The Inheritance of Rome: A History of Europe from 400 to 1000
- Downloads：9008
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2021-05-24 10:55:50
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：Chris Wickham
- ISBN：0140290141
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
'The Penguin History of Europe series 。。。 is one of contemporary publishing's great projects' New Statesman
The world known as the 'Dark Ages'， often seen as a time of barbarism， was in fact the crucible in which modern Europe would be created。
Chris Wickham's acclaimed history shows how this period， encompassing peoples such as Goths， Franks， Vandals， Byzantines， Arabs， Anglo-Saxons and Vikings， was central to the development of our history and culture。 From the collapse of the Roman Empire to the establishment of new European states， and from Ireland to Constantinople， the Baltic to the Mediterranean， this landmark work makes sense of a time of invasion and turbulence， but also of continuity， creativity and achievement。
The world known as the 'Dark Ages'， often seen as a time of barbarism， was in fact the crucible in which modern Europe would be created。
Chris Wickham's acclaimed history shows how this period， encompassing peoples such as Goths， Franks， Vandals， Byzantines， Arabs， Anglo-Saxons and Vikings， was central to the development of our history and culture。 From the collapse of the Roman Empire to the establishment of new European states， and from Ireland to Constantinople， the Baltic to the Mediterranean， this landmark work makes sense of a time of invasion and turbulence， but also of continuity， creativity and achievement。
Reviews
Wang
，
My conclusion: Chris Wickham is not a good writer。 He might be an expert but his writing is dry and out of focus。 Chris neglected Spain while spent much time on non-European countries like Iraq， Persia， etc。
Alastair Heffernan
，
The Inheritance of Rome begins so strongly。 We are treated to Chris Wickham's appeal not to disregards hundreds of years of history as 'dark'， or as the poor successor to the Roman Empire， or as a mere Middle Ages between the great years of Roman antiquity and the rebirth of the Renaissance （yes I know that's a tautology but you get my point）。 In the early pages Wickham teases the reader with the promises of an exciting world most people， even those with an interest in history， seldom take much The Inheritance of Rome begins so strongly。 We are treated to Chris Wickham's appeal not to disregards hundreds of years of history as 'dark'， or as the poor successor to the Roman Empire， or as a mere Middle Ages between the great years of Roman antiquity and the rebirth of the Renaissance （yes I know that's a tautology but you get my point）。 In the early pages Wickham teases the reader with the promises of an exciting world most people， even those with an interest in history， seldom take much notice of。 This promise of a new vista is mostly lived up to - I learnt a lot about this unknown world - but only after struggling through what is at times an extremely tiring read。 The avoidable challenges the book presents the lay reader prevents this book living up to its potential to be a truly great work of history writing。 Let's start with the good。 In the introductory pages and throughout， Wickham does a masterful job of guiding the （in my case at least） historical lay-person through the nuances of the historiography of the period。 In other words， Wickham explains in clear terms the sources of evidence （documentary and archaeological）， their various pros and cons， and how the interpretation of sources has changed and become more nuanced in recent years。 A good example early on in the book is when we are told the surprising fact that the "huge quantity of Christian writing after 350 or so substantially outweighs in quantity the work of late Roman secular élites"。 As the author goes on to note， however: this body of writing "was almost entirely the work of men who were much more rigourist than their neighbours。" The religious bent of most authors from the period， Wickham stresses， means it "is not always easy to tell if people ever did the things that were criticised [by the puritanical authors]， let alone how common such actions were。" At the same time， Wickham does not condone throwing away such evidence but rather advises interpreting it carefully: the diatribes by religious authors against particular sins can be taken as a worry of the times or of indicating plausible actions， but these writings may not be good evidence that such behaviours were widespread or represented a genuine social concern （as their polemical nature might suggest）。 Through elaborations like these， I learnt so much more about history as a discipline。 The readability of these nuanced discussions is truly the author at his best。 Related to this is the quality of the book's structure。 The last book I read was Robin Lane Fox's 'The Classical World: An Epic History of Greece and Rome'。 A key issue I had with that similarly long and ambitious book was that discussions of social life and attitudes were awkwardly inserted within key historical developments and utterly broke the flow。 Wickham still separates the discussions of the times from the broad sweep of events， but covers far more ground in the history chapters and so doesn't break the flow up with the nuanced analysis of how people actually lived （which comes later）。 The chapters， simply put， are far better divided and organised， making following the history easier。Which is not to say the history is ultimately that easy to follow; it's just that Wickham's smart organisation gives him a fighting chance。 Despite this， a key issue is the lack of ease with which the reader can truly follow the events being described。 The author at times， for example， jsut assumes the reader will know who a particular group are or what the broad outline of events is。 The Vandals， for instance， are first mentioned through a nuanced discussion of their differences to the Romans， several pages before we are told their key role: kicking the Roman's out of North Africa， a key driver of the political break-up of the western Roman Empire。 At other times the history is obfuscated by the sheer volume of detail。 