Was he objectively the most competent Emperor in Roman history?

Elagabalus.

Certainly in the top 5. His attempts to reform the coinage and halt the rampant debasement pof currency at least shows he had some idea as to why the Roman economy has completely gone to shit, unlike most of his counterparts.

Diocletian's "reforms" in this regard were fucking outrageously retarded, but then again he is a massively overrated Emperor anyway, and most of his success can pretty much be attributed to Aurelian's work.

What about emperor Majorian?

F

Marcus Aurelius

He was one of the best conquerors, expanded the borders of Rome, pretty much always on campaign. Managed to do all this while writing one of the most essential philosophical novels (though he didn't intend to publish it and it doesn't really reflect his ability to rule).

>Charlemagne
>Roman
>Emperor

Julian was the best emperor. Had he not been assassinated by cowardly Christians he likely would have reversed the decline and saved the Empire.

He came to late.

Watching Roman art through the ages is like watching a loved one slip away to dementia.

Late Roman art is patrician tier you filthy pleb

Aurelius looses points for how badly he fucked up in raising his son and choosing his successor.

t. Gibbon
Antonius Pius was the best emperor, but people don't talk about him because he wasn't a meme.

I don't quite get the Religious views of Gibbons.
While he did view Christianity as one of the main causes for the fall of Rome he seem to have cared enough about the faith to covert to Catholicism, why? I mean, being such a gigantic Romanophile that should have pushed him away from the Church and especially the Catholic Church.

>Antoninus Pius

The guy was the most useless lazy piece of shit to ever rule the empire. He did absolutely nothing of any note, and as soon as his reign ended, Marcus Aurelius was left dealing with all the shit Pius had neglected to do.

He had twenty years of peace, a long and stable reign without any war or invasions or plagues, and he didn't take advantage of it at all. Other emperors would have killed for the chance to rule when he did.

He had twenty years of peace and prosperity because he wasn't constantly getting Rome involved with stupid wars or other unessesary shit.

No, he had it because he was lucky. Aurelius was an infinitely batter ruler, but had a troubled reign because he was unlucky when plague wiped out 1/3 of the empire's population and the Marcomans and their allies launched massive invasions.

Pius was good at managing the empire at its height. He was never really faced with a major plague, war or economic crisis. Its impossible to say if he'd be able to achieve military, economic or social changes on the scale of the icons. Mainly because he never tried.

Super good at building roads though, which is something no US president can claim since Ike

Hadrian

Alexios Komnenos

He should have sorted out the long-standing problems in Dacia and Britain, the former by conquering the entire territory along the length of the Danube, and the latter by actually making a proper effort with the Antonine Wall. By neglecting to do these, the Empire had to spend far more manpower and resources in Britannia than was necessary, and Dacia was so vulnerable Aurelian had to abandon it.

The plague spread to Rome because of eastern invasions. This which made Rome look weak and caused all of Marcus's troubles.

The war in the east was started by Parthia. Verus' campaign and his bringing the plague back was hardly his fault, or Marcus'.

I agree with you about Britain, but Dacia was a lost cause from the start

It certainly could have been held longer than it was historically, had the Romans made the effort to conquer the Roxolani territory and the free Dacians. There was a good opportunity to do it during Pius' reign, but as usual the lazy fuck didn't do anything.

If anything, a stronger Dacia in the 3rd century would have blunted the barbarian invasions that ravaged the Balkans and weakened the Empire sufficiently, allowing disasters like Adrianople to occur later on.

I wasn't trying to imply that the Antonine plague was Marcus's fault, just that Rome's sudden decline after Pius's death was unavoidable.

>lazy
Cautious and patient, not lazy.

Caracalla

You have to remember though that Pius was far from a military expert. It took Trajan's full attention to conquer Dacia and MA full entire life to hold it. Pius was a senator's senator and almost no military activity before taking office. This dislocation with the military was why he was selected. He most likely would have failed in taking any trans-Danube territory.

Marcus probably could have persuaded Lucius otherwise, as far as i know they were close

Bump in the name of the Senate and People of Rome

Can we take a moment to appreciate a top 5 that never gets counted?

>Constantine XI
>Heraculus
>Otho
>Tiberius II Constantine
>Claudius Gothicus

why?

Aurelian is objectively the most underrated Roman Emperor

Had a lot of kids die though I think

But was Commodus really as bad as they say?
There's literally nothing wrong with being a spoiled little brat.

Meme emperor. No skill in rule, and he gets credited for a comeback that he wasn't really responsible for

>But was Commodus really as bad as they say?
Literally yes. Did nothing but alienate the senate, lose wars against the germs, and organize games.

Antonius Pius

Vespasian
Aurelian
Theodosius
Anastasius
LeoVI
John I Tzimiskes
Nikephoros II Phokas

Augustus was just as good if not better.

Say what you want but he really did find Rome a city of brick and left it a city of marble.

Do we know what Rome looked like during say, the last 100 years of the republic? And how it compared with the imperial era city? (I know the colisseum, pantheon, etc are imperial buldings).

Bump

>church law
>implying anyone gave a fuck

Aside from gilded aesthetics, late Republic Rome was literally really no different from early Principate Rome.

What about the Rome of the Gracchi brothers? Do we still have intact buildings from the 200-100s B.Cs?

it's literally plebeian inspired trash

Fuck you nigger

>he's mad that somebody insulted his homo emperorfu
He's the worst of the five good emperors and would have had his memory damned by the Senate if it weren't for Pius.

valtetinian 1 is the best emperor

Why would you say that?

>Otto the great
>roman

I'll second this, I don't give a fuck what anybody says. Really clever guy with an astounding level of patience, which ultimately wore off for the betterment of the Empire.

He tried so hard

Objectively correct.

Julian.

>Otho

"He renounced fighting that would have cost much blood,

And with sure hand pierced right through his breast.

By all means let Cato in his life be greater than Julius Caesar himself;

In his death was he greater than Otho?":

Probus

How so?

And got so far

>tfw you will never fuck and kill your mum
>tfw you will never kick your pregnant wife to death
>tfw you will never castrate a qt trap and make her your empress