paolo

I picked the 'everything' button because we couldn't pick more than one. I enjoy learning about Italian history from Ancient times to the Renaissance. Oh yeah and the food is good too.

I was born in the States, and I'll die in the States.

Count me in, which book is best ?

Is religion bad for society? 'Religion' itself is not bad, people who use it for malevolent purposes are harmful. Does it make more problems than it can fix? It doesn't make problems, it's simply been a prevalent choice for using as a facade to hide ulterior motives. Is it a positive influence in society? Sometimes is given the opportunity to be a positive influence. What is religion to you? A way to connect to our Maker. Everyone has a different way of doing (or refraining from doing) this. Religion is a means of expression and why people argue over which way is better is about as ridiculous as arguing over who's favourite food is best.

I just started it, he has me hooked.

i finished the book, actually i got skimming on it. now i know why i was starting to stall around (and have time to return here). he still had some great writing, but got a bit bogged down in the pace. i didn't fully understand the deal with tissarphernes at the end. how about ford's "the last king" is that a good one ? i will get ahold of "gates of fire" too.

Ursus, ah you think like me. I wrote down that "Rubicon" recommendation too.

primuspilus, I also tried "I, Claudius" and you are right, it didn't appeal. I couldn't feel the characters. They seemed too flat and distant. I put it down pretty quickly.

primuspilus, I finally took one of your recommendations and am 3/4's through "The Ten Thousand" by Michael Curtis Ford. This is really good writing ! I can't believe the negative comments he got at Amland. I will have to put in a good word for him when I am finished. I haven't done a review there in awhile. It's so hard from me to break away from my 'non-fiction' to read fiction. So now I am reading both. But I think I am learning a lot from this fiction too. I really enjoy how he fleshes out the characters and brings the reader right in the middle of everything. His ruminations and sense of humour are well incorporated diversions.

primuspilus : thank you for your list of book recommends. oddly enough, in the past few years i had bought a few of michael grant's books, but only referred to the "a guide to the ancient world: a dictionary of classical place names". then a few days ago, i finally started to read one of the others "the founders of the western world" and decided to google around and see what i could find on him. lo and behold, i landed here. *smiles* i am sad to find out that he has passed away. it's kind of bizarre that it happened so close to when i decided to read one. no doubt some horoscope/karma person would have a fun time in their speculations. reading non-fiction takes up most of my brain supply, but i have taken note of your fiction recommends and will have to sample. (i also see now, that i didn't specify whether i was referring to non-fiction or fiction, and indeed we were discussing fiction, so that would be the obvious guess) if robert graves is similar in style to mccullough, i will take ur advice and hold off on that. that you single out steven pressfield, intrigues me. any specific reasons ? i am even newer to greek history, but i am finding it intriguing. i have read edith hamilton's "greek way" while i learned a lot from her book, i found her writing style irritating. is it because her vernacular is dated ? her general message, was inspiring to me. is she the originator of those or just popularizing them ? thank you for the link to your book review. (i toss in a customer review every once in a while at amland) i can't say i am a mystery fan, the idea of guessing a mystery about a fiction seems peculiar to me, because the author could do anything. what also baffles me, is murder mysteries are supposedly the preference of librarians. i can't imagine piciking up a mystery with so many tempting options surrounding me. that's like choosing a bowl of strawberries instead of the chocolate ganache cake off the dessert tray. <-i have actually witnessed this phenomena. paolo

primuspilus : i understand that he took historical 'liberties' and the exact ones would only be important if he 1) didn't admit to doing so (which he does) or 2) if it took away from the feel of the general time period he was representing. i know that they were not born close enough to have been 'pals' but that's the beauty of fiction, combining them for a 'what if' or 'ideal' as a fun way to portray two characters who would perhaps have made an interesting friendship/relationship. more what i was asking, were there details which took away from that general time period. i have seen mentioned in some of the other amazon reviews that there were no corn crops at that time, or the author used unlikely wording for expressions. these would be things that would be harmful to the accurate general image, more so than the mixing of almost contemporary figures if they lived in similar enough times and settings. that caesar was not raised on a country estate would be valid if one feels that would change his personality too much. but the fact that there were indeed such estates at that time, would make it an acceptable choice otherwise. similiarly this would apply for other deviations from known facts. since i am just a beginner at all this, the deviations did not jump out at me and distract me from enjoying the story. maybe historical authors would do well to take note of those readers of historical fiction who despite these points in defense of "artists' license", would bow to the demand for attention to detailed accuracy or simply refrain from using specific historical characters and invent their own. i want to make clear not even these two options include bestselling enigmas like dan brown who obviously has a better agent than editor. his literary faux paux are too many to count. <- this is not a result of anything you have said, it just rattles my cage how glaringly stupid his book is and how many people gush over it. paolo

oh, i am happy to see this game getting rave reviews. i have never played a war game before and was thinking of this one. i hope i figure it out though.

