FREE TAKEN AT THE FLOOD: THE ROMAN CONQUEST OF GREECE PDF Robin Waterfield | 320 pages | 17 Apr 2014 | Oxford University Press | 9780199656462 | English | Oxford, United Kingdom Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece by Robin Waterfield, Paperback | Barnes & Noble® Goodreads helps you keep track of books you want to read. Want to Read saving…. Want to Read Currently Reading Read. Other editions. Enlarge cover. Error rating book. Refresh and try again. Open Preview See a Problem? Details if other :. Thanks for telling us about the problem. Return to Book Page. Preview — Taken at the Flood by Robin Waterfield. This was the crucial half-century of Rome's spectacular rise to imperial status, but Roman interest in its eastern neighbors began a little earlier, with the First Illyrian War ofand climaxed later with the infamous destruction of Corinth in Taken at the Flood chronicles this momentous move by Rome into the Greek east. Until now, this period of history has been overshadowed by the threat of Carthage in the west, but events in the east were no less important in themselves, and Robin Waterfield's account reveals the peculiar nature of Rome's eastern policy. For over seventy years, the Romans avoided annexation so that they could commit their military and financial resources to the fight against Carthage and elsewhere. Though ultimately a failure, this policy of indirect rule, punctuated by periodic brutal military interventions and intense diplomacy, worked well for several decades, until the Senate finally settled on more direct forms of control. Waterfield's fast-paced narrative focuses mainly on military and diplomatic maneuvers, but throughout he interweaves other topics and themes, such as the influence of Greek culture on Rome, the Roman aristocratic ethos, and the clash between the two best fighting machines the ancient world Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece produced: the Macedonian phalanx and Roman legion. The result is an absorbing account of a critical chapter in Rome's mastery of the Mediterranean. Get A Copy. Kindle Editionpages. More Details Original Title. Roman Republic Greece. Other Editions Friend Reviews. To see what your friends thought of this book, please sign up. To ask other readers questions about Taken at the Floodplease sign up. Lists with This Book. This book is not yet featured on Listopia. Community Reviews. Showing Average rating 3. Rating details. More filters. Sort order. May 31, Colin rated it really liked it. A magisterial, if dry, account of how Greece and Macedonia were absorbed by Rome The conquest of Greece and her former Macedonian masters was a complicated Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece, and is generally overshadowed in the history books by the Punic Wars that were taking place or in preparation at roughly the same timeframe. When students used to ask me about it, I would usually just say, "Well, the specifics are complicated, but basically those areas ended up as Roman provinces, and that's all you need to know about A magisterial, if dry, account of how Greece and Macedonia were absorbed by Rome The conquest of Greece and her former Macedonian masters was a complicated process, and is generally overshadowed in the history books by the Punic Wars that were taking place or in preparation at roughly the same timeframe. When students used to ask me about it, I would usually just say, "Well, the specifics are complicated, but basically those areas ended up as Roman provinces, and that's all you need to know about the actual conquest - more interesting is the influence Greece then had Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece Rome. Well, if you ever wanted to know, this book will tell you the story, in great detail. The account is a little dry - perhaps that could not have been helped - but balances between magisterial scholarship on the matter without trying to present every known historical detail, which would probably fill a whole shelf of volumes this size, and be lethally boring. Check it out if you have an interest in the history of the relations between Greece and Rome. Feb 18, Dmitri rated it really liked it Shelves: europe. This is a compact military and political history of the Roman conflicts with Greece between BC, told by a well-known classicist writer and translator. It is set forth without a lot Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece polemical frills, contrary to what is suggested in the Bryn Mawr Classical Review. Events Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece clearly related, and the book works well as an introduction to the period. It is not a comprehensive or in depth survey of the period. It wouldn't be possible in pages. There isn't much social or cultural histo This is a compact military and political history of the Roman conflicts with Greece between BC, told by a well-known classicist writer and translator. There isn't much social Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece cultural history presented, aside from several supplemental passages. Some have been quick to criticize the drawing of comparisons between the Roman Empire and the United States. The importance of this within the overall context of the book has been overstated as it only appears a few times. Waterfield points out that this is not the purpose of the book, nor his area of expertise. But it is not an overall anachronistic portrayal of the period on the part of the author. Waterfield could have deleted these passages and probably should have since they don't really add much to the book. A reader suggested we would be better off to just read Polybius and Livy. The scope of the historian shouldn't be limited to recounting primary sources, influenced as these sources were by the politics and perspectives of their time. A higher goal would be to provide analysis and advance critical thinking about the sources. Waterfield provides such insights, and it is up to us to decide if we agree with them or not. Limiting the scope of an ancient historian to factual representation, besides being unachievable, denies the tradition and evolution of modern historiography. To read Roman history by Gibbon, Mommsen, Syme, or Gruen provides substantially different insights on many of the same events. These writers Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece built upon and argued against the work of their predecessors. The Roman conquest of Greece is replete with competing Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece. Several views advanced were that Rome was defending itself against anarchy in the Mediterranean, that Rome became involved as a series of unplanned circumstances over a long period, or that Rome was intentionally extending their political and economic influence. Waterfield comes down on the side of the last argument, and gives various reasons for this. I can see aspects of these explanations existing simultaneously without contradiction. The bibliography references primary and secondary sources for further study. This book is worthwhile reading if you are interested in a basic recount of the events, or to review ideas you've read elsewhere. For steadfast supporters of the Republic, let it be it known: Rome looks no worse than others in this tome. Just finished reading Taken at the Flood. I thought it did a good job at describing the geopolitical situation inherent in The Roman Republic's eventual conquest of Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece. His analysis was interesting, but at times I found it too cursory. This was particularly true when he was discussing key battles. Nevertheless, I appreciated his key points, namely Rome's strategy of virtual control and balance if power politics. It was definitely enjoyable and interesting. It is obvious that Waterfield's sympathies lie with the Greeks, and his account of the Roman conquest is more focused on how the Greeks abased themselves before the Romans over the course of the second century BC. Waterfield's view of the Romans falls mainly in line with William Harris's thesis: the Romans were aggressively looking to expand their control into Greece and the Balkan peninsula almost from its first foray into Illyria in BC. A useful counterpoint to other accounts, like Erich G It is obvious that Waterfield's sympathies lie with the Greeks, and his account of the Roman conquest is more focused on how the Greeks abased themselves before the Romans over the course of the second century BC. A useful counterpoint to other accounts, like Erich Gruen. Oct 30, Daniel Kukwa rated it liked it Shelves: non-fiction. The book gets a bit tedious when it dives into the fine details surrounding the squabbling Greek states; it would have Taken at the Flood: The Roman Conquest of Greece satisfying if this section had been condensed into a more digestible form. The Roman side of events is far more readable and fascinating, but overall this remains a solid overview of Greece's absorption into the newly coalescing Roman Empire. One stop shops for information are always a god-send to history teachers like myself. Jan 25, Panagiotis Gioxas rated it really liked it. Jun 19, Nathan Albright rated it it was amazing Shelves: challenge. This book is a rare achievement on several levels, one worthy of high praise as well as the praise of reading it and reflecting upon its eerie contemporary relevance. Many readers will likely know little about the context of this period, with shifting alliances and the growing power of Rome over Greek affairs despite the rel This book is a rare achievement on several levels, one worthy of high praise as well as the praise of reading it and reflecting upon its eerie contemporary relevance.