Product Description
This is a reproduction of a book published before 1923.This book may have occasional imperfections such as missing or blurred pages, poor pictures, errant marks, etc. that were either part of the original artifact, or were introduced by the scanning process.We believe this work is culturally important, and despite the imperfections, have elected to bring it back into print as part of our continuing commitment to the preservation of printed works worldwide.We appreciate your understanding of the imperfections in the preservation process, and hope you enjoy this valuable book. ... Read more

Product Description
Roman art. Roman sculpture, Roman architecture, Latinliterature, Music of ancient Rome, Natural History(Pliny),Roman Empire, Justinian I, Fayum mummy portraits,Encausticpainting, Erotic art in Pompeii and Herculaneum. ... Read more

Product Description
Campaign history of the Roman military. Ancient Rome,Western Roman Empire, Samnite Wars, Battle of Asculum(279BC), Battle of the Aegates Islands, First Macedonian War,Battle of Magnesia, Cimbrian War, Battle of Naulochus,Battle of the Catalaunian Plains. ... Read more

Product Description
Roman Empire, Ancient Rome, Roman Emperor, Imperator,Romancivil wars, Romulus Augustulus, Constantine XI, RomanEmperor (Principate), Roman Emperor (Crisis of the ThirdCentury), Roman Emperor (Dominate), Roman Emperor (LateEmpire), Equestrian order, Cursus honorum, Military ofancient Rome, Roman army, Roman Navy, Roman province,Grainsupply to the city of Rome, Imperial cult (ancient Rome),Classical Latin, Latin, Vulgar Latin, Greek language,KoineGreek, Phoenician language, Aramaic language, Syriaclanguage, Coptic language, Celtic languages, Culture ofancient Rome, Social class in ancient Rome, Romancuisine,Latin literature, Roman art, Roman architecture, Romanschool, Roman currency, Roman provincial coins,History ofthe Roman Empire, Crisis of the Third Century,Diocletian,Tetrarch, Decline of the Roman Empire, Migration Period,Byzantine Empire ... Read more

Product Description
High Quality Content by WIKIPEDIA articles! The term Thraco-Roman refers to the culture and language of the Thracian and Dacian peoples who were incorporated into the Roman Empire and ultimately fell under the Roman and Latin sphere of influence.The term was coined in 1901 by Ovid Densusianu,who used it to describe the "oldest epoch of the creation of the Romanian language", when the Vulgar Latin spoken in the Balkans between the fourth and sixth century, having its own peculiarities,had evolved into what is known as Proto-Romanian. By extension, historians started to use the term to mean the time period of the history of the Romanian people until the 6th century, which witnessed the cultural and linguistic Romanisation of many Daco-Thracian tribes. ... Read more

Product Description
Roman Empire, Ancient Rome, Roman Emperor, Imperator,Romancivil wars, Romulus Augustulus, Constantine XI, RomanEmperor (Principate), Roman Emperor (Crisis of the ThirdCentury), Roman Emperor (Dominate), Roman Emperor (LateEmpire), Equestrian order, Cursus honorum, Military ofancient Rome, Roman army, Roman Navy, Roman province,Grainsupply to the city of Rome, Imperial cult (ancient Rome),Classical Latin, Latin, Vulgar Latin, Greek language,KoineGreek, Phoenician language, Aramaic language, Syriaclanguage, Coptic language, Celtic languages, Culture ofancient Rome, Social class in ancient Rome, Romancuisine,Latin literature, Roman art, Roman architecture, Romanschool, Roman currency, Roman provincial coins,History ofthe Roman Empire, Crisis of the Third Century,Diocletian,Tetrarch, Decline of the Roman Empire, Migration Period,Byzantine Empire ... Read more

Product Description
This book presents a historical study of the Roman Empire in Late Antiquity from the accession of the emperor Diocletian 284 to the death of the emperor Heraclius in 641.

• The only modern study to cover the western and eastern empire and the entire period from 284 to 641 in a single volume
• A bibliographical survey supports further study and research
• Includes chronological tables, maps, and charts of important information help to orient the reader
• Discusses the upheaval and change caused by the spread of Christianity and the barbarian invasions of the Huns, Goths and Franks
• Contains thematic coverage of the politics, religion, economy and society of the late Roman state
• Gives a full narrative of political and military events
• Discusses the sources for the period

Customer Reviews (1)

Compilation not History
This is a carefully documented, but otherwise undistinguished history of Roman Empire from the accession of Diocletian (284 CE) to the death of Heraclius (641 CE). It is of course important to carefully document all the sources used in compiling a history, but it is equally important to develop an effective scheme to organize and analyze those sources based on some sort of unifying theory or theme. That is the difference between a compilation of events and a history.

The Roman Republic and then Empire, as with all nation states, under went a more or less continuous evolution from the foundation of Rome to the fall of Constantinople in 1453 (CE). During the calamitous Third Century this evolution was especially profound and rapid. When Diocletian assumed the imperial purple the empire was vastly different from the time of Caesar Augustus and even from the time Marcus Aurelius Commodus (180-192 CE). Diocletian was a reforming emperor who tried to stabilize the empire and the way it was governed. He realigned administrative boundaries often codifying changes that occurred during the breakdowns of the Third Century and tried to stabilize the economy by various methods including creating bans on changing jobs. In this history Mitchell alludes to this only vaguely and only in the middle of the book does he even mention that the Third Century was a time of evolution. In the same manner, one would never know from this history the later Roman Empire was considerably more than a continuation of the earlier Roman Empire.

Mitchell appears unable to identify linkages, note significant changes, or prioritize the information he presents. For example had he compared the Roman Army of Marcus Aurelius Antoinus (161-180 CE) with Notia Dignitatum which he mentions at least twice he would have discovered that the Roman Army had evolved into a very different entity thanGallo-Roman legionaries of the earlier empire. This is not a trivial quibble, but goes to the heart of Roman-Barbarian relations in the later Empire. Indeed the erosion of the capabilities of the Western Roman Army declined precipitously after inflicting a serous defeat on the Goths at the Frigidus River in 394 CE. This decline made the Western half of the Empire open to the out right take over of Roman territory by various barbarian groups.This inability to conceptualize patterns and trends prevails though out the book.



... Read more

Product Description
The death of the Roman Empire is one of the perennial mysteries of world history. Now, in this groundbreaking book, Peter Heather proposes a stunning new solution: Centuries of imperialism turned the neighbors Rome called barbarians into an enemy capable of dismantling an Empire that had dominated their lives for so long.
A leading authority on the late Roman Empire and on the barbarians, Heather relates the extraordinary story of how Europe's barbarians, transformed by centuries of contact with Rome on every possible level, eventually pulled the empire apart. He shows first how the Huns overturned the existing strategic balance of power on Rome's European frontiers, to force the Goths and others to seek refuge inside the Empire.This prompted two generations of struggle, during which new barbarian coalitions, formed in response to Roman hostility, brought the Roman west to its knees.The Goths first destroyed a Roman army at the battle of Hadrianople in 378, and went on to sack Rome in 410. The Vandals spread devastation in Gaul and Spain, before conquering North Africa, the breadbasket of the Western Empire, in 439. We then meet Attila the Hun, whose reign of terror swept from Constantinople to Paris, but whose death in 453 ironically precipitated a final desperate phase of Roman collapse, culminating in the Vandals' defeat of the massive Byzantine Armada: the west's last chance for survival.

Peter Heather convincingly argues that the Roman Empire was not on the brink of social or moral collapse. What brought it to an end were the barbarians. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (63)

WoW! Great history text.
This book is astounding. He built on the work of others and lays out a convincing argument for his reasons for why the Empire fell. I am not a historian, nor a student of Rome, I just wanted to read about why Rome fell. This was a great book to read for enjoyment. It was all fun to read.
The only drawback were the maps, which don't show all the cities he refers to. He covers 400+ years of history and even city names changed so the lack of great maps was a deficiency. Other than that minor irritant, the book was worth the read.
There are many great reviews here, but after reading the book I believe that the negative ones are nits, so go with the positive ones.
My big complaint was where I bought it. I was on vacation & so couldn't wait for a mailing. This cost me twice as much at a book store as Amazon.com. I've got to plan better in the future!

Best Book Yet on the Fall of the Roman Empire
I am a retiree with an interest in the disintegration of the Roman Empire and not a historian.I have an ever-increasing number of books on the subject and this is the best of the bunch.In particular, I liked Heather's clear and entertaining style of writing, the book's scope and depth, and the fact that Heather sometimes explains, in detail, his reasoning as he extracts information form ancient sources.

A number of reviewers have complained about Heather's use of modern vernacular.To the contrary, I very much enjoyed Heather's use of current expressions such as "supergroup", "cover-up", "warm up for the main event" and even "imperial bureaucrats" and was surprised to find that the use of these expressions added both clarity and interest.

Clear, compelling, detailed, and insightful
Peter Heather's The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians is quite simply brilliant. Heather combines a rich, detailed history with clear writing to argue that Rome fell from without, not from within.

It's clear that Gibbon's The History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire (Penguin Classics) was wrong when he claimed a decline in morals - particularly Christianity - led to the collapse of the Western empire. However, a surprising amount of people still believe this. Some more serious historians, such as Adrian Goldsworthy in How Rome Fell: Death of a Superpower, argue that internal political chaos weakened the empire enough to allow the barbarians to invade.

However, Heather makes the case that it was barbarian strength, rather than Roman weakness, that led to the collapse. First, Germanic tribes along the frontier had become more prosperous, populous, and politically organized. Second, the invasion of the Huns pushed several tribes into the empire, where they decided to resettle - permanently. Third, some of those tribes seized key Roman provinces, particularly North Africa, depriving the empire of a key tax base. Finally, the Persian Sassanian threat diverted just enough resources to drain the Roman military machine. In short, it was a perfect storm spurred by the Hunnic revolution. Heather does admit that internal politics may have exacerbated the situation (particularly Constantine III's uprising), but keeps his focus outside.

One of the best features to Heather's writing style is how he seamlessly incorporates archaeological evidence, economic data, written accounts by Romans themselves as evidence for his argument. He is not afraid to guess - or even guesstimate - when the evidence just can't reach a firm conclusion, but he always prefaces such estimates with his reasoning and qualifiers. As such, Heather takes readers not just into the imperial halls of Rome (or Ravenna), but tries to consider the points of view and interests of provincial Roman landowners, Gothic kings, and even soldiers. Again, this nuance shows how domestic political turmoil just doesn't explain all of the events leading to Rome's collapse.

Perhaps the best thing I can say about The Fall of the Roman Empire is that it changed my mind. Going into it, I thought Heather would simply be yet another revisionist. I honestly thought I'd end up writing a review saying that he ignored the ferocity of Rome's civil wars or that the split between Byzantium and Rome sapped the empire's strength. However, I've come away convinced that, by and large, he's right. I'm looking forward to reading his new book, Empires and Barbarians: The Fall of Rome and the Birth of Europe.

I would warn readers that it would be useful to have some conception of Roman history before 375 A.D. Heather doesn't provide much background (which in my opinion is good, because he leaves more room to discuss the period of the collapse). I'd recommend Neil Faulkner's Rome: Empire of the Eagles, 753 BC - AD 476 for a brief but insightful overview.

The Fall of the Roman Empire Decadence Mythology
Peter Heather is upfront in his Introduction: he's about to summarize the main theses of the last couple of decades of academic research. The novelty of this research is that it is informed by archeological discoveries not available to early historians. Using this information, Heather destroys the usual believe that the Roman Empire collapsed mainly because of internal causes.

His prose is clear and to the point. His research expertise is on the Barbarians, and as such that world is really well explained, sometimes using "informed guesses" by the lack of historical documents. Heather always distinguish his sources, but makes it really easy to the reader to follow his argument and main thesis in the book: The Hunnic Empire provoked indirectly the fall of the Roman Empire. It was their collateral damage that cause the massive immigrations and invasions of Barbarians into Rome.

Heather also clearly explained that the Empire was not at all giving his last breath, on the contrary, for example, archeological evidence show how agriculture (a common example of decadence) was in fact thriving in the Fourth and Fifth century. The fall of the Hunnic Empire also serves as a counterpoint of a system that really collapsed for internal reasons.

I'm looking forward to read his new book "Empires and Barbarians: The Fall of Rome and the Birth of Europe".

Heather:A Layman's Review
This book is the best recent one-stop shopping-place for anyone interested in the topic.Specialists will cavil about details and emphasis, and any interested specialist and generalist will agree or disgree about interpretation.The author's overarching themes are easily summarized (see blurb and other reviews), and naturally they elicit agreement or argument depending on where the reader (or reviewer) resides on the spectrum of opinion about whether and why antiquity ended and the medieval world began.

