Antiquity by Norman F. Cantor

Antiquity Reviews

• 
  anthony e.

  This one took me a while to get through, and, in the end, really proved not worth the effort. In fact, I moreso consider it a success because of the fact that I didn't abandon it, which is something I've been doing with a lot of books of late.
  
  Cantor's work is ambitious, and therein lies its folly. The text attempts to cover so much that its inevitable something is going to get left out, and that's an understandable shortcoming. But when you claim to examine antiquity from the birth of Sumerian civilization to the Fall of the Roman Empire, and then give Sumeria a single paragraph, you know shit's gonna go south fast. Much of what is examined is readily available in more interesting ways in Dan Carlin's excellent Hardcore History podcast, or can be gleaned by reading, well, nearly anything with a passing attention to ancient history.
  
  I suppose this may be useful for the new-comer, but that's an assessment I can't really make, because I am not one. But I feel like a newcomer wouldn't gravitate to this book, and frankly, think they shouldn't. The same information is available elsewhere, and without the agenda.
• 
  Tim Martin

  _Antiquity_ by Norman F. Cantor is a very readable and useful general introduction to the history and culture of the ancient Mediterranean. Though he wrote in his introduction that this book covers antiquity from earliest humanity (about 2.5 million years ago) to the fall of the Roman Empire (in the west) in the fifth century A.D., the focus is primarily on the cultures of ancient Greece and Rome as well as on ancient Judaism and early Christianity (with Jewish history particularly well covered). Ancient Egypt is fairly well discussed though there is very light coverage on the civilizations of Mesopotamia and some of the other Mediterranean civilizations, such as those of the Minoans, Phoenicians, and the Carthaginians (and generally the latter only in context with Roman history). Having said that though, I still found the book worthwhile as it provided a nice review of ancient history.
  
  The book has a somewhat odd format. Part I, which he titled the Basic Narrative, is a series of short chapters laying out basic facts about ancient times that he felt every educated person should know. Most of the chapters in this section are about five to ten pages in length. Part II, which he called Societies and Cultures, is over half the book and goes into much more detail, though also covering again some information mentioned in Part I. Part II had some particularly interesting sections, including a chapter on the legacy of Roman law (and on that of Marcus Tullius Cicero, the greatest Roman lawyer of all time) and on divisions in the early Christian church. This latter chapter was particularly unusual, constructed as an imagined conservation between Saint Augustine (tremendously influential Christian theologian from early fifth century Tunisia), his sister Placida, and a one time friend of Augustine, Bishop Vincent, a leader of a Christian sect called the Donatists, one that Augustine was at odds with.
  
  Cantor remarked several times how remarkable it was that the small city-state of Athens (counting farmers in the nearby countryside not more than 200,000 people at any one time) managed to forge an empire and to become for a time the predominant political, military, economic, and most importantly for us today cultural center for not only Greece but for the Mediterranean. This particular culture gave us Aristotle, Socrates, and Plato, incredibly influential thinkers and writers that along with the Hebrew Bible were the foundations for Western civilization.
  
  The author compared the Jews and the Athenians on one interesting point; both were cultures grounded in an epic historical myth. The Jews had their Exodus and the Athenians had the Trojan War as described in the epic poem _The Iliad_, both of which were national historical myths that gave "identity and moral authenticity" to their respective peoples. While the Jews were seen as "heroic refugees from slavery" and "righteous conquerors" of a pagan land, the Athenians saw themselves as descended from courageous warriors. Controversially, Cantor wrote that there is no evidence of any Jewish Exodus from Egypt (he does provide sources), though I myself had not read that the Exodus was wholly myth. Another observation he made, again new to me, was that Homer was not some folk poet nor were his writings folk stories that grew with time. Rather, Homer's writings were created specifically for the Athenian market, with his sequel to _The Iliad_, _The Odyssey_, revealed "clearly" that he was a "market-driven professional writer," one who borrowed heavily from traveler's stories and Egyptian fantasy in concocting his tale.
  
  Ancient Judaism is very well covered with Cantor describing the evolution of the synagogue and how the modern threefold spilt in Jewish religious culture had it origins in ancient times, as well as the relatively late addition of the concept of personal immortality in Judaism, a concept that quietly entered the rabbinical mainstream around 200 B.C. as a "concession" to the anxious masses by religious leaders.
  
  One interesting point he made several times in the book regarded a civilization's views of history and progress. For centuries the forces for change in the great societies of Egypt and Iraq were generally external rather than internal, spurred not generally by internal power struggles and change but by invasions (with one notable exception in Egypt, the attempt by the Pharaoh Akhenaton to impose a new monotheistic religion around the year 1330 B.C.). The Egyptians felt that events of the moment were transitory, that the present was eternal, and that the world was as a whole static. Egyptian literature did not have careful records of events or the distinctive traits of individual pharaohs, but rather strove to portray the divine ideal, the eternal nature of the subject, independent of time and space. History was at best cyclic. Similarly, many Greeks felt that history moved in circles, repeating itself infinitely. The Jews (and later the Christians) felt instead that history moved forward directly, unrepeatable, from the creation to the end of the world, all preordained by a divine plan. The Jewish idea that each event in history was singular and that history proceeded along a straight path was Cantor wrote to have a profound impact upon European thinking.
  
  Though much of the book focuses on the history of the ancient Mediterranean and the importance of Aristotle, Plato, the Bible, Roman law, and Greek theater (among other things) to the foundation of Western civilization, the author did note some of the deficiencies of classical culture. While the Greeks gave us epic poems, philosophy, theatrical tragedies, and invented the natural sciences, history, and anthropology and the Romans a huge body of poetry and a system of law still more or less in use today in much of Europe, they gave us virtually nothing of the rich oral traditions of the ancient Mediterranean nor any accounts of the hopes, thoughts, and feelings of the millions of people of the era. Additionally, classical culture often lacked a social conscience, oblivious to slavery, despotism, poverty, disease, everyday cruelty, and "might makes right" ways of thinking.
• 
  Whitney

  You know I gave up on this one. Mr. Cantor seems to be a widely respected academic. But he seemed to be unable to resist the recurring temptation to impose a biased slant on his subject matter (I could probably tell you his viewpoints on flashpoint subjects ranging from the theory of evolution to sexual license). Now I did not pick up "Antiquity" to discover Mr. Cantor's viewpoints on such matters, I picked it up to learn about ancient civilizations. Now I don't want to give the wrong impression, the slanting was subtle and perhaps a less persnickety person would not even notice it, but it was enough to disrupt the experience for me more than once.
  
  That is not to say that I did not learn some interesting facts about ancient civilizations in the 53 pages I did read. And perhaps this is one book that would have improved with acquaintance. I shall never know.
• 
  Gary

  a good summary of classical western history. covers egyptian, near eastern, greek, and roman history up to the fall of the roman empire in the middle of the first millenium. much of the book is a repeat of what many people have already learned in high school history classes. but the book tends to go into much more depth in certain areas and also includes alternative views of history that aren't usually taught in school.
  
  overall a quick read that provides a surprisingly thorough overview, even if its length makes it necessary to omit many things.
• 
  Sarah

  It's pretty ambitious for a relatively short book, but it's a good overview. He spends way more time on certain aspects of antiquity than on others - I found the sections on Egypt and the "hydraulic despotisms" somewhat disappointing, but the musings on Judaism and Greek and Roman civilization and culture are more than adequate. I was also a bit surprised, not unpleasantly but surprised nonetheless, by how much space he devotes to extrapolating some aspects into the medieval period and even into modern culture (e.g. Christian thought, Roman law, classical heritage in Western culture).
  
  So the title is a bit misleading because it's not so much a straight history of antiquity, but it's an intriguing read and in the end I feel I know more about the cultures than I did before, and that's a good thing.
• 
  Willow Redd

  Another one off the Read Your Library list and I have to say that I thoroughly enjoyed this!
  
  Cantor writes wonderfully, pulling you in with his style. Covering the period beginning with the dawn of civilization in Mesopotamia and Ancient Egypt, to the rise and fall of Greece and Rome, and on to the rise of Christianity; Cantor gives an honest view of the history of the ancient world. He destroys a lot of romanticism in the classical portrayals of both early Judaism and the Greek and Roman histories. Instead of simply adopting the classical viewpoint as absolute truth, he presents the less-glossy version. He shows us histories warts.
  
  I would definitely recommend this one to anyone interested in learning more about the ancient world. It's certainly a good book to start with, and Cantor includes some suggestions on further reading for each of the subjects he covers.
• 
  Elisa

  This book is a sweeping historical overview of the period "from the birth of the Sumerian civilization to the fall of the Roman Empire."
  
  It covers a lot of ground.
  
  It also made me feel weirdly uncomfortable. I felt like the author had clear biases...he dismissed or judged harshly some peoples and their civilizations in a way that seemed non-objective. Certain groups were depicted as more "primitive' than others, but it wasn't justified by his actually factual descriptions of what their lives were like, it seemed injected in because of his attitude or opinion.
  
  it's hard to explain...I would have liked this book for its educational value a lot more, but the tone occasionally made me cranky.
• 
  Daniel Kukwa

  It reads like a dream, it offers fine details without getting bogged down in dull lecturing, and it highlights many of the key contributors to each civilization in interesting (and on one occasion, surprisingly creative) ways. It maintains a fairly jolly objectivity and equilibrium, but doesn’t dismiss outright the religious nature that weaved through many of these civilizations. A definitive primer for its subject matter, and a valuable addition to any historical library.
  
  To put it simply: Norman F. Cantor, I'm a fan!
  
• 
  Amanda

  The book that started it all!
  Having always been fascinated by the ancient cultures, this was the first book that really enlightened me on their ways of life. Very well organized and well written, easy to follow.
• 
  Dave

  Great short work on early civilization. Cantor writes easily for any reader of history.
• 
  Elizabeth Peterson

  This book was terrible. I expected a history, not an opinion article.
• 
  Wayne

  When I initially read this book I really enjoyed it. It's a relatively brief and accessible overview of ancient Greek and Roman history. Upon re-read, I began noticing some cracks in the armor. I noticed an assertion that is actually Hollywood fiction rather than fact and that made me read with a much more critical eye. I got bogged down a bit in the section about Roman Law, but in general it's still a concise overview of the Greeks and Romans.
• 
  Rachel

  A note to Mr. Cantor: when one writes a brief but apparently authoritative and comprehensively wide-ranging volume on the 'civilization of the ancient world', the proportion of it that concerns the early development of the Judeo-Christian peoples should not exceed oh, say, one-fifth. If that. Antiquity discussed these religious predeccesors of modern Jews and Christians for at least a full third of its length (I can attribute this to no cause but pro-monotheistic prejudice).
  
  The remainder of the book, which discussed the other, and, to be honest, far more contemporaneously significant civilizations of Egypt, Greece, and Rome. And an unbelievably brief section on Mesopotamia. These brief overviews somehow managed to contain the most simplistic and frankly ludicrous literary criticism of Euripides that I have ever read.
  
  Stick to Edith Hamilton for these sort of 'cultural histories'. At least her pretentiousness is well-deserved.
• 
  Joseph

  I liked the breadth of the book, but would have liked more detail on each of the subjects. At ~300 pages it's hard to cram in Ancient Egypt, Athens, Rome, and the rise of Judaism and Christianity, so lack of depth is understandable, if not also unsatisfying. The book lays a good foundation for each of these subjects and makes me want to explore each more thoroughly. I considered giving the book 4 stars until the absurd chapter based on an imagined conversation between St. Augustine and Vincent.
• 
  Megan

  This book was great overall! I got bogged down several times by the author's own opinions of past historical events of why he thought they took place. He made you feel that if you don't agree with his opinions- you are an idiot who does not know history. Aside from that- if you can get past Cantor's feelings about history, the books as a whole is very intriguing.
• 
  Bob

  Totally biased and inaccurate. In the first page the author says something to the effect of "I'm not going to burden you with details such as names and dates...."
  
  What?
  
  Oh, my bad. Who needs specific things like facts when reading a history book. Yet, I still squeaked out a second star because of my love for the ancient world...even this author couldn't ruin that.
• 
  G. Tramaine Peoples

  Decent read on many of the popular cultures from Ancient times.. I was only disappointed because I purchase this book in hopes of gaining more knowledge on the history of the Summerians but not a lot of information is presented on them. Perfect for if you need to write an essay on any of the great civilizations on Antiquity..
• 
  Hannah

  All of the 1 star reviews and a few of the 2 star reviews says it all. I'm sorry Mr Cantor never got around to reading up on the Dead Sea Scrolls, perhaps he was too uncomfortable with real "facts" staring him in the face.
  
  This is entertainment, at best. Even Brendon Fraser and Harrison Ford have more accurate things to say about history and archaeology.
• 
  Taylor

  This book was hard to get through. On the surface it's mainly a drive-by of random factoids that cover the ancient world, so it's a Cliffs Notes of sorts. If not for the bias Cantor inserts into his writing, I'd say it's a good book for a high school student.
• 
  Whitney

  I gave this book three stars because it had great information. However the writing style was confusing and long winded. The book should not take the reader long and should be able to be read cover to cover, I found myself using the textbook method throughout over half the book .
• 
  Heather Lewis

  The information in the book was insightful and helped to broaden my knowledge in the history but I did not care for how he organized the information. Furthermore, the book had a tendency to be dry in certain areas.