5. (Par.) When Cinna had put in force again the law regarding the return of exiles, Marius and the rest of his followers who had been expelled leaped into the city with the army left to them by all the gates at once; these they shut, so that no one could make his escape, and despatched every man they met, making no distinction, but treating them all alike as enemies.  They took special pains to destroy any persons who had possessions, because they coveted such property, and outraged their children and wives as if they had enslaved some foreign city.  The heads of the most eminent citizens they fastened to the rostra.  That sight was no less cruel than their ruin; for the thought might occur to the spectators that what their ancestors had adorned with the beaks of the enemy was now being deformed by the heads of the citizens.

For, in fine, so great a desire and greed for slaughter possessed Marius, that when he had killed most of his enemies and no one because of the great confusion prevailing occurred to him whom he wished to destroy, he gave the word to the soldiers to stab all in succession of the passers-by to whom he should not extend his hand.  For Roman affairs had come to this, that a man had to die not only without a trial and without having incurred enmity, but by reason of Marius’s hand not being stretched out.  Now naturally in so great a throng and uproar it was not only no object to Marius to make the gesture, but it was not even possible, no matter how much he wished it, to use his hand as he pleased.  Hence many died for naught who ought certainly on every account not to have been slain.  The entire number of the murdered is beyond finding out; for the slaughter went on five whole days and an equal number of nights. (Valesius, p. 642.)

[Sidenote:  B.C. 86 (a.u. 668)] 6. (Par.) While the Romans were offering the New Year’s sacrifice at the opening of the season and making their vows[66] for their magistrate according to ancestral rites, the son of Marius killed a tribune with his own hands, sending his head to the consuls, and hurled another from the Capitol,—­a fate which had never befallen such an official,—­and debarred two praetors from both fire and water. (Valesius, p. 645.)

[Footnote 66:  Reading [Greek:  euchas] (Reiske, Boissevain) in place of [Greek:  archas].]

[Sidenote:  FRAG.  CI] 1. (Par.) The lieutenant of Flaccus, Fimbria, when his chief had reached Byzantium revolted against him.  He was in all matters very bold and reckless, passionately fond of any notoriety whatsoever and contemptuous of all that was superior.  This led him at that time, after his departure from Rome, to pretend an incorruptibility in respect to money and an interest in the soldiers, which bound them to him and set them at variance with Flaccus.  He was the more able to do this because Flaccus was insatiable in regard to money, not being content to appropriate what was ordinarily left over, but enriching himself even from the soldiers’ allowance for food and from the booty, which he invariably maintained belonged to him.  (Valesius, p. 650.)