus and Stratoniceia, and
their admission to the Senate, a decree was
passed ordering the Rhodians to withdraw their garrisons
from Caunus and Stratoniceia. And the embassy of Philophron and Astymedes having received this answer sailed with
all speed home, alarmed lest the Rhodians should disregard
the order for withdrawing the garrisons, and so give a fresh
ground for complaints. . . .
Public Hatred of Callicrates and His Faction
In the Peloponnese, when the ambassadors arrived and announced the answers from
The effect of the message from the Romans in the Achaean league. Supra ch. 13.
Rome, there was no longer mere clamour, but
downright rage and hatred against Callicrates
and his party. . . .
An instance of the hatred entertained for Callicrates and
Unpopularity of Callicrates, Adronidas, and their party.
Adronidas, and the others who agreed with
them, was this. The festival of the Antigoneia
was being held at Sicyon,—the baths being all
supplied with large public bathing tubs, and
smaller ones placed by them used by bathers of the better
sort,—if Adronidas or Callicrates entered one of these, not a
single one of the bystanders would get into it any more, until
the bathman had let every drop of water run out and filled it
with fresh. They did this from the idea that they would be
polluted by entering the same water as these men. Nor
would it be easy to describe the hissing and hooting that
took place at the public games in Greece when any one
attempted to proclaim one of them victor. The very children
in the streets as they returned from school ventured to call
them traitors to their faces. To such height did the anger
and hatred of these men go. . . .
Delight at Peraea
The inhabitants of Peraea were like slaves unexpectedly
Joy of the people of Peraea at the Roman decree emancipating them from Rhodes.
released from chains, who are scarcely able to believe their
present good fortune, thinking it a change
almost too great to be natural; and cannot
believe that those they meet can understand
or fully see that they are really released,
unless they do something strange and out of the
ordinary course. . . .