El mundo de la Antigüedad tardía. De Marco Aurelio a Mahoma
- Downloads：5927
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-05-09 02:52:26
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Peter R.L. Brown
- ISBN：843062340X
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
Con este extraordinario libro， Peter Brown acuñó para la posteridad el concepto de Antigüedad tardía， indispensable para entender la historia europea， al arrojar una mirada nueva sobre los cambios culturales， religiosos y sociales entre el 200 y el 700 d。 C。 Su visión， rica， colorida y alejada de la tan reiterada idea del declive y caída del imperio， muestra hasta qué punto este periodo crucial marcó profundamente la evolución divergente de Occidente y Oriente Próximo。 Todavía vivimos los resultados de este profundo contraste。
Reviews
George
，
A must for anyone who thinks of themselves as someone who knows history
Pedro Ceneme
，
This is a great book with a misleading title。 First， let me assure you this book is great for what it intends to discuss: Christianity’s impact as a cultural a political phenomenon in Late Antiquity。 I’ve got to know Mr。 Brown’s work through the chapter he wrote on the rise of Christianity in “A History of Private Life” of Georges Duby and Paul Veyne。 This book expands nicely on that chapter by positioning Christianity first as a revolutionary ethos for urban citizens of the Roman Empire， then d This is a great book with a misleading title。 First， let me assure you this book is great for what it intends to discuss: Christianity’s impact as a cultural a political phenomenon in Late Antiquity。 I’ve got to know Mr。 Brown’s work through the chapter he wrote on the rise of Christianity in “A History of Private Life” of Georges Duby and Paul Veyne。 This book expands nicely on that chapter by positioning Christianity first as a revolutionary ethos for urban citizens of the Roman Empire， then discussing the rise of monasticism and its impacts on early Christian beliefs and finally showing how Christian religion eventually fused into the political administration of the territories of the former Empire。 Mr。 Brown writing is both elegant and fluid and he looks at ease when analyzing a vast range of sources。 I’ve found interesting how he shows the different development paths the Western and Eastern parts of the Roman Empires took from the IV century onwards: -tHow Pagans maintained Classical culture and education in the East but the Catholic Church filled such role in the West;-tHow local elites dealt with central authority and religious leaders in the different parts of the Empire;-tHow policy differed when dealing with the barbarian migrations-tWhy， despite coming to dominate the remnants of the Western Roman Empire， such barbarian kingdoms could not influence that much the culture and customs of their subjects and eventually sought to emulate the Empire they replaced。All of this is presented in an extremely rich book， with a hundred plus pictures on contemporary art which help tremendously to contextualized and contrast changes in representations of daily aspects of life throughout this period。 By showing what and how people chose to emphasize in such depictions， Mr。 Brown’s arguments on how customs evolved are much more credible。 Nonetheless， the title of this book is misleading。 First， this is more like an essay than a book per see， so don’t expect deep expositions on the topics discussed here， especially considering the long time period it deals with。 Also， if you are looking for a good summary of the period from multiple points of view， maybe this book will frustrate you: while the author discusses a wide range of topics and really covers a lot of ground in a hundred plus pages， the only topic he really goes into in detail is religion。 This leaves a rather superficial treatment on political， military， and economic factors he discusses throughout the book， with a lot of name-dropping and succinct statements with very little explanation。 This puts the reader in a difficult position to accept his arguments at face value without a lot to assess the validity of them。 For instance: Mr。 Brown argues persuasively on the great adaptability of the Roman Empire during the third and fourth centuries， with a steep decline in the power of landed aristocracy and an increasingly militarized society represented by soldier-Emperors of the period， and how this should be viewed as a revival rather than a decline as the popular view came to accept it。 While this is a very original take with several interesting ramifications， this argument is supported by just a couple of pages in the book。 The chapters on the reforms of the Byzantine Empire and the revival of Sassanid Persia are also frustrating in a similar way because of this。 。。。more
Trevor
，
I read Brown's classic treatment of the era several years ago， and it was a real pleasure to return to it。 Focused primarily on the Mediterranean and near East， the book does an admirable job of discussing social， intellectual， and economic factors that bridge the classical era with the early medieval。 It's all packaged in a book that's shorter， easier to read， and better-illustrated than many other books in its class。 My one detraction was that the focus on the Mediterranean world was all-encom I read Brown's classic treatment of the era several years ago， and it was a real pleasure to return to it。 Focused primarily on the Mediterranean and near East， the book does an admirable job of discussing social， intellectual， and economic factors that bridge the classical era with the early medieval。 It's all packaged in a book that's shorter， easier to read， and better-illustrated than many other books in its class。 My one detraction was that the focus on the Mediterranean world was all-encompassing; anywhere northwest of Italy received very little mention， and focus on Africa and the near East was limited in comparison to focus on Rome and Byzantium。 This is hardly a full critique， however， as they somewhat fall outside of the scope of the book， and the omission makes it a short and pleasant read rather than a weighty tome。 。。。more
Fern
，
I'm sure that this book is more insightful to academics and to those that already have a familiarity with this time period。 But this layperson， who is by no means stupid， didn't get much out of it。 In fairness， I only picked this book up in conjunction with an adult class I am taking。 I found the stilted language （1970s academia？） very hard to follow and the constant references to terms I didn't know maddening。 I'm sure that this book is more insightful to academics and to those that already have a familiarity with this time period。 But this layperson， who is by no means stupid， didn't get much out of it。 In fairness， I only picked this book up in conjunction with an adult class I am taking。 I found the stilted language （1970s academia？） very hard to follow and the constant references to terms I didn't know maddening。 。。。more
Joe
，
