LIVY
Titus Livius: The History of Rome
http://mcadams.posc.mu.edu/txt/ah/Livy/
· Library collection: "Everyman's Library"
· Published work: "The History of Rome, Vol. 1"
· Author: Titus Livius
· Translator: Rev. Canon Roberts
· Editor: Ernest Rhys
· Publisher: J. M. Dent & Sons, Ltd., London, 1905
Book 8: The First Samnite War and Settlement of Latium - (341 - 321 B.C.)
8. 3 (Excerpt) There were two interreges, M. Valerius and M. Fabius. The latter elected T. Manlius Torquatus (for the third time) and P. Decius Mus as consuls. It was in this year (341 B.C.), it appears, that Alexander, King of Epirus, landed in Italy, and there is no doubt that had he been fairly successful at first that war would have extended to Rome. This, too, was about the time of the achievements of Alexander the Great, the son of this man's sister, who, after proving himself invincible in another region of the globe, was cut off, whilst a young man, by disease.
Book 8: The First Samnite War and Settlement of Latium - (341 - 321 B.C.)
8. 8 The terrible severity of the punishment, however, made the soldiers more obedient to their general, and not only did it lead to greater attention being paid to the pickets and sentry duties and the ordering of the outposts, but when they went into battle for the final contest, this severity proved to be of the greatest service. The battle was exactly like one fought in a civil war; there was nothing in the Latin army different from the Roman except their courage. At first the Romans used the large round shield called the clipeus, afterwards, when the soldiers received pay, the smaller oblong shield called the scutum was adopted. The phalanx formation, similar to the Macedonian of the earlier days, was abandoned in favour of the distribution into companies (manipuli); the rear portion being broken up into smaller divisions. The foremost line consisted of the hastati, formed into fifteen companies, drawn up at a short distance from each other. These were called the light-armed companies, as whilst one-third carried a long spear (hasta) and short iron javelins, the remainder carried shields. This front line consisted of youths in the first bloom of manhood just old enough for service. Behind them were stationed an equal number of companies, called principes, made up of men in the full vigour of life, all carrying shields and furnished with superior weapons. This body of thirty companies were called the antepilani. Behind them were the standards under which were stationed fifteen companies, which were divided into three sections called vexillae, the first section in each was called the pilus, and they consisted of 180 men to every standard (vexillum). The first vexillum was followed by the triarii, veterans of proved courage; the second by the rorarii, or "skirmishers," younger men and less distinguished; the third by the accensi, who were least to be depended upon, and were therefore placed in the rearmost line.
Book 8: The First Samnite War and Settlement of Latium - (341 - 321 B.C.)
8.17. The landing of Alexander of Epirus near Paestum led the Samnites to make common cause with the Lucanians, but their united forces were defeated by turn in a pitched battle. He then established friendly relations with Rome, but it is very doubtful how far he would have maintained them had his other enterprises been equally successful.
Book 8: The First Samnite War and Settlement of Latium - (341 - 321 B.C.)
8.24 The foundation of Alexandria in Egypt is stated to have taken place this year (327 B.C.), and also the assassination of Alexander of Epirus at the hands of a Lucanian refugee, an event which fulfilled the oracular prediction of the Dodonean Jupiter. When he was invited by the Tarentines into Italy, he received a warning to beware of the water of Acheron and the city of Pandosia; for it was there that the limits of his destiny were fixed. This made him cross over into Italy all the sooner, that he might be as far as possible from the city of Pandosia in Epirus and the river Acheron, which flows from Molossis into the Infernal Marshes and finally empties itself into the Thesprotian Gulf. But, as often happens, in trying to avoid his fate he rushed upon it. He won many victories over the nationalities of Southern Italy, inflicting numerous defeats upon the legions of Bruttium and Lucania, capturing the city of Heraclea, a colony of settlers from Tarentum, taking Potentia from the Lucanians, Sipontum from the Apulians, Consentia and Terina from the Bruttii and other cities belonging to the Messapians and Lucanians. He sent three hundred noble families to Epirus to be detained there as hostages. The circumstances under which he met his death were these. He had taken up a permanent position on three hills not far from the city of Pandosia which is close to the frontiers of the Lucanians and Bruttii. From this point he made incursions into every part of the enemy's territory, and on these expeditions he had as a bodyguard some two hundred Lucanian refugees, in whose fidelity he placed confidence, but who, like most of