" was

lian, were so attracted by their beauty, that, while at Rome, they were their constant abode. "The palace," says Eustace, consumed by fire on the fatal night when Alaric entered the city. The temple, of singular beauty, sacred to Venus, was discovered about the middle of the sixteenth century, in opening the grounds of a garden, and was destroyed for the sake of the materials. Of the circus little remains, but masses of walls that merely indicate its site; while statues and marbles, found occasionally, continue to furnish proofs of its former magnificence." Many exquisite statues and pictures have been found on the same spot; but these may have been placed there by the magnificence of the imperial occupiers, and not of the original proprietor.

In these gardens, or his villa at Tibur, Sallust passed the concluding years of his life, dividing his time between literary avocations and the society of his friends-among whom he numbered Lucullus, Messala, and Cornelius Nepos.

Such being his friends and studies, it seems highly improbable that he indulged in that excessive libertinism which has been attributed to him, on the erroneous supposition that he was the Sallust mentioned by Horace in the first book of his Satires. The subject of Sallust's character is one which has excited some investigation and interest, and on which very different opinions have been formed. That he was a man of loose morals is evident; and it cannot be denied that he rapaciously plundered his province, like most Roman governors of the day. But it seems doubtful if he was that monster of iniquity he has been sometimes represented. He was extremely unfortunate in the first permanent notice taken of his character by his contemporaries. The decided enemy of Pompey and his faction, he had said of that celebrated chief, in his general history, that he was a man "oris probi, animo inverecundo." Lenæus, the freedman of Pompey, avenged his master, by the most virulent abuse of his enemy,* in a work which should rather be regarded as a frantic satire than an historical document. Of the injustice which he has done to the life of the historian we may, in some degree, judge, from what he says of him as an author. He calls him, as we farther learn from Suetonius, "Nebulonem vita scriptisque monstrosam; præterea priscorum Catonisque

Suetonius, De Grammaticis.

ineruditissimum furem." The life of Sallust, by Asconius Pedianus, which was written in the age of Augustus, and might have acted, at the present day, as a corrective or palliative of the unfavourable impression produced by this injurious libel, has unfortunately perished; and the next work on the subject now extant, is a professed rhetorical declamation against the character of Sallust, which was given to the world in the name of Cicero, but was not written till long after the death of that orator, and is now generally assigned by critics to a rhetorician, in the reign of Claudius, called Porcius Latro. The calumnies invented or exaggerated by Lenaus, and propagated in the scholastic theme of Porcius Latro, have been adopted by Le Clerc, professor of Hebrew at Amsterdam, and by Professor Meisner, of Prague, in their respective accounts of the Life of Sallust. His character has received more justice from the prefatory Memoir and Notes of De Brosses, his French translator, and from the researches of Wieland in Germany.

From what is known of Fabius Pictor, and his immediate successors, it must be apparent, that the art of historic composition at Rome was in the lowest state, and that Sallust had no model to imitate among the writers of his own country. He therefore naturally recurred to the productions of the Greek historians. The native exuberance, and loquacious familiarity of Herodotus, were not adapted to his taste; and simplicity, such as that of Xenophon, is, of all things, the most difficult to attain: he therefore chiefly emulated Thucydides, and attempted to transplant into his own language the vigour and conciseness of the Greek historian; but the strict imitation, with which he followed him, has gone far to lessen the effect of his own original genius.

The first work of Sallust was the Conspiracy of Catiline. There exists, however, some doubt as to the precise period of its composition. The general opinion is, that it was written immediately after the author went out of office as Tribune of the commons, that is, A. U. C. 703. And the composition of the Jugurthine War, as well as of his general history, are fixed by Le Clerc between that period and his appointment to the Prætorship of Numidia. But others have supposed that they were all written during the space which intervened between his return from Numidia in 709, and his death, which happened in 718, four years previous to the battle of Actium. It is maintained by the supporters of this

Fast idea, that he was too much engaged in political tumults previous to his administration of Numidia, to have leisure for such important compositions-that, in the introduction to Catiline's Conspiracy, he talks of himself as withdrawn from public affairs, and refutes accusations of his voluptuous life, which were only applicable to this period; and that, while instituting the comparison between Cæsar and Cato, he speaks of the existence and competition of these celebrated opponents as things that had passed over -"Sed mea memoria, ingenti virtute, diversis moribus, fuere viri duo, Marcus Cato et Caius Cæsar." On this passage, too, Gibbon in particular argues, that such a flatterer and party-tool as Sallust would not, during the life of Cæsar, have put Cato so much on a level with him in the comparison. De Brosses argues with Le Clerc in thinking that the Conspiracy of Catiline at least must have been written immediately after 703; as he would not, after his marriage with Terentia, have commemorated the disgrace of her sister, who, it seems, was the vestal virgin, whose intrigue with Catiline is recorded by Sallust. But whatever may be the case as to Catiline's Conspiracy, it is quite clear that the Jugurthine War was written subsequently to the author's residence in Numidia, which evidently suggested to him this theme, and afforded him the means of collecting the information necessary for completing his work.

