Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic,   ISBN:9781400078974

Customer Rating: 

This book attempts to cover the period of Roman history from ancient times to the Early Empire. While it does a good job highlighting the major events, I was a little let down based on the reviews I read here. Most stated it was a page turner and the history just "came alive." I, for one, did not find it so captivating. I am studying Ancient Rome and this is the 25th to 30th book I've read, and I think I have learned most from the Colleen McCullough historical fiction (Masters of Rome) series. Most of everything she wrote was factually accurate and when she makes conjectures or speculates, she lets you know in the end notes. Her books ARE page turners. While definitely not as DRY and lacking in depth as Michael Grant's The History of Rome, this book served its' purpose and was readable. Worth the read, especially for a novice student of the Roman world. :)

Customer Rating: 

The Roman Republic may have had many virtues in the period before this book opens; but as portrayed in this book, during its last century it takes some beating for its arrogance, hypocrisy, ceaseless competitiveness and ambition, measureless greed, envy, opportunist changing of sides, lack of principles, fickleness, debauchery, demagoguery, treachery, assassinations, lack of civic courage, brutality, thieving, bribery and corruption on a gigantic scale, vulgar display, and the crudest kind of aggrandisement both national and personal. I had only the most general knowledge of the period, and became completely lost following the treacherous manoeuvres of schemers called Caelius, Clodius, Catulus, Cethegus, and Curio whom I found hard to keep apart, or of who was married to whom. Rome resembled nothing so much as a nest of vipers, with Cato and Marcus Brutus being the only leading figures who retained their integrity. Rome's constitution still retained some old values: balance of power, frequent elections to every office, all designed to prevent any one citizen from becoming a dictator: but elections were frequently bought and at other times subject to violent intimidation and even murder.

The Romans thirsted for military glory and awarded triumphs to victorious generals; but they resented it if any general became too powerful. However, in the period covered by this book, the Senate was too often unable to curb the excess of power in the hands of individuals, afraid both of them and of the Roman poor, who were always prone to hero-worship any successful general or populist agitator. And of course in the end one general after another defied the constitution while pretending the save it, until in the end the Republic expired.

There are rounded portraits of the leading figures of the time - Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Cicero, Caesar, Mark Anthony - all shown with their bad qualities - their ambitions, their vanities, and their intrigues - but whatever virtues they had are also acknowledged: the creative side of the dictator Sulla, for instance, the for the time unusually humane way Pompey treated conquered peoples, the occasional calculated clemency of Julius Caesar towards politicians he had defeated, the respect Cicero had for the law; and finally the genius of Caesar Augustus, whose merit, after a rise as unscrupulous, as calculating and as blood-stained as that of his predecessors, showed the wisdom to make the exhausted Romans feel that their old virtues and institutions had been restored, that the civil wars were over, that Roman armies would continue to expand the boundaries of Roman control - though all under his ultimate control.

Customer Rating: 

Rubicon: The Triumph and Tragedy of the Roman Republic

I picked up this book on a recommendation from [...] from a list of "best history books". Since I've never read much about Rome before, and the book had a cool title (Rubicon it turns out is the name of a river) I decided to check it out.

The one thing I've learned about great history books is that they have superb writers. [I'm talking about history books that look like slightly oversized hardcover novels, not those terribly written textbooks.] In a way, it's not that surprising, since who would want to read a book about history unless it was written well? For a history book to be commissioned, I think the editor looks at writing ability just as much as technical ability in history. This book is highly readable. The sentences are short and concise, the font is big, and the pages use 1.5 point spacing. I can't count the number of books I have tossed because the font was so tiny and each page was jam-packed with text, so I love books with accessible presentation.

Like all good history writers, Tom Holland brings the story of the Republic to life. The combination of layout and author's style hooks you from the first page. And the history of the Republic is cold, filthy, unforgiving, ruthless, and without mercy. It reminds me much of the movie "300", except that this was real: in "300" boys were trained as killers and the weak were killed in the ultimate test of solo-hunting a beast, while in Rome parents dunked their babies in ice water to ensure only the strong would survive; in "300" the Spartans killed in ruthless fashion, in Rome there were equally horrific massacres. You learn that Rome often provoked enemies into battle just so they could enjoy gutting their cities, burning them to the ground, and slaughtering their inhabitants in full. The details of this story are so appalling that it's almost hard to believe that there could be a true story so unrelentingly bloody.

The Romans were full of contradictions; the concepts of tradition and integrity were fiercely upheld, yet bribery, cruelty, and murder were rampant; they loved citizenship and equality, but treated non-Romans with disdain; they hated the concept of dictatorship, but loved the pursuit of personal glory and praised personal ambition; their city was both the most impressive city in the world but also one of the ugliest and unplanned. Backstabbing and betrayal were so common that it was accepted, blood feuds ran for generations and would be avenged repeatedly, and those in quest for power often lived each day without knowing whether they would survive another. Perhaps it was inevitable that the seams would eventually burst and the tyranny of Empire would eventually take over.

And yet the most ironic fate of all is that an honourable man, by assassinating Julius Caesar (Caesar having become more and more of a dictator), ended up not preventing the Empire, but possibly caused it to come more quickly. ("Et tu, Brute?") And that Roman Empire would last for centuries, subjugating and enslaving millions.

Like I said, Tom Holland writes in a very clear and readable style, always moving the plot forward and never rambling. The only thing annoying about his writing is that it's peppered with scandalously obscure vocabulary like ordure, elide, recherché, peculation, haver, and lese majeste (I think I might've known two of those), words so rare that you might see once and not see again in a lifetime. All in all though, I agreed with the users of Goodreads that this is one of the best books on Ancient Rome out there. Worth reading.

Also known as Rubicon: the Last Years of the Roman Republic

Customer Rating: 

The book is overloaded with generalizing, personifying, and hyperbole, which simplifies and obscures the history. Some random examples: the Republic was exhausted and preoccupied; everyone knew; a ragbag of cities presumed; resentments seethed; the Romans judged; the plebians refused; community was cherished; peers wondered; Cato's ghost haunted the conscience of Rome. I felt frustrated that explanations and reasoning were being hidden from me.

Customer Rating: 

Tom Holland's "Rubicon: The Last Years of the Roman Republic", as its title suggests, is an examination of the turbulent final decades of Republican rule. As many other reviewers have noted, Holland attempts to lay as much historical and contextual groundwork as possible prior to Caesar's crossing of the Rubicon (which does not occur until rather late in the overall narrative). In doing so, the author distills nearly 500 years of history into a work that weighs in at just under 400 pages, meaning that "Rubicon" tends to read like a novel more often than not. Familiar names (Cicero, Pompey, Antony, Octavian, et al.) take on larger-than-life proportion (the "Great Man" approach) in tales of shadowy political maneuverings, stinging betrayals, and brutal military conquests. Holland sheds light on the poignant disparity between the nation's high minded ideals and the reality of its status as a highly stratified expansionist power, one in which thwarted political ambition could lead straightfaced patricians to decry the tyranny of a Sulla, Pompey, or Caesar, even as Rome itself became ever more addicted to the wealth and slavery of those it conquered.

Written in stripped-down prose that persistently steers clear of a weightier academic style, this is a briskly related narrative that rarely becomes unwieldy. Holland's work here is as likely to excite the lay reader looking for a comprehensive introduction to the Republic as it is to somewhat disappoint the more serious one expecting something a little more scholarly. (The book is light on footnotes, perhaps suggesting that the author wanted to keep things moving.) Either reader will likely be left wishing to dig deeper.