Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>

As early as Tacitus, Livian scholarship has struggled to resolve the "Livian paradox," the conflict between Livy's support of the Roman Republic and his overt approval of Augustus, who brought about the end of the Republic. This paper addresses the paradox by attempting to place Livy&...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Author: MacKay, Joshua Stewart
Format: Others
Published: BYU ScholarsArchive 2017
Subjects:
Online Access:https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6668
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7668&amp;context=etd
id ndltd-BGMYU2-oai-scholarsarchive.byu.edu-etd-7668
record_format oai_dc
spelling ndltd-BGMYU2-oai-scholarsarchive.byu.edu-etd-76682021-09-12T05:01:17Z Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em> MacKay, Joshua Stewart As early as Tacitus, Livian scholarship has struggled to resolve the "Livian paradox," the conflict between Livy's support of the Roman Republic and his overt approval of Augustus, who brought about the end of the Republic. This paper addresses the paradox by attempting to place Livy's writings within their proper historical and literary context. An examination of Augustus' position during the early years of Livy's writing shows that the princeps cloaked his power within the precedent of Republican autocracy, in which imperium could be unlimited in power so long as it was limited by time. As a result, although Augustus' rule would ultimately prove the end of Rome's republic, nevertheless during Livy's early writings Augustus' reign and the Republic were not antithetical. Livy's preface and early exempla further demonstrate that Livy's writings, while condemnatory of his contemporary Rome, blame Rome's decline on the character of the Roman people rather than a corruption of the Republic's political forms. In his preface Livy blames vitia, not ambitio for the universal destruction of the civil wars, while his exempla from the monarchic period and beyond show praise or condemnation of individuals for their actions, not their political offices. Livy praises most of Rome's monarchs for their individual character and their establishment of mores, while also portraying the early Romans' defense of libertas as injuriously overzealous. Ultimately, Augustus' attempts to legislate conservative, "traditional" morality made him a contemporary exemplum of Livy's ancient mores. Thus, the Livian paradox is answered by understanding that Augustus and the Republic were not antithetical, Livy was not concerned with political forms but morality, and Augustus' morality aligned with that championed by Livy. 2017-12-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6668 https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7668&amp;context=etd http://lib.byu.edu/about/copyright/ Theses and Dissertations BYU ScholarsArchive Livy Augustus Roman Revolution mores Livian paradox Roman autocracy Classics
collection NDLTD
format Others
sources NDLTD
topic Livy
Augustus
Roman Revolution
mores
Livian paradox
Roman autocracy
Classics
spellingShingle Livy
Augustus
Roman Revolution
mores
Livian paradox
Roman autocracy
Classics
MacKay, Joshua Stewart
Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>
description As early as Tacitus, Livian scholarship has struggled to resolve the "Livian paradox," the conflict between Livy's support of the Roman Republic and his overt approval of Augustus, who brought about the end of the Republic. This paper addresses the paradox by attempting to place Livy's writings within their proper historical and literary context. An examination of Augustus' position during the early years of Livy's writing shows that the princeps cloaked his power within the precedent of Republican autocracy, in which imperium could be unlimited in power so long as it was limited by time. As a result, although Augustus' rule would ultimately prove the end of Rome's republic, nevertheless during Livy's early writings Augustus' reign and the Republic were not antithetical. Livy's preface and early exempla further demonstrate that Livy's writings, while condemnatory of his contemporary Rome, blame Rome's decline on the character of the Roman people rather than a corruption of the Republic's political forms. In his preface Livy blames vitia, not ambitio for the universal destruction of the civil wars, while his exempla from the monarchic period and beyond show praise or condemnation of individuals for their actions, not their political offices. Livy praises most of Rome's monarchs for their individual character and their establishment of mores, while also portraying the early Romans' defense of libertas as injuriously overzealous. Ultimately, Augustus' attempts to legislate conservative, "traditional" morality made him a contemporary exemplum of Livy's ancient mores. Thus, the Livian paradox is answered by understanding that Augustus and the Republic were not antithetical, Livy was not concerned with political forms but morality, and Augustus' morality aligned with that championed by Livy.
author MacKay, Joshua Stewart
author_facet MacKay, Joshua Stewart
author_sort MacKay, Joshua Stewart
title Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>
title_short Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>
title_full Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>
title_fullStr Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>
title_full_unstemmed Livy's Republic: Reconciling Republic and Princeps in <em>Ab Urbe Condita</em>
title_sort livy's republic: reconciling republic and princeps in <em>ab urbe condita</em>
publisher BYU ScholarsArchive
publishDate 2017
url https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/etd/6668
https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=7668&amp;context=etd
work_keys_str_mv AT mackayjoshuastewart livysrepublicreconcilingrepublicandprincepsinemaburbeconditaem
_version_ 1719480383023611904