Biography

Titus Livius (lat. Titus Livius; 59 BC, Patavius ​​- 17 AD) is an ancient Roman historian, the author of the partially preserved History from the Foundation of the City (Ab urbe condita). Starting to compose the "History" around 30 BC. e., Livy worked on it until the end of his life and described the events from the mythical arrival of Aeneas from Troy to the Apennine Peninsula until 9 BC. e. The work consisted of 142 books, but only books 1-10 and 21-45 have survived (they describe events before 292 BC and from 218 to 167 BC), small fragments of other books, as well as periohs - brief summaries of the content.

Livy wrote in bright and lively Latin, skillfully applied artistic techniques, successfully built the narrative, but did not bother with independent research, uncritically retells his sources and did not always resolve the contradictions between them. The historical and religious views of Livy were partly influenced by the ideas of predecessor historians (primarily Sallust) and Stoic philosophy. Despite close acquaintance with Octavian Augustus, Livy - the first Roman historian who did not make a career in politics - was free to express his political views.

Livy won fame as the largest Roman historian back in ancient times and retained it until the 19th century, when the assessment of his work was revised due to serious shortcomings in working with sources and the author's passion for stylistic decoration at the expense of accuracy.

Little is known about the life of Titus Livius. This is partly due to the fact that in the surviving books of his work, the historian very rarely spoke about himself. In the last books that described contemporary events, autobiographical information may have been present, but they have not been preserved. Very little biographical information is given about him by other Roman authors, including admirers of his work. Like most Roman writers, Titus Livy did not come from Rome: it is known that he was born in Patavia (modern Padua) - one of the richest cities in the Apennine Peninsula after Rome. This part of Italy north of the Po River (Transpadania) finally received the rights of Roman citizenship only in 49 BC. e. with the support of Gaius Julius Caesar, although by that time the local population had already been Romanized. During the years of civil wars, republican sympathies dominated in the historian's hometown. Livy's date of birth is usually given as 59 BC. e. Late antique chronicler Hieronymus Stridonsky reports two contradictory facts about Livy: according to his information, he was born in 59, but at the same time he was the same age as Marcus Valerius Messala Corvinus, who was born five years earlier. According to the historian Ronald Syme, the birth of Livy should be attributed to 64 BC. e.: in his opinion, Jerome mistakenly read in his source “the consulate of Caesar and Bibulus” (Caesare et Bibulo - 59 BC) instead of “the consulate of [Lucius Julius] Caesar and Figulus” (Caesare et Figulo - 64 years BC.). However, the opposite error could also occur: as the British historian notes, Jerome was often mistaken in dates.

Most likely, Livy came from a wealthy family. The inscription, which may have been the historian's tombstone, mentions the name of his father - Guy. Titus Livy probably received his education in his native city, since the internal conflicts of the 50s and civil wars of the 40s BC. e. prevented education from the best rhetoricians in Rome and made study trips to Greece problematic. There is no evidence of his military service. Plutarch mentions that the augur (bird fortune teller) Gaius Cornelius, who lived in Patavia, allegedly reported Caesar's victory in the battle of Pharsalus before the news about it, was an acquaintance (ancient Greek γνώριμος) of Livy. Most likely, Livy moved to Rome shortly after the end of the civil wars (however, G.S. Knabe believes that the historian arrived in the capital already around 38 BC). It is not known what Livy did in Rome: he never held any positions, but he could afford to live in the capital and study history. G. S. Knabe suggests that his livelihood was provided by the inherited fortune, which he managed to save from expropriations. Ronald Mellor calls him the first professional historian in Rome, since from the beginning of the 20s BC. e. He devoted his whole life to history. He gained fame during his lifetime, and public readings of his works - a novelty of the Augustan era - were always crowded. Pliny the Younger mentions a resident of Gades (modern Cadiz in Spain), who sailed to Rome only to look at the historian[cit. 1]. "History" was not the first work of Titus Livius: he also wrote small works of a philosophical nature (Seneca mentions writings in the form of dialogues and treatises [cit. 2]), but they have not survived. It is assumed that in them Livy spoke from the positions of Stoic philosophers who adapted the teachings of the New Stoa to the present.

In the capital, Livy met Octavian Augustus. Probably, their acquaintance happened due to the education of Livy: the first emperor acted as an active patron of sciences and arts. Tacitus even refers to their relationship as friendship. It is known about the advice of Livy to the future emperor Claudius to study history. He heeded his recommendations, and Suetonius talks about the rather large historical works of the emperor. In addition, in the surviving fragments of the speeches of Claudius, some similarities with the "History" of Livy are found. For mentoring Claudius, Livius could be rewarded. Since during the years when Livy and Augustus met, Claudius lived in the Palatine Palace, the historian must have known the whole family of the emperor. Despite his closeness to the emperor and popularity, Titus Livius was not a "court historiographer". Thanks to Tacitus, it is known that the views of the historian and the emperor on the opposition of Caesar (Octavian's adoptive father) and Gnaeus Pompey did not match. There is no news of Livy's connections with Maecenas, the main patron of the literary talents of his time and the emperor's closest friend. Livy's attitude to the politics of Augustus himself is unclear (see the section "Political Views of Livy").

In total, Livy worked for about 40 years, and did not stop even when he became famous throughout the empire. According to Pliny the Elder, "he had already gained enough fame for himself and could have ended if his rebellious spirit had not found food in labor." According to Jerome of Stridon, Livy died in his native Patavia in 17 AD. e. This date is traditional. Ronald Syme, assuming a mistake of Jerome for five years, suggests 12 AD as the date of death. e. Michael Grant admits that the historian may have died in 7 CE. e. Little is known about Livy's family: there is evidence that two of his sons were also engaged in literary activities (according to another version, his eldest son died in childhood), and his daughter married the rhetor Lucius Magic. Quintilian mentions a letter from Livy to his son, in which the historian advises to focus on the style of Demosthenes and Cicero. In the Middle Ages, a tombstone was discovered in Padua that could indicate the tomb of Livy. It mentioned Titus Livius, son of Gaius, and his wife Cassia Prima, daughter of Sextus.

"History from the founding of the city"

Structure. Name

The most important work of Livy is "History from the founding of the city" in 142 books. Its volume is very large: according to modern estimates, if the entire work had survived to this day, it would have totaled about eight thousand printed pages and two million words. However, only 35 books have been completely or almost completely preserved (for more details on the preservation of Livy's writings, see below). The books are grouped by ten into decades (from the ancient Greek δέκα - ten), as well as by five into half-decades, or pentads (from the ancient Greek πέντε - five). At the beginning of each decade or half-decade, there was usually, but not always, a special introduction. However, it is not known for sure whether this division was introduced by the author himself or whether it appeared later. In addition, Livy's partial departure from the division into five and ten books in describing the history of the late republic can be traced along the periohs. The detailing of the work also changes greatly: the first book covers more than 250 years, and some of the last books describe the events of one year in several books. As possible explanations, versions of varying degrees of detail in the sources and the historian's awareness of greater interest in recent events are offered. It is widely assumed that Livy originally planned to bring the narrative to 43 BC. e., which would be 120 books. According to another version, the hypothesis about the possible end of the "History" in 43 BC. e. corresponds only to structural considerations - division into decades and pentads - but such a chronology was unfavorable for either Livy or Octavian, and therefore it is assumed that Livy's original plans included a description of events up to the end of civil wars in 30 BC. e. or before 27 BC. e. The words of Pliny the Elder (see above) are seen as additional evidence in favor of a more modest original design. In addition, the last 22 books are knocked out of the original division into 5 and 10 books. If the original plan of 120 books is correct, the work must have shown a striking contrast between the civil war era in which this work was undertaken and a glorious past. Livy's extension of the original design in this case is seen as an attempt to show the revival of Rome in the reign of Augustus. It is assumed that Livy could have planned to write 150 books, and the work was thus left unfinished. The reasons for the incompleteness of the work are the death of Livy, a serious illness that forced him to abandon history, as well as a conscious desire not to describe the politicized events of our time.

The generally accepted title of the work "History from the founding of the city" is conditional, since the real title is unknown. Livy himself calls his work "Chronicle" (lat. Annales); however, this may not be a name, but only a characteristic [cit. 3]. Pliny the Elder calls Livy's work "History" (Latin Historiae - a historical work in several books). The title "Ab urbe condita libri" (Books from the founding of the city) occurs only in later manuscripts. Perhaps this name is borrowed from the postscript "The book [number] of Titus Livius from the founding of the city is completed" at the end of each book in the manuscripts. Books 109-116 are sometimes referred to as the "civil war books" (Belli civilis libri). According to G.S. Knabe, the historian's work might not have had a title at all.

Dating

There are different opinions about the time when work on the "History" began. It is traditionally believed that Livy began working on his most important work no earlier than 27 BC. e., which is associated with the version of the compilation of the first book between 27 and 25 BC. e. The prerequisites for dating are as follows: the historian mentions the third closing of the gates of the temple of Janus (29 BC), which symbolized the end of all wars, but does not mention the fourth (25 BC); in addition, he calls the emperor Augustus, and he took this title on January 16, 27 BC. e. However, the use of the term Augustus does not necessarily mean the title of Octavian (it can only be an epithet). In 1940, Jean Bayet suggested that all of the passages in the History that mention Augustus are later insertions, probably made after the first edition of the initial books of the History. Subsequently, his hypothesis was developed by Torrey James Luce. According to his point of view, at least one of the possible insertions, mentioning Augustus, directly contradicts the main text of Livy and therefore was probably inserted later. The arguments he proposes are considered persuasive. Because of these assumptions, a significantly earlier dating of the "History" is possible - up to 31 BC. e. or even the beginning of the 30s BC. e. However, there is no direct confirmation of the existence of two editions of the first books. In 2000, Paul Burton proposed a new argument in favor of early dating - the mention in the first book of the reconstruction of the Great Cloaca by Agrippa: according to the researcher, Livy had in mind a still unfinished work, which allowed him to date the first book of the composition between 33 and 31 BC. e. However, he rejected the testimony of Jean Baye, who came to similar conclusions. According to Walter Scheidel, the features of the description of the results of qualifications in book 3 and in the period of book 59 indicate the creation of these books shortly after the censuses of Augustus in 28 and 8 BC. e. respectively. An indirect argument in support of his hypothesis, the researcher considers the uniformity of the creation of Livy's books - about three per year; otherwise, Livy had to work on the composition at an uneven pace. Despite attempts to make the "History" of Livy ancient, the traditional version about the beginning of work on it in the 20s BC is widespread. e., and the earliest dating of the preface is 28 BC. e.

The third decade is traditionally dated between 24 and 14 BC. e .: in the 28th book, the victory over the Spaniards is mentioned. However, it is not clear which of the two wars Livy meant - the victory of Agrippa over the Cantabra (19 BC) or the campaign of Augustus 27-25 BC. e. Book 59 was written after 18 BC. e.: the law of this year is mentioned (however, the text of this book is lost, and the relevant information is contained only in the perioh). Books that told about the life of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus were written during the life of Augustus: Tacitus preserved the story that the emperor found them biased in favor of this commander, and even called Livy a Pompeian [cit. 4]. Book 121, according to the note to the perioch, appeared after the death of Augustus.

Sources. historical method

Sources of Libya

Like most Roman historians of his time, Livy relied mainly on the writings of his predecessors, and rarely resorts to the study of documents. He names his sources infrequently: usually this happens only when their evidence does not match. In any case, Livy was not interested in researching the truth of the events described and establishing causal relationships. Usually Livy chose the most plausible version of several and followed it. The degree of plausibility of information was determined by him subjectively, about which he said: “Since the matter concerns such ancient events, I will consider it sufficient to recognize as truth what is similar to truth.” If the only source available to Livy reported implausible information, the historian could inform readers about his doubt: “Although the numbers [of the losses of the Romans and Ligurians] given by this writer [Valery Anziatus] do not inspire confidence, because no one can surpass him in exaggerations, nevertheless it is obvious that that it was a great victory. Distrust of the fantastic figures of his predecessors (often, for one Roman soldier killed in battle, there were tens and hundreds of dead opponents), however, remained largely declarative, since Livy often had no alternative sources of information. Livy mentions the destruction of almost all records of the events of early Roman history due to the sack of Rome by the Gauls in 390 BC. e., which could affect his opinion about the unreliability of the information of the annalists. Livy tries not to fall too much under the influence of his sources, often smoothing over the victorious reports of the Roman annalists. However, among modern researchers there is also an opinion about Livy's uncritical perception of the chronicles and writings of his predecessors. Ronald Mellor urges not to judge Livy strictly for his attitude to the sources: seeing one of his tasks as transferring the Roman tradition to the descendants, he even wrote down what he did not agree with. Livy's belief in the existence of cyclic patterns in Roman history, due to which events that happened in antiquity can be repeated, could play a certain role in preserving dubious evidence.

It is traditionally believed that Livy used the works of the annalists Fabius Pictor, Calpurnius Piso, Claudius Quadrigarius, Valerius Anziata, Licinius Macra, Aelius Tubero (it is not clear whether this was Lucius Aelius Tubero or his son Quintus), Cincius Aliment, and also the poet Quinta Ennia. However, they were used to varying degrees: Valerius Anziates and Licinius Macro were probably the most important, Aelius Tubero and Claudius Quadrigarus were less significant. Various researchers come to polar conclusions about Livy's preferences in choosing sources: S. I. Sobolevsky notes that Livy usually preferred to use newer authors, and T. I. Kuznetsova made the opposite observation. At the same time, the facts of using the writings of antiquarians of the 1st century BC are unknown. e. - Varro and Attica. The source of individual fragments of the "History", however, is sometimes recognized as antiquarian writings. Such, for example, is the origin of Livy's passage on the principles of manning the Roman army in book 8. Elizabeth Rawson, who points to this passage, however, recognizes its unique character. According to ancient tradition, Livy rarely names his sources. More often than others, he mentions the annalist Valery Anziat, but most often he does this in order to disagree with his version of events. The frequent mention of Anziatus led G.S. Knabe to suggest that this author was "the most beloved" among all sources. Perhaps the Great Annals, the official chronicle of the Roman Republic, compiled by the pontiffs and published in 123 BC, were also used. e., although sometimes the involvement of this work is denied.

According to Robert Ogilvie, Livy did not have access to documents in the senatorial and priestly archives, since he did not hold any positions. However, V. S. Durov believes that proximity to the emperor could open the door to the state archives for the historian. It is unlikely that a native of an ignoble family from Northern Italy had the opportunity to get acquainted with the archives of ancient Roman families, which contained important documents of those years when members of the family held magistrate positions. However, the collection of all available information was not the main goal of Libya. It is assumed that if Livy nevertheless refers to certain documents, then he probably got acquainted with them through the mediation of the works of other authors. Numerous inscriptions on war trophies, statues, family images of prominent ancestors, as well as records of funeral speeches, he did not trust (see sidebar).

The third, fourth and fifth decades were written under the strong influence of Polybius. Livy himself claimed to have read all the authors who wrote about the period in question. S. I. Sobolevsky considers these words of the Roman historian an exaggeration, and the most important role is assigned to the "History" of Polybius, indicating that he "even directly translated some places from it." M. Albrecht observes the evolution of the author's preferences. In his opinion, for the third decade, Polybius was first used to a limited extent (Caelius Antipater and Valerius Anziatus played the main role, to a lesser extent Claudius Quadrigarus), but towards the end of the decade, his evidence is given more and more often; for the fourth and fifth decades, the widespread use of Polybius is not denied. Ronald Mellor and S. I. Sobolevsky explain the growing use of the Greek author by Livy's gradual realization of his merits only in the process of working on the third decade. Possibly, the "Beginnings" of Cato the Elder were also used, but rarely. Since a significant part of Polybius's work has survived, the descriptions of parallel events by both authors are well studied. Although Livy often retells Polybius in whole fragments, he tried to overcome the preoccupation of the Greek predecessors with events in the Hellenistic states, adding material from Lucius Caelius Antipater and Quintus Claudius Quadrigarius on events in Italy and the western provinces. The dependence on Polybius is especially strong in the details of military campaigns. Along with borrowing facts from the General History of Polybius, Livy was influenced by his reasoning about the origins of the power of the Roman Republic. However, Livy often abbreviates the lengthy descriptions of Polybius if they slow down the pace of the narrative. Despite this, thanks to the creative work of the "History" of the Roman historian, the Greek predecessor is more detailed in describing the war with Hannibal. Compared with the first books of the "History", in the events of the late III - early II centuries BC. e. Livy navigates more freely, and instead of abstract reasoning about the unreliability of sources, he argues with them on the merits. For example, he reproaches Valerius Anziates for distorting the reason for the murder of a noble Gaul by the consul Lucius Flamininus: referring to the speech of Cato the Elder, Livy proves that Flamininus killed the Gallus in order to impress his Carthaginian lover, and not a hetaera.

Non-preserved books of Livy about the events of the end of the II - I centuries BC. e., probably relied on Posidonius, the successor of Polybius, as well as on Sempronius Azellion and Cornelius Sisenna. Most likely, the works of Sallust Crispus, Julius Caesar, Asinius Pollio, memoirs of Cornelius Sulla were involved. It is assumed that in the future Livy was not strongly influenced by one source, as in the case of Polybius, since the situation with the Greek historian could be unique: only Livy praises him, while his opinion is reserved about others. Once Livy also refers to the testimony of the emperor Augustus, reported to him personally [cit. 5]. It is assumed that in order to describe the events of his time, which had not yet been written by other historians, Livy was forced to conduct independent research.

Libya working methods

Titus Livy was not always able to rework sources, which often contradicted each other, in accordance with the needs of his work. Often his role was reduced only to the stylistic finishing of the source material. Among the most striking manifestations of Livy's uncritical attitude to sources are repetitions of the same events and conflicting reports. For example, in book 1 one story is given about the origin of Lake Curtius, in book 7 another, with Livy leaning towards the latter. He also cites different versions of the size of Hannibal's army, which differ five times. Livy sometimes admits serious inaccuracies in geography: for example, the route of Hannibal's army through the Alps is not only unhistorical, but also impossible. He also confused relatives, and sometimes very distant ones. An uncritical attitude to sources was also manifested in Livy's use of various options for dating various events - he mechanically transferred them from his sources, not bothering to bring them to uniformity. Some historical errors were added by Livy himself. The fact is that the historian shared Aristotle's justified conviction for dramatic works in the right of the author to reconstruct the actions of people of the past, based on his own understanding of their character. The right of the historian to similar actions was defended by Cicero. As a result, Livy sometimes invented facts unknown from the sources, but important for the coherence of the narrative.

Such errors led to the fact that, starting from the 19th century, a negative opinion about the abilities of Livy as a historian was established in historiography. Some researchers even admitted that he did not read anything about each period of Roman history except his only source, and he did not pay attention to contradictions between sources in different parts of the work. Only by the end of the 20th century was it possible to compare Livy's methods of work not with modern ideas about the tasks of the historian, but with similar views of the ancient era, which led to a significant improvement in the opinion of the Roman author (see the section "Scientific study of Livy"). Particular attention was paid to Livy's objective difficulties in collecting authentic documents and his desire to analyze the veracity of sources before choosing a reference text. According to Robert Ogilvie, Livy's main method of working with sources was to follow one of the predecessor authors. Although he knew the versions of other authors, he did not always resolve the contradictions between them. As an example of the analysis of discrepancies, the researcher cites a fragment of book 4, in which Livy completes the presentation of contradictory information about the magistrates of 434 BC. e. with the following words: “Let this, with what remains hidden by the cloak of antiquity, go into the unknown.” Ronald Mellor takes a different view. He suggests that before starting work on each major fragment of the work, Livy studied the main works of predecessors throughout the period, after which he considered the structure and main themes of the future work. Then, according to the researcher, a close study of the sources for the events of one year or one book followed, when the main source was chosen. Finally, Livy rewrote the materials of his main source in an elegant style, clarifying certain controversial issues in the process. The researcher defends Livy's methods of work with the argument that a detailed study of all the numerous contradictions between sources would make it impossible to complete a work of this magnitude. The accuracy of his composition was adversely affected by the frequent work with sources from memory.

Although the "History" as a whole is characterized by the shortcomings described above, in a number of cases Livy subjected the sources to critical analysis, as far as it was permissible in the historical work of his time. Often he voiced his doubts if the source offered an unlikely version of events, and also pointed out differences of opinion. In addition, Ronald Mellor notes that, compared with a more detailed contemporary Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Livy is not fond of repeating obviously fantastic traditions, and he includes the most common ones in the narrative only because of their popularity. He completely omits some of the well-known myths, presenting instead (or together with them) rationalistic interpretations. For example, he first tells the legend that the babies Romulus and Remus were fed by a she-wolf, and then tells another version - that the foster mother of the brothers, Larentia, “was called among the shepherds“ a she-wolf “because she gave herself to anyone” (in Latin, “she-wolf” and “ prostitute" are homonyms, and are spelled lupa). Speaking about the conception of Romulus and Remus by a virgin vestal, Livy omits the legend known to his sources (Ennius and Fabius Pictor) about the appearance of the god Mars, disguised in a cloud.

Style

Language Features

Like most other ancient historians, Livy attached great importance to the stylistic design of the material. According to M. L. Gasparov, a single stylistic finish, corresponding to the tastes of the public during the reign of Augustus, is one of the main differences between the work of Livy and the works of the Annalist predecessors. Livy's style differs markedly from his predecessor historians, which marks a break with both the original Roman annalistic tradition and the recently emerged artificial archaization of style popularized by Sallust. Ronald Mellor believes that the Romans often associated the stylistic attitudes of authors with their political views, and this identification could have influenced Livy to develop his own style, different from his predecessor historians. It is traditionally believed that in the field of style, Livy managed to realize the ideas of Cicero, who regretted the absence of authors among the Romans who could give a worthy answer to the great Greek historians - Herodotus, Thucydides, Xenophon. Echoes of Cicero's style appear, in particular, in thoughtful periods of speech modeled on the great orator. The influence of Caesar is also found, although Livy did not agree with his emphasized minimalist vocabulary. For various reasons (giant volume, duration of creation, heterogeneity of material), Livy's style does not have the integrity inherent, for example, in Sallust and Tacitus. Depending on the situation, Livy's style changes. He also has a craving for experiments (in particular, with the syntax of the Latin language).

The characteristic features of Livy's style appear already at the very beginning of the composition, however, by the third or fifth decades, some features of his language change. In particular, the -erunt perfect form is becoming more common than the -ere form, which was considered archaic and poetic. In the first decade, verbs with the ending -ere are used in the third person plural of the perfect in 54.7% of cases, in the third decade - in 25.7%, in the fourth - in 13.5%, in the first half of the fifth - in only 10, 1% of cases. Comparatively rare, archaic and refined words are gradually replaced by more common ones, although archaisms (for example, duellum instead of bellum, tempestas instead of tempus) do not completely disappear and are found in fragments of recent books. Changes in the choice of vocabulary are noticeable even when comparing the two earliest pentads - books 1-5 and 6-10: a number of words (proles, infit, miris modis) are used only in the very first books. In the speech of the historian, many words and expressions are found that are unknown in previous literature or are known only in archaic Latin. However, the preservation of Latin literature before Livy is very fragmentary, and it is problematic to draw conclusions about the peculiarities of the use of individual words. Often Livy uses poeticisms. For example, instead of fulmina (“lightning”), Livy often uses ignes (the more common meaning is “fires”), instead of cupiditas - cupido (“passion”, “greed”). There are also elements of conversational style.

The tinge of antiquity inherent in the first book is sometimes explained by the use of the early Roman poet Ennius as an important source. Robert Ogilvy suggested that the difference in style between the early and later books is due to the particularly careful stylistic treatment of the first books, compared to which the intensity of stylistic processing of speeches decreases. He considered this an idea of ​​Livy: in his opinion, the Roman historian understood the differences between the speech of the Romans of antiquity and modernity, and therefore in later books he more often resorted to well-known speech techniques, close to the speeches of speakers of the 1st century BC. e. According to other versions, the change in style could be the result of the natural evolution of Livy as an author, followed by a revision of the manner of writing, or a response to a change in the content of the work: in the first books, the author recounted numerous legends and traditions from early Roman history, which could affect the deliberate choice of outdated vocabulary.

Presentation Features

Like the annalistic historians of the previous era, Livy usually began the account of the events of each year with a list of the magistrates who took office, the distribution of provinces, and a description of the reception of embassies. At the end of the description of the events of the year, the election of magistrates for the following year, the decisions of the pontiffs, and other events are usually reported. However, the historian often deviates from the strict structure of the annalists.

Sometimes Livy is too verbose, which even ancient authors paid attention to. Quintilian cites the following phrase of the historian as an example: "The ambassadors, having not achieved peace, came home from where they came." He also contrasts the "milky abundance" of Livy with the pronounced brevity of Sallust. Like Sallust, Livy often breaks the symmetry of sentences. In particular, he uses different turns in the same situations in one sentence: “equitum partem ad populandum ... dimisit et ut palantes exciperent” - “... he sent out part of the cavalry to devastate [the country] and in order to catch scattered [enemies] ". Often the main idea of ​​a historian is expressed in a subordinate clause.

In general, the narrative of Livy is sometimes monotonous, and the descriptions of battles (especially the most ancient ones) are often similar. The historian often resorts to using the same images. “Crying children, wives who, with cries of despair, rush to their husbands and sons, fallen temples of the gods, desecrated graves of their ancestors,” S. I. Sobolevsky sums up the usual methods of Livy. The historian actively introduces dramatic elements into his work - for example, speeches (the speeches of the most ancient figures are considered fictional), of which 407 are contained in the surviving books. The most striking of them are the speeches of Camillus against the resettlement of the Romans in Veii, two pairs of speeches by Hannibal and Scipio, as well as a couple speeches of Cato and Lucius Valerius during the discussion of the Law of Oppius. Livy often resorts to the methods of "tragic" historiography, trying to impress the reader and arouse compassion in him. Regularly there are words indicating a sequence of events (primo, deinde, tandem - "first", "then", "finally"). The turning points of the story are traced very clearly in Livy. The unexpectedness of the denouement or the sudden change of the situation is often emphasized. The historian's favorite word in such situations is repente ("suddenly", "suddenly"):

Hoping to take this fortress by force, Hannibal set out, taking with him cavalry and light infantry; and since he secretly saw the main guarantee of the success of the enterprise, the attack was carried out at night. Nevertheless, he did not manage to deceive the guards, and suddenly such a cry was raised that it could be heard even in Placentia (XXI, 57; translated by F. F. Zelinsky).

Shouting out these words, he ordered the banners to be taken as soon as possible, and he himself jumped on the horse; the horse suddenly fell, and the consul flew over her head (XXII, 3; translated by M. E. Sergeenko).

Some writers report that a real battle was given: the Punians were driven to the very camp at the first fight, but they suddenly made a sortie, and now fear seized the Romans. But then the Samnite Decimius Numerius intervened, and the battle resumed (XXII, 24; translated by M. E. Sergeenko).

Livy is characterized by the presence of thoughtful periods in speech, but compared to his model - Cicero - they are heavier and longer. Perhaps the difference is due to Cicero's orientation towards reading works aloud, while the "History" was intended primarily for reading to oneself.

Livy skillfully added small episodes that complemented the narrative well. Giving the narrative an emotional coloring, he skillfully created dramatic episodes both at the macro and micro levels. The structure of individual episodes is carefully thought out for the sake of achieving internal unity, and the presentation is usually not overloaded with unimportant details. Since readers knew how, for example, the Second Punic War ended, after the major defeats of the Romans, Livy points out some details that will become the reasons for future victories. Sometimes Livy mentions characters from future books - for example, Scipio when describing the very beginning of the Second Punic War.

The psychological characteristics of the characters, important for Livy, are realized by him through the description of their thoughts and feelings, through the speeches and reactions of opponents. An extended portrait of a man is often given by Livy when describing his death. There are characteristics at the first mention and at important moments of a career, sometimes more than once: for example, the most significant touches to the portrait of Hannibal are given in books 21 and 28, and the characterization of Scipio Africanus is made up of several brief descriptions in books 21-22 and a detailed portrait in book 26.

Deviations from the main line of the narrative are conditionally divided into two main groups - the historian's remarks about contradictions in the sources and dry reports about the deaths of magistrates and priests, the founding of temples, prodigies, the facts of famine and epidemics. Sometimes Livy expresses his own thoughts about important events, which are often moralistic in nature, but do not impose his point of view on the reader.

Livy achieves expressiveness of presentation with the help of a number of rhetorical devices. Livy's favorite tropes are metaphor ("totam plebem aere alieno demersam esse" - "the plebs drowned in debt"), hyperbole, metonymy. The main figures are chiasmus, anaphora, asyndeton, alliteration (for example, “... quorum robora ac vires vix sustinere vis ulla possit” - “[there is no such force] that could withstand their powerful pressure”, the consonance is lost in translation). According to S. I. Sobolevsky, anaphora is used more often than others, but in general there are relatively few figures in the History. T. I. Kuznetsova connects the reasonable use of rhetorical devices with the developed sense of proportion of the author. At the level of syntax, Livy makes frequent use of parataxis and often resorts to the tricolon, a group of three similar expressions, often of increasing length: "tunc adgredi Larisam constituit ratus vel terrore... vel beneficio... vel exemplo" ("they should have been affected by or fear<...>, or the blessing of the king<...>, or, finally, the example of [so many subdued communities]), sometimes limited to only two elements. He also uses a hyperbaton, breaking the usual order of the members of the sentence: “Aetolique et Athamanes in suos receperunt se fines” (“The Aetolians and Afamans returned to themselves” in the translation of S. A. Ivanov; literally - “... they returned to their borders” ). In some cases, Livy has parallelism of parts of the phrase: for example, “I prefer that a smart enemy be afraid of me than to be praised by stupid fellow citizens” (“malo, te sapiens hostis metuat, quam stulti cives laudent”).

According to ancient tradition, the "History" of Livy includes the speeches of various characters. In the part of the "History" that has survived to this day, there are 407 of them, and they occupy about 12% of the text. The style of the carefully constructed speeches of the heroes of Livy was highly valued in ancient times: they were praised by Quintilian and Suetonius. At the same time, the style of speeches and the main composition are slightly different, since, in addition to the differences in public speaking, the use of obsolete words was expected in the speeches of ancient characters. If Livy's source (for example, Polybius) composed or reproduced a version of a certain speech, then Livy significantly rewrites it, and from the point of view of style, Livy's version often looks preferable. Speeches play a certain role in the structure of the composition. The paired speeches of the two Scipios (father and son, respectively) and Hannibal in books 21 and 30 set the framework for the entire third decade of the work. In addition to the psychological characteristics of the characters (see above), speeches help to better reveal the political or military situation at the time of delivery and explain the political views of the character and his opponents. All or almost all of the speeches of the characters in the History (at least in the surviving books of his work) are certainly fictitious. As I. M. Tronsky notes, the thoughts and feelings expressed in speeches are more characteristic of the end of the 1st century BC. e., than for previous centuries. N. F. Deratani states that elegant speeches, built according to all the canons of oratory, are delivered "even by poorly educated senators and commanders."

Libya's views

Historical views of Libya

Starting to write the "History", Livy intended to create a complete picture of the past, and not limit himself to retelling the works of his predecessors. Despite the large-scale nature of the idea, the Roman author was able to consider the past from a unified standpoint. An important element of the historical concept of Titus Livy is the theory of the decline of morals, which Roman historians borrowed from the Greeks. This theory was most developed in Rome in the writings of Gaius Sallust Crispus, who had a significant impact on Roman historiography. Even in the ancient era, Livy and Sallust were compared with the classics of Greek historiography Herodotus and Thucydides. Livy was compared with Herodotus, the author of the fascinating "History", and Sallust was a pair of serious analyst Thucydides, despite the opposite sequence of activities of Greek and Roman authors. However, despite the chronological and - partly - ideological proximity, Livy did not make the writings of Sallust a model and did not follow the basic principles of the study of history, which were developed by his predecessor. According to A. I. Nemirovsky, Livy's departure from the historical developments of Sallust was caused by the fall of the Roman Republic and, as a result, the loss of independence in thoughts and actions.

Sharing the well-known saying of Cicero (historia est magistra vitae: "History is the teacher of life"), Livy considered history a means of education. At the same time, researchers differently understand the meaning of the examples (exempla) of Livy, about which he wrote in the introduction to the first book. For example, V. S. Durov understands the words of the Roman historian as a statement of the importance of history for future generations. Ronald Mellor, on the other hand, not only focuses on Livy's call to readers to choose an example to follow, but also sees intentional parallels between the past and the present (for example, between Tarquinius the Proud and Catiline). At the turn of the 20th-21st centuries, new interpretations of this fragment appeared, revealing the relationship between the examples of Livy with the ideology and politics of Augustus and considering the effectiveness of using examples on the material of the actions of the Romans. Examples began to be considered not as auxiliary tools for the historian to reveal the situation and character of the characters, but as independent structural elements of the narrative with a clearly expressed moral content (in this case, examples are found not only in the direct speech of the characters, but also in the main narrative).

There is a version that the evolution of the moral state of the Romans was seen by Livy as a more complex process than a mechanical movement from highly spiritual antiquity to depraved modernity. As a result, it is assumed that Livy fully shared the cyclical view of historical development, although this assumption is not often found in modern studies. A supporter of this point of view, Bernard Mineo (Fr. Bernard Mineo) finds in the "History" two pronounced cycles of Roman history of approximately the same length (360-365 years), which do not coincide with the traditional division of Roman history before the establishment of the principate into royal and republican periods. The French researcher connects the beginning of the first cycle with the foundation of the city by Romulus, its apogee with the reign of Servius Tullius, after which a gradual decline follows. He sees the turning point in Roman history in the invasion of the Gauls in 390 BC. e. and the activities of Marcus Furius Camillus, whom Livy presented as the second “founder” of Rome, that is, a figure equivalent to Romulus (researchers have noticed the artificial glorification of Camillus before). Then the second cycle begins, which reached its climax under Scipio Africanus, followed by a new decline and metaphorical plunder during the years of civil wars, stopped by the third "founder" of Rome, Octavian Augustus. The main criterion for development and regression for Livy is not only and not so much the state of public morality, but dominance in a society of harmony (concordia) or discord (discordia). However, such a division is not generally accepted: for example, V.S. Durov finds in the work of Livy only one historical cycle, characterized by a gradual decline in morality and culminating in the reform activities of Octavian Augustus.

Political views of Libya

It is assumed that Livy did not hold any public positions, which distinguished him from other Roman historians (Sallust was the proconsul of Africa, Asinius Pollio was a consul, Licinius Macro was an active plebeian tribune). In addition, Livy does not explicitly state his political convictions anywhere, limiting himself only to general words about the importance of freedom, peace and unity. As a result, various modern researchers come to opposite conclusions about the political views of the historian: he is credited with clear republican sympathies, and a moderately conservative pro-Senate orientation, and the complete acceptance of the principate. The reason for the disagreement is considered to be the contradiction between the facts from his biography and the opinions expressed in the "History" - for example, his words "we cannot bear our vices, nor the medicine for them" are considered a clear allusion to the policy of Augustus, but it is reliably known about the closeness of the historian to the emperor. Conclusions about the political views of Livy are sometimes made on the basis of the epithet "Pompeian", which Octavian Augustus called the historian who praised the activities of Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus[cit. 4]. In describing the events of the late Republican era, Livy highly appreciated not only Pompey, but also Mark Junius Brutus and Gaius Cassius Longinus. All this could be regarded as a manifestation of oppositional sentiments: Pompey was an opponent of Caesar - the posthumously deified adoptive father of Augustus - in the civil war, and Brutus and Longinus were the killers of the dictator. Moreover, Seneca left such a testimony: “As many people said about Caesar’s father, and Titus Livy fixed it in writing, it’s impossible to decide what was better for the state - to give birth to a son or not.”

There are different opinions about Livy's attitude to the policy of Octavian Augustus. According to one version, Livy could be a sincere supporter of the program of Augustus, and the historian's praise of Roman antiquity could influence the mass restoration of temples and the revival of ancient rituals by the emperor. The origin of Livy from those conservative-minded layers from the periphery of Italy, on which Octavian Augustus relied during his reign, is also noted. However, in modern historiography, the opposite opinion is also expressed - about the skeptical attitude of the Padua historian to the policy of the first emperor. According to this view, the last books of Livy's work were filled with skepticism about Augustus' policies, and the delay in their publication was solely due to the historian's desire to wait for Augustus' death in order to publish them without fear of censorship. Ronald Mellor concedes that Livy's views may have changed from initial support to disappointment at the usurpation of power instead of the expected restoration of the republic. However, he sees in the late publication of the last books of the History not a manifestation of fear, but of respect, and believes that they were not too seditious. Robert Ogilvy tends to recognize Livy as a politically neutral historian: according to his observations, in the surviving parts of the History there are no attacks on the policies of Augustus, no attempts to justify him, but only general ideas of striving for peace, stability, and freedom. Since the second half of the 20th century, attempts have been made to prove the early creation of the first books of the History, which suggests not the influence of the policy of Augustus on the writing of Livy, but the reverse process.

There is also no consensus on the question of whether Livy planned to influence the political life of the state in general and the development of political decisions by the emperor and his entourage in particular with his essay. According to Robert Ogilvy, the historian did not set any political goals, and in the "History" there are no attacks on Augustus, no justifications for his policies, but only general ideas of striving for peace, stability, and freedom. On the contrary, Hans Petersen saw in the "History" messages addressed to the emperor, conceived as a warning against the establishment of a one-man monarchy. A. I. Nemirovsky sees already at the very beginning of the “History” an attempt by Livy to comprehend the present and express his attitude to the events of his time through a description of antiquity, and also discovers a veiled, but recognizable for contemporaries, description of Octavian Augustus in the story about the peacemaker king Numa Pompilius. Ronald Mellor admits that Livy could partly influence some of the emperor's decisions - in particular, the program for the reconstruction of ancient temples and the revival of ancient religious rituals.

The historian appears as a champion of people's rights and freedoms, but opposes the power of the mob. At the same time, according to A. I. Nemirovsky, Livy understands freedom primarily as “obedience to the laws of the republic and the customs of the ancestors.” Rather, he has a negative attitude towards the plebeians and the activities of the people's tribunes. In the image of Livy, the Roman people often resist the ideas of their leaders, which hinders the development of the state. Despite the stated intention to describe “the deeds of the Roman people,” the people as an independent subject of political life appear very rarely in the pages of the History. As a rule, ordinary Romans are depicted as ordinary spectators of unfolding events, who are usually immersed in internal conflicts and forget about them only in the face of an external threat. According to N. F. Deratani, the historian does not write the history of the Roman people, but of the Roman aristocracy, which eloquently testifies to his sympathies. The Roman people "occupies a third place in the work of Livy," A. I. Nemirovsky agrees. The historian is often biased towards politicians who fought against the dominance of the nobility and relied on the people in their activities: for example, Gaius Flaminius and Terentius Varro are blamed for military failures, and their opponents are portrayed in a favorable light. At the same time, Titus Livius notes the negative aspects of the patricians and the nobility and the positive ones of the plebeians. Unfounded accusations against the Roman plebs are also rare: usually the historian recognizes the unfair treatment of the aristocracy with the people and reports on the causes of the contradictions that arise.

The ideal for him is the observance of the laws and customs of the ancestors by all citizens, as well as the priority of public interests over personal ones. According to G. S. Knabe, the historian considered civil wars to be the greatest evil for the Roman state.

His attitude towards sole power is mixed. So, at first he justifies the royal power, but in the assessment of Tarquinius the Proud, he emphasizes the tyrannical nature of his reign. Although the last books of the History have not survived, it is assumed that the actions of Augustus were judged by the historian without much flattery to his patron.

Libya's attitude towards other peoples

Titus Livy idealizes the Romans in every possible way and is biased towards other peoples. The author's focus on Roman history was expressed in the abandonment of attempts to write a general history and, as a result, other peoples appear on the pages of the "History" only through their contacts with the Romans. Unlike Herodotus, who was keenly interested in foreign customs, Livy usually mentions only those elements of the material and spiritual culture of other peoples that the Romans adopted and adapted. In the speeches of the characters in the History, ideas about the exclusivity of the Romans and their superiority over other peoples are repeatedly expressed.

Since Livy adhered to the widespread theory of the "decline of morals", the traditional features of the Roman national character are most clearly manifested in the description of early Roman history. Various characters in his image have an unequal set of features of a primordially Roman character. The ideal Roman is “a stern, courageous warrior and patriot, a pious, proud, sensible citizen, distinguished by a modest lifestyle, seriousness, generosity, the ability to obey discipline and the ability to lead,” summarizes T. I. Kuznetsova. According to Livy, traditional values ​​began to be gradually forgotten under the influence of foreign customs that penetrated into Rome as a result of the conquests. However, the last books of the "History", in which the theme of "decline in morals" stated in the introduction should have been disclosed in detail, have not been preserved.

The historian contrasts the idealized qualities of the Romans with the depravity of other peoples. Livy portrayed the Carthaginians as treacherous, cruel, boastful, arrogant (because of these qualities they are the antipodes of the Romans), and their Numidian allies as unreliable. The historian describes the Gauls as frivolous, impatient, arrogant, savage, the Etruscans as treacherous, and through the mouth of one of the commanders calls the Syrians more like slaves than warriors. The Greeks as a whole are shown as frivolous, and the Aetolians, often mentioned in the fourth decade of the History, are undisciplined and unfaithful.

The historian explains the victories of the Romans over them by the corrupted morals of other peoples. At the same time, the soldiers of the opponents of Rome can also be portrayed positively, but in this case, the recognition of their valor only emphasizes the merits of the victorious Romans. Nevertheless, Livy notes those positive qualities of Rome's opponents (for example, the Sabines and Hannibal personally) that coincided with traditional Roman prowess. Facts that could reveal the negative character traits of the Romans, Livy is often hushed up or presented in a less unfavorable light. Often, the unsightly actions of the Romans are portrayed as the initiative of individuals who act against the will of the gods, obeying only their own passions.

Livy consistently justifies the foreign policy of Rome, up to a clear distortion of reality. In his depiction, wars always start because of the actions of the Romans' opponents. The defeats of the Roman troops are usually caused by circumstances beyond their control. However, this trend was characteristic of many ancient historians. In addition, it is assumed that Livy could only mechanically borrow all interpretations of the beginning of wars from predecessor historians. However, Livy recognizes the cruelty of the Romans towards the conquered peoples. So, he condemns the plundering of conquered Greece by the Romans, does not hide the facts of the destruction of cities, does not keep silent about the protests of the local population against the new government, although he tries to convince readers that in the end the Romans and the conquered peoples came to an agreement.

Religious views Libya

Religion is given a significant place in the work of Livy. The historian defends the belief that the gods participate in earthly affairs, help the pious and hinder the unrighteous. In doing so, they do not descend from the sky and do not intervene directly, but help by providing an opportunity for victory. According to the historian, the gods especially patronize the Roman people. At the same time, neglect of the gods can turn out to be the cause of many disasters for the Romans. He considers religion the foundation of public morality, recognizes the existence of free will, because of which people are responsible to the gods for their actions. For Livy, it is very important whether the politicians and commanders he describes acted in accordance with supernatural signs (see below) or neglected them. Beginning in the third decade, Livy's attention to religious issues began to decline - perhaps due to a close study of the rationalistic Polybius. However, Plutarch retells the story of a fortuneteller who learned about the outcome of the Battle of Pharsalus in 48 BC. e. on the flight of birds, with reference to the last, non-preserved books of Livy.

The religious views of the historian himself are assessed differently: he is credited with both rational skepticism and unshakable faith in the Roman gods. As S. I. Sobolevsky notes, it is unlikely that Livy shared all the supernatural beliefs that he wrote about, and his religious ideas at least differed from those of the people. AI Nemirovsky believes that the religious views of the Roman historian were formed under the influence of the cult of the emperor gradually introduced by Octavian Augustus. Livy, the researcher suggests, treated religion as a time-honored way to appease the Romans. At the same time, along with demonstrating the importance of religion for Roman society, Livy critically rethinks a number of provisions of the mythologized early history of Rome. The tendency to report counterarguments immediately after a story of miracles and legends without a final conclusion may be inspired by the philosophical skepticism that was popular in those years, which recommended refraining from categorical judgments, or by the desire to leave the decision of a controversial issue to the reader's discretion.

Opinions are often expressed about the influence of the philosophy of stoicism on Libya. Michael von Albrecht suggests that the historian was only familiar with this doctrine, and it is impossible to attribute it to the Stoics because of considering not impersonal rock, but man, as the creator of history. Other researchers, on the contrary, find in the "History" a consistently held idea about the decisive role of the all-powerful fate or providence - an idea that is characteristic of the Stoics. According to Patrick Walsh, Livy's closeness to the ideas of Stoicism is most noticeable in the use of the terms "fate" (fatum) and "fortune" (fortuna) in their Stoic sense. His Stoic convictions may have been all the stronger because the Stoicism that developed in Greece was in good agreement with the principles of traditional Roman religion. At the same time, it is noted that the Stoics themselves were partly split on some issues: in particular, Posidonius defended the significance of supernatural signs as an expression of the will of the gods, while Panetius denied it. Livy in this matter joined the point of view of Posidonius.

Livy writes down all the miraculous signs (prodigia), considering them to be a manifestation of the will of the gods. Most of them are contained in the description of events after 249 BC. e., when the Roman pontiffs began to enter all information about prodigia into the state chronicle. The heightened interest in supernatural phenomena of the historian, who repeatedly doubted the veracity of a number of myths and legends (see above), is associated with the belief that divine will is realized through signs. However, sometimes Livy doubts the truth of miracles and prodigies.

"Patavinitas"

Gaius Asinius Pollio once said that Livy is distinguished by patavinitas ("Padua", from the name of the historian's hometown). The meaning of this word is not exactly known, and there are currently several different interpretations of this statement. According to one version, it was about "Paduanisms" in his work, that is, about the words and turns characteristic of provincial speech in Patavia. Pollio may also have had in mind the rich or sublime style of the History. There is also a version about Pollio's allusion to the moral qualities of Livy himself: the inhabitants of Patavia in the Roman era were reputed to be adherents of strict moral principles. A version is also proposed about Pollio's hint at the narrowness of thinking of a provincial.

Preservation of compositions

Of the 142 books of the History, 35 have survived to this day: books 1-10 about the events from the mythical arrival of Aeneas in Italy to 292 BC. e. and books 21-45 on events from the Second Punic War to 167 BC. e. In addition, book 91 about the war with Sertorius has partially survived.

Various reasons are given for why Livy's work has not survived in its entirety, despite its enormous popularity in antiquity. The huge amount of work involved in transcribing was costly and, as a result, each complete copy had to cost a fortune. Other factors also influenced the preservation of this work. In the VI century, Pope Gregory I ordered to burn all the books of the historian for numerous stories about "idol superstition."

Numerous abridgements of Livy's work, made in the Late Antiquity, have also survived to this day. The first such extract from the work of Livy was compiled already in the 1st century AD. e .: Martial mentions him. The most famous of the surviving epitomators (from ancient Greek ἐπιτομή - reduction, extraction, summary) Livia - Granius Licinianus, Eutropius, Festus, Paul Orosius. Also known is a papyrus by an unknown author of the 3rd - early 4th century with an outline of Roman history for 150-137 BC. e. There were also thematic extracts: Lucius Annaeus Florus concentrated on describing wars, Julius Obsequent on supernatural events and signs, ideas about which played a significant role in the public life of Rome; Cassiodorus borrowed lists of consuls from Livy. However, these extracts could be compiled on the basis not of the original work, but of some intermediate abbreviation (possibly mentioned by Martial). To navigate through the enormous work of Livy, periochs (ancient Greek περιοχή - extract from the text, excerpt) were compiled - a short, usually in a few lines, listing of the main events, which were described in detail in each book. The periohs have survived to this day in their entirety, with the exception of extracts from books 136 and 137. Finally, separate extracts from various ancient authors have been preserved.

Livy's other writings have not survived.

Manuscripts

The large volume of the "History" led to the fact that in the Middle Ages, different parts of the work (as a rule, decades) were preserved and copied separately, which predetermined their different fate.

The first decade survived thanks to copies of the 9th-11th centuries, which date back to the only missing manuscript, edited at the end of the 4th - beginning of the 5th century (see below) and known as "Simmakhov" or "Nicomachean" (symbol - ""). Taking into account the late medieval copies made shortly before the invention of printing (lat. recentiores), the total number of manuscripts of the first decade exceeds 200. For a long time, the manuscripts were divided into "Italian" and "Gallic", but by the end of the 20th century they were divided into three groups - "μ " (mu), "Λ" (lambda), "Π" (pi). The first group is represented only by the Mediceus manuscript (symbol - “M”), created in northern Italy in the middle of the 10th century, and the now lost manuscript Vormaciensis (name given due to discovery in the Worms Cathedral; symbol - “Vo”), part of the discrepancies which, along with other manuscripts, were recorded by philologists of the 16th century. Two Late Antique fragments are of particular interest - a short fragment of book 1 in a papyrus of the 4th-5th centuries found in Oxyrynchus, and fragments of books 3-6 in the Verona palimpsest No. XL of the 4th-5th centuries (symbol - "V"), which was discovered by Charles Blume in 1827 and published by Theodor Mommsen in 1868. In the last text, for all its brevity, several discrepancies were found with all other known manuscripts.

The third decade has come down to us thanks to more than 170 manuscripts, which are divided into two main groups - firstly, the Puteanus Paris manuscript. lat. 5730 ("P") and its numerous copies, secondly, manuscripts copied from the lost codex Spirensis. The first group is conventionally called "Putean" after the Latinized version of the last name of the humanist Claude Dupuy - "Puteanus", the second group - "Speyer" (Spirensis) because of the Speyer Cathedral, in which the most famous manuscript of this group was found. The manuscripts of the first group contain books from 21 to 30, and the manuscripts of the second group contain books 26-30, as well as the fourth decade of the "History". The manuscript "P" was written in the 5th century in an uncial script, which later fell into disuse, which predetermined numerous errors in its copying in the Middle Ages. In the thousand years that passed before the invention of printing, the condition of this manuscript deteriorated significantly, and some pages, especially at the very beginning and end, were lost. The first known copies - made in Tour Vaticanus Reginensis 762 (or Romanus, "R") of the early 9th century and made in Corby or Tour Mediceus of the late 9th century ("M") - are also not very well preserved, and for the reconstruction of the original text (especially the first and last pages, subsequently lost in the original manuscript), the 11th-century manuscript Parisinus Colbertinus ("C"), made in Cluny, is more valuable. All other copies in the "Putean" group were made with "R". At the beginning of the 14th century, on the basis of a copy of this group, the manuscript Aginnensis (“A”) was created, in the creation of which, according to the theory of Giuseppe Billanovic, Petrarch actively participated. In addition to the third decade, the first and fourth decades of the History were included in this manuscript, and the text was amended, which Billanovic attributed to Petrarch. Subsequently, the greatest philologist of his time, Lorenzo Valla, also made corrections to this manuscript. Although the hypothesis of the serious contribution of Petrarch has become widespread, at present his contribution has been revised towards a serious reduction - the main work was done by his predecessors. The original source of the manuscripts of the "Speyer" group is unknown. For a long time, it was considered to be a manuscript found by Beat Renan in the Speyer Cathedral and soon lost: only two sheets were preserved, which made it possible to date it to the 11th century, and to consider Italy as the most likely place of creation. Another possible source for this tradition is sometimes thought to be the Taurinensis palimpsest (named after the Latinized name for Turin, symbol "Ta") with fragments of books 27 and 29, the manuscript of which was lost in a fire in 1904. The original document was made in the 5th century and, for most of the discrepancies, it coincided with the manuscripts of the "Speyer" group. However, since the end of the 20th century, "Ta" is sometimes referred to as an independent tradition that did not leave medieval copies. Of interest for the reconstruction of the original text is also the manuscript "H", created already in the 15th century, but in a number of reading options it differs from other manuscripts of the "Speyer" group.

The fourth decade has survived through several manuscripts of various origins. The vast majority of manuscripts (about a hundred) containing the text of the fourth decade have two significant lacunae - they omit book 33 and the end of book 40. The missing text was restored only by the 17th century from two manuscripts copied from other originals. The first source for the reconstruction of the missing text was a manuscript found in the Mainz Cathedral (Moguntinus), which was lost shortly after the publication of its text. The second source was a fragmentarily preserved uncial manuscript (Bambergensis Class. 35a), created in the 5th century and known to have been acquired in Piacenza by Emperor Otto III. Two copies were made of this manuscript before the ancient manuscript was used for household purposes - two of its fragments were used to bind another book. In 1906, scattered fragments of a manuscript of book 34 of the 4th-5th centuries were found in the Lateran Basilica in Rome.

The fifth decade is preserved by a single manuscript Vindobonensis Lat. 15, dating back to the beginning of the 5th century and discovered only in 1527 in the monastery of Lorsch by Simon Griney. The monastery, presumably, acquired this manuscript during the heyday of the "Carolingian Renaissance", but it was forgotten for a long time. After the discovery, the manuscript was transported to Vienna, although several sheets had been lost by this time, and their contents are restored only from the text printed by Greeney. The text of the manuscript is quite difficult to read and leaves room for interpretation, which is aggravated by the mediocre preservation of the 1500-year-old document and the scribe's errors - it is assumed that he did not always correctly parse the cursive handwriting in the original manuscript.

Finally, a significant fragment of book 91 has been preserved thanks to a palimpsest in a manuscript of Vaticanus Palatinus lat. 24. It was discovered in 1772; later, in the same manuscript, fragments of the works of Seneca were found, which at first were mistaken for the lost writings of Cicero. The period of the History is best preserved in the Heidelberg manuscript of the 11th century.

The search for manuscripts of ancient writers, characteristic of humanists, also extended to Livy - the numerous successes of lovers of antiquity made it possible to hope for the discovery of the missing books of his composition, since the scale of the History was known from the reviews of ancient writers. The immediate predecessor of the humanists Lovato Lovati, who was keenly interested in antiquity, was actively looking for books by Livy. Petrarch regretted the loss of the second decade. It is known that he purposefully searched for the manuscripts of Livy and Coluccio Salutati. The search for humanists was fueled by circulating rumors: it was rumored that in a monastery near Lübeck (perhaps it was Cismar) the full text of the History was preserved, and a certain Dane, having arrived in Italy, claimed that he had seen manuscripts of ten decades of the History in Sorø. All these rumors were not confirmed. Desperate to find the second decade of the History, Leonardo Bruni compiled his own history of the First Punic War in Latin.

Despite the efforts of connoisseurs of antiquity to search for manuscripts of the lost parts of the "History", the finds are very rare and often are copies of already known manuscripts - such, for example, was found in Marburg in the archives of the former Principality of Waldeck with fragments of the first decade. Manuscripts of lost books are usually very ancient and small in size, like a small fragment of book 11 found by a Polish archaeological expedition in an ancient Coptic monastery in 1986.

Roman historian Titus Livius (Titus Livius), years of life 59 - 17 years. BC. Born into a wealthy family in Patavum (Padua), Italy. This place became famous for the fact that Shakespeare's immortal work was written here. The Taming of the Shrew«.

Around 38 BC he comes to Rome and starts work, at the age of about 27 years. Writing the history of the empire took up most of Livy's life: there was no time left either for the completion of magistracy or for social activities.

The historian Livy lived here for 76 years, which was enough to write the 300-page book "From the Foundation of the City" ("Ab Urbe Condita"). It took 40 years to write it. 142 volumes describe 770 years of Roman history. Many of them were lost, but 35 books were saved: i-x, xxi-xlv.

They contain events from the beginning of the wars that preceded the founding of the city, around 753 BC. Until the period of the collapse of a powerful state in 9 BC. Books are ordered by decade, there are three of them:

• Machiavelli, first decade of Titus Livius;
• third decade;
• fourth decade;
• The first penctad of the fifth book.

Livy conducts the chronology according to the pontifical (religious) calendar, as well as the dates officially fixed in state documents. The clergy of Rome managed to create a strict outline of historical events. The data they indicated were subsequently confirmed by linguists and archaeologists. All records were combined and published in 123 AD. consisting of 80 books.

• I-V: Origin of Galia from Rome
• VI-XV: Beginning of the Punic Wars
• XVI-XX: First Punic War
• XXI-XXX: Second Punic War
• XXXI-XLV: Macedonian and Syrian Wars.

How objectively is the history of Rome reflected by Livius?

Wars of Rome. Titus Livy

There are historical data that give reason to believe that the work of Livy was written by official order. And, accordingly, the events in it are reflected subjectively on the part of the emperor. The following facts are provided:

The recognition of Titus Livius as the official historian of Augustus is debated. This is presumably the first decade since he started recording, around 33 BC. the battle of Aktum around 27 BC Octavian is indicated in them conditionally as emperor.

The role of the head of the Roman state in writing books is told by the stories " Virginia kidnapping” and “About Lucretia”.

In the preface, the Roman historian Titus Livy invites the reader to take history as an example to follow:

« What makes the study of history, in the main, mutually beneficial and fruitful. Which no doubt represents a kind of experience; from it you may choose that which will favor and imitate your condition, and avoid the fate of Mark...«

He directs his readers to study mores and politics, maintains morality:

« These are the questions that I would like everyone to pay close attention to when studying the history of Rome: what is life and customs, what kind of people and politicians were there, how an empire was created in peace and war, expanding its borders ...«

He described other nations:

«.. .Gauls are heretics and stubborn, they lack elementary endurance; while it is better for the Greeks to talk than to fight, she is immoderate in her emotions...«

He describes the Numidians as the most lustful: "... above all barbarians are the Numidians, who are mired in passions ...«

In the 35 surviving books of Titus Livius, 407 speeches of great politicians, generals and citizens were accurately reproduced. As an example, we can add a speech from the tribune of the people Canuleius about preventing marriages between patricians and plebeians (book 4, pp. 2-5), or Senator Fabius Maximus about condemning the plan of Cornelius Scipio (book 28, pp. 40-42).

He also describes religious rites, including the tradition of sacrifice, and cites the texts of prayers that are pronounced by priests. Each line of the "Foundation of the City" by Titus Livius is permeated with patriotism and a moral element. He characterizes the Romans throughout history as a steadfast people, intolerant of defeat in war.

History of Rome by Titus Livius

Titus Livius "History of Rome"

Titus Livius depicts key historical events with his rhetorical talent and literary style. He grabs the audience's attention with his speeches and emotional descriptions. From several conflicting versions of what happened, he chooses the one that accompanies the maintenance of Roman national dignity.

Sometimes he incorrectly cites data from Greek literary sources. He describes many everyday details of the life of Roman society, which cannot be obtained from the records of other authors, but is biased in stories about military affairs and politics. The book is an essential guide for the Roman general, covering the period in the history of the Roman Republic from its inception to the fall of the empire.

Titus Livius download "History of Rome from the founding of the city" ("Ab urbe condita")

LIVIUS, TITUS(Titus Livius) (59 BC - 17 AD), Roman historian, author History of Rome from the founding of the city. Born in northern Italy in the city of Patavius ​​(modern Padua), at the time of the highest prosperity of the city - both economic and cultural. The childhood and youth of Livy coincided with the time of Julius Caesar's rapid rise to power and passed under the sign of his Gallic campaigns and the civil wars that followed them, culminating in the establishment of an empire under the rule of Augustus. Livy stood aside from the turbulent events of the era, preferring the closed life of a learned man. At some fairly early period of his life, Livy moved to Rome, since there were sources here, without which it was impossible to study history. We know very little about Libya's private life. It is known that he supervised the studies of the future Emperor Claudius. Of great importance in the life of Livy was his friendship with Augustus, who loved Livy as a person and admired his book, despite its republican spirit.

In his youth, Livy wrote philosophical dialogues that have not come down to us, but ca. 26 BC undertook the main work of his life, History of Rome. Livy worked on it until the end of his life and managed to bring the presentation to the death of Drusus (9 BC). This huge work consisted of 142 books, by modern standards - 15-20 medium-sized volumes. About a quarter have survived, namely: books I-X, covering the period from the legendary arrival of Aeneas in Italy to 293 BC; books XXI-XXX describing the war between Rome and Hannibal; and books XXXI-XLV, which continue the story of the conquests of Rome up to 167 BC. The content of the other books we know from a brief retelling of them compiled later.

By mentality, Livy was inclined towards romanticism, and therefore in the preface to Stories he says that the aim of the historian is to promote morality. When Livy wrote his book, Roman society was in many ways in decline, and the historian looked back with admiration and longing to a time when life was simpler and virtue higher. The value of any historical research lies, according to Livy, in its applicability to life. Read the history of the great nation, he urges, and you will find both examples and warnings. The greatness of Rome rested on the strict observance of duty, both in the private and in the public sphere, and all the troubles began with the loss of fidelity to the established rules. The conquest of foreign lands brought wealth, with wealth increased luxury and lost respect for moral precepts.

To the ancient folk legends of Rome, “belonging,” as Livy himself rightly notes, “rather to the field of poetry than history,” he treated with loving skepticism. He retells these stories, often very good ones, and invites the reader to decide for himself whether they should be believed. As for the factual side of the matter, it is far from always possible to rely on it. Livy leaves out some important sources; his ideas about the functioning of the state mechanism, about military affairs, are very weak.

