a digital library of Latin literature
   
CSL Home



Keyword Search
  
     advanced search

Browse by:
          Author
          Title
          Genre
          Date

Full Corpus:
   All available texts
      (single page)



Help
Secondary Texts

What's New
Copyright
Credits
Contact Us

Marcus Junianus Justinus
Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus.
translated, with notes, by the Rev. John Selby Watson.
London: Henry G. Bohn, York Street, Convent Garden (1853).

Previous

Table of contents

Next
   


Book XXXVIII

Mithridates takes possession of Cappadocia, I.—Disputes between him and Nicomedes; the senate take from them Cappadocia and Paphlagonia, II.—Mithridates forms an alliance with Tigranes; invades Asia, and defeats the Romans and Nicomedes, III.—Speech of Mithridates to his army, IV. V. VI. VII.—Cruelties and excesses of Ptolemy Physcon; he is expelled from Egypt by his subjects, VIII.—Demetrius Nicator, king of Syria, made prisoner by the Parthians, IX.—Antiochus Sidetes, brother of Demetrius, falls in war against the Parthians; Demetrius regains his throne, X.


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

1 MITHRIDATES having commenced his cruelties by killing his wife, resolved also on removing the sons of his other sister Laodice, (whose husband Ariarathes, king of Cappadocia, he had treacherously cut off by the agency of a certain Gordius,1) thinking that nothing was gained by the death of the father, if the young princes should possess themselves of his throne, with a desire of which he himself was strongly inflamed. As he was meditating on this scheme, Nicomedes, king of Bithynia, proceeded to occupy Cappadocia, while it. was left defenceless by the death of its sovereign; and Mithridates, on receiving intelligence of his movements, sent assistance to his sister, on pretence of affection for her, to enable her to drive Nicomedes out of Cappadocia. But Laodice had already made a compact to marry Nicomedes; and Mithridates, being indignant at this arrangement, expelled the garrisons of Nicomedes from Cappadocia, and restored the throne to his sister’s son; an act of the highest merit, had no treachery followed it. But some months after, he pretended that he wished to restore Gordius, whom he had used as his agent in the assassination of Ariarathes, to his country; hoping that, if the young man opposed his recal, he should have a pretext for war, or, that if he consented to it, the son might be taken off by the same instrument by which he had procured the death of the father. When the young Ariarthes understood his intention, he expressed great indignation that the murderer of his father should be recalled from banishment, especially by his uncle, and assembled a great army. Mithridates, after bringing into the field eighty thousand foot, ten thousand horse, and six hundred chariots armed with scythes, (while Ariarathes, by the aid of the neighbouring princes, had no less a force), fearing the uncertain event of a battle, turned his thoughts to treachery, and, inviting the young prince to a conference, and having, at the same time, a weapon concealed in his lower garments, he said to the searcher, who was sent by Ariarathes, after the manner of princes on such occasions, to examine his person, and who was feeling very carefully about his groin, that “he had better take care, lest he should find another sort of weapon than he was seeking.” Having thus covered his treachery with a joke, he killed his nephew, (after drawing him aside from his friends as if to confer with him secretly), in the sight of both armies, and bestowed the kingdom of Cappadocia on his own son, a child eight years old, giving him the name of Ariarathes, and appointing Gordius his guardian.

2 The Cappadocians, however, being harassed by the cruelty and licentiousness of their rulers, revolted from Mithridates, and sent for the brother of their king, who was also called Ariarathes, from Asia where he was being educated. Upon this prince Mithridates again made war, defeated him, and drove him from Cappadocia; and not long after the young man died of a disease brought on by anxiety. After his death, Nicomedes, fearing lest Mithridates, from having added Cappadocia to his dominions, should also seize upon Bithynia which was near it, instructed a youth, of extraordinary beauty, to apply for the throne of Bithynia from the senate, as having been his father’s, pretending that Ariarathes had not had two sons only, but a third. He sent his wife Laodice, also, to Rome, to testify that her husband had three children born to him. Mithridates, when he heard of this contrivance, despatched Gordius, with equal effrontery, to Rome, to assure the senate that “the young prince, to whom he had assigned the throne of Cappadocia, was the son of that Ariarathes who had fallen in the war against Aristonicus when giving assistance to the Romans.” But the senate, perceiving the ambitious designs of the two kings, who were seizing the dominions of others on false pretences, took away Cappadocia from Mithridates, and, to console him, Paphlagonia from Nicomedes; and that it might not prove an offence to the kings, that any thing should be taken from them and given to others, both people were offered their liberty. But the Cappadocians declined the favour, saying that “their nation could not subsist without a king.” Ariobarzanes was in consequence appointed their king by the senate.

3 The king of Armenia, at this time, was Tigranes, who had long before been committed as a hostage to the Parthians, but had subsequently been sent back to take possession of his father’s throne. This prince Mithridates was extremely desirous to engage as an ally in the war, which he had long meditated, against the Romans. By the agency of Gordius, accordingly, he prevailed upon him to make war, having not the least thought of offending the Romans by the act, on Ariobarzanes, a prince of inactive disposition; and, that no deceit might seem to be intended, gave him his daughter Cleopatra in marriage. On the first approach of Tigranes, Ariobarzanes packed up his baggage and went off to Rome. Thus, through the instrumentality of Tigranes, Cappadocia was destined to fall again under the power of Mithridates. Nicomedes, too, dying at the same time, his son, who was also named Nicomedes, was driven from his dominions by Mithridates, and, having gone as a suppliant to Rome, it was decreed by the senate that “both the kings should be restored to their thrones;” and Aquilius and Manlius Maltinus2 were commissioned to see the decree executed. On being informed of this proceeding, Mithridates formed an alliance with Tigranes, with a resolution at once to go to war with the Romans; and they agreed that the cities and territory that should be taken from the enemy should be the share of Mithridates, and that the prisoners, and all booty that could be carried off, should belong to Tigranes. In the next place, well understanding what a war he was provoking, he sent ambassadors to the Cimbri, the Gallograecians,3 the Sarmatians, and the Bastarnians, to request aid; for all the time that he had been meditating war with the Romans, he had been gaining over all these nations by acts of kindness and liberality. He sent also for an army from Scythia, and armed the whole eastern world against the Romans. Accordingly, without much difficulty, he defeated Aquilius and Maltinus, who had an army wholly composed of Asiatic troops, and having put them to flight, as well as Nicomedes, he was received with great joy by the various cities, in which he found a great quantity of gold and silver, and vast warlike stores, laid up by the care of former princes. Taking possession of these, he remitted the cities all sorts of debts, public and private, and granted them an immunity from tribute4 for five years.

He then assembled his troops, and animated them, by various exhortations, to pursue the war with the Romans, or in Asia. His speech, on this occasion, I have thought of such importance that I insert a copy of it in this brief work. Trogus Pompeius has given it in the oblique form, as he finds fault with Livy and Sallust for having exceeded the proper limits of history, by inserting direct5 speeches in their works only to display their own eloquence.

4 “It were to be wished,” he said, “that it were still in his power to deliberate whether he should choose peace or war with the Romans; but that resistance should be offered against aggressors, not even those doubted who were without hope of victory; for all men draw the sword against robbers, if not to save their lives, at least to take revenge. But since it was not now a question, when they had come to hostilities (not merely in intention but in the field of battle), they must consider in what manner, and with what hopes, they could continue the contest which they had commenced. That he felt certain of victory, if they had but courage; and that the Romans might be conquered, was known, not more to himself than to his soldiers, who had routed both Aquilius in Bithynia and Maltinus in Cappadocia. And if examples from other nations would weigh more with them than their own experience, he had heard that the Romans had been overthrown in three battles by Pyrrhus, when he had with him not more than five thousand Macedonians; he had heard that Hannibal continued victorious in Italy for sixteen years, and that it was not the strength of the Romans, but the violence of his own countrymen’s envy and jealousy, that prevented him from taking the city of Rome itself; he had heard that the people of Transalpine Gaul had invaded Italy, and founded many great cities in it, and that the same Gauls had possessed themselves of a larger territory there than in Asia, though Asia was considered by no means a warlike country; he had been informed that Rome was not only taken but conquered by the Gauls, the top of one hill only being left in possession of the inhabitants, and that the enemy was not made to retire by the sword, but by gold. But that the power of the Gauls, which had always so much alarmed the Romans, he himself numbered among his own forces; for that these Gauls, who inhabited Asia, differed only in situation from the Gauls who had settled themselves in Italy; that they had the same extraction, courage, and mode of fighting; and that, as to sagacity, the Asiatic Gauls must have more than the others, inasmuch as they had pursued a longer and more difficult march through Illyricum and Thrace, having traversed those territories with almost more labour than it had cost them to acquire those in which they settled. That he had heard that Italy itself, since the time that Rome was built, had never been fairly brought under subjection to her, but that constantly, year after year, some of its people persisted in contending for liberty, and others for a share in the government;6 and that, by many states of Italy, armies of the Romans had been out off by the sword, and by others, with a new species of insult, sent under the yoke?7 But that, not to dwell on past instances, all Italy, at the present time, was in arms in the Marsian war, demanding, not liberty, but a participation in the government and the rights of citizenship. Nor was the city more grievously harassed by war from its neighbours in Italy, than by intestine broils among its leading men; and that a civil war, indeed, was much more dangerous to it than an Italian one. At the same time, too, the Cimbri from Germany, many thousands of wild and savage people, had rushed upon Italy like a tempest; and that in wars with such enemies, though the Romans might be able to resist them singly, yet by them all they must be overpowered; so that he thought they would even be too much occupied to make head against his attack.

