This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Kapust, D. Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Between Contumacy and Obsequiousness

Tacitus on Moral Freedom and the Historian’s Task

University of Georgia, djkapust{at}uga.edu

This article explores Tacitus’ negotiation of the dilemmas of writing due to the emergence of the Principate and the displacement of Republican politics. These developments constrained the orator and the historian, and required a distinctive approach to the writing of history. I argue that Tacitus develops a conception of the historian’s task that centers on the historian’s moral freedom and educative role in the Principate. This freedom is evident in Tacitus’ depiction of good and bad principes, as well as his discussion of how one ought to behave under the Principate. The historian’s task and moral freedom are important given Tacitus’ desire to avoid the twin dangers of writing under autocratic rulers: contumacy and obsequiousness.

Key Words: deliberation • despotism • oratory • rhetoric • Roman political thought • Tacitus

European Journal of Political Theory, Vol. 8, No. 3, 293-311 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/1474885109103829


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?