Velleius Paterculus
Gaius Velleius Paterculus was an early Roman historian born around 20 BCE in Campania, whose career flourished during the reign of Augustus. He is best known for his two-volume work, *Compendium of Roman History*, completed around 30 CE, which remains his only extant writing. Velleius served as a military tribune and later held significant political positions, demonstrating loyalty to the imperial family, including Augustus and Tiberius. His historical narrative places Rome within the broader context of world empires and praises Augustus for restoring stability after civil wars, often blurring the lines between history and eulogy. Velleius's work is notable for its attention to cultural developments alongside political events, contributing to the understanding of the classical canon in literature. His writings reflect the complexities of loyalty and political dynamics in early imperial Rome, although some scholars question the objectivity of his accounts due to his favorable portrayals of the emperors. Despite potential inaccuracies, his rhetorical skill provides valuable insights into the cultural attitudes of the mid-first century.
On this Page
Subject Terms
Velleius Paterculus
Historian
- Born: c. 20 b.c.e.
- Died: c. 31 c.e.
Biography
Classical scholars have established the birth of early Roman Imperial historian Gaius Velleius Paterculus around 20 b.c.e. He is known for his two-volume Compendium of Roman History, completed around 30 c.e.
Born in Campania, Velleius’s family rose during his lifetime to political prominence in Rome due in no small part to his own accomplishments and loyalty to Augustus Cæsar. He served as a military tribune under Augustus’s grandson and heir designate Gaius Cæsar, accompanying him on campaigns in the eastern provinces, including Parthia and Armenia. After the death of Gaius at Limyra in southern Turkey in 4 c.e., Velleius commanded a cavalry unit under the future Tiberius Cæsar. Having proven himself a committed Augustan loyalist, he returned to Rome to hold the office of quæstor in 6 c.e., continuing to serve under Tiberius until becoming Augustus’s personal nomination for praetor in 14 c.e. and taking that office shortly after when Tiberius succeeded Augustus as emperor.
The two-volume History is the only extant work of Velleius, and scholars do not know whether he wrote anything else. In the History, he proposes to write a larger work, but no manuscript survives. Because Velleius was already around fifty when the work was completed, scholars believe he may not have lived long enough to begin the larger work. It is also possible that he was executed in 31 c.e. along with the prefect Seianus, whom he praises in the History, or that his criticism of the Roman defeat in the Teutoburg Forest offended Tiberius and resulted in his exile. No evidence of Velleius surviving past 30 c.e. exists.
Although the first book of the History is incomplete, the work follows a popular organizing principle for its era, situating Rome in the scheme of world empires including Assyria, Persia, and Greece. Velleius praises the restoration of the state out of civil war by the Augustus after the decisive battle of Actium in 31 b.c.e., comparing Augustus favorably both to rulers of the previous world empires and to powerful Romans such as Marius, Sulla, Pompey, and Cæsar.
Velleius’s connection of cultural developments with political history is characteristic of histories during the period when he was writing, although Velleius gives more attention to culture than many other historians. He discusses Greek and Roman literature at length and is considered significant in marking the evolution of a classical canon. Although his dates are often suspect, his recognition of the role of culture in imperial unification is sophisticated.
His loyalty to Augustus and Tiberius raises questions about the quality of his scholarship. Even by Roman standards such as Cicero’s, Velleius’s suggestion that Augustus’s reign marks the pinnacle of world history is closer to encomium, a work of praise, than to history proper. Nonetheless, as a writer of Latin he had tremendous rhetorical skill, producing highly evocative images and phrases, and even when his facts are incorrect and his narrative unreliable, his work provides modern historians with valuable insight into cultural trends and attitudes during the mid-first century.