Page images

lated blunders and whims of many scribes; their spelling cannot, therefore, be very sacred or trustworthy. Our knowledge of Latin orthography is based in part upon manuscripts, but much more and more securely upon the evidence of inscriptions, the statements of the Roman grammarians, and the fact that the ancient orthography was essentially phonetic. A method thus derived is necessarily conventional, and cannot faithfully reproduce the method of any single writer ; but it is, for ordinary purposes, the best attainable. Such forms, therefore, as aecum, arena, exaustum, millia, set, though they are in the best manuscripts of Livy and are of value to specialists, have been discarded.

In the preparation of the commentary, beyond the free use of what has become the common property of scholarship, acknowledgment of aid is due to these works: the editions of Weissenborn-Müller (Berlin, 1891), Wölffin (Leipsic, 1891), Capes (London, 1889), Dowdall (London, 1888), Riemann and Benoist (Paris, 1888); Kühnast's Die Hauptpunkte der Livianischen Syntax (Berlin, 1872), Riemann's Étude sur la langue et la grammaire de Tite Live (Paris, 1885); R. B. Smith's Rome and Carthage (New York, 1886), Dodge's Hannibal (Boston, 1891), Hesselbarth's Untersuchungen zur dritten Dekade des Livius (Halle, 1889); Taine's Essai sur Tite Live (Paris, 1888).

For an account of Livy's life and writings, and an estimate of his strength and weakness as a historian, the reader is referred to the Introduction to Books I. and II.

The abbreviation ‘Gr.' in the notes is for Allen & Greenough's Latin Grammar (Boston, 1888).


JULY 12, 1893



1. The twenty-first and twenty-second books of Livy treat of the events of 219-216 B.C., the opening years of the second part of the great struggle between Rome and Carthage. It was a struggle between the Indo-European and the Semitic races for supremacy on the Mediterranean Sea, and for the two powers engaged was one for existence even. The Phænicians, the great commercial nation of the East, had extended their mercantile relations throughout the eastern Mediterranean, and, crowded out of Grecian waters by the activity of the Hellenic tribes, had concentrated their influence upon the European and North African coast in the West, long before the Latins had emerged from the condition of a simple agricultural community. But Rome from her peculiarly advantageous position controlled the whole commerce with the interior of Italy. Hence, though perhaps the Romans were not a commercial nation in the same sense as were the Greeks and Phoenicians, sending their own ships and expeditions to every quarter of the world, yet their wealth and power were really founded upon commerce, and their merchants were seen and their trade was established in every part of the West. In the conduct of this commerce they early came in contact with the Carthaginians, who were their most active rivals. Carthage was a Phænician colony which had been peaceably established in prehistoric times (probably in the ninth century B.c.) on the northernmost point of the coast of Africa, and had gradually extended its



power in the western Mediterranean. Before the end of the sixth century B.C. the Carthaginians had become masters of much of the northern and western coasts of Africa, of the islands of Corsica and Sardinia, and of a large part of Sicily, where they were contending with the Greek colonies for dominion. They had also founded colonies on the coast of Spain.

2. According to Polybius (iii. 22), in 509 B.C. the Carthaginians made a treaty with the Romans by which the merchants of Rome were excluded from all the lands south of the Promontorium Hermæum (Cape Bon). In spite of the express statement of Polybius it is more probable, though by no means certain, that this treaty was not made till 348 B.C., (Livy vii. 27) some hundred and fifty years later. But in any case it shows that the Romans had long before the latter date extended their commercial relations to all parts of Italy and Sicily and in some degree to Africa.

