Good morning staff and students. Today I will be presenting an exposition detailing Emperor Nero’s ascent and decline regarding his powerful reign. He was born in 37AD as Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus, but he is more commonly referred to as Emperor Nero. He is remembered as one of Rome’s most influential leaders and is famed for being a madman who played the lyre while Rome crumbled to pieces. Around Rome, he was known for being tyrant and for his erratic behavior regarding Rome’s future, fueled by his love for the arts. Today, he is remembered as an ineffectual, neglectful and brutal leader. However, there is considerably more to the Roman Emperor than his tyrant behavior and artistic passion. From his abuse of Christians and the abuse of leadership against powerful Romans, to the draining of the treasury, evidence suggests that Nero’s ineffective rule of Rome ultimately halted the empire’s expansion during his reign.
Emperor Nero was the last emperor of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty in Rome; he was the son of Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus and Agrippina the Younger (Roman.empire.net, 2014). Nero was only sixteen when the duty of emperor fell upon him, making him the youngest Emperor in history. Under the guidance of his mother Agrippina, his tutor Seneca, and the Praetorian Prefect Afranius Burrus, Nero’s first five years of ruling were considered to be the prime of his rule. However, things began to take a tumble shortly after. The following discourse details the impact of Emperor Nero’s abuse of power on the Roman world through personal factors, weaknesses in his leadership and social and political factors. This is demonstrated by primary records from his lifetime and shortly thereafter, alongside modern accounts and historical repor...
... middle of paper ...
...re throughout Rome trying to find out who was against their leader and if anyone was conspiring against him (J, W. and F, T. 2014).
Conclusion
The reign of Nero has long been generally accepted to be a period of insanity and darkness throughout the Roman Empire. It is true that Nero was a determined and violent man who was willing to knock over any obstacles in his path, to achieve what he wanted. However, his mother’s strong influence over his early leadership promoted his tyrannical behavior that resulted in the deaths of many Romans. Politics, whether it involves ancient Rome or even the modern world, is a dirty game that demands certain reprehensible actions in extraordinary situations. The company one keeps plays a huge role in a leader’s actions, when Nero had good administrative aides, such as Seneca and Burrus; he did great things for the expansion of Rome.
Julius Caesar is the leader of Rome and is seeking to become king in a matter of time. Though he is a good military strategist, he lacks knowledge in running government and is too greedy to have any concern for the peasants when he is alive. Caesar is all about conquering and power and he is afraid of nothing. Before he is murdered, he says “The things that threatened me ne’er looked but on my back. When they shall see the face of Caesar, they are vanished” (II, ii, 575). Th...
From ages past, the actions of conquerors, kings and tyrants had brought the Roman Republic to a stance that opposed any idea of a singular leader, of a single man that held total power over the entirety of the state. Their rejection of the various ruthless Etruscan rulers that had previously dictated them brought the Republic to existence in 509 BC , and as a republic their prominence throughout the provinces of the world exponentially expanded. Throughout these years, the traditions of the Romans changed to varying degrees, most noticeably as a result of the cultural influence that its subject nations had upon the republic, as well as the ever-changing nature of Roman society in relation to then-current events. However, it was not until the rise of Augustus, the first of a long line of succeeding emperors, that many core aspects of the Republic were greatly changed. These were collectively known as the “Augustan Reforms”, and consisted of largely a variety of revisions to the social, religious, political, legal and administrative aspects of the republic’s infrastructure. Through Augustus, who revelled in the old traditional ways of the past, the immoral, unrestraint society that Rome was gradually falling to being was converted to a society where infidelities and corruption was harshly looked upon and judged. The Roman historian Suetonius states, “He corrected many ill practices, which, to the detriment of the public, had either survived the licentious habits of the late civil wars, or else originated in the long peace” . Through Augustus and his reforms, the Republic was transformed into an Empire, and through this transformation, Rome experienced one of its greatest and stabl...
