An Imperial Possession
and over one million other books are available for Amazon Kindle .
Learn more
| ||||||||||||||||||||
 Trade In this Item for up to £1.95
Get an extra £5 when you trade in books worth £10 or more until June 30, 2012. Trade in An Imperial Possession: Britain in the Roman Empire, 54 BC - AD 409 (The Penguin History of Britain) for an Amazon.co.uk gift card of up to £1.95, which you can then spend on millions of items across the site. Trade-in values may vary (terms apply). Find more products eligible for trade-in.
|
Frequently Bought Together
Product details
|
More About the Author
Product Description
Review
? They came, they saw and they definitely conquered. David Mattingly has taken a refreshing look at what it meant for the Britons.?
?"The Times" (London)
?"The Times" (London)
Sunday Telegraph
`Mattingly shows ... just how interesting life could be on the outer fringes of the Roman Empire'
Inside This Book
(Learn More)
First Sentence
This book tells the story of the occupation of Britain by the Romans. Read the first page Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
This book tells the story of the occupation of Britain by the Romans. Read the first page Browse Sample Pages
Front Cover | Copyright | Table of Contents | Excerpt | Index | Back Cover
Tags Customers Associate with This Product(What's this?)Click on a tag to find related items, discussions, and people.
|
What Other Items Do Customers Buy After Viewing This Item?
Customer Reviews
Most Helpful Customer Reviews
31 of 36 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
For me there are three elements needed to write a good history book. Intellect: critically the ability to judge what should be left out as much as included. Industry: that the author has worked hard to pull all the material together, analyse and write in a way that engages with the reader. Imagination: someone who takes a position, the courage to make conclusions and let their personality emerge.
Dr Mattingly is an expert with access to the latest sources, so in 540 pages I was hoping he would provide a comprehensive understanding of Roman Britain. I was skim reading half way through, a slog to get to the end. This book is the first of a nine-part Penguin History of Britain. Its predecessor (Ian Richmond's Roman Britain) was in print for 50 years. I have a problem with these collective histories (there is also an eight part Penguin History of Europe). They tend to be formulaic, get it all down and fill the library shelves, chase student sales. Perhaps these are written to a deadline rather than with passion.
Mattingly's real interest appears to be the archaeology of colonialism and if you want an example of his style try "Identity is thus the key analytical tool and I seek to demonstrate the existence of discrepant identities and of discrepant experiences of the Roman Empire in Britain." And we are only on page 18. The liberal application of jargon is pervasive, he lays it on with a trowel and it sounds clever which I guess it is supposed to. I wonder if an archaeologist - which is Mattingly's metier - is best placed to write something as substantial as 463 years of Roman Britain. He opts for three-part analysis, the military, and the civil and rural communities between 54bc to ad409. Before that the first 80 pages are contextual and methodology notes, sources of information and rules of evidence. This is all good academic repartee, ideal for undergraduate seminars, passing exams certainly, but not compelling prose. The core chapters are logical and heavily detailed. It's all there but hard to find analysis. The conclusion "Comparative Perspective and Concluding Thought" is hardly inspiring. And telling a story does not mean you are writing fiction. This book might be termed technical; it is not narrative or thematic history and seems an oddly outdated reference book (and one with an overt one dimensional bias against Rome).
I was left wondering whom was this book written for? I heard Mattingly speak at the Museum of London but am none the wiser. He was as pleased with his efforts as he was dismissive of others, specifically Guy de la Bedoyere. I'd suggest that this book is of limited academic interest, lumbering in style and lacking imaginative organisation, devoid of conclusions. For the general reader, or even well informed, de la Bedoyere's New History of Roman Britain has the potential to turn you on to British Roman history and read more; aviod Mattingly as he is likely to turn you off.
Dr Mattingly is an expert with access to the latest sources, so in 540 pages I was hoping he would provide a comprehensive understanding of Roman Britain. I was skim reading half way through, a slog to get to the end. This book is the first of a nine-part Penguin History of Britain. Its predecessor (Ian Richmond's Roman Britain) was in print for 50 years. I have a problem with these collective histories (there is also an eight part Penguin History of Europe). They tend to be formulaic, get it all down and fill the library shelves, chase student sales. Perhaps these are written to a deadline rather than with passion.
Mattingly's real interest appears to be the archaeology of colonialism and if you want an example of his style try "Identity is thus the key analytical tool and I seek to demonstrate the existence of discrepant identities and of discrepant experiences of the Roman Empire in Britain." And we are only on page 18. The liberal application of jargon is pervasive, he lays it on with a trowel and it sounds clever which I guess it is supposed to. I wonder if an archaeologist - which is Mattingly's metier - is best placed to write something as substantial as 463 years of Roman Britain. He opts for three-part analysis, the military, and the civil and rural communities between 54bc to ad409. Before that the first 80 pages are contextual and methodology notes, sources of information and rules of evidence. This is all good academic repartee, ideal for undergraduate seminars, passing exams certainly, but not compelling prose. The core chapters are logical and heavily detailed. It's all there but hard to find analysis. The conclusion "Comparative Perspective and Concluding Thought" is hardly inspiring. And telling a story does not mean you are writing fiction. This book might be termed technical; it is not narrative or thematic history and seems an oddly outdated reference book (and one with an overt one dimensional bias against Rome).
