I, Claudius by Robert Graves Valor, resilience, EQ and perspective

 I, Claudius by Robert Graves

Valor, resilience, EQ and perspective

 

I, Claudius has been included among the best twenty books of literature written in English, on the Modern Library top 100 list, which refers to the 20^th century.

However, it is not one of my favorite books.

Even if I have tried for a second time to see if I get more “good vibrations” out of it, I still consider it a good book, but not more than that.

This is not a shortcoming of the book, but of this reader.

The lack of enthusiasm may have to do with the horrors taking place in it, which we should look upon with a degree of understanding: they did not have cinemas and the fight to the death of thousands of people and animals was, well, entertaining for the average man of the Roman period.

In a few hundred years from now, maybe even earlier, people of the future will look back at our times in horror:

-          “how could these people be so cruel to animals- raise them in disgusting condition, and then  killing them for food”

That will be the view of the future. But ninety per cent and perhaps over, feel it is all right, with the understanding they have of the issue, at this moment in time. Which is perhaps ok? I see it as abominable, even if I indulged in this abhorrence myself.

There are different perspectives on the History of The Romans.

One is very appreciative, almost in awe at the achievements of the Romans: the baths, roads, amenities, architecture, fighting skills, territories won…the list is rather long.

But there is an “alternative look” that emphasizes the shortcomings- the Romans threw away babies at the garbage dump: not always, obviously, but in cases of an apparent disease, a “bad sign „and for other various reasons.

Terry Jones, member of the famous Monty Python, argues in an excellent documentary that the Barbarians had a few things, habits, inventions, strategies- up on the Romans

If Hadrian is telling the story in Yourcenar’s Memories of Hadrian, in Robert Graves’ book we have emperor Claudius recounting what happened before and during his reign.

Claudius was a very unlikely emperor. Indeed, since I mentioned the babies thrown away, if Claudius would have been born in a regular family, the refuse heap might have been his destiny.

When we say emperor, we speak about an immensely powerful ruler. An empire is such a vast territory, that we can only imagine it being ruled either by group of people, like the British Empire, or by a very strong leader. The British empire by the way is my favorite country and the best period I would choose, if given the choice to travel somewhere in time and space.

Claudius seemed to be so weak that they hadn’t even bothered to consider killing him.

Most of the rivals to the throne were eliminated- either by murder, or by being sent into exile. Even the figs on a tree have been poisoned to assassinate one ruler, but in the case of Claudius it was thought that he is so powerless and non threatening that he was not considered a target.

All the intrigue of the higher circles of Roman power are presented here and we see everything through the eyes of “Clau- Clau- Claudius”.

He was stammering badly and the suggestions given to him when he was a boy made things worse.

I am not sure which version if correct:

-          The one advanced by Graves, who suggests that Claudius has been a wise, cunning and resilient leader who has survived Caligula and perhaps the darkest, most dangerous period for pretenders to the emperor’s job?

-          Or another alternative, which I have read and presents the view that Claudius was the worst emperor we can think of.

In spite of the intrigue, the horrors, characters that are strong and devious, fights in the Coliseum, battles in remote lands, crime stories with poisonings, stabbings, marriages and incest- I do not include I, Claudius among my best 50, probably not even 100 great books.

Soap operas have taken inspiration from here, even if there’s no question to compare the two: you can put on stage a kindergarten production and Hamlet at the London National Theater- just because they’re both “on stage” doesn’t mean that they are  anywhere near the same ball game.