What do you think?
Rate this book
History of the Ancient World
The Origin of Empire: Rome from the Republic to Hadrian
Beginning with the Roman army’s first foray beyond its borders and concluding with the death of Hadrian in 138 CE, this panoramic history of the early Roman Empire recounts the wars, leaders, and social transformations that lay the foundations of imperial success.
Between 264 BCE, when the Roman army crossed into Sicily, and the death of Hadrian nearly three hundred years later, Rome became one of the most successful multicultural empires in history. In this vivid guide to a fascinating period, David Potter explores the transformations that occurred along the way, as Rome went from republic to mercenary state to bureaucratic empire, from that initial step across the Straits of Messina to the peak of territorial expansion.
Rome was shaped by endless political and diplomatic jockeying. As other Italian city-states relinquished sovereignty in exchange for an ironclad guarantee of protection, Rome did not simply dominate its potential rivals―it absorbed them by selectively offering citizenship and constructing a tiered membership scheme that allowed Roman citizens to maintain political control without excluding noncitizens from the state’s success. Potter attributes the empire’s ethnic harmony to its relative openness.
This imperial policy adapted and persisted over centuries of internal discord. The fall of the republican aristocracy led to the growth of mercenary armies and to the creation of a privatized and militarized state that reached full expression under Julius Caesar. Subsequently, Augustus built a mighty bureaucracy, which went on to manage an empire ruled by a series of inattentive, intemperate, and bullying chief executives. As contemporary parallels become hard to ignore, The Origin of Empire makes clear that the Romans still have much to teach us about power, governance, and leadership.
Between 264 BCE, when the Roman army crossed into Sicily, and the death of Hadrian nearly three hundred years later, Rome became one of the most successful multicultural empires in history. In this vivid guide to a fascinating period, David Potter explores the transformations that occurred along the way, as Rome went from republic to mercenary state to bureaucratic empire, from that initial step across the Straits of Messina to the peak of territorial expansion.
Rome was shaped by endless political and diplomatic jockeying. As other Italian city-states relinquished sovereignty in exchange for an ironclad guarantee of protection, Rome did not simply dominate its potential rivals―it absorbed them by selectively offering citizenship and constructing a tiered membership scheme that allowed Roman citizens to maintain political control without excluding noncitizens from the state’s success. Potter attributes the empire’s ethnic harmony to its relative openness.
This imperial policy adapted and persisted over centuries of internal discord. The fall of the republican aristocracy led to the growth of mercenary armies and to the creation of a privatized and militarized state that reached full expression under Julius Caesar. Subsequently, Augustus built a mighty bureaucracy, which went on to manage an empire ruled by a series of inattentive, intemperate, and bullying chief executives. As contemporary parallels become hard to ignore, The Origin of Empire makes clear that the Romans still have much to teach us about power, governance, and leadership.
432 pages, Hardcover
First published April 18, 2019
24 people are currently reading
494 people want to read
About the author
David Stone Potter
20 books32 followersDavid Potter is the author of Constantine the Emperor and The Victor’s Crown: A History of Ancient Sport from Homer to Byzantium. He is the Francis W. Kelsey Collegiate Professor of Greek and Roman History and Arthur F. Thurnau Professor at the University of Michigan.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews
September 18, 2023
目前讀來三本中最糟的一本，但是要強調的是，毀在翻譯的手上。
前面一小段還好，中間開始總是會有些字句讀不通，本以為是自己沒睡飽恍神，後來真的受不了才發現真的是譯者不行。
有別於前兩本，這位作者採行的是敘事法，不過他的文筆感覺是可以的，而且常在內文中吐槽跟評論，也運用了經濟學等學科的知識來探討史事，原書是很符合這系列水平。
你說我推不推薦，我沒法回答你。
只是這本討論的歷史恰好是羅馬史最受歡迎的時代，偏偏卻搞成這樣也是無可奈何。
畢竟光是前兩本我就想評論這系列應該是目前繁體市場關於古典時代最出色的作品了。
前面一小段還好，中間開始總是會有些字句讀不通，本以為是自己沒睡飽恍神，後來真的受不了才發現真的是譯者不行。
有別於前兩本，這位作者採行的是敘事法，不過他的文筆感覺是可以的，而且常在內文中吐槽跟評論，也運用了經濟學等學科的知識來探討史事，原書是很符合這系列水平。
你說我推不推薦，我沒法回答你。
只是這本討論的歷史恰好是羅馬史最受歡迎的時代，偏偏卻搞成這樣也是無可奈何。
畢竟光是前兩本我就想評論這系列應該是目前繁體市場關於古典時代最出色的作品了。
December 4, 2019
What if empire was a bad thing? This particular book deals with an interesting subject, the way that Rome acquainted itself with being an imperial power, and completely fumbles one of the most massively important parts of that discussion, and that is the possibility that it was right that Rome should be so ambivalent to hostile about becoming an imperial nation. This is particularly relevant because both Rome and America are or were imperial republics and both have within them the same sort of ambivalence towards empire in that they acted in such a way as to get an empire but have not seemed to really know how to deal with it or how to enjoy it. There is a massive tension between the sort of egalitarian culture that one tends to find in a healthy republic and the inegalitarian behavior that is required to run a successful empire. And Rome never fully dealt with this tension, seeking at some points to spread the joys of Roman citizenship broadly to reduce the internal tensions of the empire while also promoting populist posers and corrupt grifters whose economic behavior required an expanding Roman world so as to reduce its negative effects on Roman citizens struggling with inflation and debt.