That is:does the reader, a la Gibbon and the traditional interpretation, believe the Roman world clearly ended, or does the reader instead believe, with Peter Brown and the more modern school, not in an end to the ancient world but in its transition?(The best recent one-stop shopping-place for a historiographic summary of these antithetical--or complementary--approaches is Ward-Perkins's recent book.Otherwise, Ward-Perkins tells the same story as Heather with much the same emphasis, albeit in a mere 200 pages, and still with plenty of primary-source material and good illustrations, index, and bibliography.)Further, if the reader is a believer in an end to the ancient world, is the primary reason for the end (or are the primary reasons for it, among the dozens or hundreds historians offer) internal to the Empire or external to it?

Abundant detail of the "how" of the end or of transition, whatever the reader may prefer to call it, is among the strengths of this book:Heather quotes liberally from primary sources and tells stories from wide swaths of geography and time.Other strengths:it is long, well organized, easy to follow, accessible and engaging to a nonspecialist (myself), and well indexed.The bibliography is generous, the several maps good.He is enthusiastic, and he encourages the reader to want to continue to read the book and to want to read more elsewhere.

As to weaknesses:first is the author's unfortunate recourse to witticism.Perhaps this reader has a poor sense of humor, and the author himself (in his introduction, I believe) apologizes for what he refers to as addiction (I paraphrase) to puns, but, for me at least, the jokes distract.Funny or not, they don't bring either the subject matter or the writing to life, and sometimes the attendant tone may be jarring.His witticisms often take the form of unusual diction.For instance, he's generous with present-day, hip, idiomatic, or slang terms.This is a minor flaw, but a tighter editorial rein would have made a better book.

The other weakness is one often inescapable in such works:the reader may feel s/he's in the hands of an attorney arguing a brief.

On balance, this book worthy of recommendation to anyone interested in the era.

... Read more

Product Description
A striking achievement of historical synthesis combined with a compelling interpretative line,The Roman Empire at Bay enables students of all periods to understand the dynamics of great imperial powers. David Potter's comprehensive survey of two critical and eventful centuries traces the course of imperial decline, skillfully weaving together cultural, intellectual and political history.
Particular attention is paid throughout to the structures of government, the rise of Persia as a rival, and the diverse intellectual movements in the empire. There is also a strong focus on Christianity, transformed in this period from a fringe sect to the leading religion.
Against this detailed background, Professor Potter argues that the loss of power can mainly be attributed to the failure in the imperial elite to respond to changes inside and outside the empire, and to internal struggles for control between different elements in the government, resulting in an inefficient centralization of power at court. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (5)

Caveat emptor
Initially I was going to give this book a single star rating but decided that would be unfair to the author. The content of this book itself is excellent the author covers most topics in a very thorough but imminently readable fashion. I would highly recommend it to anyone interested in the later Roman Empire.

However I have to recommend against buying the soft back version of this book. I have purchased it twice and both times the book has split along the spine about half way through the book. I own many Routledge Ancient history books and this is the only time I have had this problem. So caveat emptor.

A solid Late Antique work
Potter has written a very good book on the Late Roman world. The research and detail are meticulous, and the evolution of the state is portrayed very well. Potter does an excellent job in combining historical narrative with some of the thematic issues of the times. The chapters on the rise of Christianity and its intellectual impact are particularly well done.

However, this book has some serious flaws. It is not a well-rounded history of Late Antiquity, as the title may suggest. Potter is primarily interested in Late Antique thought and government. The Roman army only gets a scant couple of pages, and the areas beyond Rome's borders are hardly elucidated. The chapter on Persia is almost exclusively on intellectual history, while ignoring the effects that the powerful Sassanid state had on Rome. His constant numismatic focus gets tiresome after 500 odd pages, as well. The book also doesn't have the greatest selection of maps.

I give this book 4 stars because it is an excellent history of Late Antique thought and government, but is lacking in a well-rounded history of the period.

Systems Evolution
When Edward Gibbons wrote his monumental work, "The Decline and Fall of the Rome Empire", the "fall" Gibbons was referring to was that of Constantinople (Istanbul) in 1453 CE. In his view the Roman Empire until that fall was undergoing an evolution (some would say devolution) into something vary different from the Empire of Caesar Augustus. David S. Potter, the author of this current excellent history does not take such a long term view, but argues quite effectively that the Roman Empire evolved dramatically following the reigns of Commodus (180-192 CE) and L. Septimius Severus (193-211 CE).Potter uses considerable analytic skill supported by excellent documentation to trace how the catastrophic 3rd Century forced the Empire to redesign its governmental and military systems to deal with radically altered domestic and international situations. Potter maintains that as a result Roman hegemony declined or disappeared in many regions, but that the Empire continued to be a viable force through the 4th Century and into the 5th Century.

It seems to this reviewer, at least, that although this is an outstanding history, Potter may not be entirely accurate in his depiction of Roman power through the 5th Century. An alternative view would be that the Western Half of the Empire gradually ceased to function effectively over the course of the period covered by this book and the structural reforms initiated by Diocletian and continued by Constantine were really institutional band-aids that in the end fell off, at least in the West. Such alternative views are possible because Potter not only documents his arguments, but where practical provides the reader with actual contemporary quotes. This allows the reader to draw his or her own conclusions using this superbly organized book as a base.

