Nero

by Michael Grant

A historical account of one of Rome's worst emperors.

Genres: Biography, History, Classics, Nonfiction, Ancient History

240 pages, Hardcover

First published January 1, 1970

About the author

Michael Grant was an English classisist, numismatist, and author of numerous popular books on ancient history. His 1956 translation of Tacitus’s Annals of Imperial Rome remains a standard of the work. He once described himself as "one of the very few freelances in the field of ancient history: a rare phenomenon". As a popularizer, his hallmarks were his prolific output and his unwillingness to oversimplify or talk down to his readership.

Librarian Note: There is more than one author in the GoodReads database with this name. See this thread for more information.

Reviews

[John Isles · Rating 5 out of 5]

A very readable, reasonably well illustrated, account of the emperor's life based on the written historical sources supplemented by some archaeology. The most scandalous parts of Suetonius's life of Nero (which we're currently reading in the original on the LatinStudy List, https://www.quasillum.com/study/latin...) were omitted, perhaps wisely, but I thought their omission should have been justified. I read this book in the Folio Society edition, which may have different pagination from others, because some of the page numbers in the index are out by one.

[Joy · Rating 4 out of 5]

I always enjoy Michael Grant's histories. They are readable and balanced.

Grant isn't satisfied with "Nero the Anti-Christ," he wants to understand the rounded human being. Yes, Nero was responsible for many aristocratic deaths. Yes, he was dissipated and spendthrift. Yes, in fact, he was a bit off his rocker. He was unsuited to be emperor - the revolts against him were in self-defense. On the other hand, Grant points out that his murders were committed when he was frightened (as he often became). His artistic instincts were dominant, creating an impressive art collection and stirring the contempt of aristocrats who preferred a warlike emperor. His policy in Armenia allowed a rare peace settlement between Rome and Parthia.

Read 2 times

[Diskojoe · Rating 4 out of 5]

I believe that this could be the book, although I have a Folio Society edition simply entitled Nero. A readable biography of a Roman Emperor who could possibly considered the first celebrity ruler in that he wished to be known for his acting & musical abilities rather than for any military achievements.

[Sharon Barrow Wilfong · Rating 4 out of 5]

Grant does not focus on the salacious side of Nero as most other biographers do, although he shows enough of it to allow the reader to understand the corrupt and perverted character of his subject.

Instead, he focuses more on his leadership abilities and what he acquired for the empire, one of which was to free Greece and allow it to become an independent nation again.

Nero is a prime example of why leaders should be elected according to their abilities for the task and not inherit the position. Firstly free election eliminates a lot of murder. When Julius Caesar declared himself emperor he pretty much guaranteed his own assassination. This was true for all the emperors of the first century.

Except for Nero, he committed suicide but only because he knew his death was imminent and he didn't want his body desecrated.

Not that he minded desecrating his own body; what a pervert.

However, what outraged the Roman citizenry was his obsession with the arts. Instead of governing the people, he spent most of his time acting in dramas, singing in operas, writing poetry. According to Grant, this was insufferable to the Romans because it was unfitting for a leader. There were a lot of things Nero did that should have been unfitting for a leader.

And there was the paranoia that naturally comes to someone who murdered his way to the throne. This was probably the final deal breaker, for at least the Roman leaders. They figured they would need to get rid of Nero before he killed all of them off.

This book is not long, so probably not exhaustive. Grant draws mainly on first century writings, such as that of Suetonius, Tacitus and, to a lesser degree, Josephus.

I would suggest reading contemporary writers of Nero first.

[John · Rating 5 out of 5]

Fascinating and very readable account of one of the more notorious Roman Emperors. Apparently, Nero was a frustrated actor. Although not of military bent, he was far from incompetent, but totally misdirected! He was devious and cruel, but then, that's the way he was raised. He ended up killing his mother, but she was really a piece of work. She probably would have killed him, if she could have gotten away with it.

[Robert Hutley · Rating 5 out of 5]

Very well researched and well written biography of the mercurial Nero. If there is a fault it is because it is very much on all fours with Suetonius (who had his own political motivations). I guess this academic work is as much as we know and maybe unlikely to know more but none better to read on the subject.

[Dutch · Rating 4 out of 5]

It was certainly illuminating. I only had heard of Nero being notorious but I never knew why. He started out smooth but imperial life took a downward slide following his murders (if not direct than certainly indirect) of his mother and wife, Octavia. His insistence on performing in artistic contests, his suspected involvement in the Great Fire of 64 and a few massacres associated with him inevitably led to his downfall. Such ended the Julian-Claudian dynasty because Nero had alrady had assassinated every other descendent that might have jeopardized his imperial seat.

Good read for a dense history book.