Delphi Complete Works of Polybius Read online

  The Complete Works of

  POLYBIUS

  (200 BC – c. 118 BC)

  Contents

  The Translations

  THE HISTORIES

  The Greek Text

  CONTENTS OF THE GREEK TEXT

  The Dual Texts

  DUAL GREEK AND ENGLISH TEXT

  The Biography

  INTRODUCTION TO POLYBIUS by H. J. Edwards

  © Delphi Classics 2014

  Version 1

  The Complete Works of

  POLYBIUS

  By Delphi Classics, 2014

  The Translations

  Megalopolis, a town in southwestern Arcadia — Polybius’s birthplace

  THE HISTORIES

  Translated by Evelyn S. Shuckburgh

  Though originally composed of 40 books, only the first five books of Polybius’ The Histories are extant in their entirety, having been mostly passed down from collections kept in libraries in Byzantium. Polybius begins his great work in the year 264 BC and finishes in 146 BC. His primary concern, aside from the exact presentation of pragmatic history, is the 53 years in which Rome became a dominant world power, exploring precisely how and why the Romans spread their power as they did, describing the rise of the Republic, the destruction of Carthage and the eventual domination of the Greek world. In spite of its incomplete state, The Histories is a vital achievement, offering many valuable original sources.

  Of chief interest in the work is the period 220 BC to 167 BC, which witnesses Rome subjugating Carthage and becoming the dominant Mediterranean power. Books I to V deal extensively with the first and second Punic Wars, whilst Book VI describes the constitution of the Romans, outlining the powers of the consuls, senate and people. Polybius comes to the conclusion, by virtue of his Hellenistic attitude, that the Romans are so successful due to how their constitution is mixed. Therefore, Polybius is notable for his systematic study of Rome’s rise to power, as well as being useful in assessing the Hellenistic manner of writing and as a window into this Hellenistic period.

  A key theme of The Histories is the good statesman, acting as virtuous and composed. The character of the Polybian statesman is exemplified in the person of Philip II. His beliefs as to the character of a good statesman led Polybius to reject the historian Theopompus’ description of Philip’s private, drunken debauchery. For Polybius, it was inconceivable that such an able and effective statesman could have had an immoral and unrestrained private life as described by Theopompus.

  Other important themes running throughout the work are the role of Fortune in the affairs of nations, Polybius’ insistence that history should be demonstratory, or ‘apodeiktike’, providing lessons for statesmen, and that historians should be “men of action” (pragmatikoi).

  Polybius is considered by some to be the successor of Thucydides in terms of objectivity and critical reasoning, and the forefather of scholarly, painstaking historical research in the modern scientific sense. According to this view, his work sets forth the course of history’s occurrences with clearness, penetration, sound judgment, and among the circumstances affecting the outcomes, lays especial emphasis on the geographical conditions. Modern historians are especially impressed with the manner in which Polybius used his sources and in particular documents, his citation and quotation of his sources. Moreover, there is much appreciation of Polybius’s meditation on the nature of historiography in Book 12. His work belongs, therefore, amongst the most learned and unbiased productions of ancient historical writing.

  Philip II of Macedon was a king of Macedon from 359 BC until his assassination in 336 BC. He was the father of Alexander the Great. Polybius portrays him as the ideal statesman in ‘The Histories’.

  Milazzo (ancient Mylae), a town in the province of Messina, Sicily. The Battle of Mylae took place in 260 BC during the First Punic War and was the location of first naval battle between Carthage and the Roman Republic. This battle marked Rome’s first naval triumph and also the first use of the corvus.

  Diagram displaying the corvus (“crow”) the Roman military boarding device used in naval warfare during the First Punic War against Carthage, which is famously described by Polybius in the first book.

  CONTENTS

  PREFACE

  INTRODUCTION

  BOOK I

  BOOK II

  BOOK III

  BOOK IV

  BOOK V

  BOOK VI

  BOOK VII

  BOOK VIII

  BOOK IX

  BOOK X

  BOOK XI

  BOOK XII

  BOOK XIII

  BOOK XIV

  BOOK XV

  BOOK XVI

  BOOK XVIII

  BOOK XIX

  BOOK XX

  BOOK XXI

  BOOK XXII

  BOOK XXIII

  BOOK XXIV

  BOOK XXV

  BOOK XXVI

  BOOK XXVII

  BOOK XXVIII

  BOOK XXIX

  BOOK XXX

  BOOK XXXI

  BOOK XXXII

  BOOK XXXIII

  BOOK XXXIV

  BOOK XXXVI

  BOOK XXXVII

  BOOK XXXVIII

  BOOK XXXIX

  CONCLUSION OF THE HISTORY

  SHORTER FRAGMENTS

  APPENDICES

  Hannibal, son of Hamilcar Barca, (247 – c. 183 BC) was a Punic Carthaginian military commander, generally considered one of the greatest military commanders in history. He features as a prominent figure in Polybius’ ‘The Histories’.

