Note 168 — LIFE OF SERTORIUS.

τῆ βραδυτῆτι τῆς λαλιᾶς The meaning of these words may be doubtful; but what I have given is perhaps consistent with the Greek and with the circumstances. There was some hesitation about beginning the attack, and the flagging of the conversation was a natural consequence.

Sertorius was murdered B.C. 72, in the consulship of L. Gellius Publicola and Cn. Cornelius Lentulus Clodianus, in the eighth year of his command in Spain. (Livius, Epitom. 96.) Accordingly this places the commencement of his command in B.C. 80; but he went to Spain in B.C. 82, or at the end of B.C. 83. See Notes on c. 6. Appian (Civil Wars, i. 114) states that when the will of Sertorius was opened it was discovered that he had placed Perperna among his heredes, a circumstance which throws doubt on the assertion of Appian that Perperna was afraid that Sertorius intended to take his life. Appian adds that when this was known, it created great enmity against Perperna among his followers.

Plutarch's estimate of Sertorius may be a favourable one; yet he does not omit to mention that act of his life which was most blamable, the massacre of the youths at Osca. From the slight indications in Frontinus, who found some material for his work on Military Stratagems in the campaigns of Sertorius, and from other passages, we may collect that, however mild the temper of Sertorius was, circumstances must often have compelled him to acts of severity and even cruelty. The difficulties of his position can only be estimated when we reflect on the nature of a campaign in many parts of Spain and the kind of soldiers he had under him. Promptitude and decision were among his characteristics; and in such a warfare promptitude and decision cannot be exercised at the time when alone they are of any use, if a man is swayed by any other considerations than those of prudence and necessity in the hour of danger. A general who could stab one of his own men in the heat of battle, to prevent him dispiriting the army by news of a loss, proved that his judgment was as clear as his determination was resolved.

Plutarch's narrative is of no value as a campaign, and his apology must be that he was not writing a campaign, but delineating a man's character. Drumann Geschichte Roms, Pompeius, p. 350, &c.) has attempted to give a connected history of this campaign against Sertorius, and he has probably done it as well as it can be done with such materials as we possess. The map of Antient Spain and Portugal published by the Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, will be useful for reading the sketch in Drumann. Plutarch had no good map, and, as already observed, he was not writing a campaign. Some modern historical writers, who have maps, seem to have made very little use of them; and their narrative of military transactions is often us confused as Plutarch's.

The nature of Guerilla warfare in Spain may be learned from the history of the Peninsular War. The difficulties of a campaign in Navarre and the Basque provinces are well shown in the campaigns of Zumalacarregui, the Carlist chief, a modern Sertorius, whose extraordinary career was cut short by a chance ball before the walls of Bilbao, in 1835. (Henningsen, The most striking Events of a Twelve-month's Campaign with Zumalacarregui, London, 1836.)