Augustus Literary Sources
Following Augustus’ establishment of the Principate, emperors became a key topic for Roman historians and biographers due to their position at the heart of politics and the state. With this natural emphasis on emperors, an intriguing question is whether writers conceived of and presented an idea of ‘bad emperors’ in their works. Meanwhile, owing to the importance of such ancient accounts for understanding Rome and its rulers during the imperial period, it is vital to assess their reliability with regard to emperors. Before addressing these issues, it is necessary to recognise the difficulties faced when dealing with the literary sources of the Roman imperial period. First, several major works such as the imperial biographies of Marius Maximus
…show more content…
As part of his thematic approach, he collates the deeds of each emperor, sorting them into separate ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ sections. This division is explicitly marked in Nero’s biography: “These deeds, some of them meriting no reproach, others even deserving some praise, I have gathered together to separate them from the shameful deeds and crimes with which I shall henceforth be concerned.”[1] Within these ‘chapters’, actions are grouped together and used as “items of evidence” for the emperor’s character traits, which are either virtues or vices.[2] For instance, Augustus’ generosity is exemplified by “the frequency, variety and magnificence of the games he provided” for the people.[3] Meanwhile, Tiberius’ refusal to provide “a salary for those who accompanied him on his travels and military expeditions” acts as an example of his rapacity.[4] Across his imperial biographies, Suetonius consistently interprets the behaviour of emperors using pairs of opposing virtues and vices: liberality and avarice, clemency and cruelty, civility and incivility, and restraint and extravagance.[5]Suetonius chooses this set of attributes, because, together, they convey the manner in which his emperors “treated their people”, making them ideal standards for judging them as rulers.[6] Based on this, Suetonius clearly distinguishes between entirely virtuous ‘good emperors’ such as Augustus and ‘bad emperors’ like Tiberius who possess most, if not all the aforementioned
As part of his thematic approach, he collates the deeds of each emperor, sorting them into separate ‘positive’ and ‘negative’ sections. This division is explicitly marked in Nero’s biography: “These deeds, some of them meriting no reproach, others even deserving some praise, I have gathered together to separate them from the shameful deeds and crimes with which I shall henceforth be concerned.”[1] Within these ‘chapters’, actions are grouped together and used as “items of evidence” for the emperor’s character traits, which are either virtues or vices.[2] For instance, Augustus’ generosity is exemplified by “the frequency, variety and magnificence of the games he provided” for the people.[3] Meanwhile, Tiberius’ refusal to provide “a salary for those who accompanied him on his travels and military expeditions” acts as an example of his rapacity.[4] Across his imperial biographies, Suetonius consistently interprets the behaviour of emperors using pairs of opposing virtues and vices: liberality and avarice, clemency and cruelty, civility and incivility, and restraint and extravagance.[5]Suetonius chooses this set of attributes, because, together, they convey the manner in which his emperors “treated their people”, making them ideal standards for judging them as rulers.[6] Based on this, Suetonius clearly distinguishes between entirely virtuous ‘good emperors’ such as Augustus and ‘bad emperors’ like Tiberius who possess most, if not all the aforementioned