« PoprzedniaDalej »
Sagra, we can have no difficulty in recognising that river as the ancient Sagras; more especially as its situation accords perfectly with the topography of Strabo. (Cramer's Anc. Italy, vol. 2, p. 402.) SAGUNTUM or SAGUNtus, a city of Hispania Tarraconensis, north of Valentia, and some distance below the mouth of the Iberus. It was situate on a rising ground, about 1000 paces from the shore; Polybius (3, 17) says seven stadia, Pliny (3, 4) three miles. This place was said to have been founded by a colony from Zacynthus (Zákvvtoo, Xayovyroc, Saguntus), intermingled with Rutulians from Ardea. (Liv., 21, 7, 14.—Sul. Ital., 1, 291, &c.) It became at an early period the ally of the Romans (Polyb., 3, 30), and was besieged and taken by Hannibal previous to his march upon Italy. The siege lasted eight months, and, being an infraction of the treaty with the Romans, led at once to the second Punic war. Hannibal's object was to prevent the Romans retaining so important a place of arms, and so powerful an ally in a country from which he was about to depart. The desperate valour of the citizens, who chose to perish with all their effects rather than fall into the enemy's hands, deprived the conqueror of a great part of his anticipated spoils ; the booty, however, which he saved from this wreck, enabled him, by his liberalities, to gain the affection of his army, and to provide for the execution of his design against Italy. (Liv., 21, 8.— Mela, 2, 6–Diod. Sic., Eclog., 25, 5.—Sil. Ital., 13, 673.) Eight years after it was restored by the Romans. (Lit., 24, 42.—Plin., 3, 5.)—Saguntum was famous for the cups manufactured there. (Plin., 35, 12.-Martial, 4, 46, &c.) The modern Murriedro (a corruption of Muri veteres) marks the ancient city. (Mannert, Geogr., vol. 1, p. 428. — Ukert, Geogr., vol. 2, p. 415.) SAIs, a city of Egypt, situate in the Delta, between the Sebennytic and Canopic arms of the Nile, and nearly due west from the city of Sebennytus. It was not, indeed, the largest, but certainly the most famous and important city in its day of all those in the Delta of Egypt. This pre-eminence it owed, on the one hand, to the yearly festival celebrated here in honour of Neith, the Egyptian Minerva, to which a large concourse of spectators was accustomed to flock (Herod., 2, 59); and, on the other, to the circumstance of its being the native city, the capital, and the burying-place of the last dynasty of the Pharaohs. (Herod., 2, 169.) For the purpose of embellishing it, King Amasis built a splendid portico to the temple of Neith in this city, far surpassing all others, according to Herodotus, in circumference and elevation, as well as in the dimensions and quality of the stones: he also adorned the building with colossal statues, and the immense figures of Androsphinx. Herodotus likewise informs us, that a large block of stone, intended for a shrine, was brought hither from Elephantis. Two thousand men were employed three whole years in its transportation. The exterior length of the stone was twenty-one cubits, its breadth fourteen, and its height eight. The inside was eighteen cubits and twenty-eight digits in length, twelve cubits in breadth, and five in height. This remarkable edifice was placed by the entrance of the temple, it being found impossible, it would seem, to drag it within, although Herodotus assigns a differ. ent reason (2, 175).--When Egypt had fallen under the Persian power, Memphis became the new capital, and Sais was neglected. It did not, however, fall as low as the other cities of the Delta. Strabo, even in his days, acknowledges it to have been the chief city of Lower Egypt; he speaks also of a temple of Neith, and of the tomb of Psammitichus. In another passage, he remarks, that somewhat to the south of this city was a very sacred temple of Osiris, in which, according to tradition, that deity was buried. (Strab., 802.) Sais was also famous for its festival of lamps.
The modern Sa, with its ruins, marks the site of the ancient Sais.-This city must not be confounded with another more easterly, Sais, commonly called Tanis. (Mannert, Geogr., vol. 10, pt. 1, p. 561, seqq.)
