Nero: The Actor Emperor

O heart, lose not thy nature! Let not ever

the soul of Nero enter this firm bosom                 Let me be cruel, not unnatural.

Hamlet Act 3 Scene 2 382-384

 

 

If asked, the overwhelming majority of people will identify the emperor Nero with “playing the fiddle” as Rome burned.  With his pyromaniac reputation Nero has also been branded as the Anti-Christ by the Catholic Church for his persecution of Christians to deflect the blame he incurred over the burning of Rome.  His list of crimes seems limitless: he murdered his brother, mother and wife and executed aristocrats on the suspicion they were plotting against him.  In every way Nero conjures up the image and personality of a monster.  But the most enduring image of Nero for us in the 21^st century has come from novels and films.  The most popular portrayal of Nero belongs to Sir Peter Ustinov from the 1951 film Quo Vadis. Sir Peter gives us an emperor who is a cowardly bully, cruel and divorced from reality.

 

Yet, the real Nero held gladiatorial contests where the surviving losers were spared (Nero 12.1).  He antagonized the senatorial class but was loved by the commoners.  After his death, emperors Otho and Vitellius declared that they would reign with Nero as their model (Suet. Otho 7, Plut. Otho 3; Vit. 11). Perhaps more remarkable, Trajan thought the first five years of Nero’s reign were  outstanding and an example that all emperors fell short of achieving (Victor De Caes 5.2).  Nero’s life is filled with paradox: practicing clemency, then turning to tyranny. 

 

 

Family

 

Nero’s paternal family – the Domitii Ahenobarbi – were Republican nobility and could boast of a long line of consuls. The family legend concerned Castor and Pollux who foretold a Roman victory over the Latins at Lake Regillus to Lucius Domitius.  In order to convince him of their divinity the two demi-gods stroked his cheeks, turning his beard to bronze, hence the family cognomen Ahenobarbus. Nero’s great-great-grandfather Lucius (consul 54 BCE) was a man of considerable courage and was a bitter enemy of Julius Caesar.  He was called an outstandingly excellent young man by Cicero (Verr. 2.2.139) and, with his great wealth, raised many troops for Pompey during the Civil War. Lucius was taken prisoner at the start of the Civil War and was set free by Caesar.  But scorning Caesar’s clemency, he rejoined Pompey’s forces and was killed at Pharsalus; his death was glamorized by the poet Lucan in his poem De Bellum Civille (2.508-27,7.219-20, 7.597-616).

 

It became the practice of the Domitii, since the Romans had no rights of primogeniture, to limit their offspring to one son, so their wealth would be concentrated in the hands of one male heir. As if to stress this practice, the male members of the family monotonously alternated their praenomen from Lucius and Gnaeus generation after generation.  Lucius’ son Gnaeus (consul 32 BCE), Nero’s great-grandfather, was implicated in Caesar’s assassination and joined the cause of Brutus and Cassius as admiral of the Republican fleet.  Upon their defeat, he went over to Antony and was one of the triumvir’s staunchest supporters.  Knowing what side was likely to win during the civil wars was an art that Lucius practiced to perfection.  On the eve of Actium, Lucius went over to Octavian bringing his fleet with him; his defection was a contributing factor in Antony’s defeat.

 

Lucius passed his name to his son, Nero’s grandfather, who is described by Suetonius as a cruel and extravagant man who staged brutal gladiatorial shows (Nero 4).  However, Vellius contradicts this by relating that Lucius was of noble simplicity and Tacitus reports that he won the ornamenta triumphalia for taking the Roman army across the Elbe farther than anyone. He was named as executor by Augustus in his will and married Octavia’s daughter Antonia the Elder (Vell. 2.72.3; Ann. 4.44.1-3; Plut. Ant. 87.3).  Lucius’ son Gnaeus (consul 32 CE) was known to be indolent as well as cruel.  He is said to have killed one of his freedmen for not drinking as much as he was told and deliberately ran over a boy while driving his chariot.  He got into an argument with a knight and intentionally gouged out one of his eyes (Nero 1-4). Despite his bad reputation, Tiberius placed his trust in Gnaeus.  He was allowed to remain in office as consul for an entire year, an unusual privilege, and in 36, after a fire destroyed part of the Circus Maximus and a large part of the Aventine, Gnaeus was placed in charge of a commission to dispense aid to people who had suffered property damage. But, soon after he was accused by the emperor of adultery, incest with his sister Lepida and treason.  He was saved by the timely death of the emperor in March 37 (Ann. 6.45, 47-48; Nero 5.2). 

