Cassius Dio's History Narrates Octavian's Ascension From Ruthless Triumvir To The Divine Augustus.
The Greek historian & statesman Cassius Dio was born in 163 or 164 A.D., in the Roman province of Bithynia. The son of Cassius Apronianus, who was himself an imperial governor & consul of considerable esteem, Dio was instructed in the fine art of diplomacy from a very young age. It is believed that Cassius Dio first came to Rome in the year 180 A.D. during the chaotic reign of the madman Commodus, son of the famed Marcus Aurelius. Dio held the quaestorship in 188 or 189 which heralded his official entry into the Roman senate.
Cassius Dio weathered the rise & fall of numerous Roman emperors throughout his long life, among them Pertinax, Septimus Severus, Caracalla, & Elagabus. He originally wrote his signature historical work, 'The Roman History' as a series of 80 books spanning the time period beginning in 1200 B.C. with Aeneas' arrival to Italy, continuing with Rome's foundation in 753 B.C. all the way to Dio's own second consulship in the year 229 A.D. It was an undertaking that consumed roughly twelve years of Dio's life to research & compose. Not all of the 'Roman History' has survived to present day, unfortunately much of it is fragmented or lost altogether.
This edition by Penguin Classics is as the title states a selection of 'The Roman History', & not a translation of the entire manuscript. 'The Roman History : The Reign Of Augustus' includes Books 50 - 56 of Dio's monumental literary work. Originally published in 1987, it features translation work completed by Ian Scott-Kilvert & a fantastic introduction at the beginning of the volume written by John Carter, who is himself an expert on Augustan-Era Rome if the short synopsis on his life at the beginning of the book has anything to say about it. I can't say enough about how wonderfully informative & engaging I found the introduction to be, it contains an in-depth analysis of Augustus' reign & what set his rule apart from the men who followed in the years after his death. The introduction also includes an entire section devoted to Cassius Dio himself which discusses his background the kind of man he was & the work he did in his life & how we believe his writing style was influenced by all of these factors. The text of 'The Reign Of Augustus' contains copious annotations in the form of detailed notes at the back of the book as well as a Chronological Table with key events of Augustus' era in Roman history divided into three separate sections : 'Rome', 'The East' & 'The West' which is helpful in assisting those first learning the period. Accompanying this is a list of Roman consuls by year from the year 43 B.C. to 15 A.D. followed by a collection of beautifully-drawn maps depicting every area of the Roman empire in the age of Augustus. The provinces of Hispania (Spain), Germania (Germany) & Anatolia (Western Asia) all have maps which in addition to being pleasant to look at are also immensely helpful to the reader when reading up on Augustus' & Marcus Agrippa's exploits in expanding the Roman principate as a visual aid.
The base manuscript of Cassius Dio's 'The Roman History' is as I mentioned earlier very much incomplete due to large sections of the work being lost to history. Books 36 - 54 are, thanks to the efforts of scholars & historians, virtually all complete & free of 'lacunae' (gaps in the text), as are Books 57 - 60. Books 55 & 56 both have very-noticeable gaps in the original manuscript & this was remedied through an in my opinion most ingenious solution. There were two Byzantine-era historians, Joannes Zonaras & John Xiphilinus who lived during periods when the entirety of Dio's work was accessible & they wrote summaries that included material covered in Book 55 & 56. There are bracketed passages in 'The Reign Of Augustus' which denote to the reader that they have been inserted to provide a more cohesive, unbroken narrative. Book 50 commences in 32 B.C. as tensions between the young then-Octavian & his ally-and-triumvir Marc Antony boil over into all-out civil war, setting the stage for the climactic Battle of Actium that ultimately seals Antony's doom. Book 56 runs all the way to 14 A.D. where Augustus dies at his house in the small Italian village of Nola.
Surprisingly, Cassius Dio does a remarkable job of making his history feel less like a simple school exercise & more like an epic saga depicting the death of republican Rome & the rise of the Augustan principate. How does he accomplish this? He employs conventions that many historians have leveled criticism at him for, first & foremost the utilization of dramatic 'speeches' delivered by important characters in his narrative widely believed to be utterly fictitious. The introduction informs us that what likely occurred was that Cassius Dio used what he knew of the basic character & personalities of people like Marcus Agrippa, Marc Antony, Augustus' wife Livia & Gaius Maecenas & imagined what might have been spoken by that particular individual. He then inserted their long-winded soliloquies before or during key events in his story to not only add dramatic flair but reinforce the significance of the events taking place.
