<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Mediocre at best
Review: As a classics major in college, I have been regularly referred to the Roman section of this work to gain increased general knowledge over later classical antiquity. After thoroughly reading and rereading many sections, I can scarcely say I've gleaned anything close to that.The "chapters" read more like non-peer reviewed articles that are virtually impossible to understand for the casual reader, and very difficult for classics students. They lack any sort of central thesis, lack much logical sequence in historical events within themselves and in relation to other chapters, use highly colloquial terms and accentuate seemingly arbitrary themes throughout history while ignoring others. Cases in point: Marius' name is mentioned about 3 times, and never in regards to his own exploits. Cinna is missing entirely as far as I can tell. The Catilinarian conspiracy receives about half a paragraph (even though Sallust devoted a book to it), as do the Gracchi brothers, and Cato the Elder, but we receive heaps of names about obscure tribes in the Italian peninsula during Rome's expansion, whose importance as individual tribes are confusingly illustrated by varying levels of information which seem to lead nowhere. The exact identities of "Roman", "Etruscan", "Latin", and "Italian" are anyone's guess. When the political division between the "populares" and "optimati" are introduced, the latter is left unexplained. I have not read the Greek section yet and refrain from commenting upon it. In short, the Roman section of this text, I think, is a disgrace to the name "Oxford". If you want to learn about classical history, I suggest you read an array of entries from the Oxford Classical Dictionary, a condensed scholarly text that cuts through much of the subjective interpretation of events to the meat of the matter, giving you the "who's who" and "what's what" in concise entries.
Rating: 
Summary: A Superior Overview of Greek History
Review: The best aspect of this book on Greek history is its comprehensive treatment of all aspects of Greek life. Literature, politics, religion, etc. are all covered in this book. My favorite sections dealt with how the Greeks socialized through organizations such as the Gymnasion and the Prytany. It really showed how the Greeks were devoted to the polis and how they were required to be very social creatures from cradle to grave. A serious problem of the book is tendencies by some of the authors to write in a style that is not user friendly. Also, a background in Greek history is required to recognize names and places. Without that you will be lost. Don't buy it unless you are really interested in Greek culture.
Rating: 
Summary: very good
Review: This is a very good work on classical Europe. There are many virtues of this complete book, I would like to stress though its most important: its fresh look at ancient world (eg the first chapter by Mr G.Forrest is a good example), and although one might not agree with all points in the book (e.g the hindoeuropen idea at which Mr Griffin is attached is at best weak), but certainly one agrees that the concept of the book is on the right track. I especially enjoyed the very good chapters in a not well known part of hellenic history, that of the hellenistic times, at which the Macedonian hellenes, made Greece a Universal culture. Buy this book and study it, you can only gain!
Rating:
Summary: A Superior Overview of Greek History
Review: While the appeal of the 'oxford' name and the attractive price/page ratio make this book seem like a good deal, I found it extremely difficult to get any useful information out of this book. The authors give their opinions on subjects, before (or in many cases, in place of) giving any coherent summary of it. Just for example, try to figure out who Draco was. If you don't already know, this book is not going to tell you. The writing style is not especially clear, either. If this is one of the best texts available, I can see why nobody learns classical history anymore.
<< 1 >>
| 