  Monument at ancient Cannae. The Battle of Cannae was a major conflict of the Second Punic War, which took place on 2 August 216 BC in Apulia in southeast Italy. The army of Carthage under Hannibal decisively defeated a larger army of the Roman Republic under the consuls Lucius Aemilius Paullus and Gaius Terentius Varro. It is regarded both as one of the greatest tactical feats in military history and as one of the worst defeats in Roman history. The battle is narrated in Book III.

  Publius Cornelius Scipio Africanus (236–183 BC) was a general in the Second Punic War and statesman of the Roman Republic. He was best known for defeating Hannibal at the final battle of the Second Punic War at Zama, which earned him the agnomen ‘Africanus’, as well as recognition as one of the finest commanders in military history.

  TO

  F. M. S.

  IN GRATITUDE FOR MUCH PATIENT HELP

  PREFACE

  This is the first English translation of the complete works of Polybius as far as they are now known. In attempting such a task I feel that I ought to state distinctly the limits which I have proposed to myself in carrying it out. I have desired to present to English readers a faithful copy of what Polybius wrote, which should at the same time be a readable English book. I have not been careful to follow the Greek idiom; and have not hesitated to break up and curtail or enlarge his sentences, when I thought that, by doing so, I could present his meaning in more idiomatic English. Polybius is not an author likely to be studied for the sake of his Greek, except by a few technical scholars; and the modern complexion of much of his thought makes such a plan of translation both possible and desirable. How far I have succeeded I must leave my readers to decide. Again, I have not undertaken to write a commentary on Polybius, nor to discuss at length the many questions of interest which arise from his text. Such an undertaking would have required much more space than I was able to give: and happily, while my translation was passing through the press, two books have appeared, which will supply English students with much that I might have felt bound to endeavour to give — the Achaean league by Mr. Capes, and the sumptuous Oxford edition of extracts by Mr. Strachan-Davidson.

  The translatio
n is made from the text of Hultsch and follows his arrangement of the fragments. If this causes some inconvenience to those who use the older texts, I hope that such inconvenience will be minimised by the full index which I have placed at the end of the second volume.

  I have not, I repeat, undertaken to write a commentary. I propose rather to give the materials for commentary to those who, for various reasons, do not care to use the Greek of Polybius. I have therefore in the first five complete books left him to speak for himself, with the minimum of notes which seemed necessary for the understanding of his text. The case of the fragments was different. In giving a translation of them I have tried, when possible, to indicate the part of the history to which they belong, and to connect them by brief sketches of intermediate events, with full references to those authors who supply the missing links.

  Imperfect as the performance of such a task must, I fear, be, it has been one of no ordinary labour, and has occupied every hour that could be spared during several years of a not unlaborious life. And though I cannot hope to have escaped errors, either of ignorance or human infirmity, I trust that I may have produced what will be found of use to some historical students, in giving them a fairly faithful representation of the works of an historian who is, in fact, our sole authority for some most interesting portions of the world’s history.

  It remains to give a brief account of the gradual formation of the text of Polybius, as we now have it.

  The revival of interest in the study of Polybius was due to Pope Nicholas V (1447-1455), the founder of the Vatican Library. Soon after his election he seems to have urged Cardinal Perotti to undertake a Latin translation of the five books then known to exist. When Perotti sent him his translation of the first book, the Pope thus acknowledges it in a letter dated 28th August 1452: —

  “Primus Polybii liber, quem ad nos misisti, nuper a te de Graeca in Latinam translatus, gratissimus etiam fuit et jucundissimus: quippe in ea translatione nobis cumulatissime satisfacis. Tanta enim facilitate et eloquentia transfers, ut Historia ipsa nunquam Graeca, sed prorsus Latina semper fuisse videatur. Optimum igitur ingenium tuum valde commendamus atque probamus, teque hortamur ut velis pro laude et gloria tua, et pro voluptate nimia singulare opus inchoatum perficere, nec labori parcas. Nam et rem ingenio et doctrina tua dignam, et nobis omnium gratissimam efficies; qui laborum et studiorum tuorum aliquando memores erimus.... Tu vero, si nobis rem gratam efficere cupis, nihil negligentiae committas in hoc opere traducendo. Nihil enim nobis gratius efficere poteris. Librum primum a vertice ad calcem legimus, in cujus translatione voluntati nostrae amplissime satisfactum est.”

  On the 3d of January 1454 the Pope writes again to Perotti thanking him for the third book; and in a letter to Torelli, dated 13th November 1453, Perotti says that he had finished his translation of Polybius in the preceding September. This translation was first printed in 1473. The Greek text was not printed till 1530, when an edition of the first five books in Greek, along with Perotti’s translation, was published at the Hague, opera Vincentii Obsopaei, dedicated to George, Marquess of Brandenburg. Perotti’s translation was again printed at Basle in 1549, accompanied by a Latin translation of the fragments of books 6 to 17 by Wolfgan Musculus, and reprinted at the Hague in 1598.

  The chief fragments of Polybius fall into two classes; (1) those made by some unknown epitomator, who Casaubon even supposed might be Marcus Brutus, who, according to Plutarch, was engaged in this work in his tent the night before the battle of Pharsalus. The printing of these began with two insignificant fragments on the battle between the Rhodians and Attalus against Philip, Paris, 1536; and another de re navali, Basle, 1537. These fragments have continually accumulated by fresh discoveries. (2) The other class of fragments are those made by the order of Constantinus Porphyrogenitus (911-959), among similar ones from other historians, which were to be digested under fifty-three heads or tituli; one of which (the 27th) has come down to us, discovered in the sixteenth century, containing the selecta de legationibus; and another (the 50th) de virtute et vitio. The printing of the first of these begins with the edition of Fulvius Ursinus, published at Antwerp in 1582. This was supplemented in 1634 (Paris) by an edition by Valesius of excerpta ex collectaneis Constantini Augusti Porphyrogeneti. The first edition of something like a complete text of Polybius, containing the five entire books, the excerptae legationes, and fragments of the other books, was that of Isaac Casaubon, Paris, 1609, fo. It was accompanied by a new and very brilliant Latin translation, and a preface which has been famous among such works. It contains also a Latin translation of Aeneas Tacticus. Altogether it is a splendid book. Some additional annotationes of Casaubon’s were published after his death in 1617, Paris. Other editions followed; that of Gronovius, Amsterdam, 1670: of Ernesti, Leipsic, 1764, containing Casaubon’s translation more or less emended, and additional fragments. But the next important step in the bibliography of Polybius was the publication of the great edition of Schweighaeuser, Leipsic, 1789-1795, in nine volumes, with a new Latin translation, — founded, however, to a great extent on Casaubon, — a new recension of the text, and still farther additions to the fragments; accompanied also by an excellent Lexicon and Onomasticon. This great work has been the foundation from which all modern commentaries on Polybius must spring. Considerable additions to the fragments, collected from MSS. in the Vatican by Cardinal Mai, were published in 1827 at Rome. The chief modern texts are those of Bekker, 1844; Duebner (with Latin translation), 1839 and 1865; Dindorf, 1866-1868, 1882 (Teubner). A new recension of the five books and all the known fragments — founded on a collation of some twelve MSS. and all previous editions, as well as all the numerous works of importance on our Author that have appeared in Germany and elsewhere — was published by F. Hultsch, Berlin, 1867-1872, in four volumes. This must now be considered the standard text. A second edition of the first volume appeared in 1888, but after that part of my translation had passed through the press.

  Of English translations the earliest was by Ch. Watson, 1568, of the first five books. It is entitled The Hystories of the most famous Cronographer Polybios; Discoursing of the warres betwixt the Romanes and Carthaginenses, a rich and goodly work, conteining holsome counsels and wonderful devices against the inconstances of fickle Fortune. Englished by C[hristopher] W[atson] whereunto is annexed an Abstract, compendiously coarcted out of the life and worthy Acts perpetrate by oure puissant Prince King Henry the fift. London, Imprinted by Henry Byneman for Tho. Hacket, 1568, 8vo. See Herbert’s Ames, p. 895. Another translation of the five books was published by Edward Grimestone, London, 1634, of which a second and third edition appeared in 1648 and 1673. A translation of the Mercenary War from the first book was made by Sir Walter Raleigh, and published after his death in 1647 (London, 4to). Next, a new translation of the five books was published in London, 1693 (2 vols. 8vo), by Sir H[enry] S[hears], with a preface by Dryden. In 1741 (London, 4to) appeared “A fragment of the 6th book containing a dissertation on government, translated from the Greek of Polybius, with notes, etc., by A Gentleman.” This was followed by the first English translation, which contained any part of the fragments, as well as the five books, by the Rev. James Hampton, London, 4to, 1756-1761, which between that date and 1823 (2 vols., Oxford) went through at least seven editions. Lastly, a translation of Polybius’s account of Hannibal’s passage of the Alps is appended by Messrs. Church and Brodribb to their translation of Livy, 21-22. There is a German translation by A. Haakh and Kraz, Stuttgart, 1858-1875. And a French translation by J. A. C. Buchon, Paris, 1842, Orléans, 1875. For the numerous German essays and dissertations on the text, and particular questions arising from the history, I must refer my readers to Engelmann’s Bibliotheca. In England such studies are rare. Mr. Strachan-Davidson published an essay on Polybius in Hellenica; and his edition of extracts of the text (Oxford, 1888) contains several dissertations of value. Mr. Capes (London, 1888) has published an edition of extracts referring to the Achaean league, with an introductory essay on the author a
nd his work. And a very admirable article on Polybius appears in the recent edition of the Encyclopædia Britannica by Mr. H. F. Pelham. There is also a good paper on Polybius in the Quarterly Review for 1879, No. 296. Criticisms on Polybius, and estimates of his value as an historian, will be found in Thirlwall’s History of Greece, vol. viii.; Arnold’s History of Rome; Mommsen’s History of Rome, book iv. c. xiii.; Freeman’s History of Federal Government and Essays; Bunbury’s Ancient Geography, vol. ii. p. 16; Law’s Alps of Hannibal. For the Roman side of his history, besides the works mentioned by Mr. Strachan-Davidson, a good list of the literature on the 2d Punic war is given by Mr. W. T. Arnold in his edition of Dr. Arnold’s history of that period [London, Macmillan, 1886].

