What do you think?
Rate this book
Domination
Not yet published
Expected 26 Feb 26This is the story of the fall of an Empire – and the rise of another.
Who spread Christianity, how, and why? In her quest to find the answer, Professor Alice Roberts takes us on a gripping investigative journey. From a secluded valley in south Wales to the shores of Brittany; from the heart of the Roman Empire in a time of political turmoil to the ancient city of Corinth in the footsteps of the apostle Paul; from Alexandria in the fourth century to Constantinople.
As the Roman Empire crumbled in Western Europe, a shadow of power remained, almost perfectly mapping onto its disappearing territories. And then, it continued to spread. Unearthing the archaeological clues and challenging long-established histories, Professor Roberts tells a remarkable story about the relationship between the Roman Empire and Christianity.
Lifting the veil on secrets that have been hidden in plain sight, this story is nothing short of astonishing.
Domination is a page-turning exploration of power and its survival.
Who spread Christianity, how, and why? In her quest to find the answer, Professor Alice Roberts takes us on a gripping investigative journey. From a secluded valley in south Wales to the shores of Brittany; from the heart of the Roman Empire in a time of political turmoil to the ancient city of Corinth in the footsteps of the apostle Paul; from Alexandria in the fourth century to Constantinople.
As the Roman Empire crumbled in Western Europe, a shadow of power remained, almost perfectly mapping onto its disappearing territories. And then, it continued to spread. Unearthing the archaeological clues and challenging long-established histories, Professor Roberts tells a remarkable story about the relationship between the Roman Empire and Christianity.
Lifting the veil on secrets that have been hidden in plain sight, this story is nothing short of astonishing.
Domination is a page-turning exploration of power and its survival.
432 pages, Paperback
First published August 28, 2025
115 people are currently reading
761 people want to read
About the author
Alice Roberts
39 books785 followersAlice May Roberts is an English anatomist, osteoarchaeologist, physical anthropologist, palaeopathologist, television presenter and author.
Roberts studied medicine and anatomy at Cardiff University, qualifying in 1997 as a physician with a Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MB BCh) degree, having gained an intercalated Bachelor of Science degree in anatomy. She earned a PhD in paleopathology in 2008 from the University of Bristol.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Roberts studied medicine and anatomy at Cardiff University, qualifying in 1997 as a physician with a Bachelor of Medicine, Bachelor of Surgery (MB BCh) degree, having gained an intercalated Bachelor of Science degree in anatomy. She earned a PhD in paleopathology in 2008 from the University of Bristol.
Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the Goodreads database with this name.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews
November 17, 2025
4.5 stars
Reviewing this could be interesting as it raises all sorts of issues as the book goes against many of the trends of the time, particularly in the UK. Alice Roberts is well known in the UK for her TV appearances on archaeological programmes. She trained as a medic and worked as a junior doctor. She went on to do a PhD in paleopathology and researched osteoarchaeology. She’s had a variety of roles, including being Chair of the British Humanist Association. This, of course, means she does have an opinion on the issue of how Christianity grew and spread.
There has also been an awful lot of vitriol heaped on Roberts on social media, especially on X from a variety of sources. There is a strand of particularly British nationalism spreading at present, often focussed on Reform UK and Nigel Farage. This involves the flag, a weird concept of what the Knights Templar were, deporting everyone who is not white and a version of some sort of pure Christianity. It’s all a load of nonsense (there are other more satisfactory words I could have used here), but it means Roberts has been subject to a good deal of criticism. There is a clear critique as Sebastian Milbank says:
“ her view is that Christianity’s success was due to its usefulness to elites, and that its members were primarily motivated by the desire for wealth and power.”
Roberts’s arguments are broader than this but views become fixed. It is important to remember this isn’t an academic historical tome. It is broader in scope and more polemical.
The book looks at the way Christianity grew from a small Jewish cult into the dominant religion in the Roman Empire. I’m not going to give a blow by blow account of this, but to just raise a few issues that struck me.
The first part of the book looks at archaeology and in particular at Wales, Cornwall and Brittany and at the way society developed as Roman influence declined. Often cemeteries were outside town walls. As time went on they often had chapels built and eventually roles were reversed and the church became more important than the cemetery. Another interesting development was that many roman villas, because of their size, became places of worship as the buildings were repurposed.
Roberts makes some interesting points about asceticism and suggests maybe it wasn’t always as it seemed. Eucherius of Lyon, when he went on a Lenten retreat to a monastery, took with him 1740 litres of wine and 66 kilos of cheese. She also suggests that Simon Stylites, who spent many years sat on top of a twenty-foot pillar, may have been fooling himself if he thought it was a way of avoiding people. When I first heard the story as a child, my first thought was “Where does he go to the toilet?” A question no one has ever satisfactorily answered.
