Roman Succession

[garbon]

This point applies to garbon as well, what was the alternative and how would it give better results?

I agree with that. I was calling out the dynastic child emperors as further examples that a clear succession (as suggested by Tim) wouldn't have really helped matters.

[jimmy olsen]

This point applies to garbon as well, what was the alternative and how would it give better results?

I agree with that. I was calling out the dynastic child emperors as further examples that a clear succession (as suggested by Tim) wouldn't have really helped matters.

The internecine warfare of the 3rd century devastated the West, caused the economy to collapse and lead to a decrease in urbanization.

If much of that fighting had been avoided, Rome would have been in much better shape to ward of the pressure coming from the East.

[Viking]

This point applies to garbon as well, what was the alternative and how would it give better results?

I agree with that. I was calling out the dynastic child emperors as further examples that a clear succession (as suggested by Tim) wouldn't have really helped matters.

The internecine warfare of the 3rd century devastated the West, caused the economy to collapse and lead to a decrease in urbanization.

If much of that fighting had been avoided, Rome would have been in much better shape to ward of the pressure coming from the East.

I thought it was established Languish Fact that the wars with persia which brought back plagues from the east caused the depopulation?

[Admiral Yi]

The nature of power was what it was at that time and that power was the army. It doesn't matter if the emperor is made dynastically or by right of conquest. What matters is that the true nature of power would remain unchanged. Again the Japan analogy works here, the Emperor could have ended up as the Tennoheika locked in a Kyoto castle monumentally irrellevant.

This.

[Valmy]

The crisis of the 3rd century crippled the Empire and it never really recovered from the devastation and the instability it generated.

Yeah and one Emperor, Gallienus, ruled in Rome for practically the entire period.

[Valmy]

I'll agree that there was a problem however. Being soldiers the emperors merely saw the rest of the empire as a source of funding for the army and relied on the support of that army for their legitimacy. 

This.  Eventually the civilian elites just saw they could never win so they checked out. 

[Valmy]

The internecine warfare of the 3rd century devastated the West, caused the economy to collapse and lead to a decrease in urbanization.

If much of that fighting had been avoided, Rome would have been in much better shape to ward of the pressure coming from the East.

Pretty sure the constant flow of Barbarians flowing over the border, which was mainly a result of Decius' crushing defeat than anything else, was a big part of the problem.  And that is, after all, why the West seceded: not as a bid to overthrow Gallienus but as a bid to do something to finally stop the bleeding.

You cannot downplay the massive gamechanger of the Germans uniting into confederations.  That completely changed the balance of power and the political calculus in the West.

[Admiral Yi]

Rome suffered from an excess of people who believed that civil disobedience was a legitimate method of affecting the political process. 

[Ed Anger]

The crisis of the 3rd century crippled the Empire and it never really recovered from the devastation and the instability it generated.

Yeah and one Emperor, Gallienus, ruled in Rome for practically the entire period.

Fuck him. Claudius Gothicus was cooler.

[Siege]

Theodosius I (379-395 A.D.)

[jimmy olsen]

The internecine warfare of the 3rd century devastated the West, caused the economy to collapse and lead to a decrease in urbanization.

If much of that fighting had been avoided, Rome would have been in much better shape to ward of the pressure coming from the East.

Pretty sure the constant flow of Barbarians flowing over the border, which was mainly a result of Decius' crushing defeat than anything else, was a big part of the problem.  And that is, after all, why the West seceded: not as a bid to overthrow Gallienus but as a bid to do something to finally stop the bleeding.

You cannot downplay the massive gamechanger of the Germans uniting into confederations.  That completely changed the balance of power and the political calculus in the West.

If there wasn't constant infighting between forty wannabe emperors they wouldn't have been able to do much.

There were 7 Emperors between 98 and 192. If the next century had a similar number of Emperors the barbarians would have been thrown back into the Rhine.

Hell, if Commodus had gotten his reckless ass killed before his father died the good times would have continued to roll. (Dude had 8 sons and that freakshow was the only one to survive, what bad luck!) Marcus Aurelius would have picked someone competent to succeed him and they would have completed the establishment of the provinces of Marcomannia and Sarmatia. Pushing the border to the Elbe may have even been possible. The praetorian prefect Tarutenius Paternus crushed the Quadi deep in Germania, but Commodus pissed it all away.

[Sophie Scholl]

Hell, if Commodus had gotten his reckless ass killed before his father died the good times would have continued to roll. (Dude had 8 sons and that freakshow was the only one to survive, what bad luck!) Marcus Aurelius would have picked someone competent to succeed him and they would have completed the establishment of the provinces of Marcomannia and Sarmatia. Pushing the border to the Elbe may have even been possible. The praetorian prefect Tarutenius Paternus crushed the Quadi deep in Germania, but Commodus pissed it all away.

I've been working on a theory that Commodus wasn't a bad Emperor, and gets a lot of his bad rap for his hatred of the Senate and elites and attempts to curtail their power and influence and place it firmly in the Imperial hands.  He tried to follow the precedent of Augustus, Titus, Domitian, Nero, and more in his self deification in sculpture and his imagery.  Being prior examples of people born to the purple or the founder of the Emperor position, they were naturals to look at for inspiration.  He also tries to move the focus away from Rome as the only important area and make all areas of the empire on par with each other in terms of rights and obligations.  He did this with a renaming policy and also with building projects and other efforts.  He settled with the Germans and stabilized the borders in the north, something his father failed to do via war.  He was actually loved by a lot of the non-Italian Romans who saw him as a champion of their cause.  So much so, that when Semtimius Severus in particular came to power he made claims at being related to Commodus in his coinage for many areas outside of Italy.  Roman history is dominated by the elites and those who benefited from the old Roman territory benefits of citizenship in terms of whose writings we have on the era.  Obviously they would have been opposed to Commodus' policies on personal, economic, political fronts due to the ensuing decrease in power, prestige, and more his policies were bringing about.

[Josquius]

I wonder how a secure dynastic emperor and a shogun would work out for rome. Could it lead to more of a Rome cant be permanently broken way of thinking?

[Threviel]

I wonder how a secure dynastic emperor and a shogun would work out for rome. Could it lead to more of a Rome cant be permanently broken way of thinking?

Isn't that more or less what happened in the end in the west?

[jimmy olsen]

  He settled with the Germans and stabilized the borders in the north, something his father failed to do via war. 

His father had made great progress by the time he died.

Marcus Aurelius is my favorite emperor.