described it were from the event, the more detailed is the knowledge which they show. This eclipse found Rome at war with Macedonia. Polybius,[1] cited by Suidas, tells us that 'the moon being eclipsed in the reign of Perseus the Macedonian, the saying prevailed among the multitude that it betokened an eclipse of a king. And this made the Romans more courageous, and humbled the Macedonians in their minds. So true is the proverb that there are many vain things in war'. This suggests that the eclipse happened long enough before the decisive conflict for a common rumour as to its meaning to reach both camps. Polybius was only a contemporary and he may be imperfectly reported. Anyhow his story is not particularly striking.
Cicero[2] is fuller. He tells us that Sulpicius Callus was a very dear friend of the consul Aemilius Paulus, to whom he was serving as legatus the year before he was elected consul. That fixes the year B.C. 168. While the Romans were in camp, he says, their army was perturbed by a religious fear, because on a fine night the full moon which was shining bright was suddenly eclipsed. Then Gallus did not hesitate to proclaim publicly in the camp next day that it was no prodigy and that it had happened then and would always happen at fixed times, when the Sun was so placed as not to be able to touch the Moon with his light.
This narrative is not in full agreement with Polybius inasmuch as it suggests that the Romans were persuaded that the phenomenon was not a portent, while Polybius makes them regard it as a portent favourable to themselves. Observe that there is no suggestion that Gallus had computed the eclipse; he merely explained it by the common cause of all lunar eclipses, and his explanation was not given till the day after the
