| Title | : | Terry Jones' Barbarians |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 0563493186 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9780563493181 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Hardcover |
| Number of Pages | : | 288 |
| Publication | : | First published January 1, 2006 |
Terry Jones' Barbarians Reviews
-
Loved this! Finished it on campsite in Orkney... very atmospheric! Highly recommended! :)
-
This wonderful book tells the history of the Roman Empire with the humour and irony one would expect from Terry Jones (best known as a member of Monty Python, the small but very decent collection of historical books he has written are not yet as well known). This book was a tremendous amount of fun to read! Below I mention the things it is about, conclusions reached and so on. But really the best thing about it was that I loved picking it up to read more; it was the treat at the end of the day and I started rationing the last chapters because I wanted it to last longer almost more than I wanted to read the final part.
One important part of this book, is that it lets us see the Roman invasions from the point of view of all the other nations and cultures that Rome stomped on, and all too often completely stomped out. Hence it is called ‘Barbarians; an alternative Roman history’.
For me, the most exciting thing about this history is that it explains the Roman Empire in a way I can understand. For years I have wanted to understand the history of Rome. I have read books about it, often the ‘classics’ and at the end of the day had no overview of Rome, it's army's, it borders or it's Empire at all. A good book about Rome in Britain leaves one mystified about the rest of the empire. A very sensible discussion about the movement of forces in Europe leaves one completely unable to grasp what Africa had to do with anything, and so on an so forth.
Terry breaks down his book into parts that cover the Celts, Barbarians (everyone not Roman, remember) from the north, from the south and then the Vandals and Huns separately. He deals with the different borders of the empire one by one explaining how what was happening on the other front affected each area. The 'East Empire', the 'West Empire', the simultaneous multiple Emperors, what the hell Rome was doing in Persia and Egypt anyway, all the things I could never get my head around are covered. Terry also tells the initial story of Rome the city, and how it mobilised in the first place. For the first time ever I think I understand how the thing worked up until about the Fifth Century, the end of the book.
I also have a much better picture of how the Roman Catholic Church came about. Terry does not seem to care for Catholicism much and he is not complimentary about it at all. But if you ever wondered how it got a stranglehold on worldwide Christianity in the first place the last bit of the book makes it quite clear. I have always thought that there are a lot of inconsistencies between what Catholicism says it is about and what it actually does. Based on what I have read in this book, several of those inconsistencies can be traced very directly to the fact that the religion developed in the Roman culture and as an inheritor of the Roman Empire, which was in some strife by the fifth century, when the Pope got the Roman decree making him in charge of the catholic church.
I also came to a few other conclusions; I already knew Rome destroyed pretty much everything it touched (ecologically and culturally), so no surprises there. I have walked away with a better understanding of how Europe fell into ‘the dark ages’ and we can point to Rome for that too; they crushed out all the science (unless it could be used in war), leached out all the wealth and the academically inclined (if they were of use in war) and squashed cultural achievements replacing them with Romanisation (which is to say circuses) and eventually there was none left.
My other surprise was this; I was always unclear how women came to have such a subverted role in classical European culture (Yes, I have read some feminist literature, and yet...). A Celtic woman BC was an independent entity with rights and there were laws protecting her property and person even after she married. An English Edwardian woman however had fewer rights and less freedoms that a contemporary Arab woman in Africa (though sharia has since put paid to that). It looks like we can lay that one on Rome as well; Rome did not give women rights, they were the possessions of whichever male happened to be head of the family, and as Rome crushed to cultures it rolled over it seems to have taken that notion with them.
It was a fascinating book, I was glad to read about Rome from the very civilised Barbarian perspectives. We all know that the winner writes the history so thank you Terry, for making it possible to a have look at what events might have looked like before the Roman spin doctors got at the history books. -
-Con intenciones lúdicas y no necesariamente riguroso.-
Género. Ensayo.
