Cassius Dio, a Roman senator with Greek origin, is well known for being a keen imitator of Thucydides. His imitative techniques were quite obvious already to Photius, although, Photius himself does not consider him too attached to his model and praises his style and diction, especially his rhetorical skills. In the first fragment of his Roman History Dio shows awareness that applying certain rhetorical devices to his text (and one may infer that he meant those characteristic of the Thucydidean diction) may provoke criticism, even a suspicion that the account he gives might not be true. It is indeed this feature of the Thucydidean style that had been criticised previously by Dionysius of Halicarnassus at the end of the first century BC, and therefore Dio seems to be defending his style against this kind of criticism.
Among the ancient authors who narrated the reign of Augustus and Tiberius, Cassius Dio is surely the one who dedicated the most space to the influence that Livia Drusilla exercised over both her husband and her son. In this regard, the foremost example is found in a large section where Dio narrates how Livia persuaded Augustus to forgive Cornelius Cinna for having plotted against his regime. Also, according to Dio, after the death of Augustus, Livia considerably increased her authority over the imperial government, trying not only to co-rule with her son, but also to become the sole effective ruler by controlling all his political activities. Some scholars have suggested that Dio probably exaggerated the role played by Livia because of the similar extraordinary power enjoyed by his contemporaries Julia Domna and the other Syrian women who lived during the Severan age. A close examination of Dio’s passages dedicated to Livia reveals no traces of situations that could refer to his contemporary political situation. The statements of the Bithynian historian and senator concerning Livia are normally well detailed because he made use of good sources. Indubitably, Livia’s strong influence was fundamental in shaping the reign of both Augustus and Tiberius. Even two centuries later, while Severus was trying to depict his regime as a new golden era on the model of Augustus, Julia Domna followed the example of Livia on many occasions. Nevertheless, Dio does not seem to be aware of these analogies and his work appears to be characterized by a mere record of facts rather than an investigation of their real power within the imperial court.
The consequences of Crassus’ invasion of Mesopotamia in 54–53 BCE were unanticipated and unintended; however, his disastrous failure shocked the Roman world and suddenly established the Parthians as a serious rival to Rome. Moreover, the shame the Romans felt after the Battle of Carrhae was considerable. The battle scarred the Roman psyche and severely damaged the Roman ego. This study synthesizes and investigates what became a vicious and virulent Roman literary tradition of anti-Crassus propaganda, examining how numerous Roman writers over the course of numerous centuries used the dead and disgraced Crassus as a convenient scapegoat to help explain Rome’s failure to dominate the East and subdue the Parthian rival. It demonstrates that these writers ignored the legitimate causes for the First Romano-Parthian War (56 BCE – 1 CE), which Crassus had inherited, and illustrates that the disaster at Carrhae became a popular moralizing lesson about the consequences of greed, impiety, and hubris.
Between 24 July and 26 October 2008 a large exhibition was held in the British Museum in London with the title
Hadrian: Empire and Conflict
. It was the exhibition to give us the idea of reflecting on how Hadrian was adopted by Trajan. Trajan’s wife the Empress Plotina backed Hadrian’s career in every respect. Referring to Hadrian it is more appropriate to use the word
. The present study draws attention to the word
as used in Gellius’ work. (Gellius,
5. 19). Starting from the etymology of the word it can be claimed that
could only happen after putting on the
. It was one of the conditions of
had to be at least 60 years old. Trajan reached that age in 113, so the adoption could not happen before that. Hadrian had been considered to be Trajan’s successor since he became a
in Syria, so the takeover of power was not a result of court conspiracy.
The life-work of Augustus and its memory is usually illustrated by the Res gestae as well as the historical pieces of Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio. This cultural memory omits the Augustus-portrait of the chapters 147–150 of Book 7 of the Naturalis Historia, which summarize the life or more exactly the misfortunes of the life of Rome’s first emperor. This anti-Res gestae divi Augusti is unique not only in ancient literature but in the context of the Naturalis Historia as well. Critics have advocated different explanations. This paper is devoted to an analysis of these chapters in the context of the textual unit that organically contains them, and which culminates in them.
If one needs to obtain some information on the Roman conquest of Pannonia, his job seems to be easy: he has just to read both the ancient sources and many a modern work about this issue. But there are three problems: 1) the Greek and Latin sources are scanty, very poor in details and sometimes misleading; 2) the modern scholars often echo and deepen the errors of the ancient sources while adding other mistakes of their own; 3) mainstream opinions as well as minority views about Pannonian ethnography are premised on false or faulty assumptions and distort further our understanding of the historical events. This paper wants to correct both ancient errors and modern ones. Its author tried to reconstruct a coherent and clear picture of bellum Pannonicum in 12-9 BC; he also aimed at throwing new light on the ethnic composition of the Pannonian tribes.
Kolb 1972 = F. Kolb : Literarische Beziehungen zwischen CassiusDio, Herodian und der Historia Augusta. Antiquitas 4.9. Bonn 1972.
Kovács 2007 = P. Kovács : Fontes Pannoniae Antiquae in aetate Severorum
CassiusDio, Hist.Rom. = CassiusDio Cocceianus: Historia Romana (Dio’s Roman History). Translated by E. Cary. London 1955.
Chioffi 1998 = L. Chioffi : Mumificazione e imbalsamazione a Roma ed in altri luoghi del
Authors:Iryna Izarova, Bartosz Szolc-Nartowski, and Anastasiia Kovtun
ambitum et potentium preces constituta . Tiberius’s active involvement in the proceedings is also mentioned in CassiusDio, see Dio 57.7.6. Indeed, it is believed that all the authors relied on an earlier source, see Bablitz (2009),121–33; According to the