<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: To be or not to be . . . mad, that is the question
Review: A wonderful analysis of Caligula, Roman emperor so commonly portrayed as mad. But we must consider the sources of this popular view. The author demonstrates this by comparing and contrasting the various 'original' and archaelogical sources. Contemporaries who bear a grudge, will likely be biased towards a negative assessment, an exaggeration or willing to promote a rumour. Taken in light of the environment, the mentality of the times, the pressures of being a ruler of a vast empire, was Caligula so mad or was he reacting naturally ?Barrett manages a conversational tone while including essential background, character analysis, and trends of the time. Actively, he shares his thought processes along side the available clues. Encouraging the reader to do more than passively swallow the lines in yet another history account, he gathers the viewpoints of the various sources so we may also draw our own conclusions. Valuable for its accessible tone, array of information, and not least important, adequate maps. This is an intriguing read for anyone interested in an intimate look at a legend who held the reigns of the Roman Empire.
Rating: 
Summary: Refreshingly Balanced
Review: Anthony Barrett's book offers a very balanced view of Caligula's brief reign. By carefully examining coinage, sculpture and the scarce, extremely biased and often contradictory literary sources he creates a very vivid and well documented portrait of one of history's most interesting despots. Was Caligula a deranged madman or just an eccentric and inexperienced young man who suddenly found himself at the top of a huge and highly organised empire? The unreliability of the extant literary accounts of his life, sometimes written generations after his death, makes certainty impossible, but Mr. Barrett manages to reconstruct the most important aspects of his reign and personality in a very clear and persuasive manner. According to him, Caligula was, among other things, a refined and educated man and a very talented administrator, but he also had a penchant for overspending and a sardonic sense of humour that was often misinterpreted by his contemporaries. However, his behaviour was sometimes cruel and whimsical and he did have a lot of problems in his relations with the senate (which was a body that represented the interests of the nobility and not, as some people seem to believe, a democratic institution). Well written and painstakingly researched, this a great book that is both scholarly and involving.
Rating: 
Summary: A tough, rambling read
Review: Anthony Barrett, in his foreword, asks that scholars and academics shouldn't be too hard on him because "Caligula: Corruption of Power" is written for the popular consumption. If academics should judge him lightly, then the average reader should render a harsh verdict. This book is thick and rambling. Barrett, sensitive to the great controversies about the life of Caligula, demonstrates that he has done his homework and provides every little detail he can. This ultimately has the effect of slowing the book down to an unimaginably slow pace and saps the life out of what should be an intriguing biography. While there are moments of pleasure one can derive from this historical sketch - for example Caligula's non-erotic relationship with his sisters - there is much that seems to be glanced over - like Caligula's relationship with the Emperor Tiberius. The book has little sense of narrative and reads like an extended dissertation. This makes the reader feel like an outsider. We never quite grab ahold of the story, because the real story is buried under hundred of names, and equally as many side conversations. One can appreciate that Barrett tried to present a balanced picture of Caligula; that is, he tried to put the various sources in some kind of perspective. This book is undoubtedly well reasearched and balanced. Moreover, there is very little speculating on what made Caligula tick. At least Barrett has enough respect for the reader to let them come to their own conclusions rather than over-analyzing a person in antiquity. However, while doing so he has created a book that is not fun to read and a portrait as colorless as the ancient Roman marble statues.
Rating: 
Summary: Reinventing Caligula...........
Review: Gaius Germanicus Caesar, more widely known as Caligula, has become synonymous with decadence, sadism, and profligacy. Anthony Barrett's tacit intention here is to clean the image up a bit. Barrett assigns much of Caligula's bad press to contemporary enemies and the emperors who succeeded him. Exaggeration, Barrett claims, can be rightly identified as the culprit responsible for some of the more heinous allegations. However, let no one mistake Caligula for a man unfairly marked. Caligula met his end riddled with stab wounds primarily because of his thirst for power; a thirst that led him to denegrate and, indeed, cold-bloodedly murder his fellow Romans. Barrett relies chiefly on the historical records of Dio, Josephus, and Suetonius, however, he repeatedly tells us that these records are confused, partisan, and unreliable. Caligula's contemporaries believe Caligula evil incarnate. Barrett, peering back nearly 2000 years, offers the supposition that Caligula, perhaps, wasn't quite as evil as that. All fine and well, but perhaps the lay person would be more interested in a purely historical narrative than a modern day character defense. The book's title, after all, would tend to support the former. I liked the book, though in the latter third the pace waned significantly. As early Roman biographies go, it is neither outstanding nor particularly poor. It is an average effort deserving the average rating of three stars.
Rating:
Summary: Being Objective
Review: I was very disappointed with this book. Why do poeple find Caligula fascinating? It was because of his obscure, cruel, fascinating behavior. Unfortuantely, Mr. Barret Tends to focus, often too in depth, of the family lineage of Caligula. I swear he spends more time talking about how someone is related to some minor character than our beloved emporer. He makes more references to other people than he does the title character. I almost gave up on this book God knows how many times. But, the hope that he would eventually talk about one of Caligula's crazy antics made me press on, often bored to tears. If you want a good history on the former emporer, I would highly recommend the episode Of Biography that A & E did on him. I would not read this book unless you are an insomniac and can't afford medicine.
Rating:
Summary: A Paring Down of History's View On Gaius Caesar
Review: In popular culture, the name Caligula has come to represent violence, madness, depravity and untold evil. However, few people have taken the time to study and wade through the many and often conflicting histories of Gaius Caesar, more readily known as Caligula.
