For Roman Catholics and others interested in what Europeans called "Modernism" in the early 20th century, this books provides the best explanation of the hows and whys of the social interaction that led to the condemnation of "Modernist" Roman Catholic scholars. Accusations of Modernism still ring in the halls of traditionalist Roman Catholic scholars. To understand their accusations and their laments, Schultenover's book is indispensible. His approach is historical, with primary and some previously unpublished sources, and anthropological, viewing events with the lenses of Mediterranean cultural anthropology. The result is an excellent overview.

David Macaulay's works are always entertaining, educational and literate, and this is no exception. A multitude of black-and-white line drawings illustrate the story of Roman urban planners as they design and construct a new city on the Roman empire's frontier. Every stage is explained thoroughly using text, illustrations and charts, from developing a master plan through construction. Tools are explained, cross-sections are used to good effect and specific projects such as a house, a road, a bridge and aqueduct, the forum and central market, public baths, the sewer system and an amphitheater and theater are represented. The book ends with a one-page glossary. If you or a student you know is interested in Roman engineering, this would be a marvelous book to read.

As a teacher I constantly seek new resources for the classroom. I teach high school and find this resources reaches all levels. My own college student sat down and devoured this book. You will not be dissappointed as Mr. MacAulay once again dissects the difficult and dry and produces an interesting and accesible resource on Rome.

I read this book before going to Pompeii and Herculeum, and it greatly enriched my appreciation for and understanding of those sites. Guidebooks may help you develop a general idea as to the use of a particular building, usually help you find that building, and may give you an idea as to what that building looked like 2000 years ago. This book gives you a brief, easily accessible account of what life was like in these places and helps you identify and understand little details that you otherwise would have either missed or puzzled over. It will greatly increase your appreciation for the Romans as engineers and urban planners!

Tacitus the great Roman historian, although this means somewhat different things from what it does now, wrote during the eventful years of the first and second century straddling the changes in Roman society that took place over this time and the first inklings of the vast population movements which were still to come.

In these books he chronicles the events taking place in the year AD 69 during the civil war which followed the death of Nero and the power vacuum left in his wake. The machinations of Otho, Galba, Vitellius and Vespasian are laid bare in a story told from Tacitus's viewpoint. One gets the feeling that he wrote in times of cynicism and greed, corruption and a degenerate society come to the fore. Tacitus was convinced that Roman society, and I'm sure many thought so as well, had declined in its inherent worth. Tacitus always seems to be looking back to the golden eras of a strong, vital and honest society often represented by the early years of expansion and struggle exemplified by the early Republic with figures such as Cato and later by Marius and even Augustus. He writes I think to both judge his time and leave it open for improvement especially as regards the integrity of the common man. The book is full of treachery and corruption from the lowest ranks such as slaves and freed men right up to the senators themselves. Strangely, although these weaknesses consume him he nonetheless points out the decent core yet still awake in the Roman state. At one point Otho the Emperor, at war with Vitellius over the throne, appears a self indulgent man taking too much pleasure in food and drink, rather against the original stoic mind set of his Roman forebears, but in the next he appears not totally without merit through his inspirational speeches to the troops. The same applies to the entire retinue of the warring parties each of whom are analysed in a manner exposing their weaknesses and strengths, all done mostly through the story itself rather than through an in depth analysis of the individual characters as such. Yet another reason Tacitus was such a skilled writer.

As the year progresses and gradually Vitellius becomes dominant as Emperor and finally Vespasian makes his moves through fascinating political manoeuvres which include a number of personages even including Domitian, we see many aspects of the complex process at work in the eventual rise of Vespasian to the throne.

There are some things which stand out in the narrative, one of which disabuses us of the usual interpretation of the situation as regards the views held by the Roman populace to the external "barbarians", especially in free Germany along the Rhine and Danube frontiers. What becomes clear is that even the seemingly alien Germans become part of the political process, they no longer seem a distant agressor hidden in the depths of the dark trackless forests of Germany but rather become human possessing the same weaknesses and strengths as other men. They are no longer seen as strictly alien to Romans themselves but are now players in the field of Empire. These new views seem at odds with other works even Tacitus's own "Agricola and the Germany" where the differences of these peoples from that of Rome is emphasised.

Although this "new" view is noted, much is made of the ability of the German auxiliaries, their toughness and strength and bold recklessness in war, an aura of eliteness surrounds them and even of fear in the eyes of the legions. Similar note is taken of separate legions themselves such as those of Germany who having fought the Germans themselves many times are also considered almost invincible. The 14th Legion which single handedly defeated the Boudiccan rebellion against enormous odds, being outnumbered at least five to one, also stand out and are taken as elite.

Unfortunately some of the original "Histories" is lost and this is shown by the abrupt end to the book just as Vespasian really starts to enter the picture. Nonetheless this is a fascinating book written with much skill and deft handling although it doesn't possess the same wit as his other "Agricola and the Germany". This tome seems a more serious work and may have been intended as such.

A great book bringing the time alive.

Tacitus Histories deals with the turbulent year 69AD the year of four emperors. Tacitus eye for detail which allows us to understand the personalities of Galba, Otho, Vitellius and Vespatian and their motivations and ambitions in this trully chaotic time in Rome's history. The sinister role of the Praetorians in these events is faithfully accounted. I found I could not put it down! Very readable compared to the Annals. The translation is first rate. The work is also supported by numerous foot notes and maps. Anyone interested in this period of Roman history must read this book.

The year 69 CE, called The Year of the Four Emperors, was awfully busy in the Roman Empire. The Emperor Nero had committed suicide in the previous year, the last ruler to have a family connection to Julius Caesar. His place was taken by Servius Sulpicius Galba, who was murdered early in 69 as part of a revolt by the next emperor, Marcus Salvius Otho. Otho himself committed suicide after being militarily bested by the next emperor, Lucius Vitellius. But by December of 69, Vitellius had been assassinated, and his place taken by Titus Flavius Sabinus Vespasianus, the general who had brutally suppressed the Bar Kochba rebellion in Judea. All this in less than 365 days.

Tacitus was a Roman conservative and, if his spirit could be summoned back from the dead, I would love to see him coming "From the Right" on "Crossfire." He was a tremendous writer, and "The Histories" are full of examples of this. There are his epigrams, such as his observation that Galba would have universally been thought of as worthy to rule had he never, in fact, ruled. There are interesting characters, like the great opportunist Antonius Primus, whose nickname translates roughly as "Beaky" because, well, he had a huge nose. There are a great many people mentioned in this work and therefore it needs to be read carefully, as it's hard to keep track of the Romans without a scorecard.

After the year 69, the Presidential election of 2000 seems pretty tame, doesn't it?

First I have to compliment Colleen McCullough on her research. Truely an outstanding effort and very praiseworthy. Her glossary at the end of the book is excellent and one which I have referred back to more then once for just general information. Having said that I now have to state that the entire series has been going down in quality since the second installment The Grass Crown. With the first two novels it is apparent that Ms. McCullough wrote them more or less simultaneously over a period of several years while doing her very extensive research. I read that she spent over five years researching and writing the first chapters and it shows. The attention to detail is excellent, her characters come to life, they sound and act like Romans. There is nothing modern about her dialouge, plot, or characterization. After a short while I felt like I was reading a prequel to Robert Grave's classic novels about Claudius. The only thing I felt there wasn't enough of was the biting wit that was so prevelant in Graves work. Unfortunly starting with the third installment I saw the old Colleen McCullough coming through. The bestselling author who has written The Thornbirds and Tim. It was obvious that the research was done and the dramatic stage set was built. Now Ms. McCullough is simply filling in with her trademark writing. Instead of a series of Roman novels now we have a soap opera with rather modern characters running around in togas. Instead of intruiging and fleshed out historical personas we have hero worship of Julius Ceaser and two dimensional characters. I made it through the fourth installment and gave up. More tired then disgusted - for what had been rather unusual has now become typical and could just as easily be set in New York City of today. I reccommend the first two novels highly. In my opinion they reach a level higher then the average summertime read, but after that one has mind candy pure and simple. Instead read I, Claudius and Claudius the God and his wife Messalina by Robert Graves if you want truly enertaining fiction set in the Roman Empire. Vale.

