No CrossRef data available.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 05 February 2016
The language and style of Tacitus form a subject of fascinating interest. Tacitus created a very personal and uniquely powerful medium of expression, and yet his creation is in no way outlandish or merely idiosyncratic, but largely formed by further extension of possibilities of brevity, pregnancy, and expressiveness developed by his predecessors. We may trace in Tacitus’ historical writings his continual efforts to refine and improve his medium, in other words his stylistic evolution. And we see that, while his style is changing unceasingly in detail, its general characteristics remain constant, as do the main motives which condition it, such as desire for dignity, colour, and force.
page no 35 note 1 Philologus xxv (1867), 92-134; xxvi (1867), 92-166; xxvii (1868), 113-49; also, in excerpted form, in Ausgewählte Schriften (Leipzig, 1933), 22-102.
page no 35 note 2 Leipzig, 1877-90.
page no 35 note 3 Op. cit. and ‘Zum Stil des Tacitus’ in Dragma M. P. Nilsson (Lund, 1939), 297-308.
page no 35 note 4 Studien zu den Annalen des Tacitus (Lund, 1934).
page no 35 note 5 Variatie sermonis Tacitei (Uppsala, 1935).
page no 35 note 6 CR lx (1946), 17-19; Eranos li (1953), 89-96; CR N.s. xviii (1968), 144-6.
page no 35 note 7 JRS lviii (1968), 22-31.
page no 36 note 1 ‘Beobachtungen über Sprache und Stil des Tacitus am Anfang des 13. Annalenbuches’, Hermes lxxxiii (1955), 187-200 = Studien, 659-71.
page no 36 note 2 In several of his valuable appendixes on Tacitus’ language.
page no 36 note 3 Op. cit. 111 ff.
page no 37 note 1 JAS ii (1912), 197-9.
page no 37 note 2 Many of its distinctive features have been usefully examined by Kuntz, F., Die Sprache des Tacitus und die Tradition der lateinischen Historikersprache (Diss. Heidelberg, 1962)Google Scholar.
page no 38 note 3 See Ogilvie, R. M., A Commentary on Livy, Books 1-5 (Oxford, 1965)Google Scholar, passim.
page no 38 note 1 The best brief account in English is by Martin, R. H., ‘Tacitus and his predeces sors’ in Tacitus (Studies in Greek and Latin Literature and its Influence, London, 1969), 117-47Google Scholar.
page no 38 note 2 Der pointierte Stil des Tacitus (Münster, 1963), 76-9.
page no 38 note 3 Annotations on Tacitus (Brassels-Berchem, 1964), a good collection of information, but somewhat mechanical in approach. See my review in Gnomon xxxvi (1964), 586-9.
page no 38 note 4 ‘Livia and Tanaquil’, CR xli (1927), 55 ff.
page no 39 note 1 See Miller, N. P., ‘Virgil and Tacitus,’ PVS 1 (1961-2), 25–34 Google Scholar.
page no 39 note 2 See Robbert, L., De Tacito Lucani imitatore (Göttingen, 1917)Google Scholar.
page no 39 note 3 One must express some hesitation, for it is not certain that Tacitus used Claudius’ speech directly. For a different approach, concentrating on the senatorial debate as Tacitus presents it, rather than comparison with Claudius’ speech, see Schillinger Haefele, U., Historia xiv (1965), 443-54Google Scholar.
page no 39 note 4 Vol. 2 of his major edition of the Annals (Oxford, 1907), 55.
page no 39 note 5 Pace Wellesley, K., ‘Can you trust Tacitus?’, Greece & Rome N.S. 1 (1954), 13–35 CrossRefGoogle Scholar, who defends Claudius’ speech and regards the speech in Tacitus as futile and artificial.
page no 39 note 6 La Technique des discours dans Salluste, Tite-Live et Tacite (Oslo, 1927).
page no 39 note 7 ‘Dramatic speech in Tacitus’, AJPh lxxxv (1964), 279-96Google Scholar.
page no 40 note 1 Henry, D. and Walker, B., ‘Tacitus and Seneca’, Greece and Rome N.s. x (1963), 93–110 Google Scholar, fail to grasp Tacitus’ subtlety and skill. They suppose the accumulation of stale ideas and expressions means that Tacitus was bored by Seneca. On the contrary, Tacitus is interested, as a cartoonist may be in a politician he sees through and despises, and he makes Seneca sound as empty as he conceives Seneca to be.
page no 40 note 2 JRS lvii (1967), 109-14.
page no 40 note 3 ‘Tiberius speaks’, AJPh lxxxix (1968), 1-19.
page no 40 note 4 Enghofer’s, R. Der Ablativus Absolutus bet Tacitus (Würzburg, 1961)Google Scholar may serve as a specimen of the excellent work still going on.
page no 40 note 5 On the constancy of Tacitus’ use of variatio see Martin, R. H., ‘ Variatio and the development of Tacitus’ style’, Eranos li (1953), 89–96 Google Scholar.
page no 40 note 6 Studien, 664-5.
page no 41 note 1 Der Satznachtrag bei Tacitus (Würzburg, 1960).
page no 41 note 2 For a brief, but sensitive, account of Tacitus’ metaphors see B. Walker, op. cit. 62-6.
page no 41 note 3 ‘The use of “forem” in Tacitus’, Univ. of California Publ, in Class. Phil, vii, no. 6 (1923), 209 ff.
page no 42 note 1 See p. 35.
page no 42 note 2 For example Koestermann, E., Gnomon xi (1935), 321ffGoogle Scholar. and F. Klingner, Studien, 659, n. 1.
page no 42 note 3 See p. 35.
page no 42 note 4 JRS lviii (1968), 22-31.