Excellent Study of the Imperial System
Within its set limits, this is an excellent book.Potter's major focus is the Imperial system of government and how it changed over the period covered in this book.Potter starts with the Imperial system at the end of the reign of Marcus Aurelius, the termination of a period of remarkable stability with a series of successful transitions between Emperors.Under Marcus Aurelius and his predecessors, the Emperor functioned as the fulcrum of a system in which governence was exercised partly by the Imperial court, partly by the Senatorial class through institutions inherited from the Roman Republic, partly by a bureaucracy staffed by the Roman equestrian order, and partly through the Army.The Emperor mediated through these different systems and balanced local/regional needs against Imperial needs.The ranks of the Senatorial and equestrian orders were socially permeable with provincial families making their up the social ladder into important positions.Potter shows the Empire at this point to be somewhat backward looking with intellectual life driven by work of important thinkers from prior generations and important institutions, like the Army, maintaining the structures established decades, if not centuries earlier.After Marcus Aurelius, a number of stresses emerged that drove major changes in governence.The Persian empire was reinvigorated by the Sasanids, 'barbarian' invaders from Europe became more of a problem, and chronic succession problems produced political instability.The imperial succession is marked by a series of incompetent (Commodus), underage, or arguably insane (Caracalla, Elagabalus) Emperors.Succession crises produced frequent civil wars.Over time, the role of the Imperial court expanded with a reduction in the importance of the traditional forms of governance and efforts to more closely govern the provinces. While the Emperor remained the linchpin of the system, Potter argues that towards the end of this period, the court bureacracy had become capable of manipulating Emperors.Certainly, the Army had become something of an arbiter of political fortunes well before the fall of the western Roman Empire. Potter implies that the shift to a more centralized form of government dominated by the court was responsible for some of the difficulties of the Empire.I'm not sure this is convincing.From Potter's account, it seems to me that the difficulties in producing peaceful successions seem more important and the other changes Potter describes might be secondary to the stresses an unstable Imperial system experienced.
Potter does very well in describing another major process in this period, the rise of Christianity as the official state religion.His discussion of religion in general is quite good and his description of how Christianity became the state creed is excellent. In some respects, the emergence of a single, somewhat exclusive state religion is of a piece with the centralizing tendencies of the later Roman state.
I think Potter does less well with demography and economic history, which are hardly mentioned, though I am sure there is not much real data on these topics.Still, what is mentioned is intriguing and would have been worth additional exploration.Towards the end of this period, there were persistent difficulties in recruitment for the Army.Troops were drawn often from 'barbarian' groups.Why?Was this due to population shortfalls in the Empire?This is not really addressed.
This book is written very well though there is an irritating tendency to use some post-modernist jargon like employing the word narrative in the sense of betokening a world view or sense of identity. Recommended strongly.

vita brevis roma longa
Potter's book approaches late antiquity not as a tale of inevitable decline, but as a vibrant, living society. Its thinkers, its scandals and its changes are documented here in fascinating detail. For one such as I, whose learning about the ancient world ground to a halt with the death of Augustus, it is a most interesting read, that truly made the Romans come alive. ... Read more

Product Description

Did you ever stop and notice how much your daily life is influenced by the contributions of the Romans? Satire, tax shelters, the interstate highway system, the sports stadium, the health club, and the real biggie and the reason you have the ground under your feet: Manifest Destiny.

The CIG to the Roman Empire you get:
-- Why Rome wasn't built in a day: Fascinating blow-by-blow description of how the Romans conquered the world.
-- Accurate depictions of life in ancient Rome -- What was it like to be a gladiator? A plebe? A slave? A woman?
-- An in-depth look at Roman society, politics, and architecture -- and why its timeless influence still effects us even today.
-- A close-up view of the famous (and infamous) leaders of the Roman Empire: Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, Nero, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, and -- of course -- Caesar.
-- A look at Roman influence around the world -- from Egypt to the UK to Romania to Syria. ... Read more

Customer Reviews (18)

Great book!
I think Eric Nelson has done a GREAT job in making an in-depth topic very readable and understandable to the "plebs" of this world! I really enjoyed the book and think it is the best of its kind for those studying Roman history. GREAT JOB ERIC!

Perfect Reference for Any Rome fan
Get past the HBO series and learn about the expansive Roman Empire.Like many I was taken in by the HBO series- Rome.Like many- I didn't pay much attention to this topic in school!Rather than trying to stay awake while reading a dry history book I turned to the Idiot Guide and was not disappointed.

This is a Must Read for Everyone!!!!
If you have any interest in Ancient Rome then this is the first book you need to buy to get you started. This book is well-written, not a bunch of long confusing jargon or thoughts, its straight, simple, and to the point. It starts with Rome's origins and takes you through the highs and lows all the way to the end. All kinds of topics are covered such as the gods, aquaducts, government, buildings,etc-its all there in one book. Professor Nelson makes it even more interesting with funny commentary but never goes off-track. This is the perfect book for any age person that has an interest in Roman history. You will come away wanting to study Roman history in greater depth. I've read this book several times and continue to use it as a reference. I can not say enough positive things about this book. Much thanks to the author!!!

One of the best overviews of Rome out there!
I've been a Rome buff for awhile now having first learned about the great civilization in middle school. My interest was piqued again during a trip on Italy and watching HBO's 'Rome' drama.

I've always been a bit wary of historical narrations and books, particularly about something as broadly scoped as a guide to Rome (from foundation to fall). In my experience books on the subject fail in framing the subject in a way that's coherent, exciting and innovative. Hence, I thought I would give the traditional books a pass and try something like the 'Idiots Guide'.

Forget the Oxford and Cambridge guide. This IMHO is the new golden standard. The book delivers an outline of Rome in a creative way that's `out of band', not necessarily chronological. Eric frames Rome beautifully by tackling the various aspects of Rome first before settling into a chronological overview of the Empire. All the while he provides tidbits of critical and interesting information in context using sidebars. Eric also dispels myths and provides a very compelling and insightful (may I say unbiased) account of early Christianity. It really becomes clear that a lot of beliefs that where written down over the first millennia since Christ by successive people were highly influenced by other religions and political tensions in the time (ex: the myth about Romans being intolerant overall, exaggeration of accounts of persecutions of early Christians, etc).

The book finally wraps up with a timeline that helps one consolidate all the information. Here's what I think this you can get out of this book
1) Feel well-informed of Roman history at a basic level and be armed with pointers to sources for follow-up depending on interest.
2) Appreciate this amazing civilization and the profound impact it has on us today.
3) Have common misconceptions on Rome dispelled
4) Realize that history does repeat itself and these people thought and acted just like us 2 millennia ago (things haven't really changed). For example, even in the golden era of Rome citizens grumbled about `foreign influences' and moral decay of society and how things were better 'back in the day'!

Eric I wish you had written this over a decade back so I could have been taught this in school rather than some boring thorny compilation written by multiple authors. Two of my friends have purchased this book on my recommendation and I will continue send folks down the way of your 'Idiots Guide'. (And I threw a coin in the Trevi Fountain for you during my visit in Nov 09!)

