The Narratives between Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio - Essay Example

ANCIENT ROMAN HISTORY Name: Course: Course Director: Institution: Date: TABLE OF CONTENTS 1.0 QUESTION ONE 3 1.1 The Narratives between Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio, their form of work and perspectives 3 1.2.1 Cornelius Tacitus 4 1.2.2 Suetonius 5 1.2.3 Cassius Dio 6 2.0 QUESTION TWO 7 2.1 The Importance of the Praetorian Guard Demonstrated By the Julio-Claudian Rulers from Tiberius to Nero 7 2.2 The origin of the Praetorian Guard 7 2.3 Duties of the Praetorian Guards 8 3.0 QUESTION THREE 10 3.1 Trajan as a Good Emperor and His Distinguishing Features (A.D. 98-117) 10 3.2 Qualities that distinguished him from other reigns before him 10 3.3 Trajan’s main Achievements as the ruler of Rome 11 3.3.1 War Conquests 11 3.3.2 Public Works and Construction in Rome 11 3.4 Conclusion 12 References 13 1.0 QUESTION ONE 1.1 The Narratives between Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio, their form of work and perspectives Rome especially in the first century was chronicled by many Roman historians and the most common ones were, Tacitus, Suetonius and Dio Cassius. The first of these historians was Tacitus, a political player that has firsthand experience in the ending rule of Domitian. As he later became consul of Rome, he began to write history where he documented the years between 69 to 96AD(Bury 2009). Later on, as Trajan’s senior officials, he documented the accession of Tiberius to the throne, and went on with the transition to Claudius with the main focus being the dead emperors belonging to a dead dynasty. Regardless he brought to light many differences between the reign of Domitian and Tiberius with his judgments greatly shaping the Roman history for many centuries after. Other biographers that followed suit managed to blend Tacitus accounts from the archives with the first person accounts of the past. Suetonius focus was however a bit wider as he now focused on Rome from the time of Domitian to Julius Caesar. He was more organized as his biographies were in the order and by topic comparing emperors’ backgrounds, lives and personalities in all the actions they took while under leadership. Dio Cassius was the last of the group of biographers and also contributed to later years all these biographers had different styles and stories all together but all of them uniquely played a role of creating a coherent foundation for the understanding of Rome. 1.2 Comparison between the Three Philosophers 1.2.1 Cornelius Tacitus It is unfortunate that the earliest recorded history that exists about Rome is the works of Tacitus as the work of the predecessors are lost. His works have been severely criticized by many scholars but at the same time, admired and cherished as they give Rome a history that is rich and well defined both in lucidity and moral charge(Clarence 1927). The “Annals,” which refer to the accounts written by this historian from the reign of Tiberius to that of Nero, have had compassionate evaluation of all the horrors faced in the imperial despotism. This means that his narratives are mainly based on the time when Rome was slowly leaving behind the golden age with no laws to a time when laws were becoming a necessity and also achieving higher and tougher consequences if broken(Clarence 1927). The transition between Tiberius, Claudius and Nero shows that the tyranny became cruel with time and that the people adopted submissive behaviors as others resulted into opportunists in Rome. Tacitus did not hide this era in his writings as he depicted everything as it was including the atrocities of the political arena and the war between leaders that magnified the extent of the discontent. With regard to his style of writing, he was detailed, too informative and horrendous that many did not want to support his views because of how he depicted matters as they were appearing exaggerated(Bury2009). His aims were however modest and he used illustrations that were ironic and sarcastic in describing majority of the historical instances. For instance, he addressed the state of peace in the area, the affairs of the state that were often sad and all other intentions of extending the empire. One of his quotes was that, “I have only to record the mandates of despotism, incessant accusations, faithless friendships, and the ruin of innocence; the one unvarying repetition of causes terminating in the same event, and presenting no novelty from their similarity and tiresome repetition”(Bury2009). From this therefore it is certain that Tacitus presents not a sustained history but a depiction of events over time with the reign of Tiberius as the main concern of the first six books, Claudius in the eleventh and twelfth and of Nero in the final four books. 