This is a good treatment of the time from Diocletian to Constantine (actually shortly before and shortly after those landmark reigns). The book will be profitable to all readers, but it will be most valuable to those who already know at least a little of Rome's history. Certain background is presumed, and some important events are merely glossed over rather than treated in depth. This isn't really a drawback -- not every book can be a comprehensive history; some have to look in more detail at certain aspects!

Burckhardt is at his best in describing the state of paganism and of the arts in this age. He really comes alive here.

One drawback is the very "19th century" feel -- e.g., certain events or behaviors are sweepingly and uncritically characterized as due to race or gender. Another is that, in discussing Constantine and the Church, it seems clear that Burckhardt doesn't want Constantine to be a Christian, and this may cloud some of the presentation and interpretation.

But, overall, a good treatment. Don't read it for a biography of Constantine -- you'll be disappointed.

An introduction to writing and writers in Greece and Rome. This is a bibliophile's delight, or for those interested in the classics. Recommended to all (by this bibliomane). The only downside is that the chapters can be lengthy and as someone who likes to read a chapter a sitting this is a detriment.

The tragedy of "Oedipus" as told by the Roman playwright Seneca is a very bloodthirsty and savage retelling of the story from classical mythology, much in keeping with the Roman view of popular entertainment. Seneca also wrote his version of the Oedipus myth after the downfall of Nero, as the Roman Empire was emerging from a particularly dark period in its history. Whereas the Greek tragedy by Sophocles is concerned with unraveling the puzzle (most readers never note that the prophecy as told to Oedipus is not the same as what was told to his parents), the Seneca version is more about psychology and emotion than logic. In this version there is an impending sense of doom that hangs over the characters. The contrasts and comparisons between the two versions are inevitable because no one is going to come to Seneca's "Oedipus" without knowledge of Sophocles's "Oedipus the King."

In the Roman play the chorus functions not as a narrative counterpoint to the dramatic action as we find in Greek tragedy, but as a means of confronting Oedipus with his darkest thoughts and fears (i.e., an internal dialogue). Ironically, given that the plays of Sophocles provided the characters that Freud turned into key psychological complexes, it is the Seneca version that seems more like a fevered dream. Like most of Seneca's plays, "Oedipus" takes the familiar stories of Greek tragedies and provides some original details. For example, in this version Teiresias, the blind prophet of Thebes, uses a spell to call up the dead Laius so that he can offer his morbid insights on the events unfolding.

If Sophocles is interested in psychology, then Seneca is more the philosopher. Before Jocasta commits suicide in the play she has a final scene with Oedipus in which they discuss the accountability of humankind and fate. The play begins with a monologue by Oedipus where he talks about the calamitous state of Thebes and his fear that he may be the cause. At the end Oedipus is again alone on stage with all of his worst fears fully realized and self-blinded to ensure constant and continued punishment and suffering. Before the irresistible force of fate human beings can do nothing but suffer. This is not so much a tragedy, per se, but rather an unhappy story (i.e., a tale without the audience enjoying the Greek idea of catharsis). Comparing the versions by Sophocles and Seneca also provides a basic understanding of the difference between Greek and Roman tragedy.

This book is advertised as being in a hardback edition. However, as the back cover says, it is "paperbound".

While Tacitus remains the most brilliant, eloquent, and important of all the Roman historians, his translators Alfred John Church and William Jackson Brodribb have purged the excessive verbosity and superfluity of style common in other translations to form a complete and precise representation of Tacitus' original. An amazing anthology at an affordable price...there's no better deal or collective genius of works available.

This is an excellent collection of Tacitus' work, while the translation is not the most recent it is good.

Eventhough this is an abridgement of Gibbon's
great treatise it is a shame that the subject is treated in such a cursory fashion. Little attention is given to one emperor before the reader is pushed on to the next one.

Hadas' edition does give us some of the early history of growth of Christianity, one of the underlying causes of the downfall.

All in all, I found myself wanting more detail. After reading this book I felt like a had read the equivalent of a Chinese meal. It was OK but I soon found myself wanting more

I think the other reviewer misunderstands Hadas's intention. As Hadas states in his introduction, this book is intended as digest and, hopefully, a guide to the fuller work. Hadas pragmatically realizes that most readers are unlikely to undertake a multi-volume book that totals literally thousands of pages; but his abridgement -- rendered with admirable coherence for such an undertaking -- provides both a taste of the fuller work and hopefully a temptation to read it. If more scholars like Hadas existed, the great works of literature and antquity might have a broader readership today.

