M.A. (Latin) / Please refer to full text to view abstract

No description available.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1901. / Reprinted with "occasional alterations" from the American journal of archaeology, Second series, vol. VIII, 1903.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, 1901. / Reprinted with "occasional alterations" from the American journal of archaeology, Second series, vol. VIII, 1903.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Chicago, Dept. of Classical Languages and Literatures, June 1998. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 205-210). Also available on the Internet.

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Pennsylvania, 1930. / On cover: University of Pennsylvania. Includes bibliographical references (p. [11]-14).

Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Washington, 1999. / Vita. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 175-182).

Thèse--Faculté des lettres de Paris.

Made available in DSpace on 2014-06-11T19:26:38Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 Previous issue date: 2006-06-23Bitstream added on 2014-06-13T18:07:48Z : No. of bitstreams: 1 barnabe_le_me_assis.pdf: 1081865 bytes, checksum: 94a1f842970e33f260ef1ade9b1cddd0 (MD5) / Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES) / No primeiro livro de sua obra, o historiador romano Lívio se dedica ao período lendário da fundação de Roma e ao período monárquico que se sucede. A publicação deste volume ocorre paralelamente aos primeiros anos do principado de Augusto. Ao caracterizar sua época como um período de decadência da sociedade, o historiador incita seus contemporâneos a recuperarem o respeito às antigas tradições através da sua história de Roma. Esta pesquisa visa analisar a construção das personagens históricas dos reis e identificar as influências do presente do historiador na sua composição, principalmente no que tange à defesa de um modelo de identidade romana calcado nas tradições do mos maiorum. / In his first book, the Roman historian Livy dedicates himself to the legendary period of the foundation of Rome and to the monarchic period that follows on. The publication of this volume takes place in the first years of Augustus' principality. In characterizing his age as a period of society decadence, the historian incites his contemporaries to recover the respect for the old traditions through the history of Rome. This research aims to analyze the construction of historical characters of kings and identify the influences of the historian's present in its composition, especially regarding the defense of a model of Roman identity based on the traditions of the mos maiorum.

As early as Tacitus, Livian scholarship has struggled to resolve the "Livian paradox," the conflict between Livy's support of the Roman Republic and his overt approval of Augustus, who brought about the end of the Republic. This paper addresses the paradox by attempting to place Livy's writings within their proper historical and literary context. An examination of Augustus' position during the early years of Livy's writing shows that the princeps cloaked his power within the precedent of Republican autocracy, in which imperium could be unlimited in power so long as it was limited by time. As a result, although Augustus' rule would ultimately prove the end of Rome's republic, nevertheless during Livy's early writings Augustus' reign and the Republic were not antithetical. Livy's preface and early exempla further demonstrate that Livy's writings, while condemnatory of his contemporary Rome, blame Rome's decline on the character of the Roman people rather than a corruption of the Republic's political forms. In his preface Livy blames vitia, not ambitio for the universal destruction of the civil wars, while his exempla from the monarchic period and beyond show praise or condemnation of individuals for their actions, not their political offices. Livy praises most of Rome's monarchs for their individual character and their establishment of mores, while also portraying the early Romans' defense of libertas as injuriously overzealous. Ultimately, Augustus' attempts to legislate conservative, "traditional" morality made him a contemporary exemplum of Livy's ancient mores. Thus, the Livian paradox is answered by understanding that Augustus and the Republic were not antithetical, Livy was not concerned with political forms but morality, and Augustus' morality aligned with that championed by Livy.