Rome at Its Very Best

[omoplata]

Which event, time period or even individual represents, in your opinion, the very best of Rome?

 

In my view, the incredibly courageous and resolute stance of the Romans after the battle of Cannae is most impressive. The very worst Rome has ever faced did indeed bring out the very best in Romans.

 

What is your view?

[Ursus]

The comparative peace and cultural enlightenment from Augustus to Hadrian - and particularly exemplified by the two aforementioned emperors who bookmark that period .

[Centurion-Macro]

Interesting question, and one I find difficult to answer.

 

I think the Augustan period was its best, not for the military supremacy or the new empire but because this phase marked a new stage of cultural development in Rome. Some of the worlds greatest poets flourished under it, and some brilliant epic poetry was fathomed. More than anything else I think that showed Rome at its best.

[Kosmo]

Event - the treaty of Apamea. After 3 successive victorious wars in Greece Roman influence now extends into Middle East but Rome still refrains from outright eastward expansion in these rich regions.

Time period - The Middle Republic because it was a very successful period under an incredibly stable civilian government that was both lawful and representative.

Person - Hadrian, for his (mostly) benign eccentricity and his very unroman persona, but mostly because he wondered around the peaceful and prosperous Empire like no emperor before or after.

[DecimusCaesar]

I suppose it could be Rome during the reign of Antoninus Pious. The Empire at that time was stable and prosperous, and pretty much as close as it could come to being a Golden Age. Some could say the reign of Trajan was better, but at the time Rome had just suffered terrible defeats at the hands of the Dacians a few years earlier during the reign of Domitian. By Antoninus's time, Rome had been ruled by Good Emperors for a few generations, so it was probably better off than directly during Trajan's time.

[omoplata]

To those who picked a relatively long time period; how about if you had to pick one moment in the history of Rome, as in one snapshot?

 

To me, it is the return to the city of Rome of the Senator Gaius Terentius Varro after the defeat in Cannae. He is said to have ridden into town with very few surviving men and directly walked into the Senate where a meeting was being held. As he stepped in with blood, dirt and grime all over him, the Senate supposedly stood up and applauded him, despite the enormous loss of life in the battle and the disastrous defeat. (please correct me if my version of the story is inaccurate)

[Ursus]

To those who picked a relatively long time period; how about if you had to pick one moment in the history of Rome, as in one snapshot?

 

Very well. The dedication of the Altar of Peace, whose internal art thoughtfully records the moment in "snapshot." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:RomaAraPacis_ProcessioneSudParticolare.jpg

[wryobserver]

I don't know if it was the best period for the Roman empire in any sense of the word, but the point when I most cheered a Roman army and felt moved was when Aetius led an assembled Roman army, made up of hastily arranged alliances with large Visigoth tribes who had previously been enemies to confront the invasion of Attila the Hun in 447. Attila had swept across northern France and had hithero been undefeated and unbeatable. He was creul and vicious, and the empire was in great fear.

 

Aetius was a gifted Roman general who was trying to hold the empire together whilst the emperor was just a child, Valentiniun 111. He was a brilliant strategist and he led his army and stopped Atilla at Chalons, racing to get there before Atilla, so he could seize the higher slopes to his advantage. Atilla attacked and was repulsed with heavy losses. So shocked was Atilla to actally loose a battle that he demanded his troops kill him and burn him on a pire, but they refused.

 

He sloped back up north and eastward, with Aetius tracking him from a distance, resisting calls from his advisors to go after Atilla. Aetius knew that if he lost the whole empire would fall and it was too much to risk.

 

He did the right thing because Atilla retreated to lick his wounds, take a bride the year after and then died of a heart attack on his wedding night. Nasty piece of work that he was.

 

This battle/campaign was truely the first world war, because it was built up of alliances on both sides from large tribal groups across Europe, from Spain to the Baltics.

 

It would make an amazing film. I think Aetius was an amazing hero, but if I am not mistaken he was eventually killed by a jealous emperor who feared his popularity!

 

Power battles between emperors were like watching power battles between the Mafia today. The fastest way to an early grave was to try to become emperor, or even be sucessful and popular enough to be a threat.

[abvgd]

The moment in time I would choose would probably be in AD80, more precisely during the inaugural games of the Colosseum. If I would pick one specific moment, then it would be the staged naval battles in the Colosseum, which would have been the most spectacular (and morally least questionable) part of the inaugural festivities.

 

Why?

 

Partly, because the opening of the Colosseum was and still, 2000 years later, remains the archetypal display of Rome's might, splendor and architectural achievements. Strictly speaking, this wasn't really a historically important event, since it was a pure spectacle for the masses. However, given its proper historical context I think this event would still qualify as being "Rome at its very best".

 

Partly, however, also because the latter half of the 1st century AD was as good a time as any to be a Roman and to live in Rome. Much of the archeological evidence points to the 1st century AD as representing the pinnacle of Roman trade, mobility and cultural exchange, three areas which could be branded as Rome's greatest legacy and achievement. What Rome did better than anyone else was to bring together disparate peoples which otherwise never would have had such an opportunity. In the 1st century AD, the centrifugal pull of Rome was the greatest it had ever before been and would ever subsequently be.

Edited May 10, 2012 by abvgd

[Belisarius]

For a snapshot, I'd have to go with the overthrow of the Tarquin kings, and the founding of the Republic, the twelve tables, etc.

[Axel Wers]

Augustus' era was good era. But his successors were not very successful. Emperors like Caligula or Nero would be killed very fast in 3rd century crisis. They had only luck, that Roman Empire in their years was very strong.

 

Then Vespasianus' era was relatively good era, Titus including. But not Dominitianus.

 

And finally era since Traianus, through Hadrianus to Antoninus Pius. This is the best era in Roman Empire for me. Marcus Aurelius had to face lot of problems already. He was probably last emperors in the best times. With Commodus best years ended for good.