Buy new:
-21% $23.64
FREE delivery Monday, May 20 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Ships from: Amazon.com
Sold by: Amazon.com
$23.64 with 21 percent savings
List Price: $29.99

The List Price is the suggested retail price of a new product as provided by a manufacturer, supplier, or seller. Except for books, Amazon will display a List Price if the product was purchased by customers on Amazon or offered by other retailers at or above the List Price in at least the past 90 days. List prices may not necessarily reflect the product's prevailing market price.
Learn more
Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns
FREE delivery Monday, May 20 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Only 8 left in stock (more on the way).
$$23.64 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$23.64
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Ships from
Amazon.com
Ships from
Amazon.com
Sold by
Amazon.com
Sold by
Amazon.com
Returns
30-day easy returns
30-day easy returns
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.
Returns
30-day easy returns
This item can be returned in its original condition for a full refund or replacement within 30 days of receipt.
Payment
Secure transaction
Your transaction is secure
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
Payment
Secure transaction
We work hard to protect your security and privacy. Our payment security system encrypts your information during transmission. We don’t share your credit card details with third-party sellers, and we don’t sell your information to others. Learn more
$11.38
Get Fast, Free Shipping with Amazon Prime FREE Returns
Book is in Good condition. 100% money-back guarantee! Ships directly from Amazon. Book is in Good condition. 100% money-back guarantee! Ships directly from Amazon. See less
FREE delivery Monday, May 20 on orders shipped by Amazon over $35
Only 1 left in stock - order soon.
$$23.64 () Includes selected options. Includes initial monthly payment and selected options. Details
Price
Subtotal
$$23.64
Subtotal
Initial payment breakdown
Shipping cost, delivery date, and order total (including tax) shown at checkout.
Access codes and supplements are not guaranteed with used items.
Kindle app logo image

Download the free Kindle app and start reading Kindle books instantly on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.

Read instantly on your browser with Kindle for Web.

Using your mobile phone camera - scan the code below and download the Kindle app.

QR code to download the Kindle App

Something went wrong. Please try your request again later.

Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece (Ancient Warfare and Civilization) Hardcover – April 7, 2014

4.3 4.3 out of 5 stars 108 ratings

{"desktop_buybox_group_1":[{"displayPrice":"$23.64","priceAmount":23.64,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"23","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"64","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"LuiEIBZL9vcnj7aT8hOxioxD5GUv1%2BvEyviPWQyDeqF0%2FjgnbdiPGODQ2P8K5QFTBwef9y4IcPEbrVQRZ9OomJsRvfI7gb6ULYoXE2UY1zEAADgpV8EtSRPOWjaBLF3oePmyVIbwmdXvNU5VvMRXCA%3D%3D","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"NEW","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":0}, {"displayPrice":"$11.38","priceAmount":11.38,"currencySymbol":"$","integerValue":"11","decimalSeparator":".","fractionalValue":"38","symbolPosition":"left","hasSpace":false,"showFractionalPartIfEmpty":true,"offerListingId":"LuiEIBZL9vcnj7aT8hOxioxD5GUv1%2BvEl64LST5uz4Lz97LOrMvBo1TiIxUJ8dH6hjiMf19cTDHmdRADMwgJPpnfAFxsnb9%2FrbJEt8OSOky1J3htrVttHu%2B8nR1tmpvaGYdDSKSFlRMFyjkZW5pij54lYyBNnjHdzuglyBtJ%2Bfuz%2FylhPpM%2FhjLEKpoicadV","locale":"en-US","buyingOptionType":"USED","aapiBuyingOptionIndex":1}]}

Purchase options and add-ons

"Is there anyone on earth who is so narrow-minded or uninquisitive that he could fail to want to know how and thanks to what kind of political system almost the entire known world was conquered and brought under a single empire in less than fifty-three years?" --Polybius, Histories

The 53-year period Polybius had in mind stretched from the start of the Second Punic War in 219 BCE until 167, when Rome overthrew the Macedonian monarchy and divided the country into four independent republics. This was the crucial half-century of Rome's spectacular rise to imperial status, but Roman interest in its eastern neighbors began a little earlier, with the First Illyrian War of 229, and climaxed later with the infamous destruction of Corinth in 146.

Taken at the Flood chronicles this momentous move by Rome into the Greek east. Until now, this period of history has been overshadowed by the threat of Carthage in the west, but events in the east were no less important in themselves, and Robin Waterfield's account reveals the peculiar nature of Rome's eastern policy. For over seventy years, the Romans avoided annexation so that they could commit their military and financial resources to the fight against Carthage and elsewhere. Though ultimately a failure, this policy of indirect rule, punctuated by periodic brutal military interventions and intense diplomacy, worked well for several decades, until the Senate finally settled on more direct forms of control.

Waterfield's fast-paced narrative focuses mainly on military and diplomatic maneuvers, but throughout he interweaves other topics and themes, such as the influence of Greek culture on Rome, the Roman aristocratic ethos, and the clash between the two best fighting machines the ancient world ever produced: the Macedonian phalanx and Roman legion. The result is an absorbing account of a critical chapter in Rome's mastery of the Mediterranean.
Read more Read less

Books with Buzz
Discover the latest buzz-worthy books, from mysteries and romance to humor and nonfiction. Explore more

Frequently bought together

$23.64
Get it as soon as Monday, May 20
Only 8 left in stock (more on the way).
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
+
$30.00
Get it as soon as Monday, May 20
Only 8 left in stock (more on the way).
Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
Total price:
To see our price, add these items to your cart.
Details
Added to Cart
Choose items to buy together.

Editorial Reviews

Review

"Waterfield has made himself into a living international treasure by his lean and lucid accounts of some of the most involved periods of ancient history (here, Rome's wars in Greece and Macedonia; in Dividing the Spoils, the wars of Alexander the Great's successors). The current story Waterfield tells clearly and enjoyably, with a deft selection of detail." --J.E. Lendon, The Weekly Standard

"The story Waterfield tells is complex, but he tells it well." --Peter Jones, BBC History

"This sorry story is told with great verve and pace by Waterfield." --Literary Review

"Taken at the Flood is a thrilling account of the bloody process that created Greco-Roman civilization. It is also a masterpiece of ancient history. Much has been written about the march of Roman arms, but for some reason scholars have never gotten around to producing a comprehensive volume of Rome's most crucial conquest--Greece. This has filled that void, in what will long remain the definitive account of Rome's subjugation of the once powerful Greek states." --Jim Lacey, author of The First Clash: The Miraculous Greek Victory at Marathon and Its Impact on Western Civilization and Moment of Battle: The Twenty Clashes That Changed the World

"Taken at the Flood is as elegant and powerful an introduction to the Roman conquest of Greece as you are likely to find. Waterfield tells the story in all its blood and cunning." --Barry Strauss, author of Masters of Command: Alexander, Hannibal, Caesar and the Genius of Leadership

"Taken at the Flood offers a vivid and exciting retelling of a key chapter in the story of Rome's rise to power, the conquest of the Greeks." --Greg Woolf, Professor of Ancient History at the University of St Andrews and author of Rome: An Empire's Story

"An epic tale, engagingly told in clear, eloquent prose. ... The book is a valuable contribution to the study of the formative years of Roman involvement in the East." -Bryn Mawr Classical Review

Book Description

A captivating narrative of Rome's first war for empire in the Eastern Mediterranean

Product details

  • Publisher ‏ : ‎ Oxford University Press; Illustrated edition (April 7, 2014)
  • Language ‏ : ‎ English
  • Hardcover ‏ : ‎ 312 pages
  • ISBN-10 ‏ : ‎ 0199916896
  • ISBN-13 ‏ : ‎ 978-0199916894
  • Item Weight ‏ : ‎ 1.3 pounds
  • Dimensions ‏ : ‎ 9.3 x 6.1 x 1.2 inches
  • Customer Reviews:
    4.3 4.3 out of 5 stars 108 ratings

About the author

Follow authors to get new release updates, plus improved recommendations.
Robin Waterfield
Brief content visible, double tap to read full content.
Full content visible, double tap to read brief content.

