@@Jazmillenium Didn't Washington do quite a lot of "generalling" (I now that is not a word) before others decided he was incompetent at that? Octavian always new his limitations and did NOT get thousands of people killed because he fancied himself some kind of general. So to compare him to Washington does not fit IMO.
Fun fact about the Julio-Claudian Dynasty that my history professor shared with me. Normally, blood relations weren't a particularly a big deal when it comes to clash against to adoptions. For example, no one had a problem about the fact that Tiberius, the second Roman emperor wasn't actually blood related to Augustus. Augustus personally however, was obsessed with dynasty through blood. I suspect this is due to Caesarian being the son of Caesar which Marc Antony used to promote himself in Rome. Anyways, Marc Antony's children were adopted by Augustus' sister and eventually married into the Julio-Claudian Dynasty. The biggest irony of them all is that by the end of the Dynasty, the Dynasty had more of Antony's blood than Augustus himself.
This is true. The empire almost never went down a father/son blood line like how you would normally associate a traditional monarchy. In fact I think the only time this was the case was when Commodus took over after Marcus Aurelius. Emperors normally would hand pick their successor and formally adopt him in their teenage years.
@RandolfLycan The second dynasty, the Flavian Dynasty, had Vespasian and his two sons, Titus and Domitian directly took over as emperors following their father's death and were generally good emperors. But they were already mature by the time their father even considered becoming emperor. Commodus, however, was unique because he was "born in the purple" meaning Marcus Aurelius was already emperor by the time he was born.
@@bradle4162, Vespasian did become Emperor after overthrowing a guy who overthrew another guy who overthrew another guy who rebelled against Nero, soooo... yeah.
In my history classes, I never heard that “fiddling” meant actually picking up a violin. Rather, my instructors always stressed it as metaphorical fiddling. That is, that he was slow to respond. I always thought his absence at the fire’s outbreak was the genesis of that.
While Nero certainly wasn’t great, it is important to remember that all the sources we/the Biographics video/popular history have on for Nero reign (Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius Dio, among others.) were (1) written well after Nero’s death and reliant almost entirely on previous accounts (that are largely lost to time) that were written by historians patronized by the Flavian dynasty (Vespasian and the guys who eventually won the civil war that overthrew Nero in the end), who had every reason to trash the guy they just overthrew to justify why they should be in charge now and (2) are all senatorial histories, whose writers particularly disliked when emperors, like Nero, could be seen as appealing to the “masses” or favoring freemen over them for bureaucratic postings. That’s not to say these sources are completely wrong, or that Nero was a great guy, but the real Nero was almost certainly more complicated then popularly assumed and the more crazy stuff (the fiddling during the burning of Rome, the Agrippina bits, etc.) were probably exaggerated, if not fabricated, to tell a good politically motivated story.
Claudius is also related to Augustus. His father, Drusus married Augustus's niece. Claudius is Augustus' great nephew. Just like how Augustus' dad married Julius Caesar's niece.
35:00 wearing masks of your departed ancestors was standard procedure for a patrician funeral march. Not so much on stage though, but that's the impetus.
Fiddles and violins hadn't even been INVENTED in Nero's time , so it was a little impossible for him to have fiddled while it burned. A documentary I watched on him earlier said he was 'out of town' when it happened and was actually very worried and wanting to help with fighting the fire and its aftermath.
Thanks for the great content! Super insightful & interesting. Would love to see you provide insight on biographics video on Caligula & other Roman rulers.
My two favorite on-screen depictions of Nero are Michael Sheen in The Rise and Fall of an Empire and Christopher Biggins as a young Nero in I, Claudius. Sheen especially is mesmerizing!
Glad to see review on roman history. For emperor augustus, one of the greatest politicians ever to walk on this earth. Unfortunately, he was not the greatest father to have if you were Julia or Tiberius.
Great video. Hopefully you can do a reaction video for Augustus. He’s a truly unique individual with a great story. Have a great trip Chris and wishing you a speedy recovery.
I will definitely be watching any Rome videos. Wish I could visit the area, and specifically, the mountains south-east of Rome, where my family comes from.
When you're in Rome if you have time I recommend you visit piazza del popolo. On the left side once you enter there will be a church (Basilica Parrocchiale Santa Maria del Popolo) it's a pretty church. Also I highly recommend Castel Sant'Angelo if you want to get a feel for what a mediaeval fort feels like. When you go to Firenze you must go to the gallerie degli uffizi. On one side of the gallery you get a very nice view of the different bridges (ponte Vecchio for example) and on the other side in the piazza there are huge marble recreations of famous statues by different artists like Michelangelo. You can easily walk the entirety of old Firenze in a day.
Great video, as always. I was just wondering if you could do a commentary on Civil War era music since you are erudite in that part of history, perhaps it would enhance our understanding of the war and help us recognize the importance of music in boosting morale among troops and keeping them united toward a common cause, but that's just my idea :)
25:00 one small addition: There was not one leader of the Praetorial Guard but two. IIRC it was Augustus who installed 2 leaders, because he realized that only 1 leader would have a position that was too powerful. The two leaders should keep each other in check. But you are spot on of course, the Guard had incredible power and without their approval no emperor could hold to his office. The Praetorian Guard frequently meddled, accepted or killed emperors. Once, they even AUCTIONED the post of emperor. The one who paid them the most in this auciton was confirmed as emperor and got the purple.
People talk a lot about Nero and Caligula being screwed up, but I feel like not nearly enough people talk about Tiberius. I mean, the guy literally had an Epstein style island off the coast of Italy where young boys and girls would prance about naked through his garden. He called them his " Little Minnows".
The worst thing is that Sporus (possibly bad spelling) died age about 20, went through all that in two decades of life. Tiberus, Caligula and Nero definitely made sure the empire had a bad start after Augustus' delicate constitutional reform.
