Julian II (the Apostate) and his policies

[Virilis]

The Empire was crumbling at the time of Julian the Apostate ? Peter Heather's new book "The Fall of the Roman Empire" states that before Adrianople that the Empire's economy was not in decline, in fact it was booming. The army too was far larger than those of earlier times at any period (except maybe in times of the Republic's civil wars.) The Empire was strong enough to withstand emperors like Julian, who I see as a walking fiasco in everything he did as sole emperor. His religious and foreign policies produced nothing but internal and external discord for the Empire. The only real redeeming quality of his reign that I see seems to be his reduction of taxes and his attempt to reduce bureaucratic corruption (which everyone tried to do) and the size of the court. On balance he was a net minus for the Empire and appears to be more in mold of Nero. Both emperor's ensured their dynasty's end by not siring any heirs and their foreign policies jeopardized the security of the Empire, Imo. To compare Julian to Pius who pursued peaceful policies and internal harmony doesn't appear seemly to me. Where's the comparison ?

BTW, in my group we have a Roman coin dealer : Flavius Crispus. Yes, our own Flavius Crispus here on RAT. You can send him a PM or I can get in touch with him if you like, Virilis.

~Theo

I can see your point, Theo! I have read Heather`s book too and although it is a good book it really brings nothing new to the subject in my opinion. In addition I don`t look Julian as a point of view of the survival struggle of the roman empire. I was speaking of him in a kind of "shakespearean" sense, in an existential point of view if you like :wink: ! He was not a very good military leader but it is not easy to put aside his succesful querilla-warfare around the river Rhein, battle of Strasbourg etc. In all he is a very INTERESTING person if not a blessing to the roman empire as a whole :wink: !