Notice: This is the official website of the All Empires History Community (Reg. 10 Feb 2002)

  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Register Register  Login Login

What if Emperor Claudius had not adopted Nero
 Post Reply Post Reply
Author
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
morticia View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Editor

Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077 		  Quote morticia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: What if Emperor Claudius had not adopted Nero
    Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 12:58
What would have happened if Brittanicus (Emperor Claudius only biological son) would have become emperor upon Claudius death instead of Nero (his fourth wifes (Agrippina) son whom he adopted)? Was Brittanicus perhaps mentally challenged? Hence, the reason that Claudius adopted Agrippinas son from another marriage to be his successor? What is your opinion as to said "adoption"?

Morty
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711 		  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Sep-2005 at 05:33
Am glad you raised this but it is really hard to guess on. Suetonius outright says that Britannicus was an intelligent boy, though he muses that perhaps this was due to the fact that the threat of Nero kept him on his toes.

Claudius was actually in the process of making moves to promote Britannicus thanks to the urging of his freedman Narcissus. It was also clear that Britannicus possessed some charismatic features inspite of an upbringing overshadowed by his nasty step-mother Agrippina. He had a beautiful singing voice, was good looking, physically quite well built and he even had the wit to embarass Nero during a party by singing a song about a boy who lost his inheritance (analogous with Britannicus himself) which overwhelmingly won the sympathy of the audience.

I think Britannius was at least mildly promising, but certainly you could not do much worse than Nero.
Back to Top
morticia View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Editor

Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077 		  Quote morticia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 15-Sep-2005 at 10:45
Thank you, Constantine, for your reply. Come to think of it, even if Brittanicus had, in fact, become Emperor, he would have ultimately been killed by Nero anyway.....so I guess history would not have been altered.   It would have been nice, though, to think that the Romans could have been spared the tyranny of Nero!

Morty


Edited by morticia
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711 		  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20-Sep-2005 at 19:53
Well I considered that scenario, but it occured to me that had Britannicus managed to become Emperor after Claudius died that he most likely would have found a way to get rid of Nero. Britannicus had his own faction and plenty of supporters. They two boys hated eachother and this, aside from political reasons, would have been more than enough reason for Britannicus to get Nero out of the way, probably sending his mother Agrippina to the prison island of Pandateria in the process.
Back to Top
Degredado View Drop Down
Consul
Consul
Avatar

Joined: 07-Aug-2004
Location: Portugal
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 366 		  Quote Degredado Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Sep-2005 at 18:12

Originally posted by Constantine XI

I think Britannius was at least mildly promising, but certainly you could not do much worse than Nero.

What about Caligula, or Heliogabulus? 
Vou votar nas putas. Estou farto de votar nos filhos delas
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711 		  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 21-Sep-2005 at 18:21
Nero had more staying power than those two. The first five years of his reign were quite good I will concede, but only because he had very capable tutors guiding the helm of state. I don't know if Nero was worse than either of those two either, I would argue that he probably was given the longevity of his reign coupled with the massive economic disintegration and the fact he managed to plunge Rome into a civil war far worse than Elgabalus. I think Caligula and Elagabulus were considered on par with Nero for personal viciousness, but were not able to have such a devastating impact on the state as a whole.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Guest
Guest
  Quote Guests Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Sep-2005 at 05:56
According to me the most important reason why Claudius adopted Nero was Agrippina. according to me, If he hadn't adopted Nero and Brittanicus would have become the emperor, the boy probably wouldn't have had a very long rule (and life) because of Nero and his mother. The ambition from Agrippina to make her son emperor must have been enormous. Nero on the other hand wouldn't have doubted to get his steph-brother out of the way when this would have happened either. If Brittanicus could have found a certain way to protect himself and to take his 'concurrents' out of his way, he might have been a good emperor, I don't think you can say something like this in advance, many people didn't think Claudius wouldn't become a great emperor either, but he actualy was. In the end I guess the emperors that succeeded Nero would in the end not be so diferent if it hadn't been Nero. An other thing is how Rome would have looked today, because Nero actually did many things to it. Also i ask myself the question how the vission on christians would have been. It might have been even worse, as they probably got a lot of sympathy after Nero, but on the other hand it might have been better as well as Nero did like anything in his power to put them in a bad light.
Back to Top
Constantine XI View Drop Down
Suspended
Suspended

Suspended

Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711 		  Quote Constantine XI Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Sep-2005 at 09:14
The Christians would have been persecuted anyway, most likely. In his Annals Tacitus records that people did feel some sympathy for the Christians, not because of their cruel punishment but rather because their deaths served to smother blame against Nero. Their practices alone were considered utterly foul by the Roman authorities and one way or another they would have come into conflict with Roman officials on such a scale a mass persecution occurred. Tacitus, though disapproving the reason they were killed, expresses the view of the Roman officialdom when he thinks their very existance warranted such cruel punishment anyway.
Back to Top
morticia View Drop Down
Sultan
Sultan
Avatar
Retired AE Editor

Joined: 09-Aug-2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2077 		  Quote morticia Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 29-Sep-2005 at 12:52
Thanks for all the interesting scenarios presented here.

I believe that Nero was one of those individuals who was predestined to become "emperor" (one way or another). Even if Brittanicus would have succeeded as emperor, I don't think he would have survived only but a few days before Nero disposed of him. Nero's mind was set on becoming Emperor and I don't think anything or anyone could have gotten in his way.

Morty

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.56a [Free Express Edition]
Copyright ©2001-2009 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.