1.2.2 Suetonius Unlike Tacitus, he is most famous for his narratives on the reigns of Julio-Claudian and Flavian emperors among other notable historical figures. He had a good rank in the imperial administration at a very young age and among the staff for those in command as he held various positions before being discharged. This shows that he had close proximity to the government and hence incorporated this knowledge in his biographies. He however took a slightly different part from that of Tacitus because he was able to incorporate biographies of other members to the different reigns such as poets, orators, historians and philosophers. Likewise, contrary to Tacitus, he has no order or chronology of events as he addressed any issues that he found the need to talk about including some that were addressed by Tacitus and above(Syme 1958). Regardless, his era of specialization was the one spanning from Julius Caesar to Domitian with a slight summary of their contributions, rules, shortcomings, successes and death. He relies more on the use of themes than chronology. This means that he found it much easier to compare the different successes and failures as well as the duties and the responsibilities while within the government. This was also inclusive of the building of projects and public entertainment(Bury2009). The overall style and thematic reference was a very entertaining and unique way to capture the history of Rome, but at the same time, it created a great challenge when it came to identifying the dating of the events and the emperors’ life events(Syme 1958). Likewise, aspects such as the casual sequence were disrupted as it was harder to depend on the past to explain the future and identify change without actual chronology. This means that his work appears to be an evaluation of the characters and the works of the emperors in a simplified style and with greater reference sources which he often quoted directly (Naphtali & Meyer 1990). The lack of irony, sarcasm, artistic organization and colorful language however, as well as, his focus on strictly interesting events in history made people criticize him for not exactly being interested in history but rather in telling stories that appealed to him(Naphtali & Meyer 1990). His overarching interest in cataloging the lives of his subjects and those in leadership therefore, disqualifies his in many contexts as a historian but rather a biographer that highlighted the successes and failures of these emperors of his time(Naphtali & Meyer 1990). Works by Suetonius that may be incomplete have not yet been found and many of them he is said to have described culture and society, like the Roman Year or the names of seas 1.2.3 Cassius Dio He is also commonly referred to as Lucius and is a great Greek Historian from a leading family(Naphtali & Meyer 1990). He like Tacitus and Suetonius is also best known for numerous publications of the history of Rome as he served under the Emperor Severus Alexander. After his service, Dio retired from politics and in addition to the history of Rome, he looked at the foundation of the death of Severus Alexander and the Civil Wars of 193-197(Kline 2010). His work is one of the few that were written in Greekafter twenty-two years of intensive research on the topic. Generally, the narratives begin from the arrival of Aenas in Italy and the events that go all the way from 69 BC to AD 46 but there is a large gap after 6 BC. Dio’s narratives are great and extensive thanks to all the offices he held and the opportunities he got to experience all the operations that take place while investigating them. In addition, the narratives shows his hand as a soldier and a politician as it is free from bias and correct in terms of simulations and explanations(Kline 2010). In addition to this, he goes into further detail instead of just compiling events such that, as he tells the story of Rome from his perspective as the senator who accepted and supported the imperial system of those centuries(Kline 2010). Specifically, his account of the late republic and the age is especially interpreted with the support of the supreme rule 2.0 QUESTION TWO 2.1 The Importance of the Praetorian Guard Demonstrated By the Julio-Claudian Rulers from Tiberius to Nero According to Julio-Claudian Rulers, becoming a Praetorian guard was an honor and a high standing opportunity that was intriguing, respected and political in nature. This means that this was considered a good career path at the time but at the same time, the huge responsibility that came with certain limitations(Brian 1994).There was a particular hierarchy that involved the emperor, the Praetorian Guard and his deputy who was required to remain faithful to the superior power(Kline 2010). This means that any signs that showed the possibility of plotting to take over in power or against the family of the leader, it would result to the death of the person at fault. 2.2 The origin of the Praetorian Guard The republic was originally protected by guards that went with the name “Cohors Praetorian” who were named after the commander’s headquarter, “the Praetorium.” With time, this guard eventually became a personal bodyguard for thefaction leaders at the time of the civil wars in groups of one or more cohors(Kline 2010). However, when Augustus took power, he transformed the troops and made them specifically to guard him as his core protectors in Rome, Italy. Dio has captured this in one of his many narratives where he shows that at the time, there were tens of thousands willing to be deployed in various divisions and Augustus created twelve groups of the cohors keeping nine for his protection and three for the senate(Brian 1994). At the time, these troops enjoyed superior conditions, in terms of pay, living standards, clothing and uniforms which were only limited to certain occasions to not alarm members of senate not accustomed to the new introduction. 2.3 Duties of the Praetorian Guards The Julio- Claudian Rulers ensured that the functions of this elite army were set out and the main one was established as the overall protection of the “Princeps.” This was a Latin word that referred to those that were first in time and order such as the chief, the noble men, and the first families(Kline 2010). This means that the leaders believed that having strong protection would limit the probability of plotters and conspirators from bringing any harm against the Princeps. Secondly, the guards were required to follow the emperor and his companions around for campaigns and other operations, but they had no duty to interfere in any way to how the campaign was being carried out(Durry 1939). In most cases, these that are the guards that often ended up plotting and coming up with constipations against the Princeps and historians have depicted these stories such that even in this day, the Praetorians evoke an image of plotters and incompetent soldiers(Syme 1958). A good example of this reference is the Nixon’s “praetorians” as an example of this association. Thirdly, the emperor needed constant protection and supervision at his home as well as with his family. For this reason, a well-trained Praetorian would have been the best fit which meant that several modifications needed to be made(Syme 1958). It was at this ruling under Augustus that Maecenas suggested that a better and more promising tactic be used in training to ensure success(Durry 1939). This meant that the emperor appointed two of the best Praetorian guards that had to be well trained under the leadership of the Equestrians, who were the members of the Elite, and that the same would be the commander of the troops(Durry1939). The main aim for this was to boost the certainty that those chosen would be loyal at all cost to the emperor especially against other plotting Praetorian guards. In addition to this, Augustus identified that his reigns and the many others to come required stability and adequate checks and balances(Brian 1994). This means therefore that two other members of the Praetorian Guards were appointed as prefects and were to be close to the Princeps in command(Bingham 1997). Having such people therefore meant that in ensuring the “checks and balances” were in place, other informal wishes of the emperor were carried out, especially those that were unrelated to his primary job. This means that once again, this position provided a certain influence over the leadership at this time as the guards were assets, held valuable information and provided security all at the same time(Brian 1994). In some instances, it was probable that certain prefects like Sejanus, would slowly become overly powerful due to the level of dependency the Princeps would have on them in the execution of very important duties. Overall, Augustus eventually realized that he preferred having the equestrians to head the Praetorian troops because they were; first and foremost disinterested in the throne hence would not encourage a coup. In addition to this, he felt certain that there was insecurity on the willingness of senators to accept an unelected and lower post(Bingham 1997). Due to lack of precedents on the matter, the only other source of encouragement was the certainty that they were more likely to be loyal than the senators who were power hungry and politically driven(Bingham 1997). These Praetorians therefore, were many things to the leadership at these times such as, the demonstrators of might and unwavering loyalty, as well as, a great show of discipline and stability in the reign. 3.0 QUESTION THREE 3.1 Trajan as a Good Emperor and His Distinguishing Features (A.D. 98-117) Trajan is referred to as one of the greatest Roman Emperor after Julius and Augustus. His story and power is self-made due to his army and the great body of people that stood right behind him(Thienes 2015). Trajan was not born in Italy and the fact that he was a Spaniard by birth showed that clearly, the distinctive aspect between the Romans and the Provincials was now fading away(Thienes 2015). He ruled bravely, wisely and as a successful administrator and is known to have continued the efforts of Nerva to remedy most evils that had been passed down over the reins by the early despotism in Rome. 3.2 Qualities that distinguished him from other reigns before him As a leader, he restored various responsibilities to various arms of leadership(Thienes 2015). This includes the elective power of the senate, the freedom of speech and to take action to the public and the judiciary which comprised of the magistrates, their authority He abolished various laws that stirred fear among the people among them being the law of treason and also took a proper place among the magistrates to ensure justice and the rule of law was ensured. He was very active in the role of relieving the poor and the hungry whereby, he ensured that the children were fed(Thienes 2015). Sources show that close to five thousand people received their daily allowance of food from him and this is among the traits that earned him the title of “Optimus”, which meant the great He was an active participator and contributor to the arts and literature culture in Rome. 3.3 Trajan’s main Achievements as the ruler of Rome 3.3.1 War Conquests After the death of Augustus, Rome had only managed to add Britain to the Roman territory. However, when Trajan became the leader, he brought change with him by conquering many other areas(Thienes 2015). He extended his conquests across the Danube and acquired the Province of Dacia, in addition, he was able to extend to Asia bringing subjection to Armenia, Mesopotamia and Assyria. Under Trajan in particular, the empire was able to achieve new great heights. 3.3.2 Public Works and Construction in Rome Trajan administration was well organized and hence Rome and the whole of Italy experienced a great period of rebuilding in terms of the materials acquired and the skills used(Enckevort 2003). He developed the infrastructure, such as the roads, the baths which ensured that there was equality between the men and the women among others. In addition, he ensured that monuments such as the New Forum that told the tales of the Roman people were created with great expertise so that his victories would live to be remembered at all times. 3.3.3 Roman Art With the advancement in building construction and the development of a particular Roman style at the time, Trajan helped Roman reach new heights in terms of cultural inclusion in the appearance of most buildings(Enckevort 2003). The Roman arts were so creative, innovative and inclusive of many other cultures that it was in competition to the one of the Greeks. The Greeks were well known for their sense of beauty when it came to representation but the Romans had a higher representation in terms of skill, design, expertise in the imposition of dignity (Thienes 2015). The Romans adopted originality that did not revolve around gods and other such mythological scenes that the Greeks largely focused on in the creation of monuments of deities such as Venus, Apollo and others(Enckevort, 2003). Pompeii walls are a great demonstration of this because the Roman architecture was more about telling stories of their different leaders, times and others completely different to the style of the Greeks such as the arch of Titus and the column of Trajan. 3.4 Conclusion The above clearly shows that Trajan brought about a different time in Rome, one which encouraged the participation of others in leadership, the freedom of expression of the people and the assurance the poor would be taken care of. These qualities make him different from other emperors as he was able to reduce the power the emperor held in Rome substantially enough to ensure that he could work with people at the same time foster greater developments as a leader. His furtherance of the Roman culture and the creation of buildings and monuments that mark major happenings in Rome today, show that he is also a major contributor to the sustenance of the history as it is known today. All these factors therefore do prove that Trajan is one of the greatest emperors of Rome. References Direct Ancient Sources Clarence W M, 1927, Tacitus: The Man and His Work, Oxford, pp. 219. Durry, M, 1939, Review of Les cohorts prétoriennes, JRS 29 (1939), pp. 243 Kennedy, DL, 1917, Dio Cassius, Roman History, “Some observations on the praetorian guard” Cambridge and London, pp. 55.24.6 Kline, AS. 1955. (Prose translation) "Suetonius - The Twelve Caesars," pp. 301 Rolfe, CJ, 1914, The Lives of the Twelve Caesars at Lacus Curtius (Latin original, English translation from Loeb Classical Library Syme, R., 1958. Tacitus Vols. 1 & 2. Tacitus, Church, Alfred &Brodribb, 109 A.C.E, the Annals. Modern Sources Bingham, SJ, 1997, The Praetorian Guard In The Political And Social Life Of Julio-Cl Audi An Rome (Doctoral dissertation, The University of Alberta) Brian C, 1994, The Roman Army 31 BC – AD 337 –London and New York, 38 Bury, E, 2009, the Forums of Rome, “Forum” Middleton, Ancient Rome, Chs. 5, 6, 8 (9); Lanciani, Rums, pp. 232-254 (9) Enckevort, HV, 2003, September, the Significance of the Building Activities of Trajan and the Legio X Gemina for the Integration of the Batavians into the Roman Empire. In Limes XIX, Proceedings of the Sixth International Congress of Roman Frontier Studies Held in Pécs, Hungary (pp. 85-94) Hekster, O, 2005, propagating power. Hercules as an example for second-century emperors. Herakles and Hercules. Exploring a Graeco-Roman Divinity, pp.205-21 Kline AS, 2010, The Twelve Caesars at Poetry in Translation (New English translation with in-depth name index Martin, R, 1981, Tacitus and the Writing of HistoryISBN 0-520-04427-4 pages 104–105 Naphtali L & Meyer R, 1990, Roman Civilization, vol. 1, (New York,), 580 Thienes, EM, 2015, remembering Trajan in Fourth-Century Rome: Memory and Identity in Spatial, Artistic, and Textual Narratives (Doctoral dissertation, University of Missouri). Read More