Viggen

Book Review by Virgil61 In the Battle that Stopped Rome Professor Peter Wells brings to light discoveries in the recent find of one of the most famous and influential battles of the ancient world known as the Battle of Teutoburg Forest. This should be a welcome work, the battlefield is the most complete one of its kind ever found, located in a semi-rural area of Germany and undisturbed for two thousand years. Unfortunately rather than stating the discoveries and giving a view to all possible theories, which would have made this a seminal work, Wells misses this opportunity by embarking on an opinionated interpretation of the event. Judicious and balanced this work is not. Perhaps this is possibly explained by his area of concentration in anthropology; his writings are almost exclusively dedicated to the northern barbarians of antiquity. In spite of their victory, Wells seems somewhat defensive of the German tribes in his portrayal of the battle. Much of the book is quite interesting; Wells does a nice job of describing the lifestyle of the Romans on the Rhine in their garrisons as is the chapter on the anthropology of the German tribes and the background of Arminius, the German leader who lured Varus into the ambush by pretending friendship. While Wells states that Germans engaged in a militarization because of the Roman intrusions, the truth is that they were not peaceful natives conducting tea party's. They were notorious raiders who often preyed on each other and known to both the Gauls and Caesar two generations earlier, as a serious military threat. There is a chapter that describing battle from an individual's perspective and a section that discusses battlefield wounds; both are stimulating and intelligently drawn. It's a tragedy that the most informative and important chapter in the book on the archeology of the battlefield is extremely brief although the eight pages of pictures are helpful and instructive. Someday someone will adopt a rule for scholars of military history that academics will be prohibited to write about tactical matters without first spending some time as infantrymen. I make the comment only half-jokingly for throughout the "Battle that Stopped Rome" Professor Wells makes assumptions that a 25 year-old infantry squad leader today could correct. While weapons have changed, much of tactical ground movement on foot remains very similar in many ways. Take Wells ambush scenario. He criticizes the Roman view that Varus was to blame for the slaughter, because in his view, this downplays the competency of the Germans. Wells assumes that auxiliary scouts (German) told the Romans the way was clear, yet later on acknowledges auxiliary cavalrymen's spurs interred with Roman bodies indicating they perished along with them (Roman legions under Germanicus buried many of the remains when discovered years later). Any movement of a unit through a narrow passage in unfriendly or unknown territory is dangerous and for a commander, then or now, not to take precautions is simply irresponsible. Soldiers understand this concept today and the Romans- competent professionals- understood it. Wells seems to misunderstand that this doesn't downplay the competence of German tribes, it acknowledges their ability to conduct serious operations. There was ample evidence of this German tactic as even he states that Drusus and his legions almost succumbed to a similar disaster in 11 B.C. Certainly Varus assumes much responsibility for the disaster. There are also little quibbles. Unsure, the author speculates on an amazing find, a legion donkey's bell stuffed with grass. Perhaps, he asks, it was to squelch it's sound or was it to allow the soldiers to hear what was happening around them? Some things don't change, ask any infantryman about that bell and he'll understand it immediately. Wells speculates that the Romans fled in panic within minutes, yet there is evidence along the walls in the form of legionary effects, that some attempted a counter-attack on the ambushers (a technique taught today to soldiers caught in ambushes). The garrison at Haltern is singled out because of the large quantity of items buried by the unit stationed at the location, which Wells helpfully points out "fled in terror". Again he seems misses what seems obvious; buried items indicate time to plan. Terror-filled troops don't organize the burial of equipment, money and other personal items, they leave immediately. The alternate answer is the unit knew of the disaster or was called back and in either case intended on returning. But what may be regarded as the worst criticism is saved for his description of the battle and his unwarranted speculation that it was over in an hour; the legions were annihilated or captured by that time. This is squarely in opposition to Cassisus Dio's written description over a century later that a large part of Romans escaped initial destruction and built defensive works nearby succumbing to the Germans within three days. But Wells gives no reasons for his this major departure and states only in a footnote his agreement with scholars who doubt Dio. While ancient writers must often be taken with a grain of salt, one does so in such a dramatic fashion with peril. Velleius Paterculus, a contemporary of Varus and probably acquainted with him, writing only a few years after the battle says the two prefects survived long enough to speculate on surrender of the remaining forces or death in combat and one Lucius Caedicius may have made it back to a Roman camp with a band of survivors. Tacitus as well, relying on reports from survivors and veteran's of a later campaign, writes that the legions under Germanicus finding the site saw ramparts where it looked clearly like defensive works were built, indicating much more than an hour-long battle (to be fair Tacitus may have mistaken the partially fallen