Books on the Roman Republic?

[hippacrocafish]

I'm interested in learning more about Rome's history, both the Republic and the Empire, but there seems to be a shameful lack of material on the Republic based on my searching. :l

Any recommendations would be appreciated, for either era, though I want to start with the Republic.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

'Livy - the History of Rome ' is the standard work and you can read it online (I'm doing so off and on right now).

'Polybius - The Histories' - the surviving books are good and cover our early timeframe well; particularly Book 6 which is a must read on the Republican Army organisation/recruitment. Available online I believe, but the Pengiun Classics is very good.

'Caesar - the Commentaries' (Gallic War, Spanish War, Civil War iirc) are good for the Later Republic - they're next on my list after Livy and also available online.

I've done a lot of reading recently.......

There are, of course, a lot of more modern works available. I've always liked Peter Conolly's 'Greece & Rome at War', which has some great artwork too. It has the odd inaccuracy (that I've now discovered), but he's not alone in that.

[tungri_centurion]

im now reading pompeii:life in a roman city my last book was great it called rome power whitout borders(it whas in dutch,dont know if its in other langueges) the books of livy,polybius and caesar are in english or latin?

[Sertorio]

http://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/home.html

Enjoy... i am reading Polibius myself.

[Sertorio]

There are, of course, a lot of more modern works available. I've always liked Peter Conolly's 'Greece & Rome at War', which has some great artwork too. It has the odd inaccuracy (that I've now discovered), but he's not alone in that.

I going to buy Conolly when its out in June...what inaccuracy ?
Sory for the double post.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

I going to buy Conolly when its out in June...what inaccuracy ?
...

The book I'm thinking of has been 'out' for years - perhaps there's something new.

The particular "inaccuracy" I am thinking of, is perhaps too strong a word, for which I apologise, although I am convinced myself - but who isn't, I could be wrong too....'misinterpretation' is probably better.

Polybius gives a comprehensive breakdown for the Consular Army Legion structure of 4,200, which he then details as: 1,200 Hasatati; 1,200 Principes; and 600 Triarii; with the rest being the Velites, who are subdivided proportionally.

Connolly, like others I have seen (which is why it's worth going back to the original text) repeats the breakdown, but states that it's 1,200 Velites - because they want it to add to 4,200, and then shows some subsequently odd pictures.

However, not only have such interpretations ignored the many other references in Polybius to 4,000 men; they ignore the subsequent bit in Book 6 that clearly shows that all the 'officers' have to come out of the 4,200 - pretty much 200 of them! Thus there are 1,000 Velites and that then is consistent with all the other references.

4,000 men split perfectly into 50 'centuria' equivalents of 60 Heavy Infantry + 20 Velites to total 80 - a figure that then lasts for, quite possibly, the next 900 years or so.

The Roman Cavalry detail is something I've been working on for the last 5 months, or so.......

[Sertorio]

The book I'm thinking of has been 'out' for years - perhaps there's something new.

New editors, cant even find the published ones in amazon...

For fiction writers i do like the "Eagle" series by Simon Scarrow and for Late Rome, the "Warrior of rome" series by Harry Sidebottom.

[Julio-Claudian]

If you want to begin with the early stages I'd suggest this:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Early-Histor...ef=pd_sim_b_15

I always read the ancient works. Tacitus, Plutarch et cetera. I feel that way any modern interpretation and inaccuracy can be avoided, but that's just me. Most of them wrote their accounts long after they happened so they mostly didn't witness the events but they did their research, it would have been like one of us writing about WW1 using notes from a soldier or something, whereas we only have their works to go by and not all of the contemporary sources, so we might as well just read those works that have survived. In any case they're bound to be more accurate. Of course it's ancient history so we'll never know everything.

But yeah anyway, I suggest that Livy.

[hippacrocafish]

Thanks for all the recommendations, guys! I'll be sure to pick at least one of these up.

[chaplain118]

If you're looking for historical fiction, Steven Saylor's Roma is a pretty interesting read. It covers Roman history from the foundation all the way until Augustus, though only select episodes that most readers of Roman history would be familiar with. It's pretty cool how he combines mythology of the founding with a more mundane version of history and then using human nature to twist those stories from acts of normal men into the stuff of legends. Definitely give it a go.

