The first time I read The Flames of Rome was for a Latin class in high school. I wasn't a fan of the book at the time, probably because it was a class requirement and who likes those when you are a teenager. As an adult I gave the book another go and am really glad that I did. The book is packed full of information, while still having an interesting storyline(s). There are parts of this book that are hard to read, especially the treatment of Christians, but the Roman times weren't all about eating grapes from a reclined position.

Note: Reading dates are a total guess. ( )

Some kind of spark was missing but I did keep reading to find out about Sabinus [the protagonist and Vespasian's brother]. I wanted to like this novel more than I did. The novel followed very closely the historical record [mostly primary but some secondary sources]. Much of the work was given to the expansion of Christianity to and in Rome, even after the Great Fire, which the author painted as not set deliberately; the author posits it starting in an oil merchant cum builder's shop. Many historians of today agree with the assessment that the Fire was an accident. The retaliations against Christians as described were horrendous, but described in ancient sources.

The story followed Sabinus from his return to Rome from military service in Britannia; as a senator; marriage into the Plautius gen; and terms of office as census taker in Gaul and Roman City Prefect [equivalent of mayor]. The novel brings out his role in plot against Nero. The author did make him sympathetic towards and helpful to Christians; the real-life Sabinus was a decent and peace-loving man. I liked the descriptions of the several outlandish assassination attempts on Agrippina; she was certainly 'a cat with nine lives' who finally used them all. I liked the coverage of Pomponia Graecina's trial by her family. I liked in the last part Lucas [Luke] telling Sabinus that he is using a coded form of his complete name, the first three sounds of 'Titus Flavius Sabinus' meaning 'Theophilus' for Luke's dedication to him of the "Acts." This is fiction or at least conjecture, but I'd like to think it might be true.

I admire the author as a historian and his use of the sources, but he lacked something as a novelist. Each character was actually historical, but all of them came across as wooden except for Sabinus himself. Claudius and Nero were the usual cartoonish stereotypes. Dialogue was nothing remarkable and was stilted. As much as or more than the novel itself, the end notes were most interesting: from where the author got his information and how he used it. Those are worth reading. The orgy scenes were probably risqué for when the book was written [1981], but they are very tame today. It is worthwhile for the history of that period and explanation of the Latin terms, e.g., the voting system at a trial: A [Absolvo], C [Condemno] or NL [Non Licet=not proven=in our parlance, Abstention]. ( )

Boeiend verhaal vanwege de historiciteit. Als roman wat minder. ( )

The First Man in rome sweeps the reader into an irresistibly vivid world of political intrigue, danger, wars, assassinations, devastating upheal, intricately passionate family alliances and rivalries and undeniable reality.

It is New Year's Day of 110B.C. and two of the latest in a long line of noble Roman mediocrities are assuming the coveted mantle of consul. but among those watching are two very different men, men whose vision, ruthlessness, and courage will force shattering change upon the Roman Republic, struggling to cope with mushrooming territorial possessions and the growing resentment of the Italians it treats as third class citizens.

One of these two men is Marius, a wealthy rustic barred by his low birth from grasping his prophesied destiny, to become the First Man in Rome he who stands above all his peers through sheer excellence. The second handsome and debausched scion of an impeccably aristocratic house, prevented by penury from claiming his birthright. Yet both men have a mighty presence for all fickle, capricious, elusive the goddess Fortune, who loves and favors them above all others. Brought together by war in dark and distant lands, they battle the enemies within Rome; for the quest to become the First Man in Rome will faascinate readers with its richess and accuracy of historical detail, fitting background for characters who are themselves historic. ( )

This is one of the best novels I have read in years. All so-called Christian fiction should aspire to be as well-written as this book. The author, Paul Maier, may be a better fiction writer than non-fiction writer. In the story, he starts with the reign of the Emperor Claudius, and takes us all the way through Nero's.
There are no characters in the story who did not live and breathe, and if some of the connections between the characters are broad assumptions, that's the prerogative of the author to advance the plot.
Flames of Rome is suspenseful and really hard to put down. It's true, it has descriptions of violence, but this was a violent, morally bankrupt age.
I really enjoyed seeing the biblical characters, Aquila & Priscilla, Simon Peter, and Paul of Tarsus come alive in this book. The early persecution of the Christians is dealt with frankly, but yet it's a very gripping and emotionally moving account. The lives of the early saints are presented in such stark dramatic contrast to the corrupt and morally degenerate Nero that you wonder why the Lord let him live as long as he did.
I give this wonderfully suspenseful and gripping book the highest rating. ( )