So often I read novels with some modest historical references where the author expresses thanks to the "little people" who helped with the research. Sometimes these include dozens of names. Astoundingly in "The First Man in Rome" Colleen McCullough says that is was basically a one woman show. Honestly, this book is such a comprehensive study of an era of Roman history that I think it would be worthy of someone working on a doctorate dissertation. The detail is breathtaking. And Ms McCullough even does the (very good) maps and other illustrations!

It is hard to explain the story of a 1000+ page historical novel. But it basically chronicles the political and military struggles in and around Rome circa 105 BC. The detail to which the author describes these events can be a bit beyond the interest of most readers but at least her prose is very rich and enjoyable to read. And she entertains the reader with several vignettes into the personal lives of the Roman leaders. Rather than dwelling on debauchery and crude aspects of their lifestyle she focuses on aspects on what is important to the Roman citizen: honor, status, money, and power.

Bottom line: a long and sometimes heavy read which is quite simply a masterpiece. Compulsory reading.

This is the first book in a (so far) 5 book series on ancient Rome. I highly recommend the entire series. As has been mentioned previously, the level of detail (and hence research) is amazing and highly engrossing. I know some folks who have given up on this book because of the detail and sheer number of charachters (for shame Mom). To combat this, McCullough has a great summary in each of the subsequent novels and an interesting glossary, defining Latin and other hard to recognize terms (I wish Patrick O'Brien would do likewise). But this book is really focused on Gaius Marius, a remarkable general and a real man's man. While he had nowhere near the pinache or number of victories as Caesar, he was equally as facinating and deserving of the title of a founder of Rome. His victories were a result of tremendous training, a use of spies that would make Sun Tzu proud, weapons innovations, and inspired leadersip. If you are a fan of Roman history or historical novels in general you must read this book. However, throughout the series McCullough's plot lines involve the women, merchants and slaves of Rome as much as the political and military leaders - the intrigue in the bedroom is equally entertaining. This makes the book a great read for any fan of great fiction.

I must first say to you that I really do love the Aeneid. There are some brilliant sections contained in that epic. Its poetry goes unsurpassed in spots, and the characterization would not be matched for another thousand and more years in the Western tradition. It's also the most sophisticated of all the classical epics; not only does it tell the tale of a brave hero with the attributes most dear to his race(just like all the other epics), but it also serves as propaganda for Augustus Caesar(fun to analyze), warns about the costs of fate(witness Dido!), and inflicts deep pathos upon the reader, along with articulating the purpose of the Roman Empire.

However, this translation is by no means adequate to convey the meaning behind this tale. I've read the Latin, which is of course superior, but it isn't that hard to find a better translation. Epics are supposed to be in high language...that's how they sounded even to the Romans! This new translation cuts out many poetic passages and renders them in dull, conversational English. Perhaps it is the easiest to understand, but using that argument would lead to the elevation of "See Spot Run" as highest art.

I suggest W F Jackson Knight's translation instead; Penguin, knowing that this new one would NOT be for everybody, and that the discerning would look for something better, still prints the other one too! The poetry, the faithfulness, and all the other important attributes of translation are much better taken care of in that one, so beware David West's travesty and get the good stuff instead.

For individuals less inclined to reading verse, David West's prose translation will come as a long-awaited relief. David West does not discard those elements that make Virgil so pleasant to read, and suprisingly manages to convert and preserve the original song and eloquence that marks the beauty of Virgil's great classic, the Aenied. In contrast with other editions this is moderately recommended.

David West renders this classical work accessible with a flare and sensibility that is truly rare. In so doing he brings this masterpiece from the realm of scholars into the hearts and minds of students worldwide. West captures the pure power and scale and grandeur of Virgil through his enormous talent for rendering epic poetry into prose. And for me the words ring true through the accessible prose style of West. He is worthy of great credit for opening this ancient, mystical tale of war and peace, adventure and love, quest and conquest to students who can benefit from its richness. In many ways Aeneas is an ideal man: smart, strong, bold and existentially insatiable. Because so much can be learned from this one epic work, West has done us a great favor in the boldness of his vivid prose. Purists and elitists may advocate looking elsewhere. But for my money, Virgil comes alive in the fortunately forged prose of West. His rendering of this astonishing tale has left an indelible mark for the better in my life. Personally, I feel that I am a richer man intellectually because of the talent with which West enabled me to connect with Virgil.

