Last updated 09/07/24: Online ordering is currently unavailable due to technical issues. We apologise for any delays responding to customers while we resolve this. For further updates please visit our website: https://www.cambridge.org/news-and-insights/technical-incident
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 February 2009
The Sallustian Suasoriae are far from being works whose origin and authenticity can be claimed as matters of earth-shaking importance. As forms of composition their interest is mild; linguistically they are less valuable than bizarre; and as historical records theysuffer from the defect of most Suasoriae—that the author cannot advise about the past and is compelled to deal chiefly with the potentialities of the future. But in spite of this it is not without reason that in Germany much attention has been paid to these few pages of Latin during the last twenty years. If they are what they seem to be, their evidence, such as it is, must at least be taken seriously. And this evidence is not without promise; for not only do these pieces contain several scraps of otherwise missing information largely about the prosopography of the last century B.C., but in general they purport to express the views of Sallust—a man who was no fool, even if his ability was not so great as has some-times been alleged—on the political and economic difficulties of Rome during the closing phase of the career of Julius Caesar. Material of this kind cannot lightly be neglected; but at the same time the significance, both of the author's suggestions and of his casual references to events inthe past, will depend to a great extent on the author having been Sallust himself, and not a member of some rhetor's establishment writing perhaps a hundred years or more after the events with which he pretends to be contemporary. So though there may be no welcome for yet another addition to the literature of a subject whose bibliography is already long, it may still be worth while to make some observations which will perhaps help to show that, wherever the true conclusion about the authenticity of these pamphlets may lie, at least it does not lie in the direction which has been taken in recent years by several scholars—in particular by Pöhlmann and Eduard Meyer.
page 87 note 1 Gerlach, Vol. II., p. 28; and Jordan, , Die Ueherlieferung der Rtden und Briefe aus Sallust's Historien, in Rhein. Mus. N.F. XVIII. (1863), pp. 584–593Google Scholar.
page 88 note 1 von Wölfflin never discussed this question in print so far as I am aware, but several times he declared his faith. Vide e.g. Archiv fur lat. Lex. und Gramm., Bd. XI., p. 31.
page 88 note 2 Norden himself has not published his views, but his attitude may be inferred without unfairness from two notes in Meyer, E., Caesars Monarchic (2), 1919. Vide pp. 5661 and 5872Google Scholar.
page 88 note 3 These works are arranged so far as possible under the years of their first publication; but in the absence in some cases of the first edition I have been compelled to rely occasionally on Zedler's Universallexicon, the accuracy of which is not above reproach.
page 90 note 1 J., Vide Cler. ap. Wasse, p. xxiGoogle Scholar.
page 90 note 2 It should be made clear that in this paper by ‘first Suasoria’ is meant the piece which stands first in V, though its dramatic date is later than that of the ‘second Suasoria’—the piece which stands second.
page 90 note 3 Meyer, p. 572.
page 90 note 4 For the death of Bibulus, vide the authorities cited by Münzer in Pauly-Wissowa, R.E. III., col. 1369.
page 90 note 5 Vide II. 6, 1, ‘agetur’; II. 7, 2, ‘adduxeris’.
page 90 note 6 Meyer, p. 360.
page 90 note 7 Ibid., p. 354.
page 90 note 8 C.I.L. I. (2) 600. Vide Gradenwitz, Bruns, Fontes Iuris Romani (7), p. 101Google Scholar.
page 90 note 9 Gebhardt, p. 22.
page 91 note 1 Vide I. 1, 8; 3, 1; 5, 1.
page 91 note 2 Meyer, p. 587.
page 91 note 3 Stoffel, Vide, Hist, de Jules Char, Guerre civile, Paris, 1887; II., pp. 151 and 436Google Scholar.
page 91 note 4 Jordan, p. 7.
page 91 note 5 See Ciacconius in Putschius, pp. 297 and 299.
page 91 note 6 I. 5, 1, satis dictum; 1, 9, utei dicant; 8, 8, disserere; 8, 10, a me quidem pro uirili parte dictum.
page 91 note 7 II. 2, 2, scripsi; 12, 1, perlectis litteris.
page 91 note 8 For ‘dicere’ of the written word in Sallust vide Bell. lug. 95, 2; and for ‘disserere,’ Bell. Cat. 5, 9.
page 91 note 9 Meyer, pp. 568–9.
page 91 note 10 Ap. Serv. ad Aen. VI. 623. Vide Serv. ed. Thilo and Hagen, Vol. II., p. 88 n.
page 91 note 11 Quintilian IV. 1, 68, and IX. 3, 89. These passages have often been treated as interpolations, but for no very cogent reasons.
page 92 note 1 Meyer, p. 587; Gebhardt, p. 9. If Norden's points are in any way misrepresented here I will apologize at once. The difficulty is due to the unfortunate brevity with which they are stated.
page 92 note 2 Gebhardt, p. 9.
page 92 note 3 Vide e.g. Suet. Diu. Iul. 44, 2.
page 92 note 4 Cichorius, C., Römische Studien, Leipzig, 1922, p. 228 sqqCrossRefGoogle Scholar.
page 92 note 5 Varro, R.R. I. 13, 7; III. 2, 16; 10, 1.
page 92 note 6 Gebhardt, p. 9.
page 93 note 1 Gebhardt, p. n sqq.
page 93 note 2 I.e. ‘published his own infamy’.
page 93 note 3 Asconius, p 84, Kiessling-Schoell; p. 94, Clark; p. 72, Stangl; p. 102, Giarratano: ‘Feruntur quoque orationes nomine illorum (C. and A.) editae, non ab ipsis scriptae sed ab Ciceronis obtrectatoribus; quasnescio an satius sit ignorare’.
page 93 note 4 Quintilian IX. 3, 94.
page 94 note 1 Meyer, p. 571.
page 94 note 2 Ibid., p. 587.
page 94 note 3 As the question of verisimilitude is not here to be discussed, it may not be amiss to call attention to the extraordinary translations by which Meyer produces some of his effects. Thus in I. 2, 5 the text gives ‘per idem tempus maledictis ineiquorum occupandae reipublicae in spem adducti homines, quibus omnia probro ac luxuria polluta erant,’ which Meyer renders (p. 584) ‘Zu derselben Zeit erregten die gehässigen Schmähungen gegen Dich, Du wollest Dich zum Herrn des Staats machen, Hoffnungen bei denen, deren ganzes Leben durch Schmach und Luxus be fleckt war.’ In reality ‘occupandae reipublicae’ clearly depends on ‘in spem.’ There is another mistranslation on the same page.
page 94 note 4 Maurenbrecher, B., C. Sallnsti Crispi Historiarum Reliquiae, Fasc. II., Lipsiae, 1893, Appendix II., p. 212sqqGoogle Scholar.
page 95 note 1 For the special use of asyndeton in these cases, Cicero, vide, Brutus, ed. EberhardtKroll, Jahn (5), Berlin, 1908, p. 155Google Scholar.
page 95 note 2 C., AhlbergSallusii Crispi Coniuratio Catilinae, Göteborg, 1911Google Scholar, and Teubner text, 1919. Vide also id. Prolegomena, p. 179 sq.
page 95 note 3 Constans, Vide, De sermone sallustiano (Paris, 1880), p. 250 sqGoogle Scholar. and von Wolfflin, Zum Asyndeion bei Sallust, in Archiv f. lat. Lex, utid Gramm. XI., p. 27 sqq.
page 95 note 4 E.g. ‘partam reliquerit gloriam,’ II. 11, 3.
page 95 note 5 Jordan, p. 29 sqq. For a not very forcible reply to some of his charges vide Hell wig, p. 9.
page 95 note 6 Kurfess, p. 28.
page 95 note 7 V reads ‘at herculem catonem.’ The choice seems to lie between the above, which is Mommsen's. and Orelli's ‘at hercule M. Catoni’.
page 96 note 1 Appian, Bella. Ciu. I. 95, 3.
page 96 note 2 Spandau, p. 21 sqq.
page 96 note 3 Pöhlmann, p. 39 sqq.
page 96 note 4 Unless ‘o Caesar’ in II. 13, 1, is counted an exception.
page 96 note 5 Bardt. col. 940.
page 96 note 6 I. 4, 1.
page 96 note 7 Meyer, p. 577 sq.
page 96 note 8 Ibid., p. 578 sq.
page 97 note 1 Vide Bell. lug. 53, 4; 58, 3; 76, 5; 103, Ep. Pomp. 4.
page 97 note 2 Meyer, p. 100.
page 97 note 3 Cicero, , pro Milone 14, 37Google Scholar.
page 97 note 4 Meyer, p. 578.
page 97 note 5 Rinkes, S. H., De Q. Asconii Pediani Commentariis emendandis; in Mnemosyne X. (1861), pp. 199–225Google Scholar. Vide p. 216 sq.
page 97 note 6 Clark, , Asconius, p. 32Google Scholar. Giarratano, , Asconius, p. 37Google Scholar. Both these editors follow Rinkes altering ‘elisi’ of SPM to ‘uisi’ of an apograph. Before giving as one reason for this the consideration that ‘elisi’ ought to mean not ‘crushed’ but ‘throttled’ (Cicero, vide Clark, Pro T. Annio Milone, Oxford, 1895, p. 97 n.)Google Scholar, some reference is due to Suet. Diu. lid. 39: ‘ad quae omnia spectacula tantum undique confluxit hominum, ut plerique aduenae aut inter uicos aut inter uias tabernaculis positis manerent, ac saepe prae turba elisi exanimatique sint plurimi et in his duo senatores’.
page 97 note 7 Stangl, , Ciceronis orationum Scholiastae, Vol. II. (Vindobonae 1912), p .31Google Scholar. He refers to Lichtenfeldt, , De Q. A. P. fontibus ac fide (Vratislaviae 1888), p. 65, n. 1Google Scholar.
page 98 note 1 II. 9, 3.
page 98 note 3 For thisMommsen, vide, History of Rome III., p. 109Google Scholar, andGreenidge, , History of Rome I., pp. 237 sqGoogle Scholar.
page 98 note 3 II. 8, 1–2.
page 99 note 1 The Correspondence of Cicero, Vol. III. 2, p. 251Google Scholar.
page 99 note 2 Mommsen, , Röm. Forsch., Vol. II., p. 434, n. 42Google Scholar.
page 99 note 3 Münzer in Pauly-Wissowa, R.E., I.A, col. 1913, 6 sqq.
page 99 note 4 Funaioli, col. 1919, 6 sqq.
page 99 note 5 For other views vide Groebe, Drumann, Gesch. Roms, Vol. II., p. 92Google Scholar and n. 2.
page 99 note 6 Vide Meyer, p. 357, II. 3.
page 100 note 1 Orelli, p. II.
