(3) WORST: COMMODUS –

NERVA-ANTONINE DYNASTY

(180 – 192 AD: 12 YEARS 9 MONTHS 14 DAYS)

His accession was the exact moment Rome went from a kingdom of gold to a kingdom of iron and rust, according to contemporary historian Cassius Dio. (Almost literally in the form of him devaluing the currency).

I mean, you have seen the gospel according to Ridley Scott, Gladiator, haven’t you? As Dovahhatty joked, the “historian Ridley Scott already debunked all this garbage”.

Yes, it’s – ahem – not entirely accurate to history, but it does capture the essence of Commodus, even if it is turned all the way up to eleven (and he didn’t actually murder his father Marcus Aurelius to succeed to the throne).

Joaquim Phoenix nailed it with a despicably oily performance as Commodus – it’s something he does well, as in the Joker film. Come to think of it, his Joker would adapt reasonably well to Commodus.

In real life, Commodus was not killed in the arena by Maximus, a vengeful ex-general sentenced whose family Commodus had executed but was strangled in his bath by his wrestling partner Narcissus as part of a wider plot. However, if that doesn’t smack of symbolism for his reign of dissolute narcissism, I don’t know what does.

He was the first emperor “born in the purple”, that is, as during his father’s reign as emperor, and remained the only one for about two more centuries, as well as the empire’s best advertisement for an imperial line of succession by adoption,

In fairness, “whereas the reign of Marcus Aurelius had been marked by almost continuous warfare, Commodus’ rule was comparatively peaceful in the military sense” – mainly because he flaked out on finishing his father’s wars along the Danube properly – “but was also characterised by political strife and the increasingly arbitrary and capricious behaviour of the emperor himself”.

Not that he was any more interested in peacetime imperial administration than he was in the empire’s military policy – he preferred LARPing as Hercules or as a gladiator, the latter more akin to an abattoir for animals (when human gladiators weren’t taking a dive against him), which turned off even the usually bloodthirsty Roman audience.

Edward Gibbon’s title for his chapter on Commodus sums it up – the “cruelty, follies and murder of Commodus”. In it, Gibbon wrote “Commodus had now attained the summit of vice and infamy”.

Also – “But every sentiment of virtue and humanity was extinct in the mind of Commodus. Whilst he thus abandoned the reins of empire to these unworthy favourites, he valued nothing in sovereign power, except the unbounded licence of indulging his sensual appetites”.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (WORST TIER)

EMPIRE DEBAUCHER

MAXIMUS:

He shared his father’s triumphs as Germanicus and Sarmaticus. He claimed the title of Germanicus Maximus from the victories of his generals, and Britannicus from the extension of Roman Britain to the Antonine Wall. Sigh

DAMNED & DEIFIED.

After his death, the Senate declared him a public enemy, albeit without any formal damnatio memoriae. Subsequent emperor Septimus Severus, seeking favor from the family of Marcus Aurelius, had Commodus deified. Sigh.

SPECTRUM RANKING COMPARISON: Exactly the same, as third worst emperor…except we probably should add Honorius and Valentinian to the absolute bottom of the list, which would make him fifth worst emperor.

 

(3) BEST: AURELIAN –

NON-DYNASTIC / CRISIS OF THE THIRD CENTURY

(270 – 275 AD: 5 YEARS 3 MONTHS)

 

Restitutor Orbis and Sol Invictus, the Restorer of the World and the Unconquered Sun.

 

“Flash

Ah-ah

Saviour of the universe

Flash

Ah-ah

He’ll save every one of us

Flash

Ah-ah

He’s a miracle

Flash

Ah-ah

King of the impossible”.

 

Really, I could just continue with the lyrics of Queen’s Flash Gordon theme song for the rest of this entry…and I will!

 

“He’s for every one of us

Stand for every one of us

He’ll save with a mighty hand

Every man, every woman, every child with a mighty Flash.

 

Flash

A-ah!

Flash

A-ah!

He’ll save every one of us.

 

Just a man, with a man’s courage

He knows nothing but a man

But he can never fail

No one but the pure in heart may find the golden grail

Oh-oh-oh

Oh-oh-oh-oh”

 

Aurelian, Aurelian, we love you

But we only have five years to save the Roman Empire!

 

It was the darkest depths of the Crisis of the Third Century, the Roman Empire was on the brink of doom as Germanic barbarians and Sassanid Persians rampaged deep within it, while the empire itself had broken into three parts, the western and eastern parts all but seceding or conquered by the Gallic Empire and Palmyrene Empire respectively.

