Rome: Strategy of Empire
- Downloads：1334
- Type：Epub+TxT+PDF+Mobi
- Create Date：2022-10-14 09:51:45
- Update Date：2025-09-06
- Status：finish
- Author：James Lacey
- ISBN：019093770X
- Environment：PC/Android/iPhone/iPad/Kindle
- Download
Summary
The first work to lay out Roman strategic thinking from its start under Augustus until its final demise in 476 CE
From Octavian's victory at Actium （31 B。C。） to its traditional endpoint in the West （476）， the Roman Empire lasted a solid 500 years -- an impressive number by any standard， and fully one-fifth of all recorded history。 In fact， the decline and final collapse of the Roman Empire took longer than
most other empires even existed。 Any historian trying to unearth the grand strategy of the Roman Empire must， therefore， always remain cognizant of the time scale， in which she is dealing。 Although the pace of change in the Roman era never approached that of the modern era， it was not an empire in
stasis。 While the visible trappings may have changed little， the challenges Rome faced at its end were vastly different than those faced by Augustus and the Julio-Claudians。 Over the centuries， the Empire's underlying economy， political arrangements， military affairs， and， most importantly， the
myriad of external threats it faced were in constant flux， making adaptability to changing circumstances as important to Roman strategists as it is to strategists of the modern era。
Yet the very idea of Rome having a grand strategy， or what it might be， did not concern historians until Edward Luttwak wrote The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A。D。 to the Third forty years ago。 Although the work generated much debate， it failed to win over many ancient
historians， in part because of its heavy emphasis on military force。 By mostly neglecting any considerations of diplomacy， economics， politics， culture， or even the changing nature of the threats Rome faced， Luttwak tells only a portion of what should have been a much more wide-ranging narrative。
For this and other reasons， such as its often dull presentation， it left an opportunity for another account of the rise and fall of Rome from a strategy perspective。 Through a more encompassing definition of strategy and by focusing much of the narrative on crucial historical moments and the
personalities involved， Strategy of Empire promises to provide a more persuasive and engaging history than Luttwak's。 It aims not only to correct Luttwak's flaws and omissions， but will also employ the most recent work of current classical historians and archeologists to present a more complete and
nuanced narrative of Roman strategic thinking and execution than is currently available。
From Octavian's victory at Actium （31 B。C。） to its traditional endpoint in the West （476）， the Roman Empire lasted a solid 500 years -- an impressive number by any standard， and fully one-fifth of all recorded history。 In fact， the decline and final collapse of the Roman Empire took longer than
most other empires even existed。 Any historian trying to unearth the grand strategy of the Roman Empire must， therefore， always remain cognizant of the time scale， in which she is dealing。 Although the pace of change in the Roman era never approached that of the modern era， it was not an empire in
stasis。 While the visible trappings may have changed little， the challenges Rome faced at its end were vastly different than those faced by Augustus and the Julio-Claudians。 Over the centuries， the Empire's underlying economy， political arrangements， military affairs， and， most importantly， the
myriad of external threats it faced were in constant flux， making adaptability to changing circumstances as important to Roman strategists as it is to strategists of the modern era。
Yet the very idea of Rome having a grand strategy， or what it might be， did not concern historians until Edward Luttwak wrote The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire: From the First Century A。D。 to the Third forty years ago。 Although the work generated much debate， it failed to win over many ancient
historians， in part because of its heavy emphasis on military force。 By mostly neglecting any considerations of diplomacy， economics， politics， culture， or even the changing nature of the threats Rome faced， Luttwak tells only a portion of what should have been a much more wide-ranging narrative。
For this and other reasons， such as its often dull presentation， it left an opportunity for another account of the rise and fall of Rome from a strategy perspective。 Through a more encompassing definition of strategy and by focusing much of the narrative on crucial historical moments and the
personalities involved， Strategy of Empire promises to provide a more persuasive and engaging history than Luttwak's。 It aims not only to correct Luttwak's flaws and omissions， but will also employ the most recent work of current classical historians and archeologists to present a more complete and
nuanced narrative of Roman strategic thinking and execution than is currently available。
Reviews
Edoardo Albert
，
In 1976， Edward Luttwak published The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire in which he argued that the Romans did indeed have a grand strategy。 The book caused a sensation， not least for the fact that Luttwak was not a historian but rather an American military strategist and， for a time， a consultant to Ronald Reagan’s administration。 While admitting its historical sweep， professional historians rushed to debunk the book and， in general， they seem to have succeeded。 The consensus among Roman histo In 1976， Edward Luttwak published The Grand Strategy of the Roman Empire in which he argued that the Romans did indeed have a grand strategy。 The book caused a sensation， not least for the fact that Luttwak was not a historian but rather an American military strategist and， for a time， a consultant to Ronald Reagan’s administration。 While admitting its historical sweep， professional historians rushed to debunk the book and， in general， they seem to have succeeded。 The consensus among Roman historians today is that Rome worked on an ad hoc basis， with individual emperors responding to crises as they arose。 The view is that the Empire lacked the ongoing central command necessary for a grand strategy， as well as not having a clear view of frontiers nor any way to map them in order to conduct an overall strategy。James Lacey， another working military strategist， enters the debate with Rome: Strategy of Empire and makes a robust case for Luttwak’s overall thesis: the Romans did indeed have a grand strategy and they were more than able to adapt their policies accordingly。 Lacey answers the critics， who point out that there is a dearth of Roman historical sources detailing strategic thinking， by looking at the facts on the ground: in particular， the Empire’s unparalleled ability to field， feed and focus huge armies throughout the breadth of the Empire。 Lacey also argues that for the emperor， maps were unimportant because what he needed to know was where a crisis was， which was the nearest legion and how long it would take the legion to get there。 Roman itineraries， which allowed generals to estimate accurately how long it would take them to get to crisis points， would， Lacey says， have furnished the required information better than any map。 What was more， the Mediterranean and the key frontier rivers， the Rhine and the Danube， allowed the Romans to deploy armies far more quickly than their enemies through their use of maritime or riverine resupply。 Rome: Strategy of Empire begins with the reign of Augustus and ends with the fall of the Western Empire， providing an overview of the interplay between the Roman economy and Roman strategy。 However， it suffers， as does Luttwak’s original， from not considering in any detail the strategy of the Roman Republic， which actually conquered most of the territory that the later Empire sought to protect and consolidate。 Lacey had the experience of decades in the military before becoming an academic military strategist and this allows him to apply practical knowledge to all aspects of military operations but in particular the crucial importance of logistics。 When we compare the huge armies – in the tens of thousands - regularly fielded by the Romans to the armies of the early Medieval period which， in Britain， could number as few as 35 men， we can clearly see the strength of Roman logistical efforts。 In Rome: Strategy of Empire Lacey seeks to overturn the established academic consensus。 With battle rejoined， it will be fascinating to read their response。 But one thing is sure: once this book is published the strategy of the Roman Empire will once again be a hot topic among historians。 。。。more
Andrew
，
Lacey offers an insightful survey of the grand sweep of Roman imperial history from the perspective of military strategy。 He persuasively argues against the tendency among modern historians to discount the empire's ability to formulate and execute grand strategy。 This is a first class work of analytical history。 Unaccountably， it is marred by countless typos and misspellings。 I expect more from Oxford University Press， especially for $30 hardcover。 Lacey offers an insightful survey of the grand sweep of Roman imperial history from the perspective of military strategy。 He persuasively argues against the tendency among modern historians to discount the empire's ability to formulate and execute grand strategy。 This is a first class work of analytical history。 Unaccountably， it is marred by countless typos and misspellings。 I expect more from Oxford University Press， especially for $30 hardcover。 。。。more
Robyn
，
Thanks to Edelweiss+ for the DRC of this title。The history and drama of the Roman Empire has long held the world fascinated。 James Lacey adds a new layer to the epic drama by framing the history from a military general perspective in this enthralling historical tomb。 Well researched and carefully laid out， "Rome: Strategy of Empire" is a good read for anyone interested in that time period in world history。 Thanks to Edelweiss+ for the DRC of this title。The history and drama of the Roman Empire has long held the world fascinated。 James Lacey adds a new layer to the epic drama by framing the history from a military general perspective in this enthralling historical tomb。 Well researched and carefully laid out， "Rome: Strategy of Empire" is a good read for anyone interested in that time period in world history。 。。。more
Annarella
，
It was one of those book that makes you reflect and realize that it's a new idea， the idea of a Roman general strategy。The book is well researched and there's a lot of interesting reflections。I found it thought provoking。Highly recommended。Many thanks to the publisher for this ARC， all opinions are mine It was one of those book that makes you reflect and realize that it's a new idea， the idea of a Roman general strategy。The book is well researched and there's a lot of interesting reflections。I found it thought provoking。Highly recommended。Many thanks to the publisher for this ARC， all opinions are mine 。。。more
Reference
google book https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=Rome: Strategy of Empire
hathitrust digital library https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/ls?q1=Rome: Strategy of Empire&field1=ocr&a=srchls&ft=ft&lmt=ft