Livy and Tacitus

This paper argues for the recognition of distinct instances of humor in Tacitus’ account of Nero’s reign, Annals 13-16, and explains their function in the historiographer’s program. Though modern scholarship has traditionally regarded the historian as a more somber representative of an already-serious genre, Tacitus’ use of humor has received some attention, albeit limited and not recently.

Immediately preceding Capua’s fall to the Romans in 211 BCE, Livy describes a debate in the Capuan senate that centers on the question of what treatment Capua can expect from Rome if they choose to surrender the city.

Livy’s discussion of Rome’s topography has garnered a significant amount of attention from scholars interested in the role that monuments play as receptacles of cultural memory, even after their destruction or decay (Kraus 1994, Jaeger 1997, Gowing 2008, Lushkov 2014).

This paper offers a new reading of the mutiny on the Rhine in Book 1 of Tacitus’ Annales. Scholars have long noted that Tacitus’ juxtaposition of the mutiny on the Rhine with the earlier mutiny in Pannonia creates an effective synkrisis between the two young commanders at the head of each army, Germanicus and Drusus (Ross 1973). In this paper, I contend that this is not the only comparison that Tacitus is making; rather, he also assesses Germanicus’ behavior in relation to the ways in which great generals of the past handled similar situations.

Much ink has been spilled over Livy’s relationship with his fellow historian Valerius Antias. In chapter twenty-six of his Ab Urbe Condita, Livy famously criticizes his source with the phrase ...adeo nullus mentiendi est, “so unlimited are his lies” (Livy 26.49.3). Work on Livy and Antias first saw scholars side with Livy in regards to his accusations of falsehood against Antian figures: thus, early twentieth century scholars such as R.B. Steele and Albert Howard argued that Livy was right to reject Antias’ figures.

In his exhortation to his men, Tacitus’ Calgacus locates his Caledonians as living at the “furthest limits of the earth and of freedom” (terrarum ac libertatis extremos, Agr. 30.3); this has been their natural defense, but nothing satisfies Roman avarice. Calgacus’ connection between land and libertas reflects upon the Roman impact outlined earlier in Tacitus’ text, when Agricola encourages urbanization, but the revised landscape leads to immorality and decadence.