Customer Reviews

History of the Later Roman Empire: From the Death of Theodosius I to the Death of Justinian (Volume 1)

5 star:		(4)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Bury's classic keeps the reader at all times close to the primary sources, resulting in a unique view of the period (395-465) that is less filtered than many more recent treatments. The start of volume I (Rome's administrative apparatus) seems somewhat dry at first, and is an effort to set the stage and provide necessary background for the rest, rather than to induce one to keep reading. But getting through this is well worth it, for what follows is a rounded, interesting presentation of political, social and military developments -- and their context -- from the end of unified control of the empire under Theodosius to Justinian's attempt to restore Rome's glory.

The coverage of first hand accounts of scenes at Attila's court and between competing factions at the hippodrome under Justinian is particularly fascinating.

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.

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.

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.

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.

This classic work can be found in every "suggested reading" list on the Roman empire. It is mainly a political and military history and does not spend much time on social or cultural change, as the reader of a more recent work would expect; but what it does say in these areas is always interesting. It is plainly the work of a scholar who understands his subject about as thoroughly as anyone. Sometimes he acknowledges that there is not enough information to allow as complete an account as would be desirable. I found myself puzzled by the character of Stilicho and wondered why there was so much Christian doctrinal strife in Constantinople. Bury is not vivid like Gibbon, but all the same he demonstrates the helplessness of the later western emperors plainly. I am not a scholar, but surely, given the intrinsic importance of the subject, anyone interested in ancient history should read this.

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.