What do you think?
Rate this book
I, Claudius/Claudius the God
A work of historical fiction which recreates the life and times of Emperor Claudius, who lived from 10 BC to AD 41, a time when poisoning, blasphemy, treachery, incest and unnatural vice were commonplace. From the author of CLAUDIUS THE GOD AND HIS WIFE MESSALINA.
839 pages, Paperback
Published January 1, 1986
68 people are currently reading
2324 people want to read
About the author
Robert Graves
639 books2,065 followersRobert von Ranke Graves was an English poet, soldier, historical novelist and critic. Born in Wimbledon, he received his early education at King's College School and Copthorne Prep School, Wimbledon & Charterhouse School and won a scholarship to St John's College, Oxford. While at Charterhouse in 1912, he fell in love with G.H. Johnstone, a boy of fourteen ("Dick" in Goodbye to All That) When challenged by the headmaster he defended himself by citing Plato, Greek poets, Michelangelo & Shakespeare, "who had felt as I did".
At the outbreak of WWI, Graves enlisted almost immediately, taking a commission in the Royal Welch Fusiliers. He published his first volume of poems, Over the Brazier, in 1916. He developed an early reputation as a war poet and was one of the first to write realistic poems about his experience of front line conflict. In later years he omitted war poems from his collections, on the grounds that they were too obviously "part of the war poetry boom". At the Battle of the Somme he was so badly wounded by a shell-fragment through the lung that he was expected to die, and indeed was officially reported as 'died of wounds'. He gradually recovered. Apart from a brief spell back in France, he spent the rest of the war in England.
One of Graves's closest friends at this time was the poet Siegfried Sassoon, who was also an officer in the RWF. In 1917 Sassoon tried to rebel against the war by making a public anti-war statement. Graves, who feared Sassoon could face a court martial, intervened with the military authorities and persuaded them that he was suffering from shell shock, and to treat him accordingly. Graves also suffered from shell shock, or neurasthenia as it is sometimes called, although he was never hospitalised for it.
Biographers document the story well. It is fictionalised in Pat Barker's novel Regeneration. The intensity of their early relationship is nowhere demonstrated more clearly than in Graves's collection Fairies & Fusiliers (1917), which contains a plethora of poems celebrating their friendship. Through Sassoon, he also became friends with Wilfred Owen, whose talent he recognised. Owen attended Graves's wedding to Nancy Nicholson in 1918, presenting him with, as Graves recalled, "a set of 12 Apostle spoons".
Following his marriage and the end of the war, Graves belatedly took up his place at St John's College, Oxford. He later attempted to make a living by running a small shop, but the business failed. In 1926 he took up a post at Cairo University, accompanied by his wife, their children and the poet Laura Riding. He returned to London briefly, where he split with his wife under highly emotional circumstances before leaving to live with Riding in Deià, Majorca. There they continued to publish letterpress books under the rubric of the Seizin Press, founded and edited the literary journal Epilogue, and wrote two successful academic books together: A Survey of Modernist Poetry (1927) and A Pamphlet Against Anthologies (1928).
In 1927, he published Lawrence and the Arabs, a commercially successful biography of T.E. Lawrence. Good-bye to All That (1929, revised and republished in 1957) proved a success but cost him many of his friends, notably Sassoon. In 1934 he published his most commercially successful work, I, Claudius. Using classical sources he constructed a complexly compelling tale of the life of the Roman emperor Claudius, a tale extended in Claudius the God (1935). Another historical novel by Graves, Count Belisarius (1938), recounts the career of the Byzantine general Belisarius.
During the early 1970s Graves began to suffer from increasingly severe memory loss, and by his eightieth birthday in 1975 he had come to the end of his working life. By 1975 he had published more than 140 works. He survived for ten more years in an increasingly dependent condition until he died from heart
At the outbreak of WWI, Graves enlisted almost immediately, taking a commission in the Royal Welch Fusiliers. He published his first volume of poems, Over the Brazier, in 1916. He developed an early reputation as a war poet and was one of the first to write realistic poems about his experience of front line conflict. In later years he omitted war poems from his collections, on the grounds that they were too obviously "part of the war poetry boom". At the Battle of the Somme he was so badly wounded by a shell-fragment through the lung that he was expected to die, and indeed was officially reported as 'died of wounds'. He gradually recovered. Apart from a brief spell back in France, he spent the rest of the war in England.
One of Graves's closest friends at this time was the poet Siegfried Sassoon, who was also an officer in the RWF. In 1917 Sassoon tried to rebel against the war by making a public anti-war statement. Graves, who feared Sassoon could face a court martial, intervened with the military authorities and persuaded them that he was suffering from shell shock, and to treat him accordingly. Graves also suffered from shell shock, or neurasthenia as it is sometimes called, although he was never hospitalised for it.
Biographers document the story well. It is fictionalised in Pat Barker's novel Regeneration. The intensity of their early relationship is nowhere demonstrated more clearly than in Graves's collection Fairies & Fusiliers (1917), which contains a plethora of poems celebrating their friendship. Through Sassoon, he also became friends with Wilfred Owen, whose talent he recognised. Owen attended Graves's wedding to Nancy Nicholson in 1918, presenting him with, as Graves recalled, "a set of 12 Apostle spoons".
Following his marriage and the end of the war, Graves belatedly took up his place at St John's College, Oxford. He later attempted to make a living by running a small shop, but the business failed. In 1926 he took up a post at Cairo University, accompanied by his wife, their children and the poet Laura Riding. He returned to London briefly, where he split with his wife under highly emotional circumstances before leaving to live with Riding in Deià, Majorca. There they continued to publish letterpress books under the rubric of the Seizin Press, founded and edited the literary journal Epilogue, and wrote two successful academic books together: A Survey of Modernist Poetry (1927) and A Pamphlet Against Anthologies (1928).
