History, as the old saying goes, may not repeat, but it frequently rhymes. One of those rhymes is the regularity with which major disasters overcome and even destroy major cities; this has been something that happens now and then, and has for as long as there have been cities. Plague, war, and natural disasters have all had their impact. Another is fire, a horrendous problem in the ancient world.

The day I write this, Saturday, July 18, 2026, is the 1,962nd anniversary of the Great Fire of Rome, that conflagration during which the Emperor Nero made himself the very archetype of arrogant, uncaring dictators by fiddling while Rome burned.

There's just one problem. It didn't happen that way. A recent report from 2023 by a Hungarian historian, Vedran Bileta, has some interesting information on this event.

On a hot summer night in July AD 64, a great fire broke out and swept across the city of Rome, the capital of the Roman Empire. For over six days, the raging inferno consumed everything in its path. When the fire finally ran its course, it left seventy percent of the city a smoldering ruin. It did not take long for rumors to spread, with people accusing the reigning emperor Nero of starting the fire.

According to those rumors, Nero observed the calamity from his palace at the summit of the Palatine, while playing his lyre as flames devoured the great city. This tempting image outlived both the notorious emperor and the Roman Empire. Yet, for all its notoriety, the story is untrue. So why was Nero blamed for the calamity?

So, what happened, and why was Nero blamed? Well, Nero wasn't without his issues. In fact, the very notion of someone with the power of an Emperor is utterly repulsive to someone raised enjoying the liberty and individual rights that we sometimes take for granted. But facts matter, too. This wasn't the first fire Rome had suffered, and it started in the commercial district, in a series of shops selling "flammable goods." The renowned Roman historian Tacitus was there.

The Great Fire of Rome (Magnum Incendium Romae) broke out on the night of July 18, AD 64. Our best source for the calamity, the historian Tacitus, mentions the rapid spread of fire, which ravaged the Roman Empire’s capital for six days and seven nights. Only four of the fourteen districts of Rome remained untouched by the terrible conflagration. Seven were burned to near destruction, and three were utterly ruined.

 According to Tacitus, an eye-witness of the unfolding catastrophe, the fire started in the eleventh district, in the area that hosted the Circus Maximus, the great arena for chariot racing. The first flames appeared in merchant shops near the grand structure, selling, in the words of Tacitus, “flammable goods.” Thus, the shops provided the fuel to ignite the initial spark. Soon, the fire swept the whole length of the Circus, destroying the building and advancing further.

It seems likely that this would have happened regardless of who was Emperor. Fires were, at this time, not only devastating but painfully common, although ones on the scale to burn an entire city didn't happen so often. But there were no organized fire brigades. When fires sprung up, they were fought with pails of water, with brooms, with wet clothes, and if a fire grew out of control, all the victims could do was wait for it to burn out.

So, where was Nero when all this was going on? Mr. Bileta notes that the lyre-playing legend didn't happen the way it was later described.

Our main sources for Nero’s guilt, Suetonius and Cassius Dio, wrote decades after the disaster. Moreover, both were senators who exhibit consistent hostility toward Nero, and worked for later emperors who may have had a vested interest in vilifying the last Julio-Claudian emperor.

I've read both Suetonius and Cassius Dio, and while they both deserve their good reputation as chroniclers of Roman history, they were not perfect - and they were not there.

Read More: History, Now Rhyming: Welfare, Rome, and the Grain Dole

History of the Middle East, Part One: The March of the Ten Thousand

Tacitus, on the other hand, was present, albeit as a boy. Bileta continued:

Our most reliable source, Tacitus, was only a child during the conflagration, but he collected several eyewitness accounts. While he reports that rumors of Nero’s involvement were widespread, he is not sure whether to believe them. Moreover, besides the valuable intel on the fire’s origin, Tacitus tells us about Nero’s actual location and actions, revealing a different story.

 According to Tacitus, when the fire started, Nero was not in Rome. The 26-year-old emperor was relaxing at his seaside villa in Antium (modern-day Anzio), 50 km (31 miles) away. As soon as the emperor heard about the fire, he immediately returned to the capital. Once there, Nero personally led the rescue efforts.

While Nero could have orchestrated the fire from a distance, Tacitus’ account suggests that Nero went above and beyond to help the survivors of the calamity. After the blazing inferno was finally contained, the emperor offered cash incentives to ensure the city’s rapid recovery. He also passed and enforced new regulations to prevent recurring disasters. Nevertheless, many Romans believed that Nero was to blame for their misfortune.

I'll place my bet on Tacitus being correct in this case.

History is a lot of fun, even when it's in error. And while we have to remember to judge the people chronicled in our histories by the standards of their time, not ours, we also have to judge them fairly. Nero, according to Tacitus, acted as responsibly as any leader could have faced with a disaster of this size and destructive power. Tacitus, as well as Suetonius and Cassius Dio, were all aligned in portraying Nero as a corrupt dictator, a cruel, self-indulgent, megalomaniac. He was not someone anyone today should seek to emulate. But on this day, on the anniversary of an event that took place almost two millennia ago, we should remember that horrific event for what the best reporting from the time says actually happened, not what legend developed later claimed it to be.

Facts matter. The truth matters. That's the lesson of Nero and the Great Fire of Rome.