In conclusion, William Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar is the quintessence of a tragic hero. He is highly respected in society and holds a position of authority, yet is corrupted by his pride and arrogance. He ignores warnings of assassination, but once he is attacked by his confidant Brutus he realizes his flaws. Unfortunately, he can never repent of his prideful ways, as his life is extinguished. Because he is murdered by one of his greatest friends and did so much to aid the destitute, he is a sympathetic character. Julius Caesar is a complex and multi-faceted man, but the tragedy of his life strikes a chord of sympathy that resonates throughout not only his subjects, but the readers of his downfall for centuries past, present, and future.
Historians generally like to remember julius caesar during the Roman age and tend to forget the importance of others during this period in this paper strives to cover the importance of his son Augustus caesar and the things he has done in his life and how he has changed our way of life.
Sheldon, Col. R. M., Virginia Military Institute. (2000). Military History Quarterly, Autumn,pp. 28-33. Retrieved from http://www.historynet.com/espionage-in-ancient-rome.htm#sthash.iSybKnYa.dpuf on 11/29/2014.
Livy’s The Rise of Rome serves as the ultimate catalogue of Roman history, elaborating on the accomplishments of each king and set of consuls through the ages of its vast empire. In the first five books, Livy lays the groundwork for the history of Rome and sets forth a model for all of Rome to follow. For him, the “special and salutary benefit of the study of history is to behold evidence of every sort of behaviour set forth as on a splendid memorial; from it you may select for yourself and for your country what to emulate, from it what to avoid, whether basely begun or basely concluded.” (Livy 4). Livy, however, denies the general populace the right to make the same sort of conclusions that he made in constructing his histories. His biased representation of Romulus and Tarquin Superbus, two icons of Roman history, give the readers a definite model of what a Roman should be, instead of allowing them to come to their own conclusion.
In Titus Livius’, The Early History of Rome, Livy takes on the task of documenting Rome’s early history and some of the famous individuals who help contribute to the ‘greatness’ of Rome. Livy dedicates an entire portion of his writing to describe the reigns of the first seven kings of Rome; all who influence the formation and governance of Rome in some way. However, of the seven kings in early Roman history, King Romulus and King Numa Pompilius achieved godlike worship and high esteem from their fellow Romans. While both highly important and respected figures in Rome’s history, the personalities and achievements of King Romulus and King Numa Pompilius are complete opposites of one another. Despite the differences found in each king and of their rule over Rome, both Romulus and Numa Pompilius have a tremendous influence in the prosperity and expansion of Rome in its early days.
In the early first century AD, the Roman Empire was subject to autocratic rule and the old Republic was long dead. Augustus had been ruling for forty years and most of that time he was loved and praised by the Senate and the people of Rome. Throughout his reign, Augustus had the one lingering problem of finding a successor to take over the role of Emperor. He had chosen 3 different heirs in his time of rule; however, they all passed before they had the chance to inherit Augustus’ esteemed power. His fourth choice, Tiberius, was the one to succeed Augustus. He was often referred to, by Augustus, as an outstanding general and the only one capable of defending Rome against her enemies. The statement, ‘Tiberius is condemned by many ancient historians (including Tacitus), and his reign is often portrayed as being detrimental to the welfare of the Roman Empire’ is invalid as he treated the senate fairly, created strong economics and security in the state and boosted the empire into an unprecedented state of prosperity. This hypothesis will be proven through this essay by analyzing factors such as Tiberius’ administration of the Empire, his relationship with the senate, his financial control, the effect of Sejanus over his rule and why were his last years as Emperor referred to as a ‘reign of terror’ by Tacitus.
Julius Caesar was a strong leader of the Romans who changed the course of the history for the Roman world decisively and irreversibly. With his courage and strength, he created a strong empire and guided the empire for almost 20 years. His life was short, but had many adventures. I will tell of some of this man’s remarkable life. He did many things, therefore, I will only discuss a few. His name, part of his reign, one of his greatest battles, and his death will be told.
Emperor Nero, infamously known as one of the most malevolent, oppressive, and tyrannical leader throughout history, was the last ruler of the Julio-Claudian Dynasty. He was born outside Rome in Antium and his mother married his great uncle, Emperor Claudius, in order for her son to be the next Emperor of Rome. It wasn’t apparent that her son was to become one of the most feared and cruel leaders in Roman history from 54 CE to 68 CE. By examining his achievements and failures as an emperor, his influences and changes over the entire economic, political and social spectrum are revealed.
In 509 B.C. the Romans declared themselves a republic, free from rule of the Etruscan kings. (“The Rise of…”) From that point on, the Roman’s form of government would never include the title of “king”, in fear that a single person would gain absolute power. The republic included a dictator (in emergencies), the senate, two consuls, and several other positions. (Bishop) Although the goal of creating a republic was to have a government that represented the wishes of its people, the Roman senate consisted of men of wealth or power, leaving most of the plebeians, or common people, out of the picture. Many of the emperors’ policies strengthened the power of the government, and therefore weakened the power of the plebeians. By the end of Sulla’s rule in 78 B.C., grain prices had risen substantially and there was large gap between the rich and poor. (“The Rise of…”) When Julius Caesar took power, he initiated several reforms that were much needed at the time. Caesar spent large volumes of money on entertaining the citizens, while expanding citizenship to people of conquered lands and lessening the power of the senate. His policies threatened the method of income of senators and around 60 senators, in the name of saving the republic, murdered Julius Caesar at a senate hearing in 44 B.C. Civil war then erupted in Rome and lasted over a decade. At the end of the blood brawl, it was Octavian who emerged victorious; he would be the first Roman Emperor and would be known as Augustus. (Morey) Although the “Liberators” (Julius Caesar’s assassins), might not have realized it, the day that Julius Caesar died was the same day that the republic died; t...
Forsyth, Fiona. The First Emperor: Augustus. New York: Rosen Central, 2003. Print. Leaders of Ancient Rome.
Julius Caesar (100-44 BC) was one of the most outstanding leaders in history. He was the first ruler of the Romano-Hellenic civilization and achieved his goals with great success throughout his life of 56 years. He was assassinated by the conspirators, who accused him for practicing tyranny. This essay will discuss whether it was right for the conspirators to murder Caesar and what its consequences were.
Two powerful leaders, one power hungry whose ambitious ideas lead to his downfall, the other mindful of people who deserve their higher positions. A true leader is someone who has a vision, a drive and commitment to achieve what's best. In the play written by William Shakespeare, Julius Caesar, Brutus and Caesar are one of the main characters. They demonstrate leadership qualities that are still relevant to today. They are both very ambitious characters; however, they do so for different reasons and differ in their openness to others. There are many similarities and differences that lie between them. Both are noble and great men with loyal followers and neither man questions the rightness of his own path. Both made crucial mistakes that resulted in their death. However, Caesar acts out of love for for himself, his country, and to retain his power as ruler of Rome. Brutus on the other hand acts out of love for freedom of Rome. This essay will discuss and compare their qualities as leaders as well as their styles and how they are effective/ineffective in the play.
While Suetonius’s scriptures of Nero may pose a risk of bias, similar perversions were discussed within Edward Champlin’s ‘Nero Reconsidered’. Champlin discuses Nero’s descent into debauchery and malfeasance; how his personal exploits gradually began to corrupt his political and military affairs (Champlin, 1990). Nero began alienating and persecuting much of the elite for higher interests in personal concerns, as well as neglecting military advances and affairs completely. Nero’s exorbitant personal affairs and expenditures left the treasury thoroughly exhausted. His period was riddled with deflation as shortage of money began to emerge (Champlin, 1990). Nero’s adolescence and unruly upbringing was largely contributory to his inadequacy during his years as Roman Emperor. While Nero contributed significantly to the city, his reign demonstrated the unravelling of the Roman