What do you think?
Rate this book
The Roman Emperor Aurelian: Restorer of the World
The leader who helped keep the Dark Ages at "An excellent picture of the Crisis of the Third Century and the life and work of Aurelian" (StrategyPage).
The ancient Sibylline prophecies had foretold that the Roman Empire would last for one thousand years. As the time for the expected dissolution approached in the middle of the third century AD, the empire was lapsing into chaos, with seemingly interminable civil wars over the imperial succession. The western empire had seceded under a rebel emperor, and the eastern empire was controlled by another usurper. Barbarians took advantage of the anarchy to kill and plunder all over the provinces. Yet within the space of just five years, the general, and later emperor, Aurelian had expelled all the barbarians from within the Roman frontiers, reunited the entire empire, and inaugurated major reforms of the currency, pagan religion, and civil administration.
His accomplishments have been hailed by classical scholars as those of a superman, yet Aurelian himself remains little known to a wider audience. His achievements enabled the Roman Empire to survive for another two centuries, ensuring a lasting legacy of Roman civilization for the successor European states. Without Aurelian, the Dark Ages would probably have lasted centuries longer.
The ancient Sibylline prophecies had foretold that the Roman Empire would last for one thousand years. As the time for the expected dissolution approached in the middle of the third century AD, the empire was lapsing into chaos, with seemingly interminable civil wars over the imperial succession. The western empire had seceded under a rebel emperor, and the eastern empire was controlled by another usurper. Barbarians took advantage of the anarchy to kill and plunder all over the provinces. Yet within the space of just five years, the general, and later emperor, Aurelian had expelled all the barbarians from within the Roman frontiers, reunited the entire empire, and inaugurated major reforms of the currency, pagan religion, and civil administration.
His accomplishments have been hailed by classical scholars as those of a superman, yet Aurelian himself remains little known to a wider audience. His achievements enabled the Roman Empire to survive for another two centuries, ensuring a lasting legacy of Roman civilization for the successor European states. Without Aurelian, the Dark Ages would probably have lasted centuries longer.
353 pages, Kindle Edition
First published October 1, 2006
141 people are currently reading
292 people want to read
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
April 16, 2020
This was quite a strange book. The crisis of the 3rd century is definitely one of the most difficult periods of Rome's history to write about due to the scarceness of sources. The sources that are available have been disregarded (in part or in full) as biased, unreliable or straight out wrong.
The author does a a good job of highlighting this and presents alternative views when there are such things.
The portrait painted of Aurelian is a stern; bordering on cruel man who wished to see Rome returned to the glory days he remembered from his youth. Despite his strictness, he imposed no standards on his countrymen that he himself could not live up to.
The accomplishments of this man in five years years are nothing short of incredible. Stitching back Gaul and Palmyra into the fold, while defending off almost every border from barbarian hordes, while putting down usurper emperors at the same time and reforming the army and stemming inflation. Without him the Roman empire would have fallen centuries earlier. The authors reference to him as a 'Danubian Superman' is well deserved.
Its a tragedy of this time period that so little information is available about his life.
However at times the author's extreme disdain for barbarian's seems to cloud his judgement, and jumps to some extreme conclusions at times.
More alarming is the sheer amount of spelling mistakes, grammatical errors and incorrect names. On one page I counted three glaringly obvious spelling mistakes. He also refers to Emperor Justinian as 'Justiruan' and confuses Constantine XI with Constantine XIII (there was no such person).
Such blatant errors make me question the credibility of the rest of the book.
The author does a a good job of highlighting this and presents alternative views when there are such things.
The portrait painted of Aurelian is a stern; bordering on cruel man who wished to see Rome returned to the glory days he remembered from his youth. Despite his strictness, he imposed no standards on his countrymen that he himself could not live up to.
The accomplishments of this man in five years years are nothing short of incredible. Stitching back Gaul and Palmyra into the fold, while defending off almost every border from barbarian hordes, while putting down usurper emperors at the same time and reforming the army and stemming inflation. Without him the Roman empire would have fallen centuries earlier. The authors reference to him as a 'Danubian Superman' is well deserved.
Its a tragedy of this time period that so little information is available about his life.
However at times the author's extreme disdain for barbarian's seems to cloud his judgement, and jumps to some extreme conclusions at times.
