In order to find the answer, one must dig into the character, achievements, and civilization of Rome and of her people. The Romans is written from the point of view that the study of the past is vitally important to understanding ourselves today.
Barrow believes that Rome should be an essential part of that research: “This book is not a history of Rome; it is rather an invitation to consider whether Roman history s not worth further study. ” Barrow intends to give the reader a desire to research the history of Rome and apply it to his life. This is a biblical standpoint, because we cannot understand ourselves if we do not understand how we got here. The Romans should be read by anyone who desires to understand the Romans: how they thought, lived, and imprinted history.
The Romans will have lasting value in Western Civilization because Rome helped shape how we live today. In his book The Romans, Barrow addresses the concept of how Rome became what it was. How did the Romans achieve so much? He analyzes her introductions to Western Civilization and the essence of Roman genius and character. How did Rome become immortal? No other nation achieved an Empire so far-reaching and so fundamentally humane. The Romans focused on Law, but the Law was made by them and they imposed it on themselves.
When their law is studied, the Romans’ eternal values are revealed: respect for the will of the gods (pietas), respect for human personality (humanists), regard for each individual’s freedom (liberties), respect for tradition (mores), respect for authority (custodial), respect for the pledged word (fide), raining (discipline), the training which comes from the self (services), responsible cast of mind (gravitas), and purpose (constant). Barrow focuses on these traits expressed in the actions, law, and government of Rome. Barrow also discusses the concept of what the Roman mind was like.
It was that of the farmer-soldier-?the soldier is the conqueror of distant lands and the farmer is the cultivator of this land. Both know the value of routine, discipline, and self-reliance. Also, there is an unknown element involved with both. For the farmer, it is the weather. For the soldier, it is the enemy. However, the most important similarity between the two is that they both believe that “knowledge born of existence is worth more than speculative theory. ” Roman civilization can be defined by knowledge gained by experience (unlike the culture of Greece). Barrow emphasizes this concept throughout his whole book.
Since Barrow does not include a bibliography in The Romans, it is hard to tell where he got his information from. Since he was not there at the time of Rome, I assume that he used mostly secondary texts. However, I feel that a to of what Barrow says is simply personal observation. He know,n. RSI the hard facts, but he fails to mention where he learned them from. He might have used some primary texts, like biographies or diaries, but he didn’t mention which or even if he used any. He most likely just relayed what he knew in a logical progression without mentioning where he had learned it.
He used his personal opinion to emphasize his point-?that the history of Rome is vitally important. His writing is somewhat biased toward Rome, and this can be seen in his writing. He argues his thesis using specific events or people that articulacy resemble what he wants the reader to see. Barrow asks several questions about Rome. What made it last? What was different about it? ‘What manner of men were the Romans? ‘ He asks about the people of Rome, not just their achievements. He focuses On the people themselves. The theme of this book is not what the Romans did, but what they were.
He aims to explain what kind of men were behind the greatness of Rome, which is the right point of view. History is made by men, so it is important to understand what motivated them. The Roman was a farmer- soldier. At the end of the book, the reader stands face-to-face with a Roman farmer, shouldering his plow, and he knows him. Barrow gives the reader a glimpse into the heart and soul of what motivated the Roman people. Barrow recognizes that he cannot cover every aspect of Roman history in just one short book, but he gives a good summary and overview. However, he glosses over the repellent and unpleasant aspects of Rome.
The reader will have to discover those elsewhere. The book was also heavy on Roman law, endurance, military, and Senate. It didn’t really dwell on what life was like for he average Roman day-to-day. Also, since it is such a short book, it seems very fast-paced and rushed. It is so quick, it lacks details that could make the overview more informative. The Romans is for the layman, not the professor who wishes to learn more. It is an introduction, and it should be treated as such. R. H. BarroWs style is casual and fun to read. His book is interesting, and it does not sound like a history book usually does.
He makes ancient events and people seem relevant and applicable to our lives today. His writing makes the reader want to know more. Barrows book is very well-written-?it is perfect for a high school student, but not for the specialist. His style is informal, but his information is factual and to the point. He is not dry’, nor is he eloquent. He simply States the facts in a fun, readable manner. He clearly answers his question: how did Rome become so great? He gives an overview of Roman history punctually and efficiently. Barrows point comes across very clearly and vividly. He accurately hit his mark.
His desire when writing this book was to make the reader want to know more about the Romans and how their history relates to us. He wanted the reader to desire more knowledge, because he knew that his book alone was not sufficient. Barrow’s point was that the study of the past is of vital importance for the understanding of ourselves. The Roman culture and civilization helped to shape ours. Therefore, it is necessary to understand their world in order to understand our own. Barrow accomplished his goal. Though his book gave a thorough overview, I feel like I should investigate more in order to understand the history of Rome.
His book was interesting, but lacking in specific facts. BarroWs goal was to make the reader want to know more, and that is what he achieved. The greatest strength of The Romans, in my opinion, is its readability. Standard history books tend to be simply facts on a piece of paper, but Barrow brought the story to life. He applied it and contrasted it to modern day. He turned the boring history of Rome into an action novel which focuses on the characters. Its greatest weakness would be its pace. It is sometimes hard to follow a quick overview since it contains so much information.
The author’s point of view is hat the past is important-?his book reflects his thinking very accurately. Barrows The Romans helped me understand the history of Rome and its people much better. I now understand what the Romans believed, how they thought, how hard they worked, and how they left their mark on history. Barrows point of view is admirable-?he believes that history is still important today. I feel that this book should be read by any person who appreciates history and wants to understand the past. I personally enjoyed reading it, and hope that others will, too. The Romans truly is an immortal work.