The subjects chosen by Sallust form two of the most important and prominent topics in the history of Rome. The periods indeed which he describes were painful, but they were interesting. Full of conspiracies, usurpations, and civil wars, they chiefly exhibit the mutual rage and iniquity of embittered factions, furious struggles between the patricians and plebeians, open corruption in the Senate, venality in the courts of justice, and rapine in the provinThis state of things, so forcibly painted by Sallust, produced the conspiracy, and even in some degree created the character, of Catiline. But it was the oppressive debts of individuals, the temper of Sylla's soldiers, and the absence of Pompey with his army, which gave a possibility, and even prospect of success to a plot which affected the vital existence of the commonwealth; and which, although arrested in its commencement, was one of those violent shocks which hasten the fall of a state.

ces.

The History of the Jugurthine War, if not so imposing or menacing to the vital interests and immediate safety of Rome, exhibits a more extensive field of action, and a greater theatre of war. No prince, except Mithridates, gave so much employment to the arms of the Romans. In the course of no war in which they had ever been engaged, not even the second Carthaginian war, were the people more desponding, and in none were they more elated with ultimate success. Nothing can be more interesting than the accounts of the vicissitudes of this contest. The endless resources and hair-breadth escapes of Jugurtha-his levity, his fickle and faithless disposition, contrasted with the perseverance and prudence of the Roman commander Metellus, are all described in a manner the most vivid and picturesque...

Sallust had attained the age of twenty-two when the conspiracy of Catiline broke out, and was an eye-witness of the whole proceedings. He had, therefore, sufficient opportunity of recording with accuracy and truth the progress and termination of the conspiracy. Sallust has certainly acquired the praise of a veracious historian, and I do not know that he has been detected in falsifying any fact within the sphere of his knowledge. Indeed, there are few historical compositions of which the truth can be proved on such evidence as the conspiracy of Catiline. The facts detailed in the orations of Cicero, though differing in some minute particu lars, coincide in every thing of importance, and highly contribute to illustrate and verify the work of our historian. But Sallust lived too near the period of which he treated, and was too much engaged in the political tumults of the day, to give a faithful ac count, unbiassed by animosity or predilection; he could not have raised himself above all hopes, and fears, and prejudices, and therefore could not in all their extent have fulfilled the duties of an impartial writer. A contemporary historian of such turbulent times would be apt to exaggerate through adulation, or conceal through fear, to instil the precepts not of the philosopher but the partisan, and colour facts into harmony with his own system of patriotism or friendship. An obsequious follower of Cæsar, he has been accused of a want of candour in varnishing over the views of his patron; yet I have never been able to persuade my self that Cæsar was deeply engaged in the conspiracy of Catiline, or that a person of his prudence should have leagued with such

rash associates, or followed so desperate an adventurer. But the chief objection urged against his impartiality, is the feeble and apparently reluctant commendation he bestows on Cicero, who is now acknowledged to have been the principal actor in detecting and frustrating the conspiracy. Though fond of displaying his talents in drawing characters, he exercises none of it on Cicero, whom he merely terms "homo egregius et optumus consul," which was but cold applause for one who had saved the commonwealth. It is true, that, in the early part of the history, praise, though sparingly bestowed, is not absolutely withheld. The election of Cicero to the consulship is fairly attributed to the high opinion entertained of his talents and capacity, which overcame the disadvantages of obscure birth. The mode adopted of gaining over one of the accomplices, and for fixing his own wavering and disaffected colleague, the dexterity manifested in seizing the Allobrogian deputies with the letters, and the irresistible effect produced by confronting them with the conspirators, are attributed exclusively to Cicero. It is in the conclusion of the business that the historian withholds from him his due share of applause, and contrives to eclipse him by always interposing the character of Cato, though it could not be unknown to any witness of those transactions that Cato himself and other senators publicly hailed the consul as the Father of his country; and that a public thanksgiving to the gods was decreed in his name, for having preserved the city from conflagration, and the citizens from massacre. This omission, which may have originated partly in enmity, and partly in disgust at the ill-disguised vanity of the consul, has in all times been regarded as the chief defect, and even stain, in the history of the Catilinarian conspiracy.

Although not an eye-witness of the war with Jugurtha, Sallust's situation as Prætor of Numidia, which suggested the composition, was favourable to the authority of the work, by affording opportunity of collecting materials, and procuring information. He examined into the different accounts, written as well as traditionary, concerning the history of Africa, particularly the documents preserved in the archives of King Hiempsal, which he caused to be translated for his own use, and which proved peculiarly serviceable in the detailed account which he has given of the inhabitants of Africa. In this history he has been accused of shewing an undue par