talucas24's review against another edition
adventurous
informative
tense
medium-paced
5.0
Excellent!
ghostbleedingink's review against another edition
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.75
I found this book to be very informative in relation to the death of Caesar. I especially liked his exploration of the sources and their reliability relative to each other.
socraticgadfly's review against another edition
3.0
Thought-provoking, but doesn't live up to its hype.
Strauss does good to encourage some speculative new thought about Caesar's assassination, but he overloads speculation about the Roman general Decimus, as well as painting a less than accurate picture about one Roman leader at that time.
I agree with following Nicholas of Damascus and Appian more, and Plutarch less, on the basics of the plot, assassination and aftermath, while using good historical methodology. However, even Nicholas doesn't tell us enough about Decimus for the judgment Strauss makes, namely that Decimus' motives for the plot were largely disinterested and patriotic, rather than selfish.
Rather, I think that, although he (and Mark Antony) didn't know about the revision of Caesar's will to adopt Octavian, he did see how the personal wind was blowing, and also was personally hurt to not get more military recognition, and also not more career preferment in Caesar's Dictatorship.
Ditto for Strauss' interpretation of why Titus Labienus went over to Pompey.
Next, that "Roman citizen"? Strauss talks relatively little about how much of a gloryhound, as well as a weathervane, Cicero was. Yes, he covers this somewhat, but not as much as he could.
Finally, his alt-history speculation doesn't ring true. Had Antony moved to pair up with Decimus, whether before or after sidling up to Lepidus, many of Caesar's veterans among his troops likely would have deserted to Octavian. Guided by Agrippa, especially if Lepidus joins them, Octavian easily wins that battle. He then addresses Brutus/Cassius, likely with the same result as in reality. Then, Sextus Pompey is finished off, as in reality, by 36 BCE. That leaves an independent Cleopatra never falling into Antony's arms. Octavian probably guarantees her her independence for her lifetime, if she turns Caesarion over to him. Peace, half a decade earlier, and with less bloodshed, over the Empire. Octavian then finds it easier to expand the German border as far as the Elbe, with better generalship than Varus.
That said, Strauss gives a good look at Caesar's last couple of years, as dictator of Rome, and just how he could have learned from his grandnephew on "stroking" senators, taking time on some of his changes, and more. So, I'll keep this at a third star, but stress again that it doesn't live up to its hype.
As a sidebar, Strauss' author photo is a bit off-putting to me. I don't expect academic historians to look like investment bankers, but looking like a mix of semi-Indiana Jones and a 1920s Mafia don from "The Untouchables" was a bit jarring.
Strauss does good to encourage some speculative new thought about Caesar's assassination, but he overloads speculation about the Roman general Decimus, as well as painting a less than accurate picture about one Roman leader at that time.
I agree with following Nicholas of Damascus and Appian more, and Plutarch less, on the basics of the plot, assassination and aftermath, while using good historical methodology. However, even Nicholas doesn't tell us enough about Decimus for the judgment Strauss makes, namely that Decimus' motives for the plot were largely disinterested and patriotic, rather than selfish.
Rather, I think that, although he (and Mark Antony) didn't know about the revision of Caesar's will to adopt Octavian, he did see how the personal wind was blowing, and also was personally hurt to not get more military recognition, and also not more career preferment in Caesar's Dictatorship.
Ditto for Strauss' interpretation of why Titus Labienus went over to Pompey.
Next, that "Roman citizen"? Strauss talks relatively little about how much of a gloryhound, as well as a weathervane, Cicero was. Yes, he covers this somewhat, but not as much as he could.
Finally, his alt-history speculation doesn't ring true. Had Antony moved to pair up with Decimus, whether before or after sidling up to Lepidus, many of Caesar's veterans among his troops likely would have deserted to Octavian. Guided by Agrippa, especially if Lepidus joins them, Octavian easily wins that battle. He then addresses Brutus/Cassius, likely with the same result as in reality. Then, Sextus Pompey is finished off, as in reality, by 36 BCE. That leaves an independent Cleopatra never falling into Antony's arms. Octavian probably guarantees her her independence for her lifetime, if she turns Caesarion over to him. Peace, half a decade earlier, and with less bloodshed, over the Empire. Octavian then finds it easier to expand the German border as far as the Elbe, with better generalship than Varus.
