Tacitus Annals and History

I committed myself to finally reading Tacitus from start to finish. Previously, I have only read chunks of it hear and there but here I am. I'm in the middle of "The Year of the Four Emperors". If you ever decide to read Tacitus be prepared for a long, depressing slog and plenty of moments when you're wondering if this is worth it. The suicides, moral capitulations, betrayals, executions, slaughters and obscene depravities feel almost unreal. I've caught myself feeling relieved that so many of the books are lost (forgive the thought). Nonetheless, Tacitus is riveting at times, suspenseful and full of what appear to be "on the mark" commentary about the characters he portrays. His final comment on Galba is a case in point: "He seemed greater than a subject while he was yet in a subject's rank, and by common consent would have been pronounced equal to empire, had he never been emperor." Translation or not, this is a sentence and statement of such balance that it remains a timeless truth. How often, someone is admirable in their character and abilities until they are given a responsibility clearly beyond their abilities and virtues. If I get through the History I'll be satisfied and can save Agricola for another time and a rereading of Germania for another time as well. I'll find out when I get there if I'm up for it. If you wanted to just read a part of Tacitus to start I think the reigns of Tiberius and/or Nero would be enough. Caligula is completely missing and Claudius only has only the last seven years of his reign. Tiberius and Nero have parts missing as well but at least most of their reigns are covered. The beauty of reading up to where I'm at is that in the beginning you feel the fiction of Republican norms being respected especially in the early years of Tiberius but from one emperor to the next the pretend respect for the senate and the republican offices is completely ripped to shreds. Tacitus makes it clear what the fight for empire in the post-Nero world proved: "for now had been divulged that secret of the empire, that emperors could be made elsewhere than at Rome."

I have (belatedly) just read this post. I read Tacitus's account of the year of the four emperors as my Advanced Level Latin set book in high school. Tacitus was a great Latin stylist and is not exactly an easy author to translate. His style is terse and epigrammatic in a way that does not come over in translations. I'm surprised you found him a "long, depressing slog and plenty of moments when you're wondering if this is worth it." And if you thought Tacitus was a long depressing slog, try Livy. As for the "suicides, moral capitulations, betrayals, executions, slaughters and obscene depravities", he's got nothing - absolutely nothing - on the Secret History of Procopius...

I finished(some time ago). From Tiberius to Vespasian. As a historian, I like him better than Livy. As a writer, I prefer Livy. As for Procopius, it's been 25 years but at least it was short (I remember wondering if he was making a good deal of it up and perhaps never intended for it to be found and published). The consequence of finishing Tacitus is that I felt compelled to give Suetonius a reread. Started with Vespasian and then backtracked to Augustus and back up to where I started. Now I have to finish the Flavians.