upon it, and stretching toward the west; while Langius thinks that the regions more remote from the Atlantic Ocean, and extending toward the east, are meant. But Langius did not consider that those who had inverted keels of vessels for cottages, could not have strayed far from the ocean, but must have settled in parts bordering upon it_. And this is what is signified by _intra oceanum_. For _intra aliquam rem_ is not always used to denote what is actually _in a thing,_ and circumscribed by its boundaries, but what approaches toward it, and reaches close to it.” Kritzius. He then instances _intra modum, intra legem; Hortensii scripta intra famam sunt_, Quintil. xi. 8, 8. But the best example which he produces is Liv. xxv. 11: _Fossa ingens ducta, et vallum_, intra eam _erigitur_. Cicero, in Verr. iii. 89, has also, he notices, the same, expression, _Locus_ intra oceanum _jam nullus est–quo non nostrorum hominum libido iniquitasque pervaserit_, i. e.. _locus oceano conterminus_. Burnouf absurdly follows Langius.
 Numidians–_Numidas_. The same as _Nomades_, or wanderers; a term applied to pastoral nations, and which, as Kritzius observes, the Africans must have had from the Greeks, perhaps those of Sicily.
 More to the sun–_sub sole magis_. I have borrowed this expression from Rose. The Getulians were more southward.
 These soon built themselves towns–That is, the united Medes, Armenians, and Libyans.
 Medes–into Moors–_Mauris pro Medis_. A most improbable, not to say impossible corruption.
 Of the Persians–_Persarum_. That is, of the Persians and Getulians united.
 The two parties–_Utrique_. The older Numidians, and the younger, who had emigrated toward Carthage.
 Those who had spread toward our sea–for the Libyans are less warlike than the Getulians–_Magis hi, qui ad nostrum mare processerant; quia Libyes quam Gaetuli minus bellicosi_. The Persians and Getulians (under the name of Numidians), and their colonists, who were more toward the Mediterranean, and were more warlike than the Libyans (who were united with the Medes and Armenians) took from them portions of their territories by conquest. This is clearly the sense, as deducible from the preceding portion of the text.
 Lower Africa–_Africa pars inferior_. The part nearest to the sea. The ancients called the maritime parts of a country _the lower parts_, and the inland parts _the higher_, taking the notion, probably, from the course of the rivers. Lower Egypt was the part at the mouth of the Nile.
 XIX. Hippo–“It is not Hippo Regius” (now called _Bona_) “that is meant, but another Hippo, otherwise called _Diarrhytum_ or _Zarytum_, situate in Zengitana, not far from Utica. This is shown by the order in which the places are named, as has already been observed by Cortius.” _Kritzius_.
 Leptis–There were two cities of this name. Leptis Major, now _Lebida_, lay between the two Syrtes; Leptis Minor, now _Lempta_, between the smaller Sytis and Carthage. It is the latter that is meant here, and in c. 77, 78.
 Next to the Catabathmos–_Ad Catabathmon_. _Ad_ means, on the side of the country toward the Catabathmos. “Catabathmon _initium_ ponens Sallustius ab eo _discedit_.” Kritzius.
 Along the sea-coast–_Secundo mari_. “Si quis secundum mare pergat” _Wasse._
 Of Therseans–_Theraeon_. From the island of Thera, one of the Sporades, in the Aegean Sea, now called _Santorin_. Battus was the leader of the colony. See Herod., iv. 145; Strab., xvii. 8; Pind. Pyth., iv.
 Two Syrtes–See c. 78.
 Leptis–That is, _Leptis Major_. See above on this c.
 Altars of the Philaeni–see c. 79.
 To the south of Numidia–_Super Numidiam_. “Ultra Numidiam, meridiem versus.” _Burnouf_.
 Had lately possessed–_Novissime habuerant_. In the interval between the second and third Punic wars.
 XXI. Both armies took up, etc.–I have omitted the word _interim_ at the beginning of this sentence, as it would be worse than useless in the translation. It signifies, _during the interval before the armies came to an engagement_; but this is sufficiently expressed at the termination of the sentence.
 Cirta–Afterward named _Sittianorum Colonia_, from P. Sittius Nucerinus (mentioned in Cat., c. 21), who assisted Caesar in the African war, and was rewarded by him with the possession of this city and its lands. It is now called _Constantina_, from Constantine the Great, who enlarged and restored it when it had fallen into decay. Strabo describes it, xvii. 3.
 Twilight was beginning to appear–_Obscuro etiam tum lumine_. Before day had fairly dawned.
 Romans–_Togatorum_. Romans, with, perhaps, some of the allies, engaged in merchandise, or other peaceful occupations, and therefore wearing the _toga_. They are called _Italici_ in c. 26.
 Three young men–_Tres adolescentes_. Cortius includes these words in brackets, regarding them as the insertion of some sciolist. But a sciolist, as Burnouf observes, would hardly have thought of inserting _tres adolescentes_. The words occur in all the MSS., and are pretty well confirmed by what is said below, c. 25, that when the senate next sent a deputation, they took care to make it consist of _majores natu, nobiles_. See on _adolescens_, Cat., c. 38.
 XXII. Told much less than the truth–_Sed is rumor clemens erat_. “It fell below the truth, not telling the whole of the atrocity that had been committed.” _Gruter._ “Priscian (xviii. 26) interprets _clemens_ ‘non nimius,’ alluding to this passage of Sallust.” _Kritzius._ All the later commentators have adopted this interpretation, except Burnouf, who adopts the supposition of Ciacconius, that a _vague and uncertain_ rumor is meant.
 Right of nations–_Jure gentium._ “That is, the right of avenging himself.” _Rupertus._
 XXIV. Pays no regard–_Neque–in animo habeat._ This letter of Adherbal’s, both in matter and tone, is very similar to his speech in c. 14.
 I have experienced, even before–_Jam antea expertus sum._ He means, in the result of his speech to the senate.
 XXV. Chief of the senate–_Princeps senatus._ “He whose name was first entered in the censors’ books was called _Princeps Senatus_, which title used to be given to the person who of those alive had been censor first (_qui primus censor, ex iis qui viverent, fuisset_), but after the year 544, to him whom the censors thought most worthy, Liv., xxvii. 13. This dignity, although it conferred no command or emolument, was esteemed the very highest, and was usually retained for life, Liv., xxxiv. 44; xxxix. 52. It is called _Principatus_; and hence afterward the Emperor was named _Princeps_, which word properly denotes rank, and not power.” Adam’s Rom. Antiq., p. 3.
 At length the evil incitements of ambition prevailed–_Vicit tamen in avido ingenio pravum consilium._ “Evil propensities gained the ascendency in his ambitious disposition.”
 XXVI. The Italians–_Italici._ See c. 21.
 XXVII. By the Sempronian law–_Lege Sempronia._ This was the _Lex Sempronia de Provinciis._ In the early ages of the republic, the provinces were decreed by the senate to the consuls after they were elected; but by this law, passed A.U.C. 631, the senate fixed on two provinces for the future consuls before their election (Cic. Pro Dom., 9; De Prov. Cons., 2), which they, after entering on their office, divided between themselves by lot or agreement. The law was passed by Caius Gracchus. See Adam’s Rom. Antiq., p. 105.
 Publius Scipio Nasica–“The great-grandson of him who was pronounced by the senate to be _vir optimus_; and son of him who, though holding no office at the time, took part in putting to death Tiberius Gracchus. He was consul with Bestia, A.U.C. 643, and died in his consulship. Cic. Brut., 34.” _Burnouf._
 Lucius Bestia Calpurnius–“He had been on the side of the nobility against the Gracchi, and was therefore in favor with the senate. After his consulship he was accused and condemned by the Mamilian law (c. 40), for having received money from Jugurtha, Cic. Brut. c. 34. De Brosses thinks that he was the grandfather of that Bestia who was engaged in the conspiracy of Catilina.” Burnouf._
 XXIX. For the sake of giving confidence–_Fidei causa._ “In order that Jugurtha might have confidence in Bestia, Sextius the quaestor was sent as a sort of hostage into one of Jugurtha’s towns.” _Cortius._
 As if by an evident majority of voices–_Quasi per saturam exquisitis sententiis._ “The opinions being taken in a confused manner,” or, as we say, _in the lump_. The sense manifestly is, that there was (or was said to be) such a preponderating majority in Jugurtha’s favor, that it was not necessary to ask the opinion of each individual in order. _Satura_, which some think to be always an adjective, with _lanx_ understood, though _lanx_, according to Scheller, is never found joined with it in ancient authors, was _a plate filled with various kinds of fruit, such as was annually offered to the gods._ “Lanx plena diversis frugibus in templum Cereris infertur, quae satura nomine appellatur,” Acron. ad Hor. Sat., i. 1, _init_. “Lanx. referta variis multisque primitiis, sacris Cereris inferebatur,” Diomed., iii. p. 483.”Satura, cibi genus ex variis rebus conditum,” Festus _sub voce_. See Casaubon. de Rom. Satira, ii. 4; Kritzius ad h. l., and Scheller’s Lex. v., _Satur._ In the Pref. to Justinian’s Pandects, that work is called _opus sparsim et quasi per saturam collectum, utile cum inutilibus mixtim._
 To preside at the election of magistrates–_Ad magistratus rogandos._ The presiding magistrate had _to ask_ the consent of the people, saying _Velitis, jubeatis–rogo Quirites._
 XXX. To give in full–_Perscribere._ “To write at length.” The reader might suppose, at first, that Sallust transcribed this speech from some publication; but in that case, as Burnouf observes, he would rather have said _ascribere._ Besides, the following _hujuscemodi_ shows that Sallust did not profess to give the exact words of Memmius. And the speech is throughout marked with Sallustian phraseology. “The commencement of it, there is little doubt, is imitated from Cato, of whose speech _De Lusitanis_ the following fragment is extant in Aul. Gell. xiii. 24: _Multa me dehortata sunt huc prodere, anni, aetas, vox vires, senectus._” Kritzius.
 XXXI. During the last fifteen years–_His annis quindecim._ “It was at this time, A.U.C. 641, twenty-two years since the death of Tiberius Gracchus, and ten since that of Caius; Sallust, or Memmius, not to appear to make too nice a computation, takes a mean.” _Burnouf._ The manuscripts, however, vary; some read _fifteen_, and others _twelve_. Cortius conjectured _twenty_, as a rounder number, which Kritzius and Dietsch have inserted in their texts. _Twenty_ is also found in the Editio Victoriana, Florence, 1576.