Throughout history, Emperor Gaius Caesar, has been portrayed as the epitome of a ruthless despot, who disgustingly and savagely exploited his position of power. However, Dr. Barrett successfully attempts to pare down the historical exaggerations regarding Gaius' reign, and debunk many of the myths that were the result of grudges and prejudices espoused by antiquity's historians, most notably the famed Dio and Suetonius.
Barrett maintains that Caligula did indeed exploit his power, going so far as to force the wives of Roman nobles to enter his bedroom, flay and execute those seen as potential usurpers with little or no evidence, and occasionally fulfilling whims that can only be seen to border on madness.
Still, Barrett contends that these traits were not solely confined to the reign of Caligula. Rather, Barrett provides evidence that the unseemly behavior of Gaius Caesar was not uncommon to nearly all of the Julio-Claudian emperors.
"All of the Julio-Claudians exhibit to some degree the same combination of a passion for vulgar pursuits and a lively interest in matters of the intellect."-Barrett
Aside from Barrett's comparison between emperors, he provides enlightening insight into the works of Dio and Suetonius, perhaps the foremost historians of Caligula's reign. In his work, Barrett examines the possible flaws in the works of both Dio and Suetonius, exploring and reinterpreting much of the material in order to better understand the actual mentality of Caligula.
For example, Barrett argues that many of the tales of Gaius' debauchery could actually be rooted in the Emperor's sharp, albeit crude humor. He argues that many of Caligula's notable acts of depravity may not have occurred, but were the result of misinformation and rumor, based upon Caligula's scathing and unpredictable wit. It is contended that Caligula's words caused more upset than his actions.
Although Barrett's account of Caligula does not release the emperor of any of his infamy, it places his behavior into the realm of the less spectacular. Barrett argues that rather than epitomize an evil despot, Gaius Caesar was simply one of many emperors of the time who were corrupted by power and found themselves filling their animalistic and hedonistic desires, often at the expense of their subjects.
Rating:
Summary: An intriguing new look at the infamous Roman Emperor
Review: This is a well researched, scholarly look into one of history's most complex characters. Could Rome's most infamous "madman" actually be a victim of politics? For anyone who thinks there is more to Caligula than Suetonius' account will want to read this book.
Rating:
Summary: Gaius
Review: This is the first biography I've read on Caligula. I have read several other books that touched on him, but this is the first full-length book I've read on him. This is the first case of reading a biography on anyone from the ancient world where I felt like I really didn't need to read it. I got plenty of info on Caligula from Michael Grant's books or biographies on Tiberious (Caligula's predecessor). I once read an article on Caligula in a journal that discussed the theory where the reason behind his madness was due to Interictal Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Barrett's book starts out great with a lot of background information on Caligula's family and his struggle to move into the number one slot in the Roman Empire. He talks about Caligula's father Germanicus in detail which I enjoyed. I have been trying to find a good book on Germanicus for a long time. We was one of the most popular people in his day and well liked by the population and elite. Then Barrett spins into questions of whether or not Caligula was fit to rule. Most of it didn't make sense to me and was based on a lot of speculation. I did like his appendix and end notes. Those are always value added if done well and Barrett knows how to do them. In the same fashion as his later book on Agrippina, Barrett has a few interesting lists including "Named Victims of Caligula" and how they were victimized. There is a bout a five page photo spread which is kind of weak, but a few good timelines and other easily accessible data. It is not necessary to read this whole book if you want to know more about Caligula. I would suggest reading Grant's The Twelve Caesars. Grant gives a good overview on who Caligula was and what his reign was all about. Save this book for the hardcore.
Rating:
Summary: Gaius
Review: This is the first biography I've read on Caligula. I have read several other books that touched on him, but this is the first full-length book I've read on him. This is the first case of reading a biography on anyone from the ancient world where I felt like I really didn't need to read it. I got plenty of info on Caligula from Michael Grant's books or biographies on Tiberious (Caligula's predecessor). I once read an article on Caligula in a journal that discussed the theory where the reason behind his madness was due to Interictal Temporal Lobe Epilepsy. Barrett's book starts out great with a lot of background information on Caligula's family and his struggle to move into the number one slot in the Roman Empire. He talks about Caligula's father Germanicus in detail which I enjoyed. I have been trying to find a good book on Germanicus for a long time. We was one of the most popular people in his day and well liked by the population and elite. Then Barrett spins into questions of whether or not Caligula was fit to rule. Most of it didn't make sense to me and was based on a lot of speculation. I did like his appendix and end notes. Those are always value added if done well and Barrett knows how to do them. In the same fashion as his later book on Agrippina, Barrett has a few interesting lists including "Named Victims of Caligula" and how they were victimized. There is a bout a five page photo spread which is kind of weak, but a few good timelines and other easily accessible data. It is not necessary to read this whole book if you want to know more about Caligula. I would suggest reading Grant's The Twelve Caesars. Grant gives a good overview on who Caligula was and what his reign was all about. Save this book for the hardcore.
Rating: 
Summary: I'm Not Impressed
Review: With the amount we really do not know about all of these classical figures, it's a wonder we can come to any conclusions at all. And yet, Mr. Barrett tries to read between the lines, reconcile conflicting accounts, and distill a reasoned, if speculative, look at one of Rome's most infamous emperors. What I really like about this book is the author's admission, in several places, that his opinion was just that, his opinion. Well thought out and supported though it was, he freely admits that reliable historical facts are hard to come by based on the accounts that have survived. Still, if nothing else, the author is able to show us two things: the inner workings of the empire in the power struggle between the Senate and the Royal House of Augustus, and how classical history should be researched, reasoned and viewed.
<< 1 >>
|
