NERO CLAUDIUS CAESAR

AUGUSTUS GERMANICUS
Nero (A.D. 37-68) became emperor of the Roman Empire after the death of his adopted
father, the Emperor Claudius, in A.D. 54. The last ruler of what historians call the “Julio-
Claudian” dynasty, he ruled until he committed suicide in June, A.D. 68.

Famously known for the apocryphal story that he fiddled while Rome burned in a great
fire, Nero has become one of the most infamous men who ever lived. During his rule, he
murdered his own mother, Agrippina the Younger; his first wife, Octavia; and allegedly,
his second wife, Poppaea Sabina. In addition, ancient writers claim that he started the
great fire of Rome in A.D. 64 so that he could re-build the city center.

Yet, despite the numerous charges that have been levelled by ancient writers, there is
evidence that Nero enjoyed some level of popular support. He had a passion for music
and the arts, an interest that culminated in a public performance he gave in Rome in A.D.
65. Also, while he was blamed for starting the fire, he took it upon himself to organize
relief efforts, and ancient writers make other allusions to acts of charity that he performed.

“He let slip no opportunity for acts of generosity and mercy, or even for displaying his
affability,” wrote the otherwise critical Suetonius in the 2nd century A.D. (translation by J.
C. Rolfe).

Recently, a newly translated poem has been published, and it depicts Nero in a positive
light. It tells of the deification of his dead wife Poppaea Sabina, concluding with her
watching over Nero from the heavens. Scholars were surprised to discover that the text,
which proclaims Nero a man “equal to the gods,” dates to about two centuries after Nero’s
death, suggesting that some individuals in the Roman Empire held a favorable view of
him long after his death.

EARLY LIFE
Nero was born in Antium, in Italy, on Dec. 15, A.D. 37, to his mother, Agrippina the
Younger, and his father, Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus. His father, a former Roman
consul, died when he was about 3 years old, and his mother was banished by the Emperor
Caligula, leaving him in the care of an aunt. His name at birth was Lucius Domitius
Ahenobarbus.
After the murder of Caligula in January A.D. 41, and the ascension of Emperor Claudius
shortly afterward, mother and son were reunited. His ambitious mother would go on to
marry Claudius (who was also her uncle) in A.D. 49, and she saw to it that he adopted
her son, giving him a new name that started with “Nero.” His tutors included the famous
philosopher Seneca, a man who would continue advising Nero into his reign, even writing
the proclamation explaining why Nero killed his mother.

The newly adopted son would later take the hand of his stepsister, Octavia, in marriage,
and become Claudius’ heir apparent, the emperor choosing him over his own biological
son, Britannicus (who died shortly after Nero became emperor).

After the death of Claudius in A.D. 54 (possibly by being poisoned with a mushroom),
Nero, with the support of the Praetorian Guard and at the age of 17, became emperor. In
the first two years of Nero’s reign, his coins depicted him side by side with his mother,
Agrippina.

She “managed for him all the business of the empire … she received embassies and sent
letter to various communities, governors and kings …” wrote Cassius Dio who lived A.D.
155-235 (translation from the book "Nero Caesar Augustus: Emperor of Rome" by David
Shotter, Pearson, 2008).

KILLING HIS MOTHER

Nero and his mother appear to have had a falling out within about two years of his
becoming emperor. Her face stopped appearing on Roman coins after A.D. 55, and she
appears to have lost power in favor of Nero’s top advisers, Seneca and Burrus, the
commander of the Praetorian Guard who advised him on military affairs.

Officially, the reason given for Nero’s orders to kill his own mom in A.D. 59 was that she
was plotting to kill him. Whatever the reasons, Nero knew that he was making a decision
that could come back to haunt him. “This was a crime that will have caused revulsion in
the Roman world, for the mother was that most sacred of icons within the Roman family,”
writes David Shotter, a professor of history at Lancaster University, in his book.
Nero, not trusting his Praetorian Guard to carry out the killing, ordered naval troops to
sink a boat that she would be sailing on. This first attempt failed, with his mother swimming
to shore. Nero then ordered the troops to do the job directly.

