What do you think?
Rate this book
The Jugurthine War
The Roman historian C. Sallustius Crispus, better known as Sallust, decided to write about the war against the Numidian king Jugurtha, 'because it was a long and cruel struggle in which fortune swung from side to side; and secondly, because it was then for the first time that a stand was taken against the arrogance of the nobles'.
290 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 64
11 people are currently reading
142 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews
September 13, 2023
The War of Jugurtha
By Sallust (86 to 35 BC)
“Jugurtha” is Solluste’s second work of History.
Events took place in Numidia (now Algeria) in North Africa in the years from 111 to 105 BC.
The story is fiction in detail but historical in background.
Jugurtha was the son of King Micipsa’s brother who had died when Jugurtha was still a child.
King Micipsa adopted the boy and raised him together with his sons, and they grew up together like brothers.
It soon became apparent that Jugurtha was superior in every way, physically and mentally to the King’s natural sons, and the King realized the danger for his sons after his death.
He sent Jugurtha to Rome to join the Roman army at some point of conflict with the secret hope that he would get killed there. But this did not turn out as the King had hoped. The opposite happened. Roman Generals trained Jugurtha, and he soon became a valuable soldier and officer himself.
After King Micipsa died, events quickly exceeded his worst nightmares.
Jugurtha, the now rogue prince, returned to Numidia and claimed the throne for himself. He had Hlempsal, Micipsa’s younger son, murdered and threatened the older one Adherbal, with the same fate. Adherbal could escape and turn to the Roman Senate for help. The Senate, after lengthy hesitations, could not refuse help to the rightful prince and heir to the throne.
And so, Rome, little by little, got engaged in a war against Jugurtha, which was to last several years. Jugurtha turned out to be a superior general to several Roman opponents and turned many battles to his advantage. Roman armies, over several years, lost precious lives and armaments.
The author provides the reader with insight into Roman politics, explaining how Marius, a commoner, had gained the unlikely position of Consul. This promotion and his limitless ambition made Marius replace a complacent Metellus who had been unsuccessfully fighting Jugurtha in Numidia.
Sallust’s vivid descriptions of battles, intrigues and treasons are superior to many other classic or even modern writers.
Leading Jugurtha into a trap, killing his numerous bodyguards, and laying chains on him, is the result of treason. Bocchus, King of Mauretania and Jugurtha’s associate arranged the fateful meeting.
Sylla, at the time still only an officer, dispatched by Marius, was the decisive link to Bocchus.
Sylla, in this arrangement, risked his life as it was uncertain, up to the last minute, who would be victorious and who would be the other’s prisoner.
Bocchus was known to change his mind often and swiftly.
This work is a ‘must-read’ for any readers of Latin classic literature.
It is on the level of “War of the Gauls” by Julius Caesar.
By Sallust (86 to 35 BC)
“Jugurtha” is Solluste’s second work of History.
Events took place in Numidia (now Algeria) in North Africa in the years from 111 to 105 BC.
The story is fiction in detail but historical in background.
Jugurtha was the son of King Micipsa’s brother who had died when Jugurtha was still a child.
King Micipsa adopted the boy and raised him together with his sons, and they grew up together like brothers.
It soon became apparent that Jugurtha was superior in every way, physically and mentally to the King’s natural sons, and the King realized the danger for his sons after his death.
He sent Jugurtha to Rome to join the Roman army at some point of conflict with the secret hope that he would get killed there. But this did not turn out as the King had hoped. The opposite happened. Roman Generals trained Jugurtha, and he soon became a valuable soldier and officer himself.
After King Micipsa died, events quickly exceeded his worst nightmares.
Jugurtha, the now rogue prince, returned to Numidia and claimed the throne for himself. He had Hlempsal, Micipsa’s younger son, murdered and threatened the older one Adherbal, with the same fate. Adherbal could escape and turn to the Roman Senate for help. The Senate, after lengthy hesitations, could not refuse help to the rightful prince and heir to the throne.
And so, Rome, little by little, got engaged in a war against Jugurtha, which was to last several years. Jugurtha turned out to be a superior general to several Roman opponents and turned many battles to his advantage. Roman armies, over several years, lost precious lives and armaments.
The author provides the reader with insight into Roman politics, explaining how Marius, a commoner, had gained the unlikely position of Consul. This promotion and his limitless ambition made Marius replace a complacent Metellus who had been unsuccessfully fighting Jugurtha in Numidia.
Sallust’s vivid descriptions of battles, intrigues and treasons are superior to many other classic or even modern writers.
Leading Jugurtha into a trap, killing his numerous bodyguards, and laying chains on him, is the result of treason. Bocchus, King of Mauretania and Jugurtha’s associate arranged the fateful meeting.
Sylla, at the time still only an officer, dispatched by Marius, was the decisive link to Bocchus.
Sylla, in this arrangement, risked his life as it was uncertain, up to the last minute, who would be victorious and who would be the other’s prisoner.
Bocchus was known to change his mind often and swiftly.
This work is a ‘must-read’ for any readers of Latin classic literature.
It is on the level of “War of the Gauls” by Julius Caesar.
March 14, 2024
The War of Jugurtha
By Sallust (86 to 35 BC)
“Jugurtha” is Solluste’s second work of History.
Events took place in Numidia (now Algeria) in North Africa in the years from 111 to 105 BC.
The story is fiction in detail but historical in background.
Jugurtha was the son of King Micipsa’s brother who had died when Jugurtha was still a child.
King Micipsa adopted the boy and raised him together with his sons, and they grew up together like brothers.
It soon became apparent that Jugurtha was superior in every way, physically and mentally to the King’s natural sons, and the King realized the danger for his sons after his death.
He sent Jugurtha to Rome to join the Roman army at some point of conflict with the secret hope that he would get killed there. But this did not turn out as the King had hoped. The opposite happened. Roman Generals trained Jugurtha, and he soon became a valuable soldier and officer himself.
After King Micipsa died, events quickly exceeded his worst nightmares.
Jugurtha, the now rogue prince, returned to Numidia and claimed the throne for himself. He had Hlempsal, Micipsa’s younger son, murdered and threatened the older one Adherbal, with the same fate. Adherbal could escape and turn to the Roman Senate for help. The Senate, after lengthy hesitations, could not refuse help to the rightful prince and heir to the throne.
And so, Rome, little by little, got engaged in a war against Jugurtha, which was to last several years. Jugurtha turned out to be a superior general to several Roman opponents and turned many battles to his advantage. Roman armies, over several years, lost precious lives and armaments.
The author provides the reader with insight into Roman politics, explaining how Marius, a commoner, had gained the unlikely position of Consul. This promotion and his limitless ambition made Marius replace a complacent Metellus who had been unsuccessfully fighting Jugurtha in Numidia.
Sallust’s vivid descriptions of battles, intrigues and treasons are superior to many other classic or even modern writers.
By Sallust (86 to 35 BC)
“Jugurtha” is Solluste’s second work of History.
Events took place in Numidia (now Algeria) in North Africa in the years from 111 to 105 BC.
The story is fiction in detail but historical in background.
Jugurtha was the son of King Micipsa’s brother who had died when Jugurtha was still a child.
King Micipsa adopted the boy and raised him together with his sons, and they grew up together like brothers.
It soon became apparent that Jugurtha was superior in every way, physically and mentally to the King’s natural sons, and the King realized the danger for his sons after his death.
He sent Jugurtha to Rome to join the Roman army at some point of conflict with the secret hope that he would get killed there. But this did not turn out as the King had hoped. The opposite happened. Roman Generals trained Jugurtha, and he soon became a valuable soldier and officer himself.
After King Micipsa died, events quickly exceeded his worst nightmares.
Jugurtha, the now rogue prince, returned to Numidia and claimed the throne for himself. He had Hlempsal, Micipsa’s younger son, murdered and threatened the older one Adherbal, with the same fate. Adherbal could escape and turn to the Roman Senate for help. The Senate, after lengthy hesitations, could not refuse help to the rightful prince and heir to the throne.
And so, Rome, little by little, got engaged in a war against Jugurtha, which was to last several years. Jugurtha turned out to be a superior general to several Roman opponents and turned many battles to his advantage. Roman armies, over several years, lost precious lives and armaments.
The author provides the reader with insight into Roman politics, explaining how Marius, a commoner, had gained the unlikely position of Consul. This promotion and his limitless ambition made Marius replace a complacent Metellus who had been unsuccessfully fighting Jugurtha in Numidia.
Sallust’s vivid descriptions of battles, intrigues and treasons are superior to many other classic or even modern writers.
December 4, 2022
Sallust has a knack for a great turn of phrase here and there. It's easy to see how this book got preserved until now.
There were some spots where the selections made by the editor seemed odd to modern taste--or at least mine. In one spot the editor skipped a part where there was some bribery going on. That choice blew my mind, though I think I was reading an older edition than this one.
There were some spots where the selections made by the editor seemed odd to modern taste--or at least mine. In one spot the editor skipped a part where there was some bribery going on. That choice blew my mind, though I think I was reading an older edition than this one.
December 11, 2024
7,5/10 Meravellós! Una època fascinant, on l'autor aprofita un episodi menor de l'expansió de Roma a l'Àfrica per relatar les lluites intestines entre els "optimates" (noblesa) i els reformadors (populars). L'autor és afí a Cèsar i a la causa popular i se l'hi pot atribuir un biaix partidista, malgrat que es fa palès el seu desencís, tant amb els nobles com amb la plebs. Sal•lusti es pot considerar un dels grans historiadors de Roma, malgrat ser poc curós amb les dates. Tant de bo més clàssics de Roma en català!
March 7, 2010
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.
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.
February 10, 2007
Edición bilingüe en latín para mis estudios de la facultad. Farragoso, partidista... Desde luego, no figuraría entre mis clásicos. No obstante, está bien escrito, y hay momentos en que alcanza altura narrativa.
