Philip Freeman (1)Recensioni

Freeman is well known in the historical world as the author of what is considered "the best" biography of Julius Caesar. (I have not read). In this book, the author begins at the beginning when Hannibal's, father, Hamilcar Barca, became General of the Carthage forces. Hannibal was aged around 8-10 at this time and swore to his father that he would never become a friend to Rome. After the death of his father and at the age of 26, Hannibal became the General of the Carthage forces. Some print was dedicated to the "story" of the war elephants, but this author said too much is made of that particular episode as it was not nearly as successful as people currently believe. Most of the book centered on the Battle of Cannae in 216 BCE and what Hannibal did and did not do. What he did was surround Rome and route the Roman legion. What he did not do was invade the city proper and raze it; for he could have. He has been hailed as both a hero and a coward for this decision. Hannibal thought it not a wise use of resources nor worth the loss of the tens of thousands of lives it would have cost for an invasion of the city proper.

I also liked this book because the 19 pages at the end listed several of the main scholarly writings from which the author obtained his information. Amongst them: Livy, Polybius, Pinder, and Plutarch. The author attempts to evaluate their bias.

Enjoyed it. If felt like it was written for a younger reader until one scene involving pagan rites.

Decent history and look into the world Sappho would have grown up and lived in. I felt the author's translations, though illuminating in parts (describing the translation difficulties and nuances) were less vibrant than Mary Barnard. I also appreciated the weaving of her poetry to the history and biography, especially in regard to sticking with the female perspective that is so lacking, but I just wish there was more! 160 pages of bio/history left me wanting.

As with his other biographies, the author has a simple and straightforward writing style which makes the narrative flow smoothly. Given the scope of Alexander‘s momentous achievements, it is easy to become bogged down in the detail of his journeys. However, the author strikes a good balance – he narrates Alexander‘s life and times with sufficient specificity, but maintains the reader’s attention.

An excellent first foray for those interested in Alexander. For those with more knowledge, the book does not present any new or novel concepts, but is still a worthwhile read.

This is an excellent biography. Freeman's writing style is clear and concise. Summarizing Caesar's astounding life is a daunting task, yet this work sufficiently covers all pertinent aspects and yet flows smoothly and quickly.

My only small issue is that battle narratives are so brief that one cannot get a realistic sense of what transpired.

Highly recommended, and the best Caesar biography other than Adrian Goldsworthy's seminal work.

Just a great read, period. Doesn't matter the genre, Phillip Freeman has crafted one of the best biographies/histories that I have read to-date. I really reads like a work of fiction, it is lucid and the prose is excellent. It is readable for anyone (well anyone high school and older) and for being of ancient material, it is well researched. Just a great job by the author and a fun book to read.

I kept thinking, this is a story that HBO should make a mini series about...everything about Alexander was just over-the-top.

Highly recommended for anyone!½

Philip Freeman has here provided a popular biography of Alexander that makes is accessible to a public library audience without offending a snob. He said he was writing a narrative, not an analysis, and he does. One odd effect is that the reader seems to connect with Alexander the royal tourist as the Macedonian rube arrives at the great Eastern cities and gapes at their wonders.
Freeman judges him by the standards of his time and doesn’t find him better or worse morally. The standards of the time, it is understood, included destroying the lives, often literally, of thousands of civilians who trying to live their lives. What was exceptional about him was his genius as a general, his ambition, and his impact. Freeman surprised me twice when discussing the latter. He believes that Greek culture might have been another cultural backwater if Alexander hadn’t spread it as a military necessity. (Freeman trucks no nonsense about Alexander the cultural ambassador.) And he believes that Christianity couldn’t have spread throughout the Roman Empire if the use of “Alexander’s Greek” hadn’t been widespread.

Oh My Gods is a good book, albeit with a misleading name. There is nothing modern about these retellings. But the title intrigues people. Whenever anyone saw me reading this book, they'd say "Oh my Gods!" and I'd be like, "what?".

