Members with This Book
Most Helpful Reviews
see all reviews
Liked It “Building up to the period where the republic was at risk, Caesars civil war and its aftermath. Prose history.” see full review » see other reviews » |
Newest Reviews
see all reviews-
“Building up to the period where the republic was at risk, Caesars civil war and its aftermath. Prose history.”
Arjen vdr Hoeven wrote this review Tuesday, March 13, 2012. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“This is a great read! Better than a novel. Exactly what I was looking for. I was a history major and even took a class in Roman history. There was a lot of socio-economic history in the class I took. The problem with socio-economic history is that it is often not interesting. Or I should say, it is boring data sets if you can't connect it to a person, place, and timeline. Unless you have a good idea of how the story flows and a few colorful anchor points for reference, it is really hard to make any sense of what food Romans ate, or how they built their houses, or their art and religion, life expectancy, rural/urban migration patterns, grain prices, shipping costs, percentages of slaves to free citizens, plebs to patricians. All of this is just trivia if you don't understand the grand ideas and personalities that the common person listened to and either admired or reviled on a daily basis.
Thomas Stevens wrote this review Saturday, January 7, 2012. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Holland brings the late Republic to life. Lot's of characters to keep up with. . . but hey, this was the late Republic. It is not going to be a biography. You can't tell the story without a lot of leading actors jockeying for position.
I was not bothered by some of the coloring Holland did. I think this happens a lot more in history than most people realize. Even if you take a dataset, a historian is often weaving some modern Marxist ideology into what the data says. True, we will never know if Pompey really "swaggered." But it is not a complete fabrication. It is just a decent inference from the available material.
I enjoyed this book very much!
Note: Not all of the foot notes are linked in the Kindle version which, of course, makes them virtually inaccessible.”
“Wonderfully readable and vivid overview of the fall of the Roman Republic.”
Clodia Metelli wrote this review Sunday, November 27, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“I suppose Rubicon is what you would call a popular history book, a gripping narrative retelling of the History of the Roman Republic. Like many of my current interests my interest in Classical History has only become piqued in the last few years, although I did have a brief love affair with Robert Grave’s Claudius books in my late teens, but that was mainly because of the bawdiness of the concurrent television production with Brian Blessed as as a shouty Augustus and John Hurts monstrous Caligula.
Sean K wrote this review Monday, October 17, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
Having studied History I do find that popular History books are a good way into a period though and good ones are well sourced and researched so it’s easy to go back to the primary sources and make your own mind up, where the author is busy colouring in for you. I have the last few years been enjoying fictionalised Roman history as well of which there has been a plethora of high quality productions in the recent past. The BBC/HBO Rome series being a case in point, but also the exceptional series of books from Robert Harris starting with Pompeii and continuing with his current series based on the life of Cicero (looking forward very much to the next one).
Rubicon is a history book though, and a great introduction to the period leading up to the founding of the dynastic line of Emperors half begun by Julius and completed by Augustus. What caused the Roman ruling class to implode and let one man and his faction seize control of the state? As Tom Holland states it would be over a thousand years before we saw a return to rule by the people as the last vestiges of ancient democracy were wiped out.
Written deliberately with hindsight the book shows the enormity of the Roman ruling classes ambition and greed, with their bloodlust and their love of theatricality they remind you of the Hiitler led gang in Germany 2000 years later, sharing the same symbols and ideas. That one of their number would rise above the others appears inevitable, but with his tour-de-force presentation of the omnipresent Cicero, we can see the confused times and the very carefully balanced forces arrayed against one another. It could have gone either way. That probably wouldn’t have mattered , dynasty would have ensued.
The only weak area is the rise of Augustus towards the end, but I have the marvellous …....... to look forward to reading again, which i will write about at another time.
I gave this book to the Blue Cedar Library at Co-Camp 2011, I hope it found a good home.”
“2003...library”
Care B wrote this review Tuesday, January 4, 2011. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“As a student of history, Rome holds a particularly strong fascination for me. Having been brought up in western civilization, Roman history is my history. I can see echoes of it in my everyday life, from the words I use to the ways in which I think. Despite its importance, it has been quite some time since I refreshed myself in its history, and so this week I read Rubicon: the Last Years of the Roman Republic. The author begins by stating that narrative history is starting to come back into vogue now, and that is the style in which he intends to write. For my part, I prefer narrative history to any other kind I know about.
smellincoffee wrote this review Saturday, October 16, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
More than two millennia after the Republic's collapse, the "extraordinary character" of the men -- and women -- who starred in its drama still astonishes. But so too -- less well known perhaps than a Caesar, or a Cicero, or a Cleopatra, but more remarkably than any of them -- does the Roman Republic itself. If there is much about it we can never know, then still there is much that can be brought back to life, its citizens half emerging from antique marble, their faces illumined by a background of gold and fire, the glare of an alien yet sometimes eerily familiar world.
- from the preface
Holland begins with "The Paradoxical Republic", where he examines the character of the Republic itself, telling the reader of its many contradictions: that it urged its citizens to care for glory above all, but that it also also tried to corral that zeal for glory into purposes that would increase the stature of the state: that its citizens were both free and tyrannized, and that despite all of its problems there existed "an almost religious sense of community". Here he introduces about the growing influence of populist politics versus patrician politics -- a theme is woven throughout the book. In "The Sibyl's Curse", Holland addresses a kind of morbid fear that Roman citizens had about the splendor of their Republic, that one day its own citizens would destroy it. I was unaware of the "prophecies of Sibyl", but according to Holland three books of prophetic sayings were hidden in one of the temples and consulted during moments of great crisis.
Beginning with the third chapter, the book becomes less background and more narrative. Like all narratives, this is one driven by characters, and the first is the character of Sulla. Holland puts to pen Sulla's rising fortune and influence and his conflict with Marius, leading to the civil wars, the existence of which surprised me the first time I heard about them so many years ago. Sulla, Crassus, and Marius all dominate the first part of the book. Sulla is perhaps the most difficult to put one's finger on, Crassus perhaps the easiest. Given that Sulla and Crassus were both characters in the Roman fiction I've been reading, my interest in them was particularly heightened. In "Fame is the Spur", Holland introduces the young character of Caesar, who will return -- obviously, given the book's title.
Caesar emerges as Sulla and Marius are passing way into death and as the Republic is now driven by the likes of Pompey and Crassus. Holland is not just interested in political power, however. He also visits men like Cato and Cicero, who will be voices questioning the way the Republic is crumbling until the end of the book. (Holland mentions two trials of Cicero's: one was in Imperium, and the other was in Roman Blood. Holland's description holds firm with both Harris' and Saylor's, increasing my appreciation for both. They seemed to have been able to render a story while keeping it true to the facts at hand, assuming all three of them are not engaging in an authorial conspiracy. The latter third of the book begins with the First Triumvirate, and the beginning of the end for the Republic. We can see the Republic's old ideals fading even as they are championed.
The book does not end with the Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon. Holland continues, describing the war between Marc Antony and young Octavian. Holland titles this "World War", and this is typical. The narrative is somewhat informal, and Holland has a tendency to impose 20th century terminology on the history of the past. He refers to Marius' putsch, calls Pompey the "Generalissimo", and describes Caesar's war in Gaul as consisting of a "blitzkieg". The latter is somewhat amusing given the location (Gaul being France), but I didn't enjoy the "imposition". This is a matter of taste, of course, but it seemed to detract from the purity of the text for me. Overall, though, I found the book to be quite enjoyable. It raised a lot of issues for me, personally.”“I thoroughly enjoyed this book and would recommend it to history buffs, people who want a good story, and/or people with interest in political theory. Tom Holland does a great job condensing approximately a hundred years of Roman history, political intrigue, and personalities into a concise story - narrative history. His title is intentionally provocative at a time when many people of various views (copyright 2003) fear the American Republic is struggling.
Andy R wrote this review Thursday, September 23, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
My first narrative history book - or at least the only one I remember - was enjoyable and offered a lot of insight as Holland was able to connect many events and times together. An important item to remember is how the shared values is as important if not more important than laws and law enforcement in keeping a society a nation of laws, not of men.
Great juxtaposition of quotes from two contemporary Romans on the first page:
"Human nature is universally imbued with a desire for liberty, and a hatred for servitude." — Caesar, Gallic Wars
"Only a few prefer liberty – the majority seek nothing more than fair masters." — Sallust, Historis”“A very readable account of the end of the Roman Republic. The focus is on the main actors: Sulla, Cato, Cicero, Pompey, Caesar, Mark Antony, Octavian, etc. The tone is a little sly and knowing, and the author clearly enjoyed reading the source material. The author clearly respects some historical actors more than others: he seems to pick the winners over the losers consistently: Caesar over Pompey, Octavian over Mark Antony. His portrayal of Cicero is particularly unflattering.
James L wrote this review Monday, August 16, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
The book's main theme is the Roman pursuit of honor through deeds and how that ultimately destroyed the mesh of customs and laws that the Roman state had created to channel it. Once a dictator was proclaimed (Sulla), it was inevitable that there would be another. And since there were enough ambitious men, it was inevitable that they would seek to be dictator or greater themselves.
I also think the book shows the danger of adhering to outmoded modes of governance for too long. Eventually they will be swept away. ”
“An awesome book by Tom Holland which goes in great detail of the history of the Roman Republic, but sometimes it got a little boring.”
historynerd12 wrote this review Saturday, July 10, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
“What a book! I loved it from start to finish, couldn't put the book down, in fact. He makes history come so alive, you live with the characters, feel their aspirations, their anguish. In fact, it held me so much that after finishing it, I started to reread I, Claudius by Robert Graves; a continuation, as it were...”
Sharad wrote this review Thursday, July 8, 2010. ( reply | permalink ) Was this review helpful? Yes | No
