930 MARCELLUS. ber and magnificence of the spoils brought from Syracuse. (Li v. xxvi. 21 ; Plut. Marc. 20, 22.) Shortly after his triumph he was elected for the fourth time consul, together with M. Valerius Laevinus. But scarcely had he entered on his office (b.c. 210) when he had to encounter a storm of indignation, raised against him by his proceed- ings in Sicily. Notwithstanding the praises be- stowed by the Roman writers, and still more by Plutarch (Marc. 20 ; and see Cic. in Verr. ii. 2, iv. 52, 54), upon his moderation and clemency, it is evident that his conduct was considered by many, even of his own countrymen, as having been unnecessarily harsh. Deputies from the Sicilian • cities now appeared at Rome, to lay their complaints before the senate, where they met with powerful support ; and though the governing body was unwilling to cast a slur upon Marcellus, and de- termined to ratify his past acts, yet the entreaties of the Sicilians so far prevailed, that the two consuls exchanged provinces, and it was arranged that Marcellus, to whose lot Sicily had previously fallen, should take the command in Italv against Hannibal. (Liv. xxvi. 22, 26, 29—32; Plut. Marc. 23 ; Zonar. ix. 6.) From this time the Sicilians appear to have changed their policy, and being freed from all immediate apprehensions from Marcellus, they endeavoured to conciliate his favour by every kind of honour and flattery : the Syracusans placed their city under the patronage of himself and his descendants, erected statues to him, and instituted an annual festival, called the Marcellea, which continued to be celebrated down to the time of Verres. (Liv. xxvi. 32 ; Plut. Marc. 23; Cic. «•» Verr. ii. 21, 63.) Marcellus now joined the army in Apulia, where he was soon after enabled to strike an important blow, by the conquest of Salapia, which was be- trayed into his hands by Blasius, one of the prin- cipal citizens of the place [Blasius], and this success was followed by the capture of two cities in Samniura, which had been occupied by Carthaginian garrisons. Meanwhile, Hannibal had surprised and destroyed the army of Cn. Fulvius at Herdonea ; whereupon Marcellus hastened to oppose him, and check his victorious career. The two armies met near Numistro in Lucania, and a battle ensued, Apparently without any decisive result, though the Romans claimed a victory ; and the remainder of the campaign was occupied with unimportant movements, Marcellus continuing to follow the «teps of his wary antagonist, but carefully avoiding an engagement. So important, however, did he deem it not to lose sight for a moment of the Car- thaginian general, that he declined to repair to Rome even in order to hold the comitia, and in consequence, by direction of the senate, named Q. Fulvius dictator for that purpose. (Liv. xxvi. 38, xxvii. 1 — 5 ; Plut. Marc. 24, 25 ; Appian, Annib. 45 — 47 ; Zonar. ix. 7 ; VaL Max. iii. 8. ext. § 1.) During the following year (209) he retained the command of his army with the rank of proconsul, in order that he might co-operate with the two consuls of the year, Fabius Maxiraus and Fulvius Flaccus, against Hannibal. At the opening of the campaign he was the first to oppose the Carthaginian general, whom he found near Canusium ; and in the neighbourhood of that city, according to the Roman historians, there ensued three successive actions between the two armies. Of these the first was a MARCELLUS. drawn battle, in the second the Romans were de- feated with heavy loss, and in the third they are said to have gained a complete victory ; notwith- standing which, Hannibal drew off his army un- molested towards Bruttium, while Marcellus was unable to follow him, on account of the number of his wounded. So severe indeed had been his losses, that he shut himself up within the walls of Venusia, and remained there in perfect inactivity during the remainder of the season, while Han- nibal moved up and down throughout the south of Italy without opposition. Such conduct could not fail to give much dissatisfaction at Rome ; and it was even proposed by one of the tribunes that Marcellus should be deprived of his command. But on hearing of this motion he immediately hastened to Rome, and defended himself so suc- cessfully, that he was not only absolved from all blame, but elected consul for the ensuing year, together with T. Quintius Crispinus. (Liv. xxvii. 7, 12—14, 20, 21 ; Plut. Marc. 25—27.) Before he entered on this, his fifth consulship, he was sent into Etruria to appease a threatened revolt of the Arretians, and succeeded in quieting their discontent for a time. After he returned to Rome, and was preparing to resume operations in the field (b. c. 208), he was detained for some time by unfavourable omens and the religious ceremonies deemed necessary, in order to avert the evils thus threatened. At length he once more took the command of the army at Venusia, and being joined by his colleague Crispinus from Bruttium, they encamped with their combined forces between Ve- nusia and Bantia. Hannibal's camp was at a short distance from them ; between the two armies lay a wooded hill, which the two consuls imprudently proceeded to reconnoitre, escorted only by a small body of horse, and in so doing fell into an ambus- cade of Numidians. A sharp skirmish ensued, but the Romans being far inferior in number, were quickly dispersed or put to the sword : Marcellus himself was run through the body with a spear, and killed on the spot: his colleague was with difficulty carried off the field severely wounded. Hannibal displayed a generous sympathy for the fate of his fallen foe, and caused all due honours to be paid to his lifeless remains. (Liv. xxvii. 21 — ■ 23, 25—28 ; Plut. Marc. 28—30 ; Polyb. x. 32 ; Appian, Annib. 50 ; Zonal*, ix. 9 ; Val. Max. i. 6. §9.) There are few characters in Roman history of which the picture transmitted to us has been more disfigured by partiality than that of Marcellus. Almost the whole account of his military operations jigainst Hannibal has been so perverted, that it is difficult now to arrive at the truth ; but it is start- ling to find, after reading in Livy or Plutarch the details of his numerous victories over the Car- thaginian general, that Polybius expressly denied he had ever defeated Hannibal at all. (Plut. Camp. Pelop. c. Marc. 1 ; and see Polyb. xv. 1 L) The ambiguous character of many of his alleged victories has been indeed already adverted to, and is suf- ficiently apparent even from the accounts of the Romans themselves. It seems probable that many of these exaggerations have found their way into history from the funeral oration of Marcellus by his son, which we know to have been used as an authority by some of the earlier annalists. (Liv. xxvii. 27.) Still more unfounded is the reputation he seems to have obtained for clemency and hu- J
