What do you think?
Rate this book
Scipio Africanus #1
Scipio Rising
210 BCE. The Roman Republic is on the cusp of a second war with the empire of Carthage. Three young men emerge to battle each other and change the course of history: Cato the Elder, Hannibal the Great, and Scipio Africanus. Follow the Scipio Africanus saga as a quiet scholarly boy emerges to become the man who Liddell-Hart called "Greater than Napoleon."
This new edition of Scipio Rising includes battle maps and details omitted from the first edition, to better illustrate the brilliant stratagems executed by the Carthaginians and Romans. The book includes additional details on the historic Battle of Cannae.
This new edition of Scipio Rising includes battle maps and details omitted from the first edition, to better illustrate the brilliant stratagems executed by the Carthaginians and Romans. The book includes additional details on the historic Battle of Cannae.
- GenresHistorical Fiction
399 pages, Kindle Edition
First published December 26, 2013
106 people are currently reading
89 people want to read
About the author
Martin Tessmer
26 books22 followersMartin Tessmer spent thirty-five years as a design and training expert for universities and the military. In the late 1990s, he went on hiatus from the academic world to work as an outdoor writer, publishing several wilderness books and writing for numerous outdoor magazines.
Martin returned to academia in 2000, heading up an online training development center for the University of Colorado system. He retired in 2010, and went on to work with the U.S. Navy on designing fighter pilot training programs. He is now semi-retired, devoting himself to historical novels. His recent research on the Punic Wars has taken him to London, Rome, Ostia, and Barcelona.
In addition to his six-book Scipio Africanus series, Martin has just released The Noble Brute, the first historical novel about Quintus Fabius Maximus Rullianus.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews
September 25, 2018
This is going to share the podium of worst novel about the Second Punic War that I've read with Ross Leckie's trilogy. The flaws are so many I can't possibly go about each individually, so I'll group them:
1. The language is too modern. Really, really too modern. It's especially distracting during dialogue passages, because of how non-authentic it sounds because of the language. The characters, both protagonist and secondary, speak like people today at any informal gathering, with no attempt at standard English or formality/politeness.
I don't expect novels to be written resembling Olde English to give the impression of classicity, it's too tricky a technique. However, there should be an attempt to write using a vocabulary and a style as standard as possible, taking care not to let your regional speech seep through and not sound slangy or idiomatic. American authors are particularly prone to stumble over this stone, and should therefore be more careful.
2. Piggybacking on the above, the manner in which people interact and relate to each other, both between peers and across social classes, is also lacking in "period authenticity" and truthfulness to history. The Romans weren't like us modern peoples, so over-familiar, so ready to fake smiles, so informal, so unmindful of rank and class and ceremony. There's such a marked carefree and unceremonious atmosphere that you wonder what happened to the Roman concepts of dignitas and auctoritas amongst senators and patricians. I was almost expecting characters to greet each other with What's up, mate? instead of that curious attempt at sounding "Roman" by inserting a salutatio formula incorrectly.
An example of this that did me in was the author making Gaius Laelius, sidekick and lifelong friend of Scipio the son, call him Scippy. I mean . . . what? Scippy?!
But what's the point of that? And can you imagine friends calling Cato or Fabius Maximus by diminutives like this? Or Sulla, Caesar, Augustus, etc., be called something like Luce, Juls, Gus by their friends? "Hey, Porty, drop your oxen now, clean the dirt from under your nails, and let's go to the Rostra!"
3. The author doesn't seem to know how to handle the narrative and steer it along a defined arc. Instead, he seems to write like checking historical facts boxes and inserting superfluous and poorly done sex scenes when he doesn't know what to write in-between one check box and the next. Hannibal swears to his dad to destroy Rome, check. The Barcas conquer Hispania, check. Cato and Fabius Maximus meet and scheme, check. Hannibal crosses the Alps, check. Scipio is defeated at Ticinus, check. Battle of Trebia, check. Slaughter at Cannae, check. Oh, and why don't I write a scene of Scipio Jr having sex with his slave at the beginning, and then again banging a horny Italian young matron in-between battles? I mean, what else can be used as filler while awaiting the next big battle?
4. Since the author doesn't have a story but follows History instead, his plot becomes didactic and ridiculously linear. He inserts maps in each chapter where a battle is happening. I'm not joking, he really does. There you are reading the description of a battle between Romans and Carthaginians and . . . poof! A map appears right in the middle and breaks immersion. What is this? A novel or a non-fiction book? In what well-made and respectable Historical Fiction novel is it acceptable to insert battle maps in the middle of chapters?
