# Ancient Rome, anyone?



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Any history buffs here interested in Ancient Rome? If so, which era or people in particular? Any books you recommend? 

I'm mainly interested in the end of the Republic transitioning into the Empire under Augustus. I've got a quite a few books on Augustus. The first one I read was by my favorite author on the subject, Adrian Goldsworthy. The one I'm currently reading is by Jochen Bleicken. I highly recommend both of them. 

:tiphat:


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

This post originally in the Book Chat Group downstairs in Groups:

Lovers of both Ancient Rome and the English countryside will enjoy author Bronwen Riley's The Edge of the Empire. Riley crafts (recreates) the slow, stately progress of the newly-appointed governor of Britannia, Julius Severus, as he and his party leave Rome in AD 130 and travel by sea and land to take up his new position. Appointed by the emperor Hadrian, Severus, one of Hadrian's most experienced generals, has been given this difficult position in the far northwest to oversee Rome's dominance over the area of the newly-constructed wall, ordered by Hadrian to keep the unruly tribes to the north contained and to give the empire a fixed, defensible boundary.

We learn much about Roman and Romano-Briton life close up: what people ate, wore, drank. How they occupied their time, traveled--whether common folk or imperial envoy. We also travel slowly about Roman England, once arrived, and accompany Severus as he proceeds on his extended inspection tour of his new province, visiting city and town and fort along both new and old roads until we arrive at the wall. Once there, we travel east along its entire length and check its state of repair, its recent history, and how it is manned and by whom. The author closes by giving a long list of English places with their Latin-named counterparts--some close (London, Londinium), others whose names have been changed completely.

This book is not a novel, but is partially fiction filling in movement and speculation where, very commonly, specific historical records are non-existent. A calm, quiet read; most instructive and enjoyable!


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

My interest in the history of Ancient Rome lies mainly between the onset of the Punic Wars and the death of the Emperor Severus Alexander.

About recommending books, there are so many that is difficult to mention just a few, so let's go for the great classics: Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire and Mommsen's Römische Geschichte (History of Rome, in English translation).


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

Some books I've enjoyed are:

_The Dawn of Empire: Rome's Rise to World Power_ by R.M. Errington. This covers the years 264-146 BCE.

Following conveniently right behind Errington is:

_From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome from 133 BC to AD 68_ by H.H. Scullard.

The best short history of Rome, from start to finish, that I've ever read is Donald R. Dudley's _The Civilization of Rome_. Dudley is a wonderful writer with every now and then a very memorable and often humorous turn of phrase.

The fall of the Republic is a fascinating period in Roman history, and we know so much about it from the remarkable biographies of Plutarch. A book that extensively deals with the decades and careers of Marius and Sulla is _Swords Against the Senate: The Rise of the Roman Army and the Fall of the Republic_ by Erik Hildinger. Hildinger shows that the growth and professionalization of the Roman army under Marius led pretty directly to the increasing takeover of the republican instruments of government by military strongmen. The Senate often was happy to sit on its hands and let the generals do "what seemed best". Reminds me in some ways of US senatorial politics today.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Here's the painless 10 minutes of quick facts of Roman history






I've never been interested in history. ...I don't know what's wrong with me - when I know many people who are deeply interested --- but why?

History and religion and philosophy, to me, seems to be what grows from a handful of men, with their own motivations, who put some info together.. and it stuck, for whatever the reasons.. Please help


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

One gets a better sense of where you're going if you know where you've been. On the other hand, we have Yogi Berra's classic: "I don't know where we're going, but we're making great time!"


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> One gets a better sense of where you're going if you know where you've been. On the other hand, we have Yogi Berra's classic: "I don't know where we're going, but we're making great time!"


Well, I'm glad people have filled in the outline, but a more detailed study is for other folks.

I got sufficiently hooked on the early characters in this 4 hour video series to watch the whole thing (to see how it turned out, lol), but it's more interesting than just history..


