Review by Choice Review
Goldsworthy is one of the most productive, most readable of contemporary military historians of ancient Rome. His works include an authoritative discussion of Rome's struggle with Carthage (The Punic Wars, CH, Jul'01, 38-6341) and a valuable descriptive survey of Roman military forces (The Complete Roman Army, 2003). Here, he offers what is fundamentally a military history of the Roman Empire from c. 161 to c. 540 CE, but a history embedded in its relevant political contexts. Several English scholars have recently treated the grand theme of decline and fall: Bryan Ward-Perkins offered an analysis of systemic collapse in the west provoked by the trauma of Germanic invaders (The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization, CH, Sep'06, 44-0488); Peter Heather stressed imperialist traditions in creating, with the coming of the Huns, enemies of Rome's neighbors (The Fall of the Roman Empire, 2006). Goldsworthy is less inclined to argue for specific reasons, although readers may see in his study a reflection of Gibbon's observations on the sheer exhaustion that gradually overtook "the most civilized portion of mankind." Clarity of exposition will make for a solid textbook. Excellent chronology, glossary, bibliography. Adequate maps and illustrations. Summing Up: Recommended. All general and student collections. P. B. Harvey Jr. Pennsylvania State University, University Park Campus
Copyright American Library Association, used with permission.
Review by New York Times Review
The Roman Empire "may well have been 'murdered' by barbarian invaders, but these struck at a body made vulnerable by prolonged decay," Goldsworthy argues. Surveying roughly 300 years (he starts where both Gibbon and "Gladiator" do, with Marcus Aurelius' death in A.D. 180), he concludes that fear of usurpation turned the increasingly militarized empire into a vast vehicle for each Roman ruler's self-preservation - and that this internal flaw, rather than the external threats, deserves prime blame for the decline and fall. To prove his thesis, he carefully narrates almost every uncountable instance of succession, a meticulous approach that has the disadvantage of making one read slight variations on the same story ad nauseam. Fortunately, certain emperors - the savvy Diocletian, the determined Constantine, the strikingly modern Julian - stick out, providing a refreshing recess from the tedium. Even without the subtitle, "Death of a Superpower," a contemporary book with this subject inevitably raises the question: Is the United States the new Rome, and destined for its fate? Goldsworthy says that to ask this is to compare apples and bathtubs: "The closer you look at Rome, the more obvious it is just how very different it was to any modern state, let alone the United States." But if that's the case, then why is it so vital - as Goldsworthy appears to believe - to divine the single, overwhelming cause of Rome's demise? Meanwhile, when Goldsworthy notes, "There is something very depressing about the collapse of Roman power," one leaps to agree, and wishes he'd spent more time exploring why the thoroughly not-analogous Rome still stirs our passions.
Copyright (c) The New York Times Company [October 27, 2009]
Review by Publisher's Weekly Review
At only 40 years of age, British historian Goldsworthy's (Caesar) ninth Roman history offers the same high level of scholarship, analysis and lucid prose as the previous eight. After a superb survey of Roman politics and civilization, Goldsworthy begins with the death in A.D. 180 of emperor Marcus Aurelius, whose reign is traditionally viewed as the apex of Roman power. During the disastrous century that followed, emperors rarely ruled more than a few years; most were murdered, and civil wars raged, though there was some stability during the reigns of Diocletian and Constantine. Invasions slowly chipped away at the empire until it vanished in A.D. 476 with the abdication of the last Western emperor. Goldsworthy makes sense of 300 years of poorly documented wars, murders and political scheming. Highly opinionated, he presents surviving documents and archeological evidence to back his views such as that Constantine became Christian because Roman leaders traditionally believed that divine help won battles, and the Christian god seemed to Constantine like the front-runner. This richly rewarding work will serve as an introduction to Roman history, but will also provide plenty of depth to satisfy the educated reader. Illus., maps. (May) (c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
(c) Copyright PWxyz, LLC. All rights reserved
Review by Library Journal Review
Drawing on archaeological and numismatic evidence and, where available, contemporary historical writings, Goldsworthy (Augustus) presents an in-depth assessment of an empire riven by endless civil war, where each emperor's prime concern was not the good of the state but simple self-preservation against successive usurpers. With occasional mordant British wit, Goldsworthy follows the fate of Rome from the death of the emperor Marcus Aurelius in 180 CE through the final collapse of the western empire in 476, during which time there was scarcely a decade when Roman armies were not fighting somewhere-frequently against other Roman armies. This ceaseless, factious bloodletting gradually enfeebled the empire and culminated in the barbarian conquests. Narrator Derek Perkins does an admirable job with a complex topic, avoiding being bogged down in the occasional minutiae of governmental and military structures. VERDICT Scrupulously researched and well written, this work will appeal to serious students of late antiquity.-Forrest Link, Coll. of New Jersey Lib., Ewing © Copyright 2015. Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
(c) Copyright Library Journals LLC, a wholly owned subsidiary of Media Source, Inc. No redistribution permitted.
