The text of Sallust, notwithstanding the many and excellent editions
which have been published, has not yet acquired a form that can be
regarded as generally adopted and established; for the number of
manuscripts is great, and their differences have led critical editors to
form different opinions as to which, in each case, is the correct
reading, or at least the one most worthy of acceptation. This difference
of opinion manifested itself especially after the edition of Gottleib
Corte (Leipzig, 1724, 4to.), who in many passages abandoned the vulgate
as constituted by Gruter and Wasse, and on the authority of a few
manuscripts, altered the text of Sallust, on the mere supposition that
his style was abrupt. Corte's recension was adopted by many, and often
reprinted; while others, especially Haverkamp, in his valuable and very
complete edition (Hague, 1742, 2 vols. 4to.), returned to the vulgate.
The latest critical editors of Sallust--Gerlach (Basel, 1823, &c. 3 vols.
4to., and a revised text, Basel, 1832, 8vo.) and Kritz (Leipzig, 1828,
&c. 2 vols. 8vo.)--though declaring against the arbitrary proceedings of
Corte, yet very often differ in their texts from each other. Between
these two stands the edition of the learned critic, J. C. Orelli (Zurich,
1840), whose text forms the basis of the present edition. But besides
abandoning his artificial and antiquated orthography, and restoring that
which is adopted in most editions of Latin classics, we have felt obliged
in many instances to give up Orelli's reading, and to follow the
authority of the best manuscripts, especially the Codex Leidensis (marked
L in Haverkamp's edition). For our explanatory notes we are much indebted
to the edition of Kritz, though we have often been under the necessity of
differing from him.