Whether or not Syme made a convincing case for revolution at Rome, hisRoman Revolutiondid not effect a revolution in Roman history. To be sure, his choice of where to start and where to end his discussion was unorthodox (if orthodoxy was the old edition of theCambridge Ancient Historyor Rice Holmes or the periodization of Oxford Greats), but his relentless focus on individual political actors and their relations with one another differs from the emphasis of earlier scholars only in its priorities and intensity. Whether or not Wallace-Hadrill makes a convincing case for revolution at Rome,Rome's Cultural Revolutionis revolutionary. To be sure, the individual parts of the book have been variously anticipated in particular studies, but the insistence that what happens in the history of buildings,instrumentum domesticum, dress, and monuments constitutes not simply the background to a political story, but is itselfthestory of Late Republican Rome — in W.-H.'s own words ‘that the political transformation of the Roman world is integrally connected to its cultural transformation’ (xix) — challenges the assumptions on which Roman historians have built the history of the Republic ever since Asinius Pollio.
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 18 citations exist upstream.