Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition by Michael Kulikowski (PDF)

Description

Rome’s Gothic Wars is a concise introduction to research on the Roman Empire’s relations with one of the most important barbarian groups of the ancient world. The book uses archaeological and historical evidence to look not just at the course of events, but at the social and political causes of conflict between the empire and its Gothic neighbours. In eight chapters, Michael Kulikowski traces the history of Romano-Gothic relations from their earliest stage in the third century, through the development of strong Gothic politics in the early fourth century, until the entry of many Goths into the empire in 376 and the catastrophic Gothic war that followed. The book closes with a detailed look at the career of Alaric, the powerful Gothic general who sacked the city of Rome in 410.

User’s Reviews

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

⭐This is a short book and easy to read but is packed with eye openers, it is valuable both for a hobbiest like myself and the professional. I recently read Peter Heather’s “The Fall of the Roman Empire” (2005), as well as other survey accounts of the Goths including Gibbon and Bury (and of course the History Channel “Barbarians”) – Kulikowski’s writing style is great, it’s difficult to tire of such an incredible story, everyone tells it a little differently adding new ideas and perspectives.More than a survey, Kulikowski makes a bold (and convincing) case about the origins of the Goths and what motivated them (or not) to cross the Danube in 376. In addition we learn about the latest approach to barbarian ethnicity (called “ethnogenesis”) which is applicable to all the ancient peoples and important to understand in the face of so much racist and nationalistic scholarship out there; an excellent historiography of Gothic studies which reveals some interesting connections to modern educational institutions; a general overview of the barbarians and the Roman Empire; a “Further Reading” where we get the authors recommendations on the best books available for specific topics; a list of key names with short descriptions (about 150 names).This is the first in a series which is described in the opening matter: “This series is composed of introductory-level texts that provide an essential foundation for the study of important wars and conflicts of classical antiquity. Each volume provides a synopsis of the main events and key characters, the consequences of the conflict, and its reception over time. An important feature is the critical overview of the textual and archaeological sources for the conflict, which is designed to teach both historiography and the methods that historians use to reconstruct events of the past.”

⭐This book is well written, no doubt about it. But it is much more a historiography than a history – it describes in detail the historical analysis the author went through to come to his conclusions. All of which are professionally presented and interesting – but if you are looking for a little more drama and excitement in the narrative, look elsewhere.

⭐It was an education not only in the history, but also the historiography of the period – and it pointed me in the direction of a good primary source.

⭐Was a text for college but still it was fun for me since I love this time. Recommend it.

⭐After acknowledging “the historian has a duty to make history intelligible” (p. xi), Professor Kulikowski proceeds to further obscure the already obscure subject of Romano-Gothic relations. Rather than “help those who are just beginning the advanced study of late antiquity,” he abandons serious scholarship and builds a house of cards which admits little scrutiny. Professor Kulikowski starts with the humble-sounding premise that “even the most basic facts are either unknown or else uncertain because of contradictory evidence” (p. 12), then proceeds to savage his our sources. Even more startling is his thesis that “the Roman empire create[d] the Goths as we know them.” (p. 13) Time and again throughout the first half of Wars, Kulikowski tells us “as we will see”, then spends the second half saying “as we have seen” never having supported his intriguing thesis. In the end the reader is left with an assertion–a plausible scenario, but not the only plausible scenario. The key chapter is “The Search for Gothic Origins” in which Kulikowski deconstructs ancient and modern theories that the Goths or their prehistoric antecedents came from the region of modern Scandinavia and/or Poland. Then he examines archeological evidence in the region from which the Goths first came to the attention of classical cultures. While he acknowledges that the Alans and Sarmatians lived as a horse culture on top of an agricultural substrata, he avows that the remains uncovered in the Sântana-de-Mureº/Èernjachov cultural zone support his assertion “that there was no Gothic history before the third century. The Goths are a product of the Roman frontier, just like the Franks and the Alamanni who appear at the same time.” (p. 67) In addition to needing a refresher in logic, the good professor should have sought grammar assistance from his school’s English department. The text is replete with participles and passive constructions, which will not help those beginning students he proclaimed as his target audience. While Professor Kulikowski tends to cite (and analyze the reliability of) ancient sources, he rarely quotes those sources, leaving the reader to accept his analysis of what the source did nor did not report. Maps in Wars are woefully inadequate, both in number and detail. Kulikowski’s statement on page xii that the Department of History “produced [them] at short notice” implies that all the maps were an afterthought. Make no mistake, Professor Kulikowski’s theory is a provocative and insightful one. But the norm for historical writing these days is provocative new theories. Modern historians are not content to stand on the shoulders of their predecessors for a slightly better view. Modern historians feel compelled to tear down everything before them and start anew–even if it means they are writing fiction. Kulikowski explains his new theory well enough; he just never proves it. Despite its shortfalls, Rome’s Gothic Wars offers a good review of the current state of knowledge about Romano-Gothic relations between A. D. 376 and 410. Professor Kulikowski offers insights to Rome’s degeneration from an externally invincible empire to a shadow of its former self–the “eternal city” sacked and independent barbarian kingdoms established within its borders. Guardedly recommended.

⭐As a couple of other reviewers mentioned, this book makes for an excellent entry point into Rome’s Gothic wars from the early to mid-third century up to Alaric’s sac of Rome and ultimate failure. Although the narrative essentially stops shortly after Alaric’s death and does not go on to tell the story of the Kingdom of the Wisigoths or the story about those who became known as the Ostrogoths, the author has multiple points to make, many of which are controversial and acknowledged as being so.Before briefly mentioning these points, I also need to acknowledge that these are written in a clear, eminently readable and concise style, something that allows the non-specialist reader to engage with the book. In addition to this, and some might even say despite this, this is a book written by a scholar but not a “scholarly book” or a “textbook”.There is, for instance, quite a bit of discussion on the historical sources and the historiographical traditions that have been built around the Germanic tribes in general and the Goths in particular. In both cases, and regardless of whether one agrees with the author’s point of view, he has had the merit to show to what extent a few passages of a single source – Jordanes writing in sixth century Constantinople centuries after the events that he presents – has been used (and re-used) to make a rather questionable point.The point is that of the somewhat improbable and mythical origins and identity of the Goths, which are supposed to have migrated from Scandinavia through what are now modern Poland and Russia before settling in what are now Ukraine and the northern shores of the Black Sea. One of the merits of this book is that it traces this idea back to the Late Middle Ages through the romantic and nationalistic 18th and 19th centuries and the need to forge Germany’s unity and identity. A related merit is that the author tends to somewhat favour the idea that Gothic identity owed more to interactions with the Roman Empire once the Goths had reached its borders, much like what happened with the Franks and the Alemanni along the Rhine and for similar reasons. However, he also draws the reader’s attention to the limits of so-called “ethnogenesis”, and, for instance, the dangers related to over-interpreting archaeological finds to make them fit with a pre-conceived theory.A related and well-made point, which has gained increasing traction over the last decades and including the last decade since this book was published, is about the huge influence, military of course, but also economic and cultural, that the Empire exercised over and well beyond its “frontiers”, especially north of the Rhine and of the Danube. This is a point that has increasingly been made in Late Roman studies, particularly studies focusing on Roman frontiers, alongside a related point about the so-called “Barbaricum” and “the Great Invasions”. Even if plunder and enrichment were clearly one of the motivations of rather opportunistic “barbarian” attacks, another more profound one was the search of security, home and a reliable living within the Empire. This is a point that is well illustrated by the whole career of Alaric who, by sacking Rome, ultimately failed to reach his goals of integration. It is also well illustrated through the career of the numerous generals of non-roman origin (including but not only Stilicho) and the even more numerous soldiers from beyond the Rhine and the Danube that had been increasingly serving in Rome’s army throughout the centuries.There are also a host of other, more limited but nevertheless very interesting, points that are made throughout the book. One series of points are those made about the events that lead to the disastrous Roman defeat of Adrianople, and the need to exercise caution and critical judgement with regards to Amianius Marcellinus, despite his value, and given his biases and his ability to mislead modern historians. One of these concerns the behaviours of Lucipinus. He was the Comes in charge of organising the Goths’ crossing of the Danube and who both botched and mishandled things so much that he drove the Goths to rebel. As the author mention, somewhat provocatively, the mixture of oppression, corruption and treachery exercised against the Goths was possibly not as outrageous as it may seem to us nowadays, with Roman officials traditionally expected to enrich themselves. The main reason he has gone done in history is because he essentially failed in organising the crossing, botched the attempt to assassinate the Gothic leaders and was then defeated in battle, fleeing the field while his army was cut to pieces. A related point is about Valens, whose reputation was essentially tarnished and blackened because of his ultimate defeat and demise on the battlefield in the purest Roman tradition.Another example of such a point is the author’s relatively poor opinion of Theodosius “the Great”, who he sees as a somewhat mediocre general who never won a battle on his own and who essentially owes his title and reputation to the Christian Church for giving in and accepting its demands. This included even the most outrageous, such as doing public penance for having avenged the death of his governor through bloodshed, essentially massacring a few thousand citizens of Thessalonica. Here again, and apart from the contrasting view put by Stephen Williams in the Empire at Bay that another reviewer mentioned, the modern reader can easily be influenced into believing that such atonement was the least he could do. It was, however, a rather extravagant thing to do for a Roman Emperor, even a Christian one. Neither the “pagan” Diocletian less than a century before, nor Justinian a century and a half later, despite being a Christian, would have humiliated themselves, compromised the imperial majesty in such a conspicuous way and appeared so weak.Five stars for a superb introduction and entry point which might need an update in a few years time.

⭐It’s amazing how an idea can really come to take a hold of an academic subject, in ancient history, this is especially true of why the Western Roman Empire fell. Chief among the reasons recycled throughout history are the barbarian invasions of the fourth century, with the Goths enjoying alongside the Huns the role of barbarian offenders in chief. This work largely told from a Gothic perspective, provides a clear narrative (pleasantly so, many Roman focused histories of the period can be difficult to engage with) which is an easy read.Kulikowski’s work is a refreshing sea change in this area, writing as part of a series of works called “key conflicts of classical antiquity”, the work looks to provide an entry point and serious discussion of Rome’s Gothic Wars. This isn’t a military history as such, but in fact a sound, well thought out and conceptualised history, combining an analytical narrative history of Roman/Gothic relations alongside a serious attempt to engage with ancient and modern historiography on the Goths and utilising the archaeological evidence.The book really seeks to get under the skin of the topic and the work on Gothic Origins and the impact of a move to create a non-roman northern European history from the fifteenth century onwards are excellent. Throughout the work Kulikowski’s knowledge and ability with a diverse range of source material including archaeology, prosopography, epigraphy and written accounts is superb, he is a historian clearly in control of his material.Equally refreshing in a work, that is meant to be an entry point to the subject, is the way that Kulikowski challenges the status quo in many areas of academic research. He is broadly negative towards Theodosius (“The Great” – he actually provides an intriguing slant on Theodosius ascension – particularly targeting Stephen Williams recent work), he disagrees with the migration and diffusionist schools of thought on the barbarians, instead seeing the Gothic identity as a product of the Roman Frontier and has excellent comments on the primary source material in particular on Jordanes. A quality of Kulikowski’s work is that where he does conflict with an established doctrine, he makes the reader aware of what he is arguing against and which historians, giving the reader the option of researching the material themselves.Overall this is an accessible, thoroughly scholarly and engrossing account.

⭐Although this book is about the Goths from the third century to Alaric’s sack as the title suggests, it is really about much more than that. A great deal of space is devoted to the historiography of the study of the Goths and historical methodology. For this, Kulikowski needs a serious commendation. Far too many books on ancient history, and especially introductory-level works ignore just how we do the history and prefer to skip over the debates in the field, making such things appear to be settled. This is simply not how history works any more as Enlightenment positivism is (thankfully) long dead. This is precisely why Kulikowski’s book needs to be commended. Instead of telling us exactly who the Goths were and what they did, he presents numerous points of view and introduce students to the uncertainty present in so much of our historical material. However, this is also this book’s greatest weakness. He often argues for a particular interpretation over others, except that far too frequently these are only weakly supported. No doubt if he had more page space he would be able to explore these arguments in full, but as it stands some of them (the Romans’ creation of the Goths; the early career of Theodosius) are so briefly mentioned and unsupported that one has to wonder about their validity. The maps are also not sufficient for the subject matter. They lack detail beyond the frontiers, and the map detailing the Santana-de-Mures/Cernjachov culture is particularly bad, as it does not really show the exact limits of the cultures, just the places mentioned in the text. As a whole though, this book is an excellent discussion of the early years of the Goths leading up to the siege of Rome. Kulikowski needs to be commended for his choice to write with such a strong focus on methodology and historiography, asit enlivens the discussion even if it detracts from the space needed to make his own arguments complete. More than just a book on the Goths, I would recommend this as an excellent work on understanding ancient history in general given the focus on historiography, methodology, and wide range of modern interpretations.

Keywords

Free Download Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition in PDF format
Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition PDF Free Download
Download Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition 2006 PDF Free
Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition 2006 PDF Free Download
Download Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition PDF
Free Download Ebook Rome’s Gothic Wars: From the Third Century to Alaric (Key Conflicts of Classical Antiquity) 1st Edition