Catilinan salaliitto & Jugurthan sota

by Sallust, Marja Itkonen-Kaila (Translator)

Alternate cover edition of ISBN 0140441328.
Sallust (86-c. 35 BC), who had various public offices in Rome & later a governorship in Africa, supported the political group known as the populares. He was a friend of Caesar & an opponent of Cicero. His history of the war against Jugurtha, King of Numidia, & his account of Catiline's conspiracy in 63 BC are his only complete works to survive; they were written in the years after Caesar's assassination.

Genres: History, Classics, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Ancient, Roman, Roman History

187 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 64

About the author

Gaius Sallustius Crispus (86 BC-34 BC), better known as 'Sallust' was a Roman politician and historian who supported Populares party of Julius Caesar.

His historical works included romanticized views of events, which served as polemics against his moral opponents, including Cicero. It was a style which set him apart from the dry historians who proceeded him.

Sallust joined Caesar in the African wars, and after their victory, was placed as governor of Roman Africa. He eventually retired to private life, when he composed his histories and funded an extensive personal garden.

Reviews

[Shannon · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is one of those ancient works that arguably parallels our own times as some argue the things that happened within are evident in our own recent times and a sign of a possible crisis to come (though I would argue Rome went on for hundreds of years after the events in this book). This work focuses on two events during the later years of the Roman Republic: the Catiline Conspiracy (basically a young wanna be senator doesn't get elected and resents it and raises a secret army to take it yet gets caught yet some say the system was broken and saw him as a hero) and the Jugurthine War (a former ally of Rome, Jugurtha, rises to power against his cousins but one cousin gets away and flees to Rome for help and Rome realizes they'd rather have the biddable cousin than the tyrant king, Jugurtha).

I'll break this up into sections but to reiterate some points going on in discussions all over the world some people draw parallels between the Catiline Conspiracy to the 1% Wall Street versus the 99%. And the Jugurthine War is about a former ally of Rome who rises to power in Numidia but then turns upon them using bribes and violence to control his territories while a cousin to this tyrant king begs Rome for assistance in securing his throne. So any parallels to former allies of ours or maybe a certain terrorist named Bin Laden who got military assistance from us back in the day and then turned against our country a la 9-11? Something to think about. Or, maybe go back further to Iran and Iraq before we went to war with the latter.

Anyway, onward . . .

JUGURTHINE WAR

I still remember reading this book back in the day and recalling a a famous Jugurtha quote:   "Urbem venalem et mature perituram, si emptorem invenerit" ("a city for sale and doomed to quick destruction, if it should find a buyer," Sallust, Jug. 35.10). See, Jugurtha was known for bribing Roman officials (something he learned from his military service during the Punic Wars), including a former consul who had been involved in the murder trial of Gaius Gracchus (basically Gaius and his brother were seen as trying to shake up the Old Guard and were brutally murdered. Man does that sound like maybe the 99% arguments being made today?). The Roman heavy infantry were not used to hit and run tactics by Numidian light cavalry so they didn't accomplish much over the years. Later on a man named Gaius Marius was named Consul and he decided on a different tactic that involved having an ally-competitor turn Jugurtha over to Rome. The deposed tyrant was taken back to Rome for a victory march and then left to starve in one of Rome's great prisons. More important to Rome was the fact that Gaius Marius gained renown for ending the war and he and his quaestor, Cornelius Lucius Sulla, would both rise to power but then go to war against each other in the streets of Rome, resulting in a terror and invasion of the capitol by the Roman military. This would be the first time a Roman army occupied Rome which would set a dangerous precedent and later influence later Romans, including a young Julius Caesar.

THE SECOND CATILINE CONSPIRACY

To some people Catiline might seem like a rich kid who didn't get his way and then chose to raise an army with his allies and prepare to march on Rome. To the younger nobles he was somebody who was going to shake up the Old Guard and “refresh” the Senate but to the masses he was even more favored. Debt was at an all time high and Catiline promised to help with that problem and that endeared him to veterans of the Punic Wars who were in massive debt and/or struggling to maintain their diminished farms or protect them from foreclosure. Sounds like anything happening today maybe? Hmmm. Well, the short of it was that there was evidence of an enemy army being formed in Gaul by some of Catiline's backers but some of them bailed once Cicero and other senators found out about it and got ready. Catiline, to his credit as a true Roman noble, went into battle knowing he would die. His corpse was found far in the front and he went down as a martyr. Julius Caesar, who would later end the Roman Republic, may have been impacted by some of things Catiline tried to do. Ironically, he voted for clemency for Catiline but was shouted down.

WRITING STYLE

Sallust was the type of writer who liked to go off on tangents and talk about the moral decay of Rome in the later years of its Republican Period. Fortunately for me, I enjoyed some of his off tangents though I can see them really irritating some of his readers. At times the writing didn't flow well but that could be said of most of the ancient texts. These guys were writing for a certain niche of people back in the day and weren't trying to necessarily be super entertaining nor amusing so you have to take that in stride or look for an entertaining summary of this period elsewhere. Sallust was considered something of a dramatist at times in this work and he was biased towards the Old Guard. He was a big fan of Julius Caesar and when things didn't go well he retired to his villa to write his views of Roman Republican History. By the way, he was a horrible governor in Africa but that's another story. In the end say what you will of Sallust. Unlike most writers his works are being read over two thousand years later. How many writers of any type will receive that honor? Not many. People who want to read this work online can find it at Project Guttenberg. Those who don't want to plow through such a work but are interested in the latter tale might enjoy Steven Saylor's “Catilina's Riddle”.

WRITING STYLE: B minus to B; FOCUSES/DETAILS: B plus to A minus; THEMES THAT PARALLEL OUR TIMES: B plus to A minus; ACCURACY/OBJECTIVE VIEWPOINT: B; WHEN READ LAST: 2010 (third reading); OVERALL GRADE: B plus.

[Sean Chick · Rating 5 out of 5]

Sometimes when reading ancient history I get the feeling of looking at another world, or at least a more blunt and violent one. Yet, I find Medieval works more foreign, due to certain religious obsessions, than those by the Romans. Among that latter group few seem so contemporary as Sallust, a Roman politician and military commander turned historian. Religion, unlike in Livy and Plutarch, is rarely mentioned.

There is a moral tone, at least as morality was seen by Rome, for rarely does Sallust balk or even condemn when an entire city is put to the sword. Rather, the tale here is one of decline, corruption, ambition, and avarice, as well as an exultation of power of military skill and sweeping oratory. All of these seem like fairly eternal parts of humanity. Atrocities are explained away as being perpetrated against enemies who deserve it and cannot be trusted, a logic we find at work whether in the old Soviet Union or among today's Twitter mobs.

As to the history, The Conspiracy of Catiline (more accurately called Catiline's War) is the more bizarre and partisan work of the two. Sallust treats Cataline less as a monster (drinking the blood of a child aside), and more as a man of great talent and courage undone by ambition and appetite. Beyond that, the work seems mostly to diminish Cicero by half measures while defending Sallust's patron, who was none other than Julius Caesar. The Jugurthine War may lack the personal drama, but being a bit removed from Sallust's lifetime, it is the better work in detail, fairness, and analysis, despite some vague points and Sallust's shaky geography.

As history these books fill out the period when the Roman Republic, having failed to reform and increasingly given to foreign conquest, entered a crisis period that eventually saw the rise of a hybrid-monarchy with Augustus. The Jugurthine War forms the bridge between the Gracchi and the duel between Marius and Sulla. The Conspiracy of Catiline is between the death of Sulla and the rise of Caesar. Sallust's bias must always be accounted for, and a person in love with contemporary history will decry the emphasis on "powerful white males" while the more analytic will note the lack of analysis. Yet, the works are good reads. Sallust (like most ancients I find) is able to see good traits even in men such as Cataline and Sulla. Analysis may be light and focused on "great men," but the case can easily be made that they shaped the biggest events, then and now. Furthermore, as with Plutarch, Sallust shows that individuals and their talents, flaws, and choices, do shape events. Try as our more "enlightened" histories may, this insight is as true and penetrating as ever.

Lastly, although beaten in the end and rarely able to win a battle, Jugurtha I might be the republic's most extraordinary enemy, barring Hannibal and Sertorius. He comes across here as a superb liar and ambitious, but also a gifted strategist who used diplomacy, bribes, and intrigue the way Hannibal and Alexander used battle. He stormed a Roman camp, an almost unheard of feat in the era. He may have lost, but like Hannibal and Sertorius, he exposed weaknesses in the republic that were never remedied.

[J.G. Keely · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sallust had a long political career, siding with the populists, who would eventually become the triumvirate of Caesar, Crassus, and Pompey. In many ways, Sallust's history resembles Caesar's memoirs twenty years later, but Caesar's biases are much more difficult to ferret out. If Sallust had been a more clever man, we might have taken his word for it and entered his works as pure history, but his bias is so evident that we can almost fill out the rest of the story by it's absence.

There are fairly self-evident motivations for the men Sallust presents as incorrigible villains, and we may also compare his view of history to Cicero's; for even though they were of like opinion, Cicero tends to be more equitable in his explanations.

This difference between the two authors rather perfectly encapsulates the difference between them as men, and the central point of their disagreement. Cicero was a pacifier, a placator, but one of enough skill and vigor to change his opponent's course in the midst of deference. We might expect him to be in perfect agreement with Ben Franklin who, when once asked for advice by Thomas Jefferson, is supposed to have said "never disagree with anyone".

Sallust, on the other hand, was an incurable idealist. We are treated to long passages on the particular moral qualities a man ought to have and how Sallust's opponents lack them and how Sallust's friends all have them. There is a constant sense of injustice being perpetrated throughout the politic sphere, but it is always by Sallust's political and ideological enemies.

Though the reader rarely doubts such depravity and greed went on, Sallust's self righteous displays of humble innocence strike as false. His history is not informed enough to serve us--indeed, it is filled with errors in dates, places, and people. But neither is his rhetoric so impressive that it saves his tract from being more than the lamentations of a man who retired to complain for posterity's sake.

As a historical view, he is useful, but moreso within the context of other writers.

[Jim · Rating 3 out of 5]

Through some strange quirk, Sallust is one of the few ancient Roman historians whose two major works have come down to us more or less intact. I had read The Jugurthine War some eight years ago, and I finally decided to read The Conspiracy of Catiline.

While Sallust is a journeyman historian, very much like Xenophon compared to Herodotus and Thucydides, he cannot give Tacitus or Livy much of a run for their sestercii. It is interesting to see Catiline from another viewpoint other than Cicero's, especially as Cicero had so much personally invested in exposing Catiline. He dined out on this reputation for many years until he gave a series of fourteen orations attacking Marc Antony, which is what sealed his doom.

Like many ancient historians, Sallust liked to make up long speeches for his protagonists and antagonists. Particularly interesting in the case of The Conspiracy of Catiline is the contrast between how Julius Caesar would have dealt with the conspiracy compared to Cato's less accepting attitude.

Unless you are a total history wonk like myself, I don't see too much to recommend about Sallust. Suetonius is ever so much more fun, even when he is making up stuff about the first twelve Caesars.

[Heather · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sallust writes as a moral historian. He sees Rome's grandeur as the "good old days" of the Republic which have been ruined by leisure and luxury. It is refreshing to a modern reader interested in history to find history that does not purport merely to set out dry, objective facts, but to record history to some end.

This very quality is also what makes Sallust sometimes laugh-out-loud funny, though. I took to writing in the margins of my book "jab!" whenever Sallust brought this theme into his writing, for at times it overwhelms the work.

Moralizing aside, the record of the Jugurthine War and Catiline Conspiracy are invaluable for the peek they give into the late Republic of Rome and the severe crises it faced. This work provides evidence of the critical issues that precipitated the change from the Republic to Empire. Though sometimes the reader must look past Sallust's Patrician biases, this work makes clear the critical problems that faced Rome near the end of the first century B.C.

[Josh · Rating 3 out of 5]

I would rate his account of the catiline conspiracy 2 stars and his description of the jugurthine war 4 stars

[Nate Padley]

The Conspiracy of Catiline is one of the greatest works of political history that I have ever read. Sallust is delightfully cynical in all of the right ways, but he still goes out of his way to portray genuine nobility in the actions of many leading Romans. Despite his career association with Julius Caesar, Sallust is not unduly harsh towards the old oligarchy, nor is he unduly charitable towards the common people of Rome. In fact, for my money, the most noble and stirring character in the whole account is Cato the Younger, a gatekeeper of the oligarchy if there ever was one.

This work is a masterclass in crafting political history. Sallust effortlessly blends storytelling and analysis into an account that is as enjoyable as it is instructive.

The timelessness of Sallust’s analysis really stood out to me on this read through. One could easily identify parallels between the conspirators who rallied around Catiline and the spirited youth who have become disaffected with modernity in our own day.

There are two works of Sallust included in this volume: The Conspiracy of Catiline and The Jugurthine War. I found Sallust’s account of The Jugurthine War rather dry and uninspired. His speeches were lackluster, his battle scenes were confused, and his style felt like a poor imitation of Thucydides. I deleted this history from my brain almost as soon as I finished it. There is certainly value to be had in many of the speeches of the African emissaries, but I would not encourage anyone but a dedicated Rome enthusiast to read this for pleasure or insight.

[Matt · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Jugurthine War is filled with good old Roman populist rhetoric and war heroism but I can make heads or tails of the Conspiracy of Catiline so I give it a mediocre rating.

[Marc Lamot]

Read the first part during College years, the second lots of years later. Not really interesting as literary works, perhaps better as historical documents.

[Temucano · Rating 3 out of 5]

El estilo de Salustio es bastante llevadero, sobre todo en "Guerra de Yugurta", gracias al detalle de las campañas militares del norte de Africa y todas las intrigas del reino de Numidia. Refleja una época crucial de Roma (S. I a.c), cuando la República se estremecía ante las minorías oligarcas, el surgimiento de dictadores, y solo la luz del César se avizoraba en el horizonte (amigo del autor claramente).

Salustio impregna de un tono moralista gran parte de la narración ( lo que sería una visión sesgada y parcial si nos atenemos a sus propios datos biográficos), lo que adormece un tanto las declamaciones de personajes y las cartas al César, más en general las narrativas de hechos cruciales le quedaron bastante bien (el final de "La conjuración de Catilina" mi escena favorita)

Sobre los personajes históricos la gran mayoría eran unos sanguinarios, empezando por Yugurta, Sila, algo menos Metelo, y en especial el loco de Catilina.

[David Sarkies · Rating 4 out of 5]

Two stories from the Roman Republic
8 March 2011

I quite like books written by ancient historians, though we must remember the purposes of the ancient historians are a little different to modern historians (though I would argue that it is not all that different). The editor argued that ancient historians tended to have different purposes, though all historians, I believe, will approach a period in history, or, as in Sallust's case, certain events within history, to not only tell a story but for the reader to come out of the story having learnt a lesson. This is not so much different to how many historians write today. Granted, we do have text books and encyclopaedias which try to be as objective as possible, however it is very difficult not to let one's subjective opinion get in the way, or even revise the events to push one's own personal agenda. I can easily refer you to the works of Niall Ferguson as an example of this (his book on the British Empire was written to push the idea that imperialism is not necessarily a bad thing) and I will also refer the reader to Philip Jenkins Lost History of Christianity as an example of a revisionist text (though he tries to be objective, when I think of the history he writes he tends to put the scientific achievements of the Arabs into the hands of the Nestorian Church).

This particular book is about two events near the end of the Roman Republic. One event is a war with an outside enemy (the Numidians, located in modern day Algeria) and the second involves a spoilt rich kid who could not handle losing his bid to become consul (sort of like a president, but less so, particularly since one had to share the position with another) and his tantrum that brought the Republic onto the verge of civil war.

Sallust, in the first story (for that is what it really is) explores the events that brought Rome to war with the Numidians, and the destruction that this war left upon the peninsula. The reason for this was because Rome had committed much of her veteran troops to Numidia, they were unprepared by another Gaullic invasion from the north (though this invasion was nowhere near as devastating as one of the earlier invasions). He also delves into how Jugurtha would bribe his opponents to leave him alone and also how he would use intrigue to set elements of the Roman Senate against each other. However, in the end, Jugurtha was defeated by the Consul Marius (who was elected into the position seven times, but died during his seventh year). Reporting to Marius was Sulla, a man who was to become quite important as cracks began to appear in the Republic.

The Conspiracy of Cataline is basically about a spoilt rich kid. It is clear from the text that Cataline was never consul material. He just kept on getting himself into trouble, and the one time he almost got elected, he lost by the narrowest of margins. Instead of simply accepting the vote he stormed off in a rage and began to raise an army to forcefully take the position. When considering people like Cataline, it brings to mind modern politicians like Richard Nixon and John Howard. Nixon lost by the narrowest of margins to Kennedy (and some suggest that Kennedy cheated), but waiting eight years was elected in a landslide. While not so similar to John Howard, as the news media said when he was finally defeated in 2007, that he was one of those politicians that would be elected when the time was right. If Nixon and Howard had thrown a tantrum like Cataline then it is highly unlikely that they would have come to the fore as they have. As for Al Gore, another modern politician who lost by a narrow margin, he went on to win a Nobel prize and an Oscar, two things Bush never achieved.

Sallust was a supporter of Julius Caeser, and after Caeser's assassination he retired to his country estate to become an author. I wonder if he expected that his writings would still be read by history buffs and taught in universities two thousand years after his death? Thucydidies wanted that to happen, but then I guess there were a lot of writers back then that dreamt of such a legacy. Out of all of the Roman Emperors, only Caeser and Marcus Aurelius obtained that distinction (most Emperors considered themselves authors). As for his history, we must remember that Sallust was writing from living memory. He experienced the conspiracy of Cataline, and was no doubt a young man during the Jugurthine War. However, looking back, it seems as if the devastation of the Jugurthine War that Sallust wrote about was quite minor for the Roman Empire went onto its greatest period subsequent to this, much in the same way that after losing her American Colonies, Britain then went on to rule the world.

[arbuz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Отличный стиль: выдержанный и ёмкий, можно даже сказать, монументальный. При этом довольно живописный, с философскими отступлениями дидактического характера и выразительными речами (очень напоминает Фукидида). Читать стоит хотя бы ради этих образцовых речей.

[D · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Their bodies a source of pleasure to them, their minds a burden"

An contemporary of Julius Caesar looks back at historical incidents that precipitated the fall of the Republic. The histories are short and focused on political maneuverings and moral decline. The semi-historical speeches are particularly a fascinating to read including the dueling arguments of Cato and Caesar on how to handle Catiline. Less famous but more stirring is Marius' attack on the patricians.

Thanks to Cicero (barely mentioned by Sallust) the Catiline Conspiracy is known to contemporary readers with a passing interest in the ancient world. The Jugurthine war, although more obscure, is more interesting. Far from just the story of some ancient imperial conquest, its at the heart of the Republic's decline. Jugurtha came to Rome multiple times, bribed the Senate, and was later appeared before them but was able to avoid testifying. Initial Roman military failures against him fanned the flames of class hatred. Marius and Sulla, the two whose competition for power would set off years of civil war, served together against Jugurtha. Both used their actions in the war to rise to greater prominence. Sallust, far closer to the events than any other surviving historian, brings all this to life. His histories are a short excellent way to come face to face with the world of the late Roman Republic.

[Literati · Rating 3 out of 5]

Sallust is an incredibly biased historian- which makes these two accounts very interesting, as he intersperses his critiques of the Optimates, Sulla and Cato throughout. At the same time, he eludes the level of detail that Caesar and Suetonius were known for. The Jugurthine part was quite interesting- a classic issue of betrayal and greed, and also the rise of Marius. Catiline- not so much. Much less formally written. It is rather funny to think that Catiline started a revolt because he was in so much debt, and all the other broke guys joined in as well. Not exactly ideologues.

[Koeneman · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a translation from two book of Sallust (Roman politician and historian). These include “The war on Catilina” and “The war against Jugurtha”. Both stories are fascinating but especialy the first one.

Sallust was alive at the time and may have been a spectator in some moments of the Catilinarian conspiracy.

In this book you have the left page with the original Latin sentences and to the right the modern translation.

Overall a nice book to have. I got the pocket edition what is very easy to take everywhere.

[Madame Onyl]

Only read the conspiracy of cat

[Iulia · Rating 4 out of 5]

would've been five stars if caesar didn't yap 🥰

[Cassiopée · Rating 4 out of 5]

«Aujourd'hui, au contraire, les derniers des lâches commettent le crime inexpiable d'arracher à nos alliés ce que les vainqueurs héroïques de jadis leur avaient laissé : comme si pratiquer l'injustice était l'unique moyen de faire acte d'autorité.»

[Tristan Timms · Rating 4 out of 5]

Had to read for my course but ended up really enjoying it. Sallust’s prose is sharp and his analysis incredibly enduring despite it being written 2000 years ago.

[Roz · Rating 4 out of 5]

The last years of the Roman Republic were a pretty wild time. Casear was running his army through Gaul, Pompey was battling out in the East and at home, there was discontent and riots. Two of the most interesting moments care rather early in the late period and were both covered by the same author in two short monographs.

Sallust was a senator and governor in these years. According to legend, he was wildly corrupt and made a killing before being asked to resign, when he retired to a private life of writing histories. Two of these have come down to us: one looks at the short war against Jurgantha, the other examines Cataline’s conspiracy to bring down the government in a coup. I can’t speak to Sallust the politician, but as an author, he’s an interesting one, if one that’s problematic.

Let’s start with the Jugurthine War. Jugurtha was a king in what’s now northern Africa and an ally to Rome, although someone who wanted power, which Rome wasn't willing to give. He bribed people in the senate to overlook his naked power grabs as he marched up and down the country. He eventually ended up killing Romans and pissing off the republic, who sent an army down to deal with him. Sallust’s timeline isn’t exactly clear, but he generally follows as both Quintus Caecilius Metellus and Gaius Marius ran consecutive campaigns against him.

It’s pitched stuff. Roman armies come close to defeat, but pull out a win at the last moment. Roman leaders corrupt Jugurtha’s confidents, who then stage plots to kidnap and sell their king to Rome. Marius captures a city when a foot solider discovers an overlooked path that leads right around the strongholds. Finally, there’s an all-or-nothing battle where Jugurtha throws it all on the line and loses.

Meanwhile, the Catiline conspiracy is shorter, but even crazier. Catiline was “an ambitious careerist,” as Hardford puts it, who eventually decided he should rule Rome. After losing elections and seeing his enemy Cicero be elected to power, Catiline staged a conspiracy to put together an army and take Rome by force.

It wasn’t really all that crazy. At the time, Roman generals commanded a lot of personal power with their armies, who looked to them for everything from pay to a plot of land when they retired. And at the time, Pompey and his army were out in the far east.

In Sallust’s hands, it plays out like a morality play. Catiline corrupts people with his wealth and attracts all sorts of undesirables. Meanwhile, the upstanding leaders in Rome – Cicero, Cato and Caesar – investigate like detectives, debate appropriate punishments and set up resistance. Coming from a guy who was legendarily corrupt himself, seeing such moralizing is kind of funny. Although again: Sallust is great at setting tension and building a gripping narrative.

