The Fall of the Roman Empire: A New History of Rome and the Barbarians | 
 enlarge | Author: Peter Heather
Publisher: Oxford University Press, USA
Category: Book
List Price: $19.95
Buy New: $11.29
You Save: $8.66 (43%)
New (30) Used (14) from $11.27
Avg. Customer Rating:  38 reviews
Sales Rank: 7637
Media: Paperback
Number Of Items: 1
Pages: 576
Shipping Weight (lbs): 1.9
Dimensions (in): 9 x 5.9 x 1.5
ISBN: 0195325419
Dewey Decimal Number: 937
EAN: 9780195325416
ASIN: 0195325419
Publication Date: June 11, 2007
Availability: Usually ships in 1-2 business days
Shipping: International shipping available
Condition: Brand new item. Over 3.5 million customers served. Order now. Selling online since 1995. Order with confidence. Code: B20080725212931T
|
| Also Available In:
|
| Similar Items:
|
| Editorial Reviews:
Product Description
The death of the Roman Empire is one of the perennial mysteries of world history. Now, in this groundbreaking book, Peter Heather proposes a stunning new solution: Centuries of imperialism turned the neighbors Rome called barbarians into an enemy capable of dismantling an Empire that had dominated their lives for so long.
A leading authority on the late Roman Empire and on the barbarians, Heather relates the extraordinary story of how Europe's barbarians, transformed by centuries of contact with Rome on every possible level, eventually pulled the empire apart. He shows first how the Huns overturned the existing strategic balance of power on Rome's European frontiers, to force the Goths and others to seek refuge inside the Empire. This prompted two generations of struggle, during which new barbarian coalitions, formed in response to Roman hostility, brought the Roman west to its knees. The Goths first destroyed a Roman army at the battle of Hadrianople in 378, and went on to sack Rome in 410. The Vandals spread devastation in Gaul and Spain, before conquering North Africa, the breadbasket of the Western Empire, in 439. We then meet Attila the Hun, whose reign of terror swept from Constantinople to Paris, but whose death in 453 ironically precipitated a final desperate phase of Roman collapse, culminating in the Vandals' defeat of the massive Byzantine Armada: the west's last chance for survival.
Peter Heather convincingly argues that the Roman Empire was not on the brink of social or moral collapse. What brought it to an end were the barbarians.
|
| Customer Reviews: Read 33 more reviews...
 Every CEO's Manual May 24, 2008
2 out of 9 found this review helpful
Most company failures come as a surprise to management and shareholders alike. The downdraft is often sudden and devastating -- think Bear Stearns -- but Peter Heather shows C-Level executives everywhere a new way to think about what can happen and the ways it can happen.
The collapse of Rome is like the failure of so many high-cost companies today under assault from many small, low-cost alternatives. They don't often see it coming until its too late, like the recording industry (Rome) so quickly dismembered by Apple (Goths etc).
Heather's great book is every CEO's necessary book. A super lesson in what can happen if you don't understand the structure of your markets. Don't manage your company without it.
Changes views of the ancient world, is hugely readable. January 22, 2008
This book is accessible, written in a conversational style, and the narrative moves crisply. The author creates a new view of the end days of Rome.
The research is up to date, weaving modern archaeology and new translations of barbarian writers to update our view of what a "barbarian" is...
The result is a sharp, to the point new view of how Rome ended its power... The rise of technologies among nearby peoples gave Rome technological competitors, able to create war and generate surpluses. The Hunns pushed the Goths out of central Europe and into the Western Empire in the years 375 - 420, just when the Goths had military might sufficient to challenge the Empire.
The Western Empire lacked a stable political system, a reserve military force, fast communications and large surpluses. The scope of the Empire worked against its ability to be nimble. Political factions whose wealth was based on land had an incentive to support new groups of "barbarians" over established Roman power centers.
Still, Rome was strong. Rome had a slow ability to work back into powerful positions, only to be swamped by wave after wave of sophisticated attackers. The author builds a view of Rome the unresilient...
