Customer Reviews

Caesar's Women

5 star:		(29)
4 star:		(20)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(5)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I can think of no other books that encompass a lost society so well than the 'Masters of Rome' series. Caesar's Women is a marvel of research from this author. Fictionalizing it must have been very difficult...but then again, how could it not be. But reading it one feels like the author was the proverbial fly on the wall over 2,000 years ago. Amazing!

Caesar's Women focuses on the powerful roles that the ladies during Caesar's rise played in the formation of things to come. Aurelia (his mother) is undoubtedly the strongest of these, as is Servilia (Brutus' mother and Caesar's lusty wanted and dangerous woman). Julia, Caesar's daughter, plays a pivotal role as she is swept away from Brutus --- whom she was betrothed to --- and then given to Pompey (who is as happy as a clam since he sees her as a goddess figure and a way into the Julii line). My only problem with this portion of the story was that Pompey fell head over heels for Julia but never seems to see the political significance of it (for the Caesars). Pompey is a very powerful man with much dignitas and wealth. Surely he must have noticed how quickly Caesar agreed to break Julia's betrothal to Brutus and give her to him. But there is no mention of this, and the story only tells us how in love the two became. Pompey wasn't a fool.

That being said, I think Caesar's Women is a triumph for the history of the women of that time. They are always seen as insignificant to the arena and times, since men dominated. But Mrs. McCollough shows us the back rooms behind the Senate and the Plebian Assembly. Women were pivotal. And Caesar's Women doubly so. Extremely intriguing.

Of course, now it's on to Caesar --- the last book in the series thus far (at least to my knowledge). The build up of Clodius, Brutus, and Cato leaves a tingling in one's spine as you realize what is to come. The dagger! Oh god...where is that next book! I've got to start now!

Ms McCullough has done a profound historical research in order to write her "Roman Saga" started with "The First Man in Rome" (1990), continued with "The Grass Crown" (1991), "Fortune's Favorites" (1993) and "Caesar's Women" (!1995).

She delivers an accurate picture of the late Roman Republic, bringing to life historically characters with amazing detail.
The author follows and reveals step by step all the intricacies of that rich and complex era.
Does this mean that the book is boring? By no means, Ms McCullough is able to show daily life, dressing, feeding, religious rituals, political and social structures in a magnificent fresco and at the same time construct an engaging story that will trap the reader for hours.

The story starts in the year 68 BC after Sulla's death. Pompeius Magnus, Julius Caesar and Marcus Crassus consolidate finally in triumvirate and defy Cato, Bibulus and the Senatorial Party. There are two major interesting issues described in this volume: Caesar's political growth thru ten years, giving the reader a complete picture of less known aspects of his life.
Second issue is feminine characters are brought into limelight. They are strong, willed, some beautiful, some cunning and most of them determined to succeed. They are all true Roman Matrons.

As in preceding volumes Ms McCullough continue extrapolating and giving wonderful explanations to odd issues as why Clodius hated so many contemporaries; why and when Caesar and Cicero started fencing and growing enemies.

Last but not least the author has drawn beautiful busts of the main characters; detailed maps of different ancient scenarios where action takes place and very complete glossary.

I advise reading the first volumes of the series, but even if you don't do it, you may start here and consider it as first part of Caesar's adulthood story.
I strongly recommend this book to any serious history aficionado!
Reviewed by Max Yofre.

Far from the weightiness of "The First Man In Rome" and "The Grass Crown," yet nowhere as torpid as "Fortune's Favorites," Colleen McCullough's fourth installment in her Masters of Rome series, "Caesar's Women," is the perfect summer novel. It is light, airy, and filled with enough scandal and rancor to put any Judith Krantz or Terry McMillan novel to shame.

That said, it is too heavy on the scandal, too light on the politics, and McCullough weights the scale in favor of the scandal by making her Caesar an impossible man to beat or block. Caesar was an incredibly brilliant man, a political animal who achieved great military feats--but McCullough makes light of his faults by portraying his enemies as buffoons or fools, or worse. Cato the Younger was a bad politician, a drunkard, and a bigot; yet he was also one of the late Republic's great Stoics. Likewise, Cicero, albeit timid and insecure, was a great orator and a master of legal rhetorical technique; McCullough makes him a figure of ridicule all through the book. No matter what the challenge, Caesar comes through looking like a hero (or at least with the last word). And the scene with Lucullus is cringe-inducing--even though it was probably the reaction McCullough was hoping for in readers, it left me feeling as if I'd seen a bad bit of overacting.

Still . . . the book is titled "Caesar's Women," and the women are something to enjoy. Although McCullough likes to remind her audience of the patriarchal nature of Roman society (as if it could be forgotten!), still one fact remains: a Roman woman was not someone to be ignored. Be she widow, crone, Vestal, whore or lawful wife, her society and her culture acknowledged her existence, no matter how bounded it was by custom and morality. And although the surviving histories focus on the men, Roman women had great influence on their families, particularly their sons and daughters, and that influence contributed to the ideals of the Republic.

A grand example is Servilia, the wife of Decius Junius Silanus, mother of the young Brutus--a cruel, hateful, beautiful woman who falls utterly under Caesar's thumb. Of course the attraction is instant, but to call this a romance would be a misnomer. Servilia is in love; Caesar is simply in lust, and too perceptive of Servilia's true character to lose his heart to her. The relationship is so well portrayed, it makes up for the casting of Caesar as the Superman of the Republic.

At this stage of her life, Servilia is wed to a man she cordially despises, and is the mother of daughters she ignores and a son she browbeats into submission. Poor Brutus is so dominated by his mother that the few forms of rebellion he commits usually come back to bite him--avoiding an active lifestyle, for one, including his military training. Yet Servilia is also a force to be reckoned with, something Caesar keeps in mind as he avoids her attempts to strengthen their sexual intimacy into something more.

Caesar's favorite activity of cuckolding his political enemies is continued here. The victims are many, with the grandest display of outrage belonging to Cato. And McCullough does weaken his image as a flawless charmer in depicting his marriage to Pompeia Sulla. A "beautiful idiot," Pompeia is described as silly, dull, materialistic, tasteless--in short, almost every shortcoming ever ascribed to a woman except physical ugliness. Caesar's contempt is almost instant; his treatment of her, completely restricting her comings and goings, is tyrannical--but who enforces it all? His mother, Aurelia.

Perhaps the best female character McCullough has created is Aurelia, Caesar's mother, and she is phenomenal. Whenever Aurelia enters the scene, she captures attention. Her actions at the Bona Dea feast, with Clodius Pulcher, will make your hair stand on end. But McCullough aged her "portrait," just as she did Sulla's in "Fortune's Favorites"--and I doubt anyone could detest it as much as I do.

A close runner-up for best female character is Fulvia, Pulcher's wife. A screaming, uninhibited force of nature, Fulvia doesn't do much in "Caesar's Women," but when she's around it's impossible to ignore her. As for the most charming, that would be Julia, Caesar's daughter. A wise, sweet child, hardly precious or overweening (anyone remember the author's portrayal of young Cicero?), Julia is a heart-stealer from the first moment she appears. But for mousiest female, Calpurnia (Caesar's third wife) would take the prize. And for most unpleasant . . . Servilia would win the laurels. The poster child for the havoc a loveless childhood can wreak, Servilia darkens the scene whenever she appears--but it's impossible not to snicker and enjoy the mayhem that ensues when she does.

I've avoided going into detail about the book to keep from spoiling it for other readers. I will recommend it--it's a fine portrayal of the end of the Roman Republic, and it does a beautiful job of portraying Roman women in all their power, strength, and personality.

In her latest installment of the Masters of Rome series, Colleen McCollough endeavors to introduce the feminine forces that acted upon Caesar and shaped him irrevocably. Servilia Caepionis (mother of Brutus of "Et, tu Brute" fame)is delightfully nasty, a classical Madame Bovary. Aurelia is as withdrawn as ever, and Caesar's beloved daughter Julia is used to remind us that no matter how much a father loved his daughter, she was simply a pawn furthering his political future (although her fate was better than the average pawn's).

Although McCollough tries to give the women of Rome an important role in this novel, I believe that the laurels go to the men. By trying to paint the women as having interesting, thought-provoking personalities, the reader is by the end wishing that we could go back to the Forum or resurrect Sulla and Marius. Anything to stop the shallowness!

I agree with one previous reviewer that the author has many catch-phrases that often grate on the reader's nerves. For example, the phrase "A pearl beyond price" is first used to describe Caesar's aunt Julia, wife of Marius, and the title is inherited by his daughter Julia. (However, I thought it was absolutely "priceless" when Caesar gave Servilia that peerless pearl...it seems she has a price after all!)

However, I disagree when the author is written off as dull and formulaic. Of course dear Colleen will never equal Suetonius or Cicero, but you must understand that they both work in different media. The former saints worked in non-fiction, whereas Ms. McCollough is attempting admirably to revive a long-dead Republic so that even the layman can explore the fall of Rome and the rise of the Empire through the eyes of the remarkable people who rose from obscurity to bend the knee of the entire world. In short, she makes history interesting, and I will never be able to give her sufficient thanks for opening up this rich new world for me. I believe that is her saving grace, and she will hear no more from me on her style or presentation.

