review Pax Romana ´ PDF DOC TXT or eBook

download ç PDF, DOC, TXT or eBook » Adrian Goldsworthy

Pax RomanaBest selling author Adrian Goldsworthy turns his attention to the Pax Romana the famous peace and prosperity brought by the Roman Empire at its height in the first and second centuries AD Yet the Romans were conuerors imperialists who took by force a vast empire stretching from the Euphrates to the Atlantic coast R. It probably seems odd that I’m starting a 5 star review with a criticism but I would say that even for a history nerd like me this wasn’t the uickest read It’s worth it though for the level of insight provided This isn’t a narrative history rather a comprehensive look at the Roman Empire at its height and an attempt to explain its success The book concentrates on the period from the third century BC to the end of the second century AD when the Pax Romana was at its height From the third century AD the Empire was weakened by freuent civil wars and increased threats from outsideDr Goldsworthy argues that the Empire can be considered a success firstly for its longevity Other empires have been bigger but few if any have lasted as long Sicily was Rome’s first overseas province and remained under continuous Roman administration for than 700 years Britannia was one of the last provinces to be added and was one of the first to be lost but even there Roman rule lasted around three and half centuries Many people of my vintage will be familiar with the “What have the Romans ever done for us” sketch from the film “The Life of Brian” “Well peace and stability that’s what” would be Dr Goldsworthy’s reply He argues that “ the areas under Roman rule experienced considerably less war and organised violence than they did in the centuries before or since” He highlights that rebellions against Roman rule were rare and where they did happen tended to occur within a generation of the arrival of the Romans This was the case with the rebellions led by Boudicca in Britain and Vercingetorix in Gaul and the successful revolt in Germany led by Arminius The exception was Judaea which saw at least 3 major rebellions the book contains a discussion about why Judaea was such an unusually turbulent province Moreover the Roman Empire did not collapse because of any desire for independence from its provinces On the contrary what evidence we have from the following centuries suggests a yearning for the days of the EmpireDr Goldsworthy is known as a specialist on the Roman military and this book is full of insights on that subject Although the Roman Army was huge the size of the Empire meant it was thinly spread The legions were all deployed in the frontier provinces and others were only very lightly garrisoned with auxiliary troops There was always the distant threat of the legions returning in the event of serious unrest but on a day to day basis governors of settled provinces were not in a position to impose their will through force of arms The book suggests that the scene in the Gospels where Pontius Pilate gives way to the demands of the mob may well have been common than most of us think However the author argues that it was this very concentration on the security of the frontier that made successful attacks on the Empire very rare thereby maintaining the PaxThe other great success of the Romans was their ability to absorb other cultures reconciling them to Roman rule This was especially the case with the leaders of the subject peoples The Latin language spread through western Europe and other aspects of Roman culture – public baths toga wearing the gladiatorial arena and the circus for chariot racing spread through the whole Empire Tacitus’ book “The Life of Agricola” contains a particular reference to the way this happened in BritainIt should be said that the author doesn’t attempt to gloss over the negative side of the Roman Empire He notes that “we can confidently state that over the centuries millions died in the course of the wars fought by Rome millions were enslaved and still would live under Roman rule whether they liked it nor not” For all that he argues persuasively that the Romans created a long period of relative peace over the huge area they ruled That achievement was “a glory greater than war”

free download Pax Romana

review Pax Romana ´ PDF, DOC, TXT or eBook Ñ Best selling author Adrian Goldsworthy turns his attention to the Pax Romana the famous peace and prosperity brought by the Roman Empire at its height in the first and second centuries AD Yet the Romans were conuerors imperialists who took by force a vast empire stretching from the Euphrates toNts the rebellions of the conuered examines why they broke out why most failed and how they became exceeding rare He reveals that hostility was just one reaction to the arrival of Rome and that from the outset conuered peoples collaborated formed alliances and joined invaders causing resistance movements to fade aw. Arrggh Adrian Goldsworthy This is the third book of his I've read which normally would indicate that I think rather well of the author Yeah normally that's the case But it's not the case with Goldsworthy I mean I liked the first book of his I read The Punic Wars His tome on the Fall of the Roman Empire was well it was informative but it was less than the sum of its parts But this one Notice how the first word in the review is Arrggh Yeah Here's what separates a Goldsworthy book from one I'd normally appreciate Take the other book and throw out its intro and conclusion Then go to each chapter and throw out the intro and summary sections of each chapter Then go to each part of the chapter and get rid of anything which makes the key point for each portion What's left is just a giant pile of info without any real context or clear point it's making It's just information That's a Goldsworthy bookAnd there's value in knowing about stuff Clearly that's the foundation upon which we build all other knowledge But it's just the foundation Most books worth a damn realize you build on that foundation and make a point out of it You have a central idea you try to convey Not our man Goldsworthy He just piles shovel ful after shovel ful of stuff at you For much of the book I found myself wondering OK that's nice but why is that important What's your point Why is that worth noting And cricket sounds This wasn't a big deal with the Punic Wars book because that had a clear narrative which the stuff centered around The Decline book also had a narrative though it wasn't very clear until the end why he thought Rome fell Here Nah there really isn't any narrative at all And with neither a clear narrative nor a clear point it's hard to really give a damn Also it takes soooooo long for this damn book to even get to the Pax I've traditionally heard of the Pax Romana being from when Augusts took power ending the era of Roman civil wars until the death of Marcus Aureilius This book is 40% of the way in before Augustus shows up So it's stuff without a narrative or point that isn't even about the Pax As for Goldsworthy's points to the extent they even exist he is pro Rome He thinks they ushered in an era of unparalleled peace in the Mediterranean world Sure they were ruthless and bloody in conuering it but Goldsworthy contends that didn't separate the Romans from everyone else They were just better at it Other groups constantly fought and did atrocities and no one was really bothered by Rome doing it because they all did Early on there were revolts and rebellions Usually a big one happened a generation after an area's conuest But then people got used to it Things settled down There would be banditry in the outlying mountainous areas but that was about it The Jews had the longest tradition of resistance in the 60s then again from 115 117 and 132 135 but even they settled down And because the Pax lasted so damn long everyone got acclimated to Rome In fact when Rome had its problems in the 3rd century it's worthy noting there were virtually no rebellions breaking out against them Under Augustus there was constant war More territory was taken by him than by anyone else he finished up Iberia took to the Alpa and in the Balkans went up the Danube His forces crossed the Rhine it didn't take and went down the Nile to minimal gains The Druids were disliked because they had an alternate judicial system in which locals saw legitimacy Often the rebellions against Rome were led by Rome's allies during the wars of conuest Those allies didn't expect conuest They expected Rome to help them beat their old traditional enemies but ended up hoisted by their own petard The provinces rarely thought of themselves as a singular people in that province Governors were supposed to look for Christians but if they didn't want to no one worried about it The local elite were gradually given citizenship The pace of change was slower in the countryside Rome had the biggest professional army in European history until the French Revolution It gained this size under Augustus The merchants would often follow the army on its campaigns There was a deep longing to be Roman across much of the empire into the 5th century So yeah there is information here But it's often frustrating to figure out what point if any Goldsworthy is trying to make

Adrian Goldsworthy » 0 characters

Uthless Romans won peace not through coexistence but through dominance; millions died and were enslaved during the creation of their empire   Pax Romana examines how the Romans came to control so much of the world and asks whether traditionally favorable images of the Roman peace are true Goldsworthy vividly recou. I loved this book be aware tough it is not the most fast paced book it deals with the daily goings of the running of the Roman Empire In it you will learn that while the Roman Empire provided peace to the regions it conuered it wasn't always permanent and while the term Pax romana calls to the time after Augustus those years were not always free of conflict the only difference was that the Roman Empire was strong enough to contain the threat and amortize the effects this would change in the future highly recommend this book to anyone interested in classical history and anyone with an interest in the Roman Empire