Particularly towards the back of the book I was often overwhelmed by the number of names， such as in the description of the post-Carolingian states。 This is especially acute because， with almost no exceptions （barring perhaps Charlemagne and the occasional pope） the amateur reader is exceptionally unlikely to have heard of any of the players （unlike in a history of earlier or later periods when the reader likely has a few knowledge anchor points）。 This issue could have been mitigated both through a condensation of the subject matter and much better signposting （such as introductory paragraphs identifying the major contours of events before we dive into the detail）。 The more cultural or thematic chapters （such as on economics） can be guilty of a surfeit of information too， nowhere more so than in a late chapter on aristocrats。 In just one mega-paragraph （spanning pages 513-515） all the following individuals or groups of people are mentioned: Bernard Hairy-paws; The Canossa; the lords of Uxelles; William the Pious; King Berengar II of Italy; his male-line heirs who controlled the Mâconnais; his grandson Otto-William; Josseran I; the count of Mâcon; Bernard II （Josseran's grandson as I'm sure we all know）; the Uxelles seigneurie; and Georges Duby （I may have missed one or two）。 Such a level of detail is not uncommon in this book and， frankly， rendered reading this book at times exhausting。I think what this really indicates is an issue of audience: who is this book truly for？ The propaedeutic quality of the discussion of historiography， for instance， spoke to me as a history novice。 The introduction indeed claims an audience of those who know nothing about the period。 At the same time， that this book evolved out of a university course shines through， for good and bad。 On the one hand， we truly feel like we are being swept into the world of an active early Middle Ages academic and listening in on the very much alive debates in the field。 We are carefully shown the evidence as students on Wickham's courses likely were。 On the other hand， we are nearly drowned in detail and have too much assumed of us - the uninitiated reader， not necessarily an enterprising history student。 If you know a reasonable bit about this period I imagine this book will be a wonderful read， since the onslaught of information will not weight you down so much。 If you know nothing like me， you will still enjoy this book， particularly with regards its inside look into the practice of researching history， but it will be a hard-won enjoyment all the same。 。。。more
Cihan
，
Very disappointing， incoherent and rambling。 Contrary to the introduction， this is not for those wanting to learn about the era for the first time， as Wickham has a habit of jumping back and forth in chronology and name-dropping events （like the Nika riots of Constantinople） without giving any context whatsoever， and never mentioning them again。 He does this constantly。 A very disjointed and jarring experience， seemingly written for his graduates who already know everything he cryptically refers Very disappointing， incoherent and rambling。 Contrary to the introduction， this is not for those wanting to learn about the era for the first time， as Wickham has a habit of jumping back and forth in chronology and name-dropping events （like the Nika riots of Constantinople） without giving any context whatsoever， and never mentioning them again。 He does this constantly。 A very disjointed and jarring experience， seemingly written for his graduates who already know everything he cryptically refers to。 I write this as someone already well versed in events up to 800 AD thanks to other books， but given the way the first three chapters were written， I decided to cut my losses and dropped the book to seek others。 。。。more
Allee
，
For breadth and depth of knowledge， there can be no criticism of Wickham's work。 Stylistically， however， this was a much more difficult/less enjoyable read than the first book in the Penguin History of Europe series。Wickham is so at pains to prevent the reader from seeing widespread trends were they don't exist that he is constantly gesturing towards a development， only to immediately walk it back with a warning to the reader about drawing too many conclusions。 Repeating this pattern constantly For breadth and depth of knowledge， there can be no criticism of Wickham's work。 Stylistically， however， this was a much more difficult/less enjoyable read than the first book in the Penguin History of Europe series。Wickham is so at pains to prevent the reader from seeing widespread trends were they don't exist that he is constantly gesturing towards a development， only to immediately walk it back with a warning to the reader about drawing too many conclusions。 Repeating this pattern constantly throughout the book， after having already cautioned the reader in the introduction， becomes annoying and begins to feel patronizing; as if the reader is too dumb to remember his general warnings in the intro and requires constant reminding。He also falls into the habit of offering so many parenthetical examples of names/places/events when discussing trends， that these examples disrupt the narrative rather than enhance it。 A well-used anecdotal example brings historical trends to life， name/place/date dumping does not。 。。。more
Filip
，
A generous star rating because the author is obviously knowledgable， and this book is probably an excellent read for a specialist in the field。 But I thought I was getting a grand survey of the european and mediterranean areas in the early middle ages， a readable large-scale， general， history book from penguin， similar to the one they gave us on The cold war （Westad）。 Instead this book was overly academic， name-dropping， and anecdote heavy。 Large parts are completely unreadable for a general au A generous star rating because the author is obviously knowledgable， and this book is probably an excellent read for a specialist in the field。 But I thought I was getting a grand survey of the european and mediterranean areas in the early middle ages， a readable large-scale， general， history book from penguin， similar to the one they gave us on The cold war （Westad）。 Instead this book was overly academic， name-dropping， and anecdote heavy。 Large parts are completely unreadable for a general audience。 You want to know how a fascinating society functioned in the 8th century， its regime and quirks， not read endless anecdotes about an experience a minor noble had regarding something marginal。 All this sourcebook-type noise distracts from a coherent narrative。 It will not stick to a general reader， nor should it occupy space， it's hardly relevant for anything but a specialized understanding of the subject。 I believe Paul Freedman used this book as a reference in his online course series （Yale， available on Youtube）。 I would rather recommend his lectures。 If you have already read Gregory of Tours and Einhard， you are likely the target audience - in that case， enjoy！ 。。。more
Joseph Lord
，
I have read history from all periods for several years。 As a BA in Philosophy， I have been parsing difficult， long-winded writing for several years。 This is a book that is somehow less pleasant to read than Kant-- perhaps even Hegel。 I never leave reviews， but for this I had to。 This is emphatically and without a doubt the worst piece of history I have ever read and maybe even the worst thing I've ever read。 Two stars is generous。 Wickham is rambling， he makes mention to things and people whom w I have read history from all periods for several years。 As a BA in Philosophy， I have been parsing difficult， long-winded writing for several years。 This is a book that is somehow less pleasant to read than Kant-- perhaps even Hegel。 I never leave reviews， but for this I had to。 This is emphatically and without a doubt the worst piece of history I have ever read and maybe even the worst thing I've ever read。 Two stars is generous。 Wickham is rambling， he makes mention to things and people whom we have no clue about， and I learned nothing whatsoever from reading this。 I get it， the cover is beautiful， but please do yourself a favor and do not buy this book。 。。。more
Adam Marischuk
，
A solid look into a period of history that is often neglected by an important medievalistIt is impossible to study the Middle Ages currently without repeatedly coming across Christ Wickham， likely the most important living scholar of， at least the early， Middle Ages。 This is the second book I have read by him， the first being Medieval Europe and I plan on reading his foundational work Framing the Early Middle Ages: Europe and the Mediterranean， 400-800 thus I am moving backwards through his bibl A solid look into a period of history that is often neglected by an important medievalistIt is impossible to study the Middle Ages currently without repeatedly coming across Christ Wickham， likely the most important living scholar of， at least the early， Middle Ages。 This is the second book I have read by him， the first being Medieval Europe and I plan on reading his foundational work Framing the Early Middle Ages: Europe and the Mediterranean， 400-800 thus I am moving backwards through his bibliography。 Thus it is impossible for me to review this book without making passing reference to what I have already encountered from him。The Inheritance of Rome is a substantially more enjoyable read than Medieval Europe in my opinion。 It grew out of the university lectures he delivered while at Birmingham Univeristy and the order， and organization reflect the thematic rather than chronological structure of a series of lectures。 Much like Medieval Europe it reflects a couple of common Wickhamian interests， the emphasis on taxation rather than rent paid in kind， the constant （negative） comparisons of Western Europe to Byzantium and the Arab world， the emphasis on politics to the neglect of other intellectual or religious trends。It is dense and periodically a slog， but the use of illuminating stories at the beginning of each of the chapters helps the reader （and assumedly his student audience when this was in oral format） enter into the chapter and make the connection between the practical application and the theory or general idea of the chapter。 Speaking of which， the chapters are: 1。 IntroductionPart I: The Roman Empire and its Break-up， 400-5502。 The Weight of Empire3。 Culture and Belief in the Christian Roman World4。 Crisi and Continuity， 400-550Part II: The Post-Roman West， 550-7505。 Merovingian Gual and Germany， 500-7516。 The West Mediterranean Kingdoms: Spain and Italy， 550-7507。 Kings without States: Britain and Ireland， 400-8008。 Post-Roman Attitudes: Culture， Beliefs and Political Etiquette， 550-7509。 Wealth， Exchange and Peasant Society10。 The power of the Visual: Material Culture and Display from Imperial Rome to the CarolingiansPart III: The Empires of the East， 550-100011。 Byzantine Survival， 550-85012。 The Chrystallization of Arab Political Power， 630-75013。 Byzantine Revival， 850-100014。 From 'Abbasid Baghdad to Umayyad Córdoba， 750-100015。 The State and the Economy: Eastern Mediterranean Exchange Networks， 600-1000Part IV: The Carolingian and Post-Carolingian West， 750-100016。 The Carolingian Century， 751-88717。 Intellectuals and Politics18。 The Tenth-Century Successor States19。 'Carolingian' England， 800-100020。 Outer Europe21。 Aristocrats between the Carolingian and the 'Feudal' Worlds22。 The Caging of the Peasantry， 800-100023。 Conclusion: Trends in European History， 400-1000 I would have gladly given the book four stars but for a couple of issues:The first two have very little to do with Professor Wickham and I blame the publisher for1） The lack of foot or endnotes （the bibliography is organized by page reference to the text）2） The substandard index of only names and places， making searching for themes difficultThe other issues only detract from the book in a limited scholarly way， and given the above two issues， I am not convinced that the intended audience is a scholarly one。3） Much like how Medieval Europe begins with an introductory chapter on framing the Middle Ages， The Inheritance begins with a historiographical discussion of teleology and ideology in history。 This discussion essentially boils down to: Professor Wickham does not care for the grand-narrative teleological approach。 But he is tilting at windmills here because I cannot think of any modern historians who read or write history explicitly in either of the two grand narratives: with regard to nation-building （nationalism） or with regard to progress to modernity。But after his diatribe， he goes on to present a his own narrative， borrowing much language and economic concepts from Marx。 I am not certain to what degree professor Wickham identifies with Marxism， but he has clearly inherited some of that grand narrative with regards to his economic perspective。 This is a common trend amongst liberals， that they decry bias in others but fail to recognize their own。4） Closely related to the previous criticism is the meta-history of taxation in money being held up as a better alternative to taxation in kind。 Wickham here assumes two things: 1） that taxation is money helps develop a centralized state， and 2） that taxation in kind places a heavier burden on the peasants。What professor Wickham's praise of Rome， Byzantium and the Arab （Muslim） states is that the money taxation is strongly interconnected with slavery in all three civilizations， and that a military aristocracy relying on fiscal taxation is parasitic。 Though there is much to not like about the medieval lords， they were interested in the stability and development of their lands in a way that， if they merely expropriated taxes， would not be。 And this accounts for much of the success and stability of Medieval Europe which could solidify its borders， even expand them southwards back into Spain and Italy （and through the Crusades into the Holy Land）。In the conclusion Professor Wickham laments the medieval peasants decision to prefer stability over freedom "peasant exploitation。。。security。。。autonomy。。。 （I think they would have prefered autonomy）"（p。 559） but isn't this the very thing he was trying to avoid？ I agree with him but for a different reason。 I think the peasants should have prefered autonomy， though they clearly did not。 This is no surprise as most people are willing to part with freedom for perceived security at the drop of a hat， as the recent Covid situation has made demonstrably clear。 And just like feudal lords， the modern governments have not let this crisis go to waste。5） The criticism of Henri Pirenne and the Pirenne thesis is really making a distinction without a difference。 If his "two serious flaws" are an emphasis on long-distance exchange， isn't this completely understandable given Wickham's own emphasis that the vast majority of economic activity was local and only the aristocracy provided any economic demand for luxury goods。 This is closely parallel to the second 'flaw' that "most of Pirenne's arguments concerned luxuries" （p。 223） Wickham's preference for archeology attempts to reconstruct much of the medieval economy from ceramics， and Pirenne from luxury goods （mostly shipping records）。 Both reconstructions only capture a fraction of the economic activity of the time。And if "Pirenne was actually wrong to say that the Arabs closed the Mediterranean; well before the Arabs arrived， the western part of the sea already had dramatically less shipping" （p。 224） I think this is just proving Pirenne's point。 The disruption of the Germanic invasions seriously or fatally weakened Roman civilization， but the Merovingians were able to continue as a shaddow or echo， until finally the Mediterranean was closed and the balance of Western European power shifted northwards to Paris （and the North-sea triangle）。 Wickham is at pains in the book to show the Roman continuity and draws the live somewhere around 1000 （for Western Europe， later for Byzantium and earlier with the fall of the Abbasids） whereas Pirenne drew the line with the Carolingians （Renaissance） and Gibbon with the German invasions。 But this concept of "a line" is only really important for publishers and I suppose no rebirth can be possible until the original is dead。 。。。more
Liam
，
"[T]he miraculous was a normal part of the early medieval world; the contest was over who controlled it。" （179）"Castles and seigneurial rights are markers of a new attention to dominance， beginning particularly after around 900 in the post-Caroligian lands， and steadily increasing， and becoming more localized still， after 950/1000。 。。。 Increasingly， however， especially in the tenth century， attention to one's local power-base was essential。" （518-9）"Historians tend to like exchange complexity， a "[T]he miraculous was a normal part of the early medieval world; the contest was over who controlled it。" （179）"Castles and seigneurial rights are markers of a new attention to dominance， beginning particularly after around 900 in the post-Caroligian lands， and steadily increasing， and becoming more localized still， after 950/1000。 。。。 Increasingly， however， especially in the tenth century， attention to one's local power-base was essential。" （518-9）"Historians tend to like exchange complexity， and they use value-laden words like prosperity， development， and （as I have done） dynamism to describe it。 But complexity has costs， and the cost in this period was a decisive move to restrict the autonomy （and sometimes， indeed， the prosperity） of between 80 and 90 per cent of the population。" （550-1） 。。。more
Maria
，
Wickham counters the conventional view of the Dark Ages in European history with a work of remarkable scope and rigorous yet accessible scholarship。 He traces the large trends and themes of developing political theory， and the beginning of a European culture with it's roots firmly planted in Roman society and culture。 He shows the various empires that gradually separated out of the Roman world， the Byzantine， Carolingian， and Ottonian territories and the their citizens the Goths， Franks， and Van Wickham counters the conventional view of the Dark Ages in European history with a work of remarkable scope and rigorous yet accessible scholarship。 He traces the large trends and themes of developing political theory， and the beginning of a European culture with it's roots firmly planted in Roman society and culture。 He shows the various empires that gradually separated out of the Roman world， the Byzantine， Carolingian， and Ottonian territories and the their citizens the Goths， Franks， and Vandals to Arabs， Anglo- Saxons， and Vikings。 Why I started this book: There is something soothing about a large well researched history。 Why I finished it: Dense， and a little hard to follow as an audio， I appreciated Wickham's summary at the end， as he reminded readers of the larger trends that he explored in the previous chapters。 I also liked his summary of what written resources and records are available and the challenges of interpreting them。 。。。more
