Caesar and Cleopatra Books

After having read the first volume of this expected series of 7 volumes I was triggered by the thesis of these authors that ancient Greek and Roman history did in fact take place in the Middle Ages. So I started studying medieval history of the Middle East - also known as Islamic history - to find out if the opponents of the ancient Greeks and Romans - the Acheamenid Persians, Sassanids, Scythians, Egyptians, etc. - also have their duplicates in medieval history. My search was disappointing: none of the many medieval Islamic dynasties seemed to correspond to the ancient middle eastern rulers.

However, I did find a close correspondence between Herodotus' Persian kings and medieval events:

- the defeat and capture of an Anatolian king - the Lydian Croesus - by the Persian conqueror Cyrus is identical to the defeat and capture of another Anatolian king - sultan Bayezid - by the Asian/Mongol conqueror Tamerlane;
- the Persian conquest of Egypt by the cruel tyrant Cambyses reds almost exactly as the Ottoman conquest of Egypt by Selim the Grim (note the nickname!);
- Darius the Lawgiver of the Persian Empire looks very much alike to Sulayman the Magnificent, the Lawgiver in Islamic history;
- Xerxes, whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by the Greeks at the naval battle of Salamis, looks like Selim II (the Sot) whose main claim to fame is to be defeated by a Spanish-Italian alliance at the naval battle of Lepanto.

I should have expected Fomenko et al. to arrive at similar conclusions, however, they claim that the Persian kings are the alter egos of the Angevin kings of Sicily whose biographies do not contain the exploits of the Persian kings.

The similiarities I indicate lead to the conclusion that Herodotus must have written his Histories at the close of the 16th century. But this is extremely late, given that Herodotus is "the Father of History", so therefore all other "ancient" histories must have been fabricated even later. Yet, the founders of modern chronology - Scaliger and Petavius - laid their foundations also at the close of the 16th century and had the full corpus of ancient histories already at their disposal.

It seems to me that Fomenko has to address these inconsistencies, maybe in the forthcoming 5 volumes?

Another critique of their book is that the correspondencies between different rulers are often based on a superficial comparison of the biographies; upon a more thorough comparison many details appear that do not correspond at all.

Finally, the authors rely heavily on the works of Gregorovius (1821-1891!!) - his medieval histories of Rome and Athens - as the source of medieval history; these works are - at least in the West - hoplessly outdated and have been superceded by more up-to-date works (for instance, Julius Norwich's trilogy on Byzantine history is not even cited).

I don't care what other people say of this book. Those affirmig it's fake, they hadn't ever read it. Or have some special reasons to do so. "Living is easy with eyes closed, misunderstanding all you see..." This book won't make you feel comfortable. It'll make you feel free. It'll make you feel you're "not the only one" to feel you'd been lied to for centuries.

We can so far divide the New Chronology into the following three parts:

a) The verifiable theory that proves consensual chronology wrong with the aid of astronomy, statistics and mathematics;

b) The new chronology hypothesis based on a new understanding of known historical facts and the most likely logical explanation of the most obvious inconsistencies inherent in the official version of history;

c) The history conjectures, that is experimental historical reconstructions based on assumptions that the authors believe to make sense in the light of their research and linguistic parallels - void of ironclad factual support to date.

Fomenko's theory complies with the most rigid scientific standards as a whole:

It gives a coherent explanation of what we already know.

- It is consistent: independent lines of inquiry all lead to the same conclusion.

- The predictions it makes are confirmed empirically.

Fomenko goes by the following axioms:

- Chronology is the basis of history;

- Human evolution has always been linear, gradual and irreversible;

- The "cyclic" nature of human civilization is a myth, likewise all the gaps, duplicates, "dark ages" and "renaissances" that we know from consensual history;

- The accumulation of geographical knowledge as reflected in cartography is a gradual and irreversible process;

- The chronological distance between a given manuscript and the events described therein is proportional to the amount of distortions it contains;

- There is no "useless" information in authentic ancient sources.

Why the mainstream historians do not shower mathematician Academician Dr.Prof Fomenko with thanks and laurels?

The Russians:

Because Fomenko asserts that there was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by three centuries of slavery, providing a formidable body of documental evidence to prove his assertion. The so-called "Tartars and Mongols" were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a bilingual state with Arabic spoken as freely as Russian. The ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities. The hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called "blood tax"). Their "invasions" were punitive operations against the regions that attempted tax evasion. Fomenko proves that Russian history as we know it today is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scientists brought to Russia by the usurper dynasty of the Romanovs, whose ascension to the throne was the result of coup d'état, charged with the mission of making their reign look legitimate. Fomenko proves Ivan the Terrible to be a collation of four rulers, no less. They represented the two rival dynasties - the legitimate rulers and the ambitious upstarts. The winner took it all! Over some 30 years of controversy, Russian historians have made a most remarkable transition - they were initially accusing the young mathematician Fomenko of anticommunist dissident activity and attempts to deface the historical legacy of Soviet Russia; nowadays the middle-aged mathematician is accused of adhering to "pro-communist Russian nationalism" and defacing the proud historical legacy of Great Russia.

The Westerners:

Because Fomenko blows consensual Russian history to smithereens, successfully removing a crucial cornerstone from underneath the otherwise impeccable edifice of World History. Fomenko adds insult to injury, wiping out one by one the Ancient Rome (the foundation of Rome in Italy is dated to the XIV century A. D.), the Ancient Greece and its numerous poleis, which he identifies as the mediaeval crusader settlements on the territory of Greece, and the Ancient Egypt (the pyramids of Giza become dated to the XI-XV century A. D. and identified as the royal cemetery of the Global "Mongolian" Empire, no less). The civilization of the Ancient Egypt is irrefutably dated to the XII-XV century A. D. with the aid of the ancient Egyptian horoscopes cut in stone. He was the first one to decipher and date all such horoscopes, coming up with mediaeval dates in every case. English historians rage at the suggestion that the history of Ancient England was de facto a Byzantine import transplanted to the English soil by the fugitive Byzantine nobility. To reward the English historians who consider themselves the true scribes of World History, the cover of the present book portrays Tintoretto's Jesus Christ crucified on the Big Ben.

The Chinese:

Because Fomenko wipes out the Ancient History of China outright. No such thing. Full point. The compilation of the so-called Ancient Chinese History is reliably datable to the XVII-XVIII century only. It is perfectly recognizable as the Ancient European history, reworked and transcribed in hieroglyphs as yet another historical transplantation, this time performed on the Chinese soil by the loving Jesuit hands. The Chinese are the next in line to go berserk. Chinese history is inevitably bound to get both more ancient and more eventful, proportionally to the growing involvement of China in the world affairs. Chinese historians will keep on finding valid proof of prehistoric Chinese spaceflights until the Politburo orders them to shut up.