This book is a bit more than 400 pages and is divided into five parts and 31 chapters. After beginning with maps, notes to the abbreviation in the text, and an introduction on the path to empire that Rome took starting in the 3rd century BC, the first part of the book looks at Rome's experience in the Punic Wars and other conflicts from 264-201BC (I), including the invasion of Sicily by some "blockhead" (1), the first Punic war (2), Rome's wars in Italy with the Gauls (3) after that, Hannibal (4) and Cannae (5), and victory (6) in 201BC. After that the author looks at Rome's awkward experience with empire from 200-146BC (II), with chapters on Macedon (7), victory in the East (8), the home front (9), and the Third Punic War (10). This leads to a discussion of revolution at home from 146-88BC (III), with chapters on Tiberius (11) and Gaius (12) Gracchus, the view of critics (13), Marian politics (14), and the civil wars of the early 1st century BC (15). After this comes a discussion of late Roman Republican dictatorship from 88-36BC (IV) with chapters on Sulla's victory (16), the Rome (17) and legacies he left behind (18), politics after his death (19), 63BC (20), law and disorder (21), Pompey and Caesar (22), and the conflict among their supporters after their death (23). Finally, the author explores the monarchy from 36BC-138AD (V), with chapters on Augustus (24) and his empire (25), eccentricity and bureaucracy (26), the emergence of an imperial society (27), the fall of dynasties (28), reimagining Rome (29), the view from Tivoli (30), and what happened after that (31), after which the book ends with notes on sources, a list of illustration, acknowledgments, and an index.
Perhaps most shocking of all, although this book spends a lot of time talking about Rome's internal politics, especially in the late Republic, as well as the involvement of Rome in various imperial wars starting with the wars against Carthage and moving on from there, this book actually does not really address the question of the development of the Roman empire. It occasionally touches upon this point, when looking at the economic trade-offs involved in determining whether this or that patch of earth became a part of Rome or in looking at the fleecing of provincials in Asia minor or looking very briefly at the difference between senatorial and imperial provinces, but the book shockingly does not do a good job at explaining how it was that Rome became imperial and handled the contradictions inherent in its position. It is certainly an interesting book about Roman history, about which there is no shortage of materials. To be sure, this is a book that is easy enough to read and enjoy, even if it does not quite do what it purports to do, but that means that the book simply needs a title that better reflects its granular look at Roman politics.
This book is a bit more than 400 pages and is divided into five parts and 31 chapters. After beginning with maps, notes to the abbreviation in the text, and an introduction on the path to empire that Rome took starting in the 3rd century BC, the first part of the book looks at Rome's experience in the Punic Wars and other conflicts from 264-201BC (I), including the invasion of Sicily by some "blockhead" (1), the first Punic war (2), Rome's wars in Italy with the Gauls (3) after that, Hannibal (4) and Cannae (5), and victory (6) in 201BC. After that the author looks at Rome's awkward experience with empire from 200-146BC (II), with chapters on Macedon (7), victory in the East (8), the home front (9), and the Third Punic War (10). This leads to a discussion of revolution at home from 146-88BC (III), with chapters on Tiberius (11) and Gaius (12) Gracchus, the view of critics (13), Marian politics (14), and the civil wars of the early 1st century BC (15). After this comes a discussion of late Roman Republican dictatorship from 88-36BC (IV) with chapters on Sulla's victory (16), the Rome (17) and legacies he left behind (18), politics after his death (19), 63BC (20), law and disorder (21), Pompey and Caesar (22), and the conflict among their supporters after their death (23). Finally, the author explores the monarchy from 36BC-138AD (V), with chapters on Augustus (24) and his empire (25), eccentricity and bureaucracy (26), the emergence of an imperial society (27), the fall of dynasties (28), reimagining Rome (29), the view from Tivoli (30), and what happened after that (31), after which the book ends with notes on sources, a list of illustration, acknowledgments, and an index.
