Gaius Paulinus Maximus Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 In 50 BC Gaius Sallustius Crispus (Sallust) was expelled from the Senate by the censors for alleged immorality.......Why? In his Conspiracy of Catiline he briefly mentions the incident but doesnt go into great detail...... My earliest inclinations led me, like many other young men, to throw myself wholeheartedly into politics. There I found many things against me. Self restraint, integrity, and virtue were disregarded; unscrupulous conduct, bribery and profit seeking were rife. And although being a stranger to the vices I saw practised on every hand, I looked on them with scorn. I was led away by my ambition and, with a young man's weakness I could not tear myself away. How ever much I tried to dissociate myself from the prevailing corruption, my craving for advancement exposed me to the same odium and slander as all my rivals. Catiline 1.3. Can anybody expand on this? What exactly did Sallust do to deserve his expulsion from the senate? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 Wasn't Sallust leading a riot after the murder of Clodius? Wasn't he culpable in the burning of the senate house? If my recollection is correct, I'm guessing that burning down the senate might get one expelled from it! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.Clodius Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 "For gross immorality". What that entails is anyone's guess, probably partisan politics at play as he was a stringent anti pompeian when it wasn't exactly healthy to be one. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Paulinus Maximus Posted October 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 Wasn't Sallust leading a riot after the murder of Clodius? Wasn't he culpable in the burning of the senate house? If my recollection is correct, I'm guessing that burning down the senate might get one expelled from it! Sallust was a tribune of the plebs and also a supporter of Clodius at the time of his murder so the chances of him being involved in the burning of the senate house would have been pretty high but all this happened in 52 BC and he wasn't expelled for another two years, surely it wouldn't have taken that long to get rid of him, I'm guessing that he'd been up to something else.....but what?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Paulinus Maximus Posted October 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 "For gross immorality". What that entails is anyone's guess, probably partisan politics at play as he was a stringent anti pompeian when it wasn't exactly healthy to be one. Yes possibly, he does say "my craving for advancement exposed me to the same odium and slander as all my rivals." It's pretty clear that he was all for the popular cause so maybe it was a case of a political witch hunt on behalf of the Optimates ? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.Clodius Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 When did Lucca take place, 52? He was expelled by A Claudius Pulcher, who came back, if not towing the Caesarian line, somewhat subdued . Perhaps there was a grudge? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 Here's an interesting hint from one of Cicero's letters: I almost forgot what above everything else I was bound to write to you. Do you know that the censor Appius is doing marvels? Busying himself about statues, pictures, land-owning, and debt with the greatest vigour? He is persuaded that his censorship is a kind of soap or soda. I think he is wrong: while he is meaning to wash off stains, he is really exposing all his veins and vitals. Hurry home, in the name of gods and men! Come as quickly as you can to enjoy a laugh, that a trial under the Scantinian law should be before Drusus, and that Appius should be making regulations about statues and pictures. Believe me, you ought to make haste. It appears that Appius was on some sort of quixotic rampage against luxury, and it's possible that the eponymous owner of Sallust's Gardens may have been one of the casualties. If so, this would an ironic end for Sallust's career in the senate, given his own rhetoric against luxury. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Paulinus Maximus Posted October 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 When did Lucca take place, 52? He was expelled by A Claudius Pulcher, who came back, if not towing the Caesarian line, somewhat subdued . Perhaps there was a grudge? It does appear that there was some sort of grudge on Claudius' side due to Sallusts connections to Caesar. Heres what Cassius Dio has to say..... Pompey, accordingly, as he could effect nothing in any other way, proceeded without any further disguise to harsh measures and openly said and did everything against Caesar; yet he failed to accomplish anything. Caesar had many supporters, among them Lucius Paulus, the colleague of Marcellus, and Lucius Piso, his father-in‑law, who was censor; for at this time Appius Claudius and Piso were made censors, the latter against his will. So Piso on account of his relationship belonged to Caesar, while Claudius, though opposing him, since he favoured Pompey's cause, yet quite involuntarily rendered Caesar very efficient aid. For he expelled a great many both of the knights and senators, overruling his colleague, and in this way made them all favour Caesar's cause. Piso, who was in any case disposed to avoid trouble, and for the sake of maintaining friendship with his son-in‑law paid court to many people, was himself responsible for none of the above acts, but he did not resist Claudius when he drove from the senate all the freedmen and numbers even of the exclusive nobility, among them Sallustius Crispus, who wrote the history. When, however, Curio's name also was about to be expunged, Piso, with the help of Paulus, whose kinsman he was, did beg him off. Consequently Claudius did not expel him, but made public in the senate the opinion that he had of him, so that the other, indignant, tore Claudius' clothes. So Marcellus seized him, and thinking that the senate would pass some severe vote against Curio and, because of him, against Caesar, brought forward motions about him. Curio at first opposed the rendering of any decision regarding himself; but on coming to realize that the majority of the senators then present were either actually attached to Caesar's cause or else thoroughly feared him, he allowed them to decide, merely remarking: "I am conscious of doing what is best and most advantageous for my country; to you, however, I surrender both my body and life to do with as you please." Marcellus accordingly accused him, thinking that he would certainly be convicted; but when he was acquitted by the majority, the accuser took it greatly to heart, and rushing out of the senate, he came to Pompey, who was in the suburbs, and on his own responsibility, without the formality of a vote, entrusted him with the protection of the city and likewise with two legions of citizens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 The passage in Dio Cassius shows that Appius Claudius prosecuted both Caesarians and neutrals alike. This is entirely consistent with the passage in Cicero showing Appius on a rampage against men with too many pictures, sculptures, and other luxuries. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 (edited) In 50 BC Gaius Sallustius Crispus (Sallust) was expelled from the Senate by the censors for alleged immorality.......Why? In his Conspiracy of Catiline he briefly mentions the incident but doesnt go into great detail...... My earliest inclinations led me, like many other young men, to throw myself wholeheartedly into politics. There I found many things against me. Self restraint, integrity, and virtue were disregarded; unscrupulous conduct, bribery and profit seeking were rife. And although being a stranger to the vices I saw practised on every hand, I looked on them with scorn. I was led away by my ambition and, with a young man's weakness I could not tear myself away. How ever much I tried to dissociate myself from the prevailing corruption, my craving for advancement exposed me to the same odium and slander as all my rivals. Catiline 1.3. Can anybody expand on this? What exactly did Sallust do to deserve his expulsion from the senate? Salve, Amici! Here Cassius Dio informed us; (Roman History, Liber XL, Chapters LXIII, sec. I-IV): "Caesar had many supporters, among them ... Lucius Piso, his father-in‑law, who was censor; for at this time Appius Claudius and Piso were made censors ... he did not resist Claudius when he drove from the senate all the freedmen and numbers even of the exclusive nobility, among them Sallustius Crispus, who wrote the history." And here Aulus Gellius quoted M. Varro to explain it: (Noctes Atticae Liber XVII, Ch. XVIII): "Quod M. Varro C. Sallustium, historiae scriptorem, deprehensum ab Annio Milone in adulterio scribit et loris caesum pecuniaque data dimissum. M. Varro, in litteris atque vita fide homo multa et gravis, in libro, quem scripsit Pius aut de pace, C. Sallustium scriptorem seriae illius et severae orationis, in cuius historia notiones censorias fieri atque exerceri videmus, in adulterio deprehensum ab Annio Milone loris bene caesum dicit et, cum dedisset pecuniam, dimissum. " Then, he was ejected on the ground of his having been caught in the act of adultery with Fausta, the wife of T. Annius Milo (and the daughter of the dictator Sulla). It is said that the husband soundly whipped Sallustius, and only let him off on payment of a sum of money.. Edited October 4, 2007 by ASCLEPIADES Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P.Clodius Posted October 4, 2007 Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 It appears that Appius was on some sort of quixotic rampage against luxury, and it's possible that the eponymous owner of Sallust's Gardens may have been one of the