5 “That they ought therefore to take advantage of the present circumstances, and seize the opportunity of increasing their power, lest, if they remained inactive while the Romans were occupied, they should hereafter find greater difficulty in contending with them, when they were quiet and unmolested. For it was not a question whether they should take up arms or not, but whether they should do so at a time favourable to themselves or to their enemies. That war, indeed, had been commenced against him by the Romans, when they took from him, in his minority, the Greater Phrygia, a country which they had granted to his father as a recompence for the succours which he had afforded them in the war against Aristonicus, and which Seleucus Callinicus had given to his great-grandfather Mithridates, as a dowry with his daughter. When they required him to quit Paphlagonia, too, was not that a renewal of hostility, a possession which had fallen to his father, not by conquest or force of arms, but by adoption in a will,8 and as an inheritance on the death of its own sovereigns? That, under the severity of such decrees, he had not been able to soften them by compliance, or to prevent them from assuming harsher measures towards him every day. For in what particular had he not submitted to their requisition? Had not Phrygia and Paphlagonia been given up? Had not his son been removed from Cappadocia, which he had gained, as a conqueror, by the common law of nations? Yet his conquest had been forced from him by those who had nothing themselves but what they had got in war. Was not Christos,9 king of Bithynia, on whom the senate had decreed that war should be made, killed by him for their gratification? Yet that whatever Gordius or Tigranes did, was imputed to him; that liberty was readily granted by the senate to Cappadocia (liberty of which they deprived other nations), on purpose to affront him; and that when the people of Cappadocia, instead of the liberty offered them, begged to have Gordius for their king, they did not obtain their request merely because Gordius was his friend. That Nicomedes had made war upon him by their direction; that when he was going to avenge himself, he was obstructed by them; and that their pretence for making war on him at present would be, that he had not given, up his dominions to Nicomedes, the son of a public dancer, to be ravaged with impunity.

6 “That it was not the offences of kings, but their power and majesty, for which they attacked them; and that they had not acted thus against himself alone, but against all other princes at all times. That they had treated his grandfather Pharnaces in the same manner, who, by the arbitration of his relatives, was made successor to Eumenes king of Pergamus; that Eumenes himself, again, in whose fleet they had for the first time been transported into Asia, and by whose army, rather than their own, they had subdued both Antiochus the Great and the Gauls in Asia, and soon after king Perses in Macedonia, had been treated by them as an enemy, and had been forbidden to come into Italy, though they made war, which they thought it would be disgraceful to make upon himself, upon his son Aristonicus.10 No king’s services were thought more important by them than those of Masinissa, king of Numidia; to him it was ascribed that Hannibal was conquered; to him, that Syphax was made prisoner; to him. that Carthage was destroyed; he was ranked with the two Africani, as a third saviour of the city; yet a war had lately been carried on with his grandson in Africa, so implacably, that they would not save the vanquished prince, for the sake of his grandfather’s memory, from being cast into gaol, and led in triumph as a public spectacle. That they had made it a law to themselves to hate all kings, because they themselves had had such kings at whose names they might well blush, being either shepherds of the Aborigines, or soothsayers of the Sabines, or exiles from the Corinthians, or servants and slaves of the Tuscans, or, what was the most honourable name amongst them, the proud; and as their founders, according to their report, were suckled by the teats of a wolf, so the whole race had the disposition of wolves, being insatiable of blood and tyranny, and eager and hungry after riches.11