German wall used to cover their ambush for the army's defensive positions). Wells ignores this completely. He ignores that human remains found buried together were almost certainly the result of burial by the legions of Germanicus lending some credibility to Tacitus' version of events. He also ignores physical evidence that shows movement in two columns west of the narrow passage in what seems a fighting retreat, possibly supporting Dio and Paterculus' statements on the battle. One of the chief archeologists of the site, Suzanne Wilbers-Rost, has said that her own opinion is the number of killed at the immediate battle site was closer to 10,000 than 20,000. That may mean either some troops did not accompany Varus or that a large number survived the initial onslaught and moved off the battlefield, further indicating that the battle took much longer than the one hour Wells speculates. That he chose to write and dictate a chapter based on such a position seems a serious error on his part. While there is a lot to applaud in The Battle That Stopped Rome it ultimately seems a vehicle for a misplaced defense of the German tribes who won and poorly thought out assumptions on the tactical nature of the battle in spite of the dramatic and excellent description of individual combat. Wells spends a lot of ink explaining that the Romans held the Germans in contempt and were loath to think that they could execute an attack with any degree of coordination. He seems to dismiss Drusus' earlier difficult venture into Germany, Tiberius' invasion demanding more than ten legions which (cut short by probems in Illyria) or Varus' assembling of three legions along with cavalry and auxiliaries to counter a perceived threat to believe instead that Rome dismissed German military ability. Being condescending and arrogant of your opponent if you are an ancient Roman writer is one thing, but the legions knew better. While the Germans won due to the duplicity of Arminius, something Wells seems curiously critical of the Romans for pointing out, in the end Varus is as much to blame for his failure to heed warnings given by other Germans and his complete tactical failure in a dangerous crossing. Six years later the Romans returned to Germany under Germanicus exacting retribution of sorts and Arminius' met his end being murdered by his own people. While the battle was a psychological blow to Rome, previous forays into the region had already showed the legions that the conquest of Germany would take a large amount of military resources. The final answer to the Roman approach to Germany may be that it was simply not worth the serious efforts it would have taken to conquer it. While The Battle That Stopped Rome is an interesting and worthwhile read, it contains far too much speculation than should have been included. A comprehensive story of the battle based on the archeological evidence and ancient sources is still to be written. ...more Book Reviews! Greatest Defeat by Murdoch Roman Gaul by A.King Enemies of Rome by P. Matyszak Peter S. Wells is Professor with the Department of Anthropology at the University of Minnesota. He attended the University of Tübingen, and received his degrees from Harvard. He specializes in European archaeology, especially of the Bronze & Iron Ages, the Roman Period, and the early medieval period, and has been Director of excavations at the late Bronze Age and Iron Age settlements of Hascherkeller, Altdorf, and Kelheim in Bavaria. His recent main publications include How Ancient Europeans Saw the World: Vision, Patterns, and the Shaping of the Mind in Prehistoric Times (2012). Barbarians to Angels: The Dark Ages Reconsidered (2008) and Image and Response in Early Europe (2008). Professor Wells’s The Barbarians Speak: How the Conquered Peoples Shaped Roman Europe (1999) was named “Outstanding Title of 1999” by the Profession and Scholarly Division of the Association of American Publishers. Tell us your opinion - Submit your Review - Buy the book! Book Review of The Battle That Stopped Rome - Related Topic: Teutoburg Forest Bibliography Get it now! The Battle That Stopped Rome for the UK ________________________________ Archive

Book Review by pompeius magnus The founding of Rome is shrouded in mystery. There are many stories from the likes of Livy and Vergil which have many falacies as can be expected from a source such as them writing fully believing in the stories of Rome's founding. What really happened we can not know, but a great theory based on archaeology is given by British author and Oxford professor TJ Cornell whom furthers the dominance of the British in the study of Rome. His book begins with an introduction describing the evidence including recent excavations that begin to bring us closer to understanding the mystery that is early Roma as well as going over the variety of sources that come from Rome herself as well as Greek people and gives a brief description of many of them. Cornell starts off with a great background of Italy including the languages that exsisted during the early days of Italy. Cornell then disects the various myths surrounding the founding of Rome as well as the early days of the city from the Sabines to the rise of the city state. During this analysis Cornell goes through the problems of the city state following it up with maps of the projected set up of the Roman city state. Cornell gives invaluble info on the changes in customs during this time, such as the calander of Numa and the changes in funerary practises. A thourough examination of the myths of Etruscan Rome adds to the influx of knowledge that Cornell gives to the reader. A thorough description of the rise of rome, such as their building of their walls as their power began to rise in 6th century, leading into the roman republic provides insight into the last of the kings, Superbus and analyzes the problem of