Perhaps most shocking of all, although this book spends a lot of time talking about Rome's internal politics, especially in the late Republic, as well as the involvement of Rome in various imperial wars starting with the wars against Carthage and moving on from there, this book actually does not really address the question of the development of the Roman empire. It occasionally touches upon this point, when looking at the economic trade-offs involved in determining whether this or that patch of earth became a part of Rome or in looking at the fleecing of provincials in Asia minor or looking very briefly at the difference between senatorial and imperial provinces, but the book shockingly does not do a good job at explaining how it was that Rome became imperial and handled the contradictions inherent in its position. It is certainly an interesting book about Roman history, about which there is no shortage of materials. To be sure, this is a book that is easy enough to read and enjoy, even if it does not quite do what it purports to do, but that means that the book simply needs a title that better reflects its granular look at Roman politics.
June 24, 2021
A great summary overview of the political situation in Rome from 264 BCE - 138 CE, looking at the processes and individuals which saw Rome transition from a “democracy” to a full-blown empire.
I did feel that some parts were rushed at the expense of others, and whilst I understand the aim was never to analyse, personally I would have preferred to see more analysis of key figures such as Cicero and Augustus, rather than just taking the sources at their word.
On the whole, a refreshing and enjoyable read, if not the most academic or analytical out there.
I did feel that some parts were rushed at the expense of others, and whilst I understand the aim was never to analyse, personally I would have preferred to see more analysis of key figures such as Cicero and Augustus, rather than just taking the sources at their word.
On the whole, a refreshing and enjoyable read, if not the most academic or analytical out there.
March 30, 2022
A surprisingly poor and frustrating retelling of what is otherwise a fascinating period of history, let down by bad writing.
The writing style can best be described as 'glossing over' events in a loose and cursory way that jumps back and forth in time making it hard to understand them in any sort of detail or follow a chronological narrative. There was strangely minimal coverage of some of the most important events in Roman history (the final defeat and destruction of Carthage for instance, Rome's greatest enemy, was barely given a page). I found myself repreatedly frustrated by this, such that I had to look up the events online to feel I had even a basic understanding of them.
The author also uses bizarre and unprofessional phrases (like a general wanting his men to "think brave thoughts" or a delegation arriving from "their lovely city" or a Roman legion being joined by "a Spanish gentleman") that felt so jarring and out of place in a professionally written history book.
I don't like being negative but that is the pervading feeling I had while reading this. For some reason I got the impression the author just wanted to rush through everything as quickly as possible to be done with it.
The writing style can best be described as 'glossing over' events in a loose and cursory way that jumps back and forth in time making it hard to understand them in any sort of detail or follow a chronological narrative. There was strangely minimal coverage of some of the most important events in Roman history (the final defeat and destruction of Carthage for instance, Rome's greatest enemy, was barely given a page). I found myself repreatedly frustrated by this, such that I had to look up the events online to feel I had even a basic understanding of them.
The author also uses bizarre and unprofessional phrases (like a general wanting his men to "think brave thoughts" or a delegation arriving from "their lovely city" or a Roman legion being joined by "a Spanish gentleman") that felt so jarring and out of place in a professionally written history book.
I don't like being negative but that is the pervading feeling I had while reading this. For some reason I got the impression the author just wanted to rush through everything as quickly as possible to be done with it.
February 27, 2021
Extremely interesting approach to the history of formation of the Roman Empire. Potter tackles the topic as a chain of social and economic changes that had started as early as the IIIrd century BC and gradually led the Republic to collapse
July 28, 2021
Excellent in its social and economical analyses of the ever-changing Roman Republic and early Empire. The way some literary sources are used and analysed are somewhat lackluster however (Vergilius’ 4th eclogue for instance).
All in all still an exemplary history.
All in all still an exemplary history.
August 21, 2021
I'd give this three-and-a-half if that were possible.
A history of Rome from the First Punic War to the death of Hadrian sounds interesting. Who divides Roman history like that?
"Origin of Empire" is a deep dive into the death of the Republic and the establishing of the Empire. I think every consul in the era gets a mention. (And it becomes very difficult to keep the Claudiuses, the Fabians, and the Pisos straight.) Sometimes the level of detail is invigorating. Sometimes it is deadening.
The big takeaway from this book, for me, is that there was no one moment when the Republic died and the Empire started. It is all a gradual process. That makes sense, but one feels it could have been expressed more concisely.
Recommended for experts in Roman history. For readers who are simply curious about Rome, I would recommend Mary Beard or Adrian Goldsworthy first.
A history of Rome from the First Punic War to the death of Hadrian sounds interesting. Who divides Roman history like that?
