| View Larger Image | The Ruin of the Roman Empire: A New History | Paperbackby James J. O'donnell (Author)
| List Price: | $15.99 | | Price: | $10.87 | | You Save: | $5.12 (32%) | | | Available: | Usually ships in 24 hours |
| | Binding: | Paperback | | Publisher: | Ecco | | Edition: | Reprintth Edition | | Page Count: | 448 Pages | | Publication Date: | September 01, 2009 | | Sales Rank: | 329,194th |
|
FEATURES | - ISBN13: 9780060787417
- Condition: NEW
- Notes: Brand New from Publisher. No Remainder Mark.
- Click here to view our Condition Guide and Shipping Prices
|
EDITORIAL REVIEWS |
Product Description
The dream Alexander the Great and Julius Caesar shared of uniting Europe, the Medi-terranean, and the Middle East in a single community shuddered and then collapsed in the wars and disasters of the sixth century. Historian and classicist James J. O'Donnell—who last brought readers his masterful, disturbing, and revelatory biography of Saint Augustine—revisits this old story in a fresh way, bringing home its sometimes painful relevance to today's issues. With unexpected detail and in his hauntingly vivid style, O'Donnell begins at a time of apparent Roman revival and brings readers to the moment of imminent collapse that just preceded the rise of Islam. Illegal migrations of peoples, religious wars, global pandemics, and the temptations of empire: Rome's end foreshadows today's crises and offers hints how to navigate them—if present leaders will heed this story. |
CUSTOMER REVIEWS (Average Customer Rating: 3.5 based on 14 reviews)
|
Somewhat unfocused by Solomon (Colorado)  4 Stars
October 05, 2009
The publisher of a book generally determines its title with the aim of boosting sales. Since the "The Fall of the Roman Empire" has been used many times, the publisher opted to use "Ruin" instead of "Fall", but I do not think that either is very accurate for this book. I think that this book should more accurately have been titled "The Good, the Bad and the Last Consul", as it is about the reigns of three men - the good Gothic King Theoderic, the bad Emperor Justinian, and Pope Gregory, whom the author likens to the last Consul (although he was not actually a Consul).
This is a book that tends to veers off on tangents and, in my opinion, these tangents tend to obscure what is being said. As near as I can figure, the main ideas of the book are that:
1. The Gothic invasion and conquest of the Western Roman Empire did not destroy the empire. It remained Roman, but under new management - a management that produced peace and stability, and was generally better than that which it replaced.
2. Justinian ruined not only the Western empire, but also the Eastern Empire, and he was at least indirectly responsible for all of the ills that followed in the next 1500 years.
These are interesting theses, but I do not think that the text completely supports them. The author clearly shows that Justinian's conquest of North Africa was largely bloodless, but except for its effect on religion (which was accepted by most of the common people) did not alter things very much, so how did this "ruin the empire"? His invasion of the rest of the Western Empire was confined to Italy (and not all of it), so the rest of what had been the Western Empire was not even directly impacted. The 16-year guerrilla war that ensued in Italy did have a significant effect on Italy, and the fact that he overspent the treasury of the Eastern Empire was significant, but does this rise to the level of ruining the empire? I was not convinced, especially since the book clearly shows that Justinian's immediate successors and a war with Persia in the beginning of the seventh century were much more responsible for any ruining that went on.
There are spectrums of approaches to writing history books; from the academic and dry to the novelistic and lively (but often less comprehensive). This book falls in the latter camp and judging from the many favorable reviews, many people like this approach; I was less appreciative because, as stated, I found the book to be somewhat unfocused. For instance, in the beginning of chapter 4 the author states that some people hated the Eastern Emperor Anastasius, but that they were wrong to do so. He says that it is important to understand why he was hated, but then spends rest of the chapter (16 pages) rambling on about things as diverse as the myth of the founding of Rome, the prophesy of the Sibyls, the Persian Empires (from Alexander the Great through the successor state of the Ottoman Turks), and other items (including a poem by Kipling), without giving a clear answer to the question. (I suspect that his point was that the emperor was the victim of a smear campaign that employed a phony prophesy, but this is never clearly stated, and the discussion of the Sibyls and their prophesy morphs into the other items just mentioned.) In reality, I think that the point of the chapter was actually what the Emperor Justinian should have done, instead of what he did, and the question about Anastasius seems to have been forgotten along the way. If limited to just what Justinian should have done, the chapter would have been only 3 pages long; instead it was enlarged to 17 pages. I feel the most egregious enlargement occurred in the last part of the book that was devoted to "Gregory's World", which I guess is supposed to be about the ruined empire and Gregory's influence on the Catholic Church, but it is so unfocused that it is difficult to tell what point the author is trying to make. As near as I can tell, the three chapters of this part of the book were largely an excuse to discuss the meaning of Gregory's "Teachings in the Book of Job", his "Dialogs," and for a chapter-long riff on Angels, particularly the Archangel Michael. Most of the book was similarly "enlarged", requiring one to weed out the important history from that which appears to have been added for background color and to enlarge the ideas to book-length.
Don't get me wrong; there is a lot of interesting stuff included in what I would call enlargement or padding, and I understand that one man's padding is another's literary masterpiece. Another, more positive way to look at this "padding" is by analogy with jazz music. Only perhaps 10-15% of this book is focused directly on the "Ruin of Rome"; the rest can be likened to jazz riffs, which cover a multitude of topics ranging from early Christianity and the literature of the period, to analogies with 20th century history and current international politics. Professor O'Donnell is able to blend and relate the story of Cassiodorus, a sixth century Roman politician and literary figure, with that of the fictional Dr. Zhivago. Unfortunately, I would rather have had an explanation of Justinian's motivation in invading Italy than the six pages spent on the story of Cassiodorus and two of his contemporaries. I was more interested in the history of Theoderic, Justinian, and Gregory, so while interesting, I found a lot of the book to be padded.
These criticisms should not be taken as an indication that I did not find anything of use in this book. Quite the contrary - in spite of what I considered to be a very unfocused presentation, I did learn quite a bit about the 100 year period following the generally accepted fall of the western empire in 476. For instance:
1. I learned more about the kingship of Theoderic, the actions of Justinian, and early church of Pope Gregory.
2. I did not know that the Senate of Rome continued to function, at least until 578 (although since the end of the republic, it had ceased to have any real power).
3. I learned that the idea of Romanism still survived, supported by kings like Theoderic, who considered themselves to be Roman (culturally if not by lineage) and the worthy successors to the western emperors.
4. I learned that yearly Consuls were still elected, at least until 541, when the office became little more than a permanent (for his reign) title of the Eastern Emperor.
5. I learned that people still spoke Latin and that it still remained an official language of the empire, at least until the reign of the Eastern Emperor Heraclius, at the beginning of the seventh century.
I would recommend this book to those who appreciate a well-turned phrase and are more interested in the literary quality of a history book than in a more straightforward, but perhaps dry, history. The best way illustrate this is to quote a typical sentence - "The inclusion of Ireland in Roman Europe progressed slowly, not reaching stability and success until the prime ministership of Garret Fitzgerald in the 1980s, following the deposition of the last of the ancient sacred high kings, Eamon de Valera". I favor a dryer and less literary approach, but you may not, so please accept my 4-star rating accordingly.
| |
Needs focus by J. Hubble (Northern California)  3 Stars
May 24, 2009
O'Donnell attempts to tell the history of the Roman Empire through our modern multicultural sentiments. He is somewhat successful at removing the biases of the historians of antiquity - but then steers the history directly through the biases and modern day worldview.
The book's biggest downfall, however, is the lack of focus. He shows his knowledge by bringing in Wagner-playing Ipods and various Shakespeare characters. However, he fails to provide a compelling narrative. Whole sections often appear to do nothing more than show off his literary knowledge, rather than advance the narrative. With a little more focus, this book could have potential.
| |
Neocons in the 6th century?? by marcabru  1 Stars
May 19, 2009
When you see critiques of neoconservatives pop up in a book about the 6th century Roman empire you are excused if you have the feeling that the author really wants to write a diatribe about very recent politics. So why not do just that and avoid the nuisance of going into ancient history that interests only a few general readers. The "civilized barbarian" mentioned here is an oxymoron as the Dark Ages quickly proved. These civilized barbarians sacked Rome and every other city they could. Of course they had their virtues as do all societies but in the end they only increased human misery. Similarly Persia had no more "right" to the Middle East outside its borders than did Byzantium and their civilization was as brutal as any. If you want to read a far more intelligent and witty book in a somewhat similar vein, try Lucy Hughes Hallett's book "Cleopatra".
| |
A history in perspective by Randy Stapilus (Carlton, Oregon, USA)  5 Stars
May 17, 2009
There's an irony in the way James O'Donnell has organized his take on the transition out of - as opposed to fall of - the Roman Empire. He sets up sections organized around three significant rulers of the era, from the late 400s to the early 600s - Theodoric, Justinian and Gregory - and weaving them in and out of his sections to make the case that you can't simply declare an end to empire with the end of the roster of emperors (which in the western empire is usually taken to be AD 476). O'Donnell's point is that, before and after those hard dates, life has pretty much tended to go on, and in more shades of gray than we generally acknowledge.
This is a highly useful history, not so much for the detailed narrative as for the perspectives. O'Donnell's story telling is plenty lively, but the real value here comes in putting the era into perspective. Long after there were no more Roman Emperors in the west, or even in the east, many people thought of themselves as carrying on the tradition. Rome itself was reduced to a minor city well before the empire is thought to have "fallen," and the oft-described barbarians were themselves heavily Romanized by the time they took over large slices of the empire.
Read this and be prepared for a change of perspective on history, and not only on late antiquity.
| |
Attack of the revisionists by Adam Kallel (San Diego CA) 1 Stars
April 01, 2009
If you are interested in learning about the last years of the Roman Empire, read A.H.M Jones monumental 2 volume work on the subject. Peter Heather has writen an readable and accurate pricture of the same period. Professor Odonnel is obsessed with hating the Bush administration and uses his history as a soap box to further a left-wing political agenda. Do not waste your time with this nonsense. I would like to send him a bill for the time I wasted on this nonsense.
| |
SIMILAR PRODUCTS |
| How the Barbarian Invasions Shaped the Modern World: The Vikings, Vandals, Huns, Mongols, Goths, and Tartars who Razed the Old World and Formed the New
by Thomas J. Craughwell (Author)
Veteran author Thomas J. Craughwell reveals the fascinating tales of how the barbarian rampages across Europe, North Africa, and Asia—killing, plundering, and destroying whole kingdoms and empires—actually created the modern nations of England, France, Russia, and China. Moscow, Dublin, and Delhi are international centers of...
| 
| 428 AD: An Ordinary Year at the End of the Roman Empire
by Giusto Traina (Author), Averil Cameron (Preface)
This is a sweeping tour of the Mediterranean world from the Atlantic to Persia during the last half-century of the Roman Empire. By focusing on a single year not overshadowed by an epochal event, 428 AD provides a truly fresh look at a civilization in the midst of enormous change--as Christianity takes hold in rural areas across the empire, as western Roman provinces fall away from those in the Byzantine east, and as power shifts from Rome to Constantinople. Retracing the kind of route a...
| 
| The Inheritance of Rome: Illuminating the Dark Ages, 400-1000 (Penguin History of Europe (Viking))
by Chris Wickham (Author)
An ambitious and enlightening look at why the so-called Dark Ages were anything but that
Prizewinning historian Chris Wickham defies the conventional view of the Dark Ages in European history with a work of remarkable scope and rigorous yet accessible scholarship. Drawing on a wealth of new material and featuring a thoughtful synthesis of historical and archaeological approaches, Wickham argues that these centuries were critical in the formulation of European identity. Far from being a...
| 
| The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome
by Christopher Kelly (Author)
A bold new account of Attila the Hun as empire builder and political threat to Rome. Conjuring up images of savagery and ferocity, Attila the Hun has become a byword for barbarianism. But, as the Romans of the fifth century knew, Attila did more than just terrorize villages on the edge of an empire. Drawing on original texts, this riveting narrative follows Attila and the Huns from the steppes of Kazakhstan to the opulent city of Constantinople and the Great Hungarian ...
| 
| Augustine: A New Biography
by James J. O'Donnell (Author)
Saint Augustine -- the celebrated theologian who served as Bishop of Hippo from 396 C.E. until his death in 430 C.E. -- is widely regarded as one of the most influential thinkers in the Western world. His autobiography, Confessions, remains among the most important religious writings in the Christian tradition. In this eye-opening and eminently readable biography, renowned historical scholar James J. O’Donnell picks up where Augustine himself left off to offer a fascinating, in-depth...
|
|
|
