Safiria Caesar

Allow me to humbly step into this long standing debate with my personal opinions. I hardly can take the point that Augustus was not a monarch. I do agree that we cannot discuss about the Roman Republic in terms of the modern definition of a Republic, but saying that the Republic hadn't gone anywhere... well, I find that quite hard to agree with, unless, and I know that's a provocation, you take the point of view of Caesar, "nihil esse rem publicam, appellationem modo sine corpore ac specie" (Suet., Life of Caesar, 77) that the Republic is nothing but a mere name, without body or form. And yes, I know that dear old Suetonius is not a very reliable source... Now, in this sense, I could agree that the Republic was still in place under Augustus, otherwise it seems quite hard to get along with your statement. August had, effectively, taken upon himself so many power and rights, that he was running the State on his own, leaving the Senate without much to do or say, other than agreeing with him. As to why he never admitted that the Republic was gone, I stand with Indianasmith... he saw what happened to his "dear old great-uncle Julius". But I do agree with Caldrail about the fact that the nasty side of Augustus is rarely focused on, which something that really makes me angry when I read about him! Everybody horiifies at Sulla's proscriptions, but when it come to Augustus' proscriptions many authors tend to underplay them. Why? He even put some of his own relatives on them (true, most of them got away with their life, if not with their money), but still we are talking about a boy in his twenties... I find it quite indicative of what kind of person he was. About Augustus duality, it comes to mind a book I read some years ago, by an Italian journalist and writer - not a historian - who had a big passion for Ancient Rome and studied and wrote on it, Antonio Spinosa. The book was "Augusto, il grande baro", which can be translated in Augusts, the great cheater (or mystifier, if you prefer)...

Dear Aurelia, I'd say that more than "jaded" with new discoveries people in Italy are both tired and unintersted when it comes to things about ancient Rome. That might be because of a sum of things. Just to give you a couple of examples, there are ruins of Roman buildings scattered all over Italy and there are so many that people don't even look at them any more, even if they are in the middle of the way (and I mean it physically). A good example is Largo Argentina in Rome, if you ask to people living in Rome if they new what are the ruins of Largo Argentina and if they know that that is probably the place where Caesar was killed, the majority of them will answer with a polite "Really?, Ah, that's interesting". And that will be it. Another thing might be that in Italy history of ancient Rome (and ancient Greece, of course) is studied at elementary, middle and high school, so that most people are quite fed up with ancient Rome, when they become adults. And even with that, it is awidely common mistake to mix up Caesar and Augustus, and that very easily explained, in Italy they are normally referred to as Jiulius Caesar and Caesar Augustus, so that after a while, in the memory of most people it remains the name Caesar and a mix of the two historical personality. Of course, there are also people interested in ancient Rome and there national associations with "delegations" in each region of Italy and many active groups that study ancient Rome from an historical or archeological of litetature point of view. All this said, I agree with you and I subscribe your words: "that would be a pity though because every such discovery should be celebrated.".

News like these continue to have a double effect on me. On the one side, I'm always happy to get to know about new archeological dicoveries, but, on the other side, being Italian, I find amazing that not a single world in Italian TV news or newspapers is spent about new discoveries, whereas they're always ready to make big titles for everything that "falls" in Pompeii, Erculaneum, etc.

Thanks for your welcome, GhostofClayton, you're right it should have been "salvete atque valete" as the post was for a community of people, but I simply wanted to be a bit less formal and salute everybody singularly, that's why I used the singular form.

Hi to everybody, I'm Safiria Caesar, a name I also use on AW, a community of which I'm still a member. I'm not a pro in Ancient history, but I've studying the late Republic in general, and Julius Caesar in particular, for some years now. I'm also always reading new books being published on Caesar and I'm interested in constructive discussions about his life and his life-time, spanning from the II century BC to I century AD, Hope to become an "interesting" member of UNRV and find new friends here, Salve atque vale