Abstract
The paper is intended to investigate the ‘deeper sense’ behind the allusion in the prooem of Sallust’s Catilina (3.2) to Thucydides 2.35.2: Whereas the Greek historiographer introduces an encomiastic speaker (Pericles) adapting himself to the standards of objective historiography, Sallust himself complies to the rules of moralizing rhetorics. This crucial difference is verified by a close interpretation of the original text and the imitation.