Robert also points out that as the administration of the Church and the imperial administration grew ever closer, one principle was assured, “The rich stayed rich and the poor stayed poor.” Roberts spends a good deal of time looking at the life and conversion of Constantine and makes some interesting points about syncretism, the mixing of old and new ideas and the fluidity of moving between two sets of ideas. Christian conversion is often portrayed in very dichotomous terms, but in reality the situation was that of a gradual acceptance and movement, to and fro. Roberts also points out that the language of the Church is often straight from terms used by Roman administration. For example clergy, laity, baptistry, basilica, curia, ecclesia are all terms straight from roman antecedents.
Towards the end of the book Roberts argues that the structure and nature of the Church made it similar to a multi-divisional firm. She takes some of the economic arguments from Ekelund and Tollison and quotes them:
“In the corporate structure of Christendom the medieval monastery operated as a (downstream) franchised firm, receiving quality assurance and name-brand recognition from the Church of Rome in return for certain payments (upstream).”
The concept of the Church as an economic firm hasn’t gone down well. It has been discussed in academic circles for a while and even Adam Smith mentioned it, putting it blatantly in the mainstream has created a reaction.
This is by no means a flawless book and I think Roberts spends too long on some of the theological debates and heresies, but it does explode a few myths along the way. It explains why Christianity was attractive to the elites and the middle classes. The poor, of course, are almost invisible and I suspect their primary objective as always was survival. If you want a not too academic look at the rise of Christianity, then this may be for you.
Reviewing this could be interesting as it raises all sorts of issues as the book goes against many of the trends of the time, particularly in the UK. Alice Roberts is well known in the UK for her TV appearances on archaeological programmes. She trained as a medic and worked as a junior doctor. She went on to do a PhD in paleopathology and researched osteoarchaeology. She’s had a variety of roles, including being Chair of the British Humanist Association. This, of course, means she does have an opinion on the issue of how Christianity grew and spread.
There has also been an awful lot of vitriol heaped on Roberts on social media, especially on X from a variety of sources. There is a strand of particularly British nationalism spreading at present, often focussed on Reform UK and Nigel Farage. This involves the flag, a weird concept of what the Knights Templar were, deporting everyone who is not white and a version of some sort of pure Christianity. It’s all a load of nonsense (there are other more satisfactory words I could have used here), but it means Roberts has been subject to a good deal of criticism. There is a clear critique as Sebastian Milbank says:
“ her view is that Christianity’s success was due to its usefulness to elites, and that its members were primarily motivated by the desire for wealth and power.”
Roberts’s arguments are broader than this but views become fixed. It is important to remember this isn’t an academic historical tome. It is broader in scope and more polemical.
The book looks at the way Christianity grew from a small Jewish cult into the dominant religion in the Roman Empire. I’m not going to give a blow by blow account of this, but to just raise a few issues that struck me.
The first part of the book looks at archaeology and in particular at Wales, Cornwall and Brittany and at the way society developed as Roman influence declined. Often cemeteries were outside town walls. As time went on they often had chapels built and eventually roles were reversed and the church became more important than the cemetery. Another interesting development was that many roman villas, because of their size, became places of worship as the buildings were repurposed.
Roberts makes some interesting points about asceticism and suggests maybe it wasn’t always as it seemed. Eucherius of Lyon, when he went on a Lenten retreat to a monastery, took with him 1740 litres of wine and 66 kilos of cheese. She also suggests that Simon Stylites, who spent many years sat on top of a twenty-foot pillar, may have been fooling himself if he thought it was a way of avoiding people. When I first heard the story as a child, my first thought was “Where does he go to the toilet?” A question no one has ever satisfactorily answered.
Robert also points out that as the administration of the Church and the imperial administration grew ever closer, one principle was assured, “The rich stayed rich and the poor stayed poor.” Roberts spends a good deal of time looking at the life and conversion of Constantine and makes some interesting points about syncretism, the mixing of old and new ideas and the fluidity of moving between two sets of ideas. Christian conversion is often portrayed in very dichotomous terms, but in reality the situation was that of a gradual acceptance and movement, to and fro. Roberts also points out that the language of the Church is often straight from terms used by Roman administration. For example clergy, laity, baptistry, basilica, curia, ecclesia are all terms straight from roman antecedents.
