[ 6 ] 



the rational mind * : But its chief importance refts on the grounds 

 I have premifed. If we deteft an hiftorian in any one inftance, 

 in a peremptory and dogmatical affertion of a difputed, nay 

 improbable charge, have wc not caufe to view his writings with 

 general fufpicion, and fcrutinize with jealous eye his accuracy 

 or his candour ? And we cannot feledt a better example than 

 that of a diredt and unqualified allegation of a plain and fimple 

 fa£t, into which, if falfe, the writer could not from any cir- 

 cumftanccs be fuppofed to be innocently or unwittin2;ly be- 

 trayed. 



Suetonius, then, dircdly and circumftancially afcribes the 

 conflagration at Rome in the time of Nero to that detefted 

 Emperor, while Tacitus only fays, forte an dolo Imperatorh in- 

 certum. The authority of the former feems to have prevailed, 

 and few traditions have been more ftrongly believed, or fayings 

 more frequently applied, than " that Nero fiddled while Rome 

 " was burning." I apprehend therefore that the following argu- 

 ments to the contrary will have at leaft the recommendation of 

 novelty, as the oppofite opinion has never been hinted by any 

 writer whom I have met, except the Abbe Millot, who annexes 

 no reafons for his doubts. 



The 



• The deGre of feeing the refemblance of Troy in flames is too childifli to be 

 imputed even to the fantaftical mind of Nero, and the defign of burning a great city 

 in order to improve and rebuild it, if indeed neceflary, in the plenitude of his power, 

 for fuch objeft (while under our moderate government fimilar improvement is 

 without difficulty attained on valuing the houfes pulled down) does not feem to b« 

 confirmed by his fubfequent aflions. 



