Customer Reviews

The Roman Way

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(4)
3 star:		(2)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(2)

 

 

I'd have to partially agree with the previous viewer. The Roman Way is boring at times. Hamilton's prose can be haulting, and her analysis somewhat pedantic. However, Hamilton was a product of a certain time and certain educational background, and one has to take that in mind when evaluating her style.

The major problems with the book are two. The first is that this book, when compared to Hamilton's Greek Way, is almost an afterthought. It's easy to see which culture was nearer and dearer to Hamilton, and into which she invested more thought. It's almost as if, having done a survey of the Greeks, Hamilton said to herself: "I suppose I better humor the Romanophiles and say a few words about those Latins."

The second problem is the method of analysis. Hamilton concentrates on the literature of the period, and from this draws her conclusions about Roman mentality. A lot of scholars from her era seem to think of classical society mostly in literary terms. Unfortunately, there is a lot more to a civilization than its poets and dramatists.

Hamilton saw the Greeks as a pleasant people who saw beauty in every day nature, and who tried to place themselves in harmony with that nature. She saw the Romans as people who had little use for beauty, and were instead on a quest to control nature. These generalizations don't do much justice to either culture.

Still, Hamilton is such a giant in the field, you almost have to read her works whether or not you find them sound. And her enthusiasm for the classical world, especially for Greece, is almost infectious.

I read this book (actually is was a combo of The Greek Way and The Roman Way). I really enjoyed it a lot. Edith Hamilton has a style that seems to bring one back in time. One almost believes he is there experiencing that ancient time. But moreover, one receives a personal feel of all the charactors she so richly describes. Caesar, Cicero, Catullus, Horace, etc. all seem to come alive. Above it all, Ms. Hamilton has a wonderful writing style that manifests itself throughout. I would recommend this to anyone and everyone.

I was first exposed to this classic in high school, but, of course, lacked the experience and maturity to appreciate it. I am glad I was exposed to it anyway because I was indeed impressed by it and remembered it in spite of my immaturity. I picked it up again and re-read it and was delighted. Hamilton is a voice from another time, a time not just of ancient Romans but a time when educated people in the modern West were really educated in what really matters and will always matter: the best that has been written and thought about the drama of human life throughout the ages. With that classic outlook, the reader cannot but help to recapture some of the balance, insight, sensitivity, and maturity that are the best fruits of a classical education. Now, more than ever, we need the classic restraint and equanimity that comes from the best of classical civilization. Reading Hamilton is a great tonic for a society increasingly fragmenting into more and more lunatic and decadent dead ends. The classics mature our personalities--and we need that in a time when egotism and undisciplined emotionalism are so rampant.

_The Roman Way_ (1932) by Edith Hamilton is an easily readable, highly informative account of the mindset of the Romans as illustrated in the lives and exploits of the great military and political leaders; the oeuvre of Roman poets, playwrights, and historians; and the insights of her philosophers. The Roman Way spans a period of roughly four hundred years, from 200 BC to 400 AD, the high water marks of both the republic and the empire. The breadth of the work is incredible.

In treating such a wide range of subjects, Hamilton offers a rich, dynamic story of Rome. She introduces the major figures in enough depth to make their voices come alive, in their own complexity as well as in the context of what was taking place in Roman society. As a result, _The Roman Way_ is very useful either as an introduction to Roman society for a general reader or a synthesis of knowledge for those who have already studied these authors and history in detail.

Within Hamilton's history are two ideas, woven throughout the text. First, while demonstrating Rome's debt to ancient Greece, she contrasts Rome's pragmatism in the arts and sciences with the Greek interest in abstract philosophy and metaphysics. Second, she traces--often in asides--rudimentary similarities between the Roman and the American worldview (of the 1930s), particularly with respect to the arts. She points out that American pragmatism and culture often draw more from Roman values and virtues, as opposed to the Greek penchant for philosophical speculation. This latter point is suggestive but is, rightly in my opinion, not a major focus of the work.

