In The Jugurthine War, Sallust uses his descriptions of the Roman military commanders sent against the African king to make a political point. Sallust served in several offices of the Republic. He was a quaestor in 55 and a tribune in 52. While tribune, he tried to get Milo condemned for the murder of a rival, and attacked Cicero for defending him. This "action marked him as a supporter of the populares, the anti-senatorial group of politicians…" (p. 7). He then served a second quaestorship, served Julius Caesar as an officer during the civil war, was praetor in 46, and "was installed by Caesar as proconsular governor of the Province of Africa Nova…" (p. 7). He retired from politics after Caesars' death and wrote his 'histories.'
Ancient historians were not wedded to analysis and fact finding. Instead, they used their craft to instruct the reader in the traditions of their people, to highlight events or persons they deemed admirable, or those that they disliked and, "to impress him by preaching sermons upon the proven consequences of vice and depravity…" (p. 8).
Handford claims that the 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" (p. 10). I am not convinced that this charge can bear up to close scrutiny. Certainly, most of the nobles sent against Jugurtha do seem to fit the charge of being "selfish, incompetent, [and] corrupt…," but not Metellus. And the tactics Marius used to wrest control of the war from Metellus are just as ignoble as the deeds of those he indicted in his speeches and rabble-rousing. Metellus also seemed to be the equal of Marius as a general. So, let us turn to Sallust's own words to see if we can find the political point that he was making.
Lucius Calpurnius Bestia, consul in 111, was the first noble to be sent against Jugurtha militarily. 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" (p. 64). But, "although the consul had many good qualities, they were all rendered useless by his avarice" (p. 64)
Aemilius Scaurus, who had been consul in 115, was one of Bestia's lieutenants. He is described as "an enterprising nobleman who, although he was a political intriguer with an appetite for power, advancement, and riches, had enough cunning to hide his faults" (p. 52). "So for once Scaurus curbed his habitual rapacity," due only to the power of popular resentment (p. 52).
The war had barely begun when Jugurtha managed to bribe them both. This 'peace treaty' incensed the masses and worried the Senate. Should it be ratified or annulled? Sallust says that "It was chiefly the power of Scaurus, who was reported to be the prompter and accomplice of Bestia, that deterred them from taking the honest and patriotic course" (p. 65).
These two do not make out well in Sallust's eyes. One indication that Sallust is making a political point against them is the fact that he reproduces in full one of Memmius' speeches, which sets "forth the many arrogant and cruel acts of the nobles…" (p. 65). This speech fills almost four pages of the book. In it, Memmius claims that "In Rome, as well as at the battle front, the Republic has been put up for sale" (p. 69).
Consul in 110, after Bestia, was Spurius Albinus, who was given Numidia. Sallust describes him only briefly, but claims that "Albinus was eager to conduct a war, and therefore wanted to keep everything in a state of turmoil…." This can be assumed to imply that he was more concerned with personal glory, and with increasing his own wealth, than with the interests of the Republic. He had little time to conduct the war before he returned to Rome to oversee elections. He left his brother, Aulus Albinus, as acting praetor. Aulus is described as a "conceited ignoramus," who ends up getting defeated by Jugurtha in a most shameful manner.
Metellus, consul in 109, is then assigned Numidia. Sallust describes him as "an energetic man, who, although an opponent of the popular party, enjoyed an unblemished reputation among all sections of the community" (p. 80). Reinforcements were voluntarily sent and the Senate supplied all his needs. "The people hoped for great things from him, because apart from his other good qualities he was a man whom the prospect of wealth could not tempt" (pp. 80-81). He was a good general and was retained in command by the Senate as proconsul for 108.
Gaius Marius was Metellus' lieutenant. Marius had long wanted a consulship, "an office for which he had every qualification except blue blood. He was a hard worker, a man of integrity, and an experienced soldier. Indomitable on the battlefield, he was frugal in his private life, proof against the temptations of passion and riches, and covetous only of glory" (p. 99). He held several offices but "he dared not aspire to the consulship" (p. 99). While offering a sacrifice at Utica he was told by a soothsayer that "he should seize every opportunity of pushing his fortune, since all his enterprises would prosper" (p. 99).
Metellus was quite taken aback by Marius' request for leave to run for the consulship and suggested that 'he not reach beyond his station.' This "served merely to inflame Marius' eagerness for the honour he coveted and to make him hate Metellus. Desire and anger are very bad counsellors: and it was by these that Marius was now actuated. There was nothing he would not do or say to make himself popular" (p. 100).
Metellus finally allowed Marius to return to Rome "since Metellus did not want to have about him a man who was discontented and bore him a personal grudge…" (p. 107). Marius was elected consul by popular vote. Sallust claims that when Metellus received the news that Marius had been given Numidia, "He was more upset by the news than was right or becoming."
While still in Rome, Marius renewed his hostility against the nobles. He called a public meeting for the purposes of recruitment and to again attack the nobles. Sallust gives five pages for the speech that Marius delivered at this meeting. His speech really builds himself up as a 'new man' while tearing down the nobles and their reliance on their ancestors' glory. "My hopes rest only on myself, and I must sustain them by courage and uprightness; for I have nothing else to trust in" (p. 117). "The truth is that ancestral glory is like a torch that sheds a revealing light both on a man's virtues and on his faults" (p. 119). "Virtue, they have not bequeathed to them, nor could they; for it is the only thing that no man can give to another or receive from another" (p. 120). I find Sallust's dismissal of Metellus and his immense support of Marius as the plebian savior of Rome to be quite disturbing. Metellus seemed to be a good man and a capable general. Marius used all sorts of tactics to undermine him and to make him look bad, including accusing him of deliberately prolonging the war. His greed for personal glory caused him to act in anything but a virtuous manner. Sallust glossed over these points a little too easily. I feel that these can only be to support his political message.
As a general, "Marius acted with energy and foresight…." His boldness, and luck, enhanced his reputation even more. When he acted rashly, "fortune made amends for Marius' rashness, and an act for which he deserved blame won him renown" (p. 131). Many believed that "he either possessed divine insight or was the recipient of signs vouchsafed him by favour of the gods" (p. 127). Sallust says that "victory did not make him careless or arrogant", that "the consul saw to everything in person" (p. 135). "Always fully armed and on the alert himself, he compelled the soldiers to follow his example" (p. 135). "[H]e maintained discipline by appealing to his soldiers' honour, rather than by punishment" (p. 136). "[H]e could not, by enforcing the most rigorous discipline, have served the state with more success or distinction" (p. 136). Marius is thus shown to have been a good general.
I believe that Sallust used his 'history' of the Jugurthine War to make a political point. He was claiming, particularly through his descriptions of Bestia and Albinus, that the nobles were all more concerned with personal wealth and advancement than they were with the interests of the Republic. Bestia may have some good qualities but they are all subordinated to his avarice. Albinus seems only to be concerned with furthering his personal ambitions.
Sallust uses the speeches of Memmius and Marius to further his political point. These speeches are full of rhetoric indicting the nobles on many counts, most particularly on selling the soul of the Republic. These two speeches fill almost eight percent of the pages of the book. I conclude from this emphasis that they are definitely there to make his political point.
Sallust's descriptions of Metellus and Marius seem to confuse the issue. Both are described as good, capable men who turn out to be good generals. I believe that the key is in his dismissal of Metellus, and his immense support of Marius. Metellus returned to Rome, "where, to his surprise, he was welcomed with great joy" (p. 123). Thus, although Metellus was an optimate, he had been liked previously and was again popular. It was not in Sallust's interest to try to defame Metellus. As for Marius' horrible behavior, it was also not in Sallust's interest to harp on this aspect of Marius' character. Popularly at least, he was the savior of Rome. It was more important politically to make him look good as consul and as a general than it was to show the underhanded way in which he obtained these posts.
Bibliography
Sallust (Gaius Sallustius Crispus); Handford, S. A., translator, The Jugurthine War ; the Conspiracy of Catiline. Harmondsworth, Middlesex: Penguin Books, 1963.