Personally I don't consider Julius Caesar the beginning of the first dynasty mainly because most of the things Octavion/Augustus was given powers that Julius Caesar, whether you think he wanted to become a monarch or was just trying to build Rome back up from years of Civil War, but if Julius did the same things that Augustus did he would have gotten assassinated even sooner. Lot of this based on Roman ideology back then. But I'm just a Roman history fan not an expert so feel free to ignore me
I have a question? Was Julius Caesar considered the first emperor by the people in that era. His name was used to identify the Emperors right down to the 20th Century, example Kaiser Wilhelm or the Czar of Russia.
@@mikealvarez2322No, Caesar was a Dictator of the Republic. Not the same as an Emperor. It was Augustus who made the name Caesar synonymous with being an "heir" to the throne. He gave the name to his grandsons & later Tiberius when adopting him However it was more of a family thing. It was actually Emperor Galba (first non Julio-Claudian) to take the name of Caesar & Augustus. After him, everyone did it as a form of legitimacy & eventually it became the titles of Senior & Junior Emperors
Well Augustus didn't got assassinated because he purged the senate and had no opposition after getting rid off Marcus Antonius and Lepidus. Caesar was way too forgiving, I mean the enemies he forgave killed him in the end. That's something Augustus never forgot.
@@iDeathMaximuMII well the so called "enemies" killed Julius Caesar over very petty transgressions. One of them in particular being one of Caesar's allies who was mad that Caesar didn't want to pay his debt off. You should check Kings and Generals video on the motivations on all his Assimators, like I said above most of them joined because they were petty
There are some horrendous roman emperors besides Nero and Caligula. As sadistic as Nero and Caligula were their were some equally horrifying emperors such as Commodus and Caracalla. Caracella I have heard from many might have been the most cruel of all the roman emperors but I am not too familiar on the subject. Regardless, they were all pretty cruel people even for the time. EDIT: Also shout out to Elagabalus who was a teenage emperor. He was just a wild and absurd emperor. He was not as absurd as some teenager emperors in Chinese history like Liu Ziye(holy was this guy insane and a monster, the whole liu song dynasty which he comes from was insane in fact) but Elagabalus gets almost pretty close to their insanity and absurdity.
While there were very cruel emperors, keep one thing in mind: The emperor was often disposed and some other took the throne. And this new emperor often had an interest in making his predeccesor look bad. And writers often tried to carry favor with new emperors, by putting the earlier emperors in a bad light. That's why it is important to identify WHEN the tales of horros originate. If it was mainly AFTER the emperor died, there is a good chance they are exaggerated. If they already were around when the emperor was still alive, they are way more likely to be true. Nero is a good example for that. His "oh so horrible" tortures against Christians were "documented" by christian clerics way later and it is reasonable to believe that Christians weren't worse off under him than before or after his reign. His "burning of Rome" was reported (more likely: Invented) later as well - in fact if you look at the remaining sources from this day, there is nothing to indicate he was responsible for it. Does this make him good? No, because we have a lot of tales and stories from his time.
You definitely are right that Christian's absolutely were not better off before or after his reign. He persecuted Christian's similarly to how others did at the time. I think nero's case is likely brought up because it was so early in christianity so it's used as a sort of a symbol of early Christianity persecution from a popular figure. It's likely a scapegoat but probably more of a situation where they are using nero as a symbol of early christian persecution. There is good evidence he did persecute Christians(likely not to the extent in some stories though which exxagerate) but tbh so many major figures of the time were doing the same things as Nero since christianity was a new religion and we know how serious people are when it comes to religion throughout history lol.
22:18 From what I've read (I forgot whether it was Suetonius or Tacitus, maybe both) Tiberius was also reluctant to rule. Goaded into it by his scheming mother Livia who had married Augustus. She forced him to divorce a wife he loved and the bitterness left him sexualy perverted.
Can’t wait to see you that Sunday in Gettysburg will see you at both events! Can’t wait to see the guy I see on my screen daily to learn history. Can’t wait to tell you about my areas history because it’s rich and I think you’ll find it interesting. Can’t come the other days don’t have the money for a hotel or the Friday event as much as I love Martin sheen from the west wing and Sam waterson because he was Jack McCoy in one of my favorite shows law and order! Just can’t go
All this talking about Nero made me re-watch the movie 'Quo Vadis', which has my favourite portrayal of Nero in a work of fiction. Set in the year 64AD the movie focusses on a Roman general coming back from a three year campaign to fall in love with a Christian girl living in Rome. Some historical events featured in the story are the burning of Rome, Nero's pursuit of the Christian community and the crucifixion of the apostel Peter. With a runtime of nearly 3 hours it's a long one, but well worth the watch if you have an interest in the Roman empire, Nero and/or the early life of Christianity.
28:48 Fun fact, the Jews of the time absolutely ADORED Nero to the point where one apocryphal story is that he didn't commit suicide, he fled after learning about a potential coup, converted to Judaism after a miracle with four arrows all flying towards Jerusalem, and became a Torah scholar.
Seeing that you do Roman history from time to time, please do Ancient Rome in 20 minutes by Arzamas. They also have Ancient Greece in 20 minutes. Thank you!
Great video overall, but as you stated a few times in the video: history was most often (re)written with a purpose. Caligula's bad reputation was created by his opponents. The described him as a madman who made his horse into a senator. Rather than the actions of a someone who couldn't be reasoned with, it makes much more sense this was a deliberate statement from Caligula against the many corrupt senators by saying his horse could do a better job. But of course, by doing, he gave additional fuel to his opponents to slander him further.
Chris, I've been watching your videos so much lately, that I had a dream about you. In my my dream I met you and I was thinking "He's as nice as ai thought he would be."
Neros fire safety measures have influence on fire safety of the city of rome till today credit where credit is due. Also Nero persecuted the Christians because according to him where responsible for the fire so his persecution of them was legitimate by roman law and understandable.
Chris this is a great video, i would recommend and i hope u do watch the video done on dominatian, that is one of the greatest emperors who's is falsy portraited as a second Nero, please do a reaction on that video. Second I recomend u read the 3 books of Tom Holland: Rubicon, Dynastie and Pax Romana. These 3 books tell the fall of the republic, the Julio-claudian dynastie and the succesers of them from Vespessian until Commodus.
Have you been watching Manhunt on Apple TV? I’ve caught up on the first three episodes. I would love to see you give a review for it. I saw your trailer reaction and thought maybe an update would be cool.
I think it is interesting that even as far back as Caesar in gaul and Augustus after the battle of Phillipi that the family showed violent behavior, but once they got lots of power they started to more sadistic.
Caligula got his name from the legions in Germania. Since he was a small child he was with his father (Germanicus) in Germania. (Can't remember if his mother was there as well.) And the soldiers adored him. They nicknamed him Caligula, which you correctly translated to "little boot". To be precise: It refers to the boots of a soldier, the marching boots Caliga.
Finally learning some of the most fascinating history there is. You could make TV shows and movies about Rome for decades. But instead we got Gayme of thrones.
If you need a video to watch on your flight to brush up on Roman history, Overly Sarcastic Productions has a three hour video “The Complete History of Rome Summarized”
I grew up in a home full of hurt boys, foster home for the abused, both mentally, and emotionally. In another time, Nero would have been a kid I shared my room with while he was on respite from the home that needed a break. But because 16 was an adult in Rome, he became a mentally unstable, hormonal monster, given powers most of us couldn't handle, and freedoms no one should have. He most likely would have blown out at the age of 18 (If he didn't run away) and ended up homeless before he was 20, in jail, prison, or passed. Cursed is cursed. No sympathy for the millenia gone, but childhood is what makes you, and it made him the confused selfish monster he became. That and yummy lead, I wonder if his teeth had ever turned green?
I hope you and your family do recover from Covid soon, but I have to ask, is it wise to be going to Pennsylvania if you do recover from Covid? you could still be a carrier or might not even be fully recovered.
Tbh Caesar not being an emperor is mostly a convention among historians. There wasn't any official title attached to what we now call an "Emperor". They just held collection of republican offices that were supposed to be held separately. Augustus was technically just a governor of like a dozen of provinces ("coincidentally" the ones that had the legions attached to them), Princeps Senatus, Censor and Tribune of the Plebs. Nevermind that some of these offices required him to be physically outside of Italy and other to be physically in the city of Rome. Nevermind that these were supposed to be held for one year term and then usually required to wait 10 years before running for office again. Due to being Princeps Senatus, he was allowed to speak first in the senate. Due to being Censor he was allowed to alter the rolls of the Senate if Senators have represented "bad morals" (which is vague enough term that you can accuse them of anything) or had yet to be added to the rolls (you won the elections? Tough luck, let's wait 10 years till you can actually walk into the senate). Due to being Plebeian Tribune he could veto all of the legislation so it wouldn't be voted on. Due to being being simultaneously and separately governor of all of frontier provinces, all the legions were sworn to him. That's why principate's "governors" started to be called "Legates". Those were actually dudes below the actual governor. But since actual governor couldn't be in 12 places at once (and be at the capital at the same time) the actual governing fell to the Legates. But here's the thing - Caesar held those same powers, but through a different set of titles. He was "elected" to be Dictator for Life and Consul for five year term. He planned to resign from the latter one, but the former still gave him legal power to alter the rolls of the senate (which he famously used to appoint like half a thousand of his lackeys), speak first in debates, veto legislation and made him officially above anyone in military hierarchy. So if i'm being honest, Caesar, due to his powers being actually attached to one office, was even more of an emperor than his successors. One could also make the same argument about Second Triumvirate, who had three Triumvirs with official set of prerogatives directly copied from Dictator's ones. And keep in mind that we're all in agreement that later situations of Co-emperorships (most famously, the Tetrarchy, but also Marcus Aurelius+Lucius Verus duo, or many examples from Crisis of the Third Century) are still emperors. Power sharing isn't a problem, as long as those powers are absolute. Thus i think excluding Caesar, Mark Antony and Lepidus out of the ranks of Roman Emperors is totally arbitrary, and should be ditched. By the time of "official" start of the empire, officials were not democratically elected for about 20 years. Even a brief return to the Republic didn't changed that, as one of the first acts of the Senate after Assassination of Caesar was to ratify all his acts and appointments. This included his appointments for *future* magistrates. They probably hoped to outlast any outstanding appointments and then return to democratic elections. But after a year Triumvirate was born. There wasn't even a month of break in the continous streak of monarchy-like rule from 48 to 27 BC
What do the Roman emperors Elagabalus, Commodes, Caligula, Galbanum, Aurelian, Gordian III, Pertinax, Probus, Balbinus, Pupienus, Caracalla, Numerian, and Philip II all have in common? They were all murdered by the Praetorian Guard.
interesting thing about beauty is... beauty changes. so his wife would have been beauty by roman standards but def not in modern age. Like in feudal japan beauty means having your teeth blackened. Like if you take the bible, Rachel is considered to be more beautiful than leah. But if you take a closer look at the words used to describe them, Rachel is described basically as a tomboy, super strong and masculine with masculine features. while leah is described as "delicate" which is ironically considered beautiful in modern standards. it literally says everything about her was delicate which just means she was more feminine but in ancient middle east, masculine features were considered beautiful. Like rachel is a shepherdess, and we know from david how dangerous a shepherd job is.
This is gonna sound weird but I'm englishman but i have learnt the italian language and history in my own time (because my football team is A.S Roma and I just adore the country even though it has its faults) but pls visit the trestavere if possible for great food and appetisers as well as the baths of caracalla. Wish I could join you on the trip but I'm going in May myself and I'm still a university student so money is hard to come by for me. You'll love it, Sono Pazzi Questi Romanisti! They're crazy. Those Romans. S.P.Q.R
I loved I CLAUDIUS as novels and miniseries, but it seriously whitewashed the title character. Claudius may not have been "about killing his relatives" before becoming emperor (when it was not an option anyway), but he did not shy away from it at all after getting the crown. He ordered the deaths of his third wife, several of her relatives, his son-in-law, and numerous members of his household afterward. Uncle:niece marriage was taboo in Republican Rome, but it was very common in client states of the the Roman world. In the Herodian dynasty (Herod Agrippa was a close friend of Claudius from childhood) it was so common that Salome of biblical fame was the granddaughter, great granddaughter, and daughter-in-law of Herod the Great. It was practiced by the Spanish royal family until well into the 19th century: Isabella II was not only borne of an uncle:niece union but was married to her double first cousin who also was uncle:niece begotten (and was homosexual to boot- it wasn't a legendary love match, but did produce children).
