Explore the Epic History of Rome: War, Peace and Conquest in the Pax Romana

Harmonious: This book is very important for politicians and, to Armed Forces. Rome practiced something similar to what the Catholic Church calls subsidiarity. Rome always had an ear on the ground. They did not hesitate to be heavy handed. But, they kept their end of the bargain: increase in commerce, better roads and public facilities, kept the peace (safety for most of the people). A lot of dynamism and active supervision.

United States on Oct 14, 2023

therover: Reading this account of the wider Roman Empire taught me that conquest only can not keep the peace. You must add magistrates, governors, and the military. This was a very interesting book. Some of the information was familiar, but most was new to me.

United States on Aug 03, 2023

docread: The author attempted to produce a balanced account of the Roman Empire, nevertheless he succumbed to the usual propensity of exaggerating its benefits and downplaying its drawbacks and faults, with the excuse that we cannot apply our own liberal standards to Ancient Societies. Pax Romana like Pax Britannica, is a thesis that has acquired some authoritative validity amongst historians based on a selective and biased interpretation of historical facts, to perpetuate the myth of a civilised benevolent Empire. It is based on the notion that the armed occupation and deployment of military might imposed by an enlightened elite of a martial Empire, provided a great measure of security and stability in a dangerous world . A world constantly threatened by irruptions of violence perpetrated by uncivilised barbaric nations. The Roman legions by bringing law and order amongst divided and primitive warring tribes, facilitated the spread of prosperity and good governance in backward areas, and replaced the preceding insecure chaotic state of affairs. The Romans allowed their subjects some autonomy and the freedom of religious worship. There might be some validity in this analysis when applied...

United Kingdom on Nov 05, 2022

Ian Thumwood: This is the third of Adrian Goldsworthy's books that I have read and perhaps the most controversial from a number of perspectives. What interests me is that there is some overlap with Mary Beard's equally authoritative "SPQR" yet the perspectives are radically different to the extent that they almost feel like two different topics.

Given Goldsworthy's background in military history, this book naturally eschews Beard's more socially driven account but this is replaced with a comprehensive understanding of Roman administration of it's Empire and the relation it had with it's subjects and those people with whom it came in to contact. The book is crammed with facts, quotes and reference to archaeology to the extent that the detail sometimes obscures the bigger picture. Without doubt Goldsworthy knows his subject inside out and is also very balanced in his assessment, The introduction to the book is particularly noteworthy reminding the reader not to judge the Romans from a 21st century perspective. I think this writer is a very good historian and there are moments when he recasts moments from the New Testament which make you wish he would tackle this wholly within a new book as...

United Kingdom on Feb 24, 2019

Djilly L.Djilly L.: Quite enjoyed this book among my annual dose of Roman-history books. I rate Adrian Goldsworthy based on previous work and he does not disappoint here. In short, the enjoyable book answered quite a few of my long term key questions. The book however might be less appreciated by those with less background in classical history.

Pax Romana tells about assimilation and integration during the unique, and not often enough questioned, long period of Roman peace and stability. Banditry was not uncommon and there where frequent uprisings as there was some violent conflict. But rarely did it challenge central Roman power. While reading the book you once more start to appreciate how well, despite its brutality and imperialist superiority, the Roman Empire worked. And how well it suited simple requirements of tens of millions of people at that time. While the book makes clear the Rome's neighbours were not quite the innocent, passive victims as they are often portrayed.
The author cunningly manages to cover a wide scope and lengthy period in Roman history, starting with Republican expansion and manages to make brilliant connections along the way.

Looking forward to Mr...

United Kingdom on Oct 23, 2018

Beat a ’Bhèist: All in the United States of America should in fact read this book. It reminds one of a whole lot of things-in particular that "democracies" or "Empires" do not fall from without but from within! Furthermore, it explains how the "Romans" were successful in "in-corp-orating" the "populations" of many cultures and religions. Also, how the "roman" Empire was in fact successful and last so long by "Guarding" their "Blind" spots on both the "fringes" and "with-in" their own "House" so to speak! It reminds one of the 'Jimi Hendrix' songs "All Along The Watch Tower" and "Purple Haze!" Oddly, since before ROME, "purple" has been the color of royalist and the "highly" influential!

It is also kind of like the "Jethro Tull" album "Storm Watch (NC)" as the Romans built "Hadrian's Wall" in England to "deter" the Picts and kept "out post's" all along the Rhine River (Wacht am Rhine) to prevent "Germanic" tribe "incursions/infiltration!" Oddly, the "ROMANS" lost an entire "legion" in Germany, because they "trained/educated" a "highly" prominent son of a very "DOMINANT" German Tribe, that "tricked" the Roman's and led the "legion Commander" to his and his "legionnaires" demise! Kind of,...

United States on May 02, 2018

kahemingway: The Roman period of history is one of those subjects where there are so many books written on the subject that it can be a bit difficult to figure out where to start. After seeing this book recommended in a military magazine, I decided that I would try this book. Having merely glossed over the subject of Rome in history class, I had always wanted to know more about this predecessor to modern Western civilization.

The book starts off with an introduction by the author explaining that modern historians often focus only on the colonial aspect of Rome and tend to paint Rome as nothing more than a brutal, horrific oppressor of its citizens. This is done with limited evidence and large amount of the book is spent on debunking these assertions with examples and documentation. The story of Rome itself is divided into two sections; one for the Republic and the other for the Empire. Since this is more of a summary, the reader is given the events and people of the time without being bogged down too much with the details. After the timeline is established at the beginning of each section, the author uses subsequent chapters to flesh out the various duties of the Romans, along with...

United States on Oct 21, 2017

Emile: Adrian Goldsworhty is, without a doubt, a good writer. But I felt uncomfortable reading this book. And that has several reasons.
1. The title and subtitle is wrong. This book is not about Pax Romana. Nor is it about "War, Peace and Conquest". It is about the way Rome dealt with other people. The governance of provinces, the dealings with allied kings, etc. etc. Pax Romana was never an end goal of the Romans and Goldsworthy says so himself.
2. There are no summaries at the end of each chapter. If you are struggling to make sense of what is being said, then that certainly does not help.
3. The style in which the book is written doesn't help either: Goldsworthy is an historian and therefore makes no claims when he is not allowed to make them. Problem with that is that the book is filled with nuances. That too makes difficult reading.
4. Add to this the amount of details in the book: the amount of soldiers located in camps (this varied), the transfer of centurions throughout the Empire, etc. etc.
That meant that, while I was reading this book, I felt the ground shifting underneath my feet, so to speak.
In defence of the writer I have to say that the subject of the...

Germany on Oct 02, 2017

Jack Evatt: Another success from one of my favourite Authors. Pax Romana delves into a world not just inhabited by Romans but one filled with various different cultures and peoples all fighting for power/glory/wealth and in some cases simply just for freedom from Rome. He shows that the Romans were not the only aggressive state/peoples in the ancient world but that they were by far the most successful of them. There are many reasons why they were more successful than other states/cultures and Adrian Goldsworthy looks and comments on these reasons with care, respect and a professionalism to not judge the Roman culture by 21st century standards (something the majority of us do when looking back through their history) It certainly appears that the PAX ROMANA did exist across the empire and existed for a long time in various places. He points out that some regions, once they had been defeated and turned into provinces or client states, experienced decades upon decades of uninterupted peace. Now, this in itself proves the PAX ROMANA did exist, although it can be argued that various regions could or would have experienced long periods of peace if they had not been invaded and defeated by the Romans...

United Kingdom on Sep 16, 2016