More alarming is the sheer amount of spelling mistakes, grammatical errors and incorrect names. On one page I counted three glaringly obvious spelling mistakes. He also refers to Emperor Justinian as 'Justiruan' and confuses Constantine XI with Constantine XIII (there was no such person).
Such blatant errors make me question the credibility of the rest of the book.
November 29, 2020
This book is a cliche. Apparently everyone in the world, other than the Romans, were mindless barbarian savages. Who were evil. And terrorists.
The author's language intentionally dehumanises large swathes of different peoples, rendering them into unthinking zombie hordes with no distinct cultures, no motives, and no history.
When a Roman does something reprehensible, the author uses neutral wording and quickly moves on. Sometimes he can't help himself, and even praises them. When a non-Roman does the same, the author slows down and brings out words like 'savage' and 'wicked' to vividly bring barbarian caricatures to life.
Rome is assaulted by 'greedy' 'migrant hordes' sent by 'regimes' in the east.
There is no nuance, exploration or analysis of these existential threats. Just a shlocky read, unashamed of leaning on the unreliable Historia Augusta. Rife with opinionated tone, possibly the worst type of writing a historian can inflict on readers.
Never take authors like Adrian Goldsworthy for granted, folks. We are so fortunate to have writers like them.
The author's language intentionally dehumanises large swathes of different peoples, rendering them into unthinking zombie hordes with no distinct cultures, no motives, and no history.
When a Roman does something reprehensible, the author uses neutral wording and quickly moves on. Sometimes he can't help himself, and even praises them. When a non-Roman does the same, the author slows down and brings out words like 'savage' and 'wicked' to vividly bring barbarian caricatures to life.
Rome is assaulted by 'greedy' 'migrant hordes' sent by 'regimes' in the east.
There is no nuance, exploration or analysis of these existential threats. Just a shlocky read, unashamed of leaning on the unreliable Historia Augusta. Rife with opinionated tone, possibly the worst type of writing a historian can inflict on readers.
Never take authors like Adrian Goldsworthy for granted, folks. We are so fortunate to have writers like them.
April 4, 2016
The most breezy and envigorous account of Aurelian and the second half of the third century of Rome that I've read. It covers a lot of ground quickly, from the founding of Rome to the fall of Constantinople with most of its <200 pages focused on the crisis that saw Aurelian come to the purple and his demise. Not trying to be an academic work, this is an easily accessed book about an overlooked and vital portion of Roman history. The book has a lot of nice looking maps as well and a good amount of content in the back about the various consuls and dates throughout Aurelian's life. This is a good book to read to familiarize yourself with a forgotten period.
December 27, 2024
❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️Aurelian❤️❤️❤️❤️❤️
January 18, 2023
Es una biografía que empieza bien y se cae horrible a la mitad. Y se cae porque el libro es más largo de lo que debería: en lugar de circunscribirse a la vida de Aureliano termina abarcando los gobiernos de Tacitos, Probus, Carus y Diocleciano de una forma demasiado apresurada como para que valga la pena.
De igual forma, el autor no logra dar una narrativa coherente a los aspectos administrativos del reinado de Aureliano, aunque el aspecto de reconquista y reintegración del imperio sí está bien narrado.
El personaje de Aureliano es en si mismo interesante, pero no le recomendaría este libro a alguien que no sabe nada sobre ese emperador, justo por los problemas de narrativa histórica y organización.
De igual forma, el autor no logra dar una narrativa coherente a los aspectos administrativos del reinado de Aureliano, aunque el aspecto de reconquista y reintegración del imperio sí está bien narrado.
El personaje de Aureliano es en si mismo interesante, pero no le recomendaría este libro a alguien que no sabe nada sobre ese emperador, justo por los problemas de narrativa histórica y organización.
November 5, 2024
One of my all-time favorite Saturday Night Live skits starred Fred Willard as a sweet guy who’s just opened a Scotch Tape store in the local mall. He sells only Scotch Tape, not masking, packing, or electrical tape, just Scotch.
It’s a funny premise because it’s obvious to everyone that he’s going to fail, but he’s such a nice guy that no one seems able to tell him. He has a vision, a dream, however narrow, and he’s going to see it through even though the solution is rather obvious – broaden what you’re doing so you can do what you want and more on top of that.
