The dissertation examines Suetonius' ideals of feminine conduct by exploring the behaviors he lauds or censures in imperial women. The approach comes from scholarship on the biographer's practice of evaluating of his male subjects against a consistent ideal. This study argues that Suetonius applies the same method to imperial women. His tendency to speak of women in standardized rubrics (ancestry, marriage, the birth of children) suggests that he has a fixed notion of model feminine behavior, one that values women for being wives and mothers. Chapter 1 argues that because Suetonius' Lives center on male subjects, his picture of women is fragmented at best. The biographer uses this fragmentation to manipulate his female characters. Livia, for instance, is cast as a "good" wife in the Augustus, but as a "bad" mother in the Tiberius. Suetonius' often inconsistent drawing of women reveals that he uses them primarily to elucidate certain aspects of their associated men. Having a "good" wife, mother, or sister reflects well on an emperor, while having a "bad" one reveals his lack of authority. Chapter 2 explores the role of mother. Atia serves as the "good," silent type and Livia and Agrippina the Younger the "bad," meddling type. Chapter 3 investigates the role of wife. Livia exemplifies the "good," loyal wife who is not politically active, while Agrippina the Younger illustrates the "bad," sexually manipulative wife who murders her husband to advance her son. Chapter 4 looks at members of the wider imperial family, noting that Suetonius writes more about sexually promiscuous women, such as Drusilla and Julia, than those women, like Domitilla the Younger, who followed social norms by marrying and bearing children. As a result, the Caesares are slanted towards negative portrayals of women. Chapter 5 "reassembles" the fragmented picture of women. The small role that Suetonius writes for Poppaea reveals his independence from Tacitus. The biographer's portrayal of Livia and Agrippina subverts ideals espoused on imperial coins and statues. Overall, the most important role for women in the Caesares is that of mother. By focusing on his portrayal of women, this study also sheds light on Suetonius' use of rhetoric and stereotypes. / Dissertation

Zugl.: Diss. Univ. Frankfurt am Main, 2006.

La conception de l'écriture de l'histoire par les auteurs romains, leur méthodologie historique sont très différentes des nôtres. On a ainsi souvent déploré que le primat littéraire de leur démarche les ait amenés à effacer autant que possible de leurs textes les informations sur leurs recherches préparatoires.Or ces informations existent, bien que ce ne soit pas sous la forme qu'elles adoptent de nos jours : interventions à la première personne, formules introductrices, mais aussi fortes ressemblances dans le traitement de certaines figures, de certains épisodes. Ces traits permettent de saisir les cadres informatifs et narratifs à respecter et, dès lors, de mieux apprécier les choix personnels.Cette thèse étudie ces éléments pour les deux historiens romains du début du IIème siècle ayant écrit sur les premiers empereurs, Tacite et Suétone. Elle étudie ainsi successivement : leur présence visible dans leurs textes (chap. 1) ; les mentions explicites de sources, qu'elles soient nominales ou anonymisées (chap. 2) ; l'influence du genre choisi pour traiter de cette période historique (chap. 3) ; les éléments topiques dans le récit de certaines scènes (chap. 4) ; l'élaboration progressive de certains épisodes (chap. 5) ; le portrait général de chaque empereur (chap. 6) ; la façon dont Tacite et Suétone concevaient l'écriture de l'histoire et leur rapport au passé (chap. 7) ; la conception romaine de cette écriture (chap. 8).Cette recherche met ainsi en évidence les particularités de l'historiographie romaine du IIème siècle, tant par rapport à l'historiographie grecque qu'à celle d'aujourd'hui. Elle fait également apparaître le rapport propre des Romains à leur passé, à la fois souple dans l'établissement des faits historiques et tourné vers le futur. / How Roman authors conceived the writing of history, their historical methodology are very different from ours. For instance, it has been quite often found regrettable that, as their main goal was literary, they cancelled as much as possible any trace of their preparatory researches.But these informations exist, even though not presented as they would be today : there are direct interventions in the first person singular and plural ; introductive formulas ; similarities between the presentation of certain people or how some episodes are narrated. These elements reveal the informative and narrative frames which were to be respected and, as a consequence, the personal choices that were made by the authors.This PhD dissertation aims at studying these pecularities for the two Roman historians of the IInd century CE who wrote on the first emperors, Tacitus and Suetonius. It thus successively studies : their visible presence in their texts (chap. 1) ; the explicit mentions of sources, whether they be nominal or anonymous (chap. 2) ; the influence of the genre chosen to narrate that historical periode (chap. 3) ; the topic elements in the narration of certain scenes (chap. 4) ; the progressive elaboration of certain episodes (chap. 5) ; the general portrait of each emperor (chap. 6) ; how Tacitus and Suetonius conceived the writing of history and their relation to the past (chap. 7) ; how the Roman in general conceived that activity (chap. 8).This research thus demonstrates the pecularities of Roman historiography in the IInd century CE, in front of Greek and modern pratices. It also shows the personal relation Roman society had with its past, at the same time quite flexible about the narration of historical facts and subordinating it to the future.