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

Mary Beard, SQPR. She also wrote an excellent book on Pompeii 
I also recommend Robert Harris t’Imperium’ Trilogy


----------



## Larkenfield (Jun 5, 2017)

Luchesi said:


> I've never been interested in history. ...I don't know what's wrong with me - when I know many people who are deeply interested --- but why?
> 
> History and religion and philosophy, to me, seems to be what grows from a handful of men, with their own motivations, who put some info together.. and it stuck, for whatever the reasons.. Please help


Listen. If one supposedly is genuinely interested in_ the why_, perhaps the place to start is by seeing history as more than a male sexist pursuit written by men-or are males the only ones with cultural influence, influential opinions, and a past? There have been any number of important women historians who have written influential or memorable histories:

https://www.bustle.com/articles/135440-25-history-books-written-by-women

For one to have no value of history suggests that the person may have never learned anything of value from his or her own personal experiences-and it would seem that's impossible unless one is completely unconscious of one's past. So history is not a sexist pursuit; it's a personal one that starts out by being meaningful to the person who's living that life. The study of cultural history is what a collective group of people have done with their lives to meet the challenges of life and overcoming them, to survive, learn, create, influence society in art, war, agriculture, technology, or other meaningful pursuits. It's hard to imagine that any musician would find nothing of creative value by examining the lives of the great composers, whether it's Hildegard von Bingen or Amy Beach. There is nothing of value to be learned from the history of their lives that is still meaningful to the present?


----------



## DiesIraeCX (Jul 21, 2014)

Here's my collection:

_Pax Romana, Caesar, Augustus, The Fall of Carthage, In the Name of Rome, The Fall of Rome_ (all by Adrian Goldsworthy)
_Augustus_ (Jochen Bleicken)
_Augustus_ (Pat Southern)
_Augustus_ (Edmondson/Collect of scholarly essays over Augustus)
_Rubicon_ (Tom Holland)
_SPQR_ (Mary Beard) - I'm sorry to say I am not a fan at all of Mary Beard's style of history and stopped reading mid-book.

Of the ancient authors, I have the complete works by Tacitus (who's my absolute favorite of the ancient historians), a ton of works by Cicero, _On the Conquest of Gaul_ by Julius Caesar, _The Twelve Caesars_ by Suetonius, _The Aeneid_ by Virgil (not history, I know, but essential to know Augustus).


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Great fiction: "Eagle in the Snow: A Novel of General Maximus and Rome's Last Stand." A really good book about trying to guard Rome against the tribes pushing south.*

https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1590710118/ref=oh_aui_search_detailpage?ie=UTF8&psc=1

And more relevant to the Augustine era, "I, Claudius: From the Autobiography of Tiberius Claudius Born 10 B.C. Murdered and Deified A.D. 54." Of course.

https://www.amazon.com/Claudius-Aut...F8&qid=1540868696&sr=1-1&keywords=I,+Claudius

*This book makes me think of the "caravans" pushing north from Central America that are in the news now. The tribes weren't interested in invading Rome -- they were looking for better lives, more food, and a fairer and more orderly society to live in. Like the United States, Rome was not very interested in their needs.


----------



## senza sordino (Oct 20, 2013)

I've been trying to read SPQR by Mary Beard. I like her style. I like how she tells what we know, but also how we know this. But I too stopped mid book. It's just a heavy read for me, lots of information. I'll try to get back to it later. 

Ten years ago I started but didn't finish The Classical World by Robin Lane Fox. 

That I didn't finish these books says more about me and my inability to read dense history books than it does about the book itself. History is not my specialty. I didn't learn much history as a student. I like the idea of reading history books, but I've started many more than I've finished.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Talking about fiction, I would recommend Colleen McCullough's "Masters of Rome" series. There are seven books, starting with Marius and Sulla, ending with Octavian and Mark Antony. An amazing tour de force, with hundreds of characters, and great insights into the politics, wars and daily life of Roman aristocracy in the first century B.C.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

_Annales_ by Tacitus is magisterial, but what a pity that so many key sections are missing - Sejanus's downfall, the whole of Caligula's reign, the first half of Claudius's and the final two years of Nero's. We really only have Seutonius to plug these gaps - _De vita Caesarium_ is an entertaining read but I wonder how much of the more salacious and damning content was the result of urban myth and/or Antonine revisionism?


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Yes, I am very interested in history, and very interested in the history of Ancient Rome.

I've been influenced by growing up in York ('Eboracum') and seeing Roman walls and ruins from my earliest days - by having parents and three older siblings all mad about history - by learning Latin at school - and by reading Rosemary Sutcliff's 'Eagle of the Ninth' trilogy. 
Something I still enjoy rereading. 

