Emperor: the gates of Rome

[Anonymous]

Thank you for your comments, SilverCue. The thing that has always surprised me about comments re the book is that they are usually along the lines of 'How can Octavian be his great-nephew without a sister, hmmm?'<br>
<br>
- one of the scenes in the book involves Cabera laying hands on a dying man and saving him, but no-one anywhere has written to say that was impossible. Very odd.<br>
<br>
As for a website, I don't have one yet, though I was thinking of it. A friend of mine paid for one to be set up for a comedy club he owns in London and it looks pretty good. I'll probably use his people sometime in 2003, to set one up. As it happens, I did spend a lot of time learning the code to make one myself, but it's probably a bit basic without the bells and whistles.<br>
<br>
Best wishes,<br>
<br>
Conn<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>

[richsc]

Well heck folks, I like the book. I'm not too concerned about the exact history as much as a good story. I'm only to chapter 11 though. But I did wonder about that hands on stuff with Cabera, all that clicking and whirring that seemed to be going on in his head. I hope that gets explained in chapter 34.<br>
<br>
Just wondering Conn; did you actually burn a crow in olive oil as research for the book? <p>Richard Campbell, Legio XX<br>
<br>
</p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

I'm glad you're enjoying it so far, Richard. As it happens, I did catch a raven when I was young, as I had the idea of training it to kill at a word of command. I know this not a good idea now, but it seemed pretty clever back then.<br>
<br>
I called my raven 'Omen' and I'm sorry to say, it killed itself as wild birds will do in captivity. It refused to eat, pulled all its feathers out and died.<br>
<br>
I was too young to see any kind of metaphor with the feathers, but I used the experience in the book, along with my attempt to cremate it in Viking style with lighter fluid. I was crushed to find I'd only cooked it.<br>
<br>
As for Cabera, he's my touch of the mythical, the seer, the healer, the early saint, perhaps. The sort to tell someone to beware the Ides.<br>
<br>
<br>
Conn<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Hi Conn, finished the book and here's my thoughts on the matter.<br>
<br>
One of the bugbears of writing historical fiction is that one is tempted to write with an eagle-eyed pedant leaning over one's shoulder. You try to make sure that you have nailed down every fact, every detail of clothing and equipment. Every major historical event is only re-presented after exhaustive research. Failures in accuracy should be by omission rather commission. If there is a gap in the knowledge, then we license ourselves to fit our material in on the basis that the boundaries it shares with what is known are rendered as seamlessly as possible. Otherwise, as Bernard Cornwell oft remarks, we might as well slap bren guns on the poop deck of the Victory.<br>
<br>
There is another approach, of course. That is to say that history itself is a story and as such it is perpetually being rewritten. To be more accurate, history is perpetually being re-interpreted on the basis of the same raw material. This form of historic fiction, or hi-fi for short, tends not to be so popular with fans of the genre, because it often twists the knowledge they already possess about the specific context. To guard against this most authors pursuing this strategy play fair by laying the ground rules in some kind of foreword, as Rathbone does in The Last English King.<br>
<br>
You, however, try a new approach. You not only re-interpret history, but go a step further and re-invent it prior to re-interpreting it, and don't mention this until the author's note at the end. It's an interesting ploy, but it is also a high risk strategy for those readers who have more than a superficial grasp of the historical context. One example suffices to illustrate the problem. Sulla stabs Marius at the gates of Rome. Now this simply didn't happen and the moment you read it the immersion in the narrative evaporates in a flash. Once is distracting enough, but when such moments come piled one upon another, there's a problem. What I fail to understand is why you do this when the material is already exciting enough for the popular market? Why make Marcus Brutus (assuming the character turns out to be THAT Brutus later in the series… there’s still time to alter that possibility Conn) the same age as Caesar when there’s a chance he may have been one of his many illegitimate offspring? Why drop any mention of the outrages perpetrated on the population of Rome by kindly uncle Marius? It doesn’t make sense.<br>
<br>
Which is a shame, since the first 150 pages were so very promising. The childhood of Caesar on a small rural estate is beautifully realised. There’s a real sense of place and, to a lesser extent, character. The words flow easily and I turned the pages with pleasure. It’s a welcome change from a lot of the Caesar narratives that dwell on the great man of later years and an approach that allows the character to grow with the reader. A good move for the author then. Things then begin to slip soon after we follow Caesar to Rome. Suddenly there’s an explosion of characters and narrative strands that overstretches any empathy the reader might have for the main characters. Some characters are thrust to the foreground and dangled in front of the reader only to be quietly sidelined. With so little time to develop personalities your cast is reduced to one-note stereotypes. Take Sulla, a character so lacking in guile it’s a wonder he ever made it past aedile. In every scene he is modelled on John Hurt from ‘I, Claudius’. Another problem arising out of this necessary minimalism is the characters’ penchant for declamatory dialogue. Take this example of a man, crying out in the heat of battle: “With me! They’re going after the general in the confusion.â€ÂÂ

[Anonymous]

