Author (also a decent Twitter follow) has spent a good chunk of her lifetime researching and writing about ancient Rome. I like that she seems pretty modest about drawing conclusions for the many portions of the story line where information, or evidence, is scanty; and that she questions many of the stock story lines that have developed based on so many centuries of historians seeking to explain Rome. I also think her way of dividing up the story line is helpful.Easy to see why empires, or dominant states, that have risen up after Rome tend to see their own trajectories in terms of Rome's.
As the US now seems to be waking up, belatedly, to the fact that most news is "fake" - and I'm not referring here to the deliberately false clickbait world, but instead the world of reporters-with-agendas - it's pretty fascinating to be reminded of how expert the Romans were at making up narratives that sold the preferred story line. A sophisticated version of victors writing history.
I hadn't really pieced together how pivotal Augustus (the first one, that is) was to the development of the role of emperors.
Romans were unique in so many ways - very effective at letting their concept of citizenship evolve to meet the needs of the expanding empire.
I definitely will tour through this one from time to time.
No comments:
Post a Comment