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
Various analogies have been used to describe Tacitus’ way of writing in his historical works. Racine called him ‘le plus grand peintre de l’Antiquité’. The analogy of painting is often pertinent, for Tacitus has supreme skill in presenting scenes visually, in catching and highlighting details of gesture and movement, not least so with crowd scenes, as in the mutinies narrated in Ann. 1, and with night scenes, as at Ann. 1. 65 and 14. 8. This kind of approach has been used and developed by E. Courbaud in his sensitive and imaginative book Les Procédés d’art de Tacite dans les Histoires, and aspects of visual presentation are further explored by H. Hommel. The analogy of drama is more influential still. Moriz Haupt said Tacitus ‘was born to be a tragic poet’, and later critics have taken up the idea variously.
page no 22 note 1 Paris, 1918, particularly 121-66.
page no 22 note 2 ‘Die Bildkunst des Tacitus’, Würzburger Studien ix (1936), 116-48Google Scholar.
page no 22 note 3 For instance Löfstedt, E. (JRS xxxviii (1948), 5)Google Scholar: ‘the end of most books of the Annals resolves itself, as it were, into the tragic and arresting close of an act of a drama. No tragical writings in the ordinary sense of the word have been preserved from these times, but we may well say that in the Annals Tacitus has given us a whole series of tragedies—tragedies of men, together making up the great tragedy of Rome’.
page no 22 note 4 Tacitus (Göttmgen, 1986) =Ausg. kl. Sehr. 2. 263-76.
page no 22 note 5 ‘Dramatic construction in Tacitus’ Annals’, Yale Classical Studies v (1935), 3-53.
page no 22 note 6 Op. cit. 35 ff.
page no 22 note 7 De Tacitea historiae conscribendae ratione (Kerkrade, 1926).
page no 23 note 1 So, rightly, Timpe, D., Der Triumph des Germanicus (Bonn, 1968), 3 Google Scholar.
page no 23 note 2 It is a recurrent temptation to scholars to give special importance to two or three passages and build on them impressive superstructures of ‘Tacitean’ thought. Paratore’s, E. Tacito (Milan, 1951)Google Scholar notably exemplifies this weakness.
page no 23 note 3 Die staatsrechtlichen Excurse in Tacitus’ Annalen, Nachrichten von der Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen 1896, 191-208 = Ausg. kl. Sehr. 2. 299-317.
page no 23 note 4 On which see Timpe, D., op. cit., and Koestermann, E., ‘Die Feldzüge des Ger manicus 14-16 n. Chr.’, Historia vi (1956), 429-79Google Scholar.
page no 23 note 5 The campaign in Thrace recounted at Ann. 4. 46-51 also shows some notable elaboration of language.
page no 24 note 1 Stuttgart, 1924, 371 ff.
page no 24 note 2 I borrow the phrase from R. H. Martin.
page no 24 note 3 Others are given by Kroll, op. cit.
page no 25 note 1 See particularly the useful study by Tresch, J., Die Nerobücher in den Annalen des Tacitus (Heidelberg, 1965)Google Scholar.
page no 25 note 2 The Greater Roman Historians (Berkeley2, 1963), 121.
page no 25 note 3 Les Sources de Tacite (Paris, 1893). For some pertinent criticism of this approach see Boissier, G., Tacitus and other Roman Studies (London, 1906), 58ffGoogle Scholar. and B. Walker, op. cit. 139 ff.
page no 26 note 1 R. Syme’s treatment of the sources is in general sane and judicious, though disputable on some important details. See Townend, G. B., ‘Cluvius Rufus in the Histories of Tacitus’, AJPh lxxxv (1964), 337-77Google Scholar, an excellent paper which can be used as an introduction to some of the wider problems involved.
page no 26 note 2 In his article ‘Cassius Dio’, Real-Encyclopädie 3. 1714 ff.
page no 26 note 3 Not many scholars have produced an adequate explanation. For instance D. M. Pippidi, op. cit. 66 ff., hardly satisfies on this matter.
page no 26 note 4 ‘Tacitus und die Geschichtsschreiber des ersten Jahrhunderts nach Christus’, Mus. Heh. xv (1958), 194-206 = Römische Geisteswelt (Munich, 1961), 469-89.
page no 27 note 1 ‘Cornelius Tacitus und Cluvius Rufus’, Hermes iv (1870), 295 ff. = Gesammelte Schriften 7 (Berlin, 1909), 224ff.
page no 27 note 2 Studien zur Darstellungskunst des Tacitus (Würzburg, 1935).
page no 27 note 3 Die Geschichte Kaiser Othos bei Tacitus, Berichte der Sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften xcii (1940), Heft 1 = Studien, 605-24.
page no 27 note 4 Here is a simple example: Plut. Galba 25 oů κατά τήν τοθ σώμοπ-ος μαλακΐβν καΐ θηλύτητα тђ ψυχη διατίθρυμμένος, Tac. Hist. 1. 22. I non erat Othoni mollis et corpori similis animus, and Suet. Otho 12. 1 tanto Othonis animo nequaquam corpus aut habitus competit.
page no 28 note 1 Studi sulle fonti degli ‘Annales’ di Tacito (Rome2, 1963).
page no 28 note 2 See Syme, R., ‘The senator as historian’ in Histoire et historiens dans l’Antiquité (Fondation Hardt 4, Geneva, 1958), 187–201 Google Scholar.
page no 29 note 1 The prefaces have occasioned voluminous discussion. See particularly Vogt, J., ‘Tacitus und die Unparteilichkeit des Historikers’, Würzburger Studien ix (1936), 1–20 Google Scholar, F. Klingner.‘Tacitus über Augustus und Tiberius’, Sitz, der Bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 1953, Heft 7 = Studien, 624-58, and Koestermann, E., ‘Der Eingang der Annalen des Tacitus’, Historia x (1961), 330-55Google Scholar.
page no 29 note 2 See Weyman, C., ‘Sine ira et studio’, Archiv für lateinische Lexicographie xv (1908), 278–9 Google Scholar.
page no 30 note 1 Such explanations are fashionable nowadays, but I believe that the prejudices of individuals, such as Mommsen, have had more influence on scholarship than the general prejudices, of any particular age.
page no 30 note 2 Reid’s, J.S. paper, ‘Tacitus as a historian’ JRS xi (1921), 191-9Google Scholar, is a good specimen of the hostility to Tacitus in vogue earlier this century.
page no 30 note 3 The Reign of Tiberius (Oxford, 1931).
page no 30 note 4 Criminal Trials and Criminal Legislation under Tiberius (Middletown, 1935). See also his Studies in the Reign of Tiberius (Baltimore, 1943).
page no 30 note 5 Tiberius (Stuttgart, 1960).
page no 30 note 6 ‘Die Majestätsprozesse unter-Tiberius’, Historia iv (1955), 72–106 Google Scholar.
page no 31 note 1 Op. cit. 11.
page no 31 note 2 More of them will be mentioned in the next chapter.
page no 31 note 3 On this see Pippidi, op. cit. 26 ff.
page no 31 note 4 R. Syme, op. cit. 316-17.
page no 31 note 5 op. cit. 41.
page no 32 note 1 ‘Tacitus’ art of innuendo’, TAPA lxxiii (1942), 383-404.
page no 32 note 2 On Tacitus’ presentation of Tiberius and Germanicus see D. M. Pippidi, op. cit. 25 ff., and Krohn, F., Personendarstellung bei Tacitus (Leipzig, 1934)Google Scholar.
page no 33 note 1 An ingenious suggestion of F. Klingner’s (Studien, 658) claims passing mention. He suspects that this idea of external restraint is a transference to Tiberius of the famous notion that republican Rome preserved her uirtus while metus hostilis impended over her. When it was removed, moral decay began.
page no 33 note 2 See Knoche, U., ‘Zur Beurteilung des Kaisers Tiberius durch Tacitus’, Gymnasium lxx (1963), 211-26Google Scholar.
page no 33 note 3 See M. P. Charlesworth’s treatment of Tiberius in CAH, vol. 10, and the judicious remarks of Grant, M., Aspects ofthe Principate of Tiberius (New York, 1950), 130-4Google Scholar.