This book gives one pause. Perhaps the so-called decline and fall of Rome was less of a decline, and more of a systemic inevitability. As a layered view of the fall of Rome is delivered, analogies to the West today fade... Rome fell in the end, perhaps, because Rome grew too big to survive. Maybe it was not the moral decline of Rome that killed it, maybe it was the unsustainable scope and successes of Rome, that over-extended it and tilted it off balance.
This book is a wonderful book to read, and the writer captures many small vignettes that illuminate, layering these with his judgments, to show a Rome suffering a systems collapse. Along the way, casually and in an off-hand manner, the author teaches more about the Roman Empire than dozens of other books. This is a must-have...
Interested Newcomer December 25, 2007
1 out of 2 found this review helpful
I really loved this book. I was suspicious at first. I usually don't like "new history" or "revisionist history" per se, but the author's interpretation of the events and relationships between the romans and barbarians is so clear and compelling, that I feel I now have the beginnings of an understanding of this interesting period. Professor Heather certainly knows his stuff, and is a most entertaining writer. He gives you the feeling that you are there, a first hand witness. There are so many statements that I have read by other authors, and puzzled over, that are analyzed and put in an understandable context. I must admit however that I am not completely convinced by his treatment of the religious, economic and cultural factors. He raises the question: Why didn't the romans get more roman soldiers to fight the barbarians? I wasn't convinced by his answer, but I liked his analysis.
Good Scholarship: Solid Empirically Backed Arguments November 10, 2007
0 out of 2 found this review helpful
If I were ever to think about taking a course in Roman History, this is the man I would want to take a course from. Heather knows his stuff and marshalls his arguments in a way that is both pleasing and devoid of ideological content (about as far away from the axe-grinding methods of Victor Davis Hanson as one can imagine). Refreshing...!!!
There is too much to get into here, but let me mention something about the style of Heather. Heather's advances some novel arguments about the fall of the empire. Some such that the barbarians essentially became "more like the Romans" are counter-intuitive. Also the notion that many aspects of the empire were essentially uncorrupted.. or rather neither more corrupted nor less corrupted than Rome at its hieght, also strikes one as unusual if you were raised on Gibbon, Plutarch, Tacitus or Livy. Gone is the notion of internal decay and decadence... that is at first a hard notion to get ones mind around, but Heather does this beautifully.
1) He is tremendously empirical in his approach. He cites modern archeological records, recently discovered medieval texts written on recycled roman records. Recently excavated Roman garbage and personal letters. These he skillfully interweaves with the general empirical records, tax incomes, statements of army strength.
2) He then also puts his strong historical insight to put the pieces together in historical time-line. Too many times historians are too immersed in details of history to check where they fit in the historical time line. Heather will take a general statement; then he will analyse the tax record and army strength to see if such an event or statement is buttressed by the historical record of the exact time. He is aware the different rulers and political crisis necessitated different responses to the barbarian threat. That the tax revenue in one decade may be radically different from that of another decade. Gone are manay of the generalisations of Roman culture and method of war that we have grown used to.
3) This is not really a military history. Campaigns are analysed almost year by year, battles noted and the impact of battles on peoples and government properly related. But the real emphasis is upon motivation of peoples and leaders. From Attila to the Vandals, their motivations may appear less clear than we assume: they are not merely maurauding barbarians intent on closing on Rome and sacking her, but rather allies, potential Roman citizens and warriors, and also Roman Emperors in waiting.
All of this is a far cry from the traditional interpretation of Rome collapsing as a result of internal decay. But Heather is not saying that Barbarians became Romans in all ways. He is saying that they became Roman enough to eventually subdue her, but not Roman enough to carry on the Empire -- they never developed the internal political and societal culture to stop their empires from atomising into historical nothingness, as witnessed by the swift dissipation of the Hunnic Empire upon the death of Attila.
Heather has good prose style and keeps a good pace while all the time ploughing new ground in historical scholarship.
 Comprehensive and well written November 6, 2007
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
This is a great book. It is well researched and reads like the best of narrative history. The Roman world from 376-476 is described and interpreted in a fascinating way that argues the external forces (Goths, Huns) were the catalyst for the dissolution of the Roman Empire (not internal decay). The first third of the book is a bit sluggish and not really narrative history but more of a context-setting section. If you can get through that, the second two thirds are five star.
|
|
|
