Take a photo of a barcode or cover
christopherc 's review for:
The Fate of Rome: Climate, Disease, and the End of an Empire
by Kyle Harper
In this book, historian Kyle Harper aims to complement traditional histories of the decline and fall of the Roman Empire – mainly stories of political misfortunes and lost battles – with two factors that have not been so appreciated so far: epidemic disease and climate change. While this book is published by a university press, it is meant for a mass audience and Harper clearly aims to make his points in as gentle and clear a manner as possible.
Thus chapters on disease or climate alternate and cover a period from the second century AD to roughly Justinian’s era. For each pivotal moment in Roman history, Harper first looks at contemporary testimony by Roman authors, and then sees what modern-day science can tell us. Thus certain major epidemics that ravaged the empire are identified as smallpox, some filovirus (e.g. Ebola) and bubonic plague, respectively. For climate change that led to poor harvests and sent invaders sweeping in from the eastern steppes, Harper draws on recent studies of ice cores, stalactites, and tree rings which tell us much about variations in solar activity and destructive volcanic activity.
While Harper presents a number of facts I was previously unaware of, and I did find the book worthwhile, it is hard to rate it so highly simply because of how repetitive it is, especially the first 50–100 pages that keep making the exact same points again, and again, and again in nearly the same wording. Did Harper feel he had to repeat himself so often to keep a layman audience engaged? Or did he realize that without such repetition, the actual text of the book would be too small (as the notes and bibliography are already 50% of the book as it is)?
Thus chapters on disease or climate alternate and cover a period from the second century AD to roughly Justinian’s era. For each pivotal moment in Roman history, Harper first looks at contemporary testimony by Roman authors, and then sees what modern-day science can tell us. Thus certain major epidemics that ravaged the empire are identified as smallpox, some filovirus (e.g. Ebola) and bubonic plague, respectively. For climate change that led to poor harvests and sent invaders sweeping in from the eastern steppes, Harper draws on recent studies of ice cores, stalactites, and tree rings which tell us much about variations in solar activity and destructive volcanic activity.
While Harper presents a number of facts I was previously unaware of, and I did find the book worthwhile, it is hard to rate it so highly simply because of how repetitive it is, especially the first 50–100 pages that keep making the exact same points again, and again, and again in nearly the same wording. Did Harper feel he had to repeat himself so often to keep a layman audience engaged? Or did he realize that without such repetition, the actual text of the book would be too small (as the notes and bibliography are already 50% of the book as it is)?