Okay - so Horace is notoriously allusive, each line packed with meaning. What that calls for, it would seem, is a translation with as many pages of notes as of text, if not more, and a line-by-line gloss in the back.

West in his Oxford World's Classic gives better annotation than most (the Penguin or Modern Library edition), but still could stand to do a lot more. One suspects he wants people to buy his expanded editions of the Odes.

The translations, as poetry, will not knock you off your feet, but they do better than the looser Michie versions at letting you know what Horace more or less wrote. (I find Michie's unrhymed versions very fine as poetry, but the rhymed ones are too glib to bear.) And West's aren't quite as soporific as Shepard's versions in Penguin.

Basically, it seems, I need to learn Latin. And if any of you eager reviewers knows a good English-language commentary on the Odes, don't keep it a secret.

After the defeat of Brutus at Phillipi in 42 BC, Horace was allotted the time to devote himself to poetry at his newly granted Sabine estate under the patronage of Gaius Maecenas, a reputed "scion of Etruscan kings." During this time, Horace's literary genius was able to flourish in the Sabine countryside, while he remained in dutiful correspondence with a brilliant circle of poets, including the great Virgil. These poems, collected here in David West's translation of Horace's "Odes and Epodes," are some of the most charming, warm, lovable, and humorous works to be found among the Roman poets of the Augustan Age, even though they may be equally full of both piercing sarcasm and fierce invective. In the Epodes Horace brings forth, through his unprecedented use of the Greek iambic meter in Latin form, the praise due to his patron Maecenas, the mild reflections upon the pastoral life, the pangs of love and war, and the personal sorrows of the defeat suffered at Phillipi. In the Odes, Horace moves on from the iambic meter to the early Greek genre of lyric poetry such as may be found in the works of poets like Alchaeus and Sappho. Furthermore, in the Odes, Horace muses upon friendship and relations with women, offers hymns to the gods and honor to Augustus, and at the same time reveals the typical Epicurean's "love for the moment." With the addition of Suetonius' brief but very important "Life of Horace" and the noble "Secular Hymn" dedicated to the dignity of the Augustus' new state, David West's translation will be a welcoming edition for everyone.

[This review refers to the Oxford World's Classics
edition of Horace's THE COMPLETE ODES AND EPODES,
and the "Secular Hymn" -- "Translated with an Introduction
and Notes by David West."]

It is always wise, if funds permit, to purchase more
than one edition (translation) of some of these classic
works. To read several translations that are well done
is like experiencing the same piece of classical music
so well interpreted but with different style, flair, and
felicity by different orchestras and conductors.
The Oxford World's Classics series are excellent for
their formatting, the scholarship, and the wonderful
Explanatory Notes at the back which give such helpful
context and understanding.
You know that you are in the company of an interesting
translator (as well as the company of Horace, the poet,
himself) when you read something like this in the
"Introduction":
"Those who know Horace well, find that of all dead
writers there is none who is a closer friend, who speaks
more usefully in easy and in difficult times, and none
whom they would more happily sit down to drink with.
* * * We have seen glimpses of [Horace's] humour and
studied his tactical deftness as a client poet. His
poetry is steeped also in the affairs of the day. He
is interested in those he addresses and sensitive and
affectionate towards his friends. He has an eye for
metaphor and a taste for the surreal. * * * The sound
is unique, setting against elaborate, fixed metres the
music of powerful speech. The complexity of the
structure of many of the poems amazes with subtle
transitions, astonishing leaps of sense, and rich
modulations of feeling. The elusvieness of Horace is
familiar."
-- David West. "Introduction."
-------
But it is in the "Translator's Note" that the real
insight and sensitivity of this translator come out.
For he says of Horace: "The odes of Horaace are among
the densest lyric poems ever written. The allusions
are rich and subtle, and the tone is so iridescent
that readers can never be quite sure of it, and find
endless pleasure in disagreeing with each other about
it. Translation of poetry is always impossible but
translation of Horace's odes is inconceivable."
-- David West. "Translator's Note."
-------
But very fortunately for us, David West proceeded
with his translation quest anyway. And he has given
us some very fine experiences with Horace, even if
they are in English. Here is a part of West's
translation of Ode XXIX from Book III:
Fortune enjoys her cruel business and
persists in playing her proud game,
transferring her fickle honours,
favouring now me, now another.

