Was the so-called Domus Aurea of Nero actually a Flavian enterprise?

by Damien F. Mackey “It is suggested that the Esquiline wing, the best known of the buildings presently identified as the Domus Aurea, is only partially Neronian, and that its eastern section is Flavian in date”. P. Gregory Warden We read about the fabulous Abbasid Caliphate of Baghdad and the House of Wisdom (Bayt al-Hikmah) founded by its genius ruler, Harun al-Rashid, during his long reign (786-809 AD). Sadly, however: • Harun al-Rashid is just a colourful character of Arabian Nights fantasy; • He is an Islamic appropriation of the biblical king, Hiram; • Baghdad, Madinat al-Salam (“City of Peace”), did not archaeologically exist at that time, but was based on ancient Jerusalem, the “City of Peace”; • The House of Wisdom, supposedly built by Harun al-Rashid, was, in fact, the Temple of Yahweh in Jerusalem, built with the assistance of Hiram; • The Abbasid Caliphate never was; hence • The Golden Age of Islam never was. On all of this, see e.g. my articles: Original Baghdad was Jerusalem https://www.academia.edu/117007478/Original_Baghdad_was_Jerusalem Oh my, the Umayyads! Deconstructing the Caliphate https://www.academia.edu/117122001/Oh_my_the_Umayyads_Deconstructing_the_Caliphat and: Melting down the fake Golden Age of Islamic intellectualism (4) Melting down the fake Golden Age of Islamic intellectualism The Baghdad situation reminds me somewhat of the villainous Nero, who, likewise, appears to be missing some crucial elements: Nero’s missing architecture (4) Nero's missing architecture Might even the famous Domus Aurea have been more Flavian than Neronic? We read this tantalising review at: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/The-Domus-Aurea-Reconsidered-Warden/13e3d9aa581749079d30fa520f1dfa9653fcc81d The Domus Aurea was built by Nero after the fire of 64 A. D., and construction continued at least until Nero’s death in 68. Although the building is described by Roman writers, none of the remains identified today as the Domus Aurea are mentioned in the literary sources. Previous scholarship, basing itself on literary sources and other Roman monuments, has shown that the Domus Aurea was a landscape park in which the architectural components were subordinated to a greater landscape design, but problems still remain with regard to topographical questions. The Domus Aurea is normally reconstructed as vast in scale, covering up to 80 hectares or a large part of ancient Rome. It is suggested here that the monument covered a much smaller area, perhaps only half that normally reconstructed. Problems of chronology are also discussed, particularly the question of what happened to the building after the death of Nero. It is suggested that the Esquiline wing, the best known of the buildings presently identified as the Domus Aurea, is only partially Neronian, and that its eastern section is Flavian in date. This revision affects our view of the development of Roman architecture and assigns less importance to the role played by Neronian architects in the "concrete revolution" of the 1st century A. D. [End of quote] Relevant to this, see also Mary Harrsch’s 2015 article: Was Nero’s Domus Aurea as big as the ancient sources claim (4) Was Nero's Domus Aurea as big as the ancient sources claim