Cicero

Having read, before this, Anthony Everitt's biographies of Hadrian and Augustus, I had a pretty good idea of what to expect from Cicero: an extremely readable and well researched account of the life and times of that famous historical figure.  I was not disappointed.  The book was more gripping than most non-fiction books that I have read.  There was almost genuine suspense at the end (even though I knew what had to happen).  While this covers the time period of Roman history that I know the most about, I think it was the most enjoyable of the three of his books that I have read.

Like his other books, in Cicero, Everitt discusses what happened before Cicero was born that influenced his life (in this case that would be basically the stories of Marius and Sulla) which provides important context for readers unfamiliar with Roman history.  The book then proceeds through Cicero's life in chronological order in almost a story form.  However, the author is quick to admit where something is a supposition or unclear.

This book is also interesting because, unlike the Roman Emperors of his later books, there is a large collection of Cicero's correspondence with his friends revealing a personal side of him that most famous figures have lost due to the attenuation of history.  This is by no means a definitive look into his personality but it is certainly a clearer look than there is available for basically any one else in the period.

Unlike the other two biographies that I have read by him, this book did not go into the aftermath of Cicero's death in particular detail.  However, I will forgive this fault because Augustus picks up at (technically slightly before) the end of this book.

If this book seems like a fun read, I also recommend Colleen McCullough's Masters of Rome series.  It is a novelized version of basically the events of this novel, with a little before and a little after.  It covers seven books and is very good.

Overall, I would give this book a 93%.

Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome

I was first exposed to the wonders of ancient Rome by Colleen McCullough's Master's of Rome series which is a novelized version of the key events in the Roman Republic in its twilight from 110 BC to 27 BC (after which it became the Roman Empire which endured for another ~5 centuries).  It is a great series and basically single handedly sparked my interest in ancient Rome.  Since then I have read a lot of different books (non-fiction and otherwise) about the Roman Republic and, subsequently, Empire.  Of these, my favorite is definitely Anthony Everitt's Augustus.  It a detailed journey through everything that has been unearthed about Augustus and his reign but it is written in such a way that it feels much more like a story than a textbook.

After reading Augustus, all of Anthony Everitt's books have been on my list of things to look for at a used book store especially Cicero because, due to Ms. McCullough's writing, the end of the republic is my favorite time in Roman history (though the parallelisms to Star Wars don't hurt).  I haven't found Cicero yet but I did find the "sequel" to Augustus in a stack off to the side in a used book store in Victoria.  Not wanting to pass up any Everitt book, I grabbed Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome.

Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome follows Hadrian through his life while also explaining the shaping circumstances of his life.  This means that this book spends a lot of time talking about the previous two emperors, Nerva and Trajan who were the first two of the "Five Good Emperors" (making Hadrian the third) which created a great setup to Hadrian's eventual ascension and added some really interesting parts that would have been lacking from the book if the discussion had only covered Hadrian's time as emperor (next time I am in Rome, I am definitely paying more attention to Trajan's column).

Like Augustus, this book follows Hadrian from his birth to shortly after his death in more of a story style than a textbook.  Everitt is quick to admit what we do not know but he makes suppositions to fill in the blanks, always explaining why he thinks what he does.  Hadrian is not quite the key figure in Roman history that Augustus was, so this book was less interesting but it was still a fascinating read and a great window into the days of Rome.

Overall, I would give this book an 88%.