Hunter Quinn
，
I couldn't do it。 Too much detail， not enough coherance。 I couldn't do it。 Too much detail， not enough coherance。 。。。more
Tim Filla
，
Perfect example of how a book can be academically rigorously without being boring。
Jack
，
What is a formative and pivotal moment in global history US rendered so dry and dense as to be nearly unreadable。 For a book which promises to “illuminate” the Dark Ages it does anything but。 Not recommended。
Ledgismus
，
A good introduction to the time concerned。 I naturally wouldn't recommend something so broad for full understanding， but with use of the notes section it makes for an entertaining diving point。 My complaint would be that the chapters tend to overstay their welcome， especially the 'Outer Europe' chapter later on。Nevertheless， I found myself reading this book with keen interest。 Perhaps the writing style feels more approachable， or the paper texture was just that smooth。 I personally don't like pu A good introduction to the time concerned。 I naturally wouldn't recommend something so broad for full understanding， but with use of the notes section it makes for an entertaining diving point。 My complaint would be that the chapters tend to overstay their welcome， especially the 'Outer Europe' chapter later on。Nevertheless， I found myself reading this book with keen interest。 Perhaps the writing style feels more approachable， or the paper texture was just that smooth。 I personally don't like pure white pages that make the practice of history too clinical in feel。 Nothing to do with the contents， mind you， but a contribution to how I managed to read so much at once。It is not something quick or easy to digest， however。 Would not recommend reading it at every spare moment like me， else you risk becoming a knowledge funnel。 。。。more
Scott
，
I’m putting this book down and switching to Chris Wickham’s “Medieval Europe。” Both are excellent books but Inheritance seems to me is written for professional historians， while “Medieval Europe” is more for a general audience。
David Cowhig
，
Great book on the so-called Dark Ages。 Prof Wickham stresses how many post-Roman "barbarian" political entities inherited many ideas on political organization from the Roman Empire。 Filled in a large Dark Ages gap in my understanding of European history。 Great book on the so-called Dark Ages。 Prof Wickham stresses how many post-Roman "barbarian" political entities inherited many ideas on political organization from the Roman Empire。 Filled in a large Dark Ages gap in my understanding of European history。 。。。more
Jacovlev
，
Great overview of the 400-1000 period。The author clearly articulates his two lenses through which he exposes the facts: a） refusal of teleology and seeing in the early middle age the sign of the future European states creation b） the idea that early middle age is not real 'history' - in the context of history of modernity。Each chapter begins with a 'sketch' to give a feel of the interactions and relationship of people at the time， and then proceeds illustrating the more general facts and argumen Great overview of the 400-1000 period。The author clearly articulates his two lenses through which he exposes the facts: a） refusal of teleology and seeing in the early middle age the sign of the future European states creation b） the idea that early middle age is not real 'history' - in the context of history of modernity。Each chapter begins with a 'sketch' to give a feel of the interactions and relationship of people at the time， and then proceeds illustrating the more general facts and arguments。Obviously， being an overview of many events and polites across a large time frame， it won't go into extreme details， but one can get a good grasp of the end of the Western Roman empire and continuation which led to the formation of new polites， the clash between Monophysitism and Nestorianism， the Carolingian empire and its legacy。 。。。more
Anders Sundell
，
Vad hände i Europa de sex århundradena efter romarrikets fall？ Denna bok har svaret。 Chris Wickham går igenom alla delar av Europa， ur politiska， sociala， ekonomiska och religiösa perspektiv。 Omfattningen är svindlande， och det är inte helt lätt att ta in allt。 Wickham har ingen större tes som går igenom boken - syftet är enligt författaren istället att visa på nyanser och skillnader， snarare än likheter。 Även om det finns en tydlig struktur i bokens delar och i vad kapitlen tar upp så är varje Vad hände i Europa de sex århundradena efter romarrikets fall？ Denna bok har svaret。 Chris Wickham går igenom alla delar av Europa， ur politiska， sociala， ekonomiska och religiösa perspektiv。 Omfattningen är svindlande， och det är inte helt lätt att ta in allt。 Wickham har ingen större tes som går igenom boken - syftet är enligt författaren istället att visa på nyanser och skillnader， snarare än likheter。 Även om det finns en tydlig struktur i bokens delar och i vad kapitlen tar upp så är varje kapitel ändå en samling beskrivning， betraktelser och anekdoter i flödande text。 Inte som en kursbok med faktarutor och punktlistor。En av poängerna Wickham ändå vill göra är att man varken ska under- eller överdriva brottet som följde på roms "fall"。 Övergången var gradvis， utan exakta datum med före och efter （även om det finns viktiga händelser， som vandalernas övertagande av Karthago）。 Den riktiga slutpunkten för Roms inflytande sker först kring millennieskiftet。 Mycket av traditioner och sociala strukturer levde också vidare i staterna som följde Rom。 Men annat förändrades， till exempel upphörde beskattningen i stort， och samhällseliten militäriserades mer。 Med tiden fragmentiserades också staterna i "Frankrike" och "Tyskland" mer。Man lär sig mycket， men antagligen fastnar inte så mycket som man skulle önska。 Boken är värdefull både för att få en överblick， och för fascinerande berättelser。 Men som samhällsvetare är det ändå fascinerande hur man kan beskriva en kontinents historia i sådan detalj och begränsa sig till att spana trender och gemensamma drag på bokens tio sista sidor！ 。。。more
Vidur Kapur
，
I approached this book with an open mind。 Even if the ‘Dark Ages’ had been exaggerated by early scholars， my impression was still that not much intellectual progress had been made in Europe after the Greek Hellenistic period （as opposed to in India and the Islamic world） - and that this state of affairs deteriorated after the collapse of the Roman Empire - until the 16th and 17th Centuries。 This book has not dissuaded me from that view。 If anything， it has strengthened it。Wickham is right to not I approached this book with an open mind。 Even if the ‘Dark Ages’ had been exaggerated by early scholars， my impression was still that not much intellectual progress had been made in Europe after the Greek Hellenistic period （as opposed to in India and the Islamic world） - and that this state of affairs deteriorated after the collapse of the Roman Empire - until the 16th and 17th Centuries。 This book has not dissuaded me from that view。 If anything， it has strengthened it。Wickham is right to note that the early Middle Ages “has its own validity as a field of study” （but who claimed otherwise？）。 He is right to stress that the fall of the western Roman Empire shouldn’t necessarily be seen as a “Bad Thing”—indeed， not much scientific， technological or mathematical progress had been made in the Roman Empire， either。 He is certainly right to point out that the Eastern Roman Empire lived on as Byzantium （but who denied this， or am I just in the habit of reading the good historians？）。 And he is right to state that history did not end with the end of the Roman Empire， but this again seems to me to be a strawman argument: perhaps this argument was advanced many decades ago， but no serious historian that I’ve read makes this claim today。Meanwhile the book itself demonstrates that matters did become ‘darker’。 Political and economic structures drastically simplified， as did architecture。 In one comical passage， Wickham notes that poetry and complex prose became unimportant， and that by the end of the ninth century aristocracies in the West were generally unable to read。 But he goes on to say that we should be “neutral” about these changes。 Neutral？ Imagine if， today， a society had lost its ability to generate poetry and complex prose， and that even the upper classes had gradually lost the ability to read？ Would this seem neutral to us， or more like a catastrophe？ As Ward-Perkins （2005） notes: "widespread literacy in the post-Roman West definitely became confined to the clergy。"This also helps to explain the scarcity of sources during the Early Middle Ages。 Some scholars， indeed， labelled the Early Middle Ages 'dark' not so much for intellectual or cultural reasons， but because of the dearth of surviving documents。 Wickham does his best to push back against this perception， but throughout the book even he has to concede that， for many regions and periods of early mediaeval Europe， there are very few， if any， sources。It’s also cheeky of Wickham to include discussion of the Islamic world in a book that’s meant to be part of a Penguin series about European history。 For it was in the Islamic world where much of the world’s intellectual progress was being made while the West was ‘dark’。 As the author writes: "the caliphate was simply richer and more powerful than any post-Roman polity。。。 [they] far surpassed their neighbours in their wealth and in the sophistication of their intellectual culture"。 They were responsible for， "by far the largest-scale buildings in Eurasia west of China in this period"。 Baghdad， he notes "had an economic and cultural importance。。。 that outclassed anywhere in the world， and that certainly impacted on Europe"。 But to include a history of the Islamic world in a book about Europe simply because it heavily impacted on Europe is a bit dubious。 Yes， things did happen in Europe from 400 to 1000， and Wickham describes them well， from Visigothic Spain to Byzantium。 Wickham does highlight that， thanks to Photios， there was something of a revival of intellectual culture in Byzantium in the last 150 years of this period。 However， as he notes， the 279 Greek books in his Bibliotheke is far outweighed by the 6，000 books listed in the Index of al-Nadim。 And Byzantine intellectual culture was not novel。 Nor was the brief revival of intellectual culture in Carolingian western Europe; indeed， as Wickham writes， it "never claimed to be novel"。 Overall， then， this is a well-written and engaging book， hampered by poor argument and even poorer marketing。 Petrarch was， on the whole， right。 。。。more
Lly_th
，
The narrative is all over the place。
John Cairns
，
Valentian I died from a fit at the Quadi telling him their attacks were defensive。 Barbarian leaders fought for Rome as the head of their own communities， like Alaric， rather than as Romans， a cause of the empire's fall。 Xians were defined by faith in Christ as god and that no others existed。 As demons they did。 If Aetius had stopped the Vandals taking Carthage， the western empire might well have survived， this historian insists。 Chlotar II had Brunhild torn to pieces by a horse。 Chindasuinth cu Valentian I died from a fit at the Quadi telling him their attacks were defensive。 Barbarian leaders fought for Rome as the head of their own communities， like Alaric， rather than as Romans， a cause of the empire's fall。 Xians were defined by faith in Christ as god and that no others existed。 As demons they did。 If Aetius had stopped the Vandals taking Carthage， the western empire might well have survived， this historian insists。 Chlotar II had Brunhild torn to pieces by a horse。 Chindasuinth curbed the aristocracy by executing seven hundred of them。 An Irish law tract stipulates a king's duties day by day eg Thursday for sexual intercourse。 They didn't do things by halves in the Merovingian or Visigothic successor states 。。。or Ireland。 British counterattacks， led by Ambrosius Aurelianus， held up the Anglo-Saxons at the Severn valley。 Was a wonder-working ascetic， who drank too much of the wine offered and died of alcoholism， divine or demonic？ Witches， magicians and soothsayers cast spells， cured， affected the weather and told the future， just like me！ Men prone to anger， drew weapons， killed each other and were revenged， like our drug gangs。 Fredegund solved the feuding by killing all the survivors。 You can have too much of a good thing。 None of the customary bricolage was involved in the building of Hagia Sophia！ It is grand， but the blue mosque was so airy I felt like dancing。 The numerous rooms of palaces were set out for effect on visitors， as had been done by pharaohs。 Nikephorus in 811 was the first Eastern Roman emperor to die in battle， against the Bulgars， since Valens in 378 against the Goths。 The empire was no longer a great power。 'On the spot to which Muhammed reputedly miraculously travelled for a night' out 'from Mecca' to Jerusalem。 Only a Muhammedan would repute it。 A Byzantine ex-slave called Shaghab （troublesome） dominated her son's reign。 Charlemagne surrounded himself with intellectuals and could appreciate poetry and theology - but never fully learned to write！ The king should control himself before controlling others， moralists wrote， much what grandma told mum， she couldn't if she didn't， but。。。？ Rome with 25，000 was the biggest city in the west， no bigger than Buckhaven and Methil in the Forties！ The general depopulation is never explained。 The career of the leading intellectual and assured political dealer from non-noble birth to 。。。but I won't spoil the surprise。 Good king Wenceslas or Vaclav was murdered by his brother， Boleslav， for accepting Frankish hegemony。 Demesne agriculture and labour services were a part of lord-tenant relationships as late as the fourteenth century in England when the Black Death came to the aid of the peasantry by wiping quite a few of them out and empowering the remainder。 。。。more
Taymaz Azimi
，
The Inheritance of Rome was one of those books that I just wanted not to ever finish。 It was an absolute joy to read， not just because of its content [which indeed would have been enough] but because of the approach Chris Wickham had on writing a work of history for non-expert readers。 Wickham is not submitting to the public/academic division; he writes in a serious and scholarly manner because he believes the public should and would read scholarly historical analyses。 The problem with popular h The Inheritance of Rome was one of those books that I just wanted not to ever finish。 It was an absolute joy to read， not just because of its content [which indeed would have been enough] but because of the approach Chris Wickham had on writing a work of history for non-expert readers。 Wickham is not submitting to the public/academic division; he writes in a serious and scholarly manner because he believes the public should and would read scholarly historical analyses。 The problem with popular history writing is that it reduces history to story-telling and as a result， such books only focus on exciting narrative rather than informing the reader of the debate about the events and the trends in historical analyses of the topic。 Wickham successfully shows that one can write accessible history for the public audience and yet maintain the scholarly tropes。 Other than this amazing approach there are a few points I would like to make note of:1） The book is part of the Pinguin's History of Europe series and some reviewers mentioned that to criticise Wickham for his extensive focus on the history of the Middle East during the covered period。 I object to those objections; this， indeed， is one of the points of strength in Wickham's work， because while this is a well-known fact for scholars of Early Middle Ages the general audience may not know how interconnected these areas had been and the politico-economical superiority of the Middle/Near Eastern powers during this period makes it impossible for any study of the period not to mention the late Sasanian Iran or the Islamic Caliphate。 Wickham also justifies this through the name he gives to his book: the Caliphate inherits as much of the Roman Empire as Byzantium and， I believe， way more than Early Medieval Italy。 2） Wickham plants an ideology in approaching historical subjects in one's head throughout this book。 He insists again and again not on the lack of certainty while making likely assumptions by appealing to some contemporary consistencies。 On top of that， he makes a strong case for not interpreting the state of affairs at the Early Middle Ages in terms of other historical periods。 Something I loved about his cautious approach was that he repeatedly says about our different assumptions not to emphasise too much on them or not to get too excited about them because most such assumptions are pumped up by our imaginations。 I love that 'settle down mate' approach he employs。3） Not that his account of the evolution of feudalism and the 'caging of the peasantry' is all original but his analyses of such accounts are quite interesting and are of extreme import to the modern reader （especially English people with their romantic view of their bleak history）。 Reading his account actually made me think of the current attitude towards tenancy in England and there are some fascinating genealogical traces to be looked at: we are still dependent peasants， and we still haven't really broken our cages。I did also have a few issues with this book which were， by the end， eclipsed by how impressive this book was as a whole so I went ahead and gave it a 5-star review。 The main problem that I cannot avoid mentioning is the terrible manner of punctuations that， at points， make the text quite difficult to read。 I did shout at the book， several times， for this。 Some good editing for a new edition could really help this book。 。。。more
Paul moved to LibraryThing
，
I know there's very little information available but that's no reason to latch on to any of it that is concrete and start listing names and dates I will forget two sentences later just because you have that information。Additionally， if you removed all the repeated caveats of "we cannot be sure" and "this could have happened but maybe it didn't" this book would be 20% shorter。 I get it。 Too few written records， lots of guesswork - explaining that once is enough。 I know there's very little information available but that's no reason to latch on to any of it that is concrete and start listing names and dates I will forget two sentences later just because you have that information。Additionally， if you removed all the repeated caveats of "we cannot be sure" and "this could have happened but maybe it didn't" this book would be 20% shorter。 I get it。 Too few written records， lots of guesswork - explaining that once is enough。 。。。more
