Roman Antiquities, Volume II: Books 3–4

by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, Earnest Cary (Translator)

Dionysius of Halicarnassus was born before 53 BCE and went to Italy before 29 BCE. He taught rhetoric in Rome while studying the Latin language, collecting material for a history of Rome, and writing. His "Roman Antiquities" began to appear in 7 BCE. Dionysius states that his objects in writing history were to please lovers of noble deeds and to repay the benefits he had enjoyed in Rome. But he wrote also to reconcile Greeks to Roman rule. Of the 20 books of "Roman Antiquities" (from the earliest times to 264 BCE) we have the first 9 complete; most of 10 and 11; and later extracts and an epitome of the whole. Dionysius studied the best available literary sources (mainly annalistic and other historians) and possibly some public documents. His work and that of Livy are our only continuous and detailed independent narratives of early Roman history.

Dionysius was author also of essays on literature covering rhetoric, Greek oratory, Thucydides, and how to imitate the best models in literature.

The Loeb Classical Library publishes a two-volume edition of the critical essays; the edition of "Roman Antiquities" is in seven volumes.

Genres: History

544 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1939

About the author

Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Greek: Διονύσιος Ἀλεξάνδρου Ἁλικαρνασσεύς, Dionúsios Alexándrou Halikarnasseús, "Dionysios son of Alexandros of Halikarnassos"; c. 60 BC – after 7 BC) was a Greek historian and teacher of rhetoric, who flourished during the reign of Caesar Augustus. His literary style was Atticistic — imitating Classical Attic Greek in its prime.

Dionysius' opinion of the necessity of a promotion of paideia within education, from true knowledge of Classical sources, endured for centuries in a form integral to the identity of the Greek elite.

Reviews

[Lukerik · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very enjoyable… novel?

It opens in the time of legend with the story of Rome's 'third' king, Tullus Hostilius, and closes with the creation of the Republic. Dionysius takes a God's eye view and happily reports the characters' inner emotions. He gives dialogue and accounts of scenes that couldn't be known by anyone except those who were there. Those history documentaries where a narrator overlies dramatised scenes with dialogue etc: this is the literary equivalent. Is it even trustworthy as a record of the stories that the Romans told about themselves? Dionysius is quite open about about his biases.

I'm not criticising. I happen to like those dramatised documentaries. And he tells the stories well and is consistently interesting. I particularly enjoyed the bit about the floating penis.