3. The contest for the possession of Sicily between the Greeks and Carthaginians continued with various interruptions till 338 B.C., when a treaty was made with Timoleon by which the island was divided between the rival powers. This state of things lasted till about 289 B.C., with the exception of a short period of war with Agathocles of Syracuse. Later, the Carthaginians were gaining on the Greeks, when the advent of Pyrrhus, in 2.78 B.C., forced them back to the extreme west of the island, until his withdrawal, in 275 B.C., left the field again in their possession. In the meantime, through fear of the Greeks friendly relations had been established between the Romans and their old rivals. The treaty of 348 B.C. had been renewed in 306 B.C. (Livy ix. 43 et cum Carthaginiensibus eodem anno foedus tertio renovatum, legatisque eorum qui ad id venerant comiter munera missa). Another renewal was made in 281 B.C. (Livy, Per. xiii. cum Carthaginiensibus quarto foedus renovatum est) when the war with Pyrrhus was impending, and a Carthaginian fleet was offered to the Romans, which, however, doubtless from jealousy, was declined. In


272 B.C. the appearance of a Carthaginian fleet before Tarentum was regarded by the Romans as a breach of the treaty (Livy, Per. xiv. Carthaginiensium classis auxilio Tarentinis venit, quo facto ab his foedus violatum est).

THE FIRST PUNIC WAR. 4. With the departure of Pyrrhus the Romans became practically masters of the whole of Italy, and now the two grasping nations came face to face on the two sides of the Strait of Messina. Their first hostile contact was forced by the Romans with characteristic aggressiveness. They undertook to assist a lawless band of Campanians, who had seized Messina, against Hiero of Syracuse and the Carthaginians, and for the first time, in 264 B.C., a Roman army crossed the strait into Sicily. The success of this army drew Hiero to join the Roman cause, and a war was begun which lasted more than twenty years. The possession of Sicily was hotly contested by land, but, from the extraordinary power of the Carthaginians on the sea, the war was chiefly a naval one. The Romans, who were without any considerable fleet, contrived with marvelous energy and ingenuity to build one; and, in spite of many disasters, they finally, in 241 B.C., by a victory at the Ægates islands, so crushed the power of the Carthaginians that the latter were forced to submit to a disadvantageous treaty, by which they lost Sicily with all the islands lying between Italy and Sicily. Thus closed the First Punic War a war, as Polybius says, the longest, the most continuous, and the greatest which the world had then known.

TROUBLES OF CARTHAGE AT HOME. 5. Hardly was peace concluded with Rome when Carthage was seriously threatened by the combined revolt of her mercenary soldiers and of her Libyan dependencies. This war was marked by fearful atrocities on both sides, and after continuing more than three years was brought to a close by Hamilcar Barca, who had given proof of great genius and patriotism during the last six years of the war with Rome. Either there were ambiguities in the treaty of 241 B.C., which gave a show of reason to the Romans, or they took advantage of the embarrassment of their enemy; at any rate, they soon succeeded in wresting from Carthage both Sardinia and Corsica.

[ocr errors]


6. Partly because of the jealous opposition of Hanno, who represented the peace-loving commercial and aristocratic classes, and partly no doubt to initiate a far-seeing plan of revenge against Rome, Hamilcar, in 237 B.C., crossed into southern Spain. Here, sometimes by force of arms and sometimes by diplomacy, he continued to promote the power and wealth of Carthage till he fell fighting in 228 B.C. His successor was his son-in-law, Hasdrubal, who organized the Carthaginian empire which Hamilcar had established in Spain, and founded New Carthage as its capital. The Romans were alarmed at these movements and forced Hasdrubal to agree not to extend his conquests north of the river Ebro. On the assassination of Hasdrubal, in 220 B.C., Hannibal, the son of Hamilcar, succeeded to the control of the interests of Carthage in Spain.

THE SECOND PUNIC WAR. 7. Before 220 B.C., the year when Hannibal took the command, all the accessible regions of the Spanish peninsula south of the river Ebro were in the hands of the Carthaginians, except the city of Saguntum, which had come into alliance with the Romans after the treaty of 241 B.C. Hannibal, who inherited the long-cherished determination of Hamilcar and Hasdrubal to retrieve the disasters of the First Punic War, devoted himself to preparing Spain as a base of operations, and in 219 B.C. began hostilities by the siege and final capture

[ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »