Bellum Jugurthinum

Bellum Jugurthinum

Engraving depicting Sallust
Author	Sallust
Language	Latin
Genre	Essay, historical monograph
Publication date	c. 40 B.C.

The Bellum Jugurthinum (in English, The Jugurthine War) is the second of two historical monographs written by the Latin historian Gaius Sallustius Crispus (86 - 34 B.C.), after De Catilinae coniuratione.

The work, divided into 114 chapters and thus longer than the previous monograph, narrates the ups and downs of the war waged by the Romans against the king of Numidia, Jugurtha, between 111 and 105 B.C., and concluded with the victory of the Roman consul Gaius Marius.

Through the narration of events that are nonetheless of great historical interest, Sallust is concerned to address the moral and social decadence that led to the collapse of the Roman res publica and the rise of the Empire.

Features

Title and narrative

The Bellum Jugurthinum was written and published around 40 B.C., and has come down to us by direct tradition through medieval codices. Especially in Anglo-Saxon countries, it is also known under the title De bello Iugurthino.

Compared to the first Sallustian monograph, the Bellum Jugurthinum appears markedly more varied. Unlike De Catilinae coniuratione - in which the conspiracy lasts about a year and a half, with the main events localized between November 63 and January 62 B.C., taking place in Rome and Etruria, thus in a fairly limited area - in Bellum Jugurthinum the theater of events changes frequently, with sudden shifts between Rome and Africa, and the wearisome war that breaks out, the antecedents of which are also narrated, lasts for a full seven years, from 111 to 105 B.C. The character system is also more complex: the Romans Scipio, Metellus, Scaurus, Bestia, Marius, and Sulla are contrasted with the Numids Micipsa, Adherbal, Jugurtha, and Bocchus, and in any case the narrative is more eventful and richer as the main characters present ambiguous, multifaceted, and even changeable dispositions.

Although stretched into a longer text (114 chapters), the narrative technique is kept the same as in the Bellum Catilinae, namely that typical of Hellenistic historiography. In fact, after the proem, the portrait of the protagonist, and the antecedents ("archaeology") that link the story with the history of Rome, the historian begins to narrate the events by interspersing them with digressions and speeches that mark pauses for reflection and offer the occasion for particularly meaningful displays of rhetoric and historical judgments.

Structure of the Bellum Jugurthinum

Chapter(s)	Contents	Topics covered
1–4	Proem	Incipit: the body, the soul, the virtus.
5	Introduction	Rationale for the choice of topic.
6–16	Background of the story	Events between 120 and 117 BC and portrait of the protagonist.
17–19	1st excursus	Geographical and historical description of Numidia.
20–40	Beginning of the war	Events between 116 and 110 BC.
41–42	2nd excursus	Age of the Gracchi.
43–77	Unfolding of the war	Events between 109 and 108 BC.
78–79	3rd excursus	Further geographical discussion.
80–114	Conclusion of the war	Events between 107 and 104 BC.

Historical background

Historical background

In 146 BC. Rome became the undisputed ruler of the Mediterranean and most of the territories bordering it. Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus carried out the siege of Carthage and annihilated its historic rival, while to the east the armies of the Urbe razed Corinth to the ground and sanctioned Roman dominance over Greece and the entire Balkan peninsula. For Rome, a new historical phase was opening that, through a century of crisis, would lead to the fall of the Republic and the birth of the Empire. At the political level, there was to be pacification in Spain, where the Celtiberians and Lusitanians had long been in revolt. On the social level, however, a major crisis was sweeping the Italic economy: local crafts were being supplanted by products from the East, and small landowners,

who formed the recruiting base for the armies, had found their fields destroyed after years of neglect. Only the exploitation of the provinces guaranteed the subsistence of the state, and ensured, at the same time, very considerable possibilities of enrichment for the class of equites. In this context the policy of Tiberius and Gaius Gracchus took shape: opposed to them and to the factio of the populares was that of the optimates, eager to maintain their privileges by becoming increasingly disinterested in the real conditions of the res publica.

The subject of the second Sallustian monograph is the wearisome war, which Rome fought between 111 and 105 B.C., (seventy years before the publication of the work) in Africa against the king of Numidia Jugurtha, and which ended in Roman victory. It was not in this case a war waged by the rapacity (or avaritia as Sallust's term would have it) of the nobilitas: in fact, the senate really had no interest in it and would not have benefited greatly from fighting on the African front, where it hoped to pursue a policy of non-intervention. Instead, it risked leaving the northern front uncovered, where, a few years later, there would be the dangerous invasion of Italy by the Cimbri and Teutons, who would cross the Alps only to be defeated, in Italic territory, by Gaius Marius. The classes most interested in the African campaign were, rather, the equites (horsemen), advocates of a policy of exploiting the commercial resources available in the Mediterranean Basin, the wealthy Italic mercatores (merchants) (from whose ranks came the negotiatores massacred in 112 B.C. by Jugurtha): they derived much of their wealth from trade in the provinces, and the strengthening of Roman rule in Africa might have appeared to them as an attractive prospect, whereas losing control over those areas appeared undesirable. The Roman and Italic plebs, for their part, hoped that, after the conquest, African lands would be distributed according to the usus instituted ten years earlier by Gaius Gracchus, when the first overseas Roman colony had been founded on the ruins of Carthage.

In such a framework it is understandable how, after years of useless and inconclusive guerrilla warfare, the "Jugurthian problem" was destined to be liquidated by a representative of the forces interested in the conquest, far from the senatorial nobilitas, the homo novus Gaius Marius, and not by aristocratic generals, whom Sallust can only accuse of corruption, incapacity and pride.

Summary

Chapters 1 - 4 (proem)

Falso queritur de natura sua genus humanum, quod imbecilla atque aevi brevis forte potius quam virtute regatur. Nam contra reputando neque maius aliud neque praestabilius invenias magisque naturae industriam hominum quam vim aut tempus deesse. Sed dux atque imperator vitae mortalium animus est. Qui ubi ad gloriam virtutis via grassatur, abunde pollens potensque et clarus est neque fortuna eget, quippe quae probitatem, industriam aliasque artis bonas neque dare neque eripere cuiquam potest.

Mankind wrongly complains that its nature, weak and short-lived, is governed by chance rather than virtue. In fact, on closer inspection, it will be found on the contrary that there is nothing greater and nobler, and that human nature lacks the will to act more than strength or time. But it is the spirit that guides and dominates men's lives. When it tends to glory through the path of virtue, it possesses vigor, strength and fame in abundance and has no need of fortune, for it cannot infuse honesty, tenacity and other moral qualities in anyone, nor wrest them from those who possess them.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 1, 1-3

Like De Catilinae coniuratione, the Bellum Jugurthinum opens with a proem that is outside the historical events narrated in the work, but which highlights the author's ideology regarding human nature: indeed, the human being consists of body and soul, but only the solid possession of virtue is a guarantee of eternal glory. Man must therefore exercise the soul more than the body, since the goods of the body are ephemeral and destined to disappear, while those of the soul allow one to have real control over one's life, and lead to immortal greatness.

The universally valid Sallustian message takes on particular relevance in the context of the crisis of the res publica, when it is precisely attachment to virtus that seems to be the only path capable of restoring peace and stability.

Verum ex iis magistratus et imperia, postremo omnis cura rerum publicarum minime mihi hac tempestate cupienda videntur, quoniam neque virtuti honor datur neque illi, quibus per fraudem iis fuit uti, tuti aut eo magis honesti sunt.

Among these, however, magistratures and military commands, in short, any public office, do not seem at all desirable in this period, because honor is not given on merit, and even those who have obtained it through intrigue are not more secure or honored for it.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 3, 1

Sallust, therefore, openly criticizes the political system, which allows those who do not deserve it to attain power; in such a situation, fundamental is the importance played by the historian's activity, which instead risks being regarded as otium. Through the proem, then, Sallust can also ennoble his activity, as he does, similarly, in De coniuratione Catilinae.

Chapters 5 - 16

Bellum scripturus sum, quod populus Romanuscum Iugurtha rege Numidarum gessit, primum quia magnum et atrox variaque victoria fuit, dein quia tunc primum superbiae nobilitatis obviam itum est.

I am going to recount the war that the Roman people fought with Jugurtha, king of the Numids, first because it was long, bitter and with ups and downs, then because for the first time the arrogance of the nobles was countered.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 5, 1

After introducing the actual historical narrative, Sallust recounts, so that the whole of the events may be clearer and more understandable, the history of the kingdom of Numidia: during the Second Punic War, the Numidian king Masinissa helped Publius Cornelius Scipio against the Carthaginian Hannibal, and, after the Battle of Zama and subsequent treaties, Rome decided to reward him by granting him sovereignty over many of the lands wrested from the Carthaginians, thus creating a strong friendly relationship with Numidia. Upon Masinissa's death, his three sons, Gulussa, Mastanabal and Micipsa, inherited the kingdom, but the latter remained as sole ruler due to the untimely deaths of his brothers. In turn, Micipsa left the kingdom to his sons, Adherbal and Hiempsal, and his nephew Jugurtha, son of Mastanabal and a concubine.

After the brief historical digression, the narrative shifts to the character of Jugurtha, of whom Sallust provides an accurate psychological description, and then to that of Micipsa: the latter, old and now close to death, is led as much to exalt Jugurtha as to suspect his good faith: for this reason, in 133 B.C. he sends him to Publius Cornelius Scipio Aemilianus, engaged in the siege of Numantia, in the hope that the young man will die in the war. Jugurtha, however, survives and distinguishes himself for his bravery, so much so that he deserves numerous personal praises. A few years later then, Micipsa, on his deathbed, summons his sons along with Jugurtha, and designates all three as his heirs, advising them to rule in harmony.

The three heirs immediately disregarded the recommendations they had received: they divided the state treasury among themselves and divided up areas of influence; in particular, sharp disagreements arose between Jugurtha and Hiempsal. The latter, of a very prideful nature, attempted to put his cousin in the background, but Jugurtha, in response, had him killed.

The repercussions of the act were very serious: most of the terrified Numids rallied around Adherbal, who was forced to send ambassadors to Rome and clash with Jugurtha in the field. From the battle, however, Adherbal emerges defeated, and he is forced to flee to Rome, where he hopes to receive the support of the senate; meanwhile, Jugurtha also sends gold and silver to Rome, to make gifts of it to the senators and thus draw them to his side. Having arrived in Rome, Adherbal is able to deliver a long speech in the Senate: in order to sensitize the audience, he tries to leverage the relationship of friendship and fides that binds Rome to the Numidian dynasty, emphasizes the villainy of Jugurtha's actions and portrays himself as unhappy and hapless. Having also listened to Jugurtha's ambassadors, the senators, bribed by the sums of money they received, decide to favor the usurper: they merely send a commission to Numidia, headed by Lucius Opimius, which assigns the area bordering the Roman province of Africa to Adherbal, and the more fertile area bordering Mauretania to Jugurtha.

Chapters 17 - 19

Res postulare videtur Africae situm paucis exponere et eas gentis, quibuscum nobis bellum aut amicitia fuit, attingere.

The topic seems to require a brief description of Africa's position and a few words about those peoples with whom we have had relations of war or peace.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 17, 1

Sallust decides to interrupt the narrative to include in the work a brief ethnographic digression on northern Africa, which he considers a continent separate from Europe and Asia. After briefly mentioning the characteristics of the territory and the men who inhabit it, he begins the actual history of human peopling in Africa, relying on the information handed down from the Libri Punici of Hiempsal: he then narrates about the nomadic and primitive tribes of the Libyans and the Gaetuli, the first inhabitants of Africa, later supplanted by the Medes, Persians and Armenians. The digression continues with a brief mention of Phoenician breakthrough and Carthaginian rule, which Sallust states that he does not want to talk about in order to avoid talking too little about it, and closes with a description of the situation at the time of the events narrated: the Romans have control over the Carthaginian cities, Jugurtha over most of the Numids and Gaetuli, and Bocchus I, father-in-law of Jugurtha himself, over the Mauri.

De Africa et eius incolis ad necessitudinem rei satis dictum.

Enough has been said about Africa and its inhabitants for the needs of the narrative.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 19, 8

Chapters 20 - 40

Encouraged by Rome's favorable intervention, Jugurtha, in 113 B.C.E., resumed hostilities against Adherbal, who was determined to seize his kingdom in order to unify Numidia. The armies of the two clashed near Cirta, and victory again came to the forces of Jugurtha: Adherbal was forced to retreat within the walls of Cirta, where the Italic negotiatores organized resistance to the siege. Having learned of the battle, the senate sends ambassadors to Numidia, but Jugurtha, appealing to the jus gentium, succeeds in thwarting their presence, and preventing them from speaking to Adherbal; he then devotes himself to the careful organization of the siege, making use of all his strategic gifts. Adherbal, meanwhile, sends a request for help to the senate, which sends a new ambassadorship to Numidia, led by Marcus Aemilius Scaurus. The elderly senator attempts to force Jugurtha to cease hostilities, but the Numidian refuses to obey. Adherbal, then, urged on by the Italic negotiatores themselves, decides to surrender the city provided he and all other inhabitants have their lives saved; Jugurtha accepts the bargain, but, seizing Cirta, he tortures and kills Adherbal, and massacres all the adult citizens, both Numidian and Italic.

Chapters 41 – 114

/todo/

Characters

The Numids

Adherbal

Adherbal is the eldest of Micipsa's sons, and is therefore Hiempsal's brother and cousin of Jugurtha. Unlike his brother's, his role in the story is decidedly important: after Hiempsal's untimely death, in fact, Adherbal is left alone to counter Jugurtha's expansionist aims. He is repeatedly defeated in the field by his cousin, without displaying any particular tactical skills; similarly, Sallust gives credit for the resistance of Cirta to the Italics, thus downplaying Adherbal's role there as well. He thus appears naive and inexperienced when compared to his rival Jugurtha, who already had experience. The words that Adherbal speaks addressed to the senators turn out to be important: the Numidian in fact tries to receive Rome's help by appealing to some of the ideals-primarily that of fides-relatable to the mos maiorum: they go unheeded precisely because of the corruption and greed of the nobilitas and the moral crisis of Rome. Similarly, Adherbal also points out how Jugurtha's acts constituted an offense against the Roman maiestas, but the senate nevertheless refused to intervene on his behalf, convinced by Jugurtha's own gifts. Rather than prone to plots and intrigue, therefore, Adherbal appears to be a ruler dedicated to a policy of peaceful coexistence, which cannot subsist in the face of Jugurtha's duplicity and the corruption of the senate.

Jugurtha

A coin depicting Jugurtha, the king of Numidia.

Qui ubi primum adolevit, pollens viribus, decora facie, sed multo maxime ingenio validus, non se luxu neque inertiae corrumpendum dedit, sed, uti mos gentis illius est, equitare, iaculari; cursu cum aequalibus certare et, cum omnis gloria anteiret, omnibus tamen carus esse; ad hoc pleraque tempora in venando agere, leonem atque alias feras primus aut in primis ferire: plurimum facere, [et] minimum ipse de se loqui.

When he became a teenager, strong and handsome in appearance, but above all of lively intelligence, he did not allow himself to be corrupted by luxury and idleness, but, according to the custom of his people, he rode, threw the javelin, and competed with his peers in running; and, while surpassing everyone in glory, he was nevertheless cherished by them all; moreover, he spent most of his time in hunting, was always the first or among the first to strike the lion and other beasts; he was extremely active, and spoke very little about himself.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 6, 1

Differences between Catiline and Jugurtha and the causes of the corruption of the Roman nobility

The character of Catiline can be seen as a monstrum, since he assimilates in himself several characteristics, even completely opposite to each other, which make him one of the most enigmatic characters ever in literature, along with the Numidian Jugurtha. But while the character of Catiline in the course of the De Catilinae coniuratione all in all does not undergo substantial changes in his psychic character, and in fact he is born as a character with a corrupt and evil disposition and remains so until the end, the character of Jugurtha undergoes remarkable changes in character; in fact, he is born as a young boy, heir to the Numidian throne, with a wholesome soul and full of good principles, but in the course of the Bellum Jugurthinum he changes radically, "polluted" by the negative influence on him of the then deeply corrupt Roman nobilitas, which led his character to become pravus. Both characters are the fruit of the wickedness of the senatorial class, from which they came (Catiline) or were strongly conditioned (Jugurtha); this "internal marciumen" from a social and moral point of view has its roots in 146 B.C., the year of the destruction, by the Roman armies, of Carthage. In fact, the defeat of the Punic city put an end to the so-called metus hostilis (fear of the enemy), that is, the fear that the Romans had for the Carthaginian enemies and which drove them to remain united and smoothed out internal disputes; having lacked this powerful "glue," the feelings of ambitio and avaritia of the senatorial oligarchy were exacerbated and, above all, the hostilities present between the various factiones, resulting in the bloody civil wars of the first century B.C. Indeed, there is a shift from struggles between hostes (foreign enemies, barbarians) to struggles between adversarii (political rivals, factional strife), which unleashed unprecedented waves of internal violence and decreed the inevitable end of the whole set of institutions that constituted the Roman res publica.

Hiempsal

Hiempsal is the youngest of the sons of Micipsa, brother of Adherbal and cousin of Jugurtha. His role in the Bellum Jugurthinum is entirely secondary, although it is his behavior that provides the occasional cause for the beginning of hostilities between Jugurtha and Adherbal. For he, particularly prideful by nature, despises Jugurtha because he is the son of a concubine, and tries in every way to humiliate him, even siding with the abolition of the measures taken by Micipsa after his nephew's association with the throne. He thus demonstrates that he lacks the political intelligence, characteristic, on the other hand, of his father, and performs rash acts without foreseeing the consequences. Jugurtha, in fact, moved by wrath and fear, decides to have him killed, and sends some of his men to the dwelling where he is: Hiempsal, rather than honorably attempting to defend himself, dies by cowardly taking refuge in the hut of a slave girl, and his head, severed, is brought to Jugurtha.

Micipsa

Micipsa is the eldest son of the Numidian king Masinissa, and he rises to power along with his brothers, Gulussa and Mastanabal, upon his father's death in 148 BC. After the untimely death of his brothers, he finds himself reigning alone, and provides valuable aid to the Romans during the Third Punic War. He has two sons, Adherbal and Hiempsal I, and is the uncle of Jugurtha. In his role as a "politician," he is naturally an example of the continuous mutability that characterizes many characters in the work.

In the Bellum Jugurthinum he appears already late in life, busy thinking about who is best suited to succeed him in the role of ruler. He rejoices in the prestige of Jugurtha, confident that the latter may be suitable to lead Numidia and bring it great glory, but he soon realizes that his nephew would be in a condition of clear superiority to his sons because of his age and popularity. He then finds himself frightened by the nature of Jugurtha, greedy and prone to satisfy his own desires. The king of Numidia then demonstrates, in his attempt to eliminate his nephew, that he is a wise politician and as careful as ever about the consequences that his acts may have: he therefore avoids having him assassinated or having him fall victim to some intrigue. Rather, he prefers to tempt fate and send him to war with Numantia. His plan having failed, Micipsa finds himself forced to accept the now inevitable rise of his nephew, who becomes heir along with Adherbal and Hiempsal. Even at this juncture, however, he shows great political intelligence in being able to adapt to the different situations in which he finds himself, always avoiding creating situations of open conflict.

Finally, on his deathbed, he summons his sons and grandson to his side, and, pretending to rejoice in the successes of Jugurtha, instructs his successors on how they should behave in leading the kingdom. He invites them to concord and mutual cooperation, giving them advice that is still valid today:

Non exercitus neque thesauri praesidia regni sunt, verum amici, quos neque armis cogere neque auro parare queas: officio et fide pariuntur. Quis autem amicior quam frater fratri? Aut quem alienum fidum invenies, si tuis hostis fueris? Equidem ego vobis regnum trado firmum, si boni eritis, sin mali, imbecillum. Nam concordia paruae res crescunt, discordia maximae dilabuntur.

Neither army nor treasures are the defense of the kingdom, but friends, whom you cannot force with weapons nor buy with gold: they are won with respect and loyalty. Who can ever be more friendly than a brother with his brother? Or what stranger will you find trustworthy, if you will be an enemy to your own? I give you a strong kingdom, if you will be righteous, a weak one, if you will be wicked. For in concord small states prosper, and in discord even the mightiest collapse.

—Sallust, Bellum Jugurthinum, 10, 4-6

Shortly thereafter, he died, receiving all the funeral honors worthy of a king.

Analysis

Reliability and historicity of the work

Absent from the Bellum Iugurthinum are the elements of ethnographic description that should be essential to a historiographical work. The geographical and historical digression of chapters 17-19 comes across as very approximate, especially for a historian who held the position of governor of the province of Africa for a number of years: indeed, Sallust states that he draws on written sources rather than personal observation, and this makes his description come across as inaccurate. Similarly, the portrait of Jugurtha also appears rather stereotyped, and not the result of careful observation of the habits of the local people: some traits of youthful behavior and education are those typical of barbarians, and Sallust seems to draw on the Greek historiographical tradition, in particular Xenophon's Cyropaedia. The description, therefore, is in the overall reticent, vague and nebulous.

At the historical level, Sallust shows little attention to the exact temporal placement of the events narrated: in fact, inaccuracies regarding chronological details are frequent, and equally frequent is the use of ellipses and expressions that fill long narrative spaces otherwise devoid of action.

See also

• Gaius Marius
• Gaius Gracchus
• Sulla
• Adherbal (king of Numidia)
• Jugurtha
• Masinissa
• Micipsa
• Cirta
• Numantia
• Numidia

Bibliography

Texts

• Sallustio Crispo, Gaio; N. Flocchini; G. Ottaviani (1993). Antologia dalle opere. Torino: Paravia.
• Sallustio Crispo, Gaio; L. Canali (a cura di) (1994). La guerra giugurtina. Testo originale a fronte. Milano: Garzanti Libri.
• Gaio Sallustio Crispo; P. Frassinetti; L. Di Salvo (a cura di) (2002). Opere. Torino: UTET.
• Gaio Sallustio Crispo; A. Crugnola (a cura di). Antologia sallustiana. Principato.

Critics

• L. Olivieri Sangiacomo (1954). Sallustio. Firenze: Le Monnier.
• K. Buechner (1960). Sallust. Heidelberg.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: location missing publisher (link)
• Syme, R. (1968). Sallustio. Paideia.
• Scanlon, T. F. (1980). The influence of Thucydides on Sallust. Heidelberg.
• Mevoli, D. (1994). La vocazione di Sallustio. Congedo.
• Gaio Sallustio Crispo; Tito Livio; L. Coco (2003). L'uomo e la natura. Loffredo.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Other books

• Augusto Camera; Renato Fabietti (1969). Elementi di storia antica, vol II - ROMA. Bologna: Zanichelli.
• Luciano Perelli (1973). Antologia della letteratura latina. Torino: Paravia.
• Lao Paletti (1974). Corso di lingua latina. I. Fonetica, Morfologia, Sintassi. Torino: Paravia.
• Luca Serianni; Alfredo Castelvecchi (1989). Grammatica italiana. Italiano comune e lingua letteraria. Torino: UTET libreria, Linguistica.
• Luigi Castiglioni; Scevola Mariotti (con la collaborazione di Arturo Brambilla e Gaspare Campagna) (1990). IL – Vocabolario della lingua latina. Torino: Loescher.
• Lodovico Griffa (1990). Latino – Teoria. Firenze: La Nuova Italia.
• Alfonso Traina; Giorgio Bernardi Perini (1995). Propedeutica al latino universitario. Bologna: PATRON editore.
• Gian Biagio Conte (2001). Letteratura latina. Firenze: Le Monnier.
• Campanini; Carboni (2003). NOMEN - Il nuovissimo Campanini Carboni. Latino Italiano - Italiano Latino. Torino: Paravia.