I'm interested in history because I want to know about people and what makes them tick and what effect the events and fashions and way of thinking had on their personalities, hopes and dreams. 
It's the same curiosity that makes me want to read novels and watch plays and films. 

I feel that by understanding more about what other people think and feel, I can understand my own psyche and make more sense of my life experience - live more abundantly. 

I'm also interested in history because I love the art, music & literature of the past, and knowing more about the background gives me deeper interest and enjoyment. 

I know that not everybody is a history buff - I remember one of the brightest girls at my grammar school asking me with incredulity why I enjoyed history lessons. I was equally incredulous that she didn't. 

Never mind - à chacun son goût.


----------



## Triplets (Sep 4, 2014)

senza sordino said:


> I've been trying to read SPQR by Mary Beard. I like her style. I like how she tells what we know, but also how we know this. But I too stopped mid book. It's just a heavy read for me, lots of information. I'll try to get back to it later.
> 
> Ten years ago I started but didn't finish The Classical World by Robin Lane Fox.
> 
> That I didn't finish these books says more about me and my inability to read dense history books than it does about the book itself. History is not my specialty. I didn't learn much history as a student. I like the idea of reading history books, but I've started many more than I've finished.


I have just returned from a trip to Italy, so I was motivated to do some reading. SQPR was actually a bit light on facts compared to some other books on Rome. She only references the military campaigns as guideposts for the cultural life that was unfolding simultaneously, and she doesn't get lost in the thickets of Imperial Geneology, and barely mentions the periphery of the Roman World, such as Spain, Britain or the Levant. Beard's emphasis instead is on the the roles of the various strata-Royalty, Plebians, Women, Slaves, Children, the relationship between the the Rulers and the Ruled-and I was fascinated.
I also read The Classical World, years ago. It's far less memorable.
I recommend the fictional Robert Harris trilogy that I referenced earlier. It might stimulate an interest in reading about some of the Historical background


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

The series by Colleen McCullough is formidable. As I recollect, McCullough is said--or claims--to own the largest private library of books on Roman history on the planet. _I, Claudius_ and _Claudius the God_ are marvelous books, and the TV series made from them with Derek Jacoby is one of the greatest masterpieces of extended cinema I've ever seen.


----------



## elgar's ghost (Aug 8, 2010)

I loved _I, Claudius_ as well - I was about 12 when it was first broadcast. I thought it was an excellent combination of psychodrama, pathos and black comedy. It was made on a low budget but what a cast - some weren't particularly well-known before then but looking now at the acting credits reveals a veritable _Who's Who_ of British stage and screen. And it's probably the only series where you can see Patrick Stewart (Sejanus) with hair and Brian Blessed (Augustus) without his trademark bushy beard! Siân Philips almost gave me nightmares with her cold-eyed portrayal of Livia - even allowing for historical/artistic license that was one truly frightening woman.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

And let's not forget the equally star-studded cast of Joseph L. Mankiewicz' film of the Grandaddy Of Them All, Shakespeare's _Julius Caesar_. The play has perhaps more quotable quotes than anything else Shakespeare penned, and the film is a masterful realization of the play. A brilliant mixed Anglo-American cast, led by John Gielgud, Marlon Brando, and James Mason, highlights the effort, with Louis Calhern, Deborah Kerr, Greer Garson, Edmond O'Brien, and a host of other top-notch actors filling out the cast. This is the real deal, not a Taylor/Burton Hollywood spectacle. Black-and-white cinematography certainly helped also.


----------



## Ingélou (Feb 10, 2013)

Ave, Strange Magic! Et ita vero! :tiphat:



Strange Magic said:


> The series by Colleen McCullough is formidable. As I recollect, McCullough is said--or claims--to own the largest private library of books on Roman history on the planet. _I, Claudius_ and _Claudius the God_ are marvelous books, and the TV series made from them with Derek Jacoby is one of the greatest masterpieces of extended cinema I've ever seen.


I read Robert Graves' 'I, Claudius' and 'Claudius the God' in the interim between completing my O-levels and going into the sixth form. Not only were these books an excellent read, but they told me who everybody was for when I came to study A-level Latin.



Strange Magic said:


> And let's not forget the equally star-studded cast of Joseph L. Mankiewicz' film of the Grandaddy Of Them All, Shakespeare's _Julius Caesar_. The play has perhaps more quotable quotes than anything else Shakespeare penned, and the film is a masterful realization of the play. A brilliant mixed Anglo-American cast, led by John Gielgud, Marlon Brando, and James Mason, highlights the effort, with Louis Calhern, Deborah Kerr, Greer Garson, Edmond O'Brien, and a host of other top-notch actors filling out the cast. This is the real deal, not a Taylor/Burton Hollywood spectacle. Black-and-white cinematography certainly helped also.


This is my favourite Julius Caesar film, which I always used in my teaching in preference to any other version. James Mason's troubled face as Brutus made him very sympathetic, and though I'm not a big Brando fan, I think he does a wonderful job here, and I would often use the funeral speech from this film even with disaffected 'GCSE English Retake' classes* in the sixth form college where Taggart and I worked.

It worked a treat and was a great clip for studying, not only the play, but also how political oratory can work. 

* 'Miss, why do I have to do English again - English is boring!'


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Larkenfield said:


> Listen. If one supposedly is genuinely interested in_ the why_, perhaps the place to start is by seeing history as more than a male sexist pursuit written by men-or are males the only ones with cultural influence, influential opinions, and a past? There have been any number of important women historians who have written influential or memorable histories:
> 
> https://www.bustle.com/articles/135440-25-history-books-written-by-women
> 
> For one to have no value of history suggests that the person may have never learned anything of value from his or her own personal experiences-and it would seem that's impossible unless one is completely unconscious of one's past. So history is not a sexist pursuit; it's a personal one that starts out by being meaningful to the person who's living that life. The study of cultural history is what a collective group of people have done with their lives to meet the challenges of life and overcoming them, to survive, learn, create, influence society in art, war, agriculture, technology, or other meaningful pursuits. It's hard to imagine that any musician would find nothing of creative value by examining the lives of the great composers, whether it's Hildegard von Bingen or Amy Beach. There is nothing of value to be learned from the history of their lives that is still meaningful to the present?


What are you saying? I should be interested because women came up with some history?


----------



## Tristan (Jan 5, 2013)

I will also recommend SPQR by Mary Beard 

Since I had a minor in Latin, I took a number of classes on Ancient Rome. I'll admit that my interest always lay more in the language than in the history, but the history was always fascinating to me.


----------



## Strange Magic (Sep 14, 2015)

> KenOC: "Great fiction: "Eagle in the Snow: A Novel of General Maximus and Rome's Last Stand." A really good book about trying to guard Rome against the tribes pushing south."


Ken's reference to this book reminds me that the history of empires--Ancient Egypt, the various Mesopotamian states, Persia, China, Rome, etc.--is of Ups and Downs, usually with barbarians at the gates or rival upstart empires threatening to take over your action. Plenty of material of interest to both historians and novelists or dramatists. The Roman Empire had its share of near-death experiences and then periods of recovery. One such period of recovery were the successive though brief reigns of the three Illyrian emperors: Claudius Gothicus (268-270), Aurelian (270-275), and Probus (276-282). By smashing (for a time) the Goths, the Germans, Palmyra, and the Gauls following the years of just hanging on under Gallienus (260-268) and the preceding chaos (twelve emperors between 235 and 260) when big chunks of the empire were carved away or set up shop as independent entities, the Illyrian emperors restored much of the lost territory and reunified all the breakaway pieces. This cleared the way for the years of relative stability of Diocletian and then Constantine. Quite a novel could be written of those fraught times.


----------



## KenOC (Mar 7, 2011)

Strange Magic said:


> Ken's reference to this book reminds me that the history of empires--Ancient Egypt, the various Mesopotamian states, Persia, China, Rome, etc.--is of Ups and Downs, usually with barbarians at the gates or rival upstart empires threatening to take over your action. Plenty of material of interest to both historians and novelists or dramatists. The Roman Empire had its share of near-death experiences...


_
Eagle in the Snow_ centers on the years 405-407 AD, when things were getting pretty grim for Rome. Not long after, they had to set up turnstiles and allow barbarian sackings on various days of the week, or so I've heard. 

The novel obviously has resonances today, in the current news.


----------



## schigolch (Jun 26, 2011)

Strange Magic said:


> Ken's reference to this book reminds me that the history of empires--Ancient Egypt, the various Mesopotamian states, Persia, China, Rome, etc.--is of Ups and Downs, usually with barbarians at the gates or rival upstart empires threatening to take over your action. Plenty of material of interest to both historians and novelists or dramatists. The Roman Empire had its share of near-death experiences and then periods of recovery. One such period of recovery were the successive though brief reigns of the three Illyrian emperors: Claudius Gothicus (268-270), Aurelian (270-275), and Probus (276-282). By smashing (for a time) the Goths, the Germans, Palmyra, and the Gauls following the years of just hanging on under Gallienus (260-268) and the preceding chaos (twelve emperors between 235 and 260) when big chunks of the empire were carved away or set up shop as independent entities, the Illyrian emperors restored much of the lost territory and reunified all the breakaway pieces. This cleared the way for the years of relative stability of Diocletian and then Constantine. Quite a novel could be written of those fraught times.


Indeed.

There is a series of books set in the 3rd century, by Nick Brown, called "The Agent of Rome". I have read only one of them, 'The Imperial Banner', that was mildly interesting to me.


----------



## Meyerbeer Smith (Mar 25, 2016)

_I, Clavdivs_ has already been invoked.

ITV's _Caesars_ (1967) is excellent; _I, Clavdivs_ may be a stronger drama, but _Caesars_ is more intelligent politically. The great André Morell as a sympathetic, moral Tiberius; Agrippina I as Lady Macbeth; while Caligula is a coldly rational psychopath, who'll discuss the ethics of power over dinner while making a father watch his son's murder.

Books
Period sources: You can't go past Suetonius, Tacitus, and the Historia Augusta (even though it has many omissions and contains much that is apocryphal, or at least wildly inaccurate). Dio Cassius and Herodian are also important histories; so's Procopius's _Secret History_, for the reign of Justinian (Byzantine). Couldn't get into Ammianus Marcellinus.

Non-fiction: Ivar Lissner's _Power and the Folly_ is a great read, even though it has a Christian bias. (For a useful corrective, read Catherine Nixey's _Darkening Age_, which argues that the Christians were the equivalent of Muslim fanatics.) Michael Grant's _Roman Emperors_ (which goes up to Romulus Augustulus). Tom Holland's recent _Dynasty_, although it only covers the Julio-Claudians. There are many excellent studies of individual emperors, including more obscure ones like Probus, Aurelian, and Gallienus. Gregorio Maranon's _Tiberius: A Study in Resentment_ is intriguing, if wrong-headed.

Fiction: Graves, of course. Marguerite Yourcenar's _Mémoires d'Hadrien_. Alfred Duggan's _Family Favourites_ (looks at the reign of Elagabalus). Gore Vidal's _Julian_.

Oh, and if you like utter trash:
Stephen Barber and Jeremy Reed's _Divine Carnage: Atrocities of the Roman Emperors_, pornographic fantasy masquerading as history
Bob Guccione's _Caligula_ - with contributions by Gore Vidal, Malcolm McDowell, Helen Mirren, Peter O'Toole, and John Gielgud - and a complete waste of their talents.


----------



## Luchesi (Mar 15, 2013)

Strange Magic said:


> Ken's reference to this book reminds me that the history of empires--Ancient Egypt, the various Mesopotamian states, Persia, China, Rome, etc.--is of Ups and Downs, usually with barbarians at the gates or rival upstart empires threatening to take over your action. Plenty of material of interest to both historians and novelists or dramatists. The Roman Empire had its share of near-death experiences and then periods of recovery. One such period of recovery were the successive though brief reigns of the three Illyrian emperors: Claudius Gothicus (268-270), Aurelian (270-275), and Probus (276-282). By smashing (for a time) the Goths, the Germans, Palmyra, and the Gauls following the years of just hanging on under Gallienus (260-268) and the preceding chaos (twelve emperors between 235 and 260) when big chunks of the empire were carved away or set up shop as independent entities, the Illyrian emperors restored much of the lost territory and reunified all the breakaway pieces. This cleared the way for the years of relative stability of Diocletian and then Constantine. Quite a novel could be written of those fraught times.


Is this part of the reason (these threats) why they soon instituted the new policy on religions? Church and state solidarity? Jesus was claimed to be an eternal being, had existed eternally even though, somehow, he was an offspring of their god. When you were competing with other religions back then - you had to have the highest and most extreme presentation. There would be a few dissenters with the exile of Arius, but far fewer than if you let theological contentions lead to blood in the streets. The Emperor had been distressed about the civil unrest and bloodshed which had resulted from Arianism. So he felt he had to step in.


----------

