Masinissa (BJ 5.4-5) (202-148), ally of Rome against Carthage and Hannibal in second Punic War, friend of Scipio Africanus and, according to some sources, of his grandson by adoption Scipio Aemilianus.
He had three sons mentioned by Sallust (BJ 5.6): Micipsa, Mastanabal, Gulussa
Gulussa had at least one son, Massiva (BJ 35.1-6)
Mastanabal had at least two sons, Jugurtha (BJ 5.7) (118-106) and Gauda (BJ 65.1-3) (said to be cerebrally challenged)
Micipsa (148-118) had two sons, Adherbal (118-112) and Hiempsal (BJ 5.7)
After the war the Romans installed Gauda (Jugurtha's half-brother) (106-88) as the king of Numidia; he was succeeded by his son Hiempsal II (88-60) (mentioned in BJ 17.2 as a source for African history), and he in turn by his son Juba I (60-46), who supported Pompey and his successors (i.e. the losing side) in the civil war. His infant son was brought up at Rome under Octavian (Augustus) and later installed as client king Juba II (25 BCE - CE 23). A man of wide learning, he collected art, invented a new dyeing process, and wrote books in Greek on Libya, Arabia, and Assyria, a history of Rome, researches into language, drama, and painting, a treatise on the plant euphorbia, which he discovered and named after his doctor Euphorbus, and a comparative study of antiquities, mostly Greek and Roman.
The king of Mauretania was Bocchus, who first appears at BJ 19.7
M. Aemilius SCAURUS (cos. 115) BJ 15.4, 25.4, 25.10, 28.4,
29.2-5, 30.2, 32.1, 40.4
Q. Caecilius METELLUS NUMIDICUS (cos. 109) first mentioned BJ
43.1, last BJ 89.6
L. Calpurnius BESTIA (cos. 111) first mentioned BJ 27.4, last
85.16
L. CASSIUS LONGINUS (cos. 107) BJ 32-33, sent to bring Jugurtha
to Rome
L. Cornelius SULLA (cos. 88) first mentioned BJ 95.1
M. Fulvius FLACCUS (cos. 125) BJ 16.2, 31.7, 42.1
C. MARIUS (cos. 107) first mentioned BJ 46.7
C. MEMMIUS, (tr.pl. 111) BJ 27.2, 30.3-4, 32-34
L. OPIMIUS (cos. 121) BJ 16.2
A. Postumius ALBINUS (cos. 99) BJ 36-39, 43-44, 55
Sp. Postumius ALBINUS (cos. 110) BJ 35-36, 39, 44, 77.3, 85.16
P. RUTILIUS RUFUS (cos. 105) BJ 50.1, 52.5-6, 86.5
C. Sempronius GRACCHUS (tr.pl. 123) BJ 16.2, 31.7, 42.1
Ti. Sempronius GRACCHUS (tr.pl. 133) BJ 31.7, 42.1
4.5-6 Wax masks of Roman ancestors: when an important man died, a death-mask was made of wax from his face. These masks were kept in the front hall of the direct descendant; when one entered the house of a representative of a famous old family (a Cornelius Scipio, or a Fabius, for example), one encountered portraits of numerous ancestors. Actors wore these masks for each funeral of a family member, and did their best to reproduce the personae of those they represented. This extended to the person in whose honor the funeral was held. This person (a man, always, until the late Republic, when extended funeral services for important women became fashionable), was carried out in a sitting position (before being cremated) and an actor would impersonate him as he was in life, sometimes comically. The most senior representative of the family would then deliver a funeral address to the deceased, remarking upon his accomplishments and those of all his ancestors. Cicero says that there was always a certain amount of embellishment in these funeral orations.
5.1-3 Since Sallust says that the two most important reasons for choosing to describe this war were military and political, it is important to see if his narrative bears out his claim: how many exciting and close battles were there? And how often does he describe the political fallout from Romans' dealings with Jugurtha? Does one of these themes receive preferential treatment in the narrative? He also says that this war marked "the first time that the haughtiness of the nobility was confronted — and the latter struggle convulsed everything, divine and human alike, and advanced to such a point of derangement that only war and the devastation of Italy put an end to the citizens' passions". The latter prediction does not include events covered in the war against Jugurtha, but in several places Sallust will foreshadow the coming conflict.
8.1-2 According to Sallust, Jugurtha was corrupted and given ambition by unnamed Romans whom he met while campaigning with Scipio Aemilianus in Spain. Scipio, of course, plays the role of the upright Roman who warns Jugurtha against misbehavior. Since this Scipio serves for later writers (especially Cicero) as an exemplary role-model of Roman virtue and behavior, it might be worthwhile to investigate what is known of his actions (as opposed to what people said about him, almost all of which is positive), to see if the later Romans' opinions were justified.
14.1-25 What kinds of arguments does Adherbal seek to use to persuade the Roman senate to support him? Threats? Entreaties? Praise? Blame? Moral blackmail? Arguments of advantage?
15.4-5 The first appearance of Scaurus. How does Sallust characterize him?
16.2-3 The first appearance of Opimius, the consul of 121: to what does Sallust attribute his influence in the Senate?
24.2-10 Letter sent by Adherbal to the Senate, during the siege of Cirta. Again, what types of arguments does he employ? The same as in his address to the Senate? The letter is at least shorter than the speech. How does Sallust (25.1-4) describe the reaction at Rome and to what does he attribute it?
27.2&4 First appearance of C. Memmius and the consul Bestia. Does Sallust anywhere have any fault to find with Memmius? What about Bestia?
31.1-29 Speech of Memmius in a public meeting (contio); one knows what to expect when at 30.3 Sallust says that he has already introduced Memmius as a person who is both independent and an opponent of the nobility (NB Memmius himself was a member of the upper class, and we know from other sources that Memmius was on bad terms with both Scipio Aemilianus and Scaurus). Various phrases attributed to him by Sallust describe the faction of senatorial 'old boys': a powerful oligarchy, an arrogant ruling class, the tyranny of this faction, a clique of noblemen, a gang of criminals, craving for power, a few powerful men, tyranny, a handful of men, outrageous insolence, the Republic has been put up for sale, tyrants, despot. His closing argument is especially interesting: whereas it is sometimes thought in modern times that it is better to let a guilty person go free than to condemn an innocent one, the ancients believed just the opposite.
33.1-35.10 Jugurtha's visit to Rome, assassination of Massiva by Bomilcar, Jugurtha's departing comment. Sallust says (35.7) that justice (equity and right) and law do not always coincide: that is, to put Bomilcar on trial for murder was the right thing to do but contrary to the law of nations. Then, as now, ambassadors had immunity.
37.1-2 A dispute concerning elections could delay the elections for months, although this happened seldom. Bad omens could also delay elections, as could violence.
39.3 The senate rejects the treaty that Aulus Albinus had made with Jugurtha; the senate was always able to decide whether or not to accept any arrangements that a general made with others, and based its decision occasionally on the basis of animosity or friendship for the general in question, as well as on considerations of utility or honor.
41.1-42.5 Sallust's famous conception of the origins and reasons for civil strife in Rome. There is some truth to his analysis, but there is much lacking also. Can you think of any social, political, or economic factors which he does not mention? Where the translation says "parties and factions" at 41.1, Sallust uses two words, partes and factio (what these terms mean). At 41.5 where the translation says "the whole was split into two parties" Sallust says "everything was split into two parts".
42.2 Note that when he describes the activities of the Gracchi he says that they "did not show a sufficiently moderate spirit" - although he does not explain what he means. Nevertheless he comes down on the side of refraining from violence in opposing them. The statement that it is better to suffer harm oneself than to inflict it on another is Socratic, most cogently expressed in Plato's dialogue Gorgias.
43.1 Introduction of Metellus (Numidicus), who has many good qualities even though he was 'an opponent of the popular party', and is not even greedy. Sallust will eventually reveal Metellus' one failing, so be on the lookout for it.
44.3 When Sallust says there was not much time (due to the postponed elections) for campaigning, he speaks of the campaigning season. In the ancient Mediterranean world it was the usual practice for armies to take to the field and fight battles from spring through fall, but during winter to stay at home (if near enough) or in winter quarters. Not that the winters were especially harsh, although they could be rainy, but it was an old practice, maintained from the days of small city-states and citizen soldiers who had to return home to tend to their winter wheat, which they harvested in spring. Sieges of cities, of course, would continue during winters, but most other military activity ceased.
45.1-3 Details of how to whip a demoralized and undisciplined army into shape. This is standard treatment, and unfortunately the description of lax discipline in the Roman army became a frequent topic in histories, perhaps because it was true.
46.3 Here for the first time, but not the last, Sallust characterizes Numidians as fickle and untrustworthy; this is the excuse that Metellus uses (according to Sallust) for not taking Jugurtha's offers of surrender seriously. For other examples see 54.4 and 74.3 (Numidian soldiers can disperse after a defeat because no one expects them to stay around), 56.3-5 (the people of Sicca try to change sides again), 66.2 (the rebellion in Vaga - here the fickle people are not only Numidians but "their public", the translator's rendition of the word volgus, also spelled vulgus, meaning the common people).
46.7 First appearance of Marius. Does he get a proper introduction at this point? At some other? Compare the treatment of Sulla (95.1-4).
47.2 Roman occupation of Vaga. Later (66.1-67.3) Jugurtha persuades the people there to kill the soldiers and officers left by Metellus as garrison.
49.2-6 Jugurtha delivers a short pep talk to his soldiers before the battle, and Metellus does likewise. Historians acknowledged the practice but did not reproduce a full-fledged speech on each occasion, for that would clutter the history. (Cf. 51.4 where Metellus' verbal encouragement is reported but not given in detail.) The battle address was standard practice in the ancient world; the commander would either assemble the men and address them from a platform of some sort, or mount upon a horse (the voice carries better that way) and either speak in one position or ride slowly along the front ranks. Many have doubted whether these speeches were genuine or if generals actually addressed their troops at all, mostly on the grounds that the soldiers would not be able to hear them. It is known that a commander with a weak voice would have someone else deliver his words for him. In more modern times, Benjamin Franklin wrote of a preacher who came to Philadelphia and was able to be heard by a very large number indeed: "He had a loud and clear Voice, and articulated his Words and Sentences so perfectly that he might be heard and understood at a great Distance, especially as his Auditories, however numerous, observ'd the most exact Silence. He preach'd one Evening from the Top of the Court House Steps, which are in the Middle of Market Street, and on the West Side of Second Street which crosses it at right angles. Both Streets were fill'd with his Hearers to a considerable Distance. Being among the hindmost in Market Street, I had the Curiosity to learn how far he could be heard, by retiring backwards down the Street towards the River, and I found his Voice distinct till I came near Front-Street, when some Noise in that Street, obscur'd it. Imagining then a Semi-Circle, of which my Distance would be the Radius, and that it were fill'd with Auditors, to each of whom I allow'd two square feet, I computed that he might well be heard by more than Thirty-Thousand. This reconcil'd me to the Newspaper Accounts of his having preach'd to 25000 People in the Fields, and to the ancient Histories of Generals haranguing whole Armies, of which I had sometimes doubted."
51.1 The irregular battle tactics upset the Romans, as they upset any army which preferred a more formal method of warfare. Sallust's battle descriptions contain many traditional elements which are often lumped under the title of "tragic history"; he observes that the "scene of activity" was "fluctuating, unpredictable, foul and wretched", as if the reader were a person watching a tragedy performed on a stage.
54.6 It is apparently not only acceptable but good that Romans wage war against a king (not one elected by his countrymen) by harassing and terrorizing people in towns and on farms around the countryside. The treatment of the enemy is standard: "ordering the adults to be killed and everything else to be plunder for the soldiers".
58.5 What does the scene between Metellus and Marius reveal of their relationship up to this point?
60.3-4 Speaking of tragic history, the defenders of Zama watch the battle outside as if it were a drama put on for them. Sallust probably got the idea for this (note they "gave hand signals or strained with their bodies, moving them this way and that . . .") from Thucydides' description of the people on shore watching the battle in the great harbor at Syracuse (Thucydides 7.71).
61.1-3 A more detailed description of the difference between campaigning season and winter, and activities appropriate for a good commander when the army is in winter quarters. This time, Metellus interrupts the siege, not because it is winter but because it seemed hopeless to capture the city. When he speaks of "the Province" he means the part of North Africa which used to be Carthaginian territory, now the Roman province of Africa. Metellus' attempt to remove Jugurtha by means of his best friend, Bomilcar, reaches a new level of serious negotiation (61.4-5); he had begun to try this method of winning the war when he first arrived in Africa (46.4).
63.1-64.6 Re-introduction of Marius, and the prophecy which was thought by most of the ancients to guide his career from this point on. After revealing Metellus' one fault, Sallust details the deterioration of the friendship between Marius and Metellus. It is possible, although not certain, that one or more of the Metelli had supported Marius in his entry into political life. What does Marius do when he is disappointed of his commander? Do his subsequent actions agree with what Sallust says of his character at 63.2?
65.5 The Mamilian law refers to the commission established (40.1) to investigate senators' dealings with Jugurtha.
66.3-69.4 There is a slightly different version of Turpilius' fate, and the reasons for it, after the fall of Vaga in Plutarch's Life of Marius chapter 6.
