"'Sociologists studying Rome, early second century A.D., found on short notice that they needed to know what the upper classes thought of the Emperor Domitian, who died a couple of decades earlier. Did they really remember him as a Stalin, or concede that he'd done a few worthwhile things? The later sections of Tacitus eloquently expressed the negative view...'"
-Poul Anderson, "Star Of The Sea" IN Time Patrol, p. 486.
Tacitus wrote:
"In Republican times biographies and even autobiographies of outstanding individuals were written and admired; but they are out of fashion in an age hostile to excellence, when a brilliant career has become so hazardous and talented biographers so reluctant. Indeed, under the tyrannical rule of Domitian the authors of two such works were condemned to death and the books destroyed, as part of a calculated attack on freedom of expression in Rome. Although the new regime is far more liberal, we are slow to recover from fifteen years of such oppression - and in writing a biography of my father-in-law Agricola I feel I must ask indulgence both for my theme and for my lack of literary skill."
-D.E. Soulsby, Tacitus, Selections From Agricola (Cambridge, 1973), p. 2.
Brilliant careers becoming hazardous reminds us of what Chunderban Desai said to Dominic Flandry about the later phase of the Terran Empire. And now I really must get back to reading some Latin...
"Gnaeus Iulius Agricola, vetere et inlustri..."
1 comment:
Kaor, Paul!
One point to remember about Tacitus is how often his bias and partisan ax grinding shows up in his writings. Which is why, in this case, Suetonius' biography of Domitian, despite its own flaws, is a useful corrective.
Sean
Post a Comment