<< 1 >>
Rating: 
Summary: Buy the Visitor Guide Instead of this Book
Review: Hadrian's Wall AD 122 - 410 is the second in Osprey's new Fortress series that aims to summarize the "design, technology and history of key fortresses, strategic positions and defensive systems." This new series should serve to fill in many of the gaps of traditional military history, by providing greater detail on the fortresses that have shaped warfare throughout the centuries. Having spent a day exploring Hadrian's Wall several years ago, I felt that few could fail to be impressed by this unique remnant of Roman military engineering. Unfortunately, I wish I could say that same about Osprey's Fortress #2, but I cannot. Dr. Nic Fields, a professor in Ancient History at the University of Edinburgh, knows his material but writes in the typical horrid British academic style that reduces all the essential elements of this topic to a opaque mush. Like many academics who write about ancient military history, Fields is too-often sidetracked by esoteric archaeological issues and cannot focus on the actual military aspects of his subject. Furthermore, Fields has borrowed liberally from D.J. Breeze's earlier works on Hadrian's Wall and readers would be advised to check out that author's work in preference to this volume. Hadrian's Wall AD 122 - 410 begins with a description of the various types of Roman fortifications, the origins of the wall and a very brief chronology. The heart of the book lies in the chapters discussing the anatomy of the wall, the wall's construction, the function of the wall, it's garrison and life on the wall. The author includes three low-quality 2-D maps, all of which are inferior to those in the Visitor's Guide one can purchase on the modern site of the wall. There are also seven color art scenes that are decent: a milecastle, a turret, the cavalry fort at Chesters, early development of the wall, the fort at Birdoswald, a night raid on the wall and a Roman punitive raid against the Caledonians. One of the best aspects of the volume is a detailed chart that depicts the various Roman garrisons at all the major locations of the Wall in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries. Unfortunately, since the author makes little effort to discuss Roman military organization, it is difficult to determine how many troops (at least the nominal strength) might have been along the wall in these periods. The fundamental problem with this volume is that the author views the Wall in terms of its material - brick, stone and mortar - instead of how it fit doctrinally into Rome's military strategy. With precious little insight, the author advances the theory that the wall was primarily designed as an observation platform rather than a fighting position, since the walls were too narrow. Further, Dr Fields argues that since the Roman Army was an "offensive army," it did not defend static positions. This is nonsense. Anyone who has seen Hadrian's Wall and has knowledge of basic defensive tactics will see that the Roman units chose terrain that was very advantageous for defense. If the wall was merely intended for observation as the author contends, why not build simple earth ramparts with watchtowers, like the Limes in Germany? The author also contends that the defenses of Hadrian's Wall were not particularly impressive but this is also rubbish, since the various tribes in the north of Scotland lacked any tools for siege warfare. A 21-foot high stonewall with a garrison atop it would have been a very serious obstacle to lightly armed and poorly-organized tribesmen. The fact that the tribesmen did breach a section of the wall in 181 AD is far more indicative of a temporary lapse in Roman discipline and order than a fundamental defect in Hadrian's Wall. The Roman's built Hadrian's Wall - an enormous effort and expense - in order to achieve economy of force in what was essentially a secondary theater. By building the wall, the Romans could garrison the northern frontier of Britannia with modest auxiliary forces, allowing some of the regular legions to be transferred to more critical theaters like Germany and the Danube. Even the regular Roman units that remained in England could be utilized to secure the major population centers, rather than wasting away on a thinly populated frontier. At the cost of a five-year engineering effort, the Romans secured their northern frontier in Britannia for nearly three centuries - a bargain. Hadrian's Wall is worthy of study as a very cost-effective effort that achieved the maximum efficiency for Roman Britain at the lowest cost. The construction of the wall was truly amazing and Dr Fields failed to emphasize that the wall was built by infantryman, not trained engineers (although there were technical advisors). When one visits the wall today, the visitor can see unit insignias such as bulls or lions engraved on the century markers, denoting which infantry company (centuria) built that section of the wall. The pride in their achievement, as well as its longevity, are evident for all to see - except in this book.