In 1927, he published Lawrence and the Arabs, a commercially successful biography of T.E. Lawrence. Good-bye to All That (1929, revised and republished in 1957) proved a success but cost him many of his friends, notably Sassoon. In 1934 he published his most commercially successful work, I, Claudius. Using classical sources he constructed a complexly compelling tale of the life of the Roman emperor Claudius, a tale extended in Claudius the God (1935). Another historical novel by Graves, Count Belisarius (1938), recounts the career of the Byzantine general Belisarius.
During the early 1970s Graves began to suffer from increasingly severe memory loss, and by his eightieth birthday in 1975 he had come to the end of his working life. By 1975 he had published more than 140 works. He survived for ten more years in an increasingly dependent condition until he died from heart
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 115 reviews
September 3, 2016
Having seen the TV series some time back, I have been looking for this for some time. Finally listened to it in audiobook this weekend. Still excellent - a classic that I will keep around and go back to once in a while. Very well written, with everything a good story needs: love, suspense, deceit, politics, friendships, treason, ambition and ironies of fate playing tricks on the characters...
A book about a very human experience, the story of a convinced republican, who became emperor - by accident... A book about power and how it changes the people who have it.
A book about a very human experience, the story of a convinced republican, who became emperor - by accident... A book about power and how it changes the people who have it.
February 7, 2017
Ah, the story that launched a thousand melodramas about the Roman Empire. At last I know the inspiration for HBO's Rome, Showtime's Spartacus, and yes, even Gladiator. For this is where it all began: every tale of debauched and insane emperors and cruel, manipulative women being the power behind the throne. All can trace their lineage back to the O.G. crazy-Roman-schemers-wracking-up-a-body-count book. And this is it.
The (much abridged) plot: an unlikely uncle of crazy ole' Caligula accidentally becomes Emperor after spending his whole life being overlooked and underestimated because of his stammer and his limp. And it turns out he does a damn good job of it, which is a big relief to the Romans, who had to endure Tiberius (a cruel, selfish, impotent tyrant) and then Caligula (a fucking criminally insane egotist who bankrupted the empire). This is how--in a story over 500 pages long--Claudius was raised and educated, survived, ascended to the emperorship, and went about fixing the huge mess his predecessors left him. It has a supporting cast of literally hundreds, and spans literally decades.
I'm going to be honest, the sheer number of characters (many of whom either have the same name or confusingly similar names) was the most mind-boggling part of reading this book. I made the wise decision of listening to it on audiobook, which helped not only because I could speed up the narration, but different voices were used to differentiate characters. Otherwise I fear I would have been hopelessly lost.
I walked away with an impression of disbelief. I'm sure Graves exaggerated some details for dramatic effect and the sake of meaningful fiction. But the basic facts are all pulled straight from the history books. And that history is fucked up. Like, it's insane that Augustus's mistress just went about poisoning everyone in the line of succession until her own son was next in line to be emperor... with no one stopping her! It's insane that Caligula ran the empire into the ground with his ridiculous extravagances and there were no checks and balances in place to stop him. It's insane that a republic couldn't be restored because of fear of the military's independent power as a king-making force. It's insane that a former reality TV star and failed businessman won the election to be President of the United--wait, sorry, that's reality, not I, Claudius. But believe you me, our recent election and everything that's happened since could fit pretty damn well in this classic tale of political corruption, moral debauchery, and elitist abuse of the working class.
And yet this fucking happened (for the most part). I did feel at some points that I had read this story before... and that's when I realized that so many contemporary fiction about Rome drew heavily from Graves as their source material. This book is so sweepingly influential and groundbreaking that it has been the model for most Roman empire fiction to follow it. And if that isn't the mark of great literature, I don't know what is.
But let's talk about Claudius. The "idiot" who survived simply because no one thought he was worth killing. As a character, he is fascinating. He survives through a combination of luck (being born a lame stutterer among handsome, accomplished, athletic brothers tends to make one fade into the background) and his own wits (he's so fucking smart he ends up talking his way out of any scrape his natural pathetic demeanor can't get him out of). He's perfectly placed to take over the empire and fix its shit simply because his predecessors wiped out so much of the competition that there's literally no one left able to challenge him. All the heroic patriots are dead. All the vicious schemers have blundered into their own demises. All that are left are the survivors, who are either so relieved to have a sane emperor that they fall in line to help him, or so cunning that they play the long game in opposing him.
The story is narrated in the first person, so we spend a lot of time in Claudius's head. And that's a pretty good place to be. Whether by historical fact or the author's artifice, Claudius is a historian. And as such, he's pretty damn good at explaining all the moving pieces and how they fit together. But more than simply being an effective narrator, Claudius has an interesting voice. He's narrating from his deathbed, so he is in turns tired and regretful. He's wise, but still slightly pathetic. His feelings are easily hurt. But unlike Caligula, who would simply murder anyone who so much as looked at him wrong, Claudius responds to his hurt feelings by accepting that he probably deserved to be shat upon anyway. His self esteem is so startlingly low that he takes his many heartbreaks and personal insults in stride.
The narration is ridiculously dense. This is not a light read (another reason I'm glad I listened to it instead). But it is fascinating, and I'm certainly glad I read it.