Necessary Overview to Begin Studying Roman Empire
After reading several starter books on the Romans, I am now ready to read detailed accounts. This "Idiot's Guide" was the greatest help in giving me the outline I needed to continue. One of the best things about this book is that it tells us that which we do NOT know. It details the sources from which we know about Roman civilization and tells us how they were probably biased and/or involved in embellishment. This book makes me want to grab a shovel and start digging around the Mediterranean where I could suddenly find a major long lost source of information tomorrow. ... Read more

Product Description
Edward Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire compresses thirteen turbulent centuries into an epic narrative shot through with insight, irony and incisive character analysis. Sceptical about Christianity, sympathetic to the barbarian invaders and the Byzantine Empire, constantly aware of how political leaders often achieve the exact opposite of what they intend, Gibbon was both alert to the broad pattern of events and significant revealing details. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (14)

Great book on Roman Generals
This book covers a lot of subjects and eras of the Roman Republic/Empire. On each age several roman generals distinguished themselves over the rest.
Great reading for new comers to roman warfare as to old time roman fans

10 Stars !!
This book concentrate only on military events , its not a biography of each leader , even its not
a full military biography of each leader ! Just focusing on the most important campaigns in the
leaders career ..

Thereupon , and in a word ; ( In the Name of Rome ) is a magnificent , majestic , amazing ,scholarship
book but at the same time reads like a novel ! .. my only complaint is the absence of some great military
names from the author list , such as : Sulla and emperor aurelianus .

all by all : 10 stars ! ..

Excellent - Real Learnings for Corporate Leaders and Military Commanders Today
Goldsworthy's book is a superb study in ancient Roman military leadership, the realities faced by commanders over a 600 year period fighting opponents all over the "world" (at least as it was known to the Romans).Clearly, for any student of Roman history, whether scholar or hobbyist, this is a must have.

What I found fascinating, however, were the lessons that Goldsworthy clearly identifies throughout the book that are so applicable to the world around us today.Lessons that we can use in making decisions and thinking about complex situations; lessons that, with any luck, we can all apply and not have to relearn the hard way.

First - and easiest to make - are analogies with today's military situation.Modern militaries of US, Europe, Japan, and so on, are not likely to fight great battles any more than most of the Roman commanders fought great battles against equally armed, styled, and sized opponents.Few of the Roman commanders battled equal Parthian or Carthaginian armies; most conflicts were against smaller opponents like Gaulish, Germanic and Pictish tribes.Roman commanders had armies who were vastly better armed, trained, and organized than these tribal warbands.And yet, when the Roman tried the "traditional" means of warfare, the tribal warbands did not "play along" (when they did, the Romans defeated them).And so the warbands turned to raiding and almost guerrilla-like tactics.Goldsworthy then lays out what the Roman generals did in order to cope and turn the situation to their advantage:heavy reliance on intelligence gathering, rapid responses, spread out deployments holding down various fortified positions or camps, constant politicking to find even small allies amongst the various tribes, and continual work with local populations to improve their lot (building roads, bridges, etc.) and refrain from plundering.

Sounds a lot like the strategies in Iraq and Afghanistan, doesn't it?

For corporate leaders, Roman leadership lessons also apply.Be seen with your "employees" (i.e., soldiers); do not set yourself too far apart from your men (e.g., it's fine to have the corner office but having a beautiful glass and steel office building dedicated to you and your staff miles away from your factories and call centers is not going to engender support and loyalty and, thus, increased productivity and creativity amongst your employees); make sure you are in a position to be able to see, identify and call out individuals for going above and beyond the call of duty - and make sure to reward them; insist on everyone - from the leader to the junior hire - helping in the grunt work (in the Romans, case rebuilding ruined fortifications, fortifying camps, etc.).

Sounds a lot like advice from some of the best business and leadership books written over the past decade, doesn't it?

Admittedly, Goldsworthy's "In the Name of Rome" is not a book you're going to sit down with after dinner and whip through before bedtime; but then good leaders are not made in a day.

Roman Generals 200 BC to 565 AD
In The Name of Rome by Adrian Goldsworthy presents summary biographies of fifteen Roman generals from roughly 200 BC through 565 AD. Subjects include not only many of the better known Roman generals from the Republican era (Scipio Africanus, Marius, Pompey, and Julius Caesar) but also many lesser known generals from both the Republican and Imperial eras (from Fabius and Marcellus who checked Hannibal's advance in Italy to Julian the Apostate who held back the Germanic invaders in Gaul in the 350s AD and Belisarius who battled the Persians on behalf of the Byzantine Empire after the fall of Rome.

In addition to the chronological events and biographical materials on the primary actors, Goldsworthy presents, as an almost subliminal subplot, his analysis of the changes in Roman government that led to the fall of Rome. Rather than detail the lives of the fifteen generals, I plan to outline this analysis in the following paragraphs.

From about AD 200 on, Emperors were largely made and deposed by the army. This pattern had several effects on both the military and government of Rome.

1. Emperors were generally insecure in their positions. Having been placed in power by force of arms, they were inclined to be on the lookout for other generals who might attempt to follow the same path to power. To prevent rival generals from developing power bases in the army, Emperors spent more and more time in direct command of the army in the field.

2. Prior to AD 200, larger provinces were garrisoned by up to four legions. This was a considerable force and could become the power base for a potential rival. To reduce this potential threat, Emperors reduced the sizes of provincial garrisons by either transferring forces or subdividing the larger provinces. This resulted in provincial garrisons that seldom exceeded a single legion in size.

3. The reduced provincial garrisons were less able to cope with serious revolts or invasions. With limited forces at their disposal, provincial commanders were less inclined to come to the aid of a hard-pressed colleague.

4. Significant revolts or invasions required a large army to quell or repulse them However, the only really large army was that commanded directly by the Emperor. This further tied the Emperor to field operations onpermanent basis.

5. The need for an army commanded by the Emperor to deal with major conflicts effectively eliminated the Senate's role in creating proconsuls to govern provinces and command armies.

6. The selection of the Emperor by the army destroyed even the myth that the Senate exercised any meaningful role in imperial succession.

7. The extended absence of the Emperor from Rome effectively transferred the seat of government to the army's current headquarters location, further reducing the influence of the Senate and administrative bodies in Rome.

8. The need for direct imperial leadership of the army on campaign effectively limited the ability of the empire to deal with more than one or two simultaneous crises.

These themes seem to me to explain why Rome fell better than most other sources.

Excellent insight into Roman art of war
Adrian Goldsworthy's book In The Name of Rome would be an outstanding addition to the library of anyone interested in ancient Roman military history.Goldsworthy is in my opinion, and based largely on the reading of this excellent book, not only extremely knowledgeable about the subject, he writes compellingly and engagingly and communicates not only his interest and knowledge but also his enthusiasm for the subject.I loved this book.