Rating:
Summary: Buy the Visitor Guide Instead of this Book
Review: Hadrian's Wall AD 122 - 410 is the second in Osprey's new Fortress series that aims to summarize the "design, technology and history of key fortresses, strategic positions and defensive systems." This new series should serve to fill in many of the gaps of traditional military history, by providing greater detail on the fortresses that have shaped warfare throughout the centuries. Having spent a day exploring Hadrian's Wall several years ago, I felt that few could fail to be impressed by this unique remnant of Roman military engineering. Unfortunately, I wish I could say that same about Osprey's Fortress #2, but I cannot. Dr. Nic Fields, a professor in Ancient History at the University of Edinburgh, knows his material but writes in the typical horrid British academic style that reduces all the essential elements of this topic to a opaque mush. Like many academics who write about ancient military history, Fields is too-often sidetracked by esoteric archaeological issues and cannot focus on the actual military aspects of his subject. Furthermore, Fields has borrowed liberally from D.J. Breeze's earlier works on Hadrian's Wall and readers would be advised to check out that author's work in preference to this volume. Hadrian's Wall AD 122 - 410 begins with a description of the various types of Roman fortifications, the origins of the wall and a very brief chronology. The heart of the book lies in the chapters discussing the anatomy of the wall, the wall's construction, the function of the wall, it's garrison and life on the wall. The author includes three low-quality 2-D maps, all of which are inferior to those in the Visitor's Guide one can purchase on the modern site of the wall. There are also seven color art scenes that are decent: a milecastle, a turret, the cavalry fort at Chesters, early development of the wall, the fort at Birdoswald, a night raid on the wall and a Roman punitive raid against the Caledonians. One of the best aspects of the volume is a detailed chart that depicts the various Roman garrisons at all the major locations of the Wall in the 2nd and 3rd Centuries. Unfortunately, since the author makes little effort to discuss Roman military organization, it is difficult to determine how many troops (at least the nominal strength) might have been along the wall in these periods. The fundamental problem with this volume is that the author views the Wall in terms of its material - brick, stone and mortar - instead of how it fit doctrinally into Rome's military strategy. With precious little insight, the author advances the theory that the wall was primarily designed as an observation platform rather than a fighting position, since the walls were too narrow. Further, Dr Fields argues that since the Roman Army was an "offensive army," it did not defend static positions. This is nonsense. Anyone who has seen Hadrian's Wall and has knowledge of basic defensive tactics will see that the Roman units chose terrain that was very advantageous for defense. If the wall was merely intended for observation as the author contends, why not build simple earth ramparts with watchtowers, like the Limes in Germany? The author also contends that the defenses of Hadrian's Wall were not particularly impressive but this is also rubbish, since the various tribes in the north of Scotland lacked any tools for siege warfare. A 21-foot high stonewall with a garrison atop it would have been a very serious obstacle to lightly armed and poorly-organized tribesmen. The fact that the tribesmen did breach a section of the wall in 181 AD is far more indicative of a temporary lapse in Roman discipline and order than a fundamental defect in Hadrian's Wall. The Roman's built Hadrian's Wall - an enormous effort and expense - in order to achieve economy of force in what was essentially a secondary theater. By building the wall, the Romans could garrison the northern frontier of Britannia with modest auxiliary forces, allowing some of the regular legions to be transferred to more critical theaters like Germany and the Danube. Even the regular Roman units that remained in England could be utilized to secure the major population centers, rather than wasting away on a thinly populated frontier. At the cost of a five-year engineering effort, the Romans secured their northern frontier in Britannia for nearly three centuries - a bargain. Hadrian's Wall is worthy of study as a very cost-effective effort that achieved the maximum efficiency for Roman Britain at the lowest cost. The construction of the wall was truly amazing and Dr Fields failed to emphasize that the wall was built by infantryman, not trained engineers (although there were technical advisors). When one visits the wall today, the visitor can see unit insignias such as bulls or lions engraved on the century markers, denoting which infantry company (centuria) built that section of the wall. The pride in their achievement, as well as its longevity, are evident for all to see - except in this book.
Rating: 
Summary: I'd have to disagree
Review: I am afraid I am going to have to disagree with the previous reviews of this book. Knowing a little about Osprey publishing and the way the set their guidlines for authors, I feel the brevity was in no way Dr. Fields fault. This conclusion was drawn particularly from the fact that Osprey required a certain word limit which was met in this 64 page volume.
That said I also have to disagree with the previous entries concerning the doctrinal importance and context of Hadrian's Wall. Indeed I feel Dr. Fields is correct in his assertion that Hadrian's wall was not a defensive point, but a staging point for operations further afield and a watch station to better react to problems before they got to the wall. As Webster in his 1998 republication of The Roman Imperial Army noted that the purpose of the wall was to "impose total control over all traffic passing in and out of the Province, with provision for the collection of fees, tolls and duties and a thorough inspection of goods and persons. Its military purpose is less clear, but it certainly could never have been used as a fighting platform, only as a patrol track. An efficient signalling system and alert surveillance by forwads units would have made it possible for command HQ to order units to move forward through the fort and milecastle gateways to any area to deal with hostile elements." This passage sums up Hadrian's Wall to 'T'. The actual garrison at any given locality on Hadrian's wall couldn't have held it for any length of time against a determined enemy. In addition to this fact it is worth noting that the emperor to succeed Hadrian, Antoninus Pius (AD 138-161), in short order moved the frontier to the lowlands of Scotland where he did in fact build earthen fortifications. So in conclusion I would argue that this book is well worth a read for those who want a simplified glance at the defensive work that still provides a decent synopsis and sufficient depth. This combined with a thorough biliography should mean that this is an excellent staging point for anyone insterested in doing further research on the Wall, its functions and significance.
Rating: 
Summary: 64 Pages?
Review: Trying to cover the history, construction, use, and importance of Hadrian's Wall in 64 pages is impossible. It was a good effort, but Nic Fields just wasn't able to do it. I like this Fortress series from Osprey, and I like the brevity of these books, but Hadrian's Wall was a little too brief. One area Fields could have covered at least a little bit was that of the Emperor Hadrian himself and the reasons why he built this wall in the first place. Even though Fields doesn't believe the Roman army was a defensive one; Hadrian tried very had to outline the empire and create "defensive" lines like that of the wall. The previous review pretty much covered everything about this book. However, I will add that the illustrations and photos are wonderful and you will enjoy them. This is the first book I've read where I've wanted to purchase the original artwork. The nice thing is I will be able to buy them because Osprey has made available the email address and website of the company that produced the artwork. This book is very easy to read and the illustrations make this book even shorter than 64 pages. I finished reading this book recently on a flight from Frankfurt to Philadelphia. It was the only book I brought with me and I messed up because on an eight-hour flight I was left with nothing to read after three hours. Osprey books are suppose to be good introductions to topics, but this one doesn't quite cut it and I would suggest a different book on the subject or maybe even a good biography on Hadrian like Hadrian: The Restless Emperor by Anthony Birley. Birley covers Hadrian's Wall and his journey to Britain in great detail.
Rating:
Summary: 64 Pages?
Review: Trying to cover the history, construction, use, and importance of Hadrian's Wall in 64 pages is impossible. It was a good effort, but Nic Fields just wasn't able to do it. I like this Fortress series from Osprey, and I like the brevity of these books, but Hadrian's Wall was a little too brief. One area Fields could have covered at least a little bit was that of the Emperor Hadrian himself and the reasons why he built this wall in the first place. Even though Fields doesn't believe the Roman army was a defensive one; Hadrian tried very had to outline the empire and create "defensive" lines like that of the wall. The previous review pretty much covered everything about this book. However, I will add that the illustrations and photos are wonderful and you will enjoy them. This is the first book I've read where I've wanted to purchase the original artwork. The nice thing is I will be able to buy them because Osprey has made available the email address and website of the company that produced the artwork. This book is very easy to read and the illustrations make this book even shorter than 64 pages. I finished reading this book recently on a flight from Frankfurt to Philadelphia. It was the only book I brought with me and I messed up because on an eight-hour flight I was left with nothing to read after three hours. Osprey books are suppose to be good introductions to topics, but this one doesn't quite cut it and I would suggest a different book on the subject or maybe even a good biography on Hadrian like Hadrian: The Restless Emperor by Anthony Birley. Birley covers Hadrian's Wall and his journey to Britain in great detail.
<< 1 >>
|