In many ways the great fire actually improved the living conditions of the average Roman, most of the ordinary citizens before the fire lived in "Insua" a type of apartment building which were often of low quality, made of wood, were unsafe in their construction and had poor sanitary conditions. They often caught fire but the fires in kitchens with blocked flues before the great fire which were often caught early enough not to spread quickly. After the fire the new buildings were made from brick, made to a much safer standard and as Simon says with wider roads to stop fire from spreading quickly- taking the common citizen from a squalid hut of a home to a comfortable safe home with improved sanitation. The instance of disease also dropped - so it is unfortunate that we only see the bad side and not the good- Nero wanted to be loved by the commoners but the wealthy did not like this "sharing" of the wealth of empire. So I agree that the history that those victors of this coup wrote, was very unfavorable to Nero and some people claimed that Nero or his ghost were sometimes still seen in Rome years after his suicide. Would I want to live through his chaos no, but I think his early reign was good for the common man in the empire, even if he had no real interest in running it so he must have chased good reliable advisors in those first 10 years and have had good sense to keep them happy.
Yeah I had read that nero was in his villa 35 miles away when it broke out and immediately rushed to Rome and began relief efforts even opening his villa as a shelter but then after everything burnt down he put a palce. He also put new building codes in place and then blamed Christians for the fire.
I've been pretty compelled by some recent arguments that Caligula and even Nero may both have been overly critisised by the dynasties that followed so as propaganda essentially, they didn't want to damage the concept of emperor because that was the position they held or wanted to hold themselves so Augustus was still held up as great. This is not to say that Caligula and Nero were actually perfect, but that theymay have been far more in line with the other emperors, just that they lost the political game. Essentially this is a history told by the victors situation.
I'm not going to defend a lot of Nero's very questionable actions throughout his Rule but I do find it fascinating how a lot of what is written about him was by his enemies and people who wanted to make sure he was remembered as a terrible person by filling the records and stories about him with all kinds of stuff that was just not true combined with people who then mistranslated a lot of that and came up with stuff like him fiddling which was even further from the truth. Objectively and logically due to those things we should not take everything said about his actions as 100% true but more with a grain of salt because they were penned by people with one motivation or another to make him out to be far crazier and crueler than he probably actually was. This isn't the only case of this sort of stuff either, for example the Gunfight at the O. K. corral is riddled with counter views to the main one and other angles on who was actually bad or good. History should not be judging about who was the bad one and who wasn't. It's about what objectively happened and the reader should make up their own mind whether something was valid or not. Sometimes it's just not that easy to know.
Octavian's greatest skill was knowing what he was good at and what he needed help with and then building a team around him to fill his skill gaps.
"I found Rome of clay, and left it of marble." 🗿
_Insert Marcus Agrippa zooming around in a little spaceship_
That's called being a good leader. Washington was much the same way in knowing he wasn't too great a general and listened to others.
@@Jazmillenium Didn't Washington do quite a lot of "generalling" (I now that is not a word) before others decided he was incompetent at that?
Octavian always new his limitations and did NOT get thousands of people killed because he fancied himself some kind of general.
So to compare him to Washington does not fit IMO.
@@victornunes900, I see you are a man of culture.
Love you man
Fun fact about the Julio-Claudian Dynasty that my history professor shared with me. Normally, blood relations weren't a particularly a big deal when it comes to clash against to adoptions. For example, no one had a problem about the fact that Tiberius, the second Roman emperor wasn't actually blood related to Augustus. Augustus personally however, was obsessed with dynasty through blood. I suspect this is due to Caesarian being the son of Caesar which Marc Antony used to promote himself in Rome. Anyways, Marc Antony's children were adopted by Augustus' sister and eventually married into the Julio-Claudian Dynasty. The biggest irony of them all is that by the end of the Dynasty, the Dynasty had more of Antony's blood than Augustus himself.
That explains the lavish parties and general disregard for safety.
This is true. The empire almost never went down a father/son blood line like how you would normally associate a traditional monarchy. In fact I think the only time this was the case was when Commodus took over after Marcus Aurelius. Emperors normally would hand pick their successor and formally adopt him in their teenage years.
@RandolfLycan The second dynasty, the Flavian Dynasty, had Vespasian and his two sons, Titus and Domitian directly took over as emperors following their father's death and were generally good emperors. But they were already mature by the time their father even considered becoming emperor. Commodus, however, was unique because he was "born in the purple" meaning Marcus Aurelius was already emperor by the time he was born.
@@bradle4162, Vespasian did become Emperor after overthrowing a guy who overthrew another guy who overthrew another guy who rebelled against Nero, soooo... yeah.
In my history classes, I never heard that “fiddling” meant actually picking up a violin.
Rather, my instructors always stressed it as metaphorical fiddling. That is, that he was slow to respond. I always thought his absence at the fire’s outbreak was the genesis of that.
Lead exposure is a hell of a thing.
While Nero certainly wasn’t great, it is important to remember that all the sources we/the Biographics video/popular history have on for Nero reign (Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius Dio, among others.) were (1) written well after Nero’s death and reliant almost entirely on previous accounts (that are largely lost to time) that were written by historians patronized by the Flavian dynasty (Vespasian and the guys who eventually won the civil war that overthrew Nero in the end), who had every reason to trash the guy they just overthrew to justify why they should be in charge now and (2) are all senatorial histories, whose writers particularly disliked when emperors, like Nero, could be seen as appealing to the “masses” or favoring freemen over them for bureaucratic postings. That’s not to say these sources are completely wrong, or that Nero was a great guy, but the real Nero was almost certainly more complicated then popularly assumed and the more crazy stuff (the fiddling during the burning of Rome, the Agrippina bits, etc.) were probably exaggerated, if not fabricated, to tell a good politically motivated story.