 

Nero’s father had two sisters that are often confused as a single person.  Ancient sources usually refer to this sister as Lepida or Domitia or Domitia Lepida.  Suetonius comes closest to distinguishing the two when he speaks first of Domitius’ sister and then of “his sister Lepida” (Nero 5.2). Domitia looked after Nero when his mother was in exile during Caligula’s reign and she is alleged to have been poisoned by Nero in 59 when close to dying  (Nero 34.5; Ann. 13.19, 21; Dio 61.17.1).  Domitia was probably older than Nero’s father and was married to Gaius Sallustius Crispus Passienus, who later divorced her to marry Agrippina. Lepida was a younger sister of Gnaeus and was said to be close in age to Agrippina.  She married Messala Barbatus, with whom she bore the future empress Messalina.  Her husband died and she married Faustus Cornelius Sulla by whom she had a son who was betrothed to Claudius’ daughter Antonia and was later executed by Nero (Ann. 12.64.4; Dio 60.30.6a).

 

Just nine months after Tiberius’ death, on December 15, Domitius acknowledged the birth of a son in the ninth year of his marriage to Agrippina (Nero 6.1; Dio 61.2.1; Ann. 13.6) and, true to the Domitii tradition, this was the only son born to Gnaeus. Nero was born at Antium, a favorite place for the Julio-Claudians, just as the sun rose (a favorable omen) and entered the world feet first (considered a bad omen).  This kind of delivery would have been dangerous and very painful and  the difficulty of Nero’s birth may explain why Agrippina did not bear any more children.  [1] It is reported that Agrippina consulted an astrologer on her son’s fortune and was told he would become emperor and kill his mother.  Her improbably reply, a reflection on her belief that the principate was hers by blood relationship, was, “Let him kill as long as he rules” (Pliny NH 7.46; Nero 6.1; Ann. 11.11.3, 14.9; Dio 61.2.2).

 

When her brother Caligula became emperor, Agrippina and her sisters received the highest honors, which fueled her ambition.  At the lustratio (purification ceremony) held nine days after the birth of Nero, Agrippina invited her brother to name the child, perhaps thinking he would favor her son as his heir.  However, Caligula, keeping his options open, mischievously suggested the child be named Claudius.  Family tradition eventually came to Nero’s aid and he received the name: Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus.  During the ceremony, Gnaeus is said to have remarked that “nothing born of myself and Agrippina can be other than odious and a public disaster” (Gaius 8, Nero 6.2; Dio 61.2.3). [2]  Agrippina’s ambition for her son was boundless, and she became implicated in the conspiracy of Gaetulicus in 39 and was exiled to the Pontian Islands.  Gnaeus emerged unscathed and left Rome; toward the end of 40, he died at Pyrgi in Etruria.  Nero, only three years old, inherited a third of his father’s estate until it was confiscated by Caligula (Nero 6.1). He was sent to live with his aunt Domitia, who is reported to have neglected the boy and assigned a dancer and barber to be his tutors.  But in a matter of months, Caligula was assassinated and Nero’s great-uncle Claudius became emperor.  Nero’s estate was restored to him and his mother was recalled from exile (Dio 60.4.1). On her return, Agrippina placed Nero’s education in the hands of two Greek freedmen: Anicetas and Beryllus.  Nothing is know as to their qualifications as tutors but since Nero was at the beginning of his education it may have been enough that he was taught reading and writing, along with Greek.

 

                                               

Court Politics Under Claudius

 

 

Despite her status, the empress Messalina was in an insecure position. Being married to a much older man meant she could expect Claudius to die before their son Britannicus would be old enough to acquire official power.  Coupled with this was the problem that Claudius did not have a strong bloodline connection to Augustus. Messalina proceeded to destroy anyone who could be considered a threat to her position as empress and the future of her children. Dio reports that Messalina was offended by Julia Livilla because she did not show her proper respect and was jealous that the beautiful niece of Claudius was spending so much time with her uncle (60.8.5).  As the wife of Marcus Vinicius, who had been proposed for the principate in 41, Livilla gave her husband credibility in his claim to the throne. It would not be difficult to convince Claudius of a threat in the general paranoia at the start of his reign.  Suetonius comments that Claudius had his niece put to death on "unspecified charges" with no defense allowed, a fairly common procedure in maiestas cases (Claud. 29.1).  Seneca became implicated as Livilla’s paramour and his fate in the affair confirms a political connection. The philosopher was tried before the Senate and given the death sentence (Seneca Cons. Polyb. 13.2) but his punishment was commuted to exile on Corsica. The choice of the death penalty in an adultery case was extraordinary and proves that Seneca was considered dangerous enough to merit removal. The philosopher always insisted he had been wronged and he expressed the hope that the emperor’s sense of justice would cause him to review his case (Claud. 17.3).