70.1-72.2 Sallust resumes his interrupted narrative of Bomilcar's plot; deliberate creation of suspense is as natural to a writer of ancient history as to a novelist. What is the effect on Jugurtha? Whether or not he reacted as Sallust says he did (72.2), a description such as this was considered obligatory.
73.2 When Metellus begins his second year of campaigning, he does so without the assistance of Marius; the story once again takes place on two fronts, the political battles at Rome, where Marius and his supporters are doing all they can to denigrate Metellus (negative campaigning, although Metellus was not actually running for office, was as familiar to the Romans as to us) and Metellus is doing all he can in Africa to capture Jugurtha. What does Sallust say is the deciding factor for the voters? Incidentally, when he says that "rebellious magistrates stirred up the public" this is standard rhetorical treatment of tribunes of the people: as a rule, any tribune attacking the status quo was labeled seditious. Although Sallust begins to describe Metellus' second year in Africa by returning to the scene of the elections in Rome, he gives the campaign and other political activity scant notice until (82.2-3) Metellus learns that he will be replaced, and by whom.
74.2-3 Sallust does not reveal where the battle between the Romans and Numidians took place. Metellus next plans and embarks upon the desert crossing and attack on Thala.
75.9 How do the Roman soldiers interpret the rainfall?
76.5-6 Thala falls but what happens to the booty? Metellus then needs to take his army to Leptis (also spelled Lepcis).
79.1-10 The etiological digression on the altar of the Philaeni appears both for its own interest, because digressions were a regular feature of ancient history, and to interrupt the narrative. Sallust never says whether the Romans succeeded in maintaining Leptis as a friendly city, but one assumes that they did. Cyrene was a Greek kingdom on the north coast of Africa between Carthage and Egypt.
80.3 King Bocchus of Mauretania now enters the story and remains important to it. Sallust had mentioned him briefly before, during the description of Africa (19.7) and as a place of refuge for deserters from the Roman army (62.7) and for some of Jugurtha's advisers (74.1). What topics does Sallust introduce along with Bocchus?
83.1-3 What does Metellus do and refrain from doing when he hears about the African command?
84 From what Sallust writes, it would appear that Marius was the only consul for the year 107. In fact the second consul was L. Cassius Longinus, mentioned at 32.3 as the person of great integrity to whom Jugurtha was willing to entrust himself when he visited Rome. The other consul went to Gaul, where he was killed in battle. Since Sallust has omitted an account of the campaign rhetoric before the election, he seizes the opportunity provided by winter and the intermission of military activity to report on Marius' words and deeds, and then includes a long speech in which Marius praises himself at the expense of the nobility (85.1-50). Exactly what arguments does Marius employ, and what kind of evidence to make his case? Does anything he says disagree with what Sallust writes in the narrative, either up to this time, or, reading ahead, when Marius wages war in Africa?
86.2-3 Marius' preparations: what kind of person does he recruit for the army, what does Sallust say the senatorial opposition thinks of common opinion of military service, and what conclusion does the historian draw?
87.1-3 Marius trains his combined army: what are similarities and differences compared to Metellus' course of training? Did the two commanders face the same kinds of issues with their armies at the outset?
88.3-4 Sallust shows Bocchus trying to negotiate with Marius, but even the historian will not venture an opinion as to motives.
89-90 Marius decides to attack the town of Capsa (which is not shown on the map at the back of the book; it is inland, west of Syrtis minor, and can be seen on this map of Numidia): why? What does Sallust think of his plan and does the action on the following pages lend credence to the historian's judgment?
91.7 What reasons does Sallust give to justify Roman brutality in the capture of Capsa? The usual procedure, if a place surrendered without putting up a fight, was to leave the inhabitants unharmed.
92.2 Marius, according to Sallust, was regarded by both Numidians and Romans as favored by divine providence (or something like that). Are there reasons or evidence given for statement this in the narrative?
92.5-94.7 Marius' second great accomplishment, described in some detail, is to capture a fort near the river Muluccha. What was so difficult about this feat? Who or what, according to Sallust, enabled Marius to prevail in the end? And why was the Ligurian after snails?
95.1-3 Introduction of Sulla. Although Sallust never says so (while Plutarch does), Sulla wrote an autobiography which a number of ancient historians and biographers used. He was not the only Roman to do so; Scaurus, too, wrote an autobiography (one modern historian said that Scaurus had a lot to explain - or to explain away), as did P. Rutilius Rufus. When reading the remainder of this monograph, see if it is possible to identify what material Sallust may owe to Sulla, and what evidence there is of Sallust's independence of it. What Sallust's readers knew, and you perhaps may not, is that despite the good terms on which their professional relationship began, Marius and Sulla ended up deadly enemies, and hated each other so much that Sulla even had Marius' remains dug up and scattered (Marius died in 86 when Sulla was away in Greece and Asia Minor).
96.3 Sallust says that Sulla did not "in the meanwhile (the customary effect of crooked ambition) damage the reputation of the consul or any good man". This is in contrast to whom? When Sallust says that Sulla only cared that no one should be better than he was and few his equal, he describes the heroic ideal of an old-fashioned Roman: to be first, best, and greatest (or at least not to be second).
97.1-3 How does Jugurtha persuade Bocchus actually to attack the Romans?
97.3-100.5 The battle won, Marius marches to winter quarters. What specifically does Sallust say about how Marius behaves in battle and conducts the army on its march and in camp? Does anything of this description seem surprising?
101.1-11 The final major battle, fought not far from Cirta. Since this was a major victory in a pitched battle (as opposed to a siege or a skirmish) between the Romans and the armies of two kings, Sallust adds a suitably glorious and gory conclusion.
102.1-113.7 The war ends by treachery and the only question left is to see how it happens. There are many details of interest in these final pages, none of which has anything to do with Marius' military activities (which are mentioned but not described in any detail).
102.2-11 When Bocchus asks Marius to send two reliable people to discuss things with him, whom does Marius send and which one speaks? (It is not Sallust's habit, believe it or not, to write as many direct speeches (= those in quotation marks) as may be found in other historians, and he parcels out direct speech only when the person and the occasion are especially important to his narrative.) What kinds of persuasion does the Roman employ?
102.12-14 Bocchus' reply does not rate a direct speech. How much of what the king says appears to be true? Since Sallust had taken the trouble to point out (101.6) that Jugurtha spoke Latin, how did the Romans and Bocchus understand each other? (cf. 109.4) Sallust says that Bocchus changed his mind about sending a delegation to Rome, although there is no way to tell from the narrative that this statement was true; it may have been apparent at the time from the lapse of time before he actually did send some people. It is probably not a coincidence that with Sulla at the center of the narrative Fortune (with a capital F) starts to play a role in the narrative (102.9, 104.2 "human affairs, which, fleeting and volatile as they are, are always changing to the opposite", 106.3 Sulla's acceptance of whatever fate had in store for him). In the year 82, almost 25 years after the events related here, Sulla adopted the surname Felix, 'the Fortunate'.
103.1-7 While Marius is away besieging a fort manned by Roman deserters (it would have been interesting to learn their fate, which one may take for granted, but Sallust does not give any details other than to say that Marius returned after a number of weeks), Sulla befriends Bocchus' envoys. What opinion does Sallust express about this, and about the reasons why Bocchus may have changed his mind once again?
104.5 The senate's reply to Bocchus' envoys was not extraordinary under the circumstances.
105.1-107.7 Sulla's adventures, involving Volux the son of Bocchus, on his way to meet the king, marked by the distinction of more direct speech.
108.3 Sallust comes very close here to revealing an exact source (probably Sulla) when he describes Bocchus' desire to treat the Romans treacherously and lack of courage to do so. When he says that the king was characterized by "Punic loyalty" he was merely using in his comparison what the Romans considered the most outstanding trait of Carthaginians: the Latin expression Punica fides meant "Carthaginian (good) faith", that is, none at all.
110.1-8 Bocchus finally receives his own speech, the tenor of which seems mainly to be that he likes Sulla and is willing to do whatever he can for the Roman people. What does Sulla reply?
112.2-3 What is Jugurtha's counter proposal to Bocchus and on what grounds does he make it? The historian uses a certain amount of space making the negotiations and potential treachery as suspenseful as possible.
114.1-4 The ending leaves the reader in suspense to wonder what will happen with the new – and much more serious – threat to Italy from southern Gaul. And there is another source of suspense that would have been obvious to Sallust's readers, although not to most of us in the twenty-first century: Marius and Sulla are the rising military stars of the next couple of decades at Rome, and the outcome of this war in Africa not only brought both to prominence, but brought the two men into conflict with each other over who deserved more credit.
|
Last updated: 8 September 2010 Send Comments to: Barbara Rodgers, bsaylor@uvm.edu Copyright © 2009 Barbara Saylor Rodgers All Rights Reserved. |