SPQR: A History of Ancient Rome

I was disappointed in SPQR. As someone said in our book club, the author seems more interested in histography than in writing a narrative history of the Roman Empire. Can't fault her expertise, but I found this book exceedingly repetitive and therefore pretty full

Rather than give us a strictly chronological account of the rise and fall of the Roman Empire, Mary Beard attempts to contextualize the Roman Republic and Empire (to the peak) for modern folks. She takes great pains to explain what we have disputed for centuries, what we aren't sure about, and what both we and the Romans can be confident actually happened, which is refreshing as compared to a "high school" (or early college) account of history of the period.

Mary Beard is an expert classicist. This is a very good book on the history of Rome.

Why Rome Matters?

Mary Beard's studied conclusion to the question above gives an answer with which I completely agree.

"Nevertheless, since the Renaissance at least, many of our most fundamental assumptions about power, citizenship, responsibility, politics, violence, empire, luxury, and beauty have been formed, and tested, in dialogue with the Romans and their writing." p 535.

The entirety of the book documents that conclusion IMO.

Fascinating insight into the lives of ordinary Romans. As the author acknowledges, most of our familiarity with Roman culture derives from the writings of the prominent. This history examines a lot of the environment within which the average citizen (or slave) existed. Don't read it unless you have a basic understanding of the evolution of the Empire and its most prominent characters. In my humble opinion, Julius Caesar is underrated in this well documented account of transition from Republic to Empire. Great read though!

The beginning and ending of the books was more interesting to me. The vast majority of the middle was a little less interesting in terms of how the information gets presented. I think at times a more direct writing style would suit the book better. Going over more battles would have been nice, more detail or stories about some of the main people or emperors, or going over the Roman/Greek religion would have been a nice addition to readers new to the classical world. It is obvious that we do not know precisely how the world worked back then, but as a reader I understand this, and being constantly reminded gets annoying. Also it would have been cool to know more about Roman innovation. The book does make you want to learn more about this period, and there is some extra information in the book, further reading, maps, timelines etc,

over all a good book

One of the great pleasures of retirement is that I have more time to read. And I have discovered authors I never knew about. Mary Beard is such a writer. I wish I had begun reading her when she began writing. Her newest book is one of those wonderfully written books that focusses on a particular period of time and covers it exhaustively. I took four years of Latin in high school and two more in college, so you'd think the period of the empire of Rome would be familiar to me as that was also the time of the golden age of Latin literature. It is true that what we learnt in school was toned down as not to sully our young minds, but what we missed! SPQR nicely fills in the missing pieces and I loved having the complete story. Ms Beard's writing is wonderful. She's pitched it nicely to not quite that required of a scholarly tome but not quite the lowest common denominator, either. I look forward to catching up w/ her other books.

Wonderful details and an excellent narrative thread. Unfortunately,the SPQR theme is well explained at the start, but Prof. Beard fails to sustain it throughout the book. Although Prof. Beard is a distinguished scholar, her writing flags at times. When it comes to telling the tale of the Roman Empire, she's good, but frankly, I prefer the brilliant, if less scholarly, Tom Holland.

Erudition and style hand-in-hand reach the nirvana. Incorporation of most recent archaeological research and the implications thereof makes the book doubly interesting. This is not a book to be perused just once and thrown away; it is a reference book. Very good reading.

One minor point, possibly attributable either to my misunderstanding of the semantic finesse in the text or to editors'/proofreaders' slip, could be raised about the second sentence in the last paragraph, on page 210. Re. Corinth, it says "It [Corinth] had made a fortune from its prime trading position, with harbours on each side of the narrow strip of land separating the Peloponnese from the rest of Greece." With all due respect, I would be inclined to disagree. This 'narrow strip of land' 'CONNECTS' the Peloponnese TO the rest of Greece rather than separating the peninsula from the mainland.

