series
authors
data
Product: Book
ISBN-10: 0-14-044060-7
ISBN-13: 9780140440607
Publisher: Penguin Classics
Country:
Year: June 30, 1956
Edition: Revised
Size: 12.70 x 19.56 x 2.29cm
Number of pages: 464
Weight: 318gr
Binding: Paperback
ISBN-10: 0-14-044060-7
ISBN-13: 9780140440607
Publisher: Penguin Classics
Country:
Year: June 30, 1956
Edition: Revised
Size: 12.70 x 19.56 x 2.29cm
Number of pages: 464
Weight: 318gr
Binding: Paperback
editions
Cornelius Tacitus, William Jackson Brodbribb (translator), Alfred John Church (translator)
Digireads.com; 2005
Paperback
order
catalog
description
Product Description
Tacitus' »Annals of Imperial Rome« recount the major historical events from the years shortly before the death of Augustus up to the death of Nero in AD 68. With clarity and vivid intensity he describes the reign of terror under the corrupt Tiberius, the great fire of Rome during the time of Nero, and the wars, poisonings, scandals, conspiracies and murders that were part of imperial life. Despite his claim that the Annals were written objectively, Tacitus' account is sharply critical of the emperors' excesses and fearful for the future of Imperial Rome, while also filled with a longing for its past glories.
Tacitus' »Annals of Imperial Rome« recount the major historical events from the years shortly before the death of Augustus up to the death of Nero in AD 68. With clarity and vivid intensity he describes the reign of terror under the corrupt Tiberius, the great fire of Rome during the time of Nero, and the wars, poisonings, scandals, conspiracies and murders that were part of imperial life. Despite his claim that the Annals were written objectively, Tacitus' account is sharply critical of the emperors' excesses and fearful for the future of Imperial Rome, while also filled with a longing for its past glories.
reviews
A Vital Primary Source on Imperial Rome 
Anyone who has even casually read about Roman imperial history will have encountered Tacitus. He is, according to translator and noted classicist Michael Grant, virtually the only Latin historian we have for the early days of the Roman Empire. This work, generally considered Tacitus' greatest, covers the period from shortly before Augustus' death to AD 69, about three years before Nero's death. Unfortunately, we don't have the entire work. (The Annals only survived into the Middle Ages through two manuscripts, one for each half of the work.) The section on Caligula is totally missing, and we only have parts of Tiberius' and Claudius' reigns. It's history with a moral purpose: to punish evil and reward virtue through the judgement of posterity. Grant calls Tacitus' Latin »unusual and difficult«, possessing a pungent simplicity in the original. Has Grant rendered it accurately? Not knowing Latin, I have no idea. (The problem of translation is further complicated by possible corruption in those two manuscripts.) As it appears here, it's a stylish history, particularly in its many speeches. Tacitus himself was a noted orator and wrote about the art. The speeches he gives us range from mutinous Roman soldiers and Agrippina (wife of Tiberius' nephew Germanicus) reacting to said troops, German barbarians, and some of Nero's victims before they »opened their veins« after his condemnation. I say Tacitus gives us those speeches because they are all invented. There's no way Tactitus would have a verbatim record of what was said. However, as Grant makes clear, he's operating in a tradition of ancient historical writing as well as trying to tell a compelling story. Grant claims that Tacitus' account of Tiberius' reign is usually considered the highest example of his art. There is certainly art there. I didn't find the condemnation of Tiberius entirely convincing though, and Grant argues that Tacitus is reacting to his experiences as a senator under the tyrannical reign of Domitian rather than Tiberius' who died before Tacitus was born. There is much on Rome's intervention in Parthian and Armenian politics. I found the reign of Nero the most interesting with Tacitus noting the craven, cowardly flattery of most of Rome's nobility along with a few who would not abase themselves. (The amount of people who pliantly committed suicide after facing Nero's disapproval is explained by their effort to protect surviving family members and to preserve at least a portion of their estate.) Grant helpfully footnotes some of the allusions to missing parts of the work or earlier episodes of Roman history. Still, I wouldn't attempt this work without first reading a general history of the period. Grant does put in a nice glossary of Roman political and military terms. Frankly, I didn't need to look at it, but I did happen to glance at some of the entries. Grant chooses, here, to make some unconventional translations of some terms, particularly the military ones. I'm not sure why. I haven't seen things like »company-commander« for centurion in his other work including his later _The Army of the Caesars_. The several included maps show almost all the referenced places, and there are four very necessary pages covering the complicated genealogies surrounding the Julio-Claudian emperors.