casualties. If so, this would an ironic end for Sallust's career in the senate, given his own rhetoric against luxury. This event occurs before the gardens though, he hadn't raped his province yet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaius Paulinus Maximus Posted October 4, 2007 Author Report Share Posted October 4, 2007 "Quod M. Varro C. Sallustium, historiae scriptorem, deprehensum ab Annio Milone in adulterio scribit et loris caesum pecuniaque data dimissum.M. Varro, in litteris atque vita fide homo multa et gravis, in libro, quem scripsit Pius aut de pace, C. Sallustium scriptorem seriae illius et severae orationis, in cuius historia notiones censorias fieri atque exerceri videmus, in adulterio deprehensum ab Annio Milone loris bene caesum dicit et, cum dedisset pecuniam, dimissum. " Then, he was ejected on the ground of his having been caught in the act of adultery with Fausta, the wife of T. Annius Milo (and the daughter of the dictator Sulla). It is said that the husband soundly whipped Sallustius, and only let him off on payment of a sum of money.. I also came across this latin text but was unable to translate it so thanks for that Asclepiades, but again this episode happened in 52 BC which is still two years before his expulsion. I also came across these mentioning Sallust.... At quo die? quo, ut ante dixi, fuit insanissima contio ab ipsius mercennario tribuno plebis concitata. Hoc significat eo die quo Clodius occisus est contionatum esse mercennarium eius tribunum plebis. Sunt autem contionati eo die, ut ex Actis apparet, C. Sallustius et Q. Pompeius, utrique et inimici Milonis et satis inquieti. Sed videtur mihi Q. Pompeium significare; nam eius seditiosior fuit contio. And... Scitis, iudices, fuisse qui in hac rogatione suadenda diceret Milonis manu caedem esse factam, consilio vero maioris alicuius. Me videlicet latronem et sicarium abiecti homines ac perditi describebant. Q. Pompeius Rufus et C. Sallustius tribuni fuerunt quos significat. Hi enim primi de ea lege ferenda populum hortati sunt et dixerunt a manu Milonis occisum esse Clodium et cetera. Could you translate please, I don't know how useful they'll be though Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M. Porcius Cato Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 Then, he was ejected on the ground of his having been caught in the act of adultery with Fausta, the wife of T. Annius Milo (and the daughter of the dictator Sulla). It is said that the husband soundly whipped Sallustius, and only let him off on payment of a sum of money.. Nice find. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Julius Ratus Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 And here Aulus Gellius quoted M. Varro to explain it: (Noctes Atticae Liber XVII, Ch. XVIII): "Quod M. Varro C. Sallustium, historiae scriptorem, deprehensum ab Annio Milone in adulterio scribit et loris caesum pecuniaque data dimissum. M. Varro, in litteris atque vita fide homo multa et gravis, in libro, quem scripsit Pius aut de pace, C. Sallustium scriptorem seriae illius et severae orationis, in cuius historia notiones censorias fieri atque exerceri videmus, in adulterio deprehensum ab Annio Milone loris bene caesum dicit et, cum dedisset pecuniam, dimissum. " Then, he was ejected on the ground of his having been caught in the act of adultery with Fausta, the wife of T. Annius Milo (and the daughter of the dictator Sulla). It is said that the husband soundly whipped Sallustius, and only let him off on payment of a sum of money.. A supporter of Cloius boffing Milo's wife? This is just too good to be true! I would say this would count as 'gross immorality'. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ASCLEPIADES Posted October 5, 2007 Report Share Posted October 5, 2007 I also came across these mentioning Sallust.... At quo die? quo, ut ante dixi, fuit insanissima contio ab ipsius mercennario tribuno plebis concitata. Hoc significat eo die quo Clodius occisus est contionatum esse mercennarium eius tribunum plebis. Sunt autem contionati eo die, ut ex Actis apparet, C. Sallustius et Q. Pompeius, utrique et inimici Milonis et satis inquieti. Sed videtur mihi Q. Pompeium significare; nam eius seditiosior fuit contio. And... Scitis, iudices, fuisse qui in hac rogatione suadenda diceret Milonis manu caedem esse factam, consilio vero maioris alicuius. Me videlicet latronem et sicarium abiecti homines ac perditi describebant. Q. Pompeius Rufus et C. Sallustius tribuni fuerunt quos significat. Hi enim primi de ea lege ferenda populum hortati sunt et dixerunt a manu Milonis occisum esse Clodium et cetera. Could you translate please, I don't know how useful they'll be though Those are fragments (#45 & #47) of the Q Asconius Pedanius' commentary on the famous MT Cicero's Oratio Pro T Annio Milone. Sallustius' allusion at the process was almost incidental and had presumably nothing to do with Fausta's affaire. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.