Thank you for your comments, Simon. I can't say I agree with the comments on declamatory dialogue, though to be fair, you're not the first to point that out to me. As far as I'm concerned, people do say odd things occasionally and in representing conversation - especially a moment of crisis - it isn't always possible for someone to turn out a polished phrase. One of the problems with novel dialogue purporting to be 'realistic' is that it never approaches the halting lack of fluency that is the mark of most real speech. I shouldn't give the impression that I was trying for some sort of realism however. I like both those lines.<br>
<br>
As for the comments on changed history, I do appreciate the importance in historical fiction of the interest that comes from knowing one is reading about real things. I am aware of the perils in my approach, but hope that the note at the end of each book goes some way to redress the balance. I suppose as a general rule, I will choose a more satisfyingly dramatic scene over a strictly accurate one, but will say what I changed at the back. That covers it, I think, though I have tried to be as accurate as possible where I have intended to be, if you see what I mean.<br>
<br>
As for the simplicity of Marius, or indeed Sulla, I cannot apologise, really. I found the former far more admirable than the latter and would need a decalogue to explore every facet of their personalities. It has been my constant experience in writing these books, that considerations of space and pace have forced me to omit events and characters I would have liked to keep. This has always been a conscious choice, but a novel is not a historical text, if only for the density of information it is possible to put across. That is why I recommended Christian Meier's 'Caesar' in the note, for those who wanted to look further at the life and times. I've been told that sales of that book have had a little jump, which pleases me.<br>
<br>
I do appreciate your comments. It would be surprising if my writing did not improve over the four books and I shall endeavour to keep them taut and interesting. The epilogue of that last has a bearing on the series title, by the way. I can't tell you how many people have mentioned to me that Caesar wasn't an emperor, which has been quite frustrating at times. He was declared a god though, which is quite a promotion for any young lad.<br>
<br>
Conn<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Hi Conn,<br>
I'm glad you took it in a constructive spirit. I have to say that writing about major historical characters is very difficult and no-one carries if off flawlessly. I think Todorov has some interesting advice on the matter, i.e. the easiest solution is to write from an outsider's perspective of the great. Even Massie chickened out when doing his book on Caesar, which is a shame since his Augustus and Tiberius were fine pieces of writing that did much to add a human dimension to these emperors. I'll be following your version of Caesar with enthusiasm as the series pans out, although I'm rather more taken with Marcus (who has hints of darkness about him that are very alluring. Will Renius be his dad I wonder?)<br>
All the best<br>
Simon <p></p><i></i>

[Caius Fabius]

It is impossible to make any writer 100% happy with a detailed historical criticism of his work. I read many books, by many authors, some are good, a very few are great, the rest are not, for various reasons.<br>
Last night, (after Dr. Bishop's book on segmentata) I managed to find time to read "Nobody Loves a Centurion" by John Maddox Roberts. It is a good book. I liked the characters, the descriptions were plausible, the action was reasonable, the plot was lively with a few twists, and most of the "period historical color" was excellent. (I had one or two points where it was a little "off" for me, but it didn't hurt the story).<br>
When I look at a historical novel, I look for an overall historical color, and the glaring inaccuracies are one of the first "turn-offs". I see the characters and action in a movie in my (fat) head, and when someone adds anachronistic material, it is like adding "pink flamingos" to a film, sometimes they become "neon pink"! and sometimes they become "neon pink dancing flamingos"!<br>
If the action is forced, if the characters are doing anachronistic things, if the "history" is mostly fantasy, I will finish the book, but put the author on the (only as a last resort) list of "buy when you can't find anything else" list. If you tell me up front you are writing fantasy in a historical timeframe, I enjoy that too. I hate buying a book that pretends to be historical and is really a fantasy novel.<br>
I don't appreciate buying books that don't inform or entertain, or that are poorly researched. If you want to write historical fantasy, go for it! I just think there is a difference between historical fiction and historical fantasy.<br>
For me, my read of the historical fiction novel "Emperor: the gates of Rome" had a couple of pink flamingos" dancing through the narrative. On an open forum, reviewing books, I felt that I should be honest about my review, but I was not very graphic. It is an okay historical fantasy book.<br>
I don't even try to publish my "fiction" stories. Not because I shun the criticism, but because I already have torn the manuscripts apart myself. I have spent my life as a researcher whose writings had to be as correct as possible, and as a teacher who taught research methods and required documentation and proof (footnotes or end notes acceptable). I enjoy and collect historical fiction. My overloaded bookshelves are happy to have books by Harold Lamb, Lew Wallace, Lloyd Douglas, Henryk K. Sienkiewicz, Robert Graves, Mika Waltari, Wallace Breem, John M. Roberts, Simon Scarrow, Lindsey Davis, Steven Saylor, Colleen McCullough, Barry Sadler, Rosemary Sutcliff, "Damion Hunter", Harry Turtledove and many others. (Sorry, can't see the other shelves from my computer station and I am too lazy to move). <br>
If my very brief comment about a certain book makes someone upset, imagine how unhappy they would be if I had written an in depth review! I am a reasonably well-read consumer of Roman fiction. I don't demand perfection, but I do require a entertaining and plausible story for a novel to get my positive rating. I try and spend less than $200 a month on books, but I rarely make that goal, so if you write it, I will probably buy it. I try and give any author a second chance, since I do know how hard it is to write, but three strikes and you're out! <br>
By the way, as a "published author", I have been called to task and had to do a retraction and rewrite more trhan once. It is different if you deal in factual information about the present, for the government. They really do expect perfect accuracy, (another impossible dream). <br>
<p>"Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=caiusfabius>Caius Fabius</A> <IMG HEIGHT=10 WIDTH=10 SRC="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/ROMANISROMANORVM/files/C%20Fabius%201988b.jpg" BORDER=0> at: 6/20/03 3:40 pm<br></i>

