43.
There was a quarrel between Marcus Fulvius and the consul Aemilius; and in addition to other motives, Aemilius thought, that he had been made consul two years later, by the opposition of Marcus Fulvius.
[2]
In order, therefore, to exasperate the minds of the public against him, he introduced to the senate ambassadors from Ambracia, whom he had secretly instructed in the charges they were to make against him.
[3]
[p. 1770]These complained, that “war had been made on them when they were in a state of peace, after they had executed the commands of former consuls, and were ready to show the same obedience to Marcus Fulvius; that first their lands were ravaged; and that, the terror of rapine and carnage was then cast into the city, that by that fear they might be compelled to shut their gates.
[4]
They were then besieged and assaulted, and all the horrors of war were inflicted on them, murders, burnings, the sacking and demolishing of their city.
[5]
Their wives and children were dragged away into slavery; their goods taken from them; and, what shocked them more than all, their temples were despoiled of their ornaments, and the images of their gods, nay, the gods themselves were torn from their mansions, and carried away; so that the Ambracians had nothing left to adore, to which they could address their prayers and supplications, but naked walls and pillars.”
[6]
While they were making these complaints, the consul, as had been agreed, by asking questions leading to further charges, drew them on, as if against their inclinations, to the mention of other matters.
[7]
The senators being moved by these accusations, the other consul, Caius Flaminius, took up the cause of Marcus Fulvius: and he said that “the Ambracians had set out in an old course, now long out of use.
[8]
In this manner Marcus Marcellus had been accused by the Syracusans; and Quintus Fulvius by the Campanians. Why might not the senate as well allow Titus Quintius to be accused by king Philip; Manius Acilius and Lucius Scipio, by Antiochus; Cneius Manlius, by the Gauls; and Fulvius himself, by the Aetolians and the states of Cephallenia?
[9]
Do you think, conscript fathers, either that I in behalf of Marcus Fulvius, or that Marcus Fulvius himself, will deny the besieging and taking Ambracia, the removing thence the statues and ornaments, and the other proceedings, which are usual on the capture of cities?
[10]
He is about to demand a triumph from you for those very services, and to carry before his chariot those statues, the removal of which is charged as criminal, together with the other spoils of that city, and hang them up on the pillars of his house.
[11]
There is no kind of pretence for their separating themselves from the Aetolians; the cause of the Ambracians and of the Aetolians is the same.
[12]
Let, therefore, my colleague either vent his malice in some other [p. 1771]case; or, if lie is determined to proceed in this, let him detain his Ambracians until Fulvius comes home.
[13]
I will not suffer any determination, concerning either the Ambracians or Aetolians, to pass in the absence of Marcus Fulvius.”
Livy. History of Rome by Titus Livius, books thirty-seven to the end, with the epitomes and fragments of the lost books. literally translated, with notes and illustrations, by. William A. McDevitte. York Street, Covent Garden, London. Henry G. Bohn. John Child and son, printers, Bungay. 1850. 4.
The National Endowment for the Humanities provided support for entering this text.
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.