Contemporary scholars of Roman imperialism have discussed the ways in which ancient historians denigrate non-Romans and thereby present intellectual justifications for Roman conquest. This paper offers a case study that questions this position's validity: an examination of Sallust's Epistula Mithridatis (Hist. 4.69M) and Pompeius Trogus' speech of Mithridates (Justin 38.4-7). I argue that Sallust offers a more powerful attack on Roman foreign policy than does Trogus, whom many scholars have deemed "anti-Roman," and conclude that Roman historians are capable of using speeches offoreigners to engage in Roman self-criticism.
© 2001-2024 Fundación Dialnet · Todos los derechos reservados