Senatus Populus Que Romanus discussion

Has anyone read the Conn Igguldon trilogy about Julius Caesar? I thought it was very good and full of historical detail. Has anyone read both it and the McCullough series? Anyone have any comparison opinions?

I read the first few pages in the library, and was weirded out that young Caesar and young Brutus were boyhood friends, considering that Caesar was 15 years older than Brutus, and the rumor was that he was Brutus' father (not possible in my opinion). But maybe I misunderstood what I read. I'm very interested to hear what others have to say.

That was a bit tough to swallow for me, too, but I was focused mostly on Caesar, since it was his book. I am anxious to get to the Caesar-Brutus relationship in the McCullough series.

I've read all four books (Conn has hinted at writing a fifth) and absolutely loved them. I appreciate he doesn't strictly stick to history, but the pace of the books and action/battle scenes are especially good.

I've read first man in rome and the grass crown but now i think i'll read more in colleen mccullough's series. I'm sure her style is very different (nothing like the same pace, which is fine) and probably more historically accurate.

I enjoyed the pace of the Iggulden books, but the history seems a bit skewed. The McCollough books seem more historically accurate, and I love the definitions in the back. I am now reading Iggulden's series on Genghis Khan and it is just as interesting as Caesar.

I loved them first and foremost. There are a few incidents of 'massaged' history but I can forgive an author this, to an extent, especially when it is fiction after all.

They were very compelling reading, that is true.

Iggulden is about to write a fifth book in the series, about Octavian/Augustus!

Hurrah! :)

He should have it nearly finished by now. Due out in September, I think.

Iggulden is a good writer and he shows a great sense of pace, which is informed by good physical description and a mastery of place. However, there is a difference between "massaged" history and what Iggulden does. The author seems content to wholly invent history to suit his needs. When he uses actual history he seems to take every single incident of historical significance during or around the life of Caesar and insert the protagonist in its fore. His main characters are romanticized to a point that takes away from the writing. In comparison to McCullough's series Iggulden's works are shorter and with more action, where as the aforementioned author drives her works with multi-layered charecters, dialogue, and historical detail. As a fiction author Iggulden is above average, but as an author of historical fiction he grades low.

Iggulden really keeps a great focus on the history, but also keeps a nice fictional flow. It can give you some facts, but is also a great fictional read. Iggulden talks about Caesar, and really gives you a perspective on what life was like at that time, especially in the military. If you like Iggulden, I would recommend The Forgotten Legion by Ben Kane. It has a similar focus, but gives a perspective on the fighting in the Eastern Roman Empire at that time and also talks about the murder of Caesar. Both are good reads, and I highly recommend both to anyone who is new to the topic or is in need of a break from harder reading. (Even though it is about an early high school level.)
Conn Iggulden is a great writer and flings his protagonist into the middle of the politics of Rome during Caesar's time. He gives an insight into the military of the day, the politics, and his book upholds much historical detail. This is a great book for people who like Historical Fiction, History, and is also good for people who like Thrillers.

i read the first two books and think they are well paced and written but for my taste to historically inacurate

I've read the first of his Roman-themed books and didn't like it particularly, in fact I don't even remember much about it. So I'm not seeking out any others in the series.

[Full disclosure: To my shame, I have not yet read any of Conn’s novels.]

Historical fiction has two distinct schools. It appears Conn makes historical figures central to his narrative. This requires that he stick to the historical record and that he use his creativity to flesh out the motivations and settings. Sticking to biography puts the creative Muses into a straight-jacket. I think there are few historical novelists who pull this off successfully, but the achievements of Gore Vidal come to mind.

The other method of writing historical fiction is to place fictional characters against a backdrop of real personages and events. Structuring the historical novel in this way gives the reader the flavor of the times, something of the actual history, while still enabling him/her to care passionately about the characters and the outcome.

For my money, I read history books for the history, and historical fiction for the flavor of the times and for the emotional impact.

Vann, that is an excellent delineation!

I recently finished the 5th volume of his Roman series - I thought it was better than the previous entries to the series. He doesn't play so fast and loose with historical fact in this one.

This series is what actually drew me into Ancient Rome, believe it or not. While it's far from historically accurate, I can say it did it's job with me. Having said that, I'd most likely be unable to read it these days.

That's about right. It started off with Julius Caesar and Brutus being childhood friends, and I gritted my teeth and got past that because Ancient Rome was now so visible and I wanted to learn more.

Conn Iggulden is my top favorite author, and as much as I love his Khan series, I don't recommend his ones about Caesar. The writing was exceptional, as always but the history was far from accurate. That's a reason for me to avoid any his fic book. For a while Conn got away with it in reviews because readers were so enthralled by his storytelling abilities.
But a huge 'yes!' to any of his Genghis Khan series.

I'll second Rachel comments - great story telling, very bad history

I abandoned him too over his nonsensical history. A pity, because he writes a good yarn. I loathe writers who mess with the facts as he does.

I was also a bit upset about it, but the writing drew me in. it's all fiction anyway.

Linda wrote: "I was also a bit upset about it, but the writing drew me in. it's all fiction anyway."No, No and thrice No. I've met people who watched JFK and are convinced the Kennedy assassination was a conspiracy because they saw the puff of smoke on the grassy knoll. That bit was faked and patched into the Zubruder film. People will read the novels and really think that the Brutus who killed Caesar was a military hero from Gaul!!! Either you right fictiuon such as the Macro and Cato stuff, or you get the fundamentals right. That's me done.

Guy wrote: "Linda wrote: "I was also a bit upset about it, but the writing drew me in. it's all fiction anyway."No, No and thrice No. I've met people who watched JFK and are convinced the Kennedy assassinatio..."

Amen. Historical fiction is supposed to inform and entertain. That's why I avoid fantasy. Nothing worthwhile learning from a story set on a fictional planet. A novel with the history twisted is misleading and just as bad.

I think he learned his lesson on bad history - I read Stormbird about the Wars of the Roses, recently and it seems to follow actual history fairly closely and where he departs, I thought was rather minor and adequitly explained in his authors note

Good to hear. I have an interest in the WOTR so I may indulge!
Cheers

I recently read Dan Jone's The Wars of the Roses: The Fall of the Plantagenets and the Rise of the Tudors and I am currently reading Skidmore's The Rise of the Tudors: The Family That Changed English History, and Igguldon had not changed the major events, and while the historical characters locations have been adjusted a little for the needs of the story, (view spoiler)[ ie Henry VI's queen, Margret is in London during Jack Cades rebellion and her presence is there used as a plot device IRL she was safely out of London (hide spoiler)] the ages and relationships are historical

Sorry about the digression - back to our regularly scheduled discussion :)