This review analyzes Kenneth Wellesley's 1964 translation of the The Histories by Tacitus. The Histories is an account of Rome during the infamous A.D. 69, in which Rome held four emperors, and the surrounding months. In it, Tacitus described the reigns of Galba, Otho, and Vitellius and Vespasian's rise to power, as well as the battles, executions, and other events that shook Rome at the time. Actually, The Histories is believed to have covered a much longer time period, approximately from the death of Nero to the end{of} Domitian's reign, but the other portions of Tacitus's work have been lost, leaving primarily that one significant year. The work is split into multiple "books," which are closer to chapters by modern standards. Book One provides …show more content…
Book Three covers the Flavian campaign till Vitellius's death. Book Four covers the beginning of Vespasian's reign, Civilis's revolt, and the start of A.D. 70. Book Five includes a brief, inaccurate description of the Jewish people and their history and the end of Civilis's revolt. Tacitus's viewpoint is the most important part of this work; he was a Roman senator, consul, and governor who was only fourteen during the year A.D. 69. He had first and second-hand knowledge of Rome lost on modern historians. This is why the book is written as though readers are intimately aware of certain aspects of Roman culture, such as religious festivals or execution styles. However, the nearness of events also biased Tacitus's viewpoint. Tacitus had strong social opinions relevant to the times and people he wrote about, including the Batavians and Jews. Also, Tacitus could not help but show some sense of shame and personal interest when writing about tragedies that struck his own nation just a few decades ago, shown in lines like "This (the burning of the Capitol) was the most lamentable and appalling disaster in the whole history of the Roman …show more content…
He does credit one story to Vipstanus Messalla, and references the histories written by Gaius Plinius (Elder Pliny). (160;162) However, rarely did Tacitus document his sources. Fortunately, the translator, Kenneth Wellesley, provides some suggestions as to Tacitus's sources. As a Roman senator, Tacitus had access to official documents such as the Roman Hansard and the Transactions of the Senate. There was a wealth of literature, including Elder Pliny's work, about that time period even in Tacitus's days for him to call upon, which seems evidenced by his references to "others have recorded" or similar statements when providing multiple accounts of an incident. Also, he had many witnesses and survivors such as his father-in-law Agricola or probable friend Vestricius Spurinna still alive at that time to supply secondhand accounts. Of course as a lad of fourteen at the time these events took place, Tacitus likely called upon a great deal of his own knowledge. Wellesley suggests all these formed the backbone of The
You will read about Lucius Junius Brutus (Tarquin the proud). His culture the Etruscan. Roman Republic Government. Rome’s everyday life and inventions.
Tacitus (56-120 CE) was a Roman orator and public official, who used many public records, official reports, and his own experience as the basis for his historical writings. As a writer, it is said that he demonstrated his moral authority and dignity through his works, but also that he controlled the performance of the characters in his writings, making them not necessarily strict history. In Tacitus’ Annals, he states that the disaster could have been “accidental or treacherously contrived by the emperor.” Throughout the account, he depicts Nero to have greatly relieved and aided the people, as well as made
The first and second Punic wars occurred over a period of around 60 years in the mid and late second century B.C. Although this is a relatively short timeframe in comparison to the vast history of the Roman Empire, these wars would shape the fundamental outlook on Roman foreign policy for years to come. However important to the Romans, though, these repeated military conflicts would spell the end for their adversaries – the Carthaginians. Though at times in the fighting the Carthaginians definitively maintained an upper hand, I assert that the Romans were destined to win both wars. The Carthaginians simply could not overcome the Roman’s intrinsic courageousness, their superior political and armed forces organization, and, most importantly, the manpower the Republic possessed.
The achievements of Roman civilization are numerous, both in the public life of Rome and for the individual. In the poems of Catullus, Catullus describes his personal achievement of starting a relationship with Lesbia and the subsequent degeneration of the relationship. In Livy’s The History of Rome, Livy lays out several public Roman achievements, such as the founding of the city and the establishment of the monarchy; Livy depicts the struggles of maintaining some form of stability associated with these great achievements. Although these Roman achievements have lasting impacts on the individual and on the state, these achievements do not have lasting existence, which shows their relative instability and fragility.
As a writer at Gladiators Monthly, I am examining the historical accuracy of the movie Gladiator. There are aspects of Gladiator that do and do not hold true to the historical accuracy of the Romans under Commodus. This essay will show how the depiction of Commodus has both accurate and inaccurate qualities, while the portrayal of the Roman crowd determining the fate of the gladiators is quite accurate. In reality, Commodus did not kill his father, Marcus Aurelius, nor did he reign for such a short period of time.
