Greatest Roman emperor

Crann na Beatha

This post has been deleted.

slowburner

The 'greatness' of a Roman emperor is a little hard to define - great for Rome, great for the Roman Empire, or great for their contribution to the world?
I can't decide on one emperor, so I'll list three that I think fit the bill.

For the hardcore Romanophile it has to be Augustus (or Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus b.63 BC ) who reigned from 31 BC to 14 AD.
Probably the shrewdest politician of all time (apart from Bertie) - he managed to convert a republic into a dictatorship without anyone noticing.
Essentially, he created the mould for the next three or four centuries.

Hadrian (76 - 138 AD) - his reign formed the most enduring image of the Romans imho.

I also like Vespasian (9 - 79 AD), mostly because I like the saying the name , but he did start the Colosseum, and picked up the pieces after Nero.

Manach

I'd agree with Vespasian. After the year of the 4 emperors, he re-introduced order into an empire that could have fragmented, reformed the taxation system after the period of misrule under Nero ("Money does not smell") and transition the emperorship to his heir Titus without any of the strife that marked previous change-overs.

Though, as this is the History section, perhaps the people's choice would be the fellow historian Claudius.

Einhard

Bit of a Hadrian man myself. His predecessor Trajan had expanded the empire to its greatest extent, and this was causing significant difficulties for Rome. A more insecure emperor might have adopted a more bellicose attitude and sought to build popular support by bringing the fight to the peoples threatening the newly enlarged frontiers, but Hdrian decided to pull back and retrench. The territory of the empire actually declined during his imperium, but it allowed Rome to concentrate on other matters besides endless campaigns at securing an overstretched frontier. I think it was a brave yet shrewd move. Also, as far as I know, he was the first emperor to travel extensively throughout the empire. He brought the grandeur and authority of the imperial court to the provinces.

Balmed Out

Id second Augustus/Octavian. He became Caesars successor at a fairly young age and against all the odds held onto power and went on to defeat Marc Anthony. He expanded the empire, rejuvenated and transformed the city of Rome and his policies (especially on taxation and setting up a standing army) began a period of 200 years of peace.

Manach

Augustus was a great emperor. He held the Roman polity together after a devastating era of civil wars and laid the foundations of a century or more of successful governance. But on the negative side, he had a clean slate to build on as the people wished for peace after the decades of civil war so did not encounter much internal opposition. Also he had issues in handing over the reins of state - Tiberius inherited by default and this lack of clear guidance over succession was a fatal flaw.

RDM_83 again

After Hours Reply: Caligula, because he inspired the film, both Peter O'Toole and Helen Mirren make it a must watch

Serious reply: What about Constantine, reunited the empire, first Christian Emperor which obviously had enormous impacts on European development, and founded Constantinople in such a strategic spot it meant that the Eastern Roman Empire lasted a thousand years longer than the west.

Reekwind

Augustus doesn't really count though. He's the Sean Connery of Roman Emperors: the benchmark that all successors are ultimately compared against

dubhthach

I'm always remined of the following:

"felicior Augusto, melior Traiano" (be luckier then Augustus, and better then Trajan)