The (much abridged) plot: an unlikely uncle of crazy ole' Caligula accidentally becomes Emperor after spending his whole life being overlooked and underestimated because of his stammer and his limp. And it turns out he does a damn good job of it, which is a big relief to the Romans, who had to endure Tiberius (a cruel, selfish, impotent tyrant) and then Caligula (a fucking criminally insane egotist who bankrupted the empire). This is how--in a story over 500 pages long--Claudius was raised and educated, survived, ascended to the emperorship, and went about fixing the huge mess his predecessors left him. It has a supporting cast of literally hundreds, and spans literally decades.
I'm going to be honest, the sheer number of characters (many of whom either have the same name or confusingly similar names) was the most mind-boggling part of reading this book. I made the wise decision of listening to it on audiobook, which helped not only because I could speed up the narration, but different voices were used to differentiate characters. Otherwise I fear I would have been hopelessly lost.
I walked away with an impression of disbelief. I'm sure Graves exaggerated some details for dramatic effect and the sake of meaningful fiction. But the basic facts are all pulled straight from the history books. And that history is fucked up. Like, it's insane that Augustus's mistress just went about poisoning everyone in the line of succession until her own son was next in line to be emperor... with no one stopping her! It's insane that Caligula ran the empire into the ground with his ridiculous extravagances and there were no checks and balances in place to stop him. It's insane that a republic couldn't be restored because of fear of the military's independent power as a king-making force. It's insane that a former reality TV star and failed businessman won the election to be President of the United--wait, sorry, that's reality, not I, Claudius. But believe you me, our recent election and everything that's happened since could fit pretty damn well in this classic tale of political corruption, moral debauchery, and elitist abuse of the working class.
And yet this fucking happened (for the most part). I did feel at some points that I had read this story before... and that's when I realized that so many contemporary fiction about Rome drew heavily from Graves as their source material. This book is so sweepingly influential and groundbreaking that it has been the model for most Roman empire fiction to follow it. And if that isn't the mark of great literature, I don't know what is.
But let's talk about Claudius. The "idiot" who survived simply because no one thought he was worth killing. As a character, he is fascinating. He survives through a combination of luck (being born a lame stutterer among handsome, accomplished, athletic brothers tends to make one fade into the background) and his own wits (he's so fucking smart he ends up talking his way out of any scrape his natural pathetic demeanor can't get him out of). He's perfectly placed to take over the empire and fix its shit simply because his predecessors wiped out so much of the competition that there's literally no one left able to challenge him. All the heroic patriots are dead. All the vicious schemers have blundered into their own demises. All that are left are the survivors, who are either so relieved to have a sane emperor that they fall in line to help him, or so cunning that they play the long game in opposing him.
The story is narrated in the first person, so we spend a lot of time in Claudius's head. And that's a pretty good place to be. Whether by historical fact or the author's artifice, Claudius is a historian. And as such, he's pretty damn good at explaining all the moving pieces and how they fit together. But more than simply being an effective narrator, Claudius has an interesting voice. He's narrating from his deathbed, so he is in turns tired and regretful. He's wise, but still slightly pathetic. His feelings are easily hurt. But unlike Caligula, who would simply murder anyone who so much as looked at him wrong, Claudius responds to his hurt feelings by accepting that he probably deserved to be shat upon anyway. His self esteem is so startlingly low that he takes his many heartbreaks and personal insults in stride.
The narration is ridiculously dense. This is not a light read (another reason I'm glad I listened to it instead). But it is fascinating, and I'm certainly glad I read it.
November 1, 2015
For me, this is the historical novel. This edition contains two books, the original I, Claudius and the sequel, Claudius the God. I devoured them one after the other, and I have read them again many times since.
From the very first paragraph you're rooting for poor old Clau-clau-claudius. The author manages to portray an entire character in just a few beautifully chosen words.
And, despite the debauchery and the Machiavellian intrigues, of which there are plenty, this book is an unrivalled character portrait. The settings put you in ancient Rome, but it's the characters that bring it so vividly to life as Claudius manages to dodge his way through the lives of some of history's most famous monsters long enough to write his autobiography.
A must read.
From the very first paragraph you're rooting for poor old Clau-clau-claudius. The author manages to portray an entire character in just a few beautifully chosen words.
And, despite the debauchery and the Machiavellian intrigues, of which there are plenty, this book is an unrivalled character portrait. The settings put you in ancient Rome, but it's the characters that bring it so vividly to life as Claudius manages to dodge his way through the lives of some of history's most famous monsters long enough to write his autobiography.
A must read.
August 9, 2022
Brilliant, read it twice and I am sure will read it again.
November 29, 2025
Claudius the God by Robert Graves
Legendary work
It is a BBC adaptation that I am discussing here and not the original.
If I, Claudius appears as rated, commented and read twice, it is because that’s what happened, albeit the second time it was an adaptation.
Claudius becomes not just the emperor, but also a God as the title suggests, in spite of his republican convictions.
Well, at least until he became the most powerful man in the world and changed his views to a certain degree.
When he was instated, we must say it was against his will, for he had been a scholar, satisfied with life in a library, more or less.
But the killing of Caligula, notwithstanding its necessity, opened the door for opportunists and the outlook was grim.
Herod, king of Judea has a talk with Claudius and makes a few strong points in favor of accepting the title:
- If you don’t become emperor, others will fight for the power and hell will break loose
I guess it is not what Claudius said, but that is one of the points:
- How much is hard work and research of historical documents and what is artistic license?
- Obviously the dialogue is a product of imagination, but some facts have been recorded
Even with documents there is an issue, if not really a major problem.
We read in new books that the documents were written from the perspective of the ruler and historians were biased.
