man, I love this narrator. I first heard him on narrating the Michael the Brave series where he pronounced the names spot on and created a very immersive atmosphere
It did take two to tango. Morally and a strategically, Sulpicianus could have refused to bid. Julianus would have purchased the empire at a lower price, but would have had even less support from the guards.
Great video again. It is very interesting to see the reigns of some of the shorter lived and more obscure emperors, like Otho and see what they got up to in more detail than a typical general narrative allows. I noted on your description of the Historia Augusta near the end that you quite understandably mention that it was written under Diocletian and Constantine and by six authors. Understandable but scholarship on the HA seems to be in agreement that it was written by a single author pretending to be six people and was written in the late fourth century. The authorship is based on the similarity of the style written throughout and the dating, though not precise is based on his mention and allusion to events he could only know of post Diocletian and Constantine I. He may very well have even fabricated some of the sources he cited mixed in with real ones to give his claims extra kudos. Such is the minefield that is the Historia Augusta.
The fact that the author pretended to be six people instantly increases my respect for him (her?). Either it's like a reverse ghost writer situation or some kind of weird prank or maybe an untreated mental illness issue.
Roman crowd: "We don't want you for Emperor and we won't take your bribes!" Didius Julianus: "Slay everyone who said that!" Also Didius Julianus: *"But what evil have I done?! WHOM have I killed?!"* Jokes aside, on paper Didius might've been one of the best candidates for the throne, but of the things that he actually did when he ruled, few are not worthy of disgust. His rule however reveals one important change that the Empire was undergoing since the death of Marcus Aurelius: namely that basically anyone who had a loyal army and money can claim the title of Emperor, no matter the opinion of Senate. Thankfully, unlike the Praetorians and the Senate, the people and the legions did not fell so low that they can be bribed so easily........yet.
The fact that the people turned against Didius Julianus kinda showed how beloved Pertinax was. If anything it feels like Didius Julianus truly wanted to show he could be a good emperor but the pretorian guard basically used him to take the full brunt of the people’s wrath.
The generals under Marcus and Commodus were lowkey amazing. Cassius, Pompeianus, Priscus, Pertinax, Niger, Albinus and Julianus were all very capable commanders and administrators. Interesting to imagine if Pompeianus chose to accept the throne, that officer corps would have taken lower Germania and dealt a blow to Parthia.
Haven't commented in awhile, but glad you are doing so well on RU-vid! The very fact that the Roman throne was auctioned off in that manner just shows how far Imperial power had declined since the death of Marcus Aurelius. Can't wait for Septimius Severus to fix things up!
I wonder how you would persuade someone to want to buy something like the Roman Empire. It's like bidding in an auction where the prize is a live grenade that you have to juggle for the rest of your life. Even if you win, you're kind of losing.
I really love these examinations you do of individual Roman figures. I feel like a lot of them don't get talked about very much and most of the attention goes to the more notorious names like Caligula or Nero. Even the emperors with brief stints lived lives worth talking about before that, and it's interesting to see how they all got to where they ended up.
Compared to some others who aspired to the throne, and some who actually achieved it, Didius Julianus was in fact highly experienced in both administrative and military affairs of the empire. Compared to some like Heliogabulus or Gaius (Caligula), he would have in fact made an extremely good emperor in the style of Marcus Aurelius. I wonder how Roman history would have developed if he had been able to keep the throne, and his head?
I mean, even if Julianus was a literal saint on earth and could do no wrong, the way he received the Emperorship was absolutely shameful and contrary to any Roman morality.
Unfortunately, while Severus was a very capable ruler, his nearly 18-year reign would be the last period of stability within the Empire for generations. And the less said about the remainder of his family dynasty the better! Severus was also the last Roman Emperor known to die from natural causes prior to Diocletian, a hundred years later! Had he not been murdered by the damn Praetorians, Aurelian could have ended up being the greatest emperor since Augustus or Trajan.
@JimmyWhisper, by that logic then, you are judging him wrongly because you are relying on what-ifs and theoreticals rather than the muddy truth of history.
Honestly that's the only time I'm glad an emperor die soon, and don't have a long reign. Julianus was a new Crassus, far more cupid and equally as stupid. Severus was not the best, but he did a good job securing the empire (don't talk about his sons)
Crassus was many things but he was not stupid. The main problem he faced was he was just not as great of a general as Caesar or Pompey. His son showed great promise though. Severus was a pretty good emperor but the same can not be said for the rest of the Severan dynasty.
Crassus was more overconfident of his abilities. He tried making up for his short comings by being brutal. But yeah, he wasn't stupid but not the brightest neither
He really sort of rented it. I doubt the military would have respect for anyone who paid the gold price for the empire forged by giants who paid with iron and blood.
Pompeianus what happened to his emperial instructor,ship after pertinax.the pretorian guard was abolished Severus who was killed by patricide. in York who condemned and replaced by a imperial guard
Didius what evil have I committed, his praetorians none are emperor, we just send you on your way so that you may make a path for us to follow in Elysium, now turn around and say a prayer to Jupiter.
The Historia Augusta is fiction, though, so I'd shrug at anything attributable to it. Consider the overall lifetime of accomplishment from Didius, and then suddenly he's Elagabulus-like in frivolity once he becomes Emperor? I rather doubt it. Beyond that, the "deep disgrace" of buying the Empire must've been a Roman religion thing. Honestly, who would've cared. But hey, I'm not Roman.
The openly biased Cassius Dio who hated Didius, was the one who claimed that Didius committed some outrageous shenanigans. The Historia Augusta was more favorable to Emperors elected by the Senate like Didius was.
@@risingsonfilms says Wikipedia ,😅.i know i know,Wikipedia should not be trusted cause sometimes it says the wrong things however I’ve also heard in documentaries about Rome where the História Augusta is also mentioned and they say that at the time the document história Augusta was used however through the centuries it was proven as an untrustworthy source for information based on the Roman Empire/anything related to Rome. I don’t have the links or proof right now sorry about that buts it’s true.
It's not one book. It's a compilation of sources from a not well attested period. Some of it is false, some very false, some legendary, and some true. It's often referenced for 3rd century happenings, even if just to "HA does mention ______."
Didius Julianus was a good mrmber of the administration, but choosing to buy the Empire was a horrible decision. He sided with the weakest possible faction. I think everything else he did was to try to cover up the situation.