Here’s where the trouble comes in: he’s often confusing and misleading in his storytelling. At worst, he’s outright malicious and disingenuous. He places events where they have more dramatic impact, not when they actually happened. He gives people cool dramatic dialogue – “I will check the fire that threatens to consume me by pulling down everything about your ears.” – but provides it at the wrong time (and, according to Cicero, gives us the wrong words, too!).

This is where a good editor like the late S.A. Handford comes in handy: he establishes the misleading errors, provides context and lays out a clear timeline in two introductions and keeps the taut, dramatic narrative intact. Even if Sallust wasn’t an accurate historian, he was still a pretty solid writer, although I’d rank him in a second class behind Livy or Tacitus.

[Gijs Grob · Rating 4 out of 5]

Gelezen in de Nederlandse vertaling van Vincent Hunink

Rome in verval - De samenzwering van Catilina
Geschiedschrijving van de dramatische samenzwering van de gewetenloze senator Catilina, die in 63 v. Chr. de macht wil grijpen, maar wiens opstand door consul Cicero verijdeld wordt.

Het geheel begint nogal warrig (door gebrek aan context en een enorme hoeveelheid namen), maar krijgt gaandeweg momentum om dramatisch te eindigen met twee meeslepende (door Sallustius zelf verzonnen) redevoeringen van Caesar en Cato, de terechtstelling van enkele medeplichtigen en de eindstrijd tot de dood van Catilina en zijn overgebleven legertje tegen de Romeinse troepen.

Sallustius schrijft vrij objectief (de slechteriken zijn niet geheel slecht, de 'goeien' niet per se puur goed; als hij vindt dat iets slechts een gerucht is, zegt hij dat ook), maar ook meeslepend en soms zelfs romantiserend. Zo worden hele toespraken opgetekend, hoewel het zonneklaar is dat de schrijver er zelf niet bij was.

Ook valt er een moralistisch-pessimistische toon te bespeuren. Sallustius is duidelijk niet onder de indruk van de mores van zijn tijd en ziet in de samenzwering een uitstekend voorbeeld van het verval dat zijn Rome beleefde. Vandaar de door de vertaler toegevoegde titel 'Rome in verval'.


Rome in verval - De oorlog tegen Jugurtha
De geschiedenis van de oorlogen van de Romeinen tegen de Numidische (Noordwest-Afrikaanse) koning Jugurtha (112-106 v. Chr.) die lafhartig zijn halfbroers vermoordt, het Numidische koninkrijk claimt en als geniaal strateeg het de naar Noord-Afrika gezonden Romeinse legioenen, onder leiding van de briljante generaal Metellus en de ambitieuze consul Marius, knap lastig maakt. Uiteindelijk wordt hij verraderlijk ten val gebracht, waarna de geschiedenis abrupt ophoudt en in tegenstelling to 'De Samenzwering van Catilina' dus met een sisser afloopt.

Maar verder is deze geschiedenis is levendiger, spannender en begrijpelijker dan die van 'De samenzwering van Catilina'. Waarschijnlijk door de onbekendheid van Numidië en omdat het een wat oudere geschiedenis betreft geeft Sallustius zijn Romeinse lezers veel meer context en achtergrondinformatie, wat de begrijpelijkheid van de tekst zeer ten goede komt.

Alle karakters komen zeer rond uit de verf en hebben zowel goede als slechte eigenschappen. Sallustius' pessimisme over zelfverrijking van de Senaat en hun veronachtzaming van de belangen van de staat sijpelt geregeld door zijn relaas, maar het is duidelijk dat ten tijde van deze oorlogen het echte verval nog moet beginnen (een van de hoofdrolspelers, de militair Sulla, zal enkele jaren later de macht grijpen en als dictator een despotisch regime vestigen in Rome).

Al met al een zeer leesbaar relaas over een minder bekende episode uit de oudheid.

[Chris Wolfington · Rating 4 out of 5]

Sallust was an ancient Roman general and governor who sided with Julius Caesar in the Roman Civil Wars. This Loeb edition is conveniently small and contains the original Latin with an English translation on the opposite page.

This book contains the complete works of Sallust, which are:

The Jugurthine War-This was a minor and relatively unimportant war fought by the Romans against a king of the Numidians named Jugurtha. Jugurtha was a cruel and crafty monarch, and this story of his war is interesting due to the military tactics and stratagems employed on both sides. More importantly, the story highlights the decline of Roman morals during the beginning of the Late Republic; the transition into a monarchy was starting to take place, and Sallust shows us how corrupt Rome had become even at this early period. It also highlights the early careers of Caius Marius and Cornellius Sulla, two Romans who began a private feud during this war, and who later dragged it into state politics, helping to usher in Rome's first Civil War.

The Cataline Conspiracy-This takes place a generation after the Jugurthine War, when Roman politics has reached a new pitch of excitement. The Roman optimate Cataline conspires to destroy most of Rome and assume the dictatorship over what remains. His plot is revealed to Cicero, and the story follows Cicero's course in thwarting the conspiracy, while at the same time showing how Cataline tried to bring it to fruition. This moment in history shows what conditions the City of Rome was in shortly before Caesar's Civil War, and displays the personal energy and political shrewdness of Cicero, who was nicknamed "Founder of Rome" for his preservation of the city during this trying time.

Speeches-Sallust wrote another historical work on the first Civil War between Sulla and Marius, which unfortunately has not been fully preserved. However, Sallust was known for his oratory skills, and several speeches from this history have been preserved. They are specimens of fine oratory, and shine some light on the events of the period.

This is a fine book for anyone interested in human affairs. The stories and speeches are in themselves entertaining, but they also serve as valuable lessons on the corruption of morals, and on politics when law and order are threatened with destruction.

[Peregrino · Rating 3 out of 5]

Siendo uno de los grandes historiadores romanos, la lectura de Salustio se empequeñece ante la fuerza y la legitimidad de las crónicas de Julio César en su Guerra de las Galias. Salustio cuenta en este libro dos historias, una contemporánea a él, y la otra de oídas. Son curiosos los juicios morales que hace al principio de sus relatos, si se contrastan con su vida. Salustio se convierte en historiador después de haber intrigado y de haberse enriquecido en la vida política. No es una mala jubilación, y su contribución a la historia seguro que es muy notable, ya que sin sus escritos poco conoceríamos de los hechos que relata con mucho detalle. Pero sus juicios morales pierden algo de valor... Como historiador parece intentar ser neutral en su explicación de la Historia, cosa que no consigue.

En la Conjuración de Catilina nos explica sin mucha objetividad el peligro de revolución que supuso el oscuro personaje en el año 63 adC. La falta de escrúpulos le presta mucha modernidad a su narración, diferenciada, gracias a Dios, en lo que se refiere a la política moderna en nuestras democracias, en la no utilización de la violencia física para la consecución de los objetivos.

La Guerra de Yugurta pone de manifiesto el peligro que tiene el que las naciones civilizadas (y Roma era el parangón de la época), se apoyen en líderes locales, a los que forman militarmente y dan recursos. También suena a moderno o contemporáneo, desgraciadamente. Yugurta, rey namibio por asesinato que comete de sus hermanastros, utiliza su formación militar romana para erigirse en dictador de su país. Negocia, soborna, compra voluntades para ocultar sus intenciones, hasta que se ponen de manifiesto y no le queda más remedio que luchar contra sus patrones. Interesante la historia sobre Metelo y Mario, el gran demagogo que alcanzó el puesto de cónsul, que derrocó al primero, utilizando también los resortes del arribismo en Roma.

En fin, nos da la visión de un Senado corrupto, y una sociedad corrompida, caldo de cultivo para el cambio de régimen que en pocos años aconteció. ¿Un nuevo aviso para nuestros contemporáneos?

[Al · Rating 4 out of 5]

This Loeb edition is a good translation that flows well, which is a pleasant surprise since most Loebs are a labor to read. Sallust is one of the few good sources for Roman Republican history. This edition contains the War with Cataline; the War with Jugurtha; six orations and speeches from Sallust’s fragmentary Histories, and several pseudo-Sallustian works appended to the end. The War with Jugurtha was a bit tedious, although it illustrates how much the late Republic had changed and was continuing to change. Jugurtha finally realized that anything and anyone in Rome had a price. I think The War with Cataline is the best piece, as it moves along quickly and several passages have a modern applicability.

“Do not suppose that it was by arms that our forefathers raised our country from obscurity to greatness. If that were so, we should have a much fairer state than theirs, since we have a greater number of citizens and allies than they possessed…But there were other qualities which made them great, which we do not possess at all: efficiency at home, a just rule abroad, in counsel an independent spirit free from guilt and passion. In place of these we have extravagance and greed, public poverty and private opulence. We extol wealth and foster idleness. We make no distinction between good men and bad, and ambition appropriates all the prizes of merit.” (War with Cataline, 19-23)

I wish I had paid closer attention the first time I read this as a Classics major.

[Julian Meynell · Rating 3 out of 5]

I have been on an ancient historians bender recently. If we judge Sallust by the standards of his fellows he is clearly one of the weakest, but so far as I can see nothing bad managed to survive the dark ages to come down to us from ancient Greece or Rome. The book is worth reading as a result, but is hardly the place to start.

