A Dictionary of Greek and Roman biography and mythology. By various writers. Ed. by William Smith. Illustrated by numerous engravings on wood.

970 TACITUS. TACITUS.
observing the precision of the writer as to those convey the political instruction that is derived from
Germans who were best known to the Romans the history of a free people. Tacitus claims the
from being near the Rhine. That the hearsay merit of impartiality (Annal. i. 1), because he lived
accounts of more remote tribes must partake of the after the events that he describes; but a writer
defects of all such evidence, is obvious; and we who is not a contemporary may have passions or
cannot easily tell whether Tacitus embellished that prejudices as well as one who is. In his Histories
which he heard obscurely told. But to consider (i. I) he states that neither to Galba, nor to Otho,
the Germany as a fiction, is one of those absurdities nor to Vitellius, did he owe obligations, nor had he
which need only be recorded, not refuted. Much received from them any wrong. From Vespasian
has been written as to the special end that Tacitus and his sons, Titus and Domitian, he had received
had in view in writing this work; but this discus- favours; yet, in the commencement of his life of
sion is merely an offshoot of ill-directed labour; a Agricola, he has recorded the horrors of Domitian's
sample of literary intemperance. [SENECA, P. 782.] reign; nor can we suppose that in the lost books
The dialogue entitled De Oratoribus, if it is the of the Histories, he allowed the tyrant to escape
work of Tacitus, and it probably is, must be his without merited chastisement.
earliest work, for it was written in the sixth year The history of the empire presents the spectacle
of Vespasian (c. 17). The style is more easy than of a state without any political organisation, by
that of the Annals, more diffuse, less condensed; which the tyranny of a ruler could be checked
but there is no obvious difference between the when it became insupportable. The only means
style of this Dialogue and the Histories, nothing were assassination; and the only power that eithei
so striking as to make us contend for a different the emperor could use to maintain himself, or a
authorship. Besides this, it is nothing unusual for conspirator could employ to seize the power or
works of the same author which are written at dif- secure it for another, was the soldiery. From this
ferent times to vary greatly in style, especially if alternate subjection to imperial tyranny and military
they treat of different matters. The old MSS. at- violence, there were no means of escape, nor does
tribute this Dialogue to Tacitus. One of the Tacitus ever give even the most distant hint that
speakers in the dialogue attributes the decline of the restoration of the republic was either possible
eloquence at Rome to the neglect of the arduous or desirable; or that there were any means of
study of the old Roman orators, to which Cicero public security, except in the accident of an able
has left his testimony; but another speaker, 1Ma- emperor to whom a revolution might give the suternus, has assigned a direct and immediate cause, preme power. Yet this empire, a prey to the vices
which was the change in the political constitution. of its rulers, and to intestine commotion, had its
Oratory is not the product of any system of favourable side. The civilised world obeyed a regovernment, except one in which the popular ele- volution which was accepted in Rome, and the
ment is strong. provinces were at peace with one another under
The Annals of Tacitus, the work of a mature this despotic yoke. France did not invade Italy
age, contain the chief events of the period which nor Spain; Greece was not invaded by barbarians
they embrace, arranged under their several years fiom the north; Asia Minor and Syria Mere
(Annal. iv. 71). There seems no peculiar pro- protected from the worse than Roman despotism,
priety in giving the name of Annales to this work, the despotism of Asia; and Egypt and the north
simply because the events are arranged in the order of Africa enjoyed protection against invaders, even
of time. The work of Livy may just as well be though they sometimes felt the rapacity of a gocalled Annals. In the Annals of Tacitus the vernor. The political,condition of the Roman emPrinceps or Emperor is the centre about which pire under the Caesars is a peculiar phase of Euroevents are grouped, a mode of treating history pean history. Tacitus has furnished some materials
which'cannot be entirely thrown aside in a mo- for it; but his method excluded a large and comprenarchical system, but which in feeble hands merges hensive view of the period which is comprised within
the history of a people in the personality of their his Annals. The treatment in the Histories has a
ruler. Thus in Tacitus, the personal history of wider range. The general review of the condition
Tiberius, Claudius, and Nero, fill up a large space. of the empire at the time of Nero's death is a rapid,
Yet the most important public events, both in but comprehensive sketch (i. 1, &c.).
Italy and the provinces, are not omitted, though The moral dignity of Tacitus is impressed upon
every thing is treated as subordinate to the exhi- his works; the consciousness of a love of truth,
bition of imperial power. The Histories which of the integrity of his purpose. His great power
were written before the Annals, are in a more is in the knowledge of the human mind, his insight
diffuse style, and the treatment of the extant part into the motives of human conduct; and he found
is different from that of the Annals. Tacitus wrote materials for this study in the history of the emthe Histories as a contemporary; the Annals as perors, and particularly Tiberius, the arch-hypocrite,
not a contemporary. They are two distinct works, and perhaps half madman. We know men's innot parts of one; which is clearly shown by the tellectual powers, because they seek to display
very different proportions of the two works: the them: their moral character is veiled under silence
first four books of the Histories comprise about a and reserve, which are sometimes diffidence, but
year, and the first four books of the Annals com- more frequently dissimulation. But dissimulation
prise fourteen years. alone is not a sufficient cloke; it merely seeks to
It was his purpose in the Annals to show the hide and cover, and, as the attempt to conceal exgeneral condition of the empire of which Rome cites suspicion, it is necessary to divert the vigilance
was the centre, and the emperor the representative: of this active inquisitor. The dissembler, therefore,
not only to show the course of events, but also their assumes the garb of goodness; and thus he is bycauses (Hist. i. 4); for this remark, which is made pocrite complete. The hypocrite is a better citizen
in the Histories, may be applied also to the Annals. than the shameless man, because by his hypocrisy
But the history of despotism in any form does not he acknowledges the supremacy of goodness, while