Fire of Rome in 64 AD
The fire of Rome in 64 AD . it was one of the most tragic events in the history of the city
The damage was enormous and the number of victims impressive.
Over the centuries, rivers of ink have been spilled over the event, but some aspects remain uncertain to this day.
First of all, it was really Nero who caused the Urbe to burn ?
And why?
The historians Tacitus, Suetonius, Cassio Dione and Paolo Orosio they openly accused the Emperor, who according to them was so crazy that he wanted to be remembered as the new founder of the city.
But could Nero, although bizarre and at times psychotic, have gone this far?
It actually seems unlikely.
Furthermore, although Tacitus was the most objective, all the authors cited were fiercely antineronian.
While the fire in Rome was raging, investing people and things, the Emperor was in Anzio, but he returned immediately and tried to do everything possible to limit the damage.
Nero's measures were effective and saved what could be saved.
It would not seem the typical behavior of the person responsible for a catastrophe, but according to some it had to serve to ward off suspicions.
For his part, Nero wasted no time in accusing Christians, that he persecuted indiscriminately and mercilessly.
But they were innocent or guilty ?
According to some more risky historians, the fire in Rome may have been started by extremists of the new Creed, but it doesn't seem plausible.
So who was foolish enough to cause such a tragedy?
Almost certainly none.
Currently, most scholars maintain that the fire in Rome in 64 d. C. was completely accidental.
The kitchens of the houses, especially in the poorest neighborhoods, were made of wood and caught fire quite often.
On that occasion, also thanks to the scorching heat (it was July 18), the situation got out of hand and a large part of the city went to ashes ( see also :Https://www.pilloledistoria.it/12153/storia-antica/incendio-di-roma-danni-vittime).