Slave Revolts in Antiquity: A lack of academic following?

Theresa Urbainczyk, a professor at the University College in Ireland, published a book "Slave Revolts in Antiquity."  The book is unique because the academic following of ancient slave revolts has been neglected.  In her book, Urbainczyk hypothesizes that there is a clear explanation for the lack of scholarship on the subject.  She argues that although slaves did revolt in antiquity, in some instances by the thousands, and sometimes in revolts lasting for years, but the key fact that they all eventually ended and slavery persisted.  She also claims that the slaves did not really have a chance of succeeding.

Crucial though to Urbainczyks theory, is the significance of studying slave revolts in giving an understanding of the societies they took place in.  Additionally, studying ancient slaves revolts give insight into later revolts.

Urbainczyk points out many similarities between more recent revolts and revolts in antiquity, but I found her comparison of the scholarship of the two to be more significant.  She cites Moses Finley's comments of Marx's "Communist Mannefesto," where Finley basically says that since Marx made the claim that all history is the history of class struggle, the study of ancient slavery has be come a "battleground for Marxists and non-Marxists.

Utilization of Circumstance:

Can we find any similarities in the circumstances of outbreaks of slave revolt in antiquity?

This is a very interesting question, and Urbainczyk tries to tackle it:

Basically slave revolts popped up at all different times, but the "successful" revolts, having significant impacts on ancient society mainly took place during times that the masters were at war or there was alternative political unrest.  Also, some slaves, learning of  other rebellions, would rebel themselves, and this domino effect was responsible for many specific revolts.

More to come...

Source:
Urbainczyk, Theresa, "Slave Revolts in Antiquity". UCLA Press. 2008.