Data Bases • Custom Term Papers • Free Term Papers • Free Research Papers • Free Essays • Free Book Reports • Plagiarism? Links • Top 100 Term Paper Sites • Top 25 Essay Sites • Top 50 Essay Sites • Search 97,000 Papers @ DirectEssays.com • Search 101,000 Papers @ ExampleEssays.com • Search 90,000 Papers @ MegaEssays.com Free Essays • Term Paper Sites • Chuck III's Free Essays • Free College Essays • TermPaperSites.com • My Term Papers • Get Free Essays • Essay World • Planet Papers	Search Lots of Essays Back to Subjects - History Other NERO NERO NERO – MONSTER OR ANTIQUATED ANGEL? “Let Nero be ever before your eyes, swollen with the pride of a long line of Caesars… an Emperor condemned by his own people… Nero will always be regretted” (Tacitus: The Principle of Adoption) Throughout the ages, Nero has been viewed as a rogue and a disgrace to the Roman Empire, thanks to unreliable primary sources. Because of this, Nero is now renowned world wide as the man who hated Christians, the man who killed Jesus and the man who wanted nothing but to satisfy his own desire of personal gain. This, though was not the case. Ever since birth, Nero has been slandered, shunned and looked down upon; but now (thanks to more reliable secondary sources) we know that these allegations are untrue, and are nothing but a petty stereo type which was branded upon Nero years ago. Nero’s childhood was anything but that of a fairy tale. Even before his birth, Nero was ridiculed and disliked, Suetonius himself having proclaimed “Any child born to himself (Nero’s father) and Agrippina was bound to have a detestable nature”. Nero’s father, Domitius, passed away when Nero was three years old, and so his Mother took care of Nero until the age of ten. At this age, his then Uncle Claudius adopted Nero, because Agrippina was exiled from Rome. Claudius (another roman emperor) passed away when Nero was seventeen years old, leaving Emperorship to Nero. According to Suetonius, Nero immediately turned over all Roman public and private affairs to his mother’s management. Primary sources then go on to list Nero’s accomplishments and contemporary ideas, such as the founding of a colony at Antium for retired centurions, Nero’s promise to base roman law upon that of Augustus, and Nero’s obvious attempts to always look generous and merciful. Primary sources also make mention of Nero’s abolishment of certain high taxes, the continuation of the Neronia festival and his aid in The advancement of architecture within Rome (eg. Fire fighting platforms etc). Tacitus, Suetonius and Plutarch, although major historians of their time, were not completely reliable and (now we realise) their works contained bias, mainly a result of upon the writers personal opinion and beliefs. Another cause of bias within primary text was the influence of the Roman elite hierarchy upon the contemporary writers of the time. Plutarch himself admitted this in many statements and claimed to not be a historian but a biographer. Plutarch regarded biography as a different class of writing, and his primary goal was to entertain the audience, as opposed to informing them. He did this by writing only what the reader wanted to read rather than the actual event that had taken place. This is the number one reason why much of ancient Roman sources are unreliable, and biased. Plutarch’s popularity rested upon his ability to avoid raising situations which people may find disquieting. Plutarch wrote freely and superficially, using a combination of anecdote and his own morals and ethics, to please the general audience. Another immediate reason why bias and misinterpretation is rampant throughout the Primary Sources, is the renounment of writers not cross checking quotes and/or evidence obtained by eyewitnesses or political documentation. Nero, even today, is renowned for allegedly setting fire to his own kingdom (for his own personal gain), and then blaming the Christians. Nero also created whirlwinds of controversy when he allegedly was the one to crucify Jesus. This was, perhaps, the one most noteworthy event, which earned Nero such a bad name. According to the Primary sources in sixty four AD a great fire burned for nine days and nine nights, destroying a large portion of the city of Rome. During the raging fire, Nero was not in the city at the time, but was said to have been sighted atop a hill playing the lute, singing a merry song. After the fire, Nero constructed a great palace in the burnt portion of the city, adorned with plates made from mother of pearl and littered with exquisite Greek statues. Because of his extravagance, people began to spread rumours that Nero had purposely started the fires, so he could build his palace without suspicion. When Nero learned about these rumours, he immediately blamed the then small religious group, known as the Christians, resulting in the execution of many from the Christian community. These events however, were documented in such a way, that Nero was in no doubt the “bad guy”. This may in fact be incorrect. According to evidence obtained in modern times, it would have been highly unlikely that Nero would have the motive to do such a thing, due to his already increasing unpopularity within the roman community. Nero, had already thrown the Romans into economic turmoil by overspending on the construction of unnecessary things, and had had to print fake money to get Rome out of debt. The story of Nero upon the hilltop playing lute is also proven false, as lutes did not come into existence until several years after the great fires. It is also worth noting that the Christians were already hated by the people of Rome, but only grew sympathetic toward them when they saw how Nero was treating them. Due to the fire scandal, Nero’s popularity plummeted and the people of Rome rebelled viscously. People refused to pay taxes, and there was much civil unrest. Faced with this rebellion, Nero committed suicide at the age of thirty-two after governing Rome for fifteen years. Based upon analysis of both Primary sources and modern day Secondary sources, I feel that Nero, despite his many flaws and pitfalls, was portrayed in an undeservingly sinister light. Plutarch, Suetonius and Tacitus have all admitted to their blatant displays of misinterpretation and bias yet still for centuries people from both Rome and all across the world have continued to devour their works as the truth. Nero may well have been cruel at times, but he did not deserve of the media treatment, which he received, if anybody was to be blamed for the events, which took place during his ruling it would be both Agrippina (his mother) and the roman elite hierarchy. In my opinion, Nero was obviously influenced greatly by his family (particularly his mother) this may be due to the loss of his father at such an early age. Because of his reputation, Nero’s reign was stricken from all official senate records after his death. The death of Nero ended a period of Emperors choosing either a close relative or adoptive son as their heir, but despite all the changes which occurred, the actions which Nero carried out during his reign saw that even after his death, Rome continued to prosper and grow. Bibliography: BIBLIOGRAPHY PRIMARY SOURCES  Suetonius, The Twelve Caesars, Penguin Books Ltd, 1957 pages 213-247  CP Jones, Plutarch and Rome, Oxford House University Press, Ely House, 1971 pages 18,19,22,24,25,29,78,79,80,125 SECONDARY SOURCES  John Malam, Indiana Jones Explores Ancient Rome, Evans Brothers Ltd, 1994 page 25  P Levy, People who Made History In Ancient Rome, White Tomson Publishing Ltd, 2000 pages 27-30  Larousse Encyclopedia of Ancient and Medieval History, Gillan Auge, 1963, Paul Hamlyn London 205-206  The History Of the Ancient and Medieval World-The Roman Empire Volume Six, Marshall Cavendish Corporation, 1996 Pages 768-774  Fact or Fiction, Alice Cary, Biography, March 2000, Volume Four, Issue Three page 28 INTERNET SITES  http://www.crystallinks.com/plutarch.html  www.fordham.edu/halsall/ancient/tacitus/tacitus_hist1a Word Count: 1119
Copyright © 2005 College Term Papers, INC All Rights Reserved.