Don't cite it as a reference for your dissertation, but....
While there are many inaccuracies throughout the book with regards to the various ages of the characters, the equipment and terminology of the Roman legions (Ford writes as though they were the legions of Marius and Gaius Julius Caesar, but the legions of the 5th century AD were as different from those as Revolutionary War soldiers are from the soldiers of today) this book is nevertheless an entertaining page turner and I enjoyed it a great deal.
The story revolves around the two great generals who fought each other at the Battle of Chalons (aka the Battle of Catalaunian Fields) in 451 AD. On one side is Flavius Aetius, the "last of the Romans," who is depicted as the epitome of the intensely disciplined, completely honorable, upright and puritanical Roman male ideal. (The reality was that Aetius was as ambitious as Julius Caesar and had numerous intrigues in the political arena) On the other side is the King of the Huns, Attila.
The story begins with them as teenage boys - each spending considerable time in the royal courts of each other's homelands as "hostages" to guarantee that alliances would be observed. While Aetius learns the art of Hunnish warfare and indeed is treated as a son by the Hunnish King Rugila, Attila impatiently passes the years in the Roman capital, Ravenna, learning little of Roman ways, but observing their decadence, their weakness, their need for material comforts. As they grow in martial stature and skill, they eventually become friends and develop a genuine admiration for each other, but their destinies are to lead their respective nations against one another.
All of this eventually comes to a head at the Battle of Chalons. Attila and his Hunnish horde had been invincible to this point. Although the book makes only scant mention of it, up until Chalons, Attila's army had lay waste to more than a dozen cities in Gaul (modern-day France) after successfully crossing the Rhine. Aetius finally catches up with Attila when Attila is attempting to attack the city of Orleans (this is also not mentioned in the book) and Attila is forced to turn and fight. The description of the battle is similar to what I read in other accounts, but the numbers involved are frankly, not believeable. Ancient historians had a penchant for hyperbole, and in any event, one million men is just a ridiculous number. Even great modern-day battles like Stalingrad did not involve a million men at a time - but I digress. The Battle of Chalons is technically a draw, since neither side carried the field, but because the Huns had been stopped, finally deprived of clear-cut victory, they were forced to retreat and eventually return to the Hunnish lands beyond the Danube River. It was this victory that preserved the Western Roman Empire from Hunnish domination, even if only for a few more decades...
In all, this was a very entertaining book, and can serve as a good introduction to someone wanting to know more about that period in history, but without having to read through dry, boring academic history texts. I recommend it.
The Last Years of the Roman Empire
For centuries Rome had ruled the known world with an iron glove. From Africa to the wind swept island of Britain the Roman legions had held sway over the native inhabitants. Wherever the conquered they made there mark bring stability and wealth to those who were prepared to bow to the might of Rome. Now from the east came an enemy that caught the Roman Empire when its decline had begun.
The author has an ability to bring the scenes of ancient warfare to life for the reader. He captures the horror of it all. The screams of both men and animals. The bloodshed and the pain. Battles where you do not fight your enemy from a distance as with modern warfare, but close up, toe to toe, where you can smell the fear in the sweat of your opponent.
The author brings to life the period of 400 AD when the Roman Empire is buckling. Not yet on its knees, but not far off and now it must face the most dangerous enemy Rome has even known, a man named Attila . . .
Exciting but badly flawed
This exciting but flawed book is about the intertwined lives of two men from boyhood to middle age culminating at the battle of Chalons in AD451. One is Flavius Aetius the effective ruler of the western Roman Empire, the other Attila the Hun. Attila is well researched, however the same can't be said for Aetius.The author's poor knowledge of the Roman army and court matters a lot as this is a book about war and power.
The army he describes might have been that of Julius Caesar 500 years earlier, he uses obsolete terms (pilum, praetorian guard etc), he uses `legion' frequently and even mentions the 10th legion - Caesar's favourite, although the legions were split up a century earlier into bands of around a 1000 men, probably better described as units or regiments, The author has no knowledge of armor, army ranks and army life in general. Aetius was not count of Gaul, there was no such title.
The Roman imperial court and ceremonial are virtually ignored, the intrigues (in reality there by the bucketful) and jockeying for position and power by eunuchs and soldiers are absent. In reality the Emperor Valentinian 3rd murdered Aetius in AD454 and was himself killed shortly thereafter as was his successor. The Emperor's sister (called a princess!) is introduced to Aetius not the other way around.
Bizarrely the author uses `Flavius' as a given name and `Aetius' as a surname in the modern manner, the opposite is true, thus he is forced to rename Aetius' father from Flavius Gaudentius to Gaudentius Aetius!
With these exceptions it is a fair read about a rather obscure period of history provided you don't stop to think about the oddities like Aetius the ruler of the west only having a staff of one one-legged man!
I would not have have bothered to write this review but I was irritated by the author's continual reference to his 'research' and having the book vetted by a classicist! also the reviews on the front flyleaf stress the non-existant research.
For me these mistakes spoilt the book and the book's cover sums up my view, it shows a barbarian warrior fighting a soldier wearing vaguely roman armor, 'vaguely roman' says it all.
Ford's Best Yet
This is definitely the best novel that Ford has written so far. I could not put this book down until I was finished. I even took a day off work so I could get through it uninterupted.
In his three previous novels, Ford has always written from the perspective of a secondary character. He has effectively left that method behind in "The Sword of Attila" and shown how much he has matured as a writer of historical fiction.
I must stress...FICTION! Anyone that knows the real history of this period in time might find the book annoying. Ford had definitely taken a lot of creative license over distances, sizes of armies, language, and relationships between historical figures. However, as long as you can ignore the glaring innaccuracies, you will love this book.
I should also note that Ford does explain what he has invented or changed at the end of the book for those readers that know the history of the late roman empire. He also recommends some great complementary reading for those that are interested in learning more.
READ THIS BOOK!
Outstanding
Interesting and informative piece that captured life in two disparate cultures over a millenium ago. I hope that it is written as a screenplay one day.
(23 reviews)
