Nerva's reign lasted only just over sixteen months. He was proclaimed emperor by the senate in haste, within hours of the news of the assassination of Domitian to prevent a civil war. He might have been considered a safe choice because he was old and childless. He lacked widespread support in the empire. Despite the fact that many senators suffered with Domitian's many treason trials, there still was a pro-Domitian faction in the senate. Therefore, his attempts to involve the senate in his government were only partially successful, even though he stopped Domitian's treason trials, returned the confiscated property to its owners, released the people who had been imprisoned and gave amnesty to those who had been exiled.
To gain support among the people Nerva gave a sum of money to each Roman citizen, granted a large number of plots of land for the poor, exempted people from the inheritance tax and made loans to the rich conditional to paying an interest of 5% to the local council for the support of the needy. However, the expenses that this generosity involved got the treasury into trouble.
To appease the Praetorian (imperial) Guard, Nerva gave them a generous donation and sacked their head, who had been involved in Domitian's assassination. However, support for Domitian was still strong in the army and the Praetorian Guard considered his measures insufficient. They demanded the execution of the assassins, but Nerva refused.
In his efforts to be a benign ruler, Nerva allowed the senate to continue to prosecute those who had been Domitian's informers. This led to anarchy as the senators acted in their personal interest and tried to settle scores with personal enemies. It was said that Domitian's tyranny was preferable to Nerva's anarchy. A plot against him was discovered, but he refused to execute the conspirators. This met the disapproval of the senate. As he had no heir, Nerva considered adopting the governor of Syria to have him as his successor. This was opposed by those who supported the general Trajan. The Praetorian Guard sieged his palace, took him hostage and forced him to meet their demand to hand over the assassins of Domitian for execution. His reputation was irreparably damaged. Nerva realised that without the support of the senate and the army his position was untenable. He adopted Trajan as his successor and shared power with him. Three months later he had a stroke and died soon afterwards.
He definitely killed his mother and first wife. He is supposed to have indulged in many vices, but some of these are questionable and come down to us by way of writers who were republican leaning and would have nothing positive to say about any emperor. Some of these "vices" that he's accused of having scandalized the Roman upper class, but endeared him to the populace. He performed on the stage and drove chariots in competition. This caused the aristocracy to gasp, but the general public loved it. But the worst thing that he did was to exempt Greece from taxes (Greece was one of the wealthiest provinces) and then to deplete the treasury on his lavish spending sprees.
That's a hard question to answer. The aristocrats hated him, and most of our history about him comes from aristocratic sources. He did many negative and bad things, but he had reasons for most of them. Because he acted extremely in certain circumstances, he is labeled as a bad emperor. However there was another side to Nero; he was inventive and generous, he was a builder and innovator. While he outraged the aristocrats, the common people loved him. For five years after his death, the common people piled his grave with flowers. Twenty years after his death an impostor in Parthia claimed to be Nero and raised an army on Nero's popularity. It stands to reason that a person who still had prestige twenty years after his death could not have been all bad.
No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.No, Nero was considered a bad emperor as his memory was damned by the senate. However the ancient Roman senate could be said to be a bit biased as far as Nero was concerned as the senatorial class suffered massive losses in both financial and property areas due to Nero.
Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.Galba did not kill Nero. He revolted against Nero. Nero committed suicide, killing himself.
Well I actually know the answer to this question because I know two slaves that were around under his reign. Yes their dead now, kind of, but you just gotta trust me. He wasn't gay exactly. But he defiantly was bi-sexual. Also he was into bestiality, animals / animal skins. He was also into incest, doing many things to his mother.
It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.It is said that Nero had Britannicus poisoned.
Type your answer here... bad
Nero and Vespasian
Nero could not have said something bad to Augustus. Augustus died in 14 AD.Nerowas born in 37 AD.
NO he was a bad guy he is the badest of all
he was good and bad
Nero did many good things for Rome but we only hear of the bad things because that makes better reading. We get our negative information from the ancient writers who were aristocrats themselves, and because Nero targeted the aristocrats, they had an axe to grind. Nero did do bad things like killing his mother, wife and brother, but the ancient writers never go into the reasons why he did these things. The same goes for his mistreatment of the nobility who were hatching plots against him.As for the positive things that Nero did, there were many, and the writers only give him passing credit for them. For one, he was a very popular emperor as far as the common people were concerned. After the Great Fire, (which he did not start) he redesigned the streets and building fronts to make them safer and more fire resistant. He banned the charioteers from racing up and down the streets injuring people. The ancient writers always mention the elaborate "Golden House" that Nero built after the fire, but they rarely mention the fact that it was not just a private residence, it's parks and grounds were also open for the public to enjoy. Even before the Golden House was built, Nero opened his private gardens to house the homeless from the fire.
That's a hard question to answer. The aristocrats hated him, and most of our history about him comes from aristocratic sources. He did many negative and bad things, but he had reasons for most of them. Because he acted extremely in certain circumstances, he is labeled as a bad emperor. However there was another side to Nero; he was inventive and generous, he was a builder and innovator. While he outraged the aristocrats, the common people loved him. For five years after his death, the common people piled his grave with flowers. Twenty years after his death an impostor in Parthia claimed to be Nero and raised an army on Nero's popularity. It stands to reason that a person who still had prestige twenty years after his death could not have been all bad.
He killed his mother, wife, and half brother.
nero was a bad man. he killed his own mother and was said to have burned down everything so he could build his mansion.
IN a book titled IMPACT, it states that Agustus was a good emperor while Caligula and Nero were bad emperors and weak.
Commodus and Nero. Commodus went insane with his own self-obsession, and Nero just did all the wrong things.
He lowered heavy taxes and invented firefighting for starters