Good summary， I wanted more。 This gives an overview of the years 150-750 AD or so in Mediterranean Europe， but it's not exactly a good introduction。 I wish I had known a bit more about some of the key figures before starting it （Justinian， Theodosius， etc。）。 Major events were covered quickly， and I wanted to pause and read more about them。 E。g。， I feel like I could read a whole book about the "Great War" between Byzantium and Persia that made room for the Arabs。 This is a good launching off poin Good summary， I wanted more。 This gives an overview of the years 150-750 AD or so in Mediterranean Europe， but it's not exactly a good introduction。 I wish I had known a bit more about some of the key figures before starting it （Justinian， Theodosius， etc。）。 Major events were covered quickly， and I wanted to pause and read more about them。 E。g。， I feel like I could read a whole book about the "Great War" between Byzantium and Persia that made room for the Arabs。 This is a good launching off point。 But not an end point on the period of "Late Antiquity。" 。。。more
William Bies
，
For this reviewer， the period known to historians as late antiquity has always been engaging， as it marks a pregnant transition between two great civilizations， the ancient and the medieval。 The characterization with which one will have been familiar since schoolboy days – originating with Gibbon – as the ‘decline and fall of the Roman empire’ is sooner misleading。 For one thing， the empire kept on going strong in the eastern Mediterranean and shaded imperceptibly into the Byzantine。 But even in For this reviewer， the period known to historians as late antiquity has always been engaging， as it marks a pregnant transition between two great civilizations， the ancient and the medieval。 The characterization with which one will have been familiar since schoolboy days – originating with Gibbon – as the ‘decline and fall of the Roman empire’ is sooner misleading。 For one thing， the empire kept on going strong in the eastern Mediterranean and shaded imperceptibly into the Byzantine。 But even in the west， the conventional terminal date of 476 was a non-event。 By that time， the intermingling of Latin and Germanic peoples that goes under the heading of the ‘Völkerwanderung’ in German-speaking historiography was already a long-accomplished fact; the northern border along the Rhine and Danube rivers was rather porous all along and after the troubles of the third century， Roman civilians had long since become accustomed to the dominant presence of Germanic barbarians in the military and even as their imperial rulers。 Thus， when the Ostrogothic king Odoacer deposed the last Latin emperor Romulus and declined to reappoint another Augustus in the west （sending the imperial insignia to Zeno at Constantinople instead）， nobody at the time saw it as registering an epochal threshold。 After all， the Germanic tribes had been settled in Gaul， Spain and Pannonia for two generations or more， where， of course， the Latin-speaking population remained numerically preponderant; the Roman senate continued to exist etc。 As one will gather from the interesting writings of the French historian Pierre Riché [Education and Culture in the Barbarian West from the Sixth to the Eighth Century]， the traditional Latin curriculum and cultural consciousness lasted well into the Merovingian period， at least among a small circle of aristocratic elites。 Nevertheless， the late-antique era did witness startling changes， such as the gradual supplanting of paganism by Christianity and， with the sudden eruption of Islam， the loss of the north African and near Eastern provinces to conquest by the Arabs。The eminent British historian Peter Brown， by far the most distinguished authority in the field， tells the story of all these historical occurrences very adeptly in the present little work， The World of Late Antiquity， which dates from early in his career and which he has followed up with a host of further eloquent， more focused studies。 This reviewer enjoyed the good fortune to enroll as a junior in college in a course on late antiquity taught by the professor himself， when he was as the height of his scholarly trajectory。 If one delves into the work now under review， one will perceive at once what sets Brown apart。 He deploys his vast erudition effortlessly to paint a compelling portrait of late-antique society， always with a good eye for illustrative detail and apt comparisons。 Chronological narrative （which anyone could supply） is kept to a minimum; what occupies Brown more strenuously is the character of a civilization as a whole and how this evolves under the impact of social， political and religious currents。 He pays particular attention to the differences and connections among western and eastern Europe and the near East， with the goal of reconstructing the process whereby the comparatively unified world of the second century， which forms for us the very definition of classical antiquity at the summit of its flourishing， became progressively more and more fragmented and issued ultimately in the early medieval standoff among the Latin west， the Greek Byzantine east and the Islamic caliphate under the Abbasids， which oriented itself away from the Mediterranean and towards Persia and central Asia。 The late antique period was an era of both dislocation and impressive continuity。 Brown begins his narrative by highlighting the vital importance of classical education to the upper-class’ self-definition in a time of uncertainty。 People felt that the way to restore order and stability was to model themselves on their ancient heroes。 Yet， the aristocracy was open to new blood; the surprising degree of social mobility during the fourth-century restoration raises the question of how valuable a hereditary aristocracy really can be， when closed to replenishment by recruitment from the lower orders。 Unlike what one will find in the Oxford companion to the classical world （q。v。， the immediately preceding review by this reviewer）， Brown enters into a full treatment of the role of religion in the second half of part one （pp。 49-114）。 To be sure， throughout his emphasis is rather sociological than dogmatic; cf。 p。 144， his characterization of the pivotal council of Chalcedon in 451 in which the theological points at issue are skated over lightly in favor of political analysis。 Brown highlights as a departure from earlier pagan cult the religious importance ascribed to interiority， conversion， revelation and the role of demons。 The unstoppable rise of Christianity figures in Brown’s narrative beginning pp。 62ff， with a pause to look at the complexion of contemporary pagan Hellenism on pp。 70-74。 All during the fourth century， the religious imagination began to turn to the figure of the holy man， a man of power who could intercede with the demonic forces and obtain protection for the community—an important station along the way to the early medieval cult of the saints， to which Brown has devoted another well-received book。 The new attitude contrasts with the more objective stance of paganism during its heyday in early antiquity， when what Brown calls a ‘religion of things’ prevailed: temples， sacred groves， mountain heights and a liturgical cult of community over the individual。 