Fire of 64 AD - Secrets of the Dead episode

[Nathan Ross]

That Tacitus is not an entirely objective witness is hardly news! I agree with you about the slim chances of the Christians being involved, but I tend to think that the fire was far more likely to have been accidental - fires broke out in Rome all the time, after all - there was another one in 80, which burned for three days and destroyed large areas of the Capitol and Campus Martius, and nobody seems to have been blamed for that. Starting a fire was easy, it seems, but to guarantee any sort of apocalyptic conflagration the Christians would have had to cause it to spread unchecked and prevent its being extinguished - in 64, I very much doubt that there were sufficient Christians in Rome to do anything of the sort. That certain of them might have seen in the fire evidence of divine wrath is a possibility, I suppose, and an unguarded remark to that effect might have swayed public feelings enough to make them suitable scapegoats.

Perhaps Nero was responsible, perhaps not. As a rather excessive slum-clearance program, the fire might have had a purpose, and even Tacitus grudgingly commends Nero's rebuilding program. Quite why the Italian archeologist quoted on the site linked above believes that the senators lived 'in the Forum', however, I don't know - but huge fires are by their nature quite indiscriminate, and not very easy to target against one's enemies in particular.

Was the program, I wonder, attempting to make the crafty insinuation that the early Christians were a sort of ancient Al Quaida, determined to wreak terrorist war on the ungodly pagans?

- Nathan