The multitude of existing studies about Nero does not mean that novel approaches are not welcome. Eric Varner’s monograph decidedly adds much to the corpus of monographs that have addressed the biography as well as the cultural context of the most famous of the allegedly wicked emperors of the Roman world. The title immediately gives away one of the monograph’s conclusions: Varner does not see Nero as a ‘normal’ dynast but especially addresses the outrageous demonstrations of his power and life in his view. At the same time, his book is not a biography nor an analysis of the historical developments under Nero.
The Introduction provides the reader with a compact overview of the book and presents the scholarship standing at the base of this work. In chapter 2 the reader encounters the predecessors, quasi Ab excessu divi Augusti to speak with Tacitus. The Julian, Claudian, and other families involved (such as Nero’s father’s family of the Ahenobarbi) had a complicated relationship. The inclusion of a stemma would have facilitated the understanding of the relationships mentioned. Varner focuses especially on portraits of the family members (sculptures, gems, cameos, and coins) and demonstrates his profound knowledge of Roman portraiture on every page. Nero was the subject of portraits from 49, the moment that his mother Agrippina married Claudius and increased her influence. One of the first notable monuments is the depiction of Britannicus and Nero on the “Two Princes” relief from the Sebasteion in Aphrodisias (p. 40, fig. 2.13). Varner makes clear that among the earliest portraits, statues of a young orator dominate, which may underline Nero’s rhetorical proficiency and proof his early maturity (p. 67).
Chapter 3 discusses the well-known Quinquennium Neronis, the first five years of Nero’s reign, seen as a positive era influenced by the wise counsel of Seneca. Varner does not dwell at length on history and immediately passes on to representation. He connects the ‘type 2’ portraits of the young emperor, demonstrating a great similitude with the heads of Augustus. It was Seneca who had suggested a connection with Augustus. The same bonds with Augustus were made clear in Agrippina’s portraits of the fifth type, since as his granddaughter she was the concrete biological link to the founder of the Empire (figs 3.8-10, 3.17). The iconography of cuirasses of military representations displays Nero’s bond between land and sea, whilst Nero’s depictions in the guise of gods (Jupiter, Apollo, Sol) and mythical figures and the insertions of symbols serve to express political messages of both the emperor and (in these early years) his mother, presented as Ceres and Fortuna. Varner connects Nero’s alignment with the gods with contemporary literary evocations by Calpurnius Siculus, Seneca, and Antiphilus. In these and other works the Augustan notion of the Golden Age (Aurea aetas) returns as a programmatic issue. A brief discussion of the quinquennium Neronis closes this chapter and brings together its main insights.
Chapter 4 rightly gives ample space to Nero’s building projects in Rome.[1] First of all, there was the wooden amphitheater built in one year (57) in the southern Campus Martius, full of technical and luxurious devices as we know from four sources. The Macellum magnum on the Caelius followed in 59, with its two-storied central tholos crowned by a cupola, and the baths in the Campus Martius, a masterpiece of architects Severus and Celer and an example for imperial baths to follow. Some notes on streets and bridges give an idea of urbanistic interventions, but since the fire of 64 devastated such large parts of the town, they are more difficult to verify. Unfortunately, the same is true for the massive interventions after the fire, loudly praised by Nero’s opponents for their quality and audacious character. Here little of the luxuria connected with Nero’s private monuments was at stake.
The utility and nobility of this nova urbs did not prevent Nero from a self-representation full of luxury, matters tackled in two chapters labeled ‘Golden Excess.’ Chapter 5 (“Nero’s Portraits and the cult of Luxury”) brings us back to figural arts. Varner makes clear that Nero’s portraits of the third type, in use between 59 and 64, showing his face fleshier, the hair abundant with curls, and sometimes whiskers and under-chin beard, connect him with the intellectual world of philosophers and Hellenistic rulers (p. 192-193). The fourth type (64-68) shows a developed hairstyle, with a regular row of comma-shaped locks on the forehead. Here, the notion of tryphe displayed by the Ptolemies as a symbol of “fecund peace that fostered prosperity and flourishing cultural achievements” (p. 211) became still more important. If this is true—and to judge from the similarities it is likely—the reader would like to see explanations of Nero’s association with the land of the Nile, for which, indeed, there are several (mostly artistic) indications.[2] Convincingly, Varner argues that this fashion of representation corresponds with literary testimonies of Nero’s looks and behavior. Among the gods Nero fostered, Sol stands out, as we know from the motif of the radiate crown and the huge bronze Colossus erected in the vestibule of his Golden House. The portraits of Nero’s wives Claudia Octavia (rare coins), Poppaea (coins, marble, and precious stones), and Messalina (two busts) share the desire for luxurious representation advanced by the emperor himself. Varner expands on the lavish use of precious cameo and gemstones, noting their exotic provenance and prestige, in a paragraph (pp. 275-278) that could have formed a single section for its relevance for the priceless miniature portraits discussed throughout the book. The chapter unfortunately lacks a final assessment of the ‘excess’ of the imperial portraits, so that the chapter threatens to have the character of a Sammelsurium despite the many thought-provoking interpretative remarks.