Anyone who has even casually read about Roman imperial history will have encountered Tacitus. He is, according to translator and noted classicist Michael Grant, virtually the only Latin historian we have for the early days of the Roman Empire. This work, generally considered Tacitus' greatest, covers the period from shortly before Augustus' death to AD 69, about three years before Nero's death. Unfortunately, we don't have the entire work. (The Annals only survived into the Middle Ages through two manuscripts, one for each half of the work.) The section on Caligula is totally missing, and we only have parts of Tiberius' and Claudius' reigns. It's history with a moral purpose: to punish evil and reward virtue through the judgement of posterity. Grant calls Tacitus' Latin »unusual and difficult«, possessing a pungent simplicity in the original. Has Grant rendered it accurately? Not knowing Latin, I have no idea. (The problem of translation is further complicated by possible corruption in those two manuscripts.) As it appears here, it's a stylish history, particularly in its many speeches. Tacitus himself was a noted orator and wrote about the art. The speeches he gives us range from mutinous Roman soldiers and Agrippina (wife of Tiberius' nephew Germanicus) reacting to said troops, German barbarians, and some of Nero's victims before they »opened their veins« after his condemnation. I say Tacitus gives us those speeches because they are all invented. There's no way Tactitus would have a verbatim record of what was said. However, as Grant makes clear, he's operating in a tradition of ancient historical writing as well as trying to tell a compelling story. Grant claims that Tacitus' account of Tiberius' reign is usually considered the highest example of his art. There is certainly art there. I didn't find the condemnation of Tiberius entirely convincing though, and Grant argues that Tacitus is reacting to his experiences as a senator under the tyrannical reign of Domitian rather than Tiberius' who died before Tacitus was born. There is much on Rome's intervention in Parthian and Armenian politics. I found the reign of Nero the most interesting with Tacitus noting the craven, cowardly flattery of most of Rome's nobility along with a few who would not abase themselves. (The amount of people who pliantly committed suicide after facing Nero's disapproval is explained by their effort to protect surviving family members and to preserve at least a portion of their estate.) Grant helpfully footnotes some of the allusions to missing parts of the work or earlier episodes of Roman history. Still, I wouldn't attempt this work without first reading a general history of the period. Grant does put in a nice glossary of Roman political and military terms. Frankly, I didn't need to look at it, but I did happen to glance at some of the entries. Grant chooses, here, to make some unconventional translations of some terms, particularly the military ones. I'm not sure why. I haven't seen things like »company-commander« for centurion in his other work including his later _The Army of the Caesars_. The several included maps show almost all the referenced places, and there are four very necessary pages covering the complicated genealogies surrounding the Julio-Claudian emperors.
Definitive Primary Source On the History Of Imperial Roman
I read this book for a graduate course in Roman history. It is an indispensable primary source for students of Roman history. On the first page of his Annals of Imperial Rome, Tacitus wrote that Octavian »seduced the army with bonuses, and his cheap food policy was successful bait for civilians.« Tacitus' description of Augustus' transformation of Rome from a republic into an empire is most illuminating as well. »Upper-class survivors found that slavish obedience was the way to succeed, both politically and financially. They had profited from the revolution, and so now they liked the security of the existing arrangement better than the dangerous uncertainties of the old regime.« Sir Ronald Syme relied heavily on the work of Tacitus for his cogent narrative of Octavian's rise to power as Augustus. Syme's in-depth study of Tacitus' life and work was published in 1958. Tacitus' historical accuracy was doubted for centuries and Syme made a project of re-evaluating the accuracy of his historical writings. Syme believed that Tacitus was in a unique position to write about the birth and early political history of the Imperial period in Rome due to his very active political life. Tacitus had served as a senator, consul, and proconsul of Asia. In addition, he was known to be an excellent orator in his day. In his writings, Syme believed that Tacitus provided excellent accounts of Augustus' rise to power and his career as Rome's first Emperor. Tacitus delved into the machinery of the new government, including Augustus' use of patronage as well as his many thwarted attempts at planning for his own succession. What Syme found was a man that grew very adept politically and whose political maturity rapidly developed at an early age. At eighteen, he was named as heir to Julius Caesar. He grew into the greatest Roman princeps spanning fifty-six years until his death. Augustus knew that to retain power he had to maintain the general consent of the governed. He astutely maintained order not by following the constitution or past precedent, but by using the tremendous resources at his disposal. Augustus kept the plebeians in check making sure they were fed, kept them amused with games, and constantly reminded them that he was protecting them from the oppression of the nobiles. Augustus became the »leader of a large and well organized political party as the source and fount of patronage and advancement.« Recommended reading for those interested in Roman history, military history.