I was left wondering whom was this book written for? I heard Mattingly speak at the Museum of London but am none the wiser. He was as pleased with his efforts as he was dismissive of others, specifically Guy de la Bedoyere. I'd suggest that this book is of limited academic interest, lumbering in style and lacking imaginative organisation, devoid of conclusions. For the general reader, or even well informed, de la Bedoyere's New History of Roman Britain has the potential to turn you on to British Roman history and read more; aviod Mattingly as he is likely to turn you off.
50 of 66 people found the following review helpful
Format:Hardcover
As the author was one of my teachers (brilliant by the way) at university (1997-2000 leicester BSc course) i should be loyal and claim this as a triumph, but its REALLY hard going. While the research is immaculate and its certainly scholarly the language is so obtuse and the line of thought wanders so much you kind of keep wondering what the point is? Individually each chapter has its good points but taken as a whole it strikes me as a bit of a bodge job done piecemeal when other projects allow. Not worthy of the great brain David Mattingly has.
9 of 12 people found the following review helpful
Format:Paperback
David Mattingley's book is a bit of a curates egg. On the one hand the 539 densely printed pages of texts and maps do contain not only detailed coverage of the History and archaeology of the roman conquest and occupation of Britain but a thesis of sorts. Far from bringing the benefits of roman knowledge and technology (overplayed by some says Mattingly) they were also ruthless exploiters of Britains natural resources and people. Hence, the Romans didn't convert us dimwits in these islands to suave sophisticated citizens but enslaved us or did deals with local chieftans in return for obeyance. At times this is compelling stuff and the thesis emphasises the regional differences whilst also constantly questioning received views of the period. This is all well and good and there are interesting takes on many aspects of life in these islands; not least that Britain was a particuarly tough country to take over and the size of the Roman garrison was large.
The problem comes with a lack of commitment to produce a decent book; time and time again Mattingley is reduced to describing things that the book doesn't illustrate. Granted there are copious maps and charts but no illustrations at all otherwise or colour plates. There are many other books in the extensive and useful bibliography that might do this but it seems a strange omission when other books in this series do have some photos and pictures. (see Miri Rubin-The Hollow Crown for example).
The writing is sometimes lumpen and dull and he tends to repeat himself as though parts of the book were written at different times without reference to other sections. The emphasis on archaeological evidence is understandable but at times there is simply too much detail that ensnares and traps the possibilities of a more energised and interesting narrative.
There is half a really good book fighting to get out- Mattingleys book seems like an occupied country itself with the people representing the really good story possessed by his less than imperious prose. Not a general history; occasionally more like corporal punishment.
The problem comes with a lack of commitment to produce a decent book; time and time again Mattingley is reduced to describing things that the book doesn't illustrate. Granted there are copious maps and charts but no illustrations at all otherwise or colour plates. There are many other books in the extensive and useful bibliography that might do this but it seems a strange omission when other books in this series do have some photos and pictures. (see Miri Rubin-The Hollow Crown for example).
The writing is sometimes lumpen and dull and he tends to repeat himself as though parts of the book were written at different times without reference to other sections. The emphasis on archaeological evidence is understandable but at times there is simply too much detail that ensnares and traps the possibilities of a more energised and interesting narrative.
There is half a really good book fighting to get out- Mattingleys book seems like an occupied country itself with the people representing the really good story possessed by his less than imperious prose. Not a general history; occasionally more like corporal punishment.
Would you like to see more reviews about this item?
Were these reviews helpful?
Let us know
Most Recent Customer Reviews
Close up on the Roman-British
A thorough treatment of all aspects of Roman Britain, what it was like to be dominated by a foreign power for four centries. Read more
Published 3 months ago by R. PETTS
An antidote to 'what the Romans did for us'
This is quite heavy going at times, but only because it's very thorough. Mattingly is pretty anti-Roman throughout, never letting us forget they were an occupying military power... Read more
Published on 29 May 2009 by Anthony K. Divey
Brilliant
This book has been invaluable to me whilst studying Roman Britain at university. It has provided lots of fascinating information and led to many hours of research. Read more
Published on 11 Oct 2008 by Mr. Keith A. Dowen
Listmania!
|
|
Look for similar items by category
Look for similar items by subject
Feedback
- Would you like to update product info or give feedback on images?
- I am the Author, and I want to comment on my book.
- I am the Publisher, and I want to comment on this book.
|
