A well researched and informative book about a chaotic and less know time of the Roman Empire. It made me learn something and I appreciated the style of writing.
Recommended.
Many thanks to the publisher for this ARC, all opinions are mine

I really enjoyed reading this book, it had that history element that I was looking for and enjoyed about nonfiction books. I enjoyed getting to learn more about Roman and their Emperors. It had everything that I was looking for and enjoyed the way John D Grainger wrote this.

This book explores the demise of Roman senatorial power and the empire’s transition into a full-fledged autocracy in the eighty years after the death of Marcus Aurelius. The book is well-researched fairly easy to read. It provides an interesting analysis of the sociopolitical changes that took place during this time period.

Thanks, NetGalley, for the ARC I received. This is my honest and voluntary review.

This is a study of the 3rd century crisis when the Roman Empire experienced a range of pressures that nearly caused it to buckle. The system of governance was simply insufficient for the size and scale of the empire and the emperor, senate, and army came to grind against each other violently. The emperors sought to wrench themselves free of a senate whose status outstripped their use value. The army faced pressures on every border and decided to seize the resources it needed to do its job properly.

Grainger charts the period of, roughly, 180-280, in terms of these internal tensions and conflicts. It was a period when emperors came and went rapidly, particularly in the years 197 and 238. These two single years are cast as a kind of breaking fever, with the internal balance of the Roman government (imperial court, senate, and army) being recast each time. These are the two ‘revolutions’ of the title – not revolutions from below but revolutions from above.

It is a narrative history, but the narrative is focused on demonstrating that idea of the two revolutions. The first 7 chapters explore the decline and fall of the emperor Commodus (that mad emperor from Gladiator) and the messy aftermath. There is a kind of second half, with a sort of fresh introduction, for the chaotic decades-long crisis that started in 238.

Grainger has set himself the task of charting how Roman governance got itself from the early Caesars to the much more bureaucratic and ceremonial state machine that Diocletian and Constantine constructed. There are many gaps in the record and these require informed speculation to plug; this is where the author’s particular skill set lies. The book is perhaps best described as ‘forensic’. As such, it is the story of the leading political and military figures, many of them are named and whose social relations and biographical details reconstructed (a method called ‘prosopography’). It is not the blood-and-guts version you get in Harry Sidebottom’s Throne of the Caesar trilogy of novels. Grainger’s style is both drier, but also more patient, detailed and yet for all that surprisingly clear.

It is safe to say this book is unrivalled. There are quite a few military histories of the period and some that chart the sequence of emperors, but I can’t think of another book that really covers the political and institutional history of the period like this. I’ve already gone on too long, but it is worth adding that Grainger is a real gem and his contribution to my own understanding of the ancient world, across his many, many books, has been huge. So, author – many thanks.

Unfortunately I have to say that Two Roman Revolutions ended up as a DNF (did not finish) for me. I couldn't really get into the book, as the writing was vibing with me and I had a hard time following the events that take place in this book. So I decided to DNF it instead of finishing it and potentionally giving it a low star rating.