09-23-2010, 12:50 PM
I must admit that I do not share the author's opinion, that, whereas "the fight in the Teutoberger Wald has received a good deal of attention from military historians", the Jewish Revolt(s) "have been primarily tackled by historians exclusively involved with the religious implications" (p. 1). In my opinion, both have been addressed equally. Certainly, most modern accounts of Roman siege warfare confine themselves to a description of a Jewish War siege (sometimes Jotapata, sometimes Jerusalem, mostly Masada).
So I do not share his pessimism, that "Rome's hard-fought, brutal subjugation of the three (sic) Jewish revolts in the first and second centuries A.D. comprises an unaccountably blank chapter in the literature on early imperial Roman combat operations" (p. 1).
But (as we've found more than once before) one has to drum up interest in a new book somehow. :roll: I note (with some trepidation) the author's proud boast that he has an "ability to extrapolate scenarios from scanty or disjointed data" (p. 3) -- isn't that what historical novelists do?
So I do not share his pessimism, that "Rome's hard-fought, brutal subjugation of the three (sic) Jewish revolts in the first and second centuries A.D. comprises an unaccountably blank chapter in the literature on early imperial Roman combat operations" (p. 1).
But (as we've found more than once before) one has to drum up interest in a new book somehow. :roll: I note (with some trepidation) the author's proud boast that he has an "ability to extrapolate scenarios from scanty or disjointed data" (p. 3) -- isn't that what historical novelists do?
