Sunday, October 4, 2026

Emperor Nero of wicked repute

 



by

Damien F. Mackey

  

 

Who, then, was this Nero?

 

Where does Nero fit into this list of kings?

 

And can Nero be the man-beast numbered 666 in John’s Revelation 13:18?

 

 

Introduction

 

The emperor Nero I have found extremely difficult to slot into an appropriate time frame in my revision of ancient history.

 

In this sense, Nero has been for me like - in the case of Assyrian history - the difficult Ashurnasirpal, or his presumed (but not actual) son-successor, Shalmaneser so-called III.

 

In earlier times I would simply have considered Nero as – just as the text books tell us – a Roman emperor who reigned in the era thereby assigned to him, after Claudius.

 

The conventional (or text book) succession of Roman rulers is given as follows:

 

1st century AD

 

 

2nd century AD

 

….

 

But my revision of these names – so far skirting around Nero (Galba, Otho, Vitellius) – has played havoc with this list, which mischief on my part accords with my view (focussing upon Assyro-Babylonia) that the:

 

Chaotic King Lists can conceal some sure historical sequences

 

(6) Chaotic King Lists can conceal some sure historical sequences

 

At my hands, the Egyptian, Assyrian and Chaldeo-Babylonian king lists have undergone major streamlining.

 

And so has the above ‘Roman’ list (still very much a work in progress, though).

 

Thus:

 

-         Julius Caesar is found to have been a fictitious composite, partly based upon Jesus Christ:

 

Julius Caesar legends borrowed, in part, from life of Jesus Christ

 

(6) Julius Caesar legends borrowed, in part, from life of Jesus Christ

 

-         Augustus is the Seleucid Greek king, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ (re-dated to the Infancy of Jesus Christ):

 

Time to consider Hadrian, that ‘mirror-image’ of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus

 

(6) Time to consider Hadrian, that 'mirror-image' of Antiochus Epiphanes, as also the census emperor Augustus

 

-         Tiberius. I have left the door open for the possibility of a merger of Tiberius with Claudius:

 

Tiberius – Claudius similarities

 

(8) Tiberius - Claudius similarities

 

-         Caligula, or Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, is a crazier version of Augustus (the Greek Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ - also ‘Epimanes’, the “Madman”).

 

-         Trajan, Hadrian (Augustus, Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’ above), Antoninus Pius, all these names belong to the one, same ruler:

 

Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian

 

(1)           Hadrianus Traianus Caesar – Trajan transmutes to Hadrian

 

No room for Antoninus Pius

 

(1) No room for Antoninus Pius

 

Who, then, was Nero?

 

Where does Nero fit into this list of kings?

 

And can Nero be the man-beast numbered 666 in John’s Revelation 13:18?

 

Was Nero a primary ruler, or a secondary one?

 

The reason that I ask this is because Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’, and the various alter egos whom I have assigned to him, all now to be recognised as Greek, had a notable second:

 

Herod, the emperor’s signet right-hand man

 

(3) Herod, the emperor's signet right-hand man

 

-         In the case of Antiochus himself, that man was Philip (I Maccabees 6:14-15):

 

“Then he called Philip, one of his most trusted advisers, and put him in charge of his whole empire. He gave him his crown, robe, and official ring, and authorized him to educate his son Antiochus the Fifth and bring him up to be king”. 

 

-         In the case of Augustus, that man was Marcus Agrippa, his right-hand man. He was also Herod ‘the Great’.

 

-         In the case of Caligula, it was, again, Marcus Agrippa:

 

Caligula exalts Marcus Agrippa

 

(3) Caligula exalts Marcus Agrippa

 

-         In the case of Hadrian, that man was Herodes [Herod] ‘Atticus’.

 

All of this is fully explained in my “Herod” article above.

 

Nero, I have ultimately concluded, was a primary ruler, an emperor, rather than a powerful second.

 

For Nero has been likened to my various versions of the biblical “Caesar Augustus” (cf. Luke 2:1), likened to Antiochus ‘Epiphanes’; likened to Caligula; and likened to the bearded philhellenic ‘Greekling’, Hadrian.

 

It appears that Nero had even tried to surpass Augustus.

