Collen McCullough's Rome Series

[MissMarplestein]

Just curious if anyone has read the Rome series by Colleen McCullough - some of the books in the series include - The Grass Crown, The Last Man in Rome, Caesar's Women, etc. The series is all about Caesar's life; from a young boy to his rise in the political arena...very good books.

[Christina]

Sorry, Miss Marplestein, I've not read those book but I just had to say that I love the extract in your signature! :-)

[Ash]

I picked up Last Man in Rome and ended up tossing it in the trade pile. I tried three times, and just couldn't get into it. I do have an aversion to Roman history stuff, and it really has to click fast for me (I loved Quo Vadis, so its not just the size of the book). This one is probably as well written as her other ones, but I had to move on.

[MissMarplestein]

Sorry, Miss Marplestein, I've not read those book but I just had to say that I love the extract in your signature! :-)

Thank you...it's from the movie Man of LaMancha - the song is Dulcinea. The movie is one of my all time faves, and the first time I heard the song I knew I would name one of my cats by the same name...4 years ago I finally got 2 kittens and one is named Dulcinea, the other Miss Marplestein...but the song is beautiful.

[Tanzanite]

I read The October Horse and didn't care for it - it was too long winded for me without really accomplishing much.

[Susan]

Just curious if anyone has read the Rome series by Colleen McCullough - some of the books in the series include - The Grass Crown, The Last Man in Rome, Caesar's Women, etc. The series is all about Caesar's life; from a young boy to his rise in the political arena...very good books.

The series actually starts before Julius Caesar. I read and enjoyed the early books, but stopped reading either Casear's Women or Casear...I can't remember which and I don't recall why I stopped though. It was too long ago. I learned a lot about ancient Rome from these books. McCullough has wonderfully detailed glossaries.

The First (not Last) Man in Rome is about Gaius Marius and Lucius Cornelius Sulla as is The Grass Crown. Julius Caesar starts appearing in The Grass Crown as a child. Lucius Cornelius Sulla is once again in Fortune's Favorites along with a young Julius Caesar.

These are all the books in the series:

1. The First Man in Rome (1990)
2. The Grass Crown (1991)
3. Fortune's Favorites (1993)
4. Caesar's Women (1996)
5. Caesar (1997)
6. The October Horse (2002)
7. Antony and Cleopatra (2007)

[annis]

This is a very good series, but I'll probably incur someone's wrath by saying that I felt a bit more rigorous pruning wouldn't have gone astray. "Antony & Cleopatra" was a bit of a disappointment, but Colleen McCullough hasn't been in the best of health for some time now, and perhaps it shows in A&C.

Allan Massie's Imperial trilogy is very good as well
1. Augustus
2. Tiberius
3. Caesar

I'm looking forward to David Blixt's take on the Flavians, too :)

[Toelistangan]

I read Antony & Cleopatra and I like it. McCullough made a good narration on the political situation during that period of time (around 40 BC) as well as description on main characters and their political problems.

[sweetpotatoboy]

I've read all of the series except Antony & Cleopatra (which I'll get to shortly). IMHO, this is some of the best historical fiction written in the last 15 years - although the first 4 or 5 books are definitely the best of the bunch.

The October Horse was very plodding and difficult to get into, though ultimately worthwhile. This from someone who had read and loved the previous books in the series. For someone coming new to the series at that book, it could have been close to unreadable, methinks.

I heartily agree with the recommendation of the Massie books. Extremely readable. Should be read in the order they were written, although they are not strictly chronological. But there are actually 6 books in the series. The other books are Antony, Nero's Heirs and Caligula.

[Carla]

I've read all except the most recent (Antony and Cleopatra - haven't got round to that one yet). I thought Caesar's Women was the weakest, as not much seemed to happen in that one.

Overall the series does a tremendous job of showing how the Roman Republic turned itself into the Roman Empire. I like the racy style and the way all the characters have their individual quirks, especially in the first three (First Man in Rome, Grass Crown, Fortune's Favourites). When Caesar comes to the fore in Book 4 he seems to dominate the series and tends to eclipse everybody else.

[annis]

Posted by Toelistangan
I read Antony & Cleopatra and I like it. McCullough made a good narration on the political situation during that period of time (around 40 BC) as well as description on main characters and their political problems.

I agree, she does do that, but to me that was the problem - it felt much more like a narrative than a novel. Mind you, I guess the same could be said of some of the other books in the "Masters of Rome" series. I suppose I just found it lacking in a bit of the zing which such a dramatic tale deserves.

[Margaret]

I think this series is a stunning achievement. McCullough goes very deep into her characters' psyches, giving me the feeling of living in ancient Rome as I read, both from the perspective of the physical and political setting and the psychological. It's not that common for an author to excel at both. These are books about Roman politics, and the level of detail can be too much for readers primarily interested in more personal stories.

My favorite was First Man in Rome, but I also liked The Grass Crown very much. The story of Sulla fascinated me. As the series progressed I became a bit less riveted by each novel, until the opening chapter of the one that begiins with Caesar's foray into Britain (Caesar, I think) was finally a little too dry for me. I think part of the problem was that I had been intensively researching pre-Roman and Roman Britain and was just too stuffed with information to feel like reading more at that particular point. I should probably try again.

McCullough is very much a fan of Julius Caesar, whereas I tend to think of him as a charming but ruthless megalomaniac obsessed with amassing power. I like reading novels that provide various perspectives on him, though. He was undoubtedly an extremely complex man - and for better or worse a genius.

[red805]

I've read the entire series, and agree with Margaret and sweetpotatoboy, this series is a master work. It's number 1 on my Top 10 list. The level of research McCullough has done is amazing. I do like the earlier books of the series better also, as there is less recitation of events and more character development, especially with Julius Caesar's family members. The series is quite dense, & requires some attentive reading, but I feel as I've had quite an education in Roman society, religion, personalities, and of course history. McCullough's interpretation and fictionalization of historical characters and events seems plausible and logical, and to my (limited) knowledge she does not stray from known fact or chronology. I highly recommend this challenging series.

[Ani]

I marvel at the sweep and depth of McCullough's research, but I have never found the magic Rex Warner created in Young Caesar and Imperial Caesar in McCullough's work. In fact, like Margaret, the books I really liked in her epic series were not the ones that chronicled the life of Caesar, but the earlier ones in the sequence - First Man in Rome and The Grass Crown.

[cesco]

I adore this series. The depth, the research, the wonderful intuitive leaps from historical fact to probable fiction, the character development - all amazing. And I think it's hard to deny that the earlier books are the best - not only because of the rushed feeling of the latter books, but also the impending sense of loss, as we all know what's coming.

Because of this series, I place Colleen McCullough third in my rankings of favorite HF authors - Dunnett, O'Brian, then McCullough.

[Margaret]

Another interesting series for those who enjoy McCullough's Rome series is Steven Saylor's "Roma Sub Rosa" or "Gordianus the Finder" mystery series beginning with Roman Blood. Saylor, too, is deeply knowledgeable about ancient Rome, and infuses that knowledge into his novels, which contain a lot more depth that the typical historical mystery. He offers a very different, more skeptical, perspective on Julius Caesar when he gets around to that time period.

[Carla]

Good point. I've only read two or three of the Roma Sub Rosa series, but was very impressed and fully intend to read the rest in due course (so many books, so little time.....).

[sweetpotatoboy]

I wasn't that taken with Roman Blood and didn't bother with the rest (historical mysteries rarely do it for me). But Saylor's most recent novel, the epic 'Roma', was excellent.

[annis]

Posted by Sweetpotatoboy
Saylor's most recent novel, the epic 'Roma', was excellent.

If you're interested in online book groups, Saylor's "Roma" is shortly up for discussion at Roman History Books and More
http://romanhistorybooks.typepad.com

They're also looking at the topic of the significant Battle of Teutoberg Forest. I noted recently that Harry Turtledove has a novel due out this year on the subject- titled, in the words of Augustus, "Give Me Back My Legions!" (http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/t/harry-turtledove/give-me-back-my-legions.htm).
I'll be looking forward to reading that.

[sweetpotatoboy]

If you're interested in online book groups, Saylor's "Roma" is shortly up for discussion at Roman History Books and More
http://romanhistorybooks.typepad.com


Thanks for that. Unfortunately, their online chats take place at what is the middle of the night here! But it would be interesting to see what they have to say about it.

[Margaret]

Interesting that you liked Roma better than the mysteries, SPB. I had exactly the opposite reaction. I felt like Roma just tried to cover too much ground, so that the individual stories were given short shrift. In the mysteries, on the other hand, Saylor generally takes a particular aspect of Roman history and uses the mystery format to explore it in great depth - in contrast to the usual historical mystery which often gives short shrift to some of the deeper questions of history. Of course, Roma gives a sense of the grand overall sweep of Roman history that's probably impossible to do in any other format. Very much in the spirit of James Michener or Edward Rutherford.

[sweetpotatoboy]

Interesting that you liked Roma better than the mysteries, SPB. I had exactly the opposite reaction. I felt like Roma just tried to cover too much ground, so that the individual stories were given short shrift. In the mysteries, on the other hand, Saylor generally takes a particular aspect of Roman history and uses the mystery format to explore it in great depth - in contrast to the usual historical mystery which often gives short shrift to some of the deeper questions of history. Of course, Roma gives a sense of the grand overall sweep of Roman history that's probably impossible to do in any other format. Very much in the spirit of James Michener or Edward Rutherford.

Would be boring if we all liked the same thing! It's just me: historical mysteries rarely work for me, but I'll keep trying them. I didn't mind Roman Blood; I just wasn't thrilled enough with it to continue with the series. Yes, Roma follows the format used by Michener and Rutherfurd. I adore Michener and have loved some of Rutherfurd's work, so I am very comfortable with that grand sweep. Saylor's book finishes just at the point where most books on Ancient Rome start, and for that reason I found it fascinating for covering the earlier neglected periods. It's not of the calibre of Michener, or even Rutherfurd at its best, but it makes a valiant attempt and is worthwhile in my view.

[Ani]

I really liked Roma. This is the first book I read by Stephen Saylor. I'm now interested in trying out his mystery series. Incidentally another book, which lacks the sweep of Roma, but gives a very interesting view of Romulus and Remus is Alfred Duggan's Children of the Wolf.

[SusannaG]

I think my favorites, generally speaking, are at the front half of the series. In the latter ones, she's just a little too in love with Caesar. I think my favorite two are The First Man in Rome and Fortune's Favorites (Grass Crown is a little long for my taste). I find Sulla fascinating - like a snake!

[siouxzee]

I've read all of them except Antony and Cleopatra (it's sitting in my to-read pile) and they are some of my favorite historical novels! Especially the first two. Not only did I find them a gripping read, but I learned A LOT about Roman history.

[Frigate]

I adore McCullough's Rome series - in fact it is one of those I restart ever so often and reread the whole thing (probably hoping each time Caesar will not die this time lol) It took me a couple of tries to start it too but once I got past the half-way mark in The First Man in Rome I was well on my way. Fell totally in love with Caesar before the thing was done, of course, which sort of ruined The October Horse for me after his death. In fact, I thought that was the weakest of the series (haven't read A&C - as I personally detest both characters) for after Caesar's passing the rest of that novel seems to drag on interminably as if her heart just wasn't in it either. The depth of research in her work, however, and the well-drawn character development makes these classics of their time and genre.

[Kallithrix]

I haven't read McCullough's Roman series because after reading Song of Troy I was somewhat sceptical of her research credentials - there were certainly glaring inaccuracies in her translation of Greek, leading her to some very questionable interpretations of the Iliad! And although historical authors are perfectly entitled to take poetic licence with their source material, especially when that material is itself poetic, still... it was UNFORGIVEABLE what she did to the characters of Diomedes and Odysseus, and all because she wanted us to feel sympathy for the deeply unsympathetic character of Achilles. All I can say is that her Roman novels had better play a little fairier with the historical figures than she did with the mythological ones!

[Frigate]

And I haven't read Song of Troy! :D I'm not sure about accuracy in the Roman novels - there is a daunting amount of historical material with which she had to become very well acquainted and a great deal of complicated human characters that had to be humanized - but she succeeded at least in my mind in making a world come to life. Yes, she's a bit biased here - if you are a Cicero fan you might get a bit irked, but in the end it's the good writing and the ability to maintain a complicated cast of humanized yet distant characters through a long writing exercise that holds me.

[Kallithrix]

Oh dear... I am indeed a Cicero fan (hard not to be when you're already a Demosthenes fan) so I might give the Rome series a miss, as I'm likely to get rather cheesed off if she's said anything to malign him...

I loved Robert Harris' characterisation of Cicero in Imperium though - if you weren't very fond of the pompous old Republican windbag when you startd, you will be after you finish reading that! :-)

[Gaslight]

I also like the first few books in the series better than the later ones (haven't read A&C yet either), but maybe that's because I've re-read the first 4 about 3 times each and the later ones only once. I started the series at the same time I was majoring in Greek and Roman History, so they were VERY helpful in livening up the dry history tomes we had to read. And with great characters like Publius Rutilius Rufus and his letters to "fill you in" on the goings-on, it was simply great fun.

The Republic era is much more fascinating to me than the Caesar pre-Empire, so I'm more fond of the early books. Plus Sulla is one of those characters I rooted for, even during the whole conscription purges. Something about the man turned me into a drooling fangirl... :D

Same thing for Cato. What a prude, but I cried during his messy suicide in October Horse. Didn't want him to leave!!!

We had to read Roman Blood for one of the Roman history classes (prof was a buddy of Saylor's, and detractor of McCullough's), but I couldn't get into it. Mysteries just aren't my thing, historical or not. I can watch them on TV, but in book form they're an instant zzzzzzzzzzzzz........

[Margaret]

When she described the young Sulla in attendance at a sacrifice, early in First Man in Rome, I was hooked. Just a brief passage, but it encapsulated everything the man would become - from his magnetism to his twisted psyche. McCullough made him interesting, where another writer would have made him merely horrific.

[Sharz]

I've read the first three books of the series and I positively adore it. I have the next two, but I'm going to hold off a bit. Space it out, because once it's done, it's over, and I want to string it out a bit. I suspect I'll finish the series by the end of the year, though.

Kalliethrix, it's well worth the read regardless of how you feel about Cato. This series is SO much bigger and deeper than any one character.

[Chatterbox]

once it's done, it's over

Well, not altogether! I've re-read the entire series three times; once recently, and twice before, in advance of the publication of each of the last two novels. There are some parts of that which never grow stale...

[Sharz]

I hear you. I am a re-reader, so I'm sure I will read McCullough's Rome series several more times. But you can get burnt out on a series of such LONG books, one right after another. For example, I've read the first four Outlander books 4 times, but I've never read 5 again, even though I liked it almost as much as 1-4. I keep thinking that I will read it again this time, but I always burnout first. I don't want to get burnt out on Rome. I want to savor it.

[fljustice]

I've found that people either love or hate this series. I come down on the love side. I found her research breath taking and her story telling compelling (for the most part.) I agree there are occasional draggy bits, but I put up with them for what I can learn. Antony and Cleopatra are on my TBR pile along with Harris' Imperium. I'm looking forward to both.

[SusannaG]

Antony and Cleopatra is not my favorite in the series (that may be Fortune's Favorites), but I did like it a great deal. I also enjoyed Imperium, though not as much.

It was interesting reading Harris' books about Cicero (well the first two, anyway) paired with the relevant parts of McCullough's series; the same events handled in very different manners and wildly different portrayals of the personalities involved.

[Kallithrix]

I loved Imperium and have got Lustrum on my shelf waiting to be read (as soon as I've forced myself to finish the plodding Pauline Gedge novel I'm currently snoring my way through).

It's probably because I'm a total geek when it comes to rhetoric, love nothing more than reading a bit of Demosthenes, and have admired Cicero from the moment I first picked up his Philippics (which never approach the masterful statesmanship or profoundly dignified prose of Demosthenes' originals, being more of an exercise in personal invective than any actual attempt at sound political advice, but still rollicking stuff!). I always felt that Cicero got a bad rap from both contemporary and modern sources, and after reading De Officiis (basically his moral self defence for the choices of his political career masquerading as advice on duty to his son) I felt really sorry for the guy. So I was really pleased by Harris' portrayal of him. I thought it was sympathetic yet critical at the same time, full of both praise and censure so felt far more balanced than most novels that just depict him as a pompous, cowardly, hypocritical little demagogue.

I also thought it was a very original subject for an historical novel, focusing not on the battles and big political power struggles, but a view from street level of the electioneering that most certaintly went on in the background of all these great events of history. Fascinating stuff.

[Gabriele Campbell]

Another McCullough fan here. :) I've read this series several times. I agree with Carla though that Caesar's Women is the weakest. And October Horse is definitely not the right place to start the series. McCullough is also a bit too much a Caesar fan - personally I don't like the man - but I can forgive her for the great tapestry she weaves.

[lauragill]

I've read the first four books and liked them, though it took a bit of effort. I'm waiting for the last three to be re-released in the new paperback editions.