Most Helpful Customer Reviews
114 of 115 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Great Intro and Overview of the Roman Art of War, May 31, 2000
This review is from: Roman Warfare (Cassell's History of Warfare) (Hardcover)
This book is not the definitive history of Rome's wars, but a well-constructed survey of how it prepared, equipped, manned and made war, using selected illustrative examples from each stage of development over the thousand-year period. Goldsworthy sets his task as tracing the development of warfare within the context of the evolution of the army and state: the nature of the army, why and with what objectives if fought a war, and the way in which it operated, taking into consideration the military institutions of the main enemies in each era. Matters such as arms,armor and equipment are handled succinctly by use of drawings and diagrams, which are especially good at depicting battle tactics for the major encounters. The positions of troops are shown as if from an aerial view rather than the bare schematic bars and squares usually shown. Despite being touted as a general, introductory text, there is plenty to keep the knowledgeable reader interested as well. I found new insights in every chapter, which follow a chronological rather than topical arrangement. Being pitched at the general reader, as is required by Cassell's _History of Warfare_ series, the book is heavily illustrated. This has its good and bad features. Mostly, the illustration are taken from columns, gravemarkers, monuments and ruins of forts. They are usually provided with detailed captions to explain the significance of the features shown therein. My only complaint is that some of the pictures occupy a full-page or two-page spread where a smaller image would have sufficed. I expect this is due to the publisher's required text-to-illustration ratio. Here is an example of Goldsworthy's exposition, taken from his section on Caesar in Gaul. After a brief excerpt from Julius Caesar's _Bellum Gallicum_, describing the battle at Sambre in 57 BC, Goldsworthy remarks: "It is worth noting that Caesar, although he had moved into the front line, does not bother to tell us whether or not he actuallt fought hand-to-hand. What he does stress is that he exposed himself to danger in order more effectively to do his job of encouraging the battle line. The general's job was to lead and control his army, not inspire them with his personal prowess, like the warrior aristocrats of early Rome or Alexander the Great who consciously emulated the behavior of Homeric heroes." The book is filled with such helpful commentary. Every epoch (including that of Marcus Aurelius and Commodus, of _Gladiator_ fame) is depicted, showing how the financial and political policies of the emperors and senate affected the abilities of the armies to do what was expected. A detailed chronology, a glossary that actually explains rather than merely annotates terms, a brief review of the ancient sources for each chapter, mini biographies of each of the luminaries, and a well thought out reading list for each chapter all add to the books usefulness. Highly recommended both as a "first book" for novices and a handy references for old hands.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
24 of 24 people found the following review helpful:
4.0 out of 5 stars
A Good Overview of the Roman Army's Political Evolution, March 15, 2005
This review is from: Roman Warfare (Cassell's History of Warfare) (Hardcover)
Unlike other armies in antiquity, the Roman army evolved to be a formal institution with a distinctive military code, standard equipment, defined ranks and duties, as well as laws and procedures affecting the life and retirement of its soldiers. Although service was long (20 years/no family allowed) and discipline was strict (i.e. decimation), it was truly the first modern professional army with very specialized units ranging from doctors and cooks to sappers and siege engineers. Its men were led by leaders such as Lucullus, Pompey, and Caesar who took war as a precise implementation of massive and usually unrestricted force towards a defined political ends. Despite its defeats, the Roman army's training, efficiency and tenacity allowed it to overcome superior numbers of often disorganized tribal or despotic mercenary armies of Celtic tribes or Greeks even under higher attrition. It made Rome the master of the Mediterranean world and most of modern Europe for over 1500 years (counting the Byzantine.)
Adrian Goldsworthy's book on Roman warfare is a decent text covering the evolution of the Roman army from the Early Republic to the Empire but is primarily illustrative. The text tries to study the evolution of the Roman army from the perspective of three disciplines: historical, political,and sociological. It generally covers its projection from the origins as aristorcratic clans and retainers raiding cattle from nearby Veii to the Imperial war machine that would for so long ruthlessly crush any threat or resistance to its conquest. The problem with the text seems to be in what discipline it focuses on to explain a certain evolutionary aspect of the army: the juxtapositions are awkward and/or fail to reinforce the main purpose of the text in clarifying the evolution. More specific details about the Roman legionary life could have been added for example and, in other places, more detail on the political changes would have been more instructive. Again the book's emphasis is more on the political evolution of the army as opposed to a strict categorization of army units and equipment and how they each evolved over the course of time. The book is a sociological summary of the Roman army: how it affected the political process and vis versa.
The book is primarily illustrative and therefore has great pictures, maps, and charts, but it doesn't have much depth in its summaries. The book presents good introductory material on Roman warfare but is general in its content. The information is presented more as a summary and the main value in the book is in its maps and diagrams which seem to be more illustrative on the subject matter than the text itself. Don't let that dissuade you though: the summaries are decent and the hardbound book is good for looking at its maps or photos making it a great addition to your bookshelf. However, for a complete categorical summary description of structure, units, armor, and armaments covering the Roman Empire, I would recommend Goldworthy's "The Complete Roman Army" which is more comprehensive on these precise topics as well as more categorical in the division and chronology of these topics. A book on the political evolution of the Roman army as attempted here is something that requires more textual analysis than illustration as it is more abstract of a subject and so I would also recommend G.R. Watson's 'The Roman Soldier' as a companion to this book as it explains the Roman army more from the perspective of the individual soldier as opposed to Rome's political institutions.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
20 of 22 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Best brief guide to Roman warfare available, June 11, 2006
Adrian Goldsworthy's short guide, Roman Warfare, is easily the best book of its length that I have read. If you're looking for a concise yet detailed survey of Roman military history, this is the book to buy.
Goldsworthy cuts the fat from the subject, stripping away the mundane details that typically bog down the casual reader or armchair historian. He charts the development of the Roman army from its earliest forms through the end of the empire, relying on impeccable research and a very clear style. He clears up a lot of confusing ideas (such as the composition of the republican-era triplex acies formation) and, unusual for an historian dealing with figures like Caesar, Scipio, and Hannibal, he never indulges in hero-worship (something which, sadly, cannot be said of the otherwise excellent historians Theodore Dodge and B.H. Liddell-Hart).
Another thing that makes this book worthwhile is the copious amount of maps and illustrations, all of which support the text in a clear and easy to understand manner.
If you enjoy this book and would like something a bit deeper, I'd also recommend Goldsworthy's The Fall of Carthage, a very good history of the three Punic Wars.
Roman Warfare is highly recommended reading for anyone new to Roman military history or history in general.
Help other customers find the most helpful reviews
Was this review helpful to you? Yes
No
|