One of the great pleasures of retirement is that I have more time to read. And I have discovered authors I never knew about. Mary Beard is such a writer. I wish I had begun reading her when she began writing. Her newest book is one of those wonderfully written books that focusses on a particular period of time and covers it exhaustively. I took four years of Latin in high school and two more in college, so you'd think the period of the empire of Rome would be familiar to me as that was also the time of the golden age of Latin literature. It is true that what we learnt in school was toned down as not to sully our young minds, but what we missed! SPQR nicely fills in the missing pieces and I loved having the complete story. Ms Beard's writing is wonderful. She's pitched it nicely to not quite that required of a scholarly tome but not quite the lowest common denominator, either. I look forward to catching up w/ her other books.

Wonderful details and an excellent narrative thread. Unfortunately,the SPQR theme is well explained at the start, but Prof. Beard fails to sustain it throughout the book. Although Prof. Beard is a distinguished scholar, her writing flags at times. When it comes to telling the tale of the Roman Empire, she's good, but frankly, I prefer the brilliant, if less scholarly, Tom Holland.

Erudition and style hand-in-hand reach the nirvana. Incorporation of most recent archaeological research and the implications thereof makes the book doubly interesting. This is not a book to be perused just once and thrown away; it is a reference book. Very good reading.

One minor point, possibly attributable either to my misunderstanding of the semantic finesse in the text or to editors'/proofreaders' slip, could be raised about the second sentence in the last paragraph, on page 210. Re. Corinth, it says "It [Corinth] had made a fortune from its prime trading position, with harbours on each side of the narrow strip of land separating the Peloponnese from the rest of Greece." With all due respect, I would be inclined to disagree. This 'narrow strip of land' 'CONNECTS' the Peloponnese TO the rest of Greece rather than separating the peninsula from the mainland.

This was terribly interesting. It covers 1,000 years (the first Roman millennium) so things go quickly. You go from the foundation of Rome through the last of the Caesars that ruled from Rome. Rome is the focus here, not necessarily the Roman Empire or the Caesars but it still very interesting and very readable. This has spurred my interest in going deeper on both the the Roman Empire and the Caesars not covered in this book.

Information Rich, and just enough of a conversational method in the dialogue to make it easy to keep going through it. When I was younger, and saw some "Roman" movie I came away amazed that anyone survived, because I thought carrying swords around like they did, and USING them often, as I thought surely everyone would perish. After reading into this, I realize actually, I wasn't far off - During the period the book covers, there actually WERE a lot of people dieing of things other than old age! Fascinating read.

Great view of Rome from foundation to about 200 AD. A really excellent analysis of the founding of Rome; addressing the question what made Rome different from the other small villages of the time. I very much like Ms. Beard style of writing about what is known, and how we have that information. She has a fascinating ability to 'read between the lines' of the surviving historical record. The added discussion of the evidence adds another layer to the story and provides interesting new insights to the classical timeline.

I would strongly recommend this book to the many people who studied Latin in school. Despite the rigors of learning grammar and vocabulary, few students who struggle to translate Caesar, Cicero or Virgil in modern schools learn very much about the social/political context about which these authors put pen to parchment and most, like me, learn even less about the audiences who read (or listened) at the time to what these authors wrote. Professor Beard provides a balanced, well argued narrative about both the issues and the people involved in the first millennium of Roman civilization. Even people who did not spend some of their adolescence studying Latin will have much to enjoy and learn by reading this fine book.

I found the book interesting, but it tended to assume that the reader is already VERY familiar with the major events in Roman History. This led to the book glossing over the most important events under the assumption that the reader already knew all about them - which I did not. Still, it gave an excellent perspective of life in Roman Times which I really enjoyed.

I think someone should be absolutely fair about this book. It's not the worst book about the Roman Republic you will read, but, it's definitely not the best either. The most honest thing I could say about this book is that if you are reading this book as your first introduction to Roman history or the Roman Republic, you will probably not read anything else finding it not that compelling or interesting. Try to find a book that just tells the history based on tremendous research. Don't read books, like this one, where the author feels compelled to inject their opinions or biases.

Not just a dry recitation of dates and facts, but rather a sweeping and broad analysis of what made Romans Romans, what accounted for their success, and how the people and the system evolved over time. Ms. Beard explains what it meant to be in the upper class, in the middle and the lower... Both in the city and the provinces. She explains the politics and the day-to-day life in clear and entertaining prose. An east and rewarding read.

I knew very little about the first Roman Millennium. This book was a revelation. The author, Mary Beard, is an accomplished scholar She writes for an audience that is probably not familiar with the history, but she assumes the reader will work at understanding and following events, places and people with unfamiliar names and titles and roles to play. I read this book in an on-line book club, Goodreads. The on-line community made it easier to stay focused and follow the evolving empire in a disciplined but enjoyable way.

A real trudge. Much too much detail. The salient points could have been made without the minutiae. I have no problem with the author's conclusions but found myself bored at times with endless references.

Hail Caesar! Dr. Mary Beard a professor of classics at Cambridge University has the ability to translate the latest in scholarship to the general public in a writing style that is comprehensible to the general reader. This new book examines the unlikely rise of Rome from a small village in Italy a thousand years before the birth of Christ to the ruler of the ancient world by time of the first century. The book ends when Emperor Caracalla named each free person a citizen of Rome in 212 AD. The book:
a. Traces the rise of Rome as a political, economic and military powerhouse .
b. Examines the reigns of the fourteen emperors who followed Augustus (who reigned from 27 BC to 14 AD_.
c. Dispels myths about the Romans and corrects the record. For instance, the cry of Caesar to Brutus at the time of his assassination in 44 BC was not "Et tu Brute." This Greek phrase was inserted by Shakespeare in his Julius Caesar play.
d. The Romans did not have a set plan to expand their empire; it grew gradually as land was obtained from enemies.
e. The author examines the literary works of such outstanding Latin authors as Livy.; Virgil; Dio Cassio; Cicero and many others. She focuses on Cicero whom we know more about than any other Roman author.
f. Beard also looks at the lives of women, slaves and ordinary Roman citizens during ancient times.
g. The book is well illustrated with many photographs, charts and contains an excellent bibliography and extensive footnotes.
This is the best book I have read on Rome in quite a while. Recommended!

Brilliant and engaging, Mary Beard reminds us at every page that our laws and social compacts were instructed by the Romans. SPQR deftly draws parallels to life today, involving politics, social upheaval, class struggles, etc. Human nature has changed very little in 2,000 years.

I bought this book for my husband, the Latin teacher! He really enjoyed it. He even ordered a copy for a dear friend and colleague and she was most delighted; there were things in the book that even she did not know. Both wished they had read the book back in the 70's and 80's so they could have shared some of the information with their students!

SPQR is a superb overview by an accomplished classical scholar of nearly a millennium of Roman history from the founding to the imperial regimes in the first two centuries CE. As a survey work it is a great introduction for those not familiar with the story and the people. It is said to be a scholarly work but does not read that way at all. She develops a number of themes like the virtuoso she is. The reader must be patient and follow the development of these themes and at the end sit back having effortlessly digested the important things ancient Rome has to say to us over the span of 2 millennia since. In this way it is a synthesis from a scholar who is able to pull it off in a masterly fashion. For example, she tells of Pliny’s dealings with Christians and for the reader having arrived there it allows a deep understanding of the reasons from the Roman perspective of the need to persecute them. It is told in a way that frames the issue for deep and true comprehension. It is a pleasure to read and is highly recommended. History writing doesn’t get any better.

Fascinating, extremely well written history for the general reader covering the history of Rome from its founding until 212 AD when all occupants of the empire were given citizenship. The time period reflects Beard's focus on the the political entity called Rome and the people who lived in it's central city of the same name. The larger empire is for the most part discussed only as necessary to understand the players back home, i.e. the Senate and people of Rome referred to in the title. ("S.P.Q.R." = Senates Populusque Romanus).

Obviously well thought of by most of her readers, Beard has been criticized here on essentially two grounds, both utter nonsense. The first is her politics. Apparently she is a well known liberal and that has sent some folks into a rage that is reflected in their reviews of S.P.Q.R.. Personally I would not have known what her politics were if these folks hadn't told me as it's certainly not reflected in her book. On the contrary, her real focus is on what we can and cannot know about Rome. Her view is balanced in that she always gives the "accepted" story but goes on to assert the alternative interpretations of what we actually know. As such, S.P.Q.R. is worth reading by anyone interested in history as it is an eye opener about the limits of historical knowledge.

