Fall Of The Roman Empire

deleted

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

That is the view I most disagree with. And I think the academic debate has moved away from it too. It's been popularised by some smart people - but actually there was a fall, even if it was drawn out, and the dark ages really were much darker. I think the debate has been rather reinvigorated recently in new comparative context.

 

deleted

 

I'll need to look for specific references. In broad terms I'm thinking about some of the popular broad civilisational histories, a lot of work on economic history (a booming sub-discipline right now), and a few others - like a brilliant history of science that debunks some of the recent positive views of medieval science. Seems like civilisational history is back in fashion after a long hiatus, and comparisons with China have been revealing as we learn much more about Chinese history.

 

Oh, and quite tangential but I found Aldo Schiavone on Roman slavery revelatory on this question.

 

Goldsworthy is an easier read, Heather is a drier read. Goldsworthy pictures an empire in decline, though not necesarily doomed to collapse, until hit by a series of calamities. Heather paints a picture of a more robust empire, with some serious issues but definitely stable, until hit by a series of calamities. Either one is good. I wouldn't say either is more right or wrong, but they have shaped my understanding of the collapse, and if you liked the mumbo jumbo I wrote in my long posts, then you'll like both of these books.

 

deleted

 

Well, if you find any more recent materials on the subject, let me know. I too I'm always interested in this topic.

How Rome Fell, the first book I mentioned, was from 2009. Is that recent enough?

Books of this sort don't get published every day. Why it took 87 years for a new English language biography on Marcus Agrippa to be published. Books on Julius Caesar are a dime a dozen, books on serious ancient Roman history not so much.

 

In fairness the argument that there was no great fall and the dark ages weren't so dark was popularised by Peter Brown back in the 1970s, so I think Sallent's references are valid. The most interesting work I've read has been more tangential, though. Some of the economic evidence is quite compelling, like core samples from the polar ice caps showing much less iron smelting after the fall of Rome.

 

A book that rigorously defends the traditional view - The Fall of Rome by Bryan Ward-Perkins. The picture of economic collapse he paints is vivid and startling.