The Arabs:

Too bad. Islam with all its key figures is datable to XV-XVI century A. D. Arabic historians may find consolation in the crucial historical role of the Ottoman Empire in the XVI-XVII century. The trouble is that this empire was initially a Christian state, with Hagia Sophia identifiable as Temple of Solomon, according to Fomenko! We can only guess if the acquisition of Alexander the Great (a Macedonian and a Christian) as the founder of the Muslim World Empire will make Fomenko's theories more acceptable to the Arabic mainstream. He certainly does not spare any holy cows at all, claiming The Stone of Qa'Aba in Mecca to contain the lost Arch of the Covenant.

The Divinity:

Despite of reiterated statement that his theory is all about chronology and not Religion, Fomenko stirs up a whole condominium of wasp nests. His collection of anathemas, fatwa, and other condemnations from all parties concerned is already considerable. Little wonder, considering that the history of religions à la Fomenko looks as follows: the pre-Christian period (before the XI century and JC), Bacchic Christianity (XI-XII century, before and after JC), JC Christianity (XII-XVI century) and its subsequent mutations into Orthodox Christianity, the Catholicism, Islam, Buddhism, and so on.

According to Fomenko we know strictly NOTHING about the events that predate the X century A. D.

St Augustin was prescient when he spoke unto us: "be wary of mathematicians, particularly when they speak the truth."

Watch Video Here: http://www.amazon.com/review/R3A80YKC8W7UEE New Chronology is a theory validated by astronomical research and statistical analysis of ancient manuscripts that asserts: that Antiquity and Dark Ages are phantoms invented in the 16th 18th centuries. Human civilization is barely 1000 years old!

New Chronology complies with the most rigid scientific standards:

- It gives a coherent explanation of what we already know;
- It is consistent: independent lines of inquiry all lead to the same conclusion;
- The predictions it makes are confirmed empirically;

New Chronology goes by the following basic axioms:
- Chronology is the basis of history;
- Human evolution has always been linear, gradual and irreversible;
- The "cyclic" nature of human civilization is a myth, likewise all the gaps, duplicates, "dark ages" and "renaissances" that we know from consensual history are fantasy and hoax;
- The accumulation of geographical knowledge as reflected in cartography is a gradual and irreversible process;
- The closer in time is a given manuscript to the events described the less distortions it contains;
- There is no "useless" information in authentic ancient sources.

Fomenko asserts: There was no such thing as the Tartar and Mongol invasion followed by over two centuries of yoke and slavery, providing a formidable body of documental evidence to prove his assertion. The so-called "Tartars and Mongols" were the actual ancestors of the modern Russians, living in a trilingual state with Arabic and Turkic spoken as freely as Russian. The ancient Russian state was governed by a double structure of civil and military authorities. The hordes were actually professional armies with a tradition of lifelong conscription (the recruitment being the so-called "blood tax"). Their "invasions" were punitive operations against the regions that attempted tax evasion. Fomenko proves that official Russian history is a blatant forgery concocted by a host of German scholars brought to Russia by the usurper dynasty of the Romanovs. Their ascension to the throne was the result of conspiracy, so they charged these imported historians with the mission of making Romanov's reign look legitimate.

Fomenko proves Ivan the Terrible to be a collation of four rulers, no less. They represented the two rival dynasties - the legitimate Godunov rulers and the ambitious Romanov upstarts.

As Fomenko blows consensual Russian history to smithereens, he successfully removes a crucial cornerstone from underneath the otherwise impeccable edifice of World History. Fomenko adds insult to injury, wiping out one by one: the Ancient Rome: the foundation of Rome in Italy is dated to the 14th century A. D., the Ancient Greece and its numerous poleis, which he identifies as the mediaeval crusader settlements on the territory of Greece.

The Ancient Egypt: the pyramids of Giza become dated to the 11th to 14th century A. D. and identified as the royal cemetery of the Global "Mongolian" Empire, no less. The civilization of the Ancient Egypt is irrefutably dated to the 11th to 15th century A. D. with the aid of the ancient Egyptian horoscopes cut in stone, like enormous Dendera horoscope that hangs in main entrance to the Louvre museum in Paris.

He was the first one to decipher and date unambiguously all such horoscopes, coming up with mediaeval dates in every case.

English historians rage at the suggestion that the history of Ancient England was de facto a Byzantine import transplanted to the English soil by the fugitive Byzantine nobility. To reward the English historians who consider themselves the true scribes of World History, the cover of the book "History: Fiction or Science?" portrays Tintoretto's Jesus Christ crucified on the Big Ben.

Fomenko wipes out the Ancient History of China outright. No such ancient history. Period. The compilation of the so-called Ancient Chinese History is reliably datable to the 17th 18th century only. It is perfectly recognizable as the Ancient European history, reworked and transcribed in hieroglyphs as yet another historical transplantation, this time performed on the Chinese soil by the loving Jesuit hands. The Chinese are the next in line to go berserk. Chinese history is inevitably bound to get both more ancient and more eventful, proportionally to the growing involvement of China in the world affairs. Chinese historians will keep on finding valid proof of prehistoric Chinese spaceflights until the Politburo orders them otherwise.

Islam with all its key figures appears as late as 15th-16th century A. D. as a branch of proto-Christianity. This is amply illustrated by imagery of Prophet Mahomet, archangel Gabriel, Heaven and Hell of this period. In today's Islam all imagery of the things living is taboo.

Arabic historians may find consolation in the crucial historical role of the Ottoman Empire in the 16th 17th century. The trouble is that this empire was initially a proto Christian state, with Hagia Sophia identifiable as Temple of Solomon, according to Fomenko! We can only guess if the acquisition of Alexander the Great (a Macedonian and a Christian!) as the founder of the Muslim World Empire will make Fomenko's theories more acceptable to the Arabic mainstream. He certainly does not spare any holy cows at all, claiming The Stone of Qa'Aba in Mecca to contain the lost Arch of the Covenant.


The history of religions according to Fomenko looks as follows: the pre-Christian period (before the 11th century and Jesus Christ ), Bacchic Christianity (11th to 12th century, before and after Jesus Christ), Jesus Christ Christianity (12th to 14th century) and its subsequent mutations (15th to 17th) into Orthodox Christianity, the Catholicism, Protestantism, Islam, Buddhism, and so on..

Saint Augustine was quite prescient when he said: "be wary of mathematicians,.. particularly when they speak the truth."

Henry Ford once said: "History is more or less bunk!"

Prominent mathematician Anatoly Fomenko not only proved it for a fact, but as true scientist tried to upgrade it into a rocket science.

This book will change your perception of History forever!
What if Ancient Rome, Greece and Egypt were invented during Renaissance?
What if The Old Testament was a rendition of events of the Middle Ages?
What if Jesus Christ was born in 1053 and crucified in 1086 AD?
Sounds Unbelievable?
Not after you've read "History: Fiction or Science?" by Anatoly Fomenko, the genius mathematician.
Armed with astronomy and computers Anatoly Fomenko turns History into a rocket science.

Here is a serie of books which turns "the whole world" upside down. I learned a lot of it and I hope that a new book from A.T. Fomenko will follow very quick. A absolute must for everybody who is interested in history or even a little bit from it.

