Conspiracy of Catiline and the Jurgurthine War by 86 BC-34? BC Sallust
page 72 of 325 (22%)
page 72 of 325 (22%)
|
[36] The same eagerness for honors, the same obloquy and jealousy, etc.--_Honoris cupido eadem quae caeteros, fama atque invidia vexabat_. I follow the interpretation of Cortius: "Me vexabat honoris cupido, et vexabat _propterea_ etiam eadem, quae caeteros, fama atqua invidia." He adds, from a gloss in the Guelferbytan MS., that it is a _zeugma_. "_Fama atque invidia_," says Gronovius, "is [Greek: _en dia duoin_], for _invidiosa et maligna fama_." Bernouf, with Zanchius and others, read _fama atque invidia_ in the ablative case; and the Bipont edition has _eadem qua--fama, etc._; but the method of Cortius is, to me, by far the most straightforward and satisfactory. Sallust, observes De Brosses, in his note on this passage, wrote the account of Catiline's conspiracy shortly after his expulsion from the Senate, and wishes to make it appear that he suffered from calumny on the occasion; though he took no trouble, in the subsequent part of his life, to put such calumny to silence. [37] IV. Servile occupations--agriculture or hunting--_Agrum colendo, aut venando, servilibus officiis intentum_. By calling agriculture and hunting _servilia officia_, Sallust intends, as is remarked by Graswinckelius, little more than was expressed in the saying of Julian the emperor, _Turpe est sapienti, cum habeat animum, captare laudes ex corpore_. "Ita ergo," adds the commentator, "agricultura et venatio servilio officia sunt, quum in solo consistant corporis usu, animum, vero nec meliorem nec prudentiorem reddant. Quia labor in se certe est illiberalis, ei praesertim cui facultas sit ad meliora." Symmachus (1 v. Ep. 66) and some others, whose remarks the reader may see in Havercamp, think that Sallust might have spoken of hunting and agriculture with more respect, and accuse him of not remembering, with sufficient veneration, the kings and princes that |
|