Life and literature in the Roman republicFrank, Tenney
History
Life and literature in the Roman republic
Frank, Tenney
Latin literature -- History and criticism; Rome -- Intellectual life
During the same period and catering to the same taste, many histories
of special periods and propagandizing biographies appeared. Caelius
Antipater, a professional writer, produced a history of the Second Punic
War in which dramatic composition and stylistic values counted for more
than accuracy. He wrote not for the information of statesmen but rather
for the delectation of the young and the leisured dilettanti. Some of
the autobiographies and histories of the time were produced by important
statesmen, but their value was in many cases marred by a willingness to
cater to the lower critical standards of the day and no less by a desire
to excuse their political behavior at a time when factional strife had
raised dangerous animosities. Fannius, indeed, seems to have written with
some sobriety regarding his part in the Gracchan struggle, but Aemilius
Scaurus, Sulla, Marius, and Catulus pleaded their cases with more or less
open partisanship. Of similar tendency, though more restrained, were men
like Licinius Macer, Cornelius Sisenna, and Sallust, who, having engaged
in the factional struggles of their day, wrote history with a political
bias, and furthermore, heeded the new demand for stylistic attractiveness
to the extent of disregarding now and then the requirements of accuracy.
The third group of writers, the professional researchers, appears during
the Ciceronian period. As the first extension of a superficial culture
had created a demand for easy and interesting general histories, so
the spread of a more thorough education produced a class of readers
who became suspicious of popular accounts and demanded solider works
on special topics. Furthermore, the increasing number of writers
desired reference books that presented details in more compendious and
reliable form than did the voluminous histories of the Sullan age. It
was in response to such demands that dry antiquarians now wrote their
crabbed commentaries and encyclopaedias. Aelius Stilo, best known for
his grammatical work, also delved in the sources of political history.
Varro, his pupil, compiled reference books on Roman law, on religious
institutions, on the Roman _tribus_, and on geography. The great jurist
Sulpicius wrote commentaries on the Twelve Tables and a history of the
praetorian edicts. Licinius Macer[3] and Aelius Tubero attempted to find
new archival materials in the priestly offices and financial bureaus,
various men made up convenient _libri magistratuum_, and even Cicero so
far entered the field of the specialist as to write a history of Roman
oratory, in the preparation of which he read hundreds of orations. Such
special studies naturally did not supplant the popular accounts—in fact
a score of less serious writers were busy at the same time—but their
influence upon historiography was abiding. Livy, for example, not only
used their digests of material but learned from them to be skeptical
of the Sullan romancers and to respect the data provided by the early
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account