What do you think?
Rate this book
罗马共和国的兴衰在西方文明史上占有独特的地位。在本书中，戴维·M. 格温从罗马的起源以及建城传说开始，一路写到汉尼拔跨越阿尔卑斯山和凯撒在三月十五日遇刺，为我们呈现了罗马共和国引人入胜的历史画卷。其中，他审视了共和国独一无二的政治结构，描述了它的文学和物质来源，生动地刻画了罗马共和国的文化和社会。他还思考了罗马人的价值观和信仰，以此来解释共和国跌宕起伏的兴衰史。最后，格温还反思了罗马共和国留给后世的非凡遗产，包括它作为典范和灵感及一种警醒，在今日文学和影视作品中的再现。
320 pages, Paperback
First published August 30, 2012
89 people are currently reading
997 people want to read
About the author
David M. Gwynn
17 books5 followersDavid Gwynn is a Reader in Ancient and Late Antique History at Royal Holloway, University of London.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 108 reviews
Read
March 6, 2020I'm not sure when my interest in the Romans began. Perhaps it was Asterix that sparked it off, maybe Asterix reading was just an early symptom of an ongoing but so far non-fatal malady. I can recall leafing through the pages of an encyclopaedia at primary school consuming all the Roman related articles and beginning particularly struck by the deaths of Scipo's father and uncle in battle on account of the fickleness of their Spanish allies. As it happened I never went to the kind of school that taught Latin, something which I hope is meaningful only in a UK context, this may have been beneficially since years later I was speaking to a work colleague who had been to Grammar school and all she had been taught was 'Gaius has a dog' type stuff which I imagine may well cure a child of any Roman enthusiasm altogether. I was disappointed at this, since she went to an all girls school I'd have imagined that been taught Latin from Ovid's love poetry would have both give a grounding in the language and a more solid preparation for life. Attentive readers may be reassured to know that I am not involved in creating school curricula.
None of the above has much relevance to this book save to explain having seen it I settled instantly on reading it despite another book on the go and another review semi-written, such are the power of childhood passions.
The other introductory book I've read on this topic is Crawford's The Roman Republic. That comes in at around 180 to 190 pages of text, while this volume in the Very Short Introduction has 132 pages of narrative in small print. So really not to dissimilar in length. My impression was that Gwynn's prose was curter. On the whole I think I preferred Crawford's book, but this is a fair summary history from the mythical beginning to the end of the Roman republic.
Gwynn's thesis, repeated several times over the book, is that the competition for Gloria and the need to maintain Dignitas among the Roman elite caused both its rise to dominance over the Mediterranean, but also inevitably led to the destruction of the Republic. This is at the moment a fairly conventional thesis, although I preferred Cunliffe's version of this which reminded me more of my reading on System's Theory in Greeks, Romans and Barbarians. One of the nice features of Gwynn's book is the last chapter's very brief discussion of changing interpretations of Republican history. 'Defensive Imperialism' in the nineteenth-century to an emphasis on the innate aggression of the Roman polity after the beginnings of post-war decolonisation. We seem to find the face of the present reflected back at us when ever we scrutinise the past.
So after eating my way through the book I wondered if this kind of from start to finish account was a good way to start to explore Republican Roman History. The nature of the Republic changed markedly as far as we can tell from the expulsion of the kings down to the Augustus, while the available sources don't provide a continuous narrative. It struck me that slices out of Republican history - for instance the Gracchi and land reform, Marius and military reform, Rome and Carthage - examined in more detail might make for more interesting examinations of particular issues and in turn provide a lens for exploring the whole history of the Republic than simply running through from the Brutus who overthrew the last king to the Brutus who killed Caesar.
A few things were new to me or that I had forgotten and stand out particularly. That Cicero's name meant 'Chickpea', that the Gracchi's maternal grandfather was Scipio Africanus - a disappointment as I had imagined in my naivety that the Tribunes of Plebeians might actually have been Plebeians, and in a literal manifestation of the Patriarchal nature of Roman society the Patricians would in English be the Fathers.
Gwynn suggests that one reason for our fascination for the Republic is its violent ending in a world where change comes ever more rapidly, we still seek our own lessons from the failures of the Republic and Rome's transformation into empire (p132). I don't know, I felt that there were several reform attempts that resolved one problem and set up the next one in its turn, and yet although the end of the Republic and the establishment of an Empire seem very clear to us now, the first Emperors spent a fair amount of time and energy denying that the Republic had ended at all.
It seems to me though that Machiavelli comes closer to the meat of the issue: A republic, [Machiavelli] argued, had to choose whether like Rome its aim was expansion or whether it preferred self-preservation like ancient Sparta or contemporary Venice. Machiavelli's choice was clear. Perhaps those states that rejected expansion might last a little longer and avoid the conflicts that beset the Roman Republic. But this was not the path to glory. All states either rise or fall, and it is better to accept the challenge of dissension and ambition, 'looking on them as evils which cannot be escaped if we would arrive at the greatness of Rome' (p122). It is not so much that the Republic ended, but rather the idea that there was a choice or perhaps simply the possibility of the state evolving in different directions, but maybe that is simply an illusion based on a failure to appreciate simply how vicious a circle its political dynamic was.
None of the above has much relevance to this book save to explain having seen it I settled instantly on reading it despite another book on the go and another review semi-written, such are the power of childhood passions.
The other introductory book I've read on this topic is Crawford's The Roman Republic. That comes in at around 180 to 190 pages of text, while this volume in the Very Short Introduction has 132 pages of narrative in small print. So really not to dissimilar in length. My impression was that Gwynn's prose was curter. On the whole I think I preferred Crawford's book, but this is a fair summary history from the mythical beginning to the end of the Roman republic.
Gwynn's thesis, repeated several times over the book, is that the competition for Gloria and the need to maintain Dignitas among the Roman elite caused both its rise to dominance over the Mediterranean, but also inevitably led to the destruction of the Republic. This is at the moment a fairly conventional thesis, although I preferred Cunliffe's version of this which reminded me more of my reading on System's Theory in Greeks, Romans and Barbarians. One of the nice features of Gwynn's book is the last chapter's very brief discussion of changing interpretations of Republican history. 'Defensive Imperialism' in the nineteenth-century to an emphasis on the innate aggression of the Roman polity after the beginnings of post-war decolonisation. We seem to find the face of the present reflected back at us when ever we scrutinise the past.
So after eating my way through the book I wondered if this kind of from start to finish account was a good way to start to explore Republican Roman History. The nature of the Republic changed markedly as far as we can tell from the expulsion of the kings down to the Augustus, while the available sources don't provide a continuous narrative. It struck me that slices out of Republican history - for instance the Gracchi and land reform, Marius and military reform, Rome and Carthage - examined in more detail might make for more interesting examinations of particular issues and in turn provide a lens for exploring the whole history of the Republic than simply running through from the Brutus who overthrew the last king to the Brutus who killed Caesar.
A few things were new to me or that I had forgotten and stand out particularly. That Cicero's name meant 'Chickpea', that the Gracchi's maternal grandfather was Scipio Africanus - a disappointment as I had imagined in my naivety that the Tribunes of Plebeians might actually have been Plebeians, and in a literal manifestation of the Patriarchal nature of Roman society the Patricians would in English be the Fathers.
Gwynn suggests that one reason for our fascination for the Republic is its violent ending in a world where change comes ever more rapidly, we still seek our own lessons from the failures of the Republic and Rome's transformation into empire (p132). I don't know, I felt that there were several reform attempts that resolved one problem and set up the next one in its turn, and yet although the end of the Republic and the establishment of an Empire seem very clear to us now, the first Emperors spent a fair amount of time and energy denying that the Republic had ended at all.
It seems to me though that Machiavelli comes closer to the meat of the issue: A republic, [Machiavelli] argued, had to choose whether like Rome its aim was expansion or whether it preferred self-preservation like ancient Sparta or contemporary Venice. Machiavelli's choice was clear. Perhaps those states that rejected expansion might last a little longer and avoid the conflicts that beset the Roman Republic. But this was not the path to glory. All states either rise or fall, and it is better to accept the challenge of dissension and ambition, 'looking on them as evils which cannot be escaped if we would arrive at the greatness of Rome' (p122). It is not so much that the Republic ended, but rather the idea that there was a choice or perhaps simply the possibility of the state evolving in different directions, but maybe that is simply an illusion based on a failure to appreciate simply how vicious a circle its political dynamic was.
December 19, 2020
کتاب تاریخ جمهوری روم رو به روشنی و زیبایی شرح میده، اما آموزندهترین بخش کتاب، توضیح چرایی سقوط جمهوری و شکلگیری امپراتوری روم بود.
کتاب در همون فصلهای ابتدایی یه نظریه مطرح میکنه و تا آخر کتاب ضمن بیان تاریخ جابهجا اون نظریه رو در سیر وقایع نشون میده. کتاب میگه بر جامعهٔ اشراف روم یه اخلاق سیاسی حکمفرما بود و اون هم ارزش کسب افتخار بود. اشراف رومی از بدو تولد تربیت میشدن که فقط و فقط به کسب افتخار برای خودشون و خانوادهشون اهمیت بدن، و کم کم نوعی رقابت شدید بین اشراف و خاندانها بر سر کسب افتخار پدید اومد. فاتحان بزرگ پس از بازگشت از فتوحاتشون از طرف سنا اجازه پیدا میکردن که در شهر رژهٔ پیروزی برگزار کنن، مجسمههاشون رو توی شهر بر پا میکردن، و حتی به افتخارشون معبد میساختن و به عنوان خدا میپرستیدنشون. در خونههای اشراف ماسکهای مومی پرافتخارترین نیاکان خاندان در اتاقها نصب میشد تا سرمشق اعضای خاندان باشن. این اخلاق که در ابتدا به گسترش سلطهٔ روم کمک کرد، کم کم وقتی از حد گذشت، به جنونی برای جنگافروزی به قصد کسب پیروزی و افتخار تبدیل شد. حالا اشراف برای کسب افتخار حتی مقابل سنا و جمهوری میایستادن و به رغم مخالفت سنا، وارد جنگ میشدن و اگه سنا میخواست جلوشون رو بگیره، به شهر رم لشکر میکشیدن و سنا رو منحل میکردن و سناتورهای مخالف رو به قتل میرسوندن.
چیزی که به این خودرایی اشراف کمک میکرد، اقتصاد متزلزل روم بود: بعد از فتوحات درخشان و سرازیر شدن ثروت و برده به روم، کشاورزان هر چه بیشتر از کار بی کار شدن و جاشون رو بردهها گرفتن. کشاورزهای بی کار به شهر رم مهاجرت کردن و انبوه جمعیت فقیر و ناراضی شهر رو تشکیل دادن. روم از قدیم قانونی داشت که طبق اون، فقط زمیندارها حق شرکت در خدمت نظامی داشتن. چون جمهوری به سربازهاش حقوق و سلاح نمیداد، سربازها باید زمین میداشتن تا از قِبَلش مخارجشون تأمین بشه. اما در سالهای پایانی جمهوری، فرماندهان جویای افتخار، جمعیت فقیر و بی کار رم رو به خدمت نظامی دعوت کردن، و در مقابل بهشون سلاح، حقوق ثابت و وعدهٔ زمین در پایان مدت خدمت دادن. این گروه جدید نظامیها به جای این که به روم و جمهوری روم وفادار باشن، به شخص فرمانده که قرار بود بهشون زمین بده وفادار بودن. در نتیجه سنا هر چه بیشتر نیروی نظامی رو از دست داد و اشخاص صاحب ارتشهای شخصی شدن. اشخاصی که در ضمن، مبتلا شده بودن به جنون کسب افتخار به هر قیمت.
اوج این جنون در سالهای پایانی جمهوری، در اتحاد سه جنگسالار سزار، پومپیوس، کراسوس بود، که جمهوری رو برای همیشه نابود کرد و یک امپراتور رو صاحب تمام افتخار و ثروت و قدرت نظامی کرد.
