Sallust's critique of avarice and moral decay in the Roman Republic

Sallust

In his historical writings, such as Bellum Jugurthinum, Caius Sallustius Crispus (Sallust) strongly criticizes avarice and ambition and the erosion of the Roman Republic and its earlier strong values. In fact, Sallust admits that he, too, was guilty of corruption and greed. By the time he retires from the political life, he says he recognizes his valueless and vain ways and has cast them aside to bring to light the same negative traits in others. Is this not a case of "doth protest too much?" Sallust rightly so goes down in history as being the first true historian, writing a concise record of the times and establishing a template for other historians to come. On the other hand, it should not be forgotten how Sallust was able spend his retirement years living in luxury because of his political savvy and subsequent gains from Caesar.

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

Sallust's was born in the county of Sabines in 86 B.C., in the midst of a major transition in Roman politics. The Romans had established a government of checks and balances when they overthrew the monarchy in 510 B.C. It was democratic, in the general view with its executive branch of elected magistrates, a Senate that earlier consisted of heads of patrician families and later evolved into prior magistrates, and a hierarchal legislative branch. The senators were naturally positive about the role that they played and the governmental structure. They called the Roman Republican government a perfect model with its corresponding branches, consuls acting for the monarchy, a Senate of noblemen, and a democratic voice executed by electoral assemblies. They praised their government, yet, according to Earl, "The vast majority of Roman citizens had not fallen into the modern error of supposing that political systems were important to anyone but the politicians. They looked on government as a service, the chief purpose…to provide internal stability and freedom from interference so that the important business of life could proceed unhindered."[footnoteRef:2] [2: Donald Earl.The Moral and Political Tradition of Rome. (Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press, 1967), 23]

In this Senate, the ex-magistrates served for life and it was made up of officers from the cavalry class that was divided into a number of various groups that was based on their military office rather than property owned. In ascending order, these positions were quaestorian, tribunitial, aedilician, praetorian and consular. The consulars had the ultimate power. When a Senator wished to speak, it was necessary to wait until the consular asked and answered a question. Then, the praetorians could respond, downward to the quaestorians, who rarely were able to say anything in the Senate. [footnoteRef:3]" Praetors could become a consul for three years, and every noble craved this highly competitive position. "It was, moreover, fraught with personal danger, for rivals or their adherents were continually bringing suit in the courts in order to eliminate, through exile or removal from the senate, an opponent who seemed likely to win."[footnoteRef:4] The favorite was extortion, which Sallust would experience in his later years. [3: L. Ross Taylor. Party Politics in the Age of Caesar. (Berkley: University of California Press, 1966), 3] [4: Ibid., 31-32.]

As the Romans extended their empire, the country's internal troubles worsened. The optimates, who consisted of those from very well-to-do plebeian families joined forces with the old patrician families and prohibited everyone but themselves to be higher magistracies and the Senate. It is this aristocratic ruling class, which Sallust later recognizes as what exemplified the worst of what Rome: Selfish and egotistical men who lived in luxury and had lost sight of the values that had led them to where they were today.

Many argue that Sallust was born at the apex of the decline of the Roman Republic, when the country and its government had become "turbulent, corrupt, immoral. And some even speak of decadence[footnoteRef:5]." However, there are also those such as Dorey who point out that these were also times of "splendor and brilliance."[footnoteRef:6] It is Sallust, himself, notes Dorey, who painted this time in such a negative light in his later writings. "His attempt to portray a society in decay is not wholly convincing; corrupt in many respects it may have been…"[footnoteRef:7] [5: Ronald Syme. Sallust. (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1964), 16] [6: T.A. Dorey. Latin Historians. (New York: Basic Books, 1966), 85] [7: Ibid. ]

Admittedly, when Sallust was born, the Roman Republic was undergoing much strife and was seeing the political intrigue and corruption that he later denounced. Trouble was growing between Clodius Pulcher, who denounced the popularists, and Marcus Tullius Cicero. Clodius instigated more turbulence as a tribune by passing a law to ensure that his rival, Cicero, would lose his position of strength. The law stipulated that anyone who killed a Roman citizen without a trial would be exiled. Naturally, it just happened that Cicero had executed several Catiline conspirators.[footnoteRef:8] [8: Taylor, Party Politics, 60]

This all occurred under the bidding of Caesar who did not want to leave affairs in the hands of two such unqualified political leaders as Pompey and Crassus, while Cato and Cicero were in Rome. Clodius took care of Cicero, but what about Cato? It was conveniently decided that Cato would become senator of the newly annexed Cyprus.[footnoteRef:9] While Cicero went off to his exile, Clodius' power started going to his head. He enacted another law stipulating that Cicero [9: Ibid, 138.]

had to stay at least 400 miles away from Italy and all his property would be usurped. Believing that he was fooling others of his treachery, Clodius had someone else purchase Cicero's property for him. He then continued to pass laws that made him well liked by the masses and enhanced his political power.

As happens in such political infighting, a tribune requested that Cicero be recalled in 57 B.C. "The Italians -- particularly, of course, the richest of them, who valued Cicero's tireless defense of private property -- came in throngs." [footnoteRef:10] Cicero bragged that it was not only the merchants, but also the entire municipalities who had chosen him consul and who now favored his restoration. Clodius attempted to thwart this decree, but Milo restrained him with armed support. [10: Ibid, 61]

In return, Clodius assaulted Cicero, burned down his brother's house and impeached Milo for inciting riots, but to no avail as the decree went forward. Milo, still angered by this confrontation ran for consulship as Clodius did the same for the praeorship, the two men literally fought it out in the streets of Rome with armed troops. Clodius was either accidentally killed or purposely assassinated. The Senate elected Pompey to take Caesar's place, but the tribunes blocked the vote.

SALLUST'S HISTORICAL WORKS

Although it is known that Sallust wrote a number of different historical works, Bellum Catilinae and the Bellum Jugurthinum are the only two remaining intact. In addition are four speeches, a few letters and 500 parts of his Historiae to be published in five books. Laistner speaks for other historians when he praises Sallust for his historical writings. Despite the fact that Sallust's moral tone now turns readers off, his overall ability as a historical artist should not be denied. Sallust's value is due his interpretation of Roman history during the late Republic, which frequently differs from other interpretations and opposed to the optimate viewpoint.[footnoteRef:21] [21: M.L.W. Laistner, The Greater Roman Historians. Berkeley: University of California Press, 1963), 64]

Syme questions Sallust's ultimate purpose in writing these histories. On the one hand, it is as if Salust is writing biographical works on the achievements of Caesar. He cannot refrain from bringing in his political opinion. He also uses Cato as his double-edged sword: Cato, is a man of integrity, "scourged the nobles of his day for vice, inertia, incompetence. Sallust exploits him for style, but also as a precedent and a weapon…" [footnoteRef:22]G.M. Paul (in Dorey[footnoteRef:23]) adds that "For Sallust, the pursuit of gloria was a fact of human experience, natural, self-evident and unquestioned…" When his career came to an end, he was most likely disappointed "though at the same time, his desire for distinction spurred him to pursue it in another field, namely historiography." Sallust's writings are also autobiographical. He may be writing about the history around him, but he is also the protagonist in the story. In. Bellum Catilinae 3.3 Sallust apologizes that his prior occurrence with public life was not fortunate. He continues that once he set his mind to leave politics behind for good, he set the goal to dedicate himself to the writing of impartial and accurate historical monographs. [22: Syme, Sallust 125] [23: Dorey. Latin Historians, 85]

Yet, are they impartial? It to see these comments by Sallust as hypocritical moralizing, because Sallust was anything but a poor, or even "middle-class" author. He retired in luxury founded on unethical gains received from involved with Caesar's in group. He was Caesar's "yes man" for quite some time. His writings were also biased toward Caesar, painting him in a much more positive light than others. Readers should also question why would Sallust continue being pro-Caesar after he died? Why did Sallust make it so clear that he was never going back into public life?

It is necessary to look at Sallust's life in relationship to the political and historical indications of the time. From when he was a young man, Sallust, as noted by his own comments, was politically inclined. He had continued to forge on, despite his on-again, off-again position, and not performing as well as he or Caesar expected him to do during the civil wars. When he came back to Rome and was, as many others were over the years, charged with extortion, it was most likely the last straw with Caesar. Most likely, Sallust did not rate high enough for a consulship. Also, Caesar did not need any more blemishes on his track record, which was quickly sliding. Given a choice of ending his days in luxury and being remembered by his histories, or sticking around for what he most likely saw as the upcoming demise of Caesar's leadership, Sallust took the easier road.

War with Jugurtha, or Bellum Iugurthinum is one of Sallust's two completed books that can still be read today. It not only provides insights into the times in Sallust's role as a historian, but it also gives readers insights into the author, himself. It is said that he most likely wrote about Jugurtha since he was closely involved with the action and had seen what happened firsthand. Sallust states that he chose this historical event "because of its perilous nature and shifting fortunes, and because it marked the beginning of successful resistance to the dominant power of the nobles." He saw what was happening there as a way for him to further is ultimate theme of moral values and against greed and power.

