Qualis artifex pereo: The Use and Reception of the Neronian Narrative.

摘要

By examining material and literary sources related to the most notable points of Nero's reception, we can understand how formerly benign aspects of the Neronian narrative contributed to his characterization as a "bad emperor." Scholars have long questioned the myth of Nero as a villain. A balanced reading of the primary sources that describe his reign, such as Tacitus, Suetonius, and Cassius Dio, instead reveals a mediocre emperor unequipped to manage the complicated political situation he inherited. More recently, analyses of the material and literary evidence produced by Nero and his regime have highlighted the logic behind actions once considered symptoms of his madness. The Flavians and later ancient writers manipulated aspects of Neronian narrative to exaggerate the scope of his perceived crimes against the Roman people. I assess the immediate reception of literature, coinage, and architecture of Nero's reign to demonstrate how later sources influenced impressions of Nero's actions and policies. I have chosen five of the most notable people or events from his life: Seneca, Agrippina, the Domus Aurea, the Greek Tour, and Nero's death. I analyze Seneca and Agrippina through the lens of the Octavia, a play so far little considered in studies of Nero's reception. As one of the first reactions to Nero's Principate, it offers us a valuable impression of how the narrative of his early reign, embodied by Seneca's monograph De Clementia and coinage featuring Agrippina, was refitted to suit the myth of Nero as a villain. Next, I focus on Nero's innovations in public representation. The Domus Aurea represents a revolutionary new approach to Imperial architecture and the use of space within the city of Rome. The Greek Tour was an effort on Nero's part to consolidate Rome's interests in the Near East. Certain aspects of both the palace and the tour, however, are magnified to personify Nero as a megalomaniacal and delusional figure. These negative interpretations converge in the narrative of Nero's death, in which he is characterized as foolish and cowardly. In retrospect, Nero's official imagery becomes damning in the context of a narrative created by his successors.