The Top 10 Greatest Roman Emperors Of All Time.

⚔️ SPQR Shop, excellent hand-crafted Roman rings and other items:
spqrshop.com/?...
Enter the code "Maiorianus" to get a 20% discount on every purchase. The ideal present for any fan of Rome 😉!
🔴 YOU WANT TO SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL? 🔴
🤗 Join our Patreon community: / maiorianus
Or become an official Maiorianus member on KZbin: / maiorianus461
🎁 The official Maiorianus merch store is now OPEN:
maiorianus.mys...
🤗 One-Time Donation?
PayPal: paypal.me/Maio...
Bitcoin: bc1qv4lsfsplvfecrrgvmfclhga28we7mvh9563xdj
🔗 Share the video with anyone who might be interested (it helps a ton!)
The wonderful background music is by Adrian von Ziegler: • Relaxing Roman Music -...
Disclosures: Some links in the description are affiliate links which means that if you purchase something by clicking on one of them, your host Sebastian will receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. In this way you will be supporting the channel to improve the video production quality at no extra cost to you.
📬 Contact us: [e-mail]
#Maiorianus

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

⚔ SPQR Shop, excellent hand-crafted Roman rings and other items: spqrshop.com/?sca_ref=4770010.FM16q4LJHr Enter the code "Maiorianus" to get a 10% discount on every purchase. The ideal present for any fan of Rome 😉!

[@Ima1stHuemanHi]

Albino don't forget Nero knew CHRISTIANS was lying

[@johndorilag4129]

The greatest Roman Emperors 1) Augustus 2) Trajan 3) Vespasian 4) Marcus Aurelius 5) Claudius 6) Hadrian 7) Constantine I 8) Aurelian 9) Antoninus Pius 10) Justinian I

[@richardscanlan3419]

@@johndorilag4129 maybe a place for Theodosius.

[@TaeSunWoo]

You’re based for remembering that the “Byzantines” are Roman. Love this vid and hope to see more medieval Roman or AI stuff. It goes quite hard

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Thanks a lot for your kind donation, I really appreciate it :) Yes, I often find it unfair that the Eastern Romans are called "Byzantines". They would not have liked this term, and I want to respect their wishes. Indeed, AI is crazy, and it can offer as an amazing way, to see that past as if we would have been there.

[@hewhoshallnotbenamed5168]

Putting Augustus, the man whose reforms birthed the Roman Empire and gave it its longevity, at #4 is pretty ballsy. My boy Aurelian made it to #2 though so I can't complain too much, lol. Also, I think Claudius I should have gotten an honorable mention as he was by far the best emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty behind Augustus.

[@Eazy-ERyder]

I was a little disappointed at not seeing Claudius on this list but it was a good one overall.

[@PhishusAugustus]

I agree with the Augustus take and was fairly shocked, I really was betting on him taking the #1 or #2 spot as in most other videos. I agree with the reasoning and it is hard to make such claims that he is the greatest when there are equally outstanding candidates like Aurelian, Trajan, or Basil II, for me, I would consider him at least #2, but I’m glad he recognized the possibility of him being the greatest

[@LordWyatt]

Agreed

[@joshm9504]

@@PhishusAugustus None of those others had to go through what Augustus had to go through to even become emperor. He had to pretend like he wasn't. He had to balance his power with maintaining a facade of a return to the republic. He did so brilliantly. I like quite a few of the emperors, but I don't think any of them can stand up to the capabilities of Augustus. He was one of the most brilliant people to ever live.

[@PhishusAugustus]

@@joshm9504 I wasn’t necessarily saying I didn’t think Augustus wasn’t deserving of the #1 spot, he’s in my top 2 of emperors for rome and just historical figures in general. He was indeed a brilliant man who transformed a dying state into something that could meet the needs of the empire. Trajan not so much, for me he’s #3 or #4 but Basil II and Aurelian (maybe not him because he only reigned 5 years) still deserve a shot of being considered in the same league as Augustus of impact and achievement

[@TheSphee131]

Good to see heraclius on the list. Heraclius deserves some credit for single handingly saving the Empire with his daring expedition to the sassanian heartland.

[@sammalla5238]

On par with Majorian in terms of REALLY trying to emulate Aurelian and restore the empire. Gotta give props when it's due, probably my favorite emperor after Galleinus, Aurelian & Majorian

[@V1bePL]

@@sammalla5238its sad how the worst thing he did was die too late

[@Baamthe25th]

Vespasian deserved to be at least in the Honorable mentions

[@Matt-vh2ci]

Dear me I must be turning into a god

[@michaelfisher7170]

​@@Matt-vh2ci one of my favorite historical quotes! Well done.

