xlvi
τ. Pomponius atticus—ciceeo.
Macer in. importance.8 He accompanied Cicero as legate into
Asia ; he belonged to the party of the optimales, and was a
very honest man. Livy quotes his work from the earliest times ;
and whatever is preserved of it, bears a character of great his-
torical respectability, although we see that he was not acquainted
with the ancient constitutional phraseology, and did not dis-
tinguish between the institutions of his own time and those of
the earlier periods.
T. Pomponius Atticus wrote Roman annals, which seem to
have been nothing more than chronological tables.9 It was not
an unusual thing, at that time, to draw up short historical out-
lines from the detailed narratives of others, as Cornelius Nepos
did, after the example of Apollodorus. Thus sciences extend
and become contracted again. The annals of Atticus seem to
have been valuable ; but as we never find them quoted, we may
conclude that of many books of this kind, we know nothing.10
In the admirable introduction to the work “ De Legibus,”
Cicero represents himself as being told by his friend Atticus,
that his countrymen were looking to him for a history of Rome ;
and he seems to have done this, not from vanity, but because
he thought it his duty to write such a work, and because many
of his friends had actually expressed such a wish to him. To
this suggestion, he replies in a manner which shews that he
would have liked to undertake the task, but that at the same
time he had never entertained any serious thought of doing
it. But, however this may be, we may, without injuring his
reputation, assert that had he ventured upon it, he would have
attempted something which was beyond his powers. He was
a stranger to the early history of his country11 ; he was more of
a statesman than a scholar, and a man of an immensely active
and indefatigable character. The task of writing a history of
Rome would have required a series of studies for which he had
no time. In his work, “De Re Publica,” we have an opportu-
nity of seeing how exceedingly little knowledge of the consti-
tution he possessed when he began writing it. Lie does not
8 See Livy, iv. 23; Sueton. Caes. 83; Gellius, x. 28, xiv. 7 and 8; Servius,
ad Aen. ii. 15; Cicero, ad Quint. Frat. i. 1, pro Plane. A2,pro Ltgario, 7, foil.
9 C. Nepos, Hannib. 13, Attic. 18; Cicero, Brut.3, 5, and 11, Orat. 34; Asco-
ni∏4 in Pison., p. 13, cd. Orelli.
‘° There are passages in which the work of Atticus is referred to, as those in
C. Nepos and Asconius referred to above, and Ascon, in Cornel., p. 76, ed Orelh ;
but we have no quotations from it. ɪɪ Compare vol. i. note 1040.
VjIBIOUS WEITEBS — SALLUST.
xlvii
seem to have made use of Junius Gracchanus, but to have de-
rived the greater part of his information from Polybius, and
perhaps from his friend Atticus.
There are many other writers whom I might mention, such
as Antipater, Fannius, Polybius, Posidonius, Eutilius, LucuIIus,
Scaurus1 and others, many of whom wrote in Greek.12
Sallust, as he himself says13, found the history of his country
unwarrantably neglected, although if it had been written, it
would have thrown that of the Greeks into the shade. It would,
indeed, have been a problem for a man who had the power of
writing it; since the Romans had no history of their country,
any more than we have one of Germany. Sallust, like Cicero,
a man of great activity, had the necessary qualifications for
writing it; but as a practical man he neither would nor could
undertake the immense preparations it required, and he wisely
chose separate portions of it, especially those in which Sisenna
did not satisfy him.14 Thus he wrote his Jugurthine war, the
object of which was to show how the Eoman world had sunk
in every respect through the government of the oligarchs; and
how the popular party was developing and gaining strength
through the shameful abuse which the aristocratical party made
of its victory. His “ Historiae” began after the death of
Sulla, and were intended to describe the reaction against the
unreasonable institutions of the dictator, and the war against
Sertorius. In his account of the conspiracy of Catiline who
belonged to the party of Sulla, his object was to show what
degenerate villains those aristocrats were, who called them-
selves optimales and boni ; he suggests that their party had
already lost its importance, and that their proceedings were no
better than those of robbers. If Sallust had not been satisfied
with the history of the other events which were described by
Sisenna, namely the period between the Jugurthine war and
the consulship of Lepidus, he would undoubtedly have written
it himself. Much has already been done for Sallust ; but there
arc yet many laurels to be gained.13
Owing to the great change in the Eoman world under
12 These authors were not mentioned by Niebuhr in his Lectures. The short
notice here inserted was found among the few MS. leaves which were given to
Lr. I⅛lcr, to be used in the preparation of the Lectures for publication.
13 Catiline, 7 14 Jugurth. 100.
15 Respecting Niebuhr’s opinion on the letters addressed to Caesar, which are
commonly ascribed to Sallust, see vol. iii. p. 342, foil.