I think of that skit when reading this book because I have a similar sense for what John White is after. He is utterly scrupulous in discussing the sources for this life of Aurelian, and he is clearly committed to bringing attention to an important but often overlooked Roman emperor. But…
There’s just not that much about the man.
The story as we get it here effectively begins with the crisis of leadership that followed the generation after the death of Severus Septimus. The Goths invaded, one after another leader proved weak or got assassinated, and the empire as such began to fracture.
Then comes Gallienus. He may have had his flaws, but he manages to subdue the Goths and restore some stability to the empire. There are a couple of short-lived emperors, then Aurelian takes the purple and proves a very successful general. He effectively defeats the breakaway Gallic empire, bringing much of Spain and France back into the fold. Then he defeats the Palmyrian Queen Zenobia and acquires enough wealth to make his soldiers very happy.
Aurelian is declared “Restorer of the World,” a bad-ass title, and he proceeds to address many aspects of empirical decline. White goes into deep detail about how he restores the purity of the coinage, repairs roads and aqueducts, and plays nice with the Senate.
But then he’s assassinated. We go through a couple more quick emperors, and then comes Diocletian who more or less finishes the job of restoring the empire which holds, more or less for another century.
That’s the wide-array-of-tape-store history that I wish White had given us. That way, instead of tying everything back to Aurelian who, even if he was the best general of them all, makes little sense outside the context of Gallienus and Diocletian.
As it is, he wraps up this history by talking about what he calls “the legacy of the Danubian emperors” – which is these three and more – who all come to power on the northern frontier and then make their way back to Rome. It seems a powerful dynasty-like series of emperors, a series that might nicely describe a crucial half-century of history.
By the end of this, I do feel I’ve learned a lot not just about that era but also about the historiography. Maybe, then, it’s to White’s credit that I feel I know enough to critique his entire organizing principle.
Either way, the butter gets spread awfully thin on the bread here – or, if you prefer, the store still doesn’t stock masking tape – and, while it has a lot of information, it feels like it’s missing a chance to make the same case in a larger and even more informative concept.
It’s a funny premise because it’s obvious to everyone that he’s going to fail, but he’s such a nice guy that no one seems able to tell him. He has a vision, a dream, however narrow, and he’s going to see it through even though the solution is rather obvious – broaden what you’re doing so you can do what you want and more on top of that.
I think of that skit when reading this book because I have a similar sense for what John White is after. He is utterly scrupulous in discussing the sources for this life of Aurelian, and he is clearly committed to bringing attention to an important but often overlooked Roman emperor. But…
There’s just not that much about the man.
The story as we get it here effectively begins with the crisis of leadership that followed the generation after the death of Severus Septimus. The Goths invaded, one after another leader proved weak or got assassinated, and the empire as such began to fracture.
Then comes Gallienus. He may have had his flaws, but he manages to subdue the Goths and restore some stability to the empire. There are a couple of short-lived emperors, then Aurelian takes the purple and proves a very successful general. He effectively defeats the breakaway Gallic empire, bringing much of Spain and France back into the fold. Then he defeats the Palmyrian Queen Zenobia and acquires enough wealth to make his soldiers very happy.
Aurelian is declared “Restorer of the World,” a bad-ass title, and he proceeds to address many aspects of empirical decline. White goes into deep detail about how he restores the purity of the coinage, repairs roads and aqueducts, and plays nice with the Senate.
But then he’s assassinated. We go through a couple more quick emperors, and then comes Diocletian who more or less finishes the job of restoring the empire which holds, more or less for another century.
That’s the wide-array-of-tape-store history that I wish White had given us. That way, instead of tying everything back to Aurelian who, even if he was the best general of them all, makes little sense outside the context of Gallienus and Diocletian.
As it is, he wraps up this history by talking about what he calls “the legacy of the Danubian emperors” – which is these three and more – who all come to power on the northern frontier and then make their way back to Rome. It seems a powerful dynasty-like series of emperors, a series that might nicely describe a crucial half-century of history.
By the end of this, I do feel I’ve learned a lot not just about that era but also about the historiography. Maybe, then, it’s to White’s credit that I feel I know enough to critique his entire organizing principle.
Either way, the butter gets spread awfully thin on the bread here – or, if you prefer, the store still doesn’t stock masking tape – and, while it has a lot of information, it feels like it’s missing a chance to make the same case in a larger and even more informative concept.
November 23, 2024
If you have even a passing knowledge of the Roman Empire, you know that things took a very bad turn for Rome during the third century. The weather cooled messing up growing seasons and causing flooding and perpetuating devastating plagues. On top of that, possibly driven by the same climate change factors, barbarians began to move east to get away from the Huns. These tribes saw Rome and wanted what they had and they quite often invaded. This proved too much for the empire which was already reeling from the plagues, flooding, and deteriorating agriculture that produced dramatic economic hardship. On the macrolevel, this led to tremendous instability in leadership. I read somewhere that for much of the third century, the average reign of emperors was roughly two years. There is a year that sees five different emperors in the same year. Any general with a legion seemed to think that he might as well be the top man, but if the Praetorian Guard didn’t think their emperor was treating them well enough, they were more than happy to stab him in the back and try another one who would raise wages and give them bonuses.
It's commonly understood that Diocletian and Constantine turned things around for Rome at the end of the third century, but White argues persuasively, that Rome might not have lasted long enough for Diocletian to save it without the brilliance of Aurelian. In five years, he returned stability to Rome with decisive victories over barbarian tribes, the Persians, and rebelling client states. He tried to fix the economy by improving the coinage. He began to reestablish the Pax Romana of old—and then his legionnaires murdered him. The question that arises from his brief but important reign was whether or not Diocletian would have been needed if Aurelian had survived to rule for fifteen or twenty years instead of five.
It's commonly understood that Diocletian and Constantine turned things around for Rome at the end of the third century, but White argues persuasively, that Rome might not have lasted long enough for Diocletian to save it without the brilliance of Aurelian. In five years, he returned stability to Rome with decisive victories over barbarian tribes, the Persians, and rebelling client states. He tried to fix the economy by improving the coinage. He began to reestablish the Pax Romana of old—and then his legionnaires murdered him. The question that arises from his brief but important reign was whether or not Diocletian would have been needed if Aurelian had survived to rule for fifteen or twenty years instead of five.
May 28, 2025
As someone interested in Roman and ancient history in general and the Crisis of the Third Century in particular, this had been on my reading list for a while. I received this as a birthday gift and was very eager to read it. It is very informative and factual, and makes for not only interesting and insightful reading into Aurelian's reign but the later half of the third century as well.
It shines a light on the struggles Rome was dealing with at that time, its tactics it took to combat it and many of the important events and battles of the era. As with Aurelian it goes particularly into detail during his 5 year reign, going through his restoration of the Empire from the Palmyrenes and the Gallic Roman Empire, his tactics and style of rule, personal views on administration and matters, personality and so forth... I was also curious to find some numismatic information about his coins and monetary policy which I was really interested in as I am an amateur coin collector of this period of Roman times. It also analyses the sources for this era in a very good way and makes sure not to have much bias wherever possible. One thing I would say it is more of a general history of the Illyrian emperors too, with a focus on Aurelian.
All in all, a good, interesting and clear read, which I completed in about two weeks. I would recommend it for anyone who wants to know more of the Third Century Crisis or the collapse of the Roman Empire. 4 stars
It shines a light on the struggles Rome was dealing with at that time, its tactics it took to combat it and many of the important events and battles of the era. As with Aurelian it goes particularly into detail during his 5 year reign, going through his restoration of the Empire from the Palmyrenes and the Gallic Roman Empire, his tactics and style of rule, personal views on administration and matters, personality and so forth... I was also curious to find some numismatic information about his coins and monetary policy which I was really interested in as I am an amateur coin collector of this period of Roman times. It also analyses the sources for this era in a very good way and makes sure not to have much bias wherever possible. One thing I would say it is more of a general history of the Illyrian emperors too, with a focus on Aurelian.
All in all, a good, interesting and clear read, which I completed in about two weeks. I would recommend it for anyone who wants to know more of the Third Century Crisis or the collapse of the Roman Empire. 4 stars
January 16, 2025
I enjoyed this book, but it's really more a history of the Crisis of the Third Century, rather than Aurelian.