7 “But as for himself, if he were compared with them as to respectability of descent, he was of more honourable origin than that mixed mass of settlers, counting his ancestors, on his father’s side, from Cyrus and Darius, the founders of the Persian empire, and those on his mother’s side from Alexander the Great and Seleucus Nicator, who established the Macedonian empire; or, if their people were compared with his own, he was at the head of nations,12 which were not merely a match for the power of Rome, but had withstood even that of Macedonia. That none of the people under his command had ever endured a foreign yoke, or obeyed any rulers but their own native princes; for whether they looked on Cappadocia or Paphlagonia, Pontus or Bithynia, or the Greater and Lesser Armenia, they would find that neither Alexander, who subdued all Asia,13 nor any of his successors or posterity, had meddled with any one of those nations. That as to Scythia, only two kings before him, Darius and Philip, had ventured, not indeed to reduce it, but merely to enter it, and had with difficulty secured a retreat from it; yet that from that country he had procured a great part of his force to oppose the Romans. That he had entered on the Pontic wars14 with much more timidity and diffidence, as he was then young and inexperienced. That the Scythians, in addition to their arms and courage, were defended by deserts and cold, by which was shown the great labour and danger of making war there, while, amidst such hardships, there was not even hope of spoil from a wandering enemy, destitute, not only of money, but of settled habitations. But that he was now entering upon a different sort of war; for there was no climate more temperate than that of Asia, nor any country more fertile or more attractive from the number of its cities; and that they would spend a great part of their time, not as in military service, but as at a festival, in a war of which it was hard to say whether it would be more easy or more gainful, as they themselves might feel assured, if they had but heard of the late riches of the kingdom of Attalus, or the ancient opulence of Lydia and Ionia, which they were not going to acquire by conquest, but to take possession of; while Asia so eagerly expected him,15 that it even invited him in words, so much had the rapacity, of the proconsuls, the sales of the tax-gatherers, and the disgraceful mode of conducting law-suits, possessed the people with a hatred of the Romans. That they had only to follow him bravely, and learn what so great an army might do under his conduct, whom they had seen seizing Cappadocia, after killing its king, not with the aid of any troops, but by his own personal effort, and who alone, of all mankind, had subdued all Pontus and Scythia, which no one before him could safely penetrate or approach. As to his justice and generosity, he was willing to take the soldiers themselves, who had experienced them, as witnesses to what they were; and he had those proofs to bring of the latter, that he alone, of all kings, possessed not only his father’s dominions, but foreign kingdoms, acquired by inheritance through his liberality, namely, Colchis, Paphlagonia, and the Bosporus.”

8 Having thus encouraged his troops, he entered upon the war with the Romans,16 twenty-three years after his accession to the throne.

In Egypt, meanwhile, on the death of Ptolemy,17 the throne, with the queen Cleopatra his sister in marriage, was offered by an embassy to the Ptolemy18 who was reigning at Cyrene. Ptolemy, rejoiced at having recovered his brother’s throne without a struggle (for which he knew that his brother’s son was intended, both by his mother Cleopatra and the inclination of the nobles), but being incensed at all that had opposed his interests, ordered, as soon as he entered Alexandria, the partisans of the young prince to be put to death. He also killed the youth himself on the day of his nuptials (when he took his mother to wife), amidst the splendour of feasts, the ceremonies of religion, and in the very embraces of his parent, and thus went to the couch of his sister stained with the blood of her child. Nor was he afterwards more merciful to those of his subjects who had invited him to the throne, for license to use the sword being given to the foreign soldiers, all places daily ran with blood. He divorced his sister, too, offering violence to her daughter, a young maiden, and then taking her in marriage. The people, terrified at these proceedings, fled to other countries, and became exiles from their native soil through fear of death. Ptolemy, in consequence, being left alone with his soldiers in so large a city, and finding himself a king, not of men, but of empty houses, invited, by a proclamation, foreigners to become residents in it. While people were flocking thither, he went out to meet some Roman commissioners, Scipio Africanus, Spurius Mummius, and Lucius Metellus, who had come to inspect the dominions of their allies. But he appeared as ridiculous to the Romans as he was cruel to his own subjects; for he was disagreeable in countenance, short in stature, and, from his obesity, more like a beast than a man. This deformity the extraordinary thinness of his apparel, which was even transparent, made more remarkable, just as if that was affectedly obtruded on the sight which by a modest man would have been most carefully concealed. After the departure of the commissioners, (of whom Africanus, as he surveyed the city, was an object of interest to the Alexandrians), finding that he had become hateful even to the foreigners whom he had invited, he withdrew secretly, for fear of plots against his life, into voluntary exile, accompanied by a son that he had by his sister, and by his wife, her mother’s rival, and, having collected an army of mercenaries, made war at once upon his sister and his country. He next sent for his eldest son from Cyrene, and put him to death, when the people began to pull down his statues and images, and he, imagining that this was done to please his sister, killed the son that he had by her, and contrived to have the body, divided into portions and arranged in a chest, presented to the mother at a feast on his birth-day. This deed occasioned grief and sorrow, not only to the queen, but also to the whole city, and threw such a gloom over a banquet intended to be most joyous, that the whole palace was suddenly filled with mourning. The attention of the nobility, in consequence, being turned from feasting to a funeral, they exhibited the mangled limbs to the people, and let them see, by the murder of his son, what they were to expect from their king.

9 Cleopatra, when the mourning for the loss of her son was over, finding herself pressed by war on the part of her brother, sent ambassadors to request aid from Demetrius king of Syria, a prince whose changes of fortune had been numerous and remarkable. After making war, as has been said above,19 upon the Parthians, and gaining the victory in several battles, he was suddenly surprised by an ambuscade, and, having lost his army, was taken prisoner. Arsacides,20 king of the Parthians, having sent him into Hyrcania, not only paid him, with royal magnanimity, the respect due to a prince, but gave him his daughter also in marriage, and promised to recover for him the throne of Syria, which Trypho had usurped in his absence. After the death of this king, Demetrius, despairing of being allowed to return, being unable to endure captivity, and weary of a private, though splendid, life, secretly planned a mode of escaping to his own country. His counsellor and companion in the scheme was his friend Callimander, who, after Demetrius was taken prisoner, had come in a Parthian dress from Syria, with some guides that he had hired, through the deserts of Arabia to Babylon. But Phraates, who had succeeded Arsacides, brought him back, for he was overtaken in his flight by the speed of a party of horse sent after him by a shorter road. When he was brought to the king, not only pardon, but a testimony of esteem for his fidelity, was given to Callimander, but as for Demetrius, he sent him back, after having severely reproached him, into Hyrcania to his wife, and directed that he should be kept in stricter confinement than before. Some time after, when children that were born to him had caused him to be more trusted,21 he again attempted flight, with the same friend as his attendant, but was overtaken, with equal ill-fortune, near the borders of his dominions, and being again brought to the king, was ordered out of his sight, as a person whom he could not endure to see. But being then also spared, for the sake of his wife and children, he was remanded into Hyrcania, the country of his punishment, and presented with golden dice, as a reproach for his childish levity. But it was not compassion, or respect for ties of blood, that was the cause of this extraordinary clemency22 of the Parthians toward Demetrius; the reason was, that they had some designs on the kingdom of Syria, and intended to make use of Demetrius against his brother Antiochus, as circumstances, the course of time, or the fortune of war, might require.

10 Antiochus, having heard of their designs, and thinking it proper to be first in the field, led forth an army, which he had inured to service by many wars23 with his neighbours, against the Parthians. But his preparations for luxury were not less than those for war, for three hundred thousand24 camp followers, of whom the greater number were cooks, bakers, and stage-players, attended on eighty thousand armed men. Of silver and gold, it is certain, there was such an abundance that the common soldiers fastened their buskins with gold, and trod upon the metal for the love of which nations contend with the sword. Their cooking instruments, too, were ot silver, as if they were going to a banquet, not to a field of battle. Many kings of the east met Antiochus on his march, offering him themselves and their kingdoms, and expressing the greatest detestation of Parthian pride. Nor was there any delay in coming to an engagement. Antiochus, being victorious in three battles, and having got possession of Babylon, began to be thought a great man. All the neighbouring people, in consequence, joining him, nothing was left to the Parthians but their own country. It was then that Phraates sent Demetrius into Syria, with a body of Parthians, to seize the throne, so that Antiochus might be recalled from Parthia to secure his own dominions. In the meantime, since he could not overthrow Antiochus by open force, he made attempts upon him everywhere by stratagem. On account of the number of his forces, Antiochus had distributed his army, in winter quarters, through several cities; and this dispersion was the cause of his ruin; for the cities, finding themselves harassed by having to furnish supplies, and by the depredations of the soldiers, revolted to the Parthians, and, on an appointed day, conspired to fall upon the army divided among them, so that the several divisions might not be able to assist each other. News of the attack being brought to Antiochus, he hastened with that body of troops which he had in winter-quarters with him, to succour the others that lay nearest. On his way he was met by the king of the Parthians, with whom he himself fought more bravely than his troops; but at last, as the enemy had the superiority in valour, he was deserted, through fear on the part of his men, and killed. Phraates had funeral rites performed for him as a king, and married the daughter of Demetrius, whom Antiochus had brought with him, and of whom he had become enamoured. He then began to regret having sent away Demetrius, and hastily despatched some troops of horse to fetch him back; but they found that prince, who had been in fear of pursuit, already seated on his throne, and, after doing all they could to no purpose, returned to their king.