This book is designed to give an insight to the reader. It was written by a Broadway Playwright, Margaret Webster. First she teaches about Shakespeare and the time he lived in. Then she goes into his early plays. She continues into the Histories, Comedies, Tragedies, Unpleasant Plays, Sad/High/Working Plays and Music at the Close. Then she relates all this to Shakespeare as we get it today. She helps us understand more what we read while reading Shakespeare.

This book is spectacular, transporting the reader back to the waning days of the Roman republic when Cleopatra consorted with Caesar, Antony and Octavian.. Old myths about Cleopatra and Antony are shattered, and, by the end of the book when Cleopatra commits suicide with the famous asp, you really feel like you've lived her life. The character development and writing style are amazing, and I enjoyed every page of the 900+ book. Margaret George has written a true classic, one of the most compelling stories I have ever read.

Loved, loved, loved it! I have always been fascinated by this modern woman living in ancient times (I studied about her a multitude of times during five years of Latin). Margaret George brings to life one of history's most celebrated yet maligned women, Cleopatra. What is it about her that engages our fancy? Even my daughter HAD to be Cleopatra one Halloween. It's a family thing. This book was amazing, and one of my favorite reads this past year.

Such a great novel. Margaret George has knack for making her characters so human, and accessible. I enjoyed every minute of this book.

THE MEMOIRS OF CLEOPATRA are narrated by Cleopatra herself. They begin when Cleopatra is a child in the palace of Alexandria, then follow her through to her famous death scene. Although Ms. George can be wordy at times, describing the clothes or landscape with more description than the reader really needs, the story more than makes up for this.

MEMOIRS is a lengthy book, and not for readers who don't like history or aren't willing to put in the time to read it. I have several friends who stopped half-way through, but for anyone who is a fan of ancient Rome, ancient Egypt or history in general, you'll be well rewarded in reading this.

Margaret George can write. At times her prose is remarkably good, almost poetic in its beauty. I think I'd enjoy reading a non-historical novel by her. My only objection to this book is her flagrant dismissal of history in creating aspects of her novel. The other Egyptian themed author to compare is the brilliant Pauline Gedge, herself an Egyptologist whose strict adherence to historical facts makes her books something you know you can trust and which are completely believable. Or Wilbur Smith who takes some liberties with his unhistorical figures but has them so connected to historical facts that you accept them without the reservations you develop with George. I think historical fiction should be as accurate as possible. Of course, novelizations require fictionalizing fact, but there's a line over which I fear George has stepped.

George has an annoying habit of trying to take historical figures and place them into scenarios common to the average person, presumably to make the reader relate, when in fact, the reverse happens. For example, she has Cleopatra as a young girl running wild, doing as she pleases, going off on excursions with boys. Fishing, swimming, boating with boys, going off on a long trip down the Nile on a whim. It was like Cleopatra was a tomboy on Huck Finn's raft. This idea is just so wildly not possible that it destroys the suspension of disbelief so necessary when reading an historical novel. These images are just too ridiculous to be believed. Another such example was the Pharaoh, Cleopatra's father, who liked to spend his evenings in something that translated as close to a family room as she could get. Princes and Princesses lying on the floor playing with toys or being bounced affectionately on daddy's knee. I all but saw faux wood panelling, oval braided rugs and Sear's plaid sofas in that scene. Some Pharaohs had hundreds of children, wives, concubines. I doubt they bounced anyone on their knees and probably often never set eyes on some of their children.

The other aspect which disturbed me was bringing modern notions into an Egyptian time period. The most glaring example of this was when Cleopatra was preparing to marry Marc Antony and referred to her "wedding gown". Please! Why stop with that? Why not have the honeymoon get-away chariot and tossing a bouquet of lotus flowers at crowds of bitter, desperate vestal virgins?

She also did something which I found personally repellent. While she treated the Egyptian and Roman gods with appropriate awe and respect necessary for this character, she did insert some scenes that were in very poor taste about Cleopatra's fascination with the Old Testament and her longing and approval of the foretold Christ. Please!

If George made these kinds of frankly amateurish mistakes with her other books, I would strongly hesitate to read them. The thing that saved this book from being a morass of faux pas and bad taste is the fact that in all other respects, she is a brilliant writer. Her writing keeps you turning the pages. You roll your eyes in disgust at these lapses and are tempted a time or two to throw the book across the room, but the lure of beauty left unread is too much to repel you for long.

Along with Alexander of Macedon, Augustus is arguably
the most important ruler of the ancient Western World.
This book presents what seems to be the best possible
reconstruction of his life, based on documents that survive
to our time. The prose is elegant and engaging, and while
much of the text is speculative, the author is careful to
point out when his sources are insufficient or contradictory.

In a certain sense, the history of Rome during Julius Cesar
and Augustus has many parallels
with the current state of US politics (domestic and global).
A republic and democracy that is slowly coming under control
of a dynastic ruling class, just as it became the sole
superpower in the (known) world. Much of this is obviously
due to the fact that the writer draws from the present
to describe the past, which we can only glimpse at through
sometimes badly preserved manuscripts. However, there
do appear to be certain trends that re-appear throughout histories
of empires.

Great biography on Augustus! Well written and the average reader (like me!) is in not talked down to by the author and the author - though obviously a highly intelligent and well-versed man on the subject matter, does not flaunt it but makes the read enjoyable and understandable. After watching HBO's Rome series, it was very enjoyable to have the fact sorted out from the fiction as well as to have greater dimension and depth added to the key players in Augustus' long life.

As a student, I only knew the basics of Roman history. Something about this book attracted me. This is an extremely well written, easy to understand history lesson on both Caesar Augustus as well as the Roman Empire. Everitt makes sure to explain every Roman or Latin term he uses. He covers all events througout Augustus' life that I never knew. After reading this book, I feel that I am significantly more knowledgable regarding the pinnacle of the Roman empire. Augustus entertains as well as informs. Highly reccommended.

Any list of most successful politicians throughout history must include the Emperor Augustus at the top. Victorious at Actium in 31 BC after the chaos that followed the death of Julius Caesar, he was the most powerful man in the Western world until his death in 14 AD. Anthony Everitt's lucid biography gives a great description of the times and political life of the man who established the Roman Empire.

I found this book particularly satisfying after reading "I Claudius" and viewing the HBO production "Rome". The author provides an excellent description of historical context for this fascinating rise from obscurity to preeminence.

`Augustus' by Anthony Everitt

In this eponymous titled work Mr. Everitt tells the remarkable story of Rome's first emperor, Augustus. Clearly, it is brilliantly researched, extremely well written and a really enjoyable book to read. Anyone looking for an entry into ancient history would be well served reading this book. Mr. Everitt does spend an inordinate time on Octavian, Augustus' name before he became emperor, however the book remains a comprehensive source of information not only on the life of this truly unparalleled Roman leader, but the Julio-Claudian family overall. The family lineage, which is a difficult feat for anyone to successfully describe, is very well laid out and clearly organized in both text and helpful chart inserts.

I had read Everitt's earlier work on Cicero and was immediately hooked on his writing style. Fans of the aforementioned book will not be disappointed with his follow up, `Augustus'. Enjoy.

I could probably write a ten page long review of all the things I love about this book, starting with the author's vivid descriptions of Egypt and ending with the breath-holding fights between Antony and Octavian. The novel begins with Antony in control of half of the Roman Empire (the East) and Octavian in control of the other half (the West). Fights soon break out between the two, and the fire which rages between them is only fueled by Antony's abandonment of his wife, Octavia, who is sister to Octavian. Of course, we all know who he abandons her for: Cleopatra.

This novel is long, but not too long. It holds your attention the entire way through and doesn't ever let it wander.

Having read all previous volumes of the Masters of Rome series, I welcomed awaited the opportunity to immerse myself in Antony and Cleopatra. Colleen McCullough has the gift of credibility when it comes to historical fiction. She creates authentic and richly textured pictures of the time, effectively fills in the blanks between known events, and molds convincing personalities for the mostly shadowy people of the ancient world. As added twists in Antony and Cleopatra, she departs from accepted history at the end of the novel. This could have been a total disaster, but McCullough pulled it off. The course of history stayed basically the same, but the changes were a pleasant surprise that made the ending more interesting and enjoyable than a standard recounting of the events.

The downside is that I did not enjoy Antony and Cleopatra as much as many of the other books of the series. Antony and Cleopatra covers the period from 41 B.C., recently after the battle of Philippi to 27 B.C., the recognized end of the Roman Republic. This was a lot of ground to cover and perhaps McCullough should have dealt with the period in two books or more pages in order to fully develop the characters and settings (However at 576 pages this is not a cursory treatment). Previous books in the series seemed to give more of a view into the everyday lives of both the main characters and the average Roman. Another problem with the book from the reader's standpoint, is that none of the major characters are especially sympathetic or attractive. This is not necessarily wrong because Antony and Cleopatra is a story of the quest for power in a time in which excess and cruelty were much more in the open and also accepted than today. Of course prior installments of the series included much of the same unpleasantness; however the major characters in the prior installments seemed to have more redeeming characteristics to offset the nastiness. The book is almost much a story of Augustus' (along with Livia) rise to pre-eminence and I actually found that story-line more interesting than that of Antony and Cleopatra and hope there will be another in the series that focuses on them.

The above criticism should be kept in perspective. I strongly recommend Antony and Cleopatra because it is very good historical fiction. Colleen McCullough sets a high standard that is difficult for anybody, including herself, to meet.

I'm an avid fan of McCullough's Masters of Rome series, which is why I puchased this book. While it's not terrible I just didn't find it up to the quality of that earlier series.

Antony and Cleopatra.The story of Antony's bewitchment by Cleopatra, Queen of Egypt; of their tragic downfall and Octavian's triumph; of Antony and Octavian's struggle for power; and of the rise of Rome as the world's unrivalled power. McCullough writes clearly, keeping the action going. Anthony's shoulders and thighs are so muscled that he can hardly move. Cleopatra, on the other hand, is thin as a stick. Octavian is the only beautiful one.

The time span of this book, is from 41 to 27 B.C. It covers a lot of famous events nicely, such as Antony's unsuccessful war against the Parthians; the famous naval battle of Actium and the double suicides of the main characters. Octavian's killing Caesor and Cleopatra's son Caesarion. All because of the power struggle. One of the good things I found is the usage of a glossary.

I did feel sorry for Antony at the end, the way the events happened and the conversations drafted.

Quite some scenes can be forgotten. Battles, for example, have a lot of strategy before and after and less of the actual war.

There is one more thing though. Reading this book made me search some more information about the main characters of this book. I searched the Internet about Caesor and Cleopatra's son - Caesarian. And one of the Websites quotes,

"Following Cleopatra's death, Caesar's son, Caesarian, was strangled, and the two sons of Mark Anthony mysteriously disappeared in strange circumstances. Selene was taken to Rome to be raised by Octavia."

The book, however, has the opposite to say. Octavian kills Caesarian first. When this news is broken to Cleopatra, does her desire to live die and then she gets bitten by a cobra.

Nice read if you are interested in history.

There are clues early on that this will be a new twist of an old story. Antony suspected in Caesar's murder? Caesarion, not a brat but a precocious co-regnant with his own ideas on government? Has this been speculated before?

As the book progresses McCullough develops her theme, the reader comes to believe that this is IT: The true interpretation of this variously interpreted story.

Like all McCullough books, this one is an achievement. Because she is always meticulous, I expect every the fact of battle, geography and genealogy is correct. She has grafted a new interpretation onto the record.

One thing, interesting to me, is that both Antony and Octavian, as well as a few other men in this book, cry with tears. Perhaps men cry in the earlier McCullough novels, but it must not have been as prominent or I think I'd have remembered it. While the tears fit well into the characters she creates in this novel, it is interesting that it is the male characters who cry. If this is indeed new, perhaps this is a sign of our times, more than Rome's.

Amazon has no way to give first First Man in Rome (Masters of Rome) the 6 stars which it deserves. While this, the last book of this series, is another highly readable achievement it does not reach those heights. Despite this comparison, McCullough's Antony and Cleopatra is still a 5 star book.

"Alexandria ... the greatest city of the Mediterranean. It was a royal city, residence of the Ptolemaic dynasty, which history had grafted onto the timeless tree of the Pharaohs, ... a cosmopolitan city bringing together adventurers, men of letters and science, merchants and travellers. Alexandria was the heart of a complex administration whose particular ambition was to amass all the trappings of wealth, the intellectual heritage of the Greeks and other peoples, as well as the curios of the natural world."




The Cosmopolitan Metropolis:
Alexandria is one of those cities that has always attracted a diversity of people fascinated with its long history and role at the crossroads of trade between Africa, Asia, and Europe. Alexandria was the greatest cosmopolitan adventure of conscious humanity, during all ages, unfolded in time, catalyzed by geographic distinction and demographic diversity. It embraced large, Egyptian, Greek and Jewish communities among many other ethnicity. Its glorious library and pioneering university, the Museon, provided a cultural hub for its learned population. Located in the north coast of eternal Egypt, at the NE corner of Africa, being connected to but reaching far beyond the continent it sat upon, even beyond the boundaries of the old world around the Mediterranean. It combined the genius of Bologna(first university in Europe), ethnic diversity of New York, and lively life of Paris, in its BC era. No other city today could offer a parallel, of library that leading edge cultural hub,or the Pharos, of global wonder in architecture, and promotion of global commerce. That city embraced with Hypatia, Philo, Euclid and Ptolemy, Origen, Anthony, Athanasius, Cyril and John Philoponus.