Nero’s major ‘excesses’ are his residences in Rome discussed in chapter 6: the Domus Transitoria and the Domus Aurea. The ‘excess’ is the misuse of the dwellings as domains of a false form of otium, that is, not devoted to intellectual and philosophical exercises, as meant by Nero’s teacher Seneca, but to luxuria (p. 285). In my opinion, the fundamental problem is that we have barely any remains of the residential and public parts of the residences used for statal affairs but nowadays can only admire remains of sections devoted to otium. Varner starts his description with portions of a large aula, a sort of basis villae on the northwestern corner of the Palatine that formed part of the Domus Tiberiana (maybe residential sections), and remains of the Domus Transitoria. They display a wealth of marble decorations on floors and walls, indicative of the refined decorative nature of their interiors. The Domus Transitoria[3] constituted a chain of buildings in a vast garden landscape, partly devastated by the Great Fire of 64 and reinstalled in the subsequent Golden House. He suggests that the properties had thoroughfares (transitus) enabling the emperor to move through it. The only section on the Palatine we know was a specus aestivus,[4] an underground dining room known as the Bagni di Livia discovered in the 18th century. The opus sectile floors display what has been called the ‘quadricromia neroniana,’ a four-color scheme with yellow giallo antico, red and green porphyry, and whitish pavonazzetto (p. 298, fig. 6.10). The ceiling paintings are innovative as well, showing complex patterns of centripetal grotesque bands on a white ground with panels filled in with scenes from the Trojan War.[5] Varner does not connect the topic with Nero’s own poem Troica on the fall of Troy[6] but refrains from direct political interpretations, with which I agree. Such messages would not fit the festive ambience and contradict the verdict of a wrong form of otium. Yet, at the same time he associates an Amazonomachy in room A5 with Nero’s Armenian conquest (p. 311). Varner attributes the paintings of the Domus Transitoria to Famulus, known as the principal active artist in the golden House (p. 315-316; Pliny, HN 35.120) and recognizes his characteristics in the figural scenes.
Varner’s description of the Golden House includes the Temple of Divus Claudius (in my opinion unfinished),[7] the Vestibulum and Colossus on top of the old house of the Domitii Ahenobarbi (see above), and the Lake ‘in the shape of a sea’ under the Colosseum. The surrounding landscape formed an ideal villa complex that Varner, attractively, connects with Columella’s agricultural books of the same period. There is a long analysis of the only preserved part, the pavilion on the Esquiline (pp. 328-384). Without evidence, Varner accepts the old thesis that its western wing belongs to the Domus Transitoria phase and that the eastern part was added “after the fire” (of 64, pp. 330, 340), whereas modern research sees the complex as one single post-64 project.[8] The fine decorations in the west wing would belong to the ‘third style’ due to the chronology adopted by Varner, but most shapes and motifs are usual in the ‘fourth style’ as well. The octagonal room 128 is designed, Varner argues, to create special solar effects and solar manifestations (‘hierophanies’) through the year, and thus represent a strong Sol ideology (pp. 334-340). As in the case of the political reading of the mythological scenes in the Domus Transitoria, I have always been very sceptical about this reading since it should imply a strong ideological function of (this section of) the pavilion.[9]
In the vault and wall decorations, Varner observes the frequency of the hanging drapery and connects it with a mix of historical, literary, and ideological arguments (p. 346-347). Varner recalls, one more time, the presence of Trojan or Troy-related images in the uppermost décor of room 80, the ‘Golden Vault’, which was a major source of inspiration for Renaissance artists and has recently been analyzed in a masterly way by Marco Brunetti.[10] Varner connects the image of the central tondo, a mock oculus, with Famulus (see above), but does not work out his proposal. He might have considered the brilliant red frieze only known from Francisco de Hollanda’s 1538 watercolor.[11] Besides, Troy appears in other rooms, e.g., 119 and 129, as well. But figural scenes are scarce and mostly small, especially in comparison with the Domus Transitoria.
Varner completes this overview of the decorations with a discussion of the criticism of luxury in texts from the Neronian era, none of which really dates to the years of construction and decoration of the pavilion. Lucan, Seneca, and Petronius committed suicide in 65 and their cryptocriticism could only refer to the earliest stages of the imperial residences rather than the extant Golden House.
Unfortunately, little of the Golden House’s sculptural adornment, not to speak of original painted panels, tapestry, furniture, and other mobilia, is known: the preserved buildings are empty, and the furniture disappeared after Nero’s death to the palaces of his successors as well as the Templum Pacis (pp. 384-399). Varner includes art works found on the Esquiline (figs 6.80-6.84), among which is the Laocoon (pp. 395-399). Here Varner does not consider the most recent findings. First, according to him, its findspot would match the extreme eastern part of the Oppius pavilion. This can simply not be true, since it is far too distant, some 200 m northeast from that (unfortunately hypothetical) eastern extremity. The room formed a part of the gardens of Maecenas, as Chrystina Häuber has established. Second, he argues that the statue would not be the same as that seen by Pliny, since it consists of more parts than Pliny’s remark ex uno lapide suggests, and would date to the Neronian age due to its style and iconography. This is not the place to go into Varner’s argumentation, but I tend to follow the hypothesis that the Laocoon was created in connection with the Sperlonga sculptures in the thirties BCE; this association has gradually become communis opinio.[12]
As in the previous chapter, one misses an overarching assessment, including an interpretation of the respective parts of the preserved complexes within the parks of Domus Transitoria and Domus Aurea, designed long before Hadrian created his villa at Tivoli. Which were the components of the ‘golden excess’ and how far did Nero differ from his predecessors? Questions to which the influence of politics might be added as a complicating factor.
Nero as a “martyr and monster” is the topic of chapter 7: his end and—rich—tomb are evoked, as well as the immediate aftermath, the three short-reigned successors and the Flavians. Not all his portraits fell prey to damnatio memoriae, but remained preserved, both as Nero’s effigy and recarved into those of his predecessors and successors. Varner wants to argue that the bad name of Nero did not prevent him from remaining an influential factor in Rome. Therefore, this chapter does not so much complete the story of Nero and the arts of his time than it draws an image of the immediate aftermath. Varner also discusses the “restaging” of Rome under the Flavians, when Neronian buildings vanished or got a new function. Among the posthumous memorials, medallions of the late 4th and early 5th centuries connected with the games in the Circus Maximus deserve attention (pp. 448-458). The treatment of Nero’s aftermath gets a finale in chapter 8 in which the “anti-Christ” Nero is the central motif. But Varner also discusses post-antique portraits that often correspond with types 3 and 4 of the ancient portraits. The rich Nachleben, however, also includes operas, starting with Monteverdi’s Incoronazione di Poppea of 1641, drama, films, and modern novels and short stories (e.g., Martin Walser), to name a few examples only.
The book has a fine layout and the many color images reproduce almost all artworks discussed. Their quality is not always great in the printed version, whereas the e-book’s very good images can be zoomed in on and downloaded. Unfortunately, the number of typos is endless: Greek letters and accents are set wrongly; we often encounter instances of turned or double letters; and so on. No meticulous ultimate proof reading has taken place. Τhe book is volume 76 of the series ‘Brill’s Studies on Art, Art History, and Intellectual History,’ edited by Walter S. Melion. The series, encompasses studies on a wide array of topics but few so far on antiquity. Varner’s monograph covers many aspects of Melion’s series, including the subject of intellectual history in the last chapter but some more reflections on that aspect would have added to the value of this extremely rich book.
Notes
[1] Here Varner (p. 153, note 1) refers to my downplaying of Nero’s importance (E.M. Moormann, Some Observations on Nero and the City of Rome, in L. de Blois et al. (eds), The Representation and Perception of Roman Imperial Power, Amsterdam 2003, 376-388.
[2] See A. Russo et al., L’Amato di Iside. Nerone, la Domus Aurea e l’Egitto = Beloved of Isis. Nero, the Domus Aurea and Egypt, exhibition catalog Domus Aurea, 22.06.2023-14.01.2024, Rome 2023 [non vidi]. Varner briefly discusses a Nero-Hercules in Egyptian fashion found in a villa at Tor Vergata near Rome (p. 248, fig. 5.43).
[3] Tacitus, Ann. 15.39. Its name is based on the meaning of transitoria as a connection between the Palatine and another hill. According to Varner, this would be the Esquiline (p. 289), but in fact I was an extension touching the borders of the Gardens of Maecenas, so that they remained two separate properties.
[4] Varner has specus estivus (p. 295, 318, 319)
[5] For the frieze with the Muses of room A2 (p. 311-312, fig. 6.21, see A. Raimondi Cominesi, Muses, Seasons, and Aion Ploutonios. The Dionysiac Frieze from the nymphaeum of the Domus Transitoria, in U. Niffeler & Y. Dubois (eds), Pictores per provincias II – status quaestionis. Actes du 13e colloque de l’Association Internationale pour la Peinture Murale Antique (AIPMA), Basel 2018, 471-480. The same author present further thought provoking observation on this complex in her paper Architectural and Decorative Inventions in the Nymphaeum of Nero’s First Palatine Residence (Domus Transitoria), in M. De Souza & O. Devillers (eds), Neronia X. Le Palatin, émergence de la colline du pouvoir à Rome : de la mort d’Auguste au règne de Vespasien, 14-79 p.C. Travaux présentés à Rome sur le thème du Palatin lors du Xème Congrés international de la Société Internationale d’Études Néroniennes du 5 au 8 octobre 2016, Bordeaux 2019, 153-165.
[6] In room 33, the ‘Red Vault’ of the pavilion on the Esquiline, a series of Trojan images might indeed have associations with Nero’s poem. See M. Brunetti, I Troica di Nerone e la Volta Rossa della Domus Aurea, Ocnus 23, 2015, 137-152; Varner p. 344.
[7] I have suggested that the monument was not completed (Moormann as in note 1). See also idem, Domitian’s remake of Augustan Rome and the Iseum Campense, in M.J. Versluys, K. Bülow-Clausen, G. Capriotti Vittozzi (eds), The Iseum Campense from the Roman Empire to the Modern Age. Temple – monument – lieu de mémoire (Papers of the Royal Netherlands Institute in Rome 66), Rome 2018, 161-177 (with references to other views).
[8] For the old thesis, with modifications considered by Varner, see L. Ball, The Domus Aurea and the Roman architectural revolution, Cambridge 2003. Contra, P.G.P. Meyboom & E.M. Moormann, Le decorazioni dipinte e marmoree della Domus Aurea di Nerone a Roma, Louvain 2013, I, 43-46; H.J. Beste, Neue Einblicke in die Errichtung der Domus Aurea des Nero, Archäologischer Anzeiger 2016, 295-308; H.-J. Beste & F. Filippi, Die Domus Aurea Neros – das neue Konzept eines Herrschersitzes, in J. Merten (ed.), Nero – Kaiser, Künstler und Tyrann, Darmstadt 2016, 189-199; E. Segala & H.J. Beste (eds), Lavori e ricerche nella Domus Aurea durante gli anni 2010-2016. Atti della Giornata di studi in memoria di Fedora Filippi (Roma, 15 settembre 2022), Bari 2022.
[9] E.M. Moormann, Das goldene Haus Neros in Rom: Eine orientalische Erfindung?, in R. Rolle, K. Schmidt, R.F. Docter (eds), Archäologische Studien in Kontaktzonen der antiken Welt, Göttingen 1998, 689-702; P.G.P. Meyboom & E.M. Moormann, Le decorazioni dipinte e marmoree della Domus Aurea di Nerone a Roma I-II, Leuven, Paris, Walpole 2013, passim.
[10] M. Brunetti, Nero’s Domus Aurea : reconstruction and reception of the Volta Dorata, Cinisello Balsamo 2022; Varner pp. 358-361.
[11] Meyboom & Moormann 2013, I, 62, 205-207; Brunetti 2022, 344-352.
[12] Pliny, HN 37,37. The surface would have been polished and maybe covered with plaster and paint to create the effect of a single block. See, most recently C. Häuber, The Eastern part of the Mons Oppius in Rome. The Sanctuary of Isis et Serapis in Regio III, the Temples of Minerva Medica, Fortuna Virgo and Dea Syria, and the Horti of Maecenas, Rome 2014 (amply quoted by Varner), esp. 619; S. Muth (ed.), Laokoon. Auf der Suche nach einem Meisterwerk, Rahden/Westf. 2017, 40-42, figs 3-4 )seven pieces: S. Muth); 291-330 (idem: S. Muth & L. Giuliani), 353-374 (on the “trick” of ex uno lapide: S. Muth); 387-396 (chronology: S.G. Schmid); 445-453 (location: J. Bartz & S. Mulattieri). See also C. Häuber, Laokoon, FORTVNA PAPERS IV [book in fieri of which parts are online]. Here she replies to Varner’s study and refers to old and new works on this topic: (also contra Muth). I thank Chrystina Häuber for discussing this matter.