The History of Roman Empire

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Main body
Works cited

Introduction

To begin with, I should mention, that the history of ancient world is versatile and still deceitful in some questions. The contemporary scholars are discussing the controversy of ancient writers’ opinions. The Roman Empire is known to be the grandest in its structure and way of reigning throughout the history of mankind. We mention Caesar when speaking about great abilities to work and self-consistency, Konstantin when celebrating the adoption and spreading of Christianity in the Empire and abroad, and we surely remember the person of Nero, whose cruelty and ominous deeds, like Fire in Rome, stay disapprobative.

Main body

According to the question of his role in setting Rome on fire we are to appeal to the writings of three ancient philosophers and eyewitnesses, namely: Tacitus, Cassius Dio and Suetonius. Their works stay significant to analyze and explore Nero’s guilt or innocence.

First, let us realize the material losses that the fire damaged. As we know, it started in the year 64 A.D. in Circus Maximus and was spreading in the districts of Rome. Was the fire accidental or Nero made an effort? We know that the closeness of buildings and unawareness of people in the question of how to prevent people’s houses from fire is the basic reason, I think, in cases of every fire hazard in Rome. In times of Tiberius there was the greatest one. Also in times of Augustus reigning there was “a regular fire department (the vigiles)” (Malitz 67), thus, the reasons of the Great Fire in Rome are still of a mere enigmatic character.

“At the time the fire broke out, Nero was in Antium, about forty miles out from Rome. He did not return immediately, but only when the flames started to threaten his palace, the Domus Transitoria.” (J. Malitz 68). Here is the example of Nero’s egocentrism, on the one hand, and the case of his juridical innocence, on the other. Was it a willful action or he tried to weep his steps in this? Still it does not make him guilty. Six day long fire brought a great destruction for Rome. The old part of the city was commonly demolished, the number of homeless, whom Nero patronized, grew up. The opinions of the cause of the fire were separated within ancient philosophers. Some thought that it was accidental and Nero became a victim of the situation, others considered him to be the instigator of the disaster. One of the ideas tells about Nero’s need of money. He needed them to create his ambitious design of palace building and other things, as following:

Suetonius hints that Nero intended to loot the ruins; Dio asserts that he removed the free grain distribution. But there were other, darker chargers, far more damaging because they ran directly counter to his laudable actions, and taken together they suggested nor merely callous indifference to the misery of his people but active hostility to their welfare: that had intentionally started the fire, through his agents; that he sang while the city burned; that he built the fabulous Golden House amid the sufferings of the citizens; and that he extorted vast sums from them to pay for the recovery. (Champlin 180)

These unanswered questions bear in my mind the logically accepted truth and the idea of his madness at all. I suppose that his irresponsibility attacked his mind and covered him with vanity in thoughts and deeds. It is clear through discourse of ancient philosophers that he proved his will by saying the words “forte an dolo principis incertum”. Nero’s dishonesty and greed for money are the reasons, as for me, to tell about his inability to rule. Inspite of all his good intentions he always was intended to do more harm than good. He thought it to be the destiny of the strong people of the Roman Empire. His cruel denunciation of Christians to be participating in setting the fire on was just the result of their teaching about Rage of God, embodied in fire. That was metaphoric explanation, but Nero used this as another jive excuse of his innocence.

Edward Champlin, therefore, tells us about the response of Nero to the fire, when he decided to start rebuilding company, because out of fourteen districts four were saved, so there were too many homeless. Notwithstanding that the Emperor told many times about his wish to burn either city or the empire, the deeds of his vary in its magnificence. I mean the buildings, which renewed burnt city and gave it previous wealth and blossom.

As far as I am inclined to think, the plan of buildings in Rome and their location is the background for Nero’s plan. It does not matter whether Nero set the city on fire or somebody else. The structure of it was prepared to be destructed by fire, and the rebuilding reform (change of building materials of flame-proof features) would, without any doubt, be the solution for the further time of Rome’s existence and safety.

Looking briefly on works of ancient philosophers through the analysis of their writings by contemporary scholars, we admit the following standpoints on the problem of The Great Fire in Rome: 1) the Emperor Nero, having indisputable and endless power, was inclined to do good things by means of the cruel ones; 2) the fire tends to be planned; 3) the gains touched not only material things on, but also people’s lives. Summing up, I think that this was the greatest mistake of Nero. The example of his “endeavor” overgrew in philosophic treatments of different epochs, namely: in Makiavelly’s works as well as in Nizshe’s ones, but this will never brings the pragmatic solution for those who take care about motherland and people needing their help. Even if you keep in mind the idea of your miserable role within society, remember what Romans said: Mala Herba cito crescit!

Works cited

John Bishop, Nero. The Man and the Legend, London 1963, pp. 71-78.

Jürgen Malitz, Nero, transl. by A. Brown, Malden (MA) – Oxford 2005 (orig. publ. Munich 1999), pp. 66-76.

Edward Champlin, Nero, The Belknap Press of Harward University Press, Cambridge Massachusetts, London, England, 2003.

Griffin, Miriam T. Nero: The End of a Dynasty. London: Routledge, 2000.

Click Here To Order Now!

The History of Roman Empire

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)