What do you think?
Rate this book
Agrippa: A Novel of Ancient Rome's Descent into Dictatorship
From the #1 internationally bestselling author of Conclave and Dictator, a gripping tale of ancient Rome’s descent into dictatorship
He was born feet first, a dangerous way to enter the world. His mother did not survive, and the nickname, Agrippa—mother killer—stuck. But the schoolyard taunting only served to harden his resolve and hone his predilection for aggression. In time, the name lost its sting and became instead a mark of his invincibility. It came to shape his destiny.
Agrippa was a mere commoner, a plebeian, his father a humble Stoic, but he earned the respect and fear of his peers. He defended a bullied young boy, Octavius, who turned out to be the nephew of Caesar himself, a chance encounter that would change the trajectory of his life. He eventually joined the ranks of the legionnaires and marched against their enemies. His prowess on the battlefield spoke for itself, and Caesar relied on him to protect his favored nephew. When Caesar was murdered in the Senate, Octavius inherited the empire in name only. To assume the mantle he would have to fight for it, and Agrippa, forever by his side, would be his closest advisor and the merciless agent of his military will.
As gripping and full of intrigue as his bestselling novel Conclave, Agrippa is Robert Harris’s monumental return to the world of ancient Rome on the precipice of dictatorship, a novel for our times.
He was born feet first, a dangerous way to enter the world. His mother did not survive, and the nickname, Agrippa—mother killer—stuck. But the schoolyard taunting only served to harden his resolve and hone his predilection for aggression. In time, the name lost its sting and became instead a mark of his invincibility. It came to shape his destiny.
Agrippa was a mere commoner, a plebeian, his father a humble Stoic, but he earned the respect and fear of his peers. He defended a bullied young boy, Octavius, who turned out to be the nephew of Caesar himself, a chance encounter that would change the trajectory of his life. He eventually joined the ranks of the legionnaires and marched against their enemies. His prowess on the battlefield spoke for itself, and Caesar relied on him to protect his favored nephew. When Caesar was murdered in the Senate, Octavius inherited the empire in name only. To assume the mantle he would have to fight for it, and Agrippa, forever by his side, would be his closest advisor and the merciless agent of his military will.
As gripping and full of intrigue as his bestselling novel Conclave, Agrippa is Robert Harris’s monumental return to the world of ancient Rome on the precipice of dictatorship, a novel for our times.
374 pages, Kindle Edition
First published August 27, 2026
About the author
Robert Harris
65 books9,594 followersROBERT HARRIS is the author of nine best-selling novels: Fatherland, Enigma, Archangel, Pompeii, Imperium, The Ghost Writer, Conspirata, The Fear Index, and An Officer and a Spy. Several of his books have been adapted to film, most recently The Ghost Writer, directed by Roman Polanski. His work has been translated into thirty-seven languages. He lives in the village of Kintbury, England, with his wife, Gill Hornby.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 575 reviews
October 27, 2026
“Neither of us would have got so far on his own. But together we had proved impossible to stop.”
Agrippa is nearing the end of his life. Gravely ill and unhappy in his family life, he spends his remaining time writing a fictional memoir, and these words reflect on himself and Octavian, Julius Caesar’s adopted son and heir.
Their lasting cooperation can be considered one of the most effective political partnerships in ancient history. Agrippa and Octavian, later known as Augustus, complemented each other brilliantly: one provided the military muscle and loyalty, while the other brought cunning, the prestige of Caesar's name, and an instinct for political drama.
While tradition casts Agrippa as the gifted soldier and Octavian as the shrewd politician, in their era military command and political office went hand in hand—even if Octavian, frequently ill, was a mediocre battlefield commander.
Robert Harris recounts the decline of the Roman Republic and its ultimate demise after decades of civil wars not merely as a historical sequence, but as a meditation on the mechanics of power, the psychological effect of wielding unlimited authority, and the personal price paid at the helm.
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, a man of plebeian origins who rose to become co-ruler of the Roman world, has long since lost his illusions. He acknowledges that “power makes monsters of us all” and that he has become almost as secretive and distrustful as Octavian. Trust becomes an unaffordable luxury as power accumulates. Power rarely brings happiness, yet power is power.
Politics is a messy business, and one might find oneself defending one of Caesar’s assassins if it prevents being "raised, praised, and erased" – a line that encapsulates Cicero’s vision of Octavian’s role in Roman power struggles.
Agrippa helps Octavian dismantle what remained of the Republic, ushering in a stealth monarchy where Octavian holds ultimate power while preserving the Senate and traditional institutions as a republican façade. Agrippa rationalizes his actions, regretting the Roman blood spilled while hoping the new era will bring stability and peace. Seismic political changes often pass unnoticed by the public:
“The Senate moved on to discuss other business. Nothing more was said about the matter, and in this way, on a quiet winter’s afternoon, Rome’s ancient Republic died—without protest, violent overthrow or fighting in the streets. Most people did not even notice, let alone care.”
That said, the Roman senatorial elite likely acquiesced to this new reality because it suited their interests—offering stability, property protection, and social prestige.
Through Agrippa’s eyes, we observe Octavian’s inner circle. Assuming only his old friend will read these memoirs, Agrippa reveals his true feelings, though his tone remains reserved and his ultimate judgment of Augustus elusive.
He cycles through loyalty, bitterness, astonishment, respect, resentment, and rivalry. Their connection began when a young Agrippa defended a frail, bullied teenager who turned out to be Caesar’s great-nephew. Agrippa was with his friend in Apollonia when they learned of Caesar’s assassination, subsequently accompanying him to Rome to claim his dangerous inheritance.
Octavian emerges as a master of dissimulation, expertly wearing different masks: the populist, the restorer of the Republic and the laws and rights of the Roman people, the stern disciplinarian, the modest first citizen (princeps), and the guardian of public morality. Augustus understood how to manipulate public opinion.
Agrippa accepts several high-level positions, including several consulships, forging a remarkable career. Yet he acts not merely from ambition, but out of a conviction that most men around him are far worse—corrupt and cowardly.
Though Agrippa designs most of the victories that anchor Caesar’s rule, he suffers under Octavian’s jealousy of his popularity among the legions. Still, despite feeling underappreciated, he remains ready to serve.
Agrippa marries Augustus’s only biological child, Julia, which draws him even closer into the imperial family. He was previously married to Augustus’s niece, Claudia Marcella. Julia and Agrippa’s children naturally stand at the forefront of Augustus’s succession plans. Was there genuine tension between Agrippa and his mighty friend? Did Augustus make Agrippa his son-in-law to bind and neutralize a potential rival? It is difficult to say. Despite an effective partnership and lasting friendship, a certain ambiguity between Agrippa and Augustus shows through. The de facto ruler relied heavily on Agrippa and elevated him, yet expected him to remain in the shadows. Despite his brilliant campaigns, Agrippa never triumphed.
Agrippa, however, was much more than just a formidable military operator and ancestor of future Roman emperors.
Harris portrays a man "most at ease on a battlefield or a building site," eager to leave an enduring mark. He does not wish to be remembered solely for slaughter, but for works that benefit generations.
He finds his feet as an organizer of public works and engineering projects. He oversees the construction of bathhouses, canals, temples, roads, bridges, and aqueducts in Rome and across the provinces, as well as building Portus Julius as a permanent naval base.
Agrippa emerges as a complex figure attempting a candid reckoning with his past. He can be brutal, and he endorses the cruelty and vindictiveness of others (e.g., the proscriptions of the Second Triumvirate). But he tries to retain inner integrity. Since few of Agrippa's own words survive, it is impossible to know how closely Harris's portrayal mirrors the real general's mindset.
Agrippa discusses his battles, infrastructure projects, and even his marriages in a no-nonsense tone fitting a Roman commander, even if some of his reflections may feel somewhat anachronistic (e.g., his thoughts on power and how it affects individuals).
The narrative covers a big chunk of history, inevitably condensing many events into a few lines. For me, this was not a problem. Overall, I found this read a fascinating window into ancient Roman history and the life of one of its great generals.
It invites us to consider counterfactuals. Was the fall of the Republican government inevitable? What if Cassius had shown greater patience and resilience at Philippi, or Antony and Cleopatra made different choices at Actium? What would Octavian have become without Agrippa, Maecenas (his able adviser and patron of the arts), or his wife Livia?
Harris introduces a theory regarding Agrippa’s origins that may explain his rise and military talents. Albeit there is no evidence to support his theory, it works well within the context of historical fiction. That said, I doubt that the real Augustus would have treated Agrippa as he did, promoting him so highly, had he known his “secret.” But perhaps the emperor was a slightly less paranoid man than I thought.
Agrippa is nearing the end of his life. Gravely ill and unhappy in his family life, he spends his remaining time writing a fictional memoir, and these words reflect on himself and Octavian, Julius Caesar’s adopted son and heir.
Their lasting cooperation can be considered one of the most effective political partnerships in ancient history. Agrippa and Octavian, later known as Augustus, complemented each other brilliantly: one provided the military muscle and loyalty, while the other brought cunning, the prestige of Caesar's name, and an instinct for political drama.
While tradition casts Agrippa as the gifted soldier and Octavian as the shrewd politician, in their era military command and political office went hand in hand—even if Octavian, frequently ill, was a mediocre battlefield commander.
Robert Harris recounts the decline of the Roman Republic and its ultimate demise after decades of civil wars not merely as a historical sequence, but as a meditation on the mechanics of power, the psychological effect of wielding unlimited authority, and the personal price paid at the helm.
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa, a man of plebeian origins who rose to become co-ruler of the Roman world, has long since lost his illusions. He acknowledges that “power makes monsters of us all” and that he has become almost as secretive and distrustful as Octavian. Trust becomes an unaffordable luxury as power accumulates. Power rarely brings happiness, yet power is power.
Politics is a messy business, and one might find oneself defending one of Caesar’s assassins if it prevents being "raised, praised, and erased" – a line that encapsulates Cicero’s vision of Octavian’s role in Roman power struggles.
Agrippa helps Octavian dismantle what remained of the Republic, ushering in a stealth monarchy where Octavian holds ultimate power while preserving the Senate and traditional institutions as a republican façade. Agrippa rationalizes his actions, regretting the Roman blood spilled while hoping the new era will bring stability and peace. Seismic political changes often pass unnoticed by the public:
“The Senate moved on to discuss other business. Nothing more was said about the matter, and in this way, on a quiet winter’s afternoon, Rome’s ancient Republic died—without protest, violent overthrow or fighting in the streets. Most people did not even notice, let alone care.”
That said, the Roman senatorial elite likely acquiesced to this new reality because it suited their interests—offering stability, property protection, and social prestige.
Through Agrippa’s eyes, we observe Octavian’s inner circle. Assuming only his old friend will read these memoirs, Agrippa reveals his true feelings, though his tone remains reserved and his ultimate judgment of Augustus elusive.
He cycles through loyalty, bitterness, astonishment, respect, resentment, and rivalry. Their connection began when a young Agrippa defended a frail, bullied teenager who turned out to be Caesar’s great-nephew. Agrippa was with his friend in Apollonia when they learned of Caesar’s assassination, subsequently accompanying him to Rome to claim his dangerous inheritance.
