What do you think?
Rate this book
Emperors #3
Caesar
'To take the conspiracy against Julius Caesar - one of the most famous murder plots in history - and make of it something fresh and exciting is no small feat. This is what Allan Massie has done in this fine novel which should appeal equally to those who know their Roman history and those for whom it is only a cloudy rumour of remote events' Evening Standard 'Massie's achievement is to infuse the mythical emperor with blood...he invigorates his characters with voices that seem to echo the present, not the past, and which are utterly convincing...a piece of bravura invention' Independent
272 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 1993
11 people are currently reading
386 people want to read
About the author
Allan Massie
85 books83 followersAllan Massie is a Scottish journalist, sports writer and novelist. Massie is one of Scotland's most prolific and well-known journalists, writing regular columns for The Scotsman, The Sunday Times (Scotland) and the Scottish Daily Mail. He is also the author of nearly 30 books, including 20 novels. He is notable for writing about the distant past.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews
June 1, 2022
Przyjemnie napisana książka nie z perspektywy Cezara, a jednego z zamachowców - Decymusa Brutusa
March 19, 2017
Short but tightly written, enjoyable but literary, novel of Decimus Junius Brutus’s reminiscences (mainly of the period post Caesar’s defeat of Pompey) as he awaits his death in Gallic captivity having been prescribed by the Second triumvirate. In the book the narrators conventional historical role in Caesar’s assassination is (with the exception of he persuading Caesar to attend the senate) largely swapped with that of (Marcus) Brutus.
October 14, 2014
another reread though this one for once i remembered vividly from when I read it for the first time years ago - probably in the mid 90's close to publication time; first and still best of the cycle and one of the books about Caesar that manage to be both conventional and innovative without stretching the historical evidence in any way
highly recommended
highly recommended
February 9, 2025
A obra César, de Allan Massie, é um romance histórico que se propõe a recriar os últimos dias do grande líder romano e a conspiração que culminou em seu assassinato – mas o faz por meio de uma narrativa carregada de licenças poéticas que, em alguns momentos, se distanciam demasiadamente dos registros históricos. A narrativa, contada pelas “memórias” de Décimo Bruto, um dos conspiradores, oferece uma visão intensa e dramática da política de Roma, mas também apresenta uma série de inconsistências históricas que merecem ser discutidas.
Inconsistências Históricas na Narrativa
A Idade de Cleópatra:
No romance, Cleópatra é retratada como uma jovem de cerca de 15 anos ao ser seduzida por um César já de meia-idade. Todavia, os registros históricos indicam que a rainha egípcia estava na casa dos 20 anos quando conheceu César. Essa alteração parece ter sido feita para acentuar o contraste dramático entre os personagens, mas acaba por distorcer uma das características fundamentais de sua personalidade.
O Destino de Ptolomeu:
Massie apresenta uma versão na qual o irmão de Cleópatra, Ptolomeu, é assassinado – seja por ordem de César ou por circunstâncias mal definidas –, enquanto os relatos históricos apontam que ele morreu em meio a conflitos militares. Essa escolha narrativa serve para intensificar o clima de intrigas e conspirações, mas não corresponde aos eventos reais.
O Fim de Casca:
Na obra, o conspirador Casca é mostrado sendo linchado pela multidão logo após o assassinato, uma situação que contrasta com os registros históricos, que afirmam que ele continuou a lutar ao lado dos “libertadores” e acabou morrendo na Batalha de Filipos. Essa simplificação da trajetória de Casca reduz a complexidade dos acontecimentos da guerra civil romana.
A Relação Familiar de Décimo Bruto:
Para fortalecer o laço do protagonista com a trama conspiratória, Massie atribui a Décimo Bruto um casamento com a filha de Cássio, enquanto registros históricos indicam que Cássio teve apenas um filho. Essa modificação parece ter sido feita para criar conexões emocionais e políticas mais densas entre os personagens, mas distorce fatos documentados.
Inversão da Famosa Frase "Et tu, Brute?":
Tradicionalmente, essa frase é atribuída a Júlio César no momento de seu assassinato por Marcus Brutus. No romance, entretanto, ela é direcionada a Décimo Bruto, alterando o papel e a importância do personagem que, historicamente, teve uma participação secundária na conspiração. Essa escolha subverte a tradição literária e histórica, reforçando a voz do narrador e modificando a dinâmica do evento.
Caricatura de Cícero e de Marco Cato:
Massie retrata Cícero como um “chato falastrão”, desprezando sua condição de grande pensador e orador cuja influência transcende os limites da política romana. Já Marco Cato, conhecido por sua integridade e defesa inabalável dos princípios republicanos, é apresentado de forma depreciativa – quase como um “idiota”. Essa abordagem vai na contra-mão dos registros históricos e parece refletir uma possível animosidade pessoal ou, pelo menos, uma escolha estilística que favorece um tom debochado, inspirando-se, inclusive, no "Anticato", um texto em que César ironiza Cato. Tais caricaturas podem enganar o leitor incauto, que pode acabar adquirindo uma visão distorcida da importância e da personalidade desses grandes homens.
A Cronologia e Organização dos Eventos:
Massie faz também ajustes na sequência dos acontecimentos, condensando ou deslocando certos eventos para criar uma narrativa mais fluida e tensa. Embora essa técnica seja comum na ficção histórica, ela pode levar a uma compreensão equivocada do desenrolar real dos fatos, contribuindo para a sensação de que o romance se distancia dos registros históricos precisos.
Reflexão Sobre a Liberdade Criativa Versus a Fidelidade Histórica
Embora o romance histórico permita ao autor uma margem de liberdade para reimaginar personagens e eventos, é fundamental que essas liberdades não comprometam a essência dos fatos históricos nem deturpem personalidades que marcaram a história. Um leitor que valoriza a fidelidade aos acontecimentos corre o risco de ser levado a uma interpretação equivocada se, por exemplo, passar a enxergar Cícero apenas como um falastrão ou Cato como um simples idiota – visões que destoam radicalmente do que se sabe desses ícones da República Romana.
Em uma obra que se apresenta como “romance histórico”, há uma expectativa de que os elementos reais e os traços essenciais das personalidades sejam preservados, mesmo quando há um esforço para intensificar o drama e a tensão narrativa. A crítica de que, se o autor fosse verdadeiramente talentoso, poderia construir uma narrativa envolvente sem desvirtuar fatos e personalidades, é válida. Afinal, o compromisso com a verdade histórica enriquece a obra, evitando que leitores incautos formem uma impressão distorcida dos acontecimentos e dos personagens.
Considerações Finais
— César de Allan Massie é uma obra que, ao tentar combinar o rigor histórico com a liberdade literária, adota diversas liberdades narrativas que, embora aumentem o apelo dramático, podem levar a uma visão distorcida de personagens fundamentais. Enquanto a reinterpretação de eventos e personalidades é inerente ao gênero do romance histórico, é crucial que tais escolhas não ultrapassem o limite onde a fidelidade aos fatos e à complexidade dos protagonistas se perde.
Em última análise, é desejável que autores que se aventuram pela ficção histórica encontrem um equilíbrio – onde a liberdade criativa enriqueça a narrativa sem sacrificar a integridade dos registros históricos. Assim, o leitor poderá desfrutar de uma obra que, além de ser envolvente, contribua para uma compreensão mais acurada do passado.
Inconsistências Históricas na Narrativa
A Idade de Cleópatra:
No romance, Cleópatra é retratada como uma jovem de cerca de 15 anos ao ser seduzida por um César já de meia-idade. Todavia, os registros históricos indicam que a rainha egípcia estava na casa dos 20 anos quando conheceu César. Essa alteração parece ter sido feita para acentuar o contraste dramático entre os personagens, mas acaba por distorcer uma das características fundamentais de sua personalidade.
O Destino de Ptolomeu:
Massie apresenta uma versão na qual o irmão de Cleópatra, Ptolomeu, é assassinado – seja por ordem de César ou por circunstâncias mal definidas –, enquanto os relatos históricos apontam que ele morreu em meio a conflitos militares. Essa escolha narrativa serve para intensificar o clima de intrigas e conspirações, mas não corresponde aos eventos reais.
O Fim de Casca:
Na obra, o conspirador Casca é mostrado sendo linchado pela multidão logo após o assassinato, uma situação que contrasta com os registros históricos, que afirmam que ele continuou a lutar ao lado dos “libertadores” e acabou morrendo na Batalha de Filipos. Essa simplificação da trajetória de Casca reduz a complexidade dos acontecimentos da guerra civil romana.
A Relação Familiar de Décimo Bruto:
Para fortalecer o laço do protagonista com a trama conspiratória, Massie atribui a Décimo Bruto um casamento com a filha de Cássio, enquanto registros históricos indicam que Cássio teve apenas um filho. Essa modificação parece ter sido feita para criar conexões emocionais e políticas mais densas entre os personagens, mas distorce fatos documentados.
Inversão da Famosa Frase "Et tu, Brute?":
Tradicionalmente, essa frase é atribuída a Júlio César no momento de seu assassinato por Marcus Brutus. No romance, entretanto, ela é direcionada a Décimo Bruto, alterando o papel e a importância do personagem que, historicamente, teve uma participação secundária na conspiração. Essa escolha subverte a tradição literária e histórica, reforçando a voz do narrador e modificando a dinâmica do evento.
Caricatura de Cícero e de Marco Cato:
Massie retrata Cícero como um “chato falastrão”, desprezando sua condição de grande pensador e orador cuja influência transcende os limites da política romana. Já Marco Cato, conhecido por sua integridade e defesa inabalável dos princípios republicanos, é apresentado de forma depreciativa – quase como um “idiota”. Essa abordagem vai na contra-mão dos registros históricos e parece refletir uma possível animosidade pessoal ou, pelo menos, uma escolha estilística que favorece um tom debochado, inspirando-se, inclusive, no "Anticato", um texto em que César ironiza Cato. Tais caricaturas podem enganar o leitor incauto, que pode acabar adquirindo uma visão distorcida da importância e da personalidade desses grandes homens.
A Cronologia e Organização dos Eventos:
Massie faz também ajustes na sequência dos acontecimentos, condensando ou deslocando certos eventos para criar uma narrativa mais fluida e tensa. Embora essa técnica seja comum na ficção histórica, ela pode levar a uma compreensão equivocada do desenrolar real dos fatos, contribuindo para a sensação de que o romance se distancia dos registros históricos precisos.
Reflexão Sobre a Liberdade Criativa Versus a Fidelidade Histórica
Embora o romance histórico permita ao autor uma margem de liberdade para reimaginar personagens e eventos, é fundamental que essas liberdades não comprometam a essência dos fatos históricos nem deturpem personalidades que marcaram a história. Um leitor que valoriza a fidelidade aos acontecimentos corre o risco de ser levado a uma interpretação equivocada se, por exemplo, passar a enxergar Cícero apenas como um falastrão ou Cato como um simples idiota – visões que destoam radicalmente do que se sabe desses ícones da República Romana.
Em uma obra que se apresenta como “romance histórico”, há uma expectativa de que os elementos reais e os traços essenciais das personalidades sejam preservados, mesmo quando há um esforço para intensificar o drama e a tensão narrativa. A crítica de que, se o autor fosse verdadeiramente talentoso, poderia construir uma narrativa envolvente sem desvirtuar fatos e personalidades, é válida. Afinal, o compromisso com a verdade histórica enriquece a obra, evitando que leitores incautos formem uma impressão distorcida dos acontecimentos e dos personagens.
Considerações Finais
— César de Allan Massie é uma obra que, ao tentar combinar o rigor histórico com a liberdade literária, adota diversas liberdades narrativas que, embora aumentem o apelo dramático, podem levar a uma visão distorcida de personagens fundamentais. Enquanto a reinterpretação de eventos e personalidades é inerente ao gênero do romance histórico, é crucial que tais escolhas não ultrapassem o limite onde a fidelidade aos fatos e à complexidade dos protagonistas se perde.
Em última análise, é desejável que autores que se aventuram pela ficção histórica encontrem um equilíbrio – onde a liberdade criativa enriqueça a narrativa sem sacrificar a integridade dos registros históricos. Assim, o leitor poderá desfrutar de uma obra que, além de ser envolvente, contribua para uma compreensão mais acurada do passado.
September 28, 2024
Marc Anthony. Such a dick.
April 8, 2020
This is a book I read 20 years ago and saw the Massie titles sitting on the bookshelf behind the TV and just thought I'd read them again. I remember loving this the first time, and this time I really enjoyed it too! Written as a memoir by Brutus, one of his murderers, it tells the story of the end of his rise, from Egypt to lying on the floor of Pompeys theatre with 20 odd stab wounds. It's fascinating, both from a historian's point of view and that of a fiction lover. The realistic way the story is told takes you back a few thousand years to Ancient Rome: the smells, the sights, the dust and dirt of Ancient Rome and the taste of how the republic in its' dying days was gradually eroded by Sulla, Marius, Pompey, Caesar and the final nail of Augustus, though he is only a bit character here, not being much in Caesar's story aside from being his nephew and heir, but his intelligence and political acumen is displayed in preporation for later years.
Oh yes, I'm glad I read this again, it's reignited my love for reading about the Romans and their dramatic way of life and interesting twists and turns of the Empire that made Europe what she is xx
Oh yes, I'm glad I read this again, it's reignited my love for reading about the Romans and their dramatic way of life and interesting twists and turns of the Empire that made Europe what she is xx
January 31, 2014
Copiado do meu registro no Bookcrossing de 2004.
Da série Os Senhores de Roma. Ouvi dizer que é o mais fraco da série. A conspiração contra Júlio César, narrada pelo Brutus. Não gostei do estilo do autor. Os diálogos são só "cabeças falantes" (ele não descreve o que os personagens estão fazendo enquanto falam) e grande parte do tempo eles passam discutindo quem dormiu com quem (sendo romanos, todo mundo dormiu com todo mundo. Tá, dá para seguir com a estória?). César é apresentado como alguém horrível e entretanto a única justificativa de Brutus para obedecê-lo por tanto tempo é bem, se você falasse com César, entenderia (mas em nenhum momento do livro César mostra esse carisma).
Da série Os Senhores de Roma. Ouvi dizer que é o mais fraco da série. A conspiração contra Júlio César, narrada pelo Brutus. Não gostei do estilo do autor. Os diálogos são só "cabeças falantes" (ele não descreve o que os personagens estão fazendo enquanto falam) e grande parte do tempo eles passam discutindo quem dormiu com quem (sendo romanos, todo mundo dormiu com todo mundo. Tá, dá para seguir com a estória?). César é apresentado como alguém horrível e entretanto a única justificativa de Brutus para obedecê-lo por tanto tempo é bem, se você falasse com César, entenderia (mas em nenhum momento do livro César mostra esse carisma).
October 1, 2018
Picked this book up in Leaky's of Inverness for three quid. I wanted to find out about the history of Caesar . The book is written in the voice of Caesar's most trusted friend Decimus Brutus; him of the famous phrase " Not you too.."
I thought it would've been a hard read, what with all the Roman characters, but Allan Massie is a genius making the conversations between all the characters flow.
There is a useful crib page detailing the main characters.
I enjoyed this book tremendously and learned why it was necessary to get rid of Caesar.
A fantastic book. and I will certainly read his other Roman novels.
I thought it would've been a hard read, what with all the Roman characters, but Allan Massie is a genius making the conversations between all the characters flow.
There is a useful crib page detailing the main characters.
I enjoyed this book tremendously and learned why it was necessary to get rid of Caesar.
A fantastic book. and I will certainly read his other Roman novels.
September 2, 2023
4.5 stars. I'd seen this book several times and avoided it, as it seemed to be the kind of historical fiction I don't like - where an actual historical figure is "reimagined" and given the voice and opinions of the author, and speaks in olde-worlde language and idioms and oh. No thanks. As opposed to historical fiction where a peripheral or fictional character is put at the centre of great events (War And Peace, August 1914, Les Miserables, to quote but a few of the towering classics of literature.......)
Maybe a bit hair-splitting. If I've lost you there you probably won't like either genre. I digress.
This one splits the difference. The central character is Decimus Junius Brutus, who was real, but who conventional history casts in a minor role. Allan Massie takes a chance by making him the central character of his novel about the assassination of Julius Caesar. And it works brilliantly. Your only preconception of Decimus from Suetonius/Plutarch/Shakespeare is "who was he again ?". His personal contribution to what we "know" of Roman history is a few letters he wrote to Cicero. But actually he was very close to Caesar, a trusted lieutenant as important to him as Mark Antony and Gaius Trebonius, and his fictionalised "memoir" is as convincing as any other account you could read from the same 2 (possibly 3) sources. But with a brilliant "slant" - as an insider, he gives us his uncensored opinion of the people we think we know better (from the same biased sources) - Cicero is a sanctimonious windbag, forever banging on about his 15 minutes of fame when he exposed the Catiline Conspiracy and harking back to the great days of a Republic which will never return. Decimus' cousin, the 'famous' Brutus, is a callow, vacillating weakling with the gift of the gab but no real convictions. Cato is a hypocrite and terrible general who opposes Caesar out of self-interest and vindictiveness. Cassius is brave, principled, but naive. Casca is a fat old debauchee who joins the conspiracy out of personal animosity. And Mark Antony. Portrayed everywhere as a bumbling drunk incompetent who lurches from crisis to crisis surviving by pure luck. Except he clearly wasn't. And isn't here. Exactly how he was manoeuvred out of his dominance of the Roman world isn't made clear (perhaps the author's 'Augustus' gives us his take on that). But Antony is clearly a very assured and clever (if duplicitous) player in this drama.