The upcoming monkish piety of the fourth century supplanted a more inward-looking devotion of previous centuries， when the early Christians were limited to small groups below the radar screen of public life。 Brown’s illuminating comparison of the ascetic movements in the west versus the east （pp。 107-112） rings true and helps one to understand how divisions crept into the originally united Church， leading over the course of the succeeding half millennium to the schism of 1054。What Brown is so good at supplying by way of copious observations throughout his text is perspective， a sense for the meaning of historical trends above the level of pointillistic detail。 For instance， he sees the significance of barbarian invasions of the early fifth century in the circumstance that ‘the barbarian tribes entered a society that was not strong enough to hold them at bay， but not flexible enough to “lead their conquerers captive” by absorbing them into Roman life…。These invasions were not perpetual， destructive raids; still less were they organized campaigns of conquest。 Rather， they were a “gold rush” of immigrants from the underdeveloped countries of the north into the rich lands of the Mediterranean’ （p。 122）。 Justinian’s caesaropapism served as inspiration to Charlemagne and gave rise to the idea that the Holy Roman Empire should exist to protect the interests of the papacy and to secure the libertas of Roman church （pp。 134-135）。 Hence， the hierarchical clerical complexion of the whole Latin middle ages。 The long-term significance of Justinian’s reconquests of the sixth century （p。 158） is that they brought the Spanish and north African provinces into the orbit of the eastern empire and split the Mediterranean diagonally， a process only brought to its completion when they fell to the Arabs a century later。 In so far， Brown seems to concur with Pirenne’s celebrated thesis， but see more below。 Meanwhile， Brown attributes the reason why classical culture vanished in the west （pp。 174-176） to the disappearance of the secular elite and its replacement by Christian bishops who， though not by any means constitutionally opposed to it， were just too busy with everyday administration to have the leisure in which it could be cultivated。 In the territories of the eastern empire at the same time， the arrival of the Arab armies cut off tenuous links to a secular pagan public culture and promoted the rise of a totally religious culture， in which a man’s identity was defined by the religious group to which he belonged， and thus， paradoxically， completed the Christianization of the near East （pp。 186-187）。The last major section of this work is devoted to the revolution of Islam and its world-historical significance。 Nearly a century of ferocious warfare back-and-forth between the Romans and the refounded Persian empire left both sides weakened and established the conditions preparing the way for the rapid Arab conquests （pp。 169-171）。 In keeping with Brown’s tendencies， the first half of the third section of part two is devoted to a sociological explanation of the rise of Islam， starting from the context of the pagan tribes in Arabia， who， as long as defensive fortifications on the frontier to the south were strong， had been contained by a network of alliances。 The collapse of military strength of both the great powers （Byzantine and Persian） emboldened Arab adventurers to conduct raids to the north， which became attractive to them as a result of an economic boom fostered by the caravan trade with Arabia。 The second half describes the fate of the ancient near East under Islam – a regrettably brief but excellent account。 After the expulsion of the Byzantines from everywhere but Anatolia and the fall of Sassanid Persia， the Arabs reigned supreme。 Yet， in what may come as a surprise given the persistence of the Arabic language in the Muslim world， the Umayyads’ hold over the culture of the near East was to prove fragile。 Brown explains why: ‘The califs of Damascus staked their authority on this confrontation with the Byzantine empire – the Rūm。 But Constantinople held firm: the great naval expeditions of 677 and 717 were beaten back from under the walls of the city。 There is no doubt that， at that time， Byzantium saved Europe: but， in beating back the Muslims of Syria， the Byzantine emperors unwittingly lost the Near East forever’ （p。 200）， for the failure to take Constantinople ultimately led to the replacement of the Umayyad dynasty as a result of the Abbasid revolt in Iran。 A new civilizational configuration emerged， as Persian influences （now comfortably converted to Islam） reasserted themselves over Arabian and consolidated themselves into stable rule over an empire that was ever more proof against Byzantine encroachment。 ‘The eastward pull of the vast mass of Persia in the Islamic empire was the salvation of Europe。 It was not the Greek fire of the Byzantine navy outside Constantinople in 717， nor the Frankish cavalry of Charles Martel at Tours in 732， that brought the Arab war-machine to a halt。 It was the foundation of Baghdad [in 762]’ （p。 202）。Brown nicely sets forth what is for him the poignant lesson to be drawn from the study of late antiquity in this concluding paragraph （implicitly qualifying Pirenne’s thesis by delaying by a century the date of the rift between civilizations）， ‘The division between East and West， which had been blurred throughout the Late Antique period by the confrontation of Byzantium and Persia along the Fertile Crescent， came to rest along the shores of the Mediterranean itself。 The Muslim world turned its back on its poor Christian neighbors across the sea。 The cultivated man drew his language from the [Arabian] desert， and the style of his culture from eastern Mesopotamia。 In the more stable world created by this vast shift of the balance of culture， western Europe could create an identity of its own。 But the student of Late Antiquity， who realizes how much European culture owes to the fruitful interchange between the populations of the Fertile Crescent， open at one end to an empire based on the sea [Rome] and， at the other， to the Iranian plateau， can estimate the cost of the chasm that yawned across the Mediterranean throughout the Middle Ages’ （p。 203）。After winding one’s way through such a commanding scholarly performance， it seems almost ungrateful to mention any limitations， but there are some which one ought to keep in mind in order to appreciate what one does get here。 Brown is neither an intellectual historian nor a theologian， but despite this one will find it very instructive to review the history through his primarily sociological lens。 In this vein， then， it ought to be pointed out that Brown views religious phenomena from the highly polished， faux sympathetic but basically uncomprehending standpoint of the educated modern secular humanist。 