Towards the end of the book Roberts argues that the structure and nature of the Church made it similar to a multi-divisional firm. She takes some of the economic arguments from Ekelund and Tollison and quotes them:
“In the corporate structure of Christendom the medieval monastery operated as a (downstream) franchised firm, receiving quality assurance and name-brand recognition from the Church of Rome in return for certain payments (upstream).”
The concept of the Church as an economic firm hasn’t gone down well. It has been discussed in academic circles for a while and even Adam Smith mentioned it, putting it blatantly in the mainstream has created a reaction.
This is by no means a flawless book and I think Roberts spends too long on some of the theological debates and heresies, but it does explode a few myths along the way. It explains why Christianity was attractive to the elites and the middle classes. The poor, of course, are almost invisible and I suspect their primary objective as always was survival. If you want a not too academic look at the rise of Christianity, then this may be for you.
November 8, 2025
Having enjoyed Alice Roberts' programmes and her live presenting I was very much underwhelmed by this offering.
Roberts aims to tell the story of how Christianity came to dominate western Europe. At the centre is ancient Rome. The Rome and Roman emperors and various other powerful citizens who moved towards Christianity as the empire itself started to break down.
She does this and the early part of the book has some useful insight into the formation of Christian churches and, notably, saints who formed, led and influenced their flocks and the sites they worshipped at.
However, the book overall is light on archeology and other aspects that help to show that path to domination.
Like some other GR reviewers, I also became tired of Roberts' personal bias - she is a humanist - about those who sought and used religion some 2000 years ago. A further dislike was the absence of references in respect of the information and examples she writes of. Where and when are these examples quoted from and to what academic rigour or challenge have they been subject to [quoting a name is not a source or real reference]. Why did she choose to cite these rather than others and which arguments and sources did she exclude, and why?
This then is the main reason for my rating the book as 2 stars. Prof Roberts is a very capable communicator and writer but the book and its arguments falls short on saying anything new or revelatory in respect of Christianity and its path to being the dominant religion of Western Europe.
Roberts aims to tell the story of how Christianity came to dominate western Europe. At the centre is ancient Rome. The Rome and Roman emperors and various other powerful citizens who moved towards Christianity as the empire itself started to break down.
She does this and the early part of the book has some useful insight into the formation of Christian churches and, notably, saints who formed, led and influenced their flocks and the sites they worshipped at.
However, the book overall is light on archeology and other aspects that help to show that path to domination.
Like some other GR reviewers, I also became tired of Roberts' personal bias - she is a humanist - about those who sought and used religion some 2000 years ago. A further dislike was the absence of references in respect of the information and examples she writes of. Where and when are these examples quoted from and to what academic rigour or challenge have they been subject to [quoting a name is not a source or real reference]. Why did she choose to cite these rather than others and which arguments and sources did she exclude, and why?
This then is the main reason for my rating the book as 2 stars. Prof Roberts is a very capable communicator and writer but the book and its arguments falls short on saying anything new or revelatory in respect of Christianity and its path to being the dominant religion of Western Europe.
November 4, 2025
The problem with this book is that it is aimed at a general, non-specialist audience, yet you have to be pretty familiar with the relevant history and periods to understand why it's a bad book. There have already been plenty of fairly recent books on the end of the Western Roman Empire and the development of western Christendom. Some of these have been by well-known experts in the relevant period and several have been aimed at the general reader. So what was the need for this new retelling of this story by a non-historian?
It seems the publisher wanted a new book by a known TV celebrity and the author had an axe she wanted to grind. Alice Roberts is a biologist, not a historian. She is associated with history-adjacent subjects thanks to her appearances on Time Team as an expert in her actual field: paleopathology, the study of ancient bones. And she's written some successful books on subjects associated with her real expertise. But she is also a past president of HumanistsUK and an anti-religious activist. And this book is essentially a piece of ideological activism disguised as a friendly history book.
Roberts' fairly unsubtle thesis is that Christianity came to be dominant in the West because it effectively took over the Roman Empire and replaced "Romanitas" with "Christianitas". It succeed, according to Roberts, because it was ruthlessly political and endlessly greedy. Forget all that stuff about early Christians being humble, impoverished, pious and ascetic, she says, they were actually elite, fairly rich, cynical and fake - but they used politics and economics to dominate.
That Christanity was transformed by its adoption by the later Roman emperors and that it became enmeshed with late Roman politics is not news to anyone who has studied just a bit of the relevant history. Nor is it news that, for many churchmen, money was more the object than piety. This is an old story. But Roberts works hard to make her readers believe that this was the whole story, or something close to it.