I praise her while she stays. If she
shakes out
her swift wings, I return what she gave,
wrap myself
in my virtue, and look for honest Poverty,
the bride that brings no dowry.

Immensely satisfying, memorable, haunting...

Montesquieu's "Considerations..." is a refreshing change of pace from the usual, long winded, dry books on Roman history. It is a concise, clear, chronologically presented work, but still manages to be quite thorough in examining a variety of the causes behind the rise and fall of the Romans. The author touches on the social, military, economic and moral factors that made the Romans great, and in the end led to collapse of their empire. I can recommend it as a worthwhile read to those of you interested in the history of the Romans.

A book far too often ignored by modern readers. Montesquieu presents a succinct and readable analysis of the history of the Roman Republic and Empire. For both the layperson and the scholar interested in Roman History this is an essential read. He presents the reasons for the the spread of Rome's empire, the fall of the Republic, and the long duration and eventual collapse of the empire in a clear fashion. He goes through Roman history chronologically and shows how these causes relate to specific events. Edward Gibbon praises Montesquieu in his memoirs, and after reading his Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, it is easy to see how the theses presented here on religion and the military may have influenced Gibbon's own conclusions.

Johnston's book is basically organized into three sections, thought there is no mention of this structure in the table of contents. The first section introduces the reader to the sources of Roman law (how the law was made, and who made it). The second section discusses the substantive law of family, property, and contracts. The third section discusses litigation (or how the laws discussed in section two worked in practice). At the end of the book, there is a very good glossary of Roman legal terms, followed by an extremely helpful discussion of the Roman legal literature for the serious student of Roman Law to pursue.

Johnston's book does a great job of packing a lot of information into very few pages, but often at the expense of several rereads by the reader. The information is accurate and well-researched, thought it could have been presented better (see next paragraph). However, whether you're new to Roman law, or have studied the subject in depth, you will come away with a better grasp of Rome's legal system, her institutions, and her laws.

Now, for the criticism. I believe that Johnston's book would have been much better if he would have followed his discussion of the sources of Roman law (section I) with the section on litigation (section III, which discusses how the law operated in practice), followed then by a discussion of the substantive law. Johnston's organization, by not doing this, presented the reader with an entire book of disparate and seemingly disjunctive technical material without a mechanism for synthesizing it until the reader reached Johnston's last chapter on litigation. This was the chapter that tied everything together, and it should have been discussed earlier. Only upon reading this last chapter did I finally understood why everything Johnston had told me before was important, and because of this, it looks like I'll be reading this book again to fully appreciate the impact of the previous chapters.

Therefore, I would recommend reading chapter one, then the last chapter, and then the material on the substantive law following the first chapter. Doing so, I guarantee, will save you a lot of head scratching and will enable you to appreciate this book, which is otherwise very good.

Personally, while this book is accessible to the beginner, I would recommend that a reader unfamiliar with Roman law begin with Nicholas' "An Introduction to Roman Law" or Crook's "Law and Life of Rome," both of which are excellent and will better prepare you for Johnston's book.

It is hard to imagine a better introduction to the grand world of Roman law and legal history. This is a scholarly and also beautifully written essay on the most interesting cultural creation of the Romans, their law. Recommended most highly.

Julius Caesar is probably one of the better plays written by Shakespeare. This play if full of intrigue, action, betrayal, and emotion. This play is not very long (5 acts), which makes it a quick and exciting read. The characters are built nicely, and what is nice about this version of the book, is that it is easy to read, and any words that may be unfamiliar are defined on the opposite page, making it easy to look them up, and understand Shakespeare's difficult writing style. This is definately a play worth checking out. It's a fun read, and with plenty of helpful tools built in to help along the way.

