All those who offer an opinion on any doubtful point should first clear their minds of every sentiment of dislike, friendship, anger or pity.

Gaius Sallustius Crispus (Sallust), a Roman senator-turned-historian writing in the late Republic (1st century BCE), frequently contrasts moral integrity with the factional passions that, in his view, corrupted Roman public life. In his historical monographs on political crisis and civil conflict, he presents himself as an analyst striving for impartial judgment amid partisan hatred and personal ambition. The sentiment in this quotation reflects a common historiographical and civic ideal in Sallust: that anyone weighing contested matters—whether in politics, courts, or historical narration—should set aside private emotions and loyalties that distort judgment.

The quotation argues for disciplined impartiality: when a question is doubtful, emotional attachments (friendship, pity) and aversions (dislike, anger) are as biasing as overt self-interest. Sallust implies that sound opinion requires an inner “clearing” before deliberation—an ethical as well as intellectual act. The line also gestures toward a broader Roman concern with public virtue: decisions affecting the community should be guided by reasoned assessment of facts and the common good, not by personal feeling or faction. Read as historiographical advice, it is a claim that credible judgment depends on resisting the passions that drive propaganda and partisan narrative.