Call for Papers by Josiah Osgood
Books by Josiah Osgood
The Alternative Augustan Age, 2019
The princeps Augustus (63 BCE – 14 CE), recognized as the first of the Roman emperors, looms larg... more The princeps Augustus (63 BCE – 14 CE), recognized as the first of the Roman emperors, looms large in the teaching and writing of Roman history. Major political, literary, and artistic developments alike are attributed to him. This book deliberately and provocatively shifts the focus off Augustus while still looking at events of his time. Contributors uncover the perspectives and contributions of a range of individuals other than the princeps. Not all thought they were living in the “Augustan Age.” Not all took their cues from Augustus. In their self-display or ideas for reform, some anticipated Augustus. Others found ways to oppose him that also helped to shape the future of their community. The volume challenges the very idea of an “Augustan Age” by breaking down traditional turning points and showing the continuous experimentation and development of these years to be in continuity with earlier Roman culture. In showcasing absences of Augustus and giving other figures their due, the papers here make a seemingly familiar period startlingly new.
Cassius Dio and the Late Roman Republic (Brill), 2019
Cassius Dio’s Roman History is an essential, yet still undervalued, source for modern historians ... more Cassius Dio’s Roman History is an essential, yet still undervalued, source for modern historians of the late Roman Republic. The papers in this volume show how his account can be used to gain new perspectives on such topics as the memory of the conspirator Catiline, debates over leadership in Rome, and the nature of alliance formation in civil war.
Contributors also establish Dio as fully in command of his narrative, shaping it to suit his own interests as a senator, a political theorist, and, above all, a historian. Sophisticated use of chronology, manipulation of annalistic form, and engagement with Thucydides are just some of the ways Dio engages with the rich tradition of Greco-Roman historiography to advance his own interpretations.
Papers by Josiah Osgood
This paper investigates the role in Dio's history of the Sibylline oracle made public during the ... more This paper investigates the role in Dio's history of the Sibylline oracle made public during the political struggle in Rome over the command to reinstate King Ptolemy Auletes of Egypt in 56 BCE (39.15.2). In his other mentions of such oracles, Dio typically foregrounds questions of authenticity and applicability. By contrast, he raises little doubt about the oracle of 56 BCE and focuses on its decisive impact on contemporary political debate. His narrative shows a good knowledge of events, and is more balanced than modern accounts that -based on Cicero's letters -have often fixated on doubts about the authenticity of the oracle as well as suspicions concerning the role of Pompey and Crassus in the episode. Yet later in book 39, when he discusses the restoration of King Ptolemy by Gabinius and Gabinius' subsequent trials in Rome, Dio is far less balanced: he has swallowed a tradition quite hostile to Pompey and Gabinius.
The Classical Journal, 2007
This paper analyzes Seneca's representation of Claudius' voice in the Apocolocyntosis, arguing th... more This paper analyzes Seneca's representation of Claudius' voice in the Apocolocyntosis, arguing that the emperor's problems in speaking are humorous, but also constitute a real failing that renders him unsuitable as a princeps.
Cassius Dio Network by Josiah Osgood
In the imperial books Cassius Dio focuses on individual emperors and dynasties to develop a theor... more In the imperial books Cassius Dio focuses on individual emperors and dynasties to develop a theory of the best kind of monarchy and of monarchy's typical problems. One result is that his work does not present itself as exclusively annalistic in nature, but as a series of imperial biographies, beginning with the dynasts of the Republic. This introduces a tension into his narrative structure, which creates a unique sense of the past and allows us to see Roman history through a specific lens.
This in-house Network event will address the political institutions and the government of the Principate, including its honour-system, as well as the different ruling family dynasties; it will focus on how these institutions make Cassius Dio reflect on periods of prosperity and decline. Through Cassius Dio's distinctive interpretation of these issues it is possible to examine the underlying structural elements of imperial society, the individuality of emperors, and the relationship between institutions and individuals.
The aim of the conference is to focus on Cassius Dio as a historian – the only historian who allo... more The aim of the conference is to focus on Cassius Dio as a historian – the only historian who allows us to follow the developments of Rome's political institutions during a more than thousand year period, from the foundation of the city to Dio's retirement from public life in 229 CE. We propose to explore Dio's methodology and agendas, all of which influenced his approaches to Rome's history. The aim is a reassessment that will rest on a deeper study of his narrative technique, his relationship with traditions of universal and more Rome-based historiography, and his structural approach to Roman history. One question that will be raised is as follows: can we find common principles for how to use Dio as a source for different periods, events and individuals? What are our main approaches? Most frequently Cassius Dio is used as a handy resource, with scholars looking at isolated sections of his annalistic structure. This piecemeal use of The Roman History makes us forget to reflect on his work in its textual and contextual entirety. Contrary to this approach, we will put emphasis on Cassius Dio and his Roman History in its historiographical setting, thus allowing us to link and understand the different parts of his work. We thus propose to accept that Cassius Dio was a figure in his own right and with his own agendas for writing The Roman History, at the same...
Proposals for 30 minutes papers now accepted.
Reviews by Josiah Osgood
Uploads
Call for Papers by Josiah Osgood
Books by Josiah Osgood
Contributors also establish Dio as fully in command of his narrative, shaping it to suit his own interests as a senator, a political theorist, and, above all, a historian. Sophisticated use of chronology, manipulation of annalistic form, and engagement with Thucydides are just some of the ways Dio engages with the rich tradition of Greco-Roman historiography to advance his own interpretations.
Papers by Josiah Osgood
Cassius Dio Network by Josiah Osgood
This in-house Network event will address the political institutions and the government of the Principate, including its honour-system, as well as the different ruling family dynasties; it will focus on how these institutions make Cassius Dio reflect on periods of prosperity and decline. Through Cassius Dio's distinctive interpretation of these issues it is possible to examine the underlying structural elements of imperial society, the individuality of emperors, and the relationship between institutions and individuals.
Proposals for 30 minutes papers now accepted.
Reviews by Josiah Osgood
Contributors also establish Dio as fully in command of his narrative, shaping it to suit his own interests as a senator, a political theorist, and, above all, a historian. Sophisticated use of chronology, manipulation of annalistic form, and engagement with Thucydides are just some of the ways Dio engages with the rich tradition of Greco-Roman historiography to advance his own interpretations.
This in-house Network event will address the political institutions and the government of the Principate, including its honour-system, as well as the different ruling family dynasties; it will focus on how these institutions make Cassius Dio reflect on periods of prosperity and decline. Through Cassius Dio's distinctive interpretation of these issues it is possible to examine the underlying structural elements of imperial society, the individuality of emperors, and the relationship between institutions and individuals.
Proposals for 30 minutes papers now accepted.
Historical writing about Rome in both Latin and Greek forms an integrated topic. There are two strands in ancient writing about the Romans and their empire: (a) the Romans’ own tradition of histories of the deeds of the Roman people at home and at war, and (b) Greek historical responses, some developing their own models (Polybius, Josephus) and the others building on what both the Roman historians and earlier Greeks had written (Dionysius, Appian, Cassius Dio). Whereas older scholarship tended to privilege a small group of ‘great historians’ (the likes of Sallust, Livy, Tacitus), recent work has rightly brought out the diversity of the traditions and recognized that even ‘minor’ writers are worth exploring not just as sources, but for their own concerns and reinterpretation of their material (such as The Fragments of the Roman Historians (2013), and the collected volumes on Velleius Paterculus (Cowan 2011) and Appian (Welch 2015)). The study of these historiographical traditions is essential as a counterbalance to the traditional use of ancient authors as a handy resource, with scholars looking at isolated sections of their structure. This fragmentary use of the ancient evidence makes us forget to reflect on their work in its textual and contextual entirety.