Tacitus Analysis

Tacitus referred to some of Nero’s actions as a “series of reversals” which is how Roman authors traditionally talked of foreign countries which again brings in the idea of deterritorialization and the association of Rome with lesser, barbarian cultures. Woodman argues that Tacitus was prompting his readers into thinking that Nero was trying to turn Rome into the hated city of Alexandria, which was disliked for its association with Cleopatra and because it was half Greek. Those in the government of Rome should have been upholding Roman standards of morality not sinking to promote foreign cultures which, to the wise Roman, were beneath their own civilization, but as the emperor, Nero has all the power.
In regards to Nero’s love for acting,

Comparing Tacitus’ account of the death of Agrippina with that of Suetonius of Cassius Dio it is clear that Tacitus is emphasising Nero’s lack of insight and carelessness in comparison with the foresight and resourcefulness of Agrippina . Nero is shown as less capable than his mother in a political sense, he succeeded because he was the emperor, an ominous tone for the rest of the Neronian books and for Rome itself. This was compounded by how easily the senate accept Nero’s matricide and later how they gave thanks to the gods for the murder of his wife Octavia and it shows how the senate were following the Emperor to the deterioration of Roman morality. What was once a sign of a prosperous Roman, giving thanks to the gods , is now a sign of where Rome has fallen

The virtue of many of those who were killed by Nero during his reign is shown by their honourable, calm deaths, with Seneca and Tharesa Paetus making powerful statements with their dignified deaths, compared to the scene that Nero made on stage. The symbolism suggests that the moral of Rome bowed out quietly in a dignified manner as befitting good Romans while their Emperor continued to make a fool of himself on stage and bring Rome into disrupt and