This leads to the other criticism: that some folks found the book's structure hard to follow as it supposedly is not chronological. I have to believe those folks didn't actually read the book but just skimmed the first chapter. Beard does start at the middle of her time period, in 63 B.C. discussing Cicero's speech in the Senate against Catiline who Cicero and history have recorded as a rebellious traitor. Beard accepts that this characterization may be correct but also goes on to show the limitations we have in knowing the truth of this incident (i.e. that what we know comes from solely from Cicero with his particular view of Caitlin) and uses it to demonstrate how she intends to address the rest of Roman history. She then goes back and presents a very linear history beginning with the foundation myths, running through the kings of Rome, the Republic and into the Empire.

That the critics have, for the most part, been limited to these two spurious arguments says much about the value of S.P.Q.R. It is an excellent read that serves to teach much about ancient Rome and about the study of history itself and for that I recommend it highly.

Having spent 4 years in high school, lots of years ago, learning Latin, or trying to, I have always been fascinated by Rome and its history. All that's left today is my memory of the first few sentences of Caesar's Gallic Wars. With whatever bias that creates, I enormously enjoyed this book, which made human beings of all the personalities I read and heard about way back then and the lives they led.

Less enthusiastic reviewers appear to focus on two issues. One, is that Beard is a typical Leftish English academician who is distorting history to make points about our current politics. Perhaps. After all, she's an academic, which is almost a synonym for lieftish. The question is whether she wrote a ood book. I think she did (and I am certainly not a leftish academician). I haven't done the studying which would be required to discredit her presentation. She has quite obviously spent lots of time reading other histories, and Latin (and Greek letters, books and inscriptions. I don't claim to know whether her occasional references to purported similarities between those times and ours are valid, but I would be surprised to hear that humans had changed much since those relatively recent times. And, frankly, I found them kind of interesting.

The other complaint of some reviewers is that Beard was constantly noting that no one really knows the history of ancient Rome. All we have are clues, which sometimes conflict with other clues. I don't understand that objection--of course we can't know for sure what what happened in the middle of the West Coast of Italy. We don't even know for sure what is happening today in our own country--all we have is what we're told by others. It's like reading an Editorial in the New York Times and thinking you have all the facts you need. Now add 2,000 years to that uncertainty. And toss in the point of which she frequently reminds the reader--that the person who wrote some letter, book or inscription undoubtedly had biases, or wanted to persuade the reader of something about which there was doubt or uncertainty. Or maybe was just plain wrong. Do you believe everything thing our politicians and their enablers say?

Perhaps needless to say, I found the writing engaging, and was interested in the parallels she found between the lives of people--important and otherwise--back then and now.

Mary Beard is perhaps the best known and most popular historian of Ancient Rome. After reading SPQR, I can understand why. Although, not without flaws, SPQR presents a concise and very readable history of Ancient Rome from its beginnings (legendary and otherwise) to the year 212. SQPR advances more or less in historical order. For each broad period, it discusses culture, society, and history before it jumps to another period. While some have called the book “revisionist,” to my mind it does an excellent job of presenting different hypotheses—some traditional and some new. While this is not a page turner in the classic sense of the term, it is well-written and easy to read.

Beard covers the major battles and political events, however much of the book focuses on what we know and do not know about Rome’s people, its subjects, its society, and its culture. She does an impressive job bringing together archeological evidence, documents, and common sense to reconstruct Ancient Rome. Her aim, as she explains, is to show a full portrait of ancient Rome, based on what we know and on our current thinking. In other words, the history of “the Senate and People of Rome” the English rendering of the SPQR.

Before 390 BCE or so, we only have Rome’s founding myths and legends. Beard looks at these stories and at many different elements of archeological evidence. This allows her to put together a number of different possibly histories of the early history. Did Romulus found Rome after being raised by a she-wolf and killing his twin brother? No. But many of the origin stories and legends may have some basis in fact.

As the book moves forward, it focuses more and more on what we know from the documentary evidence and tries to answer questions about the period. For example, how revolutionary or populist were Julius Caesar or rabble rousers like Clodius? How dedicated was Brutus and friends to the cause of liberty? How did Romans transfer large sums of money? Or how many people really knew how to read and write (20%?).
Beard offers a great deal of insight about the Roman republic, both as it rises to power and is it falls into civil war and political chaos. I found her discussion of the rise of warlords (Sulla, Pompey, Caesar, etc.) quite engaging. As Rome became richer and more powerful, it was transformed from an oligarchic republic to a failed state. More money, greater inequality, and less stability.

To my mind, the books starts to lose its steam after the reign of Augustus Caesar (31 BC to 14 AD). Augustus (who was still called Octavian), through cunning and military force, is able to stabilize the republic and create a monarchy that restores the peace. Beard explains in detail how Augustus sets up his republican monarchy, along with its compromises and accommodations.

However Beard provides little discussion of what happens next. While she does outline the reigns of the twelve legitimate emperors from Tiberius to Caracalla (there were two short civil wars during this period), it is done in short form. Possibly Nero and Domitian were not as bloody as history tells us; perhaps Caligula was not as mad as much as maddening (to the Roman elite). There is a good discussion of the expansion of Christianity in its first two centuries. Beard also discusses the expansion of “Romanization” as the empire expands.

The narrative ends in 212, the year that Caracalla grants citizenship to the entire free population. This was on the cusp of the so-called “Crisis of the Third Century.” As Beard herself points out, it is not clear why citizenship was extended or what this meant in practice. I think that this date was chosen because the empire that emerged after sixty years of revolts and civil wars was a very different sort of place with very different rules. It is not an entirely satisfactory answer but at some point the book does have to end.

Looking back two thousand years, it is quite common to ask what we can learn from Rome or if we (our civilization) is falling like the Roman Empire fell. Mary Beard argues that there is little that we can directly learn from Rome. From this book, I learned that a lot of modern institutions that we take for granted—ranging from targeted social safety nets to a proto-nation state to the republican government that is really an authoritarian dictatorship—have their origins in Ancient Rome. Certainly, we are not destined to repeat anything but there is much that we can learn.

Brilliant history within the framework of astonishing writing. It is almost like reading a novel where the charm of the writing interacts with the history of ancient Rome. I also recommend reading this book while watching her wonderful series "Meet the Romans"

Enjoyable because of it is so well structured and presented. Even though the Roman era was one of the most facinating periods of history, it can be daunting to keep its events and characters in perspective. We get the "flavor" of the times in a most interesting way without being massively overburdened by too much detail. This is where the author is at her best, with clarity and insight.

I found this book most suitable for a Roman history enthusiast. It is loaded with information but it is not a casual read. It is a long book separated into chapters covering various aspects of the Roman story. There was some fascinating detail but a lot of detail.

This is an interesting book about Roman history that highlights some aspects of history often forgotten, including women, common people, slaves and the like. Mary Beard does a good job of critiquing the viewpoints provided in documents and does her best to provide both sides to each story. However, this is a bit of a dense read, and does not provide a simple chronology of the major events in Roman history. I found parts of it quite interesting, but other parts rather dry. For someone with some knowledge of Roman history it may be quite fascinating, but it was slightly more detailed than I thought it would be. It does describe 1000 years of Roman history, a huge undertaking, and I think overall it is very well written and is thought provoking.

This is a great book. Provides a wonderful (and somewhat provocative) look at Ancient Roman history. Mary Beard's ancdotes, and careful attention to the daily lives of rich and poor alike, help you feel closer to actually experiencing Rome in the days of Cicero and the emperors.

Not a bad generalized overview of Rome's imperial history. Beard is an academic and has so much knowledge that she wants to include, but can't necessarily because of the scope of this work. Sometimes it can get a bit arcane in its focus on specific figures, but overall a fascinating read especially with the parallels between power struggles in Rome and those playing out in our modern American "Empire."

Demise of the Roman republic examined in depth. Certainly a very scholarly work, but not THAT hard to follow. Second reading recommended for the implications to come clear. A very complicated period in human evolution, a recognition of responsibility too many people for the jobs available by the state, the major social problem today. Excellent.

