This text is part of:
Table of Contents:
1 B.C. 171
2 The name is lost; perhaps it was the ex-consul Gaius Claudius (cf. XLII. xlix. 9), since the other ex-consul, Mucius, was made a legatus (XLII. lxvii. 9, cf. also lviii. 13).
3 The name is uncertain, and is not mentioned elsewhere; the location of the town can only be conjectured.
4 The usual practice was to plunder a city which had been stormed, and spare one which surrendered (XXXVII. xxxii. 12).
5 The active sector of his province of Italy (XLII. xxxii. 4).
6 B.C. 171
7 It had been founded ten years before, cf. XL. xxxiv. 2.
8 Cassius would either have had to traverse uninterruptedly mountainous country, as he followed the coast, or to go far inland, approximately to the line of the modern railway to Saloniki, as Philip planned for the Bastarnae; but these would have been aided by friendly tribes, whereas Cassius would have been beyond aid. The Romans had always used the short sea-route from Brundisium to Illyricum and Greece, little as they liked seafaring.
9 The most recent threat from this direction had been in 186-183 B.C., cf. XXXIX. xxii. 6, xlv. 6-7, liv, though the Transalpine Gauls who had moved in near Aquileia had acted peaceably enough. Cf. the plans of Philip for an invasion of Italy by the Bastarnae, XL. lvii.
10 Strictly speaking, both the senate and the people had to approve the undertaking of a war; cf. the condemnations of similar unauthorized forays in XXXVIII. xlv. 5 and XLI. vii. 7-8.
11 B.C. 171
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.