Birthplace of Modern Mind:
This entertaining book, which posts a good question: "Where are, today, those universal figures that give birth to the future of the world and the universe?" deserves a scholarly review which I could not offer. "The Rise and Fall of Alexandria," is much more of a masterful work of historical art than a compelling study on the complex maze of sciences, technology, religious thought and philosophy, of the city of the great scriptorium. Justin Pollard and Howard Reid created a great project guiding the reader through the intellectual adventure of the city and its contribution to the way modern humanity think, learn, and belief.
Alexandria's important status in history has often been neglected due to the loss of its great architectural and intellectual landmarks. Pharos, the greatest lighthouse, until its destruction, the world's great library of 600,000 codices reduced to references in the history of World Civilization. The book is a rare documentary of the city's important role in the development of Geography, and Cartography that enhanced maritime trade in ancient times as well as the important exchange of ideas and skilled people.
Through twenty chapters, counting introduction/epilogue, the authors take us through a virtual tour of the history of the city through encountering few of its geniuses, inventors and philosophic figures and their contribution to the unique thought of Alexandria, that has triggered the development of Western civilization of thought and technology.

Museon, Library of Alexandria:
The great library comprised perhaps as many as 400-700 thousand manuscripts, the total accumulated corpus of knowledge generated by ancient philosophers, scientists and poets. It was contained in the Museon, a building thought by the ancient historians to have been of surpassing architectural glory, not a trace of which survived. By decree of Ptolemy III of Egypt, all visitors to the city were required to surrender all books and scrolls in their possession; these writings were then swiftly copied by official scribes. The originals were put into the Library, and the copies were delivered to the previous owners. This decree helped to create a reservoir of books in the relatively new city.
The Library's contents were likely distributed over several buildings, with the main library either located directly attached to or close to the oldest building, the Museon; a smaller library in the Serapeum, a temple of Serapis.

Pharos, Alexandria's Lighthouse:
Ptolemy authorized the building of the Pharos in 290 B.C., and when it was completed some twenty years later, it was the first lighthouse in the world and the highest building in existence, second only to the Great Pyramid. The crown of Alexandria's harbor was the great lighthouse erected on the eastern edge of the Pharos island. The Pharos was built to warn sailors of the dangerous sandbars off Alexandria, the busiest port of the ancient world.
It was constructed of a three-stage tower, decorated with mythical creatures, atop of which was a lantern with a giant bonfire whose light reflected by mirrors, made of polished bronze, focused into a beam visible 42 kilometer away. Ancient accounts such as those by Strabo and Pliny the Elder give us a brief description of the "tower" and its white marble casing, how its mysterious mirror reflected the lightbeam fifty kilometers away. Statius (40-96 AD) describes the light of the Pharos in the night as like that of the Moon. It was described by Antipater of Sidon (130 BC) as one of the seven Wonders of the ancient world, it remained operational until it was totally destroyed by earthquakes in the 14th century.

Epilogue to an Episode:
After a glimpse of that miraculous adventure, I have to just look into the book's Epilogue, which starts in chapter 17, 'The end of reason'. As experienced directors, the authors selected Hypatia death to anticipate Alexandria's fate, 'With the death of Hypatia, her city began to die," which is described in a tragic title, 'The shipwreck of Time'! This is really very compelling, since you take with you the accentuated feeling of tragical ending to the zenith of civilization in the Old World.

The Library of Alexandria: Centre of Learning in the Ancient World, Revised Edition
The Electric Mirror on the Pharos Lighthouse and Other Ancient Lighting

"The one city which ...hovered between illusion and reality, between the substance and the poetic images which its very name aroused in me. ... Alexandria, the capital of memory! All the writing which I had borrowed from the living and the dead, until I myself had become a sort of postscript to a letter which was never ended, never posted ..." Lawrence Durrell, cliché




Alexandria, The Megalopolis:
Alexandria, embracing its re-created Bibliotheca Alexandrina, is not one of those cities easily intimidated. Recently its sea front boulevard is expanded, fly-overs are built, palm trees are sown into the pavement in an effort to achieve at least a partial restoration to its old glories. It is after all a battle of survival, the question being how much can be preserved along the way. The Alexandria of my childhood was beautiful. The one of history was formidable. I want my grand children to have the opportunity of seeing at least a bit of the city of my childhood, but explore a lot of its millennia of glorious history, as Lawrence Durrell, described it well in Balthazar, "The city, half-imagined, yet wholly real, begins and ends in us, roots lodged in our memory. Have I not said enough about Alexandria?"

An Insiders Review:
Today after spending a big part of the day in the Bibliotheca Alexandrina, while in a visit to my birthplace, I thought that it is proper to review the fine narratives quoted from those giants of Alexandrian thought. This nice introductory is praised like many other essays and books, but fall short of presenting even a small part of the Alexandrian miracle which was a dream in the history of western civilization, whose duration was a bit shorter than a millennia. When one writes a book, or an essay or a review he may present Durell's city which hovered between illusion and reality, between the substance and the poetic images, unless the examination spans cosmology, the sciences, and philosophy. So I thought it is just right to present a part of its glory, that the authors may have never encountered. I invited two experts on Alexandria to give a more professional review, that covers the areas which no single author could expound. Haas' Alexandria in Late Antiquity: Topography and Social Conflict , is still the most scholarly, but this book is really reader friendly.

Alexandria's Genius:
The power of the creationist view can be better seen at the very outset of Western science in the person of John Philoponus. Philoponus' application of Christian theology to physics prefigured a new era in science. The Alexandrian scholar was the first to combine scientific cosmology (the study of the nature of the universe) with monotheism and the Christian doctrine of creation. In doing so, Philoponus anticipated not only the findings but also the methods of modern science. He controlled his observations in the manner of genuine research, although it is not certain he ever progressed beyond thought experiments-that is, experiments carefully thought out, but not actually performed.

Aristotle's Creationist Critic:
"Simple ideas these were, but they had profound implications as to the origin and duration of the universe, its constitution, and its physical forces. If the universe was created, it is not infinite in duration. Aristotle taught that it is. If the universe was created, the heavenly bodies can reasonably be assumed to be of the same material as the rest of creation. Aristotle taught that the stars are made of a special celestial stuff. If the heavenly bodies are material, they must be moving in a void; otherwise resistance to their passage would create impossible friction. Aristotle taught that a void is impossible. If stars are created, they are subject to physical laws of motion. Aristotle taught that divine spirits move the stars. Philoponus' replies anticipated the great Renaissance scientists Galileo (1564-1642) ... He correctly argued that the velocity of a body's fall is not proportional to its weight. A millennium before Galileo, he proposed dropping two bodies of unlike weight from a tower and postulated that the time of the fall would differ little between the two objects. He also speculated that any object dropped in a vacuum would require finite time to fall. And, contrary to Aristotle, he asserted that a vacuum is possible and saw no absurdity in supposing that motion can occur in such a void." Dan Graves

Alexandria in Late Antiquity: Topography and Social Conflict (Ancient Society and History)

It is a light history on the subject. I did enjoy reading the book although I would be careful about quoting facts from it. For example we are not sure what happened to the Great Library only that by 800CE it was gone, whether it was as the writers claim Julius Caesar and the Muslims conquerors later is not clear. Nor was I sure over some of the science quoted i.e., the accuracy of Eastosthenes's calculation on the size of the Earth, although it was a great achievement it might not have been as accurate as the writers claim. I also doubt that Geographica was as important as the writer's claim in opening up the world but it is a nice story.