The problem with this is that it's far too simplistic, highly reductionist and badly argued. Roberts uses selective evidence, dubious interpretations and a grab bag of rhetorical tricks to drive home her ideological message to the exlusion of counter examples, other relevant information, nuance or objectivity. This isn't a history lesson, it's a sermon. It would take a long time to detail all the ways this book is not what it seems and is definitely not a sure or reasonable guide to these complex historical subjects - for those interested, see my detailed critique on History for Atheists. Suffice it to say the more you know about these periods of history and the subject matter she covers, the more obvious her biases and skewing of evidence is.
Unfortunately this won't be obvious to many general readers, which seems to be the point. This is not a good history book. Books on history with ideological agendas never are. Not recommended.
(P.S. And in case anyone thinks my issues with this book may be due to any religious bias on my part, I'm a lifelong atheist. So, no.)
It seems the publisher wanted a new book by a known TV celebrity and the author had an axe she wanted to grind. Alice Roberts is a biologist, not a historian. She is associated with history-adjacent subjects thanks to her appearances on Time Team as an expert in her actual field: paleopathology, the study of ancient bones. And she's written some successful books on subjects associated with her real expertise. But she is also a past president of HumanistsUK and an anti-religious activist. And this book is essentially a piece of ideological activism disguised as a friendly history book.
Roberts' fairly unsubtle thesis is that Christianity came to be dominant in the West because it effectively took over the Roman Empire and replaced "Romanitas" with "Christianitas". It succeed, according to Roberts, because it was ruthlessly political and endlessly greedy. Forget all that stuff about early Christians being humble, impoverished, pious and ascetic, she says, they were actually elite, fairly rich, cynical and fake - but they used politics and economics to dominate.
That Christanity was transformed by its adoption by the later Roman emperors and that it became enmeshed with late Roman politics is not news to anyone who has studied just a bit of the relevant history. Nor is it news that, for many churchmen, money was more the object than piety. This is an old story. But Roberts works hard to make her readers believe that this was the whole story, or something close to it.
The problem with this is that it's far too simplistic, highly reductionist and badly argued. Roberts uses selective evidence, dubious interpretations and a grab bag of rhetorical tricks to drive home her ideological message to the exlusion of counter examples, other relevant information, nuance or objectivity. This isn't a history lesson, it's a sermon. It would take a long time to detail all the ways this book is not what it seems and is definitely not a sure or reasonable guide to these complex historical subjects - for those interested, see my detailed critique on History for Atheists. Suffice it to say the more you know about these periods of history and the subject matter she covers, the more obvious her biases and skewing of evidence is.
Unfortunately this won't be obvious to many general readers, which seems to be the point. This is not a good history book. Books on history with ideological agendas never are. Not recommended.
(P.S. And in case anyone thinks my issues with this book may be due to any religious bias on my part, I'm a lifelong atheist. So, no.)
September 1, 2025
An excellent book shining new light on the Roman to post-Roman period in Britain and Europe. I am well read on this period, but what I liked about this book is that it was all new content and new ideas to me, not a rehash of existing works. The enthusiasm of Alice Roberts for her subject shines through, sweeping us along on a journey of discovery in an exciting read.
September 11, 2025
3.75/5
3.75/5 (side note - It’s a very new book and only came out a couple of weeks ago but I didn’t seek it out, I just bought it in an airport)
It’s a decent overview of the transition of the later Roman Empire to Christianity and Christianity’s survival after the fall of the Western empire. The evidence is presented effectively and I did like the writing style. I did enjoy it that I could see me reading Robert’s other books at some point (I’ve had a couple of 2nd hand ones but never got round to them)
Normally I’d consider bringing up the author’s background and politics to be a bit cheap/lazy but it’s worth noting Roberts is a hardcore and at times political atheist (I’m not religious myself either but I’m not hardcore about it).
I think it’s worth mentioning because this is a very cynical interpretation of the rise of Christianity that’s all about elite power, status, and self interest . The main theme is that Christianity allowed the traditional elites to survive and maintain their positions during the transition from the fall of the Western empire to the various barbarian kingdoms. There was a revolving door between the church, aristocracy and military. Jobs within the church were well paying and more tax efficient than traditional administrative offices. The various heresies like Arianism aren’t about religion at all but are just different sections of the political elite finding an excuse to form factions using a culture war as an excuse. Christian charity is presented as a way for the church to extract money from the rich and give just enough to the poor while allowing the rich to absolve their guilt without having to actually interact with the poor. Asceticism (voluntarily living in very remote locations or in poverty) is about being seen to be doing it (to look good/status), not actually believing in it. The main reason for the Christianity becoming more popular is that the early Christians targeted the urban middle classes (who had some money) who in turn started to use Christianity as a networking opportunity and overtime this fed upwards towards the elite.
