\'The Fall of the Roman Empire : A New History of Rome &

[Goffredo]

Well I finished Heathers' "Fall..." and I must say I an impressed. Certainly impressed by the courage to try an overall picture. I had been for years hoping someone take up that challenge after decades of specialists saying interesting and surprising things but shying away from grand pictures. I always suspected these undoubtedly useful near-sighted specialists were just following, it not an ideology, a fashion. That modern historians did not do such outdated things as imagine grand pictures seemed to me like a smoke screen, an alibi, conjured up to hide their impotence or lack of courage.

I am enthusiastic of Heather's book and strongly suggest anyone interested in Rome read it. I learned, re-learned and un-learned many things reading Heather's book and wish to know more. So I will read specialists, recognizing their fundamental role. Found description of the down spiral leading to fall of africa to vandals and tragic failure to recapture it very drammatic. Was anguished! Always felt that eastern half had responsibilities in fall of west but now Heather convinced me otherwise. I am skeptical of some points (like over stressed role of super-composite hun bow).

Frankly Heather's closing remarks let me down a bit. Basically he says the roman empire fell because its huge power inevitably made the weak neighbors evolve, regroup to be able resist roman power and then actually challenge it. Basically he says empires fall because outsiders want in or they will resist and then fight back. It sounds kind of obvious to me. I didn't learn anything new from the concluding remarks. Maybe I just saw to many hollywood movies!