Claudius (Roman Imperial Biographies) 1st Edition

I really wish that I could recommend this book stronger. Claudius was a very interesting person, that much is clear, but Ms. Levick does a horrible job of it. As one previous reviewer noted, she continually refers to Claudius as THE usurper. The reason for using such a strongly negative word in association with Claudius isn't clear. Certainly he could be considered a usurper, although given the circumstances of his predecessor Caligula's death it's hard to state who had more of a right than him, but to refer to him as such constantly is annoying. It's even stranger considering that her presentation of him is generally positive even though she seems to work hard to use negative terms in describing him. Now, I'm not complaining because her view of Claudius is different than mine. I don't know many biographies where I agree with all the interpretations. It just seems that she doesn't put enough effort into finding out who he truly was. Or perhaps she has, and just doesn't present it well. All I know is that it seems a jumbled mess.The other thing about this book is that it, in common with a number of other scholarly books, is divided into two basic sections. The first part from 1-80 is a basic narrative of his personal life. By this I mean his marriages, his family, and the many conspiracies against his life. This would seem to be the more interesting section, but she never mentions anything outside this limited topic. As you can imagine, it's confusing to have her refer to major events such as the conquest of Britain without explaining anything about it. And that reference only came about in relation to one of the senators who was executed. The section on the invasion comes only in the second section of the book. I know that scholars like to divide a reign up into sections but in what purports to be, in part, a biography it interferes with the narrative. Some mention of the major events of his reign need to be placed in the first section just so that it can be understood where they stand in relation to the other events. It doesn't help that her dry style is particularly hard to work through. The second star is only there because this is the only biography that I could find on this interesting man. If a better one comes out I may revise my opinion downwards.

A fine book. Worth the read. A good book to read after reading "I, Claudius". I suggest reading the fictional novels along with the history book. The novels will get you enthused, the history book will get you informed. Enjoy.

This book was an excellent overview of one of the critical emperors during the formation of the early Christian church. Profesor Levick provided new insights into one of the lesser known Emperors, and some excellent suggestions as to why he might have taken some of the actions that he did. This would be an excellent source for anyone studying early Christianity as well as roman emperors.

It is clear that Barbara Levick did a tremendous job of research for this book. I found that the writing was unclear in places and got bogged down with too much detail.

This is one of the few times I've been disappointed in a book I've gotten from Amazon. First, the book smelled moldy like it had been stored in a damp place for a long time. Second, it was very poorly written. While it provided a lot of facts, it broke them up into various categories which detracted from the biography and it went well beyond Claudius' reign, as far back as Augustus and forward into not only Nero's reign, but well beyond again detracting from the biography.