  Finally, I have to express my warm thanks to Dr. Warre, Head Master of Eton, for aiding me with his unique knowledge of ancient and modern tactics in clearing up many points very puzzling to a civilian. To Mr. W. Chawner, Fellow and Tutor of Emmanuel College, for reading part of the translation in proof, and making valuable corrections and suggestions. And to Professor Ridgway, of Queen’s College, Cork, for corrections in the geographical fragments of book 34.

  INTRODUCTION

  I. POLYBIUS Fortune cast the life of Polybius in stirring times. His special claim to our admiration is that he understood the importance in the history of the world of the changes which were passing under his eyes, and exerted himself to trace the events which immediately preceded them, and from which they sprang, while it was yet possible to see and question surviving participators in them; to examine places, before they had lost all marks of the great events of which they had been the scene; and records or monuments before time had cast a doubt upon their meaning or authenticity. Nor is this ordinary praise. Men are apt to turn their eyes upon the past, as holding all that is worthy of contemplation, while they fail to take note of history “in the making,” or to grasp the importance of the transactions of their own day. But as every year has its decisive influence on the years which succeed it, the greatest benefactor of posterity is the man who understands and records events as they pass with care and sincerity. Laborious compilation, from the study and comparison of ancient records and monuments, has its value: it may often be all that it is possible to obtain; it may not unfrequently even serve to correct statements of contemporaries which have been deformed by carelessness or coloured by prejudice. But the best compilation is infinitely inferior in interest and instructiveness to the barest report of a contemporary. And when such a man is also an eye-witness of much that he relates; when he knew and conversed with many of the chief actors in the great events which he records; when again he tells us of transactions so remote in time, that all written documents have necessarily perished, and those in more durable bronze and stone all but followed in their train, then indeed the interest rises to the highest pitch. Like Herodotus and Thucydides, then, Polybius tells us of his own times, and of the generations immediately preceding them. It is true that the part of his work which has survived in a complete form deals with a period before his own day, just as the greater part of the history of Herodotus does, but in the larger part of the fragments he is writing with even more complete personal knowledge than Thucydides. He had, again, neither the faculty for story-telling possessed by Herodotus nor the literary and dramatic force of Thucydides. The language which he spoke and wrote had lost the magic of style; had lost the lucidity and grace of Sophocles, and the rugged vigour and terseness of Thucydides. Nor had he apparently acquired any of those artifices which, while they sometimes weary us in the later rhetoricians, yet generally serve to make their writings the easiest and pleasantest of reading. Equally remote again is his style from the elaborate and involved manner of Plutarch, with its huge compound words built up of intricate sentences, more like difficult German than Greek. Polybius had no tricks of this sort; but his style lacks logical order and clearness. It seems rather the language of a man of affairs, who had had neither leisure to study style, nor taste to read widely with a view to literature as such. But after all it is Greek, and Greek that still retained its marvellous adaptability to every purpose, to every shade of thought, and every form of literature. Nor is his style in the purely narrative parts of his work wanting in a certain force, derived from singleness and directness of purpose. He “speaks right on,” and turns neither to the right hand nor the left. It is when he reflects and argues and moralises, that his want of literary skill sometimes makes him difficult and involved; and though the thought is essentially just, and his point of view wonderfully modern, we continually feel the want of that nameless charm which the Greeks called χάρις.