And Decimus himself is a superbly-realised character. His account (written whilst he awaits almost certain death after the collapse of all his plans) is just self-aggrandising enough to make you think he may not be an entirely-reliable narrator.......which then makes you reflect on the fact that all the other "histories" were written post-facto to flatter either Octavian/Augustus or one of his successors. And Decimus comes across as a nice guy, his gradual disillusionment with Caesar but disquiet at betraying a man who has treated him (mostly) well being the central theme of the book. And ** spoiler alert ** the 'et tu, Brute ?" line is delivered to him, not to the more famous Brutus. Which, historically, works better: Marcus Junius Brutus was a supporter of Caesar's enemy Pompey and was humiliatingly "pardoned" by Caesar after the Battle of Pharsalus. Whereas "our" Decimus Brutus was one of Caesar's most loyal lieutenants - it would have been far more shocking to Caesar to see him wielding a dagger than the two-faced opportunistic Marcus Brutus.
Massie does play slightly fast and loose with minor points of history to make a better novel. I'm sure there are many, but here's the ones which grated on me:
Cleopatra is portrayed as being 15 (possibly younger) when she is seduced by the middle-aged Caesar - probably to increase our feeling of distaste. In fact she was in her early twenties at the time she met Caesar. Not nice to our modern sensibilities, but hardly unusual for the time.
Cleopatra's brother Ptolemy is murdered either on the orders of Caesar to flatter Cleopatra or the other way about (it's not clear even in the novel). In fact neither happened: he died in battle.
The conspirator Casca is discovered by the Roman mob after Caesar's assassination and lynched. In fact Casca fought with the "Liberators" in the ensuing civil war and was killed at the Battle of Philippi.
And our hero Decimus (possibly to give him more of a "connection" with the conspiracy) is portrayed as being married to Cassius' daughter. Cassius had one child. A son.
Maybe a bit hair-splitting. If I've lost you there you probably won't like either genre. I digress.
This one splits the difference. The central character is Decimus Junius Brutus, who was real, but who conventional history casts in a minor role. Allan Massie takes a chance by making him the central character of his novel about the assassination of Julius Caesar. And it works brilliantly. Your only preconception of Decimus from Suetonius/Plutarch/Shakespeare is "who was he again ?". His personal contribution to what we "know" of Roman history is a few letters he wrote to Cicero. But actually he was very close to Caesar, a trusted lieutenant as important to him as Mark Antony and Gaius Trebonius, and his fictionalised "memoir" is as convincing as any other account you could read from the same 2 (possibly 3) sources. But with a brilliant "slant" - as an insider, he gives us his uncensored opinion of the people we think we know better (from the same biased sources) - Cicero is a sanctimonious windbag, forever banging on about his 15 minutes of fame when he exposed the Catiline Conspiracy and harking back to the great days of a Republic which will never return. Decimus' cousin, the 'famous' Brutus, is a callow, vacillating weakling with the gift of the gab but no real convictions. Cato is a hypocrite and terrible general who opposes Caesar out of self-interest and vindictiveness. Cassius is brave, principled, but naive. Casca is a fat old debauchee who joins the conspiracy out of personal animosity. And Mark Antony. Portrayed everywhere as a bumbling drunk incompetent who lurches from crisis to crisis surviving by pure luck. Except he clearly wasn't. And isn't here. Exactly how he was manoeuvred out of his dominance of the Roman world isn't made clear (perhaps the author's 'Augustus' gives us his take on that). But Antony is clearly a very assured and clever (if duplicitous) player in this drama.
And Decimus himself is a superbly-realised character. His account (written whilst he awaits almost certain death after the collapse of all his plans) is just self-aggrandising enough to make you think he may not be an entirely-reliable narrator.......which then makes you reflect on the fact that all the other "histories" were written post-facto to flatter either Octavian/Augustus or one of his successors. And Decimus comes across as a nice guy, his gradual disillusionment with Caesar but disquiet at betraying a man who has treated him (mostly) well being the central theme of the book. And ** spoiler alert ** the 'et tu, Brute ?" line is delivered to him, not to the more famous Brutus. Which, historically, works better: Marcus Junius Brutus was a supporter of Caesar's enemy Pompey and was humiliatingly "pardoned" by Caesar after the Battle of Pharsalus. Whereas "our" Decimus Brutus was one of Caesar's most loyal lieutenants - it would have been far more shocking to Caesar to see him wielding a dagger than the two-faced opportunistic Marcus Brutus.
Massie does play slightly fast and loose with minor points of history to make a better novel. I'm sure there are many, but here's the ones which grated on me:
Cleopatra is portrayed as being 15 (possibly younger) when she is seduced by the middle-aged Caesar - probably to increase our feeling of distaste. In fact she was in her early twenties at the time she met Caesar. Not nice to our modern sensibilities, but hardly unusual for the time.
Cleopatra's brother Ptolemy is murdered either on the orders of Caesar to flatter Cleopatra or the other way about (it's not clear even in the novel). In fact neither happened: he died in battle.
The conspirator Casca is discovered by the Roman mob after Caesar's assassination and lynched. In fact Casca fought with the "Liberators" in the ensuing civil war and was killed at the Battle of Philippi.
And our hero Decimus (possibly to give him more of a "connection" with the conspiracy) is portrayed as being married to Cassius' daughter. Cassius had one child. A son.
July 11, 2025
Brutus war einer der Senatoren, die Caesar im März 44 v.Chr. ermordeten. Aber wie kam es dazu? In Allan Massies Buch erzählt Brutus die Geschichte von Gaius Julius Caesar: dem General, dem die Soldaten bedingungslos folgten, dem Staatsoberhaupt und dem gleichermaßen charmanten wie skrupellosen Menschen, der keine Gefühle kannte.
Anfangs erzählt Brutus wie ein neutraler Beobachter, der das Schicksal von einem Fremden erzählt. Zu einem Teil ist es auch so, denn je weiter er erzählt, desto mehr bekomme ich den Eindruck, als ob er Caesar erst in den letzten Monaten richtig kennen lernte. Vielleicht begann er auch er auch erst dann damit, sich mit Caesar als Mensch zu beschäftigen, als das erste Mal der Plan aufkam, ihn zu ermorden.
Je weiter er in seinen Erinnerungen kommt, desto mehr Makel fallen ihm auf. Immer offener redet er davon, wie abgestoßen er gleichermaßen von der Person und dem Staatsoberhaupt war. Trotzdem hielt er an seinem Plan fest. Warum? Weil es schon vom ersten Gedanken an die Tat zu spät war, noch umzukehren.
Brutus wird vom neutralen Beobachter immer mehr zum Beteiligten, zum Menschen mit Gefühlen. Er gesteht sich die Liebe zu seiner Frau ein, die Freude auf sein ungeborenes Kind. Sind das echte Gefühle oder nur Sentimentalität, jetzt, wo es zu spät ist? Das wird der Leser nicht mehr erfahren.
Erzählt wir hier nicht nur die Geschichte von Caesar. Es ist die hauptsächlich Geschichte von Brutus und die ist sehr anschaulich erzählt.
Anfangs erzählt Brutus wie ein neutraler Beobachter, der das Schicksal von einem Fremden erzählt. Zu einem Teil ist es auch so, denn je weiter er erzählt, desto mehr bekomme ich den Eindruck, als ob er Caesar erst in den letzten Monaten richtig kennen lernte. Vielleicht begann er auch er auch erst dann damit, sich mit Caesar als Mensch zu beschäftigen, als das erste Mal der Plan aufkam, ihn zu ermorden.
Je weiter er in seinen Erinnerungen kommt, desto mehr Makel fallen ihm auf. Immer offener redet er davon, wie abgestoßen er gleichermaßen von der Person und dem Staatsoberhaupt war. Trotzdem hielt er an seinem Plan fest. Warum? Weil es schon vom ersten Gedanken an die Tat zu spät war, noch umzukehren.
Brutus wird vom neutralen Beobachter immer mehr zum Beteiligten, zum Menschen mit Gefühlen. Er gesteht sich die Liebe zu seiner Frau ein, die Freude auf sein ungeborenes Kind. Sind das echte Gefühle oder nur Sentimentalität, jetzt, wo es zu spät ist? Das wird der Leser nicht mehr erfahren.
Erzählt wir hier nicht nur die Geschichte von Caesar. Es ist die hauptsächlich Geschichte von Brutus und die ist sehr anschaulich erzählt.
February 27, 2021
2.5 stars
I have to say I actually enjoyed this book, but more because of the historcial context than the writing. I don't know if it's jut the translation's fault, but there were words and phrases frequently used that surely couldn't have been around in that time - this provided for quite a bit of confusion and it was just off-putting at times.
I liked the personalized elements, the perpective, and although it was difficult to follow at times, the "lost biography" theme provided a special, personal angle that was enjoyable.