There are multiple modern adaptations like " Nero a story of matrcide murder and music in imperial Rome" tell's a far more nuanced story.
Yes, he wasn’t in Rome when the fire started.
Claudius is also related to Augustus. His father, Drusus married Augustus's niece. Claudius is Augustus' great nephew.
Just like how Augustus' dad married Julius Caesar's niece.
35:00 wearing masks of your departed ancestors was standard procedure for a patrician funeral march.
Not so much on stage though, but that's the impetus.
Hello have a nice day and I hope you recover!
If you're getting interested in roman history Emporer Julian the last pagan Emporer is definitely worth checking out
Fiddles and violins hadn't even been INVENTED in Nero's time , so it was a little impossible for him to have fiddled while it burned. A documentary I watched on him earlier said he was 'out of town' when it happened and was actually very worried and wanting to help with fighting the fire and its aftermath.
Thanks for the great content! Super insightful & interesting. Would love to see you provide insight on biographics video on Caligula & other Roman rulers.
Remember all: fiddles are NOT an effective fire suppressant
Rome TW?
I've heard different
Dang, I knew I was doing it wrong
I don't know... it stopped the Devil in Georgia
@@murderbus about that. I'm of the opinion that the Devil was better and should have won that duel.
My two favorite on-screen depictions of Nero are Michael Sheen in The Rise and Fall of an Empire and Christopher Biggins as a young Nero in I, Claudius. Sheen especially is mesmerizing!
0:56 we all checked our usb's
Knowledgia has a long video on Roman history you could maybe make a series out of. He has an awesome sense of humor.
Great video would love to see more Roman history videos
U look a little better, it's good to see.
Glad to see review on roman history. For emperor augustus, one of the greatest politicians ever to walk on this earth. Unfortunately, he was not the greatest father to have if you were Julia or Tiberius.
Please do the others! It’s such an interesting part of history
Get better chris! Have a good trip as well!
Great video. Hopefully you can do a reaction video for Augustus. He’s a truly unique individual with a great story. Have a great trip Chris and wishing you a speedy recovery.
Also he had a lot of bad press written about him after his death to fit the new political and religious landscapes.
I don't think the fiddle was even a thing yet when Rome burned.
Haha you're right it did not.
@@VloggingThroughHistory ohhh snap!!! I got a reply!!! I'm a huge fan, sending love from Athens, Ga.
@@joshuabowen6919
Yeah it was probably a lyre he was playing on top of the ashes of the city tho
If you're doing Roman History, more Historia Civilis please.
Also, you should check out the History of Rome podcast by Mike Duncan
That podcast is legendary
I will definitely be watching any Rome videos. Wish I could visit the area, and specifically, the mountains south-east of Rome, where my family comes from.
Thanks for doing this one. I love studying 1st century Rome. Caligula and Nero are 2 of my favorite historical figures to study.
When you're in Rome if you have time I recommend you visit piazza del popolo. On the left side once you enter there will be a church (Basilica Parrocchiale Santa Maria del Popolo) it's a pretty church. Also I highly recommend Castel Sant'Angelo if you want to get a feel for what a mediaeval fort feels like. When you go to Firenze you must go to the gallerie degli uffizi. On one side of the gallery you get a very nice view of the different bridges (ponte Vecchio for example) and on the other side in the piazza there are huge marble recreations of famous statues by different artists like Michelangelo. You can easily walk the entirety of old Firenze in a day.
Keep up the awesome work man! God bless.
Great video, as always. I was just wondering if you could do a commentary on Civil War era music since you are erudite in that part of history, perhaps it would enhance our understanding of the war and help us recognize the importance of music in boosting morale among troops and keeping them united toward a common cause, but that's just my idea :)
25:00 one small addition: There was not one leader of the Praetorial Guard but two.
IIRC it was Augustus who installed 2 leaders, because he realized that only 1 leader would have a position that was too powerful.
The two leaders should keep each other in check.
But you are spot on of course, the Guard had incredible power and without their approval no emperor could hold to his office. The Praetorian Guard frequently meddled, accepted or killed emperors.
Once, they even AUCTIONED the post of emperor. The one who paid them the most in this auciton was confirmed as emperor and got the purple.
Would love to see more reactionns from this channel,
How could he "fiddle" when the fiddle was not yet invented, or the violin? Ancient Rome is a cool study. Thank you.
People talk a lot about Nero and Caligula being screwed up, but I feel like not nearly enough people talk about Tiberius. I mean, the guy literally had an Epstein style island off the coast of Italy where young boys and girls would prance about naked through his garden. He called them his " Little Minnows".
I just read the book “dynasty” by Tom Holland on the Julio-claudians and it was really interesting. Also highly recommend “Rubicon” by him
I’m on his book that follows that one now. Pax.
Yeah, I like Tom Hollands books too.
Another author I like is Adrian Goldsworthy, maybe you'll enjoy his books too.
Like spiderman?
@@BoatsNhoes824 Yes, both have the same name - Tom Holland - but afaik they are not related in any way.
The worst thing is that Sporus (possibly bad spelling) died age about 20, went through all that in two decades of life. Tiberus, Caligula and Nero definitely made sure the empire had a bad start after Augustus' delicate constitutional reform.
Personally I don't consider Julius Caesar the beginning of the first dynasty mainly because most of the things Octavion/Augustus was given powers that Julius Caesar, whether you think he wanted to become a monarch or was just trying to build Rome back up from years of Civil War, but if Julius did the same things that Augustus did he would have gotten assassinated even sooner. Lot of this based on Roman ideology back then. But I'm just a Roman history fan not an expert so feel free to ignore me
I have a question? Was Julius Caesar considered the first emperor by the people in that era. His name was used to identify the Emperors right down to the 20th Century, example Kaiser Wilhelm or the Czar of Russia.
