This text is part of:
Search the Perseus Catalog for:
Table of Contents:
When the prince had concluded his speech, the embassadors of Jugurtha, depending more on their money than their cause, replied, in a few words, " that Hiempsal had been put to death by the Numidians for his cruelty; that Adherbal, commencing war of his own accord, complained, after he was defeated, of being unable to do injury; and that Jugurtha entreated the senate not to consider him a different person from what he had been known to be at Numantia, nor to set the assertions of his enemy above his own conduct."
Both parties then withdrew from the senate-house, and the senate immediately proceeded to deliberate. The partisans of the embassadors, with a great many others, corrupted by their influence, expressed contempt for the statements of Adherbal, extolled with the highest encomiums the merits of Jugurtha, and exerted themselves as strenuously, with their interest and eloquence, in defense of the guilt and infamy of another, as they would have striven for their own honor. A few, however, on the other hand, to whom right and justice were of more estimation than wealth, gave their opinion that Adherbal should be assisted, and the murder of Hiempsal severely avenged. Of all these the most forward was Æmilius Scaurus,1 a man of noble birth and great energy, but factious, and ambitious of power, honor, and wealth; yet an artful concealer of his own vices. He, seeing that the bribery of Jugurtha was notorious and shameless, and fearing that, as in such cases often happens, its scandalous profusion might excite public odium, restrained himself from the indulgence of his ruling passion.2
1 XV. Æmilius Scaurus] He was “princeps senatûs” (see c. 25), and seems to be pretty faithfully characterized by Sallust as a man of eminent abilities, but too avaricious to be strictly honest. Cicero, who alludes to him in many passages with commendation (Off., i. 20, 30; Brut., 29; Pro Muræn., 7; Pro Fonteio, 7), mentions an anecdote respecting him (De Orat. ii. 70), which shows that he had a general character for covetousness. See Pliny, H. N. xxxvi. 14. Valerius Maximus (iii. 7, 8) tells another anecdote of him, which shows that he must have been held in much esteem, for whatever qualities, by the public. Being accused before the people of having taken a bribe from Mithridates, he made a few remarks on his own general conduct; and added, "Varius of Sucro says that Marcus Scaurus, being bribed with the king's money, has betrayed the interests of the Roman people. Marcus Scaurus denies that he is guilty of what is laid to his charge. Which of the two do you believe?" The people dismissed the accusation; but the words of Scaurus may be regarded as those of a man rather seeking to convey a notion of his innocence, than capable of proving it. The circumstance which Cicero relates is this: Scaurus had incurred some obloquy for having, as it was said, taken possession of the property of a certain rich man, named Phyrgio Pompeius, without being entitled to it by any will; and being engaged as an advocate in some cause, Memmius, who was pleading on the opposite side, seeing a funeral pass by at the time, said, "Scaurus, yonder is a dead man, on his way to the grave; if you can but get possession of his property!" I mention these matters, because it has been thought that Sallust, from some ill-feeling, represents Scaurus as more avaricious than he really was.
Sallust. The Jugurthine War. Rev. John Selby Watson, M.A. New York and London. Harper & Brothers. 1899.
This work is licensed under a
Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 United States License.
An XML version of this text is available for download, with the additional restriction that you offer Perseus any modifications you make. Perseus provides credit for all accepted changes, storing new additions in a versioning system.