Henrique _gj
03-03-2020, 02:53 PM
Hi, I'm new to clraik. I don't play neopets but I wanted to share my opinion on this book.
FOA, english is not my native language. I apologize for my broken english.
The first problem is the unnecessary historical inaccuracy. I know it's not a problem per se, after all, little is known about the early life of Julius Caesar. But the author has changed even what is known and what did not need to be changed, for example, the kinship of the characters and their positions. (examples in spoiler tags at the end)
The second problem is that the story is slow paced, and some parts are irrelevant, having no future impact, turning the book boring sometimes.
The third problem is that the story is too simple. Some characters and their relationships are too simple. But principaly for me, the politics are too simple. The politics are so important for the roman history that it should have been better explored. The book would have been better for me if that aspect had been dealt with in greater depth.
--The civil war between Marius and Sulla was almost entirely fictional. Iggulden changed the location, the duration and the history of the war, as well as how and when some deaths happened and the attribution of some achievements. I understand the reason to some of this changings but some I just want to know why.
Why is Mithridates referred to as the king of Greece who rebelled against Roman rule if, in real history, he was king of Pontus, which had never been subject to Rome? The Second Mithridatic War really happened in real life, in the same period, with the same people. Telling the real reason would certainly not be a problem for the narrative. An historical fiction can be a funny way of learning a bit about history, but not with this amount of inaccuracy, and apparently sometimes the accuracy in this book was sacrificed for just no reason.
--
I know that this book is very revered, including by great writers, so I think I may be making a poor judgment. Maybe just because of that I created a too high expectation. Please, let me know your opinion.
FOA, english is not my native language. I apologize for my broken english.
The first problem is the unnecessary historical inaccuracy. I know it's not a problem per se, after all, little is known about the early life of Julius Caesar. But the author has changed even what is known and what did not need to be changed, for example, the kinship of the characters and their positions. (examples in spoiler tags at the end)
The second problem is that the story is slow paced, and some parts are irrelevant, having no future impact, turning the book boring sometimes.
The third problem is that the story is too simple. Some characters and their relationships are too simple. But principaly for me, the politics are too simple. The politics are so important for the roman history that it should have been better explored. The book would have been better for me if that aspect had been dealt with in greater depth.
--The civil war between Marius and Sulla was almost entirely fictional. Iggulden changed the location, the duration and the history of the war, as well as how and when some deaths happened and the attribution of some achievements. I understand the reason to some of this changings but some I just want to know why.
Why is Mithridates referred to as the king of Greece who rebelled against Roman rule if, in real history, he was king of Pontus, which had never been subject to Rome? The Second Mithridatic War really happened in real life, in the same period, with the same people. Telling the real reason would certainly not be a problem for the narrative. An historical fiction can be a funny way of learning a bit about history, but not with this amount of inaccuracy, and apparently sometimes the accuracy in this book was sacrificed for just no reason.
--
I know that this book is very revered, including by great writers, so I think I may be making a poor judgment. Maybe just because of that I created a too high expectation. Please, let me know your opinion.