This superb play by Shakespeare somehow reminded me of Antigona, the first play which directly examined the always complex interplay and usual confrontation between political reason and moral reason. This play is an excellent account of the immediately previous and subsequent days of Julius Caesar's assasination by Brutus, his best friend, and other conspirators. Brutus is persuaded by the resentful Cassius that Caesar has betrayed Rome by abandoning the Republic and turning to Dictatorship. Brutus gets to be convinced that, in order to save the Republic, Caesar must be killed. This puts him in a great dilemma, for he loves Caesar and he's his closest friend. Here we see in an acute form the way in which political power gets in conflict with morality and feelings. Friendship, power and betrayal are the basic subjects of this excellent piece of work.

A while back, a friend of mine and I decided to pick a Shakespeare play every couple months, read it, then get together and discuss it.

It worked with pretty good results for ROMEO AND JULIET, but then we ran out of gas somewhere in the middle of our next selection, JULIUS CAESAR.

Now that I've finally finished reading the play long after our allotted "couple months," I have to say that the fault (the mutual disinterest that effectively brought our little Shakespeare club to a halt) doesn't lie in the play itself, but rather in my preconceptions of what the play was about.

I can't speak for my friend, but since I took the Cliff Notes route in high school when we were supposed to be reading about Caesar and Brutus and the rest of the treacherous Roman senate (and didn't do a very thorough job at that) I always assumed the play's action revolved around the plot to kill Caesar and culminated with his death scene. I wasn't prepared to find Caesar dead halfway through the play, with two-plus acts remaining. I think I just lost interest once Caesar blurted, "Et tu, Brute?" and slouched over lifeless on the cold marble.

But thankfully I eventually kept going, and discovered what the play is really about: the manipulation of the public that goes on after Caesar's death. The speeches in JULIUS CAESAR, given by those who would take his place, are full of the damage-control, image-making spin that happens everday on our "all news" channels. It's an interesting play, maybe not Shakespeare's best, but one that has certainly has some modern relevance and is worth examining.

Now if my friend and I can just get our club back on its feet. Maybe a comedy next time...

The Roman Conquest of Italy is a purely academic look at the social, economic, and political factors that led to the Romanization of the Italian peninsula. There is little of conquest here. Jean-Michel David scrupulously avoids anything remotely resembling conquest in his quest to beat the reader about the head and shoulders with the recitation of place names and peoples, legalisms and legislators, governmental structures and the aristocrats who maneuvered within them. Even the second Punic War is employed merely as a backdrop to discuss the displacement of peoples and the subsequent land confiscation of victorious Rome. Lest you think that an act of confiscation might lend some excitement, David makes sure to drown it in ennui with stupefying legalistic effect.

If there is a less intriguing side to any facet of Romanization, David finds it with unerring regularity. He seems to leap towards drudgery. Every single time I thought the book was about to pick up, David found a new professorial rat hole to climb down. Hellenism, the agent most responsible for melding the Italics into a whole, is discussed more as an aside than the powerful (and powerfully interesting) cultural force it had become. Additionally, the Social War and the civil wars which punctuated the manifestation of Roman empire are painstakingly avoided as well.

I, long ago, experienced the college history profs who, smugly announcing that they don't do wars, dove straight into the most mindnumbingly pedantic archival material known to man. These are the people who, though apparently devoted to representing history, do it its greatest disservice. They literally suck the fun out of it. One of their kind wrote this book.

This book is only 218 pages long yet holds a lot of information. Starting around the fourth century BC, in Italy, the author describes the people of Italy, their backgrounds, governments (or lack of) and orgins. Then Rome steps onto the stage in the next act and we learn how it incorporated the other cities into their state, with or without the use of force. Hannibal and the consequences of the second Punic War are next, followed by chapters on the Italian economy, municipal politics, patronage and Romanization, Roman domination and citizenship, and in the final act the book deals with the Roman instruments of power; money, clients and prestige.

This book is a superb description of the factors that during the last two centuries BC lead Italy from being a collection of states under Rome domination to a sigle political entity. The prospective buyer must be aware that the translation of the title is misleading. This NOT a history of the conquest of Italy by Rome but a history of how after being conquested by Rome Italy became "Romanized".