JUGURTHA

Historians agree that Sallust's book War of Jugurtha provides a relatively objective view of what was occurring at the time. Syme, for example, states "In spite of many things either inadequate or peculiar, the military operations as narrated in Bellum Jugurthinum do not appear to have been distorted by prejudice against persons or by party animus" [footnoteRef:24]. However, it is also understood that Sallust is not only writing this because of the war, itself, but also due to another agenda he has, his moral views about the aristocracy. [24: Syme, Sallust, 157]

It also appears that Sallust is using the Jugurthine War to continue his political agenda and to demonstrate his own history of ambition. Perhaps he has not retired completely afterall. During his years in politics, Sallust served a number of different Republic positions, including a quaestor and a tribune. When he was a tribune, he joined others to condemn Milo for murder and attacked Cicero for defending him. Since this was in support of Caesar, this action marked Sallust as a supporter of the populares, the anti-senatorial group of politicians…"[footnoteRef:25] Sallust became a quaestor for a second time, taking the next step of serving Julius Caesar as an officer during the civil war, was praetor, and was installed by Caesar as proconsular governor of the Province of Africa Nova…" [25: S.A. Handford, S.A., translator, The Jugurthine War; the Conspiracy of Catiline. Harmondsworth, (Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1963).]

Ancient historians, comparable to some historians today, used their books not only to offer the facts, but also to forward their own theme or agenda. Handford attests that his Jugurthine War "provided Sallust with an excellent opportunity to set the selfish, incompetent, corrupt noblemen against the brilliant plebian who rescued his country from the dire peril into which they had let it fall"[footnoteRef:26]. Many of the nobles sent against Jugurtha were as Sallust noted: "selfish, incompetent, [and] corrupt…." Lucius Calpurnius Bestia, was the first noble to be sent against Jugurtha militarily, for example. Sallust says that Bestia, "no novice in the art of war," had "great power of endurance and a keen and far-seeing intellect…," and "admirable courage" But, "although the consul had many good qualities, they were all rendered useless by his avarice" [26: Ibid, 10]

Aemilius Scaurus, who had been consul, who was a Bestia's lieutenant is described by Sallust as an enterprising nobleman who had an appetite for power and money, as well as being cunning enough to hide his faults. He only curbed his usual although he was a political intriguer with an appetite for power, advancement, and riches, had enough cunning to hide his faults" and "So for once Scaurus curbed his habitual avarice for fear of being resented. It did not take long for Jugurtha to see the weaknesses of these men and to bribe them and greatly anger the Senate who expected a different result.

Sallust drums it into the reader that this was a war being fought for pure greed. He actually includes a complete speech of Memmius, nearly four pages of text, just to explain the numerous "arrogant" and "cruel" actions of the nobles. Memmius concludes: "In Rome, as well as at the battle front, the Republic has been put up for sale." Later, he includes another speech that stretches five pages.

This is only the beginning of Sallust's criticisms. Consul Spurius Albinus, who followed Bestia, was described briefly as "eager to conduct a war, and therefore wanted to keep everything in a state of turmoil…." Once again, here is someone who is thinking of himself and his own needs before those of others. How much more simply it would have been just to easily end or never start this war. To Albinus, war was a fun and interesting game that kept him busy while he was away from Rome. It was not any better when Albinus returned to Rome for the elections. In his stead, he leaves his brother, Aulus Albinus, as praetor, another person described by Sallust as a "conceited ignoramus," who ends up getting defeated by Jugurtha in a most shameful manner.

Relatively speaking, Metellus, does quite well through Sallust's eyes and gives Sallust a way to show the other side of the coin and perhaps how he saw himself. He is called energetic and despite being opposed to the popular party had an "unblemished" reputation with all people in the community. People valued him as a general and hoped for great things from him, because "prospect of wealth could not tempt" him. Similarly, Gaius Marius was Metellus' lieutenant, who did not spend his money foolishly and covet glory. He was ambitious, but only for the good of others.

Metellus was therefore surprised when Marius asks to become a consul. He only became more desirous of the position when his brother said that he was reaching beyond his station. He would do all that he could at this point to make himself popular enough to reach this goal. Marius came back to Rome at Metellus' bidding, since Metellus was concerned about having someone at the front with a personal grudge. The tides turned ironically when Metellus learned that Marius had been given Numidia. Once again, despite Sallust's positive comments about Metellus, he now shows his side of jealousy, greed and contempt, even for his own brother. In response, Marius did all he could to undermine him, including accusations of deliberately prolonging the war. His greed had taken over the goodness or values that were once inside of him.

