Startseite Altertumswissenschaften & Ägyptologie Alleinherrschaft und die Ohnmacht der Sprache. Tacitus’ Dialogus de oratoribus als historiographisches Theater
Kapitel
Lizenziert
Nicht lizenziert Erfordert eine Authentifizierung

Alleinherrschaft und die Ohnmacht der Sprache. Tacitus’ Dialogus de oratoribus als historiographisches Theater

  • Alexander Kirichenko
Veröffentlichen auch Sie bei De Gruyter Brill
Jenseits von Unterhaltung
Ein Kapitel aus dem Buch Jenseits von Unterhaltung

Abstract

This article examines the term theater as a multifaceted figure of thought that Tacitus uses in the Dialogus de oratoribus to illustrate the difference between the earlier periods of Roman history and the autocratic regime of imperial Rome. While in the late Republic and under Augustus the performative power of eloquence or poetry could be associated with the emotional effect of a theatrical performance, in post-Augustan culture, according to the Dialogus, theater became synonymous with insubstantial imitation and thus with the absolute impotence of language. This impression is particularly enhanced by the fact that, while tragedy proves to be the only literary genre that, in imperial Rome, can still produce an effect comparable to republican eloquence, the text stages an attempt to silence a tragedian. The fact that the Dialogus itself is conceived as a kind of historical drama can be interpreted as a programmatic reflection on the “historiographical theater” that Tacitus stages in his historiography, especially in the Annals: It is a literary self-presentation in which the mask of a factual chronicler of the Imperial past serves to make a statement about the timeless (deeply theatricalized) present of Roman autocracy.

Abstract

This article examines the term theater as a multifaceted figure of thought that Tacitus uses in the Dialogus de oratoribus to illustrate the difference between the earlier periods of Roman history and the autocratic regime of imperial Rome. While in the late Republic and under Augustus the performative power of eloquence or poetry could be associated with the emotional effect of a theatrical performance, in post-Augustan culture, according to the Dialogus, theater became synonymous with insubstantial imitation and thus with the absolute impotence of language. This impression is particularly enhanced by the fact that, while tragedy proves to be the only literary genre that, in imperial Rome, can still produce an effect comparable to republican eloquence, the text stages an attempt to silence a tragedian. The fact that the Dialogus itself is conceived as a kind of historical drama can be interpreted as a programmatic reflection on the “historiographical theater” that Tacitus stages in his historiography, especially in the Annals: It is a literary self-presentation in which the mask of a factual chronicler of the Imperial past serves to make a statement about the timeless (deeply theatricalized) present of Roman autocracy.

Heruntergeladen am 9.1.2026 von https://www.degruyterbrill.com/document/doi/10.1515/9783111706696-008/html?lang=de
Button zum nach oben scrollen