Brown’s noted biography of Augustine designedly eschews any treatment of high doctrine and trinitarian speculation， for instance; one is led to ponder how one could pretend to understand a man while blithely passing over what is of most vital importance to him and his self-understanding。 Has one really done justice to the Confessions without internalizing the sheer wonder， the sublime awe and the tender love of the God whom Augustine discovers？ For， the pressing question of truth in religious matters is quite irrelevant to anyone sharing Brown’s mindset， disposed to scan the closing verses of John’s gospel （in the original Greek， no less）， ‘There were many other signs that Jesus worked in the sight of the disciples。 These are recorded so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ， the Son of God， and that believing this you may have life through his name’ （John 20:30-31）， and to respond with an indifferent shrug。 Likewise， philosophy too is shortchanged in the present work; there is a pericope on Plotinus， little else （more concerned with his spiritual outlook than with his metaphysics proper）。 Needless to say， science is ignored altogether。 Yet all these are mere quibbles; if determined and enterprising， one can very well track down elsewhere sufficient scholarly treatments of the aspects of religious and intellectual history that Brown neglects， but nowhere else indeed will one come across as masterful a depiction of late-antique society as we are favored to receive from Brown’s pen here。 。。。more
Pratik Luitel
，
An in-depth look at （mostly） the society of the near east and the fertile crescent and the empires that lay within。 Highlights the radical climb of Christianity to become the dominant force in the Roman empire and the consequent Hellenization of Eastern Christianity very well。 Also describes the social causes of the Western empire falling into Barbarian hands， and makes a similarly appealing one for how Islam came to sweep over Egypt and the Levant later。Would have loved it if more focus was put An in-depth look at （mostly） the society of the near east and the fertile crescent and the empires that lay within。 Highlights the radical climb of Christianity to become the dominant force in the Roman empire and the consequent Hellenization of Eastern Christianity very well。 Also describes the social causes of the Western empire falling into Barbarian hands， and makes a similarly appealing one for how Islam came to sweep over Egypt and the Levant later。Would have loved it if more focus was put into the Persian viewpoint - like all things on this topic， it is too Rome centric （but that might be because there is simply not enough information from the Sassanian side）。 Definitely recommend reading this。 。。。more
Lysergius
，
A lavishly illustrated journey through the first 6 centuries of the first "Christian" millennium。 Describes how the Christian world splits between its Latin and Greek components leaving it ill equipped to deal with the rise of Islam。 Fascinating， and extremely well written and readable。 A lavishly illustrated journey through the first 6 centuries of the first "Christian" millennium。 Describes how the Christian world splits between its Latin and Greek components leaving it ill equipped to deal with the rise of Islam。 Fascinating， and extremely well written and readable。 。。。more
Luke
，
The Creation of a New AgeAs a supporter of the "Decline and Fall" theory， I wanted to hate this book， but I couldn’t。 Brown writes with an infectious enthusiasm for his subject， the late Roman Empire and its successors。 If at times he does over-egg the achievements of the late Roman Empire， it could be forgiven。The book is divided into two parts of roughly 100 pages each with lots of pictures。 Part One covers the later Roman Empire from Diocletian to Theodosius I （c。280-400AD）。 Part Two covers The Creation of a New AgeAs a supporter of the "Decline and Fall" theory， I wanted to hate this book， but I couldn’t。 Brown writes with an infectious enthusiasm for his subject， the late Roman Empire and its successors。 If at times he does over-egg the achievements of the late Roman Empire， it could be forgiven。The book is divided into two parts of roughly 100 pages each with lots of pictures。 Part One covers the later Roman Empire from Diocletian to Theodosius I （c。280-400AD）。 Part Two covers the heirs of Rome- the Western Senate and Papacy， Byzantium and the Muslim world。 The focus is mainly on politics， religion and the arts。 One feels a history focused primarily on economic and social achievements during the period may have emphasised a substantially different trend。 The book to me was at its most interesting towards the middle of Part One where it discusses the reasons for the religious transformation of Rome。 After all， the Christianisation of Rome after Constantine is the defining cultural event of the period。 The interesting part of Brown’s view is that it was a revolution led by the middle-class。 A world of increasing taxation （to fund the army’s incessant wars against the existential threat of Sassanian Persia and the barbarian incursions） led to wealth being concentrated at the top of Roman society in an administrative bureaucracy and money for traditional religious festivals draining away。 At the same time， many of the middle class sought learning to gain access to this bureaucracy through training in rhetoric and study （think of St Augustine）， and so a cod form of Neo-Platonism began to become commonplace- this fused with the Christian religion’s organisational structure providing a broadly popular movement with a degree of intellectual articulation。 As the “new men” rose up through the ranks， the Hellenistic aristocratic high culture was overthrown and replaced by a large and increasingly Christian bureaucracy。 For， as Brown is keen to point out， Roman history is not that of the 90% of the rural working classes， but the 10% of the city dwellers， and paganism in the countryside persisted long afterwards even into the early Islamic era。On literature and philosophy， the book is fair， but perhaps over-eggs the achievements。 Yes， Neo-Platonism， the last great philosophical movement of the Ancient World， came out of the era in question。 One could praise Plotinus for producing a logically coherent strand of mysticism and a creative reinterpretation of Plato。 But Neo-Platonism was the last movement because it was a cul-de-sac。 Instead of heading towards an exploration of the truth， Neo-Platonism postulated truth could only be approached indirectly， becoming bogged down in cumbersome systems; Plotinus’ successor Iamblichus postulated 36 gods， 72 gods proceeding from them， supported by 42 nature gods for good measure。 In literature， St Augustine wrote the greatest autobiography of the Ancient World， and Emperor Julian was no slouch at writing either （his wonderfully titled “Beard Hater” is an engaging satire of himself）。 But aside from these two giants at the end of the 4th century and Boethius in the 5th， little of interest is to be found in the rest of the period， as the literary and philosophical scene becomes dominated by homilies and endless Byzantine discussions of the nature of Christ- do you prefer one nature， one-essence or one-energy to explain the interaction between the human and divine？ The book is less convincing when it describes how Roman art shifted。 It argues that the ending of Hellenic realism represented a conscious shift away from the classical style to emphasise the importance of the heavenly realm。 In support it offers evidence classical work could still be produced up until the mid-Byzantine period。 And yet these later pieces are few and even pieces commissioned for the imperial court of Heraclius （died 641） are of a less than middling standard compared to their classical forbears。 What would be more interesting would be exploring the impact of the Sassanians on Roman art。 Persia had previously had a realistic hellenic inspired art under the Seleucids and the Parthians， but Sassanian art from the 3rd century onward rejected foreign Greek-influenced realism and harkened back to that of the Achaemenid Empire。 As the centre of the Roman world shifted East to Constantinople and closer to Persia， did this antique art also distort the Roman style？ Indeed， one wonders how much the adoption of Christianity by the Roman emperor was also influenced by Sassanian Persia， where the monotheist Zoroastrian faith was aggressively integrated into a militaristic state。My other complaint is that the work tends to bear the bias of its author。 Brown， an Irish Protestant immigrant then teaching at Oxford in the 60’s， is so firmly rooted on the side of the “new men” that he often overlooks the achievements of the Roman aristocracy。 He joyously writes of a world in which aristocratic “deadwood” was rooted out by working class soldier kings under Diocletian and Constantine。 In Part 2 he sneers at the Italian senators with their verse in a rarefied Latin dialect。 Emperor Justinian on the other hand is praised for taking the time to understand theological issues of the common men， and is portrayed as an “autocrat with efficient tax collectors” rather than a man whose prolonged sieges in Italy irreparably damaged the last remnants of Roman towns。 The Eastern Church gets an easy ride despite stuffing its pockets with gold throughout。 Barbarians are problematic because they were “encapsulated by a wall of dumb hatred” and not assimilated， not because they were even more vicious and self-serving than the soldier emperors before them。 The loss of virtually all Western territories is treated with the diffidence a 60’s leftist might take towards the loss of the European colonial empires。 One would not be surprised if at the end the 5th century Bishop Haroldus MacMillianus popped up to announce to his flock “you’ve never had it so good”。 Let’s be charitable to Brown。 His ideas are not completely crazy and help to put the decline and fall of Rome in perspective。 Up until the mid 7th century， Roman civilization’s core had， on occasion， the ability to achieve similar heights to its glory days both literally and figuratively。 The Church of Hagia Sophia in Constantinople （537AD） stands at 55m， the Colosseum in Rome （80AD） stands at 51m。 Emperor Heraclius in 627AD could still field an army of over 20，000 men and beat the Persians comprehensively， much as Trajan had beat the Parthians over five centuries earlier。 Earlier the soldier emperors Diocletian （284-305AD） and Constantine （306-337AD） had managed to put more men in the field than Rome at its height （c。 650，000 under Constantine vs。 450，000 under Hadrian） and buy the Western empire another century of existence。 This is an age worthy of serious study and non-trivial achievement。 But such a viewpoint needs to be read in conjunction with existing decline and fall works to get the full picture。 After the wars of Justinian， the West lay in ruins。 Its greatest dark-age ruler， Charlemagne， had to reuse blocks of marble from ancient monuments for Aachen cathedral as there was no one with the skill left to cut them。 Rome’s population had collapsed。 In the East， Byzantine territories shrank。 Religious intolerance towards Jews was even worse than under the pagans。 The Athenian Academy was closed， the library of Alexandria lost to the Muslims。 The Mediterranean cities that had fueled Hellenic culture shrank。 If this was a “rosy afterglow of Roma Eterna”， it was like the embers of the eternal city after its sack by the Goths。 。。。more
Mark
，
The world became slightly less confusing for me after reading this book。 I understood better the context of Western civilization and the blurriness as the Roman Empire shifted to Christianity then the Arab and Islamic thought。 The author eloquently tucks several formative centuries for humanity into a compelling narrative。
Benjamin
，
I was introduced to this book as part of my university course and approached it with the same level of fatigue that normally accompanies set texts for undergraduates。 It was a pleasure to discover， therefore， that not only was this an incredibly informative book that helped yours truly through various essays， but also a succinct and enjoyable read。 Brown's prose is accessible and engaging without losing its academic focus or creating a sense of being 'dumbed down' for the layman。The accessibilit I was introduced to this book as part of my university course and approached it with the same level of fatigue that normally accompanies set texts for undergraduates。 It was a pleasure to discover， therefore， that not only was this an incredibly informative book that helped yours truly through various essays， but also a succinct and enjoyable read。 Brown's prose is accessible and engaging without losing its academic focus or creating a sense of being 'dumbed down' for the layman。The accessibility of Brown's work has another benefit。 Whereas many of the widely available books on the Later Roman Empire and Late Antiquity （heaven forbid you should utter the name 'Dark Age'） tend to focus on the more sensational military history and the chaos in which the Roman world found itself。 Brown addresses these things but not to the detriment of the social history， which， through the use effective use of images of the material evidence and his engaging style， he brings to life in the vibrancy it deserves。I shall refrain from going much further into the contents of the book， for fear I would do Brown's arguments an injustice， but I can nonetheless heartily recommend that anyone with even a passing interest in the period defined take the time to read this work。 。。。more
Muhsin Ulusoy
，
Kitap konusu için önemli ve detaylı bir kaynak oluşturuyor。 Çeviride sorun yok ama sayfa tasarımları gerçekten çok kötü。 Kitap tek baskı yapmış diğer baskılar gelirse bu sayfa tasarımlarının ciddi anlamda değişmesi lazım。
Connor
，
Exceptional book！ The book on late antiquity for both the scholar and general reader。 It was quite a short read， but packed full of detail about late roman developments in administration， art etc。 Definitely a book to reread。
Ryan Patrick
，
