Word count: 2690
To what extent is Tacitus' account of the principate a commentary on the emperors
of his own time?
In the opening lines of his Histories, Tacitus acknowledges, “I would not deny that my career
was begun by Vespasian, advanced by Titus and carried considerably further by Domitian”1.
Despite attaining a prominent position in Roman society through this trajectory, he maintains
a disapproving stance toward the principate. Frequently posited as a figure who, having
compromised with a morally dubious regime, grappled with shame2 and sought to alleviate
his guilt by penning a scathing indictment of the very system with which he had entangled
himself. This sentiment is particularly apparent at both the beginning and end of his
"Agricola," where Tacitus expresses regret for his involvement in the execution of individuals
condemned by senators who, driven by the apprehension of the tyrannical Domitian,
succumbed to fear.3 Having witnessed these dynamics firsthand, Tacitus offers an insightful
depiction of individuals adept at flattery towards the princeps, showcasing their sycophantic
behaviour. While Tacitus makes a statement at the beginning of the Annals where he
implicitly claims to “write without anger and partiality”4, it remains challenging to believe
that his own experiences did not influence his views towards the principate5. Nevertheless,
Tacitus writes in his Annals “It seems to me a historian's foremost duty to ensure that merit is
recorded, and to confront evil deeds and words with the fear of posterity's denunciations”6.
From this, one can infer that Tacitus penned his works to provide posterity with the tools to
judge the principate, to learn from its mistakes7 and to provide a commentary on how he
viewed the emperors of his own time.
1
Tacitus, Histories 1.1
2
Percival (2009) p. 129
3
Tacitus, Agricola (2.1-3, 45.1)
4
Tacitus, Annals 1.1.2
5
Percival (2009) p. 128
6
Tacitus, Annals 3.65
7
Mellor (1993) p. 8
To what extent is Tacitus' account of the principate a commentary on the emperors
of his own time?
In the opening lines of his Histories, Tacitus acknowledges, “I would not deny that my career
was begun by Vespasian, advanced by Titus and carried considerably further by Domitian”1.
Despite attaining a prominent position in Roman society through this trajectory, he maintains
a disapproving stance toward the principate. Frequently posited as a figure who, having
compromised with a morally dubious regime, grappled with shame2 and sought to alleviate
his guilt by penning a scathing indictment of the very system with which he had entangled
himself. This sentiment is particularly apparent at both the beginning and end of his
"Agricola," where Tacitus expresses regret for his involvement in the execution of individuals
condemned by senators who, driven by the apprehension of the tyrannical Domitian,
succumbed to fear.3 Having witnessed these dynamics firsthand, Tacitus offers an insightful
depiction of individuals adept at flattery towards the princeps, showcasing their sycophantic
behaviour. While Tacitus makes a statement at the beginning of the Annals where he
implicitly claims to “write without anger and partiality”4, it remains challenging to believe
that his own experiences did not influence his views towards the principate5. Nevertheless,
Tacitus writes in his Annals “It seems to me a historian's foremost duty to ensure that merit is
recorded, and to confront evil deeds and words with the fear of posterity's denunciations”6.
From this, one can infer that Tacitus penned his works to provide posterity with the tools to
judge the principate, to learn from its mistakes7 and to provide a commentary on how he
viewed the emperors of his own time.
1
Tacitus, Histories 1.1
2
Percival (2009) p. 129
3
Tacitus, Agricola (2.1-3, 45.1)
4
Tacitus, Annals 1.1.2
5
Percival (2009) p. 128
6
Tacitus, Annals 3.65
7
Mellor (1993) p. 8
