Jump to content

Talk:Bryan Ward-Perkins

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by 188.29.50.21 (talk) at 11:51, 9 November 2014. The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Worth mentioning..?

It looks like a penguin history book not an academic work with the number of pictures it uses.

All so derivative and I realize he's trying to "reassert the old argument" but his dismissal of a lot of factors we know about thanks to science (you can list off half a dozen even from wiki's fall of the empire pages) so he doesn't actually reassert the old argument he just repeats it with a nod to other factors for about 10 secs.

Bias

There is some bias against his book here. Remember that we are to remain as neutral as possible. Therefore, If there are no objections, I would like to revise this article to make it better fit into the guidelines. Saji Loupgarou (talk) 17:30, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the changes. For your convenience, here is the previous version. Does it now seem more neutral?

His 2005 book, The Fall of Rome and the End of Civilization, was his attempt to address what he perceives to be an overcorrection in the approaches of modern historiography to late Roman history. Using primarily archaeological evidence, Ward-Perkins takes issue with what he alleges to be the "fashionable" idea that the western Roman Empire did not actually fall but instead experienced a mostly-benign transformation into the Christian kingdoms of medieval Europe. In his contrasting view, "the coming of the Germanic peoples was very unpleasant for the Roman population, and the long-term effects of the dissolution of the empire were dramatic."Saji Loupgarou (talk) 17:52, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wrote the original text and have no objection to your edits. I didn't think my text was biased against his book--a book I rather like, in fact--but I can see how one might think it was. Dppowell (talk) 21:19, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]