Robin Anthony Herschel Waterfield (born 1952) is a British classical scholar, translator, editor, and writer of children's fiction. Waterfield was born in 1952, and studied Classics at Manchester University, where he achieved a first class degree in 1974. He went on to research ancient Greek philosophy at King's College, Cambridge until 1978, after which he became a lecturer at Newcastle University and then St Andrews University. He later became a copy-editor and later a commissioning editor for Penguin Books. He is now a self-employed writer, living in southern Greece, where he has Greek citizenship.

Bio from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Customer reviews

4.3 out of 5 stars
4.3 out of 5
108 global ratings
The Velvet Glove and the Iron Fist.
4 Stars
The Velvet Glove and the Iron Fist.
In my research about the third Punic war, the one in which Rome destroyed Carthage, I ran across an intriguing quote by Polybius.“The ruin of Carthage is indeed considered to have been the greatest of calamities, but when we come to think of it the fate of Greece was no less terrible and in some ways even more so. For the Carthaginians at least left to posterity some ground, however slight, for defending their cause, but the Greeks gave no plausible pretext to anyone who wished to support them and acquit them of error. And again the Carthaginians, having been utterly exterminated by the calamity which overtook them, were for the future insensible of their sufferings, but the Greeks, continuing to witness their calamities, handed on from father to son the memory of their misfortune. So that inasmuch as we consider that those who remain alive and suffer punishment are more to be pitied than those who perished in the actual struggle, we should consider the calamities that then befell Greece more worthy of pity than the fate of Carthage, unless in pronouncing on the matter we discard all notion of what is decorous and noble, and keep our eyes only on material advantage. Everyone will acknowledge the truth of what I say if he recalls what are thought to have been the greatest misfortunes that had befallen Greece and compares them with my present narrative.”The very year that Carthage was destroyed, the Romans also destroyed the magnificent Greek city of Corinth and killed or enslaved the entire population. They took all that was valuable to Rome and the Consul Lucius Mummius Achaeaicus presented a vast amount of Corinthian booty to the Roman populace when he marched through the streets of Rome in his triumph.In Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece, Robin Waterfield goes into detail about the long but inexorable process of Rome’s ever increasing domination of its Eastern neighbor. Rome first became involved in Greece in 229 B.C. in the First Illyrian War. The Queen of Illyria, Tueta, was allegedly encouraging pirate activities along the Adriatic coast, and when Roman envoys went to discuss the matter with her, she had them killed. Rome’s military intervention was limited to Illyria at the time.During the Second Punic war King Phillip V made a treaty with Hannibal offering mutual assistance and co-operation. This led to wars between Rome and Macedon in 214 B.C. and again in 200 B.C. The Romans defeated Phillip decisively at the battle Cynocephalae in 197 B.C.In 196 B.C. the Roman Proconsul Titus Quinctius Flamininus proclaimed at the Isthmian Games that Rome was withdrawing its military forces from Greece and that it was the policy of Rome that the Greek city states would be free. The slogan was “Freedom for the Greeks.” Waterfield makes it clear that, even at that time, “freedom” was conditional-states friendly to the interests of Rome would fare much better than states whose rulers opposed Rome. Rome would control Greek polity by remote control, relying on oligarchs friendly to Rome. It wasn’t long before the velvet glove was replaced by the iron fist.Over the next decades it became more and more clear that Rome was pulling the strings. In 168 B.C. Rome, under Counsel Lucius Aemilius Paullus, destroyed the Kingdom of Macedonia after defeating King Persius at the battle of Pydna. Macedonia was divided into four sections and eventually became a Roman Province. At that time, the Romans also took the liberty of devastating the region of Epirus and selling 150,000 Epirotes into slavery. In the aftermath of the war Rome assured that all of the Greek polities had pro Roman leadership, and had many Greeks suspected of being anti-Roman taken as hostages and interned in Italy. One of these was the historian Polybius. Polybius had the good fortune of friendship with the Roman Consul Lucius Aemilius Paullus and his sons and was able to make the best of a bad situation.Polybius evidently had the notion that the Greeks brought much of their misery upon themselves through their resistance to Roman rule. After the disastrous Achaean revolt of 146 B.C. and the total destruction of Corinth, Polybius attempted to mediate between the Romans and the Greeks and get the Greeks to see that resistance was futile.By any measure, Roman dominance of Greece was disastrous for the Greeks. Many regions of Greece were depopulated and their inhabitants reduced to poverty. The conquest of Greece brought vast amounts of wealth to the Roman treasury as various victorious Consuls looted Greek temples and public monuments of their treasures to display in their triumphs. Many of the Greek polities were also compelled to pay tribute to Rome.Waterfield points out that the Greeks and the Romans had a complex relationship. Much of the art, architecture, theater and literature that we’ve come to associate with Rome had its roots in Greek culture. Many upper class Romans were bilingual in Greek and admired Greek culture. On the other hand, there was contempt for contemporary Greeks as being effete and obsequious and not up to Roman standards of virtue. Some influential Romans, notably Cato the Elder warned against the insidious influence of the Greeks. In the long run Rome incorporated much of Greek culture, leading the Roman Poet Horace to write: “Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit.” Captive Greece took her captor captive. Greece may have captivated Rome, but if the above quote by Polybius is any indication, Greece did not benefit from the transaction.
Thank you for your feedback
Sorry, there was an error
Sorry we couldn't load the review

