ia_2009_d_stephen

//**  In both a historical and modern context, the reign of Nero bears much significance. Nero’s //reign// reflects the possible answer to some of the most terrifying questions in history, such as, what would happen if a mad-man with sever insecurities and a god-complex were to become the world’s most politically powerful individual? But most of all, Nero bears significance in comparisons to modern day tyrants. His purges of the senate bearing a ghostly reminiscence of Stalin’s political purges. His lustful and over-indulgent lifestyle reflecting perhaps some of the monarchs of Medieval Britain. In short, Nero could be viewed by historians as a mirror of some of the world’s worse rulers yet to come. Perhaps bets said by Mark Twain (the American writer) “ The past does not repeat itself, but it rhymes”. Hence, in understanding Nero, historians may be able to get a better grasp on the way in which a paranoid dictator’s mind would work, the actions they could take and the way in which they would guise their possible politico-violence to the public eye.
 * D. Analysis: **
 * // Modern Significance:

**//Pyscho-Historical significance://**

Nero is Pyscho-Historicaly significant in reflecting how dictators are interpreted by different generations. Apendix A, shows Nero as a teenager, controlled by his megalomaniac mother, only to mature into an adult megalomaniac in his own right, killing the woman who, “nearly all implicated” in the murder of her husband17. This demonstrates the crucial need of understanding Nero’s origin and whether it bore significance on his later actions. However, Simon Baker*3, the BBC’s*4 and indeed modern media’s portrayals of Nero’s upbringing seems overly sympathetic and over-emphasised, Baker and “Power and Glory” constantly refer to the way in Nero’s purges of the senate, murder of his wife and other atrocities, are motivated by child-hood influences. This makes Nero significant from the outset. It shows wider, modern interpretations place possibly excessive value upon childhood, in the outcome of later life when generally interpreting historical figures.

Oscar Wilde once proclaimed, “  The only form of fiction in which real characters do not seem out of place is history. In novels they are detestable” This encapsulating the way historians and the media try to use Nero’s childhood (his own history) as the driving force behind his life because it is the only way a justification for his actions can be found. **//Political significance://**

Nero also holds significance in showing the way paranoia can fuel politically motivated violence. To a historian who pays attention to less superficial aspects, but to events such as the previously mentioned purge of the senate, fuelled by a wide-branching conspiracy against Nero which was foiled18, shows perhaps that child-hood was far from the sole and most major factor to blame for the tyranny of Nero. Hence, Nero influences the way we interpret modern dictators, himself an archetype of the dictator figure. **//Significance in interpretation://**

Nero’s reign has been a point of debate since the time of the Roman empire, he has bore a significance in showing modern historians how even the ancient historians writing close to his reign disagreed. This enables us to compare the interpretations of different generations on a world leader. However, the sources, at times, can give us reasons to ridicule their work. Perhaps the most laughable claims are about the sleeping habits of the emperor (Of which Suetonius would have had no knowledge) “he was frightened by manifest portents from dreams, auspices and omens…” 19.

In terms of consistency of fairness, Tacitus is possibly a slightly more believable source, recounting the words of important figures such as Marcellus20 and Curtius Montanus 21. This offers us a wider range of views. Tacitus’s views sum up as Nero had little bearing on Roman future, merely a momentary spike in a long chronological graph.


 * //Overall//** **//Significance://**

Nero’s significance on the outcome of the Roman Empire seems more like Tacitus’s than Suetonius’s idea. Although awful, his reign had major impacts only in the short term. The civil war that followed his death died within a year and the economy of Rome also re-gained its former strength over time. Hence, his only significant impact upon the future of Rome, would have been that his purges caused need for a stronger senate, with new-blood, (given the purges decimated so many of the higher class families).

Word Count: 712 (aprox 62 words over) _________________________   17. en.wikpedia.org/wiki/Claudius (19/08/08) *3.  Author of “Rome the rise and fall of an Empire” book *4.  The creators of the “Rome, rise and fall of an empire” TV series

18. Miriam Griffin, 1984, Nero, The End of a Dynasty, Yale University Press, ISBN:0-300-03285-4, Page 166  19 . Suetonius, Aprox 110 AD, //De Vita Caesarum//, ISBN : N/A, ** Chapter **** XLVI ** 20. Tacitus, aprox 2cnd centaury AD, //Histories//, ISBN: N/A, Book 14, section 16.28  21. Tacitus quoted him as saying “The first day after the downfall of a wicked Emperor is the best of opportunities." - Tacitus, aprox 2cnd centaury AD, //Histories//, ISBN: N/A, Book 4, section 4.42