I read this book for a graduate course in Roman history. It is an indispensable primary source for students of Roman history. On the first page of his Annals of Imperial Rome, Tacitus wrote that Octavian »seduced the army with bonuses, and his cheap food policy was successful bait for civilians.« Tacitus' description of Augustus' transformation of Rome from a republic into an empire is most illuminating as well. »Upper-class survivors found that slavish obedience was the way to succeed, both politically and financially. They had profited from the revolution, and so now they liked the security of the existing arrangement better than the dangerous uncertainties of the old regime.« Sir Ronald Syme relied heavily on the work of Tacitus for his cogent narrative of Octavian's rise to power as Augustus. Syme's in-depth study of Tacitus' life and work was published in 1958. Tacitus' historical accuracy was doubted for centuries and Syme made a project of re-evaluating the accuracy of his historical writings. Syme believed that Tacitus was in a unique position to write about the birth and early political history of the Imperial period in Rome due to his very active political life. Tacitus had served as a senator, consul, and proconsul of Asia. In addition, he was known to be an excellent orator in his day. In his writings, Syme believed that Tacitus provided excellent accounts of Augustus' rise to power and his career as Rome's first Emperor. Tacitus delved into the machinery of the new government, including Augustus' use of patronage as well as his many thwarted attempts at planning for his own succession. What Syme found was a man that grew very adept politically and whose political maturity rapidly developed at an early age. At eighteen, he was named as heir to Julius Caesar. He grew into the greatest Roman princeps spanning fifty-six years until his death. Augustus knew that to retain power he had to maintain the general consent of the governed. He astutely maintained order not by following the constitution or past precedent, but by using the tremendous resources at his disposal. Augustus kept the plebeians in check making sure they were fed, kept them amused with games, and constantly reminded them that he was protecting them from the oppression of the nobiles. Augustus became the »leader of a large and well organized political party as the source and fount of patronage and advancement.« Recommended reading for those interested in Roman history, military history.
Not the best Roman history 
In his introduction, Michael Grant tells us Tacitus ranks among Livy and Caesar as one of the best stylists of Roman histories. Either his translation loses this style or Grant is mistaken. I found the 'Annals' to lack many of the features I have come to love about Roman histories. There is little moral instruction. Reading Livy or Plutarch, you can't help but to marvel at the lives of great men and learn either from their virtues or vices. Tacitus does not dwell on such issues. Instead, his history reads more as a catalog of events. First this conspirator died, then this one, then this one, etc. Tacitus defends himself by saying each person deserves to have his name mentioned –- »let each receive his separate, permanent record.« But reading the long list of people killed is like visiting a graveyard, the endless gravestones emitting a feeble sense of transience. Part of the problem may be Tacitus's choice of time period. The bloody and mismanaged era begins with Augustus's death in A.D. 14 and concludes with Nero's 54 years later. This is a time marked by indecency and blood. The emperors, including Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius, are as wasteful as they are licentious. The most complete figure to emerge is Tiberius, who though he avoids Rome because of his debauchery with Roman children comes across as well-spoken and involved in state affairs. Subsequent emperors go no further than stick-figures, their reins filled with internal divisiveness and forced suicides. I would recommend this book to readers who already have some knowledge of Roman history. There are some parts, such as the only mention in pagan Latin of Christ's killer, Pontius Pilate, that will interest readers. But for new readers I would recommend Livy and Plutarch. They are the true stylists of ancient Rome.