And since we're into unnecessary didacticism, why is this author including quotation reference numbers? Whenever Tessmer includes a word-for-word quote by a real historical figure, he adds an endnote number that leads to the source it was taken from. Sorry, again, what is this? A novel or a non-fiction book? Make up your mind, please. It can't be both.
5. Manichaean characterisation. Yes, I'm perfectly aware of the existence of rival factions in the Roman Senate (though I disagree with the authorial choice to call each faction the Latin and Greek parties respectively since it doesn't reflect the historical reality, I can accept that it's a creative licence as per the Author's Note), but that doesn't mean the existence of such a rivalry is a green light for writing black-and-white goodies and baddies depending on your personal sympathies. The characterisation of Quintus Fabius Maximus as a mustache-twirling cartoon villain (forget it that Romans had no mustache to twirl) is frankly unacceptable to me. And no, I'm no admirer of Cunctator, he had his flaws and was a pain in the nether regions, but do give credit where credit is due: he had his part in Rome's final victory. And Cato? A bigger pain in the nether regions, if that's possible, but he was no close-minded mulish bumbler as he's portrayed here.
The point is: don't exaggerate. It's possible to write antagonist characters without having them resemble Snidely Whiplash. Nor do you need to demean the others to elevate your protagonist/hero.
6. The editing is terrible. Entire paragraphs are underlined. It should've undergone a bit of editing before it was published, because the typos and formatting don't give a good impression.
And there are also other issues and inaccuracies I found, but the ones listed here should suffice to give potential readers a good idea of whether this book would be for them or not. For me, it wasn't.
1. The language is too modern. Really, really too modern. It's especially distracting during dialogue passages, because of how non-authentic it sounds because of the language. The characters, both protagonist and secondary, speak like people today at any informal gathering, with no attempt at standard English or formality/politeness.
I don't expect novels to be written resembling Olde English to give the impression of classicity, it's too tricky a technique. However, there should be an attempt to write using a vocabulary and a style as standard as possible, taking care not to let your regional speech seep through and not sound slangy or idiomatic. American authors are particularly prone to stumble over this stone, and should therefore be more careful.
2. Piggybacking on the above, the manner in which people interact and relate to each other, both between peers and across social classes, is also lacking in "period authenticity" and truthfulness to history. The Romans weren't like us modern peoples, so over-familiar, so ready to fake smiles, so informal, so unmindful of rank and class and ceremony. There's such a marked carefree and unceremonious atmosphere that you wonder what happened to the Roman concepts of dignitas and auctoritas amongst senators and patricians. I was almost expecting characters to greet each other with What's up, mate? instead of that curious attempt at sounding "Roman" by inserting a salutatio formula incorrectly.
An example of this that did me in was the author making Gaius Laelius, sidekick and lifelong friend of Scipio the son, call him Scippy. I mean . . . what? Scippy?!
But what's the point of that? And can you imagine friends calling Cato or Fabius Maximus by diminutives like this? Or Sulla, Caesar, Augustus, etc., be called something like Luce, Juls, Gus by their friends? "Hey, Porty, drop your oxen now, clean the dirt from under your nails, and let's go to the Rostra!"
3. The author doesn't seem to know how to handle the narrative and steer it along a defined arc. Instead, he seems to write like checking historical facts boxes and inserting superfluous and poorly done sex scenes when he doesn't know what to write in-between one check box and the next. Hannibal swears to his dad to destroy Rome, check. The Barcas conquer Hispania, check. Cato and Fabius Maximus meet and scheme, check. Hannibal crosses the Alps, check. Scipio is defeated at Ticinus, check. Battle of Trebia, check. Slaughter at Cannae, check. Oh, and why don't I write a scene of Scipio Jr having sex with his slave at the beginning, and then again banging a horny Italian young matron in-between battles? I mean, what else can be used as filler while awaiting the next big battle?
4. Since the author doesn't have a story but follows History instead, his plot becomes didactic and ridiculously linear. He inserts maps in each chapter where a battle is happening. I'm not joking, he really does. There you are reading the description of a battle between Romans and Carthaginians and . . . poof! A map appears right in the middle and breaks immersion. What is this? A novel or a non-fiction book? In what well-made and respectable Historical Fiction novel is it acceptable to insert battle maps in the middle of chapters?
And since we're into unnecessary didacticism, why is this author including quotation reference numbers? Whenever Tessmer includes a word-for-word quote by a real historical figure, he adds an endnote number that leads to the source it was taken from. Sorry, again, what is this? A novel or a non-fiction book? Make up your mind, please. It can't be both.
