Search Results
6/27/2025, 10:24:30 AM
>>508856614
Yes.
Nero, the infamous emperor of the Roman Empire, is known for his cruelty and debauchery. However, one of the most enduring tales about him is that he played the fiddle while Rome burned during the Great Fire of the first century. But is this account really true, or just another example of propaganda and manipulation of history?
The Great Fire
On the night of July 18, 64 AD, a fire erupted in the merchant district of Rome, fueled by strong summer winds that rapidly spread flames throughout the city's aged wooden structures. Tacitus, the historian, reported that the fire burned uncontrollably for five days before it was finally subdued. Out of the fourteen districts in Rome, four were left untouched, three were completely destroyed, and seven suffered significant damage.
The Cruel Emperor Who Fiddled in a Disaster
In the aftermath of the fire, rumors quickly spread about the cause of the fire. As one popular account goes, Nero had been planning the construction of his grand palace, the Domus Aurea, but needed to clear a large area to accommodate the palatial complex. So, he arranged for a fire to break out in order to clear the aristocratic dwellings on the slopes of the Palatine Hill and gleefully fiddled as he watched the fire encompassing Rome. He then, of course, needed a scapegoat for his actions, so he blamed the Christians for the fire because of their apocalyptic belief that Rome and the world would end by fire. This led to an active campaign against them. Both, the fire and the persecution of the Christians became the defining image of his reign. But how much of this account is actually true?
(https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/did-nero-really-fiddle-while-rome-burned-001919)
Yes.
Nero, the infamous emperor of the Roman Empire, is known for his cruelty and debauchery. However, one of the most enduring tales about him is that he played the fiddle while Rome burned during the Great Fire of the first century. But is this account really true, or just another example of propaganda and manipulation of history?
The Great Fire
On the night of July 18, 64 AD, a fire erupted in the merchant district of Rome, fueled by strong summer winds that rapidly spread flames throughout the city's aged wooden structures. Tacitus, the historian, reported that the fire burned uncontrollably for five days before it was finally subdued. Out of the fourteen districts in Rome, four were left untouched, three were completely destroyed, and seven suffered significant damage.
The Cruel Emperor Who Fiddled in a Disaster
In the aftermath of the fire, rumors quickly spread about the cause of the fire. As one popular account goes, Nero had been planning the construction of his grand palace, the Domus Aurea, but needed to clear a large area to accommodate the palatial complex. So, he arranged for a fire to break out in order to clear the aristocratic dwellings on the slopes of the Palatine Hill and gleefully fiddled as he watched the fire encompassing Rome. He then, of course, needed a scapegoat for his actions, so he blamed the Christians for the fire because of their apocalyptic belief that Rome and the world would end by fire. This led to an active campaign against them. Both, the fire and the persecution of the Christians became the defining image of his reign. But how much of this account is actually true?
(https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/did-nero-really-fiddle-while-rome-burned-001919)
Page 1