Eagle in the Snow

Rating:
Summary: fighting to the finish
Review: I first read this story in 1971. I still consider this novel as the most memorable historical novel about ancient Rome that I have ever read. Wouldn't the final battle on the frozen Rhine make one of the most dramatic fight scenes if it were made into a movie?

Rating:
Summary: Eagle in Snow- Hollywood where are you?
Review: I have owned this book twice, on both occasions I have lent it to "friends" who have not returned it. I will buy it again to read and savour.

The book starts off slowly, with the forgotten men who manned Hadrians wall, but rapidly the action moves to Gaul, where Maximus is tasked to hold the Rhine crossings against the German tribes. He has only one Legion with which to defend Gaul and the book deals with his plans, the epic battles in defence of the Rhine and the treachery that allows the tribes to overrun Gaul.

Tightly written with magnificent descriptions of not only battles but the everyday life of a Legion this book is a must for anybody interested in military history. It is also a study of duty and honour. The characters are believable, well sketched and, if the mark of a good book is that you end up caring about the characters, this is one of the very best.

Rating:
Summary: Predictable & a little hard to follow
Review: I have taken an interest in historical fiction recently and as this book is frequently mentioned in amazon's non-fiction "listmania" recommendations, I thought I would give it a whirl. In short, it was a good read. Written like a journal / diary, it was a little hard to follow at times. Apparently, the book is to come with maps, a glossary and timeline. As I checked mine out from the library, most of these resources were missing. As the places listed in the book are old roman provinces, a map is a must. As the book is about the fall of rome, the end is predictable. Thats right, they lose. Rome has to fall sooner or later and in this book, the fall is in the end... a bit of a long, drawn out end...

Rating:
Summary: About the only Classic from my Childhood
Review: I must admitt that it is some time since I've read this book and even though I am 33 years young I can still remember the prose descibing the epic struggle of civilisation verse (supposid) barbaric tribes.
I read this book in my formative years when my parents were abroad in Germany (circa 1979), near the Rhein and my father was holding back (with a little help) another kind of horde or (supposid) barbarian threat.
I was boarding in Sussex, rich in Roman sites and visits in the holidays to such places as Xantern, one of the northern most forts of the Roman legions fueled my thoughts of the thin Romanic line.
I have since lived again in Germany and sojourned to ancient sites to again let my mind experience those thoughts kindled by this book. This just has to be read,...again. It has taken me a long time to find, an old friend.

Rating:
Summary: sad, but so good
Review: I read this book and thought it was simply amazing. It's so real it feels as if you are right there with General Maximus in the cold snow. I think this is a book anyone can enjoy...women or men, young or old. (I'm a 19 year old female.) If you love books set in the Roman era...be sure to read this one.

Rating:
Summary: The last legion on the Rhine frontier must defend the border
Review: I recently read Pressfields "Gates of Fire" and it brought this novel I read years ago to mind. Set during the final days of Romes control of the Rhine, a consul must use his single legion, auxiliaries and tribal allies to hold the Germanic tribes on the far shore. The intrigue, politics, versatility and skill of the consul and his troops is extremely well described and the story is well told.The situation is especially grim because where this single legion is holding used to be defended with difficulty by twenty. Really a very good novel.

Rating:
Summary: Dully Narrated
Review: I recognize that this book was originally published about 30 years ago and that the author is now dead, but it still remains a good example of a trend in historical fiction which began about then and continues today, and one which drives me absolutely bananas. It is that it is written in the first person and narrated by a character almost utterly devoid of personality.

There are several excellent reasons to write in the first person: it gives the reader a sense of immediacy, allowing him to share in the thoughts of the narrator; it allows the author to give us a full sense of the personality of the narrator, in that he is speaking to us with his own voice; and finally, and perhaps most importantly, it allows the author to give his take on events without necessarily adhering to the rigid stamp of dry historical textbooks.

But if you're not going to do any of these things, why bother? And more significantly, why give up the omniscient narrative available with a third-person narrator?

The narrator here is a Roman general, Paulinus Maximus, and the story takes place in the early fifth century. I'm not sure if Maximus is based on a real-life character or not and after finishing this found that I really didn't care to find out. He is posted at the "wall" dividing present day Scotland and England when the novel begins, then late in his career--but early in the novel--assigned to the German frontier along the Rhine river. His job was to hold off the mass of Burgundians, Alemanni, Franks and Vandals from crossing the river and overrunning Gaul, and he is given a relatively small force to do it with. This is the plot, pretty much, and it's pretty interesting. The backdrop to all of this is that the glory and power of Rome are fading and nobody believes in the old customs anymore, except, of course, for our hero, who is a resolute, hard, and often cruel leader.

Okay, I get that the narrator is an emotionless tough guy. I wasn't really expecting Steve Martin. But how about giving us an opinion every once in a while? In fact, how about sharing a thought or two? He is very good at description, to be sure, describing for example Rando, king of the Alemanni, with his red-beard, scars, and one eye. But after his conversation, nothing. What does he think of him? Has he altered his plan?

There is also a significant subplot having to do with Maximus' deceased wife, who was unfaithful to him with one of his subordinates. He tells us of his actions towards this subordinate, but never, not once, does he share with us his thoughts or emotions after discovering this affair. I'm not expecting him to weep or feel sorry for himself, but he certainly had some thoughts on the subject, and again, why can't we be privy to them? Probably it is because the author wishes to convey to us the severe, taciturn nature of this man, but if that's the case, a man who doesn't like to say much should not be the man telling the story, should he?