Humour 6/10 - cringey at times, but I did laugh out loud a fair amount.
(Also just a sidenote, thank you to Allan Massie for not straight-washing ancient Rome <3)
I have to say I actually enjoyed this book, but more because of the historcial context than the writing. I don't know if it's jut the translation's fault, but there were words and phrases frequently used that surely couldn't have been around in that time - this provided for quite a bit of confusion and it was just off-putting at times.
I liked the personalized elements, the perpective, and although it was difficult to follow at times, the "lost biography" theme provided a special, personal angle that was enjoyable.
Humour 6/10 - cringey at times, but I did laugh out loud a fair amount.
(Also just a sidenote, thank you to Allan Massie for not straight-washing ancient Rome <3)
May 21, 2019
Andy's Review
Downloaded this as I read ( and enjoyed) 'Tiberius ' by this author many years ago and also I have a general interest in Roman history of this period. I liked the way that the author chose to write it from the viewpoint of one of the lesser known conspirators, rather than a 'major ' conspirator such as Gaius Cassius Longinus or Marcus Junius Brutus. Enjoyed the novel immensely, & am looking forward to reading the next book in the series.
Downloaded this as I read ( and enjoyed) 'Tiberius ' by this author many years ago and also I have a general interest in Roman history of this period. I liked the way that the author chose to write it from the viewpoint of one of the lesser known conspirators, rather than a 'major ' conspirator such as Gaius Cassius Longinus or Marcus Junius Brutus. Enjoyed the novel immensely, & am looking forward to reading the next book in the series.
January 17, 2025
Presented as memoirs of Decimus Brutus, called Mouse for some reason. The book is very uneven, with some sections gripping and full of action and entire chapters of boring speeches and letters. The main plot is totally predictable but still manages to surprise the reader (mostly because it comes to fruition in one of the speeches-and-letters sections)
December 8, 2023
Caesar is such a popstar
November 21, 2024
Shakespeare is a hell of an act to follow, but Massie carries it off well.
May 16, 2014
I think very highly of Allan Massie's books of Roman history, and Caesar is one of his best portraits. The narrator is one of Caesar's closest allies, senior generals, and ultimately, one of his murderers, "Mouse", better known to history as Decimus Junius Brutus. The account of Caesar's rise, his fall, and the aftermath, is written as a dictation by Mouse to the son of his Gaulish captor, who is holding him at the orders of Mouse's former lover, and now one of the triumvirate ruling Rome, Octavian (later to become the Emperor Augustus).
What makes Massie's Romans so alive is their speech. The conversations between the Roman Senators could be taken from transcripts of eavesdropped conversations in the lobby of the House of Commons, or in a regimental mess. There are flashes of crudity, and wit, but also paraphrases of the Shakespearean plays based on the Plutarchian histories. A character like Mark Antony can move from excusing his offering of the crown to Caesar at the Lupercal with "You can't hold that against me. I was pissed," [British "pissed" = "drunk", not 'angry"] to "Friends, Romans and countrymen, lend me your ears".
As a result, the politics and motives of the historical characters make sense. These are real people with real emotions and feelings, and they move in the ways that you would expect such people to act. It's a very clever piece of "backwards writing", making the characters fit the known facts, rather than letting the characters develop their own actions, and it brings history vividly to life. I highly recommend any or all of these books to anyone with an interest in Roman history. They interlock neatly with each other to form a seamless whole spanning the time from 48BC or so, to 60AD.
What makes Massie's Romans so alive is their speech. The conversations between the Roman Senators could be taken from transcripts of eavesdropped conversations in the lobby of the House of Commons, or in a regimental mess. There are flashes of crudity, and wit, but also paraphrases of the Shakespearean plays based on the Plutarchian histories. A character like Mark Antony can move from excusing his offering of the crown to Caesar at the Lupercal with "You can't hold that against me. I was pissed," [British "pissed" = "drunk", not 'angry"] to "Friends, Romans and countrymen, lend me your ears".
As a result, the politics and motives of the historical characters make sense. These are real people with real emotions and feelings, and they move in the ways that you would expect such people to act. It's a very clever piece of "backwards writing", making the characters fit the known facts, rather than letting the characters develop their own actions, and it brings history vividly to life. I highly recommend any or all of these books to anyone with an interest in Roman history. They interlock neatly with each other to form a seamless whole spanning the time from 48BC or so, to 60AD.