[@soldiermeyer2790]

Claudius too

[@justinbuckeyefirm5790]

Agreed

[@SpectreEelman]

Very good listing, I didn't agree with all of it - but you presented solid reasons for your picks. Thanks for adding Constantine XI to the list. He had everything stacked against him, but he remained positive about doing all he could to stop the inevitable - He willingly sacrificed himself to try & save his people.

[@RAAM855]

It wouldn't be Rome if someone didn't disagree with their opinion of one of the Emperors.

[@Eazy-ERyder]

He's one of my favorite. Viva Constantine XI Dragases Palaiologos!

[@nathanielscreativecollecti6392]

@@RAAM855 Romans had a very easy solution if you disagreed about who should be emperor.

[@RAAM855]

@@nathanielscreativecollecti6392 Yup. Just declare yourself Emperor instead lol.

[@Hannibalian]

we cannot forget that marcus aurelius actually asked his son-in-law pompeianus to succeed him, however he declined, meaning the pax romana could've lasted even longer under pompeianus and then through his son lucius

[@chadzamzow913]

We support you! There’s many great channels on KZbin, but yours is my most admired because it’s so clearly a passion project, and paints a story of history more tactile and engaging than any of the many other history influencers I enjoy I hope you never stop enriching our lives with your passion for the very strange, dark and evocative age of Late Antiquity

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Hello Sir, thank you very much for your kind words and for your generous donation, I really appreciate it. Yes, Maiorianus is indeed a passion project, and the period of late antiquity I always found incredibly interesting, especially with a focus on the Fall of the West. An incredibly sad time, but an equally fascinating time. I will continue making videos for this channel, hopefully for a very long time :)

[@gordonsh24]

Great ranking, not so controversial. I like you mentioned Emperor Julian, but I am a bit disappointed that you missed one of my favourites: Vespasian. I guess there are too many of them to fulfil everybody's preferences :)

[@michaeldunne338]

Agree on Vespasian. Not so big on Julian, in that he suffered a real set back for Rome with war in the east - with Constantius II you had desultory, inconclusive war, but with Julian's failure and death, the army was put at real risk, and significant costs incurred. In the end, the Romans had to give up a number of provinces, their sphere of influence in the kingdom of Armenia, as well as the fortress cities of Nisibis and Singara.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Hi Gordon, thanks for your comment :) Yes, Vespasian was also awesome, I probably will have to make a second part, because there are also others that I couldn't put on the list, because the video already got far longer, than I initially had planned XD

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

The longer your videos are, the better!@@Maiorianus_Sebastian

[@nathank8019]

I feel bad for Pertinax. He rolled back the taxes that Commodus had implemented to fund his lavishness, after running down the Treasury to practically nothing. He lived very frugally. He tried to restore discipline to the praetorian guard. And so they killed him for it. Darn shame

[@Onezy05]

I'd probably say something like (for a top 5): 5) Basil II 4) Aurelian 3) Hadrian 2) Trajan 1) Augustus

[@Eazy-ERyder]

My Top 10: 10. Claudius (41-54 AD) 9. Constantine XI Dragases Palaiologos (1449-1453 AD) 8. Basill the Bulgar slayer - II (976-1025) 7. Hadrian (117-138 AD) 6. Justinian THE GREAT (527-565) 5. AURELIAN el RestitutorOrbis (270-275) 4. Marcus Aurelius (161-180 AD) 3. Constantine THE GREAT (306-337 AD) 2. Augustus (14 BC - 27 AD) 1. Trajan (98-117 AD) Very honorable mentions: Vespasian, Gallienus, Diocletian, Valentinian I, Theodosius THE Great, Majorian, Anastasius I Dicoeus, Maurice, Heraclius and several more...

[@michaeldunne338]

Could see the order for those listed from number 6 to first place. However, why Claudius? Not sure he really stood out? People cite the conquest of Britain, but seems he was more a decent Emperor. Why Constantine XI? Not sure losing a siege is cause for being one of the greatest Emperors? There was the implication with the title of Imperator that one was a successful commander. And the city of Constantinople wasn't exactly in great shape in the 15th century (nor in the 14th century). If Hadrian, then why not Antoninus Pius, who seem to have done a better job administering the empire than Hadrian?

