What was it that made an Emperor to be deemed successful? They all had individual opinions, strengths, weaknesses and visions for Rome and the Empire yet they all had the same or similar enough power. Also, who, in your opinion was the 'best' Emperor? I'm just getting back into this period and would love to here all of your thoughts. I do realize that the emperors or princeps didn't have to adhere to the same guidelines as officials elected during the Republic, just thought it'd be an interesting talking point since it is mainly Claudius, Caligula and Nero that you hear of, perhaps because of how sordid they're rules were.
Becky.