Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Was Emperor Nero really as monstrous as history suggests?


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

From ancient texts to modern TV shows, depictions of the Roman emperor Nero have never been flattering. He’s known for murdering family members and strangers alike, as well as starting the Great Fire of Rome that destroyed much of the city in 64 A.D.—not to mention forcing audiences to sit through his terrible singing. But a new exhibition at the British Museum, “Nero: The Man Behind the Myth,” asks visitors to rethink their perceptions of one of the most powerful people in the ancient world.

As Jill Lawless reports for the Associated Press (AP), the show starts with an image from the 1951 film Quo Vadis. The emperor strums a lyre, evoking the famous expression “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Then, visitors learn that this story, like many tales of the emperor’s terrible behavior, is a myth.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/just-how-bad-was-nero-really-180977813/

  • Like 5
  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 
2 minutes ago, Still Waters said:

From ancient texts to modern TV shows, depictions of the Roman emperor Nero have never been flattering. He’s known for murdering family members and strangers alike, as well as starting the Great Fire of Rome that destroyed much of the city in 64 A.D.—not to mention forcing audiences to sit through his terrible singing. But a new exhibition at the British Museum, “Nero: The Man Behind the Myth,” asks visitors to rethink their perceptions of one of the most powerful people in the ancient world.

As Jill Lawless reports for the Associated Press (AP), the show starts with an image from the 1951 film Quo Vadis. The emperor strums a lyre, evoking the famous expression “Nero fiddled while Rome burned.” Then, visitors learn that this story, like many tales of the emperor’s terrible behavior, is a myth.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/just-how-bad-was-nero-really-180977813/

When the previous emperor died it was common practice for the new emperor to destroy his reputation. The Senate encouraged it, and it was seen as a way of getting the people over their ex-emperor.

Whether or not he was actually `insane for power` is something we cannot tell.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting

 

Thx 4 the post btw.

 

| was about to mention [ CALIGULA ,,37~41 C.E.  ] as the torrid spawn of vile, however, there were so many ugly Rome Emperors its hard to say who was the worst. Kind of reminds me of a book on a certain twelve Popes if you can believe that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Nosy.Matters said:

| was about to mention [ CALIGULA ,,37~41 C.E.  ] as the torrid spawn of vile, however, there were so many ugly Rome Emperors its hard to say who was the worst. Kind of reminds me of a book on a certain twelve Popes if you can believe that.

Caligula was one of the most loved by the people so it doesnt surprise me to find him as one of the most demonised after he had gone.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 minutes ago, Cookie Monster said:

Caligula was one of the most loved by the people so it doesnt surprise me to find him as one of the most demonised after he had gone.

Well, it seems like from the article and others not all was bad and they (Emperors) had a few good things they tried to do here and there, of which were probably not even noted very much by writers of the time.

From the article , authors of the time and their own agenda(s)... bias, bias, bias,  should always be looked at in another light, was enlightening.

Edited by Nosy.Matters
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Cookie Monster said:

When the previous emperor died it was common practice for the new emperor to destroy his reputation. The Senate encouraged it, and it was seen as a way of getting the people over their ex-emperor.

Whether or not he was actually `insane for power` is something we cannot tell.

I agree, with the way Roman history writing worked it is quite difficult to tell what Nero's true character was.
Though I think it's fairly clear that he wasn't responsible for the fire and did a lot of relief work in its aftermath.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nero was a complex character, as much a victim as he was a perpetrator of wickedness.

(1) Who Was The Real Emperor Nero? | Tony Robinson's Romans: Nero | Timeline - YouTube

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.