(Σερτώριος) was the son of a reputable father, of Nursia, a Sabine village. His father died young, and he owed a good education to the care of a mother, to whom he was most affectionately attached. ( Plut. Sertor. 2, 22.) Sertorius had no ancestral dignity, and he left no children to perpetuate his name. He had acquired some reputation as a speaker even before he became a soldier. Cicero, who was acquainted with him, commends his facile speech and the sharpness of his judgment. (Brutus, 48.) Bodily strength, endurance of fatigue, sagacity and fertility of resources, qualified him for the life of adventure which it was his lot to have. The ancient writers have amused themselves with comparing him with other remarkable men. Plutarch has instituted a parallel between Sertorius and Eumenes, which is not inappropriate. The comparison with Hannibal, Philippus, and Antigonus, is mainly a classification of one-eyed men; for Sertorius also had lost an eye.

His military career commenced in Gaul. He was in the bloody battle on the Rhone (B. C. 105), in which the proconsul, Q. Servilius Caepio, was defeated by the Germans; and though wounded, Sertorius saved his life by swimming across the river in his armour. He was with Marius, B. C. 102, at Aix (Aquae Sextiae), and before the battle he entered the camp of the Teutones in disguise as a spy, for which hazardous undertaking his intrepid character and some knowledge of the Gallic language well qualified him. He served as tribunus militum in Spain under T. Didius (B. C. 97). During his residence in winter quarters at Castulo, which was probably on the Guadalquivr, he was expelled by the inhabitants on account of the oppressive conduct of the Roman garrison; but as the Spaniards left their gate unguarded, Sertorius made his way into the town again, and massacred all who were capable of bearing arms. He then distributed the dresses and armour of the barbarians who had been killed among his men, and under this guise obtained admission into a town which had sent men to aid the people of Castulo in ejecting the Roman soldiers ; most of the persons in the town were killed, and the rest were sold.

On his return to Rome he obtained the quaestorship in Gaul upon the Po, and he held this office at a critical time (B. C. 91), for the Marsic war was impending. He actively exerted himself in raising troops and procuring arms, and probably he held some command during the war; but the Roman annalists did not care to record the heroic acts of a man of unknown family. The marks of honour which he bore were, as he said, his scars, and the loss of an eye. Sertorius was well received in Rome; the people acknowledged his merit by clapping of hands when he entered the theatre; but L. Cornelius Sulla and his party successfully opposed him when he was a candidate for the tribuneship. On the outbreak of the civil war, B. C. 88, he declared himself against the party of the nobles, though he was by no means an admirer of his old commander, C. Marius, whose character he well understood.

When Marius fled from Rome before Sulla, Sertorius remained; and while Sulla was engaged in the war against Mithridates, Sertorius sided with L. Cornelius Cinna, the consul, against the other consul Octavius. The two consuls fought a battle in the Forum, which ended in the victory of Octavius, and the flight of Cinna and Sertorius. Cinna, however, soon rallied his party, and got a force together which made him a match for Octavius. In B. C. 87, Marius returned to Italy from Africa, and proposed to join Cinna. Sertorius was against receiving the proposals of Marius, " a man who could endure no partner in power, and who was devoid of good faith." Cinna did not follow the advice of Sertorius, and Marius was allowed to join them. Sertorius commanded one of the four armies that presented themselves before Rome; and he, in conjunction with Cinna, fought the battle against Pompeius Strabo before the Colline gate. (Appian, App. BC 1.67; Orosius, 5.19.)

Sertorius is not charged with the guilt of the bloody massacre which ensued after Marius and Cinna entered Rome. The slaves whom Marius had invited to his standard, and now kept as guards, committed worse excesses than Marius himself; they butchered their masters, lay with their masters' wives, and violated their children. Sertorius was at last roused, and either alone or with the concurrence of Cinna, he fell upon these scoundrels in their camp, and speared four thousand of them. (Plut. Sert. 5, Mar. 44.)