[Anonymous]

As there are four books in my series, I guess you'll have me struck out before the last one. At least my flamingoes weren't wearing digital watches as they danced.<br>
<br>
Conn <p></p><i></i>

[richsc]

Dancing flamingos notwithstanding, the first book was a fun read, so I'm looking forward to the others. I have all the Lindsay Davis books, (just got the new one) and there isn't a lot of history in those but they are a lot of fun.<br>
<br>
<br>
Of course, the best historical fiction of all is Harry Flashman, especially the footnotes!<br>
Or maybe Elspeth...<br>
<p>Richard Campbell, Legio XX<br>
<br>
</p><i>Edited by: <A HREF=http://pub45.ezboard.com/bromanarmytalk.showUserPublicProfile?gid=richsc@romanarmytalk>RichSC</A> at: 6/19/03 10:09 pm<br></i>

[Anonymous]

Iggulden-<br>
<br>
Who cares if some disgruntled old fart doesn't like your work- you're the published author.<br>
<p></p><i></i>

[rekirts]

Hey, you can't please everyone, so you might as well please yourself. I personally write the kind of stories I like to read and if there are people out there who don't like 'em, too bad.<br>
<br>
Wendy <p></p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

Best advice I've heard in a long time... <p></p><i></i>

[Nathan Ross]

Hey Caius! What's wrong with pink flamingos? (I mean, presuming they're not neon...) Are flamingos not pink? Or were Roman flamingos not pink? (I've just written a Roman story with pink flamingos in it - honest!) <p></p><i></i>

[Caius Fabius]

uhh, pink flamingos are okay, as long as they don't wear togas and quote Shakespeare and Colleen McCullough and get sold as Roman history. Send me the title or ISBN and I'll add your story to my library, (but not in the Roman Room). <p>"Just before class started, I looked in the big book where all the world's history is written, and it said...." Neil J. Hackett, PhD ancient history, professor OSU, 1987</p><i></i>

[Anonymous]

I always wanted to have my books published, but now that I have, I do want them to be good ones. I know the joy (no other word for it) I've had from reading some authors and when I hear someone else has enjoyed something I've written, it's really satisfying. I've just started reading Patrick O'Brien and to find an author like that with twenty books of his to read is wonderful. It's a shame he died in 2000, I would have liked to write to him to tell him how much I've enjoyed the first five. Definitely better than Hornblower. Interestingly (perhaps only to me and Simon Scarrow) those books are a superb example of the historical novel well-researched. Every ship and battle is accurate. An ancestor of mine commanded the bomb ketch Aetna in the Napoleonic wars and Aetna is mentioned, as well as a number of other ships he was in - right places, right times, even to the Royal George, which blew up in Spithead when a fire reached the magazine. Absolutely staggering in authentic detail and a good story on top, or underneath as it were. Not a pink flamingo in sight, even on the quarterdeck with a telescope.<br>
<br>
I like the flamingo image by the way, though as I've said before, if I have to choose between a dramatically satisfying scene and a more accurate but less satisfying scene, I'll go for the former and try to mention the change in an afterword. However, you really can't please everyone and people have odd tastes.<br>
<br>
I read a book last year that I absolutely hated. I won't name it, but I have never read anything that irritated me as much as that book. For months after its release I waited for the storm of abuse to begin on Amazon. Did I see some? Did I hell. Not a single nasty comment for one of the most offensive things I've read. I'm still hoping the reason for this is that no one read it.<br>
<br>
It is a pleasure to be in print, no doubt about it. In many ways, it's a private communication between the writer and someone far away in a different room. With luck, they are sitting with a cup of coffee enjoying something I wrote. I like to think of it like that, and not so much of the moment when they put pen to paper to begin,<br>
<br>
"Dear Mr Iggulden,<br>
I was appalled to notice..."<br>
<br>
To be brutally honest, I haven't actually had any nasty letters. Either the publishers keep them from me, or those that have read the first of the Emperor series prefer to use the internet.<br>
<br>
This website has become a regular with me. Those that have criticised have done so with the sort of care and attention to detail that is almost a pleasure to read.<br>
<br>
Best wishes,<br>
<br>
Conn Iggulden<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<p></p><i></i>