 

To stay clear of Messalina, Agrippina kept a low profile and sought a new husband eventually marrying Gaius Sallustius Passienus Crispus. He was a witty man with a lively sense of humor and was responsible for the famous comment on the relationship between Tiberius and Caligula, that the world had never known a better slave or a worse master (Cal. 10.2.). There is no information of how well or poorly the marriage fared.  Passienus held a second consulship in 44 and he died during the 40s, leaving Agrippina wealthy, and received a public funeral.  After his death, rumors circulated that Agrippina had poisoned her husband, it being fortunate for her to be free to marry Claudius, but there is no evidence that Passienus was murdered (Nero 6.3; Juv. Sat. 4.81; Martial 10.2.10).

 

Agrippina’s and Messalina’s only clash came in 47 during the Secular Games held by Claudius  64 years after those of Augustus.  During the games the Lusus Troiae, a parade staged by boys from the aristocracy, was performed. Taking part were Britannicus (aged 6) and Nero (aged 9), the latter being greeted by spontaneous applause far more enthusiastically than Britannicus. Shortly after this event, some unknown men, presumably sent by Messalina, entered Nero’s room as he was taking his mid-day rest.  They were set on murdering the boy as he slept but at their approach a serpent suddenly raised its head and frightened the would-be assassins.  All that could be found of the snake was a skin that Agrippina had made into a bracelet and ordered her son to wear at all times (Ann. 11.11; Nero 6; Dio 61.2).  He wore it until the murder of his mother, and in the last days of his reign was desperate to find it again.

 

Eventually, Messalina acted to secure the principate for Britannicus by marrying consul-designate Gaius Silius. She may have been forced to act because she no longer enjoyed the loyalty of Claudius. Perhaps the empress was tricked into understanding that Claudius’ freedmen would support her taking control of the state, but they were in fear of her and may have engineered her downfall. The “plot” of Messalina failed and she was executed on the orders of Narcissus, acting in Claudius’ name.

 

                                               

Claudius and Agrippina

 

The events surrounding the execution of Messalina had proved that Claudius’ regime was vulnerable. Although the emperor announced to the Praetorians that he had taken a pledge to remain a widower (Claud. 26.2) it was clear that Claudius could not remain unmarried.  Agrippina had overwhelming advantages to become Claudius’ new wife: she was a Julian through her mother and a Claudian through her father, and could play a role in bridging the unpopularity that had bedeviled Claudius from the start of his reign.  She also brought with her a grandson of Germanicus who would be an unimpeachable candidate for the principate. Roman law and tradition forbade marriages between an uncle and niece, and no one was likely to turn a blind eye toward such a union between Claudius and Agrippina. Lucius Vitellius came to the rescue and successfully argued that it was not incestuous to marry a brother’s child, which was customary in other countries.  The senators, some primed up supporters of Agrippina, carried the day, and a decree was issued to allow the marriage (Ann. 12.7.1-3; Claud. 26.3; Dio 60.31.8).

 

As her impending marriage proceeded, Agrippina began to strengthen Nero’s position in the succession by proposing her son be joint heir with Britannicus. There were several precedents for this arrangement. Augustus had adopted his grandsons, Gaius and Lucius, as join heirs and caused Tiberius to select Germanicus and his own son, Drusus, as a pair.  To cement the new family relationship, Agrippina proposed the marriage of Nero to Octavia.  The obstacle was that Octavia was already betrothed to Lucius Silanus, but the former favorite of Claudius was accused of incest with his sister and was expelled from the Senate (Ann. 12.3.2,4.1,9.2; Dio 60.31.8; Apoc. 8.2; Claud. 29.1-2).

 

Agrippina was given the title Augusta by Claudius in 50, an official status that the wife of an emperor had never enjoyed. Her new status was reflected in imperial coin issues, her portrait appearing on the reverse of Claudius’ precious metal coinage. [3]  An event of greater importance for the empress was the adoption of Nero by her husband (Ann. 12.25; Claud. 27.2, Nero 7.1; Dio 60.32.3,33.22; Octavia 536). The desire for an emperor to keep the succession within his own family had no validity under Roman law and there was no formal way of designating a successor. Claudius’ desire to be succeeded by his natural son was secondary to the survival of his regime. Britannicus was not excluded from power but he was too young to hold any offices. He also suffered from epilepsy since childhood, which if a serious form of the disease could jeopardize his chances to succeed his father (Ann. 13.16.3.) There is no reason to believe that in promoting Nero that Claudius turned against his son; Tiberius had promoted Germanicus over his own son Drusus (Ann. 13.16.3; Tib. 62.3,Nero 33.3, Titus 2; Dio 67.33.3.)  For Agrippina’s part, her relations with Britannicus may have been strained but she remained cordial with Octavia (Ann. 12.26.2). Although she worked hard to establish her son’s primacy Agrippina would need Britannicus as a spare heir should anything happen to Nero (Ann. 12.26.2).

 

Nero’s adoption was not a simple procedure since with the death of his father he was not under the control of a paterfamilias.  The only way he could be adopted, and pass under the authority of a new paterfamilias, was by a process known as adrogatio, which involved legislation from the comitia centuriata on a motion of the Pontifex Maximus. Prior to this proceeding, the adoption would be investigated by the pontiffs for validity.  The fact that Claudius already had an heir in Britannicus would make the adoption as irregular as his marriage to his niece (Ann. 1.3.5).  How these hurdles were cleared is not fully explained by ancient sources but when Britannicus raised questions about Nero’s status Agrippina protested that the adoption had been carried out by the people and a resolution by the Senate (Ann. 12.41.7).  On February 25, 50, the twelve-year old Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus was officially adopted by Claudius and became Tiberius Claudius Nero Caesar (Ann. 12.4; Nero 7.1).  Somewhat later, Nero’s name was changed to Nero Claudius Drusus Germanicus Caesar (Nero 1.2; Dio 61.33.2). The reason for this adjustment is not known but Nero was referred to as Tiberius in an early dedication inscription. 

 

Agrippina, like Philip of Macedon, wanted her son to be taught by one of the most brilliant minds of the time and she persuaded Claudius to recall Seneca.  Seneca’s banishment was clearly a serious matter and Claudius had been firmly opposed to his recall.  Agrippina’s involvement in his recall points to political charges being lodged against Seneca with adultery used as a cover. During his exile, Seneca had become a famous author, so his recall was a popular move and may have been one of the factors that persuaded Claudius since Seneca could use his literary skills to support his regime.  His exile was officially ended in 49 and Seneca became Nero’s tutor in 50.

 

Suetonius reports that the night after Seneca accepted his appointment he dreamed that he was, in fact, teaching Caligula (Nero 7.1).  The upshot of this story anticipates Nero’s future conduct and was meant as a warning to Seneca.  However, if he had such a dream, Seneca himself informs us that he placed no faith in premonitions from dreams (Ep. 53.7-8).  As a student, Nero had a lively mind and applied himself to all the liberal arts, including sculpture, painting and, above all, music. But Agrippina specifically forbade Seneca to teach Nero philosophy, insisting on statecraft. [4] Seneca taught Nero a liberal arts curriculum (Nero 52; Ann. 13.2).  Rhetoric, without a doubt, was the core of Nero’s education but Seneca would not allow his pupil to read early orators and Quintilian (10.1.126-131) says that Seneca’s egoism made it impossible for his students to adopt an independent style. Tacitus adds that Seneca taught Nero to extemporize, which was useful when speaking before the Senate (Ann. 14.55). The growing interest Nero developed for artistic pursuits and stage performances may have been due to Seneca stifling his initiative and it was only after Seneca’s retirement that Nero composed his own speeches. [5]  Seneca’s attitude of the pupil/teacher relationship was to steer a middle course between strictness and permissiveness (De Ira 2.21-2).  He appears to have been more permissive than strict with Nero, particularly demonstrated in his affair with Acte and Nero’s increasing desire to appear on stage.  Nero’s developing character, with its mixture of clemency and cruelty, was a product of the conflicting influences of his youth. Nero conscientiously practiced clemency in the exercise of power in the first half of his reign, but absolutism gradually gained the upper hand, fueled by Nero’s poor relations with the aristocracy. Pausanius thought of Nero as a “noble soul ruined by a perverted education” (7.17.3).   

