The Annals of Tacitus presents particular challenges for the translator, whose achievement is usually judged on the clarity of their version. But Tacitus is anything but clear, and to render his difficult Latin in smooth English prose does a significant disservice to the historian – and his readers. Yet the translation must also be readable. D., grappling with this problem, has produced an admirable translation, not through compromise but through boldness.
For brevity and intensity, D. makes effective, sparing use of compound nouns, sometimes to highlight juxtaposition: [Nero] exueret obsequium in matrem (13.13.1) becomes ‘he shed mother-obedience’. Bolder still is the occasional recourse to a colloquialism: Tiberius verba patrum cavillantem (1.46.2) is ‘playing word games’; interversis patroni rebus (16.10.2) is ‘pocketing his patron's property’; Agrippina, scornfully dismissing the accusations of Domitia Lepida, refers to her as anus (13.21.2), an ‘old bag’. Since these are expressions well embedded in semi-formal English usage, they do not deflate the grandeur of Tacitean prose.
The interpretative use of punctuation also energises this translation. Appuleia Varilla is brought up on a treason charge: probrosis sermonibus divum Augustum ac Tiberium et matrem eius inlusisset Caesarique conexa adulterio teneretur (2.50.1); ‘she mocked Augustus and Tiberius and his mother with insulting talk, and – Tiberius' kinswoman! – is liable on an adultery charge’. The fact of Varilla's kinship to the emperor is not a formal charge, but adds to the outrage of her alleged action. In a similar vein, D. makes visible the ubiquitous indirect questions which create the atmosphere of doubt and intrigue in imperial Rome. Perhaps this signals too much in advance the condition in which Latinate readers often find themselves, unexpectedly, enmeshed in oddly-related subjunctive verbs. But often these questions have been missed altogether, and their heightened visibility here re-presents the narrative as an exchange of voices. At the death of Augustus' confidante: neque multo post exstincto Maximo, dubium an quaesita morte (1.5.2); ‘soon thereafter Maximus was dead. By choice? Uncertain’.
The first thing to strike a reader opening this book is the look of the text: entire passages or short phrases in italics visually represent movement from narrative to indirect discourse. As D. explains ‘the primary gain is the immediacy [italics] give to the words and thoughts of Tacitus' memorable characters’ (p. liii). The value of this simple strategy is immeasurable, as the reader must confront the question of who speaks in the text: the necessary prelude to an engagement with Tacitus' psycho-political vision of history.
This text may not be popular with everyone. Those who read Tacitus as a ‘source’ rather than a ‘text’ will want to get past the rhetoric as quickly as possible, to reach what they consider to be the truth of the matter, and may well prefer a translation which reflects that view of reading history as a straightforward activity. But, as I have suggested, Tacitus is not meant to be an easy read; D.'s translation keeps that essential feature before our eyes at all times. Yet, she also facilitates our understanding: the notes help us to keep track of the senatorial figures who appear, recur and fatally disappear; the introduction sets out the fundamental issues for reading Tacitus; and the translation, in more ways than can be demonstrated here, prods the reader in the direction of new interpretations and reflections. I look forward to teaching a new generation of students through D.'s translation.
