Showing posts with label 3rd century. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 3rd century. Show all posts

Sunday, October 4, 2020

Review: Sons of Rome by Gordon Doherty & Simon Turney

Sons of Rome (Rise of Emperors #1)
Synopsis: Four Emperors. Two Friends. One Destiny.

As twilight descends on the 3rd century AD, the Roman Empire is but a shadow of its former self. Decades of usurping emperors, splinter kingdoms and savage wars have left the people beleaguered, the armies weary and the future uncertain. And into this chaos Emperor Diocletian steps, reforming the succession to allow for not one emperor to rule the world, but four.

Meanwhile, two boys share a chance meeting in the great city of Treverorum as Diocletian's dream is announced to the imperial court. Throughout the years that follow, they share heartbreak and glory as that dream sours and the empire endures an era of tyranny and dread. Their lives are inextricably linked, their destinies ever-converging as they rise through Rome's savage stations, to the zenith of empire. For Constantine and Maxentius, the purple robes beckon... 



Wow. What a challenge - two authors - two characters - one book. Did they pull it off - sure did.

This is the story of Emperor Constantine and his rival Emperor Maxentius, Set in the 3rd and 4th Centuries AD, we follow our two main characters as they embark on their rise to power within the cesspit - "... the discoloured underbelly of the Empire with all its sickening ungliness ..." - that was Rome and the Roman Empire at the height of the religious persecutions.

The Roman Empire at this time was one of chaos and anarchy. Civil wars, petty rivalries, invasions from enemies both within and without, and disease were rending the empire so perilously that the Emperor Diocletian tried to bring order by distributing power to a four-ruler tetrarchy that would govern the four quarters of the empire. Simply put, the Tetrarchic Emperors (Diocletian, b, Galerius, and Constantius), were more or less sovereign in their own lands, and they travelled with their own imperial courts, administrators, secretaries, and armies. They were joined by blood and marriage and these relationships implied a line of succession. Galerius and Constantius would become Augusti after the departure of Diocletian and Maximian. Maximian's son Maxentius and Constantius's son Constantine would then become Caesars. In preparation for their future roles, Constantine and Maxentius were taken to Diocletian's court in Nicomedia. (source: Wikipedia). Could this model work - not for very long as each man's personal ambitions came to the fore.


It was also during the reign of Diocletian that the persecutions of Christians became more rampant and decidedly brutal with the result being death, torture, imprisonment, or dislocation for many Christians. This was and is an extremely complex subject with varying degrees of enforcement and tolerance - whereas Galerius and Diocletian were avid persecutors, Constantius (father of Constantine) was unenthusiastic. 

Each author provides the first person narrative for their character, as the stories run smoothly, contemporaneous, enhancing and contributing to the narrative of the other. 

Doherty takes on the character of the colossus - Constantine (below left). A man known to all as the Emperor who sanctioned the legitimised the religion of Christianity and made it the dominant religion of the Western (Roman) Empire. There is a plethora of information on Constantine - suffice to say that the youth of Constantine is presented in a very plausable, well crafted manner.

  

Turney tackles Maxentius (above right), an emperor about whom very little is known, and as such, had the more difficult tasks of constructing a narrative for this elusive monarch. Unlike the more militaristic Constantine, Maxentius is more the politician. He comes across as the more sympathetic of the two - the underdog - that one in instinctively drawn to him more - even more so if one is a student of this particular period. 

This could quite easily have been a fail but in this instance, it isn't. This is very well researched by authors who have an obvious passion (obsession?) for the period and their characters, and this story flows seamlessly.   It is the first in a series, for though whilst we begin at the end - the Battle of Milvian Bridge - we are far from it this outing as the tale continues with Masters of Rome.

For the purist, the last dozen pages are taken up with notes and Latin terms.


Sunday, July 15, 2018

Book review: Roman burial art reveals forgotten women of Christianity


Is there such a thing as reverent glee? If so, then that's how I would have described St. Joseph Sr. Christine Schenk as she bounded among the ruins of ancient Cenchreae, the location of the house church of the deacon Phoebe during a travel program I led. There is something about standing in the place mentioned in our Scriptures that stirs us, and reminds us that our ancestors in the faith were real, historical folks. In this case, a first-century woman whom the Apostle Paul called "our sister, who is [also] a diakonos of the church at Cenchreae" (Romans 16:1).

It is this sense of immediacy that permeates Crispina and Her Sisters: Women and Authority in Early Christianity. This connection across the expanse of time makes what could have been a recitation of dusty facts into an engaging read.

While her work makes a valuable contribution to the conversation about women's authority roles within the early church, Crispina and Her Sisters does a mitzvah for academics who investigate early Christian burial practices. Schenk analyzed 2,119 images and descriptors of sarcophagi (stone coffins) and fragments from the third to fifth centuries — "all currently available images of Christian sarcophagi and loculus plates" — focusing on the portraits and their accompanying iconography.