Barbara Levick's 'Claudius' is a good resource to use when falling under the Claudian spell of such works as Graves' 'I, Claudius' and 'Claudius the God', or the 'I, Claudius' BBC production. This will help put a proper historical perspective on the man and emperor, Tiberius Claudius Nero Germanicus. Get used to the panoply of names-each noble Roman shares many names with the others in his family, thus making history often confusing.Among the things Graves' readers might miss (and certainly the television-only set will miss) is that Claudius was married four times, had five children, and was much more less of a dolt in these matters than one would realise.Levick explores some of the intrigues of the Julii Caesares as well as the Claudii Nerones; she explores the history from all angles. She looks to the politics and the sociological realities of family and court life to explain what ambitions Claudius really had, and what he might actually look forward to accomplishing in his life. 'Seneca's scathing comment on Claudius after his death was that `nobody thought he had ever been born'. In connection with this a remark of his mother Antonia recorded by Suetonius may be relevant. He claims that Antonia used to speak of her son (she need only have said it once for it to be presented as a leitmotiv!) as `a monstrosity of a human being, one that Nature began and never finished'. Antonia's hostility to her `unfinished' youngest child was probably intensified when she almost immediately lost her husband, and, a quarter of a century later, her even more brilliant elder son: now primacy was lost to her family.'Levick explores Claudius' childhood and education, which continued past the usual age, given his apparent deformities. His tutors attended him well past the usual age of tutelage. She spend a little time also writing of his princeps under Tiberius and Gaius Caligula, which shows he was not universally ignored or despised, and so his accession, though unlikely, was by no means improbable.C.E. Stevens makes the claim that Claudius was the first Roman Emperor; Augustus put together a bundle of offices and powers, which Tiberius variously held and let lapse; Caligula informed the senate of his accession and took all honours almost instantly, so perhaps Stevens is incorrect in his assessment. However, Claudius helped to formalise this automatic transfer of powers and offices as a right of imperial position, such that all future emperors, upon taking the name Caesar as a title (Claudius took it as a name, the prestigious cognomen of his illustrious ancestor) would also instantly have the array of offices and powers at their disposal.Levick continues to explore Roman society and body politic under Claudius by segment: social classes (senate, equestrian order, and aristocracy), the legal machinery (with which he was particularly interested in, and made a shift from tradition to that of individual welfare, a novel approach for the day), finance and the economy (including Claudius' ambitious public works projects), and she gives particular attention to Claudius' military campaigns and progresses, especially his triumphant battles in Britain.Levick concludes with an examination of the legacy of Claudius over the ages. Beginning with Nero's accession speech to the Senate, drafted by Seneca (who hated Claudius) which listed in great number and detail all of Claudius' failings, to the uneven revisions during the later Flavians (who took seriously Claudius' social legislation and deification at the expense of Nero's memory), then later historians, then being dropped from all but a few official functions by the third century. Fifth and sixth century historians such as Orosius and Malalas showed Claudius through the lens of their own agenda, to show God at work in the world through his clemency and care for stricken cities. By the time of George Syncellus in the eighth century, he was portrayed as a bloodthirsty man with some courage (given his battles in Britain, Germany and Thrace).In the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Claudius' reign has been revised in view once more, by work such as that of Mommsen, Momigliano, and others studying his achievements, proclaiming him as the emperor who was `the great establisher of norms', and paying particular attention to his organisational ability with regard to civil and military matters.Claudius, alas, was a usurper, and seen as such all through his reign, and even after (often as a model by which others used the army to seize power). He was never really secure. But he was successful against high odds, and a source of stability in a era which needed such.

Claudius is an `odd' Emperor, if I may use the phrase to describe the leader of the Roman Empire from AD 41 to 54. He has, in general knowledge, been portrayed as bumbling, disfigured, stupid - but he appears really to have been a shrewd man who made the best of his life in the best way he could. He appears to have been scorned by his mother, who is recorded by Suetonius as having described her youngest son as "a monstrosity of a human being, one that Nature began and never finished". Not the kindest of remarks to have made, if it was true. Son of Nero Drusus (whose mother was Livia, wife of the first Princeps, Augustus), and Antonia (daughter of Mark Antony and Octavia the Younger, sister of Augustus), Claudius was born in 10 BC. Apparently because of his slight deafness and a limp, he was passed over for passage through the cursus honorum for much of his younger life, and lived for years in the shadow of his more famous brother Germanicus; perhaps that allowed him to gather his own shrewd observations on his Julio-Claudian family, and the wider Roman imperial family; and perhaps to remain safe until his own time came. After the murder of his nephew Gaius Caligula in AD 41, Claudius was said to have been forced to declare himself Emperor by the Praetorian Guards; but you get the impression that Claudius may well have been more involved, and more aware of what was going on around him, than many knew, or than he let on.Claudius courted danger by downgrading the role of the Senate, and it was the senators who caused him the most political difficulty during his reign. Even from the death of Caligula, it appears that the Senate were debating their options when they were confronted with a fait accompli of Claudius as Emperor. Given the inherent potential antipathy of the Senate towards his rule, Claudius imposed more controls upon them, and removed some of their consultative powers. It could be said that Claudius' reign was a sharp move in Roman Imperial history towards a more direct monarchy, rather than the autocracy under the guise of Senatorial rule that had been embraced by earlier Julio-Claudians.I have read several of Barbara Levick's books, particularly around Augustus and Tiberius, and many of her papers - on Tiberius, Drusus, Agrippa Postumus and others. She is a learned and authoritative source and writes very well; her writing is not, however, for those with no previous knowledge. You really need to have a basic grounding on the topic before tackling in-depth analysis of some of the trickier episodes of Roman history, and Claudius' life and reign require careful thinking and scrutiny to come to balanced conclusions. I don't necessarily agree with all her conclusions, but I admire her analysis and the approach she takes in her writing. This book is a great overall view of Claudius and his reign, arranged both chronologically and thematically throughout, and I would recommend it to anyone wanting to learn more about the period.

very very good

Great source of information if you want to learn about the Emperor Claudius, not too dense or slow but not super exciting either.