[...] trends behind the tales." A reviewer for Publishers Weekly billed the book as "a magisterial narrative of the political, economic, cultural and religious fabrics [...] Wickham's achievement contributes richly to our picture of this often narrowly understood period." A reviewer for The New Yorker asserted that while "a single volume [...] using only a slender and unreliable documentary record and no narrative crutches, [covering] six centuries and at least seven major rival powers" sounds like an historiographical stunt, Wickham "largely pulls it off". He credits Wickham with striking comparisons such as valuations in Ireland (slave women and cows) versus valuations in other early medieval societies (coins). Matthew Hoskin, an historian at the University of Edinburgh, wrote a highly positive review in 2014 and described The Inheritance of Rome as a "tour-de-force of narrative history", saying the author makes a large story of interlocking stories readable by "carefully [choosing] not to tell everything at once." He also said that Wickham remembering "the importance of Eastern Europe and the Middle East for the development of history in this period makes it stand out in relation to other books about the era. Indeed, the breadth of The Inheritance of Rome is astounding." Some reviewers were less enthusiastic. The Guardian's Ian Mortimer praised the book for providing information that challenges common generalizations about the period and said, "The breadth of reading is astounding, the knowledge displayed is awe-inspiring, and the attention quietly given to critical theory and the postmodern questioning of evidence is both careful and sincere." However, Mortimer also argued that Wickham overly stresses the difficulty of knowing the specifics of the period and is too wary about offering interpretations that might face criticism. He also said the author gives too little attention to such aspects of the period as battles, private life, and the aesthetics of artifacts, stating that ultimately "all one can see is blurred masses, not people." Laura Schneiderman said in Pittsburgh Post-Gazette that Wickham “sheds little light on the murk” and generally presents events without examining motivations behind them. She said that the work “reads like a lengthy academic paper that assumes the reader already knows a great deal about the period”, and that the author “organizes his chapters around the points he wants to make rather than around coherent narratives.” Michael Patrick Brady of PopMatters described it as "a very meticulous, overwhelmingly detailed account [...] It is,