I especially liked the tales of the great adventures that Greek (and a few Roman) "heroes" went on. I put heroes in quotes because none of the heroes were very ethical. Even Hercules did a lot of terrible stuff. But you'll just have to read the book. See, the chapters about the gods were pretty much a long list of all the women they raped. While that may be historically accurate, I just didn't want to read through all of that. By the way, this book is definitely not for children. It has VERY adult content.

I got this book for free through Goodreads First Reads.

A collection of primary or secondary sources of primarily Irish pagan and Christian ideas, beliefs, practices, and stories.

For each piece the author explains the context, how the story is known, and how it illuminates Celtic spirituality. The stories range from myths regarding heroes and gods of old, explanations of practices and beliefs, poems, stories of saints, personal witness from saints, and the like.

A good resource for primary documentation of Irish religious views in the first millennia BCE and CE.

**--galley received as part of early review program

I put down Adrian Goldsworthy's biography of Caesar to try this one. Goldsworthy's bio is more comprehensive, though drier, and seemed to misunderstand or ignore the significance of some events in Caesar's childhood (his being saddled with the flamen dialis priesthood chief among them). Freeman's bio, despite being breezier, handles some of these details better. Overall, it's a solid bio that provides a good understanding of Caesar and his world. However, it doesn't spend much time reflecting on some of the bigger questions surrounding Caesar and his character, motivations, etc. These are unanswerable things, of course, but the kinds of questions you'd hope a biographer would delve into. My only other complaint would be that this hardcover edition was riddled with typos and a few factual mistakes (perhaps more, as I wouldn't know some errors if I read them). It does make me want to go and read some of the original source material (Caesar, Cicero, etc.), which I've put off, as it seems too much like homework.

I read a lot of biographies. I think many times, history is best learned and understood through studying the people that make it.

This biography of Alexander the Great is quite different from most that I read. Instead of a well footnoted (it does have end notes), scholarly presentation, this is very informally written. In some ways, it makes it more readable, in others, however, I find it detracts and sometimes distracts.

Writing biographies of ancient personages is a tricky business. Sometimes there is very little source material. In others, what source material exists cannot be certified as accurate. That is certainly the case here, where the sources many times conflict markedly. At other times, supernatural forces are credited.

This account does give a nice historical timeline and includes a handy map which tracks Alexander’s campaign through the Middle East, Persia, the Hindu Kush and Indus basin. It introduces all the main characters in his life and doesn’t engage in hagiography.

The best biographers, such as David McCollough, Ron Chernow and Walter Isaacson produce impeccably researched works that are both academically rigid, yet perfectly readable. Of course, their subjects did not live 300 years before the birth of Christ. Anyone looking for a somewhat informal treatment of the life and campaigns of Alexander the Great could probably do worse.½

Is an OK book but the stories themselves are just confused repetitive bizarre nonsense.

Lots of battles, injuries, betrayals, bad guys, good guys, etc. I don’t know what else I expected but it was well-told and relatively short compared to other options. I felt like I got inside Alexander’s head with this book—he wanted to rule the world. He could be very kind and generous, mainly if it helped him conquer the world.

A nice biography of Alexander the Great. Classics professor Philip Freeman keeps it readable; no footnotes, although there’s a page-indexed section on sources in the end matter. Freeman is always careful to note where the ancient authors disagree on some aspect of Alexander’s career – which is fairly often – and although willing to speculate on some of the controversial aspects (for example, did Alexander and his mother Olympias conspire to murder his father, Philip II) he doesn’t try to make a personal case for anything. Maps of the Aegean and the Persian Empire (although none of individual battles); a plate section is mostly photographs of the modern appearance of important sites.

If you are a woman who lived thousands of years ago, there is not going to be a whole lot recorded about your life, even if you were a famous poet in your time. The author does his best to use what was known about life for women in the world of ancient Greece, combined with her poetry, to give you a hint of what Sappho's life may have been like. The coolest thing about this book is that all her (known) poetry is included, even the verse fragments that literally are a single word. It is fascinating and a bit haunting.

Now I need to read Freeman's first two!

A nice little collection.

This is a fantastic book and fascinating biography of one of history's greatest men, and certainly one of the greatest military minds to have ever existed. I thought I knew a bit about Alexander the Great. I was wrong. This book is incredibly comprehensive, while remaining reader-friendly and retaining the reader's interest. I never knew just how damn BIG Alexander's empire was! Having read about Darius of Persia, a number of the Romans, Genghis Khan, the Moors, Ottomans, Hitler's Germany, Stalin and the Warsaw Pact territories, Mao, and so many others, I've come to the conclusion that Alexander the Great conquered and ruled over the greatest (in terms of geography, logistics, etc.) empire the world has ever seen. Previously it had been Darius and the great Persian Empire, but Alexander conquered that enemy and extended the realms of his empire from western and northern Europe, eastern and southern Europe, through the Middle East, virtually all of North Africa, all the way through Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Pakistan, and even throughout India! And he did ALL of this before turning age 32, which he never reached as he died shortly before that date. Indeed, Alexander the Great can probably lay claim to have been THE greatest, or certainly one of the world's very greatest, leader the world has ever seen, and in the shortest period of time! Did he turn out to be the most influential? No, that was Jesus, followed by Mohammad. But he spread Greek civilization and culture throughout virtually all of the known world, which impacted much of history for centuries after his death. It was because of him that the later "greatest" empire -- the Roman Empire -- communicated globally largely in Greek, looked up to the Greeks, continued to circulate their Hellenic culture through the Roman world, why the New Testament was written in Greek, why centuries of human history were recorded in Greek, and so much more. If you're remotely interested in human history, cultural history, western civilization, and military history, this is a book not to miss. Most definitely recommended!

I gave up on this. It was good, but not really anything new.

Reads like a novel and is impeccably detailed.

Brigid is my patron saint and I'm always happy to read anything about her. I'm glad this was based on actual history and I learned quite a few new things. I'm glad the ending was not predictable. Caught quite a few typos that the editor should have spotted.

Medieval Ireland, the Druids and the Christians, this is what drew me to this series. Sister Deidre is a Druid bard, well respected and she is also a nun at the Monastery in Kildare. Christianity is gaining a small foothold ever since the monastery was founded by Brigid, but most are still Druids. The murder of some of the sisters in the old way of Druid sacrifices may start a war between clans and Sister Deidre is called on to find out who is the killer.

I actually liked the first in series much better, but I do love reading about the older religions and how Ireland was ruled and separated into clans. The storyline was good but not as well written, and there seemed to be some outlandish occurrences that just seemed awkward. Still it was an okay read for the history and I didn't guess the murderer so there was that.

Unusual time period and setting (druids & nuns), but the mystery isn't very interesting once you get the motive. MIght get better if series progresses. Reviewed for Booklist.

A teacher of classic literature decides to make the stories of the Greek and Roman gods more accessible to a wide audience, believing these stories can appeal to the modern reader (with which this reviewer concurs). The stories are written with a light, modern touch, while remaining true to the original story, not trying to move it into the modern world of cellphones and supersonic jets. The author delineates the histories of the various gods and goddesses, and includes many of the most familiar myths such as the Golden Fleece and the face that launched a thousand ships. His telling of the Medea story (and to some extent the story of Helen) betrays a modern sensitivity as he does not go out of his way to make her an evil villainess but rather a woman wronged by a weak man whom she had helped to gain the glory he enjoyed. There is some selectiveness in which stories he leaves in and which he leaves out, as well as some things in the stories that are not quite complete, perhaps because of some disagreement on the sources. He does indicate that he is using the most widely spread versions, though he does reference in some cases what other versions of the story say. Easy to read and accessible.½

3.5 Stars - This was an entertaining tale of sixth-century cloistered life within Ireland - the peaceful (for the most part) coexistence of Pagan and Christian ritual and thought. The characters are well-developed and the women - strong in character. The quest was thwarted with twists, turns and deadends. The reader is held in suspense until the very end (although some may have their suspicions as each option is ruled out).

As entertaining as the story was, I cannot say that I was transported to the 6th century as the tale is told in voices of contemporay language. This, of course, made it a much faster read but left me glimpsing into the book but not fully entering the story as if there as an observer.½