Not to mention the new feminist and minority rejection of history as being the product of men, almost entirely and white, most of the time
- They made the history and they recorded whatever they felt like
This is a radical view and I am not aware of how much traction this thinking has and how it will impact the books of the future.
Claudius started as a reasonable, wise leader, trying to reduce the effect of the catastrophic decisions of the late Caligula.
Caligula is known for his cruelty, but his financial excesses have been just as disastrous, nearly ruining the empire.
Claudius resorts to using statues, decorations and other lavish ornaments to make coins from the gold and silver wasted on extravagant tastes.
The new emperor takes some correct administrative decisions, one of which was to establish a new port.
Here he clashed with some advisors that pointed out the huge cost of the construction, estimated at some ten million, which would run to many billions surely in today’s coinage…
- You receive bribes from those interested to see this project cancelled
- But it will move forward, for we need a security, food will come into Rome in this way and there would be no more famine
A military incursion into Britain makes Claudius use his studies of history and especially tactics, when he uses a “cunning plan”, in the first place rejected by his commanders.
He proves to be an inspired leader, when he talks to the soldiers and uses humor:
- Predecessors called this unit the slowest, but also the surest…
Perhaps the gravest mistake that Claudius “The God” makes is to marry Messalina, even if I am wrong and now consider that a later decision to not just take his niece as fourth wife, but to adopt her son, Nero.
We all know what Nero meant for the empire, as well as the debauchery manifested by Messalina, with her infamous contest.
In the play, Claudius is portrayed as in love with Messalina and incapable to believe her evil and ready to plot against him, at least until irrefutable evidence is presented.
The emperor accepts all sorts of outrageous propositions from his wacko wife, including the one to divorce her for a while and let her marry his enemy!!
Perhaps all this is overblown, given the aforementioned fact that history is told by men who distort facts-sometimes, often?-and the epitome of a scandalous, abhorrent wife was actually a sweet, if nymphomaniac spouse?
- Who knows?
Nero however would turn out to be competing with Caligula for the worst emperor in Roman times, if again data is not distorted.
Legendary work
It is a BBC adaptation that I am discussing here and not the original.
If I, Claudius appears as rated, commented and read twice, it is because that’s what happened, albeit the second time it was an adaptation.
Claudius becomes not just the emperor, but also a God as the title suggests, in spite of his republican convictions.
Well, at least until he became the most powerful man in the world and changed his views to a certain degree.
When he was instated, we must say it was against his will, for he had been a scholar, satisfied with life in a library, more or less.
But the killing of Caligula, notwithstanding its necessity, opened the door for opportunists and the outlook was grim.
Herod, king of Judea has a talk with Claudius and makes a few strong points in favor of accepting the title:
- If you don’t become emperor, others will fight for the power and hell will break loose
I guess it is not what Claudius said, but that is one of the points:
- How much is hard work and research of historical documents and what is artistic license?
- Obviously the dialogue is a product of imagination, but some facts have been recorded
Even with documents there is an issue, if not really a major problem.
We read in new books that the documents were written from the perspective of the ruler and historians were biased.
Not to mention the new feminist and minority rejection of history as being the product of men, almost entirely and white, most of the time
- They made the history and they recorded whatever they felt like
This is a radical view and I am not aware of how much traction this thinking has and how it will impact the books of the future.
Claudius started as a reasonable, wise leader, trying to reduce the effect of the catastrophic decisions of the late Caligula.
Caligula is known for his cruelty, but his financial excesses have been just as disastrous, nearly ruining the empire.
Claudius resorts to using statues, decorations and other lavish ornaments to make coins from the gold and silver wasted on extravagant tastes.
The new emperor takes some correct administrative decisions, one of which was to establish a new port.
Here he clashed with some advisors that pointed out the huge cost of the construction, estimated at some ten million, which would run to many billions surely in today’s coinage…
- You receive bribes from those interested to see this project cancelled
- But it will move forward, for we need a security, food will come into Rome in this way and there would be no more famine
A military incursion into Britain makes Claudius use his studies of history and especially tactics, when he uses a “cunning plan”, in the first place rejected by his commanders.
He proves to be an inspired leader, when he talks to the soldiers and uses humor:
- Predecessors called this unit the slowest, but also the surest…
Perhaps the gravest mistake that Claudius “The God” makes is to marry Messalina, even if I am wrong and now consider that a later decision to not just take his niece as fourth wife, but to adopt her son, Nero.
We all know what Nero meant for the empire, as well as the debauchery manifested by Messalina, with her infamous contest.
In the play, Claudius is portrayed as in love with Messalina and incapable to believe her evil and ready to plot against him, at least until irrefutable evidence is presented.
The emperor accepts all sorts of outrageous propositions from his wacko wife, including the one to divorce her for a while and let her marry his enemy!!
Perhaps all this is overblown, given the aforementioned fact that history is told by men who distort facts-sometimes, often?-and the epitome of a scandalous, abhorrent wife was actually a sweet, if nymphomaniac spouse?
- Who knows?
Nero however would turn out to be competing with Caligula for the worst emperor in Roman times, if again data is not distorted.
April 23, 2022
This is not the first time I've read this book. I first read it in my mid teens, after seeing the magnificent TV adaptation and falling hopelessly in love with the stuttering, bumbling titular hero. Reading it again many years later feels like meeting an old friend and having a lengthy catch-up session.
By today's standards, there's a lot of "telling" and "info-dumping" but I'm fine with that. It's a far-reaching, multi-generational story of family rivalries, political intrigues, murder, wars and even civil engineering! I can unashamedly say that it is the inspiration behind some of my own novels and indeed I recognise elements of it in works by some of my favourite authors.