[@siisjwj7647]

Get Aurelian outta here 😂

[@Eazy-ERyder]

@siisjwj7647 that would be a cardinal SIN

[@Eazy-ERyder]

@michaeldunne338 Pius was a good administrator but that's pretty much it. The GREAT accomplishments of greats like Trajan and Hadrian left him a strong enough empire to where Antoninus didn't have to (and did not) really do ANYthing

[@lopezlion3164]

​@@michaeldunne338I like his list. I saw some random short and they had Nerva at 6 😂

[@milesy343]

I really feel like Vespasian deserves a spot on that list,he did so much and I'm really surprised you didn't add him!

[@kriskris2625]

I agree only with Trajan to be number one. For the rest of the list, everyone has his own opinion. Thanks for another great video!

[@danielvanhaften5779]

I agree with another comment that Vespasian should've been mentioned at some point in this list. I was surprised that he wasn't mentioned at all, simply because of his love for Rome, his integrity, and his guts stepping in and arguably saving the Empire from years of civil war....if not total breakup.

[@DmT922ha]

Basil II should have been higher honestly..

[@Tazer183]

there shouldnt be any byzantine emperors in the top 10. Not because theyre all bad, it’s just too competitive.

[@Somerandomguy-b9z]

@@Tazer183 i disagre

[@Somerandomguy-b9z]

@Artaxias-V chads be like : the byzantine empire never existed , there was only the roman empire 🗿🍷

[@Tazer183]

@Artaxias-V i just said byzantine for understanding purposes

[@Tazer183]

what byzantine emperor will you rank between Augustus, Vespasian, Trajan, Hadrian, Ant. Pius, M. Aurelius, Aurelian, Diocletian, Constantine, Septimius Severus?

[@Constantine_Bush]

Diocletian,Domitian and Constantine deserved a place in the top 10 imo.Also,honourable mentions should be made to Constantius II, Anastasius,Marcian,Leo III and Alexios Komninos.This was otherwise a good video.Continue the great work.

[@flaviusaetius8042]

Domitian was one of the worst Roman Emperors. He doesn't even deserve a place in the top 50.

[@jensphiliphohmann1876]

Not Domitian. He was too much of a tyrant.

[@Hannibalian]

anastasius and constantius definitely, i'd argue constantius i also deserved a mention, i also think alexius i, ioannis ii and manuel i/ii deserved mentions

[@Tijjain]

Can't say I would put Constantine on my list. He's impactful and competent, no doubt. But there's too much about him as a person that's just hard to reconcile.

[@michaeldunne338]

​@@flaviusaetius8042 "Even Suetonius, who depicts Domitian as a monster, had to conclude that 'he took such care to exercise restraint over the city official and provincial governors that at no time were these more honest or just.'" Page 62 of "The Roman Emperors" by Michael Grant. Theodor Mommsen observed that "he was one of the best administrators who ever governed the Empire." Suspect there is much propaganda directed at Domitian. Now if he were a thug, tyrannical, etc. that would not be surprising since those were not uncommon qualities - Augustus was in his early years, as was Hadrian, at least during his last erratic years. His assertion of right to absolute monarchic rule was stupid; and he may have matched Tiberius in the use of spies and crackdowns on domestic opponents; and he may have acquired certain physical / mental problems by the end of his fifteen year reign (bad nerves that were irritated by sounds?)... The latter could have resulted from the stress of protracted warfare along the Danube, along with paranoia of conspiracies. Otherwise, he completed the conquest of the Agri Decumates and established a lodgement at Mount Taunus in Germania; and the army seem to continue to support him overall, to the point of destabilizing Nerva's reign after his demise.

[@robertdobie3400]

Great video - I particularly like the fact that you include so-called "Byzantine" emperors in the list!

[@Co3471]

Very interesting video Maiorianus, i enjoyed it, and hope you make a top 10 Roman military commanders in the future! That might be even harder than picking a top 10 Emporers though lol.👍

[@Co3471]

Oh yeah, really liked the AI images too :)

[@michaelporzio7384]

Excellent list. Glad to see Antoninus Pius got an honorable mention. Empire at peace and he chose a worthy successor.

[@TheLordRichard]

I like A P too. Technically it was Hadrian who choose Marcus Aurelius though.