their countrymen, were given to changing their minds as their fortunes changed. Continuous rains had inundated the whole country and prevented the three divisions of the army from mutually supporting each other, the level ground between the hills being impassable. While they were in this condition two out of the three divisions were suddenly attacked in the king's absence and overwhelmed. After annihilating them the enemy invested the third hill, where the king was present in person. The Lucanian refugees managed to communicate with their countrymen, and promised, if a safe return were guaranteed to them, to place the king in their hands alive or dead. Alexander, with a picked body of troops, cut his way, with splendid courage, through the enemy, and meeting the Lucanian general slew him after a hand to hand fight. Then getting together those of his men who were scattered in flight, he rode towards the ruins of a bridge which had been carried away by the floods and came to a river. Whilst his men were fording it with very uncertain footing, a soldier, almost spent by his exertions and his fears, cursed the river for its unlucky name, and said, "Rightly art thou called Acheros!" When these words fell on his ear the king at once recalled to mind the oracular warning, and stopped, doubtful whether to cross or not. Sotimus, one of his personal attendants, asked him why he hesitated at such a critical moment and drew his attention to the suspicious movements of the Lucanian refugees who were evidently meditating treachery. The king looked back and saw them coming on in a compact body; he at once drew his sword and spurred his horse through the middle of the river. He had already reached the shallow water on the other side when one of the refugees some distance away transfixed him with a javelin. He fell from his horse, and his lifeless body with the weapon sticking in it was carried down by the current to that part of the bank where the enemy were stationed. There it was horribly mutilated. After cutting it through the middle they sent one half to Consentia and kept the other to make sport of. Whilst they were pelting it at a distance with darts and stones a solitary woman ventured among the rabble who were showing such incredible brutality and implored them to desist. She told them amid her tears that her husband and children were held prisoners by the enemy and she hoped to ransom them with the king's body however much it might have been disfigured. This put an end to the outrages. What was left of the limbs was cremated at Consentia by the reverential care of this one woman, and the bones were sent back to Metapontum; from there they were carried to Cleopatra, the king's wife, and Olympias, his sister, the latter of whom was the mother, the former the sister of Alexander the Great. I thought it well to give this brief account of the tragic end of Alexander of Epirus, for although Fortune kept him from hostilities with Rome, the wars he waged in Italy entitle him to a place in this history.
Book 9: The Second Samnite War - (321 - 304 B.C.)
9.16 The writers who tell us that it was under Papirius that Luceria was recovered and the Samnites sent under the yoke, go on to inform us that after the capture of Satricum he returned to Rome to celebrate his triumph. And indeed he was, undoubtedly, a man deserving of all praise for his soldierly qualities, distinguished as he was not only by intellectual force but also by his physical prowess. He was especially noted for his swiftness of foot, which gave him his cognomen; he is stated to have beaten all those of his own age in racing. Owing either to his great strength or the amount of exercise he took he had an enormous appetite. Under no commander did either horse or foot find service harder, for he himself never knew what it was to be tired. On one occasion the cavalry ventured to ask him to excuse them some of their fatigue duty in consideration of their having fought a successful action. He replied: "That you may not say I never excuse you anything, I excuse you from rubbing your horses' backs when you dismount." He was as much of a martinet to the allies of Rome as he was to his own countrymen. The commander of the Praenestine detachment had shown a lack of courage in bringing his men up from the rear into the fighting line. Papirius, walking in front of his tent, ordered him to be called up, and on his appearance told the lictor to get the axe ready. The Praenestine, on hearing this, stood paralysed with fear. "Come, lictor," said Papirius, "cut out this root; it is in the way of people as they walk." After almost frightening him to death with this threat, he dismissed him with a fine. No age has been more prolific in great and noble characters than the one in which he lived, and even in that age there was no one whose single arm did more to sustain the commonwealth. Had Alexander the Great, after subjugating Asia, turned his attention to Europe, there are many who maintain that he would have met his match in Papirius.
Book 9: The Second Samnite War - (321 - 304 B.C.)
9.17. Nothing can be thought to be further from my aim since I commenced this task than to digress more than is necessary from the order of the narrative or by embellishing my work with a variety of topics to afford pleasant resting-places, as it were, for my readers and mental relaxation for myself. The mention, however, of so great a king and commander induces me to lay before my readers some reflections which I have often made when I have proposed to myself the question, "What would have been the results for Rome if she had been engaged in war with Alexander? "The things which tell most in war are the numbers and courage of the troops, the ability of the commanders, and Fortune, who has such a potent influence over human affairs, especially those of war. Any one who considers these factors either separately or in combination will easily see that as the Roman empire proved invincible against other kings and nations, so it would have proved invincible against Alexander. Let us, first of all, compare the commanders on each side. I do not dispute that Alexander was an exceptional general, but his reputation is enhanced by the fact that he died while still young and before he had time to experience any change of fortune. Not to mention other kings and illustrious captains, who afford striking examples of the mutability of human affairs, I will only instance Cyrus, whom the Greeks celebrate as one of the greatest of men. What was it that exposed him to reverses and misfortunes but the length of his life, as recently in the case of Pompey the Great? Let me enumerate the Roman generals - not all out of all ages but only those with whom as consuls and Dictators Alexander would have had to fight - M. Valerius Corvus, C. Marcius Rutilus, C. Sulpicius, T. Manlius Torquatus, Q. Publilius Philo, L. Papirius Cursor, Q. Fabius Maximus, the two Decii, L. Volumnius, and Manlius Curius. Following these come those men of colossal mould who would have confronted him if he had first turned his arms against Carthage and then crossed over into Italy later in life. Every one of these men was Alexander's equal in courage and ability, and the art of war, which from the beginning of the City had been an unbroken tradition, had now grown into a science based on definite and permanent rules. It was thus that the kings conducted their wars, and after them the Junii and the Valerii, who expelled the kings, and in later succession the Fabii, the Quinctii, and the Cornelii. It was these rules that Camillus followed, and the men who would have had to fight with Alexander had seen Camillus as an old man when they were little more than boys.
Alexander no doubt did all that a soldier ought to do in battle, and that is not his least title to fame. But if Manlius Torquatus had been opposed to him in the field, would he have been inferior to him in this respect, or Valerius Corvus, both of them distinguished as soldiers before they assumed command? Would the Decii, who, after devoting themselves, rushed upon the enemy, or Papirius Cursor with his vast physical courage and strength? Would the clever generalship of one young man have succeeded in baffling the whole senate, not to mention individuals, that senate of which he, who declared that it was composed of kings, alone formed a true idea? Was there any danger of his showing more skill than any of those whom I have mentioned in choosing the site for his camp, or organising his commissariat, or guarding against surprises, or choosing the right moment for giving battle, or disposing his men in line of battle and posting his reserves to the best advantage? He would have said that it was not with Darius that he had to do, dragging after him a train of women and eunuchs, wrapped up in purple and gold, encumbered with all the trappings of state. He found him an easy prey rather than a formidable enemy and defeated him without loss, without being called to do anything more daring than to show a just contempt for the idle show of power. The aspect of Italy would have struck him as very different from the India which he traversed in drunken revelry with an intoxicated army; he would have seen in the passes of Apulia and the mountains of Lucania the traces of the recent disaster which befell his house when his uncle Alexander, King of Epirus, perished.
Book 9: The Second Samnite War - (321 - 304 B.C.)
9.18 I am speaking of Alexander as he was before he was submerged in the flood of success, for no man was less capable of bearing prosperity than he was. If we look at him as transformed by his new fortunes and presenting the new character, so to speak, which he had assumed after his victories, it is evident he would have come into Italy more like Darius than Alexander, and would have brought with him an army which had forgotten its native Macedonia and was rapidly becoming Persian in character. It is a disagreeable task in the case of so great a man to have to record his ostentatious love of dress; the prostrations which he demanded from all who approached his presence, and which the Macedonians must have felt to be humiliating, even had they been vanquished, how much more when they were victors; the terribly cruel punishments he inflicted; the murder of his friends at the banquet-table; the vanity which made him invent a divine pedigree for himself. What, pray, would have happened if his love of wine had become stronger and his passionate nature more violent and fiery as he grew older? I am only stating facts about which there is no dispute. Are we to regard none of these things as serious drawbacks to his merits as a commander? Or was there any danger of that happening which the most frivolous of the Greeks, who actually extol the Parthians at the expense of the Romans, are so constantly harping upon, namely, that the Roman people must have bowed before the greatness of Alexander's name - though I do not think they had even heard of him - and that not one out of all the Roman chiefs would have uttered his true sentiments about him, though men dared to attack him in Athens, the very city which had been shattered by Macedonian arms and almost well in sight of the smoking ruins of Thebes, and the speeches of his assailants are still extant to prove this?
However lofty our ideas of this man's greatness, still it is the greatness of one individual, attained in a successful career of little more than ten years. Those who extol it on the ground that though Rome has never lost a war she has lost many battles, whilst Alexander has never fought a battle unsuccessfully, are not aware that they are comparing the actions of one individual, and he a youth, with the achievements of a people who have had 800 years of war. Where more generations are reckoned on one side than years on the other, can we be surprised that in such a long space of time there have been more changes of fortune than in a period of thirteen years ? Why do you not compare the fortunes of one man with another, of one commander with another? How many Roman generals could I name who have never been unfortunate in a single battle! You may run through page after page of the lists of magistrates, both consuls and Dictators, and not find one with whose valour and fortunes the Roman people have ever for a single day had cause to be dissatisfied. And these men are more worthy of admiration than Alexander or any other king. Some retained the Dictatorship for only ten or twenty days; none held a consulship for more than a year; the levying of troops was often obstructed by the tribunes of the plebs; they were late, in consequence, in taking the field, and were often recalled before the time to conduct the elections; frequently, when they were commencing some important operation, their year of office expired; their colleagues frustrated or ruined their plans, some through recklessness, some through jealousy; they often had to succeed to the mistakes or failures of others and take over an army of raw recruits or one in a bad state of discipline. Kings are free from all hindrances; they are lords of time and circumstance, and draw all things into the sweep of their own designs. Thus, the invincible Alexander would have crossed swords with invincible captains, and would have given the same pledges to Fortune which they gave. Nay, he would have run greater risks than they, for the Macedonians had only one Alexander, who was not only liable to all sorts of accidents but deliberately exposed himself to them, whilst there were many Romans equal to Alexander in glory and in the grandeur of their deeds, and yet each of them might fulfil his destiny by his life or by his death without imperilling the existence of the State.
Book 9: The Second Samnite War - (321 - 304 B.C.)
9.19 It remains for us to compare the one army with the other as regards either the numbers or the quality of the troops or the strength of the allied forces. Now the census for that period gives 250,000 persons. In all the revolts of the Latin league ten legions were raised, consisting almost entirely of city troops. Often during those years four or five armies were engaged simultaneously in Etruria, in Umbria (where they had to meet the Gauls as well), in Samnium, and in Lucania. Then as regards the attitude of the various Italian tribes - the whole of Latium with the Sabines, Volscians, and Aequi, the whole of Campania, parts of Umbria and Etruria, the Picentines, the Marsi, and Paeligni, the Vestinians and Apulians, to which we should add the entire coast of the western sea, with its Greek population, stretching from Thurii to Neapolis and Cumae, and from there as far as Antium and Ostia - all these nationalities he would have found to be either strong allies of Rome or reduced to impotence by Roman arms. He would have crossed the sea with his Macedonian veterans, amounting to not more than 30,000 men and 4000 cavalry, mostly Thracian. This formed all his real strength. If he had brought over in addition Persians and Indians and other Orientals, he would have found them a hindrance rather than a help. We must remember also that the Romans had a reserve to draw upon at home, but Alexander, warring on a foreign soil, would have found his army diminished by the wastage of war, as happened afterwards to Hannibal. His men were armed with round shields and long spears, the Romans had the large shield called the scutum, a better protection for the body, and the javelin, a much more effective weapon than the spear whether for hurling or thrusting. In both armies the soldiers fought in line rank by rank, but the Macedonian phalanx lacked mobility and formed a single unit; the Roman army was more elastic, made up of numerous divisions, which could easily act separately or in combination as required. Then with regard to fatigue duty, what soldier is better able to stand hard work than the Roman?
If Alexander had been worsted in one battle the war would have been over; what army could have broken the strength of Rome, when Caudium and Cannae failed to do so? Even if things had gone well with him at first, he would often have been tempted to wish that Persians and Indians and effeminate Asiatics were his foes, and would have confessed that his former wars had been waged against women, as Alexander of Epirus is reported to have said when after receiving his mortal wound he was comparing his own fortune with that of this very youth in his Asiatic campaigns. When I remember that in the first Punic war we fought at sea for twenty-four years, I think that Alexander would hardly have lived long enough to see one war through. It is quite possible, too, that as Rome and Carthage were at that time leagued together by an old-standing treaty, the same apprehensions might have led those two powerful states to take up arms against the common foe, and Alexander would have been crushed by their combined forces. Rome has had experience of a Macedonian war, not indeed when Alexander was commanding nor when the resources of Macedon were still unimpaired, but the contests against Antiochus, Philip, and Perses were fought not only without loss but even without risk. I trust that I shall not give offence when I say that, leaving out of sight the civil wars, we have never found an enemy's cavalry or infantry too much for us, when we have fought in the open field, on ground equally favourable for both sides, still less when the ground has given us an advantage. The infantry soldier, with his heavy armour and weapons, may reasonably fear the arrows of Parthian cavalry, or passes invested by the enemy, or country where supplies cannot be brought up, but he has repulsed a thousand armies more formidable than those of Alexander and his Macedonians, and will repulse them in the future if only the domestic peace and concord which we now enjoy remains undisturbed for all the years to come.
Book 26: The Fate of Capua
26.19 Seeing how the step which they had taken so impetuously now filled them with anxiety, Scipio called the voters together and spoke to them about his age and the command which they had entrusted to him, and the war which he had to conduct. He spoke in such lofty and glowing words that he evoked their enthusiasm once more, and inspired them with more hopeful confidence than is usually called out by faith in men's promises or by reasonable anticipations of success. Scipio won people's admiration not only by the sterling qualities which he possessed, but also by his cleverness in displaying them, a cleverness which he had developed from early youth. In his public life he generally spoke and acted as though he were guided either by visions of the night or by some divine inspiration, whether it was that he was really open to superstitious influences or that he claimed oracular sanction for his commands and counsels in order to secure prompt adoption. He sought to create this impression on men's minds from the beginning, from the day when he assumed the toga virilis, for he never undertook any important business, either public or private, without first going to the Capitol, where he sat for some time in the temple in privacy and alone. This custom, which he kept up all through his life, gave rise to a widespread belief, whether designedly upon his part or not, that he was of divine origin, and the story was told of him which was commonly related of Alexander - a story as silly as it was fabulous - that he was begotten by an enormous serpent which had been often seen in his mother's bedroom, but on any one's approach, suddenly uncoiled itself and disappeared. The belief in these marvels was never scoffed at by him; on the contrary, it was strengthened by deliberate policy on his part in refusing to deny or to admit that anything of the kind ever occurred. There were many other traits in this young man's character, some of which were genuine, others the result of studied acting, which created a greater admiration for him than usually falls to the lot of man.
Book 31: Rome and Macedon
31.1. The peace with Carthage was very soon followed by war with Macedonia. There is no comparison between them as regards the critical nature of the contest, or the personality of the commander or the fighting quality of the troops. But the Macedonian war was, if anything, more noteworthy owing to the brilliant reputation of the former kings, the ancient fame of the nation and the vast extent of its dominion when it held sway over a large part of Europe and a still larger part of Asia.
Book 35: Antiochus in Greece
35.14 Owing to illness Sulpicius stopped at Pergamum, whilst Villius went on to Ephesus, as he heard that the king had commenced hostilities in Pisidia. He made a short stay there, and as Hannibal happened to be there at the time he made a point of paying frequent visits to him in order to ascertain his future plans and if possible remove any apprehension from his mind as to danger threatening him from Rome. Nothing else was discussed in these interviews, but they had one result, which though really undesigned might have been deliberately aimed at, for they lowered Hannibal's authority with the king and cast suspicion upon all that he said or did. Claudius, following Acilius who wrote in Greek, says that Publius Scipio Africanus was one of the commissioners, and that he had conversations with Hannibal. One of these he reports. Africanus asked Hannibal whom he considered to be the greatest commander, and the reply was, "Alexander of Macedon, for with a small force he routed innumerable armies and traversed the most distant shores of the world which no man ever hoped to visit." Africanus then asked him whom he would put second, and Hannibal replied, "Pyrrhus; he was the first who taught how to lay out a camp, and moreover no one ever showed more cleverness in the choice of positions and the disposition of troops. He possessed, too, the art of winning popularity to such an extent that the nations of Italy preferred the rule of a foreign king to that of the Roman people who had so long held the foremost place in that country." On Scipio's again asking him whom he regarded as the third, Hannibal, without any hesitation, replied, "Myself." Scipio smiled and asked, "What would you say if you had vanquished me?" "In that case," replied Hannibal, "I should say that I surpassed Alexander and Pyrrhus, and all other commanders in the world." Scipio was delighted with the turn which the speaker had with true Carthaginian adroitness given to his answer, and the unexpected flattery it conveyed, because Hannibal had set him apart from the ordinary run of military captains as an incomparable commander.
Book 35: Antiochus in Greece
35.47 ]The king had remained on board, and when this was reported to him he decided for the present to return to Demetrias as he had not brought sufficient troops to effect anything by force. As his first attempt had proved a complete failure he consulted the Aetolians as to what the next step should be. They decided to try what could be done with the Boeotians, the Achaeans and the Athamanian king, Amynander. They were under the impression that the Boeotians had been estranged from Rome ever since the death of Brachylles and the results which flowed from it, and they also believed that Philopoemen, the chief magistrate of the Achaeans, was an object of dislike and jealousy on the part of Quinctius owing to the reputation he had gained in the Laconian war. Amynander had married Apama, the daughter of a certain Alexander of Megalopolis, who represented himself as being descended from Alexander the Great and had given his three children the names of Philip, Alexander and Apama. Her marriage with the king had made Apama much talked about and her elder brother Philip had followed her to Athamania. He was a weak and conceited young man, and Antiochus and the Aetolians had persuaded him that if he brought Amynander and the Athamanians over to the side of Antiochus he might hope to succeed to the throne of Macedon, as he really belonged to the royal stock. These empty promises carried weight not only with Philip but even with Amynander.
Book 40: Perseus and Demetrius
40.6 It happened to be the time for the lustration of the army. The following is a description of the ceremony. The body of a bitch was divided in the middle, the forepart with the head was placed on the right side of the road and the hinder part with the entrails on the left, and the troops marched between them. In front of the column were borne the insignia of all the kings of Macedonia from its remotest origin; then followed the king and his children; next to them the king's own cohort and his bodyguard, the Macedonian phalanx bringing up the rear. The two princes rode on either side of their father; Perseus was now thirty years old and Demetrius five years his junior, the former in the prime of manhood, the latter in the flower of youth. The father would have been fortunate in his maturer offspring if only he had been wise and sensible. When the purificatory rite was completed it was the custom for the army to go through maneuvers and after being formed into two divisions to engage in a sham-fight. The two princes were appointed to command in this mimic contest, but there was no make-believe about the fighting, it looked like a struggle for the crown, so fiercely did they engage. Many wounds were caused by their staves and nothing was wanting but swords to give the actual appearance of war. The division which Demetrius commanded was by far the better one. Perseus was intensely annoyed, but his wiser friends were delighted. That circumstance in itself, they said, would afford grounds for incriminating the young man.
Book 42: The Third Macedonian War
42.51 Perseus had collected 3000 cavalry out of the whole of Macedonia. Cotys, the son of Suthis and king of the Odrysae, had come in with a picked force of 1000 horse and about the same number of infantry. Thus the total number of the army was 39,000 infantry and 4000 cavalry. It was generally admitted that, next to the army which Alexander the Great had led into Asia, no Macedonian king had ever possessed so large a force.
Book 45: Rome stabilizes the East
45.7 (Excerpt) Whereas Perseus was the head and supreme director of the war; and not only were all eyes drawn to him through his own reputation and that of his father and grandfather and others to whom he was allied by blood relationship, but he was heir to the glory of Philip and Alexander the Great, who raised the Macedonian Empire to a supreme position in the world.
Book 45: Rome stabilizes the East
45.9 After this the army went into winter quarters. Amphipolis took in the greater portion. The rest were disposed in the neighbouring cities. Such was the end of the war which had for four successive years been waged between the Romans and Perseus, and the end, too, of a kingdom long renowned through the whole of Asia and most of Europe. From Caranus, the first king, twenty monarchs are enumerated down to Perseus. He received the crown in the consulship of L. Fulvius and L. Manlius, and was recognised as king by the senate when M. Junius and A. Manlius were the consuls. His reign lasted eleven years. The nation of the Macedonians was almost unknown to fame down to the time of Philip, the son of Amyntas. From that time it began to extend under his rule, but it still confined itself within the limits of Europe, embracing the whole of Greece and portions of Thrace and Illyria. Then it overflowed into Asia and during the thirteen years of Alexander's reign he first brought under his power the whole of the Persian dominions, the extent of which was almost illimitable, and then he traversed Arabia and India up to where the Red Sea washes the remotest frontiers of the world. In those days the empire of Macedonia was the greatest in the world, but after Alexander's death it was broken up into numerous kingdoms, each man grasping at power for himself until its strength was exhausted by internal conflicts, and it sank from the highest pinnacle of prosperity to its final disappearance. It stood for about 150 years.