This is a very strong example in the Roman's doing awful things to each other genre. Hmmm I should back up.

Pompeii is a Roman thriller, which juxtaposes the expected tension about the volcano all of the readers and none of the characters know is about to erupt with more immediate problems of political corruption and a broken Roman aqueduct. As a disaster thriller, this book is extremely well-written. An aqueduct engineer is a fascinating choice for a protagonist, as it mixes very specific historical details with enough involvement in the political scene to fuel the plot. In the end, the pacing of the last third, when set against the more leisurely pacing of the earlier sections, creates a sensation that the reader, like the characters, is trying to outrun an erupting volcano. Chapters open with quotes from various studies of volcanoes, which simultaneously reference the literal geological phenomena and the metaphorical theme and plot connections.

These , however, were where the book got a little sketchy for me. There's an attempt to draw a triple parallel, tying together the volcanology, the plot, and the connections modern readers tend to see between the Roman Empire and today's Western imperialism. It seems to me there is something to that concept, a place to examine the connection between ancient and modern concepts of empire, together with their inherent injustice and instability. However, I'm not sure it lands.

Impressively, Harris manages to take what is essentially an act of God disaster and still write a scenario onto it where the machinations and personal failures of the characters did plausibly contribute to their downfall. However, next to plot characterization is comparatively weak. There is a problem with Roman fiction in general, where the audience fascination with seeing themselves in Roman culture meets the desire to be thrilled by, but not necessarily introspective about, Roman downfall. That's where the fascination with despots comes in.

Ampliatus, the villain, is a character made from the idea that former slaves are the worst masters and seemingly nothing else. Proudly using the most infamous roman emperors as an influence, he grasps unethically for power and influence, while abusing his family and exacting revenge on those born above him in the hierarchy. While Harris writes his antagonist with all the gore and enthusiasm that is traditional for this type of character, it comes across a little trite. Frankly, the evil power-drunk Roman villain was done to death right around the time Tactitus finished with his actual histories. Nevertheless, if you want to see a person crack under his own immense hubris, this is a stylish execution of the idea.

Note: There is one part where the protagonist thinks something homophobic, rather superfluously. I haven't quite been able to figure out whether this is homophobia from the book or intended to be commentary on it.