And then Aurelian became emperor – “as emperor, he won an unprecedented series of military victories which reunited the Roman Empire after it had nearly disintegrated under the pressure of barbarian invasions and internal revolts…During his reign, he defeated the Alamanni after a devastating war. He also defeated the Goths, Vandals, Juthungi, Sarmatians, and Carpi. Aurelian restored the Empire’s eastern provinces after his conquest of the Palmyrene Empire in 273. The following year he conquered the Gallic Empire in the west, reuniting the Empire in its entirety.”

Or in the characteristic eloquence of Edward Gibbon, “every instant of that short period was filled by some memorable achievement. He put an end to the Gothic war, chastised the Germans who invaded Italy, recovered Gaul, Spain, and Britain out of the hands of Tetricus, and destroyed the proud monarchy which Zenobia had erected in the East on the ruins of the afflicted empire”.

All under the guise and wearing the mask of Sol Invictus, the divine Unconquered Sun. Yeah – that’s right, the same deity of Emperor Elagabalus, but cool and badass in battle from one end of the empire to the other rather than dirty dancing around an altar.

I can’t resist quoting Dovahhatty on Aurelian, as he transcends mere Youtube video and becomes art:

“The empire was now at the mercy of evil and chaos, enemies within and abroad, tearing it apart. And in these darkest of times, the greatest of all men arose…Aurelian. At the start of the crisis, he enlisted in the legions to serve Rome when she needed him most. Battle after battle, he defeated Rome’s enemies with talent and skill never seen before. Emperor after emperor he served, killing barbarians and traitors alike, always loyal and victorious.”

The preceding emperor chose Aurelian to be his successor on his deathbed – “With tears in his eyes, Claudius begged Aurelian to save Rome as its emperor with his last dying breath. For God and Empire, he put on the mask, marching on Italy and deposing the usurper Quintillus. When the Vandals dared invade his home, he marched back and slaughtered every last one of them. And as the Germans invaded Italy itself, he crushed their hordes against the ocean, denying them any mercy”.

“Once in Rome, he restored the economy from decadence, cleansing the city of all corrupt senators. To make Rome eternal, he ordered built the Aurelian walls, so that it would stand a thousand years more. After decades of terrorizing the Danube, Aurelian crushed the Goths and delivering justice to Cniva. For the empire’s sake, he evacuated the citizens of Dacia, strengthening the Danube against invasion”.

“Sailing east, Aurelian gathered his cavalrymen and slaughtered Zenobia’s army, making her flee away. Palymyra was then destroyed for all time, Zenobia captured before fleeing to the Sassanids”

“Returning west, he defeated Tetricus’ legions of traitors, making him bow again to the light of Rome. Restoring the empire from the brink of collapse, Aurelian was acclaimed Restitutor Orbis, the Restorer of the World…In only five glorious years, Aurelian had made Rome one empire with one emperor under one god”.

Sadly however, we come to Dovahhatty’s postscript – “Setting sail for the east, Aurelian engaged in one final campaign, seeking to destroy all of Rome’s enemies. But just as his unrivalled accomplishments made him a hero, so did it fill others with envy and resentment. As Aurelian built a world of good and order, their evil and chaos grew more and more threatened. Through lies they convinced themselves, a perfect man could not be allowed to exist. In the darkest of nights, the Praetorians gave in to their evil and committed their worst crime…the world is stilled”

Alas, that’s right – his reign was only for a “short period”, as he was betrayed and assassinated while on his final campaign to settle scores with the Sassanid Empire. But for the short duration of his reign – only five years, cut short by his untimely assassination – he might well be top entry.

Even so, but for Aurelian, the empire may well have fallen in the third century, instead of falling in the fifth as it did, with its eastern half enduring for a millennium beyond that. His reign may not have quite ended the crisis, but it saved the empire and came close enough to give his successors the opportunity to end it.

RATING: 5 STARS*****

S-TIER (GOD TIER – OR IS THAT SOL INVICTUS TIER?)

EMPIRE-SAVER – THE GREATEST OF THEM ALL

MAXIMUS:

Gothicus Maximus, Germanicus Maximus, Parthicus Maximus. Hell – Maximum Maximus, Restitutor Orbis.

DEIFIED:

Of course!