کتاب در همون فصلهای ابتدایی یه نظریه مطرح میکنه و تا آخر کتاب ضمن بیان تاریخ جابهجا اون نظریه رو در سیر وقایع نشون میده. کتاب میگه بر جامعهٔ اشراف روم یه اخلاق سیاسی حکمفرما بود و اون هم ارزش کسب افتخار بود. اشراف رومی از بدو تولد تربیت میشدن که فقط و فقط به کسب افتخار برای خودشون و خانوادهشون اهمیت بدن، و کم کم نوعی رقابت شدید بین اشراف و خاندانها بر سر کسب افتخار پدید اومد. فاتحان بزرگ پس از بازگشت از فتوحاتشون از طرف سنا اجازه پیدا میکردن که در شهر رژهٔ پیروزی برگزار کنن، مجسمههاشون رو توی شهر بر پا میکردن، و حتی به افتخارشون معبد میساختن و به عنوان خدا میپرستیدنشون. در خونههای اشراف ماسکهای مومی پرافتخارترین نیاکان خاندان در اتاقها نصب میشد تا سرمشق اعضای خاندان باشن. این اخلاق که در ابتدا به گسترش سلطهٔ روم کمک کرد، کم کم وقتی از حد گذشت، به جنونی برای جنگافروزی به قصد کسب پیروزی و افتخار تبدیل شد. حالا اشراف برای کسب افتخار حتی مقابل سنا و جمهوری میایستادن و به رغم مخالفت سنا، وارد جنگ میشدن و اگه سنا میخواست جلوشون رو بگیره، به شهر رم لشکر میکشیدن و سنا رو منحل میکردن و سناتورهای مخالف رو به قتل میرسوندن.
چیزی که به این خودرایی اشراف کمک میکرد، اقتصاد متزلزل روم بود: بعد از فتوحات درخشان و سرازیر شدن ثروت و برده به روم، کشاورزان هر چه بیشتر از کار بی کار شدن و جاشون رو بردهها گرفتن. کشاورزهای بی کار به شهر رم مهاجرت کردن و انبوه جمعیت فقیر و ناراضی شهر رو تشکیل دادن. روم از قدیم قانونی داشت که طبق اون، فقط زمیندارها حق شرکت در خدمت نظامی داشتن. چون جمهوری به سربازهاش حقوق و سلاح نمیداد، سربازها باید زمین میداشتن تا از قِبَلش مخارجشون تأمین بشه. اما در سالهای پایانی جمهوری، فرماندهان جویای افتخار، جمعیت فقیر و بی کار رم رو به خدمت نظامی دعوت کردن، و در مقابل بهشون سلاح، حقوق ثابت و وعدهٔ زمین در پایان مدت خدمت دادن. این گروه جدید نظامیها به جای این که به روم و جمهوری روم وفادار باشن، به شخص فرمانده که قرار بود بهشون زمین بده وفادار بودن. در نتیجه سنا هر چه بیشتر نیروی نظامی رو از دست داد و اشخاص صاحب ارتشهای شخصی شدن. اشخاصی که در ضمن، مبتلا شده بودن به جنون کسب افتخار به هر قیمت.
اوج این جنون در سالهای پایانی جمهوری، در اتحاد سه جنگسالار سزار، پومپیوس، کراسوس بود، که جمهوری رو برای همیشه نابود کرد و یک امپراتور رو صاحب تمام افتخار و ثروت و قدرت نظامی کرد.
December 13, 2020
This is the best "Very Short Introduction" that I've read. Though the author is dealing with perhaps the most universally fascinating story in history, he still avoids many of the pitfalls that could have made this into a two-star book.
Instead of falling into revisionism, judging the Romans by 21st century values, or meandering out of chronological order to make a philosophical point, the author sticks to Roman history as they themselves wrote it, and manages to always keep the reader focused on the values that the Romans themselves focused on. Dignitas and gloria are two Latin words with no precise English translation, but with overpowering influence on the way Romans behaved and thought of themselves. The author's main thesis is that the inflation of dignitas and gloria and their monopolization by certain mighty individuals in contrast to the common dignitas and gloria of the Republic as a whole is what led to the Republic's collapse into Empire. This thesis is not new nor edgy, but it seems to me the best explanation of an historical event that people never get tired of trying to explain.
That the author chose to give this version of the explanation without unnecessarily interjecting opposing views and caveats seems to me evidence of his good taste and judgment.
For those wanting a short, clear introduction to the Romans from their founding to Augustus, I can't recommend anything better.
Instead of falling into revisionism, judging the Romans by 21st century values, or meandering out of chronological order to make a philosophical point, the author sticks to Roman history as they themselves wrote it, and manages to always keep the reader focused on the values that the Romans themselves focused on. Dignitas and gloria are two Latin words with no precise English translation, but with overpowering influence on the way Romans behaved and thought of themselves. The author's main thesis is that the inflation of dignitas and gloria and their monopolization by certain mighty individuals in contrast to the common dignitas and gloria of the Republic as a whole is what led to the Republic's collapse into Empire. This thesis is not new nor edgy, but it seems to me the best explanation of an historical event that people never get tired of trying to explain.
That the author chose to give this version of the explanation without unnecessarily interjecting opposing views and caveats seems to me evidence of his good taste and judgment.
For those wanting a short, clear introduction to the Romans from their founding to Augustus, I can't recommend anything better.
April 13, 2020
I'm a PhD student in Roman history and, as a fan of Very short introductions -series, I was curious to see how this topic is covered.
I found this book a very good review of all the most important topics. Gwynn does not make strong personal interpretations but keeps it quite neutral. He puts the right emphasis, in my opinion, to the psychological and cultural aspects of the Roman Republic, such the importance of virtus, dignitas, legends of the origin of the Romans, and the cultural relationship with the Greeks. I recommend this for anyone who wants to brush up their memory or even to study the main concepts and events before moving on to heavier books.
I found this book a very good review of all the most important topics. Gwynn does not make strong personal interpretations but keeps it quite neutral. He puts the right emphasis, in my opinion, to the psychological and cultural aspects of the Roman Republic, such the importance of virtus, dignitas, legends of the origin of the Romans, and the cultural relationship with the Greeks. I recommend this for anyone who wants to brush up their memory or even to study the main concepts and events before moving on to heavier books.
July 9, 2016
This has to be one of the best summaries of the Roman Republic that exists. David M. Gwynn objectively analyzes the Roman Republic's history from its beginning to the rise of Augustus. Chapter 1 begins with the myths of the Ancient Roman past as constructed by the later Roman historians. The importance of the myths is found in the way the Romans perceived themselves through a narrative lens of the past, and the lessons of virtue that are taught through those narratives. Chapter 2 talks about the initial growth of the Republic, and the setup of the Republican system of government. Chapter 3 discusses the lives of Roman men and women, and the things they valued most in their milieu. Chapters 4 and 5 discuss the epic battles against Hannibal and Carthage, and the Roman takeover of the Greek Mediterranean. In chapter 6 begins the tale of how the Republic's own political system and values sewed the seeds for its inexorable dissolution. Chapter 7 talks about the literature the Roman world produced, especially that of Cicero's, as well as the unique Roman architecture, paintings, and sculptures. Chapter 8 summarizes the closing of the Republic into Empire, from the rise of Sulla the dictator to the defeat of Antonius by Augustus in Egypt. The final chapter is about the influence of the Roman Republic from St. Augustine, all the way to the Founding Fathers of America and into our own contemporary time. What is notable about the chapter is Gwynn's emphasis that the Republic's history is always interpreted in different ways by different eras and peoples for their own needs.
Overall, this concise summary excited me enough to continue and further my studies by rereading the primary sources of the Roman Republic (Livy, Polybius, Plutarch, Cicero, Caesar). And what I liked the most about the book was the author's emphasis on gloria and dignitas as social and psychological factors, two major reasons among many, for the ambition and drive of the senatorial elite and eventual collapse of the Republic. Definitely a solid 5/5 VSI!
Overall, this concise summary excited me enough to continue and further my studies by rereading the primary sources of the Roman Republic (Livy, Polybius, Plutarch, Cicero, Caesar). And what I liked the most about the book was the author's emphasis on gloria and dignitas as social and psychological factors, two major reasons among many, for the ambition and drive of the senatorial elite and eventual collapse of the Republic. Definitely a solid 5/5 VSI!
November 1, 2024
A well-written and organized survey of the Roman Republic. Gwynn avoids getting bogged down and does a good job of balancing describing the Republic with analyzing the Republic. He also balances using the big primary sources: Livy, Polybius, Plutarch, and Cicero with many of the great academic historians of the Roman Republic.
March 5, 2015
Ok thanks now I know.
June 7, 2024
an easy sweep; from Romulus and Remus and later the soiling of Lucretia to the rise (and fall) of Octavian and his julio claudian successors, with explanations of everything in-between. An accessible and commendable introduction to anyone wishing to learn, top up, or to crystallise their knowledge of this fine civilisation.
January 18, 2017
Excellent! It's short, moves right along, conveys a lot of information, yet is guided by an over-arching explanatory principle.
November 27, 2025
This was fantastically comprehensive and organized really well. I got a lot out of this book.
November 30, 2022
The Roman Republic: A Very Short Introduction
From its startling beginning in 510 BC to its inevitable end in 27 BC, delineating the characteristics that formed the Roman Republic is a monumental task. Republican Rome lasted for near five centuries, and within this timeline it contains some of the most defining and influential philosophical characters and warrior-heroes of the Roman era, including Scipio Africanus, Sulla, Pompeius, Julius Caesar, Octavian Augustus, Cato the Elder & Younger, Cicero, Brutus, and far much more. These people, forever bonded into legend and history, successively proved to be the inspiration for the growing ambitions of later consuls and emperors wanting to better their predecessors: those men who wanted more dignitas and gloria, manifested in what was understood as the pinnacle of a man’s political and military career – the Triumph.
In order to understand why Rome became a Republic, the author briefly introduces the reader to the myths and stories surrounding the founding of the Roman Monarchy. It begins with Virgil’s story The Aeneid, known today as the “Trojan War” from which archaeological data surmise the related battle this tradition is formed from resides in Asia Minor c.1200 BC, where the Romans understood a prince called Aeneas escaped the battle sailing to ancient Carthage and then to central-Italy, founding Alba Longa. After a time, Romulus and Remus are born from Rhea, the Vestal Virgin of the goddess Vesta, and Mars the god of war, are abandoned on the seven hills by the river Tiber near the settlement and left suckling a she-wolf. Eventually, Romulus kills his brother after a dispute on land-entitlement, to which he then founds the city-state Rome, naming it after himself: and here lies the beginning of the Roman Monarchy with the subsequent kings; Numa, Hostilius, Marcius, Tarquinius, Servius, and Superbus, having mixed success until a certain Brutus – ancestor of the very Brutus in Julius Caesar’s time – led the revolt against the last king. As a result, Brutus and Collatinus simultaneously took up the power of consul in a newly established Republic as a deliberate means to stop any one man consolidating power for themselves.
Overall, this small book was a delightful read, and helped ingrain some of the details that had hitherto been forgotten: its easygoing narration and abridged version of events certainly will attract any reader wishing to begin their journey on Roman history – or indeed act as a refresher-course to solidify the information. The Republic’s story is one of intense intrigue and drama, constant war, and of cultivating failures alongside the successes; from Caesar’s crossing the Rubicon, to Hannibal’s crossing the alps into Rome, to Sulla’s victory in Zama, the Social War, and the political strife between conservatism versus ambitious men, and patricians versus plebians: the roles of consuls, praetors, quaestors, aediles, tribunes of the plebs, and more. The Roman Republic has a lot to offer, and may even provide some insight into modern Europe’s governing machinations and mechanisms.
From its startling beginning in 510 BC to its inevitable end in 27 BC, delineating the characteristics that formed the Roman Republic is a monumental task. Republican Rome lasted for near five centuries, and within this timeline it contains some of the most defining and influential philosophical characters and warrior-heroes of the Roman era, including Scipio Africanus, Sulla, Pompeius, Julius Caesar, Octavian Augustus, Cato the Elder & Younger, Cicero, Brutus, and far much more. These people, forever bonded into legend and history, successively proved to be the inspiration for the growing ambitions of later consuls and emperors wanting to better their predecessors: those men who wanted more dignitas and gloria, manifested in what was understood as the pinnacle of a man’s political and military career – the Triumph.
In order to understand why Rome became a Republic, the author briefly introduces the reader to the myths and stories surrounding the founding of the Roman Monarchy. It begins with Virgil’s story The Aeneid, known today as the “Trojan War” from which archaeological data surmise the related battle this tradition is formed from resides in Asia Minor c.1200 BC, where the Romans understood a prince called Aeneas escaped the battle sailing to ancient Carthage and then to central-Italy, founding Alba Longa. After a time, Romulus and Remus are born from Rhea, the Vestal Virgin of the goddess Vesta, and Mars the god of war, are abandoned on the seven hills by the river Tiber near the settlement and left suckling a she-wolf. Eventually, Romulus kills his brother after a dispute on land-entitlement, to which he then founds the city-state Rome, naming it after himself: and here lies the beginning of the Roman Monarchy with the subsequent kings; Numa, Hostilius, Marcius, Tarquinius, Servius, and Superbus, having mixed success until a certain Brutus – ancestor of the very Brutus in Julius Caesar’s time – led the revolt against the last king. As a result, Brutus and Collatinus simultaneously took up the power of consul in a newly established Republic as a deliberate means to stop any one man consolidating power for themselves.
Overall, this small book was a delightful read, and helped ingrain some of the details that had hitherto been forgotten: its easygoing narration and abridged version of events certainly will attract any reader wishing to begin their journey on Roman history – or indeed act as a refresher-course to solidify the information. The Republic’s story is one of intense intrigue and drama, constant war, and of cultivating failures alongside the successes; from Caesar’s crossing the Rubicon, to Hannibal’s crossing the alps into Rome, to Sulla’s victory in Zama, the Social War, and the political strife between conservatism versus ambitious men, and patricians versus plebians: the roles of consuls, praetors, quaestors, aediles, tribunes of the plebs, and more. The Roman Republic has a lot to offer, and may even provide some insight into modern Europe’s governing machinations and mechanisms.
December 21, 2025
An excellent brief summary of the Roman Republic, including its formation, culture, wars, and downfall. Reading this made me realize how little of the actual details of Republican life and history I was familiar with, even if I knew names like Scipio, Pompeius, and Caesar. Highly recommended for anyone looking for a crash course in pre-Imperial Roman history.
January 1, 2026
This book lives up to its name. It is indeed a Very Short Introduction. If you are mildly interested in the Roman Republic, but want something quick and easy this is where you start.
October 11, 2023
Equally competent and unremarkable. Tells a familiar story of a quest for military glory leading to rise and fall.
September 7, 2014
It is what it says it is - a very short introduction to the Roman Republic. It gives the info you need to understand the history of the Republic and does it in comprehensive and comprehensible way. But is it written in a way that makes you want to read from chapter to chapter? No. More like a history textbook than an interesting read.
January 7, 2021
An excellent introduction for those unfamiliar with the history of the Roman Republic and a good review for those who are. Give the circumstances of early January 2021, maybe more people should get familiar.
March 20, 2019
Required reading for my OU course but actually worth praising the format and style of this book. It was genuinely a pleasure to learn from and I might investigate further books in this series.
July 19, 2022
Good review of the Roman Republic. It's very dense, with each paragraph chock full of facts and details.
January 28, 2022
I’m becoming obsessed with this Very Short Introduction series. It’s not that these books are all good. It’s that I love to see how scholars attempt to sum everything on broad subjects in so few pages. This author seemed to do a pretty good of summarizing. The book does indeed seem like a reasonable facsimile of a beginning course on the Republic, sans any primary source reading assignments. It’s also nice to see a book that leaves off with Julius Caesar Caesar Augustus , with just a brief reminder of the way the Republic lived on in the European and American imagination. That editorial decision seems to contextual the relative uniqueness of the Republican experiment it’s government. Somehow, my Carthaginian /Tunisian wife enjoyed this book less than I did.
July 24, 2020
A surprisingly helpful book given its brevity. Gwynn traces the history of the Roman Republic from its beginnings to the decline and fall of the Republic in the 1st century B.C. The book includes helpful discussions of the social, political, and religious ideas that permeated the Republic, discusses some of the major military conflicts (such as the Punic Wars, as well as the major internal conflicts), and the major players. The book ends with a chapter on the enduring legacy of the Roman Republic by tracing its ideas in Western thought and literature.
Gwynn accomplishes much for a book this brief. Highly recommended.
Gwynn accomplishes much for a book this brief. Highly recommended.
July 31, 2022
comprehensive but had awkward conclusions, the author is favor of attributing the fall of Roman Republic to its expansionist policies. sometimes when he is lazy he just repeats the facts, the gloria argument (a moral argument he tries to picture as ancient but still endorses it himself from time to time), and appeals to popular interpretations. for example, the land of Carthage was not salted, at most a symbolic gesture. His last chapter on the influence of Rome on later historical periods is embarrassing (esp the french part). it is good if you want a quick rundown of the important episodes of Roman Republic.
May 31, 2019
A fun little book, though perhaps more of a review than an introduction for those who know anything of the period.
Either way, it covered most topics well without getting too bogged down in any particular area, making it an easy read on a familiar topic.
However, if you really want to know more about the last century of the Republic of Rome you're still better reading the excellent Masters of Rome series by Colleen McCollough - though that is a lot more than 100 pages!
Either way, my appetite has been whetted by this first foray into the Oxford Short Introductions series, so I'll definitely look out for more.
Either way, it covered most topics well without getting too bogged down in any particular area, making it an easy read on a familiar topic.
However, if you really want to know more about the last century of the Republic of Rome you're still better reading the excellent Masters of Rome series by Colleen McCollough - though that is a lot more than 100 pages!
Either way, my appetite has been whetted by this first foray into the Oxford Short Introductions series, so I'll definitely look out for more.
January 26, 2025
A fantastic little overview, refresher, or first foray into the Roman republic. A sample platter that isn’t terribly biased by being narrative based in order to provoke further study. I loved how Gwynn posits the narrative through the lens of Dignitas and Gloria to explain why Romans, at times, felt compelled to pillage and conquer their way through foreign lands arbitrarily. Dignitas being “dignity” or status while Gloria or “glory” is the means by which you attain status through military conquest. I highly recommend this for beginners or intermediate students of Rome alike.
April 23, 2018
It was a very good and quite general introduction to the Roman republic. However, I believe it overestimates the importance of republican ideas in the world and how much “virtue” is to be found in them.
May 3, 2020
A nice short read with a surprisingly through overview of topics (meaning it covers more than only contemporary politics and war but also roman naming conventions and the legacy or Republican Rome on the Renaissance and the modern world).
May 3, 2023
A really terrific overview. He keeps the thread running through the entire narrative without getting bogged by details or leaving any vital parts out. A short overview is hard to do well, but Gwynn nails it.
March 31, 2023
Really enjoyed this brief book about the history of the Roman Republic, what lead to foundation of the republic what brought it down and how it shaped western democracy today.
July 17, 2022
3.6*s
Very well done. I don't think I've read a better very short introduction than this. Wonderfully engaging and fluid!
Very well done. I don't think I've read a better very short introduction than this. Wonderfully engaging and fluid!
July 17, 2025
Just a timeline of events. No analysis of the features of the Republic.
Notes
Censors are ex-consuls, most notoriously Cato the Elder who condemned one senator for embracing his wife in daylight in the presence of their daughter.
Offices together form the cursus honorum, sequence of magistracies. Progression - quaestor - aedile or tribune of plebs, praetor, consul, censor, with gap of 2 years between each. A dictator for 6 months in case of emergency. Cincinnatus, quietly farming, called up as dictator, kicks ass, wins his triumph, then resigns after 15 days.
Man’s standing in the Senate is his dignitas, sum of his personal worth and of his family. Inherit dignitas from noble ancestors then increase/decrease it through deeds, by winning gloria, highest form through war.
Triumph starts in Campus Martius, into Rome, down Circus Maximus, up Via Sacra through Forum ending at Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus.
Praenomen gets used only by close friends/family, like Gaius, Marcus. Oldest son same praenomen as father. More important is middle name of the genus - patrician (Julius, Fabius, Cornelius) or plebian (Sempronius, Pompeius, Tullius). Third cognomen began as nickname, Cicero is chickpea, Caesar is thick head of hair. Women’s name is feminine form of genus - Julia, Tullia. Elder/younger daughters by addition of major/minor (prima, secunda).
Girls from leading families are chosen for Vestals at age 6-10, for minimum 30 years, after which they can marry.
Sibyl of Cumae offers 9 books of prophecies to Tarquin Superbus. He refuses the price. She burns 3. He refuses. She burns 3 more. He pays the full price, for just 3 books, held in Temple of Jupiter. It tells Romans to bring Cybele great mother from Asia Minor, a meteorite in a temple made on Palatine Hill (but citizens are forbidden from participating in its orgiastic rituals).
Pax Deorum - peace of the gods, maintain their favor and placate their wrath. To Livy, disasters of century are loss of pietas that once made Rome great. Correct action orthopraxy over correct belief orthodoxy.
Caesar is pontifex maximus from 63 BC to his death, after which it passes to the Emperors.
Phoenicians from Tyre (Lebanon) found Carthage as trading/industry hub on natural harbor of Tunis, with oligarchy leading elite cavalry from Numidia and dominant navy of quinquiremes. Messina calls for Rome/Carthage aid during Mamertine attacks, Carthage first secures it, then Rome kicks them out for long stalemate with Carthage navy defending coastal towns easily. 60 days after their quinquireme runs aground, Rome copies it and builds 120 with crew from Greek allies, adding a corvus (boarding ramp) to established fixed platform for land-battle. Wins battle of Mylae 260BC but attack on Carthage 265BC is disastrous. 30 years of attrition but Rome keeps building to replace losses. After Aegates Islands battle 241, Carthage sues for peace, abandons Sicily, pays heavy indemnity, gets increasingly worse terms by bullying Romans.
2nd Punic War by the vendetta of the Barcas (Thunderers). Hannibals attack on Seguntum gives Rome its casus belli. He abandons his communications and marches across the alps. 20k spanish and african infantry, 6k numidian cavalry. Local Gauls revolt and join him. 2 years of Roman loss - appoint dictator Fabius Cunctator. Catastrophe at Cannae. Hannibal’s propaganda wins over locals in South, having killed 70k romans in 3 years. Archimedes holds off Roman siege of Syracuse, but eventually overwhelmed. Meanwhile Scipio counterattacks in Spain, takes Cartagena and its silver mines. Secures consulship, then invades N.Africa, winning over Numidia, forcing Hannibal to return, and defeating him at Zama 202BC, gets the greatest triumph seen in Rome. Sets the benchmark that Caesar would seek to eclipse.
Carthage’s disarmament induces Numidia to bite off chunks. It retaliates, causing Cato the Elder’s famous carthago delende est - carthage must be destroyed. 149BC Roman invasion destroys the city, sows fields with salt, enslaves everyone. In parallel is destruction of Corinth and Roman dominance over Macedon/Greece.
100 years later, the Republic collapses - stable but flexible, balance between collective and individual rule, but not suited for Empire. Agrarian economy transformed by influx of wealth, slaves, with rich becoming richer and poor hurt by inflation and excess labor availability. Scipio not the last Roman noble with enough popularity to challenge collective authority of Senate. Competitive nobles keep seeking to outdo gloria. Efforts made, like cursus honorum, to limit this. But tensions rise, with slave revolts a constant threat. Gracchi light the fuse.
With bluest of blood, Gracchi choose social reform over military/consulship for their gloria. Land redistribution by confiscating all land held over the limit of 300 acres. Tribune Tiberius’ aggressive campaign falters when he is killed by senatorial mob. Revived by younger brother Gaius who becomes tribune, sets fixed price for grain, keeps Romans happy by the ‘bread and circuses’ (Juvenal), takes senate’s power over criminal courts and gives it to equestrians. Senate gradually chips away at his standing, and when he proposes full Roman citizenship for Italian allies, it is too much for even plebs, massive riot, his 3000 supporters are killed and he commits suicide.