A groundbreaking classic， but one which requires effort。 You can't fully understand what Brown is saying about the culture and society of the late Roman Empire unless you are already conversant with its political history， because while the book is generally chronological， it treats whole centuries， or more， as coherent chunks of time。 Once you have that basic narrative down， it is definitely a book worth reading， if only for its historiographical interest as a foundation work in developing the w A groundbreaking classic， but one which requires effort。 You can't fully understand what Brown is saying about the culture and society of the late Roman Empire unless you are already conversant with its political history， because while the book is generally chronological， it treats whole centuries， or more， as coherent chunks of time。 Once you have that basic narrative down， it is definitely a book worth reading， if only for its historiographical interest as a foundation work in developing the whole Late Antique 'Transformationist' school。 。。。more
Eren Kozan
，
In his book World of Late Antiquity， Peter Brown reflects the social and religious conditions， mindset， hopes and fears of citizens of Western and Eastern Roman Empire between 200 AD and 800 AD。 We start from the decline of Paganism， high society culture and erosion of the ancient rituals in the Rome， go through the rise of Christianity and collapse of Western Roman Empire， see the glorious days of the Byzantine Empire and finally come to new wave of religion， Islam。I started the book aiming to In his book World of Late Antiquity， Peter Brown reflects the social and religious conditions， mindset， hopes and fears of citizens of Western and Eastern Roman Empire between 200 AD and 800 AD。 We start from the decline of Paganism， high society culture and erosion of the ancient rituals in the Rome， go through the rise of Christianity and collapse of Western Roman Empire， see the glorious days of the Byzantine Empire and finally come to new wave of religion， Islam。I started the book aiming to increase my knowledge about the politics， religion and social background of the antique world around Mediterranean Sea。 Therefore， as a history enthusiast who looks to know more about a period， I was waiting a more chronological and classic history book like flow。 However， as I read the book， I see that writer’s target audience is not the people who wants to learn about antiquity but ones that already familiar with it and try to gain new perspectives。 Although， the book has chapters with titles implies specific time periods like fall of Hellenism， wake of Christianity， when you go through the chapters you will see that there are back and forth time shifts to analyse some concepts。 This time lapses makes harder to follow what was going on around those years， which rulers was in charge， which important political and social drifts had occurred。 However， I think this rather my fault to start such a complex era with a book not written to teach late antiquity but to argue it with people who knows about it。Even though sometimes I felt lost between pages of historical information， I learn many interesting facts and details about Rome and Byzantine。 As one of the current inhabitants of Anatolia， it surprises me to see how the soils we live on hosts many different nations such as Latins， Greeks， Syrians， Persians。 I believe as Turks and Muslims live on Anatolia often， we see ourselves as the first owners of this lands and we tend to ignore the massive culture inheritance those people left for us。 However， seeing how Pagans， Christians， Manichaeists prevail all those years， spread their beliefs all around the land make me realize how our current social and culture has affected from them。In the end， although book is hard to follow for a newcomer of the world， World of Late Antiquity does not fall short to give you an overall understanding of the era。 Moreover， if you are living in the ruins of that world， it manages to give you a sense which makes you look different to your history。 。。。more
Michael Crofford
，
I really enjoyed this book。 I started listening to the Yale Open Course on the Early Middle Ages which can be found on YouTube。 Professor Paul Freedman does a wonderful job of covering the material。 There were multiple texts used in the course and this is one of them。 It's part of a series from Norton。 I might check out the others as well。 The book offers ample illustrations and the text is clear and understandable for an educated reader with some background in History。 I found it hit that perfe I really enjoyed this book。 I started listening to the Yale Open Course on the Early Middle Ages which can be found on YouTube。 Professor Paul Freedman does a wonderful job of covering the material。 There were multiple texts used in the course and this is one of them。 It's part of a series from Norton。 I might check out the others as well。 The book offers ample illustrations and the text is clear and understandable for an educated reader with some background in History。 I found it hit that perfect point with being scholarly yet still accessible。 Personally， I found the material covering the interaction between Pagan/Hellenistic culture and early Christians to be the most interesting。 Reading this text has made me want to explore this topic more。 In particular the historical role of worshipping the Roman emperor and how that manifested in early Christianity。 Also of interest is the different focuses of beliefs between the Hellenistic world and Christians and the role influential Christians played。 Brown points out that the men of the 3rd and 4th century believe they were acting as servants of God rather than the traditional paganism which mobilized feelings for sacred things。 Moreover， a strong belief in the power of demonic forces created a tide in which Christians justified the destruction of pagan sites and the persecution of their worshippers and ultimately transformed the Roman empire。 。。。more
Erica Zahn
，
My review is very late， but I found this to be a useful overview of the Late Antique period， particularly from a religious perspective， although I wouldn’t consider it one of his ‘must reads’。 Naturally it’s a challenge to cover such a vast period in a short book， but part of Brown’s goal here is to define the time covered as a distinct historical period and to explain its importance as the interim between Antiquity and the mediaeval period。 The tone is less pessimistic than the traditional view My review is very late， but I found this to be a useful overview of the Late Antique period， particularly from a religious perspective， although I wouldn’t consider it one of his ‘must reads’。 Naturally it’s a challenge to cover such a vast period in a short book， but part of Brown’s goal here is to define the time covered as a distinct historical period and to explain its importance as the interim between Antiquity and the mediaeval period。 The tone is less pessimistic than the traditional view of the ‘Fall’ of the Roman Empire， but on how the centres of power shifted to once-fringe parts of the Empire （particularly the Near East and North Africa） and how the old culture was remoulded over time by Christianity， also fitting in nicely with the contemporary pushback against the ‘Dark Ages’ label。