Rhetoric of The Roman Revolution

Abstract

Ronald Syme’s Roman Revolution is generally recognised as his literary masterpiece as well as a brilliant work of historical interpretation: that makes it a suitable subject for some of the techniques of literary analysis that are now applied to ancient historical writers. A manuscript of an earlier draft makes it possible to trace its genesis: some of his most famous epigrammatic formulations are late additions to his text, while some of his expansions of that early draft, particularly in the first chapters, suggest that he was already uneasy about areas which reviewers fastened on in their criticisms. His affectation of the manner of Asinius Pollio is discussed, together with his (overstated) pillorying of Livy. This connects with his deft use of what we now call focalisation, so that his interpretations blur imperceptibly into those that were, or could have been, expressed at the time. The paper goes on to discuss what is added by the frequent allusions to Tacitus, and how far we should press intertextual readings; a test-case is given by an apparent allusion to Shakespeare’s Henry V. Syme’s characterisation is sometimes thought limited, with the main players all interpreted in a similar cynical way so that events seem to replay themselves: but with ancient authors such patterning is seen to be a vehicle for interpretation, and the same generosity can be extended to Syme. Finally, the echoes of 1930s power politics are addressed from the viewpoint of Syme’s audience, rendering them more susceptible to accept his leading themes: so these too contribute to the rhetoric of The Roman Revolution.

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 15 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.