Livy's language is rich, elegant, highly colorful, Livy is an artist to the marrow of his bones. He perfectly describes his characters, so his book is a gallery of vivid, memorable portraits. Livy is a great storyteller, on the pages of his book the reader will find many stories familiar from childhood. Here is the legend retold by T. Macaulay in verse about how Horace Coclitus single-handedly held the bridge during the attack of the Etruscan king Porsenna, and the story of the capture of Rome by the Gauls led by Brennus, and the tragedy of Tarquinius and Lucretia, which served as the plot for one of Shakespeare's early poems , and the story of Brutus the liberator and how Hannibal's army crossed the Alps. Livy sets out his plots laconicly, achieving a powerful dramatic sound. Livy is characterized by breadth, he pays tribute even to the enemies of Rome. Like other Roman authors, he ignores the long period of Etruscan domination, but fully recognizes the greatness

Historiography for the Romans was more of an art than a science. It was based more on a hymn to the greatness of the Motherland, a call to bow before the valor of compatriots, an appeal to the treasury of outstanding examples of the past, rather than historical accuracy and scientific objectivity.

GAI JULIUS CAESAR (102 - 44 BC), an outstanding political and military figure of ancient Rome, was a wonderful orator and writer. World celebrity was given to his Notes on the Gallic War and Notes on the Civil War. Both works were left unfinished.

"Notes on the Gallic War" in ancient Rome, Caesar's writing was considered a model of concise, dryish Attic prose. Traditionally, it is the first work of classical Latin that is read in the lessons of this language. They tell about the activities of Caesar in Gaul, where he was proconsul for almost ten years, waging numerous wars with the Gallic and Germanic tribes who resisted the Roman invasion.

"Notes on the Civil War" tells about the beginning of the war between Caesar and Pompey. In the first work, Caesar wants to present his activities in Gaul in a favorable light, to show himself as an invincible commander and a wise politician. In a strictly considered presentation, the reader is inspired by the idea that the war in Gaul was aimed solely at protecting the legitimate interests of Rome and the tribes allied with it. With regard to the factual side of the narrative, Caesar tries to avoid outright lies, but often acts by default.

IN "Notes on the Civil War" he seeks to show that the blame for the outbreak of civil war in Rome lies not with him, but with his opponents - Pompey and the Senate party.

Caesar's writings are a valuable historical source. So, in the Notes on the Gallic War, he reports important ethnographic information about the inhabitants of Europe at that time - Gauls, Germans, British.

Caesar enjoyed the fame of an outstanding stylist. His writings are distinguished by their simplicity and clarity of style. However, this conciseness, strict selection of lexical means does not reduce the expressiveness of the text.

GAI SALLUSTIUS Crispus (86 - 35 BC) Roman historian of the 1st century BC e. He belonged to the popular party led by Julius Caesar. Sallust held a number of important positions up to the proconsul of the Roman province of New Africa. After the death of Caesar, he moves away from politics, devoting himself entirely to literary work. Of his HISTORICAL WORKS, the "Conspiracy of Catiline", "The War with Jugurtha", and an excerpt "History" have been preserved.

Living in an era of acute political and social. the crisis of the Roman policy, the collapse of the republic, Sallust is looking for an explanation in history for the events of our time. He refers, in particular, to the theory of "decline in morals", which saw the cause of the death of society in two main vices - lust for power and greed. Sallust wants to present himself as an impartial observer of events, but in reality he is deeply biased. The culprit of the decline of the Roman state, he portrays the Roman nobility, depravity, venality and immorality of the nobility. he denounces the vices of contemporary society.

Sallust's first monograph - "Conspiracy of Catiline" - Dedicated to the events of the recent past. The central figure is Catiline. The presentation opens with his characterization and ends with a story about his heroic death. But Catiline is presented against the background of the decay of Roman society as a product of this decomposition.

The second monograph leads to a somewhat more distant past - "War with Jugurtha" . Basing the choice of theme, Sallust points out that "then for the first time began the struggle against the arrogance of the nobility." The course of the war is described in connection with the struggle of the parties in Rome.

TITUS LIVIUS (59 -17 BC) an eminent Roman historian.

During the period of the republic, historiography was the lot of the state. Figures with political and military experience. Livy is a literary historian.

He created a huge work, numbering 142 books, of which 35 have been fully preserved, the rest are known only in brief. Livy's historical work is based on the idea of ​​the greatness of Rome, the glorification of morals, patriotism and heroism of the ancestors, characteristic of the ideological policy of the principate of Augustus.

Titus Livy was a representative of the artistic and didactic direction of ancient historiography. For him, not so much research as edifying and moral tasks were important; principle: "history is the teacher of life." This target setting led the author along a purely artistic path, he selected more vivid, emotionally expressive facts, strove for a fascinating artist. presentation.

Gaius Suetonius Tranquill (l- llcenturies AD). Suetonius was unlucky in the opinion of philologists and historians. As a historian he was always overshadowed by Tacitus, as a biographer by Plutarch. Comparison with them was too disadvantageous for him. The shortcomings and imperfections of Svetoniev's biographies were established long ago, and their list passes unchanged from book to book. Suetonius does not care about psychological consistency: he enumerates the virtues and vices of each emperor separately, without thinking how they could live together in one soul. Suetonius does not care about the chronological sequence: he combines in one list the facts of the beginning and end of the reign, without logic and connection. Suetonius lacks an understanding of history: he presents the images of emperors in isolation from the historical background and, analyzing in detail the little things of their private life, only casually mentions really important historical events. Suetonius is devoid of literary taste: he does not care about the artistic finishing of the style, he is monotonous and dry.

"Life of 12 Caesars" - Roman emperors are very often naively presented as some kind of heroes and wise statesmen, day and night taking care of the good of the Fatherland. However, the ancient Roman historian Gaius Suetonius Tranquill completely refuted this notion in his book.

Surname: Livy
Citizenship: Italy

Born in northern Italy in the city of Patavius ​​(modern Padua), at the time of the highest prosperity of the city - both economic and cultural. The childhood and youth of Livy coincided with the time of Julius Caesar's rapid rise to power and passed under the sign of his Gallic campaigns and the civil wars that followed them, culminating in the establishment of an empire under the rule of Augustus. Livy stood aside from the turbulent events of the era, preferring the closed life of a learned man. At some fairly early period of his life, Livy moved to Rome, since there were sources here, without which it was impossible to study history. We know very little about Libya's private life. It is known that he supervised the studies of the future emperor Claudius. Of great importance in the life of Livy was his friendship with Augustus, who loved Livy as a person and admired his book, despite its republican spirit.

In his youth, Livy wrote philosophical dialogues that have not come down to us, but ca. 26 BC took up the main work of his life, the History of Rome. Livy worked on it until the end of his life and managed to bring the presentation to the death of Drusus (9 BC). This huge work consisted of 142 books, by modern standards - 15-20 medium-sized volumes. About a quarter have survived, namely: books I-X, covering the period from the legendary arrival of Aeneas in Italy to 293 BC; books XXI-XXX describing the war between Rome and Hannibal; and books XXXI-XLV, which continue the story of the conquests of Rome up to 167 BC. The content of the other books we know from a brief retelling of them compiled later.

Livy's mentality was romanticized, and therefore in the preface to the History he says that the aim of the historian is to promote morality. When Livy wrote his book, Roman society was in many ways in decline, and the historian looked back with admiration and longing to a time when life was simpler and virtue higher. The value of any historical research lies, according to Livy, in its applicability to life. Read the history of the great nation, he urges, and you will find both examples and warnings. The greatness of Rome rested on the strict observance of duty, both in the private and in the public sphere, and all the troubles began with the loss of fidelity to the established rules. The conquest of foreign lands brought wealth, with wealth increased luxury and lost respect for moral precepts.

To the ancient folk legends of Rome, “belonging,” as Livy himself rightly notes, “rather to the field of poetry than history,” he treated with loving skepticism. He retells these stories, often very good ones, and invites the reader to decide for himself whether they should be believed. As for the factual side of the matter, it is far from always possible to rely on it. Livy leaves out some important sources; his ideas about the functioning of the state mechanism, about military affairs, are very weak.

Livy's language is rich, elegant, highly colorful, Livy is an artist to the marrow of his bones. He perfectly describes his characters, so his book is a gallery of vivid, memorable portraits. Livy is a great storyteller, on the pages of his book the reader will find many stories familiar from childhood. Here is the legend retold by T. Macaulay in verse about how Horace Coclitus single-handedly held the bridge during the attack of the Etruscan king Porsenna, and the story of the capture of Rome by the Gauls led by Brennus, and the tragedy of Tarquinius and Lucretia, which served as the plot for one of Shakespeare's early poems , and the story of Brutus the liberator and how Hannibal's army crossed the Alps. Livy sets out his plots laconicly, achieving a powerful dramatic sound. Livy is characterized by breadth, he pays tribute even to the enemies of Rome. Like other Roman authors, he is silent about the long period of Etruscan domination, but fully recognizes the greatness of Hannibal, the most dangerous of Rome's enemies. The admiration that we still feel for this great commander, we owe almost exclusively to Livy.