Jugurthine war, victory over invading Cimbri/Teutones gives Marius unprecedented status. He accepts any volunteer for army (not just landed), first uniform professional army equipped by state, Marian Mules, promised land at end of service, so loyal to the generals not senate or state.
By 100BC, Italians are ⅔ of army, but no political rights in Rome. Murder of their champion (for more rights) Drusus sparks Social war, till Rome agrees. Sulla emerges as premier general, gets consulship, marches on Rome when his power is transferred to Marius. Then turns back on Rome politics to fight Mithridates in Asia Minor, returns to see his opponents have sided with Samnite enemies. He marches on Rome again. Revives post of dictator, first since 2nd Punic War, but indefinitely not 6 months. 80 senators and 2600 equites are proscribed, their land given to his soldiers. Pompeii is a Sullan military colony. But also enforces minimum magistracy ages, increases queastors, reorganizes law courts under senatorial control, cripples tribunes of plebs, then resigns all offices and retires.
Crassus and Pompei armies hunt down Spartacus rebels that had humiliated senatorial forces. 6000 are crucified on Appian way from Capua to Rome. They don’t disband the armies, stand together for consulship, march into Senate in open contempt of Republican tradition.
Without controlling influence of Carthage, Rhodes, piracy in mediterranean grows. Pompei gets complete imperium at sea to destroy them, captures Cilicia and other Mithridates cities Pontus Bythnia Syria as Roman provinces. He returns, richest man in Rome, with greatest triumph seen, but at impasse with conservative Cato the Younger.
Caesar chooses to stand for election over his triumph from victory in Spain. Forms First Triumvirate with Pompei Crassus. Genocide in Germania. Crassus army massacred by Parthians at Carrhae 53BC. Pompei Caesar begin to split, meet at battle of Pharsalus in Greece. Defeated Pompei flees to Egypt, murdered by king Ptolemy, who is then killed by sister Cleopatra. Civil war is over. He becomes dictator perpetual, plans Parthian campaign to avenge Crassus. Killed in Ides of march. Antonius, Octavius, Lepidus form the Third Triumvirate to defeat the Liberators. Antonius Octavius split, Augustus emerges.
Federalist Papers written under name Publius for Publicola who founded Republic alongside original Brutus. Adams constitution references Cicero’s Republic with its 3 arms of magistrates, Senate, and popular assemblies - which become president (consuls), Senate, and House of Reps - but with balance of power preventing individual from becoming too powerful.
Notes
Censors are ex-consuls, most notoriously Cato the Elder who condemned one senator for embracing his wife in daylight in the presence of their daughter.
Offices together form the cursus honorum, sequence of magistracies. Progression - quaestor - aedile or tribune of plebs, praetor, consul, censor, with gap of 2 years between each. A dictator for 6 months in case of emergency. Cincinnatus, quietly farming, called up as dictator, kicks ass, wins his triumph, then resigns after 15 days.
Man’s standing in the Senate is his dignitas, sum of his personal worth and of his family. Inherit dignitas from noble ancestors then increase/decrease it through deeds, by winning gloria, highest form through war.
Triumph starts in Campus Martius, into Rome, down Circus Maximus, up Via Sacra through Forum ending at Temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus.
Praenomen gets used only by close friends/family, like Gaius, Marcus. Oldest son same praenomen as father. More important is middle name of the genus - patrician (Julius, Fabius, Cornelius) or plebian (Sempronius, Pompeius, Tullius). Third cognomen began as nickname, Cicero is chickpea, Caesar is thick head of hair. Women’s name is feminine form of genus - Julia, Tullia. Elder/younger daughters by addition of major/minor (prima, secunda).
Girls from leading families are chosen for Vestals at age 6-10, for minimum 30 years, after which they can marry.
Sibyl of Cumae offers 9 books of prophecies to Tarquin Superbus. He refuses the price. She burns 3. He refuses. She burns 3 more. He pays the full price, for just 3 books, held in Temple of Jupiter. It tells Romans to bring Cybele great mother from Asia Minor, a meteorite in a temple made on Palatine Hill (but citizens are forbidden from participating in its orgiastic rituals).
Pax Deorum - peace of the gods, maintain their favor and placate their wrath. To Livy, disasters of century are loss of pietas that once made Rome great. Correct action orthopraxy over correct belief orthodoxy.
Caesar is pontifex maximus from 63 BC to his death, after which it passes to the Emperors.
Phoenicians from Tyre (Lebanon) found Carthage as trading/industry hub on natural harbor of Tunis, with oligarchy leading elite cavalry from Numidia and dominant navy of quinquiremes. Messina calls for Rome/Carthage aid during Mamertine attacks, Carthage first secures it, then Rome kicks them out for long stalemate with Carthage navy defending coastal towns easily. 60 days after their quinquireme runs aground, Rome copies it and builds 120 with crew from Greek allies, adding a corvus (boarding ramp) to established fixed platform for land-battle. Wins battle of Mylae 260BC but attack on Carthage 265BC is disastrous. 30 years of attrition but Rome keeps building to replace losses. After Aegates Islands battle 241, Carthage sues for peace, abandons Sicily, pays heavy indemnity, gets increasingly worse terms by bullying Romans.
2nd Punic War by the vendetta of the Barcas (Thunderers). Hannibals attack on Seguntum gives Rome its casus belli. He abandons his communications and marches across the alps. 20k spanish and african infantry, 6k numidian cavalry. Local Gauls revolt and join him. 2 years of Roman loss - appoint dictator Fabius Cunctator. Catastrophe at Cannae. Hannibal’s propaganda wins over locals in South, having killed 70k romans in 3 years. Archimedes holds off Roman siege of Syracuse, but eventually overwhelmed. Meanwhile Scipio counterattacks in Spain, takes Cartagena and its silver mines. Secures consulship, then invades N.Africa, winning over Numidia, forcing Hannibal to return, and defeating him at Zama 202BC, gets the greatest triumph seen in Rome. Sets the benchmark that Caesar would seek to eclipse.
