On the World of Late Antiquity

Throughout this period, the Mediterranean and Mesopotamia are the main theatres of change. The world world of the northern barbarians remained peripheral to these areas. [. . .] The narrative itself gravitates towards the eastern Mediterranean; the account ends more naturally at the Baghdad of Harun al-Rashid than at the remote Aachen of his contemporary, Charlemagne.

To say this book is a ‘whirlwind’ is an understatement. Brown moves here from topic to topic with such speed (and grace) that I feel like I’ve experienced a bit of whiplash. This is a semi-narrative history meant to really define the era of “late antiquity” as a serious period for scholarly analysis. The main takeaway, in my view, is that

• the western Mediterranean experienced a veritable collapse (as you move further north, the deeper the collapse), with some Roman traditions remaining within the Catholic Church and in the hands of clergy

• the eastern Mediterranean experienced far more subtle changes, with Roman structures effectively blurring into rapidly emerging groups and institutions (the Coptic Church; new centers for learning; the maintenance of secular, bureaucratic apparatuses [apparati?]; etc.). This would remain true in the Islamic period, which in some ways saw a cycle of caliphates function as a “successor” to the Roman Empire (this is obviously an over-generalization, there was no single “successor” to Rome). The strength of Roman institutions remained strongest in Syria, Anatolia, and Mesopotamia (and, in the latter two, they often blended with Persian traditions).

Given that this book is some fifty years old now, it’s inarguably dated and more recent scholars have undoubtedly covered the same ground in more detail, perhaps raising major issues with Brown’s work. I’m unfamiliar with these works so I can’t speak to them, but I thought this was an illuminating taste (perhaps a fingerspiel) of the era and region.