C.D. Warner, et al., comp. The Library of the World’s Best Literature.
An Anthology in Thirty Volumes. 1917.
Critical and Biographical Introduction by Charles E. Bennett (18581921)
By Tacitus (56c. 120 A.D.)
P
1. The ‘Dialogus de Oratoribus.’ Tacitus’s earliest work was probably published about 81
In reply to Aper, Messalla vigorously defends the oratory of the Ciceronian era, and arraigns contemporary eloquence as disfigured by meretricious embellishment. To Messalla’s mind the prime cause of this decadence is neglect in the training of the young. Formerly the mother personally superintended the education of her children; now these are given over to irresponsible slaves and nurses. Again, in the earlier days, a young man preparing himself for the profession of oratory was wont to attach himself to some eminent advocate or jurist; and so to acquire the mastery of his art by practical experience. To-day, Messalla complains, it is the fashion merely to declaim artificial show-pieces in the schools.
Secundus and Maternus, who share in the discussion, urge also changed political conditions as another important reason for the decline of eloquence. Under the republic there had been an active political life and keen strife of parties; under the empire the fortunes of the State were directed by a single head. What wonder then that eloquence had declined, when the causes that created it were no longer in existence!
In its fine dramatic setting, its profound grasp of the moving causes in Roman civilization, and in its elevated diction, the ‘Dialogus’ is a consummate literary masterpiece; Wolf well recognized its merits and its charm when he characterized it as an aureus libellus (golden little book).
2. The ‘Agricola.’ Between the publication of the ‘Dialogus’ and of the ‘Agricola’ seventeen years intervened. Of this period fifteen years were occupied by the reign of Domitian, under whom freedom of speech had been rigorously suppressed. The accession of Nerva, however, in 96
The best years of Agricola’s life had been spent in the service of his country, and for the most part in the field. His most conspicuous successes were achieved in Britain. He had been appointed governor of that province in 78, and remained there seven years. In the course of his administration he had not only reduced the entire island to subjection, as far north as the highlands of Scotland, but had also established the Roman civilization among the Britons. All these achievements are pictured in glowing colors and with signal affection by the writer. Tacitus’s apostrophe to his departed father-in-law (here quoted), is a lofty and impressive illustration of the writer’s genius.
3. The ‘Germania.’ This was published in 98
The purpose of the ‘Germania’ has been differently conceived by different critics. Some have thought that Tacitus’s object was, by holding before his countrymen a picture of the Germans, to mark the contrast between the two civilizations, German and Roman, and to commend the rugged simplicity of the one as opposed to the degeneracy of the other. Others have regarded the treatise as a political pamphlet, written in support of Trajan, and intended to justify the attention which that prince was then bestowing upon the problems presented by the tribes of the North. Yet others have thought that the work was prepared as an introduction to the extensive historical writings which Tacitus had already projected.
But there are serious objections to each of these views; moreover, it seems improbable that the ‘Germania’ was written with any “tendency” or purpose beyond the natural and obvious one of acquainting its readers with accurate details of German geography and institutions. The German people had long been known to the Romans, and for a century and a half had furnished a more or less constant opposition to the Roman arms. Nor was the subject new: Cæsar, Livy, Pliny, and others, had given detailed accounts of this interesting and important race. That Tacitus, therefore, should have undertaken a fresh presentation of their situation and customs, seems perfectly natural, without resort to the theory of a special extraneous motive. Whatever its original purpose, the ‘Germania’ must be recognized as a mine of authentic information concerning the ancient Germans, and as a source of the first importance for all modern study of Germanic institutions.
4. The ‘Histories.’ In the preface to the ‘Agricola,’ Tacitus had already announced his purpose of writing the history of the reigns of Domitian, Nerva, and Trajan. Later, this plan was modified. The new project embraced the history of the imperial period from the death of Augustus to the death of Domitian,—a space of eighty-two years. This period naturally fell into two eras: the former that of the Julian-Claudian dynasties (from the accession of Tiberius to the death of Nero), the latter that of the Flavian dynasty (Vespasian to Domitian), including the transition period of turmoil during the brief reigns of Galba, Otho, and Vitellius. It was the latter of these two eras that Tacitus treated first, giving to the work the title ‘Historiæ.’ The events he describes had all occurred within his own memory, and many within the range of his own observation and experience. The entire work consisted probably of twelve books, published at intervals between 104 and 109
5. The ‘Annals.’ The second part of Tacitus’s programme embraced a history of the earlier period, from the accession of Tiberius to the death of Nero (14–68
The ‘Annals’ is universally regarded as Tacitus’s ripest and greatest work. While nominally a history of the times, it is in reality a series of masterly character sketches of figures of commanding interest and importance: the emperors, their advisers, their opponents, the members of the imperial family.
In his psychological analyses, Tacitus can hardly be regarded as free from prejudice and partisanship; in the case of most of the emperors and their consorts, he sees no good trait, recognizes no worthy motive. On the other hand, he is at times guilty of undue idealization; as in the case of Germanicus, who, though popular with the soldiers and the people, seems to have been deficient both in force of character and in military genius.
Tacitus’s pictures, however, while overdrawn, give us in the main an accurate view of the imperial court: they exhibit the tyranny, cruelty, and wantonness of successive sovereigns, the servility of the courtiers, the degradation of the Senate, and the general demoralization of the aristocracy, in colors as powerful as they are somber. It is greatly to be regretted that none of the ameliorating influences and tendencies of the imperial régime receive recognition at Tacitus’s hands. The contemporary social, industrial, and commercial prosperity are completely ignored: it is the dark side only that is revealed in his pages.
This striking contrast of style between Tacitus’s earliest and latest work is unparalleled in Roman literature; and for a long time tended to cast doubt on the authenticity of the ‘Dialogus.’ It is not, however, without a parallel in other literatures; and the difference between Carlyle’s ‘Life of Schiller’ and his ‘Frederick the Great’ has been aptly compared with that between the ‘Dialogus’ and the ‘Annals.’