What do you think?
Rate this book
Claudius
Traces the life of the Roman Emperor, reassesses his life and achievements, and describes the political, economic and social background of the period
272 pages, Paperback
First published February 5, 1990
5 people are currently reading
147 people want to read
About the author
Barbara Levick
28 books6 followersBarbara M. Levick is a British historian, specializing in ancient history. She was educated at St Hugh's College, Oxford, and, since 1959, has been a Fellow of St Hilda's College, Oxford (now emeritus). She is a prolific writer and occasional broadcaster on Roman history.
Levick is best known to the general public for her biographies of Roman emperors.
Levick is best known to the general public for her biographies of Roman emperors.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
March 25, 2017
Claudius - Born too late for bountiful booty
In this book, Barbara Levick offers a revisionist view of who Claudius was, moving away from the malicious words of Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio, instead relying on less biased evidence. The ancient view of Claudius depicts him as stupid, with his mother, according to Suetonius, calling him a 'monstrosity of a human being, one that Nature began and never finished'. Furthermore, he likely suffered from cerebral palsy, which affected his ability to speak. Seneca states that 'he had a cracked and hardly intelligible voice; it belonged to no land-animal, but the voice a sea-creature had', whilst Dio talks of an 'uncontrollable laughter', something which is associated with palsy. This speech impediment was made worse by the need for aristocracy to perform in public; 'Claudius used to give his speeches in the senate to his quaestor to read'. Claudius was not mentally backwards. He studied literature, rhetoric, music, mathematics, and jurisprudence, later writing twenty books on Etruscan history and eight on Carthaginian in Greek.
Nonetheless, Claudius' disability made it difficult for him to be seen as part of the family: 'Claudius finds a position here as a member of the family - a humiliating one between Germanicus' sister and children'. Coupled with the weak position of Emperor, and the need to relate oneself to Augustus, Claudius lacked the credibility and presentation to be seen as more than an necessary choice, which ultimately led to his assassination.
In this book, Barbara Levick offers a revisionist view of who Claudius was, moving away from the malicious words of Tacitus, Suetonius and Cassius Dio, instead relying on less biased evidence. The ancient view of Claudius depicts him as stupid, with his mother, according to Suetonius, calling him a 'monstrosity of a human being, one that Nature began and never finished'. Furthermore, he likely suffered from cerebral palsy, which affected his ability to speak. Seneca states that 'he had a cracked and hardly intelligible voice; it belonged to no land-animal, but the voice a sea-creature had', whilst Dio talks of an 'uncontrollable laughter', something which is associated with palsy. This speech impediment was made worse by the need for aristocracy to perform in public; 'Claudius used to give his speeches in the senate to his quaestor to read'. Claudius was not mentally backwards. He studied literature, rhetoric, music, mathematics, and jurisprudence, later writing twenty books on Etruscan history and eight on Carthaginian in Greek.
Nonetheless, Claudius' disability made it difficult for him to be seen as part of the family: 'Claudius finds a position here as a member of the family - a humiliating one between Germanicus' sister and children'. Coupled with the weak position of Emperor, and the need to relate oneself to Augustus, Claudius lacked the credibility and presentation to be seen as more than an necessary choice, which ultimately led to his assassination.
May 22, 2024
Barbara Levick's Unrelenting Erudition Makes Known The Accomplishments Of The Divine Claudius.
By the time Claudius became the emperor of Rome, he was already fifty years of age. He spent much of his life being ridiculed for his various "weaknesses" predominantly by his own blood relatives. Nearly every element of his thirteen-year reign comes off to me as very bizarre & irregular. Nonetheless the man almost universally perceived to be a mental incompetent by those living in his era, was in practice quite shrewd with his policies & administration. Claudius lacked the charisma of his brother Germanicus. He was not a handsome man, & he possessed neither percipience nor potential necessary to excel as an orator. He could speak effectively enough to pretty much get the job done & that was about it.
