Clash of Empires

este es un libro y lo seleccioné porque me gusta este tipo de historia.

Ben Kane ist eine Klasse für sich. Mir gefällt das die Themenbereiche mit 2 bis 3 Büchern auch abgeschlossen ist, obwohl man eigentlich immer weiter lesen möchte. Genauso wie die Lost Legion Trologie, Hanibal, Spartacus eine Empfehlung. Wie pflegt Ben Kane selber zu sagen pflegt 'a Page tuner'.

This is a rather excellent historical novel focused on the Roman intervention in Greece and Rome’s war against and defeat of Macedon and its King, Philipp V. It is also quite original, being the first such novel that I have come across for this war (200 to 197 BC).The story begins by presenting the background of the conflict to come: Philip’s somewhat opportunistic alliance with Hannibal in 215, at a time when the Carthaginian was winning and seemed poised to vanquish Rome and, thirteen years later, Philip’s expeditions in Asia Minor and the Hellespont to establish his hegemony while Hannibal was making his last stand at Zama against Scipio. The description of this battle seen from a legionary’s viewpoint, and of the desperate struggle against the war elephants, is quite breath-taking, as it is of course meant to be, even if historically the charge of Hannibal’s elephants at Zama was mostly foiled and unsuccessful.The whole book, hopefully the first of a new trilogy by Ken Kane, is told from the Roman and the Macedonian perspectives. Each perspective is represented by the viewpoints of the leader and of one of his simple soldiers. On the Roman side, you get the rather unscrupulous and ambitious Roman Senator Titus Quinctius Flaminius and an obscure legionary (Felix) veteran of Zama (and his brother Antonius). On the Macedonian side, the story is told from the perspective of the talented, rash and almost sympathetic King Philip V and Demetrios, a destitute oarsman in the Macedonian fleet who becomes a soldier of the frightening Macedonian phalanx.In addition to being exciting and thoroughly enjoyable - and this is probably sufficient in itself for most readers - they are plenty of other reasons for reading this book. Before listing them, however, be aware that this novel belongs to the “unputdownable” kind – the kind you read from cover to cover – so you might want to avoid starting to read it in the evening before a day’s work.The author has (once again) thoroughly researched the historical background and, in particular, largely used Walbank’s old (first published in 1940) but still unmatched biography of Philip V. The latter’s successful ambush of Roman foragers that almost turned into a disaster as the King was nearly killed because of his temerity is historical, so was his lightning raid (something for which he had quite a reputation) with a picked force of cavalry and light troops which nearly stormed Athens. Also historical is his final failure – after holding it up for six weeks - to block the Roman army in a valley that he had carefully fortified. Also historical is the successful defence of the fortress of Atrax where the phalanx did repulse the multiple assaults of the legions across the breached walls and routed them.This is where one of the main qualities of this book needs emphasising. Most historians, including Walbank, and following some of the Pro-Roman sources (Polybius and Livy in particular) tend to view the final Roman victory as unavoidable with the benefit of hindsight. This was not necessarily what the protagonists may have thought at the time, with Philip being clearly shown as believing he could win the war even against the odds and the outcomes of the various clashes being far from one-sided. The perspective of the Roman legionaries, and the sheer terror of having to go against the wall of spears of the phalanx and getting stabbed without being able to get to grips with their opponents is particularly well rendered in two of the battles.Another feature of this book is the somewhat sympathetic portrait that the author draws of Philip V, a portrait that is quite a lot more favourable that what can be found in many of the sources, whether ancient or modern. He did arrest Herakleides, his admiral and one of his closest advisors.Although the reasons alleged by the author for doing so seem to be his own invention and the admiral’s fate does not seem to be recorded in the sources, both of Ben Kane’s interpretations are at the very least plausible. Philip V had also brutally purged (i.e. executed) a few years before all of the advisors that he had inherited from his predecessor Antigonos Doson (King from 229 to 221) who was not only his stepfather and his mentor and tutor as mentioned in the book, but also his father’s cousin and the one who (rather heroically) managed to hold together most of the Macedonian Empire and re-establish Macedon’s dominance over Greece despite suffering from consumption. Regarding Philip’s character, the feelings that the author lends to him, in particular when selling Greeks into slavery or deporting Thessalians to Macedonia and destroying their crops and homes in order to deprive the Romans of support are also interpretations. While such harsh measures cost him a lot in terms of reputation across the Greek world and were used against him in his enemies’ propaganda, Alexander, correctly shown by the author as the role model of both the Macedonian King and his Roman opponent, had also committed his fair share of atrocities when he destroyed Thebes and sold tens of thousands into slavery and would commit many more in the following years. In both cases (Alexander and Philip V), the rationales may have been financial – both were desperately short of money to pay their troops when the respective sacks and destructions took place – although vengeance, spite and the desire to make an example may also have played a role.Ultimately, what also makes Philip V somewhat sympathetic across the book, as opposed to the traitorous and scheming Roman general and politician, is the fact that he is shown as fighting for a cause (the preservation of his kingdom) and loved by his soldiers and subjects. What the book does also show, however, is that, while Rome was the aggressor, its intervention was essentially the result of Philippe V’s attempts to re-establish Macedon’s hegemony across Greece and Asia Minor. These attempts, never entirely successful, essentially drew all of the lesser powers together with several of them (in particular Rhodes, Athens and Pergamum) seeking Rome’s intervention on their behalf.A five star read and I am very much looking forward to the second volume which will certainly include the climatic clash and battle between Romans and Macedonians.

Thanks Ben Kane! Once again, such an exciting read. A lot greater sense of gritty, shoulder rubbing with the locals than in previous books; starting to feel like we’re really there. Doubtlessly well researched and while I can’t wait for the next book in the series to be released, don’t rush it - write another great one like this!

Good read well written