@@mikealvarez2322No, Caesar was a Dictator of the Republic. Not the same as an Emperor. It was Augustus who made the name Caesar synonymous with being an "heir" to the throne. He gave the name to his grandsons & later Tiberius when adopting him
However it was more of a family thing. It was actually Emperor Galba (first non Julio-Claudian) to take the name of Caesar & Augustus. After him, everyone did it as a form of legitimacy & eventually it became the titles of Senior & Junior Emperors
Well Augustus didn't got assassinated because he purged the senate and had no opposition after getting rid off Marcus Antonius and Lepidus.
Caesar was way too forgiving, I mean the enemies he forgave killed him in the end. That's something Augustus never forgot.
@@iDeathMaximuMII well the so called "enemies" killed Julius Caesar over very petty transgressions. One of them in particular being one of Caesar's allies who was mad that Caesar didn't want to pay his debt off. You should check Kings and Generals video on the motivations on all his Assimators, like I said above most of them joined because they were petty
Would love if you continued the historia civilis caesar videos!
There are some horrendous roman emperors besides Nero and Caligula. As sadistic as Nero and Caligula were their were some equally horrifying emperors such as Commodus and Caracalla. Caracella I have heard from many might have been the most cruel of all the roman emperors but I am not too familiar on the subject. Regardless, they were all pretty cruel people even for the time.
EDIT: Also shout out to Elagabalus who was a teenage emperor. He was just a wild and absurd emperor. He was not as absurd as some teenager emperors in Chinese history like Liu Ziye(holy was this guy insane and a monster, the whole liu song dynasty which he comes from was insane in fact) but Elagabalus gets almost pretty close to their insanity and absurdity.
While there were very cruel emperors, keep one thing in mind: The emperor was often disposed and some other took the throne.
And this new emperor often had an interest in making his predeccesor look bad.
And writers often tried to carry favor with new emperors, by putting the earlier emperors in a bad light.
That's why it is important to identify WHEN the tales of horros originate. If it was mainly AFTER the emperor died, there is a good chance they are exaggerated.
If they already were around when the emperor was still alive, they are way more likely to be true.
Nero is a good example for that. His "oh so horrible" tortures against Christians were "documented" by christian clerics way later and it is reasonable to believe that Christians weren't worse off under him than before or after his reign.
His "burning of Rome" was reported (more likely: Invented) later as well - in fact if you look at the remaining sources from this day, there is nothing to indicate he was responsible for it.
Does this make him good? No, because we have a lot of tales and stories from his time.
You definitely are right that Christian's absolutely were not better off before or after his reign. He persecuted Christian's similarly to how others did at the time. I think nero's case is likely brought up because it was so early in christianity so it's used as a sort of a symbol of early Christianity persecution from a popular figure. It's likely a scapegoat but probably more of a situation where they are using nero as a symbol of early christian persecution. There is good evidence he did persecute Christians(likely not to the extent in some stories though which exxagerate) but tbh so many major figures of the time were doing the same things as Nero since christianity was a new religion and we know how serious people are when it comes to religion throughout history lol.
A little before Nero but check out Mike Duncan’s Storm before the Storm. A look at the fall of the Roman Republic.
22:18 From what I've read (I forgot whether it was Suetonius or Tacitus, maybe both) Tiberius was also reluctant to rule. Goaded into it by his scheming mother Livia who had married Augustus. She forced him to divorce a wife he loved and the bitterness left him sexualy perverted.
Can’t wait to see you that Sunday in Gettysburg will see you at both events! Can’t wait to see the guy I see on my screen daily to learn history. Can’t wait to tell you about my areas history because it’s rich and I think you’ll find it interesting. Can’t come the other days don’t have the money for a hotel or the Friday event as much as I love Martin sheen from the west wing and Sam waterson because he was Jack McCoy in one of my favorite shows law and order! Just can’t go
Looking forward to meeting you!
All this talking about Nero made me re-watch the movie 'Quo Vadis', which has my favourite portrayal of Nero in a work of fiction. Set in the year 64AD the movie focusses on a Roman general coming back from a three year campaign to fall in love with a Christian girl living in Rome. Some historical events featured in the story are the burning of Rome, Nero's pursuit of the Christian community and the crucifixion of the apostel Peter. With a runtime of nearly 3 hours it's a long one, but well worth the watch if you have an interest in the Roman empire, Nero and/or the early life of Christianity.
I'm from Rome, I'd be Happy to help you go around Rome and give you some suggestions on where to go and what to visit when you come here
28:48
Fun fact, the Jews of the time absolutely ADORED Nero to the point where one apocryphal story is that he didn't commit suicide, he fled after learning about a potential coup, converted to Judaism after a miracle with four arrows all flying towards Jerusalem, and became a Torah scholar.
Seeing that you do Roman history from time to time, please do Ancient Rome in 20 minutes by Arzamas. They also have Ancient Greece in 20 minutes. Thank you!
Will you ever play games such as Red Dead Redemption 1 & 2 or Call of Juarez Bound in Blood (Civil war is a part of the game)
Would really love a reaction to the greatest Roman emperor of all time, the philosopher-king himself, Marcus Aurelius
Great video overall, but as you stated a few times in the video: history was most often (re)written with a purpose. Caligula's bad reputation was created by his opponents. The described him as a madman who made his horse into a senator. Rather than the actions of a someone who couldn't be reasoned with, it makes much more sense this was a deliberate statement from Caligula against the many corrupt senators by saying his horse could do a better job.
But of course, by doing, he gave additional fuel to his opponents to slander him further.
Hope you feel better
If you want to keep going with the roman stuff id highly recommend his videos on Augustus and Trajan too
Fiddles did not exist in the time of Nero.
Chris, I've been watching your videos so much lately, that I had a dream about you. In my my dream I met you and I was thinking "He's as nice as ai thought he would be."
Well I'm glad to hear that. I'd like to think I am!