The Achievements of the Divine Augustus presents multiple examples of Augustus both expanding and improving Rome, effectively creating the great Roman Empire. From his relationship to Julius Caesar, it is reasonable to infer that Augustus was raised to respect and venerate the power of the head of Rome, if not the ideals of the Republic. Then after the assassination of Julius Caesar, Augustus (then Octavian) stepped up, and by nineteen years old, he had already, “…raised an army by means of which I liberated the Republic…” With his use of words like “liberation”, it is evident that Augustus considers himself somewhat of a savior, or hero of Rome. However, he was not the only one, because due to his exemplary leadership Augustus gained “consular rank”, the
Alyssa Minami Professor Penrose HIST 105-01 15 November 2017 Expository Essay Polybius, a Greek historian, most known work is The Histories which is his writing that describes the rise of the Roman Republic.1 In his work, he was able to describe and document the Roman government as well as events during the Hellenistic period. Through observing and analyzing the world around him, Polybius was able to deduct that mixed government was the best form of government. While popularizing the concept of mixed government, he was also able to figure out the problem that occurred with western governments. The concept of a cycle of governments was previously implied in Aristotle’s work however, Polybius was able to describe the phenomenon.
For example, the Suevians “ are remarkable for a peculiar custom, that of twisting their hair and binding it up in a knot.” Tacitus wrote this document for the Romans in his time and also to add to the already enormous collection of historical works in the Roman Empire. His purpose for writing this document is to show facts, power politics, and moral lessons and to generally discuss accounts of Germania. The circumstances that lead him to create this document would be the fact that he was also a senator thus, the need to depict the life and politics of Germania a rival nation that threatened the superiority of Rome at that time.
Suetonius offers a more concise and focused perspective on the role of Emperor Nero in the events leading up to and following the fire in his Suetonius’ Nero. Suetonius' Nero provides a detailed account of Nero's life and reign, including his role in the events leading up to the Great Fire of Rome and the subsequent persecution of Christians. It also offers insights into Nero's personal life, including his relationships with his mother, his wives, and his
According to Suetonius’ Julius and Cassius Dio’s Roman History, he spent so long at Nicomedes’ court that rumours suggested that Caesar was allegedly
Comparing Tacitus’ account of the death of Agrippina with that of Suetonius of Cassius Dio it is clear that Tacitus is emphasising Nero’s lack of insight and carelessness in comparison with the foresight and resourcefulness of Agrippina . Nero is shown as less capable than his mother in a political sense, he succeeded because he was the emperor, an ominous tone for the rest of the Neronian books and for Rome itself. This was compounded by how easily the senate accept Nero’s matricide and later how they gave thanks to the gods for the murder of his wife Octavia and it shows how the senate were following the Emperor to the deterioration of Roman morality. What was once a sign of a prosperous Roman, giving thanks to the gods , is now a sign of where Rome has fallen
In her chapter on the historiography of Roman exemplarity, Christina Shuttleworth Kraus examines this loss of power through the transition of exempla as the res gestae populi Romani to the res gestae divi Augusti (Kraus, 2). In early Roman history, exemplarity rested in the hands of popular consciousness; the citizens of Rome had the sole power of deciding which events or people to raise up to the status of exempla. This system of exemplarity that is explained in detail by Matthew Roller’s four stage model of the creation of exempla by public discourse (Roller, 216-217). However, Roller’s framework begins to collapse when Augustus intentionally influences exemplary power through his coercive Res Gestae. Rather than looking to the past for the great deeds of common people like the Sabine women or Lucretia, Roman citizens of the Augustan period had their attention directed towards the persona of one man, an exemplar in the form of an emperor.
The Life of Marius, written by Plutarch, is a fascinating ancient source detailing the career of the Roman Gaius Marius, 127-86BC. While there are interpretive and reliability issues, the Life of Marius is a particularly useful and significant source. It is our only extensive primary source on Marius, who was a key political figure of late Republican Rome. Additionally, Plutarch’s work indicates not only many crucial military and political development in Rome in the time period, but also gives a reflection of Plutarch’s own Rome and its values and political climate.
In this paper I will argue that the text was intended for Christians instead of the Romans based on the way Perpetua is praised in the text and how Perpetua’s disobedience towards her father who was the paterfamilias was most shocking to the Romans. Essentially this autobiography was written for Christian’s, particularly for those who were or later
This book has given me a greater understanding on the Classics as a whole. The book touches on a plethora of classical topics in chapter 2, and often compares the western civilization to our west. The author also gave me better understanding of the time periods. I didn’t know slaves had better treatment than the free people in Persia at the time, or that war was an enormous role in Classics age. From the western civilization class I’ve took earlier this year, this books discuss the importance of money in a war, when Sparta beat Athens, or when Rome beat the Carthaginians because of the new money they received to build ships.