Who is better Nero or Augustus

[jc02005]

Who is better

[Mark Headlee]

Ummmmmm...ok? :roll:

I would say it should not be an argument on who is "better", but rather who left a larger "mark" on history and how we see the Roman Empire and Republic today.

Johnathan, no matter who you compare to Augustus, its not going to be a fair argument. It would be like comparing George Washington to any of the presidents thereafter...each have strong points but really...who do we call the father of our country and who did the Romans say was theirs?

[Chuck Russell]

george washington slept here...
george washington slept everywhere...
why else do you think they call him teh father of our country? :lol: :lol: :lol:

[Caius Fabius]

Who was better at what?
The arts? Making laws? Finding good generals? Having his name remembered? Writing books? Performing music?

Who was better at the long jump? Be more specific and even then.....
We are relying on historians, so will we ever know the truth?

[Aetius Helvius Merula]

Neither. They're both dust, and incapable of being good, bad or anything else in the present tense :wink: .

[Sardaukar]

Kind of not seeing the point in this poll... In what aspect ? Comparing Octavianus/Augustus to Nero is like comparing orange to rotting apple (since Nero was decent emperor for few years...less so later... :roll: ).

Both were able to commit atrocities towards perceived enemies. Augustus just did it in cold pragmatic way, similar to preceeding Caesar or Sulla..with style and ways that were eerie resemblance of mixture of both combined to be "hidden behind a mask".

When comparing Nero vs. Augustus as their importance to Rome as Empire, no contest. Without Christianity, Nero would not be as publicized with "fame" as he is now but more of lesser importance. And since most Roman historians were senators or upper class...our view of Roman emperors is view thru their eyes...which is rarely objective.

[caiusbeerquitius]

See my post in the thread HERE.