It's understandable because there is so little information preserved from that period and especially about the Restitutor Orbis (Restorer of the World). The section on Gallienus was also very interesting, and I think he is a very under appreciated emperor.
The author makes quite a few odd errors, such as Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, that the last Byzantine emperor was Constantine the 13th and that Trier is in France. Strange, but still I enjoyed this read.
It's understandable because there is so little information preserved from that period and especially about the Restitutor Orbis (Restorer of the World). The section on Gallienus was also very interesting, and I think he is a very under appreciated emperor.
The author makes quite a few odd errors, such as Constantine made Christianity the official religion of the Roman Empire, that the last Byzantine emperor was Constantine the 13th and that Trier is in France. Strange, but still I enjoyed this read.
November 25, 2025
The Roman Emperor Aurelian: Restorer of the World by John White
Summary: In 270 AD, Rome was in absolute chaos. The eastern provinces had broken away, the spun-off Gallic Empire controlled Gaul, Spain, and Britain, and “barbarians" were on nearly every frontier. Meanwhile, Persia was always a threat to deliver a death blow. Yet by 275, just five years later, the Roman Empire was once again unified. The reason can be summed up in one name: Aurelian.
John White’s book shows why Aurelian, though far less famous than many who wore the purple, deserves a place on the Mount Rushmore of greatest Roman emperors. The Historia Augusta claims (with its usual exaggeration) that he personally killed nearly 1,000 men in battle, but even without such hyperbole, his military reputation was unmatched. During his short reign (270-275), he moved with astonishing speed, appearing everywhere at once, crushing threats so decisively that many enemies withdrew at his approach. For his fellow Romans, he truly earned the title Restorer of the World.
Aurelian reminded me of the early Roman dictator Camillus in his ability to pull Rome back from the brink when the odds seemed impossible. I also appreciated that this book gives attention to key figures of the era surrounding Aurelian's reign: Claudius II, Carus, and the excellent general-emperor Probus.
Summary: In 270 AD, Rome was in absolute chaos. The eastern provinces had broken away, the spun-off Gallic Empire controlled Gaul, Spain, and Britain, and “barbarians" were on nearly every frontier. Meanwhile, Persia was always a threat to deliver a death blow. Yet by 275, just five years later, the Roman Empire was once again unified. The reason can be summed up in one name: Aurelian.
John White’s book shows why Aurelian, though far less famous than many who wore the purple, deserves a place on the Mount Rushmore of greatest Roman emperors. The Historia Augusta claims (with its usual exaggeration) that he personally killed nearly 1,000 men in battle, but even without such hyperbole, his military reputation was unmatched. During his short reign (270-275), he moved with astonishing speed, appearing everywhere at once, crushing threats so decisively that many enemies withdrew at his approach. For his fellow Romans, he truly earned the title Restorer of the World.
Aurelian reminded me of the early Roman dictator Camillus in his ability to pull Rome back from the brink when the odds seemed impossible. I also appreciated that this book gives attention to key figures of the era surrounding Aurelian's reign: Claudius II, Carus, and the excellent general-emperor Probus.
December 1, 2024
This was a solid audiobook with a good performance by the narrator, keeping the listener enraptured while they recited the descriptions of several coins that depicted the Emperor Aurelian.
I would imagine reading the actual book would be less interesting than the audiobook. Especially, since it disputed most of the surviving sources as biased and relied heavily on the surviving coins minted during and around the time of Aurelian as primary sources.
I would imagine reading the actual book would be less interesting than the audiobook. Especially, since it disputed most of the surviving sources as biased and relied heavily on the surviving coins minted during and around the time of Aurelian as primary sources.
December 14, 2024
I honestly didn't feel like I walked away from this understanding why Aurelian was called "restorer of the world." I feel like I'll need to find something better written. I'm also a little dubious about the author's accuracy, as when he entered into subjects I was more familiar with he didn't seem strictly accurate (i.e. claiming Constantine made Christianity the official religion and became head of the church). What I found most informative were actually his asides about the Roman military.
August 21, 2025
This detailed, if somewhat dry, biography is fascinating in its subject matter alone. Despite being a rather well versed reader of Roman history, with specific focus on the crisis of the third century, I knew next to nothing of Aurelian before reading this book. Upon finishing, I feel that gap in my knowledge has been throughly filled. For those looking to fill the same knowledge gap, give this book a read.
April 7, 2023
This book is a must read for anyone who has an interest in the mid to late Roman Empire it dives into the courses of the age of rust and what lead to Aurelians rise to power and it continues to a bit after his demise.
It’s a fascinating look into a period of time that is lost to history and we can see how Rome was almost at the brink of collapse but could be restored by one man’s ambition.
It’s a fascinating look into a period of time that is lost to history and we can see how Rome was almost at the brink of collapse but could be restored by one man’s ambition.
March 13, 2025
Three stars more for disappointment at there not being any new information about the subject. If you have read anything on the Crisis of the Third Century this will not provide much new information if any. However, if you have not, this will be a great book. He covers the period before and several decades after the death of Aurelian.
December 18, 2023
Let down by a pretty poor conclusion.
March 1, 2024
Roman history is always a tough read and this book is no different. Worth the ancient history lesson.
June 11, 2025
well researched on a less published emperor
April 25, 2016
The book has two hundred pages, of which just over half are his biography. There is a twenty-page introduction (not counted in the two hundred pages) containing a detailed discussion and comparison of the past (ancient) histories written of Our Hero. The other ninety-five pages discuss the periods before and after. Rome was in big trouble then. The imperial electoral process was “assassination,” and rare was the man who died in bed. Barbarians were running loose all over the empire, and things were generally in a bad way. The author describes this and the emperors who preceded Aurelian. After Aurelian himself was dispatched (not dying in bed, and I hope that’s not a spoiler—well, it was for Aurelian), there are a number of pages recounting the careers of the emperors who followed.
Between Marcus Aurelius and Diocletian or Constantine, there is little known of the Roman emperors of the calamitous third century A.D. Aurelian was one of a trio who beat back the barbarians and brought some security in the latter portion of the century, the other two being Claudius Gothicus and Probus. I don’t think—don’t know, actually—the author is introducing much that is new; he is covering what earlier ancient writers wrote and evaluating their accuracy and motives. He examines the era’s coinage to get clues about economic prosperity and that seems to be fresh,if, to me, dry. I liked the coverage of Aurelian’s campaigns; he moved rapidly and employed some clever tactics in his victories.
It’s a thin volume when considering Aurelian’s career only. There isn’t much known about these short-reigned folks. But these later third-century emperors did accomplish the postponement of Rome’s fall for nearly two centuries. Even if this short bio is just a rehash of the ancients' (and Gibbon's) accounts, it serves well.
There are photographs in the middle of the book, and the author places his footnotes at the back of the book. The maps are fair, but could have better illustrated troop movements in Aurelian's campaign against Palmyra.
Between Marcus Aurelius and Diocletian or Constantine, there is little known of the Roman emperors of the calamitous third century A.D. Aurelian was one of a trio who beat back the barbarians and brought some security in the latter portion of the century, the other two being Claudius Gothicus and Probus. I don’t think—don’t know, actually—the author is introducing much that is new; he is covering what earlier ancient writers wrote and evaluating their accuracy and motives. He examines the era’s coinage to get clues about economic prosperity and that seems to be fresh,if, to me, dry. I liked the coverage of Aurelian’s campaigns; he moved rapidly and employed some clever tactics in his victories.
It’s a thin volume when considering Aurelian’s career only. There isn’t much known about these short-reigned folks. But these later third-century emperors did accomplish the postponement of Rome’s fall for nearly two centuries. Even if this short bio is just a rehash of the ancients' (and Gibbon's) accounts, it serves well.
There are photographs in the middle of the book, and the author places his footnotes at the back of the book. The maps are fair, but could have better illustrated troop movements in Aurelian's campaign against Palmyra.
March 23, 2025
A decent book which expanded my limited knowledge of Aurelian. The disappointment I have is apparently ultimately rooted in the lack of contemporary/near contemporary primary sources about him. It is rather strange that the fellow who almost single-handedly reunited the Roman world is so poorly written about (or that no sources survive). Owing to this fact, the book leans into the preceding crisis of the 3rd century (logical), but also leans notably into the period after Aurelian's short rule - leans all the way (albeit briefly) into the end of the Eastern Roman empire in 1453AD, in fact.