My own personal opinion of Cassius Dio held next to other classical historians is most assuredly a positive one. His narrative is actually compelling to read, it's interesting & the writing flows with a unique style & grace that makes the reader forget that he or she is reading a history book written almost 2,000 years ago by a man who didn't even witness firsthand let alone live through the events he was writing about as Dio lived close to 150 years after the rise of Augustan Rome. When compared with historians such as Cornelius Tacitus, Cassius Dio's work is much smoother, more polished. Tacitus, at least the translation I read, is overly verbose with what he includes & extremely confusing due to what he does not include in his histories such as any form of delineation regarding the numerous barbarian tribes which populate Germania, Pannonia or Gallia. Dio takes the time to provide explanations for these terms, probably with help from the wonderful translation by Scott-Kilvert. Sallust's histories are written with a more formal feel to the overall composition accompanied by pessimistic, somber undertones pervading his narrative. Mankind's harsh nature is fully visible in Sallust's work; there's virtually no optimism to speak of. I'd probably consider Sallust to be slightly more adept with regards to his language than Cassius Dio, but not by any considerable degree. They were both senators & very educated men which becomes noticeable upon reading their written works. From the little exposure I've had to Livy I'd venture to opine on Cassius Dio's writing style falling somewhere between his & that of Sallust. Titus Livius was in my estimation just as talented a writer as he was a historian. The limited amount of Livy's 'Ab Urbe Condita' I've read often is permeated by an underlying, dark morality he probably intended the reader would learn from Rome's folly & seek to prevent from reoccurring in future. The tone of the language Livy uses is less formal than that of Sallust, he adopts the style of a storyteller weaving an epic saga as opposed to that of an instructor delivering a lesson to a student of Roman history. Livy was unique in the sense that he assuredly was not a politician, he was a full-time career writer who also had a friendship with Augustus himself, the two men were practically the same age & probably enjoyed each other's company.
Cassius Dio's work is similar to Livy's but in my opinion, his background as a politician gives his history a slightly different structure than that of his predecessor. Dio's perspective is that of a senator, so topics such as the reorganization of Rome's controlled territories into Imperial & Senatorial Provinces under the control of the newly-appointed 'Propraetors' & 'Proconsuls' & the famous debate between Maecanas & Agrippa on forms of government become extremely important parts of the story he tells us. Dio also mentions or alludes to many laws instituted or of significance during the Augustan era such as 'Lex Saenia', 'Lex Papia Poppaea', 'Lex Julia de maritandis ordinibus' & the 'Lex Voconia'; his narrative also contains terms correlating to Roman society such as the senators' right of 'ius annuli aurei' & the status of 'ignis et aquae interdictio' which denoted banishment from the republic. I'd fully expect a man with a strong political background to compose a history that places subject matter relative to his occupation at the forefront which Dio definitely does do. Compared to historians like Suetonius or Ammianus Marcellinus, both of whom provide generous helpings of humor & sarcasm in their history, Cassius Dio is much more reserved in his narrative, which probably is a reflection of his vocation as a politician & governor.
One of the reasons I have such admiration for Augustus from a historical standpoint is due to what he managed to accomplish in his life being so impressive. He was ruthless when he had to be, his alliance with Antony was necessary in the aftermath of Caesar's assassination & the proscription era which followed. When Antony would not accept his rule, Octavian did not hesitate to go to war with him after the remaining conspirators had been eliminated as threats to the Roman state. But not only was Augustus harsh when the situation mandated he also was very cognizant of the simple reality that more than anything else the common folk of Rome desired a peaceful existence free of conflict. They didn't really care under whose rule they lived & Augustus' strategy after neutralizing his opposition reflected his intelligence as a diplomat. While he made himself indispensable to the function of the Roman government Augustus allowed many of its aspects to remain undisturbed, earning him the respect of the equestrian noble class. The men Octavian relied upon were no less impressive; Marcus Agrippa was a shrewd tactician & seasoned battle commander in addition to being a veteran soldier with humble origins, his family was neither rich nor powerful prior to taking up Octavian's cause. Gaius Maecenas was a different kind of man entirely. He was an immensely wealthy Etruscan nobleman with powerful connections & tremendous influence whom did not require a title or a position to be effective in furthering Augustus' will, making him particularly of use to the monarch while solidifying his power base.
All told I can't say enough good things about 'The Roman History : The Reign Of Augustus'. The translation is fantastic, the introduction is engrossing & the supplemental material is invaluable. The content in this book serves as a wonderful companion piece to the Roman imperial biography on Augustus Caesar, 'Augustus' by Patricia Southern as well as being immensely relevant in every regard. I'd also recommend 'The Annals' by Cornelius Tacitus as well as the compilation of Sallust's works, simply entitled 'Sallust' for both a comparison between all three historians' writing styles in addition to the time periods covered correlating with what's covered here.