Are Roman Emperors Good Or Bad

585 Words3 Pages
There have been many different rulers for many different civilizations throughout all of humanity. Some of these rulers have been great rulers, and they will forever be known as great. However, with the good comes the bad, and there have been some really bad rulers throughout history. The Ancient Roman civilization is considered an important point in human history. The Ancient Roman Empire lasted for almost 1500 years. Over the course of those years the Roman Empire had many emperors. Again, some emperors were good, and even great, but some were bad, very bad. Some of the worst emperors in Ancient Rome’s history were Commodus, Nero, and Caligula. These rulers are considered as some of the worst emperors Ancient Rome had to offer. However, Caligula is the worst emperor in all of Ancient…show more content…
At the age of seventeen, Nero became emperor of Rome. For the first five years of his rule, he gained reputation by promoting sharing power with the Senate, he ended closed-door political trials. Nero didn’t care much for politics, so he appointed three key advisers (Seneca, Burrus and Agrippina). Seneca suggested that Nero come out from his mother’s “domineering” shadow. Nero’s mother immediately turned against him. She appointed Nero’s stepbrother as the true heir. She also strongly protested Nero’s affair with his friend’s wife, Poppaea Sabina. Nero did not let this stop him though. His stepbrother soon died under mysterious circumstances. Nero also ordered Agrippina to kill his mother in her villa. Soon after, Nero married Poppaea. “Three years later, in what the Roman historian Tacitus described as ‘a casual outburst of rage,’ Nero killed Poppaea with a single kick to her belly”. After his mother’s death, Nero gave himself the freedom to study and expand his passion for the arts. Nero learned to sing and perform on the lyre. He also encouraged upper class members to participate in dance
Open Document