Site Library Library of Rome

Scriptores Historiae Augustae (SHA)

Originally, the six different authors of the Scriptores Historiae Augusta (from here on called SHA), were taken as simply that of six different authors. It was not until 1889 when Hermann Dessau came up with a new hypothesis did the SHA become controversial. Dessau stated in Hermes, xxiv (1889) that the SHA was not a group of writers from the early 4th century, but that of a single 'forger' from the time of Theodosius. The forger wanted to give the SHA the appearance of an earlier origin and attributed the Lives to six different authors. According to Dessau, the man was further motivated to fabricate sources to cover up any mistakes. Dessau's interpretations of various problems such as the thanks to Constantius Chlorus in the Vita Claudii would not have been composed while Constantius was only a Caesar (instead of Augustan Emperor). He also stated that the six different authors were important family names of the latter part of the 4th century and that none of these names were prominent any earlier. Many of the technical terms employed to the imperial administration don't seem to have been used in Diocletian or in Constantine's time but were common enough in Theodosius'.

Other authors furthered this hypothesis but Elimar Klebs argued that though the authors names may be incorrect, the original authorship of all the lives of the emperors were from the period of Diocletian and Constantine. In an other article, Klebs argued that the reason the authors sound similar to one another is that they tried to give a feel similar to Suetonius with his 12 Caesars. Their style and method were too different, he argued, to be the same author. From Hadrian to Caracalla, the authors rarely appear and their sources are barely named. Also during these Lives, no rhetoric is ever used. The Lives after Caracalla, Kleb says, were referring often to Herodian's work.

Eduard von Wolfflin (1891) investigated the SHA even further and studied its language and style. He said that despite all of the Lives using words and phrases from Seutonius, every author had his own distinction. The manner of narration, the grammatical usage, and the use of stock formulae made each author distinct. His belief, which I tend to lean toward, was that each author was indeed different, but that there was a general editor who put together the collection and added his own work. Wolffin theorized that the editor was Vopiscus who wrote from Aurelian to Carinus. He showed a list of words and phrases that could be found in Vopiscus but not in any of the major Lives by Spartianus.

Though during the 20th Century, debates and analyzing of the SHA have been more diverse, I find them trying to be more fanciful than any previous hypothesis that came before them. Statements to make the authors seem even later in date or that the 'forger' was more corrupt than possibly managed with devious works as an excuse for a scholar to pat himself on the back had almost become ludicrous. It will be interesting to see what the latest theories are about the SHA.

Greek Interaction with East Africa
The Classic Greek Interpretation of Xoanon statues
The Curia (Roman Senate House)
Homer's Bronze Age Festivities
Roman Doors
Temple of Vespasian and Titus in the Roman Forum
Arch of Tiberius in the Roman Forum
Arch of Augustus in the Roman Forum
Julia Domna: An Empress' Struggle (1)
Temple of Castor and Pollux in the Roman Forum
Latin Abbreviations [A to C]
Herodian Book VI [Alexander Severus] 6.7 to 6.9

Scriptores Historiae Augustae (SHA)

Herodian Book VII [Maximinus the Thrax] 7.1
Making a Roman Name at AncientWorlds
Index of Roman Articles