In spite of the traditional concept of the ‘Fall’ of the Roman Empire， Brown envisions this period as the birth of something entirely new， rather than a death。 The beginnings of European Christianity are naturally central to this ‘rebirth’， but it also requires a shift from lamenting the fall in influence of ‘Rome’ itself and prioritising instead the urban centres that rose in influence in the wake of its decline， even arguing that ‘Rome’ continued to exist in a different location， the ‘Fall’ omitted entirely from the narrative。 He argues for a picture of stability and continuity， only marred by （and not upended by） barbarian invasions and culture shift。 Perhaps surprisingly， the art and architecture included in the illustrations is key to telling this story， not only giving the reader a direct window into the time but also showing the creativity and expression engendered by the new culture that emerged。 The distinction from the classical world is highlighted strikingly by the way the people of this era choose to present themselves。 This forms one part of the broader vision of intellectual achievement that characterised the period， corroborating Brown’s thesis of overall ‘continuity’ of themes established in earlier Antiquity。While Brown’s arguments have proven highly influential， the argument is by no means settled: scholars such as Bryan Ward-Perkins still argue for the ‘decline and fall’ view of this period， highlighting the economic difficulties of this time which are not such a focus for Brown， a religion specialist （though he does mention them）。 The contemporary political environment is also under-emphasised by Brown， but I would argue that the most important point in the book lies in his vision of the gradual transition of Greco-Roman religion to early Christianity， with much still borrowed culturally from the earlier period， a strong point in favour of his ‘transition’ theory that is sorely lacking elsewhere。 In theory， it is of course possible to have both economic hardship and cultural achievement， though this would be surprising， though few would argue that the achievements of Plotinus and the neoplatonists are really on par with Virgil and Cicero。 Although broad and subjective， Brown has provided the best possible overview of the period from his particular perspective， but it needs to be understood within the context I’ve outlined。 。。。more
Kevin
，
Interesting mostly cultural history。 I think I wanted to read this because I saw a tweet about it being a good landmark book/essay from the early 1970s。 I think it delivered？ Hard to say because I don't know what exactly was new at the time about this take on the time period。 Interesting mostly cultural history。 I think I wanted to read this because I saw a tweet about it being a good landmark book/essay from the early 1970s。 I think it delivered？ Hard to say because I don't know what exactly was new at the time about this take on the time period。 。。。more
Nidok
，
Me l'hauria de tornar a llegir。 Me l'hauria de tornar a llegir。 。。。more
Adriana
，
A remarcable description of late antique World
Galicius
，
As the title partly describes， this is a scholarly （Oxford， Princeton） though much condensed history of Europe in what was called the “Dark Ages” but also the Persian Empire and the sudden what the author calls “rapid crisis” of Islam。
Katie Bayford
，
I'm preparing for a semester of directed reading on Justinian's reconquering of Rome， and read this to have a good base of knowledge on the general period。 Brown looks at the rise of Christianity in the West， the blurring of boundaries between the eastern and western empires， the East， and then the rise of Islam。 It's a fantastic piece of scholarship to prepare for further reading afterwards， albeit one that focuses heavily upon religion （and less so upon， say， war or politics）。 I'm preparing for a semester of directed reading on Justinian's reconquering of Rome， and read this to have a good base of knowledge on the general period。 Brown looks at the rise of Christianity in the West， the blurring of boundaries between the eastern and western empires， the East， and then the rise of Islam。 It's a fantastic piece of scholarship to prepare for further reading afterwards， albeit one that focuses heavily upon religion （and less so upon， say， war or politics）。 。。。more
Czarny Pies
，
When I first read Peter Brown's "The World of Late Antiquity" forty years ago as an undergraduate it disappointed me greatly。 It had been presented to me as outstanding rebuttal of Gibbon's great thesis that the Roman Empire Declined and toppled over。 In fact， the "World of Late Antiquity" addresses none of Gibbon's arguments。 What it does do is explain how the Mediterranean world transformed from a classical （pagan） to a medieval （Christian civilization） during the period from 150 AD to 750 AD。 When I first read Peter Brown's "The World of Late Antiquity" forty years ago as an undergraduate it disappointed me greatly。 It had been presented to me as outstanding rebuttal of Gibbon's great thesis that the Roman Empire Declined and toppled over。 In fact， the "World of Late Antiquity" addresses none of Gibbon's arguments。 What it does do is explain how the Mediterranean world transformed from a classical （pagan） to a medieval （Christian civilization） during the period from 150 AD to 750 AD。When I first read Brown's book I found the tone smug and that the proof was lacking for most of the things he said。 Brown's masterful " Augustine of Hippo: A Biography" in which he demonstrated an extraordinary understanding of the early Christian church and its theologians changed everything for me。 It convinced me that Brown truly knew his stuff and it also provided the proof more many of the points made in the later book。 In "The World of Late of Antiquity" Brown argues that the Christianisation of the Mediterranean world was a very gradual process。 The religion was first practised by small minorities in the large cities。 It would enter the countryside much later where it would progress much more slowly。 Classical or pagan philosophy would dominate education until the end of the sixth century。 The royal dynasties would move in fits and starts towards Christian culture。 Their bureaucrats and functionaries would not have a completely Christian ethos until the beginning of the seventh century。In Brown's review Europe became medieval at the point when it was monolithically Christian from the peasantry to the palace which he places at 750 AD。 At this time a monolithically， Islamic civilization would be established in the Eastern Mediterranean and North Africa creating a cultural divide in the civilized world which exists to this day。 One many instinctively agree with Brown based on how much one has read or how much art one has seen from the period。 Brown's thesis however is too high level to be either demonstrable or refutable。 One reads this book for the fun。 The best thing about it is the way the publisher has juxtaposed the many pictures of art objects with Brown's text。 My recommendation would be to not bother and read his biography of St。 Augustine instead。 。。。more
Marissa
，
A slim and engaging survey of an extremely dynamic period。 Excellent coverage of the social and religious developments of the late roman world from the 3rd-6th century。 Slightly less satisfying when it tries to incorporate Sassanian Persian and Arabian developments， let alone the interaction of Turkic and Chinese polities。 Suitable as an introduction to the topic as well as an enjoyable casual read！
Michael Finocchiaro
，
This book was highly informative and enlightening。 The period following the fall of Rome to the advent of the Carolingian Empire is a confusing one， but Peter Brown does an excellent job of describing the forces in movement and the significance of historical events during this period in their context。 Highly recommended。
Philip Coulter
，
As I understand it， this book from 1971 was influential in paving the way for current scholarship that treats the period form the 3rd to 8th centuries as distinct from the earlier Classical Roman period。 Brown is positive about this era finding growth and creative in place of or alongside the traditional views of decline and destruction。 I've read more recent， and more detailed books on this - The Inheritance of Rome by Chris Wickham stands out。 This still added something for me - the short a As I understand it， this book from 1971 was influential in paving the way for current scholarship that treats the period form the 3rd to 8th centuries as distinct from the earlier Classical Roman period。 Brown is positive about this era finding growth and creative in place of or alongside the traditional views of decline and destruction。 I've read more recent， and more detailed books on this - The Inheritance of Rome by Chris Wickham stands out。 This still added something for me - the short accessible format is， for want of a better word， accessible。 In particular the book brings up cultural figures like Augustine and Plotinus and shows the vibrant world of religious transformation （for better or worse）。 There are some great pictures throughout the book that really help to make the topic anything but dry。 It would sit nicely alongside Brian Ward-Perkins' The Fall Of Rome， which adds a much more argumentative and pessimistic view of the era - bringing up economic and archaeological evidence that Brown brushed over。 Both books are rather short introductions to what could be a very heavy debate。 。。。more
Mehmet Akif Koç
，
Ortadoğu ve Akdeniz havzasının şekillendiği MS 150-750 arası döneme ilişkin kıymetli bir değerlendirme。。。 Son bölümde， Abbasilerin yoğun Pers kimliği ve Roma-İran arasındaki rolüne dair tespitleri dikkat çekici。。。
Eric
，
Peter R。L。 Brown travels quickly over the Classical Age to Middle Ages transition， which actually strengthens his argument， since he does not bog down in historical detail。 In fact， Brown discloses at end of the book that he has only written an essay on the issue， and not an in depth analysis of the matter。 A point of interest to this reviewer is that Brown holds that the rise of Islam actually cemented （my word） the transition in world view， because it eliminated， finally， the easy exchange of Peter R。L。 Brown travels quickly over the Classical Age to Middle Ages transition， which actually strengthens his argument， since he does not bog down in historical detail。 In fact， Brown discloses at end of the book that he has only written an essay on the issue， and not an in depth analysis of the matter。 A point of interest to this reviewer is that Brown holds that the rise of Islam actually cemented （my word） the transition in world view， because it eliminated， finally， the easy exchange of classical thought among scholars who served new governmental masters， and hardened the boundaries and borders of contending empires （Byzantium， Arabic/Persian Islam and to a lesser extent， Western Europe）。 Once the flow of classical thought was contained in Byzantium （Western Europe just abandoned or lost it）， then the dominance of Christianity in Byzantium faced off against Islam， leaving Europe in the Dark Ages。 Ironically， the Arabs， and later， Central Asian， scholars preserved classical thought。 For more on this matter， see Lost Enlightenment: Central Asia's Golden Age from the Arab Conquest to Tamerlane。I gave the book only 4 stars because Brown in dealing with Christian thought views the contending theological positions through the lens of political accommodation， or， in current PC speak， toleration。 Brown opposes the orthodox Christian views （Athanasius， Chalcedon， for example） because they were uncompromising and turned out of the Church Arians and Monophysites。 A more detached stance from Brown on these matters would have been less distracting to his argument。By happenstance I own another book by Brown on the same issue， The Making of Late Antiquity， which I plan to read shortly， and which I expect will back fill some of the material in The World of Late Antiquity 150-750。 。。。more
Carlton
，
A dense book for all its brevity， outlining a description of the transition from the Roman Empire of classical thought （Greek and Latin philosophy）， which bulks large as the first Mediterranean Empire， through its decline and fragmentation， to create:1 The West， which descended into local principalities （this is not explored in depth， as the author considers that it has already been written about extensively）; and2 The Eastern Byzantine Empire， which managed to maintain its connection to classic A dense book for all its brevity， outlining a description of the transition from the Roman Empire of classical thought （Greek and Latin philosophy）， which bulks large as the first Mediterranean Empire， through its decline and fragmentation， to create:1 The West， which descended into local principalities （this is not explored in depth， as the author considers that it has already been written about extensively）; and2 The Eastern Byzantine Empire， which managed to maintain its connection to classical thought， although attacked by the Persian Empire and the first wave of Islamic expansion。The author explains in his bibliography that this book was originally written as an essay trying to provide greater coverage of the creation of the Byzantine Empire from the Eastern Roman。Although I do not have sufficient grounding in the history of these times to follow either the detail or test the arguments made， this book provided me with an exciting and dramatic sweeping story。 I immediately started reading a book about the creation of Christianity to see how this fitted into the Late Antique story and that is what I ask of a history book， that it interests me and wants me to learn more。The book was written in 1971 and I understand from other commentary has been subsequently overtaken in some areas by subsequent research， but it provides a great overview of a changing society and provides reasons for those changes。 。。。more
Bruce Fogerty
，