SALĀMus, I. a daughter of the river Asopus by Methone. Neptune became enamoured of her, and carried her to an island of the AEgean, which afterward bore her name, and where she gave birth to a son called Cenchreus. (Diod. Suc., 4, 72.-Compare the remarks of Siebelis, ad Pausan., 1, 35, 2.)—II. An islland in the Sinus Saronicus, opposite Eleusis and the coast of Attica, and said to have derived its name from Salamis, mentioned in the preceding article. It was also anciently called Scyras and Cychrea, from the heroes Scyrus and Cychreus, and Pityussa from its abounding in firs. (Strab., 393.) It had been already celebrated in the earliest period of Grecian history from the colony of the AEacidae, who settled there before the siege of Troy. (Strab., l.c.) The possession of Salamis, as we learn from Strabo, was once obstinately contested by the Athenians and Megareans; and he affirms that both parties interpolated Homer, in order to prove from his poems that it had belonged to them. Having been occupied by Athens, it revolted to Megara, but was again conquered by Solon, or, according to some, by Pisistratus. (Plutarch, Vit. Solon.) From this period it appears to have been always subject to the Athenians. On the invasion of Xerxes, they were induced to remove thither with their families; in consequence of a prediction of the oracle, which pointed out this island as the scene of the defeat of their enemies (Herodotus, 8, 56); and, soon after, by the advice of Themistocles, the whole of the naval force of Greece was assembled in the Bay of Salamis. Meanwhile, the Persian fleet stationed at Phalerum held a council, in which it was determined to attack the Greeks, who were said to be planning their flight to the Isthmus. The Persian fleet accordingly were ordered to surround the island during the night, with a view of preventing their escape. In the morning, the Grecian galleys moved on to the attack, the AEginetans leading the van, seconded by the Athenians, who were opposed to the Phoenician ships, while the Peloponnesian squadron was engaged with the Ionians. The Persians were completely defeated, and retired in the greatest disorder to Phalerum; notwithstanding which, Xerxes is said to have made demonstrations of an intention to renew the action, and with that intent to have given orders for joining the island of Salamis to the continent by a mole. The following night, however, the whole of his fleet abandoned the coast of Attica, and withdrew to the Hellespont. (Herod., 8, 83.) A trophy was erected to commemorate this splendid victory on the isle of Salamis, near the temple of Diana, and opposite to Cynosura, where the strait is narrowest. Here it was seen by Pausanias (1,30), and some of its vestiges were observed by Sir W. Gell, who reports that it consisted of a column on a circular base. (Itin., p. 303.) Strabo informs us that the island contained two cities; the more ancient of the two, which was situated on the southern side, and opposite to AEgina, was deserted in his time. The other stood in a bay, formed by a neck of land which advanced towards Attica. (Strabo, 393.) Both were called by the same name with the island. Pausanias remarks, that the city of Salamis was destroyed by the Athenians, in consequence of its having surrendered to the Macedonians when the former people were at war with Cassander; there still remained, however, some ruins of the agora, and a temple dedicated to Ajax. Chandler states that the walls may still be traced, and appear to have been about sour miles in circumference (vol. 2, ch, 46– Compare Gell, Itin., p. 303).-Salamis, according to the Greek geographers, measured seventy or eighty stadia in length, or between nine and * Its
present name is Colouri, which is that also of the principal town. (Cramer's Anc. Greece, vol. 2, p. 364, seqq.)—III. A city in the island of Cyprus, situate about the middle of the eastern side. It was sounded by Teucer, son of Telamon, and called by him after Salamis, his native place, from which he had been banished by his father. (Horat, 1, 7, 21.) This city was the largest, strongest, and most important one in the island. (Duod. Sic., 14, 98.-Id, 16, 42.) Its harbour was secure, and protected against every wind, and sufficiently large to contain an entire fleet. (Scylar, p. 41. — Diod., 20, 21.) The monarchs of Salamis exercised a leading influence in the affairs of the island, and the conquest of this place involved the sate of Cyprus at large. (Diod, l. c. – Id., 12, 3.) Under the Roman dominion the entire eastern part of the island was attached to the jurisdiction of Salamis. The insurrection of the Jews in Trajan's reign brought with it the ruin of a great portion of the city (Euseb., Chron., ann. 19, Traj. — Oros., 7, 12); it did not, however, cause the entire downfall of Salamis, as it is still mentioned after this period by Ptolemy and in the Peutinger Table. In the reign of Constantine, however, an earthquake and inundation of the sea completed the downfall of the place, and a large portion of the inhabitants were buried beneath its ruins. (Cedrenus, ad ann. 29, Constant. Mag.