Mary Beard writes in a breezy, often anecdotal, style which makes her book both informative and entertaining. SPQR covers the history of ancient Rome from its founding by Romulus to the reign of Emperor Caracalla, who, in the year 202 A.D. granted Roman citizenship to the entire free male population of the empire. This is a very ambitious work and is well worth reading. Beard not only delves into the history of ancient Rome, but also has a lot to say about its sociology. She concerns herself not only with the famous personages but also with the lower classes and their lives, with long glimpses of what went on in the bars and eateries where the ordinary people hung out. In one such establishment in Pompeii, there was a frieze picturing seven notable Greek philosophers, but rather than discussing deep philosophical topics, they are depicted as giving scatological advice. She also writes extensively on the conditions of women, slaves and freed slaves.
Beard at times seems to have a cynical attitude toward the Romans; at least, toward the movers and shakers. For example, she says about the civil war between Caesar and Pompey: “The irony was that Pompey, their figurehead, was no less an autocrat than Caesar. Whichever side won, as Cicero again observed, the result was to be much the same: slavery for Rome. What came to be seen as a war between liberty and one man rule was really a war to choose between rival emperors.” Personally, I have a bit of difficulty swallowing this, because Pompey, as egotistical as he was, had ample opportunities to march on Rome and take over as dictator in the manner of Sulla and Caesar, but he never did. And if Cato the Younger, arguably the most obstinately principled notable in history, believed that Pompey had the same ambitions as Caesar to become an autocrat, we would have declared “plague on both your houses” and stayed home rather than followed Pompey into exile.
Beard relies on the writings of Cicero for much of her analysis, and she gives him extensive coverage in SPQR. This is understandable since more of Cicero’s writings have survived than any other writer of his time.
Beard has no liking for Augustus, and at one point refers to him as a “reptile.” She does make it very clear that he was a man of remarkable gifts, able to walk that tightrope of Roman power and gaining support of the Roman elite where his Great Uncle Julius Caesar failed to do so. It probably helped that the proscriptions of the second triumvirate killed off most of the opposition. Under Augustus’ rule the Senate ceased to be a governing body and turned into a sort of civil service. Any opposition that wasn’t killed off was bought off. She describes Augustus as “a poacher turned game keeper.”
Beard also makes the point that during the next two hundred years after the end of the Republic it didn’t really matter who the emperor was or whether he was “good” or “bad.” I need to take some issue with that notion as well. If an emperor was particularly rapacious, as in the case of Nero, it could cause considerable unrest in the provinces. It was Nero’s instructions to confiscate the lands and possessions of Prasutagus, the husband of Boudicca, upon his death, that led to Boudicca’s rebellion which destroyed three Roman cities and killed an estimated 70 to 80 thousand Romans and Britons. One wonders if the same thing would have happened under a less rapacious Emperor. One suspects that Nero’s rapaciousness was also one of the causes of the full scale revolt that took place in Judea toward the end of his reign. None of the 14 emperors during this period were really “good” by modern standards, but some were more rapacious than others, and the quality of the emperor did have an effect on the running of the empire.
SPQR is a meaty work with a lot of events, analysis and ideas to digest. It gives the reader a vivid insight into the various lives of the Romans, from emperor to slave.

Wonderful. Organized by developments (power vs neighbors, citizenship criteria) instead of a progression of dates and Emperors. The result is a very readable history that creates lots of context.

My knowledge of Roman History definately deepened as a result.

I enjoyed reading the very specific examples from ancient texts that supported her story. It really brought to life 1000 years of Rome and how it ultimately collapsed. I think it is a good book to learn about Rome for someone with an interest in the topic but desires a readable text as opposed to a book written to impress scholars.

This is an interesting book about Roman history that highlights some aspects of history often forgotten, including women, common people, slaves and the like. Mary Beard does a good job of critiquing the viewpoints provided in documents and does her best to provide both sides to each story. However, this is a bit of a dense read, and does not provide a simple chronology of the major events in Roman history. I found parts of it quite interesting, but other parts rather dry. For someone with some knowledge of Roman history it may be quite fascinating, but it was slightly more detailed than I thought it would be. It does describe 1000 years of Roman history, a huge undertaking, and I think overall it is very well written and is thought provoking.