Really the book is two short monographs on two important, but not very important incidents in the history of the Roman Republic. One of these monographs is on the war with Jurgurtha which took place in Numidia and is a typical minor war of Roman expansion. The other is the shorter work on the Cataline conspiracy which is the superior of the two.

In both works Sallust is a better writer than a historian, but in the Cataline conspiracy he tells a better and more compelling tale. In both works Sallust sees the incidents as showing the decline of the Republic following its enrichment in the wake of the Second Punic War and the conquest of Greece and Macedonia. I do not think that Sallust is wrong in that, other than in the moral component that he inscribes to the actors, which like most ancient historians he saw in continual decline. I don't see that myself, but certainly Empire at first changed and then destroyed Republic government.

He is a decent writer. The Conspiracy of Cataline in particular is a good yarn, but its only for those who have my weird enjoyment of reading ancient historians.

[Luka Ekhvaia · Rating 3 out of 5]

This Book is mean for everyone who is addicted to the history of Roman Empire. Not withstanding that book is soaked with a lot of historical warrior and place names it's quite naive to navigate and become a part of it. You don't have to be the specialist of this field to comprehend the whole picture.

The Conspiracy of Cataline is much more focused on the internal politics and the nature of civil society, meanwhile The Jugurthine War is vastly concentrated on external politics and the art of war. But you will definitely acquire with philosophical and deeply political narratives which was guiding force at that times.

One more significant aspect in The Conspiracy of Cataline is how Sallust explains decay of civil society in Rome. For him the core reason for it was Rome's intention to become 'Imperialist' state. In other words, unleashed wars caused moral relativism, political putrefaction and the fetish of power. After Rome declared ambitions to rule the great territories civil society transformed and social capital started to vanish, commercialism enfolded social relations, trading become alluring activity and falseness shifted into the central value of society. This alternation is interesting to observe not only for historical retrospective but we can find out some similarities with modern imperialist states also.

[Nemo · Rating 3 out of 5]

With a few changes in names, the whole story of "The Jugurthine War" can perhaps be transplanted from 110 BC Rome to the 20th century, or any other period in history, when there are global/central super powers, local tyrants/warlords and puppet governments.

"The Conspiracy of Catiline" is a tale of political intrigue and class struggle instigated by lust-crazed individuals. It complements Cicero's account of the event in his orations "Against Cataline".

Sallust explains, from a rather cynical perspective, the cause and effect of historical events, and the motives of the individuals involved. He also makes interesting contrasts between political foes of the period: Gaius Marius and Sulla, the former an equestrian, known more for his military achievements than statesmanship, the latter a patrician who excels in both generalship and statesmanship, a forerunner of Julius Caesar, who in turn is contrasted with Cato the Younger, one generous and lenient and the other righteous and unrelenting.

[Erik Lind · Rating 5 out of 5]

"When the battle was over, it was plainly seen what boldness, and what energy of spirit, had prevailed throughout the army of Catiline; for, almost every where, every soldier, after yielding up his breath, covered with his corpse the spot which he had occupied when alive. A few, indeed, whom the prætorian cohort had dispersed, had fallen somewhat differently, but all with wounds in front. Catiline himself was found, far in advance of his men, among the dead bodies of the enemy; he was not quite breathless, and still expressed in his countenance the fierceness of spirit which he had shown during his life. Of his whole army, neither in the battle, nor in flight, was any free-born citizen made prisoner, for they had spared their own lives no more than those of the enemy."

Quo usque tandem abutere, Catilina, patientia nostra? quam diu etiam furor iste tuus nos eludet ? quem ad finem sese effrenata iactabit audacia?

[Aaron Crofut · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting read worth more than most textbooks on all of Rome. The Catiline Conspiracy has clear modern parallels to Occupy Wall Street, as does Rome's deteriorating republic and virtues, the ever present conflict between the rich and poor, though with some important differences (most important being how such divergence in wealth was created). The legitimacy of the movement, or of one similar, would be a great question to focus a class on, as would the legitimacy of Cicero's reaction.

The Jugurthine War is an excellent example of how Rome fought wars. They rather blundered into it, but once in were committed to the destruction of their foe, though not so much that diplomacy couldn't be employed to woo away the allies of Rome's enemies.

[Paul · Rating 4 out of 5]

A fascinating narrative of the war against the illegitimate son of King Micipsa of Numidia through the campaigns of Metellus & Marius....which eventually proved victorious for Rome....although Rome failed to include Numidia into the Republic until much later. This war occurred in the late stages of the Roman Republic prior to Caesar, and Sallust's account of this war clearly shows his opinions concerning the decline of the Republic. It is perhaps more of a commentary on the decline of Roman ethics than on the actual campaigns of the war, although they are both intertwined during the late Republic period. This was a wonderful snapshot of history and one of the few narratives of that particular time.