The Great Fire of London
The Great Fire of London was a major conflagration that swept through the central parts of London from Sunday, 2 September to Thursday, 6 September 1666. The fire gutted the medieval City of London inside the old Roman city wall. It threatened but did not reach the City of Westminster (today's West End), Charles II's Palace of Whitehall, or most of the suburban slums. It destroyed 13,200 houses, 87 parish churches, St Paul's Cathedral, and most of the buildings of the City authorities. It is estimated to have destroyed the homes of 70,000 of the City's 80,000 inhabitants.
The fire started in a bakery shortly after midnight on Sunday, 2 September, and spread rapidly. The use of the major firefighting technique of the time, the creation of firebreaks by means of demolition, was critically delayed due to the indecisiveness of the Lord Mayor, Sir Thomas Bloodworth. By the time large-scale demolitions were ordered on Sunday night, the wind had already fanned the bakery fire into a firestorm which defeated such measures. The fire pushed north on Monday into the heart of the City. Order in the streets broke down as rumors arose of suspicious foreigners setting fires. The fears of the homeless focused on the French and Dutch, England's enemies in the ongoing Second Anglo-Dutch War; these substantial immigrant groups became victims of lynchings and street violence. Tuesday, the fire spread over nearly the whole City, destroying St. Paul's Cathedral and leaping the River Fleet to threaten Charles II's court at Whitehall. Coordinated firefighting efforts were simultaneously getting underway. The battle to put out the fire is considered to have been won by two key factors: the strong east wind dropped, and the Tower of London garrison used gunpowder to create effective firebreaks, halting further spread eastward.
The death toll is unknown but generally thought to have been relatively small; only six verified deaths were recorded. Some historians have challenged this belief claiming the deaths of poorer citizens were not recorded and that the heat of the fire may have cremated many victims, leaving no recognizable remains. A melted piece of pottery on display at the Museum of London found by archaeologists in Pudding Lane, where the fire started, shows that the temperature reached 1,250 °C (2,280 °F; 1,520 K). The social and economic problems created by the disaster were overwhelming. Flight from London and settlement elsewhere were strongly encouraged by Charles II, who feared a London rebellion amongst the dispossessed refugees. Various schemes for rebuilding the City were proposed, some of them very radical. After the fire, London was reconstructed on essentially the same medieval street plan which still exists today.
Robert Hubert
Robert Hubert (1640-1666) was a nobody. A simple watchmaker from France, under normal circumstances, he would live a completely mediocre life as an unremarkable engineer and merchant, unrecorded by history. Alas, such a fate was not meant to be.
Following the fire, the people were restless; angry mobs formed and lynchings took place throughout the city. London was rapidly descending to chaos and anarchy. When the looting, pillaging, and mob justice weren't enough, the people started to demand responsibility to the King to compensate their losses. Fearing their fury, the King believed that a scapegoat was needed for him to save face. Hubert just happened to fit the criteria for a convenient scapegoat: He was a foreigner (feeding into the people's ultra-nationalistic sentiments), a nameless face in the crowd (meaning the King could freely "craft" a neat backstory for him without arousing suspicion), and not fluent in English (he can't defend himself from the accusations made against him).
And so the poor man was arrested and put to trial. The monarchy painted him as a heinous French spy sent to sabotage the city and its upstanding citizens as part of a conspiracy orchestrated by Louis XVI. Some refused to believe this theory, claiming that Hubert was instead a sailor who was away at the time of the fire, or that Charles was the one who orchestrated the conspiracy all along, or simply that the watchmaker never had the opportunity or capacity to start the fire. Of course, this trial was just a sham used to give the case a semblance of legality and resolution. Any opposing arguments were swiftly dismissed by piling lies upon more lies and Hubert was coerced into writing a letter admitting his guilt. Finally, Robert Hubert, the clueless sailor dastardly spy remorseless psychopath innocent watchmaker was sentenced to hang.
The chaos did not die down immediately after that. Some continued to indulge in robbing, pillaging, and looking for the "true" culprit behind the fire. Some even believed that the King's decision to execute Hubert was a mistake, further fueling anti-monarchy sentiments. Wishing to save face and sweep everything under the rug, Charles proceeded to claim that the fire was caused by "the hands of God, a great wind and a very dry season".