Essay on Nero

In “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” Augustus portrays Rome as a dignified cut above the rest. In this reading, we learn about the ruling of Augustus and how he feels entirely responsible for all the successes of Rome. I believe that this writing is not a display of the “real Rome” but rather a depiction of its author. Throughout “The Deeds of the Divine Augustus” Augustus repeatedly refers to himself in the text and how all these successes are a result of his leadership. An example of this is when Augustus states, “In my nineteenth year, on my own initiative and at my own expense, I raised an army with which I set free the state, which was oppressed by the domination of a faction.” There are

* Believed to be gods, these men acted cruelly and thoughtlessly toward their subjects. Luke describes a few of these actions in his letters, like when Domitian forces his people to stand out in the cold and rain and watch a performance while he stays warm and dry. Also Emperor Nero’s many radical actions, like burning down half his city then blaming the Christians. These men believed they were above reproach although they acted like malicious children in the treatment of their people.

Nero and Tiberius were two leaders who were liked by the public. Both starting their reigns young, Nero and Tiberius accomplished many things. Gaining the public’s eye, Nero gave Claudius a lavish funeral and personally delivered the oration in person. He founded a colony at Antium consisting of praetorian veterans, he gave the public an immense variety of entertainments, and even introduced his own style of architecture. These accomplishments all played a role in how the public adored him. Giving the public positive ideas will gain their trust, but unfortunately, he does not keep their trust. As Nero became older, his accomplishments became less and less, he began turning into someone who was in it for the money. His turning point was when he bankrupted Rome, once this happened Nero was neither trusted or liked.

Julius Caesar is perhaps the most well known in the history of Roman Emperors, yet there is no denying that his reign was filled with controversy, no reason more so than his devious rise to power and his mischievous ways of suppressing the senate. There is no doubt that in ruling as a Dictator; Caesar lost the support of the Roman people, who had fought for freedom against an Etruscan King, a role in which Caesar was playing. His death in 44BC coincided with what many believe to be the year in which the Republic completely its eventual ‘fall’ that it had been plummeting to since 133BC, and it is only by looking at the differences in the end of his reign to that of Augustus’ in 27BC that

Nero, who took the throne after his mother poisoned Claudius, the current emperor, ruled from 54 to 68 AD. At first, Nero was the picture-perfect emperor. He lowered taxes, allowed more freedom to the Senate, granted permission to slaves who wanted to sue their unfair owners, and rid Rome of capital punishment. Eventually, Nero

Now in his illustration he used the historical tragedy of Caesar getting repeatedly stabbed in the seats and subsequently killed. What he doesn't say however was that Caesar was going to become emperor, that was his ambition. Now yes the senate was corrupt, but that doesn't mean there should be one singular ruler and it surely also doesn't mean that he should have been killed the way he had been. Why would an act of defending democracy be considered so atrocious that they would be buying in hell ? It seems like he is basing his mindset off of emotion, he may have been betrayed once and is surely not basing his mindset off of logic or ethics.

He also believes this will bring him power. His downfall is shown in this quote because it shows what he’s going to do to no longer feel this way. It is also shown because the plot is based on his jealousy of Caesar.

Suetonius wrote The Twelve Caesars as a biography about twelve Roman Caesars. This essay will compare and contrast two of them, Divus Julius and Nero. Even though the two men both became Emperors who ruled Rome, they could not have been more different. Both had certain authority and public powers during each of their reigns. Their lives were also scattered with times of virtue and scandal. This was a different time from today. Human behavior and morals played a significant role in those ruling over others. Some had them and some not so much. In the end, their stories will ultimately give the reader an illustration of these two men and what their stories tell us about the lives of Roman emperors in the first century.

Nero’s rise to power was a “long road full of treachery.” (T.V.) It was also full of change such as his name he was not always know as Nero his name was Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus until his dad had died and his mom married her widowed uncle, who was the emperor of the time, and they changed it to Nero Claudius Divi Claudius Filius Caesar Agustus Germanicus. Later she convinced him to name Nero heir to the throne and allow him take his daughter Octavia as his wife. His adopted brother was reaching age to take the throne but he mysteriously died, “Many suspect that Nero poisoned him.” (biograpy.com, 2017) So, as one can see Nero was a very shady character who would stop at nothing to seize and hold the throne.

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.

from the writings of others. In the media bias plays a role in the validity of certain things. An example,

During the first decades preceding Christ's death, Christians were tolerated but not really liked by the general population of the Roman empire due to their refusal to acknowledge the emperor as a living god. This act of defiance was considered heresy by the state .The real mass persecution of the Christian people came during the reign of the emperor Nero who needed a scapegoat on whom to blame the great fire during his reign.

“the events that led to her downfall, which happened alongside that of her son Nero, are extremely difficult to disentangle and contradictory versions have come down in the sources” Barrett

Julius Caesar, a Roman general, dictator, and leader, is considered to be one of history 's most influential and powerful rulers to this day, in which his rise to power, conquest of Europe, and controversial downfall all remain to be told during modern days. The play Julius Caesar written by William Shakespeare, portrays the events leading up to Julius Caesar’s assassination, and how those who conspired against him banded together and plotted Caesar’s demise. Many of those conspirators assassinated Caesar due to his quick rise to absolute power, his “acts” of disrespect against the senate such as his failing to stand to receive the title of becoming a “god,” and pure jealousy and anger towards Caesar’s success and rule over the Roman empire. Caesar, an ambitious man, was able to conquer many lands and peoples for Rome through successful military campaigns in which he became one Rome’s best generals due to the amount of successful battles he had won and the amount of blood he had shed for Rome’s expansion. However, Caesar’s trait of ambitiousness would prove to be a double edged sword.

The accounts of emperor Tiberius’ reign by both Suetonius and Tacitus have qualities that serve to show how differing authors viewed Tiberius in various flattering and unappealing ways by their personal reasoning and desire to preserve truth as much as possible in scope of their respective intentions to provide scholars with treatments of him that give a through picture of his traits, strengths and weaknesses. Overall, by examining both accounts of Tiberius’ reign, readers are able to form independent judgement of Tiberius and if each description is biased beyond any semblance of objectively. Overall Suetonius and Tacitus leaves books that differ in style and accuracy but both do indeed want the residing public to understand the true