This item is only available for download by members of the University of Illinois community. Students, faculty, and staff at the U of I may log in with your NetID and password to view the item. If you are trying to access an Illinois-restricted dissertation or thesis, you can request a copy through your library's Inter-Library Loan office or purchase a copy directly from ProQuest.
Permalink
https://hdl.handle.net/2142/124517
Description
Title
Inimicitiae in Tacitus
Author(s)
Rudman, Nicholas Arthur
Issue Date
2024-04-12
Director of Research (if dissertation) or Advisor (if thesis)
Walters, Brian
Doctoral Committee Chair(s)
Walters, Brian
Committee Member(s)
Augoustakis, Antony
Traill, Ariana
Williams, Craig
Department of Study
Classics
Discipline
Classical Philology
Degree Granting Institution
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
Degree Name
Ph.D.
Degree Level
Dissertation
Keyword(s)
Latin literature
Imperial Literature
Historiography
Tacitus
Enmity
Interpersonal Conflict
Abstract
This dissertation analyzes the depiction of personal feuding, or inimicitiae, within Tacitus’ historical works. Said analysis is grounded in passages from Tacitus’ Dialogus de Oratoribus which imply that the ability to regulate feuding among citizens is a key means of evaluating a system of government and that the Roman republic collapsed because it failed to do so. Accordingly, Tacitus’ portrayal of enmity serves as a means of illuminating his depiction of the principate. I begin by reconstructing early 2nd-century C.E. beliefs concerning republican feuding through analyzing the work of Tacitus, his contemporaries, and earlier literature that likely influenced the historian’s thought. I also demonstrate that Tacitus’ emperors strive to present themselves as controlling the harmful effects of inimicitiae, even if they do not always live up to this ideal. The second chapter focuses on feuding over the imperial succession, arguing that the question of choosing the next ruler produced endless fights over power resembling those that destroyed the republic. My third chapter examines feuds that do not involve the imperial family directly and demonstrates that while the change in governments did alter the ways in which elite Romans conducted inimicitiae, said changes did not make feuding less dangerous and opened new opportunities for enemies to use the legal system against one another. Finally, I conclude by discussing reconciliation in Tacitus, contending that the historian shows that the emperors genuinely could act as “reconcilers-in-chief” who settled the feuds of their subjects, but that in practice, they more often abuse this role to protect their corrupt underlings. These points build to the main conclusion, namely that in Tacitus’ presentation, the changes to the nature of inimicitiae brought about by the emperors hardly solved the problem of feuding. This aligns with recent scholarly trends arguing that Tacitus does not present a solution to any issue, but rather prompts his audience to consider the strengths and weaknesses of different alternatives.
Use this login method if you
don't
have an
@illinois.edu
email address.
(Oops, I do have one)
IDEALS migrated to a new platform on June 23, 2022. If you created
your account prior to this date, you will have to reset your password
using the forgot-password link below.