I don’t entirely disagree and think it makes some good points but I think it veers too far too much towards naked self interest and ignores the true believers.
3.75/5 (side note - It’s a very new book and only came out a couple of weeks ago but I didn’t seek it out, I just bought it in an airport)
It’s a decent overview of the transition of the later Roman Empire to Christianity and Christianity’s survival after the fall of the Western empire. The evidence is presented effectively and I did like the writing style. I did enjoy it that I could see me reading Robert’s other books at some point (I’ve had a couple of 2nd hand ones but never got round to them)
Normally I’d consider bringing up the author’s background and politics to be a bit cheap/lazy but it’s worth noting Roberts is a hardcore and at times political atheist (I’m not religious myself either but I’m not hardcore about it).
I think it’s worth mentioning because this is a very cynical interpretation of the rise of Christianity that’s all about elite power, status, and self interest . The main theme is that Christianity allowed the traditional elites to survive and maintain their positions during the transition from the fall of the Western empire to the various barbarian kingdoms. There was a revolving door between the church, aristocracy and military. Jobs within the church were well paying and more tax efficient than traditional administrative offices. The various heresies like Arianism aren’t about religion at all but are just different sections of the political elite finding an excuse to form factions using a culture war as an excuse. Christian charity is presented as a way for the church to extract money from the rich and give just enough to the poor while allowing the rich to absolve their guilt without having to actually interact with the poor. Asceticism (voluntarily living in very remote locations or in poverty) is about being seen to be doing it (to look good/status), not actually believing in it. The main reason for the Christianity becoming more popular is that the early Christians targeted the urban middle classes (who had some money) who in turn started to use Christianity as a networking opportunity and overtime this fed upwards towards the elite.
I don’t entirely disagree and think it makes some good points but I think it veers too far too much towards naked self interest and ignores the true believers.
October 29, 2025
I really never thought I’d give less than 5 stars to Prof Robs, but then this isn’t her specialist subject. She’s clearly interested and passionate about it (and maybe a tad biased being a committed atheist) but I found the thrust of her argument hard to follow. Yes religion seeks power and control and legitimacy through the status quo. Not exactly ground breaking. I enjoyed the discussion of Paul’s life and some of the Gaulish Christian romans and their lifestyles in the 5th century (especially as we know so little about Britain at the same time).
Just finished it feeling a little puzzled. What was the point?
Just finished it feeling a little puzzled. What was the point?
September 25, 2025
I have loved Alice Roberts other books but found this book to be disappointing. I think the structure of the book is not good. I think the book is overly cynical and dismissive of peoples faith throughout history. Some of the "quotes" in the chapter about Paul are only partial quotes missing the context around them ( 1 Corinthians 3 3-7).Seems like a lot of the book is based on the authors personal beliefs about modern religion than how it would have been viewed historically.Pretty light on the archeology too.
November 22, 2025
I am a big fan of Alice Roberts on TV but this book did not live up to my expectations. It is subtitled ‘The Fall of the Roman Empire and the Rise of Christianity’ but it was disjointed because it was not structured chronologically and the arguments were not always convincing. Some parts were interesting and at times enlightening but I’ll have to read other books to complete my understanding of the topics. I think I’ll add Diarmaid MacCulloch’s ‘A history of Christianity : the first three thousand years’ to my reading list.
October 14, 2025
4+. Wonderful look at how Christianity used economics and the Roman Empire to spread.
October 9, 2025
Can we have zero stars for intellectual dishonesty?
Roberts' bias is quite astonishing. Is it exciting? Her documentary-ready narrarion wants it to be. Well-written? Now and again. Is it good? No. It's history like "The God Delusion" was philosophy.
Lengthy review: https://open.substack.com/pub/ruanets...
Nothing in this book comes close to Roberts' own academic background. Her research is quite poor at times (though the book does only offer selected references). At the book's worst points, it's dominated by a smug secularism unwarranted in history writing (which I say not being particularly religious myself).
It's hard to understand how something like this is published. (I mean, it isn't. Once an author provides reliable sales they can write whatever.) The skeleton is Gibbon, so Roberts adds little new, nothing not heard before apart from some archaeological finds. But the message of the book isn't actually built on newly "unveeiled secrets" (to use Professor Roberts language). Archaeology is merely used to serve her prejudicial story.
Pop history to be forgotten in five years, two if we're lucky.
Roberts' bias is quite astonishing. Is it exciting? Her documentary-ready narrarion wants it to be. Well-written? Now and again. Is it good? No. It's history like "The God Delusion" was philosophy.