u make a good point that iggulden uses a specific historical figure when if he didn't want to stick with the facts, he could have used a representative figure, although mixing the two, true figures with 'composite' ones as well as 'summarizing' events and other people, have been done. as far as the implausibility of some things, now that would be a valid point, isolated. everything should be 'believeable' even in the fiction realm. i'm afraid you have me at a disadvantage of what might be implausible, as i am only an amateur reader of history. if you happen to remember specific examples, i would be curious to know what they are. (i don't know how long ago you read the book) what are some of your favourite history writers, especially of rome ? i am currently reading "the founders of the western world" by michael grant, who seems to have just passed away. what do you think of his work ? (i'm new here as you know, maybe you have posts on this elsewhere on the site) paolo ps: i use these bigger fonts because i have an lcd screen and it makes font tiny and added to this, my screen sits at the back of the desk so i can work in front of it, i don't do it because i think my posts should be more noticeable, i wish everyone would 'raise their font'

while i will not dispute that colleen mccullough is highly regarded in her research and her accuracy, that is not enough to make her an artful fiction writer. i do take issue with that conn uggulden spins a tale that has little to do with history. while mr. uggulden takes chronological liberties with his work, he is not unlike so many writers, through the ages who have done the same and have been highly esteemed ie: homer and the authors of the king arthur legends and the bible. rather than emphasizing chronological accuracy, their aim is to provide a feel for the time period and types of people on all levels. it is for this reason they might combine a number of historical figures into one fictional character or likewise blend historical events. this approach is different but not less accurate in order to provide a history which both entertains and informs, while the reader understands strict chronology is to be found elsewhere. in contrast to mr uggulden's work, i mention dan brown who is not only historically inaccurate but fails to provide believeable characters, by 'dumbing down' their dialogue (what art historian in the last hundred years would not immediately recognize leonardo da vinci's backward handwriting ?) he also does not provide a disclaimer, on the contrary he claims to have done careful research. mr uggulden on the other hand puts in a disclaimer, revealing where he changed the facts. as long as this is done, then the reader is not misled. what ms. mccullough fails to do, is provide a flowing account to flesh out history. i would imagine she would make a better non-fiction author. as you say, it's a preference in style, and i offer my viewpoint in the spirit of friendliness, always enjoying a healthy volley of opinions. obviously a lot of people disagree with me, both are best sellers, where mr uggulden has not yet achieved that status.

salve, i'm new here. . . and very impressed with the options, especially the instant messenger links. everything so well organized. and while i'm at it, primuspilus, your signature is hilarious. paolo

i agree with ursus and julian, colleen mccullough is too dry. her prose is riddled with explanations and descriptions. if i'm going to read dry stuff, i'll just go for a 'regular' history, why struggle through a fiction ? i think conn uggulden is a very artful writer. he doesn't get bogged down the way mccullough does. he artfully reveals not only the personality of the historical figures, but their very soul. there is not a lot of background simply because this is a more psychological approach. the focus is about character development, learning what it feels like to live in ancient rome. mr. iggulden introduces five characters in the first few pages, and manages to weave enough clues into the action and dialogue to effectively develop all personalities, without resorting to artless paragraphs of description and explanation. only an accomplished writer can carry this off. This is what makes a story move along. if the reader must wade through countless paragraphs without any action, the storyline stagnates. his writing style is phenomenal. through dialogue and gesture, he reveals wonderfully rounded out personalities. gifted writing paired with an intriguing glimpse into the emotions of ancient romans. another popular author who does not impress me is mary renault paolo

salve, this is my first post. i am delighted to have found this forum and enjoy reading about history and art from ancient - renaissance. i am responding to pompeis magnus' on books about the early days of the republic or before: "the roman conquest of italy" by jean-michel david LINK Patriccio Garrahan gives a good review: "...This not a history of the conquest of Italy by Rome but a history of how after being conquested by Rome Italy became "Romanized". another book if i may, "storming the heavens: soldiers, emperors, and civilians in the roman empire" by antonio santosuosso : LINK a wonderful study of the roman armies in the early roman republic. of course there are lots of books that cover the whole range which would have early sections, like "handbook to life in ancient rome" LINK or any number of historical atlases on rome. i am new here, please excuse me if i have repeated any suggestions another has previously made. paolo