Org Mobile Site
Thread: Roman Fire of 64AD
What do you think about the fire? Did Nero intentionaly set it so that he could make his 200 acre villa?
A bunch of Christians crazies with torches is my pet theory.
Originally Posted by lars573:
A bunch of Christians crazies with torches is my pet theory.
Yeah, that's who he blamed it on. He had many crusified. Christians were his scapegoat in my opinionA bunch of Christians crazies with torches is my pet theory.
I think he certainly could have stated the fire, he was insane enough by that point. Whether he did or not is another matter.
In a Nat-Geo documentary about the fire they made a decent case for Nero being on the mark about blaming Christians. Now he blamed all Christians and fed them to the lions accordingly. I feel that it was just a small cabal of crazies with tourches.
1.Nero was at his country villaand raced back to Rome and sent the Praetorians to help fight the fire and directed the efforts.
-If he wanted Rome to burn he would have been "un-avoidably delayed" until the fire was over.
2.Tacitus is not a good soruce for anything about Nero's reign.
-Tacitus went out of his way to make Nero look bad. As he hated him. And we know more about how fire can behave than the Romans did.
3.Early Christian groups (I won't paint them as one group) though that the Roman empire was the 7 headed whore of Babylon spoken of in Revelations. And that distroying the city would destroy the empire and thus bring about the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.
1.Nero was at his country villaand raced back to Rome and sent the Praetorians to help fight the fire and directed the efforts.
-If he wanted Rome to burn he would have been "un-avoidably delayed" until the fire was over.
2.Tacitus is not a good soruce for anything about Nero's reign.
-Tacitus went out of his way to make Nero look bad. As he hated him. And we know more about how fire can behave than the Romans did.
3.Early Christian groups (I won't paint them as one group) though that the Roman empire was the 7 headed whore of Babylon spoken of in Revelations. And that distroying the city would destroy the empire and thus bring about the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.
Originally Posted by lars573:
In a Nat-Geo documentary about the fire they made a decent case for Nero being on the mark about blaming Christians. Now he blamed all Christians and fed them to the lions accordingly. I feel that it was just a small cabal of crazies with tourches.
1.Nero was at his country villaand raced back to Rome and sent the Praetorians to help fight the fire and directed the efforts.
-If he wanted Rome to burn he would have been "un-avoidably delayed" until the fire was over.
2.Tacitus is not a good soruce for anything about Nero's reign.
-Tacitus went out of his way to make Nero look bad. As he hated him. And we know more about how fire can behave than the Romans did.
3.Early Christian groups (I won't paint them as one group) though that the Roman empire was the 7 headed whore of Babylon spoken of in Revelations. And that distroying the city would destroy the empire and thus bring about the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.
Interesting theory. Get's me thinking...In a Nat-Geo documentary about the fire they made a decent case for Nero being on the mark about blaming Christians. Now he blamed all Christians and fed them to the lions accordingly. I feel that it was just a small cabal of crazies with tourches.
1.Nero was at his country villaand raced back to Rome and sent the Praetorians to help fight the fire and directed the efforts.
-If he wanted Rome to burn he would have been "un-avoidably delayed" until the fire was over.
2.Tacitus is not a good soruce for anything about Nero's reign.
-Tacitus went out of his way to make Nero look bad. As he hated him. And we know more about how fire can behave than the Romans did.
3.Early Christian groups (I won't paint them as one group) though that the Roman empire was the 7 headed whore of Babylon spoken of in Revelations. And that distroying the city would destroy the empire and thus bring about the Kingdom of Heaven on earth.
Originally Posted by Alexanderofmacedon:
Interesting theory. Get's me thinking...
Which were my thoughs. Plus I'd seen another doc about Nero. It's premise was that he was never crazy. But that he never wanted to be emperor in the first place. His mother forced him onto the throne (practically at sword point). And used him as her puppet to rule. That most of his violent actions were him lashing out at the world in frustration. Then he eventually did kill his mother things went down hill.Interesting theory. Get's me thinking...
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO