Customer Reviews

Julius Caesar: Man, Soldier, And Tyrant (Da Capo Paperback)

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

 

 

Fuller's account of the Career of Julius Caesar can also be found in Caesar's own commentaries. Some of his insights into Caesar's personality are interesting, but most can be found in classical works by Appian and Dio. His thesis that Caesar was not the great general and statesman that history dipicts him can be disputed. Caesar was the first ancient general to incorporate siegeworks as a tactical tool. Fuller's claim that the roman army was "lucky" that it did not encounter stronger cavalry arms is unfounded. Cavalry in anceint times was not much more than a skirmishing force, not in the same league as the legionares.

I was displeased with the dry, accounts of caesar's campaigns, surprising for a military man like Fuller. Also, he does not go into great detail about Caesar's personality, other than to quote the classical historians.

Overall, a very average work.

I found this book most informative and interesting. It has an amazing insight into not only the life of this amazing man but also the times in which he lived. The book effectivly depicts Caesar not only as man but also a good tactitioner and leader. This book has been well researched and writen in an easy to follow way. Although I already know a fair bit about Julius I found that this book informed me on alot of things I previously had no knowledge of. I emensly enjoyed this book and would recomend this book to anyone with a interest in the Ancient Roman Republic and Empire.

Fuller's last book was also his least, in terms of original insight and depth of research. Fuller had written a number of books on military history and biography of military men, even strategic thinking and historical analysis on the First and Second World War; here, the work comes across as somewhat tired and a little cranky.

His general theory is that at times Julius Caesar was not fully responsible for actions he took; that he was exceedingly lucky rather than good; and that towards the end of his life, he may not have been altogether sane. To that end, he starts he biography well, with good political background pre-Gallic conquest, but after this the book drops off. There is nothing in his recounting of the Gallic Wars that is not better brought out by Caesar himself in his own works, and the Civil Wars are better handled ana analyzed by numerous other Roman historians, again including Caesar himself if one reads closely and between some of the lines.

Fuller maintains that Caesar had no real politics of his own; he was simply an opportunist willing grasp at whatever circumstances seemed to offer the quicker route to more and more power. He was neither a military reformer or innovator, and his dismissal of politics per se as an ideology is shown to be shallow or non-existant by his switching allegiances from his natural Optimates status at birth to the Populares and then back again when the proper marriage made that useful. Fuller brings him out not as one of the greatest generals who ever lived - a not uncommon point of view among other biographers and for that matter this reviewer - but as a highly charismatic and brave general but one of otherwise only middling talent, stumling through a charmed career. For example, he faced and eventually beat, over a decade, barbarians such as the Gauls and a few Celtic tribes, but never had to face down a serious and quasi-civilized cavary-based army such as the Parthians fielded; moreover, even in his own legitimate triumphs, there were times of poor judgment (first invasion of Britain, e.g., as well as numerous cases in dealing with the Gauls), and just plain luck.

Instead of being, therefore, THE MAN, he becomes under Fuller he becomes simply the man who happened to be there when Rome reached its final tipping point of the long revolution, where the Senate finally fully lost control of the army to charismatic generals such as Marius, Sulla, etc., and the state itself was finally brought down. Even once the Republic became whatever it was under Caesar's short dictatorship, the tension remained unresolved until a workable solution was finally found, some years later, by Octavian, after yet another destructive civil war, in the founding of the Principate.

As a biography of Caesar, there are much better available; as a book for Fuller aficionados, this is disappointing. It remains worth reading for another view of a controversial figure pivotal to history; but it's not the only book to read.

This book is essential for anyone studying the Roman Republic and the impact of Julius Caesar. The writings in this book are very well thought out and the depth of the history comes to life in each and every sentence. Anyone wanting to learn about Julius Caesar can take away a sense of knowing a legend and feel that this book doesn't just repeat all of the others that are similar in topic -it teaches you someone else's point of view on the history and cause.
Very much enjoyable. I can't wait to read it again!

This book is a classic. Not only is it a classic, it is written by one of the most innovative generals in the 20th Century: JFC Fuller. Mr. Fuller is credited with developing the armored division of the British army, and is therefore an innovator. Almost a kindred spirit, Julius Caeser is described not in terms of how his life was led, but how it was affected by military and political aspects. This book is a must read for any ancient history or military history buff.

I am amazed at how much this book is just a copy/paste from Caesar's own _The Gallic War_ written before Christ! It is actually a more dynamic read than this version, and without the distracting *spin.*