Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome

Not nearly as good as his biography as Cicero, maybe because this book was not meant to be a biography. It tells the history of Rome from Vespasian through Hadrian, with about half of the book being focused on Hadrian's rule. Unfortunately, the underlying sources are relatively sparse and the book is filled with perhaps and maybes that link Hadrian to the world and events of his time. You don't feel like you know Hadrian and to the degree you do he doesn't seem particularly complex or interesting, unlike Cicero.

That said, overall the book presents a good history of the Roman empire at it's peak -- about 50-150 years after the well chronicled period of the end of the Republic and first series of Emperors. The portrait of that time show more through the lens of a relatively tranquil and consolidation period was interesting and worth reading -- although lacking in the drama and excitement of the end of the Republic. show less

Before I discovered a passion for the history of the Roman Empire, I found myself drawn to Emperor Hadrian - what he accomplished, who he was, and the significant romantic notion of his worldy, artistic, monument-building approach to leading the Roman Empire.

Anthony Everitt's "Hadrian - and the Triumph of Rome" blends a fairly limited set of contemporary and near-contemporary resources with wonderfully portrayed color commentary of the times in which Hadrian lived.

In a recent visit to Rome and Italy, you couldn't swing the proverbial Roman stray cat without hitting an architectural ghost of one of Rome's most heard of, yet least-known Emperors. My wife is a U.S. history buff and teaches it to gifted students in 6th grade. She and her show more students are immersed in American history's greatest characters, but while poking fun at all of the Hadrian-ness we bumped into, she couldn't get her arms around his breadth of character. The only comparisons I could make were to early American Reneissance men like Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson.

Everitt points at Hadrian's two most lasting contributions to history. First, he stopped the expansion of the Empire that his adopted father, Emperor Trajan had pushed to the greatest limits the Empire had known. Not only did he halt expansion, he actually contracted the Empire. To demarcate that which was governed by Hadrian, he built walls. He built miles and miles of walls, of stone, of dirt, and of wood; creating physical barriers between the Empire's governed, and the ungoverned barbarian frontiers. Of course, the most lasting barrier is Hadrian's Wall in northern UK.

The second major theme of his 21-year term was a very sincere devotion to the arts - specifically anything relating to ancient Hellenist culture. In laying the groundwork for the society in which Hadrian grew up, Everitt points to Emperor Nero. While generally reviled as a murderer, who decimated the Senate, and had been widely accused of burning down his own city, Nero was a great philhellene, who opened a gateway in ancient Rome, into Greece. Within the creative and artistic communities, Nero was actually celebrated as he aspired to be a poet, musician and performer. And so Hadrian followed suit, although he was a much more grounded and savvy politician as well as a more genuine (and realistic) artiste.

Hadrian was born in southern Spain. Not much detail is known about Hadrian's youth, but his family was connected to the family of Trajan. When Hadrian's father died, Trajan took him along his own meteoric rise to the top of the Roman political structure. Hadrian's adoption is not clear cut. There's some evidence (or rather lack of evidence) to indicate with any assuredness that Trajan had specifically pronounced Hadrian as his heir.

Everitt's biggest success in "Hadrian" is his portrayal of life in the 2nd century AD. His writing is crisp, and his subject is thoroughly researched. The book's strength lies not in its narrative (which, to be fair, is difficult considering the dearth of resources on Hadrian), but on its breadth and scope that paints Hadrian very colorfully in his cultural context. show less

A good biography of an philosophic and enigmatic emperor. Suffers a bit from the comparative lack of sources, but does a remarkable job at filling in with some good context.

This is the third of Everitt's trilogy on some of Rome's leading lights. The other two, Cicero and Augustine respectively, were well-written as well as this one is. Hadrian is an enigmatic figure which Everitt brings to light in an expressive and balanced manner.

Not nearly as good as his biography as Cicero, maybe because this book was not meant to be a biography. It tells the history of Rome from Vespasian through Hadrian, with about half of the book being focused on Hadrian's rule. Unfortunately, the underlying sources are relatively sparse and the book is filled with perhaps and maybes that link Hadrian to the world and events of his time. You don't feel like you know Hadrian and to the degree you do he doesn't seem particularly complex or interesting, unlike Cicero.

That said, overall the book presents a good history of the Roman empire at it's peak -- about 50-150 years after the well chronicled period of the end of the Republic and first series of Emperors. The portrait of that time show more through the lens of a relatively tranquil and consolidation period was interesting and worth reading -- although lacking in the drama and excitement of the end of the Republic. show less

Being a life-and-times treatment of Rome's great emperor Hadrian and the factors which brought his to the throne. The book is discursive to a fault, especially at the start of the book. For about the first third of the book we hear nearly nothing about Hadrian, which would be all right if the author, who is quite competent, were a bit more liberal with striking insight or superlative prose. Eventually, as this subject becomes prominent and his life better-documented, the book is enjoyable and informative.

A perfectly serviceable biography of Hadrian, but one that is hampered by the paucity of hard evidence about the emperor's early life and career. Well written and researched, but simply due the subject and available evidence, not as comprehensive or engaging as some of Everitt's other works. Still worth reading, if you're interested in the period.