Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
113 of 119 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Manslaughter; not murder!, September 17, 2005
"The invaders were not guilty of murder, but they had committed manslaughter." So says Bryan Ward-Perkins in an entertaining and stimulating historical monograph. He attacks, among other things the post- World War II politically correct thesis that the Germans reached as easy accomodation with the Romans and together they worked hand-in-hand to transform Europe into the 6th century version of a "Brave New World".
He gives substantial proof for the declining quality of life in the 5th century, and bases his work primarily on archaeologial remains and pottery studies that are often ignored by the text-centered classical scholar. It had never really occurred to me think of the significance of the lack of copper coins after the decline of the Empire, or the change in pottery finds. My doctorate is on the fall of Rome, and I plan to use this as a text the next time I teach the course. It is well illustrated, written with great wit and is brief enough to hold the interest of any student. The only odd thing about this book is that it does not mention the 80 year old "Pirenne Thesis" on the collapse of Mediterranean trade; he does however, give Peter Brown and the contemporary American "spiritual enlightenment and rebirth" school a good thrashing!
|
|
|
165 of 180 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
"Pots, tiles and coins" - The end of comfort, September 9, 2005
Bryan Ward-Perkins is concerned with impact of the collapse of the Western Roman Empire on the standard of living, or what he calls "the loss of comfort."
Seen from this standpoint, the end of Rome was the end of the world's first complex, specialised economy.
He is careful to explain that the end of the Roman Empire was not a uniform process, and that the Eastern half of the empire continued to flourish until the time of the Arab attacks in the seventh century AD.
He uses three instances: pottery, roof tiles, and coinage, to demonstrate the material changes which took place.
The use of pottery was widespread throughout the Empire, it was not solely the preserve of the elite, its manufacture was industrial, and its quality was excellent.
In provinces like Britain the availability of sophisticated, mass produced, quality pottery simply disappeared.
The skills and technology were lost. (Well the German invaders never had them!)
Tiled roofs do not catch fire, they do not attract insects, and they do not need replacing every thirty years. In Britain, " ... the quarrying of building stone, preparation of mortar, manufacture and use of bricks and tiles ... " all ceased.
Coins are the hallmark of economic sophistication: in Roman times they were "a standard feature of everyday
life ... " Their disappearance meant the disappearance of economic complexity, and in the West this was "almost total".
These three instances highlight the loss of specialisation, and as the author points out, specialisation depends on
"a sophisticated network of transport and commerce ... in order to distribute ... goods efficiently and widely."
But the frontiers were no longer secure, the countryside was more dangerous, and walls started to re-appear round cities. Traders who would have journeyed safely along the empire's highways find them no longer secure. The world's first intricate interlocking economy was unravelling.
In this situation, specialization actually posed a serious danger: " ... its very sophistication rendered it ... less adaptable to change." Indeed, the author argues that countries like Britain went back to less-sophisticated levels that those which had existed before the Roman invasion:
"It took centuries for people in the former empire to reacquire the skills and regional networks that would
take them back to these pre-Roman levels of sophistication. Ironically, viewed from the perspective of fifth-century Britain and of most of the sixth- and seventh-century Mediterranean, the Roman experience had been highly damaging."
Did the population also decline? Here the author admits that evidence is hard to find, since poorer communities leave little if any trace of their existence. However, the he uses evidence from Syria to argue that as farming became less specialist, and only local needs could be met, there was a decline in acreage cultivated.
He cites the remarkable shrinkage in the average size of cattle, from a growth in size between the Iron Age and the Roman period, to a decline below the size of Iron Age cattle afterwards.
The last section examines the differing historical interpretations of the end of the Roman Empire, and the way in which they are linked to the world-view of their protagonists.
First there is the Marxist view. The collapse of the Roman Empire marked the end of the imperial exploitation of the lower classes, and slaves.
Whilst not denying the huge differences in wealth - such as there are in Western countries today! - he believes that "basic good-quality items (were) available right down the social scale."
He further points out that Anglo-Saxon England, for example, was manifestly not an egalitarian paradise.
Then there is the intriguing case of the European Union, which appears to need the end of Rome to have been a peaceful transition. The German 'invaders' of the fifth century AD are no longer allowed to be the barbarians "assassinating" the empire, rather a Romano-German world came peacefully into existence. Hence the hallowed place of Charlemagne in the EU's pantheon.
The 'fall' of Rome also coincided with the rise of Christianity, therefore the so-called "Dark Ages" were not 'dark' at all. This was the period when the western `invaders' were converted. This was the age of saints, like St Bede, an age of spirituality.
Lastly, all cultures are now equal, so the notion that Rome "fell" implies its superiority: Roman = Civilised, Barbarian = Uncivilised. Cultures should not be judged in that way.
Bryan Ward-Perkins acknowledges these problems, and reiterates that he is writing from a material standpoint.
What this book does not set out to discuss is why the Empire fell, but it offers a prescient warning to a later more complex world: its citizens could not entertain the idea that its collapse was possible.
The author has combined his scholarship with a passion and commitment to his subject: this is one of the most stimulating history books I have read in a very long time.
|
|
|
21 of 21 people found the following review helpful:
5.0 out of 5 stars
Simply brilliant. Buy this book today!, July 4, 2006
This book is, quite simply, one of the finest history books I have ever read (and I am an avid history fan). I wish more academic writers had both the will and the ability to write as clearly and with as much flaire as Bryan Ward Perkins in this book. Sadly, it is a skill that is lacked by many of them; yet this only makes the author's achievement all the greater. Perkins does not go in for the obfuscating style that sometimes plagues academic writing. He does not need to hide behind dense terminology - he explains his ideas confidently and in plain English. I truly believe that this excellent book deserves a five star review rating.
In short, I urge you with all possible enthusiasm to buy this book today!
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|