Emperor Nero got his fabled start as simply a boy birthed by a mother who wanted to give the whole world to her son. To help her plan, his mother, Agrippina the Younger, married Emperor Claudius when Nero was a small boy. Many historians claim that this was Agrippina’s manipulative plan all along. Claudius eventually adopted the child, thus practically securing his job as future emperor. The only thing that could prevent this inevitable event from occurring was Britannicus, Claudius’ biological son from his third wife. Although Nero was the older adopted son, most thought that Claudius would choose his own blood related child. This was hurried along by Agrippina, who purportedly poisoned her husband to death in 41 CE. After the death of Claudius,
…show more content…
Many accounts from Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius (69-140 CE) state that Christianity was viewed very negatively by Nero and the elites of the day. Richard Holland reminds us of one of Suetonius famous quotes when he says, “Punishment was meted out to the Christians, a class of men professing a new and wicked superstition.” This idea was prevalent during Nero’s tenure, but the accounts of mass murder of the Christians may be blown out of proportion. As Holland writes, “The strangest thing is that none of the gospels, nor even the Acts of the Apostles, makes the slightest reference to the persecution by Nero of any Christians at Rome.” He seems to bring up a good point here. If this time period was so significant to early Christians, why is it not recorded in the Holy Book? It seems as though these accounts might be falsified based on someone’s personal opinion of the Emperor. As Professor F.W. Clayton tells us, “Tacitus is the only authority who connects the persecution of the Christians with the fire.” This comment is meant to highlight the fact that history was often decided by the few with written documentation. While we may never know the truth of these accounts, it surely highlights that one must question ancient historians when considering a person’s
Many accounts from Roman historians Tacitus and Suetonius (69-140 CE) state that Christianity was viewed very negatively by Nero and the elites of the day. Richard Holland reminds us of one of Suetonius famous quotes when he says, “Punishment was meted out to the Christians, a class of men professing a new and wicked superstition.” This idea was prevalent during Nero’s tenure, but the accounts of mass murder of the Christians may be blown out of proportion. As Holland writes, “The strangest thing is that none of the gospels, nor even the Acts of the Apostles, makes the slightest reference to the persecution by Nero of any Christians at Rome.” He seems to bring up a good point here. If this time period was so significant to early Christians, why is it not recorded in the Holy Book? It seems as though these accounts might be falsified based on someone’s personal opinion of the Emperor. As Professor F.W. Clayton tells us, “Tacitus is the only authority who connects the persecution of the Christians with the fire.” This comment is meant to highlight the fact that history was often decided by the few with written documentation. While we may never know the truth of these accounts, it surely highlights that one must question ancient historians when considering a person’s