discussion question
A) your assessment of the general attitude each modern author seems to have towards Augustus;
B) a brief discussion of at least two (2) aspects of Augustus' career / achievements discussed by two (2) or more of the modern authors (you can use Coulston & Dodge as well) over which they disagree (that is, for which they have opposing interpretations), and your opinion of how well/accurately they seem to interpret the ancient evidence. Remember to cite examples and explain WHY you agree or not based on your own readings of the ancient sources (Suetonius and Augustus), and on your understanding of the situation of the later Roman Republic when Augustus arrived on the scene).
FYI, this exercise is designed—like the Plutarch vs. Appian paper—to get you to think more deeply and critically about modern historiographical methods and interpretive strategies, and to increase your awareness of how evidence, when approached from different ideological viewpoints can render quite different portrayals of the same historical person or problem.
Title: The Modern Attitudes towards Augustus: A Comparative Analysis
Introduction:
Augustus, the first emperor of Rome, remains a captivating figure in history. Modern authors have provided diverse perspectives on his reign, achievements, and impact on the Roman Republic. This essay will assess the general attitude of modern authors towards Augustus and discuss two aspects of his career where opposing interpretations exist. By examining the ancient sources, namely Suetonius and Augustus himself, we can evaluate the accuracy of these modern interpretations.
I. General Attitude towards Augustus:
Modern authors' attitudes towards Augustus can be categorized into three broad categories:
Admiration and Praise:
Some authors view Augustus as a skilled statesman who successfully restored order and stability to the Roman Republic. They highlight his accomplishments such as the establishment of the Pax Romana, administrative reforms, and infrastructure development. According to these authors, Augustus' reign marked the beginning of a golden age for Rome.
Critical Evaluation:
Other authors adopt a more critical approach, emphasizing the autocratic nature of Augustus' rule and the erosion of republican values. They argue that while he may have achieved peace and stability, it came at the cost of personal liberties and the concentration of power in the hands of one individual.
Neutral or Balanced View:
Certain authors take a more neutral stance, acknowledging both the achievements and shortcomings of Augustus. They recognize his contributions to the empire's success but also raise concerns about the long-term implications of consolidating power in the hands of an emperor.
II. Aspects of Augustus' Career with Opposing Interpretations:
Two aspects of Augustus' career that have generated divergent interpretations among modern authors are:
The Res Gestae Divi Augusti:
The Res Gestae Divi Augusti, a document written by Augustus himself, presents his accomplishments in a propagandistic manner. Some modern authors argue that it offers a biased account, intended to shape public opinion in favor of Augustus. They highlight its self-aggrandizing nature and question its accuracy as an objective historical source.
On the other hand, proponents of Augustus argue that while the Res Gestae may be biased, it provides valuable insights into his perception of his own achievements. They contend that it cannot be entirely dismissed and should be analyzed alongside other sources to gain a comprehensive understanding of his reign.
The Transition from Republic to Empire:
Modern authors present contrasting views on whether Augustus deliberately planned to establish a monarchy or if he genuinely aimed to restore the republic. Some argue that his actions progressively undermined republican institutions, while others contend that Augustus sought to maintain republican traditions under a new system.
To accurately interpret this aspect, it is necessary to consider the historical context. The late Roman Republic was plagued by political instability, corruption, and frequent civil wars. Augustus capitalized on this chaos to consolidate power and establish stability. Despite his intentions, it is evident that the transition from republic to empire was an inevitable outcome given the prevailing circumstances.
Conclusion:
The modern attitudes towards Augustus vary from admiration to criticism and neutrality. Authors' interpretations are influenced by their ideological perspectives and their assessment of primary sources like Suetonius and Augustus' own writings. Evaluating the accuracy of these interpretations requires a comprehensive analysis of multiple sources and an understanding of the complex historical context in which Augustus operated. By critically examining different viewpoints, we can gain a deeper understanding of this enigmatic figure and his impact on Roman history.