Ammianus MarcellinusCritiques

This is a great book that begins about 20 years after the death of Constantine the Great in 337 AD and describes the tribulations of his children. Now Ammianus is not Tacitus or Livy in terms of writing style, but he had an advantage over many of these ancient historians; namely, he lived and participated (i.e., was an eye witness) to most of the events he describes.

The only unfortunate part about this book is that the editor deemed necessary to omit a large number of sections from the original manuscript. Although these sections may appear, at a superficial glance, trivial from a historical perspective (like Ammianus' opinions of what causes earthquakes), to me these kind of passages have greater value than descriptions of battles. One can find description of battles or other main events in any contemporary summary of history. But it is only by reading these ancient texts that we find out how people thought, how they spoke, their habits and culture. And sometimes, it is the off the cuff remark that reveals some surprising facts. For example, in describing Julian's campaign against the Persians he mentions of a town that was deserted "by its Jewish inhabitants because of its low walls." This town was close to today's Basrah in southern Iraq, close to the beginning (or end) of the Persian Gulf. To me this was unexpected as I never thought that Jewish people lived in their own towns so far away from Jerusalem.

Very readable history surrounding the reign of Julian the Apostate. I believe there's a novel by Gore Vidal that uses this as a source. Ammianus Marcellinus is one of the last voices of the classical era, making this a book of particular interest, closing a chapter that begins with Heraclitus.

I enjoy this book. Mr. Hamilton made a translation with an elegant lilt for a Roman history. It is also a history, not a disguised biography, with exploration of the general decline of the empire. Ammianus seems to have had some access to official decrees and some internal documents. He also includes some period and touching details such as the doffing of helmets by army officers when fighting in the emperor's presence to increase the likelihood of recognition in the promotion sweepstakes. Silly, but the kind of thing people might actually do. This is the last coherent history written until Procopius in the sixth century, by a well placed Roman and the historian is advised to read this book.

Geweldige vertaling door een groot Nederlands expert en vertaler van een waanzinnig interessant boek. Ammianus' krankzinnige stijl kan in het Nederlands niet precies geimiteerd worden, met zijn oeverloze zinnen die met rare participia plotseling een hoek omslaan, maar de toon is volgens mij precies getroffen. Ammianus doet verslag, maar het interessantst zijn niet zijn Herodotusachtige ngeografische intermezzi, maar, vind ik, de gewelddadigheid van de laatantieke wereld, vooral de grafisch beschreven veldslagen en belegeringen, ook de processen en moordpartijen, waarbij telkens het allerergste blijkt dat je op magische wijze probeert te weten te komen wanneer de keizer zal doodgaan of wie de volgende is. In het volk is Ammianus niet geinteresseerd, en hoge ambtenaren en officieren van lage komaf zijn daardoor al verdacht. Een schitterend en leerzaam boek!

One of my favourite Latin histories, perhaps because I'm more interested in the fall of the Roman empire instead of its rise. Ammianus was quite unusual, born a Greek, raised and educated in Greek, he preferred writing in Latin, possibly thorugh having been a soldier, as Latin was still the lingua franca of the military. His account of the decay of the Empire is fascinating, particularly the brief reign of Julian, tagged htroughout history by vengeful Christians as Julian the Apostate. Julian tried vainly to turn back time and reinstate paganism as the state religion. He loathed Christianity, but was liberal-minded enough not to try and destroy it as earlier Emperors had done, merely end its stranglehold on the running of the Empire. His failure is the focus of this account. It is excellent if gloomy reading., the smell of decay throughout the Empire is redolent within this book. Required reading for anyone who wished to understand how the greatest empire of the ancient world began its precipitous fall.

Zeer interessant en vooral hoog niveau. Mengeling van Herodo¬tus en Thuycidides. Hoogstaander niveau dan Livius. Opvallend zijn de moraliserende beschouwingen die van een grote erva¬ring, mensenkennis en wijsheid getuigen.

Outstanding. He was a Roman officer who participated in the battles and court conspiracies he describes in fascinating detail. This is an indespensible history of the Roman Empire sliding into collapse in the 4th Century, A.D.

I do find this translation's practice of using modern names in the text and ancient names on the maps confusing not to say downright irritating.

The introduction also claims that it is the exigencies of book publishing that forced the omission of many passages since otherwise the book would be too big for a single volume. Since it also says the gaps total about 1/5 of what is left of Ammianus' work would mean a book of say 600 pages rather than 505.I cannot see that this would make the book impossibly large.½

Ammianus Marcellinus witnessed and participated in a vital and vibrant period in Roman history. He was born just as Constantine was transferring the seat of government from Rome to Constantinople. His earliest years saw the growing influence of Christianity on the government and on the daily life of the Empire. As a young man discharging his civic and military responsibilities, Marcellinus came to admire his contemporary, Julian, the last pagan emperor. Unfortunately, only a part of Marcellinus’s history survived. That which is extant centers upon Julian: the events leading up to his reign, his term as Caesar, his assumption of the title, Augustus, his death, and finally, the shabby affairs of his successors.
However, the author clearly did not intend this work as a panegyric for Julian. Marcellinus strove mightily to maintain his objectivity with Julian, as with others who figured prominently in this work. He rigorously cited character flaws of those he obviously admired; likewise, he scrupulously included the virtues of those he held in disregard.
Marcellinus bequeathed a portrait of Julian that showed him to be a man of high character, virtuous, courageous and trustworthy. Repeatedly, Julian be-haved honorably, both to Romans and to barbarians. The author cast Julian in a favorable light not only by praising him, but by the sharp contrast created by his predecessors and successors. Constantius was small-minded and petty; he cared more about his own glory than he did about the empire. He preferred to see Romans defeated than to have achieved victory through Julian. Jovian seemed to be an indecisive weakling who managed to do no great harm only be-cause he ruled so briefly. The brothers, Valentinian and Valens, exhibited cru-elty, astonishing because it was so pointless.

Marcellinus’s work is valuable today, not only as a record of the events, but also as a glimpse of the late empire as it struggled to accommodate compet-ing religions. The author, a pagan, has surprisingly little to say about Christians or Christianity. Yet, he mentions Christian titles, holidays, and rituals enough to indicate that he probably had more than just a casual familiarity with the religion and its adherents. Marcellinus wrote of Julian, “Experience had taught him that no wild beasts are such dangerous enemies to man as Christians are to one an-other.â€? Julian, characteristically enough, appeared determined and steadfast in his drive to return to paganism, yet did not display overt antagonism toward Christianity. The author did not paint Julian’s restoring paganism in the same colors as would be used centuries later to portray Bloody Mary’s restoration of Catholicism.

Furthermore, Marcellinus showed himself to be a shrewd observer of hu-man nature. He exhibited a knack for describing of people in compact phrases which spoke volumes. After itemizing Valentinian’s many faults, he made a gen-eral observation:
The reason why some emperors are so arrogant as to commit these and similar acts is that they give their friends no opportunity of setting them right when they go wrong in thought or deed, and that their enormous power frightens their enemies into silence. There is in fact no way of correcting wrongdoing in those who think that the height of virtue consists in the execution of their will.

Many today who are not emperors could stand to remember those lines from time to time. He wrote, not as one who was proud of his high connections, but in an easy approachable style. One senses that Marcellinus would have made an agreeable companion. His humanity and affability serve, in the long run, to add to his credibility.

Alex Hunnicutt

one page separated from binding.