Top reviews from the United States

Reviewed in the United States on February 6, 2023
This book provided a great foundation for my journey to the accent of the Roman Republic / Empire and the decline of Greek military influence.
Reviewed in the United States on May 26, 2015
In my research about the third Punic war, the one in which Rome destroyed Carthage, I ran across an intriguing quote by Polybius.
“The ruin of Carthage is indeed considered to have been the greatest of calamities, but when we come to think of it the fate of Greece was no less terrible and in some ways even more so. For the Carthaginians at least left to posterity some ground, however slight, for defending their cause, but the Greeks gave no plausible pretext to anyone who wished to support them and acquit them of error. And again the Carthaginians, having been utterly exterminated by the calamity which overtook them, were for the future insensible of their sufferings, but the Greeks, continuing to witness their calamities, handed on from father to son the memory of their misfortune. So that inasmuch as we consider that those who remain alive and suffer punishment are more to be pitied than those who perished in the actual struggle, we should consider the calamities that then befell Greece more worthy of pity than the fate of Carthage, unless in pronouncing on the matter we discard all notion of what is decorous and noble, and keep our eyes only on material advantage. Everyone will acknowledge the truth of what I say if he recalls what are thought to have been the greatest misfortunes that had befallen Greece and compares them with my present narrative.”
The very year that Carthage was destroyed, the Romans also destroyed the magnificent Greek city of Corinth and killed or enslaved the entire population. They took all that was valuable to Rome and the Consul Lucius Mummius Achaeaicus presented a vast amount of Corinthian booty to the Roman populace when he marched through the streets of Rome in his triumph.
In Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece, Robin Waterfield goes into detail about the long but inexorable process of Rome’s ever increasing domination of its Eastern neighbor. Rome first became involved in Greece in 229 B.C. in the First Illyrian War. The Queen of Illyria, Tueta, was allegedly encouraging pirate activities along the Adriatic coast, and when Roman envoys went to discuss the matter with her, she had them killed. Rome’s military intervention was limited to Illyria at the time.
During the Second Punic war King Phillip V made a treaty with Hannibal offering mutual assistance and co-operation. This led to wars between Rome and Macedon in 214 B.C. and again in 200 B.C. The Romans defeated Phillip decisively at the battle Cynocephalae in 197 B.C.
In 196 B.C. the Roman Proconsul Titus Quinctius Flamininus proclaimed at the Isthmian Games that Rome was withdrawing its military forces from Greece and that it was the policy of Rome that the Greek city states would be free. The slogan was “Freedom for the Greeks.” Waterfield makes it clear that, even at that time, “freedom” was conditional-states friendly to the interests of Rome would fare much better than states whose rulers opposed Rome. Rome would control Greek polity by remote control, relying on oligarchs friendly to Rome. It wasn’t long before the velvet glove was replaced by the iron fist.
Over the next decades it became more and more clear that Rome was pulling the strings. In 168 B.C. Rome, under Counsel Lucius Aemilius Paullus, destroyed the Kingdom of Macedonia after defeating King Persius at the battle of Pydna. Macedonia was divided into four sections and eventually became a Roman Province. At that time, the Romans also took the liberty of devastating the region of Epirus and selling 150,000 Epirotes into slavery. In the aftermath of the war Rome assured that all of the Greek polities had pro Roman leadership, and had many Greeks suspected of being anti-Roman taken as hostages and interned in Italy. One of these was the historian Polybius. Polybius had the good fortune of friendship with the Roman Consul Lucius Aemilius Paullus and his sons and was able to make the best of a bad situation.
Polybius evidently had the notion that the Greeks brought much of their misery upon themselves through their resistance to Roman rule. After the disastrous Achaean revolt of 146 B.C. and the total destruction of Corinth, Polybius attempted to mediate between the Romans and the Greeks and get the Greeks to see that resistance was futile.
By any measure, Roman dominance of Greece was disastrous for the Greeks. Many regions of Greece were depopulated and their inhabitants reduced to poverty. The conquest of Greece brought vast amounts of wealth to the Roman treasury as various victorious Consuls looted Greek temples and public monuments of their treasures to display in their triumphs. Many of the Greek polities were also compelled to pay tribute to Rome.
Waterfield points out that the Greeks and the Romans had a complex relationship. Much of the art, architecture, theater and literature that we’ve come to associate with Rome had its roots in Greek culture. Many upper class Romans were bilingual in Greek and admired Greek culture. On the other hand, there was contempt for contemporary Greeks as being effete and obsequious and not up to Roman standards of virtue. Some influential Romans, notably Cato the Elder warned against the insidious influence of the Greeks. In the long run Rome incorporated much of Greek culture, leading the Roman Poet Horace to write: “Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit.” Captive Greece took her captor captive. Greece may have captivated Rome, but if the above quote by Polybius is any indication, Greece did not benefit from the transaction.
Customer image
4.0 out of 5 stars The Velvet Glove and the Iron Fist.
Reviewed in the United States on May 26, 2015
In my research about the third Punic war, the one in which Rome destroyed Carthage, I ran across an intriguing quote by Polybius.
“The ruin of Carthage is indeed considered to have been the greatest of calamities, but when we come to think of it the fate of Greece was no less terrible and in some ways even more so. For the Carthaginians at least left to posterity some ground, however slight, for defending their cause, but the Greeks gave no plausible pretext to anyone who wished to support them and acquit them of error. And again the Carthaginians, having been utterly exterminated by the calamity which overtook them, were for the future insensible of their sufferings, but the Greeks, continuing to witness their calamities, handed on from father to son the memory of their misfortune. So that inasmuch as we consider that those who remain alive and suffer punishment are more to be pitied than those who perished in the actual struggle, we should consider the calamities that then befell Greece more worthy of pity than the fate of Carthage, unless in pronouncing on the matter we discard all notion of what is decorous and noble, and keep our eyes only on material advantage. Everyone will acknowledge the truth of what I say if he recalls what are thought to have been the greatest misfortunes that had befallen Greece and compares them with my present narrative.”
The very year that Carthage was destroyed, the Romans also destroyed the magnificent Greek city of Corinth and killed or enslaved the entire population. They took all that was valuable to Rome and the Consul Lucius Mummius Achaeaicus presented a vast amount of Corinthian booty to the Roman populace when he marched through the streets of Rome in his triumph.
In Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece, Robin Waterfield goes into detail about the long but inexorable process of Rome’s ever increasing domination of its Eastern neighbor. Rome first became involved in Greece in 229 B.C. in the First Illyrian War. The Queen of Illyria, Tueta, was allegedly encouraging pirate activities along the Adriatic coast, and when Roman envoys went to discuss the matter with her, she had them killed. Rome’s military intervention was limited to Illyria at the time.
During the Second Punic war King Phillip V made a treaty with Hannibal offering mutual assistance and co-operation. This led to wars between Rome and Macedon in 214 B.C. and again in 200 B.C. The Romans defeated Phillip decisively at the battle Cynocephalae in 197 B.C.
In 196 B.C. the Roman Proconsul Titus Quinctius Flamininus proclaimed at the Isthmian Games that Rome was withdrawing its military forces from Greece and that it was the policy of Rome that the Greek city states would be free. The slogan was “Freedom for the Greeks.” Waterfield makes it clear that, even at that time, “freedom” was conditional-states friendly to the interests of Rome would fare much better than states whose rulers opposed Rome. Rome would control Greek polity by remote control, relying on oligarchs friendly to Rome. It wasn’t long before the velvet glove was replaced by the iron fist.
Over the next decades it became more and more clear that Rome was pulling the strings. In 168 B.C. Rome, under Counsel Lucius Aemilius Paullus, destroyed the Kingdom of Macedonia after defeating King Persius at the battle of Pydna. Macedonia was divided into four sections and eventually became a Roman Province. At that time, the Romans also took the liberty of devastating the region of Epirus and selling 150,000 Epirotes into slavery. In the aftermath of the war Rome assured that all of the Greek polities had pro Roman leadership, and had many Greeks suspected of being anti-Roman taken as hostages and interned in Italy. One of these was the historian Polybius. Polybius had the good fortune of friendship with the Roman Consul Lucius Aemilius Paullus and his sons and was able to make the best of a bad situation.
Polybius evidently had the notion that the Greeks brought much of their misery upon themselves through their resistance to Roman rule. After the disastrous Achaean revolt of 146 B.C. and the total destruction of Corinth, Polybius attempted to mediate between the Romans and the Greeks and get the Greeks to see that resistance was futile.
By any measure, Roman dominance of Greece was disastrous for the Greeks. Many regions of Greece were depopulated and their inhabitants reduced to poverty. The conquest of Greece brought vast amounts of wealth to the Roman treasury as various victorious Consuls looted Greek temples and public monuments of their treasures to display in their triumphs. Many of the Greek polities were also compelled to pay tribute to Rome.
Waterfield points out that the Greeks and the Romans had a complex relationship. Much of the art, architecture, theater and literature that we’ve come to associate with Rome had its roots in Greek culture. Many upper class Romans were bilingual in Greek and admired Greek culture. On the other hand, there was contempt for contemporary Greeks as being effete and obsequious and not up to Roman standards of virtue. Some influential Romans, notably Cato the Elder warned against the insidious influence of the Greeks. In the long run Rome incorporated much of Greek culture, leading the Roman Poet Horace to write: “Graecia capta ferum victorem cepit.” Captive Greece took her captor captive. Greece may have captivated Rome, but if the above quote by Polybius is any indication, Greece did not benefit from the transaction.
Images in this review
Customer image
Customer image
17 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on May 21, 2014
Although the author, Robin Waterfield, is a scholar who has translated Polybius, his book "Taken at the Flood" is written for a general audience. It is highly readable; in fact, I had trouble putting it down. The author makes a complicated story easy to understand. For the expert, Waterfield has end notes that explain some of the contentious scholarly issues surrounding this history and has placed a large bibliography for further reading. The author asterisks those books that he thinks the general reader might consult if he or she was interested in going deeper into the subject. Altogether, a very worthwhile book.
12 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on May 13, 2015
This is a compact military and political history of the Roman conflicts with Greece between 229-146 BC, told by a well-known classicist writer and translator. It is set forth without a lot of polemical frills, contrary to what is suggested in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review. Events are clearly related, and the book works well as an introduction to the period. It is not a comprehensive or in depth survey of the period. It wouldn't be possible in 236 pages. There isn't much social or cultural history presented, aside from several supplemental passages.

