The History Book Club discussion

Hello Everyone,

For the week of June 12th - June 18th, we are reading chapter 9 of SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome by Mary Beard.

The ninth week's reading assignment is:

WEEK NINE - June 12th - June 18th -> 9. The Transformations of Augustus (337-386)

We will open up a thread for each week's reading. Please make sure to post in the particular thread dedicated to those specific chapters and page numbers to avoid spoilers. We will also open up supplemental threads as we did for other spotlighted books.

This book was kicked off April 17th.

We look forward to your participation. Amazon, Barnes and Noble, Borders and other noted on line booksellers do have copies of the book and shipment can be expedited. The book can also be obtained easily at your local library, or on your Kindle.

There is no rush and we are thrilled to have you join us. It is never too late to get started and/or to post.

Vicki Cline will be moderating this selection.

Welcome,

~Vicki

TO ALWAYS SEE ALL WEEKS' THREADS SELECT VIEW ALL

by Mary Beard

REMEMBER NO SPOILERS ON THE WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREADS - ON EACH WEEKLY NON SPOILER THREAD - WE ONLY DISCUSS THE PAGES ASSIGNED OR THE PAGES WHICH WERE COVERED IN PREVIOUS WEEKS. IF YOU GO AHEAD OR WANT TO ENGAGE IN MORE EXPANSIVE DISCUSSION - POST THOSE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE SPOILER THREADS. THESE CHAPTERS HAVE A LOT OF INFORMATION SO WHEN IN DOUBT CHECK WITH THE CHAPTER OVERVIEW AND SUMMARY TO RECALL WHETHER YOUR COMMENTS ARE ASSIGNMENT SPECIFIC. EXAMPLES OF SPOILER THREADS ARE THE GLOSSARY, THE BIBLIOGRAPHY, THE INTRODUCTION AND THE BOOK AS A WHOLE THREADS.

Notes:

It is always a tremendous help when you quote specifically from the book itself and reference the chapter and page numbers when responding. The text itself helps folks know what you are referencing and makes things clear.

Citations:

If an author or book is mentioned other than the book and author being discussed, citations must be included according to our guidelines. Also, when citing other sources, please provide credit where credit is due and/or the link. There is no need to re-cite the author and the book we are discussing however.

Here is the link to the thread titled Mechanics of the Board which will help you with the citations and how to do them.

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Also, the citation thread:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Introduction Thread:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Table of Contents and Syllabus

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Glossary

Remember there is a glossary thread where ancillary information is placed by the moderator. This is also a thread where additional information can be placed by the group members regarding the subject matter being discussed.

Here is the link:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Bibliography

There is a Bibliography where books cited in the text are posted with proper citations and reviews. We also post the books that the author may have used in his research or in her notes. Please also feel free to add to the Bibliography thread any related books, etc. with proper citations or other books either non-fiction or historical fiction that relate to the subject matter of the book itself. No self-promotion, please.

Here is the link:

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts - Spoiler Thread

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

Link:

by Mary Beard

Everyone, for the week of June 12th - June 18th, we are reading Chapter 9.

The ninth week's reading assignment is:

WEEK NINE - June 12th - June 18th -> 9. The Transformations of Augustus (337-386)

Chapter Overview and Summary:

9. The Transformations of Augustus



This chapter covers the history of Octavian/Augustus.

The Second Triumvirate

Discussion Topics:

1. How did 18 year old Octavian work his way up to being the sole ruler of the extensive Roman empire?

2. Why did the formerly successful general Mark Antony fail militarily in the East?

3. Could Antony and Octavian have successfully shared the empire?

4. How did Augustus manage to bend the Senate to his will?

5. Why did Augustus want to pass the empire down to his descendants rather than return rule to the Senate and consuls?

3. Could Antony and Octavian have successfully shared the empire?

Probably not. Both seemed to be pretty egotistical, with no room for anyone else to rule.

So I have to return the book to the library as I am at the end of my 3 renewals. I can return it and check it out again, at the end of the week, or check out the ebook. Not sure what I will do.

My sympathies for your renewal problem, Michele. So annoying - I've been there too.

We will still be here for your Michelle - whatever you decide.

I have the e-book checked out until July 4! No waiting for that book.

Good news, Michele. The Internet to the rescue!

Octavian's career was really amazing. He's 17 or 18 years old in Greece when he finds out his great-uncle Caesar has died and adopted him. With nothing more than his new name, he appropriates some war funds and goes to Rome with Caesar's troops and demands his inheritance from Mark Antony, who dismisses him. Cicero is on his side against Antony, thinking he can use him and later discard him. There are various battles and he winds up joining with Antony and Lepidus in the Second Triumvirate. And that's just the beginning.

I do wonder what might have happened if Antony hadn't hooked up with Cleopatra, but just lived with Octavia in Pergamum or Athens and just tended to business. Probably Octavian would have created some pretext to go to war with him, but it would have been a lot harder without the excuse of defending Rome against a foreign ruler.

I agree with that Vicki... easier to go to war against a foreign leader than a Roman leader.

Regarding the problem of why the Senators rolled over for Augustus taking over (not that it was presented so starkly), I guess everyone was really tired after two sets of civil wars. Plus many prominent Romans had been killed in the proscriptions set up at the beginning of the Second Triumvirate. It's too bad Cato killed himself rather than submitting to being pardoned by Caesar. He would have had something to say about the situation.

I think Augustus was just the right man at the right time, right in the transition between the Republic and Empire. And he (and Rome) had lucky too because he ruled a long time. He both glorifies himself, as for instance, his name and Res Gestae, but he also was way far from Julius standards. He had quite a normal high-class residence, he "respected" some of the Republic traditions, and this mix between authoritarianism and still some subordination was just what was needed to soften the transition.

I think you've got it, Rafael. The fact that he lived so long was kind of a fluke, as he was sickly as a young man and had a couple of close calls health-wise later on. No knowing what would have happened if he had died in his 30s or 40s.

The week 10 thread is open. Chapter 10 covers the careers of emperors Tiberius through Commodus.

https://www.goodreads.com/topic/show/...

1. He proved himself as a young tribune in battle in Spain and won the favor of Julius. Following the death of Julius, he had named Octavian as his heir to the surprise of everyone. Thereafter, he just caught on and played the game really well (second triumvirate and such). He set the standard for what an emperor should be all the way through his career and it started at the very beginning.

2. Mostly overconfidence. Trying to accomplish feats with under-strength legions. Only one legion was actually based near Alexandria and the training regimen was vastly different for the auxiliary units. Relying heavily upon locals to fight locals, his overconfidence led to a lack of consequential campaigning.

3. Only as well as two children can share a tootsie roll pop - eventually only one of them gets to take a bite. Roman history repeated itself on these grounds after the whole co-emperor thing became a trend. Even more so after the Roman empire split between East and West provinces.

4. With a gun to its head. Julius really set the precedent for this in 48 and Octavian just kept rolling with it. After becoming Augustus, he had the Praetorian guard (a bunch of savage Germans!) to ensure what he said goes and they just happened to be on site.

5. Perceived weakness of the government infrastructure. The republic years are notorious for corruption, government favors, and under the table dealings. Giving power back to the individuals that Augustus felt made Rome unstable (think about how much rioting and civil unrest that went on in the century leading up to the first triumvirate) would've made Rome just that. Most emperors in Rome's history provided stability and deterred underhanded dealings; there were exceptions and there were scumbags and particularly nasty emperors. But, attempting to give Rome back to the Senate would've left a vast power vacuum that someone would want to fill.

Thanks again, Taylor, for the detailed comments. The career of Octavian/Augustus is just fascinating.

Vicki, I highly recommend By

Anthony Everitt Is a knowledgeable source and is a better storyteller.

Yes, Taylor, I read Everitt several years ago, but just gave it 3 stars, though I don't remember why.

Also, the standard here at the History Book Club is to put citations of books at the end of the post.

The citation is the whole post.

Sorry that wasn't clear, Taylor. What I meant was something like this. My favorite book about Augustus is Augustus: The Golden Age of Rome. It was written in 1937 at the beginning of what would be World War II. Baker has written other good biographies.

by G.P. Baker (no photo)

I certainly haven't read many of the vintage history books. I tend to go with more modern stuff just due to the sheer amount of information that can be extrapolated from archaeology between then and now. Also, it helps that other historians tend to read between the lines on assumptions made by long dead authors which helps to alleviate a lot of misinformation. For example, a very noted (as long as we're on this topic) historian on Roman history was Theodor Mommsen. Absolutely respected during his time, he was later discredited largely in part by more recent scholars Chester G. Starr and Lawrence Keppie. I know this isn't always the case, but as a general trend, I usually stick closer to more modern authors and just keep an eye out for anything obscure.

Although, Vicki, I do agree with you in regards to the fascination about Augustus. It's like I said earlier: Augustus absolutely set the standard for what an emperor was supposed to be. I mean most emperors following him adopted the name Augustus itself and very few were able to live up to the expectations that Romans came to demand from their leadership simply because of how they learned their emperor was supposed to operate. Granted, the first emperor started as a virtuoso of leadership at a young age and by the end of it had significant practice.

Aside from a couple of stigmas and mishaps during his tenure, his reign was a success. Relating back to this book, I don't know whether Mary Beard would agree on this account. In it, she seems a little biased toward the Republic years (indicated by her very frequent referencing of Cicero and other late republic figures).

I too, am biased toward the Republican era. The characters seem more vivid.

My two favorite figures in Roman history are Scipio of the Africanus variety and Germanicus.