What do you think?
Rate this book
Ancient Worlds: An Epic History of East and West
'This vivid and engaging book brings to life some of the most important moments in ancient history, moments that have shaped not only the politics and culture of bygone eras, but the institutions, thoughts and fantasies of our time.' Yuval Noah Harari (Sapiens)'A bold and imaginative page-turner that challenges ideas about the world of antiquity.' Peter Frankopan (The Silk Roads)'As panoramic as it is learned, this is ancient history for our globalised world.' Tom Holland (Dynasty, Rubicon)________________________________________Acclaimed historian and TV presenter Michael Scott guides us through an epic story spanning ten centuries to create a bold new reading of the classical era for our globalised world.Scott challenges our traditionally western-focused perception of the past, connecting Greco-Roman civilisation to the great rulers and empires that swept across Central Asia to India and China - resulting in a truly global vision of ancient history.With stunning range and richness Ancient Worlds illustrates how the great powers and characters of antiquity shared ambitions and crises, ways of thinking and forms of connections that only grew stronger over the centuries as political systems evolved, mighty armies clashed, universal religions were born and our modern world was foreshadowed.Scott focuses on three epochal 'moments' across the ancient globe, and their profound wider from 509-8 BCE (birth of Athenian democracy and Rome's republic, also the age of Confucius's teachings in China); to 218 BCE (when Hannibal of Carthage challenged Rome and China saw its first emperor); to 312 CE, when Constantine sought to impose Christianity on the Roman world even as Buddhism was pervading China via the vast trading routes we now know as the 'Silk Roads.'A major work of global history, Michael Scott's enthralling journey challenges the way we think about our past, re-draws the map of the classical age to reveal its hidden connections, and shows us how ancient history has lessons for our own times.
402 pages, Kindle Edition
First published June 30, 2016
176 people are currently reading
1689 people want to read
About the author
Michael Scott
12 books69 followersMichael Scott SFHEA (born 1981) is a British classical scholar, ancient historian, and presenter. He is professor of classics and ancient history at the University of Warwick.
In 2015 he was a foundation fellow of the Warwick International Higher Education Academy; he was appointed a senior fellow of the Higher Education Academy in 2016. He was a National Teaching Fellow in 2017, and in 2017–2018 was a Leverhulme Research Fellow.
In 2020 he became the co-director of the Warwick Institute of Engagement.
He is president of the Lytham Saint Annes branch of the Classical Association.
He was awarded the Classical Association Prize in 2021, this is awarded to the individual who has done the most to raise the profile of Classics in the public eye.
He was named as the International Lego Classicist of the Year in 2022.
He was appointed as Pro-Vice-Chancellor (International) at the University of Warwick in 2023.
Source: wikipedia
In 2015 he was a foundation fellow of the Warwick International Higher Education Academy; he was appointed a senior fellow of the Higher Education Academy in 2016. He was a National Teaching Fellow in 2017, and in 2017–2018 was a Leverhulme Research Fellow.
In 2020 he became the co-director of the Warwick Institute of Engagement.
He is president of the Lytham Saint Annes branch of the Classical Association.
He was awarded the Classical Association Prize in 2021, this is awarded to the individual who has done the most to raise the profile of Classics in the public eye.
He was named as the International Lego Classicist of the Year in 2022.
He was appointed as Pro-Vice-Chancellor (International) at the University of Warwick in 2023.
Source: wikipedia
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 75 reviews
April 9, 2017
The premise of this book was too good to pass up, as a love of history , it is with a certain sad resignation that we have to accept that our view of history tends to be much centered in Western Europe and Greece , but we forget to connect those worlds with what was going on at the same time in India and China. The author of this book tries to do just that , connect both worlds and link them together , in some aspects he succeeded, but in others he did not , he doesn't know how to smoothly transition from on point into another without creating an awkward space between both narratives ( for example when he talks about Christianity in Rome , then goes straight into Buddhism In china , then Zoroastrianism in Armenia without much blending . A for effort but B for execution. If you love classical history and want to expand your knowledge a bit more , this book is for you.
May 25, 2019
In an excellent (if immodest) introduction the author sets out his aims – to retell ancient history on a transversal basis, picking three different periods in history and contrasting and comparing thematically similar developments which occurred, almost simultaneously, across different cultures.
The first period he looks at is the 6th Century BC and he examines societal/political developments which occurred at the time – ones which still resonate to the present day: the foundations of Athenian democracy, the establishment of the Roman republic (as well as the ways in which these two societies viewed each other) and, slightly more tangentially, Confucius’s development of his own political philosophy (one largely spurned in his own lifetime).
The second is more focused on war – and looks at a period in the 3rd and 2nd Centuries BC when a number of young military leaders (including Hannibal, Scipio Africanus, Philip V of Macedon, The Seleucid King Antiochus The Great, Qin – Emperor of China – and in many cases their successors) were fighting for domination in their own empire, with border states (such as Bactria) and, in some cases, with each other – a time when the interconnectedness of the world started becoming more apparent particularly due to chain reactions caused by migratory tribes.
The third looks at the fourth Century AD and is focused on religion – in particular the development of Christianity as an official religion in Rome, starting with Constantine (and its earlier development in Armenia which forms a lengthy part of this section), the reorientation of Hindu Worship under the Gupta dynasty and the slower import and eventual establishment of Buddhism in China. This last section is perhaps best described as a political-economic view of religion rather than a social one – Scott is only really focused on why political leaders and rulers found it expedient to effectively subsume religion under official control, mainly as a way of adding a layer of cohesion to their disparate empires.
The real strength of the book lies in its structure. as well as an overall introduction and conclusion, each of the three parts starts with a timelines, followed by its own introduction, then three chapters (each going across different regions and having a clear opening and summary), finishing with a coda summarising the preceding section and leading into the next section. Hence at all times the reader feels orientated and even when failing to take in all of the detail, completely appreciates the author’s intentions and thesis.
The front page of my version of the book has a recommendation from Peter Frankopan author of “The Silk Roads”. The books effectively come from a similar angle - a very deliberately less Eurocentric view of world history, and an emphasis on the interconnectedness of the world over that history. In my 2016 review of “The Silk Roads” I described it as a “hugely ambitious”. Interestingly Scott, the author of this book implicitly (or even explicitly) makes a similar claim for his own book and treatment as being groundbreaking – and my main criticism of this book is that it does not quite live up to its own hype. Further while I often criticise non-fiction books for being too detailed and long I felt if anything the opposite here, the way in which the book scans across multiple areas and three distinct epochs meant that the coverage was more superficial and I felt that I was only really able to fully appreciate the author’s intentions when it was describing areas where I already had some familiarity. Unfortunately this inevitably meant the very Greco-Roman stories that the book set out to de-emphasise.
Nevertheless on balance this was a very worthwhile book and one I can recommend.
The first period he looks at is the 6th Century BC and he examines societal/political developments which occurred at the time – ones which still resonate to the present day: the foundations of Athenian democracy, the establishment of the Roman republic (as well as the ways in which these two societies viewed each other) and, slightly more tangentially, Confucius’s development of his own political philosophy (one largely spurned in his own lifetime).
The second is more focused on war – and looks at a period in the 3rd and 2nd Centuries BC when a number of young military leaders (including Hannibal, Scipio Africanus, Philip V of Macedon, The Seleucid King Antiochus The Great, Qin – Emperor of China – and in many cases their successors) were fighting for domination in their own empire, with border states (such as Bactria) and, in some cases, with each other – a time when the interconnectedness of the world started becoming more apparent particularly due to chain reactions caused by migratory tribes.
The third looks at the fourth Century AD and is focused on religion – in particular the development of Christianity as an official religion in Rome, starting with Constantine (and its earlier development in Armenia which forms a lengthy part of this section), the reorientation of Hindu Worship under the Gupta dynasty and the slower import and eventual establishment of Buddhism in China. This last section is perhaps best described as a political-economic view of religion rather than a social one – Scott is only really focused on why political leaders and rulers found it expedient to effectively subsume religion under official control, mainly as a way of adding a layer of cohesion to their disparate empires.
The real strength of the book lies in its structure. as well as an overall introduction and conclusion, each of the three parts starts with a timelines, followed by its own introduction, then three chapters (each going across different regions and having a clear opening and summary), finishing with a coda summarising the preceding section and leading into the next section. Hence at all times the reader feels orientated and even when failing to take in all of the detail, completely appreciates the author’s intentions and thesis.
The front page of my version of the book has a recommendation from Peter Frankopan author of “The Silk Roads”. The books effectively come from a similar angle - a very deliberately less Eurocentric view of world history, and an emphasis on the interconnectedness of the world over that history. In my 2016 review of “The Silk Roads” I described it as a “hugely ambitious”. Interestingly Scott, the author of this book implicitly (or even explicitly) makes a similar claim for his own book and treatment as being groundbreaking – and my main criticism of this book is that it does not quite live up to its own hype. Further while I often criticise non-fiction books for being too detailed and long I felt if anything the opposite here, the way in which the book scans across multiple areas and three distinct epochs meant that the coverage was more superficial and I felt that I was only really able to fully appreciate the author’s intentions when it was describing areas where I already had some familiarity. Unfortunately this inevitably meant the very Greco-Roman stories that the book set out to de-emphasise.
Nevertheless on balance this was a very worthwhile book and one I can recommend.
January 14, 2019
Neither broad historical overview nor focused biography, Michael Scott’s book is something quite unusual. Rather than adopting either of the above common approaches in history non-fiction works, he instead looks at a series of flashpoints within a defined range of dates, and drawing a geographical line from the Mediterranean to China, allowing him to highlight the remarkable interconnectedness of the ancient world, as well as having the space to delve into each topic with a fair degree of depth and detail. The result is an intense read that illuminates specific running strands throughout the history of the chosen time period. An intriguing read.
8 out of 10
May 1, 2018
Modern man can travel a distance roughly 400 times more than that travelled by a person in the ancient world. This nullification of distance in terms of modes of travel and the ease of communication were brought about by great progress in science and technology witnessed in the last 300 years. The world is now tightly interconnected. Cataclysmic weather events that are supposedly plausible in one part of the globe by the mere flutter of a butterfly in another part of the world is of course a gross exaggeration, but it can’t be denied that man-made events in one region can affect the outcome in another. Used as we are to the instant nature of real-time communication, it might be hard for us to think about an era in which there were no long-distance telephony, mobile phones or the Internet. Yet, even in these primitive circumstances, human spirit and endeavour crossed deserts, scaled mountains and forded rivers to establish trade and cultural contacts with his fellow beings in other societies. The ouster of a rebel, or the invasion by a nomad tribe, or the civil war in a kingdom often gave rise to a chain reaction by migration, war or missionary work so as to alter the course of history in another kingdom. There are many books available which deals with the connected nature of the modern world, but very few that focuses on inter-civilization interactions in the ancient. This book is an excellent one on that thesis, covering the history of the world from early-sixth century BCE to late-fourth century CE. It examines three new developments that came about – birth of democracy, consolidation of empires and development of universal religions. Michael Scott is a quite young professor of classics and ancient history at the University of Warwick and has authored many books on the classical period. He is best known to the public as the presenter of ancient history programs on the BBC.
The first part of the book focuses on man’s relationship to man, as negotiated through politics. Development of democracy in Athens was such a groundbreaking event that the Athenian principles continue to be employed as a mark of enlightened rule in the modern world. Cleisthenes set the basic principles in 508 BCE against tyrannical monarchs in Athens. What he christened the new system was eunomia (good order) against dysnomia (bad order) of the old ways. Though it was also called isonomia (equal order), the name demokratia stuck after the Persian invasions in 480s BCE. Scott takes great care to differentiate between the Greek system and Rome’s republic established in 509 BCE by the expulsion of King Turquinius Superbus. The new system of voting came to be known as res publica romana (the public thing of the Roman people). It was an absolute democracy in Athens where the people were organized as individuals and arbitrary tribes. Romans gravitated towards other interest groups such as patricians, plebeians, aristocrats in an unelected Senate and military leaders. The Roman republic provided for emergency powers to be concentrated in one person designated as a dictator. When the city’s survival was in jeopardy, this single head was deemed to be essential to pursue particular ends, after which he would step down. This difference made the Roman system beset with sectarian interests, but made possible an elaborate circle of mutual checks and balances that kept all levels of society believe that they had more to gain from the system than from wreaking it. It is an eye-opener to the modern world that the more autocratic Roman system had a greater lifespan than the total democracy of Athens.
Scott then moves on to examine the relationships forged between ancient communities through warfare. This was also the age in which mega states emerged across the known world in the form of Rome and the Han Empire in China. The book presents an absorbing story of the fight between Rome and Carthage for supremacy in the Mediterranean. The actions and consultations between Hannibal and the Roman general Scipio Africanus is absorbing. Interesting episodes from Polybius and Livy are given here. However, the author’s coverage of India and China looks more like an attempt to ensure a token representation to these two in a work of this nature than a genuine effort to identify the common thread that links these two cultures with their Roman, Greek and Seleucid counterparts. The accuracy of facts related to India is especially doubtful. Ashoka is said to be so transformed by his conversion to Buddhism that he is said to have donated away all his wealth which spelt doom for his empire. Recent research on that great Indian king portrays him as a much more pragmatic monarch than the naïve king Scott makes him out to be. Ashoka didn’t shun violence altogether, as can be expected from a king of those times. He didn’t turn vegetarian overnight, but merely reduced the number of birds and beasts killed for food in the royal kitchen. The narrative on Han dynasty is likewise sketchy and is just an outline. However the author neatly summarizes the geo-political upset at the western borders of the Han which propelled the Xiongnu tribe further west. This made a domino effect. The Xiongnu uprooted the Yueshi who in turn drove the Sakas before them. This exodus helped open trade routes between the East and West that later came to be called the Silk Road. The first event ever to be recorded in the histories of both East and the West is the invasion and occupation of Bactria around 140 CE by the nomadic Yueshi tribe. Strabo and Justin recorded this incident in Roman chronicles and Sima Qian in China wrote about this upon hearing about it from the Han ambassador Zhang Qian deputed to Bactria.
Development of major religions as a response to the political climate in fourth century CE constitutes the third issue the book analyses. This was a crucial period for the religions – Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism – in their theological development, growth, acceptance and integration within human societies. Development of faiths, while somewhat destabilizing for society, offered an opportunity to harness that religious belief towards the security and expansion of imperial power. Constantine is the most notable sovereign of this era. Whereas the Romans persecuted Christians generally, Constantine’s strife-torn rise to power and his need for controlling a vast empire constituting much diversity in geography and society, compelled him to assume a gentler approach to it. Pagan worship supported the idea of multiple rulers like multiple gods, while Christianity provided strong support for Constantine’s vision of a single unified community under a single ruler, like its single god. Even though he is often counted as the thirteenth apostle, Constantine adopted a very pragmatic policy towards different faiths. The agreement he signed with Licinius, the ruler of the eastern empire, in 313 CE permitted toleration of all religions. He continued worship of the Sun-god and banned all business on Sundays so that the day could be dedicated to Sun-worship. It may also be recalled that he accepted baptism only in his deathbed. Meanwhile Hinduism re-emerged from its Vedic past in the Gupta period and Buddhism thrived in China in the interregnum after the fall of Han dynasty. Thus ends the third part that studies the relationship of man and gods as played out through adoption, adaption and innovation in religious belief.
The book is very informative as it stresses on the theme of connectedness of the ancient world through the lens of three crucial moments and three themes. Karl Jespers coined the term Axial Age which runs from the eighth to third centuries BCE in which a profound change in thought came amount in all the major regions of high culture in the world. Though there was no communication between them, civilizations in the Axial Age developed ideas and institutions that continue to be widely prevalent. Scott develops on this idea and extrapolates his argument till the fourth century CE. The chance-like nature of human civilizations seen through the narrative is unmistakable. The author warns that the inevitable survival of any aspect of our society should not be taken for granted, but instead we must fight actively for what we wish to remain part of our world. Greece, Rome, India and China are the major centres of culture visited in the book, but Armenia also find a conspicuous place by elaboration of the growth of Christianity there. While India is included, its peculiar innovation of republics of North India in the pre-Mauryan period doesn’t find mention. The book is the most readable when it describes events in Rome.
The book is highly recommended.
The first part of the book focuses on man’s relationship to man, as negotiated through politics. Development of democracy in Athens was such a groundbreaking event that the Athenian principles continue to be employed as a mark of enlightened rule in the modern world. Cleisthenes set the basic principles in 508 BCE against tyrannical monarchs in Athens. What he christened the new system was eunomia (good order) against dysnomia (bad order) of the old ways. Though it was also called isonomia (equal order), the name demokratia stuck after the Persian invasions in 480s BCE. Scott takes great care to differentiate between the Greek system and Rome’s republic established in 509 BCE by the expulsion of King Turquinius Superbus. The new system of voting came to be known as res publica romana (the public thing of the Roman people). It was an absolute democracy in Athens where the people were organized as individuals and arbitrary tribes. Romans gravitated towards other interest groups such as patricians, plebeians, aristocrats in an unelected Senate and military leaders. The Roman republic provided for emergency powers to be concentrated in one person designated as a dictator. When the city’s survival was in jeopardy, this single head was deemed to be essential to pursue particular ends, after which he would step down. This difference made the Roman system beset with sectarian interests, but made possible an elaborate circle of mutual checks and balances that kept all levels of society believe that they had more to gain from the system than from wreaking it. It is an eye-opener to the modern world that the more autocratic Roman system had a greater lifespan than the total democracy of Athens.
Scott then moves on to examine the relationships forged between ancient communities through warfare. This was also the age in which mega states emerged across the known world in the form of Rome and the Han Empire in China. The book presents an absorbing story of the fight between Rome and Carthage for supremacy in the Mediterranean. The actions and consultations between Hannibal and the Roman general Scipio Africanus is absorbing. Interesting episodes from Polybius and Livy are given here. However, the author’s coverage of India and China looks more like an attempt to ensure a token representation to these two in a work of this nature than a genuine effort to identify the common thread that links these two cultures with their Roman, Greek and Seleucid counterparts. The accuracy of facts related to India is especially doubtful. Ashoka is said to be so transformed by his conversion to Buddhism that he is said to have donated away all his wealth which spelt doom for his empire. Recent research on that great Indian king portrays him as a much more pragmatic monarch than the naïve king Scott makes him out to be. Ashoka didn’t shun violence altogether, as can be expected from a king of those times. He didn’t turn vegetarian overnight, but merely reduced the number of birds and beasts killed for food in the royal kitchen. The narrative on Han dynasty is likewise sketchy and is just an outline. However the author neatly summarizes the geo-political upset at the western borders of the Han which propelled the Xiongnu tribe further west. This made a domino effect. The Xiongnu uprooted the Yueshi who in turn drove the Sakas before them. This exodus helped open trade routes between the East and West that later came to be called the Silk Road. The first event ever to be recorded in the histories of both East and the West is the invasion and occupation of Bactria around 140 CE by the nomadic Yueshi tribe. Strabo and Justin recorded this incident in Roman chronicles and Sima Qian in China wrote about this upon hearing about it from the Han ambassador Zhang Qian deputed to Bactria.
Development of major religions as a response to the political climate in fourth century CE constitutes the third issue the book analyses. This was a crucial period for the religions – Christianity, Buddhism and Hinduism – in their theological development, growth, acceptance and integration within human societies. Development of faiths, while somewhat destabilizing for society, offered an opportunity to harness that religious belief towards the security and expansion of imperial power. Constantine is the most notable sovereign of this era. Whereas the Romans persecuted Christians generally, Constantine’s strife-torn rise to power and his need for controlling a vast empire constituting much diversity in geography and society, compelled him to assume a gentler approach to it. Pagan worship supported the idea of multiple rulers like multiple gods, while Christianity provided strong support for Constantine’s vision of a single unified community under a single ruler, like its single god. Even though he is often counted as the thirteenth apostle, Constantine adopted a very pragmatic policy towards different faiths. The agreement he signed with Licinius, the ruler of the eastern empire, in 313 CE permitted toleration of all religions. He continued worship of the Sun-god and banned all business on Sundays so that the day could be dedicated to Sun-worship. It may also be recalled that he accepted baptism only in his deathbed. Meanwhile Hinduism re-emerged from its Vedic past in the Gupta period and Buddhism thrived in China in the interregnum after the fall of Han dynasty. Thus ends the third part that studies the relationship of man and gods as played out through adoption, adaption and innovation in religious belief.
The book is very informative as it stresses on the theme of connectedness of the ancient world through the lens of three crucial moments and three themes. Karl Jespers coined the term Axial Age which runs from the eighth to third centuries BCE in which a profound change in thought came amount in all the major regions of high culture in the world. Though there was no communication between them, civilizations in the Axial Age developed ideas and institutions that continue to be widely prevalent. Scott develops on this idea and extrapolates his argument till the fourth century CE. The chance-like nature of human civilizations seen through the narrative is unmistakable. The author warns that the inevitable survival of any aspect of our society should not be taken for granted, but instead we must fight actively for what we wish to remain part of our world. Greece, Rome, India and China are the major centres of culture visited in the book, but Armenia also find a conspicuous place by elaboration of the growth of Christianity there. While India is included, its peculiar innovation of republics of North India in the pre-Mauryan period doesn’t find mention. The book is the most readable when it describes events in Rome.
The book is highly recommended.
December 13, 2020
DNF
Интригуващата идея за интеркултурен античен прочит на ключови исторически събития, предизвикали ударни вълни както из класически изучаваното Средиземноморие, така и в бъдещата Поднебесна империя и из други по-слабо известни географски ширини, е много слабо и хаотично реализирана.
Твърде много имена на квадратен сантиметър, които в следващото изречение вече са забравени и нямат връзка с новите такива. На всичкото отгоре - точно из онази класически всеобщо изучавана история, която авторът се зарича да избягва. И не, не схванах какви точно връзки се напъва да открие Скот, които да не са поднесени по по-разбираем начин дори из някои форуми.
Интригуващата идея за интеркултурен античен прочит на ключови исторически събития, предизвикали ударни вълни както из класически изучаваното Средиземноморие, така и в бъдещата Поднебесна империя и из други по-слабо известни географски ширини, е много слабо и хаотично реализирана.
Твърде много имена на квадратен сантиметър, които в следващото изречение вече са забравени и нямат връзка с новите такива. На всичкото отгоре - точно из онази класически всеобщо изучавана история, която авторът се зарича да избягва. И не, не схванах какви точно връзки се напъва да открие Скот, които да не са поднесени по по-разбираем начин дори из някои форуми.
April 16, 2017
It's pretty weird to open up to the first chapter of a book subtitled 'A Global History of Antiquity'-- having read an introduction, which lambasts all other historians for failing to write proper, global history, and declares that the book you're about to read is truly revolutionary in its approach--and find that it's about the Birth of Democracy in Athens. Uh... okay, weird place to start. But it also sets the tone almost perfectly: this is a collection of stories told quite often before (founding of Roman Republic, Confucius' life story, Hannibal, the First Emperor, Contantine and Christianity, early Buddhism and Hinduism in India, Buddhism in China), with a few more novel anecdotes thrown in (the pages on Armenia were nice). What holds all this together? The revolutionary method promised in the intro seems to be comparing things from different places, so people in the ancient world(s) all did political stuff, and military stuff, and religious stuff.
Underwhelming, to say the least. This would, on the other hand, be perfect for high school or first year college students, who don't know the stories, or know them only a little. Scott's writing is fine, though, again, underwhelming. And younger readers might also be innocent enough to be excited by the awful contemporary historiographical cliches (here's the opening of one chapter: "One of her hands is placed provocatively on her slender waist, the other caught in a tentative caress of her thigh. Her ample bosom, emphasised by her clinging, flimsy clothers, is turned towards her companion" etc etc... He's describing a coin, but boy was that an exciting way to start a chapter! I'm way more interested in slender waists than I am in the Guptas! Way to trick me, author!)
Skip this, and head straight for the first half of Frankopan's Silk Roads.
Underwhelming, to say the least. This would, on the other hand, be perfect for high school or first year college students, who don't know the stories, or know them only a little. Scott's writing is fine, though, again, underwhelming. And younger readers might also be innocent enough to be excited by the awful contemporary historiographical cliches (here's the opening of one chapter: "One of her hands is placed provocatively on her slender waist, the other caught in a tentative caress of her thigh. Her ample bosom, emphasised by her clinging, flimsy clothers, is turned towards her companion" etc etc... He's describing a coin, but boy was that an exciting way to start a chapter! I'm way more interested in slender waists than I am in the Guptas! Way to trick me, author!)
Skip this, and head straight for the first half of Frankopan's Silk Roads.
December 18, 2021
Un excelente libro, qué aboga por un enfoque global para el estudio de la historia antigua, algo que no es muy común en ese periodo de tiempo, pero que se debe incentivar, puesto que nos muestra un mundo clásico más unido, dejando de lado esas descripciones densas de grandes imperios. Esto último que digo lo menciona Scott tanto en la introducción como en las conclusiones, respecto a esta primera, la mirada de los griegos antiguos sobre india es especular, nos muestra un mundo antiguo unido tanto por el comercio como por las ideas.
En la primer parte, el centro de atención será la democracia, por supuesto se inicia con Atenas donde el relato es claro y es que la democracia, inicio luego del abuso de un tirano, es así que varios políticos atenienses ven la necesidad de cambios con más participación, aunque claro la democracia tiene unos claros intereses, luego de la victoria contra los persas la idea de una democracia resultaba muy importante con el fin de defender los pueblos griegos.
Roma por su parte, al igual que Grecia. Tenía un tirano en el poder, además de tener peligros exteriores, como pueblos "bárbaros" , frente a esto, varios romanos aprenderán de la democracia ateniense, aunque claro, adaptando varias cosas para ellos, haciendo que el gobierno tenga más poder central. En China, tenemos un contexto, de un emperador, un tanto tirano, con varias dinastías en guerra, es así que confusio da las pautas para un buen gobierno, mismo que sera tenido en cuenta muy a futuro dado que habían ya otras formas de gobernar como el legalismo.
En la segunda parte, la guerra será el eje central, nos encontramos a una Nueva generación de nuevos gobernantes jóvenes militantes en Roma, macedonia, Cartago y el imperio seleucida. En primer lugar habrá una gran descripción de la segunda guerra punica, en la que se hace énfasis en la alianza entre Cartago y macedonia, por otra parte, tenemos un imperio seleucida, que vio como Roma estaba débil y aprovecho su oportunidad para expandir su imperio. Las conexiones se ven, por ejemplo, cuando Aníbal se vuelve comandante de un ejército seleucida, preparado para invadir Grecia.
La tercera parte, hará énfasis en la religión, donde la ruta de la seda será muy importante para el relató ya que fue gracias a ella que el budismo llegó a china, sufriendo algunas series de cambios; por su parte, en el imperio romano, Constantino, con el edicto de Milán, se deja de perseguir a los cristianos dando paso a que haya una tolerancia religiosa. En Armenia se usó está religión con el fin de centralizar el imperio y usarla como escusa para quitarle poder a las élites tradicionales.
Aunque el paganismo, sería aún muy fuerte, y sus prácticas se seguían realizando, el cristianismo avanzaba con gran fuerza, por su parte, el budismo, tenía acogida pues era el salvavidas en un china muy fragmentada, su influencia cada vez penetraba más en las esferas políticas. Esta misma incertidumbre, ocurrió en Roma en la que también acogió el cristianismo como religión frente a la dura crisis que había. En síntesis, las religiones se expandian por su carácter misional y por los acontecimientos políticos y económicos que ocurrían.
En conclusión el libro apuesta por una nueva visión de la historia antigua, la cual está empezando a sonar más, pero que igual es necesario estudiarla más, puesto que al leer libro se pueden estudiar otros fenómenos.
En la primer parte, el centro de atención será la democracia, por supuesto se inicia con Atenas donde el relato es claro y es que la democracia, inicio luego del abuso de un tirano, es así que varios políticos atenienses ven la necesidad de cambios con más participación, aunque claro la democracia tiene unos claros intereses, luego de la victoria contra los persas la idea de una democracia resultaba muy importante con el fin de defender los pueblos griegos.
Roma por su parte, al igual que Grecia. Tenía un tirano en el poder, además de tener peligros exteriores, como pueblos "bárbaros" , frente a esto, varios romanos aprenderán de la democracia ateniense, aunque claro, adaptando varias cosas para ellos, haciendo que el gobierno tenga más poder central. En China, tenemos un contexto, de un emperador, un tanto tirano, con varias dinastías en guerra, es así que confusio da las pautas para un buen gobierno, mismo que sera tenido en cuenta muy a futuro dado que habían ya otras formas de gobernar como el legalismo.
En la segunda parte, la guerra será el eje central, nos encontramos a una Nueva generación de nuevos gobernantes jóvenes militantes en Roma, macedonia, Cartago y el imperio seleucida. En primer lugar habrá una gran descripción de la segunda guerra punica, en la que se hace énfasis en la alianza entre Cartago y macedonia, por otra parte, tenemos un imperio seleucida, que vio como Roma estaba débil y aprovecho su oportunidad para expandir su imperio. Las conexiones se ven, por ejemplo, cuando Aníbal se vuelve comandante de un ejército seleucida, preparado para invadir Grecia.
La tercera parte, hará énfasis en la religión, donde la ruta de la seda será muy importante para el relató ya que fue gracias a ella que el budismo llegó a china, sufriendo algunas series de cambios; por su parte, en el imperio romano, Constantino, con el edicto de Milán, se deja de perseguir a los cristianos dando paso a que haya una tolerancia religiosa. En Armenia se usó está religión con el fin de centralizar el imperio y usarla como escusa para quitarle poder a las élites tradicionales.
Aunque el paganismo, sería aún muy fuerte, y sus prácticas se seguían realizando, el cristianismo avanzaba con gran fuerza, por su parte, el budismo, tenía acogida pues era el salvavidas en un china muy fragmentada, su influencia cada vez penetraba más en las esferas políticas. Esta misma incertidumbre, ocurrió en Roma en la que también acogió el cristianismo como religión frente a la dura crisis que había. En síntesis, las religiones se expandian por su carácter misional y por los acontecimientos políticos y económicos que ocurrían.
En conclusión el libro apuesta por una nueva visión de la historia antigua, la cual está empezando a sonar más, pero que igual es necesario estudiarla más, puesto que al leer libro se pueden estudiar otros fenómenos.
November 13, 2025
As an admirer of Michael Scott’s endeavours as a documentarian, I was looking forward to seeing his style shine through in textual form. And it certainly did in sections; I especially enjoyed reading about the conquests of Hannibal and Antiochus III.
On the other hand, there were historical accounts in this book that were tiresome. Not least of all, the extended explainer on the formal conversion of the Armenian state to Christianity. The author even seems to admit that it’s not really that important in the grand history of Christianity in Armenia, so I’m left in doubt about it’s significance in the greater scheme of the book. And that’s where the critical issue lies...
The book starts by setting out its ambitious and simultaneously vague scope. Perhaps the easiest way to put it is ‘to demonstrate the interconnectedness of the ancient world’. In this it does the literary equivalent of kicking the ball into row Z.
The book attempts to achieve the goal by splitting it into sections of politics, military and religion. By the end of the first section I was left in a state of confusion. I’m always happy read about the founding of Democracy, Republicanism and Confucianism, but I was at loss with the point in doing so.
The situation doesn’t improve much in the latter sections. Only as much as you would naturally expect from it covering later points in history, when empires and civilisations began to meet one another and trade.
Professor Michael Scott ends with an attempt to explain how his book demonstrates it’s aim. It firmly falls into the category of ‘too little, too late’.
Overall the book comes across as historically accurate and well researched and has some value for that. But it’s structure and approach was bewildering, and it’s for this reason that I couldn’t recommend it.
On the other hand, there were historical accounts in this book that were tiresome. Not least of all, the extended explainer on the formal conversion of the Armenian state to Christianity. The author even seems to admit that it’s not really that important in the grand history of Christianity in Armenia, so I’m left in doubt about it’s significance in the greater scheme of the book. And that’s where the critical issue lies...
The book starts by setting out its ambitious and simultaneously vague scope. Perhaps the easiest way to put it is ‘to demonstrate the interconnectedness of the ancient world’. In this it does the literary equivalent of kicking the ball into row Z.
The book attempts to achieve the goal by splitting it into sections of politics, military and religion. By the end of the first section I was left in a state of confusion. I’m always happy read about the founding of Democracy, Republicanism and Confucianism, but I was at loss with the point in doing so.
The situation doesn’t improve much in the latter sections. Only as much as you would naturally expect from it covering later points in history, when empires and civilisations began to meet one another and trade.
Professor Michael Scott ends with an attempt to explain how his book demonstrates it’s aim. It firmly falls into the category of ‘too little, too late’.
Overall the book comes across as historically accurate and well researched and has some value for that. But it’s structure and approach was bewildering, and it’s for this reason that I couldn’t recommend it.
March 5, 2021
I like that it treats ancient history across the whole of Eurasian and North Africa and cris-crosses the narrative between the Mediterranean world, India, and China, and the far East. This is a near-global history of three major cultural areas in the ancient world which makes it fun. Of course, it is a short book that attempts to cover huge amounts of time and a whole lot of cultures, and a lot of events. It has the mile wide but an inch deep issue but gives a wide-angle view which I like. Nice skim over the ancient world.
December 23, 2017
I made the mistake of reading some of the reviews as I began this book, and therefore set myself up for an underwhelming experience. After reading the book twice, I have to come to the conclusion that some of these reviews must be based on imagination. Firstly, neither the book jacket nor the Introduction make any claims like those found in some of these readers' recollection. It merely refers to the work as "an ambitious reinvention of our grandest histories", which the book certainly lives up to.
The book doesn't necessarily have an overriding theme through its three parts, aside from the fact that it asks the reader to look at each of these periods through a particular lens and from a global perspective. In so doing, for the history enthusiast, it offers a challenge to reconsider the way in which we interpret some of history's important events and/or periods. From the implementation of governmental structures and ideologies, to a particular violent and changing landscape of imperial expansion and contraction, to the spread of certain religions, one's understanding of the characters outlined thusly are inexorably altered and affected to offer somewhat greater insight. As Philip V of Macedon experienced a drunken tug-of-war between threats and limited opportunities, Ptolemy IV's reach exceeded his grasp in Egypt and a succession of Roman consuls relentlessly expanded that empire to the detriment of its own well-being. Meanwhile, the East blazed its own unique path until the connections between east and west became too much to isolate from. The overriding themes affecting them all range from the need to unite larger swaths of populations, youthful exuberance and confidence backed by massive military machines, and then a need to provide meaning and purpose in a changing and turbulent world.
Perhaps it would have been possible to add more to the topics covered in the tome, and perhaps it could have been presented in a more coherent and cohesive way. But as it stands, this book offers a new pair of glasses through which to view history. The student is, therefore, encouraged to challenge his own understanding in other areas, to look for commonalities and underlying themes, for the type of rationale that previous historians haven't necessarily offered before. While we may have known the people involved, the economic conditions, and the challenges being faced by those of the ancient empires, it is interesting that we don't usually stop to consider how there was a time when millions of soldiers and immeasurable land holdings were controlled by a small group of 20-somethings whose inexperience and brashness led to efforts and consequences unlikely to have been encountered by older leaders with more experience and, therefore, caution. The resulting effects have shaped the world as we know it today.
The author's point is that history is ALWAYS in flux, to satisfy the historian's own time period and his benefactors political goals and needs. In order to understand history, we are best served by entertaining these viewpoints, and by appreciating those which came before, as well as by considering others which may or may not jump to mind for the present day.
I can only imagine that those who didn't like this book were expecting a plain narrative, one which they could essentially dump into their brains as knowledge they could take to the bank. On this count, the book does fall short. Michael Scott provides a history which is very much alive, as a product of our own time as much as it is its own. This can be unsettling to the average person who is looking to expand knowledge and impress at cocktail parties, but is invigorating and empowering to the reader who wants to develop and foster a more three-dimensional view of the ancient world. This book provides a useful roadmap for being able to do that with, in addition to the periods and events covered by "Ancient Worlds", virtually any period in history for which a large amount of resource material exists. And that, I think, provides the best experience for someone who is picking up the book in hopes of growing his understanding of our past and how that relates to the past we may consider distant or which we have little experience with previously.
The book doesn't necessarily have an overriding theme through its three parts, aside from the fact that it asks the reader to look at each of these periods through a particular lens and from a global perspective. In so doing, for the history enthusiast, it offers a challenge to reconsider the way in which we interpret some of history's important events and/or periods. From the implementation of governmental structures and ideologies, to a particular violent and changing landscape of imperial expansion and contraction, to the spread of certain religions, one's understanding of the characters outlined thusly are inexorably altered and affected to offer somewhat greater insight. As Philip V of Macedon experienced a drunken tug-of-war between threats and limited opportunities, Ptolemy IV's reach exceeded his grasp in Egypt and a succession of Roman consuls relentlessly expanded that empire to the detriment of its own well-being. Meanwhile, the East blazed its own unique path until the connections between east and west became too much to isolate from. The overriding themes affecting them all range from the need to unite larger swaths of populations, youthful exuberance and confidence backed by massive military machines, and then a need to provide meaning and purpose in a changing and turbulent world.
Perhaps it would have been possible to add more to the topics covered in the tome, and perhaps it could have been presented in a more coherent and cohesive way. But as it stands, this book offers a new pair of glasses through which to view history. The student is, therefore, encouraged to challenge his own understanding in other areas, to look for commonalities and underlying themes, for the type of rationale that previous historians haven't necessarily offered before. While we may have known the people involved, the economic conditions, and the challenges being faced by those of the ancient empires, it is interesting that we don't usually stop to consider how there was a time when millions of soldiers and immeasurable land holdings were controlled by a small group of 20-somethings whose inexperience and brashness led to efforts and consequences unlikely to have been encountered by older leaders with more experience and, therefore, caution. The resulting effects have shaped the world as we know it today.
The author's point is that history is ALWAYS in flux, to satisfy the historian's own time period and his benefactors political goals and needs. In order to understand history, we are best served by entertaining these viewpoints, and by appreciating those which came before, as well as by considering others which may or may not jump to mind for the present day.
I can only imagine that those who didn't like this book were expecting a plain narrative, one which they could essentially dump into their brains as knowledge they could take to the bank. On this count, the book does fall short. Michael Scott provides a history which is very much alive, as a product of our own time as much as it is its own. This can be unsettling to the average person who is looking to expand knowledge and impress at cocktail parties, but is invigorating and empowering to the reader who wants to develop and foster a more three-dimensional view of the ancient world. This book provides a useful roadmap for being able to do that with, in addition to the periods and events covered by "Ancient Worlds", virtually any period in history for which a large amount of resource material exists. And that, I think, provides the best experience for someone who is picking up the book in hopes of growing his understanding of our past and how that relates to the past we may consider distant or which we have little experience with previously.
August 16, 2018
The book is divided in three periods (axial age/6th c. BC, Hannibal/3rd and 2nd c. BC, and Constantine/4th c. CE) and promises an emphatically 'global' approach to the antiquity, following, depending on the period, Athens and Rome, as well as Carthage and Persia, but also extending to Mauryan India and Zhou and Han China. That might sound very exciting in the summary, as does Scott's promise to "remind us of an era of emerging world consciousness in our ancient past".
However, the author overextends his Empire: the global shtick would have worked great had he not insisted on also covering a millenium.
After a rip-roaring debut, he quickly get muddled into a dry succession of facts, without much analysis or originality: this king did that and that emperor reacted thus, etc. The kind of information you could find in any encyclopedia, illustrated by snippets from snippets of classical historians à la Polybius and Herodotus.
The subject is interesting, and Greek and Romans aside, few readers are likely to be as familiar as the author with all those civilisations. Some detours, like that on Armenia, are very welcome, though again the chronological approach fail to help the reader imagine or understand much, beyond the litany of crimes and wars its chronicling. In a sense it feels like it has been written in the XIXth century. Or maybe it's just that I have read too much cultural-turn history, and now hard facts and celebrity history just feel strange, I don't know.
Another problem is with the thesis itself, namely that the period witnessed the 'first wave' of globalisation. Though there is some truth to this, in that contacts (however irregular) were established between the Roman and the Han Empires, for example, Scott mentions the vectors of this contact without telling us much about it. Take the Yuezhi for example: I don't know much about that lot, but there's clearly been a lot of scholarship published on the matter in the past few decades. Scott tells us how they connected China with Central Asia and India, but we learn virtually nothing about them, their culture or their differences with other peoples.
The book is written well enough, and it fulfilled its purpose, namely refreshing my memory of Greek and Roman history, and putting them in chronological comparison with China. However it does not live up to its promises, and would have deserved a much narrower focus in terms of periods, and a far less narrow conception of history.
However, the author overextends his Empire: the global shtick would have worked great had he not insisted on also covering a millenium.
After a rip-roaring debut, he quickly get muddled into a dry succession of facts, without much analysis or originality: this king did that and that emperor reacted thus, etc. The kind of information you could find in any encyclopedia, illustrated by snippets from snippets of classical historians à la Polybius and Herodotus.
The subject is interesting, and Greek and Romans aside, few readers are likely to be as familiar as the author with all those civilisations. Some detours, like that on Armenia, are very welcome, though again the chronological approach fail to help the reader imagine or understand much, beyond the litany of crimes and wars its chronicling. In a sense it feels like it has been written in the XIXth century. Or maybe it's just that I have read too much cultural-turn history, and now hard facts and celebrity history just feel strange, I don't know.
Another problem is with the thesis itself, namely that the period witnessed the 'first wave' of globalisation. Though there is some truth to this, in that contacts (however irregular) were established between the Roman and the Han Empires, for example, Scott mentions the vectors of this contact without telling us much about it. Take the Yuezhi for example: I don't know much about that lot, but there's clearly been a lot of scholarship published on the matter in the past few decades. Scott tells us how they connected China with Central Asia and India, but we learn virtually nothing about them, their culture or their differences with other peoples.
The book is written well enough, and it fulfilled its purpose, namely refreshing my memory of Greek and Roman history, and putting them in chronological comparison with China. However it does not live up to its promises, and would have deserved a much narrower focus in terms of periods, and a far less narrow conception of history.
March 22, 2017
This work of history has a very interesting premise and in some ways delivers on the promise of said premise (sorry). However, I'm not sure it's nearly as groundbreaking as the dust-jacket blurb makes it out to be. What must be said is Michael Scott is a very engaging writer of ancient history and has a natural way of presenting highly-detailed information in very readable narrative fashion. By examining the Greek, Roman, Indian, and Chinese civilizations through the lenses of their earliest political developments, their periods of great internecine strife, and the emergence of religious dominance of their cultural and political life in the Common Era, he presents a very global picture of historical development in ancient cultures that is rarely presented in this way. In that sense, he definitely succeeds. Where the book is less successful is in connecting these trends in a real, tangible confluence beyond just noting some interesting parallels that take place within centuries of each other. Interesting reading and very engaging writing, albeit not as revolutionary as promised.
August 23, 2020
Más que interesante libro que repasa la historia de los mundos clásicos de Roma, Grecia y Asia (China e India especialmente) centrándose en tres períodos (s. VI a.C., s. III a.C. y s. IV d.C.) y relacionando cada uno de ellos con un tema principal (política, guerras y religión, respectivamente). Entre otras cosas describe cómo se implantó la democracia en Atenas, la república en Roma o cómo se establecieron el cristianismo y el budismo en el imperio romano y China, respectivamente. Me parece interesante porque cuando hablamos de mundos clásicos pensamos en Roma y Grecia, pero olvidamos que había otros grandes mundos como el chino o el indio. Personalmente he aprendido muchísimo de estos dos últimos gracias a este libro. Si te interesa la historia, y más concretamente la historia clásica, te gustará este libro. Además el lenguaje utilizado por el autor es sencillo.
June 8, 2019
Gran libro donde el autor pluraliza la idea de "mundo clásico", que se limita únicamente a Grecia y Roma, pasando mejor a decir "mundos clásicos", pues en libro narra varios siglos de la historia de la India y China y muestra cómo allí estaban ocurriendo cosas parecidas a las que ocurrían en Grecia y Roma. Va alternando entre la historia de Grecia, Roma, India y China para ir narrando los eventos lo más cronológicamente posible.
Como extra, el libro sirve para enterarse de cómo se asentaron y extendieron dos de las religiones principales, el budismo (en India y China) y el cristianismo (en Grecia y Roma). Así que el libro cubre varios objetivos y sirve para varios propósitos, tiene éxito en todos, y cada una de sus 400 páginas enseña bastante.
Como extra, el libro sirve para enterarse de cómo se asentaron y extendieron dos de las religiones principales, el budismo (en India y China) y el cristianismo (en Grecia y Roma). Así que el libro cubre varios objetivos y sirve para varios propósitos, tiene éxito en todos, y cada una de sus 400 páginas enseña bastante.
October 5, 2017
Very disappointing! I had wanted to read this book for a while but once started I found that it dragged in places and many things were repeated in the summing up chapters of each section and then again in the conclusion. It reads more like a group of extended essays rather than a book! That said, I did learn some really interesting facts, especially about Chinese history which I knew very little about.
May 22, 2021
I got to page 240/400.
It's a very dense history. Fascinating. But better to read in a paper book, not on the Kindle.
