Customer Reviews

Claudius the God: And His Wife Messalina

5 star:		(15)
4 star:		(13)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Roman Emperor Claudius (41-54) has long been regarded as a so-called 'bad emperor', standing in the line of notorious guys like Caligula, Nero and Domitianus. The main reasons for this image were the books of Latin authors like Seneca, Suetonius and Tacitus. These writers all shared the same image on Claudius: a messy guy 'who was not a master, but rather a servant', as Suetonius puts it. Apparently there are some reviewers on this page who regard these 'original' sources as genuine reports on this emperor. According to them, Graves, who paints a quite sympathetic image of the emperor, is just making a funny story and not offering the facts. But those aforementioned Latin writers were not very objective either, if you look at the facts.

Seneca was a relative of Claudius, and had many personal conflicts with the emperor. Additionally, he was the one responsible for the education of cruel Nero, who would become emperor after Claudius. So I don't think you could trust Seneca. The other two authors, Suetonius and Tacitus, were both senators. They were men of the highest rank, and these people had the tradition to look down at emperors who listened more to their freedmen than to the Senate. Claudius was such an emperor: he gave many important bureaucratic jobs to his freedmen, because he could trust them better than those wolves from the Senate. Not a very bad idea, is it? But being senators themselves, Suetonius and Tacitus didn't like this attitude and so they disliked Claudius as well. What I mean to say with this is that the image we get of Claudius in this book is not less important than the one we see in the old sources: if Suetonius is called 'objective', so should Graves be.

It's also quite interesting to compare the Roman writers with Graves. During the last months, I've read some texts by Suetonius in college, and it's striking to see how much of Suetonius' information is used by Graves as well. But while the Roman writer bluntly criticizes Claudius for everything he does wrong, Graves tries to explain the same cases in favour of Claudius. Whether Graves tells the truth or not, it is interesting to see how one tries to explain things. A good example is Claudius' order to execute Appius Silanus. Suetonius just tells that Claudius was faked by his wife, who wanted Silanus to be killed. Graves tells the same, but he adds to it that Silanus had refused to tell the truth (which was, that he was innocent) when he stood in front of Claudius. So he simply had to execute him. Another example: Suetonius tells about Claudius' habitude to allow farting and burping to his table-guests, because he once had a man at his table who nearly killed himself by holding up his farts. Of course, for ancient Romans like Suetonius, this was not done, but as a 20th-century writer Graves regards this deed as an act of mere humanity. And who wouldn't, after all?

Claudius' very human attitude is the red line of Graves' entire story: it's about a quite unconventional emperor, who is in conflict with old Roman values, presented by the Senate. According to Graves, Claudius may have been too benevolent for his job, a bit naive: he often got strangled in the large web of his relatives, particularly his wives Messalina and Agrippina (Nero's mother). Nevertheless: in Graves' story, Claudius is a good man, with whom the reader gets a lot of sympathy. He was just not entirely able to deal with the snakes that crawled around him. And look at the historical facts: there is proof that the Roman Empire was governed very well under Claudius' hands. The criticism from Roman authors is more about his personal attitude than about his regime itself. So this book, after all, is a fine example of 'explaining history'. Additionally, it's a joy to read.

Taking up where "I, Claudius" left off, "Claudius the God" chronicles the reign of one of the most unlikely Emperors in Roman history: the lame, stuttering, and hardly stupid Tiberius Claudius Drusus Nero Germanicus. Having spent his entire life trying to *avoid* any political office, mostly by letting his family think he's a hopeless idiot (intelligence tends to get weeded out rather rapidly among the Julio-Claudians, usually with the help of some poison), Claudius finds himself catapulted to the throne at the age of fifty-one when his nephew, the mad Emperor Caligula, is assassinated. He doesn't want to be Emperor-he is in fact a staunch believer in restoring the Roman Republic-but eventually is forced to accept the job and thus begins the ill-fated rule of one of the most interesting Emperors of all time.

Of course he's doomed from the start-there's hardly an Emperor who *wasn't* murdered, and poison probably qualifies as death by natural causes when you're Roman aristocracy-and his wife Messalina is quite a piece of work, but that doesn't stop the book from being a good read, especially in the earlier parts of the story where Claudius shows an unexpected capacity for efficient administration. The same wry humor and political intrigue that characterized "I, Claudius" are present here as well, and the cast-of-thousands are all distinguished quite well from each other. While "Claudius the God" is not as captivating as its predecessor, and is in fact quite a bit more depressing, it's a book worth reading. There is only one drawback to reading these two tales of intrigue and Imperial families: you'll find yourself wanting to go out and get a food taster afterwards...

Footnote: While this may be the wrong place to recommend videos, I strongly suggest that anyone who read and enjoyed "I, Claudius" and "Claudius the God" should see the BBC miniseries. Derek Jacobi is perfect as Claudius, both as the aging Emperor and the young and gawky historian, and Sian Phillips brings the character of Livia to malevolent life with her portrayal of the woman behind the throne. A must-see for any fan of Roman history-or Rome in general!

The second volume to Robert Grave's best fictional works. A convincing portrayal of what life was like at the core of the early Roman empire. While the first novel dealt with Claudius' childhood through the reign of Caligula, the sequel starts during his own reign until his death.

Graves masterfully develops the character of Claudius as he ponders his life and impresses his thoughts on to his "autobiography." The reader is then taken through the ambitions and palatial intrigues of his reign. Claudius reflects on the persons and events under his rule. He finds himself with a dwindling circle of friends and in the company of a devious young wife, Messalina. Claudius ponders his life with wit and humor. With this insight, Claudius is soon appreciated by the reader as having a keen intellect as opposed to being dull and slow of wit. His desire for truth and his loathing of the imperial struggle gives his story clarity and impartiality. All of the characters are well developed; their actions and motivations all come to light in the course of the story.

Along with Gore Vidal's "Julian" this is one of the greatest works in historical fiction in this genre or any genre. A must read for anyone who enjoys history or just a good story full of intrigue and suspense.

Claudius the God is the sequel to the legendary "I, Claudius". Though not quite as powerful as its predecessor, the book continues the story of Claudius after his ascension to the throne.

The book points out the many pitfalls of ruling a state; Claudius, sadly, is as much at the mercy of his wife as the Emperor Augustus was his -- a blind spot that nearly costs Claudius his throne. The advice Claudius receives from his friend Herod Agrippa in the beginning of the book -- to "trust no one", is indeed good advice.

As a character, Herod Agrippa steals the book -- the book's first seventy or so pages deal with his story, which form a very amusing and interesting digression -- and shows how Herod Agrippa's influence in Rome is instrumental in bringing the Senate around to recognizing Claudius.

Claudius introduces legal reforms; converts the harbor at Ostia into an all-season port to help secure Rome's food supply, conquers Britain, and revives the Roman religion. The book is a wealth of historical detail and interesting anecdotes.

The book is also engaging and entertaining; although one soon sees that the job of Emperor is no fun indeed -- Claudius has as much cause for paranoia as any of his predecessors.

The book is a must read for anyone who reads "I, Claudius", and is a very good work of literature that brings the Roman age to life.

'Claudius the God' is actually part two of a two-part set, the second volume after the much-better-known 'I, Claudius'. The story is set in Rome at the time of the institution of Augustus, the first emperor, up to the accession of Nero, the last of the Julio-Claudian line of emperors (after this time, the imperial seat was more of a political prize to be fought for than a family bequest).

Robert Graves intriguing use of the vernacular language and the extensive research, following largely the histories of Suetonius (a gossipy historian) rather than Tacitus (the formal, more official historian), gives a rather racy and juicy insight into the flamboyant lifestyle of the early imperial family, as seen through the eyes primarily of its most unlikely heir, Claudius the stammerer. Claudius escaped much of the political intrigue and was seen as a harmless outsider due to his physical impediments, which helped mask his intellectual capabilities and cunning insight into the actions of others.

Grave's recreation is well-done, but a bit too sympathetic to his hero Claudius. Claudius was not the intellectual saintly character protrayed in theses novels--true, he wasn't nearly as bad as his predecessor Caligula or his successor Nero, but he had shortcomings that are often ignored for lacking the glamour of the evils of the two emperors who bookend his reign.

Graves' use of language is interesting to note. Instead of translating historical scenes into formal, high-academic English (as a classically-trained Oxbridge scholar might be inclined to do), he put things into what Alistair Cook called the everyday language of the English aristocracy, a social class accustomed to the easy exercise of world-domination power, politically and socially. This makes it an engaging work that avoids the pitfalls of academic histories.

This particular volume looks at the later part of Claudius' life, concluding with the time when he was emperor. The intrigues that had carried on in the royal family continued unabated around him as emperor, except that the wise and almost omniscient Claudius of old seemed to develop blind spots once in the imperial seat, largely due to love. When his wife Messalina finally plots his overthrow with a divorce, he acts, and his life is rather sorrowful ever after.

Derek Jacobi's performance in the BBC production is stunning; what the novel leaves out in way of historical accuracy to detail (Claudius was married more times than would Graves' books attest, for instance) it more than makes up for by way of being an entertaining introduction to imperial Rome. Make sure to get both volumes!

You must read "I, Claudius" first, but then you won't be able to stop, and you'll be so glad there's this second volume. A work of towering genius. This is my third copy, as I wore out the others.

More diffuse and less focused than I, Claudius, despite covering a shorter time period and a smaller cast of characters, Claudius the God nevertheless succeeds brilliantly and in certain respects transcends its predecessor. Readers of the first novel can, thankfully, still take the wry wit, incredible sense of time and place and fascinating political machinations for granted.

In this sequel, Graves clinically describes the claustrophobia of being a self-described republican forever trapped in the imperial "golden predicament". Graves intentionally writes an apologia for Claudius but it remains clear to the reader how much he came to abuse his power. Graves redresses the balance by including a fantastical satire of the reign and several pithy historical accounts of Claudius' death. The number of senators and knights executed during a supposedly benevolent reign is coolly spelled out, confronting the reader with the questions that Graves wants answered: was, in fact, Claudius - even the Claudius of the book - morally superior to his imperial predecessors? And if he was, does it make any difference, given the venality of the political system and the supine, self-serving nature of the Senate and the People?

It is a tribute, then, to the subtlety of Graves' characterisation that Claudius retains our sympathy to the end. Indeed, the terse semi-poem that Claudius composes after being forced to confront the true character of both his wife Messalina and of Rome, and his subsequent decision to play deaf, mute "King Log" to his successor's evil "King Stork" elicits only horror and pity.

This decision, presented as an attempt to sabotage the imperial system, is surely more true to the dramatic structure than to historical truth. But throughout, the text is shot through with valuable historical insights - for example Claudius' fateful decision to snub the senatorial class in favour of freedmen, his attitude to the Jews and the early Christians, how Greek secular philosophy was gradually eroding the faith of the Roman elite in their own (borrowed) pantheon - that ensure that this rich book repays many, many readings.

This sequel to "I, Claudius" goes into depth about the actual reign of Claudius, as opposed to the reigns of his familial predecessors and his eventual "rise" to power. If you did not enjoy the first book, don't bother with this one. It is only interesting to those who want to learn more about Claudius. For those who do, you will not be disappointed.

"Claudius the God" is the second of Graves' two-part story of the Roman Emperor Claudius, told in the form of an autobiography. It continues right where "I, Claudius" leaves off, at Claudius's ascendancy to Emperor following Caligula's rather bloody end. Thanks to Livia, Tiberius, and Caligula, most of the politically prominent citizens of Rome have been poisoned, exiled, or otherwise done away with when Claudius begins his reign. So things are relatively peaceful for a while.

If you've read the other reviews of this book, you may get the impression that it's not near as good as the first and that you wouldn't be missing out on much by skipping it. And I guess it all comes down to your tastes. If you're looking for a story packed with intrigue and deception culminating in a triumphant ending, you won't find it in the sequel. There aren't as many loonies around anymore to laugh at. And the last few years of Claudius's reign are decidedly sobering.

Yet if you like reading about history as much as I do, there's still a ton of fascinating material here to immerse yourself in. Such as a rich background on Herod Agrippa, the Jewish king who feigns friendship with Claudius while secretly fomenting rebellion. Or interesting details on the Celtic druids' rituals. And of course an account of Claudius's successful invasion of Britain. Back at home Claudius's lovely wife Messalina eventually reveals her shocking true colors, leading to a purge of Rome's corrupt nobility by Claudius.

All narration is in the same style that distinguished the first book: witty, humorous, and anything but dry. At the end of the first book, I simply had to know what happened to Claudius next. So for me, this book was a necessary read and I'm pleased to say that it far surpassed the expectations I had formed upon reading many of the other reviews here. Claudius makes a heroic effort to repair the extensive damage that the mad Caligula wreaked on the Empire's finances and general well-being (such as adding ~150 holidays to the year!). He largely succeeds but only temporarily, then ultimately yields to the Empire's natural entropic tendency to fall into disorder. You may feel somewhat down after reading it, but you'll have to agree that the ride was fascinating while it lasted!

Highly recommended.

A lot of the reviews of this book fail to recognise the exercise in which Graves was engaged when writing this book. I agree that he glorifies Claudius beyond what we will find in many historical texts, and also that he goes on about Herod Agrippa (although some people, including myself, find this very interesting) and in general, the book is written rather differently to I, Claudius.

You must recall, however, whether you have read the book already or are considering reading it, that Graves sets about to write a fictional autobiography. That is the style that he chose and I think he does it brilliantly. In I, Claudius we see the various emperors of Rome through Claudius's eyes - we are shocked by their terror, their blood-thirstiness and the general tyranny of their rule. Claudius, as a Republican, allows us to see these things in a manner that we would understand. In this book, however, Graves is trying to give us insight into the mind of an emperor: we see the difference between what occupies his mind now and what did when he was just a citizen. We also see the manner in which he justifies his actions to himself. He is constantly claiming that his actions were not tyrannical, that he was not exercising imperial authority but that he was doing what any reasonable man in his circumstances would have done. In these passages Graves is making it clear to us that he is writing about Claudius as Claudius would have seen himself.

After all, it would have been rather boring to just have another book on how terrible this or that emperor was - here, Graves has attempted, quite boldly, to put us in the shoes of the emperor and see how a reasonable man could fall prey to the charms of virtually unlimited power over the most powerful empire in world history.

I think he does it brilliantly.