Livy

[SigniferOne]

I haven't read that particular book, but I really know of very few modern historical books that have much merit. Most are utterly useless, with rare notable exceptions such as Peter Green's Alexander to Actium (containing some disagreeable things but in whole filled with solid judgment), and Victor Davis Hanson's works in general. But other than for the Hellenistic period, I don't really see why modern histories are even necessary. There's nothing more gripping than Polybius' account of Rome in Punic Wars and 2nd century, and nothing more grand than Livy's monumental description of Rome's rise (as I said, it swept the minds of all Renaissance and Enlightenment readers, including the American Founding Fathers and other great men). Finally, to supplement Roman history, there's Sallust and Plutarch, and Tacitus with Suetonius for completion. For Greek (Classical) history, again more Plutarch, Herodotus, Thucydides, and Diodorus (with Xenophon's Hellenica, and Quintus Curtius' Alexander).

Modern books, then, are usually simply superfluous, in competition with such grand works, although pre-19th century books often had a similar "weighty judgment" as well; but even that has disappeared with the help of modern Classicists. So I really don't find modern books that necessary, although I do keep up to date on the archeological front (which, by the way, vindicates Livy and Homer more and more every day), and sometimes (very infrequently) do find modern Classics histories that aren't sorely lacking in fact, or judgment, or usually both. Peter Green's "Shadow of the Parthenon", for instance, was a very intriguing set of essays.

So anyhow, about Livy -- this modern rabid criticism is just that, merely modern, and it is fueled by useless intellectuals who contribute little except the further disintegration of their once hallowed profession. Call that rude, if you will, but true it is nonetheless.