By the death of Africanus the spirits of his enemies grew bolder, of whom the chief was
Marcus Porcius Cato, who even while he lived had been wont to bark at his greatness. By his prompting it is thought that the Petillii both began the matter while Africanus lived and, when he was dead, promulgated the bill. The bill was of this sort: “Is it your will and order, Quirites, that, as to the money taken, carried off, exacted from King Antiochus and those who were under his command, what of it has not been brought into the public treasury—that concerning this matter Servius Sulpicius the city praetor refer to the Senate, which of those who are now praetors the Senate wishes to investigate the matter?” Against this bill at first
Quintus and Lucius Mummius interposed; they thought it fair that the Senate investigate the money not brought into the treasury, as had always been done before. The Petillii inveighed against the nobility and the kingly power of the Scipios in the Senate. Lucius Furius Purpurio, of consular rank, who had been among the ten commissioners in Asia, thought the bill should be framed more broadly—not only the moneys taken from Antiochus, but those from other kings and nations—aiming at Gnaeus Manlius his enemy. And Lucius Scipio, who, it was clear, would speak rather for himself than against the law, came forward as its opposer. He complained that this bill had arisen from the death of his brother Publius Africanus, the bravest and most illustrious of all men: it had been too little, he said, that Publius Africanus was not praised from the
Rostra after his death, unless he were also accused; and the Carthaginians were content with the exile of Hannibal, but the Roman people was not sated even by the death of Publius Scipio, unless both the fame of him in his grave were torn, and his brother besides, as an addition to their hatred, were sacrificed. Marcus Cato spoke for the bill—there is extant a speech of his on the money of King Antiochus—and deterred the Mummian tribunes by his authority from opposing the bill. The veto, therefore, being remitted by them, all the tribes ordered as the bill proposed. Then, Servius Sulpicius referring whom they wished to investigate under the Petillian bill, the fathers ordered Quintus Terentius Culleo. By this praetor—so friendly to the Cornelian family that those who hand down that Publius Scipio died and was carried out at Rome (for that too is a tradition) have recorded that he, wearing the cap of liberty, as he had gone in the triumph, went also before the bier at the funeral, and gave mead at the Porta Capena to those who escorted the funeral, because he had been among other captives received from the enemy in Africa by Scipio; or else so unfriendly that, on account of a notable feud, he was chosen above all others by that faction which was adverse to the Scipios to conduct the inquiry—by this praetor, then, whether too fair or too unfair, Lucius Scipio was at once made defendant. At the same time the names of his legates were both laid and received—of Aulus and Lucius
Hostilius Cato, and of
Gaius Furius Aculeo the quaestor, and, that everything might seem tainted by the partnership of peculation, two clerks also and an orderly. Lucius Hostilius and the clerks and the orderly were acquitted before judgment was passed on Scipio; Scipio and Aulus Hostilius the legate and Gaius Furius were condemned: that, to grant peace more conveniently to Antiochus, Scipio had received six thousand pounds of gold and four hundred and eighty of silver more than he brought into the treasury; Aulus Hostilius eighty pounds of gold and four hundred and three of silver; Furius the quaestor a hundred and thirty pounds of gold and two hundred of silver. These sums of gold and silver I have found recorded in Antias. In the case of Lucius Scipio I should myself prefer that there be a copyist’s error rather than a falsehood of the writer in the sum of gold and silver: for it is more like the truth that the weight of silver was greater than of gold, and that the suit was assessed at four million rather than at twenty-four million, the more so because they hand down that the account of so great a sum was demanded even of Publius Scipio himself in the Senate, and that, when he had bidden his brother Lucius bring the account-book, he tore it up with his own hands, the Senate looking on, indignant that, when he had brought two hundred million into the treasury, an account of four million was required of him. With the same confidence of spirit, when the quaestors did not dare to take money from the treasury against the law, he demanded the keys and said that he would open the treasury, he who had brought it about that it was closed. Many other things, especially about the end of Scipio’s life, and his day of trial, his death, his funeral, his tomb, are told in conflicting ways, so that I have nothing to which fame, to which writings I should assent. There is no agreement about the accuser: some write that
Marcus Naevius, others that the Petillii appointed the day; nor about the time at which the day was appointed; nor about the year in which he died; nor where he died or was buried: some say at Rome, others at Liternum, that he both died and was buried. In both places monuments and statues are shown: for at Liternum there was a monument and on the monument a statue set above, which we ourselves lately saw, thrown down by a storm; and at Rome, outside the Porta Capena, in the tomb of the Scipios, there are three statues, of which two are said to be of Publius and Lucius Scipio, the third of the poet
Quintus Ennius. Nor do the writers of history alone disagree, but the speeches too—if indeed those that are circulated are their own—of Publius Scipio and of Tiberius Gracchus jar with one another. The heading of the speech of Publius Scipio has the name of Marcus Naevius tribune of the plebs; the speech itself is without the accuser’s name; it calls him now a good-for-nothing, now a trifler. Not even the speech of Gracchus has any mention of the Petillii as accusers of Africanus, or of a day appointed for Africanus. A wholly different story must be woven to suit the speech of Gracchus, and those authorities must be followed who say that, when Lucius Scipio was both accused and condemned for money taken from the king, Africanus was on a legateship in
Etruria; that, on the report being brought of his brother’s mischance, he left the legateship and hastened to Rome, and, when from the gate he had betaken himself straight to the Forum, because it was said his brother was being led to prison, he thrust the orderly back from his body, and, the tribunes restraining him, did violence more piously than civilly. For from this Gracchus himself complains that the tribunician power was undone by a private man, and at the last, when he promises aid to Lucius Scipio, he adds that it is of a more tolerable precedent that the tribunician power and the commonwealth be seen to be vanquished by a tribune of the plebs rather than by a private man. But so does ill-will load this one violent injustice of his that, in upbraiding him for having so far degenerated from himself, it renders back to him his old praises of moderation and self-control, heaped up, in place of the present reproach: for he says that the people was once chastised by him, because they wished to make him perpetual consul and dictator; that he forbade statues to himself to be set up in the
comitium, on the Rostra, in the Curia, on the Capitol, in the shrine of Jupiter; that he forbade it to be decreed that his image in triumphal dress should go forth from the temple of Jupiter Best and Greatest. These things, even if set down in a eulogy, would mark the vast greatness of a spirit that restrained itself to a citizen’s habit in the matter of honors—which an enemy confesses by way of reproach. To this Gracchus the younger of the two daughters—for the elder had been given by her father, beyond doubt, to
Publius Cornelius Nasica—is agreed to have been married. It is less certain whether she was both betrothed and married after her father’s death, or whether those opinions are true, that, when Lucius Scipio was being led to prison, and none of the colleagues gave aid, Gracchus swore that the enmities between himself and the Scipios remained, such as they had been, and that he did nothing for the sake of seeking favor; but that, into the prison to which he had seen Publius Africanus leading kings and enemy commanders, into that he would not suffer Africanus’s brother to be led; and that the Senate, dining by chance that day on the Capitol, rose and begged that Africanus betroth his daughter to Gracchus amid the banquet. These betrothals being duly made at a public festival, when Scipio had returned home, he said to his wife
Aemilia that he had betrothed their younger daughter. When she, with womanly indignation that nothing about their common daughter had been deliberated with her, added that the mother ought not to have been without part in the counsel, even if he were giving her to Tiberius Gracchus, Scipio, glad of so harmonious a judgment, replied that she had been betrothed to that very man. These things about so great a man, however much they vary both in opinions and in the monuments of letters, I had to set forth. The trials being finished by the praetor Quintus Terentius, Hostilius and Furius, being condemned, gave sureties that same day to the city quaestors; Scipio, when he contended that all the money he had received was in the treasury, and that he had nothing of the public’s, began to be led to prison. Publius Scipio Nasica appealed to the tribunes and delivered a speech full of true distinctions, not common to the Cornelian gens only, but proper to his own family. The parents, he said, of himself and of Publius Africanus and Lucius Scipio—who was being led to prison—had been
Gnaeus and Publius Scipio, most illustrious men. They, when through several years in the land of Spain, against many generals and armies of the Carthaginians and Spaniards, they had enlarged the fame of the Roman name not by war only but because they had given those nations a pattern of Roman temperance and good faith, had at the last both fallen for the commonwealth. And whereas it would have been enough for their descendants to guard their glory, Publius Africanus had so far surpassed his father’s praises as to have made men believe that he was sprung not from human blood but from a divine stock. Lucius Scipio, of whom the matter was in hand—to pass over what he had done in Spain, what in Africa, when he was his brother’s legate—had both been judged by the Senate worthy that out of the lot the province of Asia and the war with King Antiochus should be decreed to him, and worthy by his brother, who, after two consulships and a censorship and a triumph, went as legate with him into Asia. There, lest the greatness and splendor of the legate stand in the way of the consul’s praises, it had chanced to fall out that, on the day on which at
Magnesia, standards joined, Lucius Scipio conquered Antiochus, Publius Scipio, sick, was some days’ journey away at Elaea. The enemy’s army had been no smaller than Hannibal’s, with whom it had been fought in Africa; Hannibal himself had been among many other royal generals, who was the commander in the Punic war. And the war, indeed, had been so waged that no one could so much as accuse even fortune: it was in peace that a charge was sought; that was said to have come up. Here the ten commissioners were at once arraigned, by whose counsel peace had been granted; although there had risen up out of the ten commissioners men who accused Gnaeus Manlius, yet that accusation had availed not only nothing for the credit of the charge, but not even for the delay of his triumph. But, by Hercules, in Scipio’s case the very terms of the peace were suspect, as too accommodating to Antiochus: for the kingdom had been left him entire; vanquished, he possessed everything that had been his before the war; though there had been a great quantity of gold and silver, nothing had been brought into the public treasury, all had been turned to private use. Or had there not been carried, before the eyes of all, in the triumph of Lucius Scipio, more gold and silver than in ten other triumphs, if all should be brought into one? For what should I say of the bounds of the kingdom? Antiochus had held all Asia and the nearest parts of Europe. How great a region of the earth that is, jutting from Mount Taurus to the
Aegean Sea, how many not cities only but nations it embraces, all know. This region, stretching more than thirty days’ journey in length, ten between two seas in breadth, as far as the ridges of Mount Taurus, had been taken from Antiochus, and he had been driven into the farthest corner of the earth. What more could have been taken from him, had the peace been gratuitous? To Philip conquered Macedonia was left, to
Nabis Lacedaemon, and no charge was sought against Quinctius: for he had not had Africanus for a brother; whose glory, when it ought to have profited Lucius Scipio, had by its ill-will harmed him. So much gold and silver was adjudged to have been carried into the house of Lucius Scipio as could not be raised by selling all his goods. Where, then, was that royal gold, where the many inheritances received? In a house which expenses had not drained, the heap of a new fortune ought to have stood forth. But what could not be raised from his goods, his enemies would seek from the body and the back of Lucius Scipio by vexation and insults, that a most illustrious man be shut up in prison among nocturnal thieves and brigands, and breathe his last in the stocks and the darkness, then be cast out naked before the prison. Not to the Cornelian family more than to the city of Rome would that be a thing to blush for. Against these things the praetor Terentius read out the Petillian bill, and the decree of the Senate, and the judgment made concerning Lucius Scipio: that, unless the money which had been adjudged were brought into the treasury, he had nothing he could do, save to order the condemned man to be seized and led to prison. The tribunes, when they had withdrawn into council, a little after
Gaius Fannius, out of his own and his other colleagues’ opinion—except Gracchus—declared that the tribunes did not interpose against the praetor to prevent his using his power. Tiberius Gracchus decreed thus: that, to prevent what had been adjudged from being raised out of the goods of Lucius Scipio, he did not interpose against the praetor; but that Lucius Scipio, who had utterly conquered the richest king in the world, who had extended the empire of the Roman people to the farthest bounds of the earth, who had bound King Eumenes, the Rhodians, and so many other cities of Asia by the benefits of the Roman people, who had shut up in prison the many enemy generals led in his triumph—him he would not suffer to be among the enemies of the Roman people in prison and in chains, and he ordered him to be released. With such approval was the decree heard, with such gladness did men see Scipio dismissed, that it scarcely seemed the judgment had been made in the same state. Then the praetor sent the quaestors to take possession of the goods of Lucius Scipio in the public name. And in them not only did no trace whatever of the king’s money appear, but by no means so much was raised as the sum at which he had been condemned. There was collected for Lucius Scipio by his kinsmen and friends and clients so much money that, if he had accepted it, he would have been considerably richer than before his calamity. He accepted nothing; what was necessary for his living was bought back for him by his nearest kinsmen; and the ill-will of the Scipios had turned upon the praetor and his council and the accusers.
morte Africani crevere inimicorum animi, quorum princeps fuit
M. Porcius Cato, qui vivo quoque eo adlatrare magnitudinem eius solitus erat. hoc auctore existimantur Petillii et vivo Africano rem ingressi et mortuo rogationem promulgasse. fuit autem rogatio talis: ”velitis iubeatis, Quirites, quae pecunia capta ablata coacta ab rege Antiocho est quique sub imperio eius fuerunt, quod eius in publicum relatum non est, uti de ea re Ser. Sulpicius praetor urbanus ad senatum referat, quem eam rem velit senatus quaerere de iis, qui praetores nunc sunt. “ huic rogationi primo
Q. et L. Mummii intercedebant; senatum quaerere de pecunia non relata in publicum, ita ut antea semper factum esset, aequum censebant. Petillii nobilitatem et regnum in senatu Scipionum accusabant. L. Furius Purpureo consularis, qui in decem legatis in Asia fuerat, latius rogandum censebat, non quae ab Antiocho modo pecuniae captae forent, sed quae ab aliis regibus gentibusque, Cn. Manlium inimicum incessens. et L. Scipio, quem magis pro se quam adversus legem dicturum apparebat, dissuasor processit. is morte P. Africani fratris, viri omnium fortissimi clarissimique, eam exortam rogationem est conquestus: parum enim fuisse non laudari pro
Rostris P. Africanum post mortem, nisi etiam accusaretur; et Carthaginienses exilio Hannibalis contentos esse, populum Romanum ne morte quidem P. Scipionis exsatiari, nisi et ipsius fama sepulti laceretur et frater insuper, accessio invidiae, mactetur. M. Cato suasit rogationem — exstat oratio eius de pecunia regis Antiochi — et Mummios tribunos auctoritate deterruit, ne adversarentur rogationi. remittentibus ergo his intercessionem omnes tribus uti rogassent iusserunt. Ser. Sulpicio deinde referente, quem rogatione Petillia quaerere vellent, Q. Terentium Culleonem patres iusserunt. ad hunc praetorem, adeo amicum Corneliae familiae, ut, qui Romae mortuum elatumque P. Scipionem — est enim ea quoque fama — tradunt, pilleatum, sicut in triumpho ierat, in funere quoque ante lectum isse memoriae prodiderint, et ad portam Capenam mulsum prosecutis funus dedisse, quod ab eo inter alios captivos in Africa ex hostibus receptus esset, aut adeo inimicum eundem, ut propter insignem simultatem ab ea factione, quae adversa Scipionibus erat, delectus sit potissimum ad quaestionem exercendam —; ceterum ad hunc nimis aequum aut iniquum praetorem reus extemplo factus L. Scipio. simul et delata et recepta nomina legatorum eius,
A. et L. Hostiliorum Catonum, et
C. Furii Aculeonis quaestoris et, ut omnia contacta societate peculatus viderentur, scribae quoque duo et accensus.
L. Hostilius et scribae et accensus, priusquam de Scipione iudicium fieret, absoluti sunt, Scipio et A. Hostilius legatus et C. Furius damnati: quo commodior pax Antiocho daretur, Scipionem sex milia pondo auri, quadringenta octoginta argenti plus accepisse, quam in aerarium retulerit, A. Hostilium octoginta pondo auri, argenti quadringenta tria, Furium quaestorem auri pondo centum triginta, argenti ducenta. has ego summas auri et argenti relatas apud Antiatem inveni. in L. Scipione malim equidem librarii mendum quam mendacium scriptoris esse in summa auri atque argenti: similius enim veri est argenti quam auri maius pondus fuisse, et potius quadragiens quam ducentiens quadragiens litem aestimatam, eo magis, quod tantae summae rationem etiam ab ipso P. Scipione requisitam esse in senatu tradunt, librumque rationis eius cum Lucium fratrem adferre, iussisset, inspectante senatu suis ipsum manibus concerpsisse indignantem, quod, cum bis milliens in aerarium intulisset, quadragiens ratio ab se posceretur. ab eadem fiducia animi, cum quaestores pecuniam ex aerario contra legem promere non auderent, poposcisse clavis et se aperturum aerarium dixisse, qui, ut clauderetur, effecisset. multa alia in Scipionis exitu maxime vitae dieque dicta, morte, funere, sepulcro, in diversum trahunt, ut, cui famae, quibus scriptis adsentiar, non habeam. non de accusatore convenit: alii M. Naevium, alii Petillios diem dixisse scribunt, non de tempore, quo dicta dies sit, non de anno, quo mortuus sit, non ubi mortuus aut elatus sit: alii Romae, alii Literni et mortuum et sepultum. utrobique monumenta ostenduntur et statuae: nam et Literni monumentum monumentoque statua superimposita fuit, quam tempestate disiectam nuper vidimus ipsi, et Romae extra portam Capenam in Scipionum monumento tres statuae sunt, quarum duae P. et L. Scipionum dicuntur esse, tertia poetae
Q. Ennii. nec inter scriptores rerum discrepat solum, sed orationes quoque, si modo ipsorum sunt quae feruntur, P. Scipionis et Ti. Gracchi abhorrent inter se. index orationis P. Scipionis nomen
M. Naevii tribuni plebis habet, ipsa oratio sine nomine est accusatoris; modo nebulonem, modo nugatorem appellat. ne Gracchi quidem oratio aut Petilliorum accusatorum Africani aut diei dictae Africano ullam mentionem habet. alia tota serenda fabula est Gracchi orationi conveniens, et illi auctores sequendi sunt, qui, cum L. Scipio et accusatus et damnatus sit pecuniae captae ab rege, legatum in
Etruria fuisse Africanum tradunt, quo post famam de casu fratris adlatam relicta legatione cucurrisse eum Romam et, cum a porta recta ad forum se contulisset, quod in vincula duci fratrem dictum erat, reppulisse a corpore eius viatorem, et tribunis retinentibus magis pie quam civiliter vim fecisse. hinc enim ipse Gracchus queritur dissolutam esse a privato tribuniciam potestatem, et ad postremum, cum auxilium L. Scipioni pollicetur, adicit tolerabilioris exempli esse a tribuno plebis potius quam a privato victam videri et tribuniciam potestatem et rem publicam esse. sed ita hanc unam impotentem eius iniuriam invidia onerat, ut increpando, quod degenerarit tantum a se ipse, cumulatas ei veteres laudes moderationis et temperantiae pro reprehensione praesenti reddat: castigatum enim quondam ab eo populum ait, quod eum perpetuum consulem et dictatorem vellet facere; prohibuisse statuas sibi in
comitio, in Rostris, in curia, in Capitolio, in cella Iovis poni; prohibuisse, ne decerneretur, ut imago sua triumphali ornatu e templo Iovis optimi maximi exiret. haec vel in laudatione posita ingentem magnitudinem animi moderantis ad civilem habitum honoribus significarent, quae exprobrando inimicus fatetur. huic Graccho minorem ex duabus filiis — nam maior
P. Cornelio Nasicae haud dubie a patre collocata erat — nuptam fuisse convenit. illud parum constat, utrum post mortem patris et desponsa sit et nupserit, an verae illae opiniones sint, Gracchum, cum L. Scipio in vincula duceretur, nec quisquam collegarum auxilio esset, iurasse sibi inimicitias cum Scipionibus, quae fuissent, manere, nec se gratiae quaerendae causa quicquam facere, sed, in quem carcerem reges et imperatores hostium ducentem vidisset P. Africanum, in eum se fratrem eius duci non passurum. senatum eo die forte in Capitolio cenantem consurrexisse et petisse, ut inter epulas Graccho filiam Africanus desponderet. quibus ita inter publicum sollemne sponsalibus rite factis cum se domum recepisset, Scipionem
Aemiliae uxori dixisse filiam se minorem despondisse. cum illa, muliebriter indignabunda nihil de communi filia secum consultatum, adiecisset non, si Ti. Graccho daret, expertem consilii debuisse matrem esse, laetum Scipionem tam concordi iudicio ei ipsi desponsam respondisse. haec de tanto viro quam et opinionibus et monumentis litterarum variarent, proponenda erant. iudiciis a Q. Terentio praetore perfectis, Hostilius et Furius damnati praedes eodem die quaestoribus urbanis dederunt; Scipio, cum contenderet omnem quam accepisset pecuniam in aerario esse, nec se quicquam publici habere, in vincula duci est coeptus. P. Scipio Nasica tribunos appellavit orationemque habuit plenam veris decoribus non communiter modo Corneliae gentis, sed proprie familiae suae. parentes suos et P. Africani ac L. Scipionis, qui in carcerem duceretur, fuisse
Cn. et P. Scipiones, clarissimos viros. eos, cum per aliquot annos in terra Hispania adversus multos Poenorum Hispanorumque et duces et exercitus nominis Romani famam auxissent non bello solum, sed quod Romanae temperantiae fideique specimen illis gentibus dedissent, ad extremum ambo pro republica mortem occubuisse. cum illorum gloriam tueri posteris satis esset, P. Africanum tantum paternas superiecisse laudes, ut fidem fecerit non sanguine humano sed stirpe divina satum se esse. L. Scipionem, de quo agatur, ut, quae in Hispania, quae in Africa, cum legatus fratris esset, gessisset, praetereantur, consulem et ab senatu dignum visum, cui extra sortem Asia provincia et bellum cum Antiocho rege decerneretur, et a fratre, cui post duos consulatus censuramque et triumphum legatus in Asiam iret. ibi ne magnitudo et splendor legati laudibus consulis officeret, forte ita incidisse, ut, quo die ad
Magnesiam signis collatis L. Scipio Antiochum devicisset, aeger P. Scipio Elaeae dierum aliquot via abesset. non fuisse minorem eum exercitum quam Hannibalis, cum quo in Africa esset pugnatum; Hannibalem eundem fuisse inter multos alios regios duces, qui imperator Punici belli fuerit. et bellum quidem ita gestum esse, ut ne fortunam quidem quisquam criminari possit: in pace crimen quaeri; eam dici venisse. hic decem legatos simul argui. quorum ex consilio data pax esset: quamquam exstitisse ex decem legatis. qui Cn. Manlium accusarent; tamen non modo ad criminis fidem. sed ne ad moram quidem triumphi eam accusationem valuisse. at hercule in Scipione leges ipsas pacis, ut nimium accommodatas Antiocho, suspectas esse: integrum enim ei regnum relictum; omnia possidere eum victum, quae ante bellum eius fuerint; auri et argenti cum vim magnam habuisset, nihil in publicum relatum, omne in privatum versum; an praeter omnium oculos tantum auri argentique in triumpho L. Scipionis, quantum non decem aliis triumphis, si omne in unum conferatur, [sit] latum? nam quid de finibus regni dicam? Asiam omnem et proxima Europae tenuisse Antiochum. ea quanta regio orbis terrarum sit, a Tauro monte in
Aegaeum usque prominens mare, quot non urbes modo sed gentes amplectatur, omnes scire. hanc regionem dierum plus triginta iter in longitudinem, decem inter duo maria in latitudinem patentem usque ad Tauri montis iuga Antiocho ademptam, expulso in ultimum angulum orbis terrarum. quid, si gratuita pax esset, plus adimi ei potuisse? Philippo victo Macedoniam,
Nabidi Lacedaemonem relictam, nec Quinctio crimen quaesitum: non enim habuisse eum Africanum fratrem; cuius cum gloria prodesse L. Scipioni debuisset, invidiam nocuisse. tantum auri argentique iudicatum esse in domum L. Scipionis illatum, quantum venditis omnibus bonis redigi non posset. id ubi ergo esse regium aurum, ubi tot hereditates acceptas? in domo, quam sumptus non exhauserint, exstare debuisse novae fortunae cumulum. at enim, quod ex bonis redigi non possit, ex corpore et tergo per vexationem et contumelias L. Scipionis petituros inimicos, ut in carcere inter fures nocturnos et latrones vir clarissimus includatur et in robore et tenebris exspiret, deinde nudus ante carcerem proiciatur. non id Corneliae magis familiae quam urbi Romanae fore erubescendum. adversus ea Terentius praetor rogationem Petilliam et senatus consultum et iudicium de L. Scipione factum recitavit: se, ni referatur pecunia in publicum, quae iudicata sit, nihil habere quod faciat, nisi ut prendi damnatum et in vincula duci iubeat. tribuni cum in consilium secessissent, paulo post
C. Fannius ex sua collegarumque aliorum, praeter Gracchum, sententia pronuntiavit praetori non intercedere tribunos, quo minus sua potestate utatur. Ti. Gracchus ita decrevit, quo minus ex bonis L. Scipionis quod iudicatum sit redigatur, se non intercedere praetori; L. Scipionem, qui regem opulentissimum orbis terrarum devicerit, imperium populi Romani propagaverit in ultimos terrarum fines, regem Eumenem, Rhodios, alias tot Asiae urbes devinxerit populi Romani beneficiis, plurimos duces hostium in triumpho ductos carcere incluserit, non passurum inter hostes populi Romani [ L. Scipionem ] in carcere et in vinculis esse, mittique eum se iubere. tanto adsensu auditum est decretum, adeo dimissum Scipionem laeti homines viderunt, ut vix in eadem civitate videretur factum iudicium. in bona deinde L. Scipionis possessum publice quaestores praetor misit. neque in iis non modo vestigium ullum comparuit pecuniae regiae, sed nequaquam tantum redactum est, quantae summae damnatus fuerat. collata ea pecunia a cognatis amicisque et clientibus est L. Scipioni, ut, si acciperet eam, locupletior aliquanto esset, quam ante calamitatem fuerat. nihil accepit; quae necessaria ad cultum erant, redempta ei a proximis cognatis sunt; verteratque Scipionum invidia in praetorem et consilium eius et accusatores.