I’d preordered this from my local bookstore, I can’t wait to pick it up and start reading. I think I’ve read a half-dozen books of yours by now and I’m never disappointed. Can’t wait to read this one too!
I got this book almost a week early because I preordered it shipped home haha, it’s simply another amazing book by you that I’m excited to dive into. “Philip and Alexander” is my favourite of yours.
What you've said about the limited nature of warfare is interesting in comparison with the warfare of the period of the Roman conquest of the Mediterranean as it strikes me that the Romans are behaving more like a Hellenistic monarchy in terms of limited objectives.
Question: What was the Persian agricultural economy like? The Persians seem to have only one major agricultural heartland, that of southern Mesopotamia. With smaller agricultural regions in Azerbaijan, Media, Fars, Khorasan and Transoxiana. But this is far smaller and far more lopsided than that of the Romans who had more land in total, and land which is far more suitable for agriculture, spread throughout the empire. Though I have read that under the early Arab Caliphates, Southern Mesopotamia (Sawad) produced 5x the land tax of the Levant and 4x that of Egypt. Was this true in the centuries prior? Is this also why the capital was Ctesiphon/Selucia, exposed on the far west of the empire, but able to control this incredibly rich region?
That's a big question, and it means piecing together evidence from earlier and later as well as what survives from the Parthian and Persian eras. Both dynasties invested a lot in irrigation systems where these were feasible - it was another reason why Sassanians in particular were keen on taking large numbers of captives as a labour force. There was clearly a growth in productivity during these centuries - probably not consistent, but dipping in periods of internal instability. It is hard to trace let alone quantify in detail. However, at a basic level, the Roman Empire (while united) was significantly larger than the Parthian/Persian and had more land with greater rainfall, hence larger population and overall wealth.
@@AdrianGoldsworthytheAuthor Thank you for answering my question. So very roughly, would it be possible to tell if Parthian/Sassanian Asoristan/Southern Iraq was richer than the individual provinces (like Egypt, Africa, Syria, Hispania, Gallia etc) of the Roman empire save perhaps Italia? Since it seems to have more agricultural land than Egypt (perhaps double?), While also being a major cultural heartland for the world over, and in later centuries under the Umayyads, who actively disliked the Iraqis, and neglected it's irrigation, Iraq was still many times richer than their home province of Syria or Egypt. Despite the deluge of 628 destroying a large amount of Sassanian irrigation systems. Or are there not enough sources to even make a rough comparison?
If you read Goldsworthy's book, you'll see that this isn't the case. Rome was always significantly larger and more populous. Goldsworthy gives a rough estimate of 50-60M people in Rome during the time of the Principate, compared to around 15M for Parthia. Persia was smaller. It encompassed a lot of arid areas and deserts, and thus couldn't support as large a population as the Roman Empire.
![[Full Episode] The Restaurant War Thailand ศึกพ่อค้าซ่าแม่ค้าแซ่บ Episode 2 | 29 ก.ย. 67](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/r3lfLNH6Ke4/mqdefault.jpg)
I’d preordered this from my local bookstore, I can’t wait to pick it up and start reading. I think I’ve read a half-dozen books of yours by now and I’m never disappointed. Can’t wait to read this one too!
I got this book almost a week early because I preordered it shipped home haha, it’s simply another amazing book by you that I’m excited to dive into. “Philip and Alexander” is my favourite of yours.
What you've said about the limited nature of warfare is interesting in comparison with the warfare of the period of the Roman conquest of the Mediterranean as it strikes me that the Romans are behaving more like a Hellenistic monarchy in terms of limited objectives.
so happy to find you on youtube ...love your work and look forward to this new book thx for all your work!!
I finished the Eagle and the Lion just last week. It covered an area of ancient history I knew very little about. Highly recommended!
Thank you, Professor Adrian. Congratulations!
Thank you for speaking about the weaker parts of this work and the pitfalls one can encounter.
Excited to read this.
Can you suggest a good book on Sassanid society? Great to find your channel - and about one of your books that I don’t have.
Question:
What was the Persian agricultural economy like?
The Persians seem to have only one major agricultural heartland, that of southern Mesopotamia. With smaller agricultural regions in Azerbaijan, Media, Fars, Khorasan and Transoxiana.
But this is far smaller and far more lopsided than that of the Romans who had more land in total, and land which is far more suitable for agriculture, spread throughout the empire.
Though I have read that under the early Arab Caliphates, Southern Mesopotamia (Sawad) produced 5x the land tax of the Levant and 4x that of Egypt.
Was this true in the centuries prior?
Is this also why the capital was Ctesiphon/Selucia, exposed on the far west of the empire, but able to control this incredibly rich region?
That's a big question, and it means piecing together evidence from earlier and later as well as what survives from the Parthian and Persian eras. Both dynasties invested a lot in irrigation systems where these were feasible - it was another reason why Sassanians in particular were keen on taking large numbers of captives as a labour force. There was clearly a growth in productivity during these centuries - probably not consistent, but dipping in periods of internal instability. It is hard to trace let alone quantify in detail.
However, at a basic level, the Roman Empire (while united) was significantly larger than the Parthian/Persian and had more land with greater rainfall, hence larger population and overall wealth.
@@AdrianGoldsworthytheAuthor Thank you for answering my question.
So very roughly, would it be possible to tell if Parthian/Sassanian Asoristan/Southern Iraq was richer than the individual provinces (like Egypt, Africa, Syria, Hispania, Gallia etc) of the Roman empire save perhaps Italia?
Since it seems to have more agricultural land than Egypt (perhaps double?), While also being a major cultural heartland for the world over,
and in later centuries under the Umayyads, who actively disliked the Iraqis, and neglected it's irrigation, Iraq was still many times richer than their home province of Syria or Egypt. Despite the deluge of 628 destroying a large amount of Sassanian irrigation systems.
Or are there not enough sources to even make a rough comparison?
Very good...! Thank you Dr Goldworthy
Very good...! Thank you Dr Goldworthy
Very good...! Thank you Dr Goldworthy
Two practically almost equal rivals.
Not really.
@@Unknown-jt1jo in the military sense I mean.
If you read Goldsworthy's book, you'll see that this isn't the case. Rome was always significantly larger and more populous.
Goldsworthy gives a rough estimate of 50-60M people in Rome during the time of the Principate, compared to around 15M for Parthia.
Persia was smaller. It encompassed a lot of arid areas and deserts, and thus couldn't support as large a population as the Roman Empire.
@@Unknown-jt1jo that is I wrote ''almost''.
Works of Jozef Wolski shed some more light on Parthian State, which are available in Polish and French mainly.
Any English language summaries around?
@@qboxer something on the net should be available.