This is a great book. Provides a wonderful (and somewhat provocative) look at Ancient Roman history. Mary Beard's ancdotes, and careful attention to the daily lives of rich and poor alike, help you feel closer to actually experiencing Rome in the days of Cicero and the emperors.

Not a bad generalized overview of Rome's imperial history. Beard is an academic and has so much knowledge that she wants to include, but can't necessarily because of the scope of this work. Sometimes it can get a bit arcane in its focus on specific figures, but overall a fascinating read especially with the parallels between power struggles in Rome and those playing out in our modern American "Empire."

Demise of the Roman republic examined in depth. Certainly a very scholarly work, but not THAT hard to follow. Second reading recommended for the implications to come clear. A very complicated period in human evolution, a recognition of responsibility too many people for the jobs available by the state, the major social problem today. Excellent.

Mary Beard writes in a breezy, often anecdotal, style which makes her book both informative and entertaining. SPQR covers the history of ancient Rome from its founding by Romulus to the reign of Emperor Caracalla, who, in the year 202 A.D. granted Roman citizenship to the entire free male population of the empire. This is a very ambitious work and is well worth reading. Beard not only delves into the history of ancient Rome, but also has a lot to say about its sociology. She concerns herself not only with the famous personages but also with the lower classes and their lives, with long glimpses of what went on in the bars and eateries where the ordinary people hung out. In one such establishment in Pompeii, there was a frieze picturing seven notable Greek philosophers, but rather than discussing deep philosophical topics, they are depicted as giving scatological advice. She also writes extensively on the conditions of women, slaves and freed slaves.
Beard at times seems to have a cynical attitude toward the Romans; at least, toward the movers and shakers. For example, she says about the civil war between Caesar and Pompey: “The irony was that Pompey, their figurehead, was no less an autocrat than Caesar. Whichever side won, as Cicero again observed, the result was to be much the same: slavery for Rome. What came to be seen as a war between liberty and one man rule was really a war to choose between rival emperors.” Personally, I have a bit of difficulty swallowing this, because Pompey, as egotistical as he was, had ample opportunities to march on Rome and take over as dictator in the manner of Sulla and Caesar, but he never did. And if Cato the Younger, arguably the most obstinately principled notable in history, believed that Pompey had the same ambitions as Caesar to become an autocrat, we would have declared “plague on both your houses” and stayed home rather than followed Pompey into exile.
Beard relies on the writings of Cicero for much of her analysis, and she gives him extensive coverage in SPQR. This is understandable since more of Cicero’s writings have survived than any other writer of his time.
Beard has no liking for Augustus, and at one point refers to him as a “reptile.” She does make it very clear that he was a man of remarkable gifts, able to walk that tightrope of Roman power and gaining support of the Roman elite where his Great Uncle Julius Caesar failed to do so. It probably helped that the proscriptions of the second triumvirate killed off most of the opposition. Under Augustus’ rule the Senate ceased to be a governing body and turned into a sort of civil service. Any opposition that wasn’t killed off was bought off. She describes Augustus as “a poacher turned game keeper.”
Beard also makes the point that during the next two hundred years after the end of the Republic it didn’t really matter who the emperor was or whether he was “good” or “bad.” I need to take some issue with that notion as well. If an emperor was particularly rapacious, as in the case of Nero, it could cause considerable unrest in the provinces. It was Nero’s instructions to confiscate the lands and possessions of Prasutagus, the husband of Boudicca, upon his death, that led to Boudicca’s rebellion which destroyed three Roman cities and killed an estimated 70 to 80 thousand Romans and Britons. One wonders if the same thing would have happened under a less rapacious Emperor. One suspects that Nero’s rapaciousness was also one of the causes of the full scale revolt that took place in Judea toward the end of his reign. None of the 14 emperors during this period were really “good” by modern standards, but some were more rapacious than others, and the quality of the emperor did have an effect on the running of the empire.
SPQR is a meaty work with a lot of events, analysis and ideas to digest. It gives the reader a vivid insight into the various lives of the Romans, from emperor to slave.

Wonderful. Organized by developments (power vs neighbors, citizenship criteria) instead of a progression of dates and Emperors. The result is a very readable history that creates lots of context.

My knowledge of Roman History definately deepened as a result.

I enjoyed reading the very specific examples from ancient texts that supported her story. It really brought to life 1000 years of Rome and how it ultimately collapsed. I think it is a good book to learn about Rome for someone with an interest in the topic but desires a readable text as opposed to a book written to impress scholars.

Unless you come from a place that has absolutely no ties to European history and civilization, you have been touched by Rome. Its words are in your language, its thinkers have influenced your ideologies and even your ideals, and your political institutions are based on mechanisms of governance devised by Roman statesmen. Rome's history and illustrious personages have inspired countless works of literature and art, and its Rise and Fall (well warranting capitalization) became a byword for the presumed fate of every great power after it.

But what do we really know about Rome—and, perhaps more important, how do we know it? Few Empires have been more prone to being mythologized, not least of all by the Romans themselves. No modern historians took the legend of Rome's foundation at the hand of twin brothers nurtured by a she-wolf at face value, but even with the best of intentions, it has always been easy to fall victim to some of the more credible sounding accounts especially of early Roman history. After all, contemporary portrayals of early Rome are by no means to be taken without a grain of salt. To illustrate the amount of care one must apply in their consumption, Mary Beard begins at what may seem an arbitrarily chosen juncture: Cicero's campaign against Catiline. The merit of this approach soon becomes clear: when Romans evoked Roman history—as Cicero did to tremendous effect in the speeches Beard discusses—it was rarely with the simple aim of providing what we would consider academic, much less scientific, accounts. And much as we who continue to be fascinated by the grandeur that was Rome may wish for a sweeping narrative of its ascent, we must come to terms with the gaps that become more numerous the farther we travel back in time. But Mary Beard is here to remind us that when it comes to history, tidy narratives should always be distrusted, anyway. Once we accept that, the quest for the truth that is often tucked away between the lines of history and historiography becomes far more exciting than epic tales that ultimately leave the reader with an aftertaste of fiction.

This means, of course, that SPQR does not necessarily make for thrilling reading in the style of a "History Channel" program, nor does it provide much in the way of detailed information about the lives of ordinary Romans—there is simply not enough 'hard' information to warrant this. But if you want to know how to navigate the difference between mere 'story' and 'history,' Mary Beard is as good a guide as you could wish for.

Great book. Could be a bit more detailed at times but I thoroughly enjoyed reading this book. I'm obsessed with all things ancient Roman from books, t.v. shows, movies etc. Recommend for those who want a quick crash course in ancient Roman History.

Long and could have been better organized. From c700 bc to c 60 bc was very confusing. From 60bc to 300 bc was much better organized and easier to follow. A readr not reasonably well versed in Roman history would have given up and missed many insightful obsrvations/

Very thorough and detailed. Yet the author spends more time disputing the historical record than establishing one. The reader is left with a feeling of observing a debate, and wondering whether the author truly has an opinion.

Not the most gripping history I have read, but this book certainly filled in a lot of gaps in my perspective of western history. I recommend it to the casual historian as an entry point into a world we have heard about but have never really explored.

Really amazing to read about issues in ancient Rome and see that they are still issues 2000 years later. A great book for seeing the struggles related to governing and being governed and how our legends - our history of ourselves - inform our actions.

SPQR breathes life into Ancient Rome for a new generation of global citizens. In many ways, the history of Ancient Rome sounds very much like our own history today. The politics, culture wars -- and real wars, all this make a very fascinating read.

Mary Beard has done a great service by writing what others have presented as too detailed of a history with a prose that is a true joy to read. The characters of Cicero and the various descendants of Caesar leap off the pages as the come to life alongside a history that clearly laid the groundwork for modern history and government.

Whether you're an armchair historian, a political junkie, or just intrigued by rivalries and characters that defined Ancient Rome, this book is a must read. I can't recommend it enough. Bonum lectio.