09-28-2001, 03:42 PM
I've read all the McCullough series, but I'm afraid I found them fairly turgid going. They are formidably researched, and I guess quite an entertaining way to learn about (a possible version) of late Republican history, but great literature they ain't! She falls into the perennial pitfall for not-very-good historical novelists of wearing her learning heavily. So anxious is she to display her knowledge of the period that it is continuously forced upon the reader.<br>
<br>
An interesting contrast is the Alan Massie series, comprising to date 5 books, in order of publication (from memory): Augustus; Tiberius; Caesar; Antony; and Nero's Heirs.<br>
<br>
Their standard is, frankly, uneven; and in some I would differ from nuances of Massey's historical interpreation (but hey - how accurate is Graves's depiction of Livia?). Against that, the writer is a major literary figure quite apart from his Roman sequence, and it shows in the general quality of his books. (Perhaps I am biased, since like Massey I am a Scot!).<br>
<br>
Anyone else got any views on these?<br>
<br>
Glasguensis <p></p><i></i>
<br>
An interesting contrast is the Alan Massie series, comprising to date 5 books, in order of publication (from memory): Augustus; Tiberius; Caesar; Antony; and Nero's Heirs.<br>
<br>
Their standard is, frankly, uneven; and in some I would differ from nuances of Massey's historical interpreation (but hey - how accurate is Graves's depiction of Livia?). Against that, the writer is a major literary figure quite apart from his Roman sequence, and it shows in the general quality of his books. (Perhaps I am biased, since like Massey I am a Scot!).<br>
<br>
Anyone else got any views on these?<br>
<br>
Glasguensis <p></p><i></i>