Colleen McCullough's Master of Rome series is also a good choice for the late Republic from Marius to Augustus.

[Tis Holiness]

*looks up above his computer at his Roman shelf*...If you want to know about the times of kings all the way up until about 300BC in the republic....read livy "The early history of rome" and Livy "Rome and Italy...(basically part 2)"

Polybius..."The Histories" (never read it but its on my amazon wishlist)
Plutarch..."Fall of the Republic"
A. H. Beesley..."The Gracchi Marius and Sulla"
Arthur Keaveney..."Sulla the last Republican" (One of my best books because Sulla is my hero.)

Empire books..... (I don't have a vast collection but these are my empire books)
Tacitus..."Agricola and Germania"
Tacitus..."Annuals of Imperial Rome" (I weirdly have 2 of those books:S)
Caesar..."The civil war"
Caesar..."The conquest of Gaul"
Cassius Dio..."The Roman History:The reign of Augustus
Suetonius..."the twelve Caesars"
Marcus Aurelius..."Meditations"

Basically if you want to know more on the republic...look up these people.....................
cincinatus,
Marcus Furius Camillus
Scipio Africanus (and all the rest of the scipios)
Publius Claudius Pulcher (If they won't eat. Then let them drink!)
Tiberius Sempronius Gracchus
Gaius Sempronius Gracchus
Cato the elder/younger
Lucius Cornelius Sulla felix..........(One of the republics great tragic heros)
Gaius Marius.......(nothing but an ambitious criminal)
Lucius Cinna
Carbo
Lucius Licinius Lucullus
Cicero
Marcus Antonius (Mark Antony)
Julius Caesar
Pompey Magnus
Marcus Brutus
...............theres plenty more people out there......but if you read those books (and theres plenty more out there I havent listed), and read up on those people...(Many many more i havent listed) then your knowledge of the Romans will be very very good.

[Diocle]

Lucius Cornelius Sulla felix..........(One of the republics great tragic heros)
Gaius Marius.......(nothing but an ambitious criminal)

Your point of view is a little politically deployed on the far right side of the Roman political compass!
I think exactly the opposite: Sulla was nothing more than scum! He was a small and close minded political criminal, and Caius Marius was The Man Who built the basis for the birth of the Roman Empire!...Do you see how the ancient history is able, still today, to divide the people!

[Diocle]

I want to suggest 'Historiae' by Ammianus Marcellinus, for people interested in IV century Roman history, it is better than any modern fiction work, it is really interesting: the heirs of Constantinus, the last Pagan Emperor, the battle of Adrianopolis, the greatest Roman defeat in the History, that changed forever the History of the Western Civilization the first description of the Huns, and battles, murders, intrigues, politics, conflicts of religions, really I do not think you could read anything better even in today fiction's works!

[ur-Lord Tedric]

I want to suggest 'Historiae' by Ammianus Marcellinus, for people interested in IV century Roman history, ....

I'm reading this right now as part of my research - and yes, very readable.

A general comment, however, which is also true in the version I'm reading - translators/interpreters do sadly have a regrettable habit (and it's been happening for many years) of 'modernising' military, indeed others too, terms (and not always consistently). I would like to know whether it was an 'Ala', 'Vexillatio' or 'Scholae' that is being referred to and the word 'squadron' is really not helpful!

[Diocle]

I'm reading this right now as part of my research - and yes, very readable.

A general comment, however, which is also true in the version I'm reading - translators/interpreters do sadly have a regrettable habit (and it's been happening for many years) of 'modernising' military, indeed others too, terms (and not always consistently). I would like to know whether it was an 'Ala', 'Vexillatio' or 'Scholae' that is being referred to and the word 'squadron' is really not helpful!

If you have also the Latin text, you might look at the Latin, words as 'Ala', 'Vexillatio' or 'Schola' can be read on the Latin text! I studied latin so I frequently lokk at the Latin text because as you said my Italian translation sometime is a little imprecise about military terms! Also some episode should be read or confronted with the original Latin text it is better.... (Exemple? The "accidental" (?) death of the Emperor iulianus! The last Pagan Imperator.....)
If you have only the English transaltion and not the latin Text, here the link to the 'Historiae' in Latin:

http://www.thelatinlibrary.com/ammianus.html

On IBFD Forums I reported that I found an incredible error (in my opinion voluntary) in the translation in the Internet English version of Ammianus XXV! Quite strange....if you want to take a look it is an interesting reading! .....sometime even changing the position of some words can change the correct interpretation of the text!...........Translations are a damned serious thing!

http://www.twcenter.net/forums/showthread.php?t=520130



Can I suggest also:

- Zosimus: 'New History' or 'Istoria Nea'

- Dio Cassius: 'Roman history'
- Flavius Vegetius Renatus: 'De Re Militari' (It is a MUST! )

- Arrian: 'Ektaxis Kata Alanon', (Array against the Alans) here a beautiful version:

http://members.tripod.com/~S_van_Dorst/Ancient_Warfare/Rome/Sources/ektaxis.html

Arrian is very interesting because he gives us the description of the Roman deployment against an Horse Archer/Cataphract army and the use of a Phalanx Legionary formation.

[ur-Lord Tedric]

If you have also the Latin text, you might look at the Latin, words as 'Ala', 'Vexillatio' or 'Schola' can be read on the Latin text! I studied latin .....

Oh, yes indeed, if it's available and can be read across. In fact not studying Latin at school, when I had the choice, is something I've often regretted given my interests. That said, learning German was genuinely useful, actually earned me some money and allowed me to convince nice German farmers to allow me to bring lots of heavy vehicles and sometimes even tanks on to their farms - and even have a few showers!

That said, a lot of those pesky Roman writers and their Greek chums insisted on doing lots of the good stuff in Ancient Greek - now, Roman terms and numbers I can do in Latin - but otherwise it's 'all Greek to me'

@Julio-Claudian - I don't mind so much if there's a consistent translation and an explanation - but multiple terms, which are actually different, being called the same - that is an issue. Using the classic Tacitus translation, it's really no problem to understand that 'Brigade = Legion (on its own)' and 'Division = Legion + attached Auxilia' - that's fine (as long as it's not taken too far!).

[Julio-Claudian]

I'm reading this right now as part of my research - and yes, very readable.

A general comment, however, which is also true in the version I'm reading - translators/interpreters do sadly have a regrettable habit (and it's been happening for many years) of 'modernising' military, indeed others too, terms (and not always consistently). I would like to know whether it was an 'Ala', 'Vexillatio' or 'Scholae' that is being referred to and the word 'squadron' is really not helpful!

Oh gosh. I read the annals by Tacitus (penguin classics) and it was all 'colour sergeant' and 'brigade' rather than the Roman terms. They do it so that people who "aren't familiar with Roman military terms" can understand, but it confused me more than anything, I had to constantly keep going back to the notes to check what was meant. Terribly annoying.

[ceaser543]

Personally a book that I think covers all your requirements would be In the Name of Rome by Adrian Goldsworthy. It follows specific figures through their military and political careers, from Fabius Maximus right the way to the late Empire, it does contain maps of key battles, such as the battle of Zama and the siege of Jerusalem but on a campaign wide scale I found there to be no real supporting maps for the majority of chapters.

[Ferdiad]

I really should read some of those history books. Look interesting.

[Diocle]

You did the right thing Ur-Lord!!!! German is very useful today!!!

Yes I was suggesting only to take a look at the Latin corresponding word only in the case you find a translation not correct or not credible!
The Latin texts are everywhere in Internet!

But please guys, read Vegetius 'Epitoma rei militaris' the 'Roman Art of the War'!...it is required! It is necessary! It is a moral duty! It is in your interest! You have to feel obliged! It is a good choice! It could be useful also to 'convince German farmers'! It is a religious choice! It is a good atheist choice! Vegetius ia a good man, help him! Read his book! DVK read Vegetius for sure! What could be the life without Vegetius? Please guys, seriously now, read the 'Epitoma Rei Militaris'!