Favourite Emperor of the Antonine and Severan Periods

Who are your favourite emperors from the years AD 96-235 (up to two choices)?

  • Nerva

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • Trajan

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • Hadrian

    Votes: 6 31.6%
  • Antoninus Pius

    Votes: 3 15.8%
  • Marcus Aurelius

    Votes: 7 36.8%
  • Lucius Verus

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Commodus

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • Pertinax

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Didius Julianus

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • Septimius Severus

    Votes: 3 15.8%
  • Pescennius Niger

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Clodius Albinus

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Caracalla

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Geta

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Macrinus

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Elagabalus

    Votes: 2 10.5%
  • Severus Alexander

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    19
#11
Well sure, I'm using emperorship in the modern sense for the sake of simplicity, when really what we call the Roman emperorship was a combination of powers and titles including augustus, princeps, imperator, maius imperium and tribunicia potestas. I discuss this topic a bit when i defend my choice of Domitian in the first century poll. As for Didius, indeed I only realised after writing that post that the story of an auction is a later invention. Regardless, buying the acclamation of the praetorians for 25000 sesterces a soldier from outside the camp walls is pretty fantastic.
 
Likes: benzev
Feb 2011
1,039
Scotland
#13
Not a big Hadrian fan, though having his lover fall in the Nile and get eaten by a croc gets brownie points. (hadnt he heard the song, never smile at a crocodile?). Not nice to his wife. Clearly liked his hols and was good with a trowel and bricklaying.

Surprised that 'Optimo Principi Trajan with his military record doesnt get a few more faves!

Like to push a vote for poor old Lucius Verus, who was much maligned as a pleasurelover but gave the parthians a bashing and produced some lovely coins! How might things have progressed f he hadnt had an early plague-ended venture?

My other vote was for Antoninus Pius for succeeding in being pretty dull and placing some interesting turf structures in Scotland.
 
#15
Not a big Hadrian fan, though having his lover fall in the Nile and get eaten by a croc gets brownie points. (hadnt he heard the song, never smile at a crocodile?). Not nice to his wife. Clearly liked his hols and was good with a trowel and bricklaying.

Surprised that 'Optimo Principi Trajan with his military record doesnt get a few more faves!

Like to push a vote for poor old Lucius Verus, who was much maligned as a pleasurelover but gave the parthians a bashing and produced some lovely coins! How might things have progressed f he hadnt had an early plague-ended venture?

My other vote was for Antoninus Pius for succeeding in being pretty dull and placing some interesting turf structures in Scotland.
I'm enjoying the fact that you have used a dull reign as a plus. I can see the logic.
 
#16
Well, strictly speaking, yes he did, although he was bargaining for power - not a political office that did not actually exist. The only other contestant was his step-father-in-law who lost because Didius claimed he was a supporter of the previous - and very murdered - Caesar by the name of Pertinax, plus Didius offered an outrageous donative he never actually paid. This was why the Senate virtually ignored him. You could obtain power by fair or foul means, but the elite of Rome were not supposed to muddy their paws with tawdry business deals and that's exactly how Didius Julianus came to power, and the reason he found no support when news that Septimius Severus had won the struggle for opposition and was heading to Rome at the head of an army. Didius pleaded with the Senate for help and support. All he got was a visit from a military officer with orders to kill him.

But, truth be told, I rather like the silly old duffer, and he gets my vote too :D
It appears to me that you haven't yet voted in the poll itself. Didius has only one vote and I gave it to him :)
 
Likes: benzev
Feb 2011
1,039
Scotland
#18
Antinuous was drowned, not eaten.
Well, there is some uncertainty and that is the 'official' likely reason. On the other hand the Emperor's barge should have had people to hand to rescue him; there is the possibility of and motive for foul play; there is room for seasonal licence and if he had been chomped, it's likely Hadrian wouldn't want to say it, if he were even told it. Even if not completely eaten, he may have been chopped up a bit . :)
 

caldrail

Ad Honorem
Feb 2012
5,223
#19
There's no mention of crocodiles. The ancients specifically say he drowned. Whether it was accidental as claimed or a murder plot is the only debatable point - the ancients don't see it as suspicious.

When you deal with history you have to remember that we're building on the evidence provided. Random speculation is not history - it's fantasy - and it merely clouds the issue with pointless argument. Now I agree that the Romans aren't the most reliable of historians but what else do we have?
 
#20
There's no mention of crocodiles. The ancients specifically say he drowned. Whether it was accidental as claimed or a murder plot is the only debatable point - the ancients don't see it as suspicious.

When you deal with history you have to remember that we're building on the evidence provided. Random speculation is not history - it's fantasy - and it merely clouds the issue with pointless argument. Now I agree that the Romans aren't the most reliable of historians but what else do we have?
I think you'll find that Benzev is engaging in a bit of fun speculation rather than making a serious argument about history, thus his reference to seasonal licence. I wouldn't attempt to argue death-by-crocodile in an academic article, but I suspect Benzev is just lightening the mood in a thread that's intended to be fun :)
 

Similar History Discussions