chronology. An interesting description of other Italian republics gives you extra information not included in many readings if any on Rome. A very in depth obserrvation on the pleb and patrician relationship before the withdrawing from Rome of the plebs. The most interesting part of his work is the section on the twelve tablets. In no other work on Rome can you get the wealth of knowledge that Cornell throws at his readers as other works just dance aroung the tablets and do not give an indepth description or analysis of them. Cornell does a great job with the growing power of Rome with their various wars with the Latin Neighbors with detailed maps showing the gradual growing power of Rome including the square miles, err meters you crazy brits with your meters, of the Latin cities compared to Rome. Then the Gallic invasion and its after math is described in great detail as well as the Roman recovery and the Roman expansion afterwards. The emancipation of the plebs completes the earlier description of the beginning of the plebian and patrician problems. Cornell finishes his work off with the Saminite wars and the conquest of Italy, leading up to the Wars with Carthage, which Cornell chooses as his stopping point. The reason why this book is a must for any Roman history studier is the way it conveys information along with the text it shows a variety of images such as artifacts and detailed maps to show the various points he is being about. As a student this is a great start to the study of early rome as this book reads as both a text for both the most knowledgeable in this field, but also is easily understood for a student and casual reader, it combines both the aspect of archaelogy and history into an intriguing text that I recommend to all. This book is not available in book stores in America, but is available on Amazon. Reading this book will open your eyes and ears to the foundation of Rome. ...more Book Reviews! The Oxford Classical Dictionary Hellenistic World by F.W. Walbank Roman Myths by P. Matyszak Tim J. Cornell (born 1946) is a British historian specializing in ancient Rome. He is currently Emeritus Professor of Ancient History at the University of Manchester, having retired from his teaching position in 2011. Cornell received his bachelor's degree in Ancient History, with first class honours, from University College London (1968) and his PhD in History from the University of London (1972). He was a student of Arnaldo Momigliano and wrote a dissertation entitled "Cato's Origines and the non-Roman historical tradition of ancient Italy". He was a fellow at Christ's College, Cambridge (1973–75), Assistant Director of The British School at Rome (1975–77), lecturer and senior lecturer in Ancient History at University College London (1978–88, 1988–95). Between 1995 and 2011 he was a Professor of Ancient History at the University of Manchester, apart from a brief period as Director of the Institute of Classical Studies at the School of Advanced Study, University of London (2004-2006). Following his retirement in 2011, Cornell was made Emeritus Professor of Ancient History at the University of Manchester. Tell us your opinion - Submit your Review - Buy the book! Book Review of Beginnings Of Rome - Related Topic: Roman Emperor Bibliography Get it now! Beginnings Of Rome for the UK ________________________________ Archive

Book Review by pompeius magnus Lets start things off with a brief synopsis of the book`s content. In a nut shell the book is a chronological outlook on the life of Cicero, from his days as a pupil, to his dominance in the courts, to his controversial speeches, and his end at the hands of Anthony's goonies. The author seems to be very biased in Cicero's favor, so the way he writes about Cicero may be in question but that is what history is all about, creating your own interpretations on historical facts. Going off that its on to my interpretation of how Everett interpreted Cicero. Before I get to my analysis it is important to mention that the reading of Cicero came right after I just finished the 6 book series of Colleen McCullough in which she choose to be more biased towards Caesar,so my opinions will be a mixture of the two. First off, I really enjoyed reading this book, I found it both entertaining and informative. Everettes mixture of personal reactions and exerpts from Cicero's various letters to Atticus, his witty speeches, and his many essays. The quotes Everette chose to use got a laugh out of me several times, as a man so brillant yet so clever is very rare, even today. Everette's interpretation of Cicero's youth was very well done. He set up future events such as the first meeting between Cicero and his closest friend Atticus. The splash of Cicero into the courts was well documented in this book, as well as his introduction to Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus, one of the most important friendships in the history of the roman republic and empire. Next, this is where there is a conflict in feelings about Ciceros consulship between Everett and me, I took McCulloughs views on Cicero's councilship. This is where Cicero needed to work on things was in the area of politics. Cicero was a new man from Marius's country and was challenging a group of men with strong birth, and even though he was right he handled the aftermath very badly. He executed the conspirators without a trial, but a vote from the senate. This is where Caesar and Cicero start to become bitter rivals. Everett seems to feel Cicero's councilship was a success, whereas I agree with McCullough that Cicero made a few mistakes and his handling of the situation was very questionable. He also kept parading around how he had saved his country. Then, comes the fun part, Cicero vs. Caesar. Everett seems to side with the republicans, not the same as the USA party but the protectors of the republic a dying government it may have been, and sees Caesar as a tyrant. After getting both points of view from the contrasting writers of Everett and McCullough I would support the feelings of Everett that the Caesar was becoming a tyrant, even though I love to study Caesar and admire him tremendously. I also found it very interesting and well organized how Everett would go off of the events biography to move on to his various writings that he did. Other than that the rest of the book was just an analysis of the rest of Ciceros life which I have no disputed arguments with. ...more Book Reviews! Roman Republic by P. Matyszak Caesar by Christian Meier Sons of Caesar by P. Matyszak Anthony Everitt (born 31 January 1940)is a British academic. He publishes regularly in The Guardian and The Financial Times. He worked in literature and visual arts. He was Secretary-General of the Arts Council of Great Britain. He is a visiting professor in the performing and visual arts at Nottingham Trent University. Everitt is a companion of the Liverpool Institute of Performing Arts and an Honorary Fellow of the Dartington College of Arts. Everitt has written successful books about Roman history, amongst which biographies of Augustus, Hadrian and Cicero and a book on The Rise of Rome. He lives in Wivenhoe near Colchester. Everitt studied English literature at the University of Cambridge. Tell us your opinion - Submit your Review - Buy the book! Book Review of Cicero by Anthony Everitt - Related Topic: Marcus Tullius Cicero Bibliography Get it now! Cicero: The Life and Times for the UK ________________________________ Archive

Book Review by Germanicus The book titled "The Assasination of Julius Caesar" by Michael Parenti, makes for compelling reading. It provides a detailed account of the events leading up to, and including, the fatefull Ides of March. Written from what I can only term a modern day "plebian" perspective, Parenti separates the book into chapters which compliment each other. They range in subject from discussions about Caesar the Popularis, to Cicero.....the conservative but brilliant orator who's position at the time was certainly anti Caesar, and whose same position has been adopted time and time again by historians ever since those fatefull days of the late republic. Parenti's basic arguement revolves around this historical pre-occupation with Cicero, and also around the fact that most of the Roman historians from later periods whose work has survived, adopted his position due to their patrician bias. Parenti also maintains that later writers such as Gibbon, were equivalent in their own societies to Roman patricians, being of the upper or educated and aristocratic classes. He refers to these writers as "Gentlemen Historians". Parenti believes this to be the reason for the overwelming amount of liturature condemning Caesar as a power mad demagogue and even goes so far as to say Caesar never wanted absolute power, and would have stepped down from the dictatorship eventually. What I found particularly interesting was his discusions of what has commonly referred to as the Roman "mob", being equivalent in many ways according to Parenti to the modern working class. The author quotes some excellent resources to back up his position, a great one from Cicero denounces craftspeople "the artisans and shopkeepers and all that kind of scum". The book is absolutely littered with quotes of this kind from Cicero to Cassius Dio and Suetonius, condeming the general population as brainless rabble on the one hand and on the other...inadvertantly recording specific instances where history shows that they were not. We are told of the crowd widely critiscising Caesar for the great amount of killing in Games organised by him, of them booing Pompeius Magnus in the Arena for killing Elephants, which seemed to scream out for the crowd to help them. Parenti covers all the great Popularis leaders like the brothers Gracchi and Marius, and the strict aristocratic opposition to them, which Caesar was to stand so spectacularly against. While I found the book a really great read, and could not put it down, one is able to see that Parenti is writing from a essentially marxist position. I found I agreed with him on many of the basic contentions contained in "The Assasination of Julius Caesar" but admit that I need to follow up this great read with an equally great read of Cicero, and some of the other "Gentleman Historians". If I am to make up my own mind on this touchy subject, I'll need all the help I can get ! ...more Book Reviews! Assassination by Parenti Caesar by Christian Meier Sons of Caesar by P. Matyszak Michael John Parenti, who was born in 1933, is an American political scientist, political economist, historian, and cultural critic who writes on scholarly and popular subjects. He has taught at American and international universities and has been a guest lecturer before campus and community audiences. Parenti's writings cover a wide range of subjects: U.S. politics, culture, ideology, political economy, imperialism, fascism, communism, democratic socialism, free-market orthodoxies, conservative judicial activism, religion, ancient history, modern history, historiography, repression in academia, news and entertainment media, technology, environmentalism, sexism, racism, homophobia, Venezuela, the wars in Iraq and Yugoslavia, ethnicity, and his own early life. Perhaps his most influential book is Democracy for the Few, now in its ninth edition, a critical analysis of U.S. society, economy, and political institutions and a college-level political science textbook published by Wadsworth Publishing. Tell us your opinion - Submit your Review - Buy the book! Book Review of The Assassination of Julius Caesar - Related Topic: Roman Emperor Bibliography Get it now! The Assassination for the UK ________________________________ Archive