 Your defenders have perished–_Perierint vestri defensores._ Tiberius and Caius Gracchus, and their adherents.
 Liberty of speech–_Libertatem._ Liberty of speech is evidently intended.
 Every civil and religions obligation–_Divina et humana omnia._ “They offended against the laws, when they took bribes from an enemy; against the honor of Rome when they did what was unworthy of it, and greatly to its injury; and against gods and men, against all divine and human obligations, when they granted to a wicked prince not only impunity, but even rewards, for his crimes.” _Dietsch._
 Slaves purchased with money, etc.–_Servi, aere parati,_ etc. This is taken from another speech of Cato, of which a portion is preserved in Aul. Gell. x. 3: _Servi injurias nimis aegre ferunt; quid illos bono genere natos, magna virtute praeditos, animi habuisse atque habituros, dum vivent?_ “Slaves are apt to be too impatient of injuries; and what feelings do you think that men of good family, and of great merit, must have had, and will have as long as they live?”
 Public spirit–_Pietas._ Under this word are included all duties that we ought to perform to those with whom we are intimately connected, or on whom we are dependent, as our parents, our country, and the gods. I have borrowed my translation of the word from Rose.
 The marks of favor which proceed from you–_Beneficia vestra._ Offices of state, civil and military.
 A greater disgrace to lose, etc.–_Quod majus dedecus est parta amitere quam omnino non paravisse._ [Greek: Aischion de echontas aphairethaenai ae ktomenous atychaesai] Thucyd. ii. 62.
 These times please you less than those, etc.–_Illa quam haec tempora magis placent,_ etc. “_Those times_, which immediately succeeded the deaths of the Gracchi, and which were distinguished for the tyranny of the nobles, and the humiliation of the people; _these times_, in which the people have begun to rouse their spirit and exert their liberty.” _Burnouf._
 Embezzlement of the public money–_Peculatus aerarii._ “Peculator, qui furtum facit pecuniae publicae.” Ascon. Pedian. in Cic. Verr i.
 Kings–I have substituted the plural for the singular. “No name was more hated at Rome than that of a king; and no sentiment, accordingly, could have been better adapted to inflame the minds of Memmius’s hearers, than that which he here utters.” _Dietsch._
 If the crimes of the wicked are suppressed, etc.–_Si injuriae non sint, haud saepe auxilii egeas._ “Some foolishly interpret _auxilium_ as signifying _auxilium tribunicium_, the aid of the tribunes; but it is evident to me that Sallust means _aid against the injuries of bad men_, i.e. revenge or punishment.” _Kritzius._ “If injuries are repressed, or prevented, there will be less need for the help of good men and it will be of less consequence if they become inactive.” _Dietsch._
 XXXII. Lucius Cassius–This is the man from whom came the common saying _cui bono?_ “Lucius Cassius, whom the Roman people thought the most accurate and wisest of judges, was accustomed constantly to inquire, in the progress of a cause, _cui bono fuisset_, of what advantage any thing had been.” Cic. pro Rosc. Am. 80. “His tribunal,” says Valerius Maximus (iii. 7), “was called, from his excessive severity, the rock of the accused.” It was probably on account of this quality in his character that he was now sent into Numidia.
 Under guarantee of the public faith–_Interposita fide publica._ See Cat.47, 48. So a little below, _fidem suam interponit. Interpono_ is “to pledge.”
 Under guarantee of the public faith–_Interposita fide publica._ See Cat. 47, 48. So a little below, _fidem suam interponit. Interpono_ is “to pledge.”
 XXXIII. In the garb, as much as possible, of a suppliant–_Cultu quam maxime miserabili_. “In such a garb as accused persons, or suppliants, were accustomed to adopt, when they wished to excite compassion, putting on a mean dress, and allowing their hair and beard to grow.” _Burnouf._
 XXXIV. Enjoined the prince to hold his peace–A single tribune might, by such intervention, offer an effectual opposition to almost any proceeding. On the great power of the tribunes, see Adam’s Rom. Ant., under the head “Tribunes of the People.”
 Every other act to which anger prompts–_Aliis omnibus, qua ira fieri amat._ “These words have given rise to wonderful hallucinations; for Quintilian, ix. 3. 17, having observed that many expressions of Sallust are borrowed from the Greek, as _Vulgus amat fieri,_ all interpreters, from Cortius downward, have thought that the structure of Sallust’s words must be Greek, and have taken _ira,_ in this passage, for an ablative, and _quae_ for a nominative plural. Gerlach has even gone so far as to take liberties with the words cited By Quintilian, and to correct them, please the gods, into _quae in Vulgus amat fieri._ But how could there have been such want of penetration in learned critics, such deficiency in the knowledge of the two languages, that, when the imitation of the Greek, noticed by Quintilian, has reference merely to the word [Greek: philei], _amat_, they should think of extending it to the dependence of a singular verb on a neuter plural? With truth, indeed, though with much simplicity, does Gerlach observe, that you will in vain seek for instances of this mode of expression in other writers.” _Kritzius._ Dietsch agrees with Kritzius; and there will, I hope, be no further doubt that _quae_ is the accusative and _ira_ the nominative; the sense being, “which anger loves or desires to be done.” Another mode of explanation has been suggested, namely, to understand _multitudo_ as the nominative case to _amat_, making _ira_ the ablative; but this method is far more cumbersome, and less in accordance with the style of Sallust. The words quoted by Quintilian do not refer, as Cortius erroneously supposes, to this passage, but to some part of Sallust’s works that is now lost.
 XXXV. Should be disturbed–_Movere_ is the reading of Cortius; _moveri_ that of most other editors, in conformity with most of the MSS. and early editions.
 The times at which he resorted to particular places–_Loca atque tempora cuncta._ “All his places and times.” There can be no doubt that the sense is what I have given in the text.
 In accordance with the law of nations, etc.–As the public faith had been pledged to Jugurtha for his security, his retinue was on the same footing as that of embassadors, the persons of whose attendants are considered as inviolable as their own, as long as they commit no offense against the laws of the country in which they are resident. If any such offense is committed by an attendant of an embassador, an application is usually made by the government to the embassador to deliver him up for trial. Bomilcar seems to have been apprehended without any application having been made to Jugurtha; as, in our own country, the Portuguese embassador’s brother, who was one of his retinue, was apprehended and executed for a murder, by Oliver Cromwell. See, on this point, Grotius De Jure Bell, et Pac., xviii, 8; Vattel, iv. 9; Burlamaqui on Politic Law, part iv. ch. 15. Jugurtha, says Vattel, should have given up Bomilcar; but such was not Jugurtha’s object.
 At the commencement of the proceedings–_In priori actione._ That is, when Bomilcar was apprehended and charged with the murder.
 His other subjects would be deterred from obeying him–_Reliquos popularis metus invaderet parendi sibi._ “Fear of obeying him should take possession of his other subjects.”
 That it was a venal city, etc.–_Urbem venalem,_ etc. I consider, with Cortias, that this is the proper way of taking these words. Some would render them _O venal city,_ etc., because Livy, Epit. lxiv., has _O urbem venalem,_ but this seems to require that the verb should be in the second person; and it is probable that in Livy we should either eject the O or read _inveneris._ Florus, iii. 1, gives the words in the same way as Sallust.
 XXXVI. As propraetor–_Pro praetore._ With the power of lieutenant-general.
 XXXVII. Throughout the year–_Totius anni._ That is, all that remained of the year.
 On the edge of a steep hill–_In praerupti montis extremo. “In extremo_ a scholiast rightly interprets _in margine_,” Gerlach. Cortius, whom Langius follows, considers that _in extremo_ means _at the bottom_; a notion which Kritzius justly condemns; for, as Gerlach asks, what would that have to do withthe strength of the place? Muller would have us believe that _in extremo_ means _at the top_; but if Sallust had meant to say that the city was at the top, he would hardly have chosen the word _extremus_ for the purpose. Doubtless, as Gerlach observes, the city was on the top of the hill, which was broad enough to hold it; but the words _in extremo_ signify that the walls were even with the side of the hill. Of the site of the town of Suthul no traces are now to be found.
 Vineae–Defenses made of hurdles or other wood, and often covered with raw hides, to defend the soldiers who worked the battering-ram. The word that comes nearest to _vineae_ in our language is _mantelets_. Before this word, in many editions, occurs the phrase _ob thesauros oppidi potiundi_, which Cortius, whom I follow, omits.
 XXXIII. That their defection might thus be less observed–_Ita delicta occultiora fore._ Cortius transferred these words to this place from the end of the preceding sentence; Kritzius and Dietsch have restored them to their former place. Gerlach thinks them an intruded gloss.
 The chief centurion–_Centurio primi pili._There were sixty centurions in a Roman legion; the one here meant was the first, or oldest, centurion of the Triarii, or Pilani.
 As death was the alternative–_Quia mortis metu mutabant. Neither manuscripts nor critics are agreed about this passage. Cortius, from a suggestion of Palmerius, adopted _mutabant_; most other editors have _mutabantur_; but both are to be taken in the same sense; for _mutabant_ is equivalent to _mutabant se_. Cortius’s interpretation appears the most eligible: “Permutabantur cum metuenda morte,” i.e. there were those conditions on one side, and death on the other, and if they did not accept the conditions, they must die. Kritzius fancifully and strangely interprets, _propter mortis metum se mutabant, i.e., alia videbantur atque erant_, or the acceptance of the terms appeared excusable to the soldiers, because they were threatened with death if they did not accept them. It is worth while to notice the variety of readings exhibited in the manuscripts collated by Cortius: ten exhibit _mutabantur_; three, _minitabantur_; three, _multabantur_; three, _tenebantur_; one, _tenebatur_; one, _cogebantur_; one, _cogebatur_; one, _angustiabantur_; one, _urgebantur_; and one _mortis metuebant pericula_. There is also, he adds, in some copies, _mutabant_, which the Bipont editors and Muller absurdly adopted.
 XXXIX. Under all the circumstances of the case–_Ex copia rerum._ From the number of things which he had to consider.
 XL. The Latins and Italian allies–_Per homines nominis Latini, et socios Italicos._ “The right of voting was not extended to all the Latin people till A.U.C. 664, and the Italian allies did not obtain it till some years afterward.” _Kritzius._ So that at this period, which was twenty years earlier, their influence could only be employed in an underhand way. Compare c.42.
 Marcus Scaurus–See c. 15. That he was appointed on this occasion, is an evident proof of his commanding influence.
