It looks like this covers Diocletian's monetary reforms, which is one of my absolute favorite parts of roman history - looking forward to it!
If you're talking about Mike Duncan's podcast, note that it ended in 2012 with the deposing of the final Western Emperor.
There is a spiritual successor by Robin Pierson called "The History of Byzantium" that picks up shortly after the end and is still ongoing after over 230 episodes.
Duncan's current podcast is "Revolutions", which covers a variety of historical revolutions. I've been listening for a bit now and am only on the third (French) of ten revolutions. Definitely recommend the show for people seeking a history podcast.
[1]https://www.amazon.com/SPQR-History-Ancient-Mary-Beard/dp/16...
The book also seemed like a survey that had chunks missing out of the map. The parts that were there were well done (excepting not giving any good reason for distrusting the ancient sources) and I definitely learned things. But I don't feel like I got a good feeling of the course of Roman history, more like little vignettes along the way.
I can't say I dislike the book, but I think it could be better. (Although, I'm a complete novice in Roman history, so that might influence my opinion. And maybe the book wasn't written for me, too.)
It isn't a perfect book, but it's very readable, informative, and seems to be well regarded. I was on a Rome kick at the time and didn't find anything that seemed to be completely out of left field.
[0]: e.g. Thucydides' History of the Pelopenesian war might be accurate, but honestly, why would it be? It's even worse when you have stuff like Caesar's writings.
However it was and still is enjoyable.
> While I am going at points to gesture to Gibbon’s thinking, we’re not going to debate him; he is the ‘old man’ of our title. Gibbon himself largely exists only in historiographical footnotes and intellectual histories; he is not at this point seriously defended nor seriously attacked but discussed as the venerable, but now out of date, origin point for all of this bickering.
Holding it in ill-regard would be punching down. It's an 18th work! If it were at all up to date, that would indicate serious stagnation in the academy. Of course, there has been a great amassing of new evidence since then, especially non-textual.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominate == USSR, basically. It's too editorialized to stand as a modern historical text, but it's great fun to read nonetheless!