Octavian emerges as a master of dissimulation, expertly wearing different masks: the populist, the restorer of the Republic and the laws and rights of the Roman people, the stern disciplinarian, the modest first citizen (princeps), and the guardian of public morality. Augustus understood how to manipulate public opinion.
Agrippa accepts several high-level positions, including several consulships, forging a remarkable career. Yet he acts not merely from ambition, but out of a conviction that most men around him are far worse—corrupt and cowardly.
Though Agrippa designs most of the victories that anchor Caesar’s rule, he suffers under Octavian’s jealousy of his popularity among the legions. Still, despite feeling underappreciated, he remains ready to serve.
Agrippa marries Augustus’s only biological child, Julia, which draws him even closer into the imperial family. He was previously married to Augustus’s niece, Claudia Marcella. Julia and Agrippa’s children naturally stand at the forefront of Augustus’s succession plans. Was there genuine tension between Agrippa and his mighty friend? Did Augustus make Agrippa his son-in-law to bind and neutralize a potential rival? It is difficult to say. Despite an effective partnership and lasting friendship, a certain ambiguity between Agrippa and Augustus shows through. The de facto ruler relied heavily on Agrippa and elevated him, yet expected him to remain in the shadows. Despite his brilliant campaigns, Agrippa never triumphed.
Agrippa, however, was much more than just a formidable military operator and ancestor of future Roman emperors.
Harris portrays a man "most at ease on a battlefield or a building site," eager to leave an enduring mark. He does not wish to be remembered solely for slaughter, but for works that benefit generations.
He finds his feet as an organizer of public works and engineering projects. He oversees the construction of bathhouses, canals, temples, roads, bridges, and aqueducts in Rome and across the provinces, as well as building Portus Julius as a permanent naval base.
Agrippa emerges as a complex figure attempting a candid reckoning with his past. He can be brutal, and he endorses the cruelty and vindictiveness of others (e.g., the proscriptions of the Second Triumvirate). But he tries to retain inner integrity. Since few of Agrippa's own words survive, it is impossible to know how closely Harris's portrayal mirrors the real general's mindset.
Agrippa discusses his battles, infrastructure projects, and even his marriages in a no-nonsense tone fitting a Roman commander, even if some of his reflections may feel somewhat anachronistic (e.g., his thoughts on power and how it affects individuals).
The narrative covers a big chunk of history, inevitably condensing many events into a few lines. For me, this was not a problem. Overall, I found this read a fascinating window into ancient Roman history and the life of one of its great generals.
It invites us to consider counterfactuals. Was the fall of the Republican government inevitable? What if Cassius had shown greater patience and resilience at Philippi, or Antony and Cleopatra made different choices at Actium? What would Octavian have become without Agrippa, Maecenas (his able adviser and patron of the arts), or his wife Livia?
Harris introduces a theory regarding Agrippa’s origins that may explain his rise and military talents. Albeit there is no evidence to support his theory, it works well within the context of historical fiction. That said, I doubt that the real Augustus would have treated Agrippa as he did, promoting him so highly, had he known his “secret.” But perhaps the emperor was a slightly less paranoid man than I thought.
September 11, 2026
Should have been a sure fire hit, a favourite author returning to a favourite historical period, but I found it oddly uninvolving. By covering the entire period of Agrippa's life, the book is trying to do too much and vast swathes of consequential battles, intrigue, births, marriages are glossed over in too little detail, while it's populated by too many characters. Years can pass by in a couple of sentences. Perhaps it would have been better by concentrating on a few specific years. And although titles Agrippa and told from his point of view, much of the story is actually a history of Augustus Octavious. It doesn't ever feel like we get under the skin of the title character. Trying to stick to historical accuracy seems to diminish the drama. Not a bad book, but it could have been much better.
October 12, 2026
Agrippa was a great historical fiction that follows the life of the general, lifetime friend, advisor and son-in-law to Gaius Octavius who became known as Augustus. As such, Agrippa helped to end the republic of Rome and bring in the beginning of the age of Roman emperors.
The story is told from a first person perspective as Agrippa looks back on his life as he is dying at the age of 50.
Agrippa became a school boy protector to Octavius, who was Julius Caesar’s great-nephew and heir. Caesar takes notice and commands Agrippa to continue to protect his heir. Thus, despite his common origins, he rose to great power. He was an excellent military mastermind, but his wins were often passed off as Octavius’s. Theirs was a partnership of unequals, and Agrippa was bound to do Octavius’s bidding in all matters. He also discovered a real interest and talent in building. He was largely responsible for turning Rome into “a city of marble”.
Harris does an excellent job describing all aspects of Agrippa’s life. I got a real feel for how upper class marriages were handled and how common divorce was in those ranks. It was also interesting to see how the wives of the men in power also wielded significant influence, albeit behind the scenes.
The book moves at a strong, steady pace and my interest never flagged.
I listened to this and Simon Russel Beale was a great narrator. His voice reminded me of Anthony Hopkins and carried that same weight of authority. The audiobook also includes an interview between Beale and Harris which is not to be missed. I loved Harris’s comment that writing about ancient times shows politics stripped to its rawest form.
This was my first book by Robert Harris, but I’m off now to seek out others.
The story is told from a first person perspective as Agrippa looks back on his life as he is dying at the age of 50.
Agrippa became a school boy protector to Octavius, who was Julius Caesar’s great-nephew and heir. Caesar takes notice and commands Agrippa to continue to protect his heir. Thus, despite his common origins, he rose to great power. He was an excellent military mastermind, but his wins were often passed off as Octavius’s. Theirs was a partnership of unequals, and Agrippa was bound to do Octavius’s bidding in all matters. He also discovered a real interest and talent in building. He was largely responsible for turning Rome into “a city of marble”.
Harris does an excellent job describing all aspects of Agrippa’s life. I got a real feel for how upper class marriages were handled and how common divorce was in those ranks. It was also interesting to see how the wives of the men in power also wielded significant influence, albeit behind the scenes.
The book moves at a strong, steady pace and my interest never flagged.
I listened to this and Simon Russel Beale was a great narrator. His voice reminded me of Anthony Hopkins and carried that same weight of authority. The audiobook also includes an interview between Beale and Harris which is not to be missed. I loved Harris’s comment that writing about ancient times shows politics stripped to its rawest form.
This was my first book by Robert Harris, but I’m off now to seek out others.
October 21, 2026
“I realized too, even more clearly, how essential I had been to Augustus’ ambitions – a friend at his side whom he trusted, who could act, as it were, as his muscle. He had supplied the cunning. I had supplied the body – even to the extent of fathering his sons. Neither of us would have got so far on his own. But together we had proved impossible to stop.”
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (63 BC-12 BC), the leading general under Augustus and a key Roman engineer who built the aqueducts and the Pantheon, is rumored to have written a lost memoir. In Agrippa, renowned historical fiction writer Robert Harris recreates this memoir. He chronicles Agrippa’s relationship with Augustus from their teenage years, when Agrippa defended the sickly Augustus, then known as Octavius, from the schoolyard bullies.
Agrippa was with Octavius when he learned of the assassination of his great-uncle and adoptive father, Julius Caesar, and his designation as Caesar’s heir. He helped Octavius gain control of Rome and developed the military strategies that led to the defeat of Mark Anthony and the consolidation of Octavius’ power.
Although he played a central role, Agrippa never received full recognition for his accomplishments. He was denied the customary military triumphs (military parades), and Augustus took credit for many of his achievements.
Despite the power imbalance in their relationship, Agrippa's and Octavius’ story is one of deep friendship. However, Agrippa sees how power negatively affects his friend and offers a clear-eyed view of the republic’s end and the rise of autocracy in Rome.
Harris has written four other novels about Ancient Rome and the decline of the republic, and his deep, sophisticated understanding of this period is evident in this novel. His skilled use of first-person narrative memoir adeptly captures Agrippa’s personality.
I recommend this novel to anyone interested in Ancient Rome and who enjoys historical fiction. It is the perfect complement to John Williams novel Augustus.
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (63 BC-12 BC), the leading general under Augustus and a key Roman engineer who built the aqueducts and the Pantheon, is rumored to have written a lost memoir. In Agrippa, renowned historical fiction writer Robert Harris recreates this memoir. He chronicles Agrippa’s relationship with Augustus from their teenage years, when Agrippa defended the sickly Augustus, then known as Octavius, from the schoolyard bullies.
Agrippa was with Octavius when he learned of the assassination of his great-uncle and adoptive father, Julius Caesar, and his designation as Caesar’s heir. He helped Octavius gain control of Rome and developed the military strategies that led to the defeat of Mark Anthony and the consolidation of Octavius’ power.
Although he played a central role, Agrippa never received full recognition for his accomplishments. He was denied the customary military triumphs (military parades), and Augustus took credit for many of his achievements.
Despite the power imbalance in their relationship, Agrippa's and Octavius’ story is one of deep friendship. However, Agrippa sees how power negatively affects his friend and offers a clear-eyed view of the republic’s end and the rise of autocracy in Rome.
Harris has written four other novels about Ancient Rome and the decline of the republic, and his deep, sophisticated understanding of this period is evident in this novel. His skilled use of first-person narrative memoir adeptly captures Agrippa’s personality.
I recommend this novel to anyone interested in Ancient Rome and who enjoys historical fiction. It is the perfect complement to John Williams novel Augustus.
September 12, 2026
Outstanding. This is nearly the opposite side of the coin for John William's Augustus. Both to me, are masterpieces.
Disingenuous Octavius, forceful Agrippa. Power? What type and how. Fabulous study of how power is initiated, grows, sustains. Not always what IS, but what seems to be.
The reviews for this one? BORING and FLAT. And not enough mean girls? I'll never get it. So many battles and the planning of the aqueduct products alone! Just not interesting? OMG.
Williams' book ALMOST made me understand Antony's motivations. Almost. This one nailed them.
Julia, I will never, ever understand. Choices?
But letting us see Augustus from Agrippa's eyes also embedded the essence of his nature even more than from the vanquished or the dominated. What a life!
Harris has all the acclaim for Concave and its very fiction laden track- some of which never could occur in reality. This one is better, as it encompassed the true core onus beyond just the physical man. Not only of Agrippa either.
"These days you cannot be one and not the other. Politics is warfare in civilian clothes."
Disingenuous Octavius, forceful Agrippa. Power? What type and how. Fabulous study of how power is initiated, grows, sustains. Not always what IS, but what seems to be.
The reviews for this one? BORING and FLAT. And not enough mean girls? I'll never get it. So many battles and the planning of the aqueduct products alone! Just not interesting? OMG.
Williams' book ALMOST made me understand Antony's motivations. Almost. This one nailed them.
Julia, I will never, ever understand. Choices?
But letting us see Augustus from Agrippa's eyes also embedded the essence of his nature even more than from the vanquished or the dominated. What a life!
Harris has all the acclaim for Concave and its very fiction laden track- some of which never could occur in reality. This one is better, as it encompassed the true core onus beyond just the physical man. Not only of Agrippa either.
"These days you cannot be one and not the other. Politics is warfare in civilian clothes."
October 25, 2026
Marcus Agrippa was the general, admiral, and engineer behind Augustus, Rome's first emperor. History gave Augustus the marble, Agrippa was just a footnote. Harris reverses the credit by lending the footnote a voice. The narrator, fifty, dying in a villa near Vesuvius, fills a locked chest with pages, aware that Augustus would suppress them.
The memoir begins in a Roman schoolyard, where a poor brawler named Agrippa defends a frail classmate called Octavius, great-nephew of Julius Caesar. Caesar's murder makes Octavius his heir, adopted son, prime target. Agrippa, loyal, gifted at war, invests the next forty years winning his friend's fights, then renovating his city.
Agrippa narrates in tallies of legions, miles, sesterces, admitting a preference for engineering manuals over poetry. That limits the emotional range but lifts the technical chapters. Roman aqueducts need a slope of about six inches per hundred feet. Harris makes that gradient suspenseful as his hero cuts a harbour from two lakes, then lays sixty miles of channel for fresh water.
Augustus is frail, superstitious, seasick, a loser of fleets to storms or pirates, yet history credits him with the peace. His wife Livia sorts the Senate into loyal, watched, appeased, crushed in half an hour. Harris suggests that Roman politics, and politics today, rewards whoever commissions the inscription.
Agrippa swaps wives at Augustus's convenience, marries Augustus's daughter Julia at forty-one when she is seventeen. He also shrugs off complicity in a poisoning or a rigged trial.
Augustus's inscribed autobiography, the Res Gestae, runs past three thousand words in English, yet names Agrippa only twice, in passing. Rome's domed temple, the Pantheon, still carries Agrippa's own line above the door, "Marcus Agrippa, son of Lucius, in his third consulship, did it." Augustus took the titles. Agrippa kept the verb.
Harris delivers a brisk, sensible read. If you psid attention, you know the ending from school, so suspense has to come from method. Harris supplies method generously. Temperament is withheld. The ablest man in the room keeps his inner life classified. Much of the text amounts to a dispatch from a soldier too disciplined to be indiscreet.
Efficiency makes an excellent accomplice. A republic can expire while its best administrators are busy administering. A sinister first needs a reliable second. Agrippa obeys with such skill that obedience becomes a political act. Our modern governments also run on loyal fixers, tidy memos, officials explaining that someone had to keep the trains moving. Any era produces its Agrippa. History indicts and remembers the figurehead, forgives and forgets the fixer.
Robert Harris, born 1957 in Nottingham, studied at Cambridge, presided over its Union, reported for the BBC, edited politics at the Observer, then turned to fiction. Enigma set code-breakers loose in wartime Britain. His Cicero trilogy proved that a filibuster can have a plot. Conclave locked cardinals in a papal election, earning the film version an Oscar for adapted screenplay. Harris came, saw, sold.
❤️ 🇮🇱
The memoir begins in a Roman schoolyard, where a poor brawler named Agrippa defends a frail classmate called Octavius, great-nephew of Julius Caesar. Caesar's murder makes Octavius his heir, adopted son, prime target. Agrippa, loyal, gifted at war, invests the next forty years winning his friend's fights, then renovating his city.
Agrippa narrates in tallies of legions, miles, sesterces, admitting a preference for engineering manuals over poetry. That limits the emotional range but lifts the technical chapters. Roman aqueducts need a slope of about six inches per hundred feet. Harris makes that gradient suspenseful as his hero cuts a harbour from two lakes, then lays sixty miles of channel for fresh water.
Augustus is frail, superstitious, seasick, a loser of fleets to storms or pirates, yet history credits him with the peace. His wife Livia sorts the Senate into loyal, watched, appeased, crushed in half an hour. Harris suggests that Roman politics, and politics today, rewards whoever commissions the inscription.
Agrippa swaps wives at Augustus's convenience, marries Augustus's daughter Julia at forty-one when she is seventeen. He also shrugs off complicity in a poisoning or a rigged trial.
Augustus's inscribed autobiography, the Res Gestae, runs past three thousand words in English, yet names Agrippa only twice, in passing. Rome's domed temple, the Pantheon, still carries Agrippa's own line above the door, "Marcus Agrippa, son of Lucius, in his third consulship, did it." Augustus took the titles. Agrippa kept the verb.
Harris delivers a brisk, sensible read. If you psid attention, you know the ending from school, so suspense has to come from method. Harris supplies method generously. Temperament is withheld. The ablest man in the room keeps his inner life classified. Much of the text amounts to a dispatch from a soldier too disciplined to be indiscreet.
Efficiency makes an excellent accomplice. A republic can expire while its best administrators are busy administering. A sinister first needs a reliable second. Agrippa obeys with such skill that obedience becomes a political act. Our modern governments also run on loyal fixers, tidy memos, officials explaining that someone had to keep the trains moving. Any era produces its Agrippa. History indicts and remembers the figurehead, forgives and forgets the fixer.
Robert Harris, born 1957 in Nottingham, studied at Cambridge, presided over its Union, reported for the BBC, edited politics at the Observer, then turned to fiction. Enigma set code-breakers loose in wartime Britain. His Cicero trilogy proved that a filibuster can have a plot. Conclave locked cardinals in a papal election, earning the film version an Oscar for adapted screenplay. Harris came, saw, sold.
❤️ 🇮🇱
March 19, 2026
The best Robert Harris that I have read to date. A fascinating insight into this period of history, the politics that came with it and the power they all sought. Excellent!
July 22, 2026
I loved reading Conclave and really looked forward to reading the ARC for Agrippa but was sorely disappointed. I found it dull and flat.
Written as memoir, it was like reading someone’s diary of the weather and food log but in the form of lists of battles fought and marriages arranged. What it lacks in dimension it makes up for in name dropping…exhaustively.
Unless you are fascinated with the time period, I’d skip this title. There’s nothing in it for the average reader. (May appeal to a male audience, though.)
Written as memoir, it was like reading someone’s diary of the weather and food log but in the form of lists of battles fought and marriages arranged. What it lacks in dimension it makes up for in name dropping…exhaustively.
Unless you are fascinated with the time period, I’d skip this title. There’s nothing in it for the average reader. (May appeal to a male audience, though.)
September 2, 2026
Civil war, political intrigue, arranged marriages and deceit. Welcome to ancient Rome. Robert Harris creates a fictional memoir by Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa and, as usual, brings a wealth of historical characters to life with consummate ease.
I wish that history lessons had been this much fun when I was at school. Yet another entertaining novel from Robert Harris. In fact....it's a gripper!!
I wish that history lessons had been this much fun when I was at school. Yet another entertaining novel from Robert Harris. In fact....it's a gripper!!
September 4, 2026
I’m not going to lie– the disappointment is pretty crushing.
Although I find it historically implausible, and the book and Harris’ insistence that Augustus made any wide-reaching attempt to erase and minimize Agrippa even less so, I actually did enjoy the inner conflict and resentment given to Agrippa here, especially the mausoleum scene and the last chapter. I also liked the portrayal of his building projects as stemming from a desire to leave behind a legacy other than destruction. However, the times where Harris gives the reader access to Agrippa’s psyche are frustratingly rare– the book is written in distant and generally emotionless prose, and Agrippa spends more time narrating events, while sometimes giving his arguably anachronistic thoughts about power and politics and stating his matter of fact opinions on what is happening at the time, than baring his soul in a memoir that he himself believes will never see the light of day, and therefore has little reason to hold back. Even the twist about his origins has little effect on either him or the plot, beyond the fact that he thinks about it every so often.
I believe that this is half a consequence of squeezing nearly 40 eventful years into a not very long book and half an attempt to be immersive and follow in the footsteps of event and achievement focused ancient biographies (which may also be the reasoning behind all the dialogue being rendered in em-dashes; unlike Tiro, Agrippa wasn’t a scribe with a great memory who wrote most of the conversations down), but given that Harris still departs from ancient conventions in both structure and language (Agrippa quoting the “old saying” of “if you strike at the king, you must be sure not to miss” was the worst instance, although Augustus giving a “sermon” about immorality also made me wince) I’m not sure why the needs of the modern novelist shouldn’t have won out. Not helping my sense of immersion were several small but noticeable errors that slipped the editor’s mind– Harris simplifies the distinction between plebeians and patricians/senatorial families, is seemingly unaware that the cognomen “Agrippa” was not invented for his protagonist, calls Gaius Matius “C.Calvena Matius”, mixes up the birth order of Antony and Cleopatra’s children before later correcting himself, and incorrectly states that fifteen years passed between Carrhae and Munda.
Not helping the book is the fact that it lacks the caricatured yet entertaining secondary cast of the Cicero trilogy; again, this is probably because there simply isn't enough time to develop any of them. A notable exception is Fulvia, whose page time is brief and yet steals every scene she’s in, making me wish that Harris had written a book about her instead. Cicero is fairly entertaining in his few scenes as well, and it was interesting to see a less positive opinion on him, especially since it’s implied in some places that this book takes place in the same “universe” as the Cicero trilogy. Harris does something similar with Caesar, showing a softer side to him while still having some traits of his diabolical self (as well as his raspy voice) from the Cicero trilogy, and while this makes sense in the context of the book, I must admit that I preferred his older incarnation. I am less sure of how to feel about Harris’ Augustus, who, despite a handful of humanizing moments, is cold, power-hungry, and insensitive towards Agrippa pretty much from the start, with some of his rumored misdeeds (such as killing Pansa) being depicted as fact. While he definitely emerges as the kind of person who could push his best friend to the brink, and there are some fun scenes with him (like one where he laments how Cicero didn’t live longer despite having consented to his death), it made me wonder what exactly Agrippa saw in him at all, beyond the chance for career advancement and Caesar’s apparently hypnotic request for him to protect him. The writing style certainly didn’t help in this regard, as it made it kind of ambiguous as to whether there was any great love between them even at the start of their friendship, which this novel shows coming about unintentionally.
Ultimately, this is a novel with some interesting takes on its period and a compelling conceit at its core, but that unfortunately does not allow itself any time to breathe. Readers finding out about Agrippa from this book should be aware that his life and world weren’t nearly as dull as they are here.
Although I find it historically implausible, and the book and Harris’ insistence that Augustus made any wide-reaching attempt to erase and minimize Agrippa even less so, I actually did enjoy the inner conflict and resentment given to Agrippa here, especially the mausoleum scene and the last chapter. I also liked the portrayal of his building projects as stemming from a desire to leave behind a legacy other than destruction. However, the times where Harris gives the reader access to Agrippa’s psyche are frustratingly rare– the book is written in distant and generally emotionless prose, and Agrippa spends more time narrating events, while sometimes giving his arguably anachronistic thoughts about power and politics and stating his matter of fact opinions on what is happening at the time, than baring his soul in a memoir that he himself believes will never see the light of day, and therefore has little reason to hold back. Even the twist about his origins has little effect on either him or the plot, beyond the fact that he thinks about it every so often.
I believe that this is half a consequence of squeezing nearly 40 eventful years into a not very long book and half an attempt to be immersive and follow in the footsteps of event and achievement focused ancient biographies (which may also be the reasoning behind all the dialogue being rendered in em-dashes; unlike Tiro, Agrippa wasn’t a scribe with a great memory who wrote most of the conversations down), but given that Harris still departs from ancient conventions in both structure and language (Agrippa quoting the “old saying” of “if you strike at the king, you must be sure not to miss” was the worst instance, although Augustus giving a “sermon” about immorality also made me wince) I’m not sure why the needs of the modern novelist shouldn’t have won out. Not helping my sense of immersion were several small but noticeable errors that slipped the editor’s mind– Harris simplifies the distinction between plebeians and patricians/senatorial families, is seemingly unaware that the cognomen “Agrippa” was not invented for his protagonist, calls Gaius Matius “C.Calvena Matius”, mixes up the birth order of Antony and Cleopatra’s children before later correcting himself, and incorrectly states that fifteen years passed between Carrhae and Munda.
Not helping the book is the fact that it lacks the caricatured yet entertaining secondary cast of the Cicero trilogy; again, this is probably because there simply isn't enough time to develop any of them. A notable exception is Fulvia, whose page time is brief and yet steals every scene she’s in, making me wish that Harris had written a book about her instead. Cicero is fairly entertaining in his few scenes as well, and it was interesting to see a less positive opinion on him, especially since it’s implied in some places that this book takes place in the same “universe” as the Cicero trilogy. Harris does something similar with Caesar, showing a softer side to him while still having some traits of his diabolical self (as well as his raspy voice) from the Cicero trilogy, and while this makes sense in the context of the book, I must admit that I preferred his older incarnation. I am less sure of how to feel about Harris’ Augustus, who, despite a handful of humanizing moments, is cold, power-hungry, and insensitive towards Agrippa pretty much from the start, with some of his rumored misdeeds (such as killing Pansa) being depicted as fact. While he definitely emerges as the kind of person who could push his best friend to the brink, and there are some fun scenes with him (like one where he laments how Cicero didn’t live longer despite having consented to his death), it made me wonder what exactly Agrippa saw in him at all, beyond the chance for career advancement and Caesar’s apparently hypnotic request for him to protect him. The writing style certainly didn’t help in this regard, as it made it kind of ambiguous as to whether there was any great love between them even at the start of their friendship, which this novel shows coming about unintentionally.
Ultimately, this is a novel with some interesting takes on its period and a compelling conceit at its core, but that unfortunately does not allow itself any time to breathe. Readers finding out about Agrippa from this book should be aware that his life and world weren’t nearly as dull as they are here.
October 9, 2026
You’re unlikely to go wow after reading this book. I felt the pacing was a little too even but I guess it echoes the lumbering, socially awkward but ever reliable Agrippa. Agrippa isn’t especially likeable but I guess what likeabliity he does have is made to look more so by the ruthless Augustus. On the plus side Agrippa is shown to be more than competent at everything he’s asked to do.
The author has produced a solid work with okay atmosphere which reveals how much the establishment of the Roman Empire owes to him rather than his illustrious boss.
This is very readable and so could be read by young adults.
The author has produced a solid work with okay atmosphere which reveals how much the establishment of the Roman Empire owes to him rather than his illustrious boss.
This is very readable and so could be read by young adults.
October 26, 2026
This book will please readers who liked Harris's Cicero series. It's less about politics and more about war, but the general message there is that war (especially all the Roman civil wars) is a horrible nonsense that petty, powerful men get into without any concerns for the thousands of ordinary people who will suffer and die.
September 9, 2026
Agrippa just not agripping me
September 22, 2026
Knowing his death is close, Agrippa decides to spend his last few weeks writing a memoir of his life, and his close relationship with the man who has ruled as effective emperor of Rome for decades, Gaius Octavius Thurinus, later known as Augustus. Their story begins with a chance incident in school, when Agrippa protected the young Octavius from bullies, a role he would continue to play in different forms throughout their lives.
At that moment, he didn’t know that Octavius was the great-nephew of Julius Caesar, nor that Caesar would name him as his adopted son and successor in his will. But this random encounter would bring Agrippa into contact with the great emperor, and once he was old enough, would turn him into one of Caesar’s most faithful legionaries. Caesar’s request that the strong and robust Agrippa look after the weaker, frequently ill Octavius would have been enough to ensure Agrippa’s loyalty. But after Caesar’s death, as he fought and schemed with Octavius, Agrippa became seduced by power in his own right and relished the wealth and acclamation that came with the role of right-hand man.
This is largely a recounting of the known history of the two men, with the occasional gap filled from Harris’ imagination, and some speculations included as if they were fact. Harris’ afterword gives his sources and explains where he deviates from proven fact, while claiming that there is nothing in the record that invalidates those moments of invention. Knowing nothing about the period, I’m in no position to confirm or argue with this claim, but, true or not, I felt it all held together very believably. I’m deliberately not specifying the imagined elements, since it would be a little spoilery – if, like me, this period of history is new to you, then a lot of the enjoyment in the book is in only learning about things in the order in which Harris presents them.
What are entirely imaginary are Agrippa’s thoughts and feelings about his life and his imperious friend, and it’s this that makes the book a novel rather than a history. Agrippa may be loyal to Augustus but that doesn’t blind him to the dictator’s capriciousness and cruelty. But Agrippa is a man of his time, and though he sometimes deplores the methods, he rarely disagrees with Augustus’ motives. The whole period of Caesar’s reign followed by Augustus’ rise to power is part of a long, intermittent civil war in the Roman Empire, partly between those who want a return to the more democratic Republic and those who prefer the strong-man dictator style of government. But it’s also mostly between aristocrats scrabbling for high political positions so they can increase their personal power and wealth. Harris doesn’t draw direct parallels to the Trump presidency – he doesn’t have to, since it’s almost impossible for the reader not to draw them anyway, with Agrippa as a disapproving but complicitous JD Vance, or occasionally a Hegseth.
As Augustus struggles to defeat the opposing factions in the years after Caesar’s death, Agrippa fights many battles on land and sea. Harris does a great job of explaining the strategic and political importance of each of these campaigns without getting too bogged down in detail. The same can be said about the descriptions of the battles themselves – he spends as much time on the interesting stuff of recruiting soldiers and sailors, building ships and harbours, maintaining discipline and so on, as he does on the actual fighting, and this balance worked well for me.
Once peace is established and Augustus has been acclaimed as emperor in all but name, Agrippa turns his hand to great building projects – aqueducts, public baths, and major buildings like the Pantheon. Augustus, meantime, turns his hand to ensuring his succession – a matter complicated by his failure to produce a son. We are shown how divorce and remarriage is commonplace, sometimes simply because a marriage isn’t working, but often for political purposes. (I couldn’t help feeling Henry VIII would have been a much happier man if the Christian church had been as relaxed about divorce as the Roman gods seemed to be – and his wives would have been happier women!)
Agrippa has as much ambition as any other man, so goes through a succession of wives and schemes for his own children – an emperor without sons opens up all kinds of dreams in the hearts of the men around him. Unexpectedly, not knowing who did succeed Augustus made this whole element quite suspenseful for me – would Agrippa father the next emperor? Would one of his rivals win the prize? Or would Augustus’ death herald a return to democracy?
Since Ancient Rome is not a subject I have much interest in, I went into this one with limited expectations. But Harris won me over completely – I found the warfare and building stuff interesting, and the political manoeuvring fascinating. The portrait of Augustus as cruel and Machiavellian, wholly invested in his own self-interest, is chillingly convincing, while Agrippa, for all his faults, earned my understanding, if not always my sympathy. To my own surprise, I found it a page-turner as each new danger threatened – would this be the battle Agrippa finally lost? Would this piece of atrocious behaviour from Augustus be the straw that finally broke Agrippa’s back? Great storytelling from Harris – if I were Augustus, I would award him a triumph!
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
At that moment, he didn’t know that Octavius was the great-nephew of Julius Caesar, nor that Caesar would name him as his adopted son and successor in his will. But this random encounter would bring Agrippa into contact with the great emperor, and once he was old enough, would turn him into one of Caesar’s most faithful legionaries. Caesar’s request that the strong and robust Agrippa look after the weaker, frequently ill Octavius would have been enough to ensure Agrippa’s loyalty. But after Caesar’s death, as he fought and schemed with Octavius, Agrippa became seduced by power in his own right and relished the wealth and acclamation that came with the role of right-hand man.
This is largely a recounting of the known history of the two men, with the occasional gap filled from Harris’ imagination, and some speculations included as if they were fact. Harris’ afterword gives his sources and explains where he deviates from proven fact, while claiming that there is nothing in the record that invalidates those moments of invention. Knowing nothing about the period, I’m in no position to confirm or argue with this claim, but, true or not, I felt it all held together very believably. I’m deliberately not specifying the imagined elements, since it would be a little spoilery – if, like me, this period of history is new to you, then a lot of the enjoyment in the book is in only learning about things in the order in which Harris presents them.
What are entirely imaginary are Agrippa’s thoughts and feelings about his life and his imperious friend, and it’s this that makes the book a novel rather than a history. Agrippa may be loyal to Augustus but that doesn’t blind him to the dictator’s capriciousness and cruelty. But Agrippa is a man of his time, and though he sometimes deplores the methods, he rarely disagrees with Augustus’ motives. The whole period of Caesar’s reign followed by Augustus’ rise to power is part of a long, intermittent civil war in the Roman Empire, partly between those who want a return to the more democratic Republic and those who prefer the strong-man dictator style of government. But it’s also mostly between aristocrats scrabbling for high political positions so they can increase their personal power and wealth. Harris doesn’t draw direct parallels to the Trump presidency – he doesn’t have to, since it’s almost impossible for the reader not to draw them anyway, with Agrippa as a disapproving but complicitous JD Vance, or occasionally a Hegseth.
As Augustus struggles to defeat the opposing factions in the years after Caesar’s death, Agrippa fights many battles on land and sea. Harris does a great job of explaining the strategic and political importance of each of these campaigns without getting too bogged down in detail. The same can be said about the descriptions of the battles themselves – he spends as much time on the interesting stuff of recruiting soldiers and sailors, building ships and harbours, maintaining discipline and so on, as he does on the actual fighting, and this balance worked well for me.
Once peace is established and Augustus has been acclaimed as emperor in all but name, Agrippa turns his hand to great building projects – aqueducts, public baths, and major buildings like the Pantheon. Augustus, meantime, turns his hand to ensuring his succession – a matter complicated by his failure to produce a son. We are shown how divorce and remarriage is commonplace, sometimes simply because a marriage isn’t working, but often for political purposes. (I couldn’t help feeling Henry VIII would have been a much happier man if the Christian church had been as relaxed about divorce as the Roman gods seemed to be – and his wives would have been happier women!)