Lo que nos cuenta. El libro Roma y los bárbaros (publicación original: Terry Jones' Barbarians, 2006) es una reivindicación, entre lo irónico, lo revisionista, lo serio alguna vez y lo ligero, de la figura de los bárbaros en contraposición a la Antigua Roma.
¿Quiere saber más de este libro, sin spoilers? Visite:
http://librosdeolethros.blogspot.com/... -
Disappointed. Sorely disappointed.
I was perusing my local bookshop and I found Terry Jones' Barbarians: An Alternative Roman History. I was excited by the endorsement on the back cover from a historian that said, "I wish all historical books written by non-historians were so informed and all books by historians so well written." Good enough for me - I grabbed it up and eagerly started reading, looking forward to reading this work by the creator/host of one of my favorite history-based documentaries, The Story of 1.
Boy, was I disappointed.
First of all, neither Jones nor his co-author Alan Ereira are trained historians (neither am I, but I have an appreciation for expertise in an area and how that makes the commentary more accurate) and it clearly shows. Right off the bat (p. 13) they attack Julius Caesar and belittle Romans in general for falsely describing the true nature of the elk (Romans were told of exotic animals by natives and they duly recorded the descriptions, usually false or exaggerated - this happened throughout the Roman era - Jones must not appreciate an inquisitive nature...) and then questions Caesar's ability to describe the Gauls (p. 14) because if Caesar cannot properly describe an elk, what can he describe? Cheap shot, but a warning as to the nature of the book.
The book is based on a simple premise - the barbarians that surrounded Rome were more sophisticated and advanced than most histories of Rome give them credit for. To their credit, Jones and Ereira do make this point early and often. But, rather than just making that point they repeatedly go after the Romans as being the real barbarians filling the book with snide comments about how the Romans destroyed science for more than one thousand years (pp. 152-5) and did little but destroy, loot and maim. Rather than build up the barbarians, they embark on a strategy of tearing down the Romans to make the barbarians look better by comparison. It's cheap history and does not work well. Note, I am not asserting that Rome was morally superior to their "barbarian" neighbors. Clearly, Rome had horrific, barbaric habits such as the gladiatorial games and a very willing tendency to knock their neighbors about for their cash. But, this book pushes it too far.
Other problems: ...
Read more at:
http://dwdsreviews.blogspot.com/2010/... -
The premise is promising. I'm all for "revisionist history" where it can shed light on the parts of history that have been shoved into a corner and neglected, which is exactly what this book sets out to do.
While some have (rightly) accused European history of being "Westocentric," Jones and Ereira reveal that a more accurate charge would be "Romacentric". Indeed, they say, we have been sold the idea of Rome as the epitome of civilization, the zenith of the Classical world, while the so-called Barbarians were ruthless savages bent on destruction for destruction's sake.
It's certainly easy to see how this European myth has had repercussions through the rest of our history, which makes books such as this all the more important. It certainly helps that the writing style is fun, intelligent, and witty.
As you get into the work, you do get the niggling suspicion that they tend to overstate their case. This is somewhat forgivable, as they acknowledge right in the introduction that they are portraying the Romans as the "real Barbarians" and, besides, turnabout is fair play, after all.
It is unfortunate for the authors, however, that one cannot write a complete history of Rome (or of "Rome") without coming to the topic of Christianity, and it was here that the authors totally lost me. While the particulars of Ancient Christian history are quite complex, all-too-often tied up with the politics of the Empire (post-Constantine, of course), I would expect such a seemingly well-researched book to at least get some things right on this topic.
Not only do they repeat the ignorant twaddle that Constantine infused Sun worship into the Church, moved the day of worship to Sunday, and moved the celebration of the Nativity of Christ to December 25, i.e., the feast of Sol Invictus, they go so far as to assert that Arianism was the "old fashioned" form of Christianity, and that Trinitarianism was some new-fangled, irrational dogma devised by the "Catholics" (by which, they apparently mean, the Roman Catholic Church), which was resisted by the East until it was imposed on them thanks to the efforts of St. Ambrose of Milan. In doing so, not only do they oversimplify the Arian controversy to an extreme, they also completely ignore the efforts of all the Greek and Alexandrian Church Fathers, from St. Athanasius the Great to the Cappadocians, Sts. Gregory of Nyssa, St. Basil the Great, and St. Gregory of Nazianzus.
In addition, when they do speak of the Arian Vandals "invading" Roman Carthage, they acknowledge the Vandals did destroy some theaters and arenas, but defend this destruction by saying, "but this was because [the purposes of the buildings] were immoral." One doesn't get the sense that "Catholics," whether because they were Catholic or because they were Roman, committing similar acts would have been viewed so graciously.
Later on, they speak of St. Augustine of Hippo's teachings as if they were fully accepted by the entire Church (Augustine being practically unknown in the East), and these are just a sampling of their errors. In the end, their view of Christian history is still hobbled by they same "Romacentrism" they spend most of the book railing against.
While this is, admittedly, a pet peeve of mine, I also do not deny that Christian history has been as rosy as we would like to believe. Certainly, our brethren throughout history, even up to today, have all-too-often failed to live up to the teachings of Christ, and I am all for owning up to these failings. There are plenty to pick from without engaging in misrepresentation of events our repeating of falsehoods.
The larger issue for me is that these blatant errors seriously undermine the arguments put forward in the rest of the book. To refer to an event that is recounted near the end of the text, these errors are like the earthquake knocking a hole in the impenetrable walls of Constantinople. The Huns didn't need it to be a big hole...just large enough to let a few men through at a time to overrun the whole city. Unfortunately for the authors, they did not have time to rebuild the walls before the Huns showed up. -
Monty Python's Terry Jones wants us to know that Barbarians (what Romans call anybody who lives outside the boundaries of the expansion dependent Roman Empire, or anybody who has not adopted Roman values) were sophisticated, cultured, and often times more civilized than the Romans.
In fact, Rome destroyed more clever technology and innovative human artistic expression than they ever preserved. Rome was built by conquest and the systematic exploitation of conquered lands. The would initially empty the natural resources and man made treasures of the enslaved lands. People of other cultures continuously refilled the slave pens of mother Rome. Often conquest was for the near exclusive benefit of the most wealthy Romans.
Each chapter focuses on a different Barbarian group so there is some overlap of events from chapter to chapter. This book accompanies a TV presentation. Expect some light Jones humour. I would have hoped for many more pictures since this was based on a TV special.
I give the book 3.5 stars plus .5 stars for my Python loyalty. A good introduction to Roman history. -
This book was recommended by the actor, Graham McTavish on his Intsagram page along with other books to read during our social distancing. What we know about what went on during Roman times is what was told by the Romans. We were lead to believe that the Barbarians were godless savages that ravaged Europe. That's not how what was really going on. Roman was an overburden city that was highly taxed to support their upper class and military. General Caesar first looked to Gaul to solve the problem. He invaded Gaul to plundered their riches for himself and Rome. The lie that he began was they were pagans that Rome needed to be protected from. That's exactly the truth.
Turns out the peoples surrounding Rome had their own religions that encouraged people to take care of each other and nature. They were artisans and very educated. Rome was still sacrificing to Jupiter and couldn't care less about each other. Not even when they became a Christian country did this really change.They only cared about the basics in education.
Which brings us to another point, Rome did very little inventing many to the creations that were created to them. If it had not to do with war, they were interested. The also were interested in Mathematics,that would come to hinder their growth in the future.
Barbarians is a good book if you want to know what was really going on with Rome. I found it interesting that many of the traditions in the Church can be traced by to the Romans, not Christ. -
Interesting perspective on the Roman Empire (from the point of view of its neighbors) and the non-Roman peoples who surrounded it. Popular history covering an approximately 700 year period from the Roman Republic, through the Imperial period, and up to various "falls", this book is only about 300 pages (and also associated with a BBC documentary series of the same name), so it's not especially in-depth, but does provide a decent general history of Rome's relationship with it's neighbors. Sometimes a bit oversimplified, but that's not surprising. Also, the term "Barbarians" is a slight misnomer, as, while the book covers many groups that the Romans (and many later writers) felt fit the description (Gauls, Britons, Goths, Vandals, Franks, Germans, Huns,), he also includes Greeks and Parthians/Persians. The later part of the book also delves a fair bit into early Christianity and especially the conflicts between Trinitarian (Catholic) and Arian Christians. Not especially well balanced, though; the book definitely leaves you feeling that he had an axe to grind.
-
Perfectly well-researched and smart, but the history is difficult to follow because Jones jumps around so much.
I read most of this book while sitting around on jury duty. -
Jones was a member of Monty Python troop and has been doing a lot of amateur history shows. Here he is taking on the idea that the Roman Empire was a civilizing force and instead casts them as destroyers of all that is good. His main idea is old hat because everyone is aware the Romans were cruel and blood thirsty as seen in various Coliseum spectacles. They were not invincible as shown be the debacle at the Teutoburg Forest. On the flip side anyone who reads or has been to a museum is aware of the skill and beauty of pre Roman Celtic metal work and of Greek and Persian contributions to math and science. Jones may have a point in showing that history is more complicated than is popularly thought, and showing that "barbarian" culltures were essentially as developed as the Romans. However, he works the obvious to death and when he stated that Rome destroyed Greek and Eastern science and set civilization back 1500 years I said, OK, that’s it, I’m out of here.
-
Having learned history as written by the winners, I found this an interesting addition to my knowledge of European history. Terry Jones as a writer is knowledgeable and witty. He added a touch of humor to what is considered by most to be a dry topic. If you want to find out more about just who the people were whom the Romans dubbed barbarians, this is a good, easy read to do so. There's even a handy timetable in the front.
-
I will be honest and state that I don't read history books as a rule having been put off the subject by dreadful teachers at high school, however this sounded like it could be interesting. It comes over that the Romans were the barbarians, rather than the 'barbarians' which was any race not Roman. The truth will be somewhere in the middle and this is trying to give the side of the losing teams, as history is always biased towards the winners. Hated by some reviewers and loved by others.
-
Después de leer este libro podrás darte cuenta de que los bárbaros no lo eran tal y como nos lo enseñaron en la aulas. El autor hace un excelente recorrido para cada uno de los pueblos que en su momento estuvieron al margen de la sociedad romana; el imperio romano en todos sus años de existencia trato a todo los pueblos fuera de sus fronteras como bárbaros pero este libro nos muestra de manera detallada que esos pueblos tenía su propia cultura, sus propias tecnologías (muchas de ellas usadas después por los romanos) y hasta habían sociedades en donde las mujeres estaban bien empoderadas. En resumen, un excelente libro para saber de que los Vándalos en el fondo no lo eran tal.
-
Very informative book that gives background on what was happening outside the Roman Republic/Empire, in the periphery. Starting from school we were introduced the Roman perspective and this book provides us a new viewpoint where separation of whites and blacks is not that clear. In several places there are reflections to Armenian history as well. Sometimes the author makes interesting parallels with nowadays world. I would strongly recommend this book anyone interested in history. It will not be an exaggeration if I say that this is a must read book for historians.
-
It's never a good sign when you're reading a book and it makes you raise an eyebrow at its credulity within the first page.
Barbarians reads like pseudo-history at its finest. While it's certainly got a great authorial voice, it's so blindly one-sided in its desire to debunk even Rome's most minor achievements that it outright ignores archaeological and historical facts.
The whole aim of Barbarians is to highlight the great achievements of The Gauls, Britons, Dacians, and many other 'barbarian' nations from antiquity. This, in and of itself, is an excellent premise for a history book, but a key part of any study of history is objectivity. And objectivity is sorely lacking here.
Perhaps the strangest part of the book is the fact that it begins like any other piece of non-fiction writing, presenting the facts and raising some interesting tidbits of information. But after the section on The Gauls, it diverts wildly into simply telling Rome's story of conquest, kicking any nuance it had down the drain. There's a real lack of consistency, both in tone information.
Barbarians at least has the decency to preface the start of the book with a note that its authors are not historians, but that they are 'justified in writing this book' by having spoken with several well-known historians in a bid to avoid any mistakes. This justification comes off as half-baked to anyone with even an ounce of historical understanding.
That's the real problem with Barbarians. Unless you actually have a minimal understanding of history, you're going to pick this book up and be presented with a boatload of information lacking any counterpoint. And if you've no knowledge of the topic, you'll likely accept what you read as fact. It doesn't matter if it's interesting to read, it's problematic for the study of history.
If you want a bit of a laugh, and you know the subject material, give Barbarians a whirl. If, on the other hand, you want to read an actual history book, search for something more reputable. It'll be drier, but you'll get far more out of it. -
I think this might be the single most important book on ancient history I've ever read.
Having received a fairly traditional classical education that espoused the benefits of Roman (and to a lesser extent Greek) civilisation, I'd always sort of gone along with the general beliefs about all of those Barbarians, the Goths, the Vandals, the Visigoths, who sacked Rome and burnt down civilisation.
But it is in reality quite the opposite. The so-called Barbarians were in fact the civilised ones, and it is the entire structure of Rome that was broken and corrupt. And this is the core revelation I had reading it, it's through the supremecy of Roman Catholicism that destroyed and actively suppressed all of the texts that contradicted the picture they have painted of the Catholics/Christians as the poor oppressed 'good guys' who were plucky and only won out because God was on their side, and created this image of Rome being at the center of European civilisation.
And who were the Romans? Really? They were slavers and psychopaths whose idea of Empire was to conquer and steal as much land, gold and slaves as they could. They pushed the idea of greed and wealth above all else, and the richer you were? The better you were.
Sound familiar? This is the root of Western Capitalist Consumerism. No wonder we're taught how awesome Rome and the Romans were. Because this central lie underpins our entire way of life, from the lies of Roman Catholicism, to the lies of the Bankers and Politicians of today.
It is, after all, true that he who controls the past controls the present and the future.
So yes. Immensely important book in overturning this idea of Rome being at the center of everything. Rome just won, through the Roman Catholic church, and all competing ideas were branded 'heretical' and ruthlessly stamped out.
... in much the same way as they still are today. I mean, how often do we even hear of somebody suggest an alternative to western style Capitalism? -
BRAVO! This is a masterful and delightful read, one of the best books I've read in years. The authors take a witty, conversational approach to their topic, which is an examination of the interactions of the Roman empire with the various other cultures the Romans destroyed. As the cliche says, history is written by the winners, and so we have been handed down the Romans' version of these events, painting themselves as civilizers bringing enlightenment, science, engineering, and so on, to all the various peoples they called barbarians. In fact, as the authors note vividly, the archeological record shows that in many cases the only area in which the Romans were more advanced than others was in having a professional army - some of the peoples they crushed were more advanced than the Romans in the arts, literature, mathematics, architecture, the sciences, engineering, and philosophy/religious thought. In fact, as this book makes clear, there's a strong case for the argument that Rome actually set the progress of Western civilization back by at least 1500 years.
Christianity and the actions of its various factions come in for an almost equally withering examination, due to their often vicious intolerance, their dogmatic anti-rationalism and anti-intellectualism (as in the burning of the library at Alexandria, reminiscent of the Taliban of our own time) and their blatant politicking and lust for power.
For anyone interested in the history of Europe and the Near East and Middle East, this will be a fascinating read. As Dr. Walter Pohl of the Vienna Academy of Sciences said in his cover blurb, "I wish all historical books written by non-historians were so informed, and all books by historians so well written." Buy it! Read it! Pass it on! -
'Barbarians' The Roman empires term for the other.Used to depict Western Europeans as unintelligent drunks. Deserving no better than to have lands taken by the "civilizing" sword of empire.For they were only Barbarians with a strange unintelligible language and worthless culture.
In their excursions of empire Romans set eyes upon. Gauls with cheek plated helmets and 'shields as big as men'. In Britain chariots with agility to cause panic in Caesars legions.
While the Persian Barbarians in the east had their own eccentricity's. Of letting individual local kings. With different faiths and culture rule how they see fit. At odds with the Roman model of crushing all technologies, writing and culture. History was being written by the winners.More advanced often only by their militarisation. As Tacitus recorded at the time 'Robbery, slaughter, plunder they misname empire. They make a wilderness and call it peace'
Eventually Rome fell by its Barbarian ironies. When it's Racism was reflected back at them. By the Persian empire in the east. Then when the Roman taught legions in the west. Backed A home grown Barbarian to marched on Rome.
The absurdness of the savage. Against the sophistication of empire. Was now a matter of historical record. Only for new religious and racial lines to be drawn. Forever twisting the epochal lesson of the fall of Rome. -
An okay if distinctly average and rather superfluous book that feels very much like an obligatory tie-in rather than a book that can stand on it's own feet.
It takes the rather intriguing novel idea of turning the Roman propaganda tool of 'everyone who is different to us is a barbarian' on its head and show the lie in their words. To a certain degree it achieves that yet it still feels remarkably casual and superficial.
The book skips a number of intriguing developments, like decisive battles that turned the tide of aggression etc, either by glossing over them in a sentence or two, or by just not referring to them at all.
Frankly this is a distinctly underwhelming and threadbare a book that would only really be of any use at all if you could track down a way of watching the original TV series. Compare and contrast that with the way that the tie-in books to the various series Michael Wood has done, also on the BBC, can and easily do stand on their own as entirely enjoyable as the shows themselves.
Distinctly average and likely to leave you with a feeling of incompletion. -
History is written by the victors, so this revision of the thousand years of "barbarism", from 500BC to 500AD give or take a pillaging or two, is a refreshing and enlightening book. So is its style and delivery: facts and research presented with a good dose of Monty Python irreverence. It's easy to read, and although it covers a staggering amount of facts and people, it doesn't get bogged down. "Barbarians" doesn't pretend to be a scholarly work. If you love good quality, well researched historical novels, you'll enjoy this alternative history of the Roman empire.
As Dr Walter Pohl is quoted on the cover:
"I wish all historical books written by non-historians were so informed, and all books by historians so well written." -
I loved this different perspective on history. Written with an easy pen and of course as you would expect coming from Terry Jones, a sprinkle of humour. What I enjoyed was the level of research and desire for accuracy presented in a fashion that makes the reader want to keep reading. Most books with this kind of historical content leave you falling asleep or re-reading the last sentence 12 times before you have to get up and get a drink of water because its so dry! If you like Roman history and think you know it already... open your mind to this history with a twist and you will not be disappointed.
-
Gave up on this about 1/2 - 2/3 of the way thru. Too many names & dates for my taste .... the insights & humour I was expecting were a lesser part of the book than I had hoped.
Might be better if accompanied by a "traditional" history of the times - any recommendations? -
Excellent book from Terry Jones,also of Monty Python fame. The book presents the interaction between the Roman Empire and those who had the misfortune to be in the same vicinity, with ensuing death and destruction.
-
Fairly entertaining and informative revisionist history. Those Rome-sacking barbarians weren't such bad guys after all! The narrative skips around and the assessments are not, shall we say, always even-handed. I enjoyed it nonetheless, and it has good footnotes.
-
Book nr. 1 in 2021.
We always hear about westcentric or eurocentric, and this, the glorious Roman empire, is where it all started. This is a non-Romancentric history book.
And I quote:
"Terry Jones' Barbarians is about all those peoples whom the Romans wrote off as uncivilized, but it's also a chance to take a look at the Romans themselves from an alternative point of view – from the point of view of the people they trashed. [...] we've all been sold a false history of Rome that has twisted our entire understanding of our own history – glorifying (and glossing over) a long era of ruthless imperial power [...] ".
The barbarians were not as barbarians as we all have been taught, the sack of Rome was not a sack at all:
"Oddly, none of the chroniclers who describe this 'sack of Rome' seem at all interested in the fact that what was being taken had actually been brought to the city as loot in the first place. And whereas the Romans had destroyed the places from which they took their plunder, not a single building in Rome was destroyed by the Vandals./The Goths didn't destroy Rome, nor did they massacre the population. On the contrary, the Barbarians took particular care to provide safe-houses for civilians and not to harm public buildings."
I could go on quoting on how Christians were involved, getting and giving money, how they treated women (I will get there, using other books).
"The Eastern Goths, the Ostrogoths, whose parents and grandparents had raided with Attila and his Huns, [...] They were no longer pagans, but as self-aware Goths they avoided the Roman Catholic Church. Like the Vandals and the Visigoths, they were Arians, and under their king Theodoric they set about building a new kind of Rome. In place of the old violent, intolerant and ruthless Roman Catholic empire, there was a gentler and more inclusive Barbarian vision."
Oddly enough, fear seems to have played a key role in the history of Rome, as if the grandeur of Rome was born of paranoia and desperation (I see Italians here) -
'Barbarian' is a term first used by the Greeks to describe people who were different from them, especially foreigners from different places. The use of term was popularized further by the Romans, who seek to conquer the world and rid it of barbarians, who refused to play by Romans' rule. After reading throughout the book, I get the impression that it was the Romans who were barbarians all along, for everytime they conquer other nations, they tried to eradicate every trace of civilizations and impose 'romanness' on it. The only reason why there are so many roman things survived into this time while the others were lost forever was because the 'barbarians' when they did conquer Rome, they did not do what Romans usually did unto them. Even the Huns, who are now known by their (supposed) sheer barbarity turned their backs at the gates of Rome. So overall, this is a good book. Although the topic is already familiar with, the point of view taken is so refreshing.
-
Absolutely fascinating account of the Roman Empire, the ‘barbarian’ tribes who fought it, courted it and eventually helped destroy it. The writing as you’d expect is humorous, scandalous and packed with cited accounts and historical details that immediately make you realise everything you thought you knew about the Romans is wrong. What did the Romans do for us? Only destroy cultures, wipe out progress, stunt science and learning and eventually lead directly to the control and power of the Church that then continued their work for another 1500 years.
It’s shocking to realise just how much more advanced the world could have been and realise just how damned persistent the Romans were as they just kept coming back time and again to wipe out progress.
I don’t read a lot of histories but this is the perfect kind: packed with info, accessible and a great enjoyable read. Just wish Jones had written one about the Dark Ages as I feel this is really only half the story! -
"What Have the Romans ever Given US?!" A skewed view of history, according to Jones. It was exhilarating to see euro history through a different perspective.
I learned a lot about the Gauls and Dacian culture and Arian Chrisian cultures like the Visigoths and the Vandals, who were crushed by Rome masquerading as the Catholic Church. Roman values of domincance and organization of war and romanaizaiton were contrasted by the competing cutlures religious and political. the reasons for the fall of roman empire is about an economy that enriched the oligarchy through excessive taxation which led to protofeudalism -- i found that idea compelling too...
I wonder how much protestenatism is the revenge of the arian barbararians
Avitus of Vienne The Fall of Man: De spiritalis historiae gestis libri I-III, Edited from Laon, Bibliothèque Municipale, Ms. 273. Edited by Daniel J. Nodes. Toronto: Pontifical Institute of Medieval Studies, 1985, 72 pp. (Toronto Medieval Latin Texts, 16)