 

This has led me more recently to line up Nero, instead, with Tiberius, who, in turn, shared similarities with Claudius. On this, see e.g. my article:

 

Tiberius Claudius Nero

 

(3) Tiberius Claudius Nero

 

In the course of my earlier efforts, when I was yet considering that Nero may have been yet another manifestation of Caesar Augustus, I had wondered: If, then, Nero was a primary ruler, who could his powerful second have been, to equate with our composite second as presented above?:

 

Philip/Marcus Agrippa/Herod[es]/Atticus

 

And I thought that I may have been on to something, based on appearances, with  Nero’s man, Ofonius Tigellinus of Greek descent, looking incredibly similar to Augustus’s second, Marcus Agrippa.

 

Ofonius Tigellinus - Wikipedia

 

Ofonius Tigellinus …. (c. 10 – 69) was a prefect of the Roman imperial bodyguard, known as the Praetorian Guard, from 62 until 68, during the reign of Emperor Nero. Tigellinus gained imperial favour through his acquaintance with Nero's mother Agrippina the Younger, and was appointed prefect upon the death of his predecessor Sextus Afranius Burrus, a position Tigellinus held first with Faenius Rufus and then Nymphidius Sabinus.

….

 

Tigellinus was said by the Roman historian Tacitus to have had an immoral youth and a vicious old age. ….

 

As an adult, he first worked as a merchant in Greece. …. Later, he inherited a fortune, bought land in Apulia and Calabria on the Italian mainland and devoted himself to breeding racehorses. It was through this profession that he eventually gained the acquaintance and favor of Nero, whom he aided and abetted in his vices and cruelties. …. Settling in Rome in about 60, he became Urban Prefect of the three Urban Cohorts, the city's paramilitary police force. On the death of Sextus Afranius Burrus in 62, Tigellinus succeeded him as Prefect of the Praetorian Guard. …. He persecuted his successive co-prefects, Faenius Rufus and Nymphidius Sabinus, to secure his position as one of Nero's closest and most trusted advisors. He also fabricated evidence to justify the murder of Nero's first wife, Claudia Octavia. In 64, he made himself notorious for the orgies that he arranged in the Basin of Agrippa. ….

 

In July of 64, he was suspected of incendiarism in connection with the Great Fire of Rome. After the fire had initially subsided it broke out again in Tigellinus' estate in the Amaelian district of the city. This led to the claim by Tacitus that Tigellinus was an arsonist. ….

 

In 65, during the investigation into the abortive conspiracy of Gaius Calpurnius Piso, he and Nero's second wife, Poppaea Sabina, formed a kind of imperial privy council, falsely accusing the courtier and novelist Petronius Arbiter of treason. Under house-arrest in the coastal resort of Cumae, Petronius did not wait for a sentence of execution to be passed. Instead, he chose to commit suicide by repeatedly slitting and rebinding his wrists—apparently over a period of several days, during which he entertained his friends … until he finally chose to be fatally drained of blood. ….

 

In 67 Tigellinus accompanied Nero on his tour of Greece. He had a role in the death of the famous General Corbulo, who had also been invited to come to Greece but was ordered to commit suicide.

 

In 68, when Nero's downfall appeared imminent, Tigellinus deserted him, supposedly suffering from 'incurable bodily diseases' ….

[End of quote]

 

But I am now far rather inclined to identify Nero’s man, Tigellinus, with Tiberius’s man, Sejanus:

 

One or two villains: Sejanus and Tigellinus?

 

(4) One or two villains: Sejanus and Tigellinus?

 

also of comparable appearance:

 

Sejanus 1bpblogspotcomKZQ0rjFYRUT24ZnKrkaaIAAAAAAAOfonius Tigellinus - Livius

                                   

                                                        Sejanus

 

Nero not named as such in Bible

 

Of all the names of supposed Roman emperors listed above, the only ones that appear in the Bible under those exact names are:

 

Augustus (Luke 2:1);

Tiberius (Luke 3:1);

Claudius (Acts 11:28).

 

Given my unexpected finding that:

 

Rome [is] surprisingly minimal in Bible

 

(2) Rome surprisingly minimal in Bible

 

I am leaning towards the view that some, if not most, of the ‘Roman’ names listed above were actually Greeks (certainly, Augustus; Caligula; Trajan; Hadrian; Antoninus Pius).

 

What, then, about the philhellenic Nero?

 

One of Nero’s names (Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus) actually refers to the beard. Ahenobarbus = “red (bronze) beard”.

 

He presumably became Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus.

 

Nero is most probably a nickname, meaning “strong” or “vigorous”, derived from Nereus, a Greek sea god associated with strength and power.

 

But nowhere do we find the name Nero in the Bible.

Nero in need of alter egos

 

Nero’s reputation as a builder on a vast scale and his impressive architectural achievements, these are not fully supported archaeologically:

 

Nero’s missing architecture

 

(2)           Nero's missing architecture

 

Was the so-called Domus Aurea of Nero actually a Flavian enterprise?

 

(2) Was the so-called Domus Aurea of Nero actually a Flavian enterprise?

 

One can conclude either that Nero did not build them. Or, that he did, but under a different name, an alter ego.

 

In the case of certain Egyptian pharaohs who were reputedly renowned builders, but whose output is not apparent from archaeology (e.g. pharaoh Psusennes), I have had success in finding alter egos that have perfectly saved the situation.

 

Some great names in history, belonging to rulers considered to have been significant builders, appear to be lacking crucial evidence for their building works.

 

For example: 

 

Where has Trajan’s Forum gone?

 

(3)           Where has Trajan’s Forum gone?

 

 

 

Tuesday, September 29, 2026

Homily of Pope Leo XIV at Lourdes

 

 


“In the Gospel, Jesus looks with truth and deep sorrow upon hearts that have remained closed, “you did not repent” (Mt 21:32). Why does this wound

the heart of Christ? Because God does not want his children to be lost”.

 Pope Leo XIV

  

APOSTOLIC JOURNEY OF POPE LEO XIV TO FRANCE
AND VISIT TO THE HEADQUARTERS OF THE UNITED NATIONS ORGANIZATION
FOR EDUCATION, SCIENCE AND CULTURE (UNESCO)
25-28 SEPTEMBER 2026

                                                                                                            HOLY MASS

 

HOMILY OF POPE LEO XIV


Prairie of the Sanctuary of Our Lady of Lourdes
Sunday, 27 September 2026

 

___________________________________

 

Brothers and sisters, pilgrims from France and from throughout the world, in seeing you gathered here this morning in our Mother’s home, I see the universal face of the Church.  Some of you have crossed continents, traveled far, and brought your joys and burdens to this sacred grotto.  What a joy it is to be together, as one heart and one family.

 

I would especially like to greet the pilgrims who have come from every province and diocese of France.  Today you stand on this blessed ground that has received so many graces.  May this pilgrimage rekindle the flame of faith in your homes and parishes.  Take the consolation of Lourdes back to your neighbors, your loved ones and the whole French people.

 

This Sunday’s readings touch on a central part of the message that the Virgin Mary entrusted to Saint Bernadette: the call to conversion, both tender and urgent.  In the Gospel, Jesus looks with truth and deep sorrow upon hearts that have remained closed, “you did not repent” (Mt 21:32).  Why does this wound the heart of Christ?  Because God does not want his children to be lost.  The prophet Ezekiel reminds us, “When a righteous man turns away from his righteousness and commits iniquity, he shall die for it.”  However, since “he considered and turned away from all the transgressions which he had committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die” (Ez 18:26, 28).  This is why the call to repentance runs through Sacred Scripture and the preaching of the Gospel down the centuries.  Its gravity reminds us of the urgency and necessity of conversion.  It is today, not tomorrow, that we must repent.  

 

Indeed, now is the acceptable time, now is the day of salvation (cf. 2 Cor 6:2).  God wants us to live, to open our eyes and return to him.  To repent is to leave the paths on which we lost our way, and to follow the way of life, opening our hearts to the sole joy that never passes away.

 

Jesus himself is quite direct in calling us to repentance.  As Saint Luke tells us, “Unless you repent, you will all perish” (Lk 13:5).  But he also extends our horizon beyond this earthly life to the horizon of eternal life.  For while happiness in this world is fleeting and relative, and sadly sometimes out of reach for some, true happiness is promised to everyone in hope, and this is what we should seek above all else, in all our efforts and choices.  Did not the Virgin Mary say to Saint Bernadette, “I do not promise to make you happy in this world but in the next”?

