In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire by Adrian Goldsworthy (PDF)

Description

A definitive history of the great commanders of ancient Rome, from bestselling author Adrian Goldsworthy. “In his elegantly accessible style, Goldsworthy offers gripping and swiftly erudite accounts of Roman wars and the great captains who fought them. His heroes are never flavorless and generic, but magnificently Roman. And it is especially Goldsworthy’s vision of commanders deftly surfing the giant, irresistible waves of Roman military tradition, while navigating the floating logs, reefs, and treacherous sandbanks of Roman civilian politics, that makes the book indispensable not only to those interested in Rome and her battles, but to anyone who finds it astounding that military men, at once driven and imperiled by the odd and idiosyncratic ways of their societies, can accomplish great deeds.” —J. E. Lendon, author of Soldiers and Ghosts: A History of Battle in Classical Antiquity

User’s Reviews

Editorial Reviews: Review “Absorbing. The best book I know on the Roman army and its commanders.”—Allan Massie, Spectator — Allan Massie ― Spectator About the Author Adrian Goldsworthy is a leading historian of the ancient world and author of acclaimed biographies of Julius and Augustus Caesar, among many other books. He lives in the Vale of Glamorgan, UK.

Reviews from Amazon users which were colected at the time this book was published on the website:

⭐In this book, Goldsworthy seeks to answer the questions, why some Roman generals succeeded outstandingly and what lessons we can draw. To answer them, he looks at a series of generals from the Punic Wars (3C BCE), which ensured Rome’s survival and determined its future course, to the last great general, Belisarius, who tried and failed to recapture the western portion of the Empire in the 6C CE.Each general had different styles and faced unique circumstances, but shared certain traits, namely, they ensured that their troops were logistically prepared and well trained; they shared the risks but more often maintained distance for purposes of command with an overview; and they instinctively knew where and when to press an engagement. Not all of them were popular with the men, many suffered distrust and neglect by the politicians they served, and their popularity and glory were fickle at best.Each chapter offers a detailed portrait of one general, told in a narrative style and within the broader context of what was going on, with comparisons to their immediate rivals for power and how well they fit with current circumstances. For example, to counter the seemingly unbeatable Hannibal, Fabius Maximus developed a strategy of delay and avoidance, buying time for Rome to rebuild its forces after a series of defeats and thereby taking advantage of his adversary’s mistaken assumption that Rome would sue for peace and come to reasonable terms. Though disdained as a dishonorable coward, he enabled Marcellus and later Scipio Africanus to pursue more offensive strategies. In contrast, Julius Caesar fought to enhance his own glory, to become one of the most powerful and famous Romans of all time. They are wonderful studies of character and leadership. That makes it a very different book from Goldsworthy’s classic Roman Warfare, which offers neither narrative nor individual portraits, but concentrates instead on more technical detail.The history of Rome is also brilliantly encapsulated. When its period as Mediterranean superpower began, the greatest threat it faced came from Carthage, a trading empire opposite it. At that time, the Roman army was composed of land-owning farmers, clearly amateurs who needed to return for the harvest season or face financial ruin. Once triumphant, Rome turned to conquest, eventually dominating the entire Mediterranean region, this time with a massive popular army that became a career for the poor and an almost managerial profession for aristocrats. It then became stable, a sprawling geographical patchwork that required a very different army to defend it; here, it was composed of smaller forces of different ethnicities and even mercenaries. As countries were absorbed, local aristocrats were allowed to take part as participants and citizens, ensuring their loyalty and widening to base of talent. While it helps if the reader knows this context already, it is not necessary.The political calculus is also explained in perfect detail. Generals almost always came from the aristocrats, who were born to rule. During the time of the Republic, victory and glory were fundamental to the cultivation of political power: you had to win to rule for a limited time at the top of the hierarchy. However, highly competent generals were also feared as would-be kings or dictators, which led to their mistreatment at the hands of jealous senators. Though Scipio and others grudgingly retired into obscurity after outstanding careers, this later resulted in genuine threats to the political order: as armies became professionalized (a gradual process, Goldsworthy argues), they became loyal more to their generals than to the Republic itself, which was regarded as quasi-religious but proved politically unable to provide for retired soldiers. With his war on Pompey and the Boni, Julius Caesar definitively ended this, of course, but he had predecessors who waged civil war, i.e. Caius Marius and Sulla.Following the death of the Republic, there was a constant tension between the Emperor and his generals: the former needed them to fight effectively, but feared that they would usurp power. Because Generals still came from the largely reconstituted Senate, it remained a hotbed of political intrigue that required constant attention. Often, by acclamation from their men or via their own ambition, they did indeed seize power, particularly when the Empire was so big that generals had to operate in faraway regions for lengthy periods of time. This resulted in periods of catastrophic instability, draining resources from defense and soon even maintenance of its vast territories. That is one reason why Rome declined over a long period of time.Though it is not my subject, there is also plenty about military tactics and strategy. The reader can study grand wars of attrition (Gaul), skirmishes that led to negotiated peace or fealty (Parthia), and sieges (Jerusalem). Throughout, the limitations of the time – slow communications, difficult transport, and muscle-dependent weaponry – offer interesting contrasts with present day technologies. Goldsworthy even addresses the relevance of classical studies to the conduct of modern war in his concluding chapter.This is a thoroughly engrossing read by a master writer and scholar. Goldsworthy is setting the standard for popular histories of Rome. Recommended warmly.

⭐Adrian Goldsworthy, one of the world’s foremost experts on the ancient Roman Empire, wrote this book about the great generals of that civilization. Although the author himself points out that this book is primarily about generals and statesmen and not a complete picture of what Rome was like, he still successfully fills in the gaps as he jumps from one generation of Romans to the next. In effect the reader goes on a journey though the ancient Roman civilization from the Punic Wars to the era of the ‘Byzantine Empire’. Goldsworthy has smooth narrative that flows well from the time of Hannibal to the reign of Emperor Justinian.The book features those who Goldsworthy considers to be the greatest generals in Roman history. Some of the men he studies are very famous already,–such as, Fabius Maximus, Scipio Africnaus, Pompey Magnus, and Julius Caesar–others are barely known,–Aemilius Paullus and the very tragic Sertorius –and some were emperors–Trajan and Julian. Goldsworthy challenges the traditional view that Roman generals–in light of being politicians–were, by default, amateurs who real command fell to subordinates. He argues instead that they were both politicians and military men equally.”Yet a closer examination of the evidence suggests that most of these assumptions are at best greatly exaggerated and often simply wrong. Far from taking power away from the general, the Roman tactical system concentrated it in his hands. Junior officers such as centurions played a vitally important role, but they fitted into a hierarchy with the army commander at the top and allowed him to have more control over events than less.”p.16Also explored in this book is the culture of the Roman state and how that culture impacted the senators of the Republic in their careers serving it. One of these cultural traditions was that the Romans, even if things were not going their way, would never turn on Rome in favor of a foreign power. Their bond to their homeland was incredibly strong and this is part of what makes the tragic Sertorius’s story of exile so particularly sad.”However important it was for an individual to win fame an add to his own and his family’s reputation, this should always be subordinated to the good of the Republic. The same belief in the superiority of Rome that made senators by the second century BC hold themselves the equals of any king ensured that no disappointed Roman politician sought the aid of a foreign power. Senators wanted success, but that success only counted if it was achieved at Rome. No senator defected to Pyrrhus or Hannibal even when their final victory seemed imminent, nor did Scipio Africanus’ bitterness at the ingratitude of the State cause him to take service with a foreign king.”p.155-6When the rule of the aristocratic Senate gives way to the emperors the role of the general changed from one of personal achievement and glory to all honor won by one man: the Emperor himself. Imperial Legets won glory only in the Emperor’s name giving emperors, such as Augustus, a good deal of bragging rights.”Augustus brought internal peace to Rome, an achievement which was conspicuously celebrated throughout his principate. His regime relied heavily on the glory derived from continuous and spectacular warfare against foreign opponents. Under its first emperor Rome continued to expand as intensively as it had done in the last decades of the Republic and by AD 14 had brought under its control almost all the territory which would compose the Empire for over four centuries. The Res Gestae, a long inscription set up outside Augustus’ mausoleum recounting his achievements, lists a vast array of peoples and kings defeated by the emperor. In style the test is identical to the monuments set up by triumphing generals for many generations, but in sheer numbers of vanquished enemies it dwarfs the victories even of Pomepy and Caesar.”p.270Imperial selfishness on the part of the Emperor seemed like a smart move, especially after it was proven that generals who did earn personnel glory were able to depose an unpopular emperor. However with incidents of emperors being dethoned by popular generals, Goldsworthy points out that this transfer of power to the barracks led to break down in military discipline that sapped the army’s strength and with the army went the empire.I highly recommend this book to anyone. It is an incredible achievement on the part of Goldsworthy and an overly entertaining read. It will greatly increase ones knowledge into the Roman military, its politics, and its leaders though out history.

⭐A good book that summarizes the military careers of some of Rome’s most reknown generals. Each biography is short enough to avoid going into details of the “whys”, but long enough to describe the major events throughout their careers.For most readers the biography of Julius Caesar in only one chapter might not provide any new information, but on the other hand there are quite a few less famous generals where you can find quite a bit of interesting facts that are not known for average readers.Just like in any selection of topics, readers may wonder why this general was included or why this other wasn’t. Overall I can say that the logic makes sense, although there’s an obvious sense of a lack of focus in the late empire. Perhaps the book could have covered a couple more of the eastern empire generals, since Belisarius was included in the list.In summary, a good overview of some of the most successful generals in Rome’s history. Quick read and enjoyable.

⭐I have read a number of Adrian Goldsworthy’s and what he does not know about Rome is not really worth knowing. His biography of Augustus struck me as being authorative but I think he has a tendency is some books to assume his readers have some prior knowledge. There are moments when the close focus in his books does mean that it is difficult to see the overall picture. This book is easily the most accessible of his that I have read and outlines how 15 generals shaped Roman miltary history. I would concur that with the author’s comments in the introduction that following that folloing the lives of great character is no longer so fashionable in history. In this respect I think this book takes a 180 degrees different approach to say Mary Beard’s excellent “SPQR” and I am sure that she would not subscribe to Goldsworthy’s focus of attention. I have to admit that I like ready different historic persepctives. Thos books covers the mid 3rd Century BC through to mid 6th Century AD but there is a gap of 200 years after Trajan’s Dacian campaign that is absent – largely due to lack of sources as much as lack of anyting hapoening of note.If there is a flaw, I think that it is that Goldsworthy is effectively summarising Roman histories in each chapter and , given that many of these are available in their original form, some people may prefer to read these accounts instead. As an shortened overview, I think that this book is on the money. I did find that the accounts of the Roman Republic were significantly less interesting until the point that Caesar’s invasion of Gaul was discussed. Wierdly, the chapters about which I already knew something were much more interesting than the unfamiliar and taking Germanicus out of the context of the wider political situation, for example, certainly made things very clear for me. In summary, this is a really good overview of Roman generals and their military campaigns. I think that the subtitle about “The men who won the Roman Empire” was ambitious at first and I was not comvinced my the greatness of all of the characters. In the end, I could see Goldsworthy’s perspective. It did make fascinating reading at a time when Putin has invaded Ukraine (especially in light of Pompey’s actions near this part of the world) and you did start to wonder how Romes’ opponents viewed these generals. More Left-leaning writers will be less generous than Goldsworthy, whose close ties with the British military are noted in the Preface and I think underscore the non-critical assessment of these military campaigns where concepts of right and wrong are not explored. Personally, I find a lot of military history very under-whelming as a concept but this book is much better than most in this respect. There are a few accounts of personal bravery mentioned although the historical sources do not really offer much by making the accounts human. At the end of the day, I felt that it was clear this book really fell under the remit of military history without tackling a broader picture. (The author has done this in his “Pax Romana” which I felt was a much tougher / specialist read.)

⭐I am 1/3rd way thru’ this book – highly readable, packed with relevant info., and if you are a reader who might be shy of history books on “the ancients” because they are “stuffy”, this has been penned in a style which is never that. I recommend to all readers (16 years upwards) interested in the Empire which was Rome. How I wish my history teacher had been able to have brought the past to life like Mr Goldsworthy. On that, my mediocre tacher failed terribly, but the fact I am enjoying this book is proof he failed to kill my interest in ancient Rome entirely!

⭐It’s an overview of a few important Roman figures. I found it therefore a bit lacking in detail and each chapter ended abruptly and moved onto the next person. But a good reference book for key facts.

⭐a good read

⭐A lengthy book with good detail covering 800 years of Roman military history with a bit on the politics that drove it all. Although told through the actions of fifteen generals to me the real interest was the political decay that was the cause of the downfall.

Keywords

Free Download In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire in PDF format
In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire PDF Free Download
Download In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire 2016 PDF Free
In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire 2016 PDF Free Download
Download In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire PDF
Free Download Ebook In the Name of Rome: The Men Who Won the Roman Empire