THE HISTORIES
BY POLYBIOS
Polybios (ca. 198-118 BC) was a historian from Megalopolis in Arcadia, who lived in Rome as a hostage from 167 to 150. His highly-regarded Histories covered the Graeco-Roman world between 264 and 146 BC, though they concentrated on the period from 221 BC. He was an eye-witness to many of the later events he described. Though most of his Histories are lost, they are still the most substantial surviving history of the period. The translation is W. R. Paton for the Loeb Classical Library, published by William Heinemann in London, 1922-25. His Latinisation of Greek names has been undone.
V 28 vi-ix
On the reaction of Philip V King of the Macedonians in 218 BC to reading some intercepted letters written against himself by his secretary Megaleas, who was much under the influence of Apelles, another Macedonian advisor of the King:
| On reading them and being convinced that all the mischief was originally due to Apelles, he placed him in custody and at once dispatched him to Corinth together with his son and his minion, sending at the same time Alexander to Thebes to arrest Megaleas and bring him before the magistrates to answer to his bail. Upon Alexander’s executing this order, Megaleas did not await the issue, but died by his own hand, and at about the same time, Apelles, his son and his favourite also ended their lives. Thus did these men meet with the end they deserved, | [vi] ἀναγνοὺς δὲ ταύτας, καὶ νομίσας πάντων τῶν κακῶν ἀρχηγὸν εἶναι τὸν Ἀπελλῆν, τοῦτον μὲν εὐθέως φυλακὴν περιστήσας ἐξαπέστειλε μετὰ σπουδῆς εἰς τὸν Κόρινθον, ἅμα δὲ 6καὶ τὸν υἱὸν αὐτοῦ καὶ τὸν ἐρώμενον, ἐπὶ δὲ τὸν Μεγαλέαν εἰς τὰς Θήβας Ἀλέξανδρον ἔπεμψε, προστάξας ἄγειν αὐτὸν ἐπὶ τὰς ἀρχὰς πρὸς τὴν ἐγγύην. [vii] τοῦ δ᾿ Ἀλεξάνδρου τὸ προσταχθὲν ποιήσαντος, οὐχ ὑπέμεινε τὴν πρᾶξιν ὁ Μεγαλέας, ἀλλ᾿ αὑτῷ προσήνεγκε τὰς χεῖρας. [viii] περὶ δὲ τὰς αὐτὰς ἡμέρας συνέβη καὶ τὸν Ἀπελλῆν μεταλλάξαι τὸν βίον, ἅμα δὲ καὶ τὸν υἱὸν καὶ τὸν ἐρώμενον. [ix] Οὗτοι μὲν οὖν τῆς ἁρμοζούσης τυχόντες καταστροφῆς ἐξέλιπον τὸν βίον, |
VI 8
On how aristocracies, after getting rid of tyrants, degenerate into oligarchies:
| But here again when children inherited this position of authority from their fathers, having no experience of misfortune and none at all of civil equality and liberty of speech, and having been brought up from the cradle amid the evidences of the power and high position of their fathers, they abandoned themselves some to greed of gain and unscrupulous money-making, others to indulgence in wine and the convivial excess which accompanies it, and others again to the violation of women and the rape of boys; and thus converting the aristocracy into an oligarchy aroused in the people feelings similar to those of which I just spoke, and in consequence met with the same disastrous end as the tyrant. | [iv] ὅτε δὲ διαδέξαιντο πάλιν παῖδες παρὰ πατέρων τὴν τοιαύτην ἐξουσίαν, ἄπειροι μὲν ὄντες κακῶν, ἄπειροι δὲ καθόλου πολιτικῆς ἰσότητος καὶ παρρησίας, τεθραμμένοι δ᾿ ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἐν ταῖς τῶν πατέρων ἐξουσίαις καὶ προαγωγαῖς, [v] ὁρμήσαντες οἱ μὲν ἐπὶ πλεονεξίαν καὶ φιλαργυρίαν ἄδικον, οἱ δ᾿ ἐπὶ μέθας καὶ τὰς ἅμα ταύταις ἀπλήστους εὐωχίας, οἱ δ᾿ ἐπὶ τὰς τῶν γυναικῶν ὕβρεις καὶ παίδων ἁρπαγάς, μετέστησαν μὲν τὴν ἀριστοκρατίαν εἰς ὀλιγαρχίαν, [vi] ταχὺ δὲ κατεσκεύασαν ἐν τοῖς πλήθεσι πάλιν τὰ παραπλήσια τοῖς ἄρτι ῥηθεῖσι· διὸ καὶ παραπλήσιον συνέβαινε τὸ τέλος αὐτῶν γίνεσθαι τῆς καταστροφῆς τοῖς περὶ τοὺς τυράννους ἀτυχήμασιν. |
VI 37 ix-x
Explaining who in the Roman army was punished, following conviction, with the bastinado (being beaten or stoned, usually to death, by his fellow-soldiers):
| The bastinado is also inflicted on those who steal anything from the camp; on those who give false evidence; those who in youth have abused their person;[1] and finally on anyone who has been punished thrice for the same fault. | [ix] ξυλοκοπεῖται δὲ καὶ πᾶς ὁ κλέψας τι τῶν ἐκ τοῦ στρατοπέδου, καὶ μὴν ὁ μαρτυρήσας ψευδῆ παραπλησίως, κἄν τις τῶν ἐν ἀκμῇ παραχρησάμενος εὑρεθῇ τῷ σώματι, [x] πρὸς δὲ τούτοις ὁ τρὶς περὶ τῆς αὐτῆς αἰτίας ζημιωθείς. |
XII 15 i-ii
As one of many examples of the inadequacies of Timaios of Tauromenion, Polybios cites his “astonishingly” one-sided portrait of the Sicilian King Agathokles, including his mention of the latter having been a boy prostitute. See the article Agathokles (ca. 361-289 BC), King of Sicily for this extract.
XII 16 i-xiv
The story of a legal dispute between two young men in Locri in Sicily over a slave-boy, undated and presented as a digression following events in 205 BC. This passage is not being presented here because no mention is made of Greek love. The strongest hint that the young men may have been disputing a catamite is the fuss made over who should have merely temporary possession of the boy until the trial which would settle the rightful ownership.
On Herakleides of Taras (in southern Italy) who had cunningly insinuated himself as a counsellor to Philip V, King of the Macedonians, and while recounting events of 205 BC:
| This Herakleides was of Tarentine origin, his parents were vulgar mechanics and he possessed advantages admirably qualifying him to be a daredevil and arrant knave. For he, to begin with, in his early years he had openly prostituted his person, but later he showed great sharpness and an excellent memory, and while he was a terrible bully and most bold-faced in dealing with his inferiors he was most obsequious to his superiors. | [iv] συνέβαινε δὲ τὸν Ἡρακλείδην τοῦτον τὸ μὲν γένος ἀνέκαθεν εἶναι Ταραντῖνον, πεφυκέναι δ᾿ ἐκ βαναύσων καὶ χειροτεχνῶν ἀνθρώπων, μεγάλα δ᾿ ἐσχηκέναι προτερήματα πρὸς ἀπόνοιαν καὶ ῥᾳδιουργίαν· [v] πρῶτον μὲν γὰρ ἀναφανδὸν τῷ σώματι παρεκέχρητο κατὰ τὴν πρώτην ἡλικίαν, εἶτ᾿ ἀγχίνους ὑπῆρχε καὶ μνήμων, καὶ πρὸς μὲν τοὺς ταπεινοτέρους καταπληκτικώτατος καὶ τολμηρότατος, πρὸς δὲ τοὺς ὑπερέχοντας κολακικώτατος. |
XXXI 25 ii-viii
On how in the years 167-161 BC, the author’s close friend, P. Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus, differed from most young Roman men in not indulging in extravagancies such as buying pretty slave-boys. See the article On the Increased Interest of Young Roman Men in Pretty Boys for this excerpt.
[1] Paton has “on young men who have abused their persons” instead of “those who in youth have abused their persons,” but there is no noun “men” in the Greek and the youngest Roman legionaries were sixteen.
For a good discussion of this cryptic passage and varied interpretations, see Sara Phang, The Marriage of Roman Soldiers (13 B.C.-A.D. 235): Law and Family in the Imperial Army. Leiden: Brill, 2001, p. 282.
The most credible explanation is that it concerns young legionaries who willingly let themselves be pedicated, possibly though not necessarily for remuneration, but in any case undermining their integrity as freeborn Romans and soldiers. See the consul’s speech in Livy, Roman History XXXIX 15, where he warns the Romans against trusting the defence of their wives and children to males who had been “debased by their own debauchery.” The pedication of a freeborn Roman was always a stuprum (outrage). An especially harsh view may have been taken of the pedication of soldiers for their sake in the face of military discipline. They had to obey and could be subjected to corporal punishment, in which respect they were analogous only to slaves in Roman society. Their dignity required that it be made clear they could not also be pedicated like slaves.