He Who Did Rome It's Greatest Dis-service

[Hamilcar Barca]

I just realised that Honorius really belongs on this list as well.

[Onasander]

Sulla, for attacking Rome and electing himself dictator. He was the first, nor the last. Blaim him for all that came later, it was people like him that killed Rome generation after generation.

[Zeke]

Theodoius the Great.......he banned Paganism and helped hasten the fall of the western Empire.

He did Rome a great dis-service.

 

Zeke

[Felix Marcellus]

I give it to Commodus. I won't make any claim that he started the decline of Rome, but he did stop it's incredible progress dead in its tracks. Up to Marcus Aurelius I imagine Rome to be a wonderful place of which to be a citizen. Commodus in my mind changed that for the worse.

 

Had Marcus Aurelius cloned himself and made himself heir, Rome might have had a chance to continue peaking. Unfortunately, Genetics were discovered much too late to save Rome.

[Primus Pilus]

This may sound odd... but except for the irrational megalomaniacal behavior regarding the games and such things as renaming the months, the city of Rome, etc. Commodus wasn't such a bad guy.

 

There was almost universal peace after decades of war under his father along with Lucius Verus and their predecessors , the legions were mostly happy, the people were relatively at peace, the plague had passed, etc. He probably purged the treasury but was able to replenish by confiscating it from various senators (his hand was more cruel than some before him, but not much different really) Assuredly he denigrated the position of 'Princeps' but other than that he had 12 years of relatively stable reign. That's more than can be said of many others. Unfortunately, he left the empire without a viable candidate for heir.

 

(Yes I am being somewhat facetious here, but Rome recovered from the craziness of Caligula, the eccentricities of Nero and the so-called terror of Domitian, why does poor old Commodus take the heat?)

[Lex]

Honorius.

For mostly hiding in Ravenna, with his ships ready to escape Italy at a moments notice and for not doing a single thing against the Visigoths that freely wandered Italy doing as they pleased, eventually even sacking Rome. He had an army at his disposal and could have engaged the Visigoths. He could have at least made a proper effort to request reinforcements from the Eastern Roman Empire and then launch a joint attack and finally wipe-out the common enemy.

 

Gibbon describes Honorius as "...a captive in his palace, a stranger in his country, and the patient,

almost the indifferent, spectator of the ruin of the Western empire...".

 

I'm amazed that he wasn't deposed since I'm sure the Italians absolutely hated him. He was a coward and used all the troops for his own protection around Ravenna and just didn't do anything, it was as if the Western Roman Empire didn't have an Emperor or even a proper government under his reign. When he inherited the Western Empire it wasn't in such bad shape and I'm sure that even an Emperor with a minimal amount of patriotism or loyalty to his subjects could have dramatically changed things or at least prevented much suffering for the Italians.

[Felix Marcellus]

This may sound odd... but except for the irrational megalomaniacal behavior regarding the games and such things as renaming the months, the city of Rome, etc. Commodus wasn't such a bad guy.

 

There was almost universal peace after decades of war under his father along with Lucius Verus and their predecessors , the legions were mostly happy, the people were relatively at peace, the plague had passed, etc. He probably purged the treasury but was able to replenish by confiscating it from various senators (his hand was more cruel than some before him, but not much different really) Assuredly he denigrated the position of 'Princeps' but other than that he had 12 years of relatively stable reign. That's more than can be said of many others. Unfortunately, he left the empire without a viable candidate for heir.

 

(Yes I am being somewhat facetious here, but Rome recovered from the craziness of Caligula, the eccentricities of Nero and the so-called terror of Domitian, why does poor old Commodus take the heat?)

I think it is because his predecessor was so much better than him. It's like doing an oral report in school. The Girl with the coke bottle classes who loves to talk gets up there and gives an outstanding presentation and then you come up with your work. The work you did in the library right before that class started. Totally unprepared.

 

Compared to the coke bottle glasses girl you look like a limp noodle.

[Onasander]

How did Commodus' name ever get associated with toilets?

[Hamilcar Barca]

Sure Commodus wasn't as bad as guys like Caligula or Nero, but lets face it he was still a bad Emperor.

Yes his reign was one of relative peace and stability but it was on behalf of his predessors that this was the case. I guess we should just be grateful that he didn't come to power during a more troubled time in the Empire when his ecentricties, poor leadership and bad behaviour may have pushed the empire into decline at an even faster rate... but then we had Honorius to that instead. How that man reigned for 28 years and died of natural causes, is, well, increadible considering just how inept his leadership was. The only thing eventful he ever did in his reign was kill Stilicho, and that was the stupidest thing anyone ever could have done.

[Primus Pilus]

Compared to the coke bottle glasses girl you look like a limp noodle.

LOL

[Quintus Artemis Sertorius]

I'm not sure about the worst Roman of all time, but i would think that if you asked a Roman from the late Republic it might be Quintus Servilius Caepio of Tolosa gold fame (that is if the story is actually true). We have to admit that for the most part Rome was corrupt, and that the people from highest to lowest knew it. Everyone expected the rich and powerful to take a share of any loot or tribute that was found or obtained from a province, which was the right of any provincial governor. However, to not give the treasury its fair share was something that angered all Romans, again from highest to lowest. And if the Gold of Tolosa was indeed 15,000 talents (the weight one man can carry), then Caepio truly robbed the Senate and People of Rome of a huge asset which may have eased the strain of future wars. If Rome had that much gold on hand during the Social Wars, then maybe Sulla wouldn't have later seen in neccesary to proscribe so many of the equestrian order.

[Onasander]

Destroying a republic and becoming dictator is much worst than stealing someone else's gold.

[Felix Marcellus]

Destroying a republic and becoming dictator is much worst than stealing someone else's gold.

Who did that?

[Quintus Artemis Sertorius]

I don't know about that. In total truthfulness, most of the Roman elite were more interested in personal gain than in the preservation of the Republic. Most of the howling done about "saving the Republic" was really in order to protect the ability to massively bribe sanators for certain concessions. Many rich members of the equestrian order had a good many debt-ridden senators in their pockets. The advent of a dictator means that certain types of buisness deals have to stop, or else go way way under the table, which means loss of money. Not to mention that when the treasury of Rome gets empty, eventually the equestrian class has to give up some money in one way or the other.

 

Besides, is destroying the Republic really such a bad thing? At the end, the Republic was corrupt and bloated with those scions of old family power dedicated to keeping the status quo. The conservative elements of late Republican Rome were almost always willing to sacrifice everything to keep Rome from changing. Even if that change was something that was good for the Republic (i.e. giving the Italian Allies the citizenship, stoping the publicanni from totally raping Asia Province, making it harer for sheer bribery to influence the courts, etc, etc,) the conservatives would scream like Vestal Virgins in a men's bath house. I think the Republic needed a dictator and Sulla was just in time.

[Felix Marcellus]

I think the Producer and Director of "Empire" did Rome its greatest disservice.