The Great fire of Rome was a devastating fire that began on the night, between the 18th and 19th of July in 64 AD. The fire lasted for 6 days and died down but reignited again for 3 days. This event is significant to the classical world, as 3 districts were entirely destroyed, 7 suffered serious damage and only 4 districts survived, only after 10 years since Nero became Emperor of Rome. At least two-thirds of the city was ruined. Following the fire, a rebuilding programme was led by Nero, such as the building of the Domus Aurea. This was completed but did not get much attention from the Romans. This allows us to have a better understanding of Roman life and the society. It is still unknown today, of what truly caused the fire and who caused
…show more content…
There are many various views from both historical and modern historians towards the cause of the Great Fire of Rome. Some believe that it was arson, ordered by Nero to clear room for his palace, as he took much of the burnt city to build a Domus Aurea (Golden palace) for himself. Tacitus, an ancient Roman historian, claims in the Tacitus Annals that Nero purposely set the city alight, to clear space for his Domus Aurea. Tacitus believed Nero blamed and persecuted the Christians for the beginning of the fire, in order to avoid of his arson being revealed. In Tacitus book, Annals, Tacitus stated "Therefore, to stop the rumor [that he had set Rome on fire], he [Emperor Nero] falsely charged with guilt, and punished with the most fearful tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were [generally] hated for their enormities” In the Tacitus Annals, as a punishment, Tacitus states that the Christians were “covered with the skins of beasts...torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt”. However, Cassius Dio states that “Nero secretly sent out men who pretended to be drunk or engaged in other kinds of mischief, and caused them at first to set fire to one or two or even several buildings in different parts of the city”. Both Tacitus and Cassius Dio claim that Nero watched Rome burn down and that instead sang and played his lyre. Despite Nero’s bad reputation, Tacitus stated …show more content…
Whether Nero was the one who cause or ordered the fire or whether it was a careless accident, it is unlikely that we will ever know about the whole true story, but from the accounts of ancient historians and evidence found by archaeologists we, in today’s society can get an idea about the true cause of the fire. From the fire, we can learn much about everyday ancient Roman life, such as, how many Romans built statues, how the citizens relied on the emperor and more. Ancient roman historians such as Tacitus and Cassius Dio tell us about the reactions and behaviour of the citizens of Rome towards the fire, how they were shocked and did not trust Nero. Through this, we can imagine and picture of what an everyday Roman life could have been
There are many various views from both historical and modern historians towards the cause of the Great Fire of Rome. Some believe that it was arson, ordered by Nero to clear room for his palace, as he took much of the burnt city to build a Domus Aurea (Golden palace) for himself. Tacitus, an ancient Roman historian, claims in the Tacitus Annals that Nero purposely set the city alight, to clear space for his Domus Aurea. Tacitus believed Nero blamed and persecuted the Christians for the beginning of the fire, in order to avoid of his arson being revealed. In Tacitus book, Annals, Tacitus stated "Therefore, to stop the rumor [that he had set Rome on fire], he [Emperor Nero] falsely charged with guilt, and punished with the most fearful tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were [generally] hated for their enormities” In the Tacitus Annals, as a punishment, Tacitus states that the Christians were “covered with the skins of beasts...torn by dogs and perished, or were nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burnt”. However, Cassius Dio states that “Nero secretly sent out men who pretended to be drunk or engaged in other kinds of mischief, and caused them at first to set fire to one or two or even several buildings in different parts of the city”. Both Tacitus and Cassius Dio claim that Nero watched Rome burn down and that instead sang and played his lyre. Despite Nero’s bad reputation, Tacitus stated …show more content…
Whether Nero was the one who cause or ordered the fire or whether it was a careless accident, it is unlikely that we will ever know about the whole true story, but from the accounts of ancient historians and evidence found by archaeologists we, in today’s society can get an idea about the true cause of the fire. From the fire, we can learn much about everyday ancient Roman life, such as, how many Romans built statues, how the citizens relied on the emperor and more. Ancient roman historians such as Tacitus and Cassius Dio tell us about the reactions and behaviour of the citizens of Rome towards the fire, how they were shocked and did not trust Nero. Through this, we can imagine and picture of what an everyday Roman life could have been