 

This promise, made right here, has a particular force in this land of France, and it challenges the way we think today.  

 

In an age and society that seek progress and material wellbeing, but can sometimes forget the horizon of eternity, Mary comes to remind us of the greatness and richness of our calling to life, to eternal life.  In the face of current trends that seek to redefine the value of human life in illness, suffering and old age, the grotto of Massabielle stands as a place of Christian hope.  Here, no one is turned away due to their frailty.  Your crutches, your wheelchairs and your hidden tears are not obstacles; instead, they are the very place where you are fully respected and welcomed, and where you can experience a transforming encounter with the infinite love of God.  Lourdes is blessed as a place for professing the beauty and sanctity of life, for life is welcomed here as a precious gift from God, and is called to flourish for ever in the love of the Father.

 

“I promise you!”  Indeed, eternal life is a firm and certain promise that the Lord makes to us.  He has already won it for us by his death on the cross and his resurrection, and through the grace of baptism he is bringing it to fulfilment in us each day.  It is within our reach, but we must freely welcome it, take hold of it and not stand in its way.  For the obstacle to grace and eternal life — the only obstacle to this love — is sin, whereby we turn in upon ourselves, refusing God and shutting ourselves up in our own darkness.  Our personal responsibility therefore comes into play, and a great responsibility it is.  God has made us free, since freedom is necessary for love; no one can be forced to love.  We must therefore use our freedom to say yes to Christ, relying on his grace, like Mary.  This is a yes that we renew until our final breath — “now and at the hour of our death” — as we say in the Hail Mary.

 

We hear the same urgent call to conversion in the words which Mary spoke right here, “Penance! Penance! Penance!”  She repeats the word three times.  And she asks Bernadette to perform certain acts of penance.  Why?  Are we slow to understand?  Do we too easily think of ourselves without sin?  Do we not practice penance enough?  The Virgin asks us to do penance not only for ourselves, because we too need it, but also “for sinners,” for a world that is going astray.  How can our hearts not be moved by the conflicts that are spreading and destroying so many innocent lives?  Yet the evil of our time comes from the human heart.  God is not responsible for it. As he says to the Israelites, “Is my way not just? Is it not your ways that are not just?” (Ez 18:25).  It is therefore human hearts that must change, beginning with our own.

 

Penance is an act of love, carried out in solidarity with the human family. It is an act of love for God, because we want to make amends for the wounds our sins have dealt to his heart.  It is also an act of love for those brothers and sisters of ours who do not heed this call to conversion, and whose sins lead them towards death.  This call to conversion also concerns the Church herself as she makes her earthly journey.  She must have the courage to begin with herself.  In order to heal the deep wounds, infidelities and painful errors that have occurred within her, we must humbly place ourselves under the Lord’s purifying gaze.  Recognizing our own faults is essential to our spiritual growth.  As Saint Augustine wrote, “Do not be content with what you are, if you want to become what you are not yet” (Disc. 169, 15, 18). Our Mother’s reminder of our duty to pray and repent fills us with great hope, because she shows us that the way to change the course of things is by uniting ourselves to the passion of Christ.  

 

Dear friends who are sick, so many of you here in Lourdes are familiar with suffering.  You can live your trials and pains in this spirit of offering, and so take part in the redemptive work that the world so greatly needs.  In this way, you are truly at the heart of the Church, and your role is irreplaceable.

 

Pilgrims, brothers and sisters, you will not leave Lourdes as you arrived.  You will leave as missionaries of hope.  Indeed, the miracle of Lourdes is that it can awaken the joy of hope in the very midst of suffering and hardship.  The Virgin Mary heals our outlook and changes our hearts, giving them peace.  In your countries, dioceses and families, become living witnesses to this divine strength and tenderness, which help us to persevere towards our goal.  Sustained by the prayers of the sick and the love of our Mother, walk with confidence into the future.  Do not be afraid of the storms of the world, for the holy Mother of God watches over your journey, she shelters the Church beneath her mantle of tenderness and, as the radiant Morning Star, guides your steps, so that with joy she may bring you to new birth in the very life of her Son Jesus.  Amen.