[@georgepapatheofilou6118]

Bravo for having the courage to make a list . Such a shame that all the nameless souls that made Rome possible will never be known . Let us deal with todays challenges. Good luck to all and sundry. Edited bit: Don't forget to press thumbs up, it's the least we can do .

[@canchero724]

And even if we are to fall, let us go out like Constantine XI. Never surrender. Roma Invicta

[@prototropo]

Yes, thank you, George, for mentioning all the countless souls over so many centuries who lived lives of great virtue and sacrifice, and who helped build a civilization that is--absolutely--still the basis for most of what is good in the world today. Rome had lots of demons and situations of shame, obviously, and its share of great emperors, senators, generals, diplomats, thinkers, teachers, artists and writers. But the ones whose names come down to us are few; many more Romans of sterling character, hard work and magnanimity will forever, sadly be anonymous.

[@MagaldiMateus]

You can always just say Augustus ten times.

[@TimZandbergen]

I dont agree placing Justinian above Basil II. In one important aspect they were opposites: where Justinian expanded the empire and left it exhausted, Basil II consolidated the empire and left it strong. Basil II's empire was stronger than Justinian's.

[@SolidAvenger1290]

I absolutely agree. Justinian is more controversial in terms of public opinion versus scholarly opinion. English scholars tend to give Justinian almost a free pass & given that some history KZbin channels tend to overly praise him & avoid the bad spots, excluding Flash Point History on KZbin. Justinian should at least be around 10 or 9 because he was below Basil and he had left two legacies that many still debate over - an incompetent military leader & outstanding domestic steward

[@TomSeliman99]

Basil didn't have to deal with the plague and was dealing with a weaker Muslim empire than the sassanids

[@ntonisa6636]

By same reasoning Anastasius should also be ranked above Justinian. I mean it was his frugal policies and the wealth those accumulated for the empire, which made Justinian's spending binge possible in the first place... he was the archetypical "consolidator" you could say. Unfortunately no two persons have ever come up with two identical lists of favorite emperors because there are tons of factors to consider including one's subjective priorities ... If it were me I would have included many more honorable mentions...

[@generalkenobi9782]

My man Aurelian ❤ restored the Roman Empire faster than I can in crusader kings 3

[@michaelfisher7170]

​@@generalkenobi9782i agree to a point. Justinian's calculations could not have foreseen the plague or its scale. If the same degree of biological devastation had occurred during Basils day hed be seen in the same light...good start ended by disaster. On the other hand if Justinians plague had never taken place he might be placed in the top five, or even three on lists of this sort.

[@Onezy05]

Heraclius - the man who lived too long

[@Somerandomguy-b9z]

Sad but true 😅

[@thomsbooth4906]

1. Augustus 2. Trajan 3, Hadrian 4. Aurelran 6. Constantine

[@janphilipptambke549]

Alexios Komnenos saved the empire at its lowest point. He literally could not lose and yet he succeded and set the stage for the komnenian Restoration. My Number 1!

[@theodlt5980]

He is not even the best of his dynasty

[@poukaa7047]

His son better

[@LCR-iy6xq]

Alexios ftw!

[@gm2407]

Alexios after his loss at Dyrrachium was fortunate that he has the backing of the strongest aristocratic families. Without Komnenous and Dukas families he neither gets the office or keeps it. Very impressive with adaptations he made on the fly to some very turbulent and dangerously critical situations. Built a standing army from scratch in a very different way from the pre Manzikurt Theme based army. Maintained the finances, hijacked the crusades to get back 40/50 percent of Anatolia. Chose an excellent successor.

[@johnconnery1939]

A difficult task, but you presented it very well. Thank you for keeping history alive for many people

[@heinzlilio4612]

My personal favorite is Domitian. Solely because of his sheer hate for the Senate and the Roman Upper Class

[@NateTheGnat]

Domitian would be one of the most underrated emperors of all time. But because he was so hated by the Senate, no one will ever truly value him highly.

[@michaelporzio7384]

Domitian was a capable and effective emperor. He was not loved (unlike his father and brother) but respected by the Roman people. The Senate really hated him though, and history has been based on that. Him being a "bad emperor" also sets up the "Five Good Emperor" historical narrative.

[@arthurkernkraut8904]

Great list and presentation. It is good to see a list that includes all the roman emperors, as is common for historians to make the arbitrary split of east and west (probably because it becomes more manageable).

