Palenie ksiąg w starożytnym Rzymie jako przejaw autorytarnego ograniczania republikańskiej wolności słowa

D. Nowicka
{"title":"Palenie ksiąg w starożytnym Rzymie jako przejaw autorytarnego ograniczania republikańskiej wolności słowa","authors":"D. Nowicka","doi":"10.19195/2300-7249.43.4.16","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Transition from republic to principate brought a meaningful alteration in the area of conceiving freedom of speech. Republican standards in this matter were not apt for the new regime as it was too fragile to withstand the republican dissidence. New restrictions and ad hoc measures needed to be applied. Among them burning of books was of particular importance. \nThe article deals with incidents of book burning in the times of Augustus (cases of Titus Labienus and Cassius Severus) and Tiberius (those of Mamercus Scaurus and Cremutius Cordus), which, although not numerous, were of high significance for freedom of speech within the new regime. On the basis of analysis of selected ancient sources and scientific literature on the matter, an answer to the question about their political meaning is sought. Accordingly, the socio-political background of change in the area of freedom of speech in the context of passing from a republic to the authoritarian regime of a principate needs to be taken into account. Unfortunately, historical sources regarding the matter are deeply unequivocal and scientific interpretations seem strongly conditioned by tendencies to discern crimen maiestatis in every case of book burning from the times of early empire, even if it is not plainly attested by ancient authors. It appears that the subsequent popularity of maiestas charges could have influenced the erroneous interpretation of previous incidents, which appear to have been — at least formally — distant from the law of injured majesty, being ad hoc measures at least in the times of the reign of Augustus. \nHowever, the essential point of analysis concerns the grounds of the incidents of burning books that took place under August and Tiberius, showing a step-by-step process of supressing the republican freedom of speech. Although rare, book burnings reflect a common tendency in new authoritarian rulers’ politics, which at first tend to deal with opponents unpopular among the aristocracy, only to move on to managing adversaries originating from the Roman élite. Nevertheless, the undertaken measures were not suitable for annihilating the books in question, contributing to their growth in popularity. The answer to the core question about the aims of book burnings under Augustus and Tiberius seems to boil down to mere propaganda, showing that dissident books would not be tolerated, no matter the social status of their authors.","PeriodicalId":173985,"journal":{"name":"Studia nad Autorytaryzmem i Totalitaryzmem","volume":"45 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Studia nad Autorytaryzmem i Totalitaryzmem","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.19195/2300-7249.43.4.16","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Transition from republic to principate brought a meaningful alteration in the area of conceiving freedom of speech. Republican standards in this matter were not apt for the new regime as it was too fragile to withstand the republican dissidence. New restrictions and ad hoc measures needed to be applied. Among them burning of books was of particular importance. The article deals with incidents of book burning in the times of Augustus (cases of Titus Labienus and Cassius Severus) and Tiberius (those of Mamercus Scaurus and Cremutius Cordus), which, although not numerous, were of high significance for freedom of speech within the new regime. On the basis of analysis of selected ancient sources and scientific literature on the matter, an answer to the question about their political meaning is sought. Accordingly, the socio-political background of change in the area of freedom of speech in the context of passing from a republic to the authoritarian regime of a principate needs to be taken into account. Unfortunately, historical sources regarding the matter are deeply unequivocal and scientific interpretations seem strongly conditioned by tendencies to discern crimen maiestatis in every case of book burning from the times of early empire, even if it is not plainly attested by ancient authors. It appears that the subsequent popularity of maiestas charges could have influenced the erroneous interpretation of previous incidents, which appear to have been — at least formally — distant from the law of injured majesty, being ad hoc measures at least in the times of the reign of Augustus. However, the essential point of analysis concerns the grounds of the incidents of burning books that took place under August and Tiberius, showing a step-by-step process of supressing the republican freedom of speech. Although rare, book burnings reflect a common tendency in new authoritarian rulers’ politics, which at first tend to deal with opponents unpopular among the aristocracy, only to move on to managing adversaries originating from the Roman élite. Nevertheless, the undertaken measures were not suitable for annihilating the books in question, contributing to their growth in popularity. The answer to the core question about the aims of book burnings under Augustus and Tiberius seems to boil down to mere propaganda, showing that dissident books would not be tolerated, no matter the social status of their authors.
从共和制到元首制的过渡给言论自由的构想带来了有意义的改变。共和党在这个问题上的标准不适合新政权,因为它太脆弱,无法承受共和党的异议。需要实行新的限制和特别措施。其中焚烧书籍尤为重要。文章论述了奥古斯都时期的焚书事件(提图斯·拉比努斯和卡修斯·塞维鲁)和提比略时期的焚书事件(马马库斯·斯考鲁斯和克雷穆提乌斯·科多斯),这些事件虽然不多,但对新政权的言论自由具有重要意义。在分析有关这一问题的精选古代资料和科学文献的基础上,寻求其政治意义问题的答案。因此,在从共和国过渡到元首专制政权的背景下,言论自由领域发生变化的社会政治背景需要加以考虑。不幸的是,关于这个问题的历史资料是非常明确的,科学解释似乎强烈地受到从早期帝国时代开始的每一个焚书案例中辨别出maiestatis的倾向的制约,即使没有古代作者的明确证明。看来,后来的maiestas指控的流行可能影响了对先前事件的错误解释,这些事件似乎-至少在形式上-远离了伤害陛下的法律,至少在奥古斯都统治时期是特别措施。然而,分析的重点是发生在奥古斯特和提比略时期的焚书事件的依据,显示了一个循序渐进的压制共和言论自由的过程。虽然很罕见,但焚书反映了新专制统治者政治中的一种普遍趋势,一开始倾向于处理在贵族中不受欢迎的对手,后来才转向管理来自罗马的敌人。然而,所采取的措施并不适合消灭这些书,反而助长了它们的流行。关于奥古斯都和提比略时期焚书目的的核心问题的答案似乎可以归结为纯粹的宣传,表明无论其作者的社会地位如何,持不同政见的书籍都不会被容忍。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信