Some have been quick to criticize the drawing of comparisons between the Roman Empire and the United States. The importance of this within the overall context of the book has been overstated as it only appears a few times. Once is in the preface where another author’s comparison of Roman indirect influence to post-WWII US international relations is noted. Waterfield points out that this is not the purpose of the book, nor his area of expertise.

A second instance is on page 101 where it is stated that “The Romans wanted to be players in the Greek world without being drawn into colonialism; they wanted political control without administrative control, just as over recent decades the USA has avoided structures of empire while ensuring a widespread hegemony.” This may be a somewhat clumsy way to make a point and has understandably put off some readers. But it is not an overall anachronistic portrayal of the period on the part of the author. Waterfield could have deleted these passages (and probably should have) since they don't really add much to the book.

A reader suggested we would be better off to just read Polybius and Livy. Read them we should, they have both been well referenced by Waterfield, and translated by him​ too in the case of Polybius. The scope of the historian shouldn't be limited to recounting primary sources, influenced as these sources were by the politics and perspectives of their time. A higher goal would be to provide analysis and advance critical thinking about the sources. Waterfield provides such insights, and it is up to us to decide if we agree with them or not.

Limiting the scope of an ancient historian to factual representation, besides being unachievable, denies the tradition and evolution of modern historiography. To read Roman history by Gibbon, Mommsen, Syme, or Gruen provides substantially different insights on many of the same events. These writers have built upon and argued against the work of their predecessors. The Roman conquest of Greece is replete with competing theories.

Several views advanced were that Rome was defending itself against anarchy in the Mediterranean, that Rome became involved as a series of unplanned circumstances over a long period, or that Rome was intentionally extending their political and economic influence. Waterfield comes down on the side of the last argument, and gives various reasons for this. I can see aspects of these explanations existing simultaneously without contradiction.

On the whole, ​this is a well presented and mostly uncontroversial short history. The bibliography references primary and secondary sources for further study. Waterfield indicates what he considers to be “indispensable launch pads for further inquiry” from across the spectrum of Roman history writing. This book is worthwhile reading if you are interested in a basic recount of the events, or to review ideas you've read elsewhere. For steadfast supporters of the Republic, let it be it known: Rome looks no worse than others in this tome.
16 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on August 5, 2016
Was looking for a long time for a book like this. It gives information not easily found in other books, which usually gloss over the experience from the Greek side and default to the conquest of Greece from the Roman side. Highly recommend this.
3 people found this helpful
Report
Reviewed in the United States on August 8, 2014
Too mechanical in its approach.
Reviewed in the United States on July 16, 2014
In the same league as David McCullough, for making history easy to understand and so enjoyable to read for ordinary people. Thanks for telling so well an interesting story. Highly recommended.
2 people found this helpful
Report