By the time Claudius accepted the mantle & responsibilities that formally recognized him as emperor of Rome, he was already fifty years of age. He spent much of his life being ridiculed for his various "weaknesses" predominantly by his own blood relatives & yet, somehow Claudius survived. He wasn't going to be the next Julius Caesar, I'm quite sure he was in full cognizance of that. His own sister Livilla despised him, brazenly making a spiteful remark that she basically, pitied the people of Rome for eventually having to bear him at the head of the empire.
His nephew Gaius Caligula kept him around for the simple fact that he enjoyed ridiculing his uncle Claudius tremendously, he probably took pride in it. Gaius just had him thrown into a river on one occasion, I don't know which one, probably to Claudius they were all equally distasteful. I'm not sure it was recorded.
When Gaius' sister Agrippina had her firstborn son, she probably was overjoyed. In an action intended to demonstrate a sister's genuine affection for her brother, Agrippina excitedly asked Gaius his opinion on what might be a good name for her newborn baby. Caligula suggested that she name her son 'Claudius' so he could grow up & basically be like his uncle, in a way not at all intended to be kind. Agrippina's son ended up being initially perfectly normal, both physically & mentally. The name he was born with was in homage to his father, Gnaeus, 'Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus'. Later in life, he would come to be known by another.
Many aspects of Claudius' thirteen-year reign I perceived as very unconventional, he was a strange personality type to have in the role of emperor. While almost universally perceived to be a mental incompetent by those living in his era, in practice his policies were shrewd, his administration efficient. Claudius lacked the charisma of his brother Germanicus. He was not a handsome man nor did he possess any skill, or percipience as an orator. He could speak effectively enough to pretty much get the job done & that was about it.
It turned out that Claudius was 'good enough for government work' as the saying goes. Governing actually ranks as his dominant proficiency, in my opinion. I think he had the 'Augustan' talent of being able to basically, get stuff done without enraging people to the point where they would try to have him killed. It seems like that is a recessive gene in the Julio-Claudian emperors.
Despite being at a considerable disadvantage early on, Claudius somehow managed to remain in power for quite a while, expanding the empire by invading new areas & consolidating those already under Roman occupation. He transferred power to & from provincial positions, consolidating certain powers while scaling down or eliminating roles he deemed unnecessary.
Yes, Claudius' strength was in his intellect & his talent for implementing policies that actually accomplished what he wanted them to do, which in theory sounds simple but it's probably considerably more difficult when you are the one trying to do it. He was perceived as being slow-witted which won him the sympathy of the plebian class, & that sympathy was of the kind the equestrians found themselves at a disadvantage when confronting the emperor. That sympathy probably helped keep Claudius alive.
Not counting the supplemental sections located at the end of the book, 'Claudius' is almost exactly two hundred pages in length. The style of the writing I would describe as immensely insightful, accompanied by a sharp, scholarly wit which renders the somewhat-mundane subject matter more interesting. Worth mentioning is that the edition being reviewed definitely is not the most current available, there's a second edition with the same title published by Rutledge which I've not read. The book is divided into sixteen chapters of varying length, & if you sit down for a good portion of your day you can get through it fairly quickly.
The book highlights significant events occurring prior to Claudius' reign in the initial chapters such as Augustus effectively assimilating the powers of multiple key positions & functions within the Roman structure, chiefly 'imperium proconsulare' or 'governor of provinces' & 'tribunicia potestas' or 'tribunal protection of the people'. The author also explains very well important concepts associated with Roman politics such as 'auctoritas' or 'imperium'. Those interested in learning how Augustus accomplished this might want to read Southern's 'Augustus' which is a wonderful read & also published by Rutledge.
Prior to becoming emperor Claudius most likely had been resigned to a life he believed would be that of a scholar. He tried his hand at writing Roman history, most likely due to the influence of one of his mentors, the historian Titus Livy. Claudius was very inspired by his blood relative Marc Antony & when he desired to write a book exploring the possibility of how Rome would have been different had Actium ended with an Antonian victory instead of a defeat, he was not permitted the opportunity. This is a prime example of Augustan influence attempting to censor or discourage behavior which risked compromising the legacy of the divine Augustus.
