SUMMARY Adrian Goldsworthy’s book, Augustus First Emperor of Rome is an extensive biography examining the life and political dominance of Rome’s first emperor, Caesar Augustus. Goldsworthy states that he wrote this biography in an attempt to give a more detailed and accurate account of the life of Caesar Augustus. He believed that Caesar Augustus’ life was separated into three distinct time periods based on his given name at the time. “Thus, we have a man with three very distinct names at different stages of his life, and a fair bit of variation in form and detail even with these. There are five sections in the book; the first two are separated by his name Caius Octavius and Caius Julius Caesar. These sections are what, Goldsworthy saw
…show more content…
To convey this to the reader he split the book into sections based on how Augustus was known at the time. He also uses chronological order in his description beginning with the birth of Augustus until his death in 44 CE. In addition to using chronological order, Goldsworthy also uses very detailed explanations of the events. To support his ideas, he used primary documents. When looking at the bibliography and endnotes, Goldsworthy uses numerous sources from different perspectives. His detail in the notes allows anyone that reads Augustus First Emperor of Rome the ability to do further research if they wish. He uses many different ones with different views, such as Augustus’ autobiography, Cicero, Virgil and Suetonius, which helps support his thesis of a complicated …show more content…
He is a university-educated historian so he reaches as far into the details as he is able to with the sources available to him. He does however, use more academic language that may be hard for the casual reader to understand. It can be easy to get lost in all the details Goldsworthy gives and even harder since it is the subject of ancient Rome where language was already different than what is used today.
Steve Donoghue from the Washington Post did a review of Augustus First Emperor of Rome and analyzed how he wrote about Augustus as a military dictator. “Goldsworthy relates the military victories, the hairbreadth escapes, the diplomatic successes and the dark family quarrels with a storyteller’s brio, bringing alive the empire’s tense standoffs with Eastern kingdoms such as Parthia and along the way giving us some quite wonderful readings of poets such as Virgil and Horace.” . Steve Donoghue believes Goldsworthy are weak but he does a good job of explaining the facts even with the weak primary sources he
To convey this to the reader he split the book into sections based on how Augustus was known at the time. He also uses chronological order in his description beginning with the birth of Augustus until his death in 44 CE. In addition to using chronological order, Goldsworthy also uses very detailed explanations of the events. To support his ideas, he used primary documents. When looking at the bibliography and endnotes, Goldsworthy uses numerous sources from different perspectives. His detail in the notes allows anyone that reads Augustus First Emperor of Rome the ability to do further research if they wish. He uses many different ones with different views, such as Augustus’ autobiography, Cicero, Virgil and Suetonius, which helps support his thesis of a complicated …show more content…
He is a university-educated historian so he reaches as far into the details as he is able to with the sources available to him. He does however, use more academic language that may be hard for the casual reader to understand. It can be easy to get lost in all the details Goldsworthy gives and even harder since it is the subject of ancient Rome where language was already different than what is used today.
Steve Donoghue from the Washington Post did a review of Augustus First Emperor of Rome and analyzed how he wrote about Augustus as a military dictator. “Goldsworthy relates the military victories, the hairbreadth escapes, the diplomatic successes and the dark family quarrels with a storyteller’s brio, bringing alive the empire’s tense standoffs with Eastern kingdoms such as Parthia and along the way giving us some quite wonderful readings of poets such as Virgil and Horace.” . Steve Donoghue believes Goldsworthy are weak but he does a good job of explaining the facts even with the weak primary sources he