Quo Vadis
 

Quo Vadis

by Henryk Sienkiewicz

Henryk Sienkiewicz (1846-1916) won the 1905 Nobel Prize in Literature. A brilliant Polish writer and patriot, he is possibly best known abroad for his monumental historical epic Quo Vadis that portrays the vibrant and dissonant combination of cruel excesses and decadence of Rome during the reign of the corrupt Emperor Nero and the high faith of the emerging era of early Christianity.
... (read more)

Top tags: historical fictionancient romefictionclassicpolish (all tags)

 

Member Reviews

  • Katamaster
    1 of 1 members found this review helpful.
    • Rated 0 stars

    Having been a huge fan of Robert Graves’ I Claudius and Claudius the God, I was always sad that Graves did not write a sequel to highlight the reign of the last Augustan ruler. Many times reading Quo Vadis, I felt like this was that book. It does give a good insight to the decadence of Nero’s reign along with some references to his predecessors. It also clarified some often-misrepresented assumptions like all gladiatorial competitions taking place in the Colosseum. We learn that Nero pre-dated the Colosseum and in fact, the battles were staged in a large “wooden” arena.

    Some of the action has some good vivid descriptions such as the burning of Rome and some of the gladiatorial fights. The book also gives a glimpse at what Christianity could have been. We see how the disciples Peter and Paul worshipped their religion in a way that is totally unlike anything today.

    The characters are excellent and the book never gets boring.

    Katamaster wrote this review Tuesday, September 18 2007. ( reply | permalink )
  • Jocelyn B
    • Rated 5 stars

    Decadent and debauched ancient Rome, the insanity of Nero, the city burning, Christians crucified and mauled to death by lions at the games, what more could you ask for? Great book.

    Jocelyn B wrote this review Monday, July 28 2008. ( reply | permalink )
  • diana_safina
    • Rated 0 stars

    Awesome!!

    diana_safina wrote this review Saturday, June 21 2008. ( reply | permalink )
  • ana-maria b
    • Rated 5 stars

    a great book...something that should be read

    ana-maria b wrote this review Thursday, June 19 2008. ( reply | permalink )
  • madalina s
    • Rated 5 stars

    very good book although i have to read three times the beginning to discover the interesting part and to read further:Dvery good documented actually

    madalina s wrote this review Friday, February 8 2008. ( reply | permalink )
  • bedienutza
    • Rated 5 stars

    Wonderful story.

    bedienutza wrote this review Thursday, January 10 2008. ( reply | permalink )
  • ThaddaeusAugustine
    • Rated 0 stars

    Sienkiewicz seems to be quite knowledgeable in this area of history. He is able to introduce you to characters you've learned about in a completely different way, while at the same time showing you new characters which make the story easier to be in touch with. I find that, as in other books, there are two topics which are highlighted quite a bit in the story: romance (which is not unusual in any book) and the bloodthirstiness of mankind. The problem with Sienkiewicz's romance is that, should you read more than one book of his, the relationships are all the same. Boy meets girl, they automatically fall in love, there is tons of stuff that seems like it is working against their getting married, and then in the end they get married. All the girls are the same in the different stories; the guys change a bit, but not that much.
    Sienkiewicz is right about how mankind is naturally somewhat bloodthirsty, though one cringes at the chapter-long, detailed descriptions of a massacre or how the crowd goes crazy in want of blood or some living thing to tear apart. My cousin read a section out of the middle of Ogniem i Mieczem (With Fire and Sword) by Sienkiewicz, and she got a horrible impression of him!
    Wow, this turned out long. As for Quo Vadis, not all of Sienkiewicz's works together, the book is, surprisingly, a page-turner. There are lots of unique and touching relationships, such as that between the protagonist's love and her servant. I think that Sienkiewicz should have spoken a bit more about the apostle Peter before telling of his crucifixion, though I understand how it would have been hard to talk about the personality of a far, far-back historical character, at a time when personalities weren't recorded as much as they were in George Washington's time, or someone like that.

    ThaddaeusAugustine wrote this review Tuesday, December 25 2007. ( reply | permalink )
  • Calina
    • Rated 0 stars

    i think it was worth reading, if not for the whole book, at least for the scene where "Quo Vadis?" is actually said (to Peter).

    Calina wrote this review Thursday, December 20 2007. ( reply | permalink )
Displaying 1-10 of 21 reviews
© 2008 Tastemakers, Inc. | Portions of Shelfari.com are Copyright © 1996-2008 Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates. Terms & Conditions | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy