Customer Reviews

Blood of the Caesars: How the Murder of Germanicus Led to the Fall of Rome

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(5)
3 star:		(3)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I have enjoyed before the books relating the History of the Roman Legions by author Dando-Collins, especially Nero's Killing Machine that gives background on the campaigns of Germanicus and how he become recognized as one of Rome's best military commanders. In this new book he gives us an intriguing possibility about the untimely death of Germanicus and we are confonted with evidence linking this death to a murder commited by a very well known character in Rome's history. I believe that the conclusions make sense but since this a 2000 year old mystery the case will remain unsolved foerever but his conclusions are very interesting. As far as the death of Germanicus being the cause for the later fall of the Western Roman Empire I believe that is stretching history a little bit too far, I believe even if Germanicus reached the position of Emperor, Rome would have fallen eventually to barbarian invasions and to internal decomposition as the seeds of decay lay in the internal foundations of Roman society namely: slavery, poverty, militarism and many other reasons than just bad goverment of a few emperors. If Germanicus could have finished the conquest of Germany eventually barbarians from the East namely Goths, Alans, Huns and others would have eventually overan Rome. But anyways I thoroughly enjoyed the book, new conclusions different from Robert Graves version of this famous murder as stated in I Claudius.

Blood of the Caesars is a great read. It moves swiftly, holds the reader's interest and strikes a superb balance between providing too much detail and providing too little. It is also somewhat of a murder mystery, and at the end of the book Dando-Collins gives his opinion as to the identity of the murderer of Germanicus Caesar.

Dando-Collins's contention that the murder of Germanicus led to the fall of Rome is a bit too much to swallow. It ignores the restoration of stability during the Flavian dynasty under Vespasian and Titus and, after a number of bad years under Domitian, the golden age of the "5 good emperors" (Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius and Marcus Aurelius). Almost one full century of good rulers undid the damage that occurred in the 40-odd years after Germanicus death.

There may be a key error in the book that undermines his theory of the identity of Germanicus's murderer. Dando-Collins writes that Augustus's daughter Julia died of "natural causes", but other sources say that she was starved to death shortly after Tiberius took the throne. Now, it turns out that Aggripina the Elder, Nero Germanicus and Drusus Germanicus were also starved to death. Beginning to see a pattern here? Especially noteworthy is the death of Drusus Germanicus, which clearly occurred on Tiberius's orders following the execution of Sejanus. (Sejanus is sometimes blamed for the other two deaths). Tiberius had few qualms about murdering his family and is the most likely candidate for the person who ordered the death of Germanicus.

This book was highly entertaining. Dando-Collins does just what the description claims- he creates a web of suspense that kept me reading until the last page. I figured out half of his idea of "whodunit," but the other half came as quite a suprise (although, like with any good mystery, it made me bop myself on the head and say "Oooooh!").

That said, while it's an enjoyable read, I didn't find his conclusion terribly convincing. Although he does bring up some interesting evidence that shows that there is more to the story of his main suspect, I was not convinced that that person was connected to *this* story. His theory is not backed up by any real evidence, while other theories are done away with using incomplete logic. Much of his case is circumstantial and relies on guesses or holes in the historical record. Seeing that it is a two thousand year old mystery, no one will ever know for sure.

For a work of non-fiction, I found his scholarship in some places to be spotty, not just with regards to the murder of Germanicus, but with other dates, places, and people. Some seem like careless errors that should have been caught upon revision (such as claiming Tiberius was the younger of Livia's two sons); others undermine his vision of the story by changing the timeline of events, seemingly to suit his purpose.

The claim that the death of Germanicus lead to the eventual fall of Rome should be treated with skepticism. For an idea within the subtitle of the book, it didn't take up much space, and rightly so. I found that claim much more improbable than his idea of who Germanicus' murderers were.

Overall, I did enjoy the book and would recommend it as a fun read, especially due to its novel conclusions, but not as something to base opinions on or to be taken as fact.

This is a very interesting book, but ultimately the author has produced a flawed product. The is work by Dando Collins suffers from two fatal flaws. The first is that his basic thesis, that the death of Germanicus weakened Rome, setting the stage for a series of weak and corrupt rulers, thereby leading to the western empires eventual fall in 476 AD and the eastern empire's destruction in 1453 (good runs considering). But it is perhaps his solution to the person behind the murder of Germanicus that is ultimately the most unsatisfactory aspect of this work.

That the succession issue was bothersome for Rome is no question. It lead to periodic outbreaks of Civil War and undermined political stability in the 200s. However it is probably an overstatement to conclude that had Germanicus and his eldest sons taken over from Tiberius that Rome would have been spared these complications. I have a hard time imagining that Germanicus as the third emperor could have engendered a situation, as Dando Collins claims, in which Roman ruins might have been found in Capetown and persons living in China might have learned Latin. This is an overstatement in the extreme.

Dando Collins makes extensive use of Dio, Tacitus, and Suetonius. While he tends to question the accuracy of both Suetonius and Dio in places (the did write 70 and 200 years after the events of the book), he gives Tacitus a pass. While Tacitus is an excellent writer and the leading historian of imperial Rome, he too has an agenda. Tacitus, in common with most members of the senatorial class, never met an emperor he really liked (Suetonius never heard of an affair by an emperor in which he did not believe, particularly if involved some extreme perversion). As a result the crimes of the emperors are overstated just as the failings of their victims are understated. Probably everyone was using a common play book in which murder, poisoning, slander, sexual entrapment were all considered fair game. Imperial opponents probably were no more moral than the emperors they sought to undermine.

That Germanicus was a good general is beyond dispute. He seems to have been genuinely popular and his death devastated the empire. However given the fact that his third son was Caligula and his grandson was Nero, I am more than suspicious of his status as paragon. While it is understandable that Caligula and Nero turned out the way that history records them as behaving, it probably would be less comprehensible if a product of the environment of palace intrigue, which Germanicus certainly was, would have been much better. Both Caligula and Nero both had really brilliant starts and then abruptly became erratic and tyrannical. What evidence do we have that it would have been any different for Germanicus?

I should say at the outset that I found Dando Collins' attempt to solve the mystery of who killed Germanicus to be the most disappointing aspect of the book and if anyone wishes to find out what this, he should halt reading here. Early on, Germanicus identifies five suspects, Tiberius, the emperor, Livia, the dowager empress, Piso a political rival, Plancenta, Piso's wife and Sejanus, a henchman of Tiberius, all of whom benefitted allegedly from the death of Germanicus. His solution in the last chapter is to accuse the philosopher Seneca and the wife of Germanicus, Agrippina (who previously had been portrayed as a proud, but innocent victim of Tiberius) as the likely culprits. This is nonsense. The only reason Dando Collins has for selecting Seneca is because of his later prominence. Most of the characterizations of the other figures seem to be informed by the novel by Robert Graves, "I, Claudius."

While accusing Seneca of murder is a stretch, Agrippina the elder is absurd. If anyone suffered more from the death of Germanicus, it would be her. Women in Rome derived their status from who they were married to. Her best chance of gaining the power that she craved was as the consort of Germanicus. An affair with Seneca, if learned of, would mean only disgrace and ruin. The idea that the proud granddaughter of Augustus Caesar would have taken up with an obscure Spaniard is bizarre (her daughter Julia was, as history records, not so picky). Really by making this charge Dando Collins not only is guilty of outdoing Suetonius in terms of sensation, but indulging the most absurd hyperbolic conclusions. Had the publishers of this book discarded the final chapters of the book and inserted a new conclusion, the work would have been far better in terms of quality and ultimately less disappointing.

Assigning four stars to this publication rests only on the basis of there being no centre plates/photographs. Portrait busts/statuary artworks etc, depicting the leading personalities featured in the text are extant, so why are these not in cluded in such a fine book which is otherwise so engaging, readable and scholarly?

Blood of the Caesars is a popular history review masquerading as a murder mystery inside some pretty wild speculation on what might have been, written by a very knowledgeable researcher who makes an interesting argument, but ultimately I think overstates his case.

Dando-Collins goes into the character of Germanicus, heir apparent to Tiberius (and could potentially have been to Augustus still earlier), a charismatic, talented, and hugely popular military leader, murdered at the height of his popularity. The author's point is that (a) his murderer was never really convincingly identified (though Piso's suicide ended the historical inquiry); and (b) had the murder not taken place, Germanicus would likely have eventually succeeded to the throne, and be in a position to extend the Julio-Claudian line through his many children and potential grandchildren into the far distant future, avoiding the disasters represented by Emperors such as Caligula, Nero, and the mostly disappointing successors holding the office for the next several hundred years.

The historical work relies on the classical sources writing somewhat after the fact, but may well be the best we have, though much of what is repeated here is at least arguably a little one-sided. The facts surrounding the murder trial are well-done; it's when we get into the unknowable motivations of the key players (and potential murder suspects) that we run into trouble. The eventual accusing a particular character, not previously considered as a possibility, as the murderer of Germanicus at the end of the book, seems to me somewhat very circumstantial, and not entirely convincing. It is the weakest part of the book.

The speculation on what might have been is also a little much. When one says that the rule and subsequent line of Germanicus would have been so consequential, beneficial, and positive, one overlooks the fact that Caligula and Nero in fact were part of that line. Admittedly, without the serious thinning out of his family by rivals, these particular successors (3rd son and grandson) might not have been in line; but there is no guarantee that the first or second son, or another grandson, would have been dramatically different. Further, the Roman Empire in the West did in fact last another 400 years after Nero's death; we will see if the American empire lasts as long.

However, much of the book goes into the story of the family of Germanicus, jealousy and rivalry at court, and the twists and turns of fortune in this arena. It is an interesting and absorbing story, often told in one way or another, and always worth revisiting. Dando-Collins has studied well and deeply on the Roman Empire, and while this book is not perfact, it remains well worth reading if only to see whether or not you agree with his positions.

Having read quite a few books on Augustus' times up to Nero -- including the sources like Tacitus-- I find Collins' book very well documented indeed and even facinating. It is also very well written and "can't put it down" type.

But why did Collins yielded to his editor's pressure to turn the book into a whodunnit? and added this shamefull last chapter to accuse the poor Seneca, just because he lived at the same time (and yet his birthdate has been moved back 4 years to fits the plot). It doesn't make sense one split second! Too bad! It will cost him a star

I tore through this book in a matter of three days. It is well written and flows immediately into the capture of the reader. But I could not help but notice a few mistakes such as claiming Drusus the elder was the elder brother of Tiberius when in fact, Tiberius was Livia's firstborn son. Also, Julia did not die of old age, she was starved to death at Tiberius' hands the same year Augustus died (AD 14). I could clearly see where the author was going and, though he stood much to gain by being the mastermind, it (to me) is a far fetched idea. There were plenty of people who stood to gain by being the mastermind. Livilla, wife of Drusus the younger, had motive to be rid of her brother. She was jealous over Agrippina, had formerly been posed to become the next Empress of Rome when married to Gaius, and she was involved with Sejanus. I find that she would be a more eligible candidate to mastermind the murder and had the means. I did, however, find Dando-Collins' accomplice a real twist. I've often considered the same thing. What I like best about this book is the detail about each of the players. Kudos!

I admit to being a Stephen Dando-Collins fan. This, his most recent effort, was spellbinding from start to finish. D-C takes us on a complete tour of the lives, and fates, of the descendents of Caesar. Caligula, Claudius, and Nero all figure prominently as the family vies to destroy each other. The map and family tree were very helpful in keeping the various Druses' and Aggripina's straight as author's theory on the killer of Germanicus began to gather steam. The suspects certainly include the emperor, Tiberius, himself. But don't forget Livilla, the dastardly Sejanus, and the unstable governor of Syria, Senator Piso.

The way the book is constructed is very clever as well. We open with the recent death of Germanius and proceed forward in time until the death of Nero, some 50 years later. While the theory may or may not be true, the reader is in for very good historical accuracy, clearly presented in a gripping and highly entertaining manner. Loads of fun for the Roman history lover, Three thumbs up!

Highly recommend this book. You don't have to be into Roman history to follow the book. Reads like a mystery where the detective sums up the case in the murder by poison of Germanicus. I wish history books were written like this when I was in school!