That said, Strauss gives a good look at Caesar's last couple of years, as dictator of Rome, and just how he could have learned from his grandnephew on "stroking" senators, taking time on some of his changes, and more. So, I'll keep this at a third star, but stress again that it doesn't live up to its hype.
As a sidebar, Strauss' author photo is a bit off-putting to me. I don't expect academic historians to look like investment bankers, but looking like a mix of semi-Indiana Jones and a 1920s Mafia don from "The Untouchables" was a bit jarring.
elisekatherine's review against another edition
4.0
An excellent and compelling account of a well-worn set of events - I loved the way that this book was almost written like a true crime story, covering the days leading up to and after the assassination in meticulous detail, looking at all the actors and their motivations, and generally making fresh a story that is (believed to be) widely known.
I especially appreciated the fact that Strauss covered in the text the sources he was using and up-front assessed (and continued to assess throughout) their reliability and likely biases. As someone who frequently gets frustrated with the use of primary sources in classical history, it was a breath of fresh air.
I especially appreciated the fact that Strauss covered in the text the sources he was using and up-front assessed (and continued to assess throughout) their reliability and likely biases. As someone who frequently gets frustrated with the use of primary sources in classical history, it was a breath of fresh air.
cmbohn's review
4.0
This was a very clear account of the death - execution? - murder? - of Julius Caesar. I have to admit, all I really knew about it before was thanks to Mr. Shakespeare, so it wasn't a factual account. I didn't know very much at all about the conspirators. I really enjoyed this one, but I think I would have liked it better if I read it. I occasionally found it a bit hard to follow just listening.
tombradleyjr's review
4.0
What happens in Rome, stays in Rome…unless you happen to assassinate Julius Caesar. When that’s the case, blood is spilled and loyalties switch at the drop of a toga.
In The Death of Caesar: The Story of History’s Most Famous Assassination, author Barry Strauss exposes the political motivations and behind-the-scenes machinations of Caesar’s assassination, up to the dirty deed itself and beyond the subsequent civil war between Caesar’s loyalists and his enemies.
The cast of characters—Caesar, Brutus, Decimus, Cicero, Octavian, et. al.—is familiar to anyone for whom Shakespeare’s epic was required reading in school. However, unlike The Bard, Strauss digs deep into the pantheon of contemporary writings by and personal communications among those involved in the plot; the list of works he cites is exhaustive. Strauss sorts through the sometimes conflicting accounts of what happened in the months leading to the Ides of March in 44 B.C., to present as accurate a picture as possible of the assassins and their motives.
However, the assassination’s aftermath proves to be more compelling than the murder itself, as the subsequent rise of Mark Antony and Octavian—and the demise of Brutus, Decimus, and their co-conspirators—propels Rome on a path that the assassins may not have foreseen. In other words, they should have been careful about what they wished for.
The writing is clear and concise, though some stretches were dry. Personally, I found the book interesting as I have not read much of ancient Roman history; it opened a window on the time for me, particularly as it pertains to the political landscape. I suspect readers more familiar with the subject matter may find the book tedious, but to me, it was a fascinating and worthwhile read.
In The Death of Caesar: The Story of History’s Most Famous Assassination, author Barry Strauss exposes the political motivations and behind-the-scenes machinations of Caesar’s assassination, up to the dirty deed itself and beyond the subsequent civil war between Caesar’s loyalists and his enemies.
The cast of characters—Caesar, Brutus, Decimus, Cicero, Octavian, et. al.—is familiar to anyone for whom Shakespeare’s epic was required reading in school. However, unlike The Bard, Strauss digs deep into the pantheon of contemporary writings by and personal communications among those involved in the plot; the list of works he cites is exhaustive. Strauss sorts through the sometimes conflicting accounts of what happened in the months leading to the Ides of March in 44 B.C., to present as accurate a picture as possible of the assassins and their motives.
However, the assassination’s aftermath proves to be more compelling than the murder itself, as the subsequent rise of Mark Antony and Octavian—and the demise of Brutus, Decimus, and their co-conspirators—propels Rome on a path that the assassins may not have foreseen. In other words, they should have been careful about what they wished for.
The writing is clear and concise, though some stretches were dry. Personally, I found the book interesting as I have not read much of ancient Roman history; it opened a window on the time for me, particularly as it pertains to the political landscape. I suspect readers more familiar with the subject matter may find the book tedious, but to me, it was a fascinating and worthwhile read.