What do you think?
Rate this book
The Last Assassin
Many men killed Julius Caesar. Only one man was determined to kill the killers. From the spring of 44 BC through one of the most dramatic and influential periods in history, Caesar's adopted son, Octavian, the future Emperor Augustus, exacted vengeance on the assassins of the Ides of March, not only on Brutus and Cassius, immortalized by Shakespeare, but all the others too, each with his own individual story.
The last assassin left alive was one of the lesser-known: Cassius Parmensis was a poet and sailor who chose every side in the dying Republic's civil wars except the winning one, a playwright whose work was said to have been stolen and published by the man sent to kill him. Parmensis was in the back row of the plotters, many of them Caesar's friends, who killed for reasons of the highest political principles and lowest personal piques. For fourteen years he was the most successful at evading his hunters but has been barely a historical foot note--until now.
The Last Assassin dazzlingly charts an epic turn of history through the eyes of an unheralded man. It is a history of a hunt that an emperor wanted to hide, of torture and terror, politics and poetry, of ideas and their consequences, a gripping story of fear, revenge, and survival.
The last assassin left alive was one of the lesser-known: Cassius Parmensis was a poet and sailor who chose every side in the dying Republic's civil wars except the winning one, a playwright whose work was said to have been stolen and published by the man sent to kill him. Parmensis was in the back row of the plotters, many of them Caesar's friends, who killed for reasons of the highest political principles and lowest personal piques. For fourteen years he was the most successful at evading his hunters but has been barely a historical foot note--until now.
The Last Assassin dazzlingly charts an epic turn of history through the eyes of an unheralded man. It is a history of a hunt that an emperor wanted to hide, of torture and terror, politics and poetry, of ideas and their consequences, a gripping story of fear, revenge, and survival.
253 pages, Kindle Edition
First published November 1, 2020
148 people are currently reading
866 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews
February 18, 2021
For all the remarkable facts this non-fiction contained, I would never recommend it. The sentences read like a stilted translation from Latin, filled with syntactically awkward verbosity. The narrative was bogged down with an almost obsessive penchant emphasizing how Epicurean philosophy influenced the mindset of the players. It also proved annoying to have Latin phrases thrown in which were not always translated. Did the author really feel it necessary to laud his academic prowess? Moreover, many episodes seemed to repeat facts stated in earlier chapters for no worthwhile purpose. Honestly, I've read textbooks written in a more engaging style and it is a shame to consider that such a rich complex period of history has been portrayed so poorly.
June 27, 2021
This book is a great idea for a popular history book. Most accounts of the Roman civil wars end with Caesar’s assassination or rush ahead to the fall of Antony and Cleopatra. Certainly their focus is always on either Caesar at war, Octavian in Italy, or Antony in the East – the three big names. Those on the winning side (at least until they fell out and new sides formed). This book instead chooses to focus on the opponents – the assassins of Caesar who called themselves the liberators. Specifically, this book focuses on the last of the assassins to be killed – Cassius Parmensis. A man about whom we know little, but who serves as a convenient conduit for the exploration.
Let’s get one thing clear right off the bat – this is not a scholarly book (despite the oddly untranslated Latin that sometimes pops up). This is a popular history and must be judged accordingly. There’s nothing new here that scholars of the period wouldn’t know, but it presents the information in an engaging and informative manner that should prove attractive to those for whom this is an unfamiliar topic. The tone is relaxed and conversational, like a storyteller sitting around the campfire regaling the audience with his story. It does not dig deep into these men’s souls. Cassius’ is too poorly documented to dig into anyway, as are most of the others, although he does try to tie him strongly to epicureanism. It also tends towards allusiveness rather than direct statements, something which some may find annoying.
In order to build the narrative like a novel he builds the story around his lead characters. This can lead to some misleading impressions – like the implication that Brutus was a founding member simply because it was his turn to be the focus of a chapter. The most dangerous thing the book does though is build way too much of the narrative on presumed thoughts and feelings. In particular the moments of revelation where the characters realize the world is not operating as they had foreseen. This is how one tells a good story, but we don’t know enough about any of these people to draw such detailed psychological conclusions, and in any case I question the pattern of revelations he reveals.
I did like this book and I feel it will be attractive to people who know nothing of the background but wish to learn more. It certainly provides an underexplored viewpoint as the focus. The book’s failings will likely be less serious to such an audience. I doubt serious scholars will find anything worth pursuing in here. It can be a little shallow at times, but at others it can capture genuinely exciting moments in dramatic style. You truly do feel the noose tightening around the necks of those who killed Caesar. This is an almost novelistic take on the aftermath of the Ides of March.
Let’s get one thing clear right off the bat – this is not a scholarly book (despite the oddly untranslated Latin that sometimes pops up). This is a popular history and must be judged accordingly. There’s nothing new here that scholars of the period wouldn’t know, but it presents the information in an engaging and informative manner that should prove attractive to those for whom this is an unfamiliar topic. The tone is relaxed and conversational, like a storyteller sitting around the campfire regaling the audience with his story. It does not dig deep into these men’s souls. Cassius’ is too poorly documented to dig into anyway, as are most of the others, although he does try to tie him strongly to epicureanism. It also tends towards allusiveness rather than direct statements, something which some may find annoying.
In order to build the narrative like a novel he builds the story around his lead characters. This can lead to some misleading impressions – like the implication that Brutus was a founding member simply because it was his turn to be the focus of a chapter. The most dangerous thing the book does though is build way too much of the narrative on presumed thoughts and feelings. In particular the moments of revelation where the characters realize the world is not operating as they had foreseen. This is how one tells a good story, but we don’t know enough about any of these people to draw such detailed psychological conclusions, and in any case I question the pattern of revelations he reveals.
I did like this book and I feel it will be attractive to people who know nothing of the background but wish to learn more. It certainly provides an underexplored viewpoint as the focus. The book’s failings will likely be less serious to such an audience. I doubt serious scholars will find anything worth pursuing in here. It can be a little shallow at times, but at others it can capture genuinely exciting moments in dramatic style. You truly do feel the noose tightening around the necks of those who killed Caesar. This is an almost novelistic take on the aftermath of the Ides of March.
December 31, 2020
Brilliant premise taking the last man standing of the 19 known or listed assassins of Julius Caesar Cassius Parmensis -- not the lean and hungry one but another just as there were two Brutus's the Et Tu Marcus and the accomplished general Decimus who dined with JC the night before the assassination and then turned up at his house on the day to ensure he came -- and how they all perished in the wake of JC's appointed heir Octavian and Mark Anthony's lust for revenge. It is a brilliantly executed book -- adding flesh to the bones of all the conspirators not just the two most famous ones -- by a former editor of The Times. One gets rather dizzy at the swapping of sides and tales ad the toing and froing of fortunes though the assassins appear to be on the back foot from the moment JC's blood has dried. Although men of rank and distinction their indecision afterwards sews the seeds of their downfall. Parmenses miserrimos the only words of Decimus's letter to Cicero to survive aptly sums up the fates of all of them...Cicero himself who was bigger on words than actions by this stage is not spared....Anthony, the main target of Cicero's barbed writings, in gruesome fashion sometimes would eat staring at Cicero's decapitated head. Octavian may emerge the undisputed ruler and survivor but his glory is achieved not in heroic deeds -- he is a coward on the battlefield which would have drawn the ire of his dead predecessor -- but in calculating the odds better and by virtue of having the name Caesar bestowed on him by JC...soldiers were drawn to his standard solely by that. The very republic that the mix of conspirators -- some joined due to perceived slights not because of idealistic beliefs -- wished to maintain burned with them ....all meet violent ends some choose to do it themselves and whether they were in the right to act in the first place remains open to question. A marvellous read.
March 26, 2024
Between Sulla and Tiberius stretches perhaps one of the most fascinating periods in world history.
A time when so many brilliant minds, so much atrocity, and an absolute lack of morals defined an epoch where everything was possible: even the break up of the yet to be borne Empire.
In this time of bright lights, two outshine all the rest: Caesar and Octavian. And the transition between them is defined by the killing of Caesar by a variegated "mob of assassins" posing as a "jury of liberators".
This book delves into the disparate yet identical fate of the murderers. The narrative is more than up to the task, although at times the prose is unduly tortured and some minor factual errors creep in (the liberal usage of "emperor" as in "the title that Octavian, who after Actium could also become emperor of Rome, had long ago given to himself" or saying that Publius Clodius Pulcher, was "one of Caesar’s gangsters".
All in all, a well-written, agile, and interesting book about a fascinating era that no one in their right mind would have wanted to live through.
A time when so many brilliant minds, so much atrocity, and an absolute lack of morals defined an epoch where everything was possible: even the break up of the yet to be borne Empire.
In this time of bright lights, two outshine all the rest: Caesar and Octavian. And the transition between them is defined by the killing of Caesar by a variegated "mob of assassins" posing as a "jury of liberators".
This book delves into the disparate yet identical fate of the murderers. The narrative is more than up to the task, although at times the prose is unduly tortured and some minor factual errors creep in (the liberal usage of "emperor" as in "the title that Octavian, who after Actium could also become emperor of Rome, had long ago given to himself" or saying that Publius Clodius Pulcher, was "one of Caesar’s gangsters".
All in all, a well-written, agile, and interesting book about a fascinating era that no one in their right mind would have wanted to live through.
August 5, 2021
Peter Stothard pulls off a real feat of literary wizardry in The Last Assassin: The Hunt for the Killers of Julius Caesar: he takes the fascinating story indicated in his own subtitle and renders it (unto Caesar?) virtually unreadable. There are so many tangents and switchbacks in every paragraph Stothard writes that by the time I finished the book, I felt I had read it twice from all the paragraphs I had to re-read. Consider the following as an example (spoiler alert: all of the people in this book are long dead):
"In July, he sailed to Alexandria where Antony made him a deluded offer of single combat as though they were ancient Greek heroes at Troy. Celopatra, in the more reasonable manner of a monarch, tried to negotiate for her treasure, threatening to burn it and her children, suggesting that one or more of them might retain her royal rights as a client of Rome. Octavian stayed at a distance. He received the surrender of the self-interested and the suicide of Antony and Cleopatra themselves. The reign of the Ptolemies ended. The treasure survived."
Why does a book about the Roman Empire employ such tortured Byzantine syntax?
Two of the book's appendices provide eight pages of chapter-by-chapter sources and a forty-two book bibliography. Some Goodreads reviews cite Stothard's conversational style, which leads me to surmise Stothard must have believed he was in conversation with others also familiar with those sources and bibliographical entries the way he glosses over some integral events and spends pages elaborating on others far less interesting.
The one redeeming quality of this book was the light it shed on the historical accuracy of Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar. Time and time again I was reminded of events or lines of dialogue from the play which must reflect the depth of research that went into Shakespeare's drafting of the play.
It took so long for me to read this fairly slim volume. I came, I saw, I was not impressed.
"In July, he sailed to Alexandria where Antony made him a deluded offer of single combat as though they were ancient Greek heroes at Troy. Celopatra, in the more reasonable manner of a monarch, tried to negotiate for her treasure, threatening to burn it and her children, suggesting that one or more of them might retain her royal rights as a client of Rome. Octavian stayed at a distance. He received the surrender of the self-interested and the suicide of Antony and Cleopatra themselves. The reign of the Ptolemies ended. The treasure survived."
Why does a book about the Roman Empire employ such tortured Byzantine syntax?
Two of the book's appendices provide eight pages of chapter-by-chapter sources and a forty-two book bibliography. Some Goodreads reviews cite Stothard's conversational style, which leads me to surmise Stothard must have believed he was in conversation with others also familiar with those sources and bibliographical entries the way he glosses over some integral events and spends pages elaborating on others far less interesting.
The one redeeming quality of this book was the light it shed on the historical accuracy of Shakespeare's play Julius Caesar. Time and time again I was reminded of events or lines of dialogue from the play which must reflect the depth of research that went into Shakespeare's drafting of the play.
It took so long for me to read this fairly slim volume. I came, I saw, I was not impressed.
June 6, 2024
Las secuelas del asesinato del único César opacan el periodo intermedio entre su muerte y la llegada de Octavio al poder.
Narrado desde la perspectiva de Casio de Parma, aunque los autores intentan darle un tono poético, el estilo abrumador y dramático, repleto de lamentos y contrafactuales, resulta tedioso. Esta narrativa genera una novela sosa y monótona en la que uno solo espera una escena que revitalice la acción. Las grandes batallas se reducen a unas simples líneas, careciendo de la emoción necesaria para mantener al lector enganchado.
A pesar de su intento de profundidad y lirismo, la obra carece del dinamismo necesario para mantener el interés constante. En lugar de sumergirnos en la riqueza de los eventos históricos, nos encontramos con una narrativa que se pierde en su propia melancolía. Los personajes, aunque potencialmente fascinantes, se sienten distantes y carentes de vida debido al tono lamentoso y repetitivo.
En resumen, esta obra puede servir para pasar el rato, pero no logra capturar la atención del lector de manera sostenida. No es una novela que entretenga de hito en hito; más bien, se trata de una lectura que puede resultar interesante en momentos específicos, pero que en general, carece del dinamismo y la emoción que se esperaría de una narración sobre un periodo tan tumultuoso y crucial de la historia.
Narrado desde la perspectiva de Casio de Parma, aunque los autores intentan darle un tono poético, el estilo abrumador y dramático, repleto de lamentos y contrafactuales, resulta tedioso. Esta narrativa genera una novela sosa y monótona en la que uno solo espera una escena que revitalice la acción. Las grandes batallas se reducen a unas simples líneas, careciendo de la emoción necesaria para mantener al lector enganchado.
A pesar de su intento de profundidad y lirismo, la obra carece del dinamismo necesario para mantener el interés constante. En lugar de sumergirnos en la riqueza de los eventos históricos, nos encontramos con una narrativa que se pierde en su propia melancolía. Los personajes, aunque potencialmente fascinantes, se sienten distantes y carentes de vida debido al tono lamentoso y repetitivo.
En resumen, esta obra puede servir para pasar el rato, pero no logra capturar la atención del lector de manera sostenida. No es una novela que entretenga de hito en hito; más bien, se trata de una lectura que puede resultar interesante en momentos específicos, pero que en general, carece del dinamismo y la emoción que se esperaría de una narración sobre un periodo tan tumultuoso y crucial de la historia.
October 28, 2020
This is the story of the killing of Julius Caesar and it’s aftermath. As Caesar put the Roman republic to death , his downfall was being plotted by men with the mixture that is so common in politics of sour grapes and genuine concern . The intellectual heartbeat was the Epicurean philosophy which, among other things, advocated government as contract rather than divinely omnipotent kings , an idea startling for its time which foreshadowed later thinkers such as Hume and Rousseau and the age of constitutional monarchies.
This is a paced and balanced book with good cultural links : the last assassin in Permensis the soldier poet of Parma disgruntled at his country’s use as an army retirement plot. As Augustus Ceasar ,aka Octavian, takes the throne, Virgil’s Aaneid celebrates a new age and Horace fights against the conspirators. Oct avians hunting of his foster fathers killers is driven as much by the need to maintain control during food riots as revenge as he had hoped to be seen as a man of mercy. Interesting stuff,
This is a paced and balanced book with good cultural links : the last assassin in Permensis the soldier poet of Parma disgruntled at his country’s use as an army retirement plot. As Augustus Ceasar ,aka Octavian, takes the throne, Virgil’s Aaneid celebrates a new age and Horace fights against the conspirators. Oct avians hunting of his foster fathers killers is driven as much by the need to maintain control during food riots as revenge as he had hoped to be seen as a man of mercy. Interesting stuff,
September 4, 2022
There’s a current fashion for taking a familiar period of history and viewing it from the perspective of an unfamiliar figure. The American War of Independence and Alexander Hamilton, and the reign of Henry VIII as told by his wives are two immediate examples, just from the world of musical theatre. So too here, in ‘The Last Asssassin’, which tells of the bloody aftermath of Caesar’s political murder, taking as its lead the obscure (unknown by me) figure of Cassius Parmensis, the last of the nineteen assailants to die.
The author admits he’s not certain there were 19. He’s not certain Parmensis was the final survivor. The writer, Peter Stothard, is dealing both with antiquity and with a murky period of false claims and flickering allegiances. The approach to a well known tale is a good one: I don’t think I learned much in terms of the plain facts of history, but the narrative structure certainly built rhythm, tension, and clarity. The refrain “X was the 9th assassin to die; Y was the 11th assassin to die” sounds like an ominous gong booming periodically through the tale.
I enjoyed the first half of this book greatly. It’s a fascinating and bloody era, and while I have read about Cicero, Anthony, Cleopatra, and some others, Octavian and his rise managed to both be a central focus, and somehow still shadowy and vague. The turning point both of history and in this book comes with Phillipi. Up to Phillipi, the narrative rockets along, tangled but clear, bodies dropping as the clash of assassins and revengers comes to a head. After Phillipi, it starts to get a bit tangled and confused, and the writer focuses more on poets and propaganda as the successful triumvirate turns inward. The back half had less clarity and propulsion for me, but overall this is an engaging and well-told book that wears its depth of scholarship incredibly lightly. A good addition and a fresh insight on this endlessly rewarding era of ancient history, and recommended to fellow fans of popularised antiquity.
The author admits he’s not certain there were 19. He’s not certain Parmensis was the final survivor. The writer, Peter Stothard, is dealing both with antiquity and with a murky period of false claims and flickering allegiances. The approach to a well known tale is a good one: I don’t think I learned much in terms of the plain facts of history, but the narrative structure certainly built rhythm, tension, and clarity. The refrain “X was the 9th assassin to die; Y was the 11th assassin to die” sounds like an ominous gong booming periodically through the tale.
I enjoyed the first half of this book greatly. It’s a fascinating and bloody era, and while I have read about Cicero, Anthony, Cleopatra, and some others, Octavian and his rise managed to both be a central focus, and somehow still shadowy and vague. The turning point both of history and in this book comes with Phillipi. Up to Phillipi, the narrative rockets along, tangled but clear, bodies dropping as the clash of assassins and revengers comes to a head. After Phillipi, it starts to get a bit tangled and confused, and the writer focuses more on poets and propaganda as the successful triumvirate turns inward. The back half had less clarity and propulsion for me, but overall this is an engaging and well-told book that wears its depth of scholarship incredibly lightly. A good addition and a fresh insight on this endlessly rewarding era of ancient history, and recommended to fellow fans of popularised antiquity.
July 7, 2021
A well-written and fast-paced work.
The narrative is tense and vivid, and Stothard provides a clear and lively picture of the Roman world. The book is about Cassius Parmensis (somebody who we, unfortunately, know almost nothing about), but Stothard also covers the plot to kill Caesar, the course of the civil war, and the lives and deaths of the other assassins.
There could have been a little more detail on people’s relationships and alliances. Perhaps inevitably for this era of history, Stothard is forced to speculate, and he does so often, on such topics as the thoughts of the conspirators. You never really get a clear picture of who the conspirators were and what their motives were. Nor does Stothard seem to find Caesar very interesting.
Still, a dramatic and well-researched work.
The narrative is tense and vivid, and Stothard provides a clear and lively picture of the Roman world. The book is about Cassius Parmensis (somebody who we, unfortunately, know almost nothing about), but Stothard also covers the plot to kill Caesar, the course of the civil war, and the lives and deaths of the other assassins.
There could have been a little more detail on people’s relationships and alliances. Perhaps inevitably for this era of history, Stothard is forced to speculate, and he does so often, on such topics as the thoughts of the conspirators. You never really get a clear picture of who the conspirators were and what their motives were. Nor does Stothard seem to find Caesar very interesting.
Still, a dramatic and well-researched work.
May 27, 2024
I have a rule about always finishing a book I start but I have failed here.
Not what I was expecting and finally gave up on page 100.
Never got going and I’m sorry but I was really bored.
Not what I was expecting and finally gave up on page 100.
Never got going and I’m sorry but I was really bored.
January 26, 2021
I enjoyed this book. It is an interesting and unique take on the assassination of Caesar and it's aftermath as told through the eyes of the last assassin to be hunted and killed by Octavian. Probably not a book for those looking for an overview of the aftermath of the Ides of March, but those looking for something to provide details from a new perspective, I recommend it.
September 10, 2024
Pretty solid, again too much Rome at once. I also think the next Rome book or history class I take should be one that’s not the end of the Republic. I do really like how he also ties in the trends of the literature at the time with what was happening in history
September 10, 2024
a quite enjoyable read from a fresh perspective, relying a bit too heavily on presumption and artistic interpretation - if he were an ancient historian, he would have fit right in
March 20, 2021
Quick! How many assassins were involved in the assassination of Julius Caesar? 16? 19? 26? 60? It all depends upon whose book you read on the subject.
Peter Stothard has done meticulous research, drawing upon contemporary accounts and came up with a number which is reasonable and makes sense. (If you want to know - read the book!) And who, among those assassins was the last one to be hunted down and die? (Again, read the book!) We all know what happened to some of the more prominent assassins such as Brutus (Caesar did NOT say "et tu Brute" that was a Shakespearean invention) and Cassius, but what of the others? Suffice to say, not a single one of them lived to a ripe old age and died peacefully in their sleep.
Starting with the Ides of March in 44 BC and continuing for a number of years through a rather lengthy civil war - which the author goes into detail about because it was responsible for the death of some of the assassins - we learn how each of the conspirators died and where. And sadly, there were other innocent victims as well. Finally, there was one and we find out his fate - we learn who he was early on - at the end.
Overall, for a short book of 251 pages, there's a lot of information packed in there for the reader. The serious scholar will cry out their usual moans and groans about it being too short and not going into enough detail, but it's a book about the assassins, not the civil war, so they can shut up! If you want to find out what happened to those assassins, how they died, and most importantly, who the last man standing was, this is an interesting and enjoyable read. (And just because I could, I started it on the Ides of March, 2021)
Peter Stothard has done meticulous research, drawing upon contemporary accounts and came up with a number which is reasonable and makes sense. (If you want to know - read the book!) And who, among those assassins was the last one to be hunted down and die? (Again, read the book!) We all know what happened to some of the more prominent assassins such as Brutus (Caesar did NOT say "et tu Brute" that was a Shakespearean invention) and Cassius, but what of the others? Suffice to say, not a single one of them lived to a ripe old age and died peacefully in their sleep.
Starting with the Ides of March in 44 BC and continuing for a number of years through a rather lengthy civil war - which the author goes into detail about because it was responsible for the death of some of the assassins - we learn how each of the conspirators died and where. And sadly, there were other innocent victims as well. Finally, there was one and we find out his fate - we learn who he was early on - at the end.
Overall, for a short book of 251 pages, there's a lot of information packed in there for the reader. The serious scholar will cry out their usual moans and groans about it being too short and not going into enough detail, but it's a book about the assassins, not the civil war, so they can shut up! If you want to find out what happened to those assassins, how they died, and most importantly, who the last man standing was, this is an interesting and enjoyable read. (And just because I could, I started it on the Ides of March, 2021)
February 2, 2021
A well written and reasonably paced account of the the assassination of Julius Caesar, the civil war it spawned and Octavian's (later Augustus) relentless pursuit of the assassins up to Cassius Parmensis, the last of the assassins to die for his crime(?).
It's a fascinating period of Roman history, that many of us were introduced to Shakespeare's play in high school. If enjoy the historic fiction about the era, I recommend Robert Harris' Cicero trilogy ("Imperium" "Lustrum" and "Dictator"). They're wonderfully researched and written.
If "The Last Assassin" makes you curious about Epicurism (the philosophy of Cassius Parmensis and several other of the assassins), I recommend "The Swerve" by Stephen Greenblatt which won both a Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award.
Happy reading!
It's a fascinating period of Roman history, that many of us were introduced to Shakespeare's play in high school. If enjoy the historic fiction about the era, I recommend Robert Harris' Cicero trilogy ("Imperium" "Lustrum" and "Dictator"). They're wonderfully researched and written.
If "The Last Assassin" makes you curious about Epicurism (the philosophy of Cassius Parmensis and several other of the assassins), I recommend "The Swerve" by Stephen Greenblatt which won both a Pulitzer Prize and the National Book Award.
Happy reading!
January 4, 2022
Es una mezcla entre novela narrativa y ensayo, unas partes bien detalladas otras se quedan cortas, parece bastante historia porque el autor investiga pero también hay ficción. Narra una de parte de la historia de las guerras civiles, que ve lo ridiculo de uno de los más grandes imperios y la ambición obsesiva de algunos personajes. Lo poco que valía la vida humana con respecto a la megalomanía de terceros.
January 20, 2022
Un repaso muy minucioso al asesinato de Julio César y las guerras civiles que lo sucedieron que tiene su atractivo en no quedarse en los hechos narrados por otras fuentes (bien elegidas). El autor presenta la cadena de sucesos geopolíticos, intereses personales y consecuencias del regicidio con mucha soltura. En cambio, no deja de pesar la sensación de que no se descubre nada nuevo durante la lectura.
February 9, 2021
Confusing
The book was well written and most interesting. However, all the many twists and turns , characters and plots hard to follow
The book was well written and most interesting. However, all the many twists and turns , characters and plots hard to follow
January 25, 2025
Peter Stothard, con El Último Asesino, nos lleva de vuelta al turbulento periodo que siguió a los idus de marzo del año 44 a.C., y que como ya se señalaba en la reciente reseña del libro La guerra mundial de los romanos. Del asesinato de Julio César a la muerta de Marco Antonio y Cleopatra (44-30 a.C.), no deja de ser una fuente casi inagotable para la literatura y el ensayo. Stothard centra su narrativa en la caza, uno a uno, de los conspiradores responsables de la muerte de Julio César, que culminará con la consolidación del poder de Octaviano. Stothard, fue editor de The Times Literary Supplement desde 2002 hasta 2016, y previamente ocupó el puesto de editor en The Times de Londres. Cuenta en su haber con otros libros centrados en la edad antigua, aunque el que ahora nos ocupa es el primero que ha sido traducido a nuestra lengua.
Stothard erige a Casio de Parma, el último de los conspiradores que fue asesinado, en la figura central de su obra. La mayor parte del relato gira en torno a su figura, y es utilizado por el autor como punto de ancla para hacer avanzar su narración. Otros personajes como Bruto o el propio Octavio ceden terreno ante otros menos tratados por la literatura histórica, lo cual resulta de agradecer cuando nos enfrentamos a un libro que aborda un terreno tan trillado.
La persecución de los asesinos de César, encabezada por Marco Antonio y Octaviano, no fue solo un acto de venganza personal. Ante todo supuso una estrategia política para consolidar el poder de los candidatos a sucederle. Antes incluso que las cenizas y el nombre de César se elevaran a los cielos, los conjurados pudieron comprobar que la reacción del pueblo de Roma tras el magnicidio no fue la que ellos habían planeado. Sus nombres no fueron aclamados como libertadores. La muchedumbre no les erigió como guardianes de la moribunda República. Al contrario. Las horas y días que
sucedieron el asesinato de César pronto evidenciaron que el único lugar seguro para ellos se encontraba en algún lugar lejano a la península itálica.
Fue en este contexto cuando el cónsul Cayo Peda propuso la aprobación de la Lex Pedia, con la que declaraba que el asesinato de César era un acto de traición que sólo podía ser resarcido con la muerte, al enmarcarse dentro de las normas de represión de actos que pudieran amenazar la estabilidad de la res publica.
Mientras la Lex Pedia servía para perseguir y castigar a los enemigos de Julio César, la posterior Lex Titia ofreció al Segundo Triunvirato un marco legal que permitió a sus miembros actuar con poderes casi absolutos. Las listas de proscripciones volvieron a empapelar las paredes de Roma, y el terror volvió a apoderarse de todo aquel que, de un modo u otro, pudiera ser acusado de haber colaborado con los asesinos de César. En las Églogas de Virgilio encontramos el testimonio más hermoso sobre las confiscaciones decretadas por los triunviros.
El relato de Stothard es deliberadamente cálido y onírico, gustándose en avanzar despacio, muy despacio, en la narración. Sin embargo, esta atmósfera en ocasiones se convierte en densa y melosa, exigiendo al lector algún que otro esfuerzo que no siempre se ve recompensado. El autor tiende, y este es el principal problema de la obra, a regocijarse en los supuestos pensamientos y anhelos de los protagonistas, lo cual no sólo resta verosimilitud histórica al relato sino que también lo convierten en algo que quizás muchos lectores que se acerquen a este libro no deseaban encontrar.
Dicho esto, algunos pasajes resultan notables (como el asesinato de Trebonio a manos de Dolabela), y en su conjunto se trata de un libro bastante disfrutable para cualquier aficionado. Pero al finalizar su lectura resulta difícil no tener la sensación de que unos hechos tan apasionantes como los elegidos por Stothard habrían merecido un resultado más memorable.
Stothard erige a Casio de Parma, el último de los conspiradores que fue asesinado, en la figura central de su obra. La mayor parte del relato gira en torno a su figura, y es utilizado por el autor como punto de ancla para hacer avanzar su narración. Otros personajes como Bruto o el propio Octavio ceden terreno ante otros menos tratados por la literatura histórica, lo cual resulta de agradecer cuando nos enfrentamos a un libro que aborda un terreno tan trillado.
La persecución de los asesinos de César, encabezada por Marco Antonio y Octaviano, no fue solo un acto de venganza personal. Ante todo supuso una estrategia política para consolidar el poder de los candidatos a sucederle. Antes incluso que las cenizas y el nombre de César se elevaran a los cielos, los conjurados pudieron comprobar que la reacción del pueblo de Roma tras el magnicidio no fue la que ellos habían planeado. Sus nombres no fueron aclamados como libertadores. La muchedumbre no les erigió como guardianes de la moribunda República. Al contrario. Las horas y días que
sucedieron el asesinato de César pronto evidenciaron que el único lugar seguro para ellos se encontraba en algún lugar lejano a la península itálica.
Fue en este contexto cuando el cónsul Cayo Peda propuso la aprobación de la Lex Pedia, con la que declaraba que el asesinato de César era un acto de traición que sólo podía ser resarcido con la muerte, al enmarcarse dentro de las normas de represión de actos que pudieran amenazar la estabilidad de la res publica.
Mientras la Lex Pedia servía para perseguir y castigar a los enemigos de Julio César, la posterior Lex Titia ofreció al Segundo Triunvirato un marco legal que permitió a sus miembros actuar con poderes casi absolutos. Las listas de proscripciones volvieron a empapelar las paredes de Roma, y el terror volvió a apoderarse de todo aquel que, de un modo u otro, pudiera ser acusado de haber colaborado con los asesinos de César. En las Églogas de Virgilio encontramos el testimonio más hermoso sobre las confiscaciones decretadas por los triunviros.
El relato de Stothard es deliberadamente cálido y onírico, gustándose en avanzar despacio, muy despacio, en la narración. Sin embargo, esta atmósfera en ocasiones se convierte en densa y melosa, exigiendo al lector algún que otro esfuerzo que no siempre se ve recompensado. El autor tiende, y este es el principal problema de la obra, a regocijarse en los supuestos pensamientos y anhelos de los protagonistas, lo cual no sólo resta verosimilitud histórica al relato sino que también lo convierten en algo que quizás muchos lectores que se acerquen a este libro no deseaban encontrar.
Dicho esto, algunos pasajes resultan notables (como el asesinato de Trebonio a manos de Dolabela), y en su conjunto se trata de un libro bastante disfrutable para cualquier aficionado. Pero al finalizar su lectura resulta difícil no tener la sensación de que unos hechos tan apasionantes como los elegidos por Stothard habrían merecido un resultado más memorable.
December 20, 2024
I had such high hopes for this book. It was a gift from a dear cousin, and he knew of my love and passion for Roman history—especially that of the late Republic. Therefore, after the second chapter, I was at a loss. The usual excellence of an Oxford University Press book was not evidenced here.
Let me pause here to state that the two stars I’ve given THE LAST ASSASSIN is for the excellent scholarship Stothard obviously possesses. His research is obvious, and he knows Classics and has a real handle on Latin. Being a writer myself of four historical novels, I always judge books published “traditionally” much harder than I do those published independently, since traditionally published works have the benefit of many more editorial eyes upon them, as well as a marketing support group that does its best to send these books to the forefront, getting them into bookstores and attaining top reviewers.
Therefore, I was stunned. There were misspellings on the map, within the body of text, as well as omitted punctuation here and there. These are things that editors, as well as Stothard should be trained to catch! How on earth did an editor working for O. U. P. not address these? And certainly a seasoned and respected Classicist such as Mary Beard must have read this and seen red flags.
I had hoped this would be on par with Beard’s work or that of Anthony Everitt. Instead, I was given a taste of what appeared to be an “attempt” at narrative non-fiction or a bizarre book on Roman history written in a “literary” style. The book boasted that it would be about the hunt for the assassins of Julius Caesar and that it was focused on Cassius Parmensis—the last of the assassins to be dealt with and killed. Instead, it read as drudgery and was FAR from being narrative non-fiction.
Though Stothard used numerous ancient texts to attempt this book, there simply wasn’t enough extant information on Parmensis himself to make this a success. Instead, the reader was jarred back and forth from a much-told history of the end of the Roman Republic with mere splashes of Parmensis’s whereabouts, philosophical beliefs, and updates on the other assassins and their grisly ends. Even worse, since there wasn’t enough factual nuggets on Parmensis, I as the reader didn’t really didn’t CARE about him. Stothard’s writing was all over the place and difficult to follow, even for a well-read Roman history buff. I cannot imagine having to try and plod through this if I knew NOTHING about Roman history!
I came mighty close to chocking this one up as a DID NOT FINISH, but forced myself forward, soldiering on, like Antony must have done through Parthia in the dead of winter.
Apparently, Stothard is a respected author and has other works out there. Sorry, but I won’t be reading them. And as for the poor editing both in spelling, typos, punctuation, and overall prose—Oxford University Press should be blushing with embarrassment. I’ve read plenty of independently written books FAR exceeding in excellence compared to this utter mess.
Let me pause here to state that the two stars I’ve given THE LAST ASSASSIN is for the excellent scholarship Stothard obviously possesses. His research is obvious, and he knows Classics and has a real handle on Latin. Being a writer myself of four historical novels, I always judge books published “traditionally” much harder than I do those published independently, since traditionally published works have the benefit of many more editorial eyes upon them, as well as a marketing support group that does its best to send these books to the forefront, getting them into bookstores and attaining top reviewers.
Therefore, I was stunned. There were misspellings on the map, within the body of text, as well as omitted punctuation here and there. These are things that editors, as well as Stothard should be trained to catch! How on earth did an editor working for O. U. P. not address these? And certainly a seasoned and respected Classicist such as Mary Beard must have read this and seen red flags.
I had hoped this would be on par with Beard’s work or that of Anthony Everitt. Instead, I was given a taste of what appeared to be an “attempt” at narrative non-fiction or a bizarre book on Roman history written in a “literary” style. The book boasted that it would be about the hunt for the assassins of Julius Caesar and that it was focused on Cassius Parmensis—the last of the assassins to be dealt with and killed. Instead, it read as drudgery and was FAR from being narrative non-fiction.
Though Stothard used numerous ancient texts to attempt this book, there simply wasn’t enough extant information on Parmensis himself to make this a success. Instead, the reader was jarred back and forth from a much-told history of the end of the Roman Republic with mere splashes of Parmensis’s whereabouts, philosophical beliefs, and updates on the other assassins and their grisly ends. Even worse, since there wasn’t enough factual nuggets on Parmensis, I as the reader didn’t really didn’t CARE about him. Stothard’s writing was all over the place and difficult to follow, even for a well-read Roman history buff. I cannot imagine having to try and plod through this if I knew NOTHING about Roman history!
I came mighty close to chocking this one up as a DID NOT FINISH, but forced myself forward, soldiering on, like Antony must have done through Parthia in the dead of winter.
Apparently, Stothard is a respected author and has other works out there. Sorry, but I won’t be reading them. And as for the poor editing both in spelling, typos, punctuation, and overall prose—Oxford University Press should be blushing with embarrassment. I’ve read plenty of independently written books FAR exceeding in excellence compared to this utter mess.
May 10, 2025
3'5 / 5
No es una novela. Es un libro de historia. Hay que especificar esto porque el autor ha elegido un estilo extraño de narración a caballo entre la no-ficción y la narrativa y sucede eso: que se queda a medias. Lo que yo creo es que quería hacer más amena la lectura y que no fuera un libro de historia al uso, con lo que da una sensación extraña, sobre todo al principio, porque no sabes si estás leyendo una novela histórica o un libro de historia, porque el libro empieza con el punto de vista de Casio de Parma, con lo que creemos que va a ser el protagonista de la historia, y no es del todo así. Una vez que te das cuenta de que no es una novela y que es un libro de historia la narración fluye mejor y, a mí por lo menos, no me ha molestado luego.
Aparte de esto hay algunas repeticiones a lo largo del libro, cuando habla de los epicúreos y Mitridates que no sé si es por falta de corrección o de la traducción pero son reiterativas y demasiado recurrentes para mi gusto.
Dicho esto a mí me ha gustado, la verdad que he disfrutado de su lectura, la premisa es estupenda, lo que muchos historiadores pasan por alto o explican en un párrafo o en una nota al margen en sus libros, aquí, Peter Stothard, se detiene y nos enfoca con su lupa imaginaria unos años muy convulsos de la historia de Roma en los que sucedieron muchas cosas, y nos lo cuenta a través de la historia de los asesinos de Julio César y lo que sucedió en los Idus de marzo y sus consecuencias, y me ha fascinado conocer tantos datos que desconocía, en este sentido creo que el libro tiene un gran valor.
Al final el autor escribe una sección para contarnos las fuentes en las que ha basado el libro, esto le da más verosimilitud porque yo alucinaba con algunos datos, por ejemplo, nos cuenta quién fue el que posiblemente le dio la puñalada mortal a Julio César, o que hubo un senador que previamente molestó a César cogiéndole de la ropa para que la toga no fuera un estorbo a la hora de clavarle el puñal, y estos datos tan precisos se explican en el capítulo final de Fuentes y ahí cobran sentido.
No es una novela. Es un libro de historia. Hay que especificar esto porque el autor ha elegido un estilo extraño de narración a caballo entre la no-ficción y la narrativa y sucede eso: que se queda a medias. Lo que yo creo es que quería hacer más amena la lectura y que no fuera un libro de historia al uso, con lo que da una sensación extraña, sobre todo al principio, porque no sabes si estás leyendo una novela histórica o un libro de historia, porque el libro empieza con el punto de vista de Casio de Parma, con lo que creemos que va a ser el protagonista de la historia, y no es del todo así. Una vez que te das cuenta de que no es una novela y que es un libro de historia la narración fluye mejor y, a mí por lo menos, no me ha molestado luego.
Aparte de esto hay algunas repeticiones a lo largo del libro, cuando habla de los epicúreos y Mitridates que no sé si es por falta de corrección o de la traducción pero son reiterativas y demasiado recurrentes para mi gusto.
Dicho esto a mí me ha gustado, la verdad que he disfrutado de su lectura, la premisa es estupenda, lo que muchos historiadores pasan por alto o explican en un párrafo o en una nota al margen en sus libros, aquí, Peter Stothard, se detiene y nos enfoca con su lupa imaginaria unos años muy convulsos de la historia de Roma en los que sucedieron muchas cosas, y nos lo cuenta a través de la historia de los asesinos de Julio César y lo que sucedió en los Idus de marzo y sus consecuencias, y me ha fascinado conocer tantos datos que desconocía, en este sentido creo que el libro tiene un gran valor.
Al final el autor escribe una sección para contarnos las fuentes en las que ha basado el libro, esto le da más verosimilitud porque yo alucinaba con algunos datos, por ejemplo, nos cuenta quién fue el que posiblemente le dio la puñalada mortal a Julio César, o que hubo un senador que previamente molestó a César cogiéndole de la ropa para que la toga no fuera un estorbo a la hora de clavarle el puñal, y estos datos tan precisos se explican en el capítulo final de Fuentes y ahí cobran sentido.
December 30, 2020
Fascinating!
For years, I've taught Shakespeare's JULIUS CAESAR to high school and college students. Many of these were second language learners from countries where they could easily make comparisons between the intrigue of ancient Rome and the real life dramas played out closer to home. THE LAST ASSASSIN adds a level of suspense that I had not previously thought much about. To be sure, Shakespeare gives his readers and theater-goers an up close look at the revenge meticulously meted out by Marc Anthony and Octavian in the aftermath of Ceasar's assassination, and the play ends with the death of Brutus, perhaps closest to Caesar of all the conspirators (and, therefore, something of a shock to the system - certainly to Caesar's - when he deals the final "unkindest cut"). By extension, Peter Stothard offers an intimate look at each of the conspirators and shows how, through his determination and relentlessness, Octavian finds and dispatches each, sparing nothing and no one, not even supposed allies. It's incredible suspense despite knowing the outcome. In the process, Stothard uses rich language to bring that ancient past to life. Consider: "Parmensis sailed back down the Aegean. He was running out of places and people to run to." Or this description of the ancient winter feast of Lupercalia: "...a festival of breathlessness and nightmare, sex and myth, demons kept at bay by winter flowers." I was out of breath reading it!
If you're a fan of anything CAESAR, or of the bloodier side of ancient Rome, this is a revealing and fascinating read.
For years, I've taught Shakespeare's JULIUS CAESAR to high school and college students. Many of these were second language learners from countries where they could easily make comparisons between the intrigue of ancient Rome and the real life dramas played out closer to home. THE LAST ASSASSIN adds a level of suspense that I had not previously thought much about. To be sure, Shakespeare gives his readers and theater-goers an up close look at the revenge meticulously meted out by Marc Anthony and Octavian in the aftermath of Ceasar's assassination, and the play ends with the death of Brutus, perhaps closest to Caesar of all the conspirators (and, therefore, something of a shock to the system - certainly to Caesar's - when he deals the final "unkindest cut"). By extension, Peter Stothard offers an intimate look at each of the conspirators and shows how, through his determination and relentlessness, Octavian finds and dispatches each, sparing nothing and no one, not even supposed allies. It's incredible suspense despite knowing the outcome. In the process, Stothard uses rich language to bring that ancient past to life. Consider: "Parmensis sailed back down the Aegean. He was running out of places and people to run to." Or this description of the ancient winter feast of Lupercalia: "...a festival of breathlessness and nightmare, sex and myth, demons kept at bay by winter flowers." I was out of breath reading it!
If you're a fan of anything CAESAR, or of the bloodier side of ancient Rome, this is a revealing and fascinating read.
January 8, 2023
'Et tu Brute' - these are the immortal words of Shakespeare, recounting the treacherous death of one of Rome's greatest Emperors, Julius Caesar. This book, by Peter Stothard, is a historical novel, recounting the last days of Caesar and the Empire of Rome immediately after his death and how, to a man, the assassins were hunted down and killed. The central character of the book is Cassius Parmensis, an obscure poet, who evades the hunters tracking him down for fourteen years after the brutal act of assassination. After Caesar, we see a Rome in turmoil. There is the rise of Caesar's nephew and adopted son, Octavian (later Augustus). His main competitor for the Caesar title was Mark Anthony. Along with Lepidus, these three formed a triumvirate that ruled in place of Caesar's dictatorship. We trail through the assassins' deaths, one by one, often in the midst of the Civil War that thrived during this unsettled political period. We see the signs of the ultimate disintegration of the Roman Empire and the Fall of Rome. The geography of the setting takes us across the Roman Empire... The main assassins, Cassius and Brutus die and the cycle of justice continues until we finally reach the seafaring Parmensis who has sought a relatively anonymous last stance and safehaven in Athens. His death brings the conclusion of the story and the end of the political unease of the aftermath of the Emperor Julius Caesar's murder.