Tacitus (A.D. 56-120) wrote that when the troops came to kill her, she told them if “you
have come to see me, take back word that I have recovered (from the sinking boat), but
if you are here to do a crime, I believe nothing about my son, he has not ordered his
mother’s murder” (translation from the book "Nero" by Jürgen Malitz, Blackwell
Publishing, 2005).

Nero, much to his relief, found his actions applauded. The senators said that they believed
his life was at risk and congratulated him on killing his own mom. Seneca himself wrote
Nero’s report on the murder to the Senate.

KILLING HIS FIRST WIFE

His marriage to Octavia was not a happy one. She gave him no heir, and the two were
estranged by A.D. 62. In that year, he divorced her then accused her of adultery and killed
her.

Nero may have taken the step of killing her as a way to protect his position as emperor.
As Shotter notes, a large part of Nero’s legitimacy as emperor was based, not only on the
fact that he was the adopted son of Claudius, but that he was married to his daughter.

Suetonius writes that “after several vain attempts to strangle her, he divorced her on the
ground of barrenness, and when the people took it ill and openly reproached him, he
banished her besides; and finally he had her put to death on a charge of adultery that was
so shameless and unfounded, that when all who were put to the torture maintained her
innocence, he bribed his former preceptor Anicetus to make a pretended confession that
he had violated her chastity by a stratagem,” (translation by J. C. Rolfe).
 MARRIAGE TO POPPAEA
Nero would go on to marry the already pregnant Poppaea Sabina in that same year, and
she would give birth to their daughter (who lived only about three months) in January,
A.D. 63. He took the death of their infant daughter hard and had the baby deified.

In A.D. 65, while Poppaea was pregnant again, she died. Ancient writers say Nero killed
her with a kick to the belly. However, the newly deciphered poem from Egypt casts doubt
on this, showing Poppaea in the afterlife wanting to stay with Nero.

"The poet is trying to tell you [that] Poppaea loves her husband and what it implies is this
story about the kick in the belly cannot be true," said Paul Schubert, a professor at the
University of Geneva and the lead researcher who worked on the text, in an interview with
LiveScience at the time. "She wouldn't love him if she had been killed by a kick in the
belly."

SUCCESSION
However, by this time, Agrippina had already taken the next step - the death of Claudius,
placing Nero upon the emperor’s throne. In 54 CE Claudius mysteriously died after eating
a bowl of mushrooms, probably poisoned ones. Some evidence exists suggesting that
Nero knew of the poisoning when he later called mushrooms the “food of the gods.” There
was also fear that Britannicus (Claudius’s legitimate son) might be chosen as emperor
ahead of Nero. Suetonius wrote: "He [Nero] tried to poison Britannicus being not merely
jealous of his voice … but afraid that the common people might be less attached to
Claudius’s adopted son than to his real one." Nero’s fears soon abated (temporarily) when
he was chosen as the new emperor in 54 CE. With his ascent to the imperial throne,
Agrippina became the woman behind the man; but not for long.

Among Nero’s first acts as emperor was to cancel many of Claudius’ edicts and decrees,
referring to his predecessor as a "doddering old fool." To the general public Nero was a
welcomed change. Like those before him, the early part of Nero’s reign was considered
by many to be a mini-golden age; the populace believed him to be generous, kind, and
accessible. There were lavish games, plays, concerts, chariot races and gladiatorial
tournaments, and taxes were even reduced. He restored much of the Roman Senate’s
power that had been lost over the years, but this restoration had a hidden agenda; it was
only done to enable the young emperor to pursue his worldly pleasures, to sing (he did
not possess a great voice) and play his lyre. While he sang, no one in the audience was
permitted to leave the performance. Suetonius wrote: "We read of women in the audience
giving birth, and of men being so bored with the music and the applause that they furtively
dropped down from the wall at the rear… and were carried away for burial."

NERO & AGRIPPINA

Although Nero found time for his concerts and games, he had bigger problems at home;
his overly protective mother still believed herself to be the true force behind the throne.
Agrippina even was bold enough to boast of her influence to others. Nero, of course,
found this interference intolerable and made plans to end it. First, he moved her out of
the palace. Next, he denied her the protection of her Praetorian Guard and banned her
from all gladiatorial contests. Realizing that she was losing her grip on Nero, she fought
back by throwing her support behind Britannicus, Nero’s stepbrother and Claudius’ son,
but he mysteriously died at a family banquet - another poisoning victim. It did not take
long for Agrippina to realize she was next.

Nero planned his mother’s death with great care, even bringing specialists to Rome from
Alexandria to assist in the planning. He had an elaborate device created for her
bedchamber ceiling which would collapse and crush her in her sleep; however, it proved
to be too complicated to build and install. Next, he tried a specially designed boat that
would collapse and sink, but she proved too smart and swam to the shore. Finally, his
last attempt was the simplest and easiest: he had her stabbed to death, but her death
would haunt him for the rest of his life.

TROUBLES & DISASTERS: THE GREAT FIRE

Although he had good advisors in Burrus and Seneca, the emperor’s reign would continue
to see one catastrophe after another. First, there was the Piso Conspiracy, an
unsuccessful plot to kill Nero, involving at least 19 senators as well as other leading
citizens. Its failure brought about the execution of 41 individuals. Although it failed, it led
to Nero being forever paranoid and untrusting. Next, there was the failed Boudicca
rebellion in Britain as well as numerous insurrections in many outlying provinces including
both Judea and Gaul; the latter two were a reaction to increased taxes.

The greatest threat to Nero’s reign, however, was the Great Fire, which began on 19 July
64 CE and lasted for six days. Ten of the 14 districts of the city were destroyed, hundreds
died, thousands were left homeless, and looters ravaged the city. Since the fire, many
questions have been raised. Did Nero play his lyre (not a fiddle which had not been
invented) while the city burned? Did he start it? Historians differ in their response to these
questions. Was he even in the city or did he watch it burn? Suetonius wrote: "Nero
watched the conflagration from the Tower of Maecenas enrapt by what he called ‘the
beauty of the flames’; then put on his tragedian’s costume and sang …" Tacitus seemed
to remain neutral when he wrote: "A disaster followed, whether accidental or
treacherously contrived by the emperor, is uncertain, as authors have given both
accounts, worse, however, and more dreadful than any which have ever happened to this
city by the violence of fire." The blame fell, of course, upon the heads of the persecuted
Christians who had always viewed Nero as the anti-Christ.
Although he had to raise taxes to finance the rebuilding of Rome, the city was better in
some ways than before: rebuilt residential districts, wider streets, brick buildings, and
colonnades at street level to shelter to residents from the sun. Of course, the new Rome
also included Nero’s Golden Palace (later to be buried by Emperor Trajan), containing
gold plated ceilings, a lake, and exotic animals. Those who believe Nero started the fire
point to his palace as the underlying reason.

BLOODSHED IN THE EMPIRE

Nero’s rule would have its share of bloodshed in places throughout the empire. In Britain,
in A.D. 60, the Iceni Queen Boudicca (also spelled Boudica or Boudicea) rose in rebellion
after she was flogged and her daughters raped by Roman soldiers. Her husband, King
Prasutagus, had made a deal with Claudius that would see him rule as a client-king. Upon
his death in A.D. 59, the officials appointed by Nero ignored it, seizing Iceni land.

At first, Boudicca was successful, overrunning a number of Roman settlements and

military units. “At Camulodunum and Londinium the results of the Boudican revolt may be
compared, on a smaller scale, with those of the volcanic eruptions that smothered
Pompeii and Herculaneum,” writes researchers Richard Hingley and Christina Unwin in
their book, "Boudica: Iron Age Warrior Queen" (Cambridge University Press, 2005).

Ancient sources say that Nero considered evacuating the island, but this proved
unnecessary as the Roman commander on the island Gaius Suetonius Paulinus massed
a force of 10,000 men and defeated Boudicca at the Battle of Watling Street.

Britain wasn’t the only place where Rome had military trouble during Nero’s reign. In the
east, Rome fought, and essentially lost, a war with Parthia, having to give up plans to
annex the kingdom of Armenia, which served as a buffer between the two powers.
Additionally a rebellion in Judea in A.D. 67, near the end of Nero’s reign, would eventually
lead to the siege of Jerusalem in A.D. 70 and the destruction of the Second Temple. One
effect of this was the abandonment of Qumran, the site where the Dead Sea Scrolls were
found stored in nearby caves.
 JOURNEY TO GREECE
Not all of Nero’s dealings throughout the empire ended in violence. In A.D. 66, Nero, a
lover of Greek culture, embarked on a trip to Greece, which had been under Roman
control for about two centuries by his time.

Shotter writes that Nero took part in several Greek festivals, taking home 1,808 first prizes
for his artistic presentations. The Greeks also agreed to postpone the Olympic Games by
one year so that Nero could compete in them. That wasn’t all they agreed to do, to the
“athletic contests were added for the first time artistic competitions, which included singing
and acting, for Nero’s sake,” writes Edward Champlin in his book "Nero" (The Belknap
Press of Harvard University Press, 2003).

“In one dangerous race, he fell out of his chariot, but the Hellenic Judges in charge of the
games nevertheless granted him the wreath of victory: he rewarded these traditionally
unpaid officials with one million sesterces.”

Shotter notes that Nero was so happy with the results of his trip to Greece that he
rewarded the Greeks their “freedom,” essentially tax exemption.

can but admire and obey you!

NERO’S ROME – A GREAT VISION

Nero’s particular character and flamboyancy coupled with his difficult heritage as last in
line of a great dynasty brought him to invent and initiate a vision of Rome which went
beyond all those before and after him: a transformation of Roman society along
Orientalized cultural paradigms which celebrated grandeur, joy-de-vivre, culture and the
arts.

He himself practiced incessantly as an artist-performer. Seeing himself as a shining

divinity, likened to the sun, to be applauded and adored by the plebeian masses (indeed
it seems his music and theatrical compositions were not without success). He instituted
a corps of personal supporters, young, strong and trained to clap at his performances
with their own particular rhythm and his return from his lengthy Greek tour was in every
way designed as a military triumph, donning a cloak of stars and parading to the temple
of Apollo rather than that of Jupiter.

Taken superficially this rather unusual figure of Nero emperor-artist seems utter madness,
and so it is portrayed by his upper class peers and subsequent detractors. In reality it
fitted with a well-designed plan to change the shape of Roman society, flattening the
differences between social classes and placing the emperor’s image as unique focal
point. This was supported by the imperial propaganda machine intent on elevating his
image and status, for example his colossal statue as Apollo or his image as sun-god on
the sails covering the theatre where the Parthian Tidivates was crowned king of Armenia
by Nero himself.

This vision of renewal for Roman society was accompanied with clear ideas in terms of
the city itself which commentaries of the time suggest he wanted to rename “Neronia”. It
was not all madness: in fact Roman architecture saw a fresh impulse, building on top of
the Greek legacy but with inspiration of its own, utilizing mortar and brickwork to articulate
interior spaces in a hitherto unknown manner to create a totally new personal experience.

The early period of his rule, like that of his predecessor Claudius had seen relatively little
construction activity, but the latter half saw the impulse of reconstruction induced by the
great fire of Rome. The city, for the first time, was constructed with clear direction and
urban planning to improve wellbeing of the citizens. Rules were laid out to mandate
maximum height of buildings and minimum spaces between them to allow firefighters to
do their job. Nero’s baths were the first of a kind and set the trend of future imperial baths.
However Nero’s golden house, the “domus aurea”, cut a fine line and indeed overstepped
the mark in taking over excessively large areas of the city so much so that subsequent
emperors chose to destroy and return the land to civilian use. For example his lake being
drained and the Colosseum being built over it by Vespasian.

