A review by socraticgadfly
The Death of Caesar: The Story of History's Most Famous Assassination by Barry S. Strauss
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.