I enjoyed reading this boo

Editor Moses Hadas was a world-renowned scholar, and his notes can be helpful, but the translations he presented in this volume have become outdated. Most Greek translations sacrifice something through the morality, prudence, or artistic judgment of the translator. This is a fine text for the value, but if clarity is more important to you, seek a more recent translation.

I am certainly ambivalent about this collection of "Greek Drama" as a textbook. On the one hand, I totally agree, there are much better translations out there of these plays than what Moses Hadas provides in this volume. But on the other hand, "Greek Drama" includes significant plays by all three of the great Greek tragic dramatists plus a comedy by Aristophanes, all for a lot less than it would cost you for a first rate translation of any single play. True, you can find all of these plays on the Internet, but as a general rule those translations are even older and less satisfying than what Hadas provides here. The selection of plays here is also above average: we have the opening and closing plays of Aeschylus' Oretia trilogy, "Agamemnon" and "Eumenidies," along with a summary of "Choephoroe"; Sophocles' most famous plays "Oedipus the King" and "Antigone," along with a summary of "Oedipus at Colonus" and the lesser known "Philoctetes"; Euripides' "Medea," "Hippolytus" and "Trojan Women"; and Aristophanes' "The Frogs." Although I find the last choice a tad odd, with "Lysistrata" being the obvious substitute (or even "The Clouds"), overall this is a solid introduction to exactly what the title of the book says. On balance, I have to think this tips the scale in favor of this volume, especially when you look at the competition. Final note: Teachers can do a nice ancient/modern analogue with not only the Sophocles and Anoulih versions of "Antigone," but also Euripides' "Hippolytus" and Racine's "Phaedra."

do NOT purchase this translation. it makes one of the funniest writers of all time boring. this translation is as bad as the previous reviewers have indicated. the best, and most hilarious, translation that i've seen is a 1938 version that , i think, eugene o'neill worked on as an editor or something. however, aristophanes should definitely be checked out by afficionados of ancient greek literature as well as anyone interested in comic writing that'll make you laugh out loud. he's one of the titans of world literature.

The plays of Aristophanes comic masterpieces, but not in these old-fashioned, stilted translations. I have read other translations of some of these plays. When properly translated, they are witty in much of their wordplay, frequently ribald and often funny. The language of the present translations, on the other hand, is stiff, obscure and scarcely readable. The publisher has done us a great service by compiling all of the Aristophanes plays into a single volume, but should reissue the collection in a better, more modern translation, one which does justice to the original.

I agree with the previous review on "Baudlerizing". Not only is the translation edited for sexual content but translating greek currencies (likely drachmae) into dollars, translating references to women's robes into "silk" -- probably unknown in ancient Greece, etc., makes this book less useful for people like myself who cannot read the ancient Greek, but are researching the historical period. The book retains much of Aristophanes humor and is, fairly much, kid-safe for those parents who are concerned about a child precocious enough to read Aristophanes being corrupted by an accurate translation.

Lest there be some confusion about the 2 stars I've given this book: Tacitus is fantastic and fascinating. So don't reproach me for SEEMING to criticize Tacitus, when my target here is the translation. (On the subject of reproach, Tacitus himself wrote: "To show resentment at a reproach is to acknowledge that one may have had it coming.") In fact, I think very highly of the incomparable Roman historian. Gibbon, among many others, loves him and so do I. However, this superficially handsome volume from The Modern Library (containing both The Histories and The Annals), does not do justice to Tacitus at all. These translations cannot be recommended, in spite of the praise lavished on them by the general editor. The Annals is barely acceptable but no more than that, and The Histories is inferior. No, the interested reader would be better off to consult the scintillating translation by W. H. Fyfe (revised by his editor, D. S. Levene) of The Histories, published by Oxford as a paperback in 1997. Tacitus' renown -- looking at his style rather than his content -- comes from his acerbic wit, pithy remarks and lucid analytical sentences. To get a truer sense of his abilities, look to another translation.