Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

This is the Book as a Whole and Final Thoughts" thread.

***SPOILER THREAD*

For those of you who have completed the book and/or who want to discuss aspects of the book which are beyond our weekly assignments in the non spoiler threads, this thread is a spoiler thread where you can discuss those points. We know that some folks like to color outside the lines - so this a place for them.

If you have completed the book and would like to tell us what you thought about this selection, please feel free to discuss your opinions in a respectful way here.

However, please no links to personal reviews because we consider that self promotion. Simply post your thoughts here without the links.

Many folks read ahead of the weekly assignment and that is OK too; however, you must make sure that your posted comments on the other weekly non spoiler threads do not reflect reading ahead of the posted weekly assignment. If you would like to discuss aspects of the book further along, this is a spoiler thread where you can do just that.

We try to move along the discussion slowly on the weekly non spoiler threads but realize that some folks like to move along swiftly. So we have options for both groups of folks.

This is also the thread where you write your review of the book after completing it.

by Mary Beard

I wrote this review in Amazon:

I knew very little about the first Roman Millennium. This book was a revelation. The author, Mary Beard, is an accomplished scholar She writes for an audience that is probably not familiar with the history, but she assumes the reader will work at understanding and following events, places and people with unfamiliar names and titles and roles to play. I read this book in an on-line book club, Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ. The on-line community made it easier to stay focused and follow the evolving empire in a disciplined but enjoyable way.

I would add here that any prior attempt that I made to learn history of Western Civilization left me either bored or lost. It reminds me of studying calculus: if you don't understand algebra and trigonometry, you will never understand calculus. Moreover, the calculus teachers assume that you have the background. Likewise, if you don't have a background in ancient history, you won't understand Roman History. And, yes, many historians of the classics assume that you have some background. Mary Beard makes no such assumption...thank goodness.

Very nice review, Marianne. I hope you'll add it to the Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ page about the book.

My Review:

This book starts with the mythological founding of Rome in 753 BCE, and deals only with the first millennium of Rome. It is concentrated on the years from Julius Caesar's assassination in 44 BCE to Emperor Caracalla's decision to offer universal citizenship in 21 CE.

Most books that cover a Millennium of Rome usually focus on the end of the Empire. I like that SPQR focused on the beginning.

Overall, I definitely liked the book as a whole. SPQR has a definite and deliberate focus on often overlooked aspects of the republic/empire. Mary Beard does her fair share of attempting to read between the lines for her audiences often noting the source material biases and which points are most valuable.

That said, her source materials are limited to seemingly the standard ancient historians consulted for every other Roman history for which I don't necessarily fault her. The book uses the ~60BC/Cicero time period for which seemingly all reference points are drawn. The beginning of Rome was looked back by Cicero as a period of [insert point here] and it compared to the later republic in [insert other point here] ways. Conversely, the later empire compared to Cicero's time period for such and such reasons. At first this didn't bother me, but it did become excessive and unnecessary even if only to drive some points home about qualities of the late republic.

My chief complaint is probably what the author considers the strength of this history: the history of Rome with the citizens themselves as the point about which everything revolves. That said, there is a lot of external history going on outside Rome that is given little to no explanation. I understand this isn't a war history of every battle they ever fought or with the fine details of the state, but when, for example, the explanation of the first Punic war is reduced to "some fighting on Sicily" a huge amount of context is lost in how the Romans were even involved in events of which shaped their history. Unfortunately, my example is only one of many.

All that said, it is a fairly easy read. I recommend this book for readers that already know at least a little bit about the Roman history, but not for those who have never learned anything about them (due to that lost context).

I liked the book and found the various archaeological items quite interesting. On the other hand, it seemed to skip around somewhat in time; I think I would have preferred a more chronological treatment. It's definitely not for someone new to the subject.

I've read and enjoyed a few of Beard's other books. Rome in the Late Republic is organized by topic, rather than chronology, and is very interesting (and pretty short). The Fires of Vesuvius: Pompeii Lost and Found has lots of detail about Pompeii. The Roman Triumph is pretty self-explanatory.

by Mary Beard

I would like to read her book on Roman humor. I met her not to long ago in Heidelberg, Germany where she gave a short lecture on her recent book. She is a very likeable and accessible scholar.

Several years ago Beard was at UC Berkeley teaching for a quarter and gave some lectures for the public. I went to the one about humor and it was great. She has a great sense of humor herself.

Great book to read and like the discussions!

Thanks to everyone who participated in the discussions, there were many great comments. I hope you all liked the book and the discussions and hope you'll continue your exploration of ancient Rome.

Thank you Vicki