In this engaging, densely informed and gripping account of Roman power, H., a widely acknowledged authority on Roman imperialism, has written a strong and easily accessible introduction to the Roman empire, its organisation, the resistance Rome encountered and how both cultural and legal barriers were brought down to integrate those among the conquered elites who wanted a share in the success.

The first of eleven chapters opens with Rome's conquest of the Italian peninsula. H. describes how Rome tied its fallen enemies to her hegemony by offering her new subjects different treaties and how that strategy gave the city an edge in the long struggle for full control over Italy. Chapter 1 also includes a useful introduction to the Roman political system and the role of the city's different political institutions. Chapter 2 is devoted to the conquest of Rome's first provinces and how the Romans took control of the Mediterranean. One of the assets in the chapter is the discussion of the many different motives that led Rome into war (such as fear from other states, greed and urge for glory among members of the political elite). This allows H. to offer a multifaceted account of why Rome fought so many wars when they did and a sense of why the empire expanded the way it did.

Chapter 3 covers the expansion in late Republican Rome and how the urge for power and glory among the political elite remained a strong incentive to stir up new wars. The wars between different Roman generals and King Mithridates VI of Pontus are seen as one example of how it was not always Rome that provoked new wars. Chapter 4, on the other hand, focuses on the consequences of Rome's expansion: contemporary uneasiness with how the empire started to change both the political culture and everyday life in Rome, but also on how internal unrests, politically motivated violence and civil war gradually became integral parts of Roman politics. In Chapter 5 H. turns to Augustus ‘The Greatest Imperialist’. The reader learns of how Rome's first princeps organised a new political reality with a clear monarchical imprint, of the conquests Octavian/Augustus carried out and of the efforts invested to defend the borders in Germania. H. brings in Tacitus to show how the historian perceived Augustus as a tyrant. Chapter 6 covers the wars and conquest in the age of the Empire from the death of Augustus in 14 ce to the year 212, when the emperor Caracalla granted Roman citizenship to large parts of the free population in the provinces. In the course of the chapter H. moves from Claudius’ conquest of Britain to Trajan's war in Dacia and on to Marcus Aurelius’ efforts to keep the German tribes away from the borders; he then discusses the ever-present dream to be the general that finally conquered the Parthians. The need, real or imagined, to win glory and recognition is seen by H. as a key motive behind most of these expansionistic wars.

With Chapter 7 the book turns more thematic in direction. Here H. covers different aspects of Roman empire building and its consequences. First he focuses on how provincial populations were able to acquire Roman civic rights either by serving as soldiers in the auxiliary forces or by participating in local politics. From one of the successes in Rome's approach to her subjects, H. turns to the question of government and to how Roman officials mismanaged their powers in the provinces in which they served. H. takes the obvious choice and discusses the question of the good and irresponsible provincial government through the lens offered by Tacitus. H. then moves on to include a variety of examples where governors seem not to have met their responsibilities. The question of how Rome saw her subjects is the theme treated in Chapter 9, where Rome's perceived right to rule the world is discussed. H. shows how Rome's explanation for waging war changed slowly from plundering attacks carried out to win booty, glory and political prestige to a sense among members of the empire's intellectual elite that the Romans had a right to improve the life of the people they subjected to their rule. In Chapter 10 H. addresses the question of resistance, a key aspect of Roman imperialism. The focus here is on the ongoing struggle to keep Jerusalem pacified, but H. takes the reader to several other parts of the empire as he outlines the efforts to resist Rome in Gaul, Britain and in Germany or at the borders. Chapter 11 considers how Roman the empire actually was. Here H. touches upon questions of multi-ethnicity and cultural diversity within the empire.

As with all reasonably short introductions, particularly those that cover as vast a question as the history of the Roman Empire, no one can hope to cover everything. H.'s swift and captivating style and his carefully measured punches against Roman power make this book a very good read for new students. But the overreaching conclusion gives call for further consideration. H.'s picture of Mithridates as the aggressor in the wars with Rome serves as the exception that proves the rule that in the late Republic it was usually the Roman generals who sought war. H. may be right – surely Mithridates was no victim –, but he leaves out how Romans pushed for one war after another. Whether Mithridates had much choice other than to fight the Romans is not discussed. Sulla and Marius fought the first real civil war over the command against Mithridates; Rome's consuls and the Senate made no effort to renew the peace agreement that was put in place after the first Mithridatic War; and Lucullus was well ahead with his plan to attack Pontus when Mithridates invaded Bithynia and Asia in the campaign that started the third Mithridatic War. Sure, the limited amount of space available does not permit careful treatment of all wars, but because Mithridates appears as an exception, further thoughts would not have been unreasonable.

In the otherwise useful appendix on the literary, epigraphic and material evidence that the study of the Roman empire rests on, H. follows the mainstream view that a historian like Cassius Dio, whom he uses time and again as evidence, was less skilful and sophisticated than Tacitus, whom H. celebrates as a better historian. Yet, much has happened since H.'s points of reference were written, F. Millar's A Study of Cassius Dio (1964) and S. Swain's Hellenism and Empire (1996). Several decades later, Dio is now winning recognition as a historian who offers a personal but still cohesive analysis of Rome's political history from the foundation to 229 ce, something no other ancient historian can provide. Another approach would be to discuss why ancient historians such as Dio shaped their narratives the way they did, why they judged different episodes, periods or actors as they did and why different historians saw the same episodes and actors differently. This would perhaps slow down the narrative, but on the upside it would offer a stronger sense that even in antiquity history was a construction of the historians who wrote it. That said, with its coverage and clarity, as well as several useful maps, illustrations and helpful bibliography, Rome Victorious is an effective introduction to the Roman Empire, and I will certainly add it to the reading list for relevant courses.