TY - CHAP
T1 - Introduction
AU - Meijer, Esther
PY - 2022/9/29
Y1 - 2022/9/29
N2 - In their contributions, the scholars take different methodological approaches to varying types of evidence to show that the Flavian emperors did not categorically or uniformly oppose Nero. From Vespasian’s claim to power onwards, aspects of Nero’s legacy were integrated into the Flavians’ policies, building projects, and imperial representations. Through discussions of visual (self-)representations in material culture, literary analyses, and considerations of architectural remains, the contributions to this volume demonstrate how distinctions between Nero’s Rome and that of the Flavian emperors were regularly deconstructed and reconstructed, thereby characterizing and (de)legitimizing the individual Flavian emperors and their abilities to rule, and articulating their relation to imperial predecessors. Overall, by highlighting continuities between the Neronian and Flavian eras and by exploring imperial individuality within the Flavian dynasty, we hope that this volume provides a stimulus to our understanding of the evolution of the principate, especially regarding issues of dynasty and succession in the first century CE. At the same time, the papers in this volume highlight the complex nature of many of our different types of evidence for Flavian Rome, offering ref lections on the difficulties involved in negotiating these complexities in our acts of interpretation and reminding us of the risks of over-ideologization.
AB - In their contributions, the scholars take different methodological approaches to varying types of evidence to show that the Flavian emperors did not categorically or uniformly oppose Nero. From Vespasian’s claim to power onwards, aspects of Nero’s legacy were integrated into the Flavians’ policies, building projects, and imperial representations. Through discussions of visual (self-)representations in material culture, literary analyses, and considerations of architectural remains, the contributions to this volume demonstrate how distinctions between Nero’s Rome and that of the Flavian emperors were regularly deconstructed and reconstructed, thereby characterizing and (de)legitimizing the individual Flavian emperors and their abilities to rule, and articulating their relation to imperial predecessors. Overall, by highlighting continuities between the Neronian and Flavian eras and by exploring imperial individuality within the Flavian dynasty, we hope that this volume provides a stimulus to our understanding of the evolution of the principate, especially regarding issues of dynasty and succession in the first century CE. At the same time, the papers in this volume highlight the complex nature of many of our different types of evidence for Flavian Rome, offering ref lections on the difficulties involved in negotiating these complexities in our acts of interpretation and reminding us of the risks of over-ideologization.
KW - Imperial Rome
KW - Flavian dynasty
KW - Classics
KW - Ancient history
KW - Nero
KW - Vespasian
KW - Titus
KW - Domitian
UR - https://doi.org/10.1515/9789048553570
UR - https://discover.libraryhub.jisc.ac.uk/search?isn=9789048553570&rn=1
U2 - 10.1515/9789048553570-003
DO - 10.1515/9789048553570-003
M3 - Chapter
SN - 9789463723756
SP - 11
EP - 30
BT - Flavian responses to Nero's Rome
A2 - Heerink, Mark
A2 - Meijer, Esther
PB - Amsterdam University Press
CY - Amsterdam
ER -