"Origin of Empire" is a deep dive into the death of the Republic and the establishing of the Empire. I think every consul in the era gets a mention. (And it becomes very difficult to keep the Claudiuses, the Fabians, and the Pisos straight.) Sometimes the level of detail is invigorating. Sometimes it is deadening.
The big takeaway from this book, for me, is that there was no one moment when the Republic died and the Empire started. It is all a gradual process. That makes sense, but one feels it could have been expressed more concisely.
Recommended for experts in Roman history. For readers who are simply curious about Rome, I would recommend Mary Beard or Adrian Goldsworthy first.
September 8, 2019
Excellent writing style. Breezes through the dense, packed centuries of Roman history in a fast-paced and often amused narrative. Develops the story of the main thesis that the Republic tore itself apart once it gained access to the wealth and resources of the entire Mediterranean. Corruption and constant competition for power lead to endless turmoil. The Ceasars finally bring peace and stability by imposing state values and creating a de-polticized beaucracy. I also enjoyed the discussion of the various historical source.
April 27, 2021
Pretty good summary of the events leading to the changeover from Republic to Empire. The negative is that there are so many names listed that it is hard to keep track and so many are so similar. Not the author's fault though, that's the way it was, it does get in the way of the narrative a little though.
February 14, 2024
This book is a summary of Roman history from 264 BCE, when the Roman Republic first began to expand its power outside mainland Italy, to the death in 138 CE of Emperor Hadrian, when the Roman Empire had attained its greatest extent. Whilst I found David Potter's masterly account both interesting and informative, I was irritated by his writing style. This is often colloquial, sometimes even grammatically incorrect. He even has a tendency to add cynical asides that appear to be ironic comments rather than actual facts. Since he doesn't provide footnotes or references (though there is a substantional bibliography), it is impossible to know what he means. In addition when he deals with the time of the Republic's collapse, he occasionally uses unfamiliar names for some of the key players. Thus Pompey the Great is Magnus and even Octavian is Caesar Imperator until he is formally awarded the title of Augustus. Whilst strictly correct, this usage makes it hard to realise who he is writing about. Nevertheless the book is highly readable and an excellent introduction to the complex politics and military campaigns of this period in Roman history.
June 30, 2023
While I'm giving this book four stars, I do have the sense that it ends on something of a whimper, as Potter takes you from the rise of Rome as an imperial power, with the First Punic War, ending with the reigns of Antoninus and Marcus Aurelius; men who cemented the image of the Roman Empire as one of the best of all possible worlds. The issue that Potter wrestles with is that the Roman republic never developed a good way of disciplining its military "contractors," once it became clear that a militia army was insufficient, and it is out of that mix of business and elite competition that the imperium emerged. Although Potter has insights to impart on every page, and offers intelligent critiques of the sources that have come down to us, I'm left with the impression that he attempted to do too much in the page count allotted to him.
February 16, 2024
A superb, concise, and yet detailed précis of the political and socioeconomic factors that drove the evolution of government in ancient Rome from (roughly) the Punic Wars all the way through to the middle of the 2nd Century CE.
Potter takes some sharply-held views of certain people (Sulla, for one) and trends (the "contractor class" for another) that I don't wholeheartedly share, but the book is better for it. Potter also waves away the notion that Tiberius was a sexual deviant, while simultaneously seeming to give credit to the accounts of Caligula's deviance and insanity. Since both of these notions ultimately derive from the same sources and therefore deserve similar scrutiny, one wonders why the one notion was summarily dismissed while the other was accepted.
C'est la vie.
.
Potter takes some sharply-held views of certain people (Sulla, for one) and trends (the "contractor class" for another) that I don't wholeheartedly share, but the book is better for it. Potter also waves away the notion that Tiberius was a sexual deviant, while simultaneously seeming to give credit to the accounts of Caligula's deviance and insanity. Since both of these notions ultimately derive from the same sources and therefore deserve similar scrutiny, one wonders why the one notion was summarily dismissed while the other was accepted.
C'est la vie.
.
August 23, 2024
An introduction to this period, primarily focusing on political and military history. There are so many names, and it's hard for me to get a handle on them all. I want to reread this book because I know I missed some connections. Maps are in the front, b/w pictures are throughout, and color pictures are in the back. Extensive "Notes on Sources" (further reading) section. I appreciated the occasional mentions of poets and women.
January 17, 2020
A good survey of the origins of the Roman Empire up to the Emperor Hadrian. I learned a few things and have been given a few things to explore further.
July 9, 2023
A 3.5. I consider a four-star rank a good job well done. This book was not perfect so it does not have a fifth star, and as for lacking a half-star from a total of four, this is because it did not provide me information I did not already know. However, for you first timers or returnees to the second half of the Republic to Hadrian's, this book will be perfect for you. Nonetheless, a satisfying read.
Displaying 1 - 15 of 15 reviews