Why do many historians consider Hadrian to have been the "best emperor"?

            Publius Aelius Hadrianus or also known as Hadrian ruled as emperor in Rome from one hundred seventeen to one hundred thirty eight. Many historians consider Hadrian to be the “best” emperor in the time of the Roman Empire. And in there justification, Hadrian did accomplish many great achievements in his lifetime. He is best known for constructing Hadrian’s Wall, which was built for defensive purposes for Rome’s northern land. In addition he also built the Pantheon and the Temple of Venus and Roma. During his reign, Hadrian traveled through almost every province that was located in the Roman Empire. He also has a great reputation as a military commander even though during his rule there were no significant military conflicts that occurred. However, Hadrian was not only intellectual in the knowledge of ruling the Roman empire or in the field military strategy. He was also very intelligent academically too especially anything involving art. Another one of his interests was architecture, poetry, and hunting. Compared to many of the other Roman emperors that came before and after him, Hadrian was one of the more successful. I don’t know about the “best” but he definitely made one of the biggest impacts on Roman empire. For starters, he was sane. He was not found hidden behind a curtain when told he was empire. His nose did not run whenever he became excited. He did not push his enemies off cliffs to have them met their death head first, literally. Or he did not sit on his balcony playing an instrument while watching the Roman Empire erupt in flames. All of these emperors were at the very least a little crazy. Sure they might have made some great accomplishments, but were they really good leaders? Hadrian was.