Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome

I was first exposed to the wonders of ancient Rome by Colleen McCullough's Master's of Rome series which is a novelized version of the key events in the Roman Republic in its twilight from 110 BC to 27 BC (after which it became the Roman Empire which endured for another ~5 centuries).  It is a great series and basically single handedly sparked my interest in ancient Rome.  Since then I have read a lot of different books (non-fiction and otherwise) about the Roman Republic and, subsequently, Empire.  Of these, my favorite is definitely Anthony Everitt's Augustus.  It a detailed journey through everything that has been unearthed about Augustus and his reign but it is written in such a way that it feels much more like a story than a textbook.

After reading Augustus, all of Anthony Everitt's books have been on my list of things to look for at a used book store especially Cicero because, due to Ms. McCullough's writing, the end of the republic is my favorite time in Roman history (though the parallelisms to Star Wars don't hurt).  I haven't found Cicero yet but I did find the "sequel" to Augustus in a stack off to the side in a used book store in Victoria.  Not wanting to pass up any Everitt book, I grabbed Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome.

Hadrian and the Triumph of Rome follows Hadrian through his life while also explaining the shaping circumstances of his life.  This means that this book spends a lot of time talking about the previous two emperors, Nerva and Trajan who were the first two of the "Five Good Emperors" (making Hadrian the third) which created a great setup to Hadrian's eventual ascension and added some really interesting parts that would have been lacking from the book if the discussion had only covered Hadrian's time as emperor (next time I am in Rome, I am definitely paying more attention to Trajan's column).

Like Augustus, this book follows Hadrian from his birth to shortly after his death in more of a story style than a textbook.  Everitt is quick to admit what we do not know but he makes suppositions to fill in the blanks, always explaining why he thinks what he does.  Hadrian is not quite the key figure in Roman history that Augustus was, so this book was less interesting but it was still a fascinating read and a great window into the days of Rome.

Overall, I would give this book an 88%.