Nero

Roman historians of the first and second centuries CE, chiefly aristocrats, considered Nero (r. 54-68 CE) the last of the Julio-Claudians (27 BCE-68 CE) and a monster responsible for the great fire that destroyed much of Rome and for undermining the economy with lavish expenditures on his palace, the Golden House. Modern scholars have tended to accept this assessment, depicting Nero as a megalomaniac and an incompetent who brought the empire to the brink. Relying largely on contemporary artifacts such as frescoes, statues, military equipment, papyri, medallions, and coins, Opper (British Museum) instead argues that Nero ruled effectively and relatively humanely. Nero partially succeeded in integrating the provinces into the empire and incorporating a large, talented freedmen element into society. Further, his economic policies stimulated the economy, and his cultural interest was similar to the great emperors of the next century. Nero's effectiveness is reflected in his popularity after his death. Despite executing many senators, he failed to liquidate the seditious elements within the aristocracy, which had compromised four preceding emperors. In view of Nero's murdering his mother, this persuasive rehabilitation is only partially successful. This erudite, well-written work has 225 excellent illustrations. Summing Up: Recommended. Lower-division undergraduates through faculty. --A. J. Papalas CHOICE, November 2022 Vol. 60 No. 3