Oleksandr Fediienko
，
Найкраща книга про Середньовіччя， яку я читав？ Можливо！ Великий обсяг дозволяє усебічно розглянути добу， про яку нам відомо найменше – Темні Віки。Це був би ідеальний підручник （який， втім， довелося б розтягнути на три-чотири навчальні роки）: тут вистачає і подробиць， і узагальнень。 І увагу приділено не тільки теренам колишньої Римської імперії， Західній Європі та арабському світу， але й， наскільки дозволяють письмові свідчення， регіонам далі на північ і схід， ніж це зазвичай роблять європоцентри Найкраща книга про Середньовіччя， яку я читав？ Можливо！ Великий обсяг дозволяє усебічно розглянути добу， про яку нам відомо найменше – Темні Віки。Це був би ідеальний підручник （який， втім， довелося б розтягнути на три-чотири навчальні роки）: тут вистачає і подробиць， і узагальнень。 І увагу приділено не тільки теренам колишньої Римської імперії， Західній Європі та арабському світу， але й， наскільки дозволяють письмові свідчення， регіонам далі на північ і схід， ніж це зазвичай роблять європоцентричні історики。Зокрема， в загальних рисах описане становлення Русі в контексті європейської історії。 Саме так！ Тут не прочитаєш хрестоматійної історії про те， як княгиня Ольга мстилася древлянам， бо яке це має значення для історії？。。 Натомість Кріс Вікем розповідає про запозичені русинами елементи скандинавської， хозарської і візантійської культур， про їх участь у візантійській геополітиці і про торговельні зв’язки з іншими куточками Європи。 。。。more
Justin Permenter
，
Academically rigorous and authoritative， but exceedingly dull （in my opinion， of course）， with little sense of narrative flow or attempt to draw meaningful conclusions。 In fact， Wickham explicitly decries the need for conclusions in the final chapter。And oh， dear god， the overload of names and proper nouns， with hardly any attempt to keep them straight in the mind of the reader！ （ex: "when Adelbert defeated Floabald， he drew on support from the pagan Recarred， who had triumphed in his struggle a Academically rigorous and authoritative， but exceedingly dull （in my opinion， of course）， with little sense of narrative flow or attempt to draw meaningful conclusions。 In fact， Wickham explicitly decries the need for conclusions in the final chapter。And oh， dear god， the overload of names and proper nouns， with hardly any attempt to keep them straight in the mind of the reader！ （ex: "when Adelbert defeated Floabald， he drew on support from the pagan Recarred， who had triumphed in his struggle against the Sclavenians at Flondersheim。。。" ad nauseam for another 800 pages）。 That is， when the author isn't busy meandering into 50 page long diversions on patterns and methods of pottery production and exchange in pre-Carolingian France。 Recommended for enthusiasts only， but highly unlikely to appeal to the casual student of the Early Middle Ages。 。。。more
Thomas Ernst
，
Long and sometimes excessively "wordy" book ; however， I have always been interested in the history of Western Europe between the fall of the Roman Empire in the West and the year 1000， and this book does a great job of discussing those years。 The inclusion of the Eastern Roman Empire， Constantinople /Byzantium and the Caliphate during these same years was an unexpected bonus。 It seems the Western Roman Empire did not fall but more like melted away over some years。 Roman traditions and laws last Long and sometimes excessively "wordy" book ; however， I have always been interested in the history of Western Europe between the fall of the Roman Empire in the West and the year 1000， and this book does a great job of discussing those years。 The inclusion of the Eastern Roman Empire， Constantinople /Byzantium and the Caliphate during these same years was an unexpected bonus。 It seems the Western Roman Empire did not fall but more like melted away over some years。 Roman traditions and laws lasted for a long time after the actual Empire disappearedI had no idea of the Carolingian （Frankish） dynasty that emerged in the early 500'sFor me， I enjoyed the book ; however， I was more interested in the topic than others might be 。。。more
Marylee Lannan
，
Fascinating （for a dry history book）。 Lots of work went into this book。
Al Goehring
，
Take a drink every time my man says “protagonism” or “ceremonial。”
Ailed
，
A very detailed account of the "Dark Ages" across Europe， which I thoroughly enjoyed， but that shouldn't be read as an introductory text to the period。 Wickham goes back and forth continuously and drops names sometimes without almost no background on who that person was。 So， I would recommend reading The History of the Medieval World: From the Conversion of Constantine to the First Crusade first and then this one since they complement each other very nicely。 A very detailed account of the "Dark Ages" across Europe， which I thoroughly enjoyed， but that shouldn't be read as an introductory text to the period。 Wickham goes back and forth continuously and drops names sometimes without almost no background on who that person was。 So， I would recommend reading The History of the Medieval World: From the Conversion of Constantine to the First Crusade first and then this one since they complement each other very nicely。 。。。more
Heather Hoffman
，
Although I learned a lot from this book， and it filled in some big gaps in my historical knowledge of the period， I thought things did wobble toward the end， possibly in the effort to wrap it all up。 I don't regret reading it， but I understand why it took me a few starts to finish it。 Although I learned a lot from this book， and it filled in some big gaps in my historical knowledge of the period， I thought things did wobble toward the end， possibly in the effort to wrap it all up。 I don't regret reading it， but I understand why it took me a few starts to finish it。 。。。more
Mike Johnston
，