Product Details

• Amazon Sales Rank: #444512 in Books
• Published on: 1998-04-02
• Original language: English
• Number of items: 1
• Binding: Paperback
• 336 pages

Synopsis
Among the provinces long occupied by Rome, Britain retained the slightest imprint of the invading civilization. To explain why this was true, Jones offers an analysis of the economic, social, military and environmental problems that contributed to the failure of the Romans. Drawing on literary sources and archaeological evidence, he disputes the theory that the Anglo-Saxon invasions were the determining agent in the failure of "Romanitas".

Customer Reviews

Bolshie Britons
Jones presents the argument in favour of the scenario of the Britons themselves consciously rejecting Roman civilisation at the end of the fourth century, well before the coming of the English. His reasoning essentially breaks into three categories: the relative population levels of Britons and English, mutual attitudes between the Britons and Roman government, and environmental factors.

In chapter 1, "Population and the invasions", Jones discusses population levels in Britain and the potential size of the English immigration. He suggests that the relative levels were such that the English could not have caused the destruction of Roman civilisation. In chapter 2, "The scale of the Adventus" the numbers of English immigrants are considered based on literary evidence, then in chapter 3, "The Anglo-Saxon invasions", Jones analyses the logistics of the invasion, including such matters as the ship technology of the time. The small numbers back up his suggestion that the English could not have overwhelmed and destroyed Roman society.

Chapter 4, "Romano-British attitudes" goes back once more to literary evidence to show that the British were never entirely enamoured about being part of the empire. Chapter 5 "The Roman provinces of Britain" then considers the Roman governance and how it would have given Britons plenty of reasons for grievance.

Chapter 6 "The environment and the End" considers climate change as a factor. A change in British climate in the 4th century, turning cooler and much wetter would have had a great negative impact on agriculture, creating a cause for massive civil unrest.

So Jones concludes that the Britons must have consciously thrown off Roman civilisation at the end of the fourth century, not merely rebelled as an independent province but retained Roman ways. It's certainly a well-argued presentation, but it feels a little like it's only half the argument. In order to support the thesis, we really need to know how Jones sees British society changing after the rebellion and then how he sees the small number of English subsequently transforming Britain after their arrival (or did they even need to - was the de-Romanised Britain sufficiently similar to the society of the English?) There are plenty of other archaeologists and historians arguing for continuity and even expansion of Roman civilisation after 400 (see for example Britain and the End of the Roman Empire and Britannia Prima: The Romans in the West of Britain).