Nero’s infatuation with building and acting was the mark of a man that exploited his role of emperor to pursue his passions and desires. It is possible that the ancient sources had sensationalised aspects of Nero’s life. However, the way his eccentricities were documented and seemingly affected his reign will be discussed. It will be argued that Nero was much more than an extravagant fantasist but an astute individual that used his power for his own gain. Yet, when analysing Nero’s decline it can be attributed to his eccentricities as well as a culmination of poor decisions that he had made. Moreover, the limited success that Nero had achieved will also be noted. Firstly, his rise to power will be stated to show that Nero was determined and …show more content…
He often sang at events and performed on the lyre. Nero ordered for public games to be held in Rome every five years. He is also said to have trained as an athlete to compete as a charioteer. It is unusual for the leader of an empire to compete with athletes or act in theatre productions (Champlin, 1998: 98). According to Suetonius while Nero was singing no one could exit the theatre even for the most urgent and legitimate of reasons. Salaciously Suetonius states that women gave birth during Nero’s performance and some died as they were tired of listening to him sing and secretly jumped from the walls as entrances were closed (Suet. Life of Nero. …show more content…
This led to complications as well as unrest in Africa and Spain. The governor of Galba declared himself legate of the Senate and Roman People. This was the beginning of Nero’s downfall. Soon the Praetorian Guard declared allegiance to Galba. This was followed by the Senate and they declared that Nero was an enemy of the people. It is documented that Nero attempted to escape and flee. However, once Nero learnt that his capture and execution was likely he committed suicide. It is reported that Nero’s last words were “What an artist dies in me!”. This demonstrates that if this quote is true Nero was more concerned with being remembered as an artist in contrast to a great emperor. (Champlin,
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...
Throughout the play he was a General, a husband, a leader member of the Triumvirate and Senate, and the main focus point of a conspiracy. He died in 44 B.C. in the capital of Italy or Rome from sixty seven stab
He cooled his temper by watching chariot racing, wrestling bouts and acting and singing competitions which was ‘appalling’ to the people of Rome. All of his executions were directed towards political opponents and unlike his immediate predecessors there is no reason to believe he enjoyed their deaths (Dennison, 2012). This however is very subjective as there are primary sources like Suetonius and Tacitus that say the opposite of this, that Nero did enjoy the executions of his rivals death. Nero reacted harshly to accusations of treason against himself and the senate and because of this people, if caught trying to overturn him, were exiled and executed ("Nero", 2017). One of the people Nero had executed was Seneca, Neros former tutor and mentor ("Who is Nero? Everything You Need to Know", 2017). By Nero executing his rivals, he made people scared to overturn him and changed future beliefs of emperors. It changed future emperors beliefs because they had less tolerance for conspirators making Nero an
Julius Caesar (Britannica School) “Caesar’s political ambitions developed under these circumstances. From the start he probably aimed at winning office, not just for personal glory but also to achieve the power to save Rome from decay.” (Julius Caesar -- Britannica School) Once he was travelling to Rhodes and was captured by pirates. His ransom was paid, and then Caesar hunted his captors down and had them crucified.
Because she was such an influential person in his life, people believed that she had caused his death by poisoning him when he had had second thoughts about naming Nero as his successor. Emperor Claudius was both a successful and significant ruler of the Roman Empire. His control of the Senate and new bureaucratic reforms led him to improve the efficiency of the government. His most dramatic reform was the expansion of the empire and the extension of who could be granted Roman citizenship. These new reforms gained him a lot of support.
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.
...multifaceted system which people of greater experience even had difficulty controlling. Even though he developed the arts it wasn’t worth the amount of human suffering and deaths that occurred during his time. Ultimately the government system was set up to prevent civil war, but it eventually did collapse into civil war because Nero failed the system and the Roman people.
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
Goldsmith’s account of Nero and Caligula is important in understanding why John Reed is likened to them. According to Goldsmith, Caligula was arrogant, greedy, and cruel (365). He had many vices and hurt everyone around him.
After years of fighting and civil wars, order was finally established throughout the Roman empire during the first century AD with the rule of Augustus. Peace and prosperity followed with the reign of Augustus and with the emperors that came into control after him, and it was during this time that Roman architecture began to move away from the traditional Hellenistic and Greek influences and generate its own style.
Events which stretch as far back as the reforms of the Gracchi brothers’ meant that the Rome was facing a Republic that was already deteriorating before Pompey had stepped into power. While Pompey’s quest for power was harmful, many other factors were also baleful to the Republic, and were hence instrumental in its decline. Gnaeus Pompeius’s measures to gain power were harmful because it was primarily a paradox to the principles of being part of a Republic with all its notions of shared and short power. The fundamental reason why there were other reasons for the decline of the system are that the military power was given to him, the already weak Senate, and the fact that Pompey was not the only player in the breakdown of the Republic due to the alliances he had made with Crassus and Caesar.
There were two theatres at Pompeii used for a variety of purposes. One of these includes drama performances. The two theatres held a large number of patrons. The largest held 5000 people while the smaller once called the Odeon held approximately 1500 people. The types of performances that where held were usually tragedies, comedies and farces. They took place in the larger theater usually during religious celebrations and in celebration of achievements.. The larger theatre was designed for comfort in mind with facilities for an awning on days that where very hot. Historians including Paul Zanker and Richard Beacham suggest that the theatres of Pompeii were as much as a political venue then a entertaining one. Entry was free in the theatre but social class assigned seating. The lower social class sat in the back of the theatre while the upper class sat at the front where the best view was. The smaller theatre known as the Odeon was ...
The Roman Republic ultimately failed due to the lack of large-scale wars and other crises that had united the Roman populous early in the history of the Roman Republic. Roman leadership and honor became compromised. In the absence of war and crisis, Rome’s leaders failed to develop the honor and leadership necessary to maintain the Republic.
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.