And certainly not in 35C heat.
I'll finish this off when it's cooler and my brain isn't so discombobulated by visitors, moving, job applications, and extreme heat.
It's a very dense history. Fascinating. But better to read in a paper book, not on the Kindle.
And certainly not in 35C heat.
I'll finish this off when it's cooler and my brain isn't so discombobulated by visitors, moving, job applications, and extreme heat.
June 10, 2025
A fascinating book which tries to show connections between the history of East and West and so wants to tell the history of the Ancient World.
The starting point for the author is his claim that studies about history are too often limited to a specific region and do not look beyond this region to recognise connection and parallel developments across the "ancient globe".
His approach is to focus on three moments in history which the author sees as "epochal moments across the globe": 509-508 BCE (birth of Athenian democracy, Rome's republic and age of teaching of Confucius), 218 BCE (Hannibal of Carthage challenges Rome, China sees its first emperor) and 312 CE (Constantine attempts to impose Christianity on the Roman world and Buddhism pervades China via the "Silk Routes".)
I really liked the idea. I think he also succeeded to a certain degree. On the other hand one has to admit that his explanations remain sometimes very much on the surface. This is not surprising. The book is not very long and he tries to cover a lot of history in these limited pages. I still really enjoyed it. I was wondering whether I should give three or four stars, but then decided for four, because there were many bits which were great.
I thought it was interesting how he highlighted in the first part how much of history and development depends on chance. Easily things which we consider later to be of fundamental importance could have turned out differently.
I was fascinated by the way he spoke about Hannibal (maybe I have to read more about him). I think one of my favourite bit is, when he writes about the Battle of Raphia (coincidently near the modern Rafah in Gaza). In this battle the forces of Ptolemy IV, king and pharaoh of Ptolemaic Egypt and Antiochus III the Great of the Seleucid Empire fought against each other. Scott describes the forces on both sides
But this was also a battle of animal might: Antiochus had 102 large Indian elephants against Ptolemy’s seventy-three African bush elephants (smaller, more aggressive, but less obliging).
Of particular interest was for me also the history of early Christianity in the third part.
I want to also mention two remarkable details about translation and script:
1. Also in the third part he devotes much time to explain how Buddhism spread in China, but also points out the difficulties in this endeavour, because there were not enough people who could speak both languages (Buddhist Sanskrit and Chinese) sufficiently well to make a faithful translation.
2. Armenia adopted Christianity very early on. The author explains that there was one specific difficulty, because the Armenian culture was overwhelmingly oral and there was no script to write Armenian. However the Christian religion is very much a religion which depends on texts and the book. This problem was only solved in 405 CE when an Armenian monk, called Mashtots introduced a script for writing down the Armenian language.
In the conclusion he considers the way people throughout time and place thought about history and its relationship with the present. The role of the historian in each society depended (and probably still depends) on the value and importance the society gives to history and its relevance for the present.
All in all a book worth reading - certainly as a starting point from which the reader can take up and pursue some of the threads further.
The starting point for the author is his claim that studies about history are too often limited to a specific region and do not look beyond this region to recognise connection and parallel developments across the "ancient globe".
His approach is to focus on three moments in history which the author sees as "epochal moments across the globe": 509-508 BCE (birth of Athenian democracy, Rome's republic and age of teaching of Confucius), 218 BCE (Hannibal of Carthage challenges Rome, China sees its first emperor) and 312 CE (Constantine attempts to impose Christianity on the Roman world and Buddhism pervades China via the "Silk Routes".)
I really liked the idea. I think he also succeeded to a certain degree. On the other hand one has to admit that his explanations remain sometimes very much on the surface. This is not surprising. The book is not very long and he tries to cover a lot of history in these limited pages. I still really enjoyed it. I was wondering whether I should give three or four stars, but then decided for four, because there were many bits which were great.
I thought it was interesting how he highlighted in the first part how much of history and development depends on chance. Easily things which we consider later to be of fundamental importance could have turned out differently.
I was fascinated by the way he spoke about Hannibal (maybe I have to read more about him). I think one of my favourite bit is, when he writes about the Battle of Raphia (coincidently near the modern Rafah in Gaza). In this battle the forces of Ptolemy IV, king and pharaoh of Ptolemaic Egypt and Antiochus III the Great of the Seleucid Empire fought against each other. Scott describes the forces on both sides
But this was also a battle of animal might: Antiochus had 102 large Indian elephants against Ptolemy’s seventy-three African bush elephants (smaller, more aggressive, but less obliging).
Of particular interest was for me also the history of early Christianity in the third part.
I want to also mention two remarkable details about translation and script:
1. Also in the third part he devotes much time to explain how Buddhism spread in China, but also points out the difficulties in this endeavour, because there were not enough people who could speak both languages (Buddhist Sanskrit and Chinese) sufficiently well to make a faithful translation.
2. Armenia adopted Christianity very early on. The author explains that there was one specific difficulty, because the Armenian culture was overwhelmingly oral and there was no script to write Armenian. However the Christian religion is very much a religion which depends on texts and the book. This problem was only solved in 405 CE when an Armenian monk, called Mashtots introduced a script for writing down the Armenian language.
In the conclusion he considers the way people throughout time and place thought about history and its relationship with the present. The role of the historian in each society depended (and probably still depends) on the value and importance the society gives to history and its relevance for the present.
All in all a book worth reading - certainly as a starting point from which the reader can take up and pursue some of the threads further.
February 14, 2020
Se un gallo canta di mattina a Roma ed un altro gallo canta di mattina (sebbene alcune ore prima) in Cina il chicchirichì è identico, ma potrebbe avere un accento diverso!
Voler ammassare sotto un’unica bandiera le diversità di idee e popoli, che non possono essere annullate solo scrivendo un libro, è un costringere ad accettare lo slalom, tra le vie di qualsiasi città, tra individui con la testa reclinata sullo smartphone. Ed abbiamo ottenuto l’omologazione.
Si possono aborrire i seguenti termini:
social, connessione, condivisione, facebook, bla bla bla?
Dopo decenni di letture di libri storici con la distinzione chiara tra ac e dc (bc and ad) ci troviamo, con Scott, alla divisione tra aev ev: a che pro?
Nel mio campo di studi greci e romani si pubblicano spesso libri con titoli che terminano con le parole “... nel mondo antico”. Tuttavia, a un’ispezione più attenta, ciò che il titolo intende in realtà è il mondo greco-romano del bacino mediterraneo, dove greci e romani vivevano come rane attorno a uno stagno. “Mondo antico” è diventata un’abbreviazione accettata per un’area di interazione umana molto limitata, concentrata intorno a un unico mare: I confini che ci siamo autoimposti ci hanno indotto a confondere la parte con il tutto.
(14)
Ciò che rese Roma unica – e una potenza unica nei secoli successivi al 449 a.e.v. - fu il suo complicato sistema di controlli ed equilibri, grazie al quale tutti I livelli della società rimanevano nella convinzione che fosse più vantaggioso farne parte che ripudiarlo. Secondo Polibio, Roma aveva finalmente conquistato, tramite la “disciplina di molte lotte e molti tormenti”, la concordia ordinum.
(82)
… tanto che già otto anni dopo la marcia di Annibale i resoconti delle fonti storiche del Mediterraneo e della Cina coincisero per la prima volta; da qui in poi, il mondo antico assunse l’aspetto di una scacchiera, nella quale le mosse di ciascun individuo avevano conseguenze per tutto l’insieme.
(124)
Il iv secolo, di conseguenza, merita a buon diritto la fama di momento decisivo nella storia, non soltanto perché fu teatro di dinamici cambiamenti nell’assetto religioso e politico di ampie fasce di un mondo antico effettivamente interconnesso, ma anche perché quelle mutazioni hanno ancora oggi un forte impatto sul funzionamento del nostro mondo e su molte delle idee che guidano la nostra vita.
(359-60)
Voler ammassare sotto un’unica bandiera le diversità di idee e popoli, che non possono essere annullate solo scrivendo un libro, è un costringere ad accettare lo slalom, tra le vie di qualsiasi città, tra individui con la testa reclinata sullo smartphone. Ed abbiamo ottenuto l’omologazione.
Si possono aborrire i seguenti termini:
social, connessione, condivisione, facebook, bla bla bla?
Dopo decenni di letture di libri storici con la distinzione chiara tra ac e dc (bc and ad) ci troviamo, con Scott, alla divisione tra aev ev: a che pro?
Nel mio campo di studi greci e romani si pubblicano spesso libri con titoli che terminano con le parole “... nel mondo antico”. Tuttavia, a un’ispezione più attenta, ciò che il titolo intende in realtà è il mondo greco-romano del bacino mediterraneo, dove greci e romani vivevano come rane attorno a uno stagno. “Mondo antico” è diventata un’abbreviazione accettata per un’area di interazione umana molto limitata, concentrata intorno a un unico mare: I confini che ci siamo autoimposti ci hanno indotto a confondere la parte con il tutto.
(14)
Ciò che rese Roma unica – e una potenza unica nei secoli successivi al 449 a.e.v. - fu il suo complicato sistema di controlli ed equilibri, grazie al quale tutti I livelli della società rimanevano nella convinzione che fosse più vantaggioso farne parte che ripudiarlo. Secondo Polibio, Roma aveva finalmente conquistato, tramite la “disciplina di molte lotte e molti tormenti”, la concordia ordinum.
(82)
… tanto che già otto anni dopo la marcia di Annibale i resoconti delle fonti storiche del Mediterraneo e della Cina coincisero per la prima volta; da qui in poi, il mondo antico assunse l’aspetto di una scacchiera, nella quale le mosse di ciascun individuo avevano conseguenze per tutto l’insieme.
(124)
Il iv secolo, di conseguenza, merita a buon diritto la fama di momento decisivo nella storia, non soltanto perché fu teatro di dinamici cambiamenti nell’assetto religioso e politico di ampie fasce di un mondo antico effettivamente interconnesso, ma anche perché quelle mutazioni hanno ancora oggi un forte impatto sul funzionamento del nostro mondo e su molte delle idee che guidano la nostra vita.
(359-60)
February 4, 2020
Mondi antichi
mi ha lasciato sensazioni contrastanti, di insoddisfazione su alcuni passaggi e di grande apprezzamento su altri. Partendo dai punti deboli, il libro non è ciò che mi era stato presentato: io mi aspettavo una storia universale dell'Eurasia antica che descrivesse "a volo d'uccello" i processi socioeconomici comuni a tutto il continente, come i commerci a lungo raggio e l'interazione fra culture nomadiche e sedentarie, in realtà si tratta di una storiografia comparata che analizza tre fenomeni circoscritti verificatisi contemporaneamente in aree diverse del Vecchio Mondo, tutti inerenti la produzione, attuazione e circolazione di ideologie: la riflessione politologica ateniese, romana e cinese nel VI-V secolo a.C., le guerre per l'egemonia regionale combattute dal Mediterraneo alla Cina nel III secolo a.C., l'elaborazione di nuove religioni istituzionalizzate nel IV-V secolo d.C. In questo senso ho trovato il saggio un po' deludente: il rilevamento di affinità e divergenze fra le varie regioni è molto facile da seguire e lineare nell'esposizione, ma è parzialmente compromesso dalla dovizia di dettagli sul mondo greco-romano a fronte di una mera sintesi sulla civiltà cinese e un'esposizione davvero troppo povera sull'India – e francamente mi è dispiaciuto che la cultura iranica non sia stata coinvolta nell'analisi, nonostante fosse il quarto grande polo di civiltà stanziale dell'epoca.
Questo detto, il testo ha un pregio non da poco: è un ottimo punto di partenza per studiare l'Eurasia antica come plesso di Stati e comunità che comunicavano l'una con l'altra tramite i commerci, la diplomazia e lo scambio di idee, dando adito generazione dopo generazione a stili di vita e di pensiero sincretici, scambiando continuamente costumi e idee fra i rispettivi patrimoni culturali. Una prospettiva del genere alla storia politica non è lo standard condiviso nemmeno nell'università italiana, figuriamoci alla scuola del'obbligo, quindi ben venga ogni contributo possibile per sdoganarla.
Questo detto, il testo ha un pregio non da poco: è un ottimo punto di partenza per studiare l'Eurasia antica come plesso di Stati e comunità che comunicavano l'una con l'altra tramite i commerci, la diplomazia e lo scambio di idee, dando adito generazione dopo generazione a stili di vita e di pensiero sincretici, scambiando continuamente costumi e idee fra i rispettivi patrimoni culturali. Una prospettiva del genere alla storia politica non è lo standard condiviso nemmeno nell'università italiana, figuriamoci alla scuola del'obbligo, quindi ben venga ogni contributo possibile per sdoganarla.
October 25, 2024
A good book which gives an alternative view to how we view ancient history, comparing and contrasting the ancient Mediterranean and ancient eastern Asia. Michael Scott has clearly attempted a mammoth task in trying to give a general overview of Armenian, Roman, Greek, Chinese, Indian and Central Asian history and in my personal opinion in order to achieve such a task the book needs to be a lot longer. I found it difficult to read at times, this is not due to bad writing, it is just merely because I found some topics quite tedious. I do however find it impressive how Michael managed to compress all of this history into 360 pages, one can assume that you could write 2000 pages on this topic and still not fully get your point across. After reading some other reviews one individual makes a great point, by skimming over histories such as Chinese and Indian the only histories where you can really gauge a true understanding are the ones most europeans already know about such as Greek and Roman, this contradicts the whole purpose of the book which is more or less to say “what about other ancient histories?”.
March 11, 2025
Even though this work is less than 10 years old, it falls firmly in the category of those books which I should have given a pass to. While Scott is to be applauded for his attempt to write a good general world history of antiquity that dusts off the old concept of the "Axial Age," one is left with the sense that the sum of the parts is less than the whole. At the very least I've already read too many books that go into more depth than Scott can spend on any one theme (governance, empire building, religion) or culture.
Still, I didn't find this to be a total wash-out, in that the middle section went into enough depth regarding the interactions between the successors to Alexander the Great's empire and the wider world of Central Asia, that I felt that I learned something new.
On the whole, this could still be a useful read for the right individual, say, the sort of person who likes computer games such as "Civilization" or "Assassin's Creed," and is looking for historical background in a digestible form. Scott ends on the now poignant note of wondering whether the regime of globalization that prevailed in the middle of the last decade could be upheld; the answer being, not really.
Still, I didn't find this to be a total wash-out, in that the middle section went into enough depth regarding the interactions between the successors to Alexander the Great's empire and the wider world of Central Asia, that I felt that I learned something new.
On the whole, this could still be a useful read for the right individual, say, the sort of person who likes computer games such as "Civilization" or "Assassin's Creed," and is looking for historical background in a digestible form. Scott ends on the now poignant note of wondering whether the regime of globalization that prevailed in the middle of the last decade could be upheld; the answer being, not really.
December 21, 2021
A lo mejor resulta que para quien sepa de historia más de lo que yo sé de historia este libro resulte aburrido y lleno de datos, anécdotas y cosas ya sabidas. O a lo mejor resulta que no, que este libro está presentando algo que a nadie se le había ocurrido y que por tanto mi acercamiento a él no es capaz de reconocerle esa importancia. Sea como sea, a mí me pareció un libro entretenido, interesante, que leí mientras veía el mar y tomaba tequila. Nada descomunal de información, nada con una prosa bestial de buena. No, un libro para matar las horas y enterarse de cosas sobre Confucio y Constantino y Bruto y la llegada del budismo a China. Bacano para leerlo un rato.
March 18, 2024
Această carte este doar o istorie în paralel a mai multor spații geografice care au interacționat într-un fel sau altul de-a lungul Antichității. Nu mi se pare "un volum îndrăzneț" și nicidecum "inovativ", cum îl laudă Frankopan. Cititorul ar fi mult mai câștigat dacă ar studia fiecare spațiu în parte și s-ar apleca asupra punctelor de contact.
Ca idee: dacă discutăm de o lume interconectată, legată, de ce respinge autorul ideea de "lume antică" în favoarea noțiunii mult mai fragmentare de "lumi antice"? Separarea termenului "antic" de conotația sa greco-romană se putea face și altfel decât prin schimbarea denumirii și, implicit, dinamitării ideii principale a cărții.
Ca idee: dacă discutăm de o lume interconectată, legată, de ce respinge autorul ideea de "lume antică" în favoarea noțiunii mult mai fragmentare de "lumi antice"? Separarea termenului "antic" de conotația sa greco-romană se putea face și altfel decât prin schimbarea denumirii și, implicit, dinamitării ideii principale a cărții.
Read
August 29, 2024Made me realise that in terms of ancient torture and execution methods Jesus got off easy
August 18, 2018
I feel rather mean rating this book 2* as it is clearly a well-researched piece of scholarship providing a narrative account of nearly a millennium's worth of history across China, India, the Middle East and the Mediterranean - which is no small undertaking. Unfortunately, the structure of this book jumps around between the different regions and hops backwards and forwards in time making it difficult to follow the thread of who is doing what to whom.
My main criticism, however, is the treatment of religious belief. The author consistently refuses to see leaders as ever being primarily religiously motivated. Instead he goes to great lengths to plead that any time a leader advocated for, say, Christianity, it was because that would increase their power base e.g. he tries to argue that Christianity was politically a better religion for Roman emperors than its pagan predecessor - emperor worship. There are other weird points that get emphasised to try to minimise religious experience e.g. the assertion that Constantine didn't become a Christian until his death-bed baptism. Surely Occam's razor suggests that Constantine's continual support for the Christian faith came out of personal belief throughout his life? But in that story, the author is trying to undermine Christian accounts of Constantine having had religious visions that led him to victory in battle.
In his conclusion, Scott says "The interaction between religion and ruler - which created superficially bizarre pairings of ruthless rulers and religions with peace and goodwill at the core of their message - was intended most often to support the ruler's efforts in controlling and maintaining their dominions: a means of accounting for their successes and undermining their rivals." Seriously - no - most rulers who put considerable efforts behind promoting one religion (whether that be the incumbent or a new entrant) are doing it because they have personal faith - Scott himself has already provided ample examples of that from Ashoka who gave away riches due to his devotion to Buddhism to Tridates who tried to over-turn local custom and culture to christianise his country.
Clearly, people can be and often are religiously inspired. It's quite common throughout history for people to report religious visions or experiences and then to have acted on them and we can see many examples of this happening to people alive today. To try to analyse history without acknowledging genuine faith experience just makes history a bewilderment.
My main criticism, however, is the treatment of religious belief. The author consistently refuses to see leaders as ever being primarily religiously motivated. Instead he goes to great lengths to plead that any time a leader advocated for, say, Christianity, it was because that would increase their power base e.g. he tries to argue that Christianity was politically a better religion for Roman emperors than its pagan predecessor - emperor worship. There are other weird points that get emphasised to try to minimise religious experience e.g. the assertion that Constantine didn't become a Christian until his death-bed baptism. Surely Occam's razor suggests that Constantine's continual support for the Christian faith came out of personal belief throughout his life? But in that story, the author is trying to undermine Christian accounts of Constantine having had religious visions that led him to victory in battle.
In his conclusion, Scott says "The interaction between religion and ruler - which created superficially bizarre pairings of ruthless rulers and religions with peace and goodwill at the core of their message - was intended most often to support the ruler's efforts in controlling and maintaining their dominions: a means of accounting for their successes and undermining their rivals." Seriously - no - most rulers who put considerable efforts behind promoting one religion (whether that be the incumbent or a new entrant) are doing it because they have personal faith - Scott himself has already provided ample examples of that from Ashoka who gave away riches due to his devotion to Buddhism to Tridates who tried to over-turn local custom and culture to christianise his country.
Clearly, people can be and often are religiously inspired. It's quite common throughout history for people to report religious visions or experiences and then to have acted on them and we can see many examples of this happening to people alive today. To try to analyse history without acknowledging genuine faith experience just makes history a bewilderment.
September 19, 2019
I read a third of this book back in February then left it for about six months, not entirely sure why. I think it's OK but not great. I think Scott mostly shows how events took place in various parts of the world concurrently but not so much that they were actually connected. I also thought that too much space was given to certain events, such as the Punic Wars which you can read about elsewhere and not enough space (hardly any at all) to Yuezhi tribes who migrated from China to Central Asia, were (it seems, it's not exactly detailed) instrumental in development of the Silk Road and in time established their own kingdom. I'd have really liked to read more about the migrations, the different peoples, culture and trade. And, in a book that aims at connectivity of the ancient worlds and not so much on West-centred history, it was a little bit condescending to see an author likened to 'Armenian Herodotus' or 'Indian Shakespeare'.
January 24, 2021
The book was covering interesting and original material of three periods of antiquity (4th century BCE for the development of political systems, 2th century BCE for geopolitical tensions and wars, 4th century CE for interaction between religion and power) in the West (Greece, Rome, Armenia) and the East (Persia, india, China). However despite this, it lost most of its appeal due to a heavy boring style.
February 8, 2017
Focusing on three periods in history, Scott shows how changes in society, government and religion were mirrored across Europe, Asia and India. The individual elements he discusses are fascinating, but in terms of teasing a coherent theory out of them, it's not as much of a success. Still, as a reminder to take a more global view of history, it's well worth spending time with.
May 22, 2021
fascinating! 🤠
July 2, 2018
Detailgetreu und faktenlastig.
„Eine Geschichte von Ost und West“ ist der Untertitel dieses umfangreichen Werks. Detailgetreu und faktenlastig, jedoch immer wieder unterbrochen von kurz geschilderten unterhaltsamen Mythen und Legenden, stellt Michael Scott die Geschichte von Griechenland, Italien und China nebeneinandergesetzt dem Leser vor. Diese Zusammenschau ist ungewöhnlich. Vor allem von China weiß der westliche Leser nur so von ungefähr Bescheid.
Die Geschichte der Antike ist eine Geschichte von wechselnden Herrschern, die zahllos sind wie die Sterne, und wie sie alle an ihre Macht gekommen sind und was sie mit ihren politischen Kontrahenten so alles anstellten, will man eigentlich nicht so genau wissen: es sträuben sich einem die Haare. Es wurden keine Gefangenen gemacht und man kannte keine Verwandten.
Es ist eine Geschichte von Herrschern, Dynastien und Königreichen, eine Geschichte vieler Umbrüche. Blutrünstig. Unterhaltsam. Grausam. Brutal. Seltsam. Wie zufällig gewürfelt.
Es ist eine Geschichte vom Kampf um Territorien, eine Geschichte von Schlachten und unzähligen Kriegen und vom Aufkommen und Verblassen von Religion(en) und Götterverehrung und deren Rückwirkungen auf die Politik. Dann wieder die Geschichte von Denkern. Die manchmal scheiterten und manchmal gewannen. Setzte sich ihr Gedankengut durch, entstanden durchaus neue Regierungsformen: die volksnahe Demokratie in Griechenland, die republikanische Herrschaftsform Roms, der unsympathische Legalismus in China (rigoroses, das ist brutales Vorgehen gegen jeden Bruch eines sonst einheitlichen Gesetzeswerkes zur Festigung von Einheit und Macht).
Letztlich kämpften Ratio und Selbstherrlichkeit einzelner oder kleiner Gruppierungen gegeneinander. Das ist so bis zum heutigen Tage.
Das Buch richtet sich mit seinem ungeheueren Detailreichtum hauptsächlich an fachinteressiertes Publikum. Der rote Faden liegt in den Kapitel-Überschriften, geht aber im Eifer des Gemetzels, also während der Lektüre, schon einmal verloren.
Vermisst wird eine den jeweiligen Kapiteln vorangehende oder nachfolgende Zusammenfassung und eine übergeordnete verallgemeinernde, abstrahierende Einschätzung der Zeit(en), was dem gemeinen Leser helfen würde, sich besser zurechtzufinden und zu einem Leseresultat zu kommen. Das umfassende Nachwort macht diesen Mangel eingermaßen wieder wett.
Positiv und sehr angenehm sind die Karten und Zeittafeln.
Fazit: Nicht ganz leicht zu lesendes, ein wenig an seiner Detailfülle ersticktes Werk über eine längst vergangene Zeit, deren Ausläufer noch bis in die heutige Zeit zu spüren sind.
Kategorie: Sachbuch. Geschichte. Antike.
Verlag: Bastei Lübbe, 2018
„Eine Geschichte von Ost und West“ ist der Untertitel dieses umfangreichen Werks. Detailgetreu und faktenlastig, jedoch immer wieder unterbrochen von kurz geschilderten unterhaltsamen Mythen und Legenden, stellt Michael Scott die Geschichte von Griechenland, Italien und China nebeneinandergesetzt dem Leser vor. Diese Zusammenschau ist ungewöhnlich. Vor allem von China weiß der westliche Leser nur so von ungefähr Bescheid.
Die Geschichte der Antike ist eine Geschichte von wechselnden Herrschern, die zahllos sind wie die Sterne, und wie sie alle an ihre Macht gekommen sind und was sie mit ihren politischen Kontrahenten so alles anstellten, will man eigentlich nicht so genau wissen: es sträuben sich einem die Haare. Es wurden keine Gefangenen gemacht und man kannte keine Verwandten.
Es ist eine Geschichte von Herrschern, Dynastien und Königreichen, eine Geschichte vieler Umbrüche. Blutrünstig. Unterhaltsam. Grausam. Brutal. Seltsam. Wie zufällig gewürfelt.
Es ist eine Geschichte vom Kampf um Territorien, eine Geschichte von Schlachten und unzähligen Kriegen und vom Aufkommen und Verblassen von Religion(en) und Götterverehrung und deren Rückwirkungen auf die Politik. Dann wieder die Geschichte von Denkern. Die manchmal scheiterten und manchmal gewannen. Setzte sich ihr Gedankengut durch, entstanden durchaus neue Regierungsformen: die volksnahe Demokratie in Griechenland, die republikanische Herrschaftsform Roms, der unsympathische Legalismus in China (rigoroses, das ist brutales Vorgehen gegen jeden Bruch eines sonst einheitlichen Gesetzeswerkes zur Festigung von Einheit und Macht).
Letztlich kämpften Ratio und Selbstherrlichkeit einzelner oder kleiner Gruppierungen gegeneinander. Das ist so bis zum heutigen Tage.
Das Buch richtet sich mit seinem ungeheueren Detailreichtum hauptsächlich an fachinteressiertes Publikum. Der rote Faden liegt in den Kapitel-Überschriften, geht aber im Eifer des Gemetzels, also während der Lektüre, schon einmal verloren.
Vermisst wird eine den jeweiligen Kapiteln vorangehende oder nachfolgende Zusammenfassung und eine übergeordnete verallgemeinernde, abstrahierende Einschätzung der Zeit(en), was dem gemeinen Leser helfen würde, sich besser zurechtzufinden und zu einem Leseresultat zu kommen. Das umfassende Nachwort macht diesen Mangel eingermaßen wieder wett.
Positiv und sehr angenehm sind die Karten und Zeittafeln.
Fazit: Nicht ganz leicht zu lesendes, ein wenig an seiner Detailfülle ersticktes Werk über eine längst vergangene Zeit, deren Ausläufer noch bis in die heutige Zeit zu spüren sind.
Kategorie: Sachbuch. Geschichte. Antike.
Verlag: Bastei Lübbe, 2018
Displaying 1 - 30 of 75 reviews