All right, having said all this, the novel is still okay. The plot moves along, and is populated with several interesting characters. The scene descriptions are very good, as well as the terrific battle scenes towards the end. The author clearly did his homework and is able to adequately convey a sense of time and place. There is also a sense of nostalgia, as we realize the sadness felt by the narrator that the Rome he knew and adored and fought for was to be no longer. This is good stuff and makes this a worthwhile read.

But this is a good example--and the historical fiction arena is rife with them--of a text which, failing to utilize the advantages of first-person narrative, clearly calls for that in the third-person.

Rating:
Summary: An old friend
Review: I was gratified to see this book back in print. It is like seeing an old friend again. Like many others I read it as a teenager. I almost stole it from the library since I could find no copies even in used bookstores. It is well written and certainly evokes what they must have felt as the empire fell. I find no fault in its historical accuracy. It is just a great novel.

Rating:
Summary: Rome on the Brink
Review: If the first half of this book had been more compelling I'd have given it 5 stars without a second thought since the second half is so beautifully done, a dark and devastatingly grim tale of the last days of the Western Roman Empire as its soldiery struggle to hold the line in Gaul against encroaching Germanic tribesmen. Driven by the invading Huns from middle Asia, the Germans, who have lived for generations in uneasy relation with their Roman neighbors, decide to push into the Roman province of Gaul to claim new lands and wealth for themselves, as well as to escape the Hunnic pressure. Against them stands an aging Roman general, Maximus, plucked from obscurity on the Wall in Roman Britain, and his lifelong friend, who together must marshal the shrinking resources of a shrinking Roman hegemony as Gaul's citizenry pretends all is well. The first half of the book gives us Maximus on the Wall, living a marginal life as a soldier in a forgotten outpost, marrying and losing his wife along with a close friend, Julian, who becomes involved in an insurrection and is condemned to a life of slavery. Then the Roman general Stilicho (of Germanic descent, himself) arrives and unexpectedly taps Maximus as a soldier he can depend on, to build him a legion. The aging career soldier rises to the occasion and serves with distinction in Stilicho's forces until, at last, he is sent to man a northern frontier post, opposite Germania, with instructions to hold the line against the encroaching Germans at all costs. Faced with the corruption and lack of spirit of the Gaulish townsmen, he must build his force with bits and scraps while employing a host of strategms and trickery to convince the Germanic leaders to avoid confrontation. In the end he fails as the German kings learn his real strength and the book's second half is devoted to his last-ditch efforts to hold them back. This part of the tale is as brooding and compelling as the first half was dry, making the whole thing worth the read. Each agonizing advance of the Germanic host is chronicled as Maximus employs careful planning and deception to save Gaul and his legion as the tribesmen make their inexorable advance. A good tale, albeit a slow-starter and somewhat thin on characterization. But the mood and images of a collapsing Roman world shine brilliantly through, making this one a book worth reading. -- SWM

Rating:
Summary: Orgin of Pressfield's Gates of Fire?
Review: It is quite telling that this reprinting of Wallace Breem's 1970 novel "Eagle in the Snow" has a forward by Steven Pressfield, author of the best selling novel, "Gates of Fire." Because upon reading "Eagle in the Snow," it's very evident that this is where Pressfield got the idea of his novel being narrated by the sole survivor of a lost battle retelling his story for an audience. It is little wonder that Pressfield is so praiseworthy in the forward because "borrowing" the narrative format from "Eagle in the Snow" helped make him a very wealthy man.

Breem has an eye for detail in some matters, but not in others. For instance, he gives few details on how these people looked like. How are these barbarians dressed and what do they use for armor and weapons? Do these early 5th century Roman legionnaires look anything like the 1st century Legionnaires shown on the cover of the book? (The cover of this reprint was obviously designed to attract fans of the movie "Gladiator." It also helps that the main character is a Roman general named "Maximus." Did "Gladiator's" screenplay writers read this book?") I would have really appreciated more detail on arms and equipment, but Breem gives very little. Also, I was curious why Breem didn't even bother giving a name to one of the few female characters in the story- she's just "Rando's daughter" or "the girl."

Where Breem does give detail is on the personalities of various characters- ruthless, opportunistic barbarian kings; cowardly, venal civilian authorities; and proud, professional Roman soldiers. (Breem, a former British Army officer, does not hide his sympathies.)

Breem also goes into great detail on the tactical and operational situation facing his Roman general. With too few troops, Maximus must defend a 50 mile stretch of the Rhine River against a threatened mass migration of Germanic barbarians. How Maximus keeps these tribes ignorant as to his weakness through subterfuge and diplomacy while at the same time maximizing his own tactical abilities to keep them off-balance is the crux of the novel. Meanwhile, he must also combat apathetic and pessimistic civilian authorities for his supplies and, above all, reinforcements. It is a very tenuous situation, but Maximus does have one huge ally- the Rhine River, deep and wide, it is an almost impregnable, naturally-made barrier to invasion. But, if the upcoming winter is exceptionally cold then the Rhine could become his greatest enemy....

Overall, if one can stick through the rather weak beginning then "Eagle in the Snow" becomes a very engrossing read. How Maximus deals with the challeges of a very difficult military situation is gripping.