Carthage’s disarmament induces Numidia to bite off chunks. It retaliates, causing Cato the Elder’s famous carthago delende est - carthage must be destroyed. 149BC Roman invasion destroys the city, sows fields with salt, enslaves everyone. In parallel is destruction of Corinth and Roman dominance over Macedon/Greece.
100 years later, the Republic collapses - stable but flexible, balance between collective and individual rule, but not suited for Empire. Agrarian economy transformed by influx of wealth, slaves, with rich becoming richer and poor hurt by inflation and excess labor availability. Scipio not the last Roman noble with enough popularity to challenge collective authority of Senate. Competitive nobles keep seeking to outdo gloria. Efforts made, like cursus honorum, to limit this. But tensions rise, with slave revolts a constant threat. Gracchi light the fuse.
With bluest of blood, Gracchi choose social reform over military/consulship for their gloria. Land redistribution by confiscating all land held over the limit of 300 acres. Tribune Tiberius’ aggressive campaign falters when he is killed by senatorial mob. Revived by younger brother Gaius who becomes tribune, sets fixed price for grain, keeps Romans happy by the ‘bread and circuses’ (Juvenal), takes senate’s power over criminal courts and gives it to equestrians. Senate gradually chips away at his standing, and when he proposes full Roman citizenship for Italian allies, it is too much for even plebs, massive riot, his 3000 supporters are killed and he commits suicide.
Jugurthine war, victory over invading Cimbri/Teutones gives Marius unprecedented status. He accepts any volunteer for army (not just landed), first uniform professional army equipped by state, Marian Mules, promised land at end of service, so loyal to the generals not senate or state.
By 100BC, Italians are ⅔ of army, but no political rights in Rome. Murder of their champion (for more rights) Drusus sparks Social war, till Rome agrees. Sulla emerges as premier general, gets consulship, marches on Rome when his power is transferred to Marius. Then turns back on Rome politics to fight Mithridates in Asia Minor, returns to see his opponents have sided with Samnite enemies. He marches on Rome again. Revives post of dictator, first since 2nd Punic War, but indefinitely not 6 months. 80 senators and 2600 equites are proscribed, their land given to his soldiers. Pompeii is a Sullan military colony. But also enforces minimum magistracy ages, increases queastors, reorganizes law courts under senatorial control, cripples tribunes of plebs, then resigns all offices and retires.
Crassus and Pompei armies hunt down Spartacus rebels that had humiliated senatorial forces. 6000 are crucified on Appian way from Capua to Rome. They don’t disband the armies, stand together for consulship, march into Senate in open contempt of Republican tradition.
Without controlling influence of Carthage, Rhodes, piracy in mediterranean grows. Pompei gets complete imperium at sea to destroy them, captures Cilicia and other Mithridates cities Pontus Bythnia Syria as Roman provinces. He returns, richest man in Rome, with greatest triumph seen, but at impasse with conservative Cato the Younger.
Caesar chooses to stand for election over his triumph from victory in Spain. Forms First Triumvirate with Pompei Crassus. Genocide in Germania. Crassus army massacred by Parthians at Carrhae 53BC. Pompei Caesar begin to split, meet at battle of Pharsalus in Greece. Defeated Pompei flees to Egypt, murdered by king Ptolemy, who is then killed by sister Cleopatra. Civil war is over. He becomes dictator perpetual, plans Parthian campaign to avenge Crassus. Killed in Ides of march. Antonius, Octavius, Lepidus form the Third Triumvirate to defeat the Liberators. Antonius Octavius split, Augustus emerges.
Federalist Papers written under name Publius for Publicola who founded Republic alongside original Brutus. Adams constitution references Cicero’s Republic with its 3 arms of magistrates, Senate, and popular assemblies - which become president (consuls), Senate, and House of Reps - but with balance of power preventing individual from becoming too powerful.
April 24, 2013
Ancient Rome is one of the most famous and most reflected upon topics in all of history. In many respects modern historiography is to a large extent been influenced by the study of the classical period, and Rome in particular. Furthermore, Rome has influenced many artistic works; from Shakespeare’s plays to the HBO miniseries to name just a couple that immediately spring to mind. There is no shortage of books and other resources on this topic. Even so, David Gwynn’s very short introduction to the Roman Republic stands out. It is a very lucid, cogent, and interesting book that can serve as a great source of information on this topic for the modern readers. In particular, it focuses on the Republic, the part of Roman history that has been understood, both by the Romans themselves and the modern historians and interpreters, as the most noble and politically advanced period in the life of Rome.
This book, as the name suggests, covers the republican era of the Roman history: from the end of the Roman kingdom until the beginning of the Roman Empire. It is a period during which Rome has risen from a small state in the Apennine peninsula to the status of the World power that dominated the Mediterranean and much of the continental Europe as well. The book provides some very interesting new insights that I have not come across before. For me the most intriguing insights are the ones that make explicit the degree to which concepts of “dignitas” and “gloria” pervaded the thinking and decision-making of the Roman politicians and other leaders. The latter one in particular, according to Gwynn, was one of the major driving forces behind the Rome’s militarized and expansionistic policies, and it had in the end lead to the fall of the Republic.
This is a very enjoyable and interesting book, and one that every true history buff would be well advised to consider. It is one of my favorite titles in the “Very Short Introduction” series. I highly recommend it.
This book, as the name suggests, covers the republican era of the Roman history: from the end of the Roman kingdom until the beginning of the Roman Empire. It is a period during which Rome has risen from a small state in the Apennine peninsula to the status of the World power that dominated the Mediterranean and much of the continental Europe as well. The book provides some very interesting new insights that I have not come across before. For me the most intriguing insights are the ones that make explicit the degree to which concepts of “dignitas” and “gloria” pervaded the thinking and decision-making of the Roman politicians and other leaders. The latter one in particular, according to Gwynn, was one of the major driving forces behind the Rome’s militarized and expansionistic policies, and it had in the end lead to the fall of the Republic.
This is a very enjoyable and interesting book, and one that every true history buff would be well advised to consider. It is one of my favorite titles in the “Very Short Introduction” series. I highly recommend it.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 108 reviews