Augustan Culture By Karl Galinsky

Another review has been completed for our Roman Books section, thanks to community member Ursus.

Galinsky believes scholars and scholarship are the product of their times. Augustan scholarship was held captive in the 1930

Syme (something of a hero of mine, I'll confess) was a little more subtle than the words above convey.

His book is cast not only as his interpretation of the period, but also as an attempt to reproduce the perspective of one of the lost "Antonian" historians. Even his English style is deliberately latinate - abrupt and sometimes (to me at least) enigmatic. Thus the book investigates the Augustan revolution from a critical angle - but Syme is quite open about that.

And is his view - even his conclusions - necessarily too far awry? Times do change, and one thing that we should remember in reading Syme is that in the 1930s Mussolini was still a somewhat admired figure. His methods were disconcertingly direct, but he was held up as a man who was changing his country.

The baleful, damning reputation that comes from Mussolini's association with fascism (the Italian version was very different from the German); Hitler and his later aggression against the Balkans and Abassynnia; have forever coloured our image of the Dictator. But that did not apply when Syme wrote.

And is the parallel between Octavian (rather than Augustus) and Mussolini that far-fetched?

Phil

Its been a while since I read The Roman Revolution, but what I do remember from it is Syme lambasting Augustus for 600 + pages, then praising him on the last 3 pages! I was unimpressed with Syme's withering attack on the greatest politician the world has ever seen..!

Perhaps it's worth re-reading to see what he was really trying to do.

I don't know what you mean by the word greatest. if you mean one of the most successful, I would agree. if you mean laudable, then I might quibble strongly!!

Phil