(Part 2) Top products from r/ancientrome

Jump to the top 20

We found 21 product mentions on r/ancientrome. We ranked the 139 resulting products by number of redditors who mentioned them. Here are the products ranked 21-40. You can also go back to the previous section.

Next page

Top comments that mention products on r/ancientrome:

u/Ankyra · 1 pointr/ancientrome

If you're really an enthusiast and can afford to build yourself a nice collection, you could look into getting some Loeb Classical Library volumes which have the Latin original on one side and the English translation on the other. Others have already suggested Livy, Suetonius, Juvenal and Julius Caesar, though as I said, if you're an enthusiast, they will all be of value. I'd add Tacitus and Pliny also for good measure.

"From the Gracchi to Nero: A History of Rome 133 BC to AD 68" by H.H. Scullard has been recommended, though it doesn't (entirely) cover the period you're interested in, it's very good in explaining the lead-up to the Roman Empire. I'm not sure about other's views on Scullard, so best to ask them.

Edward Gibbon has already been mentioned, I'd probably also add Colin Wells' "The Roman Empire", A. Cameron's "The Later Roman Empire" and M. Goodman's "The Roman World 44 BC-AD 180".

Best of luck with everything and congratulations on your new house!

u/Ochris · 3 pointsr/ancientrome

Well, regarding your question about why more men didn't die, Cavalry is the arm of the Army that would pursue and actually inflict the majority of casualties on a retreating Army. Caesar's Cavalry was totally blown out and tired, so they couldn't actually chase very far. When an Army is totally defeated, they tend to scatter. Especially in this case, because Pompeius literally left the battlefield when he saw his army start to falter, gathered some things up, and fled. Caesar ordered his men to continue to push until they seized the camp of the Pompeians by night, which meant that the retreating army had nowhere to hide and regroup. This wasn't always the case, and it all totally depends on circumstances. For instance, at Canae, the entire Roman forces save some people that were able to escape, were massacred in the Carthaginian double envelopment. It was the perfect battle, the one every commander dreams of, because trapping the entire enemy army on the inside of your own for a slaughter is incredibly difficult and rare. In the case of Pharsalus, the Pompeian Army had plenty of time to retreat before Caesar could cut them off, therefore they just ran and ran.


The only thing Caesar could do was to take the camp. You can't pursue thousands of stragglers or you will throw your own army into disarray when it comes to command and control. He didn't know Pompey had fled yet, and his troops needed to eat. Badly. Basically, once Caesar did that, Pompey's Army practically disintegrated or joined him. Politics plays a huge part in this, because Caesar wanted to shed as little Roman blood as possible, so he spared every last troop that he could, and spared every Roman senator he defeated the first time. So minimizing casualties was actually a political tool in that entire war, as well as in that battle. Even if the Cavalry could chase the retreating Pompeians down, I don't think Caesar would have let the dogs loose, unless it was for the purpose of capture. Propaganda was a tool that Caesar used daily, and what better way to sell yourself as the good guy in the conflict than to end it as bloodlessly as possible and spare everybody you defeated? He had to convince people that he was not going to be the next Sulla, or Marius.



As for reading, there are a ton of books. You can get some basic ones for general tactics, but if you want in-depth study, you basically need specialized books.



http://www.amazon.com/Ancient-Medieval-Warfare-Military-History/dp/0895292629
This is one of the first that I bought. It goes over the basic timeline, and outlines the battles. It also has maps of the battles that will help piece it together with the text.


For Caesar, Goldsworthy's book is the best I've read. http://www.amazon.com/Caesar-Life-Colossus-Adrian-Goldsworthy/dp/0300126891/ref=sr_1_3?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1427748435&sr=1-3&keywords=adrian+goldsworthy



I would honestly recommend just rolling over to Half Price Books and finding the Military History section. Or Ancient History. Look for books that are a bit more specialized, unless you just want a basic introduction to it all from a book that spans a long timeline. I would recommend more, but all my books are in storage at the moment because I'm in a bit of a weird living situation after moving states. If you find some good stuff, and burn through them, feel free to message me again a few months down the road and I should be able to access my books easily at that point and give you some recommendations.

u/AphroditeAndTheXbox · 7 pointsr/ancientrome

His letters to Atticus are awesome! He wrote them to his friend while on tour of his provincia Greece while he was grudgingly the governor. It's just so cool to imagine him riding in his little litter, dictating his letter, bouncing around on the rocky Greek terrain. Prim and proper city boy Cicero is certainly unamused, and it shows through. So cool!

Edit: here's a good place to start!

http://www.amazon.com/Cicero-Selected-Letters-Penguin-Classics/dp/0140444580

u/Frodiddly · 5 pointsr/ancientrome

One of the best and most dramatic works I can recommend is The Ghosts of Cannae: Hannibal and the Darkest Hour of the Roman Republic, by Robert L. O'Connell. The battle of Cannae was a turning point for Rome, and O'Connell captures the horror and drama of the battle and surrounding events excellently. I HIGHLY recommend it.

In terms of Roman historians... It really depends on what period you're looking at. Want an awesome insight into the military? Go with Caesar's Commentaries of the Conquest of Gaul. Punic Wars? Check out Livy. Definitely check out Plutarch's Parallel Lives as well.

Of course, the quintessential book on the Roman Empire is Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. One can hardly consider themselves a Roman scholar without reading it, and nearly every historian will refer to it at some point.

Oh! And there's an interesting one I came across, for a bit more of a lower-look. By a Roman no less!
Cookery and Dining in Imperial Rome*, by Apicius is very interesting. Might not be worth it to put on your list, but definitely check it out.

TL;DR: If I have to pick two to add, take the Ghosts of Cannae and Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire. By a Roman, pick from what's relevant.

u/niton · 4 pointsr/ancientrome

All the questions you've asked have incredibly complex answers to the point where entire books have been written on each. Unfortunately any succinct efforts we put in here would be about on par with Wikipedia and so you'd be better off just going there if you're a day away from submission. If you're interested in some research books, I can suggest the following:

Rome: An Empire's Story

History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire

The Fall of the Roman Empire

There are a million more but these are the three that I've personally read.

Of course your primary sources like Tacitus and Livy are available for free online.

Other less citable but more succinct (and free) sources are available in the form of the History of Rome Podcast (listen to episode 179 - The End and the episodes dealing with the slave revolts) and in the In Our Time: History Archives (look into the 5-6 episodes on Rome).

u/Kirioko · 1 pointr/ancientrome

He was Syrian by birth, but he called himself a Greek.

'Though he himself appears to have been from the non-Greek, Semitic population of Samosata, the culture by which he defined himself was Greek.' Which is from the introduction of this book.

In any case, you're clearly reposting the link in several different subs. I think even /r/Byzantium would be more appropriate since his works were quite popular in that era, though he was not of it himself.

u/BaffledPlato · 1 pointr/ancientrome

I enjoyed John Norwich's three volume series: Byzantium: The Early Centuries, The Apogee, and Decline and Fall. If that is a bit too verbose for your liking, he has also published a Short History of Byzantium which summarises his trilogy.

u/Whoosier · 15 pointsr/ancientrome

How about the Oxford Classical Dictionary, 4th ed. (2012), which is loaded with up-to-date bios of real and mythical figures and long essays on all sorts of features of Greek and Roman culture, pretty good bibliographies? 6,700 entries, abt. 1,600 pages. I use it all the time. I see it's also available online with a subscription.

u/indianajane44 · 1 pointr/ancientrome

https://www.amazon.com/Classics-Short-Introduction-Mary-Beard/dp/0192853856 there's a whole series of these short introduction books. They pack a lot of information in them and that should help you figure out what you're interested in and where to go from there!

u/okwaitno · 4 pointsr/ancientrome

Fantastic list. I would add:

Christians and the Fall of Rome. This short book is basically just the most important and famous chapter of the much larger work, Edward Gibbon’s Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire.

u/jumpstartation · 11 pointsr/ancientrome
  • The Complete Roman Army by Adrian Goldsworthy (2011).

  • Roman Warfare by Adrian Goldsworhy (2005).

    From the /r/AskHistorians book wiki:

  • Ancient Rome: A Military and Political History by Christopher S. Mackay (2004). A survey primarily covering political and military history. It provides a solid understanding of events, their significance and implications on the Roman state. It covers both Empire and Republic very efficiently. (This book is required reading for history undergrads at my university)
u/WiseMenFear · 8 pointsr/ancientrome

Greg Woolfe: Rome, an Empire's story. It was one of the set books for my degree.

Rome: An Empire's Story https://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0199677514/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_api_i_vd.vDbYGXJCV7

u/LegalAction · 1 pointr/ancientrome

You forgot Goldsworthy's book, The Roman Army at War (1998).

u/crummy_water_tower · 1 pointr/ancientrome

I just wanted to say thank you for taking the time to respond so thoroughly.

Are you familiar with the book Thinking in Time? Your statement about comparing across eras ("the academic discipline of history is premised upon keeping in mind that every historical event emerges out of different context, and that it's dangerous to compare across eras.") brought it to mind. One of its main points is the dangers of using analogies to previous events without taking the time to truly determine how similar or different they are.