Gaius Julius Caesar is not only the most well-known figure in Roman history, but he is also one of the most difficult to understand. Since his assassination, Caesar has played an important role in discussions of political power, imperial government, tyranny, and tyrannicide. While there have been literary treatments of Caesar from William Shakespeare to the present, little has been done to trace the image of Caesar through the Middle Ages and into the Renaissance. The present work attempts to fill that hole by examining portrayals of Caesar in medieval and early Renaissance texts. An examination of specific authors such as Geoffrey of Monmouth, John of Salisbury, Thomas Aquinas, Dante, Petrarch, Salutati, and Bruni, clearly demonstrates that Caesar was consistently portrayed as the first emperor and used to represent the Roman Empire. As the first emperor, representations of Caesar figured significantly in debates about the power of the Church and the Empire, the benefits and downfalls of imperial government, and tyrannicide. Authors were influenced in their portrayals of Caesar by the classical portrayals found in the works of Vergil, Lucan, and Suetonius. Each author's interpretation of Caesar was also impacted by the political and intellectual milieu in which he flourished. Analysis of Caesar's image over this time period serves not only as a part of Caesar historiography, but also provides insight into the ways that scholars write history to understand the world around them.

Submitted by Cláudia Bueno (claudiamoura18@gmail.com) on 2016-01-13T15:14:34Z No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Gustavo Cangussu Góes - 2015.pdf: 1157282 bytes, checksum: 1618e1ead4589d8d24462a8fbfdc5aa7 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Luciana Ferreira (lucgeral@gmail.com) on 2016-01-14T11:02:27Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Gustavo Cangussu Góes - 2015.pdf: 1157282 bytes, checksum: 1618e1ead4589d8d24462a8fbfdc5aa7 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2016-01-14T11:02:27Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 Dissertação - Gustavo Cangussu Góes - 2015.pdf: 1157282 bytes, checksum: 1618e1ead4589d8d24462a8fbfdc5aa7 (MD5) license_rdf: 23148 bytes, checksum: 9da0b6dfac957114c6a7714714b86306 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2015-08-17 / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior - CAPES / In this research we will discuss the family role and how Suetonius, in his work De Vita Caesarum, makes use of that to construct a negative memory of the Emperor Nero. For that we will observe the imperial ambience at which the biographer was inserted and we will also try to understand how that, with its political program, influenced the work writting. Because it is a research specially toward to family role, we will have an unfolding about the family centrality in many roman domestic attitudes and the public effects of such actions. However, for considering the biography of an Emperor, we will focus on the way such family values have their potentiality enlarged and modified in imperial family. Then we will see in which aspects Suetonius arranges them in order to present the searched nefarious image about Nero. / Neste trabalho discutiremos o papel da família e como Suetônio, em sua obra De Vita Caesarum, se utiliza desta para a construção de uma memória negativa do Imperador Nero. Para tanto observaremos o ambiente imperial no qual o biógrafo estava inserido e também buscaremos compreender como tal, com seu programa político, influenciou a escrita da obra. Por se tratar de uma pesquisa voltada especialmente para o papel da família, teremos um desdobramento acerca da centralidade familiar nas diversas atitudes domésticas de um romano e os efeitos públicos dessas ações. Contudo, por considerarmos a biografia de um Imperador, iremos focar no modo como tais valores familiares tem sua potencialidade ampliada e modificada na família imperial. Então veremos em que aspectos Suetônio os arranja a fim de apresentar a buscada imagem nefasta acerca de Nero.