 

The year 51 marked the tenth anniversary of Claudius’ accession, and the emperor became consul for the fifth time to mark the occasion.  For Nero, too, this was a pivotal year: he was allowed to assume the toga virilis one-year ahead of the normal age.  The ceremony itself appears to have been moved forward from the traditional date of March 17, during the Liberalia, since Nero was already consul-designate on March 4 in order to mark his entry into public life.  Although he would not enter office for six years, Nero was exempt from holding the lesser magistracies (Ann. 13.2). Pointing up his new prominence, Nero’s portrait began to appear on official coinage advertising his new title princeps iuventutis.  The Senate also granted him proconsul imperium outside the city of Rome. In a brief period of time, Nero had supplanted  Britannicus as the heir to the principate; a fact that was further driven home during parades of the Praetorians that Nero led, dressed in a triumphal toga whereas Britannicus wore a boy’s gown (Ann. 12.41; Nero 7.2).

 

Up to this point, there had been no campaign by Agrippina to discredit Britannicus but a chance encounter between Nero and his new brother, late in 51, changed this.  Britannicus greeted Nero as Domitius as they passed each other, offending the new heir.  Suetonius claims this was an innocent mistake on Britannicus’ part but Nero’s adoption had taken place more than a year before, giving plenty of time for him to habituate himself to the new name (Nero 7.1; Ann. 12.41.6-7). Agrippina exploited the incident to discredit what she saw as corrupting influences on Britannicus.  Claudius, who was always fearful for his security, was convinced that factions in the imperial household were causing discord and he agreed to a purge of some of Britannicus’ retainers.  Sosibus, one of the prince’s tutors, was executed for plotting against Nero, but others were simply dismissed. Tacitus further claims that Agrippina removed officers from the Praetorian Guard, of the rank of centurion or tribune, who were deemed to be sympathetic to Britannicus (Ann. 12.26.2, 12.41.5-8,12.69.2,14.7.4, 15.50.4; Dio 60.32.5). 

 

                                               

Burrus

 

Agrippina persuaded Claudius that a single prefect was more efficient and would prevent rivalries among the guards: she proposed Sextus Afranius Burrus for the job. Burrus was a native of Vasio (modern Vaison), a town in Gallia Narbonensis.  An inscription found at Vasio provides vital, but scant, information about Burrus’ early life.  He became a military tribune early in his career, but the position was administrative with no campaign service and there is no further evidence that Burrus held a military position.  His first civil office was as procurator of the res privata of Livia, which he held no earlier than 14 CE since Livia is referred to as Julia Augusta.  The Vasio inscription says he served as procurator to Tiberius and Claudius, the lack of an entry for Caligula probably being the result of a damnatio.  In this position, Burrus could have been named governor of a lesser province, where his administrative skills would have been put to good use.  He received the ornamenta consularia at an unknown time in his career.  Despite this, there was no real distinction in Burrus’ career to anticipate his selection as prefect.

 

Burrus’ appointment occurred not long after the recall of Seneca and the establishment of the philosopher as Nero’s tutor.  At this time, Seneca and Agrippina worked in concert and it is likely that she asked his advice in matters of state.  As prefect, Burrus acted as a subordinate to Seneca and possibly was his protégé at the time of his appointment.  In the position of Praetorian Prefect, Burrus lent support to Seneca and allowed him a degree of power he otherwise would not have enjoyed, but the concord that existed between them can be explained as a dominant leader and a faithful subordinate.  Tigellinus is said to have remarked after Burrus’ death that his loyalty (unlike that of his predecessor) to Nero was not divided (Ann. 14.57.2).  The interpretation of this statement has been to infer a division of loyalty between Nero and Agrippina but is more plausibly explained as loyalty between Nero and Seneca. [6]  Tacitus is uncertain as to whether Burrus was poisoned, but Suetonius and Dio had no such doubts, fixing the blame on Nero (Ann. 14.51.1; Nero 35.5; Dio 62.13.3).  Possibly, an illness was used as cover to administer poison.  Later, Nero presented the estates of Rubellius Plautus and Burrus to the divorced Octavia, both being linked by Tacitus as infausta, men who had suffered unnatural misfortune.  Since Plautus had been murdered the linking of his name with Burrus’ suggests the Prefect was also murdered (Ann. 14.57-59).  Burrus’ death would have been a way to indirectly attack Seneca, provided that the Prefect was indeed a subordinate of the philosopher.  The cause of the murder may have been the opposition of Seneca to the divorce of Octavia and Nero’s plans to marry Poppaea.  Burrus would have stood with Seneca on this matter, as his remark on Nero giving back Octavia’s dowry of the empire makes clear, so his death would have removed Seneca’s power base with the Praetorians (Ann. 62.13).

 

 

 

© David A Wend 2003