5. Manichaean characterisation. Yes, I'm perfectly aware of the existence of rival factions in the Roman Senate (though I disagree with the authorial choice to call each faction the Latin and Greek parties respectively since it doesn't reflect the historical reality, I can accept that it's a creative licence as per the Author's Note), but that doesn't mean the existence of such a rivalry is a green light for writing black-and-white goodies and baddies depending on your personal sympathies. The characterisation of Quintus Fabius Maximus as a mustache-twirling cartoon villain (forget it that Romans had no mustache to twirl) is frankly unacceptable to me. And no, I'm no admirer of Cunctator, he had his flaws and was a pain in the nether regions, but do give credit where credit is due: he had his part in Rome's final victory. And Cato? A bigger pain in the nether regions, if that's possible, but he was no close-minded mulish bumbler as he's portrayed here.
The point is: don't exaggerate. It's possible to write antagonist characters without having them resemble Snidely Whiplash. Nor do you need to demean the others to elevate your protagonist/hero.
6. The editing is terrible. Entire paragraphs are underlined. It should've undergone a bit of editing before it was published, because the typos and formatting don't give a good impression.
And there are also other issues and inaccuracies I found, but the ones listed here should suffice to give potential readers a good idea of whether this book would be for them or not. For me, it wasn't.
June 29, 2018
Good but could be better
Scipio Rising is the historical fiction novel about a young boy (Scipio)’s rise to greatness during battles in 210 BCE. The author did a great job of learning a lot of facts about the time frame; so much so that the novel sometimes feels really “teachy.” (The author is a teacher so I’m sure that influenced his writing style.) This is one of those books I would much prefer to read as a supplement to a history class. However, I do think people who enjoy this genre would enjoy this book. The characters themselves did pull some emotion out of me. It’s hard not to feel a little sympathy for people trying to be leaders in a war.
Scipio Rising is the historical fiction novel about a young boy (Scipio)’s rise to greatness during battles in 210 BCE. The author did a great job of learning a lot of facts about the time frame; so much so that the novel sometimes feels really “teachy.” (The author is a teacher so I’m sure that influenced his writing style.) This is one of those books I would much prefer to read as a supplement to a history class. However, I do think people who enjoy this genre would enjoy this book. The characters themselves did pull some emotion out of me. It’s hard not to feel a little sympathy for people trying to be leaders in a war.
August 30, 2017
Good story with believable characters
Pretty well written and enjoyable even though the story is easily available as an actual history it was well 'fleshed out' and I thought the character's were well defined. One historical inaccuracy - Ciabata bread was 'invented' in the 1950's by Italian bakers to compete with French baguettes which were becoming too popular in Italy at that time. Little 'niggle' really - just nitpicking ! Enjoyed the book.
Pretty well written and enjoyable even though the story is easily available as an actual history it was well 'fleshed out' and I thought the character's were well defined. One historical inaccuracy - Ciabata bread was 'invented' in the 1950's by Italian bakers to compete with French baguettes which were becoming too popular in Italy at that time. Little 'niggle' really - just nitpicking ! Enjoyed the book.
January 6, 2018
Thrilling reading
I love history but the historian is a dry read. Tessmer writes in a fashion that makes the reader read more before he takes a sip of his/her drink. A truly enjoyable book.
I love history but the historian is a dry read. Tessmer writes in a fashion that makes the reader read more before he takes a sip of his/her drink. A truly enjoyable book.
February 11, 2014
It is always a pleasure to read historical fiction that makes you feel a part of the time period and alongside the characters of the book. Cornelius Scipio reluctantly follow the footsteps of his father, into the army, with a pledge to destroy Rome's most fearsome enemy, Hannibal the Carthaginian. The book is as much about Hannibal and his genius for defeating Roman legions as it is about Scipio growth into a soldier and advancement in Roman politics. We learn how Hannibal changes warfare from head to head confrontations to warfare that utilizes tricks, ambushes, and the terrain to his advantage. The Romans refuse to recognize this change and continue to throw legion after legion at Hannibal, each getting wiped out. This is the first of a trilogy on Scipio and by the end of the book we see Scipio riding off to war in Iberia having learned Hannibal's lessons and intent on practicing the same skilled trickery on Rome's arch enemy.
Mr. Tessmer puts you in the middle of each battle to groan at Rome's stupidity and marvel at Hannibal's strategies. Of course, nothing is easy and all is susceptible to politics. Both Scipio and Hannibal have to fight their senates for men, arms, and money. Mr. Tessmer doesn't stop at the battles but provides a rich background of life in Rome and of Scipio's family and Rome's political intrigue between the Latin (with Cato playing an important role) and Hellenistic parties. An excellent novel making it fun to learn ancient history.
Mr. Tessmer puts you in the middle of each battle to groan at Rome's stupidity and marvel at Hannibal's strategies. Of course, nothing is easy and all is susceptible to politics. Both Scipio and Hannibal have to fight their senates for men, arms, and money. Mr. Tessmer doesn't stop at the battles but provides a rich background of life in Rome and of Scipio's family and Rome's political intrigue between the Latin (with Cato playing an important role) and Hellenistic parties. An excellent novel making it fun to learn ancient history.
November 21, 2014
I was in two minds about 3 or 4 stars for this book. I did like the story and it is well written, yet something keeps nagging at me to say it's not as good as others in a similar category - so 3 it is.
The book is good in many ways - good pace and energy and I really liked the way that Tessmer gives you a first hand insight into the politicians and practicalities of being a senior Roman at the time. I enjoyed the way I learned about Scipo and his enemies and I did like the overall feel of the book.
Yet I like a good old battle scene and these were short and sharp - with good explanations of what happened and sound reviews from two or three viewpoints, but I didn't feel transported to the side of my fellow Romans standing in line against the enemy.
I liked the different perspectives, from Hannibal to Scipio and back as well as minor players giving their thoughts on how things will play out. Yet, again, I wanted more. It seemed as if the story was too long for the writing and elements were cut short to make the book finish at a particular point in time.
Having said all of that it was well worth a read and I will read the next one in the series because (as I said above) I did like the overall feel of the book and its story.
The book is good in many ways - good pace and energy and I really liked the way that Tessmer gives you a first hand insight into the politicians and practicalities of being a senior Roman at the time. I enjoyed the way I learned about Scipo and his enemies and I did like the overall feel of the book.
Yet I like a good old battle scene and these were short and sharp - with good explanations of what happened and sound reviews from two or three viewpoints, but I didn't feel transported to the side of my fellow Romans standing in line against the enemy.
I liked the different perspectives, from Hannibal to Scipio and back as well as minor players giving their thoughts on how things will play out. Yet, again, I wanted more. It seemed as if the story was too long for the writing and elements were cut short to make the book finish at a particular point in time.
Having said all of that it was well worth a read and I will read the next one in the series because (as I said above) I did like the overall feel of the book and its story.
April 1, 2014
This book is a thrilling journey through history, into the human heart and soul of Scipio and Hannibal. Two of the most distinguished heroes of ancient History. This inspired narrative reveals the aristocrat, general, politician, and aesthete behind the Roman triumph to bring us a novel of love and betrayal. The story starts at the beginning of their lives, from childhood and on to their adult life. Braiding together parallel plots of both Scipio and Hannibal in the art of war among the Carthaginians and Romans through the Punic wars. War between Rome and Carthage was one of the great military conflicts of the ancient world and the author writes it into an entirely satisfying symphony of story and substance with breathtaking battle scenes and a tale of violent passions. As the story unfolds you have a great respect for both great men. The book is complex, surprising and thought-provoking. Non-stop entertainment right until the last chapter. All I can say is WOW! I am now an adamant history buff, and I want to read more of the story. Great book and a great author. I was given this book in return for my review. It was my pleasure, indeed.
March 2, 2015
This was a fast-paced and well-told story on the whole, and I was gripped by the plot line in particular. Some of the characters were rather shallow, and they stretched credibility a bit too much at times. The book is written in the present tense and it took me a short time to adjust to that, but once I became used to it I found it completely acceptable. But I found the occasional translations of latin words or phrases a bit irritating where they were injected into the text of the story.
I found this book to be a damned good read. I could envisage the action well enough, although the odd extra scintilla of descriptive detail could have helped. It would not have slowed the story in any way. I am certainly looking forward to reading the next book in the series.
I found this book to be a damned good read. I could envisage the action well enough, although the odd extra scintilla of descriptive detail could have helped. It would not have slowed the story in any way. I am certainly looking forward to reading the next book in the series.
February 22, 2015
I really enjoyed this book. Some of the political background was exaggerated but Tessmer admits to that for the sake of the story. The one thing I hated was his reference to 'legionnaires'. In the UK, legionnaires look after doors at clubs etc. For us the Roman Army consisted of Legionaries.
However, a great story and I shall go straight to the sequel. Recommended to any lover of Roman Army Fiction.
However, a great story and I shall go straight to the sequel. Recommended to any lover of Roman Army Fiction.
April 5, 2015
An interesting read
I think this book was interesting to read but not to the standard of other roman books I have read
I think this book was interesting to read but not to the standard of other roman books I have read
February 29, 2016
Three and a half stars. Fast-paced/story moved along nicely. Enjoyed it. The writing was a little heavy handed to belabour some points.
Displaying 1 - 11 of 11 reviews