Rape and Revolution: Tacitus on Livia and Augustus

Posted on September 3, 2020 by Thomas Strunk

Strunk, Thomas E.  “Rape and Revolution: Tacitus on Livia and Augustus.” Latomus 73 (2014): 126–148.

Although the Annales ostensibly begin “from the death of Augustus” (ab excessu Divi Augusti), Tacitus’ concise introduction covers the sweep of Roman history from the monarchy to the ascension of Tiberius.  In charting this chronology, Tacitus carefully and subtly represents the transition from Republic to Principate as a transition from libertas to servitus.  In this paper, I focus on how Tacitus uses Augustus’s abduction of Livia to signify the shift from freedom to autocracy just as earlier abductions and offenses against women marked revolutions in the constitutions of Rome and Athens.

While most accounts suggest that Livia and her husband, Tiberius Claudius Nero, were willing parties to their divorce and Livia’s remarriage to Augustus (Vell. 2.79.2; Suet. Aug. 62.2, Tib. 4.3; Dio 48.44), in Tacitus’s account Augustus appears to have taken Livia away from her previous husband forcefully (abducta Neroni uxor A. 1.10.5).  According to Tacitus, the abduction of Livia had grave consequences for the Roman state (Livia gravis in rem publicam mater, gravis domui Caesarum noverca A. 1.10.5), as Livia asserted her power and influence in political affairs (anum . . . natura potentiae anxiam A. 4.12.4).

Tacitus’ account of Livia’s abduction contrasts with the rape of Lucretia under Rome’s monarchy and the offense against the sister of Harmodius by Hipparchos in Athens, which were both viewed as excesses of tyrannical power and resulted in the offender being expelled or murdered and in a more democratic constitution for the state.  The abduction of Livia, however, led to a more authoritarian constitution and more closely mirrors the rape of the Sabine women by Romulus, to whom Augustus was compared as a second founder of Rome, and the establishment of monarchy at Rome.  Tacitus seems to be suggesting that the Romans’ passive acceptance of Augustus’ rape of Livia inaugurated a new autocracy at Rome.

Posted in Tacitus | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Rape and Revolution: Tacitus on Livia and Augustus

Collaborators amongst the Opposition?

Posted on March 25, 2020 by Thomas Strunk

Strunk, Thomas E.  “Collaborators Amongst the Opposition?  Deconstructing the Imperial Cursus Honorum.”  Arethusa 48.1 (2015): 47–58.

Colosseum from the Oppian Hill, photo by Thomas Strunk

The holding of high political office under the Roman Principate has often been regarded as evidence for collaboration with, or at least acceptance of, the imperial regime.  Thus, Pliny and Tacitus are generally viewed as accepting the legitimacy of the Principate and its principes, both good and bad, because they held high political office and furthered their careers under the Flavians, Nerva, and Trajan. Conversely, the refusal to hold high political office or to seek to advance one’s political career has been interpreted as a mark of defiance and autonomy.  In this paper, I challenge these assumptions in two ways: by examining the careers of the disloyal opposition, many of whom held high offices under the emperors they opposed, and the careers of the collaborators, many of whom despite their high offices eventually ran afoul of the regime, and by exploring how the opposition could actively use the cursus honorum as a means of opposition.

In summary, the fact that one held or did not hold high political office cannot be used as evidence of collaboration or dissent.  Political opinions were often divorced from the political offices individuals held.  This is of primary importance for determining the political views of writers like Pliny and Tacitus, whose political careers have inordinately influenced scholars in interpreting the political nature of their written works.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | Comments Off on Collaborators amongst the Opposition?

Socrates and St. Ignatius: The Mad Man, the Monk, and the Philology of Liberation

Posted on March 24, 2020 by Thomas Strunk

Strunk, Thomas E.  “Socrates and St. Ignatius: The Mad Man, the Monk, and the Philology of Liberation.”  Jesuit Higher Education 4.1 (2015).  Available at Jesuit Higher Education: A Journal.

St. Ignatius of Loyola’s Shoes, photo by Thomas Strunk taken in St. Ignatius’ rooms, Church of the Gesu, Rome

This article explores the connections and contrasts between the modes of thinking of St. Ignatius of Loyola and Socrates of Athens.  Though the two men diverge in many ways, their behavior and ways of examining the world are both liberating.

Jesuit education is founded upon the traditions of both Ignatian spirituality and Humanism, which can be
traced back to classical antiquity. The lives of St. Ignatius and Socrates are thus fundamental to learning at Jesuit institutions, because they represent two pedagogical models by which we can come to know ourselves and our place in the world: self-reflection through the application of the senses and philosophic inquiry in dialogue with others. When these methods are applied to works of philosophy, literature, and art, they
provide a reflective space for self-transformation and produce a philology that is liberating.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Comments Off on Socrates and St. Ignatius: The Mad Man, the Monk, and the Philology of Liberation

A Philology of Liberation

Posted on February 8, 2020 by Thomas Strunk

Dr. King Memorial, Washington, D.C.
Photo Thomas Strunk

Strunk, Thomas E. “A Philology of Liberation: Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. as a Reader of the Classics.” Verbum Incarnatum: An Academic Journal of Social Justice 4 (2010): 124-144.

This is a paper that I am proud of, but it is also flawed in a couple important ways, which I’ll explain in a moment. What attracted me to this topic was the idea of putting in juxtaposition ideas and thinkers that we typically want to keep apart. By my nature, I tend to rebel against that desire to separate rather than seek commonalities. I imagine both approaches are important, but I incline to the latter.

For me, it is inspiring to consider how Dr. King read the classics. For in that reading he provides a template of how we could all read the classics. He teaches us how to read – for liberation, not simply for erudition. It seems that the older a text is the more likely we are to see it merely as a relic of its own time, something to read to understand its society, to simply trace its influences, and worst of all to call ourselves educated. What I wanted to argue in this article is that Dr. King read the classics because he suspected and came to know that they would edify him and fortify him for his own liberation and the liberation of others.

There are two flaws in this work.  First, I did not emphasize enough that the classics are but one small strand of influence on Dr. King.  A spiritual and political leader of Dr. King’s stature cannot be reduced to one source of wisdom or one complete interpretation.  I never state that the classics are the key to understanding Dr. King, but I did not sufficiently express the limit of this influence.  Second, I wrote this in the heady days after President Obama’s election. I like many were elated by what had happened. I naively thought a new day had come, and in some ways a new day had come, but we have discovered that we are still tied to many of our old views on race. In being so foolishly optimistic about American race relations, I revealed my own ties to old views on race. I should have known better that racism will not end simply because individuals have achieved a certain place in society. I think we should all continue to take joy in the election and presidency of Barack Obama, but we also need to roll up sleeves and continue the hard work of dismantling white supremacy in the United States.

 

Posted in Uncategorized | Comments Off on A Philology of Liberation