Majorian: Rome’s last hope

[guy]

This is a great video on the Emperor Majorian, Rome’s last hope (reign 457-61 AD).

According to historian Edward Gibbon, Majorian "presents the welcome discovery of a great and heroic character, such as sometimes arise, in a degenerate age, to vindicate the honour of the human species". The Encyclopedia Britannica likewise calls him "the only man to hold that office [i.e. the imperial throne] in the 5th century who had some claim to greatness." 
 

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Majorian

Edited November 14, 2021 by guy

[caldrail]

A four year reign of dramatic change and an early death by betrayal. Guaranteed to be sen as a hero by some just for the story. Does he really justify the praise heaped on him? I ask that because he he settled nothing, he was a blip on the history radar that shone bright and winked out. Did he leave any lasting impression on the world? No, unless you include Gibbon's opinions and this video. Worth remembering I suppose but ultimately not hugely significant.

[sonic]

His main significance is that he tried to reverse the damage and proved that, if correctly led, it was possible for the Empire to respond to the threats facing it.  The fact that his taxation resulted in defeat led to his downfall.  But the fact that his taxation proved that the Empire was still, at least in part, financially viable if the aristocracy did their bit, demonstrates that the West was not wholly doomed to die.

[guy]

I agree with Ian that the Empire was not "doomed to die." I will quote myself from a previous thread:

Despite the frequent turnover and turmoil in leadership, the Empire [could have survived].

Quote

 

I think this relative stability can attributed to Intact institutions (extended family, a patronage system, religious organizations, etc) and a well-entrenched bureaucracy.

In Italy there have been 36 (and counting) Prime Ministers since 1946. Despite these frequent changes of government, daily Italian life is barely affected  by these transitions. Similar to Ancient Rome, people merely meet the challenges of life, supported by their local family, relationships, religious affiliations, etc.

This might explain why distant communities would continue living a Roman lifestyle long after the Empire and the city of Rome “fell.”

 

 

7 hours ago, sonic said:

His main significance is that he tried to reverse the damage and proved that, if correctly led, it was possible for the Empire to respond to the threats facing it.  The fact that his taxation resulted in defeat led to his downfall.  But the fact that his taxation proved that the Empire was still, at least in part, financially viable if the aristocracy did their bit, demonstrates that the West was not wholly doomed to die.

Assertion of Power - Imperium Romanorum - UNRV Ancient Roman Empire Forums

Edited November 14, 2021 by guy

[caldrail]

I disagree. The West was heading for the end and had been for some time. Please note that Majorian is the only leader who showed any capability to change that, and he couldn't, because he had not inspired enough loyalty (which in Roman times was a feat in itself). 

Look at the situation. Rome was no longer capital of the west, it was a disease ridden rump of its former glory. Ravenna was capital, chosen because it was inside swamplands and difficult to attack. All the money had long gone eastward to Constantinople and that in Roman society meant everything. Let's not forget that the eastern empire would survive, for the most part, for another thousand years.