Scan barcode
razgon's review against another edition
3.0
Great book by Steven Saylor - After reading it , I was dubious whether the events depicted in it were historical, but as far as we can tell, they are. While it is a detective novel, Mr Saylor shows how well he knows the subject matter throughout the book. I will be reading others in this series as well!
stephybara's review against another edition
3.0
This is good for what it is - a Roman mystery based on a true case argued by Cicero - and the writing is pretty good, but it seemed a bit long and dry in parts.
arachnistar's review against another edition
4.0
Saylor did an excellent job telling all those years of history. It's impressive that he managed to do such a good job with using all those different characters and managing to make them have interesting side-stories along with the main plot of the book.
kamreadsandrecs's review against another edition
4.0
I honestly wasn't quite sure what to think when I'd acquired Saylor's Roma Sub Rosa series. It was something of a blind acquisition, really, given that I was looking for something to tide me over after I'd gotten something of a "Roman high" from watching Spartacus: Blood and Sand and was waiting for the arrival of my copy of Gods of the Arena. This seemed like a decent-enough series to start out with, so I decimated an entire shelf at the local thrift bookstore (miracle of miracles, it turned out they had the entire series up to the most recent book), and brought the whole lot home.
Thankfully, I was not disappointed. Roman Blood was an interesting ride, a look at late Republican Rome that was of a different flavor from the one I was used to - then again, the Rome of this period that I was used to was based mostly on history books, and there are just some days when those aren't nearly as fun as fiction. The language reads very well, and while I don't know how close it is to the colloquial Latin that was spoken during the period, I think Saylor has done enough research to at least give it that feel (as any good writer should, I think).
Part of the novel's charm is its cast, both fictional and non-fictional. I'm not sure if Saylor's depiction of Cicero is accurate, but it is interesting nevertheless. His slave, Tiro, is a sympathetic character as well. But what I truly appreciated was that, come the ending, no one is truly guilty or innocent - which is all I'm going to say, because to say more would be to spoil the ending totally. Either way, I appreciate the "gray" morality more than if it was clearly black-and-white.
As to the plot, it's nothing new - the mystery fan will find similar (likely better) in other novels. But the milieu is exotic and distracting enough that maybe its faults can be ignored.
Thankfully, I was not disappointed. Roman Blood was an interesting ride, a look at late Republican Rome that was of a different flavor from the one I was used to - then again, the Rome of this period that I was used to was based mostly on history books, and there are just some days when those aren't nearly as fun as fiction. The language reads very well, and while I don't know how close it is to the colloquial Latin that was spoken during the period, I think Saylor has done enough research to at least give it that feel (as any good writer should, I think).
Part of the novel's charm is its cast, both fictional and non-fictional. I'm not sure if Saylor's depiction of Cicero is accurate, but it is interesting nevertheless. His slave, Tiro, is a sympathetic character as well. But what I truly appreciated was that, come the ending, no one is truly guilty or innocent - which is all I'm going to say, because to say more would be to spoil the ending totally. Either way, I appreciate the "gray" morality more than if it was clearly black-and-white.
As to the plot, it's nothing new - the mystery fan will find similar (likely better) in other novels. But the milieu is exotic and distracting enough that maybe its faults can be ignored.
More...