It is not difficult to see that Sallust is using the history, or actually a soap opera, of the Jugurthine War to make his point about the values and virtues of mankind, including Rome, itself, flailing and falling. He is portraying Bestia and Albinus as fall guys -- as examples of the wealthy nobles who are more interested with personal wealth and advancement than they are with the betterment of the Republic. These men may not be all bad, but greed has eaten away at their good qualities and they have succumbed to greed and personal gain. It is the same type of greed that is bringing down the Republic, and actually has brought down many other nations throughout history ever since.

Enough is enough. The rest of Sallust's story continues in this fashion, showing how even the best of men can be jaded by power. Laistner notes that Sallust has long been heralded as an exceptional historian, and it is difficult to disagree with this. He did capture the essence of what was occurring in his time. The question was his rationale. Laistner states about the Germans reading Sallust: "The Sallust who thus emerges in the pages of Schur and indeed of many of his German contemporaries is not…a writer who to the end remained a bitter political faction, but one who shed his party bias to become in the end a dispassionate, if pessimistic, critic strongly tinged with the Stoic difference as it was understood in the late Republican age."[footnoteRef:27] Instead," his stature as a historian would equal his merits as a literary agent."[footnoteRef:28] [27: Laistner, Greater Roman Historians, 47] [28: Ibid.]

The question still begs to be answered. Why did Sallust have to place such an emphasis on the greed and avarice? Was he, as so many believe, truly reformed and this was his repentance for his own ambition and greed while he was in politics? Or, was he reformed and was he truly concerned about the future of the Republic as he saw it declining in its last years? Or perhaps he was carrying guilt for his previous actions?

All of these various approaches are difficult to believe entirely when reading his negativity about the same individuals he loathed while in the political world, as well as his strong belief in Caesar despite his flaws as a leader. Then, of course, is the fact that Sallust did not do too poorly in his last years. He spent his time as a wealthy nobleman, living in an estate that would house some of the most noteworthy individuals in the decades and centuries to come. All said, he was much better off, it appears, than he was in politics. Who knows what Sallust actually had in mind when writing his history? Surely part of Sallust wanted to be remembered, and what a better way than to write a history of the times?

SALLUST'S IMPORTANCE

Regardless of his ulterior motive, Sallust did make his impact not only on Rome, but on the whole world for several thousand years. He would probably have been thrilled to know that his books are still being read and critiqued all these millennia later. As he notes in Jugurtha, Sallust believes that a memorial of past achievements is valuable as a model for future generations Cicero states is similarly: Sallust's Roman ancestral historians were lacking the story behind the actions. They only narrated and lacked the prose style. Brevity and truthfulness were their main strengths.

As Paul notes,[footnoteRef:29] Sallust as an historian may not meet the rigid requirements of a later day when it comes to writing history, and he is careless in chronological and geographical detail, vague in numbers, dates and distances, subjective instead of factual, focusing on personalities instead of general causes. Yet, "what must be put down to his last credit is that he has recorded for us what might be called the 'anti-establishment' view of late Republican political life." He knew politics well from the inside out, had sat, although briefly, in the Senate and had led legions, if not all that successful. As a result, Sallust was able to offer the "official view of public life and the recent past as recorded in the oratory and even in the history of the senatorial class." [29: Dorey, Latin Historians, 109.]

Laistner agrees, saying that Sallust's merits as an artist make his readers willing to ignore his faults. He may not be the most intellectual writer, with deep hidden meanings below the surface of this writing as others, such as Livy, but even his speeches are historically valuable, because "they are full of ethos and convey Sallust's estimate of the men in whose mouth he has placed them."[footnoteRef:30] Syme adds, that the fame of Sallust endured to the end and "the whole range of literature in late antiquity acknowledges his spell, from Ammianus to the Historia Augusta, from Church Fathers to the lowly tribe of grammarians and scholastics."[footnoteRef:31] Regardless of the doubts about the integrity of his life, and even with this own political ambition and arrogance, "only Cicero and Virgil surpass him in estimation."[footnoteRef:32] [30: Laistner, Greater Roman Historians,64 ] [31: Syme, Sallust, 301.] [32: Ibid.]

To his credit, Sallust has made a continuing impact down through the ages to the present day. Every major time throughout history from the Middle Ages, to the Renaissance, to the Victorian times to the Modern Age have cited him for his writings on the political times in Rome. Sallust's life and political times occurred in one of the most important times in history of humankind. What a shame it would have been if Sallust had not written his history and not captured what he had, regardless of the moralizing. The world would have lost a great deal not only because of what is learned about the Roman times, but what is learned about human nature in general. Thus, Sallust perhaps got his wish for being acknowledged and remembered, his ambition lives on.