Having read Tom Holland’s excellent Rubicon: The Fall of the Roman Republic, I was eager to read his latest work of popular history, Persian Fire: The First World Empire and the Battle for the West. My expectation, and hope, was that the emphasis would be on the “First World Empire” aspect, rather than the “Battle for the West.” Holland had done a stellar job of vividly illustrating Roman life, politics, and warfare, and I was hopeful that he would bring the same talent to bear on the even more distant and mysterious ancient Persians. This he does to an extent, but the subject of the book really is the epic clash between the Greek and Persian civilizations and its place in the continuing story of the conflict between “East and West.”
It is all fine for the most part, but I think the subject would have been served better by a separate book on the rise of the Persian Empire with a little more about its antecedents (and a lot more about the specifics of Persian religion, military tactics, and technology), and a separate book about the Persian Wars with Greece. Whilst I’m wishing aloud, I’ll also mention my desire for a separate treatment of the Pelopponesian War and its aftermath, and yet another about the career of Alexander the Great (with lavish details about his exploits in India).
Persian Fire is a good book overall, and I suppose I ought to be satisfied with it, but I can’t help wishing he had written a book more about the Persian Empire itself, rather than its relationship to the West.
Tags: history