I have a soft spot for the underdog, the misfit, the one shunned by polite society. I realise I'm not alone in this and that's probably what endears most people to poor old Claudius.
There's a certain irony running through this book. Claudius is a staunch Republican (not in the modern American sense, but in the anti-monarchical sense) and what happens to him at the end of the first book goes against his views, but he is forced with great reluctance into becoming Emperor. He makes a far better ruler than many of his predecessors, thus defeating his own objective in abolishing the monarchy. Yet another cruel joke heaped upon him.
The depth of detail allows the reader to become fully immersed in Ancient Rome and the cultures of other nations in power during those times. It's a fascinating work and I still love it as much as I did when I first read it.
By today's standards, there's a lot of "telling" and "info-dumping" but I'm fine with that. It's a far-reaching, multi-generational story of family rivalries, political intrigues, murder, wars and even civil engineering! I can unashamedly say that it is the inspiration behind some of my own novels and indeed I recognise elements of it in works by some of my favourite authors.
I have a soft spot for the underdog, the misfit, the one shunned by polite society. I realise I'm not alone in this and that's probably what endears most people to poor old Claudius.
There's a certain irony running through this book. Claudius is a staunch Republican (not in the modern American sense, but in the anti-monarchical sense) and what happens to him at the end of the first book goes against his views, but he is forced with great reluctance into becoming Emperor. He makes a far better ruler than many of his predecessors, thus defeating his own objective in abolishing the monarchy. Yet another cruel joke heaped upon him.
The depth of detail allows the reader to become fully immersed in Ancient Rome and the cultures of other nations in power during those times. It's a fascinating work and I still love it as much as I did when I first read it.
September 10, 2023
I first encountered Claudius in paperback when PBS ran the British series. It was impossible to ignore. I read both books by Robert Graves, but I have to say that at the time my knowledge of Rome and its history was extremely limited. Fast forward a few decades, toss in a lot more knowledge of Rome and a return visit to Emperor Claudius via the audio versions of Graves' books. The experience is even more interesting and amazing.
When I started connecting the dots of the history I had learned with the tales Claudius tells, I gained an entirely different understanding.
The first person account of encounters with historical names and places brings both the people and the history to life. Some of it terrifying. Some of it mundane.
Claudius survived a family that pretty much killed off anyone who got in the way. His journey was one of learning to keep out of sight while in plain sight (confusing, yes, but infinitely necessary). He lived in interesting times among interesting people and in places that we can only see in ruins.
The books are not for those who like their history cleaned up and tidy. History has never been either. I would like to suggest that the reader have more than a tendril of knowledge of the subject matter but in the end I'm not sure it would matter. If Claudius' story captivates enough, it could lead you into an entirely new rabbit hole.
When I started connecting the dots of the history I had learned with the tales Claudius tells, I gained an entirely different understanding.
The first person account of encounters with historical names and places brings both the people and the history to life. Some of it terrifying. Some of it mundane.
Claudius survived a family that pretty much killed off anyone who got in the way. His journey was one of learning to keep out of sight while in plain sight (confusing, yes, but infinitely necessary). He lived in interesting times among interesting people and in places that we can only see in ruins.
The books are not for those who like their history cleaned up and tidy. History has never been either. I would like to suggest that the reader have more than a tendril of knowledge of the subject matter but in the end I'm not sure it would matter. If Claudius' story captivates enough, it could lead you into an entirely new rabbit hole.
December 18, 2013
I, Claudius was one of my most riveting reads of the year. Reading on to Claudius the God just as fast as I could was a no-brainer - and if it disappoints at all, it's only in comparison to its nigh-on perfect predecessor. Claudius the God provides just as scintillating a look into Claudius's reign as the previous book did into Augustus's, Tiberias's, and Caligula's. But it's also a more ponderous journey, and the exploration of the Empire as a whole does pale in comparison to the lively soap operas of Claudius's immediate family, as found more prominently in the first book. Still, this is historical fiction at its finest and absolutely worth the read.
April 18, 2020
An almost unbelievable story (well, it's more fiction than fact). I cannot count how many times I've read the book and saw the television series.
November 26, 2017
This is a combined review for the audiobook editions of both "I, Claudius" and "Claudius the God" by Robert Graves.
Like so many others, I was drawn to these books after watching the 1976 PBS adaption which enthralled and intrigued me. This was my first foray into Roman history and I've never been the same since. That said, for those (like me) comparing Jack Pulman's screenplay to the actual book will be both impressed and disgusted. Mr. Pulman certainly got all the plot points but in the process of doing do took some curious "liberties" with both the source material and (I've come to find out) history itself. I won't disappoint the reader by revealing of to what exactly I'm referring - better if you ferret it out yourself, I think.
So how are the books, you may ask? Simply amazing. I know it's a cliche' but the books are most definitely better than the movie. And Derek Jacobi's reading is just as inspired and delightful as his screen performance was as Claudius in the PBS mini-series. I enjoyed them both immensely and will, no doubt, be taking another trip through them both again.
Finally I am a Christian, and as a final note to my fellow believers I encourage these books and/or the PBS television series for no other reason than to put the New Testament in historical context from the Roman side. I think you'll find, as I did, your depth, breadth, and understanding of the Gospels, Book of Acts, and the epistles exploding as you work through Mr. Grave's fine research and writing.
Highest recommendation. These books are classics!
Like so many others, I was drawn to these books after watching the 1976 PBS adaption which enthralled and intrigued me. This was my first foray into Roman history and I've never been the same since. That said, for those (like me) comparing Jack Pulman's screenplay to the actual book will be both impressed and disgusted. Mr. Pulman certainly got all the plot points but in the process of doing do took some curious "liberties" with both the source material and (I've come to find out) history itself. I won't disappoint the reader by revealing of to what exactly I'm referring - better if you ferret it out yourself, I think.
So how are the books, you may ask? Simply amazing. I know it's a cliche' but the books are most definitely better than the movie. And Derek Jacobi's reading is just as inspired and delightful as his screen performance was as Claudius in the PBS mini-series. I enjoyed them both immensely and will, no doubt, be taking another trip through them both again.
Finally I am a Christian, and as a final note to my fellow believers I encourage these books and/or the PBS television series for no other reason than to put the New Testament in historical context from the Roman side. I think you'll find, as I did, your depth, breadth, and understanding of the Gospels, Book of Acts, and the epistles exploding as you work through Mr. Grave's fine research and writing.
Highest recommendation. These books are classics!
April 4, 2011
Haven't yet read Claudius The God pending a reread of I, Claudius this summer to refresh my memory on the particulars. I, Claudius is one of my all-time favorites. Rich, detailed, historic and accurately melodramatic. To this day I revere and aspire to emulate Livia, vile though she may be. Such a driven and successful woman undergirding the power of the empire and fiercely pursuing the interests of herself and her family... I've rarely seen so strong a female lead, which is to say such an honest portrayal of a woman in power. The BBC mini series from the 70s is a must see. Sian Phillips is amazing as Livia. Derek Jacobi (Judi Dench's brother!) does very well as Claudius.
June 10, 2014
While Graves' King Jesus was most provocative, his two Claudius novels were the most fun of his literary treatments of the ancient world. Viewers who enjoyed the BBC series will enjoy the novels even more than the film. Readers of the two novels will be interested to see how they were translated to the screen.
February 7, 2009
Just finished I, Claudius yesterday 2-5-09 for Classix. Have always wanted to read this but never got to it. Now I'm inspired to rewatch the old PBS series too. Plus I haven't read Claudius the God yet, but will put it on my list. I really enjoyed reading and learning again about ancient Rome. It must have been horrible to live with those wicked men ruling though.
April 11, 2017
Absolutely fantastic! The author did not only manage to describe what happened in his life and what he accomplished. He also managed to describe why he acted as he did in different situations, what choices he had and what he could have done different. He really gives the readers a good insight into the culture and mentality of his society. Prepare for a historical journey!
September 16, 2016
I greatly enjoyed this book - it was very interesting and really well written...:) I learned a lot about the history and culture of Rome and at the same time I greatly admired the subtle sense of humour of the author! :) Two thumbs up! :)
April 8, 2008
Murder, backstabbing politics, infanticide - Good summer reading. LOL
January 22, 2011
Total soap operas. Awesome.
March 8, 2014
Good book. Well written. Holds your attention. Some of the historical facts can be debatable. Makes it interesting to watch this on Masterpiece Theatre.
November 5, 2019
One of the very best works of historical fiction, this is just great.
December 27, 2019
Fascinating book about the Roman Empire but in a distinctly British voice. Everyone should read these books.
April 8, 2020
Väldigt bra men man måste verkligen gilla antiken
July 21, 2025
I have spent years trying to master Latin. It's the major language component of the Bachelor of Languages degree that I began (on a part-time basis) nearly 6 years ago. I'm very comfortable reading fiction in French and Italian, but despite all my dogged application a page of Latin remains a slog to read, and without access to a translation I'm as likely as not to misunderstand its import. I don't read Latin, I 'parse' it and count myself fortunate if I derive some sense from it. It's a deeply frustrating language, and but for the pleasure of sharing this seemingly fruitless pursuit with so many other hapless strivers I don't think I could have continued. It is apparent that Graves reads Latin as he reads English. In the introduction to Claudius the God he names 27 classical authors he has consulted (some in Greek) in the writing of it. I imagine the young Graves immersed in Greek and Latin almost from infancy, otherwise how can he be so proficient?
These two volumes encompass most of what has survived of what was recorded about a certain period of Roman imperial history, the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius. Graves' Claudius is a well-informed but impotent observer in the first book, then master of events for much of the second. The novels are very rich in historic detail, to such an extent that I think Graves' assumed audience must be constituted of people already quite familiar with the matter. He shapes a welter of material into a coherent, if complex, narrative. It's very well done, but must be daunting for the uninitiated.
One reservation I have is that so much of the Roman writings that have survived is political propaganda, and deeply suspect. Was Messalina really as bad as she is made out to be? Without contradictory evidence, that's the story Graves is obliged to tell if he is to be faithful to the documents. In fiction one can't discuss sources then conclude that we cannot know. Fiction is a story, not a treatise on sources.
Claudius the republican and reluctant emperor spends much of his reign mending the damage and neglect of his predecessors, particularly Caligula. Claudius the God is mainly an account of the business of government - legislation, administration of law, engineering projects, military campaigns, et al. - and rather dry stuff because of it. Messalina's betrayal and the apparent impossibility of restoring the Republic make Claudius cynical. He decides that if he is 'King Log,' a harmless monarch mocked by the frogs, then he will set up Nero as 'King Stork' and let the frogs see how fortunate they had been. I suspect that Graves is allowing himself some license with this striking idea. It seems implausible that there is any documentary support for it, but it has a satisfying quality as fiction.
These two volumes encompass most of what has survived of what was recorded about a certain period of Roman imperial history, the reigns of Tiberius, Caligula, and Claudius. Graves' Claudius is a well-informed but impotent observer in the first book, then master of events for much of the second. The novels are very rich in historic detail, to such an extent that I think Graves' assumed audience must be constituted of people already quite familiar with the matter. He shapes a welter of material into a coherent, if complex, narrative. It's very well done, but must be daunting for the uninitiated.