In B. C. 83 Sertorius was praetor. Sulla was now returning home after reducing Mithridates to terms, and the party of Sertorius made preparations to oppose him. But their means and measures were ineffectual against so wily an enemy. The consul Norbanus was defeated; and the army of the other consul, L. Scipio, being gained over by Sulla, though Q. Sertorius had warned Scipio of the danger of a negotiation with Sulla, he withdrew into Etruria. His remonstrances also had no effect in B. C. 82 with the consuls Carbo and the younger Marius, and in order to get rid of him, they suggested that he should undertake the administration of the province of Further Spain. Julius Exsuperantius (100.8) is the sole authority for this fact, though he does not state the whole affair correctly. Appian (App. BC 1.86, 108) makes Sertorius go to Spain in B. C. 83, before the consulship of Carbo and the younger Marius.

With few men and little money, Sertorius made his way through Gaul, and bought a free passage over the Pyrenees from the barbarians (Plut. Sertor. 6). In Spain he set about forming an army of Roman settlers and Spaniards, providing munitions of war and building ships. Sulla sent C. Annius Luscus into Spain to oppose Sertorius, with the title of proconsul, who was followed by his quaestors, L. Fabius and Q. Tarquitius. They found the passages of the Pyrenees occupied by Julius Salinator, the legate of Sertorius, and they could not make any way until Salinator was treacherously murdered. The road into Spain being opened, the troops of Luscus advanced without meeting with resistance, and Sertorius embarking at Carthago Nova (Cartagena) set sail for Mauritania. Here he was attacked by the barbarians, and after some loss he put to sea again, and being joined by some Cilician pirates, he drove the Roman garrison from the Pityussae Islands (Yvica and Formontera). His light ships were now attacked by the fleet of Luscus; and harassed by stormy weather, he sailed for the Straits of Gibraltar, and finally landed at the mouth of the Guadalquivr. Here he met with some seamen who had visited the Atlantic Islands (Madeira and Porto Santo, or, as some suppose, the Canaries), and from their description of this happy region he " was seized with a strong desire to dwell in the islands, and to live in quiet, free from tyranny and never-ending wars." But the Cilician pirates left him; and, to satisfy his men and keep them employed, he went over again to Mauritania, to help the people against their king, whom he defeated. He also defeated Paccianus, whom Sulla had sent against him; and lie took Tingis (Tangier), in which the Moorish king was. This African campaign of Sertorius was in the northwest part of Marocco.

Being strengthened by the addition of the forces of Paccianus, and having acquired some fame by his success in Africa, Sertorius was invited by the Lusitani, who were exposed to the invasion of the Romans, to become their leader. He crossed over to the peninsula at the call with about two thousand six hundred men, of whom about one third were Libyans; and he soon got together an army, which for some years successfully opposed all the power of Rome.

Plutarch says that he also availed himself of the superstitious character of the people among whom he was, to strengthen his authority over them. A fawn was brought to him by one of the natives as a present, which soon became so tame as to accompany him in his walks, and attend him on all occasions. Plutarch's life of Sertorius is written something in the style of a romance; but his story of the fawn, and of the use which Sertorius made of it, contains nothing improbable, if we consider the character of the man and his circumstances. The story of the fawn is also supported by the testimony of Frontinus (Stratag. 1.11.13).

His first exploit was the defeat of Cotta, the legate of Luscus, in a sea-fight in or near the Straits of Gibraltar (Plut. Sertor. 12). In B. C. 80, Sulla sent L. Domitius Ahenobarbus to take the command against Sertorius in Nearer Spain, and Fufidius in Further Spain. Fufidius was defeated by Sertorius with great loss on the banks of the Guadalquivr. Sertorius was now strengthened by the accession of many Romans who had been proscribed by Sulla; and this not only added to his consideration, but brought him many good officers. The dictator Sulla appointed, as governor of Spain for the following year, B. C. 79, his colleague in the consulship, Q. Metellus Pius, the son of Numidicus. Metellus was about fifty years of age, inactive and fond of ease, and no match for a younger soldier, who was never weary and never off his guard.

The kind of warfare which Metellus had to carry on was new to his men and to himself. He could not bring the enemy to any decisive battle, and yet the enemy let him have no rest. In a country without roads, which was so well known to Sertorius, he could not move with safety, and he never knew when he might not expect an attack. In the meantime, Domitius and his legate Thorius had pushed forward to the banks of the Guadiana; but in their attempt to cross the river they were routed by L. Hirtuleius, the quaestor of Sertorius, and both the generals were killed. (Florus, 3.22.)

Two Roman armies were defeated by the generals of Sertorius in the north-east of Spain ; L. Valerius Praeconinus was routed on the Segre (Sicoris) in Catalonia, and L. Manilius, the proconsul of Gallia Narbonensis, was routed, and with difficulty escaped to Lerida (Herda) on the Segre with the loss of his baggage (Caesar, Bell. Gull. 3.20; Orosius, 5.23.) Metellus was still harassed by the guerilla warfare of Sertorius (Plut. Sertor. 13) : he also received a challenge to a single combat from Sertorius, which, as Plutarch observes, he wisely declined. Metellus made an attempt to take the town of the Langobritae (Langobriga or Lacobriga, a place of uncertain position), which had only one well of water within the walls. He expected to take the town in two days; but Sertorius supplied the place with water by means of skins, which were carried into the town by Spanish and Moorish volunteers. C. Aquinius, who was sent by Metellus to forage, fell into an ambuscade, and Metellus at last was compelled to retire.

In the year B. C. 77 Sertorius was joined by M. Perperna, one of the legates of M. Lepidus. Perperna fled before the generals of Sulla, and came to Spain with some troops and several senators and nobles. His men compelled Perperna to take the command under Sertorius; Plutarch says that Perperna had fifty-three cohorts with him. (Sertor. 15.) To give some show of form to his formidable power, Sertorius established a senate of three hundred, into which no provincial was admitted ; bat to soothe the more distinguished Spaniards, and to have some security for their fidelity, he established a school at Huesca (Osca), in Aragon, for the education of their children in Greek and Roman learning. The position chosen for his school shows that the north-east of Spain was under the authority of Sertorius, and probably his power was acknowledged in every part of the peninsula which had ever felt the Roman arms.

Some time in B. C. 77 Pompeius was appointed by the senate to command in Spain. Pompeius was only an eques; but in reply to the question in the senate if an eques should be sent as proconsul, L. Philippus wittily replied, not " pro consule," but "pro consulibus." Pompeius was entrusted with equal authority with Metellus, an unwise measure, which bred jealousy between the commanders. Pompeius left Italy in B. C. 76, with thirty thousand infantry and a thousand cavalry, and he crossed the Alps between the sources of the Po and the Rhone, as Appian states (Bell. Civ. 1.109). He entered Spain, and advanced to the Ebro (Iberus) without meeting resistance. (Ep. Pomp. Frag. Sallust. lib. iii.) He probably marched near the coast, and advanced into Valencia to relieve Lauro, on the Xucar (Sucro) which Sertorius was besieging. But Pompeius was out-manæuvred by his opponent, and compelled to retire with the loss of a legion. Frontinus (Stratag. 2.5), following the authority of Livius, makes the loss of Pompeius much larger. Appian (1.109) gives an instance of the severity of Sertorius on this occasion : he put to death a whole Roman cohort of his own troops, on the ground of the men being addicted to unnatural practices. Pompeius wintered north of the Ebro, a fact which shows the advantage that Sertorius had gained. The winter camp of Sertorius was also not far from the Iberus at Aelia Castra. Appian says that both Metellus and Pompeius wintered near the Pyrenees, and Sertorius and Perperna in Lusitania. (Compare Drumann, Pompeius, p. 364.)

In the spring of B. C. 75 Perperna was sent by Sertorius, with a large force, to the mouth of the Iberus, to watch Pompeius. In Baetica, or Further Spain, L. Hirtuleius had to observe the movements of Metellus. Sertorius ascended the Ebro, and laid waste the country as far as Calahorra (Calaguris Nassica). Contrebia was the place at which M. Insteius, who was ordered to reinforce the cavalry, and the rest of the commanders, were to meet him.

Hirtuleius, contrary to the instructions of Sertorius, fought a battle with Metellus at Italica near Seville, in which he was totally defeated. After the victory Metellus advanced northwards against Sertorius. Hirtuleius rallied his troops, and followed Metellus; but in a second battle near Segovia he was again defeated, and lost his life. Pompeius, though he had received no reinforcements from Rome, marched southward to oppose Herennius and Perperna, who had joined their forces; and he gave them a signal defeat near Valencia on the Guadavial (Turia) : Herennius lost his life, and according to Plutarch (Pompeius, 18), ten thousand men fell on that side.

To prevent the junction of Pompeius and Metellus, Sertorius advanced to the river Xucar; but Pompeius had no wish to join Metellus : he aspired to the glory of finishing the war himself. Sertorius met his enemy on the river, and, with his usual sagacity, deferred the combat till the evening, because whether Pompeius was conquered or victorious, his movements after the battle during the dark, and in an unknown country, must be impeded. The loss was great on both sides : the camp of Sertorius was plundered; and Pompeius, who was wounded, only escaped by quitting his costly-caparisoned horse, the capture of which amused the Moors who were in pursuit of him. It may have been in this battle that Sertorius stabbed the man who brought him news of the defeat of Hirtuleius (Frontinus, Stratag. 2.7), to prevent his soldiers being discouraged by the intelligence. On the following day Sertorius was ready to fight again; but observing that Metellus was near, he broke up his order of battle, and marched off, saying, "If that old woman had not come up, I would have given this boy a good drubbing, by way of lesson, and have sent him back to Rome." (Plut. Sertor. 19.)

The fawn of Sertorius had been lost in the confusion, but he got it again by offering a great reward to the finder. His men were encouraged by the reappearance of this animal, which was supposed to be a favourable omen, and Sertorius led them against the united forces of Metellus and Pompeius, which were encamped at Murviedro, on the site of Saguntum. Pompeius was compelled to retreat with the loss of six thousand men ; Sertorius lost three thousand. The division of Metellus defeated that of Perperna, which lost above five thousand men. (Appian, 1.110.)

The winter was now coming on. Sertorius, according to his fashion, gave the greater part of his troops leave to disperse, and appointed, as their rendezvous, Clunia, a town among the Arevaci, not far from the Douro. (Drumann, p. 369.) Metellus and Pompeius separated Metellus wintered between the Ebro and the Pyrenees; Plutarch (Sertor. 21) says that he wintered in Gallia, which is probably a mistake. Pompeius wintered among the Vaccaei. If the position of Clunia is well fixed, Pompeius must have wintered to the rear of Sertorius, which is very improbable. Owing to the want of precision, in Plutarch's narrative, and the defective state of other authorities, the movements of the hostile armies cannot be ascertained.

Pompeius wrote to the senate, in urgent terms, for men and supplies. He said, that if they did not come, lie and his army must leave Spain, and Sertorius would come after them. (Frag. Hist. Sallust. lib. iii.) The letter reached Rome before the end of the year B. C. 75, but nothing was done upon it until the following year.

The last battle had procured Metellus the title of Imperator, and he was as proud of it as any silly child would have been. He was received in Nearer Spain with flattering entertainments, and all the pomp of rejoicings after victory. Pompeius was better employed in looking after his troops. In B. C. 74 he received from Italy money and two legions, for which he was indebted as much to the jealousy of his enemies at Rome as to his friends. The consul L. Lucullus was afraid that if Pompeius returned from Spain, he would get the command in the war against Mithridates, king of Pontus. Mithridates now sent proposals to Sertorius to form an alliance, and they were accepted with some modifications. The terms are stated by Plutarch (Sertor. 24) : Metellus had already offered a great reward for the head of Sertorius, a measure which would appear to be in some degree justified by Roman notions, if it followed the treaty with Mithridates. Plutarch (Sertor. 22) mentions this fact before he mentions the treaty but his chronology cannot be trusted.

Jealousy among the party of Sertorius was the immediate cause of his ruin. Many Roman nobles who served under him, envied the man who was their superior, and Perperna, for his own ambitious purposes, increased the disaffection. Pompeius, who was in the north of Spain, was now besieging Palencia (Palantia) in Leon, but lie retreated on the approach of Sertorius, and joined Metellus. The two generals advanced against Calahorra on the Ebro, but here they were attacked by Sertorius, and sustained great loss. Metellus spent the winter in Nearer Spain, and Pompeius was compelled, by want of supplies, to spend the winter in Gallia, in the province of M. Fonteius (Cic. pro Font. 3). Sertorius was actively employed in visiting the south-east coast of Spain and inspecting his fleet, which was employed in intercepting any supplies to the enemy.

The events of the campaigns B. C. 73 and 72 are merely hinted at by the ancient authorities. Sertorius lost many towns; but there was no decisive battle. He began to abate his activity, to indulge in wine and women, and to become cruel and suspicious. (Appian, 1.113). There was, indeed, good reason for his suspicions; but as to the rest, Appian's testimony is doubtful. He had taken Spaniards for his guard, because lie distrusted his own countrymen. The Spaniards of higher rank were dissatisfied with not having the same distinctions as the Romans; and many were made indifferent to the cause of Sertorius by the success of Pompeius and Metellus. Many of the Romans "secretly damaged all his measures, and the oppressed the barbarians by severe treatment and exactions, on the pretext that it was by the order of Sertorius. This caused revolts and disturbances in the cities and those who were sent to settle and pacify these outbreaks, returned after causing more wars and increasing the existing insubordination; so that Sertorius, contrary to his former moderation and mildness, did a grievous wrong to the sons of the Iberians (Spaniards) who were educating at Osca, by putting some to death and selling others as slaves" (Plut. Sertor. 25). But the conspirators against the life of Sertorius were all Romans, and only ten in number. They sent to Sertorius a forged letter, which announced a victory gained by one of his generals. Sertorius offered a sacrifice for the happy tidings, and Perperna. after much entreaty, prevailed on him to accept an invitation to a banquet. The conspirators were afraid to do the deed that they had planned : they tried to provoke the anger of Sertorius by obscene language, which they knew that he hated, and by indecent behaviour under the assumed guise of drunkenness. Sertorius changed his posture on the couch by throwing himself on his back and pretending not to listen to them. But on Perperna taking a cup of wine, and, in the midst of the draught, throwing it away, which was the signal agreed on, Manius Antonius struck him with his sword. Sertorius attempted to rise, but Antonius threw himself upon him, and held his hands while the rest of the conspirators despatched him. Thus ended the war of Sertorius B. C. 72. The termination brought no glory to Metellus and Pompeius, for the hands of assassins, and not their skill or courage, concluded the contest. The loss of all complete and authentic materials for the war of Sertorius is ill supplied by the life in Plutarch. Drumann (Pompeii) has collected and arranged the scattered fragments of the history, and he has done it with care and ability. A certain amount of conjecture or inference is, however, necessary to fill up even the scantiest outline of the war. Plutarch's Life of Sertorius, translated by G. Long, contains a few notes. Corneille has made Sertorius the subject of a tragedy; and a modern writer, of a novel or romance, " The Fawn of Sertorius," London, 1846.