Lengthy review: https://open.substack.com/pub/ruanets...
Nothing in this book comes close to Roberts' own academic background. Her research is quite poor at times (though the book does only offer selected references). At the book's worst points, it's dominated by a smug secularism unwarranted in history writing (which I say not being particularly religious myself).
It's hard to understand how something like this is published. (I mean, it isn't. Once an author provides reliable sales they can write whatever.) The skeleton is Gibbon, so Roberts adds little new, nothing not heard before apart from some archaeological finds. But the message of the book isn't actually built on newly "unveeiled secrets" (to use Professor Roberts language). Archaeology is merely used to serve her prejudicial story.
Pop history to be forgotten in five years, two if we're lucky.
September 11, 2025
Alice Roberts is an intelligent person and every field of human inquiry including - especially - history should welcome newcomers, heretics and sceptics. Thus, an attempt at a new take on a well studied phenomenon is to be encouraged, and some of the snipes she has received (putting 'Professor' on the title page, the fact she is a newcomer, whatever else) are not relevant. She is clearly capable of providing a refreshing take on whatever subject to which she turns her mind.
Equally, however, it behoves anyone writing a history book to research the archives thoroughly and at least acknowledge other scholars in the field if you have drawn upon their work or are implicitly criticising them. Roberts has fallen somewhat short in this respect. She clearly digs at Tom Holland's similar Dominion without clearly referencing his work. Worse, she has but a single mention of Peter Brown, a scholar of immense erudition and skill whose life's work has been in this field. It is at least theoretically possible a comparative newcomer to this field could overturn or surpass Brown's own work in some way, but Roberts has not even begun to do so - or attempted it, if we are to infer from her bibliography she hasn't even read him. It would be like a Tudor historian pretending Geoffrey Elton never existed, or a D-Day author to ignore the work of Peter Caddick-Adams and Stephen Fisher combined (and if D-Day's archive spanned centuries not years). The rise of TV historians writing highly publicised "new" accounts where much more in depth scholars have covered the subject for years is rather tiresome. I recall being particularly annoyed that for the centenary commemorations about the Great War the BBC had a book written by Jeremy Paxman - good quiz host, but an absolute nobody in Great War scholarship.
This is still more of a problem for Roberts' book given the ambitious scope and the hyperbole in the blurb "Professor* Alice Roberts takes us on a gripping investigative journey. From a secluded valley in south Wales to the shores of Brittany; from the heart of the Roman Empire in a time of political turmoil to the ancient city of Corinth in the footsteps of the apostle Paul; from Alexandria in the fourth century to Constantinople. (...) Lifting the veil on secrets that have been hidden in plain sight, this story is nothing short of astonishing."
I don't think she has lifted too many secrets, she has given a good narrative account, but this is not going to rewrite the history of late antiquity or the rise of Christianity. That would be much less of a criticism if she, and her publishers, had not tried to claim so much for the book.
* Note: Roberts has received some criticism for putting her Professor title on the front cover. I don't agree with that criticism in general; she earned the title and so why shouldn't she use it. The only difficulty in this context is that she did not earn her doctorate in the subject matter of this book, so it suggests and authority she does not really possess. But that's a minor point; the substance is what matters.
Equally, however, it behoves anyone writing a history book to research the archives thoroughly and at least acknowledge other scholars in the field if you have drawn upon their work or are implicitly criticising them. Roberts has fallen somewhat short in this respect. She clearly digs at Tom Holland's similar Dominion without clearly referencing his work. Worse, she has but a single mention of Peter Brown, a scholar of immense erudition and skill whose life's work has been in this field. It is at least theoretically possible a comparative newcomer to this field could overturn or surpass Brown's own work in some way, but Roberts has not even begun to do so - or attempted it, if we are to infer from her bibliography she hasn't even read him. It would be like a Tudor historian pretending Geoffrey Elton never existed, or a D-Day author to ignore the work of Peter Caddick-Adams and Stephen Fisher combined (and if D-Day's archive spanned centuries not years). The rise of TV historians writing highly publicised "new" accounts where much more in depth scholars have covered the subject for years is rather tiresome. I recall being particularly annoyed that for the centenary commemorations about the Great War the BBC had a book written by Jeremy Paxman - good quiz host, but an absolute nobody in Great War scholarship.