I just finished reading "The Rise and Fall of Alexandria - Birthplace of the Modern World," and I want to start over again. When I read that the authors were television producers on the inside front page, it was difficult for me to believe that it was the only career they had. In fact, both men are anthropologists (Justin Pollard is an anthropologist and archeologist) educated at Cambridge.

They took what could have been a stuffy and dry subject and made it sing, gave it wings and inspired me to want to read more. There was only one frustrating omission in the book and that was there were no maps. While reading, I could only visualize the map of the world that was created by Herodotus. Fortunately, I found a book by Michael Grant, "The Atlas of Classical History from 1700 B.C. to 565 A.D.," that I had had for years, which has a map of the world drawn by Herodotus.

The best part of this book is how well the authors humanized those historical individuals whose contributions to the city of Alexandria made it the great center of learning and culture it came to be. I would recommend it for high school students who are thinking of going into the sciences. I believe it will give them a great sense of reverence for the commitment the early Greek scientists, artists and philosophers had and how much of an impact they made upon the world. And, it will give further insight as to why Carl Sagan bemoaned the rise of Christianity which occured paradoxically in Alexandria.

Those who complain this book isn't "deep" enough for their academic or at least autodidactic brains are missing something wonderful here. How many books are out there at all covering this material? In a word, none. I know because I've looked. Of course there are tomes on various subjects contained therein: individual philosophers, mathematicians, the library, the Ptolemaic dynasty, the rise of Christianity (what a snarl this subject is, and try and find a nice smooth unbiased work on that!), Cleopatras of every sort and size, but to synthesize the oftentimes dubious work of single-focus academia and to then create a flowing narrative like this, well, I am deeply impressed. Synthesis is hard. To stuff your brain with facts is easy. To understand those facts is a little less easy. But to gather the facts, absorb them, and then organize them into a history of an entire city created on a premise that no city I know of has ever attempted and then which succeeded for so long (longer than the US has existed and we're not based on this idea at all)...well, I thought this book breath-taking. As the authors say in their acknowledgement, Bill Bryson woke them up to the fact that you don't have to be an academic to write history. I say amen to that. It's the so-called "outsiders" looking in who seem best able to see.

As a devourer of history, and as one who knows that old dictum that history is written by the victors (and now the tenure seekers), this book was more than fresh air. It was an oxygen mask.

This is a very captivating book, like all other books written by gillian bradshaw. Bradshaw made the characters seem like real people. I enjoyed this book very much and hope bradshaw will write more books like this.

Gillian Bradshaw is a brilliant history fiction writer, and I have enjoyed several of his books, but `Cleopatra's Heir' is not one of my favorites. It's a decent book about imaginary escape from death of Caesarian, Cleopatra and Julius Caesar son. The plot seems very intriguing at the beginning of the book, but falters in the middle and utterly disappoints by the end. Without revealing too much of the story, Bradsaw paints a shallow picture of Macedonian Egypt by the end of Lagid dynasty, where Greeks are more common than Egyptians, and where desert smells more with perfume than sweat. Young Caesarian survives Roman's invasion and with the help of Egyptian commoner Ani and his beautiful daughter Melanthe travels to Alexandria, where he meets his royal arch enemy and rival, and gets a chance for new. although extremely undistinguished life. If you want to know the conclusion of the remarkable historical mystery buy or borrow the book but be prepared for longing and sometimes dull story. Do not expect much action, military combats or duels. The writer spends more time on Cleopatra's son evolution of character and less on surroundings. In a sense this book is about young Caesarian's tribulations after the fall of Egypt to Rome, and not really about Egypt. But I would enjoy this book much more, if Bradshaw has thrown more information about political and military stories concerning antiquity of the time of the plot.

This is a really good piece of fiction. The author obviously has an imagination and talent for bringing obscure people to life. However this book stretches my idea of historical fiction. The story starts when the historical figure is supossed to have died. It is simply an idea as to what COULD have happened if he lived which isn't that likely. A very good book...just don't be disappointed when you find out none of it happened!

If you are really into history and love historical novels then Cleopatra's Heir is highly recommended reading. The book is about the oldest son of Cleopatra and what might have happened to him if he had survived Octavius's take over of Egypt. Its well written well researched book. I also liked how the author built up Caesar's character to make him look realistic and human. He was raised to believe that the world should bow down to him than he is reduced to nothing and is treated as such. He reacts to this with all the arrogance of royalty until he learns to trust people and begins to relate to them. He really evolves throughout the book from a spoiled king to a more compassionate human being. In the end he proves to have more humanity than either of his parents and develops his own conscience. Its a good coming of age story and historical fiction novel.

I have read several books by Gillian Bradshaw and have thoroughly enjoyed every one. This was no exception. It's the fictional story of Caesarion, the son of Cleopatra and Julius Caesar, who escapes an attack on his life by the Romans and falls in with an Egyptian trader who takes care of him. The Romans believe that he died as he suffered an epileptic fit when they attacked him and passed out; they place him on the funeral pyre, from which he escapes, but the Romans burn it not knowing his body is not on there.

The story follows Caesarion's travels with his rescuer, Ani, and his gradual learning to accept Ani's friendship and to learn to trust him. Caesarion is travelling incognito and intends to go to Alexandria to try to find his mother, Cleopatra, and his half brothers and sisters. Ani has troubles with a competitor and Caesarion helps to extricate him from these, thus earning his way and repaying the debt for his life. There is a very gentle love story with Ani's daughter Melanthe, and the story builds to the climax when Caesarion is recognised in Alexandria and is brought before Octavian, the new Emperor and his second cousin.

This is an interesting portrayal of a King who is a God and finds himself working by writing letters for a minor Egyptian linen merchant. Initially we don't like Caesarion - he is untrusting, haughty and unfriendly - but as the story progresses he becomes more human. The descriptions of his problems with epilepsy are well-written and add much to the story.

As with Gillian Bradshaw's other books, this is a light read although some of the subject matter is serious, and the descriptions of the places and history are fascinating. I very much recommend it.

I've read the previous books in the series, loved some, enjoyed all. It had been a couple years since I picked up Colleen McCullough, but found it easy to get back into her rhythm and storytelling. More than ever, Caesar becomes the main protagonist, becoming more drawn out and strung out by his life. I liked the earlier books that spread the focus around and drew upon multiple characters to carry the plot. In the end, only Caesar is interesting enough to cheer for.

The book hits the climatic point a bit over 2/3 of the way, and while the remainder is interesting in setting forth the true end of the Republic and rise of Empire, I spent most of the pages racing to finish to the heavily built up finale.

All in all, a original, unique, detailed portrayal of the volatile times and the meta-effects of earlier government carrying down the proverbial slippery slope.

