Caligula wasn't a bad Emperor. He literally defeated Neptune so we could sail to Brittania much easier. Before then we kept getting wrecked by storms and waves.
But now the Britons can easily sail to us as well. I'd say his move backfired big time. Leaving that wretched island to the savages who inhabit it would've been much more prudent.
@@causantinthescot Watch Dovahatty's "Unbiased history of Rome" about the mad Emperors, and watch until you get the joke. Then come back and we'll have this discussion.
You got my instant like and subscription for including Valens. He was a decent emperor, and I'd like to point out that he didn't run away at Adrianople and died with his soldiers.
Big true. The history channel show that I cut clips from (Barbarians Rising) depicts Valens running away from the battle to a village, but it's just slander. He either died on the battlefield or was wounded and taken to the village where he eventualy perished.
@@RomabooRamblings I think he's like Anthemius. Anthemius had his own Adrianople, which was caused by his incompetent general Basiliscus, just like Valens' generals Victorius and Sebastianius in Adrianople: Refuse to outflank the Goths and charged with his troops without any orders respectively, leading the Roman army to be doomed.
I'm inclined to agree. Specifically, Constantius III and Gallienus get too little praise; and Valens and Domitian (especially the latter) get WAY too much criticism. In particular, I consider Gallienus pretty much an A-tier emperor; likewise Domitian (though in his case, he actually approaches S-tier). PS: I could see this channel getting much bigger with a few changes. My advice: pay a little more attention to the sound.
How can Domitian possibly be S-tier? Though I agree that senatorial historiography is often biased, Domitian must still stand trail for his indecisive strategy on the danube. The Romans lost some major battles there during his reign. He decided to attack the Markomanni without having really dealt with the Dacians. As the legions couldn't handle all these enemys at once, Domitian made a very unfavourable peace with the Dacian King Decabalus, giving him civilian and MILITARY technology. The dacian kingdom only really became dangerous after that, practically forcing Trajan to take decisive action.
Sometimes the cause for a worse audio quality may be the room that you are in while recording. If you are surrounded by a good deal of soft stuff - clothes pillows, etc (btw this is called room treatment if you want to do further research) the sound will be a lot crisper as hard naked walls reflect on sounds. Also, you may try talking closer to the mic but definitely use a pop filter (Made this mistake before, the audio sounded like I was spitting on the mic). Generally, you need to go through only 5 steps in audacity and the audio should sound good enough here these short videos should help you. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-Rj7sbBng-T8.html Room treatment ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-7h84lrQQTl8.html Homemade pop filter. ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-EUkB9rukJSk.html
Gallienus was a chad: the fact that he survived as long as he did despite all of the threats against him from both inside the Empire and from outside of it indicates that he must've been a fairly resourceful ruler. Sure, he was no Aurelian, but almost nobody else was in the history of the Roman Empire either.
Completely agree about Gallienus. Was probably dealt the worst hand of any emperor and still managed to stave off the total collapse of the Empire. His reforms paved the way for the Illyrian emperors.
I'm glad that you recognize Gallienus as the most underrated Roman Emperor. I agree. If it were not for Gallienus, the Roman Empire would have completely fallen apart. Aurelian may have been able to piece it back together again like he did in our timeline but it certainly would have been a more difficult task and it would have taken a lot longer to accomplish.
One of my favorite underrated emperors is Marcian, he suspended payment of tribute to the Huns and led many successful expeditions against them, and because they were busy raiding Italy and suffering from plague and being attacked on two fronts he helped forcing Attila out of Italy and contributed to the collapse of the hunnic empire. Also when he started ruling the economy of the east was not very good, but by the end of his reign he left the Easter Roman empire with a surplus of 7 million solidi due to clever financial policy and austerity measures.
For me Majorian is my favorite underrated emperor. The man who almost saved the western empire. Who defied the odds and either through diplomacy or war he regained Roman lands, and treating them fairly. He re subjugated the barbarians and defeated them when just a few years later such a thing wasn’t possible. He had Geisiric trying to conclude a peace before he would invade and when that didn’t work he started burning his own lands ahead of time to make it harder for Majorian. If he’d landed in Africa I have no doubt he’d of won. And returned a triumphant hero. Rome could still very well have called after that, but it would’ve been delayed at worst. Love this channel! Love your content so far! Really liked your list!
I might have mentioned Probus since he was a very effective Emperor who is overshadowed by the actions of Aurelian before him and Diocletian soon after. He was also the last Emperor to try and maintain an air of constitutional authority.
My favorite emperor. Very underrated commander and administrator. And he was very clever to use the military for civil service which kept them in shape and busy.
Also he would have restore Rome and conquer parts of Sassanid Empire when he was 70 years old. If he had survived the assassination, the situation would be completely different. After he survived the assassination, he made an impressive speech to all his generals and the speech was similar to Alexander's in Opis, telling them how he guarded Rome from its' dark ages, and he rewarded them by promoting them, and even his own secret: He was the reincarnation of GAIVS IVILVS CAESAR, In 269, he would march on Naissus, killing every Goth as many as possible and recruit the remainder as his army by mercy, He recovered half of Gaul and Hispania not only for taking advantages for the infighting in Gallic Empire, but also take revenge of his dead "ally" Postumus, who indirectly relieved parts of his burden by defending the Rhine frontier, An anti-Gallienus senator who encouraged people to debase the coinage and support Postumus gave whole of the Italy Penisular to the Gallic Empire,he immediately marched into Italy and wore his GOLDEN wreath, defeated and executed the incel senator by flaying him alive, as in the fashion of the execution of Valerian which had been told by Christians (myth only), There were barbarian hordes invading the empire like the Vandals, he crushed them with his generals while willing to integrate them to the Roman society for their known warrior reputations, He cleaned all the decadence in Rome by dismissed or executed the corrupt senators, and confisated their properties for his army pay, while replacing all these positions to his army officers like Probus and Diocletian in the senate, He built MASSIVE fortifications in Rome like something similar to Aurelian Walls (Gallienus Walls), to keep Rome safe from any enemies, For Danube safety, he created Little Dacia by reducing the size of Dacia which was 1/4 to it's original size , while repelling the Goths with his best general Aurelian, and deliver IVSTICE to Cinva, He and Aurelian would gather all the mobile cavalryman he had been created and wrecked the Zenobia's empire completely, as an act for revenge of another dead ally Odaenathus, and even captured Zenobia, Returning west, given the fact he acted like Stilicho in 260s, he would solely CRVSH the Gallic Empire, sparing all cities that he had conquered and forced Tetricus to bow down before him, Despite became bald like Carus and lost his father and all his sons, Gallienus had saved Rome from the brink of collapse in 280 AD, when he was 62 years old. When he marched on Rome of triumph, he was declared by everyone as RESTITVTOR ORBIS, same as Aurelian in 274 AD despite it takes a longer time, Shockingly, he pardoned Zenobia and Tetricus, allowing them for returning to their respective homeland, gave their descendants with senatorial ranks, and even defied Postumus and Odaenathus, and building MARBLE statues of them in Rome, alongside with Gallienus, He was GALLIENVS, and the only emperor who was better than AVGVSTVS and TRAIANVS. Not only he had saved the empire, but also decided to rebuild it from the ashes. In the final campaign he raised an army and EXPAND the empire towards the Persian Gulf and parts of Media, DESTROYED Cestiphon completely and erected a GIANT statue of his own like Trajan in there, and even recovered his fathers remains, who died of old age around 20 years before and gave a proper burial by Shapur I. He sacked the way to Merv and killed the incompetent shah Bahram II, forcing it to pay a huge sum of reparations, even deeper into the India aimed at looting gold, food, and slaves in there, for completely restoring the wealth of the empire, After the campaign, he did his usual duties, traveled in every corner of the empire for defeating any threat like barbarian hordes, while solving any crisis in the empire until his death in 298 AD, leaving a stronger and prosperous empire behind him, and handled his throne to his son-in-law, Constantius I Chlorus. "May you kept the marble city that I have built for you, until your son decorate it with gold, but not Maxentius, Galerius and Maximian who may ruin my plan by playing political games..."- Gallienus' last words to Constantius I Chlorus, before dying. His body gradually became cold, but his eyes never be closed. GALLIENVS, the RESTITVTOR ORBIS, died of old age in his palace, three months after he became gravely ill after defeating a rebellion in Egypt. Tears rolled out of Constantius I's eyes, as he saw his father-in-law's GIGANTIC body was turned to gold dust and winds carried it to the heaven. The same day when GALLIENVS moved to the heaven, everyone cried hardly to mourn him, and remembered as another GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR, After his death, all his surviving generals renamed GALLIENVS as GAIVS IVLIVS GALLIENVS CAESAR, to compare GALLIENVS' achievements to GAIVS IVLIVS CAESAR, And his body was not cremated, instead he enjoyed eternity in the heaven like Augustus, and watched his empire thrived under the reign of his grandson, Constantine I...
I also will have to say that the later roman emperors, especially julius Nepos, were less bad and more had a very difficult position. Fundamentally the Empire needed more to stabilize than to reconquer lost territory. I think the double whammy of having two of the most incompetent emperors practically suceed each and other and having them have simoltaneusly the longest reigns was a tall order for any state.
@@RomabooRamblings Anthemius had a decent position actually, he had a solid chance of recovering at least some parts of the west. He just got really unlucky with all the events and outcomes during his reign. Nepos on the other hand was in a hopeless situation, it's a miracle that he even managed to reconquer arelate.
Constantius III should've killed Honorius in a different world where his relatives didn't care (Since Theodosius II sent Valentinian III in response to Johannes's usurpation)
I definitely think Anastasius is very underrated as an Eastern Roman emperor. Aside from the religious stuff, he was a whiz at balancing the budget and consolidated the eastern empire’s borders and consequentially funded the campaigns of Justinian (for better or for worse).
@@andreascovano7742 Constans II seemed okay, desperately tried to deal with the sudden disintegration of the Roman Empire under the Arabs and just did some unpopular policies which ended up staining his legacy
@@magdalenusrex346 Egypt was permanently lost under his reign though. However, him simply staying alive for so long brought stability and prevented civil war so I'm a bit ambivalent on the issue.
I thoroughly agree with each of your choices, especially Gallienus, who deserves far more recognition. I would actually add Caracalla as an underrated emperor who's reputation deserves some revision. Yes, he was indeed a brutal tyrant who ordered a massacre in Alexandria. However, he was genuinely popular with his military, and his action of sharing soldierly hardship is something that compares favourably to other emperors who were raised in the purple. His military actions were largely successful, and although his willingness to use assassination and treachery has won him condemnation, it generally resulted in gaining victory without putting Roman lives at risk. Had he not been assassinated, the Romans almost certainly would have succeeded in their war against Parthia, and avoided the major defeat they sustained under Macrinus. The Antonine constitution that he published, that granted all free born Romans citizenship, was also a historically important decision, and was likely critical to the survival of the Roman empire in the third century. Without citizenship, would so many provincials have stuck by a failing, weakened empire? The murder of Geta, which was likely necessary, isn't something that should smear his overall reign, even if it shows his character. On the whole I find Caracalla a detestable human being, however as an actual emperor he deserves much more credit.
It's hard to know what to make of Caracalla. He's a fascinating character. With his Constitutio Antonianana he arguably transformed The Empire as much as Diocletian did.
I definitely agree with the diagnosis of detestable person, good Emperor. Administratively, a lot of credit for the good measures undertaken during his reign should go to Julia Domna, who essentially ran the Empire for him while he was campaigning. I would imagine that she played no small part in helping to construct the Constitutio Antoniniana. I do believe that some of the worst behaviour that is reported in the histories is likely exaggerated or fabricated, though I don't doubt that much of it is based in truth.
Gallienus has always been one of my favorite emperors. The amount of bullshit he had to clean up was insane and had it been someone else in charge of the empire instead we most likely would have seen the Western Empire fall 200 years earlier.
Got my subscription for domitian and gallienus..two of my favorites Interesting to see valens here..he generally was given much esteem by historians. Despite the muck up with procopius..he kept things together for years before adrianople and its not hard to get why he didnt want to see his 16 year old nephew come to his rescue.
Constantius III was a skilled Roman Military commander and was magister militum one of the few non germanic Romans to occupy this position in the later western roman empire. He eventually became Roman Emperor and was Roman Emperor along with Honorius. Though only for 7 months before dying of natural causes in mid september 411.
Gallienus: The Guy who kept putting out the fires until more just sprang up. I even recall a story where he went to the East to put down a revolt in Byzantium (I think that was the city) He convinced everyone inside that he would show mercy if they surrendered They did but immediately afterwards Gallienus ordered them disarmed & executed. He's not known to do many brutal acts like this during his Reign. Which tells us even more how pissed off & fed up he was with everything. He just wanted to mourn his family & be in peace Only for his own troops to kill him in the end
While many Romaboos would like to see a show/movie about a great emperor like Aurelian, I think one about Gallienus, a leader who despite the odds, fought with incredible determination and brought the Empire through its worst times, in spite of consistent humiliation by the Senate and the loss of his father. A good emperor who was just trying his best to fix a seemingly unfixable situation. Truly the most underrated Roman Emperor.
He does get a lot of credit for what he did. Gibbon writes "He 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". I'd say he rates him pretty high :D
@@RomabooRamblings I agree on that but he just isn't talked about enough. Whenever I begin a conversation about the roman empire no one ever mentions him despite what he did. It's just that the popular view kind of ignores his existance ig
If you include 1453 and top 10, I may add Sept. Severus, Theodosius I, Constantine IX, Manuel I, John III, Nikephoros I, Justinian II, Constans II, Valentinian I, Gratian, Constans, Severus Alexander, Zeno etc
Ioannes Doukas Vatatzes was such a chad. Nicea prospered and they were very close to conquering Constantinople again. He may have had suffered from epilepsy attacks but that didn't stop him from being a badass. His successor was great too but got the shit genes that John III had.
Well, someone in Rome thought Gallienus was dope; he was the second Orbus Restitutor, after all (his father Valerian having been labeled the first). I definitely agree with your top 2 picks; some points knocked off Domitian for the autocracy, but in all, a solid list.
Nerva. Dude did bugger all, ruled for less than two years, his fiscal policies undid a lot of what Domitian accomplished, was essentially abducted by his own praetorians. About the only thing he did right was naming Trajan his heir, and there's a lot of speculation he was coerced into that. Yet he gets called one of the Five Good Emperors.
Theodosius I the supposedly the 'Great'. I call him one of the worst Emperors Rome ever had. (okay slight exaggeration, rome has a lot of competitors for horrible emperors)
Thanks for shedding light on Gallienus and the Little Peace of the Church. Constantinus III's leadership was amazing. I think Theodosius I sometimes does not get the recognition he deserves as well for being The Great.
I do agree Valen's gets a bad break, but without his father and Brother Valentinian he would have never been even close. His brother and father had the military careers. So with that fact and the shape of the west during his rule easily puts him ahead. Now that being said when he did get the opportunity he certainly did a ok and shouldn't be remembered just for Adrianople
Maybe if Valentinian and Valens had switched this wouldnt have happened, because the subbordinates of Valentinian would probably not dare treat the goths badly.
Actually even in the East Valentinian I has some oversite too punish incompetent ,corrupt & abusive officials because his the Senior Augustus of the 2 other Roman Augustus at that time ( his son Gratian Junior Augustus in the West and His brother Valens Co-Augustus in the East but a Junior rank ) but by the time of Goths problem Valentinian I is already dead so those Stupid Roman offcial took advantage that Valens is not as Proactive as His older brother in desciplining incompetent/ abusive/ corrupt officials ,Gratian is 18 or 19 yrs old Emperor at the time but is too busy governing the West & fighting the Germanic threats in Rhine ( this Kid is indeed Valentinian I "The Great" Son ) , Valentinian II is a Puppet Boy Emperor is 7 yrs old when the crisis started THE BIG WHAT IF VALENTINIAN I IS STILL ALIVE IN 378 AD THATS THE BIGGEST QUESTION BECAUSE I HAVE A THOUGHT THAT A CRISIS LIKE THIS WILL EVER SPIRAL OUT OF CONTROL VALENTINIAN I HAD OVERSITE OF IMPENDING THREAT IN THE EAST REMEMBER HE WENT EASTWARD CAMPAIGN IN PANNONIA NEAR EASTERN ROMAN EMPIRE WHEN HE SUDDENLY DIE.
Also he would have restore Rome and conquer parts of Sassanid Empire when he was 70 years old. If he had survived the assassination, the situation would be completely different. In 269, he would march on Naissus and kill every Goth as possible and recruit the remainder as his army by mercy, He recovered half of Gaul and Hispania not only for taking advantages for the infighting in Gallic Empire, but also take revenge of his dead ally Postumus, If a random anti-Gallienus usurper usurped in Italy, he marched into Italy like a Hadrian, forcing the rebels to surrender and pardon the usurper like a noble, There were barbarian hordes invading the empire like the Vandals, he crushed them with his generals while willing to integrate them into the Roman society for their known warrior reputation and He cleaned all the decadence in Rome by dismissing and even confiscating any properties of them for his army pay, while put all his army officers like Probus and Diocletian in the senate, He build massive fortifications in Rome like something similar to Aurelian Walls (Gallienus Walls) For Danube safety, he then recreated Little Dacia which was 1/4 to it's original size, while repelling the Goths with his best general Aurelian, He and Aurelian would gather all the mobile cavalryman he created and wrecked the Zenobia's empire, as an act for revenge of another dead ally Odaenathus, and even captured Zenobia, Returning west, given the fact he acted like Stilicho in 260s, he would solely crushed the Gallic Empire, sparing all cities that he had conquered and forcing Tetricus and his entire surrending army to bow down before him, Gallienus had saved Rome from the brink of collapse in 280, when he was 62 years old. When he marched on Rome of triumph, he was declared as the RESTITVTOR ORBIS, same as Aurelian in 274 AD despite it takes a longer time, Shockingly, he pardoned Zenobia and Tetricus, allowing them to return in their homeland and even gave their descendants with senatorial ranks, He was Gallienus, but better than Augustus. Not only saved the empire, but also decided to rebuild it from the ashes. In the final campaign he raised an army and EXPAND the empire towards into Persian Gulf, erected a statue and recovered his fathers remains who died of old age 20 years before and gave a proper burial by Shapur I. He sacked the way to Gedorsia and killed the incompetent shah Bahram II, forcing it to pay a huge sum of reparations, After the campaign, he did his usual duties, travelling in every corner of the empire for defeating any threat like barabarian hordes, while solve the economic crisis until his death in 298, leaving a strong and prosperous empire behind him, while he handle his throne to a young general named Constantine I Magnus...... Gallienus The Great, This is your beautiful reign if you had survived longer.
A senator named @tap disliked Gallienus. He was one of the authors wrote Historia Augusta, and praised only the unrankable Quintillus. I don't think Quintillus deserved a ranking!
I really think Majorian deserves to be on this list, at least as an honorable mention. Valentinian I always struck me as just kind of "underrated" as well, but yeah, Majorian for sure I feel needs to be on there! Great video man, I hope to see similar stuff! Edit: Sorry, I missed it the first watch, but you did mention Majorian briefly at one point, but I still think he would be in the top ten if not top five.
yeah, I mention Majorian in regards to how he is better known than Constantius III :) So, the reasoning for not including him was that he had a career similar to Constantius, but is better known (and as I've written in another comment, he gets an absolutely glowing write-up from Gibbon). For my picks I was going for those who are underrated in "different ways". My 5th pick was a tie between Gratian and Constans, btw, and I was like a donkey who dies of hunger because he can't pick between 2 identical stacks of hay, so I decided to ditch both. I also can't say that Valentinian I is underrated, since he is called "the Great". Both Majorian and Valentinian underrated in a sense that they don't have the recongnition of Augustus, Trajan or Constantine, but I was going more for "underrated by history nerds and actual historians".
@@RomabooRamblings The reason is religion. Pagan historians did not like him because he was a Christian, Christian historians did not like him because he supported Arianism.
Part of the reason Domitian cut the Dacian war short was a revolt had broken out on the Rhine, and he basically dropped everything to get troops to crush it. In some regards this is an overreaction, considering that by the time one Marcus Ulpius Traianus arrived on the scene to crush it, it had already fizzled out and been mopped up by local Gallic officials. On the other hand, Domitian more than most had his politics informed by the Year of the Four Emperors, having been in Rome during 69AD and serving as a de facto hostage during Vitellius' reign. He knew how quickly an Emperor can lose power, and acted accordingly. His resolution of the Dacian question was still short-sighted and sub-optimal from a Roman perspective, but from Domitian's perspective he was still acting rationally in response to a direct threat.
I think you forgot Leo, Zeno and Anastasius on this list as the most underrated Emperors. As for the ERE, may I suggest Nikephoros I the General Logothene, Constantine V, or perhaps Irene? Thanks for the video by the way, I enjoyed it. Keep it up!
The Decree of Toleration by Gallienus was a good political move ( and practical) since it contributed to the reduction of possible usurpers and improve the tax base.
This is a very good video, even if a bit controversial. I am glad I am not the only one who views Valens also in the light of hos succeses, not just his failures.
@@RomabooRamblings Theodosius I was unlucky because he died young. If he survived, all the disasters in 410s would not occur because he proved to be a mini-Aurelian.
@@causantinthescot No he didn't. He constantly made peace with the superior goths and even gave them land, He was incompetent and timid. He also sucked as a general, and was an insane fanatical abrahamist.
Not really either. I think he deserves the credit he gets but was one of the weaker emperors of his time when you compare him to his predecessor and successor
@@taxavation The empire was at peace for 23 years. He did nothing because he didnt really have to. If things go well around you, then doing nothing and let things be actually is a good thing. And keeping 23 years of peace is not easy as ppl think.
I limited this video to United and Western Empire. Heraclius' reputation is quite good, he's always mentioned as one of the best Eastern Roman Emperors.
@@RomabooRamblings Yes i can understand that. Heraclius is after all the Emperor who lost half the Empire to the Muslims - after he proved himself an excellent statesman and general.
@@RomabooRamblings It was of the privilege of the army too much,that lead to mutiny and loss of times..he could had vassalized sassanid empire if he Attack again as planned
@@alessandrogini5283 Valentinian I: I am called the Great, but why everyone haven't appreciate me as Augustus? I am benevolent to the poor and brutal to the wicked and corrupted, while I deal every crisis as possible like Gallienus. My family members were competent and promising, as well as my two sons and my brother Valens. If anyone say my brother sucks, GET OUT OF MY SIGHT!
In my opinion, there are 7 underrated and 7 overrated Underrated: Nero Lucius Verus Pertinax Alexander Aemilian Valens Majorian Overrated: Nerva Marcus Aurelius Septimus Geta Maximian Theodosius I Theodosius II
Valens is not underrated, he is thoroughly terrible. Replace with Constantius II who, like Domitian and Gallienus, has been libelled by an antique writer (Ammianus in his case).