This is still more of a problem for Roberts' book given the ambitious scope and the hyperbole in the blurb "Professor* Alice Roberts takes us on a gripping investigative journey. From a secluded valley in south Wales to the shores of Brittany; from the heart of the Roman Empire in a time of political turmoil to the ancient city of Corinth in the footsteps of the apostle Paul; from Alexandria in the fourth century to Constantinople. (...) Lifting the veil on secrets that have been hidden in plain sight, this story is nothing short of astonishing."
I don't think she has lifted too many secrets, she has given a good narrative account, but this is not going to rewrite the history of late antiquity or the rise of Christianity. That would be much less of a criticism if she, and her publishers, had not tried to claim so much for the book.
* Note: Roberts has received some criticism for putting her Professor title on the front cover. I don't agree with that criticism in general; she earned the title and so why shouldn't she use it. The only difficulty in this context is that she did not earn her doctorate in the subject matter of this book, so it suggests and authority she does not really possess. But that's a minor point; the substance is what matters.
August 27, 2025
Domination is a story of how a tiny cult within the Roman empire came to be the powerful force called Christianity. Alice Roberts’ take is less about theology, and more about power and wealth. The focus is on the first few centuries: the formative events and people that witnessed the slow decline of an empire and the establishment of a new religion.
Her central thesis is that the path was an evolution in which some Romans (mostly elites and middle classes) brought their traditions and hierarchies into the Church. Eventually, she argues, the two became one, as much of Rome's wealth and power was inherited by the Church.
Professor Roberts is meticulous with her sources and, though not everyone will agree with her synthesis, provides a credible argument. Her style is approachable and she understands where the reader might need help to explain complex or nuanced concepts. Her personal journey of discovery (historical rather than spiritual) complements the fascinating accounts of the people who lived in those tumultuous times.
See the full review at: https://www.queenslandreviewerscollec...
Her central thesis is that the path was an evolution in which some Romans (mostly elites and middle classes) brought their traditions and hierarchies into the Church. Eventually, she argues, the two became one, as much of Rome's wealth and power was inherited by the Church.
Professor Roberts is meticulous with her sources and, though not everyone will agree with her synthesis, provides a credible argument. Her style is approachable and she understands where the reader might need help to explain complex or nuanced concepts. Her personal journey of discovery (historical rather than spiritual) complements the fascinating accounts of the people who lived in those tumultuous times.
See the full review at: https://www.queenslandreviewerscollec...
October 21, 2025
I have always considered the Church as a vast corporation with a powerful and enduring religious brand — a structure built not only on faith, but on hierarchy, influence, and control. In many ways, all religions can be viewed through this same lens: as systems of belief that have evolved into organisations managing immense human, cultural, and political capital. It was with this perspective that I approached Professor Alice Roberts’ Domination, a work that examines how religion, power, and identity have intertwined throughout history.
Although Domination proved to be an enlightened and thoroughly enjoyable read, I found it somewhat repetitive towards the end. Nevertheless, my initial thoughts about the institutional nature of religion were largely confirmed — only now with more substance, evidence, and, as the saying goes, “more meat on the bone.” Roberts’ meticulous research and accessible style lend authority to arguments that question long-held assumptions about the role of the Church in shaping Western civilisation.
Although Domination proved to be an enlightened and thoroughly enjoyable read, I found it somewhat repetitive towards the end. Nevertheless, my initial thoughts about the institutional nature of religion were largely confirmed — only now with more substance, evidence, and, as the saying goes, “more meat on the bone.” Roberts’ meticulous research and accessible style lend authority to arguments that question long-held assumptions about the role of the Church in shaping Western civilisation.
December 3, 2025
Sorry to say so but this is not up to the Alice Roberts' standards. Longwinded, iterating the same things over and over and at some places rather boring. The book needs some careful editing, too many grammatical and stylistic faults have passed. I also needs a detailed bibliography, not the farcical list of sources it has now.
The basic idea is valid, though. Christianity has gradually replaced the power structures of the ailing Roman Empire. It has done so through the status and wealth-seeking actions of individual men. And a continuity of values from Roman culture into Christianity is an important insight. Pity Roberts wrote in a hurry - pressure from the publisher to reach a contractual goal?
The basic idea is valid, though. Christianity has gradually replaced the power structures of the ailing Roman Empire. It has done so through the status and wealth-seeking actions of individual men. And a continuity of values from Roman culture into Christianity is an important insight. Pity Roberts wrote in a hurry - pressure from the publisher to reach a contractual goal?