At the time I bought this it was thought it would be the last of the Masters of Rome series. After some initial skepticism (how could the follow-up to the stupendous Caesar measure up?) I stepped through and re-read the entire series and continued on to this one. To be greatly and pleasantly surprised. Once Caesar departs the mortal coil (in an unforgettable murder scene), October Horse necessarily loses some narrative momentum; given the historical context (the effective death of the Roman Republic and the schisms among the Roman nobleman class). It's hard to imagine any fiction writer making that particular period memorable and linear in narrative. Nevertheless, it's abundantly obvious that Mark Antony was really the first De Facto Roman emperor - at least in terms of being a true despot foreshadowing the utter decadence of Tiberius, Caligula and Nero. By the time Antony assumed the consulship, the Republic was thoroughly dead. It took merely a competent tyrant like Octavian to maneuver Antony into his inevitable destruction. And a mere 19-year-old as senior consul (as Octavian was)? Clearly, the Republic was no more.

This book has many tremendous passages. Marcus Cato comes into his own here, as McCullogh invests some space in developing his character and quite plausibly illustrates why Cato wound up having a strong following. Cato's own departure from Macedonia after Pharsalus and his March of the Ten Thousand is probably the best passage in this very strong book. McCullough has a stunning gift for dialogue which keeps things moving even in the sections where "armies are moving all over the place," as it were. Her dialogue is compulsively readable and continuously reinforces the qualities of her characters.

But the character of Caesar remains transcendent. If he was even half of what McCullough conjectures in the Masters of Rome series, which he dominates throughout most of the six books and over 5000 pages, then he must really have been something. She makes his presence on every page of compelling interest, and his murder scene is a real burner. A great character to build a series around, and after he's gone, it's hard not to see anything further as an anticlimax. The character of Octavian is rather sweet and sympathetic at first, especially in his idolization of Caesar, but makes a rather rapid transformation to a budding tyrant with a gift for both propaganda and for compiling enemies' lists.

All in all, this is a strikingly strong book given that it's the sixth of a very strong series. After starting with the fabulous First Man in Rome many years ago, it is a delight for me to say that you won't be disappointed with this one. Maybe not on the level of the Patrick O'Brian Aubrey-Maturin series, but not far short and the whole Masters of Rome series is a real treat if you're desperate for some reading matter.

I pride myself on always finishing the books I start. I could not make myself finish this book. It is saturated with boring details - but no plot. None of the characters were likable, and I really did not care what happened to them. This book was a huge disappointment.

McCulloch delivers in this final entry into her epic series the Masters of Rome. All the threads begin to coalesce she has been spinning since First Man in Rome (Masters of Rome). Caesar begins to consolidate his control over Rome by hunting down the last few remnants of the Republicans. After crushing resistance he sets about reforming the creaky wheels of government. In the process he makes enemies who see him as the man who would be king. The only way they see to stop him is murder, but by murdering Caesar they don't stop him or his heir Octavian, they just make them stronger.

I have to say that this book and the series itself really opened my eyes about the culture of Rome and how things actually worked. I got so much more from this series than any history class I could imagine. McCullough immerses you in the life of Rome itself, giving you a glimpse into this familiar, yet alien world. Although like all writers and historians you have to make guesses and fill in gaps where information is missing, but she weaves a seamless tapestry that truly ensnares you. Through the series you follow the first families of Rome for four generations, seeing their triumphs and tragedies play out, as they scramble to define what Rome will be.

To be honest it is a formidable task to start this series, and the books really don't stand alone. First Man in Rome (Masters of Rome), The Grass Crown (Masters of Rome),Fortune's Favorites, Caesar's Women (Masters of Rome Series), Caesar: A Novel (Masters of Rome Series) are great reading, but they are also a huge committment. If you love a sweeping historical drama you can really believe in and have an awful lot of time to sit down and read, I highly reccommend this series.

The October Horse is an interesting and absorbing book. I found myself engrossed in this well-crafted story. My only complaint is I expected to find a bit more of Cleopatra in the book. This novel made me even more curious about ancient Rome and get my hands on as many books related to the subject as possible.

This book is well done, as usual in this series, but not my favorite. Unlike the other. more "official" reviewer, I enjoy the mystery aspect and the speculation about the real historical characters more than Gordianus' own life. It was interesting earlier in the series, but for some reason I'm a little weary of the old guy. It seemed to me that his death was implied at the end of the book, so am wondering if he plans to continue with the adopted sons of Gordianus as detectives in the book due out later this spring - a very good idea.

I have read all the books in this series and must confess that I always find them hard to put down - they are readable and interesting. At the same time, I am a much bigger fan of the John Maddox Roberts series SPQR - perhaps because Roberts inserts some much needed humor into his stories. Both writers use real historical events and characters, and why it is that Saylor gets more credit for his history than Roberts (and seems to be better known) I really can't figure out. The reason I mention both writers in a review of a Saylor book, is that both are writing about the same period in Roman history - the end of the Republic and beginning of the time of the emperors. I suggest reading both series. They frequently have a completely opposite interpretation of the events and characters, while using exactly the same facts. Since our actual historical information is sketchy, this can be done without sacrificing accuracy - and is very entertaining.

Again, I would recommend the Saylor books, but suggest reading the Roberts books at the same time. Roberts provides a helpful glossary of terms and explanations of the political and military distinctions that are so different from ours that we can't really translate without some assistance. Also, keep in mind that Roman history is bloody and savage. Looking at all the lovely ruins, we can forget that these were, after all, tribal people who created a civilization and some amazing feats of engineering, art, and literature given when and where they were. They were also a primitive people who owned slaves, bought and sold and abused other human beings (including small children,) considering them as less than cattle or horses. They crucified thousands of people by nailing them, alive, on wooden crosses in deliberately public places so the Roman citizens could watch these people die long, ugly, and painful deaths as they went about their daily business. As a group, Romans enjoyed vicious, bloody public spectacles that would appall most of us today, and this was an important part of everyday life for them. I suppose that's why a touch of humor helps make some of this more palatable - as in Roberts, and also Lindsey Davis and David Wishart (whose books are set a few years later than Saylor and Roberts.) Saylor tends to be a bit starker about it than the others - so do be prepared.

I think it's worth finding some of the earlier books in the series before reading this one - as this one has a slightly different feel to it. I'm not sure it will be appreciated without the background built up over the previous volumes. You don't need to read them all, but some will help set the stage a bit.

Gordianus's wife Bethesda believes that she can be cured of her debilitating ailment if she can only bathe in the Nile. She and Gordianus sail to Alexandria, accompanied by the mute Rupa and the two slave boys Mopsus and Androcles. No sooner does their ship get blown off course by a horrific storm than they are intercepted by none other than Pompey, a sworn enemy of Gordianus. And so begins the calamitous voyage to Egypt. This is a swashbuckling melodrama full of intrigue, narrow escapes, sexual innuendo, and horror that unfolds in the wake of Caesar's arrival in Alexandria to play peacemaker in the war between Ptolemy and his sister Cleopatra. The central mystery story kicks off when Gordianus's son Meto is accused of trying to assassinate Caesar. All the evidence points toward him. But Gordianus is sure that someone has framed Meto. But who? Cleopatra? Ptolemy? They both see Meto as a rival for Caesar's affection. They both have a motive. And both of them hinder his investigation at every turn. Or could it be someone else? THE JUDGMENT OF CAESAR contains some very witty writing on Saylor's part and it's also fast moving and suspenseful. The mystery was intriguing and the clever plot surprised me a couple of times. And, as usual, I learned a lot about Roman history.

