Simon Scarrow

[votadini]

I just picked up a copy of Simon Scarrow's 'Under the Eagle' in a local Oxfam. I've never read one of his works before, so do they come recommended?

[Lost_Warrior]

I ADORE Scarrow's work. Under the Eagle is excellent, in fact I reviewed it for this site.

 

I have the last(?) in the series upstairs. I still haven't gotten to reading it! Crap I totally forgot! I should do that.

[The Augusta]

I am famous on this site for inviting Simon Scarrow to join it and then having him read a post of mine that was less than complimentary to his work. He departed in high dudgeon. I fully admit that I am in a minority here. His works are very popular and he has earned a tidy sum from his writings - so, good luck to him. He just doesn't 'do it' for me, I'm afraid. I am a very picky reader. I want my historical fiction to be a recreation not a costume drama. I've said it before, and I'll say it again: Scarrow's books could be set anywhere. But if you love legionaries hacking at barbarians and can rejoice in lively characters that are more 1950s British than Roman, you'll lap him up. As for me, Under the Eagle went to our local charity shop after I'd slogged my way through about five chapters, and I really had to give up at that point.

 

Let me be fair: the man can string words together admirably. It's just his setting that fails for me. But please, Votadini - don't let me put you off. I think we should all make up our own minds about any author. There are as many different opinions as there are readers, so go to it - and enjoy.

 

There now - I can't be fairer than that And if you've got the book from an Oxfam shop - what have you to lose? You may love him and keep him on your shelves. Come back and let us know.

Edited December 10, 2008 by The Augusta

[Ursus]

I am a very picky reader. I want my historical fiction to be a recreation not a costume drama.

 

While I never read Scarrow's works, your attitude is generally the same one I adopt toward historical fiction.

 

So if you found his works less than compelling, I probably wouldn't either.

[Northern Neil]

I found all 8 of his Macro - Cato books enthralling and read them fom cover to cover very quickly indeed. Very enjoyable, and he certainly tells a good, adventurous yarn, and I find his characters and his settings authentic enough. That said I understand to a point what Augusta means, and I think these stories would be just as entertaining in any time slot. His main characters remind me very much of C.S.Forester's Hornblower and Bush.

[The Augusta]

I found all 8 of his Macro - Cato books enthralling and read them fom cover to cover very quickly indeed. Very enjoyable, and he certainly tells a good, adventurous yarn, and I find his characters and his settings authentic enough. That said I understand to a point what Augusta means, and I think these stories would be just as entertaining in any time slot. His main characters remind me very much of C.S.Forester's Hornblower and Bush.

 

That's a valid point, Neil. His tales are timeless in a way - thus, I suppose, enjoyable. A wide audience can read him and appreciate his storytelling. I take nothing away from the man in that respect. We all look for different things in books - which is why I was at pains to point out to Votadini that my opinion is just one of many and I want him to find out for himself.

 

You know, many people read historical fiction with this view in mind - the characters are timeless, the story could be happening now etc. To some readers this is the thing that resonates with them. Of course there is no 'right' way or 'wrong' way to write historical stories. At the end of the day, the audience will decide.

[votadini]

Thanks for all the opinions so far.

 

I generally prefer my historical fiction (admittedly, I generally prefer history works themselves) along the lines of Umberto Eco, but I have delved into Cornwell et al in the past. Never, in my opinion, going to win a Nobel but any ripping yarn will sometimes do to pass the time.

[Lanista]

Simon Scarrow is one one of the best writers in the field of Historical Fiction today. Not only are his books massively entertaining, they're sumptuously researched and accurate which I know is a major issue for many of the people on this forum. The main characters are utterly compelling because they're so believeable. I can't agree with the costume drama criticism levelled by the Augusta: these are stories about soldiers, and though the technology of war changes, the emotions and experiences of soldiers are hardly different from 1st century legionary to 21st century Royal Marine. The horror and the humour of war is something that is pretty timeless.

 

Scarrow can walk the line of entertaining whilst informing. Reading fast-paced, historically accurate novels about the Roman Legions is something of a joy for me. Also, I don't think that something has to be read with a Thesaurus in hand to be intelligent fiction. It's not enough to dismiss these books as "turn you brian off at the door" stuff - there is a lot more to them than that!

 

Cheers

 

Russ

[Gaius Paulinus Maximus]

I have to side with Lanista and NN on this one, I'm a big fan of the Eagle series too. Macro and Cato are great characters, they are always involved in some sort of rip roaring, life threatening adventure in the Roman world, it's good to see how their lives and friendship evolves throughout the series of novels.

 

For me it's a bit of light hearted release from some of the more heavy in depth factual books I like to read, but still focusing on the topic I love.

 

I totally see where The Augusta and others are coming from but like I've said many times before, I don't read these kind of novels to learn new things about Rome and it's people, I consider myself fairly knowledgeable about the subject already, I read them because I enjoy the characters, the fast paced action, the entertainment and most of all because it's about Rome and all things concerning the Roman world.

 

No historical fiction author can write these kind of novels with out thoroughly researching the period it's set in first, if they did then it would just get laughed of the shelves. Yes it's true that the truth is sometimes stretched a little bit, sometimes a lot in Igguldens case, but at the end of the day it's still based (if sometimes loosely) on fact. And if after reading these books it makes even just one person want to get a little bit more knowledgeable about Ancient Rome and maybe even study it as we do then surely it's got to be a good thing.

 

Simon Scarrow's books are a good, well written, light hearted Roman read but remember at the end of the day it is just a novel.

[JGolomb]

I just posted a reply to a Scarrow review (from a few years ago) in the book review section and then came across this thread.

 

Scarrow's work is simply fun. It's not literature, it's not particularly deep. But it's just fun and enjoyable. And in between a good serious history, it's nice to be able to just let go and enjoy the ride.

 

And there's enough solid history in it that it's spurred me on to find out more from the early British Roman era.

 

 

 

I have to side with Lanista and NN on this one, I'm a big fan of the Eagle series too. Macro and Cato are great characters, they are always involved in some sort of rip roaring, life threatening adventure in the Roman world, it's good to see how their lives and friendship evolves throughout the series of novels.

 

For me it's a bit of light hearted release from some of the more heavy in depth factual books I like to read, but still focusing on the topic I love.

 

I totally see where The Augusta and others are coming from but like I've said many times before, I don't read these kind of novels to learn new things about Rome and it's people, I consider myself fairly knowledgeable about the subject already, I read them because I enjoy the characters, the fast paced action, the entertainment and most of all because it's about Rome and all things concerning the Roman world.

 

No historical fiction author can write these kind of novels with out thoroughly researching the period it's set in first, if they did then it would just get laughed of the shelves. Yes it's true that the truth is sometimes stretched a little bit, sometimes a lot in Igguldens case, but at the end of the day it's still based (if sometimes loosely) on fact. And if after reading these books it makes even just one person want to get a little bit more knowledgeable about Ancient Rome and maybe even study it as we do then surely it's got to be a good thing.

 

Simon Scarrow's books are a good, well written, light hearted Roman read but remember at the end of the day it is just a novel.

[Centurion-Macro]

I think they are excellent books. Cato and Macro are such great characters, and the adventures they go on are awesome. They are the total opposites of each other, which is what makes them so great. The adventures they go on range from the conquest of Britain, to the Roman navy...and even to Syria. They are not extremely factual, but they are some of my favorite books. My absolute favorite would have to be the Eagle and the Wolves.

[cornelius_sulla]

Scarrow is a wonderful as an escape into the imagination - kind of like the Sharpe books are. Big on high adventure but skinny on dates and facts. I like his books, and I read a lot of historical fiction. But I make sure to try to separate fact from fun fiction. Livy he is not, but Scarrow's a bloody good read.

Edited September 6, 2009 by cornelius_sulla

[JGolomb]

Scarrow is a wonderful as an escape into the imagination - kind of like the Sharpe books are. Big on high adventure but skinny on dates and facts. I like his books, and I read a lot of historical fiction. But I make sure to try to separate fact from fun fiction. Livy he is not, but Scarrow's a bloody good read.

 

I'm finding that a good historical fiction is a terrific entrance into non-fiction. I'd not had any particular interest in late Empire until I'd read "Eagle in the Snow" by Wallace Breem. I'm chewing through "The Day of the Barbarians" by Alessando Barbero which focuses on the Battle of Adrianople - the Romans get their butts' whipped by Goths and other 'barbarians'. It's a key moment in the decline of the Empire and directly leads up to the events in "Eagle in the Snow".

 

I know that Scarrow is fiction and it's enjoyable just for that. I think we all like a good story put in a reasonable appropriate, and moderately correct, setting.

[Crispina]

I just picked up a copy of Simon Scarrow's 'Under the Eagle' in a local Oxfam. I've never read one of his works before, so do they come recommended?

 

 

I am reading "Under The Eagle" right now (well, not right now cause I'm typing) and was going to start a new thread but found this one. Having just finished the Rosemary Sutcliff series "Eagle of the Ninth", my impression is that you can sure tell Simon Scarrow grew up with television and Sutcliff didn't (as much anyway). So far I'm enjoying his first book of the series, but can't help feeling I've seen this movie before. The dialogue comes across like it could be from a group of modern Marines or other branch of service or any military movie; but who knows? maybe the centurions DID call their men "ladies" and say "I can't HEAR YOU!" And for some reason, I can't get the actor who played Marc Antoni in HBO's Rome out of my mind whenever Macro is speaking!

 

Anyway, so far I like the story and the action scenes are written very well and one of the features of this book is that the chapters are short. It feels like I'm flying through the thing and feel accomplished when I read three chapters before bed!

Definitely will continue the series. My library has the second book but the others will have to be found elsewhere.

[Lanista]

Simon's dialogue was a conscious decision on his part - he wanted to make the reader feel that these were real soldiers after all, so the shouting and swearing is all part of that. It adds realism, I think. I particularly like the "I'm not a fucking arse-bandit" line when Macro is approaching Cato about a difficult issue (no spoilers, you'll know when you see it).

 

Has to be the best Roman historical series of the last 30 years, I reckon. I can't honestly think of anyone to match the consistency in this genre. Lindsey Davis, Steven Saylor et al are mystery novels, after all, but Scarrow pulls out book after book that are all brilliant action-adventure. Each time a new one comes out, it makes you want to go back and re-read the whole series again so you can start the new one with all that back story. And, because the books are so eminently readable, you can tear through them (as you are finding) so the wait isn't too long.

 

All that said, he's been criticised for the dialogue and swearing in some quarters. On the other hand, some quarters are always going to criticise: to state the obvious, the enjoyment of fiction is a very subjective thing.

 

Talking of fiction, I'm off to kill Nephele. Sorry, "Audacia."

 

Cheers

 

Russ