—Malala, Chron., l. xii., Sub. Constantio Chloro.) Constantius-restored it, made it the capital of the whole island, and called it, from his own name, Constantia. (Hierocles, p. 706.) A few remains of this city still exist. (Pococke, 2, p. 313. — Mannert, Geogr., vol. 6, pt. 1, p. 572, seqq.) SALAPIA, a city of Apulia, near the coast, above the river Aufidius, and between that river and the Salapina Palus. According to Strabo, it was the emporium of Arpi: without such authority, however, we should have fixed upon Sipontum as answering that purpose better, from its greater proximity. (Strab.,282.) This town laid claim to a Grecian origin. The Rhodians, who early distinguished themselves by a spirit of enterprise in navigation, asserted, that, among other distant colonies, they had sounded, in conjunction with some Coans, a city named Salpia, on the Daunian coast. This account of Strabo's (654) seems confirmed by Vitruvius, who attributes the foundation of this settlement to a Rhodian chief named Elpias (I, 4.—Compare Meurs. in Rhod, 1, 18). It is probable, however, that Salapia was at first dependant upon the more powerful city of Arpi, and, like that city, it subsequently lost much of the peculiar character which belonged to the Greek colonies from its intercourse with the natives. We do not hear of Salapia in Roman history till the second Punic war, when it is represented as falling into the hands of the Carthaginians, aster the battle of Cannae (Liv., 24, 20); but, not long aster, it was delivered up to Marcellus by the party which favoured the Roman interest, together with the garrison which Hannibal had placed there. (Liry, 26, 28.) The Carthaginian general seems to have felt the loss of this town severely; and it was probably, the desire of revenge which prompted him, aster the death and defeat of Marcellus, to adopt the stratagem of sending letters, sealed with that commander's ring, to the magistrates of the town, in order to obtain admission with his troops. The Salapitani, however, being warned of his design, the attempt H. abortive. (Lir, 27, 28. —App., Han., 51.) he proximity of Salapia to the lake or marsh already mentioned, is said to have proved so injurious to the health of the inhabitants, that some years after these events they removed nearer the coast, where they built a new town, with the assistance of M. Hostilius, a Roman praetor, who caused a communication to be opened between the lake and the sea. Considerable remains of both towns are still standing, at some dis
tance from each other, under the name of Salpi, which confirms this account of Vitruvius (1, 4.—Compare Cicero, de Leg. Agr., 2. — Plin., 3, 11. – Cramer's Anc. Italy, vol. 2, p. 284). Salassi, a people of Gallia Cisalpina, in the northwestern angle of that country, and at the foot of the Alps. The main part of their territory lay chiefly, however, in a long valley, which reached to the summits of the Graian and Pennine Alps, the Little and Great St. Bernard. The passages over these mountains into Gaul were too important an object for the Romans not to make them anxious to secure them by the conquest of the Salassi. But these hardy mount: aineers, though attacked as early as 609 U.C., held out for a long time, and were not finally subdued till the reign of Augustus. Such was the difficult nature of their country, that they could easily intercept all communication through the valleys by occupying the heights. Strabo represents, them as carrying on a sort of predatory warfare, during which they seized and ransomed some distinguished Romans, and even ventured to plunder the baggage and military chest of Julius Caesar. Augustus caused their country at last to be occupied permanently by a large force under Terentius Varro. A large number of the Salassi perished in this last war, and the rest, to the number of 36,000, were sold and reduced to slavery. (Strabo, 205.—Dio Cass., 1, 53. – Oros., 5, 4.—Liv., Epit., 53.) A city was built on the ground occupied by Varro's camp, and Augustus honoured the rising colony by giving it the name of Augusta Praetoria, now Aosta. (Cramer's Anc. Italy, vol. 1, p. 49, seqq.) Sale NTiN1, a people of Italy, in the territory of Messapia. They cannot be distinguished with accuracy from the Calabri, as we find the former appellation used by several writers in a very extensive sense, and applied, not only to the greater part of Messapia or Iapygia, but even to districts entirely removed from it. Strabo himself confesses the difficulty of assigning any exact limits to these two people; and he contents himself with observing, that the country of the Salentini lay properly around the Iapygian promontory. (Strab., 277,281.) It was asserted that they were a colony of Cretans, who, under the conduct of Idomeneus their king, had arrived thither in their wanderings after the capture of Troy. (Virg., 32n., 3, 400.) The Romans, under pretence of their having assisted Pyrrhus in his expedition into Italy, soon after invaded the territory of this insignificant people, and had no difficulty in taking the few towns which they possessed. (Florus, 1, 20.—Lip., Epit., 15.) The Salentini subsequently revolted, during the second Punic war, but they were again reduced by the consul Claudius Nero. (Liv., 27, 36.)—It is probable that they derived their name from a town called Salentia, the existence of which is, however, only attested by Stephanus Byzantinus, who calls it a Messapian city (s. v. Xaževria). —The Salentinian promontory is the same with the Iapygian. (Cramer's Ancient Italy, vol. 2, p. 313.) Saler NUM, a city of Campania, southeast of Neapolis, and near the shore of the Sinus Paestanus. It was said to have been built by the Romans as a check upon the Picentini. It was not, therefore, like the modern town of Salerno, close to the sea, but on the height above, where considerable remains have been observed. (Clur., Ital. Antiq., vol. 2, p. 1189.-Romanelli, vol. 3, p. 612.) According to Livy, Salernum became a Roman colony seven years after the conclusion of the second Punic war (34, 45.—Well. Paterc., 1, 14).—Horace tells us, that the air of Sa lernum was recommended to him by his physician for a complaint in his eyes, (Cramer's Anc. Italy, vol. 2, p. 214, seqq.) Salii, I. a college of priests at Rome, instituted in honour of Mars, and appointed by Numa to take care was called praesul, who seems to have gone foremost in the procession; their principal musician, rates ; and he who admitted new inembers, magister. Their number was afterward doubled by Tullus Hostilius, after he had obtained a victory over the Fidenates, in consequence of a vow which he had made to Mars. The Salii were all of patrician families, and the office was very honourable. The 1st of March was the day in which the Salii observed their festival in honour of Mars. They were generally dressed in a short scarlet tunic, of which only the edges were seen ; they wore a largé purple-coloured belt above the waist, which was fastened with brass buckles. They had on their heads round bonnets with two corners standing up, in their right hand they carried a small rod, and in their left a small buckler, one of the ancilia, or shields of Mars. Lucan says that it hung from the neck. In the observation of their solemnity, they first offered sacrifices, and afterward went through the streets dancing in measured motions, sometimes all together, or at other times separately, while musical instruments were playing before them. Hence their name of Salii, from their moving along in solemn dance (Salii a salicmdo). They placed their body in different attitudes, and struck with their rods the shields which they held in their hands. They also sung hymns in honour of the gods, particularly of Mars, Juno, Venus, and Minerva, and they were accompanied in the chorus by a certain number of virgins, habited like themselves, and called Salia. We have in Varro a few fragments of the Salian hymns, which, even in the time of that writer, were scarcely intelligible. Thus, for example,
of the sacred shields called Ancilia, B.C. 709. (Wid. thority of Varro's treatise, Pius aut de Pace, informs Ancile.) They were twelve in number. Their chief us that he incurred this disgrace in consequence of an
“ Divum exta cante, Divum Deo supplice cante,”
i. e., Deorum exta canite, Deorum Deo (Jano) suppliciter canite ; and also the following:
“omnia dupatilia comisse jani custones duonus ceruses divius janusque remit,”
i. e., Omnia dapalia comedisse Jani Curiones. Bonus creator Dicus Janusque cenit.—Their feasts and entertainments were uncommonly sumptuous, whence dapes saliares is proverbially applied to such repasts as are most splendid and costly. (Liv., 1, 20.-Warro, L. L., 4, 15.—Ovid, Fast., 3,387.)—II. A German tribe of Frankish origin, whose original seat is not clearly ascertained. Wiarda makes it between the Silva Carbonaria (part of the forest of Ardennes) and the River Ligeris (Lys, in Brabant); Wersebe, however, in the vicinity of the Sala or Saale. They first made their appearance on the Insula Batavorum, where they were conquered by Julian ; afterward in the territory of the Chamavi, by the Mosa or Meuse. Mannert seeks to identify them with the Cherusci. (Amm. Marcell., 17, 8, seqq.–Zosim., 3, 6.) Sallustius, Crispus, a celebrated Latin historian, born at Amiternum, in the territory of the Sabines, in the year of Rome 668. He received his education in the latter city, and in his early youth appears to have been desirous to devote himself to literary pursuits. But it was not easy for one residing in the capital to escape the contagious desire of military or political distinction. He obtained the situation of quaestor, which entitled him to a seat in the senate, at the age of twenty-seven; and about six years afterward he was elected tribune of the commons. While in this office he attached himself to the fortunes of Caesar, and, along with one of his colleagues, conducted the rosecution against Milo for the murder of Clodius. n the year of the city 704, he was excluded from the senate on the pretext of immoral conduct, but more probably from the violence of the patrician party, to which i. was opposed. Aulus Gellius, on the au