That being said, I do have one tiny twinge of unease, and that is Caesar's characterization...or lack thereof. The author has the enormous task of resurrecting the dead and making them grab our attention. She succeeds with most of them, including Publius Clodius Pulcher, Fulvia, Sergius Catilina, Antony, Curio, Cato the Younger, Servilia, etc... The aforementioned people are interesting and vibrant and we love them or love to hate them (I truly cried when Publius Clodius was assassinated in Caesar...he was so real and vivid to me that I forgot I could look that fact up in any textbook!)...all except the man who matters most, and that is Gaius Julius Caesar Imperator.

There have been many a night when I wonder what to make of him. At times he is extremely selfish, vain, and perverse. At other times, he is portrayed as an all-encompassing genius, and at others a man struggling to keep his emotions in check and trying to maintain that cold persona and charm that are so inherent to his nature. But, potential readers, there is no consistency about the character, and we feel no emotional connection to him. I cried for Publius Clodius, but Colleen McCollough will have to summon Jupiter Optimus Maximus for me to shed a tear over Caesar's death.

Though she claims that she has been impartial in characterizing Caesar, I do believe that she has succumbed to the temptations of a lady novelist and cast him as Perfection personified with only superficial flaws...like the diamond with a few scratches on the surface that are best forgotten. But in every brilliant diamond, especially a human one, there is one large crack that, unseen, brings about its destruction. Caesar shone longer than most, but he too proved that Fortuna deserts even her Favorites in the end (like Sulla, only in a harsher manner).

However, in the October Horse, Caesar's persona is viewable for a few precious moments. After his fit of epilepsy, Caesar's mind is all disordered and he starts remembering the demons of his past and the immolation of his beloved Cinnilla and son Gaius. But even in his private thoughts, Caesar struggles to separate the man from the myth that he personifies...Caesar is not his name anymore...it is his title. So he says, "We burned Cinnilla and baby Gaius together, Mater and I. Not Caesar. I". For the first time in this lengthy epic, I saw Gaius, not Caesar. I do believe that I will weep for him after all.

'Caesar's Women', for those with knowledge of the Republic around this time will prove on one hand, a disappointment, the other, a pleasant surprise. A disappointment becasue some wonderful moments from this time are merely skimmed over. Though attention is given to Clodius the man, little is devoted to the street gangs and riots of around this period. The same with the Caitline conspiracy - both these seem to have been mentioned merely becasue Caesar is shifted into a starring role in both. He 'manages' Clodius, he rules the day pleading for the conspiritors. Though these are indeed facts handed down, they do seem to be exaggerated at the very least. The conspiracy was Cicero's starring moment, the street gangs Clodius', and it seems a pity to 'steal' them from these at times comic, at times tragic, yet unforgettable historical figures. Yet the novel is also a pleasure, becasue of the great time and care lavished onto it. Many historical novels seem to enjoy focusing upon characters and love affairs yet skirt over actual details such as the politics of the times, wars fought and won. McCullough manages both. Anything that has been researched so thoughtfully beforehand suggets true devotion to the work, and this is certainly the case here.

To move on, however, to elements of the novel which puzzled me (and those who are non-experts on ancient history must forgive me here!) but, as said previously, McCullough has obviously studied and studied carefully hundreds of volumes of both ancient and modern work. As far as facts are concerned, no mistakes or blunders are made, but some of the characters portryed confused me to say the least. Pompeia, second wife of Caesar, was one of these. She is presented here very harshly as ignorant, stupid, empty headed (to quote McCullough mildly!) and is practically kept prisoner by Caesar in order to prevent her escaping and running away with another man? Do we honestly blame her? Yet there is no historical evience to back this up (in which cases I realise history must be open to interpretation, but what an interpretation!) Perhaps I am being over sensitive, but I cannot see Julia being so utterly perfect had she been, say, Crassus' daughter. But she belongs to Caesar, and since Caesar himself is perfect, all that belongs to him is also. Amongst the more minor characters, Plutarch and Cicero describe Julia (mother of Marcus Antonius) as being one of the most virtuous women of her time, yet she is shown here to be frivolous, stupid and vacant. Is McCullough backing up Rome's 'Man's world' or is there another reason for these 'slips'? The men, too, are dealt with harshly. Brutus the mother's boy I can just swallow, but Cato completly insane? Bibulus hating Caesar because he (Bibulus) is far shorter than he? Somewhat difficult to justify I think! This character treatment comes about because we can see from almost the first page of the novel where McCullough's prejudices lie. We can see clearly who the good and bad are. Caesar, of course, is perfect, but others are treated mildly, it seems, for no apparent reason, and others harshly. If antony were the least intelligent of the young men (Clodius, Curio, Antony) I question how he nearly rules the worls wheras the others do not make it to praetor.

However, this book must be read, if only to 'debate' with McCullough's portrayal. An enjoying, carefully researched, read.