M.A. (Latin) / This study is focused on the different ways the character of the Emperor Nero is depicted by the biographer Suetonlus and the historiographer Tacitus. The study is Introduced with an historical survey of the life of Nero. Thereupon a discussion follows on the life experiences of the authors, Suetonius and Tacitus, as well as the different style and genre used by each, and suggestions on how their writings could have been influenced by these factors. Two aspects of Nero's life are discussed at length, namely his relationship with his mother (and issues relating to that). as well as his interest in and practising of the arts (focusing on Nero as a poet, singer and charioteer). The discussion of these topics is done in the following manner: firstiy Suetonius' account of the events are given, followed by the account by Tacitus. These versions are then compared and where different, the candidate suggests possible reasons for the difference of opinion or presentation between the authors. Various characteristics of the Emperor Nero are referred to. The main conclusions can be categorised into three sections: - First and foremost the authors had different life experiences. Suetonius held various secretarial positions at the court of Caesar Hadrian which SUbsequently influenced his writings. He Was not however a senator or interested In politics and military affairs, which explains the fact that he does not write about political upheavals and does not contribute political motivations for certain actions of characters under discussion. Tacitus on the contrary, was a senator during the reign of Domitian. The atrocities committed by the Emperor and the slowly diminishing power of the Senate influenced the mind and writings of Tacitus to a great extent.

This thesis examines the relationship between language and Roman identity, defined in the broadest sense as the political and cultural practices involved in being Roman. It focuses on evidence of multilingualism: Roman identity was defined through opposition and interaction, and it is at points of contact that these debates are cast into relief. It looks predominantly at evidence of Greek-Latin bilingualism, but also considers evidence of other languages to consider how their relationship to Roman identity differs. It combines historical and sociolinguistic approaches to multilingualism. Understanding bilingual language practices requires close sociolinguistic reading of evidence to understand how languages interrelate and analysis of the historical factors and contexts that determine language choices and their social, cultural and political implications. The thesis responds especially to the use of bilingualism as a model for Roman cultural relations, arguing that a closer engagement with sociolinguistic terminology and with linguistic evidence is necessary if we are to use language and bilingualism as a way into broader issues of politics and identity. Language is simultaneously a model for identity that works across ancient and modern thought and a central part of this identity. It frequently plays into other markers of Roman identity and a range of themes and concerns surrounding it including integration, migration and citizenship. The thesis examines three case studies in detail: the different layers of bilingualism in Suetonius' biographies; Greek in the graffiti of Pompeii; epigraphic and literary evidence for different languages in the city of Rome. These case studies demonstrate the politics of language in different types of practice and at different levels of society: the thesis argues that the overlaps between them are greater than has sometimes been appreciated. The case studies also show that the boundaries of Roman identity did not develop in a progressive or linear fashion but were continually defined and redefined through ongoing processes of absorption and rejection.

No description available.

Работа представляет собой исследование проблемы формирования и эволюции образа женщины у власти, который возник в связи с проникновением женщин императорского дома в область государственного управления, которая традиционно считалась мужской. Образ «женщины у власти» - продукт римского общества периода империи: монархическая система давала женщинам императорского дома неофициальный голос и авторитет, отсюда в произведениях античных историков появляется тип женщины, рвущейся к власти. / Research suggest examination of the problem of origin and evolution of the image of the power of women and they invasion into traditionally male sector of public administration. Women in Roman Empire weren’t included in the scope of public low. They are implemented only in family. But the monarch system in Rome provided the women from imperial family unofficial voice and authority. This women staying near they powerful husbands and sons, and women from imperial family have potential political authority in Empire. Latin authors couldn’t fail to see these changes and the image “powerful women” appeared in they works.

No description available.