Customer Reviews

Caesar: Life of a Colossus

5 star:		(55)
4 star:		(18)
3 star:		(5)
2 star:		(2)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Adrian Goldsworthy's latest book, "Caesar", is another one of those great books that you cannot afford to miss this year. Following on from his excellent run of books; "The Punic Wars" and "In The Name of Rome", this new title is a great addition to anyone's library.

The tale of Julius Caesar has been told before many times but I doubt as well as this in recent times. The research and story telling is exceptional. I found the book easy to read although it is quite detailed in regards to the political and social events and background that made up Rome during Caesar's period.

The accounts of Caesar's military campaigns were well told and presented with a number of basic maps to assist the reader in following the action. The author presented the facts covering Caesar's life in an un-biased way and left it to the reader to make up his own mind in regards to those controversial events in Caesar's life.

The book is about 520 pages in narrative text along with a number of black & white photographs and maps. Overall this is a good book and I am sure anyone who has an interest or passion for this period of history or for Julius Caesar will enjoy this book immensely.

Fans of Goldsworthy's previous works won't be disappointed with this bio, which will undoubtedly be named as one of the best overall works about Julius Caesar for many years to come.

Goldsworthy doesn't focus primarily on any one aspect of Caesar's life, yet manages to go over all of them in a way that is still detailed and illuminating, even for one who's read dozens of books on the subject.
He gives comprehensive accounts of Caesar's military campaigns, at the same time giving backgrounds on the regions/peoples involved, yet without getting lost in the history/tactics/equipment of the legions themselves.
*(the definitive work on Caesar's military campaigns will always be Theodore Ayrault Dodge's "Caesar", with Stephen Dando-Collins' ongoing history series on individual legions also proving to be very interesting - to-date he's done "Caesar's Legion" on the 10th, "Nero's Killing Machine" on the 14th, and "Cleopatra's Kidnappers" on the 6th, with "Mark Antony's Heroes" on the 3rd coming out in November)*

Goldsworthy gives one of the most detailed descriptions of Caesar's early life and rise into politics that I've ever read, and in the process is able to go over the numerous political process(es) of the era in a way easily understandable for those unfamiliar with them.
He talks about Caesar's pros/cons in an objective manner, always bringing up alternative points of view, and asking questions that may not have occurred to those whose thinking may be slanted in one direction or the other.

While very long at first glance, Goldsworthy's writing is very insightful and reader-friendly, making the subject all the more fascinating.
Just as he did in his hard-to-find 2000 work "The Punic Wars", he's able to take a topic most people would have no interest in, and turn it into a study that you want to read more than once.

Adrian Goldsworthy's Caesar: Life of a Colossus joins two other recent biographies from the same period to provide a rich sense of Rome in the first century BC and shortly thereafter. The other two are Everitt's volumes on Cicero and Augustus. Among them, once gets a sense of the increasing dysfunction of the Roman Republic and the various efforts to address the increasingly unfortunate state of affairs.

Goldsworthy's book provides a detailed view of Caesar's life. Where details are sparse, he uses good sense in trying to fill in the blanks, appropriately noting where the gaps in the record lie. The volume begins by describing the status of the Republic before Caesar's story begins. This includes the institutions of government and the increasing internal problems, with murder and assassination as more typical of "regime change" than is good for a stable polity. The role of the Senate is well described.

After setting the stage, Caesar's story is put into context. One key issue was his association with the popularis and the hostility of some of the elite of Rome toward Caesar as a result. On page 105, the author notes that "Caesar had from early in his career inclined toward a popularis path. . . ."

He held his first public office in 72 or 71 B. C. Shortly thereafter, he began to ally with Pompey the Great and, later, with Crassus in the First Triumvirate. He also began a habit of spending a great deal of money to generate support from Romans. This led to a situation where he was often risking great and even crushing debt in order to build support. Normally, the risk was rewarded with success over the course of his career.

The book goes on to discuss in nice detail Caesar's assignment in Gaul. Over a period of time, he accumulated a record of great success in fighting the Gauls and making Rome's hegemony in the region stable. His work also generated nice revenues for Rome and loot for his troops. Upon the completion of years of service in Gaul, he expected proper recognition. When the political climate became sour, he "crossed the Rubicon" with some of his troops and established his political dominance. The ups and downs of Caesar trying to overcome the army of Pompey, his former partner, and stabilizing the frontier (in Egypt, where he consorted with Cleopatra) and the east.

Upon his return to Rome he was preparing to return to the east when he was assassinated. His popularis tendencies appear to have been a part of that as well as a fear by many in the elite that Caesar was to become a dictator.

This is a nice volume on the period and on Caesar as a person. The book does a fine job of placing Caesar in the context of the increasingly problematic republic. Goldsworthy writes well and the end product is well worth a look by those interested in the subject and the time.

Perhaps writing a biography of a man who died over 2,000 years ago, even if about the most written about of the Romans, the limitation of the sources makes a truly deep biography impossible. Or perhaps Mr. Goldsworthy, as able and talented a military historian as any currently writing focused on the area he knew best. Whatever the reason, Caesar: The Colossus works only so well and so far. Julius Caesar the general comes blazing through here, with well detailed strategic and tactical analysis. Where the author's work proves less successful is in describing the other theatre of battle in which his subject excelled politics.

With a quick but informative review, Goldsworthy lays out the structure of the Roman state and the ambitions of its great men. Yet, as people these important figures, Pompey, Carassus, Cicero, and even Caesar never truly come to life. In the limitations of the work even the Table of Contents is revealing, Caesar's years of dictator, the reforms he enacted, and his efforts all discussed in less than forty pages.

Some may see this to Mr. Goldsworthy's credit, that he eschews interpretive leaps or raising the drama of the story. Yet the stories or Rome, the struggle's between Caesar and Pompey, the wealth of Crassus so great that even 2,000 years later his very name proves a descriptive -- "rich as Crassus" -- were nothing if not stuff of epics. Maybe such things are best left to the works of poets and novelists, but for this reader, one wished to see more of the human drama of these figures whose stories have transcended time.

Dr. Goldsworthy's book is detailed and insightful. I appreciate the maps and the analysis by a scholar who is a Roman military historian. This book is probably aimed primarily at the informed layman, though I believe even the novice to Roman history will find it quite interesting. The detail deserves careful reading; this may be a drawback for the casual reader, however. A serious student of history should find this level of analysis absorbing. Caesar's life was marked by his astonishing accomplishments as both a general and politician. Goldsworthy couldn't have picked a more interesting subject--Caius Julius Caesar--even to an audience today, more than 2,000 years after the remarkable man's death. This work flows much more smoothly and is easier to follow (for an English speaker) than the translation of Matthis Gelzer's "Caesar: Politician and Statesman". However, if you really want to develop a grasp of the great Caesar, read Goldsworthy's book first, then tackle Gelzer's (and try reading some of the ancient sources referenced in his footnotes). Overall, Dr. Goldsworthy's book is well worth your effort to read and study it.

In this biography of Caesar, Goldsworthy has done a wonderful job of illuminating the political climate of the late Roman Republic. The book was carefully researched and comprehensive, but not tied down by obscure technical details that would only interest a classicist. Goldsworthy's narrative is fast moving and yet detailed enough so the reader can fully appreciate the context of Caesar's political and military strategy.

I would agree with the comment above about the Epilogue. I think the author missed an opportunity to sum up Caesar's amazing political and military achievements and show how his life had influenced other leaders throughout history. He doesn't effectively say what he believes Caesar's life and story mean for us today.

Overall, this was an interesting and entertaining history of an amazing man and the author does a wonderful job of conveying Caesar's ambition, energy, wit and charm. He certainly was a colussus living in fascinating times. I would recommend this to people interested in general political and military history.

Goldsworthy's Caesar is an extraordinarily well-written one-volume biography. Some who have sniffed that Goldsworthy's treatment is not comprehensive enough miss the point - this is supposed to be a one-volume biography of Caesar and the book is 519 pages as is without chasing after the disputes between Crassus and Pompey. The author shows remarkable discipline in not wandering off down the many enticing pathways offered by the late Roman Republic. Goldsworthy specifically cautioned at the beginning that he intends to stay focused on Caesar and Caesar alone and that is what he does.

Writing a biography of Caesar presents the formidable challenge of humanizing the subject - much like writing about Napoleon or Robert E. Lee. They are the 'marble men' in Shelby Foote's phrasing. Goldsworthy succeeds admirably in this regard. He repeatedly cautions the reader not to regard the events of Caesar's life as inevitable. The reader gets the sense of Caesar as a man who strove to succeed above all else, but could have failed.

His lively writing style paints an engaging portrait of Caesar (much more so than Anthony Everritt's 'Augustus', for example). Crisply described battle scenes give the reader a good sense of what happened and why, whether against the Gauls at Alesia or Pompey at Pharsalus.

Contrary to some other reviewers, I found that Goldsworthy's background as a preeminent military historian serves him well. At Caesar's most successful he was above all a Roman general and spent most of the last 15 years of his life fighting wars first against Rome's enemies and later against other Romans. True, Caesar was nearly 40 before he embarked on the victories that made his place in history, but we remember him for those years as a military leader not for his role as praetor or pontifex maximus.

A remarkable one-volume biography. I'd give it more than 5 stars if I could. Highest recommendation.

This is an admirable and useful book, if a little heavy going for the average reader. The writer has obviously researched his subject diligently and the bibliography and other appendixes appear comprehensive. However, the writing style is a little bookish, with a few too many double negatives, and rarely matches the violent atmosphere and pace of the events it describes.

Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) is a fascinating historical figure but much of what we know of his life comes from third-hand and often unreliable sources. When stripped of all invention and supposition, the factual record is rather thin and even the relatively detailed accounts of Caesar's military campaigns, which he himself wrote up in book form at the time, are frustratingly uninformative. He was obviously a military commander of genius and pulled off a number of spectacular successes when his forces were tired and outnumbered. These sections of the book, especially the campaigns against Pompey during the Civil War, are the most enjoyable. By contrast, the long sections dealing with the political life of the Republic are complex; a non-scholar may find it hard to keep track of the many political offices and their relative significance. Further clouding the picture is the fact that many of the leading characters share the same or similar names. Many of these men seem to have made appalling choices by modern standards, but the author does a good job of summarizing Rome's turbulent recent history and the cultural pressures that drove so many respected aristocrats to behave as foolishly as they did.

Overall this is a sympathetic portrait of an extraordinarily successful man whose achievements so far outstripped those of his contemporaries that by his early 50s he was sole ruler of most of the known world. Unlike almost any other dictator in history, Caesar behaved reasonably, pardoned most of his political enemies, passed uniformly good laws, and devoted his considerable energies to repairing the damage caused by the Civil War. Nevertheless, a faction of the aristocracy so resented his dictatorial power and the obstacle he represented to their own ambitions that they assassinated him before many of his grandiose and progressive plans could reach fruition. But instead of restoring the Republic and the rule of the Senate, the assassination led to more civil war and the eventual installation of a hereditary emperor. Of the 60 or so conspirators few survived and most lost everything. There's a lesson here somewhere.

This book really is a joy. I think of it as a thriller, It takes an abstraction -- "Julius Caesar" -- and not just brings him to life but also makes the context of his astonishing career so vivid and real. I found myself wanting to know what happened next as Caesar navigated to power. At the same time, I got a far richer sense of the Roman Republic as a political, social and economic dynamism than I have gleaned from any of the many books on Roman history that I have read over so many years.

This is serious scholarship not pop history. Goldsworthy writes well, is cautious in his claims and assessments, and avoids melodrama -- no JC meets Cleo or Pompey triumphs in SuperWar XIV atuff. He uses his classical sources skilfully.

Choose any measure of evaluation of a history book -- accuracy, scope, insight, readability, depth, lucudity and clarity of explanation -- and this is five stars on each.

A final think aloud. Without striving to do so, Goldswrthy establishes an early point he makes that Caesar`is one of the domimant figures of recorded history, to the degree that his name wsa the mark of kings -- kaiser and tsar -- that he was a general comparable only to a Napoleon in waging total war, and that he was pivotal in that the entire world before and after`Caesar was different. The only other figure I can think of who matches this is George Washington -- American's Caesar and a far better human, more fallible, a lousy general, and not the highest IQ in Cabinet meetings, but a titan of equal accomplishment as Caesar's and one of the very few figures in history whose name can be equated with him.

A super book.

I found "Caesar" to be an informative & generally enjoyable read. Goldsworthy did not allow an excessive amount of analysis to get in the way of a good narrative (unlike Tom Holland's recent work on the collapse of the Roman republic).

My only complaint is that Goldsworthy either had lame English Grammar & Composition teachers in secondary school or at some later point in life forgot his schooling. I found his writing style to be rather grating. Every page has at least one sentence suffering from unclear or ambiguous reference due to improper use of pronouns that requires the reader to parse the sentence and re-read the preceding sentences and paragraph in order to make sense of what Goldsworthy is trying to say. A name repeated to maintain clarity instead of using a pronoun is by no means redundant. Don't editors at the various publishing houses EDIT anymore?