There is a very heavy emphasis in this book on the policy & administration of Claudius which contrasts sharply to the almost non-existence of any content covering his personal life other than the chapters containing Messallina's romance with Gaius Silius, followed by her downfall. The emperor's relationship with provincials, his municipal projects such as the 'Aqua Claudia' as well as an entire chapter exploring his invasion of Britannia accompanied by a thorough accounting of the campaign by the author, all interesting to read & learn about because I knew absolutely nothing about any of it beforehand.
The sources utilized for reference are as numerous as they are varied. I enjoyed seeing a few citations of Balsdon's 'The Emperor Gaius' primarily due to me having read it, & obviously with a book focusing on Claudian policies it's a given that Cornelius Tacitus' 'The Annals' would be frequently-referenced as well as Suetonius' 'Divus Claudius' from 'The Twelve Caesars'. Seneca's 'Apocolocyntosis of the Divine Claudius' was an interesting choice due to it being a farce but Seneca's satire used facts to mock Claudius, which really is the entire purpose of satire. If you make fun of someone in a lampoon it isn't actually funny unless the person actually did the stuff that's being used to ridicule them. Otherwise it's not really humor, it's just a bunch of nonsense. Unless it's in 'Lives of the Later Caesars', because the humor in that book is absolutely the CORRECT way to implement nonsense into a narrative possessing comedic value. But anyway, the references to the 'Apocolocyntosis' are actually chosen very well in my armchair-historian's opinion.
Overall, 'Claudius' by Barbara Levick is definitely a scholarly work, it's intended for that specific audience. Claudius' life was not the most interesting as far as Roman emperors are concerned. He wasn't particularly debauched or insidious when scrutinized next to depraved, maniacs like Nero or Commodus, or his nephew Caligula who was still a maniac although of a slightly different substance. Claudius is difficult to sustain interest in, for me anyway. I think Levick's writing does as much as it possibly can to make the subject matter engaging for the reader. This book I'd recommend to dedicated history enthusiasts.
By the time Claudius became the emperor of Rome, he was already fifty years of age. He spent much of his life being ridiculed for his various "weaknesses" predominantly by his own blood relatives. Nearly every element of his thirteen-year reign comes off to me as very bizarre & irregular. Nonetheless the man almost universally perceived to be a mental incompetent by those living in his era, was in practice quite shrewd with his policies & administration. Claudius lacked the charisma of his brother Germanicus. He was not a handsome man, & he possessed neither percipience nor potential necessary to excel as an orator. He could speak effectively enough to pretty much get the job done & that was about it.
By the time Claudius accepted the mantle & responsibilities that formally recognized him as emperor of Rome, he was already fifty years of age. He spent much of his life being ridiculed for his various "weaknesses" predominantly by his own blood relatives & yet, somehow Claudius survived. He wasn't going to be the next Julius Caesar, I'm quite sure he was in full cognizance of that. His own sister Livilla despised him, brazenly making a spiteful remark that she basically, pitied the people of Rome for eventually having to bear him at the head of the empire.
His nephew Gaius Caligula kept him around for the simple fact that he enjoyed ridiculing his uncle Claudius tremendously, he probably took pride in it. Gaius just had him thrown into a river on one occasion, I don't know which one, probably to Claudius they were all equally distasteful. I'm not sure it was recorded.
When Gaius' sister Agrippina had her firstborn son, she probably was overjoyed. In an action intended to demonstrate a sister's genuine affection for her brother, Agrippina excitedly asked Gaius his opinion on what might be a good name for her newborn baby. Caligula suggested that she name her son 'Claudius' so he could grow up & basically be like his uncle, in a way not at all intended to be kind. Agrippina's son ended up being initially perfectly normal, both physically & mentally. The name he was born with was in homage to his father, Gnaeus, 'Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus'. Later in life, he would come to be known by another.
Many aspects of Claudius' thirteen-year reign I perceived as very unconventional, he was a strange personality type to have in the role of emperor. While almost universally perceived to be a mental incompetent by those living in his era, in practice his policies were shrewd, his administration efficient. Claudius lacked the charisma of his brother Germanicus. He was not a handsome man nor did he possess any skill, or percipience as an orator. He could speak effectively enough to pretty much get the job done & that was about it.
It turned out that Claudius was 'good enough for government work' as the saying goes. Governing actually ranks as his dominant proficiency, in my opinion. I think he had the 'Augustan' talent of being able to basically, get stuff done without enraging people to the point where they would try to have him killed. It seems like that is a recessive gene in the Julio-Claudian emperors.
Despite being at a considerable disadvantage early on, Claudius somehow managed to remain in power for quite a while, expanding the empire by invading new areas & consolidating those already under Roman occupation. He transferred power to & from provincial positions, consolidating certain powers while scaling down or eliminating roles he deemed unnecessary.
Yes, Claudius' strength was in his intellect & his talent for implementing policies that actually accomplished what he wanted them to do, which in theory sounds simple but it's probably considerably more difficult when you are the one trying to do it. He was perceived as being slow-witted which won him the sympathy of the plebian class, & that sympathy was of the kind the equestrians found themselves at a disadvantage when confronting the emperor. That sympathy probably helped keep Claudius alive.
Not counting the supplemental sections located at the end of the book, 'Claudius' is almost exactly two hundred pages in length. The style of the writing I would describe as immensely insightful, accompanied by a sharp, scholarly wit which renders the somewhat-mundane subject matter more interesting. Worth mentioning is that the edition being reviewed definitely is not the most current available, there's a second edition with the same title published by Rutledge which I've not read. The book is divided into sixteen chapters of varying length, & if you sit down for a good portion of your day you can get through it fairly quickly.
The book highlights significant events occurring prior to Claudius' reign in the initial chapters such as Augustus effectively assimilating the powers of multiple key positions & functions within the Roman structure, chiefly 'imperium proconsulare' or 'governor of provinces' & 'tribunicia potestas' or 'tribunal protection of the people'. The author also explains very well important concepts associated with Roman politics such as 'auctoritas' or 'imperium'. Those interested in learning how Augustus accomplished this might want to read Southern's 'Augustus' which is a wonderful read & also published by Rutledge.
Prior to becoming emperor Claudius most likely had been resigned to a life he believed would be that of a scholar. He tried his hand at writing Roman history, most likely due to the influence of one of his mentors, the historian Titus Livy. Claudius was very inspired by his blood relative Marc Antony & when he desired to write a book exploring the possibility of how Rome would have been different had Actium ended with an Antonian victory instead of a defeat, he was not permitted the opportunity. This is a prime example of Augustan influence attempting to censor or discourage behavior which risked compromising the legacy of the divine Augustus.
There is a very heavy emphasis in this book on the policy & administration of Claudius which contrasts sharply to the almost non-existence of any content covering his personal life other than the chapters containing Messallina's romance with Gaius Silius, followed by her downfall. The emperor's relationship with provincials, his municipal projects such as the 'Aqua Claudia' as well as an entire chapter exploring his invasion of Britannia accompanied by a thorough accounting of the campaign by the author, all interesting to read & learn about because I knew absolutely nothing about any of it beforehand.
The sources utilized for reference are as numerous as they are varied. I enjoyed seeing a few citations of Balsdon's 'The Emperor Gaius' primarily due to me having read it, & obviously with a book focusing on Claudian policies it's a given that Cornelius Tacitus' 'The Annals' would be frequently-referenced as well as Suetonius' 'Divus Claudius' from 'The Twelve Caesars'. Seneca's 'Apocolocyntosis of the Divine Claudius' was an interesting choice due to it being a farce but Seneca's satire used facts to mock Claudius, which really is the entire purpose of satire. If you make fun of someone in a lampoon it isn't actually funny unless the person actually did the stuff that's being used to ridicule them. Otherwise it's not really humor, it's just a bunch of nonsense. Unless it's in 'Lives of the Later Caesars', because the humor in that book is absolutely the CORRECT way to implement nonsense into a narrative possessing comedic value. But anyway, the references to the 'Apocolocyntosis' are actually chosen very well in my armchair-historian's opinion.
Overall, 'Claudius' by Barbara Levick is definitely a scholarly work, it's intended for that specific audience. Claudius' life was not the most interesting as far as Roman emperors are concerned. He wasn't particularly debauched or insidious when scrutinized next to depraved, maniacs like Nero or Commodus, or his nephew Caligula who was still a maniac although of a slightly different substance. Claudius is difficult to sustain interest in, for me anyway. I think Levick's writing does as much as it possibly can to make the subject matter engaging for the reader. This book I'd recommend to dedicated history enthusiasts.
August 23, 2012
Love this book probably the most out of the series. Not only am I a HUGE Claudius fan, but Everitt shows everyone why Claudius was not a mentally challenged boy who sulked in the shadows. Everitt does an amazing job of showing how a child who was limp, deaf, and had a speech impediment brought the army and Rome to love him through his knowledge of philosophy, oration, and politics. Definitely would recommend this book to fellow students who brush over Claudius to focus on the more famous Nero.
July 5, 2017
I really wanted to like this book but I found it very awkward to read. I mistakenly assumed that it would take on the approach of a chronological biography and as a result i was a bit let down as the biography is structured in categories rather than chronology. Also the writing style of Barbara did not really suit me. I had previously came off reading Augustus by Goldsworthy, Tiberius and Caligula and I could not put them down, I buzzed right through them. This book for me is quite a slog/struggle. It could simply be that there is not an abundance of information about Claudius as he was not remembered as one of the more popular Roman emperors, wrongly considered a dunce by many. Within the first 70 pages Claudius had died by mushrooms and then a poisoned feather at the supposed hands of Agrippina along with Britannicus his son who died at a party. This timing through me off a little and then it jumped right into his politics. For me this approach was a bit jarring and it does not really gel with my reading style. I doubt i'll read it again soon which is a shame because I wanted so much to really like it and also there is so little available on Claudius out there to be read.
September 23, 2019
Interesante visión de Claudio.
Entre otras cosas sugiere su participación en la conspiración contra Calígula. Destaca cómo despliega una política basada en retomar alguno de los proyectos inacabados de Julio César, como la conquista de Britania, la ampliación del puerto de Ostia y el drenaje del lago Fucino.
Me parece meritorio el intento de separar el grano de la paja en la imagen proyectada por las fuentes primarias.
La lectura es todo lo entretenida que permite un ensayo de este tipo.
Mi nota 8,4/10
Entre otras cosas sugiere su participación en la conspiración contra Calígula. Destaca cómo despliega una política basada en retomar alguno de los proyectos inacabados de Julio César, como la conquista de Britania, la ampliación del puerto de Ostia y el drenaje del lago Fucino.
Me parece meritorio el intento de separar el grano de la paja en la imagen proyectada por las fuentes primarias.
La lectura es todo lo entretenida que permite un ensayo de este tipo.
Mi nota 8,4/10
February 4, 2022
Never before has a mere 200 pages been such a slog! Unashamedly academic, this is most definitely not for the lay reader. Prior events are referenced with no explanation of them, and sentences meander through 100 years of history with no pause. Great for a reference book, not so great as a piece of prose.
September 4, 2020
Terrific, balanced overview of an often misunderstood emperor, still first rate 30 years on. Ok, sections on provincial administration may be a bit dry for non-specialists. But opening pages are best succinct account of rise of principate I've found.
February 6, 2020
One book, one 6-page book review, and one very long day later...
April 1, 2015
Barbara Levick's book can always be expected to be full of detail and interest. Her Claudius volume is,no exception, which is why 25 years after the initial publication it is still a great read. It is beginning to show its age, if only through the fact that many new inscriptions and discoveries are not covered.
February 23, 2017
Wonderful source for those looking to study the emperor Claudius. Goes through all the major primary sources that discuss him. Very helpful for Classical Studies students focusing on Claudius or the Julio-Claudians. I think she is about to release an updated version though (if its not already out), so I would look into that one.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews