Scan barcode
melanierae's review against another edition
Phew, a lot of this went over my head but the parts I grasped were super interesting. Chapters 8-12 and the epilogue in particular that covered more of day to day life for average people and less political machinations were extra compelling.
drollgorg's review against another edition
informative
reflective
medium-paced
4.25
As a wide-ranging treatment of a historical subject that I've heard about through all kinds of other historical writing, or political writing, or philosophical writing, or anything really, but which I myself don't have anywhere near a fluency in, I can't really speak to any "takes" I had on this book. Beard makes arguments here, but I can't assess them. What I can assess is how well Beard answers the question that she poses as the reason for this book- what made Rome go from a small, unremarkable village to the center of THE Roman Empire?
Beard is sure to try and make it clear just how much is uncertain or difficult to be known from the historical evidence, and sometimes it feels like she feels such a need to dispel the idea that earlier historians knew what they were talking about that she is too cautious to put forward her own conclusions. However, I most enjoyed the sections where she examines the basis for much of the self-created mythology about the founding and kingly period of Rome and sorts through possible interpretations of the fragmentary narratives and evidence we have for the formation of Rome as a political entity.
The sheer density of events and figures makes it necessary to pay attention as you read, and this increases as the book moves forward through time and the historical record becomes more solid. Something Beard makes sure to drive home is the fact that most of the information that the Romans intentionally recorded about their own society was written by and reflective of the wealthiest and most powerful, and she works through the material culture and much more ephemeral written evidence of the lives of women, foreign subjects, poor citizens, and slaves. Her insistence upon mythbusting, of making sure to cast Roman culture neither as uniquely elevated nor as specially evil, helps created a rounded picture of how this society ended up casting such a large shadow across the history that has continued after they faded away.
Beard is sure to try and make it clear just how much is uncertain or difficult to be known from the historical evidence, and sometimes it feels like she feels such a need to dispel the idea that earlier historians knew what they were talking about that she is too cautious to put forward her own conclusions. However, I most enjoyed the sections where she examines the basis for much of the self-created mythology about the founding and kingly period of Rome and sorts through possible interpretations of the fragmentary narratives and evidence we have for the formation of Rome as a political entity.
The sheer density of events and figures makes it necessary to pay attention as you read, and this increases as the book moves forward through time and the historical record becomes more solid. Something Beard makes sure to drive home is the fact that most of the information that the Romans intentionally recorded about their own society was written by and reflective of the wealthiest and most powerful, and she works through the material culture and much more ephemeral written evidence of the lives of women, foreign subjects, poor citizens, and slaves. Her insistence upon mythbusting, of making sure to cast Roman culture neither as uniquely elevated nor as specially evil, helps created a rounded picture of how this society ended up casting such a large shadow across the history that has continued after they faded away.
takumo_n's review against another edition
5.0
Incredibly informative, clear and fast paced account of the rise of Rome. Something that, let's be honest, we most certainly don't know jack about. Unless you did some college courses on this topic, highschool never makes the cut, at least not for me. It starts with its fundation, with the seven monarchs, to the Republic, the transition to power from Julius Caesar to Augustus, and then the famous fourteen emperors, and then it gives an epilogue of the fall of Rome, in eight pages, basically sending you to read other books because that part has been written to death, fine by me. Even the parts that you think are gonna be boring, like the distribution of wealth among the citizenship, the administration of public buildings, how the provinces were governed, etc, are engaging as everything else, it's really something. I didn't know that the Chirstians appearing in the Empire wasn't that well known or documented, let alone the origins of the religion, which is a shame.
In Rome there was no doctrine as such, no holy book and hardly even what we would call a belief system. Romans knew the gods existed; they did not believe in them in the internalised sense familiar from most modern world religions. Nor was ancient Roman religion particularly concerned with personal salvation or morality. Instead it mainly focused on the performance of rituals that were intended to keep the relationship between Rome and the gods in good order, and to ensure Roman success and prosperity. The sacrifice of animals was a central element in most of these rituals, which otherwise were extraordinarily varied.
In Rome there was no doctrine as such, no holy book and hardly even what we would call a belief system. Romans knew the gods existed; they did not believe in them in the internalised sense familiar from most modern world religions. Nor was ancient Roman religion particularly concerned with personal salvation or morality. Instead it mainly focused on the performance of rituals that were intended to keep the relationship between Rome and the gods in good order, and to ensure Roman success and prosperity. The sacrifice of animals was a central element in most of these rituals, which otherwise were extraordinarily varied.