Neros fire safety measures have influence on fire safety of the city of rome till today credit where credit is due.
Also Nero persecuted the Christians because according to him where responsible for the fire so his persecution of them was legitimate by roman law and understandable.
I think it was Nero that wanted to see the origin of the Nile river but had to stop when they hit swampy land and his entourage started to fall ill.
hope ya feel better
Hmmm i live close to Gettysburg. Might try to catch that and meet you.......Simon video...im out lol
Hey Chris since your heading out try doing some stuff on Claudius my favorite emperor. Or if your interested try doing something with early Islam
If you haven't seen the video already, could you do a reaction video to Biographics' video Woodrow Wilson: The Worst Great President?
Chris this is a great video, i would recommend and i hope u do watch the video done on dominatian, that is one of the greatest emperors who's is falsy portraited as a second Nero, please do a reaction on that video. Second I recomend u read the 3 books of Tom Holland: Rubicon, Dynastie and Pax Romana. These 3 books tell the fall of the republic, the Julio-claudian dynastie and the succesers of them from Vespessian until Commodus.
Masters of Rome series by Colleen McCullough are a good read on late Roman Republic periord.
It feels illegal to be this early
Roman emperors have the most insane stories. It’s hard to keep up because it’s so crazy
Have you been watching Manhunt on Apple TV? I’ve caught up on the first three episodes. I would love to see you give a review for it. I saw your trailer reaction and thought maybe an update would be cool.
i'm planning to cover it soon. I've really enjoyed it so far.
I really enjoyed this video. Nero is easily one of the biggest lunatics of all time!
Well Caligula wasn't necessarily wrong about Agrippina ...
Rome surviving Caligula and Nero in such a short span is astonishing
Will you be doing the new Historia Civilis video?
I think it is interesting that even as far back as Caesar in gaul and Augustus after the battle of Phillipi that the family showed violent behavior, but once they got lots of power they started to more sadistic.
My favorite piece of software I ever used was Nero called so because it “burned” CDs
holy shit you have awakened a memory I didnt know i had
Sadly, I would say that there were even worse rulers than Nero. Caracalla, Eligabalus, and Commodus just to name a few.
A perfect case where absolute power corrupts absolute 😎
Caligula got his name from the legions in Germania. Since he was a small child he was with his father (Germanicus) in Germania. (Can't remember if his mother was there as well.) And the soldiers adored him.
They nicknamed him Caligula, which you correctly translated to "little boot". To be precise: It refers to the boots of a soldier, the marching boots Caliga.
Finally learning some of the most fascinating history there is. You could make TV shows and movies about Rome for decades. But instead we got Gayme of thrones.
If you need a video to watch on your flight to brush up on Roman history, Overly Sarcastic Productions has a three hour video “The Complete History of Rome Summarized”
I grew up in a home full of hurt boys, foster home for the abused, both mentally, and emotionally.
In another time, Nero would have been a kid I shared my room with while he was on respite from the home that needed a break.
But because 16 was an adult in Rome, he became a mentally unstable, hormonal monster, given powers most of us couldn't handle, and freedoms no one should have.
He most likely would have blown out at the age of 18 (If he didn't run away) and ended up homeless before he was 20, in jail, prison, or passed.
Cursed is cursed.
No sympathy for the millenia gone, but childhood is what makes you, and it made him the confused selfish monster he became.
That and yummy lead, I wonder if his teeth had ever turned green?
Computer 🖥️ sound @0:57 ?🤖?
The fiddle wasn’t even invented when Nero was emperor
I hope you and your family do recover from Covid soon, but I have to ask, is it wise to be going to Pennsylvania if you do recover from Covid? you could still be a carrier or might not even be fully recovered.
How has no one made a movie about Nero’s reign?
My favorite period is the late Republic, so from the rise of Gaius Marius until the battle of Actium.
If you go into Roman History maybe its the perfect time to do some Historia Civilis Videos.
Tbh Caesar not being an emperor is mostly a convention among historians. There wasn't any official title attached to what we now call an "Emperor". They just held collection of republican offices that were supposed to be held separately. Augustus was technically just a governor of like a dozen of provinces ("coincidentally" the ones that had the legions attached to them), Princeps Senatus, Censor and Tribune of the Plebs. Nevermind that some of these offices required him to be physically outside of Italy and other to be physically in the city of Rome. Nevermind that these were supposed to be held for one year term and then usually required to wait 10 years before running for office again.
Due to being Princeps Senatus, he was allowed to speak first in the senate. Due to being Censor he was allowed to alter the rolls of the Senate if Senators have represented "bad morals" (which is vague enough term that you can accuse them of anything) or had yet to be added to the rolls (you won the elections? Tough luck, let's wait 10 years till you can actually walk into the senate). Due to being Plebeian Tribune he could veto all of the legislation so it wouldn't be voted on. Due to being being simultaneously and separately governor of all of frontier provinces, all the legions were sworn to him. That's why principate's "governors" started to be called "Legates". Those were actually dudes below the actual governor. But since actual governor couldn't be in 12 places at once (and be at the capital at the same time) the actual governing fell to the Legates.
But here's the thing - Caesar held those same powers, but through a different set of titles. He was "elected" to be Dictator for Life and Consul for five year term. He planned to resign from the latter one, but the former still gave him legal power to alter the rolls of the senate (which he famously used to appoint like half a thousand of his lackeys), speak first in debates, veto legislation and made him officially above anyone in military hierarchy. So if i'm being honest, Caesar, due to his powers being actually attached to one office, was even more of an emperor than his successors. One could also make the same argument about Second Triumvirate, who had three Triumvirs with official set of prerogatives directly copied from Dictator's ones. And keep in mind that we're all in agreement that later situations of Co-emperorships (most famously, the Tetrarchy, but also Marcus Aurelius+Lucius Verus duo, or many examples from Crisis of the Third Century) are still emperors. Power sharing isn't a problem, as long as those powers are absolute.
