Some summing up of Nero's character may be attempted, though it seejiis hardly fair to judge a man who was only thirty-one at his death, and was undoubtedly atliicted with madness. There is perhaps less good that can be said of him than of any other Roman Emperor. That he was prodigal and licentious to an astounding degree cannot be denied. All the .savings of the Emperor Claudius were dispersed by his wastefulness, as were those of Tiberius by his successor Gains (Caligula). It may also be truly said that he had no conception of the Imperial dignity. He had much of the mountebank about him, and his musical and other performances on the public stage made him ridicu- lous. He was childish enough to enter into poetic rivalry with his subject Lucan. Though lazy by contrast with his class in governmental duty, he might have attained some eminence in the arts, and in these only, under other circumstances.
Literature. — The chief ancient authorities are Tacitus, Ab Bxcesm Diui Auijusti, bks. xiii.-xvi. ; Suetonius. LifeofSero. The best modern book is B. W. Henderson. The Life and Principate of the Emperor Nero, London, 1903 (particularly good on Corbulo's campaigns) ; J. B. Bury, A History of the Roman Empire, do., 1S93, cha. xvi., xvii., xviii. On the qxiin- quennium Neronis, see the epoch-making art. * Trajan on the Quinquennium Neronis,' by J. G. C. Anderson (with note by F. Haverfleld), in J RS i. [1911] 173-179. On the Neronian household, see J. B. Lightfoot's excursus in the Epistle to the PhUippiansi, London. 1878 ; on St. Paul's legal position under Nero, see Mommsen's art. ' Die Rechtsverhaltnisse des Apostels Paulus,' in XXTW ii. [1901] 8l-96 = Gesammelte Sehriften, iii. [Berlin, 1907J 431-446; on Nero as persecutor of Christians, cf. C. F. Arnold, Die Seronische Chrittenverfolgung, Leipzig, 1888 ; W. M. Ramsay, The Chtireh in the Roman Empire^, London, 1894, ch. xi. ; E. G. Hardy, Studies in Roman History, do., 1906, ch. iv. ; on Nero and Lucan, W. B. Anderson, in Queen'a QuarUrly, xiv. [1906-07] 196-214. A. SoUTER.
NERYA. — M. Cocceius Nerva, ■who on being chosen Emperor was henceforth known as Im- perator Nerva Caesar (sometimes Caesar Nerva)
NERVA
NEW JERUSALEM
85
Augustus, son of M. Cocceius Nerva, a juriscon- sult, anil Sergia HIautilla, was born at Nainia on the Via Flaniinia in Southern Unihria on 8tli November, probably in A.D. 35. lie was eleeted prsetor for the year 66. He gained favour witli the Emperor Nero by his interest in poetry and his help in the detection of the Pi.sonian conspiracy- After election to various priesthoods he attained the consulship (with the Emperor Vespasi.'in) in the year 71 (for the second time in 9U Avith the Emperor Domitian). Under the Emperor Domitian he was falsely charmd by astrologers with being in possession of the ETuperor's horoscope, and was banished, it is said, to Tarentum.
On the murder of Domitian on 18th Septeml)er, 96, he was, at the instance of Petronius Seeundus, prefect of the praetorian guard, and Parthenius, the murderer of Domitian, elected Emperor, though over sixty j'ears of age. He held the consulship for the third time in 97, for the fourth in 98. In the autumn of 97 he adopted M. Ulpius Traianus. He died in his sixty-third year (25tli [or 27th] Jan. 98), having ruled for sixteen months and ten days.
His reign was auspicious, though short. Any- one would have been welcome after the reign of terror under Domitian, and the Senate gave him a hearty reception. Some of the informers of Domitian's reign were pvit to deatli, but in general a policy of clemency was followed, and some of the leading partisans of Domitian continued to enjoy places of honour. Many who had been unjustly banished under the Domitianic regime were re- called, amongst them the well-known rhetorician, Dio Cocceianus of Prusa, best known to us as Dio Chrysostora. It is highly probable also that the apostle John was automatically released from confinement in Patmos, as the deatli of Domitian of necessity constituted his acta null and void (Eus. HE III. XX. 8 ; cf. W. M. Ramsay, The First Christian Century, London, 1911, p. 45). Nerva also recalled to public service worthy men who had been driven into retirement by the policj' of Domitian. His task at home was nevertheless one of very great dillicultj', and he was wisely guided in adopting Trajan {q.v.). There was also external trouble — a war with Germany. Our reports are difficult to reconcile and to understand, but at any rate botli Nerva and Trajan received tlie honorary title Germanicus about the end of the year 97.
Nerva depended for support upon the Senate, and took an oath to put no senator to death. He had to replenish the exchequer, which had been much depleted by the folly of Domitian, and he proved a master of finance, not shrinking from great per- sonal sacrifices in his efforts to right the situation. He appointed a commission of five men, minuendis publicis sumptibus, and was able to remit a good deal of taxation. Most remarkable of all his achievements from the modern point of view was his alimentary foundation, which there is reason to believe was the perpetuation of a scheme in- augurated by Domitian. In most of the Italian towns he provided contributions from the Jirivy purse for the education of the children of freeborn ])aients of slender means. The money for this special purpose seems to have been derived from Land. The Emperor's plan was followed not only by his successors, but also by private persons like the younger Pliny. Nerva also had an agrarian law passed to relieve agriculture, and carried out a land-purchase scheme which enabled the poor to obtain small-holdings. Further, he established colon ice in various parts of the Empire, and con- ferred advantages, both material and political, on a number of towns, particularly in the Greek East {e.g. Bertjea). Like all the Emperors, he bad the food problem of Rome to cope with, and in this he