Caesar's Women is a phenomenal achievement. Never have I read such thoroughly researched historical novel that left me breathless and never wanting for it to end. I did not know that this book is in a series (the fourth one) when I started it, but it did not confuse me one bit. Although some characters and events seem in need of a background, which I intend to get by reading the prequels, the book is amazing on its own. Reading over some of the other readers' comments, I've noticed that they have complained about "soft" treatment of Caesar and the lack of focus on women. First of all, this is still fiction, so McCullough had no responsibility to treat Caesar in a realistic manner. Secondly, even the written evidence cannot be trusted for the true representation of Caesar. No one will ever know his true nature or his rationale for accomplishing and achieving what he did, so McCullough's guess is as good as anybody's. Also, since this book is still about Caesar's, if not formative, then pre-tyrannical years, he may not have been as ruthless or as psychotic as he later seemed to have become. As a Classics major, I can tell you that women in Ancient Rome are more or less unseen, unless they have extremely high profile, like Cleopatra. Therefore, McCullough did a remarkable job in gathering as much information about women as she could. Perhaps the title is not as good as it could or should have been, it still does not diminish the quality of the book. I have never encountered such impassioned and interesting writing. Not from any other writer or even McCullough herself. A must read. That said, the editing is horrible. There are numerous typos and gramatical errors.

Ms. McCullough's novel was a real insight, especially into the lives of Roman women. I especially enjoyed the depiction of Julius Caesar's daughter, Julia. (Actually, she was the most sensitive, heart-warming character in the book!) The historical "digging" that McCullough has done is really astounding! I appreciated the glossery in the back, that pretty much has you speaking Latin by the time you finish the book! What I didn't care for was her overall "cold" characterizations. I refuse to believe that Julia was the only truly KIND person in Rome in the 1st century BC! And I have no clue where McCullough got her depiction of Marcus Antonius (Marc Antony). Though it's true that he was involved in some riotously hard living (probably due to a very troubled childhood!), I don't think any of his busts indicate that he was ugly! Most likely, he was one of the handsomest men in Rome. The rest of the book was engaging, though. A fun summer read.

If you read this book and have not read the others in the series, you will soon be searching for them. This book represents the entire series well, in that it is lovingly and carefully written to give you an unbelievable look into life for the big wigs of Roman civilization and some rulers of other parts of the Mediterranean. Others have written excellent reviews of this book, I mearly want to share that if you like this book, and I believe you will, you will get hooked on the series. I can't wait for The October Horse, the latest installment in the Masters of Rome series, due out near December 2002.

I'll admit that the title, Caesar's Women, piqued my interest in this book, but it wasn't long into the reading when I found that the object of my desire was Caesar, himself. In fact, I admit to falling madly in love with this young and vital Caesar. Colleen McCullough succeeds in drawing her readers into the mind, spirit, and body of this remarkable, God-like man, and allows us to fully experience Caesar, who charms us with his wit, intelligence, strength, and vitality. Having studied Latin and Ancient Rome, I was amazed not only at McCullough's thorough knowledge of her subject but even more by her ability to understand and depict the machinations of Roman politicians. American politicians are neophytes in comparison to the patricians and plebeians rising through the cursum romanum!
Caesar's Women is a book that you cannot put down, but also hate the thought of finishing, because it is that good. Having started in the middle of the series, I have now gone backwards and read Fortune's Favourites, which I also loved, especially the last part dealing with Caesar. But I have ordered all the other books in the series, which I will read this summer. I am sure, however, that I will return to Caesar's Women when I need a pick-me-up. Such a man as Caesar may only come once in a millenium, but we can experience him as often as we like in this superb novel.

I have read this series up to this book; I haven't read "Caesar" yet. I found all of them excellent: as far as I can tell, very accurate, and creating larger-than-life but extremely convincing characters: I found Marius, Sulla, Pompey, Crassus, Cicero and even Clodius remarkably interesting and consistent; I felt I knew them. Like others, though, I felt her portrayal of Caesar himself to be too positive. In this book one saw him becoming more arrogant and impatient with "lesser" men, and I was convinced that "Caesar" would develop this further, showing him as the complex man he surely was. Certainly was at least as complex as Marius, Sulla and Pompey - all extremely able men, none of them completely "good" or "bad". But from what I've read in comments on "Caesar", the author seems to have shown an all too favourable interpretation of Caesar's motives and actions. That is a pity.

The Scottish author Allan Massie has written a similar series of books, "Augustus", "Tiberius", "Caesar" and "Antony". They are not as well researched as Mrs. McCullough's books, and his "Caesar" has at least one very serious mistake, making Octavius his nephew instead of grand-nephew. But I found his portrayal of Caesar more convincing - a genius, yes, but totally convinced that he knew and deserved better than everyone else; charming and manipulative, unable to regard anyone as his equal (except, partially, Pompey), and perhaps even a psychopath.