I think it was interesting to draw a line of continuity between these Danubian emperors through Diocletian - but it seems almost in service of keeping an already short book from being even shorter.
I think it was interesting to draw a line of continuity between these Danubian emperors through Diocletian - but it seems almost in service of keeping an already short book from being even shorter.
November 2, 2019
A great book dealing with a little known period of the Roman Empire when it almost collapsed due to barbarian invasions and the self-proclaimed independence of the western and eastern provinces of the empire. The first two chapters of the book are about Aurelian's immediate predecessors, and particularly Gallienus, who is also an interesting but little known emperor. The book is also of interests to coin collectors as the author explains repeatedly when coins were minted for special occasions, when mints were closed and new ones opened, how the currency suffered from debasement and how Aurelian dealt with this monetary crisis.
December 17, 2021
The author has made a book which follows the life of Emperor Aurelian. It follows him well and there is no significant problem in the narrative, for parts of his life that could have different paths they are all listed out for the reader while the author makes his arguments for them. There is also a small bit about the treatment of the Gallic Empire which I found enjoyable. Unfourtanetley, the author is horribly biased, he is a pro-Roman, Barbarian hating writer. His epilogue is mostly a lament of how the Barbarians bought an end to the Roman Empire and how much was lost from it. Not a very good end for a history book which should be unbiased.
December 31, 2019
The title speaks for itself; In the near collapse of the 3rd century Roman Empire one man accomplished the near impossible - restoration and preservation of the Empire. This achievement is more impressive because Aurelian ruled for only 5 years (270-275). He also tried to instigate economic and legal reforms as well as to introduce new religious practice (the cult of the Sol Invictus - Unconquered Sun). The author lists the accomplishments and tries to shed light on more controversial parts (or at least those not backed up with enough evidence.) A very enjoyable read.
December 26, 2019
Fascinating
Covers the reign of most of the emperors of the middle 200’s through to Diocletian. The emphasis is on Aurelian with reasonable coverage of the emperors from Severus onwards. I felt it took a fair amount of the book to get to Aurelian and covered the first four years in full. However, I felt his demise was very briefly covered. The summary of the reigns after his give the book necessary depth. I did enjoy the book.
Covers the reign of most of the emperors of the middle 200’s through to Diocletian. The emphasis is on Aurelian with reasonable coverage of the emperors from Severus onwards. I felt it took a fair amount of the book to get to Aurelian and covered the first four years in full. However, I felt his demise was very briefly covered. The summary of the reigns after his give the book necessary depth. I did enjoy the book.
January 5, 2021
I first learned the name Aurelian from a YouTube video on the Gods and Generals channel. After that I spent a lot of time trying to learn about him. This excellent book has answered all the questions I had on him. It explored multiple prevailing theories on the emperor, and cleared up misinformation I had picked up from my own studies. If you are at all interested in Aurelian I can’t recommend this highly enough.
March 8, 2020
Good piece of historical work
A very up to date and Historical ! The author has given a fair account of Aurelian with notes of verification! Accounts correct using logic ie as in knowing the dates of events based on last know written word versus time table of an armies day of March
A very up to date and Historical ! The author has given a fair account of Aurelian with notes of verification! Accounts correct using logic ie as in knowing the dates of events based on last know written word versus time table of an armies day of March
October 19, 2020
A fascinating study. Very honest about the data available on this emperor and it's unreliability and he constantly lets you know his sources and whether or not they are really trustworthy. It was also interesting to know how much information can be gleaned from coins. Well-written and very readable.
July 20, 2019
Great read
This was a very through and well structured history and biography of a brilliant leader and strategist who single handed the brought the empire from the brink of dissolution.
This was a very through and well structured history and biography of a brilliant leader and strategist who single handed the brought the empire from the brink of dissolution.
August 31, 2016
A good read
A very good introduction to the latter end of the crisis of the third century and beyond. I would recommend it
A very good introduction to the latter end of the crisis of the third century and beyond. I would recommend it
July 2, 2017
A very decent overview of Aurelian and the history of the 'third century crisis' both before and after his reign. A good place to start in trying to understand this tumultuous period.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 30 reviews