Jump to content

History in Books


Zorral
 Share

Recommended Posts

31 minutes ago, Zorral said:

And particularly the endless attempts to limit actual Roman citizenship -- which incidentally was still playing out in Constantinople during the first century and a half, of what is usually labeled the "collapse" of the Roman Empire and the beginning of the Dark Ages.  Another sort of lesson we seem never to learn from history!

Interesting!  Reforms like Gaius Marius bringing in the lower-class men to be soldiers in Rome armies met with so much resistance.  I guess full citizenship was for the upper classes only, and there was alot of violence around expanding citizenship.  Not learning the lesson of inclusion still goes, agreed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/11/2022 at 10:05 AM, LongRider said:

I posted this in the Fourth Quarter 2021 thread and am posting here as well.  Reading historical fiction is new for me and thanks to this board and its excellent suggestions, I've been able to read good ones.  Historical fiction isn't history, but if it is based in facts, one can still learn from them, plus, HF can lead to reading actual history. 

If you haven't already read them, you should consider John Maddox Roberts' SPQR mysteries.  His protagonist is a scion of a leading Roman family who solves mysteries in the time of the fall of the Republic.  The view from the bottom of society while still part of society is very good.

SPQR Series by John Maddox Roberts (goodreads.com)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Wilbur said:

If you haven't already read them, you should consider John Maddox Roberts' SPQR mysteries.  His protagonist is a scion of a leading Roman family who solves mysteries in the time of the fall of the Republic.  The view from the bottom of society while still part of society is very good.

SPQR Series by John Maddox Roberts (goodreads.com)

I'll look them over.   Can they be read as standalones? Rather weary of long series.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, LongRider said:

I'll look them over.   Can they be read as standalones? Rather weary of long series.

Yes, each story stands alone as a mystery.  JMR was a very good writer, so the mysteries are fine, and he does an excellent job of attaching each one to a specific historical event in the fall of the Republic.  Since this period has a lot of original sources, and JMR is a strong author, I really like each of them.

The story of the protagonist is the through line, progressing in each tale.  This over-arching tale is a bit sad, and the stories don't glorify Julius Caesar like McCollough does.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Wilbur said:

The story of the protagonist is the through line, progressing in each tale.  This over-arching tale is a bit sad, and the stories don't glorify Julius Caesar like McCollough does.

Sounds interesting, will look for them in the library.  Caesar was a complex man I don’t see McCollough’s treatment of him as the last word.  
 

But also, I like books that give a good background of culture and the time.  I felt that Masters of Rome did fine there, except for too many modern words and expressions put in the character’s mouths. 

Thanks for the suggestion and your reply.   :cheers:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bret has started a series on his Unmitigated Pedantry blog around the fall of Rome in the West -- "how bad was it?" Devereaux asks  The first installment is up, and it explores the fall around "culture, literature, language and religion (‘words’)."

https://acoup.blog/2022/01/14/collections-rome-decline-and-fall-part-i-words/

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, Zorral said:

Bret has started a series on his Unmitigated Pedantry blog around the fall of Rome in the West -- "how bad was it?" Devereaux asks  The first installment is up, and it explores the fall around "culture, literature, language and religion (‘words’)."

https://acoup.blog/2022/01/14/collections-rome-decline-and-fall-part-i-words/

 

 

Oh goody!  Thanks for posting!   :D

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, LongRider said:

Oh goody!  Thanks for posting!   :D

 

It's quite, quite tasty! For me personally too, I've read many of the books to which he's referring, so there is that extra fun! I also really like that he included,

Quote

"the term ‘Dark Age’ has to do with the survival of evidence, not living conditions: the age was not dark because it was grim, it was dark because we cannot see it as clearly."

He's hitting all my historical vision of Rome, Late Antiquity and Medieval sweet spots. :lol:

Edited by Zorral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Zorral said:

"the term ‘Dark Age’ has to do with the survival of evidence, not living conditions: the age was not dark because it was grim, it was dark because we cannot see it as clearly."

Read the blog this afternoon and like you the quote jumped out at me.   Dark because it can’t be seen clearly is not a concept that would have crossed my mind, its given me a way to think differently of that time. 
 

Plan to read the blog again tomorrow, the fall of the Roman Empire is a blur to me. The series should be somewhat enlightening. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, LongRider said:

Dark because it can’t be seen clearly is not a concept that would have crossed my mind, its given me a way to think differently of that time. 

That became, ah-hem, clear to me during the first year or so when I systematically set about trying to understand why France speaks a latinate language, i.e. French, not a Germanic language, even though it was ruled by gothic groups for so long, from the time of Clovis, the Merovingians and the Carolinians.  There are so few written sources for those centuries, unlike the wealth of texts from the days of the (western) Roman empire.  And even with all that wealth, so many key works are missing, that could tell us so much, that we even know existed, as they are referred to frequently in surviving histories and other works from these centuries. 

Something else that got very clear to me is how much of what we do have from almost any period anywhere was politically motivated, score settling, public relations, propaganda.  My first encounter with this as consciously sponsored by the ruler himself was with Charlemagne.  Among his PR efforts included employment of many minstrels and jongleurs to sing songs about his achievements.

My professional history subject is US History, the Atlantic slave trade and Slavery in the Americas (which then includes Brit, French, Dutch, Spanish, etc. history too).  Going back, studying systematically, even to the Scythians, the Persians, the Romans, the Ottomans and so on, is recreation, my version of gaming (which I don't do at all and never have!).

But going back to the African slave trade and the New World -- it ends up bringing us around to the Ottomans too, since so much that happened with all that began with the attempts to circumvent the Ottomans' hold on the Asian trade.

Also, in his discussion of the continuity and continuing development in the art of Late Antiquity and the classical era -- the Metropolitan Museum of Art has an exhibit of Art of Late Antiquity, which Partner and I got to visit back in October, when we could still go into public indoor spaces.  This is the only public space event I've attended since pandemic; after vaccines, before omicron, Partner was carefully attending music and film events -- very carefully -- sometimes turned around and left because too crowded, poor safety protocol, etc.)  Gods, it was wonderful, being surrounded by art again!

O ya -- I also really like that Bret emphasized that Rome in the West didn't actually fall.  Instead

Quote

...it tore apart from the inside rather than being violently overrun from the outside by wholly alien forces. ...

USians need to pay attention to that . . . .

Edited by Zorral
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, Zorral said:

And even with all that wealth, so many key works are missing, that could tell us so much, that we even know existed, as they are referred to frequently in surviving histories and other works from these centuries. 

Something else that got very clear to me is how much of what we do have from almost any period anywhere was politically motivated, score settling, public relations, propaganda. 

This makes me think of Marat's writing during the French Revolution.  Nothing new really, did get him a knife stuck in his ribs tho'.  

 

22 hours ago, Zorral said:
Quote

.it tore apart from the inside rather than being violently overrun from the outside by wholly alien forces. ...

USians need to pay attention to that . . . .

Yes, alot of the politics from the Masters of Rome series felt so timely.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/12/2022 at 11:33 AM, Wilbur said:

If you haven't already read them, you should consider John Maddox Roberts' SPQR mysteries.  His protagonist is a scion of a leading Roman family who solves mysteries in the time of the fall of the Republic.  The view from the bottom of society while still part of society is very good.

SPQR Series by John Maddox Roberts (goodreads.com)

Well my library has none of these so that means a trip across town to the bestest ever used bookshop.  I need something to read until my holds come in and Cal's Books has filled the breech for me before.   Yeah, I bet Cal has them, if not I'll find something to read.   

Link to comment
Share on other sites

History read/being read in 2022's first month, every one of them well-written, and stuffed with useful, interesting, even fascinating information.

Bauer, Susan Wise (2010) History of the Medieval World: From the Conversion of Constantine to the First Crusade. 

Kelly, Richard (2008) The End of Empire: Attila the Hun and the Fall of Rome.

McLynn, Frank. (2015). Genghis Khan: His Conquests, His Empire, His Legacy. 

Mikail, Alan. (2020) Sultan Selim, His Ottoman Empire and the Making of the Modern World.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/15/2022 at 8:14 PM, Zorral said:

There are so few written sources for those centuries, unlike the wealth of texts from the days of the (western) Roman empire.

Yet if we consider ancient Greek and Latin texts, we've lost more than 95% of them (heck, Brett might even consider 99%, and sadly I don't rule out such a calamity). Granted, less for the late Imperial period, since for obvious reasons a big part of Christian writings have been kept - half of all Greek texts written until Justinian era are from the 3rd/4th/5th/6th centuries AD, more than what's been kept from the previous entire millennium of Greek literature. Granted, the reason isn't that barbarians burned the books, it's that Christian copyists didn't give a fuck about most of what wasn't Christian religious writings - the amount of Christian fluff that's been preserved (Migne is quite revealing) is bordering insulting compared to the fact they lost most of Livy, Sappho or Sophocles. I would also take exception with his comment that Greeks didn't give a damn about other or older literature - mostly possibly, but it seems that the early Ptolemies wanted to collect most existing literature if possible, at least as a prestige project, thus the early Greek translation of the Bible for instance, or Manetho. Last but not least, sure, Christianity copied classical works, but at the end of the day, had Christianity never taken over and had classical religions and cultures remained and slowly evolved, odds are that we would've kept a lot more ancient writings.

I haven't checked what %% of 600-1200 literature has survived though, I'm far less acquainted with that era and I fear that we just have no trace left of a lot of these works - contrary to plenty of lost Greek writings, for a starter we know for a fact there were hundreds of tragedies that've been lost even if we don't know their titles or exact amount. Odds are that less has been written, specially outside monasteries, and odds are that the losses are higher than for Christian Late Antiquity, though probably fewer than for non-Christian ancient literature.

As for the Empire, Brett makes a very good point: one key reasons why Rome was successful for so long and then was beaten down is that for centuries it never let a major military power standing on the empire's doorstep (Parthia excepted, but even Parthia was massively mauled several times to the point of succumbing to the Sassanid revolt). Once the emperors decided the borders were good as they were and no expansion was required, it meant that the peoples on the other side had plenty of time to observe, be beaten up by the legions, and to improve their own military, strategy and tech-wise. This didn't happen during most of the Republic and early Empire because any enemy military would be destroyed and the country occuped and integrated. I won't blame the Empire, there are logistical and economic reasons not to expand forever, specially in places that were far less welcoming and prosperous.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have achieved four new books: 

Washington At the Plow: The Founding Farmer and the Question of Slavery (2021) by Bruce A. Ragsdale; 
The Bright Ages (what a unfortunate title!): A New History of Medieval Europe (2021) by Matthew Gabriele & David M. Perry; 
Slave Empire: How Slavery Built Modern Britain (2020 -- just available in the US) by Padraic X. Scanlan;
Gangsters of Capitalism: Smedley Butler, the Marines, and the Making and Breaking of America's Empire (2022) by Jonathan M. Katz (as he is writing about places and events I know very well, he's been caught out as wrong on a few things, but it's a fascinating, enlightening and useful book).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/14/2022 at 10:37 PM, Zorral said:

Bret has started a series on his Unmitigated Pedantry blog around the fall of Rome in the West -- "how bad was it?" Devereaux asks  The first installment is up, and it explores the fall around "culture, literature, language and religion (‘words’)."

https://acoup.blog/2022/01/14/collections-rome-decline-and-fall-part-i-words/

 

 

Good as ever.

Broadly, I agree.  Culturally, there was a huge degree of continuity between post-Roman societies and the Western Empire.  Politically, economically, and demographically, there were big changes.  There seems no doubt that the big, observable, decline in trade hurt living standards, and populations fell, after 400.

Britain, the Rhineland, and Southern Germany probably saw living standards fall off a cliff.  Italy, Southern France, Spain all fared better.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SeanF said:

Culturally, there was a huge degree of continuity between post-Roman societies and the Western Empire.  

So much of that -- and even politically -- it was due to religion, as the Empire went Christian quite some time prior to the purported 'fall'.  Though the Christian doctrines and practices tended to separate the East and the West over time, both East and West were already, and continued, Christian.  Which continued the literacy, though it did change the directions and modes in which it was practiced, over time.

I really liked that Bret made a big point about the Roman Empire being Christian before the 5th Century purported fall -- and that the Barbarians also were Christian, though not always the same kind of Christian, in the East as well as the West.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many parts of Western Europe weren't fully Christian when the Empire fell, Christians were probably no more than 50% in some provinces.

Plagues didn't help the West to recover, specially when they hit places that had kept plenty of ancient knowledge - specially since the plague came back every few decades and societies couldn't fully recover for a long time.

At first, Italy fared better. Theodoric basically acted like he was ruling a successor state like Ptolemy did, but then Justinian decided to take Italy back and recreate the full empire. With the plague depleting manpower everywhere, the war went on for decades, many cities changed hands several times and most of the country was close to destroyed by the time the Lombards settle there. Though even if I'm not his biggest fan, I won't blame Justinian; he had some reasons to hope he could conquer Italy in a few years and hold it - were it not for the Sassanians and even more for the plague, the latter being obviously impossible to foresee.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Justinian's Flea -- the Bubonic Plague hit them too.  

But the point is the administrative and other ruling classes of what had been the empire was indeed Christian, in one form or another by mid-5th C and had been since at least Constantine. Theodoric himself was of Ostrogothic nobility, and he was Christian, as was his right hand man, Gregory.  The administrative class in the west were Churchmen, with Latin.  In the East they were also Churchmen with Latin and Greek, and the massive eunuch class, who tended toward Greek as time went on.

Despite plagues and 'barbarian: incursions, most of whom, like Alaric, were also Christian, though probably Arian Christians -- culturally and administratively, many of the core concepts of what had been the old Roman Empire continued in the west at least as much as in the east.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What many scholars believe these days is more nuanced. It not being a matter of Christianity displacing polytheistic religions.

That as a Christianity grew and expanded, it adopted more and more pagan ideas. And as Christianity expanded, polytheistic religions adopted more and more Christian ideas over time.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...