This volume seems more of a sequel than any of the previous novels in the Sub Rosa series. This is not a good place to start. The three volumes immediately preceding THE JUDGMENT OF CAESAR (RUBICON, LAST SEEN IN MASSILIA and A MIST OF PROPHECIES) are important prerequisites. But like all the other books in this series, this one is tremendously entertaining. I'll give THE JUDGMENT OF CAESAR three stars and the Sub Rosa series five stars.

This historical mystery novel is so complex that I had to keep reminding myself that I was reading fiction. Saylor has a way of making history come alive in his books. This book in the Roma sub-Rosa series is set in Alexandria where Gordianus and his wife Bethesda have gone to seek a cure for Betheseda's illness. They end up getting caught in the battle between two siblings, Ptolemy and Cleopatra. Gordianus also gets caught up in court intrigue in the King's palace in Alexandria. This book is such compelling reading, that I found it hard to put it down. The historical happenings are accurate, but Saylor has built up such a story around these momentous events, that it felt like I was there for the huge battle for Alexandria near the end of the book. We see Caesar up close and personal too, and we see how he might have been when this actually all occurred. These characters are so real, that it is hard to believe that some of them were fictional. I cannot say enough about this series and about Saylor's writing, and I recommend that anyone who loves history should make this series mandatory reading.

Having read most of Saylor's novels in this series, and being a die-hard romantic, I was left biting my nails after finishing "A Mist of Prophecies," and needed to find out what happens to Gordianus the Finder's dearly beloved wife, and will she find in Egypt the life-saving cure she is seeking ... or I shall be aflicted with agita for years to come. So,I was glad to get this one into my eager little hands.
Without further ado, and getting into long descriptions of the plot since others here have already done so, let me only blare my opinion to all and sundry:
The Judgment of Ceasar is Steven Saylot's BEST novel in the Roma Subrosa Series!

The last time I read a book by Steven Saylor was "Venus Throw" in the mid 1990's. Saylor's books are easy to read and very entertaining.

Writing about ancient Egypt is always fascinating, and even more when Cleopatra and Julius Caesar are part of the plot. Saylor describes Cleopatra in such a convincing way that it would make any man straight.

Gordianus the Finder, the main character, is especially charismatic. The story is told by the same character, always in the first person, so the book takes a personal, intimate tone from the beginning to the end. The plot intensifies when Cleopatra and her brother Ptolemy throw a dinner party to honor Caesar. Caesar's judgment takes place in the midst of the festivities and still entangled in this irresistible love triangle!

Leave it to Saylor to make an indirect reference to Harmodias and Aristogiton. I think he's one of the few authors who make reference to all the famous male couples in history.
(I think he mentioned Alexander and Hephaistion in another book, but can't remember which one).

The beginning of chapter XXXI is a good example of Saylor style. Gordianus complaints to Cleopatra about the stench of the Nile River:
"There's nothing beautiful about the Nile. It's fetid, smelly, dark and dank! The Nile brings death!"
And Cleopatra replies:
"Yet it brings life! Some men make the same complaints about the sacred delta between a woman's legs. And yet, from that place comes new life. Silly men, turning up your noses at the slippery fluids and strong odors of fertility!
You'd rather play with your hard, shiny swords and spears, and watch the blood spurt from each other's wounds!"

I laughed when I read that passage. Sexuality expressed so bluntly and so subtle at the same time.

Finally, I would like to say that it Saylor is an exceptional writer, and I am looking forward to read "Roma."

This was my first Dando-Collins book and I must say I was quite impressed. A great fiction author like Margaret George "Memoirs of Cleopatra" can make subject matter like Caesar, Mark Antony and Cleopatra and all that is the Roman Empire flow like silk, becoming irresistable to put down for readers fixated with such material. Harder though for a non fiction work to do the same. Yet I found myself drawn to this work from chapter 1 and could hardly put it down as the pages flowed.

Its a splendidly researched book that doesnt pretend to be a Cambridge History of the Times or the like. Its simply an easy to read, thought provoking fact filled and informative publication quintessentially about the 6th Legion (raised in Spain) and its contribution to the Gallic campaign, Civil War through its allegiance first to Pompey and then as an integral part of Caesars progress to claiming leadership of Rome via the pivotal events that occurred in Egypt. These were the days when he was neither guaranteed to become ruler of Rome and nor was a very young Cleopatra - encamped in Palestine - seeking to regain her place on the Egyptian throne - guaranteed to be ruler of Egypt over the badly advised and cynically cruel brother Ptolemy XIII.

The famous and the infamous men and women of the times, and their lives are richly detailed in quick succession as well as their influence or role in the events going on upon the times in which the book is based. Its a veritable who's who. And not all are so well known that the author cant surprise. Caesars promotion following his victory at Pharsalus of a young tribune called Tiberius Claudius Nero, rejected by Cicero for betrothal to his daughter but eventually to marry Livia on her way to ultimately marrying Augustus. That pre Augustan union produced Tiberius (2nd Emperor or Rome) while son Drusus marrying a daughter of Mark Antony would lead to Claudius (4th Emperor of Rome) ---> not bad work by Tiberius Claudius Nero who couldnt have known his true influence as he organised the stacking of cavalry horses and provisions on one of Caesars barges bound for Egypt. This is the sort of thing the book is great at uncovering. And why its so absorbing. If only Cicero had said "yes" then there would not have been a Nero (Livia's great great grandson). The irony of Cicero - who forsaw in the destruction of the Republic the future reign of unaccountable tyrants - indirectly causing the reign of the ulimate tyrant in Nero is truly a gem.

More than this there are moments where the description is very ethereal. Like the description at the start of the chapter "Egyptian Resistance" of the scene and surroundings as Caesars warships slip into the Alexandrian harbour at night as the famous Lighthouse glows away - with troops on deck not sure of what reception awaits but prepared for all and sundry to come at them anyway. Its quite awe inspiring the way its all painted in words.

And oh poor Caesar...think you have trouble balancing your bank account...just read and you will realise that the great man had to be as much a great banker as a statesman and leader of fighting men. There were times he had to call on the overdraft, negotiate with the creditors, manipulate the self interest of others to donate money to the cause, flog his enemies to get it or call in his own loans just to keep the campaign from collapsing around him. Amazing stuff.

THe bad? Well it wont please research purists. The prose is a mix of easy flowing fiction writers style with non fiction material. But to my mind it just takes the dryness out of learning. Then there is that annoying Dando-Collins trademark of modernising the place names, instead of just giving the original name and placing its modern equivalent in parentheses. And if you like me - love the terms Tribune, Legate, Consul, Praetor etc etc rather than lietenant general, major general, etc being substituted (which to my mind makes things more confusing than helpful) then it can be distracting. If only the author stuck to the ranks and postions as they were known at the time and listed at the beginning a chart of comparison then so much more would have been the joy of reading this work.

But all-in-all a very impressive and enjoyable read about a great Roman Legion fighting in perhaps the most fascinating