Julian II (the Apostate) and his policies

[Robert Vermaat]

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.

Erm... Julian continued what his cousin Constantius had set up. Was it Julian's fault that most if not all direct relatives had been 'purged' by his dear cousins? The war with Persia was also a direct inheritance from Constantius, who in fact been draining the military with some not-too-successful campaigns in that quarter, had planned this campaign beforehand - it was not Julian's foreign policy! Sure, Julian could have settled with Persia in return for a huge tribute, but then I'm sure he would have been blasted for being a coward. Also, it seems to have been the only way forward in getting himself accepted in the East.
I disagree, btw, about your comparing his attempts to reduce bureaucracy and corrption with the efforts of his predecessors. "They all did that" is not quite a correct comparison. Julian did a lot more. Under Constantius, they court had become enormous, and unaccessible. he at least tried to redress that, and throw out a huge number of empty-headed good-for-nothing courtiers.

No, I'm not a huge fan of Julian, but he díd regain Gaul with a small force, then re-created all kinds of new units for the army which apparently did very well. Not a great general, but good and especially lucky enough until it ran out (reminds me of Caesar).
His main mistake is that he did not recognise the sign of the times in case of religion (Constantine I sure did, as did others). This alienated him from too many people who would have loved or at least accepted him.

Hmm.. Maybe we should set up a new discussion about Julian in the proper place? :wink: