Abbildungen der Seite





trophies which are still to be seen in the court of the Capitol at Rome, and which were transported thither from the Martian aqueduct, are those of Marius. But if they are his, it will not be easy to decide whether they are those of the conquest of Numidia or of the victory over the Cimbri. Petrarch, indeed, says that they are undoubtedly those of the victories over Jugurtha, but he is decidedly in the wrong when he adds that they are representations of those which Bocchus sent to be dedicated in the Capitol. Those of Bocchus, made of gold, and representing Jugurtha delivered by the king of Mauretania to Sylla, were of quite a different nature from those which we see cut in stone in the court of the Capitol.

For myself, I am inclined to think that one of the two refers to Jugurtha, and the other to the Cimbri.

“The Romans did not immediately unite the whole of Numidia to their empire. A portion bordering on Mauretania was given to Bocchus, as a recompense for his services, and called New Mauretania. Another portion was given to Hiempsal II., whom Appian calls Mandrestal, son of Gulussa, and grandson of Masinissa.

To Hiempsal II. succeeded his son Juba I., who took part in the civil war against Cæsar. Cæsar, having defeated him in the battle of Thapsus, united all Numidia to the Roman empire. Augustus restored to his son, Juba II., one of the most learned men of his

age, the kingdom of his fathers. This Juba had two wives, Cleopatra, daughter of Mark Antony and Cleopatra, and Glaphyra, daughter of Archelaus, king of Cappadocia, and widow of Alexander, son of Herod of Judea. He was succeeded by Ptolemy, his son by Cleopatra ; after whose death Numidia had no more kings, but continued a Roman province. A Numidian named Dac-Barnas, or the little Pharnaces, a name which the Romans metamorphosed into Tacfarinas, usurped the government of it with an army in the reign of Tiberius, but his struggles to retain it ended in his defeat and death, and made no alteration in the condition of the country.” De Brosses.

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]

Of these Fragments the greater part were collected from the grammarians, and other writers who have cited Sallust, by Paulus Manutius and Ludovicus Carrio. Subsequent critics have augmented, corrected, and illustrated them. That the Speeches and Epistles, which form the larger portion of them, have reached us entire, is owing to their preservation in an old manuscript, in which they had been added to the Conspiracy of Catiline and the Jugurthine War, and from which Pomponius Lætus extracted them for the press. Cortius.

Of all who have endeavoured to illustrate these Fragments, the most successful has been De Brosses, who, by throwing light on many that were obscure, uniting some that had been disjoined, and supplying, from other writers, what appeared to have been lost, has given a restoration, as far as was possible, of Sallust's History in French. It must be allowed that the work which he has produced is worthy of being read by every student of Roman history.

Sallust gave a historical record of the affairs at Rome from A.U.c. 675, when Sylla laid down the dictatorship, to A.U.C. 688, when Pompey, by the law of Manilius, was appointed general in the Mithridatic war. During this period occurred the civil disturbances excited by Lepidus after the death of Sylla, the wars of Sertorius and Spartacus, the destruction of the pirates, and the victories of Lucullus over Mithridates. To his narrative he prefixed a summary of events from the end of the Jugurthine War; so that the Jugurtha, the History, and the Catiline comprehended, in an uninterrupted series, the occurrences of fifty-five years, from 636 to 691. Burnouf.

All the Fragments of any importance are here translated. The names appended to them are those of the grammarians, or other writers, from whom they have been extracted. The text of them can scarcely be said to be settled; Cortius and Burnouf are the two editors that have bestowed most pains upon it. I have in general followed Burnouf.

I HAVE recorded the acts of the Roman people, military and civil, in the consulship of Marcus Lepidus and Quintus Catulus!, and the subsequent period. Donatus. Pomp. Messalinus.

1 Marcus Lepidus and Quintus Catulus] They were consuls, A.U.C. 676, just

Cato, the most expressive in stylel of all the Romans, said much in few words. Servius. Acron.

Nor has the circumstance of being of an opposite party in the civil war ever drawn me away from the truth. Arusianus.

[ocr errors]

The first dissensions among us arose from the depravity of the human mind, which, restless and untameable, is always engaged in a struggle for liberty, or glory, or power. Priscian.

The Roman state was at the greatest height of power in the consulship of Servius Sulpicius and Marcus Marcellus> ; when all Gaul on this side of the Rhine, and between our sea and the ocean, except what marshes rendered impassable, was brought under its dominion. But the Romans acted on the best moral principles, and with the greatest harmony, in

the interval between the second and last Carthaginian war. S Victorinus. Augustinus.

[ocr errors]

But discords, and avarice, and ambition, and other evils after the abdication of Sylla. Ausonius mentions them, and alludes, at the same time, to the contents of Sallust's History, in his IVth Idyl, ver. 61:

Jam facinus, Catilina, tuum, Lepidique tumultum,
Ab Lepido et Catulo jam res et tempora Romæ
Orsus, bis senos seriem connecto per annos.
Jam lego civili mistum Mavorte duellum,

Movit quod socio Sertorius exul Ibero. 1 Expressive in style] Disertissimus. “Sallust had a particular regard for the History of Cato, which, in Sallust's time, had almost ceased to be read. He valued himself upon imitating his style, and his obsolete expressions. He found in his antique language an energy to which modern polish and accuracy scarcely ever attain. This is the quality which we Frenchmen so much regard in our ancient authors, as Comines, Amyot, and the incomparable Montaigne, writers who have never been surpassed for natural strength and ease of style." De Brosses.

2 The first dissensions, fc.] “ This was the commencement of a preface, in which Sallust treated of the manners and condition of the city of Rome, and of the form of government, from the foundation of the city. The following fragments relate to the same subject.” Burnouf.

3 Servius Sulpicius and Marcus Marcellus] A.U.c. 703. * But discord, &c.] Compare Jug., c. 41; Cat., c. 10.


that usually spring from prosperity, were most increased after Carthage was destroyed. For encroachments of the stronger on the weaker, and consequent separations of the people from the senate, with other domestic dissensions, had existed even from the very origin of the republic; nor, on the expulsion of the kings, were equity and moderation observed any longer than till the dread of Tarquin, and of a fierce war from Etruria, subsided; after that time, the patricians began to tyrannize over the plebeians as over slaves ; to scourge


put them to death with authority like that of kings; to dispossess them of their lands, and, excluding them from the government, to keep it entirely in their own hands. The people, being greatly oppressed by these severities, and especially by the grievance of usury, and having also to contribute taxes and service for incessant wars, at last took up arms, and posted themselves on the Sacred and Aventine Mounts; on which occasions they secured for themselves the right of electing tribunes, and other privileges. To these disputes and contentions the second Punic war brought a termination. Augustin.


When, after the terror of the Carthaginians was removed, the people were at liberty to resume their dissensions, innumerable disturbances, seditions, and subsequent civil wars, arose, while a few powerful individuals, whose interest most of the other nobles had submitted to promote, sought, under the specious pretext of supporting the senate or the plebeians, to secure power for themselves; and men were esteemed or despised by them, not as they deserved well or ill of the republic, (for all were equally corrupt ;) but whoever grew eminently wealthy, and better able to encroach on others, was styled, if he supported the present state of affairs, an excellent citizen. From this period the manners of our forefathers degenerated, not, as before, gradually, but with precipitation like that of a torrent; and the youth became so depraved with luxury and avarice, that they might be thought, with justice, to have been born powerless either to preserve their own property, or to suffer others to preserve theirs. Gellius. Augustin.

[ocr errors]


THE PEOPLE OF ROME, AGAINST SYLLA. “ YOUR clemency and probity?, O Romans, for which

1 Marcus Æmilius Lepidus] “ He was the father of Lepidus, the triumvir, of the patrician gens Æmilia, the chief families of which were the Lepidi, Pauli, and Scauri. This Lepidus was ædile in the seventh consulship of Marius, but afterwards went over to the victorious party of Sylla, and was distinguished as one of the most eager in getting possession of the property of the proscribed. He became consul-elect in the year 675, supported by Pompey, and opposed by Sylla, who was still dictator. But after Sylla resigned the dictatorship, Lepidus applied himself to nullify his acts, to revive the party of Marius, and to stir up the children and friends of the proscribed ; aspiring, himself, to power similar to that of Sylla, but not with Sylla's ability; for he was light-minded, a leader of sedition, cunning rather than prudent, and without skill in war.

De Brosses thinks that this speech was spoken by Lepidus, when he was consul-elect, and before he had entered on his office, to his own particular adherents, whom he had convened in some private place. . . But Douza is of opinion that Lepidus actually addressed himself to an assembly of the people after he had assumed the consulship, while Sylla was living in a private station after his resignation of the dictatorship, but while he yet retained much of his dictatorial power through the influence of his party.Burnouf. From the character of the speech itself, the reader will be inclined, I think, to pronounce the opinion of De Brosses fanciful, and to agree with Douza. The composition of the speech is of course Sallust's own; though the sentiments, or many of them, may have proceeded from Lepidus.

"It is very difficult to determine at what time the speech was made; for though this may seem to be sufficiently shown by its title and matter, yet it has been suspected by many that such an oration could not have been publicly pronounced while Sylla was alive, even though he might have resigned the dictatorship, but i must have been addressed to a band of conspirators, in some private place of assembly. It is, however, certain that Lepidus, as consul, made the speech to the people on the rostra; for he would not have used the term Quirites except in a public address; nor would he, in the character of consul-elect, which gave him no power or authority, have offered himself as a leader to the people for the recovery of their liberty. But, it may be said, there are many expressions in the speech which seem to prove that Sylla, at the time of its delivery, still held the dictatorship. Appius and Orosius intimate that Sylla ceased to be dictator A.U.C. 674, when he himself was consul with Metellus Pius, or the year after, when Servilius and Claudius were consuls. See Appian, De Bell. Civ. i., 103; Oros. v., 22. And from Plutarch, Syll.c. 34, we may understand that the abdication took place A.U.c. 675.

The agreement of these writers, though they are of no great authority indiviý dually, induces me to believe that Sylla resigned his office the year before Lepidus and

Catulus were consuls. But the resignation appears to me no matter of wonder; and, indeed, the writers of those days regarded it as a mere display of arrogance; for though he abdicated the name of dictator, he gave up nothing of his dictatorial power, except what he might lose by devoting himself to pleasure and luxury. . . Indeed, the power of Sylla depended not so much on his office of dictator, as on the laws which he had made, and on a party of the nobility who supported him.” Gerlach.

? Your clemency and probity, gc.] Clementia et probitas vestra, &c. Burnouf

« ZurückWeiter »