SPECTRUM RANKING COMPARISON: Similar, including that he would likely have taken out top spot with a longer reign, but Spectrum knocks him down a bit lower that I did for his brief reign, to seventh place. If I recall correctly, Daily Roman Updates ranked him exactly as I did in third place.

 

(4) WORST: HONORIUS –

THEODOSIAN DYNASTY

(395 – 423 AD AD: 28 YEARS 6 MONTHS 29 DAYS)

 

Chicken boy.

“Honorius continued on living as he always had, laying around, babbling like an idiot as the world around him fell apart, but for one exception. One day Honorius turned it all around and decided, for once, to do the best possible thing he could do for the empire and died, after ruling Rome for a godawful thirty years.”

Arguably the worst Roman emperor ever, although you could easily shuffle him with Valentinian III – a.k.a Honorius II – for that spot, as they are so uncannily similar as to be interchangeable. I know I said it before for Valentinian III but it’s worth saying again for Honorius – each was a model of supine inactivity as the empire crumbled, except for betraying the loyal subordinate who was the one holding things together and stabbing that man in the back, as well as each with one of the two notorious sacks of Rome following shortly afterwards. Between the two of them and their inexplicably long reigns, almost 60 years in combination, they broke the western Roman empire and presided over its fall. It’s like the Roman Empire cloned its crappiest emperor, just so it could have him reign twice to ensure its own fall.

Now I have ranked Honorius as worse than Valentinian III as Honorius came first and you know how it is for the diminishing returns of sequels – Valentinian III hit all the same beats and even tried to have some new twists but it just wasn’t up to the original. Less flippantly, Valentinian III inherited the wreckage of the western empire from Honorius – in particular, the barbarians firmly ensconced within the empire as they had not been before Honorius. Not that Valentinian III would do or was ever going to do anything but wreck it further.

In the case of Honorius, the loyal subordinate was his general Stilicho, who had also been his regent and was his father-in-law. Now I have argued that Valentinian’s betrayal of Aetius was worse, but that is more a matter of his direct personal involvement – killing Aetius himself – being more despicable. The betrayal by Honorius of Stilicho was more destructive for the empire.

Firstly, at least Valentinian III waited until the threat of Attila and his Huns had receded from Italy (and the empire itself as it turned out) before his betrayal of Aetius. Honorius betrayed Stilicho when the threat of Alaric and his Visigoths to Italy and Rome was still very much dire. Secondly – and worse – Honorius’ betrayal of Stilicho strengthened that threat, both by removing Stilicho as the one effective deterrent to it and with the defection of Stilicho’s foederati troops en masse to Alaric following Honorius’ massacre of their families as Stilicho’s camp followers.Thirdly, at least Valentinian’s betrayal of Alaric had the prompt consequence of Valentinian’s own assassination, where Honorius continued to burden the empire with his reign for another fifteen years.

Although Honorius didn’t have to wait that long for the sack of Rome which followed as a consequence of his betrayal of Stilicho. That betrayal led in a direct line to the sack of Rome by Alaric and the Visigoths in 410, which again was arguably worse than the corresponding sack of Rome by the Vandals in 455.

Firstly, the sack of Rome by Alaric in 410 was a profound shock to the empire, the first such sack for eight centuries. While the sack of Rome by the Vandals was more destructive – such that the Vandals lent their name as a synonym for destruction ever since – it lacked that same sense of shock given the recent occurrence of the first sack. Secondly, at least Valentinian wasn’t still alive to injure Rome further with his continued existence for its sack in 455 AD. Thirdly, Honorius added insult to injury with his initial alarm that Rome had “perished” was a reference to his favorite pet chicken he had named Roma, where he was relieved to find out it was only in reference to the actual city. That story has been identified to be likely an apocryphal one, but it’s just too true to his character and symbolic with respect to it involving a chicken that I accept it anyway.

The only distinction between Honorius and Valentinian III that led to the former reigning fifteen more years after his betrayal of Stilicho was that Honorius was fortunate enough to have a capable general (and briefly co-emperor) in Constantius III to substitute for Stilicho propping up him and the empire. All Valentinian III had after Aetius was Petronius Maximus and we’ve seen how well that went – his own assassination and the sack of Rome.

Also, Honorius was literally the creepy uncle to Valentinian, albeit more to Valentinian’s mother (and his half sister), so I blame Honorius somewhat for how Valentinian turned out.

As usual, Edward Gibbon had the best snark about Honorius, which I can’t resist quoting in all its glory –

“His feeble and languid disposition was alike incapable of discharging the duties of his rank…the amusement of feeding poultry became the serious and daily care of the monarch of the West, who resigned the reins of empire to the firm and skilful hand of his guardian Stilicho…The predecessors of Honorius were accustomed to animate by their example, or at least by their presence, the valour of the legions; and the dates of their laws attest the perpetual activity of their motions through the provinces of the Roman world. But the son of Theodosius passed the slumber of his life a captive in his palace, a stranger in his country, and the patient, almost the indifferent, spectator of the ruin of the Western empire, which was repeatedly attacked, and finally subverted, by the arms of the barbarians. In the eventful history of a reign of twenty-eight years, it will seldom be necessary to mention the name of the emperor Honorius”.

 

RATING: 1 STAR*

F-TIER (WORST-TIER)

EMPIRE BREAKER

I’m not going to even bother with imperial victory titles or deification – he had none and deserved less. I’m not sure the Senate was doing damnatio memoriae by then.

SPECTRUM RANKING COMPARISON:

Spectrum ranks Honorius separately as the worst western Roman emperor, but consistently states that he also ranks him as the worst emperor for all emperors. I’m inclined to agree, but while my three worst Roman emperors were not quite the empire breakers Honorius was, their legendary depravity trumps it for me.

 

 

(4) BEST: HADRIAN –

NERVA-ANTONINE DYNASTY / FIVE GOOD EMPERORS

(117 – 138 AD: 20 YEARS 10 MONTHS 29 DAYS)

 

The definitive Roman emperor, exceeded as such only by my top two entries.

That’s notable in that he did not add any conquests to the empire, but indeed withdrew from the conquests of his predecessor, particularly in Mesopotamia but to some extent in Dacia as well. Although the Romans themselves tended to esteem expansionism, Hadrian focused on the consolidation of the empire – “Hadrian preferred to invest in the development of stable, defensible borders and the unification of the empire’s disparate peoples”.

It is hard not to see that as the correct focus, as Hadrian presided over an empire at its peak strength and stability, without any adversary of real substance let alone rival or threat to it. Otherwise, it might have become overstretched (or more so) – and it’s possible that even his predecessor who had conquered Mesopotamia (from Persia) “may have thought his gains in Mesopotamia indefensible and abandoned them shortly before his death”.

As such, unlike other emperors in this top ten Hadrian did not even have to engage in any robust military action in defense of the empire – with one notable exception where he was very robust indeed with the one substantial adversary that revolted against the empire during his reign, which we’ll get to shortly.

However, Hadrian didn’t just sit on the empire’s laurels. He “also developed permanent fortifications and military posts along the empire’s border (limites, sl. limes) to support his policy of stability, peace and preparedness”, including the wall in Britain that famously bore his name. “Hadrian’s policy was peace through strength”, emphasised by discipline – “troops practised intensive, regular drill routines” and historian Cassius Dio “praised Hadrian’s emphasis on spit and polish as cause for the generally peaceful character of his reign”.

Fortifications weren’t all he built or rebuilt – Hadrian was famed for his building projects throughout the empire. To that end, Hadrian “travelled almost constantly throughout the empire” and “was to spend more than half his reign outside Italy”.

Hadrian was notoriously fond of Greece and the Greeks – the Historia Augusta opined he may have been “a little too much Greek” – and fond of a Greek in particular, the youth Antinous.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that but I would say that Hadrian deifying Antinous after the latter’s untimely death as a gay god was a step too far. Some men will literally apotheosize their dead catamite instead going to therapy.

The other notorious aspect of Hadrian’s regime was wiping Jerusalem and Judaea off the map in response to the Jewish Bar Kokhba Revolt. The Caledonian chieftain Calgacus as quoted (or concocted) by Tacitus had seen nothing yet when he said the Romans make a desert and call it peace – Hadrian showed how it was really done.

Hadrian was also initiated into in the Greek Eleusinian Mysteries – which I’d like to think of as the classical equivalent of the Illuminati, or perhaps just the actual Illuminati as who knows how far back that secret society and their conspiracies go…?

 

RATING: 4 STARS****

S-TIER (GOD TIER)

EMPIRE BASER

 

MAXIMUS:

I don’t think he claimed any – putting down revolts isn’t quite the same thing

 

DEIFICATION:

O yes – although his successor had to insist on it to the Senate

 

SPECTRUM RANKING COMPARISON: Exactly the same in fourth place, as was the placement by Daily Roman Updates if I recall correctly.