What are the 5 worst Roman emperors?

[caesar novus]

Does anyone want to compare thoughts on the 5 worst Roman emperors with the new sensation Chinese AI machine? Here is how I attempted to do that, but it is too busy respond to me at the moment. You may have better luck, or else may have some catastrophic security disaster... no guarantees.

- go to chat.deepseek.com

- log on with your google account or make a deepseek account

- at the prompt probably click on the globe which will source info from the web

- probably click on the deepthink option which should list it's reasoning behind conclusions

- type and hit enter: what are the 5 worst Roman emperors?

- somewhere on the lower left is a profile or something that lets you log out

ADENDUM==> Worst 5 or 7 or 12 is too easy because such lists pre-exist on web. Better try 13 or 17?

Edited Wednesday at 11:11 PM by caesar novus

[caesar novus]

OK, I got the 17 worst answered, altho with trite explanations. It appears to be more responsive than google AI or bing, and different from all-ranked web lists. So now my question is whether more complex questions can be handled, but when I asked for funniest emperors it gave me busy signal. Also I want to try without the web option to see what is on the internal database.

 

deepseek results:

 

The Roman Empire had its share of ineffective, cruel, and notorious rulers. Here’s a list of 17 emperors often regarded as the worst, based on their tyranny, incompetence, or disastrous reigns:

---

1. Nero (54–68 CE)

• Known for his extravagance, persecution of Christians, and the Great Fire of Rome (rumored to have been started by him).

• His erratic behavior and murder of family members, including his mother, made him infamous.

2. Caligula (37–41 CE)

• Began his reign well but quickly descended into madness and cruelty.

• Known for declaring war on the sea, appointing his horse as a consul, and extreme paranoia.

3. Commodus (180–192 CE)

• Neglected governance, preferring to fight as a gladiator in the arena.

• His reign marked the beginning of the Empire’s decline.

4. Elagabalus (218–222 CE)

• A teenage emperor who prioritized religious reforms (worship of the sun god Elagabal) over governance.

• Known for decadence, scandalous behavior, and poor leadership.

5. Caracalla (198–217 CE)

• Infamous for the massacre of his brother Geta and the Edict of Caracalla, which granted citizenship to all free men in the Empire (mainly for tax purposes).

• His reign was marked by brutality and heavy military spending.

6. Domitian (81–96 CE)

• A paranoid and autocratic ruler who executed political opponents and persecuted Jews and Christians.

• His reign ended with his assassination.

7. Vitellius (69 CE)

• A gluttonous and incompetent emperor during the Year of the Four Emperors.

• His short reign was marked by corruption and military defeat.

8. Maximinus Thrax (235–238 CE)

• A brutal and unpopular emperor who heavily taxed the populace to fund his military campaigns.

• His reign sparked the Crisis of the Third Century.

9. Honorius (393–423 CE)

• A weak and ineffective ruler during the decline of the Western Roman Empire.

• Failed to prevent the sack of Rome by the Visigoths in 410 CE.

10. Valentinian III (425–455 CE)

• His weak rule saw the further decline of the Western Empire.

• Failed to stop the invasions of Attila the Hun and the Vandals.

11. Pertinax (193 CE)

• His brief reign was marked by attempts to reform the Praetorian Guard, which led to his assassination after just 87 days.

12. Didius Julianus (193 CE)

• Bought the throne in an auction held by the Praetorian Guard.

• His reign lasted only 66 days before he was overthrown and executed.

13. Gallienus (253–268 CE)

• His reign saw the Empire fragment into the Gallic and Palmyrene Empires.

• Often criticized for his inability to handle the Crisis of the Third Century.

14. Phocas (602–610 CE)

• A brutal and unpopular Byzantine emperor whose reign led to the collapse of the Eastern Roman Empire’s defenses.

• Overthrown by Heraclius.

15. Claudius Gothicus (268–270 CE)

• While not entirely incompetent, his reign was too short to address the Empire’s crises effectively.

16. Probus (276–282 CE)

• His reign was marked by constant military campaigns and internal unrest.

• Assassinated by his own troops.

17. Romulus Augustulus (475–476 CE)

• The last Western Roman Emperor, whose deposition by Odoacer marked the fall of the Western Empire.

