The idea of bad emperors rings certain names such as Caligula, Nero, and Commodus. They are remebered as cruel, unstable, extravagant, or in certain cases just plain insane. Popular culture has reinforced these images through depictions in novels, television, and films. This elevates these individuals to be some of the most recognizable figures from Roman history. Modern historians increasingly ask whether the image these emperors have cultivated has been judged fairly or whether their reputations were shaped by hostile ancient writers with political agendas. Instead of judging these rulers, we should be asking whether we can and or should rehabilitate their memory?
One of the first things historians learn is that surviving evidence is never neutral. All we learn from Roman history is that the history written by Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius Dio. These men often belonged to the very social classes whose political influences these emperors limited. if an emperor played ball and cooperated with the Senate, then he would be remembered favorably whilst if he ignored, humiliated, or threatened senatorial power, his reputation would suffer. Whilst this does not automatically discredit the authors, it does place a certain looming curtain of uncertainty about them.
No emperor can illustrate this more than Nero. Ancient authors often accuse him of being a family murdering, frivolous spending, and being a general fool all whilst Rome burned. This is however not how modern scholarship sees him. Well first and foremost there was no real evidence of him playing the fiddle while watching Rome burned. Archaeology also suggests that Nero organized emergency relief after the disaster and introduced more stringent building regulations to reduce the risk of future fires. Whilst we do not deny that he was capable of brutality, authors such as Rebecca Mead and other modern scholars believe that’s a gross exaggeration. Nero was also widely popular with the ordinary Romans, especially because of his public entertainments and his prolific yet generous spending. This raises the question, were the authors of past describing a tyrant that the common Romans saw as something quite different?
The mad villain Caligula or Caligola for the Italians in the room is closely associated with madness. Stories often claimed him to have declared himself to be a god, commiting shocking acts of cruelty and even wanting to make his horse a consul. However almost ever surviving account comes from hostile writers and were produced after his assassination (on my birthday January 24th 41 A.D!!!). Some historians now suggest that many famous stories were mere exaggerations, political satire, and/or deliberate attempts to ridicule a ruler who challenged established elites. Whilst this is in no way us trying to defend him or say he was an excellent emperor. This is just us saying that separating historical reality from political propaganda is much harder than people assume.
Commodus is often remembered as the evil villain of the greatest and most accurate Roman film, Gladiator. The real Commodus certainly did enjoy presenting himself as the new Hercules as seen above. To senators, this behavior was seen as disgraceful because gladiators occupied one of the lowest positions of the Roman society. Yet public spectacles also strengthened the emperors relationship with the common population. Was Commodus humiliating the dignity of the role he held or communicating with the Romans at a language they appreciated. Different audiences would have interpreted this in various ways.
The answer depends on what we mean by the term rehabilitate. If to rehabilitate we pretend that every ruler was some wise and great man then we probably should not. But if to rehabilitate we mean to re-examine evidence critically rather than accepting ancient character assassination then the answer is yes. This debate is much more than just talk about a few Roman emperors, it is reminding us of the biases presented when reading these historical sources.
Sources:https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2021/06/14/how-nasty-was-nero-really
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/just-how-bad-was-nero-really-180977813/
https://www.historyhit.com/history-caligula-and-nero/
Rome via Brooklyn 
Leave a comment