December 11, 2014
Història entretinguda de la guerra entre la República i el númida Jugurta, l'únic error del qual va ser no aconseguir comprar Roma per segona vegada. "Ciutat venal, que no trigarà a desaparèixer, si troba comprador!"
May 28, 2019
Me impresionan los finales tan repentinos de Salustio. Cuatro estrellas y no cinco porque no puede no decirme qué pasó al final con Yugurta.
This entire review has been hidden because of spoilers.
December 1, 2025
This is not my favorite story from history, but it is my favorite collection of a story from history. The author knows exactly when to stop making his point and move on and he never gets stuck overindulging in context. Modern authors will take a two-year period and stretch it into hundreds of pages, giving you context you did not need and forcing their interpretations on you. They will take firsthand accounts and try to cross-reference them with modern ideas of what they think actually happened, turning what should be a narrative or a historical recollection into something between an opinion piece and a pile of facts that do not connect. This book does not do that. It balances cultural context with getting straight to the story. History is created by great men and this telling of history understands that. It does not linger on unnecessary details and focuses on the actions and prerogatives of men who are trying to change their lives and their world. When an author is honest about this and does not try to attach new age philosophy onto the past, it makes for an incredible recollection.
Read
March 20, 2023Um gripe mordaz me acometeu nesses últimos dias e junto ao roupão e o chá Salústio me acompanhou.
Infelizmente tenho acompanhado política e notado o feira de interesses e vaidades que se tornou nossa república e reparei na leitura quão semelhante é ao da romana. Salústio, aqui e em Catlina, é o melhor a escancarar isso sendo o próprio também (dizem as fontes) igualmente corrupto.
A guerra Jugurtina é menos a história de um distúrbio de uma colônia africana que a utilização propagandística de um escândalo. A mensagem do livro é: podres de corruptos são os nobres e seu partido que confia no sangue enquanto nós, do partido plebeu, somos nobres verdadeiros porque nós apoiamos na virtude tal qual Mário (por coincidência tio do meu amigo-modelo Júlio César).
O livro tem várias citações famosas embora ainda prefira a “Conjuração de Catilina”.
Infelizmente tenho acompanhado política e notado o feira de interesses e vaidades que se tornou nossa república e reparei na leitura quão semelhante é ao da romana. Salústio, aqui e em Catlina, é o melhor a escancarar isso sendo o próprio também (dizem as fontes) igualmente corrupto.
A guerra Jugurtina é menos a história de um distúrbio de uma colônia africana que a utilização propagandística de um escândalo. A mensagem do livro é: podres de corruptos são os nobres e seu partido que confia no sangue enquanto nós, do partido plebeu, somos nobres verdadeiros porque nós apoiamos na virtude tal qual Mário (por coincidência tio do meu amigo-modelo Júlio César).
O livro tem várias citações famosas embora ainda prefira a “Conjuração de Catilina”.
May 29, 2019
"Pero si, esclavo de sus pasiones, se abandona a la ociosidad y a los de- leites perniciosos, a poco que se engolfa en ellos y por su entorpecimiento se reconoce ya sin fuerzas, sin tiempo y sin facultades para nada"
September 4, 2023
Il fratello meno noto della famosissima Congiura di Catilina, forse meno iconico ma non meno interessante. Illuminante la prefazione che mostra come ogni fase della guerra sia dominata da un vizio differente che affligge la società romana del tempo.
April 23, 2023
mejor que la conjuracion de catilina, tiene más chispa, es más entretenido, termina abruptamente como todas las obras de la literatura latina
June 9, 2024
3 stelle su 5
Non male, ma ho preferito il racconto su Catilina. Questo l’ho trovato troppo lungo e noioso. Le descrizioni delle varie fasi della guerra sono soporifere e per nulla avvincenti.
Non male, ma ho preferito il racconto su Catilina. Questo l’ho trovato troppo lungo e noioso. Le descrizioni delle varie fasi della guerra sono soporifere e per nulla avvincenti.
May 8, 2025
Sallustio non è certamente tra i miei autori latini preferiti, questo perché mi risulta più pesante di chi per opinione comune viene reputato tale. Appare sua prosa che è a metà tra l'oratorio e il pratico riportare dei fatti preferisco gli stili diametralmente opposti di Cesare e Cicerone. Nonostante ciò ho ammirato la capacità analitica di Sallustio applicata agli eventi del II-I secolo a.C., specialmente come ha analizzato il contrasto tra patrizi e plebei e come ha presentato i personaggi di Mario e Silla.
Insomma, questo è stato un bellissimo trattato storico e non cedo l'ora di leggere il "De catilianae coniuratione"!
Insomma, questo è stato un bellissimo trattato storico e non cedo l'ora di leggere il "De catilianae coniuratione"!
May 21, 2023
Nekažnjeno, naime, činiti ono što se komu prohtije, to znači biti kraljem.
Displaying 1 - 16 of 16 reviews