intrigue with Fausta, the wife of Milo, who caused him to be scourged by his slaves. (N. A., 17, 18.) It has been doubted, however, by modern critics, whether it was the historian Sallust who was thus punished, or his nephew Crispus Sallustius, to whom Horace has addressed the second ode of the second book. It seems, indeed, unlikely that, in so corrupt an age, an amour with a woman of Fausta’s abandoned character should have been the real cause of his expulsion from the senate. After undergoing this ignominy, which, for the present, baffled all his hopes of preferment, he quitted Rome, and joined his patron, Caesar, in Gaul. He continued to follow the fortunes of that commander, and, in particular, bore a share in the expedition to Africa, where the scattered remains of Pompey's party had united. That region being finally subdued, Sallust was left by Caesar as praetor of Numidia; and about the same time married Terentia, the divorced wife of Cicero. He remained only a year in his government, but during that period enriched himself by despoiling the province. On his return to Rome he was accused by the Numidians, whom he had plundered, but escaped with impunity by means of the protection of Caesar, and was quietly permitted to betake himself to a luxurious retirement with his illgotten wealth. He chose for his favourite retreats a villa at Tibur, which had belonged to Caesar, and a magnificent palace, which he built in the suburbs of Rome, surrounded by delightful pleasure-grounds, afterward well known and celebrated by the name of the Gardens of Sallust. In these gardens, or his villa at Tibur, Sallust passed the concluding years of his life, dividing his time between literary avocations and the society of his friends; among whom he numbered Lucullus, Messala, and Cornelius Nepos. – Such being his friends and studies, it seems highly improbable that he indulged in that excessive libertinism which has been attributed to him, on the erroneous supposition that he was the Sallust mentioned by Horace in the first book of his Satires. The subject of Sallust's character is one which has excited some investigation and interest, and on which very different opinions have been formed. That he was a man of loose morals is evident; and it cannot be denied that he rapaciously plundered his province, like most Roman governors of the day. But it seems doubtful if he was that monster of iniquity he has been sometimes represented. He was extremely unfortunate in the first permanent notice taken of his character by his contemporaries. The decided enemy of Pompey and his faction, he had said of that celebrated chief, in his general history, that he was a man “oris probi, animo interecundo.” Lenaeus, the freedman of Pompey, avenged his master, by the most virulent abuse of his enemy (Suetonius, de Illustr. Gramm., 15), in a work which should rather be regarded as a srantic satire than an historical document. Of the injustice which he has done to the life of the historian, we may, in some degree, judge from what he says of him as an author. He calls him, as we farther learn from Suetonius, “Nebulonem rita scriptisgue monstrosum ; praeterea priscorum Catonisque ineruditissimum furen.” The life of Sallust, by Asconius Pedianus, which was written in the age of Augustus, and might have acted, at the present day,
as a corrective or palliative of the unfavourable impres
sion produced by this injurious libel, has unfortunately perished; and the next work on the subject now extant is a professed rhetorical declamation against the character of Sallust, which was given to the world in the name of Cicero, but was not written till long after the death of that orator, and is now generally assigned by critics to a rhetorician in the reign of Claudius, called Porcius Latro. The calumnies invented or exaggerated by Lenaeus, and propagated in the * theme of Porcius Latro, have been adopted by Le Clerc, prosessor of Hebrew at Amsterdam, and by Professor Meisner, of Prague, in their respective accounts of the life of Sallust. His character has received more justice from the prefatory memoir and notes of De Brosses, his French translator, and from the researches of Wieland in Germany.—From what is known of Fabius Pictor and his immediate successors, it must be apparent that the art of historic composition at Rome was in the lowest state, and that Sallust had no model to imitate among the writers of his own country. He therefore naturally recurred to the productions of the Greek historians. The native exuberance and loquacious familiarity of Herodotus were not adapted to his taste; and simplicity, such as that of Xenophon, is, of all things, the most difficult to attain; he therefore chiefly emulated Thucydides, and attempted to transplant into his own language the vigour and conciseness of the Greek historian; but the strict imitation with which he followed him has gone far to lessen the effect of his own original genius.