Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-rdxmf Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-22T06:25:36.520Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Theme and Style in Roman Historiography

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  24 September 2012

A. H. McDonald
A. H. McDonald
Affiliation:
Clare College, Cambridge
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

‘His combination of feeling for style with historical knowledge is still a challenge to any editor of an historical text’ (Momigliano on Justus Lipsius). It is a far cry from the scholarly humanism of the sixteenth century to the complex specialism of modern scholarship, but the overlapping results of detailed research begin to call for integration or, at least, some attempt to define them in a wider context. This paper, therefore, proposes a combined exercise in the study of Roman historiography, ranging from the historian's choice of theme through its literary composition to the quality of its ultimate effect—to relate (so to speak) res, ars, ingenium. The subject is large, but the argument involves mainly precise treatment of evidence at the critical points.

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Roman Studies , Volume 65 , November 1975 , pp. 1 - 10
Copyright
Copyright © A. H. McDonald 1975. Exclusive Licence to Publish: The Society for the Promotion of Roman Studies

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Momigliano, A., JRS xxxix (1949), 190Google Scholar, reviewing Ruysschaert, J., Juste Lipse et les Annales de Tacite (1949).Google Scholar The present paper is based on my Presidential Address to the Society on 12 June, 1973.

2 This paper follows on work presented in (i) ‘The Roman Historians’, Fifty Years (and Twelve) of Classical Scholarship (1968), ch. 13 [Rom. Hist.], with full bibliography, and (ii) ‘The Style of Livy’, JRS xlvii (1957), 156 [Liv. Style]Google Scholar. I therefore limit references here to what amplifies the particular section.

3 ‘La rhétorique était le principe de l'éducation intellectuelle. Cicéron ne pouvait faire autrement que d'aborder l'histoire avec les terms de la rhétorique’ (Rambaud, M., Cicéron et l'histoire romaine (1953), 18Google Scholar). Cf. Clark, M. L., Rhetoric in Graeco-Roman Education (1957), ch. 2 (‘The Meaning of Rhetoric’)Google Scholar.

4 cf. Badian, E. in Latin Historians (ed. Dorey, T. A., 1966), ch. 1 (‘The Early Historians’).Google Scholar

5 McDonald, o.c. [Liv. Style], 155–9.

6 The theoretical statement; cf. Rambaud, o.c. (n. 3), 13–18; Rawson, Elizabeth, ‘Cicero the Historian and Cicero the Antiquarian’, JRS lxii (1972), 33–45Google Scholar.

7 McDonald, o.c. [Rom Hist.], 474; on the style c.f Fraenkel, E., ‘Eine Form römischer Kriegs-bulletins’, Eranos liv (1956), 186 = kl. Beitr. ii, 69Google Scholar.

8 cf. P. G. Walsh, Livy (1961), ch. 6 (‘Livy's Historical Methods’).

9 Palmer, L. R., The Latin Language (1954), 130 f.Google Scholar

10 cf. Walbank, F. W., Polybius (1972), 34–9Google Scholar, with bibliography; Brink, C. O., ‘Tragic history and Aristotle's school’, Proc. Camb. Phil. Soc. vi (1960), 14–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar

11 See Syme, R., The Roman Revolution (1939)Google Scholar, ch. 11 (‘Political Catchwords’); Wirszubski, Ch.Libertas as a Political Idea at Rome during the Late Republic and Early Principate (1950)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Earl, D. C., The Political Thought of Sallust (1961), ch. 4.Google Scholar

12 cf. Lindemann, Klaus, Beobachtungen zur livianischen Periodenkunst (1964; Marburg diss., privately printed)Google Scholar: see McDonald, CR (N.S.) xvii (1967), 57–8.

13 Following H. A. L. Fisher's classic formula; on the complex ‘period’ cf. Bond, H. L., The Literary Art of Edward Gibbon (1960), ch. 7.Google Scholar

14 At this point, with special reference to style and rhythm, note Norden, E., Die antike Kunstprosa (3rd ed. with ‘Nachträge’, 1915–18) i, 175 f. (on Sallust, pp. 200–4)Google Scholar, an Die römische Literatur (5th ed., 1954), 39 f.Google Scholar (on Sallust, pp. 43–7). Cf. Löfstedt, E., Syntactica ii (1933), 290–4Google Scholar; Latte, K., Sallust (Neue Wege zur Antike ii, 4; 1935), 47 f.Google Scholar (‘Persönlichkeit und Zeit’); Syme, R., Sallust (1964)Google Scholar, ch. 14 (‘History and Style’).

15 McDonald, o.c. [Liv. Style], 170–1; cf. Kroll, W., Studien zum Verständnis der römischen Literatur (1924)Google Scholar, ch. 11 (‘Die Dichtersprache’).

16 cf. Cicero, de or. iii, 49/50, 190–4 (in Crassus' words).

17 See Bonner, S. F., Roman Declamation in the Late Republic and Early Empire (1949), chs. 2–4, 7 (for the Elder Seneca), ch. 8 (literary influence of ‘declamation’)Google Scholar; and ‘Roman Oratory’, Fifty Years (and Twelve) of Classical Scholarship (1968), ch. 12.

18 McDonald, o.c. [Rom. Hist.] 479–80.

19 E. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr. i, 302–3; Velleius Paterculus has long called for a fitting commentary, which A. J. Woodman now has in preparation.

20 cf. E. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr. i, 295 f., 306–13 (Seneca), and Röm. Lit., 87–9; E. Löfstedt, o.c. ii, ch. 12 (‘Stilarten und Sprachschichten’); S. F. Bonner, o.c. (n. 17) 74–5; Leeman, A. D., Orationis Ratio (1963) i, ch. 11Google Scholar.

21 McDonald, o.c. [Rom. Hist.] 480–4, 494 (for bibliography); cf. E. Norden, Röm. Lit., 91–6 (especially for ‘tragic history’).

22 Once again note E. Norden, Ant. Kunstpr. i, 321–43 (on Tacitus) and E. Löfstedt, o.c. (n. 14) ii, 275–90 (on Tacitus; cf. JRS xxxviii (1948), 1–8)Google Scholar; R. Syme, Tacitus (1958) i, chs. 26–7 (on the style of the Annales), ii, 711 f. (‘Style and Words’), and Ten Studies in Tacitus (1970), ch. i (‘The Senator a Historian’); Goodyear, F. R. D., ‘Development of language and style in the Annals of Tacitus’, JRS lviii (1968), 22–31Google Scholar, and The Annals of Tacitus, Book 1–6, edited with comm., Vol. i (1972), i, 1–54Google Scholar (p. 46: ‘In T.'s writings style and historical interpretation are inseparable one from the other. The style is part of the interpretation or a result of T.'s attempts to reconcile interpretation with the evidence’). Finally cf. J. Cousin, Bibliographie de la langue latine, 1880–1948 (1951), 298–308 (‘Langues spéciales, Langue des genres’); Freeman, Donald C. (ed.), Linguistics and Literary Style (1970), chs. 1–6 (on theory of ‘linguistic stylistics’)Google Scholar.