In his introduction, Michael Grant tells us Tacitus ranks among Livy and Caesar as one of the best stylists of Roman histories. Either his translation loses this style or Grant is mistaken. I found the 'Annals' to lack many of the features I have come to love about Roman histories. There is little moral instruction. Reading Livy or Plutarch, you can't help but to marvel at the lives of great men and learn either from their virtues or vices. Tacitus does not dwell on such issues. Instead, his history reads more as a catalog of events. First this conspirator died, then this one, then this one, etc. Tacitus defends himself by saying each person deserves to have his name mentioned –- »let each receive his separate, permanent record.« But reading the long list of people killed is like visiting a graveyard, the endless gravestones emitting a feeble sense of transience. Part of the problem may be Tacitus's choice of time period. The bloody and mismanaged era begins with Augustus's death in A.D. 14 and concludes with Nero's 54 years later. This is a time marked by indecency and blood. The emperors, including Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius, are as wasteful as they are licentious. The most complete figure to emerge is Tiberius, who though he avoids Rome because of his debauchery with Roman children comes across as well-spoken and involved in state affairs. Subsequent emperors go no further than stick-figures, their reins filled with internal divisiveness and forced suicides. I would recommend this book to readers who already have some knowledge of Roman history. There are some parts, such as the only mention in pagan Latin of Christ's killer, Pontius Pilate, that will interest readers. But for new readers I would recommend Livy and Plutarch. They are the true stylists of ancient Rome.
the armchair historian reads again 
While reading this, I was grateful that I'd fairly recently read a contemporary overview of the history of Rome, because that help me put some structure to the book. As a consequence, I was able to read it for the anecdotes and asides rather than worrying overly much about how things fit together. There are many many actual historians out there who can give you smart reviews about Tacitus as history. There are also many Latin scholars out there who can either laud or criticize Grant's translation. What I can say is that it is an important and enjoyable read for even the more armchair historian reader. I'm just grateful that I'm not back in college trying to read the Latin for myself-- about the translation I will only note that it seems to flow smoothly and the style is good. Tacitus was fascinated with the character of the people who made history-- a writer after my own heart. His descriptions are vivid, and the moments he painted remain fixed on the inner eye as you progress through the book. It is occasionally frustrating that much of Tacitus seems to be missing. The jumps and starts in the narrative are tough once you start connecting to the people. Still, a great book. Recommended.
While reading this, I was grateful that I'd fairly recently read a contemporary overview of the history of Rome, because that help me put some structure to the book. As a consequence, I was able to read it for the anecdotes and asides rather than worrying overly much about how things fit together. There are many many actual historians out there who can give you smart reviews about Tacitus as history. There are also many Latin scholars out there who can either laud or criticize Grant's translation. What I can say is that it is an important and enjoyable read for even the more armchair historian reader. I'm just grateful that I'm not back in college trying to read the Latin for myself-- about the translation I will only note that it seems to flow smoothly and the style is good. Tacitus was fascinated with the character of the people who made history-- a writer after my own heart. His descriptions are vivid, and the moments he painted remain fixed on the inner eye as you progress through the book. It is occasionally frustrating that much of Tacitus seems to be missing. The jumps and starts in the narrative are tough once you start connecting to the people. Still, a great book. Recommended.
Tactius Part of the Whole
An excellent piece of work on it's own. However, because it's by an »ancient historian« we should always remember that it needs supplementation by other writers of the time.
An excellent piece of work on it's own. However, because it's by an »ancient historian« we should always remember that it needs supplementation by other writers of the time.
keywords
- Ancient Rome
- Ancient|Rome
- Anthologies, Essays, Letters & Miscellaneous
- BCE to c 500 CE
- Essays, journals, letters & other prose works
- European history: BCE to c 500 CE
- History
- History: World
- History|Ancient|Rome
- History|General History
- Julio-Claudians, 30 B.C.-68 A.D
- Other prose: classical, early & medieval
- Rome
- Rome|History|The five Julii, 30 B.C.|68 A.D
- The five Julii, 30 B.C.-68 A.D
related products
Polybius, F. W. Walbank (introduction), Ian Scott-Kilvert (translator)
Penguin Classics; 1980
Paperback
Titus Livy, Stephen Oakley (foreword), Aubrey De Selincourt (translator)
Penguin Classics; 2002
Paperback
Plutarch, Robin Seager (Eds.), Rex Warner (translator)
Penguin Classics; 2006
Paperback
Suetonius, James Rives (Eds.), Robert Graves (translator)
Penguin Classics; 2007
Paperback
W. H. Fyfe, Tacitus, D. S. Levene (Eds.)
Oxford University Press, USA; 2008
Paperback
© 1994–2010 Sascha Hendel
last update: 3/12/2010
URL: http://www.book-info.com/isbn/0-14-044060-7.htm
- search