Search over 40,000 articles from the original, classic Encyclopedia Britannica, 11th Edition.
AUGUSTAN See also:HISTORY , the name given to a collection of the See also:biographies of the See also:Roman emperors from See also:Hadrian to See also:Carinus (A.D. 117-284). The See also:work professes to have been written during the reigns of See also:Diocletian and See also:Constantine, and is to be regarded as the See also:composition of six authors,—Aelius Spartianus, See also:Julius Capitolinus; Aelius Lampridius, Vulcacius Gallicanus, Trebellius See also:Pollio and Flavius Vopiscus—known as Scriptores Historiae Augustae, writers of Augustan history. It is generally agreed, however, that there is a large number of interpolations in the work, which are referred to the reign of See also:Theodosius ; and that the documents inserted in the lives are almost all forgeries. The more advanced school of critics holds that the names of the supposed authors are purely fictitious, as those of some of the authorities which they profess to quote certainly are. The lives, which (with few exceptions) are arranged in See also:chronological See also:order, are distributed as follows:—To Spartianus: the biographies of Hadrian, Aelius Verus, Didius Julianus, Septimius See also:Severus, Pescennius See also:Niger, Caracallus, See also:Geta (?); to Vulcacius Gallicanus : Avidius See also:Cassius ; to Capitolinus : See also:Antoninus See also:Pius, See also:Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, Verus, See also:Pertinax, See also:Clodius See also:Albinus, the two Maximins, the three Gordians, See also:Maximus and Balbinus, Opilius Macrinus (?) ; to Lampridius : See also:Commodus, Diadumenus, Elagabalus, See also: Marius Maximus, who lived about 165–230, wrote biographies of the emperors, in continuation of those of Suetonius, from See also:Nerva to Elagabalus; Junius Cordus dealt with the less-known emperors, perhaps down to Maximus and Balbinus. The earlier lives, however, contain a substratum of See also:authentic historical fact, which See also:recent critics have supposed to be derived from a lost work by a contemporary writer, described by one of these scholars as " the last See also:great Roman historian." For the later lives the Scriptores were obliged to resort more largely to public records, and thus preserved matter of the highest importance, rescuing from oblivion many imperial rescripts and sen%tonal decrees, reports of See also:official proceedings and speeches on public occasions, and a number of interesting and characteristic letters from various emperors. Their incidental allusions sometimes See also:cast vivid though undesigned See also:light on the circumstances of the age, and they have made large contributions to our knowledge of imperial See also:jurisprudence in particular. Even their trivialities have their use; their endless anecdotes respecting the See also:personal habits of the subjects of their biographies, if valueless to the historian, are most acceptable to the archaeologist, and not unimportant to the economist and moralist. Their errors and deficiencies may in See also:part be ascribed to the contemporary neglect of history as a See also:branch of instruction. See also:Education was in the hands of rhetoricians and grammarians; historians were read for their style, not for their matter, and since the days of Tacitus, none had arisen See also:worth a schoolmaster's See also:notice. We thus find Vopiscus acknowledging that when he began to write the See also:life of Aurelian, he was entirely misinformed respecting the latter's competitor Firmus, and implying that he would not have ventured on Aurelian himself if he had not had See also:access to the MS. of the See also:emperor's own See also:diary in the See also:Ulpian library. The writers' historical estimates are superficial and conventional, but See also:report the See also:verdict of public See also:opinion with substantial accuracy. The only imputation on the integrity of any of them lies against Trebellius Pollio, who, addressing his work to a descendant of Claudius, the successor and probably the See also:assassin of See also:Gallienus, has dwelt upon the latter versatile See also:sovereign's carelessness and extravagance without See also:acknowledgment of the elastic though fitful See also:energy he so frequently displayed in See also:defence of the See also:empire. The caution of Vopiscus's references to Diocletian cannot be made a reproach to him. No See also:biographical particulars are recorded respecting any of these writers. From their acquaintance with Latin and See also:Greek literature they must have been men of letters by profession, and very probably secretaries or librarians to persons of distinction. There seems no See also:reason to accept See also:Gibbon's contemptuous estimate of their social position. They appear particularly versed in See also:law. Spartianus's reference to himself as " Diocletian's own " seems to indicate that he was a domestic in the imperial See also:household. They address their patrons with deference, acknowledging their own deficiencies, and seem painfully conscious of the profession of literature having fallen upon evil days. Editio princeps (See also:Milan, 1495); See also:Casaubon (1603) showed great critical ability in his notes, but for want of a See also:good MS. See also:left the restoration of the See also:text to See also:Salmasius (162o), whose notes are a most remark-able See also:monument of erudition, combined with acuteness in verbal See also:criticism and See also:general vigour of See also:intellect. Of recent years considerable See also:attention has been devoted by See also:German scholars .to the History, especially by See also:Peter, whose edition of the text in the Teubner series (2nd ed., 1884) contains (praef. See also:xxxv.-See also:xxxvii.) a bibliography of See also:works on the subject preceding the publication of his own See also:special See also:treatise. The edition by See also:Jordan-Eyssenhardt (1863) should also be mentioned. Amongst the most recent See also:treatises on the subject are: A. Gemoll, See also:Die Scriptores Historiae Augustae (1886); H. Peter, Die Scriptores Historiae Augustae (1892); G. Tropea, Studi sugli Scriptores Historiae Augustae (1899–1903) ; J. M. Heer, Der historische Wert der Vita Commodi in der Sammlung der Scriptores Historiae Augustae (1901); C. Lecrivain, Etudes sur l'histoire Auguste (1904); E. Kornemann, Kaiser Hadrian and der letzte See also:grosse Historiker von Rom (1905), according to whom " the last great historian of See also:Rome " is See also:Lollius Urbicus; O. Schulz, Das Kaiserhaus der Antonin and der letzte Historiker Roms (1907). On their style, see C. Paucker, De Latinitate Scriptorum Historiae Augustae (1870); special See also:lexicon by C. See also:Lessing (19o1-1906). An En lish See also:translation is included in The Lives of the Roman Emperors, by See also: Peter, bibliography from 1893 to 1905 in See also:Bursian's Jahresbericht, cxxix. (1907). Additional information and CommentsThere are no comments yet for this article.
» Add information or comments to this article.
Please link directly to this article:
Highlight the code below, right click, and select "copy." Then paste it into your website, email, or other HTML. Site content, images, and layout Copyright © 2006 - Net Industries, worldwide. |
|
[back] AUGUSTA PRAETORIA SALASSORUM (mod. Aosta, q.v.) |
[next] AUGUSTI, JOHANN CHRISTIAN WILHELM (1772-1841) |