That's right, another book. Tacitus: The Annals of Imperial Rome

The Annals of Imperial Rome

Tacitus

One of my fave subjects is ancient history, and of that, ancient Roman history interests me the most. In this book, Publius Cornelius Tacitus, a Hadrian-era writer and senator, retells the stories of the Emperors from the death of Augustus to the downfall of Nero. Written sometime around AD 120, covering events from AD 14 to AD 66. Along with Suetonius, these works are the basis for our knowledge of the early Roman empire. Tacitus suggests that earlier authors were biased because of their being alive closer to or during the events, they wrote about, either in fear of retribution, or, more likely, in retaliation for poor treatment (personal or reputational injury) by the subjects of the text. I’m not sure who he was referring to- probably not Suetonius - he wrote after him - perhaps some lost works.

One interesting tidbit- Tacitus, a wealthy aristocrat, believed that the non-wealthy were all lazy. How things have not changed in 2000 years…

Tacitus describes Tiberius as aloof and absent from the Senate, and describes the climate in the Senate as one of predatory behavior - accusations of treason for the purposes of being awarded the property of the victims. He compares Tiberius’ adopted son, Germanicus, to Alexander the Great, showing an unexpected amount of love for a young warrior-politician. Maybe in the same way that Americans idolize JFK?

He doesn't say much about Caligula, whom he refers to as Gaius; most of these sections are lost. Much of the sections on Claudius were lost as well, although from what is left, we seems to shine a more favorable light on him. There is quite a lot of coverage on Nero, whom he portrays as quite a monster - especially after a failed coup by a group of senators, members of the guard and others. Paranoia seems to have played a major role in his spiral downward.

The drama of the political court is interesting when the players are generally known - for example, the emperors themselves, Germanicus, Sejanus, various well known senators, etc., but less interesting when the players are unknown (at least to me), and this tends to drone on and on.

I stalled on this years ago (2005?) near the end of the section on Tiberius. Later in 2015, I made it past that, and into the Claudius section, but faltered again. Finally finished with Claudius and the final sections on Nero in 2016. Again, a lot of court intrigue between unknowns (plus the fall of Neros’s mother Agrippina, which was far less interesting than I imagined that it would be).

For me, one of the ultimate goals was to read about Tacitus’ off-hand mention of a certain Christ executed by a certain Pilate, and how depraved these crazy Christ followers were. Just a small passage, but one of the few mentions in all ancient Roman works. Depravity is a term used often in Tacitus’ work; he uses it to describe the sexual perversions of Nero and others, but also Nero’s mere undignified habits as well - i.e., singing and acting. I guess ‘depravity’ can have many meanings. To be fair though, from other readings, it seems there was a lot of misinformation regarding Christians of the day (apparently, some Romans believed that they sacrificed their own children to their God, etc.).

I found myself questioning some the the prose in this book- having been written so many years after the events, and including minute details about people’s motivations, etc. While Tacitus did have access to senatorial records, did they really contain that much detail? I feel that much must have been hearsay at the very least, or perhaps even just made up. Now I know that many ancient authors, when writing about important events decades or centuries earlier, detailed long speeches made by relevant historical figures, and that they were just ‘capturing the mood of the moment’ in and around these events. But to me, at times it feels a little bit like fiction.

I’ve read both Suetonius and Tacitus covering the same period, and I definitely preferred Suetonius. Tacitus does bring a lot more detail, but for me, much of that extra detail wasn’t the interesting detail. I have ordered Tacitus’ “Histories” but won’t get to it for while. I don’t find Tacitus an easy read. I'd recommend it only to those with an extremely keen interest in the subject matter.