Previous

Table of contents

Next
   




1 He had been banished; see below.

2 The commentators are divided respecting these names. Bongarsius and Vorstius, from Appian, and Livy, Epit. lxxvii. think that the first name should be Manius Aquilius. The Juntine edition has Aquilius Manlius et Manius Attilius; Becharius and Major read Aquilius Mallius et Maltinus. But conjecture is useless; the same names are repeated, without any praenomina, in
c. 4 of this book. The name Malthinus occurs in Horace.

3 See
xxv. 2.

4 Vacationem.] That this is the sense of vacatio, though tributorum is not expressed, is generally agreed. For instances of similar immunity, Berneccerus refers to Tacit. Ann. ii. 56, and Liv. xlv. 18.

5 Justin has given two examples of direct speeches,
xiv 4; xviii. 7.—Wetzel.

6 Wetzel has pro jure imperii in his text, but seems to prefer, in his note on the passage, J. F. Gronovius’s reading, pro vice imperii, which is found in some MSS.

7 By the Samnites; Liv. ix. 5; Vell. Pat. i. 14.

8 All the editions have adoptione testamenti, et regum domesticorum interitu. Scheffer asks, “What is adoptione testamenti? Perhaps,” he adds, “adoption made per testamentum. But no one has explained this form of adoption; and if it were explained, whence does it appear that any adoption was made in this case per testamentum?” He concludes by proposing to read adoptione, testamento, &c.

9 This Christos is nowhere else mentioned.

10 See
xxxvi. 4.

11 Divitiarumque avidos ac jejunos.] A confusion of man and wolf.

12 Earum se gentium esse.] Faber observes that regem is wanting in the text, and must be supplied.

13 That is, all Greater Asia; all the eastern part of Asia.

14 Bella Pontica.] See
xxxvii. 3.

15 Tantumque se avida expectet Asia, &c.] Faber reads tamque se, &c., but even then, as Vorstius observes, the words do not suit the oratio obliqua, which requires avidam expectare Asiam, &c.

16 Romana bella.] Of which Justin gives no regular account. He touches on the subject,
xxxvii. 1, and xxviii. 3; but what he relates of Aquilius and Maltinus in the latter passage occurred twenty-three years after Mithridates commenced the war.

17 Philometor. See
xxxiv. 2.

18 Physcon. See
xxxiv. 2.

19
xxxvi. 1.

20 See note on
xxxvi. 1.

21 Because Phraates thought that such a tie was likely to attach Demetrius to Hyrcania.—Lemaire.

22 Wetzel’s text, and, I believe, all others, have mitem clementiam, but as mitem is a useless epithet, I have followed Scheffer’s conjecture, miram clementiam.

23 See
xxxvi. 1.

24 Trecenta millia.] Triginta millia, which appears in the Ven. Ald. and Col. editions, is a more probable number.—Wetzel.


Previous

Table of contents

Next
   


The English translation of Justin's Epitome was entered by David Camden (2003) from Watson's 1853 edition. This text is in the public domain and may be copied and distributed for private and educational use, provided this original notice is kept intact. Any commercial use of this text, including print-publication and inclusion in subscription-based archives, is prohibited.

The Latin text and French translation, along with the secondary material written in French, are copyright © Marie-Pierre Arnaud-Lindet 2003, and are NOT in the public domain.

This material may only be used for private and educational use and provided that its copyright status is properly cited. Any modification, remote loading, publication, reproduction on another site, diffusion on the internet, or commercial use of these texts is strictly prohibited without the prior agreement of the author.

FORUM ROMANUM