WALLACE-HADRILL, A., — Suetonius. The Scholar and his Caesars.

Yale University Press, New Haven / London, 1984. 1st US ed. IX,216p. Original black cloth with dust wrappers. Spine gilt titled. Fore edge as well as end pages a bit rust stained. Upper edge a little bit grimy. Name stamp on title page. ‘It seems incredible, but until recently there had been no full length study of Suetonius in English, even though he is a primary and contemporary source for the most evidently studied period of Roman history, is repeatedly mentioned by other ancient writers, is known also from epigraphy, and has always been a much read and widely imitated author. (…) Scholars will warmly welcome Wallace-Hadrill’s book, since it does far more than recount what is known of Suetonius’ life, paying due attention to the vexed questions when he was born (c. A.D. 69?) and where (Hippo Regius?), whether he actually served as tribunus ‘angusticlavius’ (probably not), how he published his ‘Caesares’ (perhaps serially), and in which year did he and his patron lose Hadrian’s favour (c. 128?). By discussing all aspects of Roman life and letters in the first century this study sets Suetonius in hies intellectual and social environment. He was one of those learned men of the Early Empire who combined a literary with a public career. Unlike Tacitus, he aimed to write biography, not history; and since history dealt with war and politics whereas biography handled the personality and achievements of individuals, he felt no need to burden his readers with chronological details or comprehensive narratives. His method was to emphasise the anecdotal as it reveals the individual. To this end he used mundane, unpretentious language, not the elevated epic style of history, To regard Suetonius as a mere scandalmonger is grotesque. His outlook was that of an upper class Roman intention on the traditional values of his class, and he judged every Caesar by the extent to which he promoted such values. Suetonius in fact is the mirror to contemporary ‘mores’, and Wallace-Hadrill’s refreshing approach to him is one that no social, or other historian of the Roman Empire can afford to ignore.’ (E. TOTGO SALMON in Classical World, 1985, p.616).