Top reviews from other countries

Bill Buchanan
5.0 out of 5 stars Interesting read.
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on May 27, 2021
Well written and not too high brow for the non specialist. I really enjoyed this book and read through it very quickly. Really informative.
GK
5.0 out of 5 stars Excellent book. Mr
Reviewed in Canada on August 11, 2015
Excellent book. Mr. Waterfield does an excellent synopsis of Roman Imperialism (Republic style) and paints a coherent picture of the Roman interventions, and eventual domination of Greece that has been rarely covered. It was eye-opening to see how the Greek states sealed their own doom with their internal squabbles, true divide and conquer in action, and seemingly aware of what they were doing as it happened. Also, the descriptions of the lootings the Romans did during their conquests is startling reading accustomed as we are to the hybridization of "Greco-Roman" culture.

Highly recommended.
Bghd
4.0 out of 5 stars Rome loses its innocence-if it ever had any
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 25, 2021
The Roman assertion of hegemony over Greece and the Eastern Mediterranean doesn't quite have the name recognition afforded to the wars against Carthage (even if Hannibal had a walk on role). Nevertheless in some ways they marked an even bigger caesura in Roman politics and society- Roman cultural conservatives saw them as the start of a process of ongoing degeneration. The massive economic resources looted from the East and the durable insertion of Italian economic actors into the region caused huge shifts within the Roman elite. Roman generals began to think and act like Hellenistic monarchs on campaign and found it hard to fit back into traditional Senatorial ways. More intense contacts with Greek culture left Romans musing on just what Roman-ness meant. Nothing was ever quite the same, for Rome or for Greece, where the Macedonian monarchy was abolished for good and the traditional city states survived under very different conditions. Roman armies of occupation and administrators may have been thin on the ground but everyone knew who really called the shots.

Waterfield sketches the stages by which this process was accomplished, offering an overview of the four Macedonian Wars and the associated campaigns in the Balkans and Asia Minor. On one level this is a slightly old fashioned,great men and battles, account, though taking full account of the political skulduggery in the background and with plenty of analysis of the mechanisms of indirect control favoured by Rome at this stage. He is certainly not guilty of playing down the sheer levels of violence and destruction in the process- there are precious few untarnished heroes on display here (perhaps Perseus of Macedon comes closest). He manages to keep a clear focus on events in Greece even though a great deal else was going on at the same time.- though at times it is very hard to keep track of who was allying with whom and keep the Achaean and Aetolian Leagues distinct. I would have happily traded Waterfield's very 21st century moralising about the evils of imperialism for a few pages giving a clear outline of the balance of power and relationship between the actors in Greek politics on the eve of Roman intervention, as well as an explanation of how the various leagues actually worked.

One also senses a slight anti-Roman animus from a man who has made his name as a historian of Greece. Rome's allies in Greece tend to attract derogatory epithets like "quisling" and one occasionally senses double standards at play. The Greek world was hardly in a state of pre-lapsarian innocence before the Romans turned up and "Greek Freedom" implied the right to slaughter one's fellow Greeks from the next polis in large numbers. Obsequiousness to powerful outsiders was the norm well before Rome arrived on the scene (Hellenistic monarchs, after all, expected to be worshipped almost as gods). Rome may have lost whatever innocence it possessed in asserting control over Greece, but it was arguably just more successful in playing the ruthless game of Greek politics than anyone since Alexander the Great
Roger Meek
5.0 out of 5 stars A well written history describing the events and underlying political ...
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on September 5, 2014
A well written history describing the events and underlying political and cultural differences between the Greeks and the Romans and how this led up to the Roman conquest. Unlike some reviewers I agree with the author on the parallels between Roman foreign policy and that used today by superpowers such as the USA. A solid contribution to this historical period.
2 people found this helpful
Report
PHILIPPOS VOIDOMATIS
5.0 out of 5 stars Five Stars
Reviewed in the United Kingdom on January 19, 2015
item arrived in excellent condition
One person found this helpful
Report