One reservation I have is that so much of the Roman writings that have survived is political propaganda, and deeply suspect. Was Messalina really as bad as she is made out to be? Without contradictory evidence, that's the story Graves is obliged to tell if he is to be faithful to the documents. In fiction one can't discuss sources then conclude that we cannot know. Fiction is a story, not a treatise on sources.
Claudius the republican and reluctant emperor spends much of his reign mending the damage and neglect of his predecessors, particularly Caligula. Claudius the God is mainly an account of the business of government - legislation, administration of law, engineering projects, military campaigns, et al. - and rather dry stuff because of it. Messalina's betrayal and the apparent impossibility of restoring the Republic make Claudius cynical. He decides that if he is 'King Log,' a harmless monarch mocked by the frogs, then he will set up Nero as 'King Stork' and let the frogs see how fortunate they had been. I suspect that Graves is allowing himself some license with this striking idea. It seems implausible that there is any documentary support for it, but it has a satisfying quality as fiction.
May 29, 2025
These 2 novels an epic of incredible proportions. The writing style is so unique and I definitely will read again.
January 10, 2026
Not as good as the first, but worth the read. Not as stable story line as the first part. Ending was incomplete and rushed
August 4, 2023
My full review: http://venividilegispqr.blogspot.com/...
first encountered Mr Graves’ work in the early 1980s and I have read this work many times since then. In fact it is one of the books that I would want to have in my luggage if I were ever to be shipwrecked on a desert island with no hope of rescue. It is also one of my most favorite television series and Derek Jacobi will always BE Claudius for me. It is a book that cemented my interest in Ancient Rome while encouraging me to seek out the original works that influenced much of its plot and keeping me massively entertained, all at the same time. Surprisingly, it is not a dry historical recitation of genealogies and boring battle details: rather, it is a succession of political plots, deaths, adulteries, deceptions, blackmails, witchcraft, poisonings and other assorted mayhem. At one point we follow the Imperial Palace being turned into a brothel filled with senators’ wives and daughters, while at another there is a competition between the Empress and a prostitute to see who can ‘handle’ the most men in one night. We follow Caligula’s crazy war against Neptune and the death by maggots of Herod Agrippa. There is never a dull moment!
The novel is based upon the conceit that the Emperor Claudius decided, near the end of his life, to write an account of his own life and that of his immediate family so that the truly dreadful face of Imperialism would be revealed. Fortunately, he completed the scrolls and had them sealed away somewhere safe shortly before his fourth wife, Agrippinilla, poisoned him with mushrooms. He speaks directly to us, the modern discoverers of his writings and reveals all the secrets that he has uncovered about the reigns of the Emperors before him: Augustus, Tiberius and Caligula. He presents himself as a person uniquely qualified to comment upon their lives because not only was he actually present for many of the events but he was able to question some of the most important figures of that time, such as his grandmother, the Empress Livia.
first encountered Mr Graves’ work in the early 1980s and I have read this work many times since then. In fact it is one of the books that I would want to have in my luggage if I were ever to be shipwrecked on a desert island with no hope of rescue. It is also one of my most favorite television series and Derek Jacobi will always BE Claudius for me. It is a book that cemented my interest in Ancient Rome while encouraging me to seek out the original works that influenced much of its plot and keeping me massively entertained, all at the same time. Surprisingly, it is not a dry historical recitation of genealogies and boring battle details: rather, it is a succession of political plots, deaths, adulteries, deceptions, blackmails, witchcraft, poisonings and other assorted mayhem. At one point we follow the Imperial Palace being turned into a brothel filled with senators’ wives and daughters, while at another there is a competition between the Empress and a prostitute to see who can ‘handle’ the most men in one night. We follow Caligula’s crazy war against Neptune and the death by maggots of Herod Agrippa. There is never a dull moment!
The novel is based upon the conceit that the Emperor Claudius decided, near the end of his life, to write an account of his own life and that of his immediate family so that the truly dreadful face of Imperialism would be revealed. Fortunately, he completed the scrolls and had them sealed away somewhere safe shortly before his fourth wife, Agrippinilla, poisoned him with mushrooms. He speaks directly to us, the modern discoverers of his writings and reveals all the secrets that he has uncovered about the reigns of the Emperors before him: Augustus, Tiberius and Caligula. He presents himself as a person uniquely qualified to comment upon their lives because not only was he actually present for many of the events but he was able to question some of the most important figures of that time, such as his grandmother, the Empress Livia.
January 23, 2016
I rather enjoyed the first, I, Claudius. This book seemed more a reactionary work. Perhaps as Claudius was always a reactionary character. His observations in the first go around presented much of the humor and charm. Here, he is the Emperor, the God, so he does what is mostly expected of him, and doesn't have much time or agency on his own. I feel like Graves really just finished this sequel to round off the series. I could have done without it, I suppose. The last part of the book really was a let down, as by this time Claudius was old. He stopped struggling. Graves presents Claudius as having a plan for the Republic but this feels very half hearted. In fact, the last part after Messalina's death feels like Claudius kind of gave up. But the narrator, normally so self aware, doesn't seem to note this. I say he kind of gave up because here, the narrator seems fully content just to go along with the flow of events. He stops trying to rule the government well, and ends up raising horrible people (his niece and her son) to positions of authority. This is supposed to help bring about the Republic but it's more believable that Graves was merely having the narrator say this to maintain consistency of character. All in all, a good story, but like I said, I could have done without this sequel.
