Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #4944 in Books
• Published on: 2007-03-05
• Binding: Paperback
• 304 pages

The Telegraph
'a well-polished, breezy account.'

Sunday Times
'MP, columnist, editor, television pundit and wit...his metaphors glitter; his similes soar...Johnson is never dull'

Sunday Telegraph
'the sublime and the bizarre are richly represented in this portrayal...a splendid romp through the Roman world'

Customer Reviews

I came, I saw, I read.
As someone who's knowledge of the Romans was gleaned from Asterix books and Sword & Sandal epics, this was a fantastic introduction to the Roman Empire.

Now, Boris is a bit of a Tory, and though he does write thus it doesn't mean this book won't appeal to anti Tory types. Others have suggested that he could perhaps be accused of labouring the EU/Roman empire connection a tad, but it is a useful parallel. And it does help to illustrate one of the central themes of the book, that study of the classical world can still teach us much about current geopolitics and other stuff too.

The Dream of Rome was interesting, witty and thought provoking. And besides, I now know when Gaius Julius Caesar was assassinated (44 BC), that there was a black Roman Emperor (Septimus Severus, who died in York by the way), that the Romans were into fish sauce in a big way and loads of other interesting stuff which will make me the toast of informed society.

I'm off to read some Virgil now. Good job Boris.

Boris pulls it off (so to speak)
You don't need to be a Conservative to like this book and you certainly don't need to know anything about Roman history (it might even help if you don't). You'll have come across Boris Johnson's "Tim Nice But Dim" TV image but you will be pleasantly surprised in several ways.
The book is about the rise of the Roman Empire, the way the Romans ran their affairs (a subject on which Boris is, of course, an expert!) and most specifically what messages it holds for us in the 21st century. I am no Roman scholar but I was impressed by the breadth and depth of his knowledge and the extent to which he had thought about it - you get the sense this book has been gestating for at least 20 years.
Don't be put off by this praise for his research. You will also know he has been the editor of `The Spectator' and you do not get there by being the upper class twit he has played in front of the cameras. Journalism has allowed him to develop a style of writing that talks directly to you as the reader, never patronising, using different ways to get his message over (humour, analogies, "imagine you were there", and so on). This makes the text very, very readable.
Where the book could turn off some readers is with the message for us today - does the success of the Roman Empire suggest a federal Europe is a good idea, for example? Some other reviewers have said you end up not really knowing where Johnson stands but I don't think that's the point. He lays out his interpretation of history, starts the reader on the path of thinking about the implications and then leaves us to make our own minds up. If there were dogmatic conclusions to the different chapters I think it would be a much weaker book, that was rightly seen as a historical excuse for a political rant.
So, this is not a textbook but if you enjoy history or politics and want an entertaining and thought-provoking read, I thoroughly recommend this to you, especially as the price of a used copy is now £2. Don't you pay that for your lunchtime sandwich???

Cripes! Who would have thought we could learn so much from 2000 years ago?
Before getting started on this book roman civilisation meant Hadrian's Wall, Time Team and throwing Christians to the lions. This book tells you what the piles of stones can't: how the Roman Empire was built on trade with others, imbedding Roman values into conquered civilisations and how the cult of the empreror enabled this to come about. The romans were the first ones to understand globalisation and the benefits of free trade: each country trades with another the products it makes best and as a result everyone benefits (2000 years later most governments still do not understand this) and by imbedding shared values everyone works towards a common purpose. The romans did not achieve this by military force either, army payrolls and headcount were low and the empire only got into a mess when they overeached themselves in invading Bavaria and Britain; the rest of the time the "conquerees" were happy to be part of a greater empire because they soon saw the benefits at close hand (take note EU apparatchiks). In answer to some of critical reviews Boris acknowledges that this is not an exhaustive study of the Roman Empire but I for one am now keen to find out more.