• A puppet ruler with no real power.

---

These emperors are often criticized for their poor leadership, cruelty, or inability to address the challenges facing the Roman Empire. However, historical accounts can be biased, and some of these rulers may have been unfairly maligned by their enemies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 04:16 AM by caesar novus

[guy]

I don't like many Emperors on the list, especially the Emperors from the last half of the third century.

Claudius Gothicus, for example, should be considered a success (not a failure). During his short two-year reign, he defeated the Goths and Alemanni, helped to reform the military, and was important in the reconquest of Gaul.

Probus defeated the Alemanni, the Goths, the Franks, the Longiones, and the Burgundians—hardly a failure.

Gallienus witnessed the Empire splinter but defeated several usurpers, including Macrianus Major, Lucius Aemilianus, and Aureolus. 

Domitian is frequently on these lists of "Worst Emperors." He did rule for 15 years and was crucial in many building projects in the forum and the construction of the Arch of Titus. He strengthened the borders along the Rhine and Danube. I think much of his bad reputation came from the harsh treatment by the Senate.

 

 

 

[caesar novus]

17 hours ago, guy said:

I don't like many Emperors on the list, especially the Emperors from the last half of the third century.

OK, one thumbs down for the tool hoovering up popular misconceptions. I got thru one "funny" query below. I am trying to get beyond the searching function and more into reasoning, but:

DEEPSEEK RESPONSE:

Okay, so the user is asking for the three funniest Roman emperors. Hmm, I need to figure out which emperors are known for their humorous or eccentric behavior. Let me start by recalling some of the more notorious emperors from Roman history.

 

First, I remember Caligula. He's infamous for his bizarre antics. Like, didn't he appoint his horse as a consul? That's pretty ridiculous. Also, there's stories about him declaring war on Neptune and collecting seashells as spoils. Those actions were probably seen as absurd even back then, so he might be a candidate.

 

Then there's Nero. He famously played the lyre while Rome burned, though that's more of a legend. But he also performed in public theaters, which was considered scandalous for an emperor. Romans looked down on acting as a low-class profession, so his insistence on performing could be seen as humorous or at least highly eccentric.

 

Another one might be Elagabalus. I think he was known for his extravagant parties and eccentric behavior. He supposedly hosted dinners where guests were smothered in rose petals, and he had peculiar habits like dressing in women's clothing and marrying a Vestal Virgin, which was a big taboo. His disregard for traditional norms probably made him a figure of ridicule.

 

Wait, what about Commodus? He fancied himself a gladiator and fought in the arena, which was seen as undignified for an emperor. He even renamed Rome after himself, Colonia Commodiana. That's pretty over-the-top. Maybe he should be included instead of one of the others?

 

But the user asked for the three funniest, so I need to pick the top three based on their humorous or absurd actions. Caligula, Nero, and Elagabalus seem to stand out the most for their outrageous behavior. Commodus was eccentric too, but maybe not as humorously so. Let me verify some facts.

 

Caligula's horse Incitatus being made a priest or consul is a well-known anecdote, though historians debate its accuracy. Nero's performances and the Great Fire of Rome are legendary. Elagabalus's gender non-conforming behavior and bizarre banquets are well-documented in historical sources like Cassius Dio.

 

So, I think the top three would be Caligula, Nero, and Elagabalus. Their actions, while often tyrannical and destructive, have elements of absurdity that can be seen as darkly humorous from a modern perspective. I should present their eccentricities and explain why they're considered funny, while also noting the historical context that their reigns were marked by instability and cruelty.

(Due to technical issues, the search service is temporarily unavailable.)

The Roman Empire had several emperors known for their eccentric, absurd, or darkly humorous antics. While their reigns were often marked by tyranny and instability, their bizarre behavior has inspired both historical fascination and morbid comedy. Here are three emperors whose antics stand out:

---

1. Caligula (Gaius Caesar Augustus Germanicus)

• Infamous for: Appointing his horse, Incitatus, as a "priest" and allegedly planning to make him a consul.

• Absurdity: Declared war on Neptune (the sea god) and ordered soldiers to collect seashells as "spoils of war." Hosted lavish, nonsensical parties and reportedly spoke to the moon.

• Legacy: His unpredictable behavior—mixing sadism, megalomania, and slapstick—has made him a poster child for imperial madness.

---

2. Nero (Nero Claudius Caesar)

• Infamous for: Famously (and likely apocryphally) "fiddling while Rome burned" during the Great Fire of Rome (64 CE).

• Absurdity: Insisted on performing as a lyre player, poet, and charioteer in public games, despite Roman elites viewing such roles as disgraceful. Created a 100-foot-tall statue of himself, the Colossus Neronis.

• Legacy: His theatrical self-indulgence and erratic rule turned him into a caricature of vanity and excess.

---

3. Elagabalus (Marcus Aurelius Antoninus)

• Infamous for: Throwing dinner parties where guests were smothered in rose petals, served dishes made of jewels, or confronted with lions made of pastry.

• Absurdity: Dressed in silk gowns and makeup, married a Vestal Virgin (a major taboo), and reportedly offered vast sums to any doctor who could give him female anatomy.

• Legacy: His gender-nonconforming defiance of norms and chaotic reign made him a legendary figure of decadence.

---

Honorable Mention: Commodus

• Renamed Rome "Colonia Commodiana," fought in gladiatorial bouts (rigged in his favor), and claimed to be the reincarnation of Hercules. His delusional antics could easily earn him a spot on this list.

---

Note: While these emperors’ antics seem humorous in retrospect, their reigns were marked by cruelty, paranoia, and political chaos. Their "humor" is largely a product of historical hindsight and satirical exaggeration by ancient writers like Suetonius and Cassius Dio.

 

New chat

 

 

[caesar novus]

Wow, I turned off internet searching and asked DeepSeek what emperors were like Winston Churchill:

================>>>>>

Okay, the user previously asked about the funniest Roman emperors, and now they're asking which ones are most like Winston Churchill. Let me break this down.

 

First, I need to recall Churchill's key traits. He was a wartime leader known for his leadership during WWII, his oratory skills, resilience, strategic thinking, and literary contributions. He also had a complex personality with some controversial policies.

 

Now, which Roman emperors share these qualities? The user probably wants a comparison based on leadership during crises, eloquence, political acumen, and maybe even some personal flaws.

 

Looking at Roman history, Augustus comes to mind. He ended the civil wars and established the Pax Romana, similar to Churchill's stabilizing role. Both were skilled in propaganda and building a lasting legacy. But Augustus was more of a statesman than a wartime leader in the same sense as Churchill.

 

Vespasian is another candidate. He restored stability after the Year of the Four Emperors, focused on practical reforms, and had a down-to-earth personality. His military background and rebuilding efforts post-crisis align with Churchill's leadership during and after the war.

 

Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher emperor, led through the Marcomannic Wars. His stoicism and emphasis on duty resonate with Churchill's resilience. Plus, his writings, like "Meditations," parallel Churchill's literary works. However, Marcus was more contemplative, whereas Churchill was more of a public figure.

 

Claudius might be a stretch, but he was underestimated yet effective, expanding the empire and focusing on infrastructure. His scholarly side could be likened to Churchill's writing, but their leadership contexts differ.

 

Trajan, a military emperor, expanded the empire and was celebrated, but maybe less of a literary figure. Constantine had strategic vision with founding Constantinople and promoting Christianity, which is a significant legacy, similar to Churchill's impact.

 

I need to highlight the closest matches. Augustus, Vespasian, and Marcus Aurelius seem the strongest. Claudius and Trajan as honorable mentions. The user might also be interested in leaders who balanced military and intellectual pursuits, so emphasizing those aspects would be key.

 

Also, considering Churchill's flaws, mentioning the emperors' controversies would provide a balanced view. For example, Augustus's political manipulations or Marcus's challenges with Commodus.

 

I should structure the answer by comparing each emperor's traits to Churchill's, noting similarities and differences. Conclude with a summary of why these parallels exist, perhaps touching on their legacies and how they navigated crises.