Hamilton is skilled at quoting from writings and accounts of historical figures and then explaining the context for these words. For instance, in her chapters on Roman comedy she summarizes a number of plays by Plautus and Terrence while translating key passages. The reader is exposed to a range of plays, actually experiences the language of specific scenes, and then has a chance to consider Hamilton's broader insights about the playwrights. In a few short chapters, Hamilton covers the nature of Roman comedy, the role of women in the plays and society, how comedy competed with gladiators and other spectacles, and the influence of Greek drama on Plautus and Terrence. She covers considerable ground while offering a direct feeling of the content of the plays and, most importantly, their humor.

For example, she notes that Roman comedies are often situational and studies of the ordinary rather than philosophical or poetic, which is more typical of Greek comedy. To show exceptions to this generalization, though, she excerpts two of the more far-reaching statements from Terrence and Plautus. Terrence remarks, "I am a man and nothing in mankind do I hold alien to me." Plautus expresses about the poet: "The poet seeks what is nowhere in all of the world, / And yet--somewhere--he finds it." In acknowledging these exceptions, she strengthens her point, showing the difference between the everyday and the more philosophical. Both epigrams meanwhile satisfy a reader on their own terms: they are worth contemplation.

Hamilton's chapters on Cicero, Julius Caesar, Catullus, Horace, Augustus, Virgil, and Juvenal are similarly structured with engaging quotations and close analyses explained in their larger context. Hamilton draws comparisons to Roman contemporaries and "the Roman Way." Hamilton's chapters offer snapshots of Rome at specific historical moments through memorable anecdotes and quotations that give a sense of each figure's character.

As a writer and historian, Hamilton is exceptionally clear. Her knowledge and erudition are deep, and yet her prose is direct and unadorned. The validity for her characterizations is supported by the ease with which she can discuss an entire field, from specific to general, from her own interpretations to those of others. The work has a clarity that one often finds in scholarship from the 1920s to the 1950s, which tends toward synthesis in discussions and specificity, uncluttered by qualifiers or tangents.

The final two paragraphs of _The Roman Way_ are a plea on behalf of the importance of history. Hamilton writes, "History repeats itself. The fact is a testimony to human stupidity. The saying has become a truism; nevertheless, the study of the past is relegated to the scholar and the school-boy. And yet it is really a chart for our guidance--no less than that." Hamilton's work, while suitable to scholars and students, appeals to a general reader who is interested in the lessons of the past. Hamilton's book invites the reader to venture into large fields of understanding and is filled with insights about human nature and personality.

Greece and Rome are the foundations of the modern world system and Western culture. We all owe a big debt to the spirit of those two little countries in southern Europe who gave so much to the world. "Roman Ways" should be read with "Greek Ways" if the reader wants to get a better picture of the achievements of these two sister civilizations. A good introduction to anyone who is learning the classics.

After reading the first two chapters of 'The Roman Way' I almost gave up. Hamilton's use of Roman theatre and comedy to introduce the reader to "The Roman Way", well quite frankly, bored me to tears. I just couldn't get into it. It seems that other reviewers enjoyed this approach so I suppose this is just my personal taste. That being said, I found the rest of the book to be mostly enjoyable. Hamilton's elegant writing style is certainly unique and I would agree with the reviewer who said that her writing seems to be from another era. Incidentally, this book was first published in 1932 so I suppose you could say it IS from another era. Hamilton brings to life many of the biggest names in Roman history including; Caesar, Cicero, Catullus, Horace, Virgil, Livy, and Juvenal. I particularly enjoyed the chapter on Caesar and Cicero where Hamilton describes their peculiar relationship. I also enjoyed the title chapter where Hamilton succinctly contrasts the Romans (disciplined, pragmatic, heroic) to the Greeks (beauty, pleasure, intellectualism). All in all, a different but enjoyable introduction to ancient Roman culture and the personalities that constituted it.

"The Roman Way" was a useful introduction into the famous figures of Roman literature, and the mindset of the people who built a great empire. Although sweeping generalizations about the Romans might prove irritating to anyone already very familiar with classical history, I think Hamilton still has plenty of insight about Roman culture--how it was at once noble and brutal, disciplined and imaginative.

Edith Hamilton's "The Roman Way" should not be considered if one is looking for a complete and definitive historical analysis of Roman civilization. I would consider it more of an informative pamphlet on certain aspects of the Romans. Hamilton uses only primary sources in her book. In this way she is able to avoid any misquided interpretations or exaggerations that some secondary sources contain. But what she gains in her use of primary sources exclusively, she loses in the more contemporary analyses of available secondary sources.

She attempts to depict Roman civilization by the great writers of the period, and she is partially successful in her attempt.

I, like other reviewers, particularly enjoyed her chapters on Cicero and Caesar as well as the title chapter. Her concluding chapter is an excellent summation of the Roman Empire. Unfortunately many of her chapters in the book are lacking in their support of her conclusion.

Hamilton does tend to get lost in the writings of the romantics, stoics and other authors and occasionally the reader is left with the notion that her book is a study of Roman literature. Bear with her and you'll see her view of Roman history come about eventually.

I would consider this book to be an excellent supplement to anyone studying the Romans. Especially for its analysis of the relationship between Caesar and Cicero and its analysis of Cicero himself. However, I would consider it an excellent supplement only, not a complete and thorough study of the whole of Roman history by itself.

I never studied Latin formally and my orientation to the Roman classics comes down to a 101 World Lit survey course in college that galloped through the antiquities faster than you can say "Virgil." It was time to fill in some gaps and I was pleased to see that Edith Hamilton, whose books were the wallpaper of school units on mythology in my baby boomer public schooling, had also written this book. I'd forgotten what a bright, unmannered voice she brings to the table, how lucidly she orders her information and how she can make it matter.

For Hamilton, the Romans moved into the center of western culture, usurping the Greeks' place, from the 2nd century BC to the 2nd AD. In The Roman Way she looks at the exemplary writers and forms who have had a lasting impact on western culture, and she never wavers from the view that understanding the Romans is key to making sense of modern public and private life. Her purpose is to palpate the Romans themselves--their values and social systems--believing the best way to understand them is through their writing. She helpfully compares and contrasts Roman romanticism with Greek classicism throughout the book. Obviously, in an introductory text like this, not every writer can have his due; those to whom she pays the most attention are Plautus, Terence, Cicero, Horace, Catallus, Juvenal, Virgil and Seneca. Through them, she reveals the Caesars, the Claudii, the Stoics, the art, the bloody warfare, the greed, the corruption, gender relations, class structure, the political intrigues and paradoxes, and the empire's demise.

Is this a complete concordance to the Roman canon? No. A comprehensive history? No. It's about getting a feel for who the Romans were and what mattered to them in their own words and why they continue to matter. It is a compelling overview made lively by Hamilton who does not look upon her topic as dead but rather quite vital.

This is a companion to the Greek Way, and it uses the same method: study Roman civilization by studying its greatest writers. Each writer allows Hamilton to study Rome from a different point of view: everyday life (the comic dramatists), politics (Caesar and Cicero), romance and epic (Virgil, Lily), common-sense philosophy (Horace), religious philosophy (Seneca), the dark underbelly (Tacitus and Suetonius), even private affairs (Catullus).

The best parts come when she is able to make contrasts. Financial matters are ignored by Cicero but frequently mentioned by Horace; Hamilton uses this to demonstrate the vast rise in wealth as Rome became an Empire. She also contrasts a coarse after-dinner entertainment (reported by Horace, with Virgil and Maecenas also present) with Plato's SYMPOSIUM to demonstrate the Greeks' superior culture.

A pity she didn't include the scientist-poet Lucretius, who actually foresaw modern concepts such as evolution and the uncertainty principle. Likewise the fact that no major Roman writer discussed Law means that she undervalues that part of Roman culture. She also mostly ignores what Gibbon praised as the high point of Roman civilization, the Era of the "Five Good Emperors", simply because it produced no outstanding writer except for the emperor Marcus Aurelius himself.

It's because of these omissions that I'm knocking off a star. What she does write about is excellent.