Why did she burn Rome bros?

Link has no plot.

It's literal character assassination from his political rivals that history fell for. Probably because it seemed all poetic considering Caligula and whatnot.

Attached: 1549655886568.jpg (1403x992, 1.88M)

Did fate Nero really wash her mouth with her own piss though?

Knowing Nasu, it was probably to save Rome. Somehow.

Umu.

She didn't burn Rome. She simply seized land after the fire. Which is also pretty bad.

is nero a titty monster?

No.

Attached: 1554738160058.jpg (2661x1500, 303K)

She's just really short.

yes
umu

Attached: 67336933_p0.jpg (1060x1500, 836K)

She loved people too much.

umu

I do though

Because bisluts gotta be like that.

Learn something new every day, user.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Fire_of_Rome

It was the Counter Force trying to get at a potential Beast

There were too many Easter Worshippers there

We should feed Christians to lions again for old time's sake.

I want to lick Nero’s butthole

She didn't.
The Christcucks burned rome and they should all be purged for that.

Same, but I'd realistically lick every part of Nero's body.

Attached: 0005.jpg (1139x1160, 632K)

He hated Rome, was a greek wannabe and had a God complex. He believed himself to be an artist above any other, he thought that watching his own birthplace burning would inspire him to compose a poem fit of a God. He just had to order his army to burn the city.

It comes from the fact that he built a bunch of new shit, including a huge statue of himself, in the ruins after the fire died out. It's very close to where the Colosseum was eventually built.

It's referenced in Suetonius' account. Bear in mind that Suetonius can be a problem, historically. On the one hand, he had access to various Senate records and similar. On the other, he didn't like the Imperial family or Nero. Counter that with how he was technically a biographer, but then again, he was also moralistically inclined and Nero's life and actions didn't match the morals he liked in the subjects of said biographies.

This basically means you have to look at what he wrote with an untrusting eye, it can't be taken outright as fact. He has this problem for a lot of things, taking gossip as fact. He's the gossipmonger of Roman historians.

By comparison, Tacitus, also somebody with a certain axe to grind against Emperors like Nero, does I think mention some rumours along those lines, but also reports that when the fires happened, Nero opened up his estates for refugees and to house people fleeing the destruction.

Good taste

Attached: Smug nero.png (385x555, 194K)

I don't remember Violet looking like that. That's fanart right?

link's about Charlemagne, nero and tamamo have no plot development besides Nero flirting with Artoria

>believing christian and ancient version of the 1% propaganda
Nero wasn't even in Rome at the time of the fire, and in response to it opened his, or her here cause Fate, personal residence and imperial residence to shelter the displaced and instituted fire codes. Christians teamed with rich romans to slander Nero because Nero they both hated him. Christians, for obvious reasons, the rich because Nero devalued the currency to avert an economic collapse and get more money in circulation.