NERO’S PERSECUTION OF THE CHRISTIANS

The sense we would have today, much induced by centuries of Christian doctrine in the
west, is that Nero persecuted the Christians because he had a particular issue with them
as a sect and due to their beliefs. A sort of pagan reaction against the true divine
revelation (Christ). That interpretation is unlikely for numerous reasons. It is more
probable that the Christian persecutions were much the same as those practiced on
anyone else or any other group that found itself in direct conflict with the emperor’s figure,
image and propaganda. They were also an aparently good scapegoat for blame of the
fire as they were generally singled out by the Roman citizenship at large as a group of
foreign troublemakers.

But if we need to put our finger on a single reason we could say that Nero’s persecution
of the Christians was the result of their direct competition to attract the plebeian masses
around a conceptually very similar deity: the Christians putting Christ at the focus and
Nero putting himself/Sun god/Mithras.

To support this view we should remember that many other cults were openly practicing
their faith, including monotheistic cults such as Judaism (Christianity was seen as a spinn-
off Judaic sect)

Christianity had been free to openly preach and practice its cult during the early part of
Nero’s reign. The early Christian writer Tertullian tells us St. Paul had a first trial under
Nero and was set free only to be executed following his second trial in 67AD during the
Christian persecutions. Of course it was only later that Nero developed his egocentric
vision for Roman culture.

The fact that the Christians refused to worship the emperor’s image or the other Roman
gods and their insistance on criticising the Roman way of life set them apart from other
citizens and attracted considerable dislike from the Roman citizenship at large. The
Christians were considered as annoying foreign agents provocateurs, regularly bickering
with their fellow Jews. It is not unlikely that in the midst of the chaos which surrounded
the great fire of Rome more than one of the Christians would have regarded the fire as a
divine sign of the end of the world or as divine punishment on the Romans for their
immoral pagan ways.

Nero blamed the Christians for the great fire of Rome, someone had to take the blame
and rumours were pinning them on him. He had many Christians gathered up, questioned
and plied for names and declared guilty of treason. The punishment was the same as that
adopted for criminals: put to death in a manner of exemplary ways, such as crucifixion,
burning at the stake as human torches or even throwing them to be savaged by wild
beasts and dogs. The manner in which the Christians were persecuted was so severe,
even by the standard of the times, that they were pitied by many.

In conclusion, it seems likely that the interpretation of motivations and events deserves a
little rebalancing:

Nero certainly persecuted the Christians though (possibly) not with the singular severity
Christian historians would suggest – “singular” being the word, as there was certainly
extreme severity but not purely for the christians. It was the severity reserved for those
who in the Emperor’s eyes had committed treason against his person and the state he
desired to build (see Nero’s model of rule).

Nero was quite clearly building a propagandistic machine aimed at positioning the
emperor as a semi-deity: totally at odds with Christian doctrine and hence likely to attract
extra criticism from them more than other cults. He was openly supporting doctrines such
as Mithraism which were extremely similar to Christianity in various aspects (i.e. a prime
mover of the stars and universe that rules all others) yet directly at odds with Christianity
in others.

For example, Nero’s colossal statue, self-portrait as a sun-god with rays radiating from
his head would have been ichnographically exactly the same as some painted images in
the catacombs of Christ-sun driving the quad Riga.

Nero had a vision of Orientalizing transformation of Roman society built around enjoyment
of culture and the arts. His excesses, spending on his golden house, on public leisure
such as Roman baths, feasts, shows and general profligacy were clearly at direct odds
with Christian doctrine, particularly in their intent to capture the plebeian masses: Nero
and the Christians were both after the same stock of plebeian followers.

So we can see, how Nero’s ruling model, his policies, anxiety to capture the plebeian
masses, focus on himself as a deity, designs to reshape Roman culture and policies
focused on lavish spending and luxury placed him in extreme contrast with Christian
views and objectives, leading to him being viewed as a sort of antichrist for centuries later.
Nero’s death ocurred in obscure circumstances and was strangely associated with urban
myths of his spirit and his eventual return – something which the Church tried to fight for
centuries. The church at Santa Maria del Popolo is a prime example of this.
 NERO’S END
By A.D. 68, the problems Nero faced had piled up. He had killed his mother, first wife and,
by some accounts, his second. Additionally, the rebuilding of Rome, not to mention the
construction of his “golden palace,” was putting a financial strain on the empire. This
forced him to raise taxes wherever he could and even take religious treasures.

“Nero took votive offerings from temples in Rome and Italy as well as hundreds of cult
statues from temples in Greece and Asia, after the fire of Rome in A.D. 64,” writes Richard
Duncan-Jones in his book "Money and Government in the Roman Empire" (Cambridge
University Press, 1995), who also notes that Nero reduced the size of the coins Rome
minted.

Nero’s support began to crumble. Sotter writes that in April of 64, a Roman governor in
Gaul named Gaius Iulius Vindex renounced Nero and declared his support for Galba,
then in Spain, for emperor. Although Vindex committed suicide after his forces were
defeated by German legions in May, it was enough to undo Nero.

Not long afterward, the Praetorian Guard, the force charged with guarding the emperor
himself, renounced their support for Nero and the now former emperor was declared an
enemy of the people by the Senate on June 8. The following day, he committed suicide.
His last words were said to be “what an artist dies in me!” Shotter notes that his long-time
mistress Acte was by his side and “ensured Nero a decent burial in the family tomb of the
Domitii on the Pincian Hill in Rome.”

THE EMPEROR IS DEAD

After Nero's death, the Roman Empire plunged into chaos as a succession of short-lived
emperors tried to gain control of the empire. Sotter notes that Nero still had a considerable
deal of popular support and one of these emperors, Otho, even renamed himself “Nero
Otho” in his honor.

Champlin writes that people also refused to believe that Nero was actually dead. “Many
believe that Nero did not kill himself in June of 68,” he writes. “As Tacitus (the ancient
writer) admits, various rumors circulated about Nero’s death and, because of them, many
believed or pretended to believe that he was still alive.”

Sotter also notes this, writing that “the decades that followed Nero’s death saw a number
of appearances in the East of imposters (or false Nero’s),” a sign that some in the Roman
Empire still approved of the man who, today, is known so infamously.

EMPEROR NERO’S MODEL OF RULE

A fourth century historian, Aurelius Victor, quoted Emperor Trajan as saying that Nero’s
first quinquennium (first five years of rule) were so effective that the reign of no other
emperor could compare. This view is immediately at odds with the common view of this
violent and egocentric emperor – which immediately leads us to ask two fundamental
questions:

i. Was Nero’s rule really as bad as we are led to believe (or indeed is the evidence we
have somehow coloured by judgement of the generations of historians before us?)

ii. What might have made the big difference in approach between Nero’s first
quinquennium and the later model of rule?

Answering these two questions requires us to look at numerous aspects of this emperor’s
period of rule, including Nero’s character profile, Nero’s vision for Rome and of course
the evidence we have to hand.

BUYING POWER FROM THE PRAETORIAN GUARDS

Nero’s power came as a result to the coup-d’etat which was so perfectly orchestrated by
his mother Agrippina who had him adopted as next in imperial line ahead of her husband’s
own son Britannicus, followed by the murder of her husband Emperor Claudius,by his
tutor Seneca,by Burrus head of the Pretorian guard.

The story goes that Claudius’ death was kept secret for a sufficiently long time to have
Nero presented to the Pretorian guard each of whom was paid a handsome sum of 15000
sesterces to support and defend the nomination of the new emperor. His opening speech
to the Senate was written for him by Seneca. It gave great promise of being inspired by
Augustan values, of striking a balance between Senatorial prerogatives and needs of the
people. A model (according to Seneca’s own philosophy) of balance between the needs
of a Prince for his people and the needs of the Senatorial class.

NERO’S POLICIES
Nero’s policies were often balanced in favour of the plebeian lower classes – something
which historians ascribe to his personal desire to be popular but may well also have much
to do with his tutor Seneca’s own moralising socialist tendency or indeed Nero’s early
childhood rearing by a couple of liberti in his aunt’s household. Deeper understanding of
his policies and objectives is a fundamental key to understanding Nero’s reign in a more
balanced way.

With Seneca’s guidance Nero started along the political lines of Augustus: promising the
Senate a broader degree of autonomy than they had enjoyed during the reigns of Tiberius,
Caligula and Claudius. However over time there was a definite shift in approach to a more
oriental-authoritarian-deity style coinciding with the period when he suffered an attempt
on his own life and eliminated those who had supported to early years such as his mother
Agrippina, Burrus, Seneca and others who he replaced with other dark characters such
as Tigellinus and Poppaea Sabina.

It is interesting to consider the possibility that the shift in Nero’s approach was the result
of a desire to implement reform which were largely opposed by the rich senatorial class
and nobility. So whilst historians (largely made up of educated nobles) have handed us a
rendition based around Nero’s personal excesses it could be that in reality Nero’s reforms
involved public spending in favour of broader society but at great costs to the upper
classes.

NERO’S GOOD ACTIONS

Tacitus tells us that when he took on his early role of consul Nero introduced legislation
to limit fees of lawyers,protected the rights of freedmen (liberti),ensured that tax collection
was not unduly harsh on the poor removal of government officials who were abusing their
position to extort money,began to introduce legislation to cut and remove taxes also with
the intention of lowering food prices.
When Rome burned in the great fire of 64AD he implemented a substantial relief effort,
opened the grounds to his palace to give refugees somewhere to stay and substantially
rebuilt the city with its first ever (real) urban plan.

He restored a degree of liberty in the Greek provinces

Nevertheless, his desire to please the masses as well as the numerous public works he
began cost the state treasury and ancient Rome’s economy hugely. Disasters such as
the great fire of Rome and subsequent rebuilding of the city forced the first devaluation of
Roman currency which then continued through to the fall of the Roman empire.

Nero’s rather unusual character (when compared to his kinsmen) shows through in two
major ways:

1. a domineering attitude

2. a vision for a Roman cultural revolution.

Nero surrounded himself with people and supporters who tended to be of far weaker
status than himself whilst doing away with those who threaten his status.

As is outlined in the analysis of Nero’s character we come to have an idea of his major
issue: How could Nero compete with so many amazingly successful and illustrious
ancestors such as Caesar, Augustus, Germanicus and others whilst at the same time
being visibly of a different stock ie freckled and red bearded like his Ahenobarbi parental
side? How could he put up with the continued reproach of his mother, so loved by the
German legions? Even his name as adoptive son of Emperor Claudius, “Nero Claudius
Caesar Drusus Germanicus“was in honour of his maternal grandfather.

This resulted in a tendency to create relationships clearly biased “in his favour” in order
to avoid direct confrontation, judgement and refusal. This can be achieved by raising his
own personal power (becoming more autocratic) as well as by surrounding himself with
people weaker than himself or at any rate people likely to applaud him such as liberti,
plebeians or lovers of the arts. The praise of upper class critics such as Petronius Arbiter
(“judge of taste”) would have been the greatest pleasure for him.
 Creating a new framework of values for the Roman People
(essentially an Oriental model)
Nero’s personal distaste for war and conquest as opposed to the arts was fundamental
in defining his actions and policies as an emperor. Nero’s vision for Rome and the
Romans (he certainly didn’t lack vision!) therefore flew in the face of the values that
overbearing ancestors might have stood for: The emperor himself being acclaimed for
composing plays and music. Senators, high ranking citizens and even women involved in
public circus entertainment for the enjoyment of the plebeian masses. Not to mention his
highly scenic “triumph” a full traditional triumph parade to celebrate his return into Rome
from his sporting and artistic tour of Greece: Clearly a cultural vision which flew in the
face of traditional Roman morality (and Roman law).

A passage from Suetonius (Life of Nero, 11, 12 below) gives a sense of Nero’s desire to
please the masses and receive their acclaim. Interestingly it also makes direct reference
to his open encouragement of social class intermingling through inclusion of senators,
knights and women in public displays of all kinds, on the one hand to raise the pitch of
the displays whilst on the other in an evident effort to flatten the structure of Roman
society downwards, it is unclear whether it be driven by his personal desire for supremacy
or an inspired need for reform of social structure (and eventually wealth distribution), or
most simply, given his young age at the time, inspired by a desire to make good his
personal participation and love and of the arts in spite of its being at odds with the upper
classes traditional sense of what socially acceptable (see ancient roman entertainment
and the writings/decree of the jurist Gaius Ateius Capito in AD19).

11: “He gave many entertainments of different kinds: the Juvenales, chariot races in the
Circus, stage-plays, and a gladiatorial show. At the first mentioned he had even old men
of consular rank and aged matrons take part. For the games in the Circus he assigned
places to the knights apart from the rest, and even matched chariots drawn by four
camels. At the plays which he gave for the “Eternity of the Empire,” which by his order
were called the Ludi Maximi, parts were taken by several men and women of both the
orders; a well-known Roman knight mounted an elephant and rode down a rope…..
Every day all kinds of presents were thrown to the people; these included a thousand
birds of every kind each day, various kinds of food, tickets for grain, clothing, gold, silver,
precious stones, pearls, paintings, slaves, beasts of burden, and even trained wild
animals; finally, ships, blocks of houses, and farms.”

12: “These plays he viewed from the top of the proscenium. At the gladiatorial show,
which he gave in a wooden amphitheatre, erected in the district of the Campus Martius
within the space of a single year, he had no one put to death, not even criminals. But he
compelled four hundred senators and six hundred Roman knights, some of whom were
well to do and of unblemished reputation, to fight in the arena. Even those who fought
with the wild beasts and performed the various services in the arena were of the same
orders. He also exhibited a naval battle in salt water with sea monsters swimming about
in it.Then he went down into the orchestra among the senators and accepted the prize
for Latin oratory and verse, for which all the most eminent men had contended but which
was given to him with their unanimous consent; but when that for lyre-playing was also
offered him by the judges, he knelt before it and ordered that it be laid at the feet of
Augustus’ statue.“

The same passage also reminds us of Nero’s young age:

“….At the gymnastic contest, which he gave in the Saepta, he shaved his first beard to
the accompaniment of a splendid sacrifice of bullocks, put it in a golden box adorned with
pearls of great price, and dedicated it in the Capitol.”

Nero’s new ruling model was a symptom of the end.

There is some pathos in the consideration that Nero was at least seemingly attempting to
set Roman social equilibrium more in favour of broader society at the expense of the
Senatorial class but that the means by which he went about it was a first symptom of the
ailments which constituted the eventual fall of Rome.

The period between 62-63AD can in some ways be regarded as one of the first symptoms
of the change of Roman society and of the eventual fall of the Roman empire: the first
devaluation of Roman coinage,Nero’s approach to religion, Nero’s ruling model based
around his figure as a living deity and his desire to retain the support of the masses put
him in sharp contrast with the Senatorial class, the military as well as the early Christians
who eventually came out as winners in shaping the new model of Roman society. He
sought to blame the Christians for the great fire of Rome and subsequently persecuted
them even for their refusal to consider any divinity other than their own one God.
Though we can’t necessarily pin a personal fault on Emperor Nero as having initiated the
decline and fall of the Roman empire; failing economy, social imbalance and rising
Christianity were all significant elements which characterized his reign through to the fall
of Rome.

Nero was the second Roman emperor to be put into power thanks to support from the
Roman army which was strongly aligned with his mother Agrippina and supported by his
Pretorian guards (Emperor Claudius his adoptive father had also reached power thanks
to Praetorian support and protection): a trend which was to continue the year after him
with Otho, Galba, Vitellius and Vespasian who were themselves military generals.
Vespasian was an exception as the only Emperor to be followed by his natural son (Titus).