Roman history: a society building epic - followed by politics, politics, and more politics

J. Tayler Smith
Dec 10, 2022
6 min read

Reviewing Roman Antiquities by Dionysius of Halicarnassus by J. Tayler Smith

The history of leadership

A few years ago, I thought it would be interesting to read in chronological order every biography of the American presidents and Canadian prime ministers to see how leadership evolved throughout these two nations. But then I thought, why stop there? Why not start back through the British figures from whom the American and Canadian leaders first took power? Then, I continued that thought to the leading figures of ancient Roman mythology. To kick off this list of historical leadership, I first read the Aeneid, the mythological epic poem about Aeneas, the supposed ancestor of Romulus: the founder of Rome. I just finished reading Roman Antiquities by Dionysius of Halicarnassus, which was the next book on my list of historical leadership. Dionysius records the founding of Rome, the rule of its first seven kings, and the first couple hundred years of its existence as a republic.

It was good to complete this read; however, it became more of a chore as time went on due to the longwinded nature of the author. As I progressed, the book sections felt like a challenge to overcome rather than a pleasure to explore. While I’m happy I read it, I’m glad it is finished. I am ready to move on to other books.

Rome: from founding to a republic

Dionysius wrote Roman Antiquities during the reign of the first Roman emperor, Caesar Augustus (about 7 BCE), with the intention of proving to the conquered Greeks that their Roman rulers were also of Grecian descent - worthy of ruling a Greek people. Dionysius explicitly makes this known in the opening book. To make his case, Dionysius relies a great deal on mythology, tradition, and what written records were available at the time to prove the greatness of Rome. The first book concerns the arrival of Rome’s ancestors in modern Italy, the struggles and omens that set the Roman people apart from their neighbours, and myths like those of Romulus and his rise to power, which all intend to showcase the glory of Rome over its conquered territories.

Roman Antiquities is divided into two volumes, each is about ten books. However, the first volume makes up about 80 percent of the total read since almost all the second volume is either lost or incomplete. Each book in volume one takes anywhere from 90 to 120 minutes to read; the shorter and incomplete books in volume two only take about 10 minutes each. While some may find this disappointing, I was pleased to read much smaller books after spending a month with this book since I was ready to move on to something else.

The best part of Roman Antiquities is the first two books which focus on Rome’s origin and the rule of the original seven legendary kings. These books describe a people group working to establish their identity by experimenting with different ways to govern themselves. In these books the Roman Senate is established, the cultural symbols of the wolf and eagle are explained, the foundation for Rome’s two classes of people - the patricians and the plebeians - are established, and the origin of several words still used today such as ‘capital’ (as in a capital city) and ‘tribune’ are given a traditional explanation. The rulership of the kings is interesting in and of itself and is also enjoyable to read. The descriptions of several benevolent rulers and how the people dealt with tyrants are exciting more often than not.

The remaining eighteen books follow Rome’s history once it became a republic. The collection is far dryer after this point as more focus shifts to political infighting and power struggles between the wealthy patricians and the poor plebeians. There are a couple of highlights involving war and uprisings but the majority of these books consist of long-winded speeches and debates.

A skillful author with a penchant for virtue

Dionysius seems to be a proficient author and researcher in his ability to gather history and weigh it against what other historians had previously said. Dionysius refers to the works of other historians, and he weighs in with his own logic and reasoning to determine the degree to which these historians offer trustworthy accounts. Dionysius’s ability to write a reasonably compelling history is also noted in his inclusion of speeches, battle descriptions, and storytelling. However, his movement between these writing styles works best in the first two books, the later sections focus too heavily on speeches and debates.

Roman Antiquities heavily relies on legend and mythology when discussing the earliest origins of Rome but becomes increasingly more accurate as Dionysius writes closer to his own lifetime. The overall themes and ideas Dionysius writes about seem representative of Roman life - how decisions were made, the general demeanour of rulers, and their government decision-making processes. However, some of the specifics are likely speculation or myth, such as Dionysius’s description of a time when two gods came down to fight alongside the Romans in battle.

Roman Antiquities feels like an accurate depiction of how Romans viewed themselves and their history during Dionysius’s lifetime. The author truly captures the way Romans viewed themselves and their place in the world. He demonstrates a Roman belief in being specially chosen and set apart to rule due to their virtue and a love of justice.

While it is evident that Roman Antiquities is a form of Roman propaganda, Dionysius does not shy away from talking about the city’s failures and how they overcame challenges. He is also slow in villainizing Rome’s opponents. Rather, he describes the virtues of neighbouring states and only villainizes them in the context of some moral failure on their part. The main goal of this sort of reverence seems to be a desire to demonstrate that Rome is worthy of rulership through overcoming moral failure as opposed to its neighbours. (Whether Rome actually did overcome such failures is another topic altogether.)

For a work of ancient history, Dionysius surprisingly speaks well of most people groups; he is also not gratuitous in terms of violence or sexual exploitation. Overall, the author focuses on Rome’s attempts to develop a civil system that benefits most, not all its citizens. On a number of occasions, women are the heroes in history who specifically made Rome a better place. The worst descriptions Dionysius ever gives of any people group are the patricians and rulers of Rome, whenever they take too much power for themselves and oppress others. Evil actions are not afforded inappropriate attention or detail, and the development of virtue is highly praised.

The topics of justice and virtue frequently occur in this work; Dionysius often praises the virtues of integrity, honesty, and ensuring that people are treated fairly and rightly. Certainly, he is not perfect in this regard, and he is not shy to discuss the immediate execution of those he believes deserved death. Nevertheless, the author's understanding of virtue is a major theme in his history of Rome. Those who are virtuous are praised as benefactors, and those who are moral failures are viewed as villains both on an individual and corporate level. If Rome’s citizens and leadership behave virtuously, Rome rises; but if they fail morally, Rome falls. However, this leads to the author's assumption that a successful Rome is by default a virtuous Rome. Nevertheless, I do appreciate the general praise of virtuous living and leadership.

Too much politics and not enough action

Dionysius’s first two books are written in an engaging story-telling format; however, the remainder of the book is filled with speeches and repetitive wars with few distinguishing features. Unfortunately, this makes most of Dionysius dry and hard to engage with.

The first two books of Roman Antiquities are interesting enough to bring up in casual conversation. They contain interesting anecdotes, such as when a sword breaks a stone after a soothsayer says it will be so. However, the remainder of the book is less enjoyable and memorable. There is much to be said about how little politics has changed since ancient times and about the relationship between the rich and poor, but these topics are discussed through debate and are likely to bore the average reader.

Largely due to the lack of engagement in the latter half of the book, even modern historians don’t necessarily consider this a landmark work in recording Rome’s history. There are other standout books that do what Dionysius did but better. Dionysius is good for demonstrating the mind of a Roman in his own time but his book is not a supreme authority on the topic.

Personally, I really enjoyed reading about the early history and the reigns of the kings from Dionysius’s perspective. The first two books are truly a story and tell an epic of the initial rise of Rome. However, the remaining volumes are often a slog where it is difficult to maintain focus.

Interesting history that becomes boring too quickly

There are some genuine ‘highs’ in this read that are mostly associated with the first two books and the other occasional anecdotes. Dionysius is at his best when telling stories; however, the remainder of the book is bogged down with endless speeches that detract from the surrounding circumstances. The author does well in reflecting on how Rome thought of itself from a historical perspective. He seems to be a reasonably well-researched writer, emphasising positive human virtues throughout his work. However, he quickly becomes dry, longwinded, and focuses too much on small issues. For these reasons, I give his book a five out of nine-star rating.