Comparing Roman emperors to Winston Churchill—a statesman known for his wartime leadership, eloquence, resilience, and political pragmatism—requires identifying emperors who demonstrated similar qualities: strategic brilliance in crisis, rhetorical skill, adaptability, and a legacy of stabilizing or defending the empire. Here are three Roman emperors whose traits or actions align with Churchill’s persona:

---

1. Augustus (Gaius Octavius Thurinus)

• Why Churchill-like?

  • Crisis Leadership: Like Churchill during WWII, Augustus emerged from civil war (after Julius Caesar’s assassination) to stabilize Rome, end decades of chaos, and establish the Pax Romana.

  • Political Savvy: Both were masterful propagandists and institution-builders. Augustus reorganized the Roman state while maintaining the illusion of republican traditions, much like Churchill’s balancing of wartime coalitions and democratic ideals.

  • Legacy Crafting: Churchill’s memoirs and speeches shaped his legacy; Augustus’s Res Gestae (his autobiographical inscription) did the same for his reign.

---

2. Vespasian (Titus Flavius Vespasianus)

• Why Churchill-like?

  • Post-Crisis Stabilization: Vespasian took power after the chaotic "Year of the Four Emperors" (69 CE), much like Churchill leading Britain after the political turmoil of the 1930s. He restored fiscal and military discipline.

  • Practical Reforms: Churchill’s focus on infrastructure (e.g., the Mulberry Harbors) mirrors Vespasian’s public works (the Colosseum, tax reforms). Both prioritized rebuilding and pragmatism over ideology.

  • Humorous Cynicism: Churchill’s wit finds a match in Vespasian, who famously quipped, “Money has no smell,” when criticized for taxing urine (used in tanning).

---

3. Marcus Aurelius

• Why Churchill-like?

  • Stoic Resilience: Marcus Aurelius, a philosopher-emperor, faced the Marcomannic Wars and a plague with stoic resolve, echoing Churchill’s “never surrender” ethos during the Blitz.

  • Intellectual Depth: Both were writers—Churchill won a Nobel Prize in Literature; Marcus penned Meditations, a timeless work on duty and perseverance.

  • Moral Leadership: While Churchill’s legacy is complicated (e.g., colonial policies), both leaders emphasized ethical governance during existential threats.

---

Honorable Mentions:

• Claudius: Overcame physical disabilities and political marginalization to become an effective administrator (like Churchill’s “wilderness years” before 1940).

• Trajan: A military leader who expanded the empire to its greatest extent, akin to Churchill’s imperial vision (though Trajan lacked Churchill’s literary flair).

• Constantine the Great: A strategic visionary who unified a fractured empire (like Churchill’s wartime coalition) and pivoted Rome toward a new era (Christianity).

---

Key Parallels:

• Crisis Management: All these emperors, like Churchill, rose to power during upheaval and left a lasting institutional legacy.

• Eloquence & Propaganda: Their ability to communicate vision (Augustus’s imagery, Marcus’s philosophy, Vespasian’s wit) mirrors Churchill’s mastery of rhetoric.

• Flawed but Pragmatic: Churchill’s controversies (e.g., Gallipoli) find echoes in Augustus’s ruthlessness or Marcus’s failure to prevent his son Commodus’s disastrous reign.

Note: Churchill’s blend of democracy and empire has no direct Roman parallel, but these emperors embody facets of his leadership—turning chaos into order through grit, words, and adaptability.

 

New chat

 

 

[caesar novus]

Help, I can't stop and asked about sister trivia. DeepSeek sayth:

Okay, so I need to figure out which Roman emperors had sisters. Let me start by recalling some of the Roman emperors and their family members. I know that many emperors came from dynastic families, so they might have had siblings. For example, the Julio-Claudian dynasty includes emperors like Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula, Claudius, and Nero.

 

Augustus was the first emperor, originally named Octavian. He was the adopted son of Julius Caesar. I think he had a sister named Octavia, but I'm not sure if she was his full sister or maybe a half-sister. Then Tiberius was his stepson, right? So maybe Tiberius had sisters from his biological father's side. Caligula, whose real name was Gaius, was part of the Julio-Claudian line too. His father was Germanicus, who was a prominent general. I remember that Caligula had sisters named Agrippina the Younger, Drusilla, and Julia Livilla. They were pretty influential, especially Agrippina, who later became the mother of Emperor Nero.

 

Moving on to Claudius, he was Caligula's uncle. I think Claudius had a sister named Livilla, but I might be mixing her up with someone else. Then Nero, his mother was Agrippina the Younger, so his sisters would be from her side, but Nero himself didn't have any full sisters that I can recall. Maybe half-sisters?

 

Then there's the Flavian dynasty with Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian. Vespasian had a daughter named Domitilla, but I'm not sure about sisters. Titus and Domitian were brothers, so their sisters would be Domitilla the Younger.

 

The Nerva-Antonine dynasty includes emperors like Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, and Commodus. Marcus Aurelius had a sister named Annia Cornificia Faustina. Commodus was his son, so maybe he had sisters too? I think Marcus Aurelius had daughters, so Commodus would have sisters.

 

Then there's the Severan dynasty with Septimius Severus, Caracalla, Geta, etc. Septimius had a sister named Octavilla. Caracalla and Geta were brothers, so their sisters would be from their father's side.

 

In the later emperors, like Constantine the Great, he had half-sisters, such as Constantia, who married Licinius.

 

Wait, I should verify some of these. For example, Augustus did have a sister named Octavia the Elder and another named Octavia the Younger? Or was it just one Octavia? Maybe Octavia the Younger was his sister. Then Tiberius, his biological father was Tiberius Claudius Nero, so he might have had siblings from that side. But Tiberius was adopted by Augustus, so his original siblings might not be as well-known.

 

Caligula's sisters were definitely named Agrippina, Drusilla, and Julia Livilla. They were known as the three sisters and were quite prominent. Claudius, I think, had a sister named Livilla, who was involved in some scandals, maybe with Sejanus.

 

For the Flavians, Vespasian had a daughter named Domitilla, but his sister might have been named Flavia Vespasia. Titus and Domitian's sister was Domitilla the Younger.

 

Marcus Aurelius had a sister named Annia Cornificia Faustina, yes. Commodus had sisters named Lucilla, who was married to Lucius Verus before he died, and others.

 

Septimius Severus had a sister named Octavilla, and his sons Caracalla and Geta had a sister named Julia Soaemias and Julia Mamaea? Wait, no, Julia Soaemias and Julia Mamaea were related to Elagabalus and Severus Alexander. Maybe I'm confusing the Severan women here.

 

Constantine had half-sisters, like Constantia, from his father's other marriages.

 

I need to make sure I'm not mixing up daughters with sisters. For example, when an emperor has a daughter, that's his child, not his sister. So for each emperor, I need to check if they had sisters, not just female relatives.

 

Also, some emperors might have had half-sisters if their fathers remarried. For example, if an emperor's father had daughters from a previous marriage, those would be the emperor's half-sisters.

 

Let me try to list out emperors by dynasty and note their sisters:

 

Julio-Claudian:

- Augustus: Sister Octavia the Younger (full sister), and Octavia the Elder (half-sister? Or maybe just one Octavia). Need to check. His father had two wives, so Octavia might be his full sister from the same mother.

- Tiberius: His biological father was Tiberius Claudius Nero, so his siblings would be from that marriage. He had a brother named Nero Claudius Drusus, who was the father of Claudius. So maybe Tiberius had a sister? Not sure.

- Caligula: Sisters Agrippina the Younger, Drusilla, Julia Livilla.

- Claudius: Sister Livilla (sister of Claudius, daughter of Nero Claudius Drusus and Antonia Minor). Also, another sister named Claudia?

- Nero: His mother was Agrippina the Younger, so his siblings would be from her marriage to Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus. I think he had a sister named Claudia Augusta, but she died young.

 

Flavian:

- Vespasian: Sister Flavia Vespasia.

- Titus: Sisters Domitilla the Younger and another sister?

- Domitian: Same sisters as Titus.

 

Nerva-Antonine:

- Trajan: Had a sister named Ulpia Marciana.

- Hadrian: No known sisters.

- Antoninus Pius: Had a sister named Arria Fadilla.

- Marcus Aurelius: Sister Annia Cornificia Faustina.

- Commodus: Sisters Lucilla, Annia Aurelia Galeria Faustina, etc.

 

Severan:

- Septimius Severus: Sister Octavilla.

- Caracalla: Sister Julia Domna's daughters? Wait, Julia Domna was his mother. His sister was Julia Maesa? No, Julia Maesa was Julia Domna's sister. Caracalla had a sister named Publia Fulvia Plautilla? Wait, maybe not. Caracalla's siblings were Geta and another sister, maybe named Julia Soaemias? Not sure. This part is confusing.

 

Later Emperors:

- Constantine the Great: Half-sister Constantia, Anastasia, Eutropia, and others.

 

I might be making some mistakes here, especially with the Severan dynasty. Need to check which emperors had sisters and confirm their names. Also, some emperors from the Crisis of the Third Century might have had sisters, but information might be scarce.

 

For example, Emperor Elagabalus had a sister named Julia Soaemias, but he was part of the Severan dynasty.

 

Also, some emperors might have adopted siblings, but the question is about biological sisters.

 

So, compiling all this, the key emperors with known sisters would include Augustus, Caligula, Claudius, Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, Trajan, Antoninus Pius, Marcus Aurelius, Commodus, Septimius Severus, Caracalla (though maybe not), Constantine, and others. But I need to be precise and make sure each entry is accurate.

(Due to technical issues, the search service is temporarily unavailable.)

Here is a list of Roman emperors who had sisters, along with details about their siblings:

Julio-Claudian Dynasty (27 BCE – 68 CE)

1. Augustus (27 BCE – 14 CE)

   • Sister: Octavia the Younger (full sister), a prominent figure who married Mark Antony and later supported Augustus' regime.

2. Caligula (37–41 CE)

   • Sisters: Julia Agrippina (Agrippina the Younger, later mother of Nero), Julia Drusilla, and Julia Livilla. These three sisters were central to Caligula's public image and political alliances.

3. Claudius (41–54 CE)

   • Sister: Livilla (Claudia Livia Julia), involved in political scandals during the reign of Tiberius.

4. Nero (54–68 CE)

   • Sister: Claudia Augusta (died in infancy).

---

Flavian Dynasty (69–96 CE)

5. Vespasian (69–79 CE)

   • Sister: Flavia Vespasia (name uncertain; historical records are sparse).

6. Titus (79–81 CE) & Domitian (81–96 CE)

   • Sister: Flavia Domitilla the Younger (daughter of Vespasian; sister to both emperors).

---

Nerva-Antonine Dynasty (96–192 CE)

7. Trajan (98–117 CE)

   • Sister: Ulpia Marciana, honored with the title Augusta during his reign.

8. Antoninus Pius (138–161 CE)

   • Sister: Arria Fadilla, daughter of his father’s first marriage.

9. Marcus Aurelius (161–180 CE)

   • Sister: Annia Cornificia Faustina, mentioned in his correspondence.

10. Commodus (177–192 CE)

    • Sisters: Lucilla (Annia Aurelia Galeria Lucilla, married to co-emperor Lucius Verus) and other sisters like Fadilla and Cornificia.

---

Severan Dynasty (193–235 CE)

11. Septimius Severus (193–211 CE)

    • Sister: Octavilla, though details about her are scarce.

12. Caracalla (198–217 CE) & Geta (209–211 CE)

    • Sister: Julia Avita Mamaea (mother of Severus Alexander) and Julia Soaemias (mother of Elagabalus) were their cousins, not sisters. Their only confirmed sibling was Geta (brother).

13. Elagabalus (218–222 CE)

    • Sister: Julia Soaemias Bassiana (his mother), though this is debated; some sources suggest half-sisters from his father’s side.

---

Later Emperors

14. Constantine the Great (306–337 CE)

    • Half-Sisters: Constantia (married Licinius), Anastasia, and Eutropia, born to his father Constantius Chlorus and stepmother Theodora.

---

Notes:

• Tiberius (14–37 CE) had a brother (Drusus the Elder) but no confirmed sisters.

• Hadrian (117–138 CE) and Diocletian (284–305 CE) are examples of emperors with no recorded sisters.

• Information on sisters is often fragmentary, especially for emperors during the Crisis of the Third Century (235–284 CE).

This list highlights emperors with documented sisters, though some details remain uncertain due to incomplete historical records.

Edited Friday at 07:55 PM by caesar novus