-The first work of Sallust was the Conspiracy of Catiline. There exists, however, some doubt as to the precise period of its composition. The general opinion is, that it was written immediately after the author went out of office as tribune of the commons, that is, A.U.C. 703. And the composition of the Jugurthine War, as well as of his general history, is fixed by Le Clerc between that period and his appointment to the praetorship of Numidia. But others have supposed that they were all written during the space which intervened between his return from Numidia in 709, and his death, which happened in 718, four years previous to the battle of Actium. It is maintained by the supporters of this last idea, that he was too much engaged in political tumults previous to his administration of Numidia to have leisure for so important compositions; that, in the introduction to Catiline's Conspiracy, he talks of himself as withdrawn from public affairs, and refutes accusations of his voluptuous life, which were only applicable to this period; and that, while instituting the comparison between Caesar and Cato, he speaks of the existence and competition of these celebrated opponents as things that had passed over. —“Sed mea memoria, ingenti virtute, diversis moribus, fuere viri duo, Marcus Cato et Caius Caesar.” On this passage, too, Gibbon, in particular, argues, that such a flatterer and party tool as Sallust would not, during the life of Caesar, have put Cato so much on a level with him in the comparison. De Brosses argues with Le Clerc in thinking that the Conspiracy of Catiline at least must have been written inmediately after 703; as he would not, after his marriage with Terentia, have commemorated the disgrace of her sister, who, it seems, was the vestal virgin whose intrigue with Catiline is recorded by Sallust. But, whatever may be the case as to Catiline's Conspiracy, it is quite clear that the Jugurthine War was written subsequently to the author's residence in Numidia, which evidently suggested to him this theme, and af. forded him the means of collecting the information necessary for completing his work. —The subjects chosen by Sallust form two of the most important and prominent topics in the history of Rome. The periods, indeed, which he describes were painful, but they were interesting. Full of conspiracies, usurpations, and civil wars, they chiefly exhibit the ...Y rage and iniquity of imbittered factions, furious struggles between the patricians and plebeians, open corruption in the senate, venality in the courts of justice, and rapine in the provinces. This state of things, so forcibly painted by Sallust, produced the conspiracy, and, in some degree, the character of Catiline. But it was the oppressive debts of individuals, the temper of Sylla's soldiers, and the absence of Pompey with his army, which gave a possibility, and even a prospect,
of success to a plot which affected the vital existence of the commonwealth; and which, although arrested in its commencement, was one of those violent shocks which hasten the fall of a state—The History of the Jugurthine War, if not so imposing or menacing to the vital interests or immediate safety of Rome, exhibits a more extensive field of action, and a greater theatre of war. No prince, except Mithradates, gave so much employment to the arms of the Romans. In the course of no war in which they had ever been engaged, not even the second Carthaginian war, were the people more desponding, and in none were they more elated with ultimate success. Nothing can be more interesting than the accounts of the vicissitudes of this contest. The endless resources and hairbreadth escapes of Jugurtha; his levity; his fickle and faithless disposition, contrasted with the perseverance and prudence of the Roman commander Metellus, areak described in a manner the most vivid and picturesque. —Sallust had attained the age of twenty-two when the conspiracy of Catiline broke out, and was an eyewitness of the whole proceedings. He had, therefore, sufficient opportunity of recording with accuracy and truth the progress and termination of the conspiracy. Sallust has certainly acquired the praise of a veracious historian, and we do not know that he has been detected in falsifying any fact within the sphere of his knowledge. Indeed, there are few historical compositions of which the truth can be proved on such evidence as the conspiracy of Catiline. The facts detailed in the orations of Cicero, though differing in some minute particulars, coincide in everything of inportance, and highly contribute to illustrate and verify the work of our historian. But Sallust lived too near the period of which he treated, and was too much engaged in the political tumults of the day, to give a faithful account, unbiased by animosity or predilection; he could not have raised himself above all hopes, and fears, and prejudices, and therefore could not, in all their extent, have fulfilled the duties of an impartial writer. A contemporary historian of such turbulent times would be apt to exaggerate through adulation, or conceal through fear; to instil the precepts, not of the philosopher, but the partisan; and colour facts into harmony with his own system of patriotism or friendship. An obsequious follower of Caesar, he has been accused of a want of candour in varnishing over the views of his patron ; yet it is hard to believe that Caesar was deeply engaged in the conspiracy of Catiline, or that a person of his prudence should have leagued with such rash associates, or followed so desperate an adventurer. But the chief objection urged against his impartiality is the feeble and apparently reluctant commendation he bestowed on Cicero, who is now acknowledged to have been the principal actor in detecting and frustrating the conspiracy. Though fond of displaying has talents in drawing characters, he exercises none of it on Cicero, whom he merely terms “homo egregius et optumus consul,” which was but cold applause for one who had saved the commonwealth. It is true, that, in the early part of the history, praise, though sparingly bestowed, is not absolutely withheld. The election of Cicero to the consulship is fairly attributed to the high opinion entertained of his talents and capacity, which overcame the disadvantages of obscure birth. The mode adopted of gaining over one of the accomplices, and for fixing his own wavering and disaffected colleague, the dexterity manifested in seizing the Allobrogian deputies with the letters, and the irresistible effect produced by confronting them with the con spirators, are attributed exclusively to Cicero. It is in the conclusion of the business that the historian withholds from him his due share of applause, and contrives to eclipse him by always interposing the character of Cato, though it could not be unknown to any witness of these transactions that Cato himself and other senators publicly hailed the consul as the father of his country; and that a public thanksgiving to the gods was decreed in his name, for having preserved the city from conflagration, and the citizens from massacre. This omission, which may have originated partly in enmity, and partly in disgust at the ill-disguised vanity of the consul, has in all times been regarded as the chief defect, and even stain, in the history of the Catilinarian Conspiracy.—Although not an eyewitness of the war with Jugurtha, Sallust's situation as praetor of Numidia, which suggested the composition, was favourable to the authority of the work, by affording opportunity of collecting materials, and procuring information. He examined into the different accounts, written as well as traditionary, concerning the history of Africa, particularly the documents preserved in the archives of King Hiempsal, which he caused to be translated for his own use, and which proved peculiar. ly serviceable in the detailed account which he has given of the inhabitants of Africa. In this history he has been accused of showing an undue partiality towards the character of Marius; and of giving, for the sake of his favourite leader, an unfair account of the massacre at Vacca. But he appears to do even more than ample justice to Metellus, since he represents the war as almost finished by him previous to the arrival of Marius, though it was, in fact, far from being concluded.—Sallust evidently regarded a fine style as one of the chief merits of an historical work. The style on which he took so much pains was carefully formed on that of Thucydides, whose manner of writing was, in a great measure, original, and, till the time of Sallust, peculiar to himself. The Roman has wonderfully succeeded in imitating the vigour and conciseness of the Greek historian, and infusing into his composition something of that dignified austerity which distinguishes the work of his great model; but when we say that Sallust has imitated the conciseness of Thucydides, we mean the rapid and compressed manner in which his narrative is conducted; in short, brevity of idea rather than of language. For Thucydides, although he brings forward only the principal idea, and discards what is collateral, yet frequently employs long and involved periods. Sallust, on the other hand, is abrupt and sententious, and is generally considered as having carried this sort of brevity to a vicious excess. The use of copulatives, either for the purposes of connecting his sentences with each other, or uniting the clauses of the same scntence, is in a great measure rejected. This produces a monotonous effect, and a total want of that flow and variety which is the principal charm of the historic period. Seneca accordingly (Epist., 114) talks of the “Amputate sententia, et verba ante crpectatum cadentia,” which the practice of Sallust had succeeded in rendering fashionable. It was, perhaps, partly in imitation of Thucydides that Sallust introduced into his history a number of words almost considered as obsolete, and which were selected from the works of the older authors of Rome, particularly Cato the censor. It is on this point he has been chiefly attacked by Pollio, in his letters to Plancus. He has also been taxed with the opposite vice, of coining new words, and introducing Greek idioms; but the severity of judgment which led him to imitate the ancient and austere dignity of style, made him reject those sparkling ornaments of composition which were beginning to infect the Roman taste, in consequence of the increasing popularity of the rhetorical schools of declamation, and the more frequent intercourse with Asia. On the whole, in the style of Sallust, there is too much appearance of study, and a want ef that graceful ease, which is generally the effect of art, but in which art is nowhere discovered.—Of all the departments of history, the delineation of character is the most trying to the temper and impartiality of the 7 I.
