Johnny Skeptic

Following are parts of a return e-mail sent to me a couple of years ago by Dr. Jonathan Roth, a professor at San Jose State University in California. Dr. Roth’s comments are within quotation marks.

You told me that you have a Ph.D. in ancient history. What are your main areas of expertise?

“Military history, Judea in the first century CE, ancient race and ethnicity.”

Regarding Tactitus' statement that Nero persecuted "vast multitudes" of Christians, does the statement provide any indication of how many Christians are implied?

“It does mean that more than a handful were involved, but says nothing other than that. If you read the passage, however, it can be construed to mean that some Christians were arrested and tortured into confessing that they set the fires. Then they gave the names of others Christians ‘a large number of whom’ (another way of translating this) were executed not for arson, but simply for being Christians. In other words, the expression refers to the percentage of the number killed, rather than a total number.”

Is it reasonably possible that Tacitus was using hyperbole?

“Tacitus frequently uses such hyperbole. A good example is in his description of various emperors killing members of the Senatorial opposition. He implies that large numbers are involved, but when one counts up the numbers, they are only a few dozen at most. All ancient writers use exaggeration and hyperbole.”

Is it true that Tacitus' use of the words "vast multitudes" did no favors for future historians?

“True, but remember that HISTORY WAS CONSIDERED LITERATURE AND MEANT FOR ENTERTAINMENT [emphasis mine]. Tacitus is always thinking about making his stories more interesting and readable.”

Chris Weimer

Surprised??

mountainman

Hi Johnny,

Despite the opinion of Dr. Jonathan Roth,
Tacitus may have well been interpolated.

See for example Jay Raskin's treatment of
DID EUSEBIUS MAKE INTERPOLATIONS
INTO OTHER PEOPLE'S TEXTS?

Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Johnny Skeptic

In Tacitus' case, maybe so, but Dr. Roth's comments were not only about Tacitus, but also about ancient writers in general. The topic of this thread is about writers of antiquity. Dr. Roth was only using Tacitus as one of many examples that writers of antiquity frequently embellishing what they wrote as a form of entertainment. Interpolations is a different issue.

mountainman

In that case I will contribute the following:

Recently I completed a very small course of Suetonius' Lives
and this seems to fit in quite neatly into the category of authors
of antiquity and what they wrote for their readers.

Suetonius wrote the work c.121 CE. It is advanced that Suetonius was at one time the personal secretary to the emperor Hadrian, and had as a result of this intimacy, access to the imperial archives at that time. At some point, Suetonius may have fallen out of favour, and his access restricted. He was an author in antiquity who had for his contemporaries Pliny (the Younger) and the historian Plutarch.

The Lives of the Twelve Caesars is a work of biography, and its strength is the expounding upon human character, rather than history. Specifically Suetonius relates how each of these successive emperors of the Roman Empire dealt with the office of supreme power.

The presentation of the parallel lives of the twelve Caesars by Suetonius is achieved by the sequential arrangement of subject matter under the following headings, for each of the twelve:

Youth and Background
Career
Appearance
Character
Literary Abilities
Military Skills
Religious Character
Bad Character
Death

Here is a sample from my notes re:

Julius Caesar (ruled 49 - 44 BCE)

claimed descendancy from the divinity of Venus. (See coins).
the coins of the emperors were a form of propaganda.
He built the "Temple of Venus" in Rome.
He decimated the Gallic Celts; a million deaths and a million slaves. (25)
The Gallic resistance fighter Vercingetorix brought to Rome and killed
Does a coin of Caesar's show on the obverse Vercingetorix?
That he drank very little wine was a fact "not even denied by his enemies" (53)
introduced the Julian Calendar - 365.25 days in Rome.
"The die is cast" - He was an enemy of the state; and a dictator. (32)
Note than Ammianus Marcellinus also describes him as a dictator.
he "bought a pearl costing six million sesterces" for Servilia. (50)
he covered great distances with incredible speed, often arriving before his messengers (57)
Used the term "comrades" in the assembly with his soldiers.
He bribed his way to secure in Rome the role of "Pontifex Maximus". (59)
he rejected "kingship". (79)
He was publically lamented at his death (87)
"above all the Jews, who even flocked to the place for several successive nights". (87)


So what does Suetonius want us to believe about JC?
Perhaps we have to read what he wrote of each of the
other 11 Caesars and then do a comparitive assessment?
Suetonius did have his favourites and non-favourites.

Suetonius brought the Lives of the Caesars down to
the human level, showing the weaknesses (as well as
whatever strengths) of this succession, in personal terms
that allowed his readers to perceive the character of
the subjects, but specifically how each subject had to
come to terms with the weilding of an absolute power,
or as in the case of the majority, how their character
degraded as a result of their weaknesses.


Of Nero, Suetonius wrote:

returned to Rome 67-68 CE; took his own life "assisted by his secretary".
last words purportedly were "What an artist the world is losing!"
spent all the money that he could obtain from the treasury.

Perhaps it could be appropriate to consider the
authors of antiquity as reporters (in a number
of fields)?



Best wishes,


Pete Brown

Cheerful Charlie

And its true. Herodotus has been called that "Father of History " and the "Father of Lies". Suetonius practically smirks in your face. Accuracy is hard to achieve, even if you try.

CC