January 12, 2021
I've never read anything by this author before but found this to be a really educating record not only of the fates of the assassins of Julius Caesar but also the chaos of the turbulent years following, as the Triumvirate of Anthony, Lepidus and Octavian gradually disintegrated and Sextus, the last son of Pompey, became a threat to them all. I never learnt how, 'touch and go', Octavian's ascent into overall power became during this period. He needed to oust Anthony, Lepidus and Sextus, but be able to control the armies and promote himself with the people, whose loyalties swayed back and forth because of the mayhem being caused by the warring factions. His relentlessness in pursuing the assassins until the very last held him in good stead because although the Senate did not, the people of Rome loved Julius Caesar and so did most of the army whose soldiers had been promised land, a very desirable reward for their services. I look forward to reading Stothard's other book called, The Senecans.
January 27, 2021
Connections- As a former Latin student I seem to keep reading about Rome. The last ones were SPQR and Julius Caesar.
This book covers the transition from Caesar's murder to Octavian's victory at Actium in 31 BC.
I have never read much about what happened to the assassins, those who favored assassination but didn't participate, and the resulting civil wars. The principal characters kept shifting sides and changing geography.
I do not like to be critical of what I read, but I feel there were 2 shortcomings of this book. The first is the most serious- for those without a thorough background in the characters and the times, it felt like about every third sentence was built on a paragraph, chapter or book that was missing. So I was lost most of the time. The second is that there isn't a good, short would be ok, description of the Marc Antony Cleopatra affair. While Marc is the main adversary but not one of the assassins, his story is important. Cleo comes and goes in bits.
I found all this added up to tough going.
This book covers the transition from Caesar's murder to Octavian's victory at Actium in 31 BC.
I have never read much about what happened to the assassins, those who favored assassination but didn't participate, and the resulting civil wars. The principal characters kept shifting sides and changing geography.
I do not like to be critical of what I read, but I feel there were 2 shortcomings of this book. The first is the most serious- for those without a thorough background in the characters and the times, it felt like about every third sentence was built on a paragraph, chapter or book that was missing. So I was lost most of the time. The second is that there isn't a good, short would be ok, description of the Marc Antony Cleopatra affair. While Marc is the main adversary but not one of the assassins, his story is important. Cleo comes and goes in bits.
I found all this added up to tough going.
December 27, 2024
A+ for subject matter, C for execution, and F- for style. This is a VERY (emphasis not just mine) detailed account of the months that followed the assassination of Caesar. The usual suspects feature prominently (Brutus, Cicero, the new triumviri) but so do bit players in the plot and the subsequent civil war. It's especially enlightening to see family rivalries and old grudges come to the fore in service of Octavian's new thirst for revenge/legitimacy. Because ultimately, it's hard to countenance that the future Augustus did all this to honor the manes of his dearly departed "dad". He was a shrewd kid, with a need to assert his authority, and getting rid of (almost) everyone who was anyone on the political scene is one heck of a way to achieve that. The shifting pov didn't do much to illuminate the relationships between factions, let alone when allegiances turned on a dime, but mostly there were some turns of phrase that were very opaque and I found myself doing more than one double-take to make sense of some sentences.
September 15, 2022
Met 'de laatste samenzweerder' presenteert Stothard een grimmige studie over een bloederig tijdvak ( voor-en naspel van de moord op Caesar) die terzelfdertijd een spannende thriller is hoewel de lezer vooraf de uitkomsten kent uit zijn geschiedenislessen. Hij schrijft vol vuur en wordt ondanks zijn onuitputtelijk lijkende feitenkenniskennis geen moment pedant of vervelend , wel integendeel; zijn overzicht en kennis gebruikt hij om de lezer in het verhaal te trekken en hem niet alleen weg te voeren naar de wreedheid en de pure machtswellust, maar ook naar de filosofie (epicurisme) en de ontluikende dichtkunst van Horatius en Vergilius , naar de glooiende landschappen langs de via Aemilia naar Ariminum (Rimini) of de uit rotsen gehouwen Via Appia naar Brundisium (Brindisi). Vooral ook is het een boek van de spelingen van oorzaak en gevolg, volatiele gegevens die in een oogwenk een vernietigende cascade in gang kunnen zetten.
August 19, 2023
I believe I retained just as much legitimate history from The Blood of Gods (Conn Iggulden), a fictionalized version of this story. On the other hand, this book, The Last Assassin, was written in such a way as to suggest that it wanted to be a fictionalized narrative. It is very minutely event-driven, to the point where I was wishing for maybe just a little more context. A little more history, please. Of the Roman republic, say, and how this episode fits in the sweep of Roman history. Of warfare, perhaps, to know how Octavian’s technological innovations fit in. Of how Octavian himself is viewed as a historical leader and how he compares with others. Of the society itself that laboriously generated the vast resources that were squandered in the course of pursuing these wars.
Paradoxically, then, I found this book, with its relentless focus on events, to be very forgettable.
Paradoxically, then, I found this book, with its relentless focus on events, to be very forgettable.
October 12, 2021
This is a superbly written book, though I must confess it took a while to adjust to the writing style. The background to the book is the period between the assassination of Julius Caesar and the final rise to power of his adopted son, Octavian, later to become the Emperor Augustus. At the same time we get to see the deaths of all Caesar’s assassins, by war or assassination, the book closing with the death of the final surviving assassin, Parmensis. The book has changed my view of Octavian/ Augustus; I was too influenced by Brian Blessed’s portrayal in ‘I Claudius’.
January 2, 2023
Het boek leest aanvankelijk vlot, maar hoe meer men geconfronteerd wordt met een veelvoud van namen en gebeurtenissen, is het best een inspanning om dit onafgebroken vol te houden. Negentien moordenaars van Caesar worden door een triumviraat Ocatavianus in de eerste plaats en Marcus Antonius schoorvoetend opgejaagd. Het boek concentreert zich op de laatste samenzweerder Parmensis die zich meestal op zee ophoudt om uit het gewoel te blijven. Liefhebbers van de 'Roman Empire ' komen zeker aan hun trekken.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 68 reviews