writer, more especially when he has been contemporary with the individuals he portrays, and in some degree engaged in the transactions he records. Five or six of the characters drawn by Sallust have in all ages been regarded as master-pieces. He has seized the delicate shades, as well as the prominent features, and thrown over them the most lively and appropriate colouring. Those of the two principal actors in his tragic histories are forcibly given, and prepare us for the incidents which follow. The portrait drawn of Catiline conveys a lively notion of his mind and person, while the parallel drawn between Cato and Caesar is one of the most celebrated passages in the history of the conspiracy. Of both these famed opponents we are presented with favourable likenesses. Their defects are thrown into the shade; and the bright qualities of each different species by which they were distinguished, are contrasted for the purpose of showing the various qualities by which men arrive at eminence. The introductory sketch of the genius and manners of Jugurtha is no less able and spirited than the character of Catiline. The portraits of the other principal characters who figured in the Jugurthine war are also well brought out. That of Marius, in particular, is happily touched. His insatiable ambition is artsully disguised under the mask of patriotisin; his cupidity and avarice are concealed under that of martial simplicity and hardihood; but, though we know, from his subsequent career, the hypocrisy of his pretensions, the character of Marius is presented to us in a more favourable light than that in which it can be viewed on a survey of his whole life. We see the blunt and gallant soldier, and not that savage whose innate cruelty of soul was first about to burst forth for the destruction of his countrymen. In drawing the portrait of Sylla, the memorable rival of Marius, the historian represents him also such as he appeared at that period, not such as he afterward proved himself to be. We behold him with pleasure as an accomplished and subtle commander, eloquent in speech and versatile in resources; but there is no trace of the cold-blooded assassin, the tyrant, and usurper.—History, in its original state, was confined to narrative ; the reader being left to form his own reflections on the deeds or events recorded. The historic art, however, conveys not complete satisfaction, unless these actions be connected with their causes—the political springs or private passions in which they originated. It is the business, therefore, of the historian, to apply the conclusions of the politician in explaining the causes and effects of the transactions he relates. These transactions the author must receive from authentic monuments or records, but the remasks deduced from them must be the offspring of his own ingenuity. The reflections with which Sallust introduces his narrative, and those he draws from it, are so just and numerous, that he has by some been considered the father of philosophic history. It must always, however, be remembered, that the proper subject of history is the detail of national transactions ; that whatever forms not a part of the narrative is episodical, and therefore improper, if it be too long, and do not grow naturally out of the subject. Now some of the political and moral digressions of Sallust are neither very immediately connected with his subject nor very obviously suggested by the narration. The discursive nature and inordinate length of the introduction to his histories have been strongly objected to. The first four sections of Catiline's 8. have indeed little relation to the topic. They might as well have been prefixed to any other history, and much better to a moral or philosophic treatise. In fact, a considerable part of them, descanting on the fleeting nature of wealth and beauty, and all such adventitious possessions, are borrowed from the second oration of Isocrates. Perhaps the eight following sections are also * to the