April 11, 2017
The inescapability of faith, with a large dose of irony: that may be the recipe for Claudius' life. Around this recipe the plot for two terrific novels was built, novels that can serve as a brief introduction to the Early Imperial Roman society.
Claudius is, for a long part of his reign, an exception: an anachronism stuck in a family of emperors where each day could be the last. In this scheme, Claudius plays the innocent, trying to forge his own destiny in front of long odds. Of course, in the end, the intractability of faith from the Imperial discourse shows a Claudius content with his faith, judging from his works. Of course, "Apocolocyntosis," the last chapter of the book, must be mentioned also as a lesson on how every person, slave or emperor, can't escape, again, the judgment of faith, though his "punishment" was something that must have pleased Claudius, though he doesn't say it in the book.
One minus though: in the end, he begs himself to stop talking, which adds to the irony and hopes to bring more nigh his demise. But still, considering how entertaining these two novels have been, I wish he would have kept speaking on and on...
Great and entertaining reading, following the sources. Definitely recommended.
Claudius is, for a long part of his reign, an exception: an anachronism stuck in a family of emperors where each day could be the last. In this scheme, Claudius plays the innocent, trying to forge his own destiny in front of long odds. Of course, in the end, the intractability of faith from the Imperial discourse shows a Claudius content with his faith, judging from his works. Of course, "Apocolocyntosis," the last chapter of the book, must be mentioned also as a lesson on how every person, slave or emperor, can't escape, again, the judgment of faith, though his "punishment" was something that must have pleased Claudius, though he doesn't say it in the book.
One minus though: in the end, he begs himself to stop talking, which adds to the irony and hopes to bring more nigh his demise. But still, considering how entertaining these two novels have been, I wish he would have kept speaking on and on...
Great and entertaining reading, following the sources. Definitely recommended.
July 14, 2017
“And what thoughts or memories, would you guess, were passing through my mind on this extraordinary occasion? Was I thinking of the Sibyl's prophecy, of the omen of the wolf-cub, of Pollio's advice, or of Briseis's dream? Of my grandfather and liberty? Of my grandfather and liberty? Of my three Imperial predecessors, Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, their lives and deaths? Of the great danger I was still in from the conspirators, and from the Senate, and from the Gaurds battalions at the Camp? Of Messalina and our unborn child? Of my grandmother Livia and my promise to deify her if I ever became Emperor? Of Postumus and Germanicus? Of Agrippina and Nero? Of Camilla? No, you would never guess what was passing through my mind. But I shall be frank and tell you what it was, though the confession is a shameful one. I was thinking, 'So, I'm Emperor, am I? What nonsense! But at least I'll be able to make people read my books now. Public recitals to large audiences. And good books too, thirty-five years' hard work in them. It won't be unfair. Pollio used to get attentive audiences by giving expensive dinners. He was a very sound historian, and the last of the Romans. My history of Carthage is full of amusing anecdotes. I'm sure that they'll enjoy it.”
April 16, 2024
What an astonishing tour-de-force this is... without doubt my favourite historical novel (or rather, pair of historical novels; you really do have to read both). I love the pacing: Claudius the historian refuses to be hurried in his narrative, and there is a lovely tension between his bookish, academic introversion (he just loves pottering away at his research and writing; often on deeply obscure subjects) and the sweeping – often monstrous – arcs of history intent on propelling him onto the Imperial throne. As his family is whittled away by internecine feuds and the outrageously venal machinations of his grandmother Livia, Claudius is too pathetic and unimportant to bother with. He survives by being unnoticed... until he can't hide any longer, and Fate drags him into the limelight.
Graves's true genius lies in his own academic research, which underpins every page and lends weight and conviction to what would, if truly fictional, seem far-fetched in the extreme. (Caligula, I'm looking at you.) Beyond that, he gives Claudius a voice – tremulous, uncertain, but entirely convincing, and entirely his own.
Graves's true genius lies in his own academic research, which underpins every page and lends weight and conviction to what would, if truly fictional, seem far-fetched in the extreme. (Caligula, I'm looking at you.) Beyond that, he gives Claudius a voice – tremulous, uncertain, but entirely convincing, and entirely his own.
April 27, 2009
I've really gotten into reading historical fiction set in classical times. These two books are great examples of why: they're entertaining and informative. Claudius lived in exciting times: grandson of Marcus Antonius, adopted grandson of the Emperor Augustus, nephew of Tiberius, uncle of Caligula. He's devoted to the idea of restoring the Republic, but finds himself Emperor of Rome.
Graves is able to make the story entertaining throughout, not depressing, even though he describes the reigns of legendarily cruel and insane tyrants. Claudius doesn't succumb to self pity. He is portrayed as a sensible and humane man who tries to do his duty and find a satisfying life.
One of the payoffs of this book comes at the end. Graves includes several excerpts from classical writings about Claudius. He's set things up so you catch every sarcastic reference, twisted fact, and joke the authors make about Claudius. The man he describes is consistent with what is known, even if the judgment we make is different from that of his contemporaries.
Graves is able to make the story entertaining throughout, not depressing, even though he describes the reigns of legendarily cruel and insane tyrants. Claudius doesn't succumb to self pity. He is portrayed as a sensible and humane man who tries to do his duty and find a satisfying life.
One of the payoffs of this book comes at the end. Graves includes several excerpts from classical writings about Claudius. He's set things up so you catch every sarcastic reference, twisted fact, and joke the authors make about Claudius. The man he describes is consistent with what is known, even if the judgment we make is different from that of his contemporaries.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 115 reviews