Goldsworthy breaks his book down into essentially self-contained biographies, or comparative biographies, of several major Roman generals and sometimes statesmen.He covers their lives, their campaigns in great detail, their careers in politics and what they accomplished or meant to accomplish.Some of the endings are triumphant, some tragic, some bittersweet.Subjects include Fabius and Marcellus, Scipio Africanus, Aemilius Paulus, Scipio Aemilianus, Marius, Sertorius, Pompey, Caesar, Germanicus, Corbulo, Titus, Trajan, Julian and Belisarius.

As can be seen, the book concentrates more heavily on generals during the Republic and the very early empire; he does explain how the politics of the empire caused individual generals to fade in importance vs the image of the emperors themselves.Not every stage of the Republic's growth is covered, nor every campaign of every general, and yet there is a strong and well conceived thread which goes throughout this book.

Besides the fantastic characters of the personalities themselves - and often, those of their enemies - Goldsworthy excels in describing the campaigns and the battles fought, the tactics on the field, and the qualities of leadership displayed and exercised.He contrasts the various styles with one another, and with the times in which they were used, and how these changed.The organization of the armies, how they were employed in brute force or in subterfuge, the importance of the various elements - all of it is well presented.

Finally, the book includes a chronology from the founding of Rome through the various major events in the wars and lives described in the book, through the death of Belisarius; and there is a useful glossary of Roman military terms that is very useful in the reading of the book.

If you have an interest in the Roman art of war, this book should be on your shopping list.
... Read more

Product Description
The story of the Roman military machine beginning with the crisis that enveloped Rome in the late second century B.C., when soldiers became the Empire's worst enemy, pillaging citizens and creating social turmoil.In the closing years of the second century B.C., the ancient world watched as the Roman armies maintained clear superiority over all they surveyed. But, social turmoil prevailed at the heart of her territories, led by an increasing number of dispossessed farmers, too little manpower for the army, and an inevitable conflict with the allies who had fought side by side with the Romans to establish Roman dominion. Storming the Heavens looks at this dramatic history from a variety of angles. What changed most radically, Santosuosso argues, was the behavior of soldiers in the Roman armies. The troops became the enemies within, their pillage and slaughter of fellow citizens indiscriminate, their loyalty not to the Republic but to their leaders, as long as they were ample providers of booty. By opening the military ranks to all, the new army abandoned its role as depository of the values of the upper classes and the propertied. Instead, it became an institution of the poor and drain on the power of the Empire. Santosuosso also investigates other topics, such as the monopoly of military power in the hands of a few, the connection between the armed forces and the cherished values of the state, the manipulation of the lower classes so that they would accept the view of life, control, and power dictated by the oligarchy, and the subjugation and dehumanization of subject peoples, whether they be Gauls, Britons, Germans, Africans, or even the Romans themselves. Amazon.com Review
As fans of Ridley Scott's film Gladiator know, ancient Rome could be a violent, treacherous place, one in which might made right. In thiswell-crafted historical study, Antonio Santosuosso shows that the structureof the Roman military itself was a cause of strife and disorder.

In the early Roman republic, military service was deemed a privilegereserved for members of the propertied elite, whose interests wereconsidered to be close to those of the state. As Rome's empire grew, andwith it the forces needed to control Rome's holdings, its armiesincreasingly had to rely on a different kind of soldier, drawn from themany conquered peoples the empire embraced and from the rural, landlesspoor, whose loyalties to faraway Rome were less constant and who sawmilitary service as one of the few means to advance themselves in aclass-bound society. As historian Antonio Santosuosso shows, armies at theedges of the empire instead gave their allegiance to their commanders, whoharbored imperial ambitions of their own--and who, from time to time,turned their armies around and marched on the capital to claim the thronefor themselves. Naturally enough, this made Roman politics an unstableaffair, and in fact throughout the third century A.D. an emperor was likelyto have come to power through a coup d'état, and to end his days as thevictim of assassination.

Students of military history and Roman history alike will find much ofvalue in Santosuosso's survey. --Gregory McNamee ... Read more

Customer Reviews (1)

Good History and Great Storytelling
This is a good book to read for a perspective on Roman history that emphasises the role played in that grand drama by Rome's legions. The author discusses the changing political, social and economic effects of how the legions were recruited, commanded and paid, as well as providing significant detail on the structure, command and performance of the legions over time. The effects of the military reforms of Marius, Julius Caesar, Octavian, as well as Septimius Severus and Diocletian are given special attention as are their different offensive and defensive strategies.

The author weaves historical information and his own insights into a well written story that moves along easily over the long time period covered. His discussion of specific battles (e.g. Adrianopole) and brief character studies (e.g. Marius) add personal detail and improve the general story. The book is both educational and entertaining and strongly recommended. ... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (2)

Excellent scholarship
This book is volume 2 of a reprint edition of Bury's "History of the Later Roman Empire" which was originally published in the early 1920s. It is well to keep this in mind when reading this work, as all the footnotes refer to works of scholarship from this period or before (obviously!) and much archaeological and philological work has been done since then. The reader should also keep in mind that Bury was writing for an audience that could read classical Latin and Greek, and therefore he includes passages in both languages that are not translated.

This second volume focuses exclusively on the reigns of Justin I and his famous nephew, Justinian the Great. As with the first volume, Bury's scholarship is very impressive and wide-ranging and the book is extraordinarily useful as a general reference on the reign of Justinian. In format, it is somewhat marred by disjunction and lack of flow among the chapters. Bury begins with a history of the reign of Justin I, but then interrupts his narrative with extensive character sketches of Justinian, Theodora, John the Cappadocian, and others as well as descriptions of the church of St. Sophia, the Nika Rebellion, etc. For those lacking a basic framework of Justinian's reign, this can make for confusing reading.

Bury then picks up the narrative again, successfully blending the sources at his disposal to give a coherent account of the Persian, Gothic, and Vandalic wars of the Justinianic reign. Toward the end, he gives excellent summaries of the financial and ecclesiastical situations within the empire. His overview of the great Justinianic legal reform is good, and would have been better if Bury had not wasted two whole pages decrying Roman divorce laws--this being a peculiar preoccupation for some British writers. The work ends with a very useful discussion of the major historians of the 6th century, Procopius, John Malalas, Agathias, etc.

Bury's romantic attachment to Greco-Roman paganism is evident throughout volume 2, though it is better concealed than in the previous volume. The same is true of his dislike for Roman Catholicism, and particularly the papacy. He maintains, however, an annoying tendency to judge the actions of historical figures in terms of 20th century humanism.

Overall, as long as readers are able to spot Bury's occasional biases with a clear eye, they will be well-rewarded by the time they finish this volume.

The Justinian period
This second volume of Bury's work is a good stand-alone volume about the history of the Justinian period, but really belongs with the companion first volume, which when taken together forms a comprehensive view of the Late Roman Empire to the time of its final, irrevocable split.
 
J.B. Bury was an historian of note in the early part of the twentieth century.  Educated at Irish universities, he ended up as a professor at Cambridge.  He did much to expand the historical horizons of students and scholars in the English-speaking world, whose focus had narrowed into distinctly Western emphases.  This volume on the Late Roman Empire is one such work - not content to explore the Roman Empire as centred wholly upon Rome (or, as was often the case with British historians, a Rome-Canterbury axis), his interest in the histories further afield is evident by his concentration on `barbarian'/Germanic influences, Eastern Roman Empire and Byzantine events, and courses of history outside of those that led in a linear fashion to the modern British nation. 
 
Quite often, histories written in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries suffer from several deficiencies, the bias described above being but one of them.  Lack of reference to archaeological and documentary evidence (some of which was not available) is often the case, and a cultural influence perhaps described as `Christendom-centric' is usually evident, if not blatantly then at least in implied and undergirding assumption.  Obviously, Bury's text cannot benefit from the archaeological and methodological developments of the twentieth century, but it does stand the test of time fairly well in terms of being broader in approach, less judgemental in analysis, and fairly close in using original source material and primary documents whenever possible.
 
One of the comments that Bury makes regarding the times of the Late Roman Empire (which he dates from the death of Theodosius I in 395 to the death of Justinian in 565) still rings true today - we often know far more about the events and details of life in Egypt of the Pharoahs thousands of years prior than we do about the events, or even the leading figures, of the time sometimes referred to as the beginning of the Dark Ages (Bury himself rarely uses this term in the text as part of his own descriptions).    His selection of Theodosius and Justinian look to periods of unification in the general trend of disintegration of traditional Roman authority.  The centre of power had already shifted during the period of Diocletian and Constantine away from the actual city of Rome; Theodosius I was emperor of both East and West prior to his death in 395, and Justinian was the last of the emperors of the East to have any hegemony or real authority in the West (the official line of Western emperors ended with Julius Nepos and Romulus Augustulus nearly a hundred years before the time of Justinian). 
 
Some of Bury's insights into the period dispel typical notions of the pattern of history - Bury points out that most of the so-called pagan invaders were in fact neither pagan nor invaders.  The Germanic `barbarians' were less waves of invaders, as often popularly thought, but more of the nature of longer-term settlers, who over time shifting the demographics away from Roman/Mediterranean to Northern European stock.  Battles were frequently, but rarely large and long-lasting.  As for being pagans, it is true that most were not orthodox/catholic Christians, but many if not most were Arian Christians, something that the more orthodox patriarchs in Rome, Constantinople and other leading centres of Christendom found to be even more of a threat. 
 
The second volume covers about 50 years, less than half the period of the first volume, a period of much greater clarity, relatively speaking, in the historical record.  Recreation of the historical record is still a matter of fragmentary reconstruction, but there is much more documentary data from the period of Justinian, whose reign represented a window of stability in administration for both East and West.  Consolidation of the church in many places, and reinstitution of the last of Roman authority in the West, which then served as the foundation for later kingdoms and cultures, took place during this time.
 
Bury's balanced text is perhaps exemplified in his treatment of Theodora, a controversial figure in her own time and every time thereafter.  Bury is careful to balance political rumour and social innuendo from verifiable fact, and discusses not only the motivations of the Empress and Justinian, but also the people around her.  Particularly with regard to differences between Justinian and Theodora (for example, the Monophysite controversy), he is good at navigating an even-handed course in his discussion.
 
Bury's text is interesting and lively, not at all the dry and dusty tome of typical of many nineteenth century academic writers.  Bury is a good corrective and addition to Gibbons, adding detail in his balanced treatment of East and West.  Bury includes several genealogical tables, interesting in that they still retain blank spaces where people's names in the charts remain unknown to us (while some have since been filled in by more recent scholars, some remain a mystery).  There are also useful maps.  There is a helpful index and bibliography, but this is found only at the conclusion of this second volume.
... Read more

Product Description

Customer Reviews (6)

Very Comprehensive
Extremely well written, this book travels methodically through the later portion of the Roman Empire.This book provides an interesting read to anyone interested in the history and events of the time or the scholar looking to beef up on facts.

A great book about the latter era of the Roman Empire.
History of the Later Roman Empire, is an interesting read for those who want to know more about the Eastern Roman Empire.Justinian I was considered the last real Roman emperor.The empire was slowly becoming Greek in nature
and less Latin. The writer goes into great detail during this era.Using maps and battle diagrams to illustrate, J.B. Bury also references older books (I like Secret History) and many Greek records and documents.For an older book it's a good reference and a fascinating read.If you want to learn more about a rarely talked about period of western civilization or what happened to the Roman Empire this is a good start,

Highly recommended.

A valuable but flawed history
This is volume 1 of a 2 volume reprint of a work originally published in 1923. The original publication date is not mentioned on the title page, back cover, or anywhere else and may only be inferred by reading the author's preface. Dover would really do its customers a service by mentioning the 1923 publication date somewhere. The reprint itself is adequately done, though it would have benefited from some pre-press touching up as small bits of text have dropped out in a few spots.

Overall, this is an extremely useful book for the researcher of the Late Roman/Early Byzantine empire. Bury covers all aspects of the empire during this period in adequate detail--enough to maintain a full and compelling narrative, but not too much as to drown the reader in minutiae. As with many scholars of his time, Bury was extraordinarily learned and an expansive researcher. The breadth of the sources he cites is indeed impressive, and every page is heavily footnoted. A 20 page bibliography is included at the end of Volume 2 that includes ancient historical and literary sources, inscriptions, and modern historical, literary, and artistic works up through the 1920s. This is very useful for pointing the serious researcher toward resources to provide additional detail on specific subjects of interest.

Readers should beware, however, that this book was written during a time when it was assumed that most folks trained in the liberal arts would have a working knowledge of both Greek and Latin. This may be a source of some frustration to modern readers, as Bury retains many short passages in the original languages.

The greatest weakness of this work is one that afflicts many scholars of the Anglo-American tradition up to the present day--a barely concealed animus toward the Roman Catholic Church in general and toward the Papacy in particular. Sadly, this bias permeates Bury's work, along with a not-quite-dispassionate attachment to Greco-Roman paganism that borders on the romantic. For Bury, it gets so thick in sections that it completely eclipses any semblance of scholarly objectivity.

An example may suffice: In a long tangent from his main narrative, Bury presents a harsh critical analysis of "City of God", the monumental work of St. Augustine of Hippo which seems distinctly out of place. As part of his critique, he writes, "The main argument itself, although it has a definite architectural scheme, is marred by diffuseness and digressions." It seems that the irony of such a statement, contained as it is in a diffuse digression from Bury's central theme, was lost on the author. And indeed, this statement makes for an accurate criticism of the whole of Bury's work.

It is indeed unfortunate that many of the most celebrated modern resources in English for this time period were written by protestant/agnostic/atheist scholars with an axe to grind. Few works exist to hold up the Catholic argument--at least in English. Perhaps someday, a press will see fit to translate the truly monumental Ecclesiastical Annals of the 16th century apologist and historian Cardinal Baronius into English to provide some much-needed counterpoise to the easily available histories of Gibbon and Bury.

A great overview of another time
J.B. Bury was an historian of note in the early part of the twentieth century.  Educated at Irish universities, he ended up as a professor at Cambridge.  He did much to expand the historical horizons of students and scholars in the English-speaking world, whose focus had narrowed into distinctly Western emphases.  This volume on the Late Roman Empire is one such work - not content to explore the Roman Empire as centred wholly upon Rome (or, as was often the case with British historians, a Rome-Canterbury axis), his interest in the histories further afield is evident by his concentration on `barbarian'/Germanic influences, Eastern Roman Empire and Byzantine events, and courses of history outside of those that led in a linear fashion to the modern British nation. 
 
Quite often, histories written in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries suffer from several deficiencies, the bias described above being but one of them.  Lack of reference to archaeological and documentary evidence (some of which was not available) is often the case, and a cultural influence perhaps described as `Christendom-centric' is usually evident, if not blatantly then at least in implied and undergirding assumption.  Obviously, Bury's text cannot benefit from the archaeological and methodological developments of the twentieth century, but it does stand the test of time fairly well in terms of being broader in approach, less judgemental in analysis, and fairly close in using original source material and primary documents whenever possible.
 
One of the comments that Bury makes regarding the times of the Late Roman Empire (which he dates from the death of Theodosius I in 395 to the death of Justinian in 565) still rings true today - we often know far more about the events and details of life in Egypt of the Pharoahs thousands of years prior than we do about the events, or even the leading figures, of the time sometimes referred to as the beginning of the Dark Ages (Bury himself rarely uses this term in the text as part of his own descriptions).    His selection of Theodosius and Justinian look to periods of unification in the general trend of disintegration of traditional Roman authority.  The centre of power had already shifted during the period of Diocletian and Constantine away from the actual city of Rome; Theodosius I was emperor of both East and West prior to his death in 395, and Justinian was the last of the emperors of the East to have any hegemony or real authority in the West (the official line of Western emperors ended with Julius Nepos and Romulus Augustulus nearly a hundred years before the time of Justinian). 
 
Some of Bury's insights into the period dispel typical notions of the pattern of history - Bury points out that most of the so-called pagan invaders were in fact neither pagan nor invaders.  The Germanic `barbarians' were less waves of invaders, as often popularly thought, but more of the nature of longer-term settlers, who over time shifting the demographics away from Roman/Mediterranean to Northern European stock.  Battles were frequently, but rarely large and long-lasting.  As for being pagans, it is true that most were not orthodox/catholic Christians, but many if not most were Arian Christians, something that the more orthodox patriarchs in Rome, Constantinople and other leading centres of Christendom found to be even more of a threat. 
 
The first volume covers about 120 years, a period of murkiness in the historical record.  Physical monuments are few and far between.  Church records and writings were always intentionally biased in presentations, as were the meagre political discourses which have survived.  Bury points out that no contemporary histories or records of events survive - sometimes even of the emperors and leading figures in Rome and other princedoms all we have left to us are names on lists (this same holds true for the early church and lists of bishops, patriarchs and popes).  Thus, reconstruction of the history of this period is one of reconstructing fragments. 
 
Bury's text is interesting and lively, not at all the dry and dusty tome of typical of many nineteenth century academic writers.  Bury is a good corrective and addition to Gibbons, adding detail in his balanced treatment of East and West.  Bury includes several genealogical tables, interesting in that they still retain blank spaces where people's names in the charts remain unknown to us (while some have since been filled in by more recent scholars, some remain a mystery).  There are also useful maps.  There is a helpful index and bibliography, but this is found only at the conclusion of the second volume.

"In-Depth Survey of the Later Roman Empire"
Volume one of Bury's in-depth work handles the vicissitudes of the later Empire, beginning with the end of Theodosius the Great's reign in A.D. 395 until Theoderic's artful subjugation of Italy in A.D. 493.Detailed civil, administrative, topographical, and military analysis' underlay a significant portion at the start of this work; and they provide important information concerning the Empire's indelible shift and mutual balance of power between the two great cities, Rome and Constantinople.Bury concentrates on the barbarian tribes that eventually made claims to independent sovreignty within, and on the fringes, of Imperial territory; and also on the emperors who ignominously ceeded it to them.Bury also delves on the theological disputes, Church and State relations, and the Pagan and Christian sentiments towards the Roman world in transition and decline.While this work is exhaustive and full of valuable research material, it still remains eloquent and interesting, containing an engrossing storyline througout its duration.A comprehensive study of the Later Roman Empire will be difficult without this volume; and with volume two, Bury's work will be totally indispensable. ... Read more

Product Description
A Companion to the Roman Empire provides readers with a guide both to Roman imperial history and to the field of Roman studies, taking account of the most recent discoveries.

• This Companion brings together thirty original essays guiding readers through Roman imperial history and the field of Roman studies
• Shows that Roman imperial history is a compelling and vibrant subject

• Includes significant new contributions to various areas of Roman imperial history

• Covers the social, intellectual, economic and cultural history of the Roman Empire

• Contains an extensive bibliography