The Twelve Caesars

[Drusus Nero]

Has anyone else read "The Twelve Caesars" by Michael Grant?, I read it years ago and thought it was very interesting.

It gives an in-depth profile of each Emperor, starting with Julius Caesar and his subtle erosion of the Republic, it really digs up all the details and gossip.

[Primus Pilus]

Has anyone else read "The Twelve Caesars" by Michael Grant?, I read it years ago and thought it was very interesting.

It gives an in-depth profile of each Emperor, starting with Julius Caesar and his subtle erosion of the Republic, it really digs up all the details and gossip.

 

I am unfamiliar with this. Is it a translation of Suetonius by Grant or an actual independent book on the same subject (presumably heavily influenced by Suetonius at least)?

[The Augusta]

Has anyone else read "The Twelve Caesars" by Michael Grant?, I read it years ago and thought it was very interesting.

It gives an in-depth profile of each Emperor, starting with Julius Caesar and his subtle erosion of the Republic, it really digs up all the details and gossip.

 

I am unfamiliar with this. Is it a translation of Suetonius by Grant or an actual independent book on the same subject (presumably heavily influenced by Suetonius at least)?

 

That is precisely it, PP - Grant wrote the intro to Graves' translation of Suetonius' Lives

 

Drusus - I think quite a few of us here on the Forum have read and enjoyed The Twelve Caesars. I bumped an old Suetonius thread here a couple of days ago You will find it here

 

Your comments would be welcome.

[Drusus Nero]

I've just read it and think Suetonius was a brave man to have included all the sordid details in his book.

What I mean by that is he probably counted respected public figures amongst his friends, and if they thought he would publish their secrets in one of his books, it might not make him very popular.

[The Augusta]

I've just read it and think Suetonius was a brave man to have included all the sordid details in his book.

What I mean by that is he probably counted respected public figures amongst his friends, and if they thought he would publish their secrets in one of his books, it might not make him very popular.

 

The only issue I would take here is that many of the figures whose sordid details Suetonius published had been dead for some time. The traditional date of his birth is 69 AD - therefore certainly all the Julio-Claudian emperors were dead before he was born. I suppose this made potential litigation against him for libel much less likely.

[Marcus Caelius]

The traditional date of his birth is 69 AD - therefore certainly all the Julio-Claudian emperors were dead before he was born.

 

Context: Wasn't 69 AD the year Vespasian took the throne?

[Primus Pilus]

The traditional date of his birth is 69 AD - therefore certainly all the Julio-Claudian emperors were dead before he was born.

 

Context: Wasn't 69 AD the year Vespasian took the throne?

 

Yes, and in fact there would've been a reasonable number of elderly folks in the reign of Hadrian that had both read Suetonius' published work and would've personally remembered the Flavians and Domitian in particular. If you had been 20 at the death of Domitian (AD 96) one would've been 62 at the death of Hadrian (AD 138).

 

edit: and I believe the Twelve Caesar's had been published long before that (the 110's) making the availability to those who were event contemporaries much greater. (ie. Someone who was 20 at the time of Nero's death/Vespasian's victory (AD 69) would've been roughly 65 or 66 if Suetonius' work was published circa AD 115.)

[The Augusta]

I did limit the comment to the Julio-Claudian emperors!! As these were the emperors who come in for the most scurrilous treatment (perhaps with the exception of Domitian) in Suetonius' work, I can't really see what point is being made regarding the Flavians.

[Drusus Nero]

The Julio-Claudians were most certainly the best ruling family.

[Primus Pilus]

I did limit the comment to the Julio-Claudian emperors!! As these were the emperors who come in for the most scurrilous treatment (perhaps with the exception of Domitian) in Suetonius' work, I can't really see what point is being made regarding the Flavians.

 

No attempt was being made to discredit, I was simply expanding the conversation. As the Julio-Claudian bios make up only half of the total of Suetonius' work, I was just validating MC's comment on context. At the time Suetonius published his work, there were probably many living people who may have had personal awareness of Galba, Otho, Vitellius and the Flavians. Suetonius' own father served Otho as a military tribune.

 

The lack of living witnesses to the Julio-Claudians may or may not have had an effect on Suetonius' writing, but as Augusta points out, these later bios are far less scandalous in nature (Domitian aside) than their Julio-Claudian counterparts. It's quite likely that he was free to write as he pleased on the early Caesars since everyone of potential consequence was dead. Perhaps his more careful approach in regard to the later pieces may be a reflection of protecting himself from living contemporaries of these subjects, but its also quite possible that he simply didn't have as great a collection of material to work with on these individuals.

 

This is the most interesting notion to me. We know that Suetonius didn't simply make these things up. The absence of scandalous material in some of the bios supports the idea that he may have been more scrutinizing than he is often given credit for. Clearly he had the material to work with on the Julio Claudians and did not have as much on later emperors. If he had it, such material would've been included in his work. He may have thought better of blasting Vespasian depending on the position and attitudes of living contemporaries, but why wouldn't he have been more scathing in regards to Otho, Galba and Vitellius. He was a bit more harsh with Vitellius (helping to justify the actions of Vespasian) but otherwise his treatment of Otho and Galba is noticeably absent of 'color'. The absence of this color is just a confirmation that Suetonius wasn't interested in publishing scandal for the sake of scandal. He published material that he had source material to work from. We can certainly question the viability of the sources he did use... but we can also be fairly comfortable that he was at least somewhat diligent and honest.