I, Claudius

I grew up with the BBC adaptation, which is one of the few adaptations that's better than the original, but the book is still very good. It's a leisurely read– almost everything happens in some post-hoc narration rather than on the page itself– but it's supposed to be a historian's account rather than a melodrama. is it, like, historically accurate? No, not at all, but that's not the point. It's based on Seutonius' writings, writings that Graves himself translated; it's supposed to be biased. This novel is one long meditation on historicity and the role of historians. It's sad that its legion of imitators don't seem to get that. Every single book and show and movie that covers the Julio-Claudians is deeply indebted to this book (or the BBC miniseries) either as a direct descendant (HBO's Rome, [b:The Cicero Trilogy 32310982 The Cicero Trilogy Robert Harris https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1508696043l/32310982.SY75.jpg 52938876], [b:I Am Rome 174146857 I Am Rome (Julius Caesar, #1) Santiago Posteguillo https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1692261636l/174146857.SY75.jpg 95030492]) or as self-conscious flouting of its influence (Sky's Domina, and quite obviously [b:I Am Livia 20874139 I Am Livia Phyllis T. Smith https://i.gr-assets.com/images/S/compressed.photo.goodreads.com/books/1441814072l/20874139.SX50.jpg 26171345], two narratives that beat the same dead horse into shoe leather). Honestly, the only successor who seems to get Robert Graves' intention isn't writing historical fiction at all; he's George RR Martin and you might be familiar with his little book series. If only for historical significance, and its contribution to the genre of not just Roman historical fiction but all historical fiction and literature in general (every I, [something] title is riffing off this novel in specific), this book is very much worth reading.