Agrippa has as much ambition as any other man, so goes through a succession of wives and schemes for his own children – an emperor without sons opens up all kinds of dreams in the hearts of the men around him. Unexpectedly, not knowing who did succeed Augustus made this whole element quite suspenseful for me – would Agrippa father the next emperor? Would one of his rivals win the prize? Or would Augustus’ death herald a return to democracy?
Since Ancient Rome is not a subject I have much interest in, I went into this one with limited expectations. But Harris won me over completely – I found the warfare and building stuff interesting, and the political manoeuvring fascinating. The portrait of Augustus as cruel and Machiavellian, wholly invested in his own self-interest, is chillingly convincing, while Agrippa, for all his faults, earned my understanding, if not always my sympathy. To my own surprise, I found it a page-turner as each new danger threatened – would this be the battle Agrippa finally lost? Would this piece of atrocious behaviour from Augustus be the straw that finally broke Agrippa’s back? Great storytelling from Harris – if I were Augustus, I would award him a triumph!
www.fictionfanblog.wordpress.com
September 30, 2026
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (63–12 BC) tells his own story as an aging soldier sitting down to write his memoirs. He was born to an obscure family and died co-ruler of the Roman world. The novel hinges on his boyhood friendship with Octavius (later Augustus), and the partnership between them that ended the Roman Republic.
Harris has covered these decades before in the Cicero trilogy, which I think is among his best work. This novel overlaps with the end of that trilogy and carries the story forward, showing the same collapse from the winning side.
Agrippa was a soldier and a master builder. He beat Sextus Pompeius at Naulochus in 36 BC and Antony at Actium in 31 BC, and those two victories ended a generation of civil war. As aedile he overhauled Rome's aqueducts and sewers, and he built the first Pantheon on the site where Hadrian's rebuild stands today. Octavius supplied the political cunning and Agrippa supplied the military competence. Repeatedly, Agrippa stepped back from power he could have claimed. He stayed completely loyal to Augustus, even as Augustus took powers no Roman was entitled to and put himself above the law.
Harris is one of my favorite historical novelists. His eye for detail, from banquets and triumphs to the daily business of provincial administration, brings ancient Rome to life. He closes with a note separating the real history, which is the vast majority, from what he invented, mainly the dialogue and the memoir itself.
Read the Cicero trilogy first, starting with Imperium. It gives you the full picture of the period and shows the Republic as a working system, with Cicero fighting to keep it. Cicero turns up here too, in a few early scenes. The trilogy is magnificent, and Agrippa is an excellent companion to it.
Harris has covered these decades before in the Cicero trilogy, which I think is among his best work. This novel overlaps with the end of that trilogy and carries the story forward, showing the same collapse from the winning side.
Agrippa was a soldier and a master builder. He beat Sextus Pompeius at Naulochus in 36 BC and Antony at Actium in 31 BC, and those two victories ended a generation of civil war. As aedile he overhauled Rome's aqueducts and sewers, and he built the first Pantheon on the site where Hadrian's rebuild stands today. Octavius supplied the political cunning and Agrippa supplied the military competence. Repeatedly, Agrippa stepped back from power he could have claimed. He stayed completely loyal to Augustus, even as Augustus took powers no Roman was entitled to and put himself above the law.
Harris is one of my favorite historical novelists. His eye for detail, from banquets and triumphs to the daily business of provincial administration, brings ancient Rome to life. He closes with a note separating the real history, which is the vast majority, from what he invented, mainly the dialogue and the memoir itself.
Read the Cicero trilogy first, starting with Imperium. It gives you the full picture of the period and shows the Republic as a working system, with Cicero fighting to keep it. Cicero turns up here too, in a few early scenes. The trilogy is magnificent, and Agrippa is an excellent companion to it.
September 2, 2026
I’m a sucker for everything related to the ancients, so once I had this book within my grasp, I was done with it in less than 24 hours. The pages melted between my fingers like butter in a hot pan.
August 30, 2026
It is a rainy weekend in Ireland; the perfect time to read Robert Harris’ Agrippa. I finished it an hour ago and I really enjoyed it. In Agrippa, Robert Harris returns to ancient Rome. The story is written as a memoir. The first chapter serves as a short introduction: Agrippa, 50 years of age, not well, arrives back in Rome after taking care of an uprising in Illyricum (western Balkans) which has taken less time than expected, only to find his unfaithful wife in bed with his son-in-law. He decides to leave Rome and retire to his second home near Naples. It is then that he decides to write a memoir. He tells the story of how he became friends with Octavius, later Augustus, and how this friendship determined the rest of his life.
It is a story filled with military campaigns, rivalry, political drama including back-stabbing (figuratively and literally) and domestic drama, also showing how some women, even though it was extremely hard for them, became very influential. It also shows that Agrippa was a very interesting person who also liked building and engineering. He built the first Pantheon (later burned down and reconstructed by Hadrian around CE 126), improved and built aqueducts and supervised other public works. He was overshadowed by Augustus who took the credit for a lot of the work that Agrippa had done. However, Marcus Agrippa's name is prominently displayed in large bronze letters across the frieze on the front façade of the Pantheon in Rome. M · AGRIPPA · L · F · COS · TERTIUM · FECIT (Marcus Agrippa, Son of Lucius, in his third consulship, built this.) With this book, Robert Harris made sure that we as readers also know about his achievements.
Even though I really enjoyed the book and couldn’t stop reading, I can’t stop thinking that Agrippa maybe could have been a trilogy like his Cicero trilogy. It would have given it more breathing space. I wonder why Harris made the choice to leave it at one book. Cicero of course was an orator who also left a huge first-hand legacy of letters, speeches and philosophical and rhetorical treatises and therefore gets a lot more space to voice his thoughts and emotions. Agrippa was above all a soldier, which is probably the reason why Harris keeps his fictional memoir more factual, making it a very compact story of his life in which Agrippa – who is dying while writing his fictional memoir – mentions a few times that he won’t go into detail because his time is short. Still, Agrippa had such an interesting life that it looks like it has or had the potential for at least another book, but maybe there is not enough background material to back it up. Only Robert Harris can answer those questions.
Highly recommended to those who loved the Cicero trilogy, Pompeii and books about this time period in general.
It is a story filled with military campaigns, rivalry, political drama including back-stabbing (figuratively and literally) and domestic drama, also showing how some women, even though it was extremely hard for them, became very influential. It also shows that Agrippa was a very interesting person who also liked building and engineering. He built the first Pantheon (later burned down and reconstructed by Hadrian around CE 126), improved and built aqueducts and supervised other public works. He was overshadowed by Augustus who took the credit for a lot of the work that Agrippa had done. However, Marcus Agrippa's name is prominently displayed in large bronze letters across the frieze on the front façade of the Pantheon in Rome. M · AGRIPPA · L · F · COS · TERTIUM · FECIT (Marcus Agrippa, Son of Lucius, in his third consulship, built this.) With this book, Robert Harris made sure that we as readers also know about his achievements.
Even though I really enjoyed the book and couldn’t stop reading, I can’t stop thinking that Agrippa maybe could have been a trilogy like his Cicero trilogy. It would have given it more breathing space. I wonder why Harris made the choice to leave it at one book. Cicero of course was an orator who also left a huge first-hand legacy of letters, speeches and philosophical and rhetorical treatises and therefore gets a lot more space to voice his thoughts and emotions. Agrippa was above all a soldier, which is probably the reason why Harris keeps his fictional memoir more factual, making it a very compact story of his life in which Agrippa – who is dying while writing his fictional memoir – mentions a few times that he won’t go into detail because his time is short. Still, Agrippa had such an interesting life that it looks like it has or had the potential for at least another book, but maybe there is not enough background material to back it up. Only Robert Harris can answer those questions.
Highly recommended to those who loved the Cicero trilogy, Pompeii and books about this time period in general.
September 9, 2026
History teaches us to be wary of what‑ifs and of all manner of gratuitous speculation made with the privilege of hindsight. Yet we can fairly assume that there would have been no Emperor Augustus without one of his most faithful lieutenants, Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa.
In his latest instalment of historical fiction, Robert Harris sets himself the task of telling Agrippa’s story. He is fully aware of the scale of the undertaking: there is so much to say, and only so many pages in which to say it. The job is well done: the novel goes like clockwork when it comes to tracing the chain of events and disentangling such a flurry of facts.
Yet the exercise has its limits. When he wrote about Cicero, Harris rightly gave himself the space of a trilogy to paint a convincing portrait of a complex historical character. Agrippa may not be as intricate as Cicero, but he too lived at a time when events unfolded with dizzying speed, and I am not entirely sure this book will appeal to a reader who does not already have a fair idea of what he is getting into. At the beginning of chapter VIII, for instance, Lepidus, Brutus and Cassius turn up out of the blue — no introduction, no explanation — as if Harris takes it for granted that the reader is already well acquainted with them.
Some passages are therefore wanting in narrative scaffolding, but the overall impression remains good. And Harris’s witticisms are delightful, such as: “All was peace, the perfect conditions for war.”
Still, some may wonder whether it wouldn’t be faster — and cheaper — simply to log in to Wikipedia. This is the book’s main shortcoming: a crying lack of epic breath. Harris writes his Agrippa like a meticulous forensic chronicler, all cold facts and no affect. I admire him for being a thoughtful researcher and a stickler for historical accuracy (despite a few mistakes now and then — see my list below), but I would have liked to be reminded that historical figures were human beings above all. What is the point of historical fiction if it fails in this regard?
But I want to go easy on it, because all things considered, this book "prolongs the glorious life of Rome".
Edit.
Page 6. No weeks in the Roman calendar, only days and months.
Page 16. Cesar was appointed dictator before, not after, Pharsalus.
Page 26: "Cesar seizing a demonstrator with his own hands and ordering his execution"? That is pure fiction.
Page 32: Even in the midst of civil war, Roman citizens remained Roman citizens, and as such they couldn't be crucified. That was a punishment meted out only to slaves and foreigners when lawfully condemned to death.
Page 33: "Retrieving the fallen javelins". The spike of the pilum, the famous Roman javelin, was designed in such a way that once stuck into its target, it could not be taken off without breaking in two, so that the enemy could not return it to sender.
Page 34: This wall of dead bodies put up around the besieged city of Munda is another figment of the novelist's imagination.
Page 44 and page 95: The Senate declared Cesar Divus Iulius in 42BC, two years after his assassination.
Page 59: Antony's ambition couldn't be to become the next dictator for the very simple reason that after Cesar's death, Antony himself tabled a motion, which was adopted without difficulty, to abolish the office of dictator.
Page 60: Pater Patriae, Father of the Nation, was a title bestowed by the Senate upon Cicero to thank him for squashing the Catilina conspiracy.
Page 73: Quintilis became July while Cesar was still alive.
Page 78: Antony resorted to decimation in order to deal with troublemakers within his legions plagued with subversive Octavian's agents.
Page 80: Convening the Senate in the dead of night was totally illegal and impious. No night session could ever be held, as Antony only knew too well. This was one of his many bold moves to rattle the senators.
Page 85: Let's split hairs! There was no such thing as the office of senator. Power was wielded by the magistrates, not the senators. This is not to say that the Senate was a rubber stamp.
Page 119: At Messina in 43 BC, Octavius failed in his first attempt to crush Neptune's son, Sextus Pompey.
Page 150: Antony is first in Cilicia to cross swords with the Parthians. Then, he goes to Tarsus to meet Cleopatra, and together the lovebirds set sail to Egypt.
Page 177: There are no pyramids in the Valley of the Kings.
Page 235: Roman marble statues were gaudily painted to make them more lifelike.
Page 242: I won't say much because I'm no spoiler, but this half-brother thing is fiction. You can bet that if there had been any suspicion on the matter, Republicans would have weaponised such tidbit at once.
Page 260: Octavius set up a two-tier sham to secure power for himself for an extended period of time. In 28 BC, his fake resignation led the Senate to declare him Princeps Senatus. The following year, after another deceit of the same ilk, the Empire was reorganised into senatorial and imperial provinces. Octavian was from then on called Augustus, wielding a ten-year proconsular imperium over Spain, Gaul and Syria.
Page 302: Suetonius is the only ancient source to mention Augustus’s intention to read his will aloud in the Senate. True to form, he provides no date and no chronological context. In fact, the political crisis of 23 BC — and the supposed fall‑out between Augustus and Agrippa — remains widely misunderstood. Agrippa was always the man Augustus trusted above all others.
Page 342: six lictors, not twelve, as a symbol of proconsular imperium.
In his latest instalment of historical fiction, Robert Harris sets himself the task of telling Agrippa’s story. He is fully aware of the scale of the undertaking: there is so much to say, and only so many pages in which to say it. The job is well done: the novel goes like clockwork when it comes to tracing the chain of events and disentangling such a flurry of facts.
Yet the exercise has its limits. When he wrote about Cicero, Harris rightly gave himself the space of a trilogy to paint a convincing portrait of a complex historical character. Agrippa may not be as intricate as Cicero, but he too lived at a time when events unfolded with dizzying speed, and I am not entirely sure this book will appeal to a reader who does not already have a fair idea of what he is getting into. At the beginning of chapter VIII, for instance, Lepidus, Brutus and Cassius turn up out of the blue — no introduction, no explanation — as if Harris takes it for granted that the reader is already well acquainted with them.
Some passages are therefore wanting in narrative scaffolding, but the overall impression remains good. And Harris’s witticisms are delightful, such as: “All was peace, the perfect conditions for war.”
Still, some may wonder whether it wouldn’t be faster — and cheaper — simply to log in to Wikipedia. This is the book’s main shortcoming: a crying lack of epic breath. Harris writes his Agrippa like a meticulous forensic chronicler, all cold facts and no affect. I admire him for being a thoughtful researcher and a stickler for historical accuracy (despite a few mistakes now and then — see my list below), but I would have liked to be reminded that historical figures were human beings above all. What is the point of historical fiction if it fails in this regard?
But I want to go easy on it, because all things considered, this book "prolongs the glorious life of Rome".
Edit.
Page 6. No weeks in the Roman calendar, only days and months.
Page 16. Cesar was appointed dictator before, not after, Pharsalus.
Page 26: "Cesar seizing a demonstrator with his own hands and ordering his execution"? That is pure fiction.
Page 32: Even in the midst of civil war, Roman citizens remained Roman citizens, and as such they couldn't be crucified. That was a punishment meted out only to slaves and foreigners when lawfully condemned to death.
Page 33: "Retrieving the fallen javelins". The spike of the pilum, the famous Roman javelin, was designed in such a way that once stuck into its target, it could not be taken off without breaking in two, so that the enemy could not return it to sender.
Page 34: This wall of dead bodies put up around the besieged city of Munda is another figment of the novelist's imagination.
Page 44 and page 95: The Senate declared Cesar Divus Iulius in 42BC, two years after his assassination.
Page 59: Antony's ambition couldn't be to become the next dictator for the very simple reason that after Cesar's death, Antony himself tabled a motion, which was adopted without difficulty, to abolish the office of dictator.
Page 60: Pater Patriae, Father of the Nation, was a title bestowed by the Senate upon Cicero to thank him for squashing the Catilina conspiracy.
Page 73: Quintilis became July while Cesar was still alive.
Page 78: Antony resorted to decimation in order to deal with troublemakers within his legions plagued with subversive Octavian's agents.
Page 80: Convening the Senate in the dead of night was totally illegal and impious. No night session could ever be held, as Antony only knew too well. This was one of his many bold moves to rattle the senators.
Page 85: Let's split hairs! There was no such thing as the office of senator. Power was wielded by the magistrates, not the senators. This is not to say that the Senate was a rubber stamp.
Page 119: At Messina in 43 BC, Octavius failed in his first attempt to crush Neptune's son, Sextus Pompey.
Page 150: Antony is first in Cilicia to cross swords with the Parthians. Then, he goes to Tarsus to meet Cleopatra, and together the lovebirds set sail to Egypt.
Page 177: There are no pyramids in the Valley of the Kings.
Page 235: Roman marble statues were gaudily painted to make them more lifelike.
Page 242: I won't say much because I'm no spoiler, but this half-brother thing is fiction. You can bet that if there had been any suspicion on the matter, Republicans would have weaponised such tidbit at once.
Page 260: Octavius set up a two-tier sham to secure power for himself for an extended period of time. In 28 BC, his fake resignation led the Senate to declare him Princeps Senatus. The following year, after another deceit of the same ilk, the Empire was reorganised into senatorial and imperial provinces. Octavian was from then on called Augustus, wielding a ten-year proconsular imperium over Spain, Gaul and Syria.
Page 302: Suetonius is the only ancient source to mention Augustus’s intention to read his will aloud in the Senate. True to form, he provides no date and no chronological context. In fact, the political crisis of 23 BC — and the supposed fall‑out between Augustus and Agrippa — remains widely misunderstood. Agrippa was always the man Augustus trusted above all others.
Page 342: six lictors, not twelve, as a symbol of proconsular imperium.
November 3, 2026
I realised too, even more clearly, how essential I had been to his ambitions - a friend at his side whom he trusted, who could act, as it were, as his muscle. He had supplied the cunning. I had supplied the body - even to the extent of fathering his sons. Neither of us would have got so far on his own. But together we had proved impossible to stop.
This is Robert Harris’s 17th novel I believe, and I have read no less than 14 of the previous 16.
He is I think very much underestimated as a novelist with his bestseller status, and tendency for his books to be filmed, disguising his seriousness of historical research.
He is perhaps best known for his World War II Novels – including his first two, the alternate history “Fatherland” (1992) and the Bletchley Park set “Enigma” (1995) and later the immediately pre-war and pro-Chamberlain “Munich” (2017) and more recently V2 (2020 – and one of the two I have not read with the post Stalin “Archangel” (1988)).
And then for his turn to Ancient Rome – starting with Pompeii (2003) but then followed by his deeply intelligent Cicero Trilogy: Imperium (2006), Lustrum (2009), Dictator (2015) which brilliantly not just captures Ancient Rome but (particularly in the middle volume) implicitly links the political power games fo the last days of the Republic to the last days of New Labour – a target he had addressed rather more directly in his hit job on his ex-friend Tony Blair in The Ghost (2007).
That trilogy was followed by his worse book – the absolutely preposterous sub-Dan Brown tech-thriller “The Fear Index” (2011) which to this day I struggle to believe he wrote or was allowed to publish – and then by his best the Walter Scott Prize winning “An Officer and a Spy” (2013) about the Dreyfuss Affair, his papal succession (and more recent to be filmed) Conclave (2016), the rather unique Medieval/post apocalyptical “The Second Sleep” (2019), the post English Civil War “Act of Oblivion” (2022) and then his Orwell Prize finalist WW1 outbreak novel “Precipice” (2024).
And now he has returned to Ancient Rome with a novel which overlaps with the Cicero Trilogy chronologically, partly thematically but very much not so stylistically, with an account of Marcus Agrippa: legendary Roman general (most notably his victories over the pirate rebel Sextus Pompeius and over Antony and Cleopatra at the naval Battle of Actium; engineer - most famously the “Pantheon” – but also much of Rome’s infrastructure; statesman and most of all close friend, lieutenant (on both battle field and politically), son-in-law and even father to two adopted children of the Roman Emperor Augustus.
And it is that lifelong relationship – told very much from Agrippa’s first party viewpoint looking back shortly before his death from long term wounds just after 50 – that forms the basis of the novel, which is told in three chronological parts: Octavius, Ceasar and Augustus.
Overall its an enjoyable book – Harris chooses to emphasise fairly heavily Octavius’s ill health but also his cunning and ruthlessness, and to explicitly contrast them with Agrippa being almost the entire reverse – physically healthy but intellectually perhaps a little too straightforward – much more interested in raising aqueducts than acquiring rhetoric, and sea campaigns over electoral ones.
He otherwise seems to stick largely to historical consensus – other than in choosing explicitly (and knowing its unproven) to have Agrippa late-on discover that he is likely Julius Ceasar’s illegitimate son (never adopted but sponsored by Ceasar and put in place to protect his actual adopted son and heir) – from a death bed visit (but more likely vision)
[Livia] was musing on whether I would have made the better ruler if Caesar in his will had adopted me as his son rather than Octavius and left me his estate. It must have crossed his mind, she said. It would have caused a sensation - bat since when had Caesar bothered about what anyone thought? He believed himself to be a god.
In the end, she was sure he had made the right decision.
It was a choice between the bear and the fox. And in politics there is no choice. It has to be the fox.
There are a couple of easter egg appearances of Tiro (narrator of the Cicero Trilogy) but as I alluded to the novel is otherwise very different from that series – mainly due to the narrator and central character
And it becomes a sometimes rather perfunctory (if never actually tedious) litany of elections (presented factually rather than with all their intrigue – and of course rather devalued by Augustus’s undermining of the entire Republican system as well as by Agrippa’s lack of any real interest) and battles (even those told fairly matter of factually other than perhaps the naval battles – again I think here Harris is being true to his portrayal of a narrator who only really comes to life at sea) and engineering feats (and these are unfortunately of much more interest to the narrator than any reader).
As I said much of this seems to come with the character – but I did feel that more interest might have been made of some of Agrippa’s encounters – there is a big set up of a meeting with Herod in particular which is then entirely anti-climatical. It perhaps works best on a more character level on Agrippa’s resentment of Augustus’s appropriation of much of his work – especially his victories – and most poignantly when Augustus decides to adopt Agrippa and Julia’s two children as his own (Julia’s descent into infidelity is also interestingly portrayed).
Overall not one of Harris’s really outstanding novels – a solid, reliable and unspectacular performance rather like the life of its protagonist.
September 23, 2026
Agrippa is the first book I’ve ever read by author Robert Harris. Initially I thought I picked up a book by the author who wrote The Silence of the Lambs Wrong. That would be Thomas Harris. Apparently Robert Harris writes historical fiction.
Agrippa is set in Ancient Rome - a period in history I’m fascinated by. (Gladiator is one of my favourite films.) It’s a faux memoir of Marcus Agrippa - a low-born soldier and the “right-hand man” of Julius Caesar’s heir - Octavius/Augustus. We witness the political intrigue of the Roman Empire through the first-person narrative of Agrippa.
Power is the main theme that’s explored, with a strong focus on Octavius’s rise to power - from a sickly teenager to a ruthless, power-hungry emperor. At least that’s how he comes off, as told by Agrippa.
Before this book, I had never heard of Agrippa. He accomplished a lot related to Rome’s infrastructure and architecture. He built the original Pantheon!
=====
✔️ I liked the first-person narration. I’m partial to this POV.
✔️ I liked the weaving of fact and fiction.
✔️ I found Robert Harris’s writing style to be very readable. Easy to follow.
✔️ The typeface and font size made my reading experience more pleasant. I am a stickler for that stuff. If the font is too small, for example, it makes me not want to read the book.
❌ It got a little confusing to decipher characters because so many people had the same name. I realize that is not Harris’s fault - that’s just how things were.
❌ Near the end, it got a tad dry or dragged for a bit. The story could have concluded sooner.
=====
✎ This is how power destroys itself, by the fearsome energy of its own achievement.
✎ Like all the best lies, it contained a kernel of truth. And people wanted to believe it, so they did.
✎ [...] if I have learned nothing else, it is that human beings are irrational, guided more by their emotions than by reason.
Final Thoughts
My experience was enjoyable enough that I have already started reading my second Robert Harris book - Imperium. I wanted another Ancient Rome fix.
(I read the paperback, but I couldn't find the edition on Goodreads)
September 10, 2026
I enjoyed Pompeii and the first two Cicero novels, but this is far from one of his best. It's not helped by the heavy-handed parallels with modern autocrats, which oblige the writer to populate the book with modern character types.
Would the Egyptian royal family really dress like characters from a Cecil B DeMille movie? (p19)
Agrippa has to seem like the real driving force (p52) which would be fine if Harris were a good enough writer to make this an interestingly unreliable account, but if he was this capable and this much of an egotist then he wouldn't have played second fiddle to Augustus for so long.
I was surprised that oars and sails were being used at the same time (p120) and would normally trust Harris's research if he hadn't had Ptolemy and Cleopatra relaxing on the terrace in antique Egyptian court clothing.
Telling instead of showing (p151) when Agrippa refers to Octavius's "force of character", which never comes across. Mostly Octavius frets indecisively, other people make suggestions, and he says OK.
I don't believe in this friendship (p166).
Can you throw a one-year-old up into the air (p172)? I don't have any experience with babies, but it seems risky.
Poor editing: Statilius Taurus goes from having two legions to three.
And then there's what The Economist calls "a clever plot twist" but is actually the sort of hackneyed trick that even Cecil B DeMille's screenwriters would have been embarrassed to stick into a story: . Harris may have hoped that would make the reader gasp; I just said, "Oh, fuck right off."
Overall, there is a fascinating story to be told about how Augustus stabilized the Roma Republic after years of civil war. He must have been a remarkable person, and he was lucky enough to have capable and trustworthy associates like Agrippa. Their relationship must have been fascinating and complex. None of that comes across here.
Addendum: a few days after I wrote the review, Trump offered a $5000 bribe to voters. I take back what I said about the modern parallels being forced. That bribe is a classic Roman move. I still think Harris hasn't done his best work here, and Trump is no Augustus, but I can't fault the book for its political metaphors.
Would the Egyptian royal family really dress like characters from a Cecil B DeMille movie? (p19)
Agrippa has to seem like the real driving force (p52) which would be fine if Harris were a good enough writer to make this an interestingly unreliable account, but if he was this capable and this much of an egotist then he wouldn't have played second fiddle to Augustus for so long.
I was surprised that oars and sails were being used at the same time (p120) and would normally trust Harris's research if he hadn't had Ptolemy and Cleopatra relaxing on the terrace in antique Egyptian court clothing.
Telling instead of showing (p151) when Agrippa refers to Octavius's "force of character", which never comes across. Mostly Octavius frets indecisively, other people make suggestions, and he says OK.
I don't believe in this friendship (p166).
Can you throw a one-year-old up into the air (p172)? I don't have any experience with babies, but it seems risky.
Poor editing: Statilius Taurus goes from having two legions to three.
And then there's what The Economist calls "a clever plot twist" but is actually the sort of hackneyed trick that even Cecil B DeMille's screenwriters would have been embarrassed to stick into a story: . Harris may have hoped that would make the reader gasp; I just said, "Oh, fuck right off."
Overall, there is a fascinating story to be told about how Augustus stabilized the Roma Republic after years of civil war. He must have been a remarkable person, and he was lucky enough to have capable and trustworthy associates like Agrippa. Their relationship must have been fascinating and complex. None of that comes across here.
Addendum: a few days after I wrote the review, Trump offered a $5000 bribe to voters. I take back what I said about the modern parallels being forced. That bribe is a classic Roman move. I still think Harris hasn't done his best work here, and Trump is no Augustus, but I can't fault the book for its political metaphors.
September 10, 2026
This book reads like the syllabus of a history lecture that ChatGPT put into the first person.
The dates and events are all there, but the characters are cardboard cutouts. You can’t really call it a novel.
The dates and events are all there, but the characters are cardboard cutouts. You can’t really call it a novel.
October 25, 2026
There's something peculiar about reading a man's memoir and coming away feeling you scarcely know him. That's how I felt about "Agrippa", Robert Harris's account of the soldier and engineer who helped Augustus become Rome's first emperor. I enjoyed it, although I wasn't really gripped.
Harris knows his ancient Rome. He covers almost forty years of civil wars, political intrigue, marriages, betrayals and building projects. The military and engineering detail is particularly good. Agrippa destroys cities AND helps make Rome more liveable, building aqueducts, baths and other public works. But there's an awful lot to get through. Entire campaigns disappear in a sentence, and I sometimes wished Harris would slow down and let us know the people involved.
The friendship with Augustus is the most interesting part. He has the political cunning, while Agrippa has the military genius and practical ability. They need each other, but their relationship is never equal. As Augustus grows increasingly ruthless, Agrippa puts up with one humiliation after another. He can win battles and build fleets but apparently can't tell his mate to pull his head in and let him live his own life. His loyalty is convincing enough, probably a mixture of friendship, ambition, duty and self-preservation. It isn't always particularly satisfying to read about.
The women fare worse. Agrippa's earlier wives are married, divorced and dispatched with almost military efficiency. I almost missed the second one! Julia's infidelity prompts the memoir, yet we never understand their marriage. Is this Agrippa's blind spot or Harris's? Perhaps we're meant to see how thoroughly Augustus dominates Agrippa's world. But the women don't get the choices Agrippa has, and the novel doesn't do enough with that.
Harris's prose is clear and economical, although the restrained voice becomes a little monotonous. There's plenty to admire, and I enjoyed the history. But I never became completely engrossed. A good book rather than a great one.
Harris knows his ancient Rome. He covers almost forty years of civil wars, political intrigue, marriages, betrayals and building projects. The military and engineering detail is particularly good. Agrippa destroys cities AND helps make Rome more liveable, building aqueducts, baths and other public works. But there's an awful lot to get through. Entire campaigns disappear in a sentence, and I sometimes wished Harris would slow down and let us know the people involved.
The friendship with Augustus is the most interesting part. He has the political cunning, while Agrippa has the military genius and practical ability. They need each other, but their relationship is never equal. As Augustus grows increasingly ruthless, Agrippa puts up with one humiliation after another. He can win battles and build fleets but apparently can't tell his mate to pull his head in and let him live his own life. His loyalty is convincing enough, probably a mixture of friendship, ambition, duty and self-preservation. It isn't always particularly satisfying to read about.
The women fare worse. Agrippa's earlier wives are married, divorced and dispatched with almost military efficiency. I almost missed the second one! Julia's infidelity prompts the memoir, yet we never understand their marriage. Is this Agrippa's blind spot or Harris's? Perhaps we're meant to see how thoroughly Augustus dominates Agrippa's world. But the women don't get the choices Agrippa has, and the novel doesn't do enough with that.
Harris's prose is clear and economical, although the restrained voice becomes a little monotonous. There's plenty to admire, and I enjoyed the history. But I never became completely engrossed. A good book rather than a great one.
Review of advance copy received from Éditeur
Review to come, thank you Penguin Random House for the proof copy!
I think your level of enjoyment on this book depends entireley on how pretentious you want to be about it tbh. It's Robert Harris, popular historical fiction at its finest. If you're expecting an expertly researched and detailed account of Agrippa's life, you're not going to get that. What you're going to get, however, is a fast-paced, action-packed novel that will bring awareness of Agrippa to a much larger public than the usual Roman history nerds among which I proudly stand. A novel with a compelling main character and an equally compelling antagonist (frenemy??).
It reads a little like a dramatic novelisation of Powell's Agrippa biography and I was completely unsurprised that it was the only source mentioned in the acknowledgements. It's clear there hasn't been enormous research but again, it's Robert Harris. Nobody's picking up Robert Harris for a super detailed and expertly researched novel. You pick up Robert Harris for an accessible historical adventure, and that's exactly what you get.
Let's put it out there immediately: I disagree with Harris's take on the relationship between Augustus and Agrippa. I think they were genuinely friends, and had a greatly mutually beneficial friendship; I don't find theories to the contrary logical, based on what we know. However, the blurb makes it clear this is a story of friendship fading when power comes into play, so I knew what to expect. And I do understand why Harris chose this interpretation: plainly, it makes for a better book. If Agrippa is a secondary character, it's all well and good to make him the uncomplicated, trustworthy bestie, but to make him a compelling main character, you need to give him some inner conflict. And that was an excellent inner conflict. Plus I really liked that although Agrippa questions Augustus's behaviour, he never pretends to be better. He accepts his responsibilities, admits to the part he played, openly acknowledges he did harm. He doesn't try to convince the reader he was innocent of any crime or that he attempted to stop Augustus from committing ugly deeds.
My one regret is that Agrippa's writing is rather distant and emotionless. And perhaps it makes sense; he's an older man recounting events decades old, it's hard to tell us what his younger self felt. But because of this, it's unclear whether there was great love at all between Agrippa and Octavius when their relationship began, and it makes it a little difficult to understand why Agrippa built his entire life around someone he doesn't seem to hold very dear at any point.
There's also a plot twist regarding Agrippa's identity that I didn't exactly mind, but didn't see the point of beyond the shock value. Absolutely nothing was done with it, to the point that you could completely erase it from the book and the story wouldn't change one bit. So it was a bit of a 'uh, ok, moving on'.
Having immersed myself in McCullough's incredibly researched Masters of Rome series these past few months, with their fantastic portrayal of female characters, it was hard not to notice how underdeveloped they are here. In fact, beyond Agrippa himself and Augustus, everyone is underdeveloped. But I think that's due to the book being so short for the large timeline it covers. Harris tries to cover over 37 years of Agrippa's life in 360 pages. By the time you even get to Actium, there are only 150 pages left. It's virtually impossible to spend time on secondary characters.
I have to say the author's note regarding Agrippa's legacy left me perplexed. It seems to suggest that because Agrippa is barely mentioned in the Res Gestae, it proves Augustus tried to erase Agrippa's contribution to his reign from the record. That's either a dishonest take or very poor research, but let's just say if Augustus had wanted Agrippa erased, he could absolutely have done that. And he very much did not. Basing this theory on the Res Gestae alone is incredibly bizarre, when there's plenty of evidence to the contrary (like his state funeral, his place in the imperial mausoleum, his part in the Aeneid...).
Still, I did have a great time reading this. It gave Agrippa his laurels and recreated the atmosphere of the fall of the Roman Republic very well. Agrippa is a great MC and his grappling with his decisions was believable. It was really fast-paced, and while I personally would have happily read a longer novel, I think most readers especially if they're not ultra familiar with Agrippa will appreciate how quickly everything flows. I got exactly what I expected from it and am looking forward to welcoming new readers to the Agrippa fan club!
I think your level of enjoyment on this book depends entireley on how pretentious you want to be about it tbh. It's Robert Harris, popular historical fiction at its finest. If you're expecting an expertly researched and detailed account of Agrippa's life, you're not going to get that. What you're going to get, however, is a fast-paced, action-packed novel that will bring awareness of Agrippa to a much larger public than the usual Roman history nerds among which I proudly stand. A novel with a compelling main character and an equally compelling antagonist (frenemy??).
It reads a little like a dramatic novelisation of Powell's Agrippa biography and I was completely unsurprised that it was the only source mentioned in the acknowledgements. It's clear there hasn't been enormous research but again, it's Robert Harris. Nobody's picking up Robert Harris for a super detailed and expertly researched novel. You pick up Robert Harris for an accessible historical adventure, and that's exactly what you get.
Let's put it out there immediately: I disagree with Harris's take on the relationship between Augustus and Agrippa. I think they were genuinely friends, and had a greatly mutually beneficial friendship; I don't find theories to the contrary logical, based on what we know. However, the blurb makes it clear this is a story of friendship fading when power comes into play, so I knew what to expect. And I do understand why Harris chose this interpretation: plainly, it makes for a better book. If Agrippa is a secondary character, it's all well and good to make him the uncomplicated, trustworthy bestie, but to make him a compelling main character, you need to give him some inner conflict. And that was an excellent inner conflict. Plus I really liked that although Agrippa questions Augustus's behaviour, he never pretends to be better. He accepts his responsibilities, admits to the part he played, openly acknowledges he did harm. He doesn't try to convince the reader he was innocent of any crime or that he attempted to stop Augustus from committing ugly deeds.
My one regret is that Agrippa's writing is rather distant and emotionless. And perhaps it makes sense; he's an older man recounting events decades old, it's hard to tell us what his younger self felt. But because of this, it's unclear whether there was great love at all between Agrippa and Octavius when their relationship began, and it makes it a little difficult to understand why Agrippa built his entire life around someone he doesn't seem to hold very dear at any point.
There's also a plot twist regarding Agrippa's identity that I didn't exactly mind, but didn't see the point of beyond the shock value. Absolutely nothing was done with it, to the point that you could completely erase it from the book and the story wouldn't change one bit. So it was a bit of a 'uh, ok, moving on'.
Having immersed myself in McCullough's incredibly researched Masters of Rome series these past few months, with their fantastic portrayal of female characters, it was hard not to notice how underdeveloped they are here. In fact, beyond Agrippa himself and Augustus, everyone is underdeveloped. But I think that's due to the book being so short for the large timeline it covers. Harris tries to cover over 37 years of Agrippa's life in 360 pages. By the time you even get to Actium, there are only 150 pages left. It's virtually impossible to spend time on secondary characters.
I have to say the author's note regarding Agrippa's legacy left me perplexed. It seems to suggest that because Agrippa is barely mentioned in the Res Gestae, it proves Augustus tried to erase Agrippa's contribution to his reign from the record. That's either a dishonest take or very poor research, but let's just say if Augustus had wanted Agrippa erased, he could absolutely have done that. And he very much did not. Basing this theory on the Res Gestae alone is incredibly bizarre, when there's plenty of evidence to the contrary (like his state funeral, his place in the imperial mausoleum, his part in the Aeneid...).
Still, I did have a great time reading this. It gave Agrippa his laurels and recreated the atmosphere of the fall of the Roman Republic very well. Agrippa is a great MC and his grappling with his decisions was believable. It was really fast-paced, and while I personally would have happily read a longer novel, I think most readers especially if they're not ultra familiar with Agrippa will appreciate how quickly everything flows. I got exactly what I expected from it and am looking forward to welcoming new readers to the Agrippa fan club!
October 1, 2026
Robert Harris books may not be great literature, but he writes well and he has a talent for capturing the essence of the times and places that he picks to write about. I enjoyed Pompeii and Conclave and liked this one too.
What's it like to be the autocrat's best friend from childhood who has always stood loyally by his side and has let the autocrat take all of the credit even in cases where the man in charge was sick or cowardly or cruel or incompetent? That's the lot of Agrippa. Augustus loved him and relied on him, made him rich and powerful, gave him the chance to shine, but power and proximity to power always had its price. The Agrippa we see here had some resentments but always knew not to cross the line into areas that would make Augustus jealous or that would make Augustus feel threatened. Who knows whether it was really that way? But it was plausible and felt very real. I bought it. The greatest challenge for Mr. Harris in writing this book is that his Agrippa is a practical man of action and of few words. He gets things done but doesn't spend a lot of time talking about them. It's hard to make such a character interesting but it generally works well in this book, probably because the events of this era were so interesting that they are able to carry the story on their own even with a stolid character as the narrator and principal subject.
The subtitle is a little deceptive in that Rome was well on its way to dictatorship before Octavian and Agrippa came along, but certainly the reign of Octavian once he became Augustus drove the final stake into the heart of the already almost dead Republic. And, of course, the Republic was really much more of an oligarchy than a republic anyway in its last generations, so it wasn't such a tragedy to see it go.
What's it like to be the autocrat's best friend from childhood who has always stood loyally by his side and has let the autocrat take all of the credit even in cases where the man in charge was sick or cowardly or cruel or incompetent? That's the lot of Agrippa. Augustus loved him and relied on him, made him rich and powerful, gave him the chance to shine, but power and proximity to power always had its price. The Agrippa we see here had some resentments but always knew not to cross the line into areas that would make Augustus jealous or that would make Augustus feel threatened. Who knows whether it was really that way? But it was plausible and felt very real. I bought it. The greatest challenge for Mr. Harris in writing this book is that his Agrippa is a practical man of action and of few words. He gets things done but doesn't spend a lot of time talking about them. It's hard to make such a character interesting but it generally works well in this book, probably because the events of this era were so interesting that they are able to carry the story on their own even with a stolid character as the narrator and principal subject.
The subtitle is a little deceptive in that Rome was well on its way to dictatorship before Octavian and Agrippa came along, but certainly the reign of Octavian once he became Augustus drove the final stake into the heart of the already almost dead Republic. And, of course, the Republic was really much more of an oligarchy than a republic anyway in its last generations, so it wasn't such a tragedy to see it go.
June 18, 2026
Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for this advance reader copy in exchange for a review.
Harris does it again. If you enjoyed conclave and Pompeii, no doubt you will appreciate this work. Agrippa shines a light on a (for me) little known piece of history. No doubt I was taught about these characters in school but there is nothing like a great historical fiction to bring it to life. The descriptions of the politics of the time show us that not a lot has changed as powerful men collaborate to stay in power.
I feel like this is a “guy novel” with the politics and the war, so I might not have loved it as much as Pompeii or Conclave, but no doubt it is still a wonderful read.
4*
Harris does it again. If you enjoyed conclave and Pompeii, no doubt you will appreciate this work. Agrippa shines a light on a (for me) little known piece of history. No doubt I was taught about these characters in school but there is nothing like a great historical fiction to bring it to life. The descriptions of the politics of the time show us that not a lot has changed as powerful men collaborate to stay in power.
I feel like this is a “guy novel” with the politics and the war, so I might not have loved it as much as Pompeii or Conclave, but no doubt it is still a wonderful read.
4*
September 2, 2026
2.5 stars. Roman politics after the assassination of Caesar. The descriptions and characters are very flat; basically a string of events with no real style and atmosphere.
September 21, 2026
There is taking liberties. And then there is whatever the fuck this is.
This book is mind-numbingly dull and flat. So devoid of any substantial character conflict is Harris's Agrippa, that the conflict at the heart of this novel not only undermines the historical foundations upon which it is built, but also is so ludicrous and nonsensical, it makes any enjoyment impossible for anyone who knows anything at all about Augustus and Agrippa. And to my great misfortune, I am one such sucker. Boo me hoo for going into this book with foreknowledge.
Be warned: If you don't know about the life stories of Augustus and Agrippa, don't let this be your first book about this topic. Read an actual biography of Augustus first. Or if you'd rather read a novel, read John William's Augustus. There is the true soul of their relationship captured.
Here, the conflict between them is beyond contrived--and it made Augustus, the greatest Roman Emperor, flat and one-note. And the tune goes something like "Agrippa is better than me, but I am a special, little boy so I should always be the one on top and in the public conscience."
...
If you want to read a better book, seriously, read John William's Augustus. His portrayal of all the Augustan figures, including Agrippa, is infinitely more complex and entertaining.
Boo me hoo for reading this.
This book is mind-numbingly dull and flat. So devoid of any substantial character conflict is Harris's Agrippa, that the conflict at the heart of this novel not only undermines the historical foundations upon which it is built, but also is so ludicrous and nonsensical, it makes any enjoyment impossible for anyone who knows anything at all about Augustus and Agrippa. And to my great misfortune, I am one such sucker. Boo me hoo for going into this book with foreknowledge.
Be warned: If you don't know about the life stories of Augustus and Agrippa, don't let this be your first book about this topic. Read an actual biography of Augustus first. Or if you'd rather read a novel, read John William's Augustus. There is the true soul of their relationship captured.
Here, the conflict between them is beyond contrived--and it made Augustus, the greatest Roman Emperor, flat and one-note. And the tune goes something like "Agrippa is better than me, but I am a special, little boy so I should always be the one on top and in the public conscience."
...
If you want to read a better book, seriously, read John William's Augustus. His portrayal of all the Augustan figures, including Agrippa, is infinitely more complex and entertaining.
Boo me hoo for reading this.
October 31, 2026
Agrippa deserves better.
I deserved better.
I dont understand why he wrote this book when a Wikipedia article about Agrippa already exists.
I deserved better.
I dont understand why he wrote this book when a Wikipedia article about Agrippa already exists.
September 26, 2026
This is definitely one of the better books I’ve read set in Ancient Rome of late.
Harris has a talent for making complicated and difficult history into an accessible, engaging story!
Harris has a talent for making complicated and difficult history into an accessible, engaging story!
Displaying 1 - 30 of 575 reviews