Thus i think excluding Caesar, Mark Antony and Lepidus out of the ranks of Roman Emperors is totally arbitrary, and should be ditched. By the time of "official" start of the empire, officials were not democratically elected for about 20 years. Even a brief return to the Republic didn't changed that, as one of the first acts of the Senate after Assassination of Caesar was to ratify all his acts and appointments. This included his appointments for *future* magistrates. They probably hoped to outlast any outstanding appointments and then return to democratic elections. But after a year Triumvirate was born. There wasn't even a month of break in the continous streak of monarchy-like rule from 48 to 27 BC
should watch some osp videos, lots of italy videos
please react to more of biographics
What do the Roman emperors Elagabalus, Commodes, Caligula, Galbanum, Aurelian, Gordian III, Pertinax, Probus, Balbinus, Pupienus, Caracalla, Numerian, and Philip II all have in common?
They were all murdered by the Praetorian Guard.
interesting thing about beauty is... beauty changes. so his wife would have been beauty by roman standards but def not in modern age.
Like in feudal japan beauty means having your teeth blackened.
Like if you take the bible, Rachel is considered to be more beautiful than leah.
But if you take a closer look at the words used to describe them, Rachel is described basically as a tomboy, super strong and masculine with masculine features. while leah is described as "delicate" which is ironically considered beautiful in modern standards. it literally says everything about her was delicate which just means she was more feminine but in ancient middle east, masculine features were considered beautiful. Like rachel is a shepherdess, and we know from david how dangerous a shepherd job is.
Dawg cover the new EHTV vid about napioleons siege of acre
This is gonna sound weird but I'm englishman but i have learnt the italian language and history in my own time (because my football team is A.S Roma and I just adore the country even though it has its faults) but pls visit the trestavere if possible for great food and appetisers as well as the baths of caracalla. Wish I could join you on the trip but I'm going in May myself and I'm still a university student so money is hard to come by for me. You'll love it, Sono Pazzi Questi Romanisti! They're crazy. Those Romans. S.P.Q.R
i got a 2:22 add i couldnt skip man youtube is getting rediculous :(
Wow really?
People still test for covid? I have Spine surgery in 4 days and they only asked if I had any covid symptoms once a couple days ago.
I loved I CLAUDIUS as novels and miniseries, but it seriously whitewashed the title character. Claudius may not have been "about killing his relatives" before becoming emperor (when it was not an option anyway), but he did not shy away from it at all after getting the crown. He ordered the deaths of his third wife, several of her relatives, his son-in-law, and numerous members of his household afterward.
Uncle:niece marriage was taboo in Republican Rome, but it was very common in client states of the the Roman world. In the Herodian dynasty (Herod Agrippa was a close friend of Claudius from childhood) it was so common that Salome of biblical fame was the granddaughter, great granddaughter, and daughter-in-law of Herod the Great. It was practiced by the Spanish royal family until well into the 19th century: Isabella II was not only borne of an uncle:niece union but was married to her double first cousin who also was uncle:niece begotten (and was homosexual to boot- it wasn't a legendary love match, but did produce children).
Please do a reaction to "Ancients Behaving Badly: Caligula"?!
Hope you recover! Roman history is interesting.
In many ways the great fire actually improved the living conditions of the average Roman, most of the ordinary citizens before the fire lived in "Insua" a type of apartment building which were often of low quality, made of wood, were unsafe in their construction and had poor sanitary conditions. They often caught fire but the fires in kitchens with blocked flues before the great fire which were often caught early enough not to spread quickly.
After the fire the new buildings were made from brick, made to a much safer standard and as Simon says with wider roads to stop fire from spreading quickly- taking the common citizen from a squalid hut of a home to a comfortable safe home with improved sanitation. The instance of disease also dropped - so it is unfortunate that we only see the bad side and not the good- Nero wanted to be loved by the commoners but the wealthy did not like this "sharing" of the wealth of empire.
So I agree that the history that those victors of this coup wrote, was very unfavorable to Nero and some people claimed that Nero or his ghost were sometimes still seen in Rome years after his suicide. Would I want to live through his chaos no, but I think his early reign was good for the common man in the empire, even if he had no real interest in running it so he must have chased good reliable advisors in those first 10 years and have had good sense to keep them happy.
Yeah I had read that nero was in his villa 35 miles away when it broke out and immediately rushed to Rome and began relief efforts even opening his villa as a shelter but then after everything burnt down he put a palce. He also put new building codes in place and then blamed Christians for the fire.
I've been pretty compelled by some recent arguments that Caligula and even Nero may both have been overly critisised by the dynasties that followed so as propaganda essentially, they didn't want to damage the concept of emperor because that was the position they held or wanted to hold themselves so Augustus was still held up as great. This is not to say that Caligula and Nero were actually perfect, but that theymay have been far more in line with the other emperors, just that they lost the political game. Essentially this is a history told by the victors situation.
i never understood why there was so much killing in families back in those days and why there are less today what changed
You can only do if you gain absolute power
I'm not going to defend a lot of Nero's very questionable actions throughout his Rule but I do find it fascinating how a lot of what is written about him was by his enemies and people who wanted to make sure he was remembered as a terrible person by filling the records and stories about him with all kinds of stuff that was just not true combined with people who then mistranslated a lot of that and came up with stuff like him fiddling which was even further from the truth. Objectively and logically due to those things we should not take everything said about his actions as 100% true but more with a grain of salt because they were penned by people with one motivation or another to make him out to be far crazier and crueler than he probably actually was. This isn't the only case of this sort of stuff either, for example the Gunfight at the O. K. corral is riddled with counter views to the main one and other angles on who was actually bad or good. History should not be judging about who was the bad one and who wasn't. It's about what objectively happened and the reader should make up their own mind whether something was valid or not. Sometimes it's just not that easy to know.
Quick point, there are two familes in Italy which claim to be descendent from tge female julo-cladiuo line, with some genuine legitimacy.
Do you pre watch videos?
No. In the rare cases where I do, I always say so at the beginning. I intentionally avoid watching any video I might react to.
@@VloggingThroughHistory thanks your one smart dude!