Whatever sources you may read about Dionysius, historians will agree that he is the perfect model of a tyrant. Though not much is known about his history, or the history of the Sicilian Greeks, Manfredi did an excellent job at trying to portray the impact Dionysius had in Greek history. Many reviewers thought of this book negatively on the bases of historical inaccuracies, or that it's partly made up. Well here's a spoiler: history is never accurate. No two people can look at an apple the same way, some focus on the shape, others the color. This book is no different; I believe what Manfredi portrayed the metamorphosis of Dionysius. From a moral soldier, to a blood-thirsty tyrant, and the circumstances surrounding it revolved around a series of unfortunate events. Manfredi didn’t write this book as an account of Dionysius’ life, if so he would’ve written a biography. Instead he tried to send a message that behind every tyrant is a tragic story. This tragic story can serve as a “model” for how leaders become tyrants, and the pressure they face from the responsibilities of wielding such power.This book is far from perfect, what I would like to see changed is the following;1- The summary at the back of the book contains some unnecessary details that may spoil the conflict of the story. I would have appreciated it if they were written differently.2- At certain points of the story, things were accelerated at the expense of the plot. Certain details would have enhanced the story and add more flavor to it. However, Manfredi himself admits in the author's notes that certain historical events were "omitted" for simplicity's sake.3- A short page defining the technical terms used to describe military tactics and strategy would have been helpful. Uninformed readers, such as myself, of ancient warfare would love to understand what happened in every battle.All in all a book worth reading for those who love ancient history, without expecting it to be 100% accurate.
How do you rebrand a character that history has dismissed as a one-dimensional cruel warmongerer? There are many answers to that. Unfortunately one of them is "make him a one-dimensional Machiavelli."Which is what we get, along with a cast of equally flat character. Every soldier is bold and chisled. Every old man is wise beyond his years. Every politician is a self-serving coward. Every invading horde is more bloodthirsty and savage than the last (at least Hannibal seems to be acting out of family pride). Every female hero remarkably brilliant, for a girl (she speaks so well!). Then these set pieces are given pages to demonstrate, then reiterate, how bold/wise/cruel/yellow/ideal they are. And then battles are wrapped up within a few paragraphs.This has all the subtlety of 300 (hell, this is 300 in a different timeframe) without any of the artistry or entertainment. My better half realized that I was only trying to keep reading for the sake of finishing. After perhaps the most stilted and awkwardly written sex scene I'd read in a while, I asked myself why. And so I stopped. Please, just don't start.
Do You like book Tyrant (2005)?
una fazza, una razza.. I've heard that often enough and finally I had a book about the Greek colonies in Sicily. I loved to know how life was for them and how they followed the political struggles of mainland Greece and all the Greek territories. Sadly though Manfredi is obviously a big fan of tactics, manoeuvers and battle strategies. I like that, too, but not for so many times in a row. I do understand that the struggle between the Greeks and the "barbarians" had to be told with all the battles etc., but I would have liked more insight into the life of the Greek Sicilians and not just their tyrant leader. Still this book was highly interesting and I devoured most of the book without a break during traveling.
—Katrin
At some point Sicily and a big part of North Italy was called Magna Graecia, which is a very good indication that it was mostly populated by Greeks settles that left Greece years ago to find better living conditions. Dionysius of Syracuse was a tyrant but he was also a political and military genius, he managed to make Syracuse the dominant city and also eliminate the thread from the Carthaginians.Being a history fan I really enjoyed this book, it presented a different aspect of the man, one that I really enjoy reading. Good book.
—Andreas Michaelides
No es un mal libro, pero tampoco es que me haya sorprendido. A pesar de tratar un tema totalmente conocido (hablo en épocas, no en detalles), se habla con expresiones modernas que lo hacen sonar estúpido. Además, la historia de amor con Areté no tiene sentido alguno; se crea de la nada y sin a penas chispa, es ridícula.
—celessiul