December 8, 2025
I have watched dr. Roberts’ TV shows and always liked her clear presentations. So it is with some anticipation that I started reading this book I found in my local bookstore. To say that I was disappointed would be an understatement. I found the exposition particularly muddled (for example, she mixes up the Western and the Eastern Roman Empires in the 5th – 6th century CE) and the text extremely repetitive (why does she find it necessary to explain in every other page what foederati were?). Halfway through it was not clear to me what the argument of the book is. The frequent gratuitous antireligious jabs are not helping either (let there be no misunderstanding: I am an atheist). All in all, I gave up halfway after about 100 pages, rating the book (generously) 2 stars.
October 8, 2025
Alice penned a compelling book about the dominance of Christianity through a power & economic lens ~ aspects, as she herself wrote are uncouth to point out.
I really enjoyed the first part about Iltud, symbolism and numismatics. I read it alongside Bede’s Ecclesiastical History and the Age of Bede. I highly recommend reading it alongside these old texts! But after this, I found the story dull with excessive detail that could have been cut out and not compromised her valuable and interesting points.
I really enjoyed the first part about Iltud, symbolism and numismatics. I read it alongside Bede’s Ecclesiastical History and the Age of Bede. I highly recommend reading it alongside these old texts! But after this, I found the story dull with excessive detail that could have been cut out and not compromised her valuable and interesting points.
November 2, 2025
An interesting and well researched study of the rise of Christianity: not revolution but evolution; not a grass roots movement or a peasants’ revolt but the middle and upper reaches of Roman society (magistrates, army officers, merchants, lawyers and the elite) maintaining the position of themselves and their families in society by adopting positions in the developing Christian church. Rome and Christianity didn’t collide: they combined.
November 6, 2025
The story or maybe a story or even an understanding of how Christianity sucseeded over the Romans, or maybe it was how the Romans became the Christians. I don't doubt a word of it but facts are hard to come by and opinions are not. The Romans once had a huge empire and it was sqandered away just like our western civilisation is doing now. The Emperors gave way to Kings but the people stayed the same and the smart and privileged moved with the times just as they will today.
December 25, 2025
I love to learn new words, but doubt I will be including the term ‘peregrinating’ into my conversations in the near future. 😁
I read an online newspaper review, which describes the book as ‘A brilliant, but cynical history of Christianity’. I tend to agree, especially with phrases such as ‘the trading of body parts’ used to describe relics. In addition: ‘There were saints and charlatans, we can be sure and perhaps, in some cases, not too much difference between them’.
I read an online newspaper review, which describes the book as ‘A brilliant, but cynical history of Christianity’. I tend to agree, especially with phrases such as ‘the trading of body parts’ used to describe relics. In addition: ‘There were saints and charlatans, we can be sure and perhaps, in some cases, not too much difference between them’.
September 5, 2025
Prof. Roberts does it again. I was privileged to hear her speak at the Liverpool Phil, launching the book with an entertaining and engaging evening. Reading the book straight afterwards has been a bonus.
What a fascinating insight into the story of how The Roman Empire became The Christian Empire.
So much content, so well explained and such a clear logic in how the history evolved.
What a fascinating insight into the story of how The Roman Empire became The Christian Empire.
So much content, so well explained and such a clear logic in how the history evolved.
October 8, 2025
Has to be my favourite non-fictional book of the year. Written in an almost friendly, conversational tone. I start this after reading Bart Erhman books, which were interesting, this was more readable for me as it looked at the topic from a non theological viewpoint.
It’s entertaining, educational, informative. Reith would have been very proud.
It’s entertaining, educational, informative. Reith would have been very proud.
December 10, 2025
Alice Roberts brings together religion, empire and economics in her explanation of how Christianity became the dominant religion of the Roman Empire. It was very interesting to see the Church as big business, taking over functions of empire on all levels, and making an enormous profit while doing so. I definitely learned something new with this book.
October 6, 2025
Could be better, but chaos reigns in this book, and makes following the author's concept a not very rewarding slog. Which is a pity, because late Roman empire / early Christianity can be a fascinating subject.
October 30, 2025
An authoritative historical analysis of the factors that may have influenced the spread of Christianity in the years coinciding with the decline of the Roman Empire from such an unpromising beginning.
September 5, 2025
A very one sided and militant humanist point of view, which was grating at times. There's so many better books out there in this topic.
September 10, 2025
disappointing
September 30, 2025
This book kept me up late into the night. Every time I thought I knew where it was going, it surprised me.
November 10, 2025
I love it when a book fills in a blank spot in my understanding of history. Well written and explained in excelent detail!
November 28, 2025
Awful book.
I put it down and thought it has been a long time since I have read such uninteresting drivel written by someone with an obvious agenda.
I put it down and thought it has been a long time since I have read such uninteresting drivel written by someone with an obvious agenda.
December 16, 2025
Interesting.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews