|Print List Price:||$17.00|
Save $9.01 (53%)
Random House LLC
Price set by seller.
Your Memberships & Subscriptions
Emperor: The Death of Kings: A Novel of Julius Caesar (Emperor Series Book 2) Kindle Edition
|New from||Used from|
An Amazon Book with Buzz: "The Four Winds" by Kristin Hannah
"A timely novel highlighting the worth and delicate nature of Nature itself." -Delia Owens Learn more
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
"If you liked 'Gladiator', you'll love Emperor: The Death of Kings."—The Times, London
"What a find. A first-time author who writes—wonderfully! Emperor: The Death of Kings combines the fantasy of Harry Potter with the historical details of John Jakes. Books don't get better than this."—Costa Rica Times
"Iggulden excels at describing battle scenes both small-scale and epic."—Seattle Times
From the Hardcover edition.
From Publishers Weekly
Copyright © Reed Business Information, a division of Reed Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. --This text refers to the audioCD edition.
- ASIN : B000FC0ZEY
- Publisher : Delacorte Press (March 2, 2004)
- Publication date : March 2, 2004
- Language : English
- File size : 679 KB
- Text-to-Speech : Enabled
- Enhanced typesetting : Not Enabled
- X-Ray : Enabled
- Word Wise : Enabled
- Print length : 560 pages
- Page numbers source ISBN : 0385343027
- Lending : Not Enabled
- Best Sellers Rank: #125,300 in Kindle Store (See Top 100 in Kindle Store)
- Customer Reviews:
Top reviews from the United States
There was a problem filtering reviews right now. Please try again later.
So...what did I think?
I enjoyed the writing style and the story line a lot but really struggle with how badly mis-characterized some of the major historical figures are. Octavian is one of my favorite people in history and this books absolutely misses the boat on him and that flaw alone drives me batty to the point of distraction. With each historical character, it feels as if Igguiden didn't even attempt to tap into their writings or exploits in order to connect his story and the characters with reality.
It's hard to rate, in that I've read and enjoyed these books, but in order to do so, I had to divorce myself from any knowledge or sense of who these men and women were in real life, or, more appropriately, how I envisioned them to be.
In summary, my neurosis and love of this period in Roman History keeps bumping into my overt affection for it. I will read anything about this time period because I love it, but that very reading and studying caused me to hate how he drew the characters up.
In the end, the rating is "like it" and I did, but, if this were presented as a fiction about characters the author created, then it would be five stars.
It is one thing to tell a story about historical figures, another, and lesser thing, to change the basic facts of the lives of those figures. Caesar and Brutus were fifteen years apart in age, Brutus was not an abandoned child, he was from one of the oldest and most honored families in Rome, and on and on. Others have written similar comments. This just doesn't work for me.
Having made a very detailed study of Republican Roman history, The Conn strikes me as having a very poor understanding of this period and the characters. Not one of them really convinced me. Aside from using Brutus in the most incorrect of roles and portraying him as inaccurately as possible, I was also not a believer of most of the historical characters he created with one exception: Marius. While a far from perfect portrayal and completely missing out historically, The Conn actually imparted an inspiring and magnetizing quality that arguably came close to the man as portrayed by Plutarch. Unfortunately, Sulla did not work and his manner of death was almost laughable.
The other point that was just wrong, was his conveyance of the dynamic between the faction that supported Sulla and the one supporting Marius. This was ultimately a battle between the blue-blooded old Rome and the new men. To me this is a very rich and interesting class struggle, and The Conn struck me as completely clueless in this department.
I should also add that Caesar, the main character, on rare occasions came across as maybe close to the real thing, but overall I give this a solid D. I first read Rex Warner's version of "The Commentaries" in 1989 and have since been through it a dozen times covering every translation I could get my hands on (Like the Loeb the best), so I was never fully convinced by The Conn's Caesar. Again, in the "Historical Note" section The Conn recommends, "Caesar" by Christian Meiers, which again I will say is arguably the absolute worst book I have ever read on the subject.
Something else that nagged at me through both books is the name The Conn gives to supporting characters. In the first book we get a childhood neighbor named "Suetonius", as if The Conn was trying to be tricky using the foreshadow of the future biographer, and an "Alexandria", a place that is important in Caesar's actual future life. We also get to meet "Antonidus", who featured so prominently in the film classic "Spartacus" and who was perhaps an actual figure but here turns up as a disgraced Sullan general which always proved hard to swallow. We also get a centurion named "Taranus", like, as in the pirate agent again from the film "Spartacus"? Was there a shortage of period names or did The Conn think these were common back then? There were 1 or 2 others like this, and it felt awkward.
Along with Cato, the character of Crassus was perhaps the most unbelievable. A rather weak and scrawny man? Really? Was such a character really capable of executing a ruthless business empire that made him one of the 10 richest men in antiquity? In Rome? Sorry, no way.
The big problem with this story is that it is very, very loosely based on the characters and events of this period. There is almost nothing of value historically to be taken from the read, not even an accurate portrayal of characters and events. While we all know this is fiction, good historical fiction should at least be reasonably true to what we know of the period, and so far this series is complete fantasy.
We get such butchered versions of the battle of Mytilene, Sulla in Greece, Mithridates, Caesar's defeat of Mithridates, the battle for Rome (Marius -v- Sulla), the Proscriptions (sort of), Caesar's capture by pirates, a first case of his in the law courts, a fantasy death of his first wife, and the Spartacus rebellion. Forget any mention of Merula and Caesar's first religious post, and I'll leave the Servilia subject alone along with Octavian and Atia because it is simply to much to rant about.
Along the way we finally meet Pompey, Crassus, and Cato, though they belonged in the first book. We also get a "Severus Lepidus" instead of a Marcus Lepidus, and forget Lucullus because he is simply missing along with most of the Sullan faction. I think there was also a "Sertorius" somewhere he didn't belong, though in defense of The Conn he was just using the name, for some reason??
If you know nothing about this period and care nothing for learning anything of value historically, then this book is enjoyable. I bought them all and am slogging through the mess. I liked Colleen McCullough's Roman series much more, though she can also be very feminine and brief at times. I also highly recommend Robert Harris' books "Pompeii" and "Imperium".