Late Roman Emperors

[markusaurelius]

I guess for me personally a good emperor would have shown some of the following traits:

- A vision for the Empire as Roman, beyond his palace gates.
- Political skill that did not include killing everyone (compromise anyone?).
- Good military general, or the ability to recognize and appoint someone who was.
- Someone who actually did something (that benefitied the empire), or at least tried to do so. The opposite of Arcadius, Valentinian III etc.

I guess I like giving points for effort, as I think that was half the problem with some of the late emperors. They were more inclined to sit back and enjoy the fruits of their fading empire, than to actually go out and change things, or "do something" besides assasinating rivals, leaving only useless people behind.

I actually think that Gibbon's praise of Aetius is a little miss guided. Although perhaps the last remaining general with some skill, in both politics and military, he was also busy being jealous over Bonifacius in Africa, ultimately leading to the Vandals arriving and winning there. Bonifacius, an able and tested general was then killed off by Aetius. Once Africa was lost, the light of the empire began fading at a much higher pace IMO.

my 2 cents for now.