December 11, 2015
Massie, para mim o mestre do romance histórico, neste último livro que dele li sobre as grandes figuras de Roma que escreveu (Augusto, Tibério, Marco António e Calígula, além deste César), consegue ainda surpreender-me.
Li primeiro os outros 4 livros, todos eles de imperadores romanos, deixando propositadamente para o fim o livro sobre César, que ao contrário do que muita gente pensa, não é considerado Imperador.
Ele foi o mais célebre, porventura, governante de Roma, mas só o seu sucessor, Octávio Augusto deu início à galeria dos imperadores.
E Allan Massie surpreende-me porque põe a narrativa na voz de um dos assassinos de César, e talvez o seu mais fiel seguidor, Décimo Bruto, aquele que deu origem à lenda das ´´ultimas palavras de César ao receber as suas punhaladas: "até tu, meu filho..."
Portanto o livro dá-nos uma visão perfeita da figura ímpar que foi César, da sua importância na construção e solidificação do império romano, mas também dos seus defeitos, da sua ambição e dos seus erros, mas é por outro lado um retrato da vida de Bruto, muito menos conhecida, mas também importante.
Um livro fundamental para quem gosta do romance histórico e particularmente da história de Roma.
Uma obra prima.
Li primeiro os outros 4 livros, todos eles de imperadores romanos, deixando propositadamente para o fim o livro sobre César, que ao contrário do que muita gente pensa, não é considerado Imperador.
Ele foi o mais célebre, porventura, governante de Roma, mas só o seu sucessor, Octávio Augusto deu início à galeria dos imperadores.
E Allan Massie surpreende-me porque põe a narrativa na voz de um dos assassinos de César, e talvez o seu mais fiel seguidor, Décimo Bruto, aquele que deu origem à lenda das ´´ultimas palavras de César ao receber as suas punhaladas: "até tu, meu filho..."
Portanto o livro dá-nos uma visão perfeita da figura ímpar que foi César, da sua importância na construção e solidificação do império romano, mas também dos seus defeitos, da sua ambição e dos seus erros, mas é por outro lado um retrato da vida de Bruto, muito menos conhecida, mas também importante.
Um livro fundamental para quem gosta do romance histórico e particularmente da história de Roma.
Uma obra prima.
November 3, 2011
Couldn't decide whether to rate this one as 3 stars or 4 - probably 3.5. Anyway, reading the story of Caesar from the view of Decimus Junius Brutus Albinus, one of his closest friends and advisers and one of the assassins, was fascinating. The author demonstrates how Caesar may have alienated himself from those who supported and advanced his career throughout his life. As the story evolves it appears that the only opinion that counts is his own. How can anyone doubt Caesar and his decisions yet those who campaigned or served in politics with him well know he is just a man even though he is a brilliant one. Quite a different approach but a most interesting one.
October 24, 2017
Of the three “Emperor” novels I’ve read so far, and I’ve enjoyed them all, this is my favourite. Unlike the previous two, Caesar is not written by the subject but is narrated by one of his closest colleagues.
I found myself caring a great deal for the narrator, and was very moved at the end of the novel by his fate due to his having done what any right thinking person would have reasoned to be the “right thing”, if assassination is ever the right course of action. Caesar certainly comes across as a thoroughly dislikeable individual, whose arrogance knows no bounds.
Allan Massie is an easy author to read. Enjoyable, humorous and entertaining. I for one recommend this book.
I found myself caring a great deal for the narrator, and was very moved at the end of the novel by his fate due to his having done what any right thinking person would have reasoned to be the “right thing”, if assassination is ever the right course of action. Caesar certainly comes across as a thoroughly dislikeable individual, whose arrogance knows no bounds.
Allan Massie is an easy author to read. Enjoyable, humorous and entertaining. I for one recommend this book.
September 3, 2016
I have a short review here:
https://hesperiana.wordpress.com/2016...
I was very impressed with this book and the way Massie captured the values of the Roman aristocracy. Decimus Brutus is portrayed believably, and I liked his evolving evaluation of Titus Labienus.
https://hesperiana.wordpress.com/2016...
I was very impressed with this book and the way Massie captured the values of the Roman aristocracy. Decimus Brutus is portrayed believably, and I liked his evolving evaluation of Titus Labienus.
Read
August 15, 2010A good read about a man who forcibly took his place in history. The lessons he learned in his life lend themselves to our lives. Caesar was not perfect, but then, no human is perfect. We can only aspire to learning from our history.
December 6, 2013
a real masterpiece
Displaying 1 - 23 of 23 reviews