Votre recherche
Résultats 3 ressources
-
While Caesar and his writings have been thoroughly studied for the past two centuries, it is time to make use of a new approach pioneered by Arthur M. Eckstein to study him. In his Mediterranean Anarchy, Interstate War, and the Rise of Rome Eckstein argues that Rome opportunistically conquered Italy and the Eastern Mediterranean through a series of defensive wars or “invitations”. What is novel about this approach is its use of political science paradigms, with a heavy emphasis on the concept of the realist anarchy. As such, using Eckstein’s framework and applying it to Caesar’s Bellum Gallicum this thesis shows that Caesar, contrarily to traditional historiography, did not conquer Gaul out of sheer bellicosity and personal ambition, but rather, as a result of a direct invitation from Rome’s Gallic allies to defensively interfere on their behalf in an act of bellum iustum. To do so, we will demonstrate that a state of anarchy exists in Gaul in accordance to Eckstein’s wider Mediterranean system. After which, a detailed analysis of Caesar’s De Bello Gallico will outline the specific instances in which Caesar opportunistically used this pre-existing anarchy to his advantage, before finally delving into the specificities of the “invitations” along with an analysis of Caesar’s use of aggressive diplomacy. To achieve this, we used first and foremost, Caesar’s commentaries as the primary sources, while Eckstein’s aforementioned work gave us the interpretative concepts and theoretical basis we needed; additionally, we drew on multiple supplementary primary sources and the surrounding relevant scholarship. After we demonstrated that Gaul was an anarchic system, we successfully applied Eckstein’s model, and its results clearly showed that the Gauls’ bellicosity against each other blinded them to the Roman danger, which Caesar used to systematically intervene, filling the power vacua left behind in his wake. This model is important because it provides us with an alternate explanation to the Roman conquest of Gaul, using one of history’s sister disciplines, political science. With this approach’s viability proven, it opens the door for vast other studies, in this as of yet, unexplored direction.
-
Known to the scholarly milieu of historians, Roman history reached the general public during the 20th century in various forms: cinema, literature, schools and museum exhibitions. The emperor Augustus is important in Roman history for his transformative role of the Roman world. Born in 63 BC and died in 14 AD, Augustus became the founder of a new political regime, the Principate, replacing the Roman Republic, and making Augustus the first Emperor. He thus marks the history of the Roman Empire until its fall, and will still influence the entire European and Western world twenty centuries later. In 1937, the Mostra Augustea della Romanità is an Italian exhibition organized under the fascist regime celebrating the “idea of Rome” – the Romanità –, and wanting to amalgamate Augustus with Mussolini. This exhibition is analyzed in comparison with two other exhibitions (Kaiser Augustus und die verlorene Republik, Berlin, 1988; and Augusto/Moi, Auguste, Empereur de Rome, Rome/Paris, 2013/2014). The research focuses on the museum representation of Augustus and on the relation of the historiography still evolving with each exhibition. The exhibition catalogs are the main source for exhibited artifacts, themes, research, and storytelling. Each exhibition is put in its context and compared to their contemporary historiography, centered on outstanding works of their time. Thus, these exhibitions are tinted by their time, but in turn influence contemporary and future popular historical culture and as for academia. Museological work is not only popularization of historical discourse for the general public, but also participatory work in historiography.
-
The main objective of this dissertation is to offer a social analysis of the classicizing historians of late antiquity. It aims to underline the interactions between history-writing and society. The first part presents the biographies of late antique classicising historians, from Eunapius of Sardis to Theophylact Simocatta. It describes the social profile of those historians, while insisting on the interactions between professional career and literary endeavours. The second part explains why most historians were lawyers and analyzes the place history-writing occupies in their social life. The third part deals with the social foundations of history writing. It focuses on the role of rhetorical education in the formation of future historians and shows how the virtues of the historian mirrored the social virtues of late antique elites.