Nero was in a position of power and hypothetically could have done something, hence the criticism of him for ‘fiddling while Rome burned.’ Are you suggesting the twenty-something year olds of this world have some power to turn things around?
The Nero fiddling was entirely slander, and saying he probably could and should have done something is complaining after the fact. He was a day away from Rome when he heard a fire had started, he hauled ass back there, and he personally ran around with the fire brigades to pull people from the wrecks, oppening food supplies, gardens for shelters. And then after all that he plowed the debris away and set new building regulations to make sure a big fire couldn’t do that much damage again - so he did actually do a lot about it. And then he took the empty space to build his golden palace and that’s what got people pissed and rumors spreading. Before all that, he wasn’t doing anything weirder than anyone else, beside sitting by while his mom murdered everybody else to sit him on a throne that he didn’t care for (and then he murdered her to be free of the abuse). The people liked him, it’s the nobles/rich who didn’t. Historians tried to blame him, but it’s clear there was no easy prevention method beside razing and rebuilding; Rome was long known as a fire hazard with shit wooden buildings and zero ventilation safety, fires weren’t rare. The blame game didn’t come from what he could have done before and didn’t do or from any sort of prescience that he should have had that no one else had before, it’s purely religious propaganda after the fact, when he tried to place the blame to some weirdo sect. Hell, he might even have been right, but we’ll never know.
Nero was in a position of power and hypothetically could have done something, hence the criticism of him for ‘fiddling while Rome burned.’ Are you suggesting the twenty-something year olds of this world have some power to turn things around?
The Nero fiddling was entirely slander, and saying he probably could and should have done something is complaining after the fact. He was a day away from Rome when he heard a fire had started, he hauled ass back there, and he personally ran around with the fire brigades to pull people from the wrecks, oppening food supplies, gardens for shelters. And then after all that he plowed the debris away and set new building regulations to make sure a big fire couldn’t do that much damage again - so he did actually do a lot about it. And then he took the empty space to build his golden palace and that’s what got people pissed and rumors spreading. Before all that, he wasn’t doing anything weirder than anyone else, beside sitting by while his mom murdered everybody else to sit him on a throne that he didn’t care for (and then he murdered her to be free of the abuse). The people liked him, it’s the nobles/rich who didn’t. Historians tried to blame him, but it’s clear there was no easy prevention method beside razing and rebuilding; Rome was long known as a fire hazard with shit wooden buildings and zero ventilation safety, fires weren’t rare. The blame game didn’t come from what he could have done before and didn’t do or from any sort of prescience that he should have had that no one else had before, it’s purely religious propaganda after the fact, when he tried to place the blame to some weirdo sect. Hell, he might even have been right, but we’ll never know.
No idea. Rome was never my bag. As far as OP, though, I can only guess they didn’t have quite your interest in the subject either.