lenzen's review against another edition
4.0
Athens was definitely the world's greatest civilization. Contrary to the title, however, the book covers not only its rise but also its downfall. The author argues that it was precisely because of Athens’ direct democracy and, specifically, choosing citizens to fill most roles in government by lot and paying them to serve that it achieved this greatness. Everitt shows how the achievements of the city plus the general ability of its most aggressive leaders to stir the polis led to overconfidence. This, in turn, led to aggressive expansionism beyond what the city could sustain, harsh treatment of its supposed allies in the Delian League, and outright atrocities against others.
Athens’ great rival Sparta is described in good detail. Other rivals like Thebes and Persia are covered but only briefly. The bulk of the book is focused on Athens’ Golden Age and the Peloponnesian War. It also spends a couple of chapters wrapping up with Athenian history after its loss in this great war up to the rise of Alexander. After that there are a few paragraphs at the end very briefly recounting what happened to the city after Alexander.
For the most part the book is a good read. There are, also, fascinating questions that come to mind along the way such as how much of an Athenian style democracy we would want today? Many on the left want to move in the direction of more direct democracy so it is an important question to ponder. What benefits would we be likely to see and what would be the risks?
The story generally moves along well, although in some cases too many years and too many characters are packed into too short a space. The description of the Athenian outlook on life and how religion influenced it is fascinating. Although I liked the amount of detail on exactly how Athens’ government worked, I would have liked to see more time spent on its intellectual achievements. These are described but I felt too little time is spent there compared to military and political history. Every empire has its military and political history, but Athens’ intellectual achievements are what is most unique about it. So why not more focus there?
The book would probably work better as a two-volume set, with one volume ending at the end of the Peloponnesian War and another covering the subsequent period until Phillip's assassination. As it stands, the latter history is just breezed through too quickly.
Athens’ great rival Sparta is described in good detail. Other rivals like Thebes and Persia are covered but only briefly. The bulk of the book is focused on Athens’ Golden Age and the Peloponnesian War. It also spends a couple of chapters wrapping up with Athenian history after its loss in this great war up to the rise of Alexander. After that there are a few paragraphs at the end very briefly recounting what happened to the city after Alexander.
For the most part the book is a good read. There are, also, fascinating questions that come to mind along the way such as how much of an Athenian style democracy we would want today? Many on the left want to move in the direction of more direct democracy so it is an important question to ponder. What benefits would we be likely to see and what would be the risks?
The story generally moves along well, although in some cases too many years and too many characters are packed into too short a space. The description of the Athenian outlook on life and how religion influenced it is fascinating. Although I liked the amount of detail on exactly how Athens’ government worked, I would have liked to see more time spent on its intellectual achievements. These are described but I felt too little time is spent there compared to military and political history. Every empire has its military and political history, but Athens’ intellectual achievements are what is most unique about it. So why not more focus there?
The book would probably work better as a two-volume set, with one volume ending at the end of the Peloponnesian War and another covering the subsequent period until Phillip's assassination. As it stands, the latter history is just breezed through too quickly.
stephb413's review against another edition
3.0
A readable text looking into the rise of Athens and its influence in the region. I appreciate the insight of the extremely complex relationships between the city-states and Macedonia.
myrmidex's review against another edition
adventurous
informative
relaxing
medium-paced
4.5
Such a great, interesting overview of ancient Athens and the world around it.
ashleyreads88's review
3.0
*I received this for review from NetGalley
There were things that I enjoyed about this book and others that I didn’t. With the Rise of Athens, I felt like I was reading a textbook, and it was a slow read. I loved learning about the history of Athens, there were a lot of interesting things. I found it interesting how the Ionian Greeks didn’t want the Spartans to lead them, but instead wanted the Athenians to lead them (pg. 91), the Greek alphabet was first used in the eight century (pg. 214), The Oresteia is the only surviving Greek trilogy (pg. 220), and I thought it was really interesting how the Greeks invented the tragedy (pg. 220). I really enjoyed reading about how Athens and Thebes, while not very friendly decided to go to war against Sparta together (354). On the topic of war, there was a lot of it, and it seemed to get a little repetitive. Despite my issues with this book, I still learned a great deal about Ancient Greece that I never knew before.
There were things that I enjoyed about this book and others that I didn’t. With the Rise of Athens, I felt like I was reading a textbook, and it was a slow read. I loved learning about the history of Athens, there were a lot of interesting things. I found it interesting how the Ionian Greeks didn’t want the Spartans to lead them, but instead wanted the Athenians to lead them (pg. 91), the Greek alphabet was first used in the eight century (pg. 214), The Oresteia is the only surviving Greek trilogy (pg. 220), and I thought it was really interesting how the Greeks invented the tragedy (pg. 220). I really enjoyed reading about how Athens and Thebes, while not very friendly decided to go to war against Sparta together (354). On the topic of war, there was a lot of it, and it seemed to get a little repetitive. Despite my issues with this book, I still learned a great deal about Ancient Greece that I never knew before.
lfs's review against another edition
3.0
Interesting subject matter presented in a fairly accessible manner, but at the same time, a pretty dense book that was done occasional injustice by technically unclear writing.