 But the investigation, notwithstanding, was conducted, etc.–_Sed quaes tuo exercita_, etc. Scaurus, it is probable, did what he could to mitigate the violence of the proceedings. Cicero, however, says that Caius Gallus _sacerdos_, with four _consulares_, Bestia, Caius Cato, Albinus, and Opimius, were condemned and exiled by this law of Mamilius. See Brut., c. 34.
 XLI. Took, snatched, and seized–Ducere, _trahere, rapere_. “_Ducere_ conveys the notion of cunning and fraud; _trahere_ of some degree of force; _rapere_ of open violence.” _Muller_. The words chiefly refer to offices in the state, as is apparent from what follows.
 The parents and children of the soldiers, etc.–
Quid quod usque proximos
Revellis agri terminos, et ultra
Salis avarus? Pellitur paternos
In sinu ferens deos
Et uxor et vir, sordidosque natos.
_Hor. Od.,_ ii. 18.
What can this impious av’rice stay?
Their sacred landmarks torn away.
You plunge into your neighbor’s grounds, And overleap your client’s bounds,
Helpless the wife and husband flee, And in their arms, expell’d by thee,
Their household gods, adored in vain, Their infants, too, a sordid train.
 Among the nobility–_Ex nobilitate._ Cortius injudiciously omits those words. The reference is to the Gracchi.
 By means of the allies and Latins–See on, c. 40.
 But to a reasonable man it is more agreeable to submit, etc.–_Sed bono vinci satius est, quam malo more injuriam vincere. Bono,_ sc. _viro_. “That is, if the nobility had been truly worthy characters, they would rather have yielded to the Gracchi, than have revenged any wrong that they had received from them in an unprincipled manner.” _Dietsch._ Thus this is a reflection on the nobles; in which notion of the passage Allen concurs with Dietsch. Others, as Cortius, think it a reflection on the too great violence of the Gracchi. The brevity with which Sallust had expressed himself makes it difficult to decide. Kritzius, who thinks that the remark is in praise of the Gracchi, supplies the ellipse thus: “Sane concedi debet Gracchis non satis moderatum animum fuiase; _quae res ipsis adeo interitum attulit_; sed _sic quoque egregii viri putandi sunt; nam_ bono vinci,” etc. Langius and Burnouf join _bono_ with _more_, but do not differ much in their interpretations of the passage from that given by Dietsch.
 XLIII. Of a character uniformly irreproachable–_Fama tamen aequabili et inviolata. Aequabilis_ is uniform, always the same, keeping an even tenor.
 Regarded all things as common to himself and his colleague–_Ali omnia sibi cum collega ratus._ “Other matters, unconnected with the war against Jugurtha, he thought that he would have to manage in conjunction with his colleague, and that, consequently, he might give but partial attention to them; but that the war in Numidia was committed to his sole care.” _Cortius._ Other interpretations of these words have been suggested; but they are fanciful and unworthy of notice.
 Princes–_Reges._ Who these were, the commentators have not attempted to conjecture.
 XLIV. By Spurius Albinus, the proconsul.–_A Spurio Albino proconsule_. This is the general reading. Cortius has, _Spurii Albini pro consule_, with which we may understand _agentis_ or _imperantis_, but can hardly believe it to be what Sallust wrote. Kritzius reads, _Spurii Albini proconsulis_.
 In a stationary camp–_Stativis castris_. In contradistinction to that which the soldiers formed at the end of a day’s march.
 But neither had the camp been fortified, etc.–_Sed neque muniebantur ea_ (se. castra), _neque more militari vigiliae deducebantur_. “The words _sed neque muniebantur ea_ are wanting in almost all the manuscripts, as well as in all the editions, except that of Cyprianus Popma.” _Kritzius_. Gerlach, however, had, previously to Kritz, inserted them in his text though in brackets; for he supposed them to be a mere conjecture of some scribe, who was not satisfied with a single _neque_. But they have been found in a codex of Fronto, by Angelo Mai, and have accordingly been received as genuine by Kritz and Dietsch. Potter and Burnouf have omitted the _ea_, thinking, I suppose, that in such a position it could hardly be Sallust’s; but the verb requires a nominative case to prevent it from being referred to the following _vigiliae_.
 Foreign wine–_Vino advectitio_ Imported. Africa does not abound in wine.
 XLV. With regard to other things–Caeteris. Cortius, whom Gerlach follows, considers this word as referring to the men or officers; but Kritzius and Dietsch, with better judgment, understand _rebus_.
 Numerous sentinels–_Vigilias crebras_. At short intervals, says Kritzius, from each other.
 XLVI. Villages–_Mapalibus_. See c. xviii. The word is here used for a collection of huts, a village.
 Here the consul, to try the disposition of the inhabitants, and, should they allow him, to take advantage of the situation of the place, etc.–_Huc consul, simul tentandi gratia, et si paterentur, opportuniatis loci, praesidium imponit._ This is a _locus veratissimus_, about which no editor has satisfied himself. I have deserted Cortius and followed Dietsch, who seems to have settled the passage, on the basis of Havercamp’s text, with more judgment than any other commentator. Cortius read, _Huc consul simul tentandi gratia, si paterent opportunitates loci_, etc., taking _opportuniatates_ in the sense of _munitiones_, “defenses;” but would Sallust have said _that Metellus put a garrison in the place, to try if its defenses would be open to him?_ Havercamp’s reading is, _simul tentan si gratia, et si paterentur opportunitates loci_, etc. Palmerius conjectured _simul tentandi gratia, si paterentur; et opportunitate loci,_ which Gerlach and Kritsius adopt, except that they change the place of the _et_, and put it before _si_. Allen thinks that he has amended the passage by reading _Huc consul, simul si paterentur tentandi, et opportunitatis loci, gratia;_ but this conjecture is liable to similar objection with that of Cortius. Other varieties of reading it is needless to notice. But it is observable that four manuscripts, as Kritzius remarks, have _propter opportunitates,_ which led me long ago to suppose that the true reading must be _simul tentandi gratia, simul propter opportunitates loci. Simul propter_ might easily have been corrupted into _si paterentur_.
 Frequent arrival of supplies–_Commeatum._ “Frumenti et omnium rerum quarum in bello usus est, largam copiam.” _Kritzius_. I follow the text of Cortius (retaining the words _juvaturum ecercitum_) which Kritzius sufficiently justifies. There is a variety of readings, but all much the same in sense.
 Extraordinary earnestness–_Impensius modo._ Cortius and Kritzius interpret this _modo_ as the ablative case of _modus; i. e. quam modus erat,_ or _supra modum;_ but Dietsch and Burnouf question the propriety of this interpretation, and consider the _modo_ to be the same as that in _tantummodo, dummodo,_ etc. The same expression occurs again in c. 75.
 XLVIII. Running parallel with the stream–_Tractu pari._ It may be well to illustrate this and the following chapter by a copy of the lines which Cortius has drawn, “to excite,” as he says, “the imagination of his readers:”
River Muthul, flowing from the south ————————————————– I Hill on
North I which <----------- I I Jugurtha
I I posted I I himself
————————————————– Range of hills, parallel I with the Muthul I
I Route of Metellus I
 XLIX. In a transverse direction–_Transverso itinere_. It lay on the flank of the Romans as they marched toward the river, _in dextero latere_, c.49, fin.
 Well acquainted with the country–_Prudentes._ “Periti loci et regionis.” _Cortius._Or it may mean knowing what they were to do, while the enemy would be _imperiti,_ surprised and perplexed.
 Would crown–_Confirmaturum_. Would establish, settle, put the last hand to them.
 Was seen–_Conspicitur._ This is the reading adopted by Cortius, Muller, and Allen, as being that of all the manuscripts. Havercamp, Kritzius, and Dietsch admitted into their texts, on the sole authority of Donatus ad Ter. Eun. ii. 3, _conspicatur_, i.e. (Metellus) _catches sight_ of the enemy. The latter reading, perhaps, makes a better connection.
 Rendering it uncertain–_Incerti._ Presenting such an appearance that a spectator could not be certain what they were.
 He drew up these in the right wing–in three lines–_In dextero latere triplicibus subsidiis aciem instruxit._ In the other passages in which Sallust has the word _subsidia_ (Cat. c. 59), he uses it for _the lines behind the front._ Thus he says of Catiline, _Octo cohortes in fronte constituit; reliqua signa in subsidiis arctius collocat;_ and of Petreius, _Cohortes veteranas–in fronte; post eas reliquum exercitum in subsidiis locat._ But whether he uses the word in the same sense here; whether we might, as Cortius thinks (whom Gerlach and Dietsch follow), call the division of Metellus’s troops _quadruple_ instead of _triple,_ or whether he arranged them as De Brosses and others suppose, in the usual disposition of Hastati, Principes, and Triarii, who shall place beyond dispute? The probability, however, if Sallust is consistent with himself in his use of the word, lies with Cortius. Gerlach refers to Caesar, De Bell, Civ., iii. 89: “_Celeriter ex tertia acie singulas cohortes detraxit, atque ex his quartam instituit;_ but this does not illustrate Sallust’s use of the word _subsidia_: Caesar forms a fourth _acies_; Metellus draws up one _acies_ triplicibus subsidia”.
 With the front changed into a flank–_Transversis principiis._ He made the whole army wheel to the left, so that what was their front line, or _principia,_ as they faced the enemy on the hill, became their flank as they marched from the mountain toward the river.
 L. Behind the front line–_Post principia._ The _principia_ are the same as those mentioned in the preceding note, that is, the front line when the army faced that of Jugurtha on the hill, but which presented its flank to the enemy when the army was on its march. So that Marius commanded in the center (“in medio agmine,” says Dietsch), while Metellus took the lead with the cavalry of the left wing. See the following note.
 Cavalry on the left wing–which, on the march, had become the van–_Sinistrae ulae equitibus–qui in agmine principes facti erant._ When Metellus halted (c. 49, fin.), and drew up his troops fronting the hill on which Jugurtha was posted, he placed all his cavalry in the wings; consequently, when the army wheeled to the left, and marched forward, the cavalry of the left wing became the van.
 LI. Of the whole struggle–_Totius negotii._ That is, on the side of the Romans.
 LII. The enemy’s ignorance of the country–_Regio hostibus ignara. Ignara_ for _ignota;_ a country unknown to the enemy.
 LIII. Fatigued and exhausted–_Fessi lassique._ I am once more obliged to desert Cortius, who reads _laetique_. The sense, as Kritzius and Dietsch observe, shows that _laeti_ can not be the reading, for there must evidently be a complete antithesis between the two parts of the sentence; an antithesis which would be destroyed by the introduction of _laeti_. Gerlach, though he retains _laeti_ in his text, condemns it in his notes.
 LIV. Which could only be conducted, etc.–_Quod, nisi ex illius lubidine, geri non posset._ Cortius omits the _non_ before _posset_, but almost every other editor, except Allen, has retained it, from a conviction of necessity.
 Under these circumstances, however–_Ex copia tamen._ With _copia_ we must understand _consiliorum_ or _rerum,_ as at the end of c. 39. All the manuscripts, except two, have _inopia_, which editors have justly rejected as inconsistent with the sense.
 LV. A thanksgiving–_Supplicia._ The same as _supplicatio,_ on which the reader may consult Adam’s Rom. Ant., or Dr. Smith’s Dictionary.
 LVI. Dared not be guilty of treachery–_Fallere nequibant._ “Through dread of the severest punishments if they should fall into the hands of the Romans. Valerius Maximus, ii. 7, speaks of deserters having been deprived of their hands by Quintus Fabius Maximus; of others who were crucified or beheaded by the elder Africanus; of others who were thrown to wild beasts by Africanus the younger; and of others who were sentenced by Paulus Aemilius to be trampled to death by elephants. Hence it appears that the punishment of deserters was left to the pleasure of the general.” _Burnouf_.
 Sicca–It stood on the banks of the Bagradas, at some distance from the coast, and contained a celebrated Temple of Venus. Val. Max., ii. 6. D’Anville thinks it the same as the modern _Kef._
 LVII. Javelins–_Pila._ This _pilum_ may have been, as Muller suggests, similar to the _falarica_ which Livy (xxi. 8) says that the Saguntines used against their besiegers. _Falarica erat Saguntinis, missile telum hastili abiegno–id, sicut in pilo, quadratum stuppa circumligabant, linebantque pice:–quod cum medium accensum mitteretur_, etc. Of Sallust’s other words, in the latter part of this sentence, the sense is clear, but the readings of different editors are extremely various. Cortius and Gerlach have _sudes, pila praeterea picem sulphure et taeda mixtam ardentia mittere:_ but it can scarcely be believed that Sallust wrote _picem–taeda mixtam._ Havercamp gives _pice et sulphure taedam mixtam ardentia mittere,_ which has been adopted by Kritzius and Dietsch, except that they have changed _ardentia,_ on the authority of some of the manuscripts, into _ardenti_.
 LIX. And thus, with the aid of the light-armed foot, almost succeeded in giving the enemy a defeat–_Ita expeditis peditibus suis hostes paene victos dare._ Cortius, Kritzius, and Allen, concur in regarding _expeditis peditibus_ as an ablative of the instrument, i.e. as equivalent to _per expeditos pedites_ and _victos dare_ as nothing more than _vincere._ This appears to be the right mode of explanation; but most of the translators, French as well as English, have taken _expeditis peditibus_ as a dative, and given to the passage the sense that “the cavalry delivered up the enemy, when nearly conquered, to be dispatched by the light-armed foot.”
 LX. Attacks, or preparations for defense, were made in all quarters–_Oppugnare aut parare omnibus locis._ There is much discussion among the critics whether these verbs are to be referred to the besiegers or the besieged. Cortius and Gerlach attribute _oppugnare_ to the Romans, and _parare_ to the men of Zama; a distinction which Kritzius justly condemns. There can be little doubt that they are spoken of both parties equally.
 LXI. The rest of his forces–in that part of our province nearest to Numidia–_Caeterum exercitum in provinciam, quae proxima est Numidiae, hiemandi gratia collocat._ “The words _quae proxima est Numidiae_ Cortius would eject as superfluous and spurious. But it is to be understood that Metellus did not distribute his troops through the whole of the province, but in that part which is nearest to Numidia, in order that they might be easily assembled in case of an attack of the enemy or any other emergency. There is, therefore, no need to read with the Bipont edition and Muller, _qua proxima,_ etc. though this is in itself not a bad conjecture.” _Kritzius_.
 LXII. Was summoned to appear in person at Tisidium, etc. –_Cum ipse ad imperandum Tisidium vocaretur._ The gerund is used, as grammarians say, in a passive sense. “The town of Tisidium is nowhere else mentioned. Strabo (xvii. 3, p. 488, Ed. Tauch.) speaks of a place named [Greek: _Tisiaioi_], which was utterly destroyed, and not a vestige of it left.” _Gerlach_.
 LXIII. Sacrificing to the gods–_Per hostias dis supplicante._ Supplicating or worshiping the gods with sacrifices, and trying to learn their intentions as to the future by inspection of the entrails. “Marius was either a sincere believer in the absurd superstitions and dreams of the soothsayers, or pretended to be so, from a knowledge of the nature of mankind, who are eager to listen to wonders, and are ore willing to be deceived than to be taught.” _Burnouf._ See Plutarch, Life of Marius. He could interpret omens for himself, according to Valerius Maximus, i. 5.
 The people–disposed of, etc.–_Etiam tum alios magistratus plebes, consulatum nobilitas, inter se per manus tradebat._ The commentators have seen the necessity of understanding a verb with _plebes._ Kritzius suggests _habebat;_ Gerlach _grebat_ or _accipiebat_.
 A disgrace to it–_Pollutus._ He was considered, as it were, unclean. See Cat., c. 23, _fin_.
 LXIV. As soon as the public business would allow him–_Ubi primum potuisset per negotia publica._ As soon as he could through (regard to) the public business.
 With his own son–_Cum filio suo._ With the son of Metellus. He tells Marius that it would be soon enough for him to stand for the consulship in twenty-three years’ time, the legitimate age for the consulship being forty-three.
 In the camp with his father–_Contubernio patris._ He was among the young noblemen in the consul’s retinue, who were sent out to see military service under him. This was customary. See Cic. Pro Cael. Pro Planc. 11.
 LXV. Which was as weak as his body–_Ob morbos–parum valido._ Sallust had already expressed this a few lines above.
 Merchants–_Negotiatores._ “Every one knows that Romans of equestrian dignity were accustomed to trade in the provinces.” _Burnouf_.
 With the most honorable demonstrations in his favor –_Honestissima suffragatione._ “_Suffragatio_ was the zealous recommendation of those who solicited the votes of their fellow-citizens in favor of some candidate. See Festus, s.v. _Suffragatores,_ p. 266, Lindem.” _Dietsch._ It was honorable, in the case of Marius, as it was without bribery, and seemed to have the good of the republic in view.
 The Mamilian law–See c. 40.
 LXVI. Advantageous positions–_Suos locos._ Places favorable for his views. See Kritzius on c. 54.
 LXVII. Were in trepidation. At the citadel, etc.–I have translated this passage in conformity with the texts of Gerlach, Kritzius, Dietsch, Muller, and Allen, who put a point between _trepidare_ and _ad arcem_. Cortina, Havercamp, and Burnouf have _trepidare ad arcem_, without any point. Which method gives the better sense, any reader can judge.
 On the roofs of the houses–_Pro tectis aedificiorum_. In front of the roofs of the houses; that is, at the parapets. “In prima tectorum parte.” _Kritzius_. The roofs were flat.
 Worthless and infamous character–_Improbus intestabilisque_. These words are taken from the twelve tables of the Roman law: See Aul. Gell. vi. 7, xv. 3. Horace, in allusion to them, has _intestabilis et sacer_, Sat. ii. 3.181, _Intestabilis_ signified a person to be of so infamous a character that he was not allowed to give evidence in a court of justice.
 LXVIII. Averse to further exertion–_Tum abnuentes omnia_. Most of the translators have understood by these words that the troops refused to obey orders; but Sallust’s meaning is only that they expressed, by looks and gestures, their unwillingness to proceed.
 LXIX As a native of Latium–_Nam is civis ex Latio erat_. “As he was a Latin, he was not protected by the Porcian law (see Cat., c. 51), though how far this law had power in the camp, is not agreed.” _Allen_. Gerlach thinks that it had the same power in the camp as elsewhere, with reference to Roman citizens. But Roman citizenship was not extended to the Latins till the end of the Social War, A.U.C. 662. Plutarch, however, in his Life of Caius Gracchus (c. 9), speaks of Livius Drusus having been abetted by the patricians in proposing a law for exempting the Latin soldiers from being flogged, about thirty years earlier; and it seems to have been passed, but, from this passage of Sallust, appears not to have remained in force. Lipsius touches on this obscure point in his _Militia Romana_, v. 18, but settles nothing. Plutarch, in his Life of Marius, c. 8, says that Turpilius was an old retainer of the family of Metellus, whom he attended, in this war, as _prafectus fabrum_, or master of the artificers; that, being afterward appointed governor of Vacea, he exercised his office with great justice and humanity, that his life was spared by Jugurtha at the solicitation of the inhabitants; that, when he was brought to trial, Metellus thought him innocent, and that he would not have been condemned but for the malice of Marius, who exasperated the other members of the council against him. He adds, that after his death, his innocence became apparent, and that Marius boasted of having planted in the breast of Metellus an avenging fury, that would not fail to torment him for having put to death the innocent friend of his family. Hence Sir Henry Steuart has accused Sallust of wilfully misrepresenting the character of Turpilius, as well as the whole transaction. But as much credit is surely due to Sallust as to Plutarch.
 LXX. To which Jugurtha–was unable to attend–_Quae Jugartha, fesso, aut majoribus astricto, superaverant_. “Which had remained to (or been too much for) Jugurtha, when weary, or engaged in more important affairs.”
 Among the winter-quarters of the Romans–_Inter hiberna Romanorum_.It is stated in c. 61, as Kritzius observes, that Metellus, when he put his army into winter-quarters, had, at the same time, placed garrisons in such of Jugurtha’s towns as had revolted to him. The forces of the Romans being thus dispersed, Nabdalsa might justly be said to have his army _inter hiberna_, “_among_ their winter-quarters.”
 LXXI. Behind his head–_Super caput_. On the back of the bolster that supported his head; part of which might be higher than the head itself.
 LXXIIL The factious tribunes–_Seditiosi magistratus_.
 After the lapse of many years–_Post multas tempestates_. Apparently the period since A.U.C. 611, when Quintus Pompeius, who, as Cicero says (in Verr. ii. 5), was _humile atque obscuro loco natus_, obtained the consulship; that is, a term of forty-three or forty-four years.
 That decree was thus rendered abortive–_Ea res frustra fuit_. By a _lex Sempronia_, a law of Caius Gracchus, it was enacted that the senate should fix the provinces for the future consuls before the _comitia_ for electing them were held. But from Jug. c. 26, it appears that the consuls might settle by lot, or by agreement between themselves, which of those two provinces each of them should take. How far the senate were allowed or accustomed in general, to interfere in the arrangement, it is not easy to discover: but on this occasion they had taken on themselves to pass a resolution in favor of the patrician. Lest similar scenes, however, to those of the Sempronian times should be enacted, they yielded the point to the people.
 LXXV. Thala–The river on which this town stood is not named by Sallust, but it appears to have been the Bagrada. It seems to have been nearly destroyed by the Romans, after the defeat of Juba, in the time of Julius Caesar; though Tacitus, Ann. iii. 21, mentions it as having afforded a refuge to the Romans in the insurrection of the Numidian chief, Tacfarinas. D’Anville and Dr. Shaw, _Travels in Bombay_, vol. i. pt. 2, ch. 5, think it the same with Telepte, now _Ferre-anah_; but this is very doubtful. See Cellar. iv. 5. It was in ruins in the time of Strabo.
 Had done more than was required of them–_Officia intenderant._ “Auxit _intenditque_ saevitiam exacerbatus indicio filii sui Drusi” Suet. Tib. 62.
 LXXVI. Nor did he ever–continue, etc.–_Neque postea–moratus, simulabat_, etc.–Most editors take _moratus_ for _morans_; Allen places a colon after it, as if it were for _moratus est_.
 And erected towns upon it to protect, etc.–_Et super aggerem impositis turribus epus et administros tutari_. “And protected the work and the workmen with towers placed on the mound.” _Impositis turribus_ is not the ablative absolute, but the ablative of the instrument.
 LXXVII. Leptis–Leptis Major, now _Lebida_. In c. 19, Leptis Minor is meant.
 Their own safety–_Suam salutem_: i.e. the safety of the people of Leptis.
 LXXVIII. Which take their name from their nature–_Quibus nomen ex re inditum._ From [Greek: _surein_], _to draw,_ because the stones and sand were drawn to and fro by the force of the wind and tide. But it has been suggested that this etymology is probably false; it is less likely that their name should be from the Greek than from the Arabic, in which _sert_ signifies a desert tract or region, a term still applied to the desert country bordering on the Syrtea. See Ritter, Allgem. vergleich, Geog. vol. i. p. 929. The words which, in Havercamp, close this description of the Syrtes, “Syrtes ab tractu nominatae”, and which Gruter and Putschius suspected not to be Sallust’s, Cortius omitted; and his example has been followed by Muller and Burnouf; Gerlach, Kritzius, and Dietsch, have retained them. Gerlach, however, thinks them a gloss, though they are found in every manuscript but one.
 Almost at the extremity of Africa–_Prope in extrema Africa._ “By _extrema Africa_ Gerlach rightly understands the eastern part of Africa, bordering on Egypt, and at a great distance from Numidia.” _Kritzius_.
 The language alone–_Lingua modo_.
 From the king’s dominions–_Ab imperio regis._ “Understand Masinissa’s, Micipsa’s, or Jugurtha’s.” _Burnouf_.
 LXXIX. Philaeni–The account of these Carthaginian brothers with a Greek name, _philainoi, praise-loving_, is probably a fable. Cortius thinks that the inhabitants, observing two mounds rising above the surrounding level, fancied they must have been raised, not by nature, but by human labor, and invented a story to account for their existence. “The altars,” according to Mr. Rennell (Geog. of Herod., p. 640), “were situated about seven ninths of the way from Carthage to Cyrene; and the deception,” he adds, “would have been too gross, had it been pretended that the Carthaginian party had traveled seven parts in nine, while the Cyrenians had traveled no more than two such parts of the way.” Pliny (II. N. v. 4) says that the altars were of sand; Strabo (lib. iii.) says that in his time they had vanished. Pomponius Mela and Valerius Maximus repeat the story, but without adding any thing to render it more probable.
 Devoid of vegetation–_Nuda gignentium_. So c. 93, _cunota gignentium natura_. Kritzius justly observes that _gignentia_ is not to be taken in the sense of _genita_, as Cortius and others interpret, but in its own active sense; the ground was bare _of all that was productive_, or _of whatever generates any thing_. This interpretation is suggested by Perizonius ad Sanctu Minerv. i. 15.
 Sacrificed themselves–_Seque vitamque–condonavere_. “Nihil aliud est quam _vitam suam_, sc.[Greek: _eu dia dyoin_].” _Allen_.
 LXXX. Sell–honorable or dishonorable–_Omnia honesta atque inhonesta vendere_. See Cat. c. 30. They had been bribed by Jugurtha to use their influence against Bocchus.
 A daughter of Bocchus, too, was married to Jugurtha–_Jugurthae filia Bocchi nupserat_. Several manuscripts and old editions have _Boccho_, making Bocchus the son-in-law of Jugurtha. But Plutarch (Vit. Mar. c. 10, Sull. c. 8) and Florus (iii. 1) agree in speaking of him as Jugurtha’s father-in-law. Bocchus was doubtless an older man than Jugurtha, having a grown up son, Volux, c. 105. Castilioneus and Cortius, therefore, saw the necessity of reading _Bocchi_, and, other editors have followed them, except Gerlach, “who,” says Kritzius, “has given _Bocchi_ in his larger, and _Boccho_ in his smaller and more recent edition, in order that readers using both may have an opportunity of making a choice.”
 No one of them becomes a companion to him–_Nulla pro socia obtinet The use of _obtinet_ absolutely, or with the word dependent on it understood, prevails chiefly among the later Latin writers. Livy, however, has _fama obtinuit_, xxi. 46. “The _tyro_ is to be reminded,” says Dietsch, “that _obtinet_ is not the same as _habetar_, but is always for _locum obtinet_.”
 LXXXI. The two kings, with their armies–The text has only _exercitus_.
 To lessen Bocchus’s chance of peace–_Bocchi pacem imminuere_. He wished to engage Bocchus in some act of hostility against the Romans, so as to render any coalition between them impossible.
 LXXXII. Should have learned something of the Moors –_Cognitis Mauris, i.e._ after knowing something of the Moors, _and not before_. _Cognitis militibus_ is used in the same way in c. 39; and Dietsch says that _amicitia Jugurthae parum cognita_ is for _nondum cognita_, c. 14.
 LXXXIV. Discharged veterans–_Homines emeritis stipendiis._ Soldiers who had completed their term of service.
 Means of warfare–_Usum belli._ That is _ea quae belli usus posceret_, troops and supplies.
 Cherished the fancy–_Animis trahebant. “Trahere animo_ is always to revolve in the mind, not to let the thought of a thing escape from the mind.” _Kritzius_.
 LXXXV. Its interests ought to be managed, etc.–_Majore cura illam administrari quam haec peti debere._ Cortius injudiciously omits the word _illam_. No one has followed him but Allen.
 Hostile–_Occursantis._ Thwarting, opposing.
 That you may not be deceived in me–_Ut neque vos capiamini._ “This verb is undoubtedly used in this passage for _decipere_. Compare Tibull. Eleg. iii. 6, 45: _Nec vos aut capiant pendentia brachia collo, Aut fallat blanda sordida tingua prece._ Cic. Acad. iv. 20: _Sapientis vim maximam esse cavere, ne capiatur._” Gerlach.
 To secure their election–_Per ambitionem. Ambire_ is to canvass for votes; to court the favor of the people.
 Of yonder crowd of nobles–_ex illo globo nobilitatis. Illo,_ [Greek: _deiktikos_].
 I know some–who after they have been elected, etc.–“At whom Marina directs this observation, it is impossible to tell. Gerlach referring to Cic. Quest. Acad. ii. 1, 2, thinks that Lucullus is meant. But if he supposes that Lucullus was present _to the mind of Marius_ when he spoke, he is egregiously deceived, for Marius was forty years antecedent to Lucullus. It is possible, however, that _Sallust_, thinking of Lucullus when he wrote Marius’s speech, may have fallen into an anachronism, and have attributed to Marius, whose character he had assumed, an observation which might justly have been made in his own day.” _Kritzius_.
 Persons who invert the order of things–_Homines Praeposteri._ Men who do that last which should be done first.
 For though to discharge the duties of the office, etc.–_Nam gerere, quam fieri, tempore posterius, re atque usu prius est._ With _gerere_ is to be understood _consulatum_; with _fieri, consulem._ This is imitated from Demosthenes, Olynth. iii.: [Greek: _To gar prattein ton legein kai cheirotonein, usteron on tae taxei, proteron tae dynamei kai kreitton esti_.] “Acting is posterior in order to speaking and voting, but prior and superior in effect.”
 With those haughty nobles–_Cum illorum superbui. Virtus Scipiades et mitis sapientia Laeli._
 My condition _Mihi fortuna_. “That is, my lot, or condition, in which I was born, in which I had no hand in producing.” _Dietsch_.
 The circumstance of birth, etc. _Naturam unam et communem omnium existumo_. “Nascendi sortem” is the explanation which Dietsch gives to _naturam_. One man is _born_ as well as another, but the difference between men is made by their different modes of action; a difference which the nobles falsely suppose to proceed from fortune. “Voltaire, Mohammed, Act.I., sce. iv., has expressed the sentiment of Sallust exactly:
Les mortels sont egaux, ce n’est point la naissance, C’est la seule vertu qui fait leur difference.” _Burnouf._
 And could it be inquired of the fathers, etc.–_Ac, si jam ex patribus Alibini aut Bestiae quaeri posset_, etc. _Patres_, in this passage, is not, as Anthon imagines, the same as _majores_; as is apparent from the word _gigni_. The fathers of Albinus and Bestia were probably dead at the time that Marius spoke. The passage which Anthon quotes from Plutarch to illustrate _patres_, is not applicable, for the word there is [Greek: _pragonoi: Epunthaneto ton paronton, ei mae kai tous ekeinon oiontai progonous auto mallon an emxasthai paraplaesious ekgonous apolitein, ate dae maed autous di eugeneian, all ap aretaes kai kalon ergon endoxous genomenous_.] Vit. Mar. c. 9. “He would then ask the people whether they did not think that the ancestors of those men would have wished rather to leave a posterity like him, since they themselves had not risen to glory by their high birth, but by their virtue and heroic achievements?” _Langhorne_.
 Abstinence–_Innocentiae_. Abstinence from all vicious indulgence.
 Honorable exertion–_Virtutis_. See notes on Cat. c. 1, and Jug. c. 1.
 They occupy the greatest part of their orations in extolling their ancestors–_Pleraque oratione majores suos extollunt._ “They extol their ancestors in the greatest part of their speech.”
 The glory of ancestors sheds a light on their posterity, Juvenal, viii.138:
Incipit ipsorum contra te stare parentum Nobilitas, claramque facem praeferre pudendis.
Thy fathers’ virtues, clear and bright, display Thy shameful deeds, as with the light of day.
 I feel assured–_Ex animi sententia_. “It was a common form of strong asseveration.” _Gerlach._
 Spears–_Hastas_. “A _hasta pura_, that is a spear without iron, was anciently the reward of a soldier the first time that he conquered in battle, Serv. ad Virg. Aen. vi. 760; it was afterward given to one who had struck down an enemy in a sally or skirmish, Lips. ad Polyb. de Milit. Rom. v.17.” _Burnouf_.
 A banner–_Vexillum_. “Standards were also military rewards. Vopiscus relates that ten _hastae purae_, and four standards of two colors, were presented to Aurelian. Suetonius (Aug. 25) says that Agrippa was presented by Augustus, after his naval victory, with a standard of the color of the sea. These standards therefore, were not, as Badius Ascensius thinks, always taken from the enemy; though this was sometimes the case, as appears from Sil. Ital. x.v. 261:
Tunc hasta viris, tunc martia cuique Vexilla, ut meritum, et praedae libamina, dantur.” _Burnouf_.
 Caparisons–_Phaleras_. “Sil. Ital. xv. 255:
_Phaleris_ hic pectora fulget:
Hic _torque_ aurato circumdat bellica collae.
Juvenal, xv. 60:
Ut laeti _phaleris_ omnes et _torquibus_ omnes.
These passages show that _phalerae_, a name for the ornaments of horses, were also decorations of men; but they differed from the _torques_, or collars, in this respect, that the _phalerae_ hung down over the breast, and the _torques_ only encircled the neck. See Lips. ad Polyb. de Milit. Rom. v. 17.” _Burnouf_.
 Valor–_Virtutem._ “The Greeks, those illustrious instructors of the world, had not been able to preserve their liberty; their learning therefore had not added to their valor. _Virtus_, in this passage, is evidently _fortitudo bellica_, which, in the opinion of Marius, was _the only virtue_.” Burnouf. See Plutarch, Vit. Mar. c. 2.
 To be vigilant at my post–_Praesidia agitare_. Or “to keep guard at my post.” “_Praesidia agitare_ signifies nothing more than to protect a party of foragers or the baggage, or to keep guard round a besieged city.” _Vortius_.
 Keep no actor–_Histrionem nullum–habeo_. “Luxuriae peregrinae origo ab exercitu Asiatico (Manlii sc. Vulsonis, A.U.C. 563) invecta in urbem est.—-Tum psaltriae sambucistriaeque et convivalia _ludionum_ obiectamenta, addita epulis.” Liv. xxxix. 6. “By this army returning from Asia was the origin of foreign luxury imported into the city.—-At entertainments–were introduced players on the harp and timbrel, with _buffoons_ for the diversion of the guests.” _Baker_. Professor Anthon, who quotes this passage, says that _histrio_ “here denotes a buffoon kept for the amusement of the company.” But such is not the meaning of the word _histrio_. It signifies one who in some way _acted_, either by dancing and gesticulation, or by reciting, perhaps to the music of the _sambucistriae or other minstrels. See Smith’s Dict. of Gr. and Rom. Ant. Art. _Histrio_, sect. 2. Scheller’s Lex. sub. vv. _Histrio, Ludio_, and _Salto_. The emperors had whole companies of actors, _histriones aulici_, for their private amusement. Suetonius says of Augustus (c. 74) that at feasts he introduced _acroamata et histriones_. See also Spartian. _Had_. c. 19; Jul.Capitol. _Verus_, c.8.
 My cook–_Coquum_. Livy, in the passage just cited from him, adds _tum coquus villisimum antiquis mancipium, et estimatione et usu in pretio esse; ut quod ministerium fuerat, ars haberi coepta_. “The cook, whom the ancients considered as the meanest of their slaves both in estimation and use, became highly valuable.” _Baker_.
 Avarice, inexperience, and arrogance–_Avaritiam, imperitiam, superbiam_. “The President De Brosses and Dotteville have observed, that Marius, in these words, makes an allusion to the characters of all the generals that had preceded him, noticing at once the avarice of Calpurnius, the inexperience of Albinus, and the pride of Metellus.” _Le Brun_.
 For no man, by slothful timidity, has escaped the lot of mortals–_Etenim ignavia nemo immortalis factus. The English translators have rendered this phrase as if they supposed the sense to be, “No man has gained immortal renown by inaction.” But this is not the signification. What Marius means, is, that _no man, however cautiously and timidly he may avoid danger, has prolonged his life to immortality_. Taken in this sense, the words have their proper connection with what immediately follows: _neque quisquam parens liberis, uti aeterni forent, optavit_. The sentiment is the same as in the verse of Horace: _Mors et fugacem persequitur virum_; or in these lines of Tyrtaeus:
[Greek: Ou gar kos thanaton ge psygein eimarmenon estin Andr’, oud’ haen progonon hae genos athanaton Pollaki daeiotaeta phygon kai doupon akonton Erchetai, en d’ oiko moira kichen thanaton.]
To none, ‘mong men, escape from death is giv’n, Though sprung from deathless habitants of heav’n: Him that has fled the battle’s threatening sound, The silent foot of fate at home has found.
The French translator, Le Brun, has given the right sense: “Jamais la lachete n’a preserve de la mort;” and Dureau Delamalle: “Pour etre un lache, on n’en serait pas plus immortel.” _Ignavia_ is properly _inaction_; but here signifies _a timid shrinking from danger_.
 Nor has any parent wished for his children, etc.–[Greek: _Ou gar athanatous sphisi paidas euchontai genesthai, all’ agathous kai eukleeis_.] “Men do not pray that they may have children that will never die, but such as will be good and honorable.” Plato, Menex. 20. “This speech, differing from the other speeches in Sallust both in words and thoughts, conveys a clear notion of that fierce and objurgatory eloquence which was natural to the rude manners and bold character of Marius. It is a speech which can not be called polished and modulated, but must rather be termed rough and ungraceful. The phraseology is of an antique cast, and some of the wordscoarse.—-But it is animated and fervid, rushing on like a torrent; and by language of such a character and structure, the nature and manners of Marius are excellently represented.” _Gerlach_.
 LXXXVI. Not after the ancient method, or from the classes–_Non more majorum, neque ex classibus_. By the regulation of Servius Tullius, who divided the Roman people into six classes, the highest class consisting of the wealthiest, and the others decreasing downward in regular gradation, none of the sixth class, who were not considered as having any fortune, but were _capite censi_, “rated by the head,” were allowed to enlist in the army. The enlistment of the lower order, commenced, it is said, by Marius, tended to debase the army, and to render it a fitter tool for the purposes of unprincipled commanders. See Aul. Gell., xvi. 10.
 Desire to pay court–_Per ambitionem_.
 LXXXVII. Having filled up his legions, etc. Their numbers had been thinned in actions with the enemy, and Metellus perhaps took home some part of the army which did not return to it.
 Their country and parents, etc–_Patriam parentesque_, etc. Sallust means to say that the soldiers would see such to be the general effect and result of vigorous warfare; not that they had any country or parents to protect in Numidia. But the observation has very much of the rhetorician in it.
 LXXXVIII. From our allies–_Ex sociis nostris_. The people of the province.
 Obliged the king himself–to take flight without his arms _Ipsumque regem–armis exuerat_. He attacked Jugurtha so suddenly and vigorously that he was compelled to flee, leaving his arms behind him.
: LXXXIX. The Libyan Hercules–_Hercules Libys_. “He is one of the forty and more whom Varro mentions, and who, it is probable, were leaders of trading expeditions or colonies. See _supra_, c. 18. A Libyan Hercules is mentioned by Solinus xxvii.” _Bernouf_.
 Marius conceived a strong desire–_Marium maxima cupido invaserat_. “A strong desire had seized Marius.”
 Wild beasts’ flesh–_Ferina carne_. Almost all our translators have rendered this “venison.” But the Africans lived on the flesh of whatever beasts they took in the chase.
 XC. The consul, etc.–Here is a long and awkward parenthesis. I have adhered to the construction of the original. The “yet,” _tamen_, that follows the parenthesis, refers to the matter included in it.
 He consigned to the care, etc.–_Equitibus auxiliariis agendum attribuit_. “He gave to be driven by the auxiliary cavalry.”
 The town of Lares–_Oppidum Laris_. Cortius seems to have been right in pronouncing _Laris_ to be an accusative plural. Gerlach observes that Lares occurs in the Itinerary of Antonius and in St. Augustine, Adv. Donatist., vi. 28.
 XCI. After marching the whole night.–He seems to have marched in the night for the sake of coolness.
 XCII. All his undertakings, etc.–_Omnia non bene consulta in virtutem trahebantur_. “All that he did rashly was attributed to his _consciousness of_ extraordinary power.” If they could not praise his prudence, they praised his resolution and energy.
 Difficult of execution–_Difficilem_. There seemed to be as many impediments to success as in the affair at Capsa, though the undertaking was not of so perilous a nature.
 In the midst of a plain–_Inter caeteram planitiem_. By _caeteram_ he signifies that _the rest_ of the ground, except the part on which the fort stood, was plain and level.
 Directed his utmost efforts to take–_Summa vi capere intendit_. It is to be observed that _summa vi_ refers to _intendit_, not to _capere_. _Summa ope_ animum _intendit ut caperet_.
 Among the vineae–_Inter vineas_. “_Inter_, for which Muller, from a conjecture of Glareanus, substituted _intra_ is supported by all the manuscripts, and ought not to be altered, although _intra_ would have been more exact, as the signification of _inter_ is of greater extent, and includes that of _intra_. _Inter_ is used when a thing is inclosed on each side; _intra_, when it is inclosed on all sides. If the soldiers, therefore, are considered as surrounded with the _vineae_, they should be described as _intra vineas_; but as there is no reason why they may not also be contemplated as being inclosed only laterally by the _vineae_, the phrase _inter vineas_ may surely in that case be applied to them. Gronovius and Drakenborch ad Liv., i. 10, have observed how often these propositions are interchanged when referred to _time_.” Kritzius. On _vineae_, see c. 76.
 XCIII. A certain Ligurian–in the auxiliary cohorts–The Ligurians were not numbered among the Italians or _socii_ in the Roman army, but attached to it only as auxiliaries.
 A desire–of seeing what he had never seen–_More humani ingenii, cupido ignara visundi invadit_. This is the reading of Cortius, to which Muller and Allen adhere. Gerlach inserted in his text, _More humani ingeni, cupidio difficilia faciundi animum vortit_; which Kritzius, Orelli, and Dietsch, have adopted, and which Cortius acknowledged to be the reading of the generality of the manuscripts, except that they vary as to the last two words, some having _animad vortit_. The sense of this reading will be, “the desire of doing something difficult, which is natural to the human mind, drew off his thoughts from gathering snails, and led him to contemplate something of a more arduous character.” But the reading of Cortius gives so much better a sense to the passage, that I have thought proper to follow it. Burnouf, with Havercamp and the editions antecedent to Cortius, reads _more humanae cupidinis ignara visundi animum vortit_, of which the first five words are taken from a quotation of Aulus Gellius, ix. 12, who, however, may have transcribed them from some other part of Sallust’s works, now lost.
 Horizontally–_Prona_. This word here signifies _forward_, not _downward_, as Anthon and others interpret, for trees growing out of a rock or bank will not take a _descending_ direction.
 As nature directs all vegetables–_Quo cuncta gignentium natura fert_. It is to be observed that the construction is _natura fert cuncta gignentium_, for _cuncta gignentia_. On _gignentia_, i.e. vegetable, or _whatever produces any thing_, see c. 79, and Cat., c. 53.
 Four centurions for a guard–_Praesidio qui forent, quatuor centuriones_. It is a question among the commentators whether the centurions were attended by their centuries or not; Cortius thinks that they were not, as ten men were sufficient to cause an alarm in the fortress, which was all that Marius desired. But that Cortius is in the wrong, and that there were common soldiers with the centurions, appears from the following considerations: 1. Marius would hardly have sent, or Sallust have spoken of, _four_ men as a guard to _six_. 2. Why should centurions only have been selected, and not common soldiers as well as their officers? 3. An expression in the following chapter, _laqueis–quibus allevati milites facilius escenderent_, seems to prove that there were others present besides the centurions and the trumpeters. The word _milites_ is indeed wanting in the text of Cortius, but appears to have been omitted by him merely to favor his own notion as to the absence of soldiers, for he left it out, as Kritzius says, _summa libidine, ne uno quidem codice assentiente_, “purely of his own will, and without the authority of a single manuscript.” Taking a fair view of the passage, we seem necessarily led to believe that the centurions were attended by a portion, if not the whole, of their companies. See the following note.
 XCIV. Those who commanded the centuries–_Illi qui centuriis praeerant_. This is the reading of several manuscripts, and of almost all the editions before that of Kritzius, and may be tolerated if we suppose that the centurions were attended by their men, and that Sallust, in speaking of the change of dress, meant _to include the men_, although he specifies only the officers. Yet it is difficult to conceive why Sallust should have used such a periphrase for _centuriones_. Seven of the manuscripts, however, have _qui adsensuri erant_, which Kritzius and Dietsch have adopted. Two have _qui ex centuriis praeerant_. Allen, not unhappily, conjectures, _qui praesidio erant_. Cortius suspected the phrase, _qui centuriis praeerant_, and thought it a transformation of the words _qui adscensuris praeerat_, which somebody had written in the margin as an explanation of the following word _duce_, and which were afterward altered and thrust into the text.
 Progress–might be less impeded–_Nisus–facilius foret_. The adverb for the adjective. So in the speech of Adherbal, c. 14, _ut tutius essem_.
 Unsafe–_Dubia nisu_. “Not to be depended upon for support.” _Nisu_ is the old dative for _nisui_.
 Causing a testudo to be formed–_Testudine acta_. The soldiers placed their shields over their heads, and joined them close together, forming a defense like the shell of a tortoise.
 XCV. For I shall in no other place allude to his affairs–_Neque enim allo loco de Sullae rebus dicturi sumus._ “These words show that Sallust, at this time, had not thought of writing _Histories_, but that he turned his attention to that pursuit after he had finished the Jugurthine war. For that he spoke of Sylla in his large history is apparent from several extant fragments of it, and from Plutarch, who quotes Sallust, Vit. Syll., c. 3.” _Kritzius._
 Lucius Sisenna–He wrote a history of the civil wars between Sylla and Marius, Vell. Paterc. ii. 9. Cicero alludes to his style as being jejune and puerile, Brut., c. 64, De Legg. i. 2. About a undred and fifty fragments of his history remain.
 Except that he might have acted more for his honor with regard to his wife–_Nisi quod de uxore potuit honestius consuli._ As these words are vague and indeterminate, it is not agreed among the critics and translators to what part of Sylla’s life Sallust refers. I suppose, with Rupertus, Aldus, Manutius, Crispinus, and De Brosses, that the allusion is to his connection with Valeria, of which the history is given by Plutarch in his life of Sylla, which the English reader may take in Langhorne’s translation: “A few months after Metella’s death, he presented the people with a show of gladiators; and as, at that time, men and women had no separate places, but sat promiscuously in the theater, a woman of great beauty, and of one of the best families, happened to sit near Sylla. She was the daughter of Messala, and sister to the orator Hortensius; her name was Valeria; and she had lately been divorced from her husband. This woman, coming behind Sylla, touched him, and took off a little of the nap of his robe, and then returned to her place. Sylla looked at her, quite amazed at her familiarity, when she said, ‘Wonder not, my lord, at what I have done; I had only a mind to share a little in your good fortune.’ Sylla was far from being displeased; on the contrary, it appeared that he was flattered very agreeably, for he sent to ask her name, and to inquire into her family and character. Then followed an interchange of amorous regards and smiles, which ended in a contract and marriage. The lady, perhaps, was not to blame. But Sylla, though he got a woman of reputation, and great accomplishments, yet came into the match upon wrong principles. Like a youth, he was caught with soft looks and languishing airs, things that are wont to excite the lowest of the passions.” Others have thought that Sallust refers to Sylla’s conduct on the death of his wife Metella, above mentioned, to whom, as she happened to fall sick when he was giving an entertainment to the people, and as the priest forbade him to have his house defiled with death on the occasion, he unfeelingly sent a bill of divorce, ordering her to be carried out of the house while the breath was in her. Cortius, Kritz, and Langius. think that the allusion is to Sylla’a general faithlessness to his wives, for he had several; as if Sallust had used the singular for the plural, _uxore_ for _uxoribus_, or _reuxoria_; but if Sallust meant to allude to more than one wife, why should he have restricted himself to the singular?
 Lived on the easiest terms with his friends–_Facilis amicitia_ The critics are in doubt about the sense of this phrase. I have given that which Dietsch prefers, who says that a man _facilis amicitia_ is “one who easily grants his friends all that they desire, exacts little from them, and is no severe censor of their morals.” Cortius explains it _facilis ad amicitiam_, and Facciolati, in his Lexicon, _facile sibi amicos parans_, but these interpretations, as Kritzius observes, are hardly suitable to the ablative case.
 Most fortunate–_Felicissumo_. Alluding, perhaps, to the title of Felix, which he assumed after his great victory over Marius.
 His desert–_Industriam_. That is, the efforts which he made to attain distinction.
 XCVII. When scarcely a tenth part of the day remained–_Vix decima parte die reliqua._ A remarkably exact specification of the time.
 From various quarters–_Ex multis._ From his scouts, who came in from all sides.
 The Roman veterans, who were necessarily well experienced in war,–The reading of Cortius is, _Romani veteres, novique, et ob ea scientes belli;_ which he explains by supposing that the new recruits _were joined with_ the veterans, and that both united were consequently well skilled in war, citing, in support of his supposition, a passage in c. 87: _Sic brevi spatio_ novi veteresqua _coaluere, et virtus omnium aequalis facta._ And Ascensius had previously given a similar explanation, _quod etiam veterani adessent._ But many later critics have not been induced to believe that Cortius’s reading will bear any such interpretation; and accordingly Kritzius, Dietsch, and Orelli, have ejected _novique_; as indeed Ciaeconius and Ursinus had long before recommended. Muller, Burnouf, and Allen, retain it, adopting Cortius’s interpretation. Gerlach also retains it, but not without hesitation. But it is very remarkable that it occurs in all the manuscripts but one, which has _Romani veteres boni scientes erant ut quos locus,_ etc.
 _Neque minus hostibus conturbatis_. If the enemy had not been in as much disorder as himself, Marius would hardly have been able to effect his retreat.
 _Pleno gradu_.–“By the _militaris gradus_ twenty miles were completed in five hours of a summer day; by the _plenusus_, which is quicker, twenty-four miles were traversed in the same time.” Veget. i.9.
 XCIX. When the watches were changed–_Per vigilias: i. e. at the end of each watch, when the guards were relieved. “The nights, by the aid of a clepsydra, were divided into four watches, the termination of each being marked by the blast of a trumpet or horn. See Viget. in. 8: _A tubicine omnes vigiliae committuntur; et finitis horis a cornicine revocantur_.” Kritzius He also refers to Liv. vii. 35; Lucan. viii. 24; Tacit. Hist. v. 22.
 Auxiliary cohorts–_Cohortium_. I have added the word _auxiliary_. That they were the cohorts of the auxiliaries or allies is apparent, as the word _legionum_ follows. Kritzius indeed thinks otherwise, supposing that the cohorts had particular trumpeters, distinct from those of the whole legion. But for this notion there seems to be no sufficient ground. Sallust speaks of the _cohortes sociorum_, c. 58, and _cohortes Ligurum_, c. 100.
 Sally forth from the camp–_Portis erumpere_. Sallust uses the common phrase for issuing from the camp. It can hardly he supposed, that the Romans had formed a regular camp with gates during the short time that they had been upon the hill, especially as they had fled to it in great disorder.
 Stupor–_Vecordia_. A feeling that deprived them of all sense.
 C. in form of a square–_Quadrato agmine_. “A hollow square, with the baggage in the center; see Serv. ad Verg. Aen. xii.121. … Such an _agmen_ Sallust, in c. 46, calls _munitum_, as it was prepared to defend itself against the enemy, from whatever quarter they might approach.” _Kritzius_.
 Might be endured by them with cheerfulness _Volentibus esset._ A Greek phrase, _Boulomenois eiae._
 Dread of shame–_Pudore._ Inducing each to have a regard to his character.
 CI. Trusting that one of them, assuredly, etc.–_Ratua es omnibus aque aliquos ab tergo hostibus ventures. By aequo Sallust_ signifies that each of the four bodies would have an equal chance of coming on the rear of the Romans.
 In person and with his officers–_Ipse aliique._ “The _alii_, are the _praefecti equitum,_ officers of the cavalry.” _Kritzius._
 Wheeled secretly about, with a few of his followers, to the infantry–_Clam–ad pedites convertit_. What infantry are meant, the commentators can not agree, nor is there any thing in the narrative on which a satisfactory decision can be founded. As the arrival of Bocchus is mentioned immediately before, Cortius supposes that the infantry of Bocchus are signified; and it may be so; but to whatever party the words wore addressed, they were intended to be heard by the Romans, or for what purpose were they spoken in Latin? Jugurtha may have spoken the words in both languages, and this, from what follows, would appear to have been the case, for both sides understood him. _Quod ubi milites_ (evidently the Roman soldiers) _accepere–simul barbari animos tollere_, etc. The _clam_ signifies that Jugurtha turned about, or wheeled off, so as to escape the notice of Marius, with whom he had been contending.
 By vigorously cutting down our infantry–_Satis impigre occiso pedite nostro_. “A ces mots il leur montra son epee teinte du sang des notres, dont il venait, en effet, de faire une assez cruelle boucherie.” _De Brosses_. Of the other French translators, Beauzee and Le Brun render the passage in a similar way; Dotteville and Durean Delamalle, as well as all our English translators, take _pedite_ as signifying _only one soldier_. Sir Henry Steuart even specifies that it was “a legionary soldier.” The commentators, I should suppose, have all regarded the word as having a plural signification; none of them, except Burnouf, who expresses a needless doubt, say any thing on the point.
 The spectacle on the open plains was then frightful–_Tum spectaculum horribile campis patentibus_, etc. The idea of this passage was probably taken, as Ciacconius intimates, from a description in Xenophon, Agesil. ii. 12, 14, part of which is quoted by Longinus, Sect. 19, as an example of the effect produced by the omission of conjunctions: [Greek: _Kai symbalontes tas aspidas eothounto, emachonto, apekteinon, apethnaeskon Epei ge maen elaexen hae machae, paraen dae theasasthai entha synepeson allaelois, taen men gaen aimati pe, ormenaen, nekrous de peimenous philious kai polemious met allaelon, aspidas de diatethrummenas, dorata syntethrausmena, egchoipidia gumna kouleon ta men chamai, ta d’en somasi, ta d’eti meta cheiras_.] “Closing their shields together, they pushed, they fought, … But when the battle was over, you might have seen, where they had fought, the ground clotted with blood, the corpses of friends and enemies mingled together, and pierced shields, broken lances, and swords without their sheaths, strewed on the ground, sticking in the dead bodies, or still remaining in the hands that had wielded them when alive.” Tacitus, Agric. c. 37. has copied this description of Sallust, as all the commentators have remarked: _Tum vero patentibus locis grande et atrox spectaculum. Sequi, vulnerare, capere, atque eosdem, oblatis aliis, trucidare…. Passim, arma et corpora, et laceri artus, et cruenta humus_. “The sight on the open field was then striking and horrible; they pursued, they inflicted wounds, they took … Every where were seen arms and corpses, mangled limbs, and the ground stained with blood.”
 Besides, the Roman people, even from the very infancy–The reading of this passage, before the edition of Cortius, was this: _Ad hoc, populo Romano jam a principio inopi melius visum amicos, quam servos, quaerere_. Gruter proposed to read _Ad hoc populo Romano inopi melius est visum_, etc., whence Cortius made _Ad hoc, populo Romano jam inopi visum_, etc. But the Bipont editors, observing that _inopi_ was not quite consistent with _quaerere servos_, altered the passage to _Ad hoc, populo Romano jam a principio reipublicae melius visum_, etc., which seems to be the best emendation that has been proposed, and which I have accordingly followed. Kritzius and Dietsch adopt it, except that they omit _reipublicae_, and put nothing in the place of _inopi_. Gerlach retains _inopi_, on the principle of “quo insolentius, eo verius,” and it may, after all, be genuine. Cortius omitted _melius_ on no authority but his own.
 Out of which he had forcibly driven Jugurtha–_Unde ut Jugurtham expulerit [expulerat]_ There is here some obscurity. The manuscripts vary between _expulerit_ and _expulerat_. Cortius, and Gerlaen in his second edition, adopt _expulerat_, which they of necessity refer to Marius; but to make Bocchus speak thus, is, as Kritzius says, to make him speak very foolishly and arrogantly. Kritzius himself, accordingly, adopts _expulerit_, and supposes that Bocchus invents a falsehood, in the belief that the Romans wouldhave no means of detecting it. But Bocchus may have spoken truth, referring, as Muller suggests, to some previous transactions between him and Jugurtha, to which Sallust does not elsewhere allude.
 In ill plight–_Sine decore_.
 For interested bounty–_Largitio_. “The word signifies liberal treatment of others with a view to our own interest; without any real goodwill.” _Muller_. “He intends a severe stricture on his own age, and the manners of the Romans.” _Dietsch_.
 About forty days. Waiting, apparently, for the return of Marius.
 CIV. Having failed in the object, etc.–_Infecto, quo intenderat, negotio._ Though this is the reading of most of the manuscripts, Kritzius, Muller, and Dietach, read _confecto_, as if Marius could not have failed in his attempt.
 Are always verging to opposite extremes.–_Semper in adversa mutant_. Rose renders this “are always changing, and constantly for the worse;” and most other translators have given something similar. But this is absurd; for every one sees that all changes in human affairs are not for the worse. _Adversa_ is evidently to be taken in the sense which I have given.
 CV. At his discretion–_Arbitratu_. Kritzius observes that this word comprehends the notion of plenary powers to treat and decide: _der mit unbeschrankter Vollmacht unterhandeln konnte_.
 Presenting–_Intendere_. The critics are in doubt to what to refer this word; some have thought of understanding _animum_; Cortius, Wasse, and Muller, think it is meant only of the bows of the archers; Kritzius, Burnouf, and Allen, refer it, apparently with better judgment, to the _arma_ and _tela_ in general.
 CVI. To dispatch their supper–_Coenatos esse_. “The perfect is not without its force; it signifies that Sylla wished his orders to be performed with the greatest expedition.” _Kritzius_. He orders them _to have done_ supper.
 CVII. And blind parts of his body–_Caecum corpus_. Imitated from Xenephon, Cyrop. iii. 3, 45: [Greek: _Moron gar to kratein boulomenous, ta tuphla, tou somatos, kai aopla, tauta enantia tattein tois polemiois pheugontas_.] “It is folly for those that desire to conquer to turn the blind, unarmed, and handless parts of the body, to the enemy in flight.”
 At being an instrument of his father’s hostility–_Quoniam hostilia faceret_. “Since he wished to deceive the Romans by pretended friendship.” _Muller_.
 CVIII. Of the family of Masinissa–_Ex gente Masinissae._ Massugrada was the son of Masinissa by a concubine.
 Faithful–_Fidum_. After this word, in the editions of Cortius, Kritzius, Gerlach, Allen, and Dietsch, follows _Romanis_ or _esse Romanis_. These critics defend _Romanis_ on the plea that a dative is necessary after _fidum_, and that it was of importance, as Castilioneus observes that Dabar should be well disposed toward the Romans, and not have been corrupted, like many other courtiers of Bocchus, by the bribes of Jugurtha. Glarcanus, Badius Ascensius, the Bipont editors, and Burnouf, with, most of the translators, omit _Romanis_, and I have thought proper to imitate their example.
 Place, day, and hour–_Diem, locum, tempus._ Not only the day, but the time of the day.
 That he kept all points, which he had settled with him before, inviolate–_Consulta sese omnia cum illo integra habere_. Kritzius justly observes that most editors, in interpreting this passage, have erroneously given to _consulta_ the sense of _consulenda_; and that the sense is, “that all that he had arranged with Sylla before, remained unaltered, and that he was not drawn from his resolutions by the influence of Jugurtha.”
 And that he was not to fear the presence of Jugurtha’s embassador, as any restraint, etc.–_Neu Jugurthae legatum pertimesceret, quo res communis licentius gereretur_. There is some difficulty in this passage. Burnouf makes the nearest approach to a satisfactory explanation of it. “Sylla,” says he, “was not to fear the envoy of Jugurtha, _quo_, on which account (equivalent to _eoque_, and on that account, _i. e._ on account of his freedom from apprehension) their common interests would be more freely arranged.” Yet it appears from what follows that fear of Jugurtha’s envoy _could not be dismissed_, and that there could be no freedom of discussion in his presence, as Sylla was to say but little before him, and to speak more at large at a private meeting. These considerations have induced Kritzius to suppose that the word _remoto_, or something similar, has been lost after _quo_. The Bipont editors inserted _cautum esse_ before _quo_, which is without authority, and does not at all assist the sense.
 African duplicity–_Punica fide_. “_Punica fides_ was a well-known proverbial expression for treachery and deceit. The origin of it is perhaps attributable not so much to fact, as to the implacable hatred of the Romans toward the Carthaginians.” _Burnouf_.
 CIX. What answer should be returned by Bocchus–That is, in the presence of Aspar.
 Both then retired to their respective camps–_Deinde ambo in sua castra digressi_. Both, _i. e._ Bocchus and Sylla, not Aspar and Sylla, as Cortius imagines.
 CX. It will be a pleasure to me–_Fuerit mihi_. Some editions, as that of Langius, the Bipont, and Burnouf’s, have _fuerit mihi pretium_. Something of the kind seems to be wanting. “Res in bonis numeranda fuerit mihi.” _Burnouf_. Allen, who omits _pretium_, interprets, “Grata mihi egestas sit, quae ad tuam, amicitiam coufugiat;” but who can deduce this sense from the passage, unless he have _pretium_, or something similar, in his mind?
 CXI. That part of Numidia which he claimed–_Numidiae partem quam nunc peteret_. See the second note on c. 102. Bocchus continues, in his speech in the preceding chapter, to signify that a part of Numidia belonged to him.
 The ties of blood–_Cognationem_. To this blood-relationship between him and Jugurtha no allusion is elsewhere made.
 His resolution gave way–_Lenitur_. Cortius whom Gerlach and Muller follow, reads _leniter_, but, with Kritzius and Gerlach, I prefer the verb to the adverb; which, however, is found in the greater number of the manuscripts.
 CXII. Interests of both–_Ambobus_. Both himself and Jugurtha.
 CXIV. At that time–_ Ea tempestate_. “In many manuscripts is found _ex ea tempestate_, by which the sense is wholly perverted. Sallust signifies that Marius did not continue always deserving of such honor; for, as is said in c. 63, ‘he was afterward carried headlong by ambition.'” _Kritzius_.