[@causantinthescot]

Honorable mention: GALLIENVS

[@wolfm33]

I truly believe that Basil II should have been no 2 (behind only Trajan). But he failed in one very important aspect, securing a capable heir for his throne.

[@ismailsahin3232]

Love that you add eastern romans and overall a good list but augustus is the goat by far. İ mean by almost every metric.

[@Fhjull34]

My top: 1. Augustus (ended civil wars and created a system that lasted 3 hundred years. one of the greatest politicians in history) 2. Constantine (end of the crisis of the 3rd century, unification of the empire, monetary reform, beginning of Christianization, founding of Constantinople). He is also one of the best generals in Roman history. 3. Aurelian (without him the empire would probably have collapsed completely in the 3rd century) 4. Trajan (there is no need to explain here. Not such an epoch-making reign as the three above, but good in literally everything) 5. Hadrian (near the best administrator in the history of the empire) 6. Tiberius (stabilization of the empire after the death of Augustus, cessation of conquests, good manager, excellent commander) 6. Constantius 2 (successfully held the empire during a rather long period of crisis, a person with a developed sense of duty). 7. Valentinian 1 (basically the same as in the previous paragraph) 8. Gallienus (conducted reforms that laid the foundations for overcoming the crisis of the 3rd century) 9. Probus (continued the work of Aurelian, strengthened the army, assembled a military elite, which would then rule Rome for another 30 years). 10. Domitian (a good administrator, which was previously said about Hadrian and Tiberius, but unlike them he also had serious failures).

[@aaronTGP_3756]

The Komnenids and Laskarids weren't even given honorable mentions. Alexios I, John II, and John III were among the greatest Emperors.

[@michaeldunne338]

John III presided over a rump state, rather than an empire - the period of 1221 to 1254 was not particularly great for Greek potentates seeking to revive an Eastern Roman Empire. As for John II, there is more of a story there, with the Balkans, limited advances and defensive measures in Anatolia, and latent strengths of Constantinople and various littoral regions, but central eastern Anatolia was still lost, placing the much reduced Empire, if not rump state, on the strategic backfoot.

[@tylerellis9097]

@@michaeldunne338 Bruh by that logic the Last Constantine nor Heraclius should be on this list. Both Johns saw their Reigns coincide with economic growth, territorial expansion and cultural flourishing. John III single handily turned Nicaea into the strongest power in the region. John II never lost a battle and secured the Anatolian coastline alongside all of Anatolias rich populated areas while defeating the Serbs, Hungarians and Armenians in Cilicia.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@tylerellis9097 Constantine should have been on the list given his military record, administrative record, building program, impact on society, etc. Aside from that, Constantinople and the hinterlands were a mess after 1204/1205. I think its up for debate the extent of economic growth under John III, given how cliometrics is a bit of a black art, along with historical demography (maybe at some very localized levels there was a rebound?). And the maps are not so clear about what came after John III given the infiltration, raiding and advances of Turkic peoples/those of the Muslim faith in Anatolia as the Nicaean rump state focused on Thessalonika, Constantinople and the Balkans. Compared to the Principate and Dominate, this was small beer. With John II there is more of an interesting story, just don't think it amounts to supporting a characterization of one of the ten greatest, nor a next tier of ten honorable mentions. Willing to hear more out since he did defeat the Pechenegs, restored much influence/control over Balkan lands, and staunched advances of Turkic/Muslim formations. But this was all in a much smaller set of theaters of operations in contrast to the Eastern Roman Empire of old, although campaigns in the Balkans turned out much better than what the Eastern Roman Empire accomplished in the late 370s, early 380s, late 390s, 420s, 430s, 440s, etc. Heraclius is a tough one, since there were enormous disasters in conflicts with the Persians that he managed to rally back from, but then the beginning of the massive fall of Empire in the East and North Africa, and massive retrenchment into an Anatolian and Balkan polity.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@tylerellis9097 Constantine XI Palaiologos should not have been on this list. For most of Roman history this person by any standard would not have been viewed as great. Just a potentate of a vastly diminished city state, one that actually put itself under vassalage of the Turks in the prior century. To ancient Romans this Constantine would have looked like one of the potentates of the bits and pieces of Seleucus' old empire.

[@emperorofhistory8724]

Excellent list, and I am very pleased to see the Eastern Romans remembered as indeed Roman.

[@marcellepesek3038]

This is the first tie I've watched one of your videos and I'm really impressed. I also enjoy your pronunciations. Thank you for a most interesting as well as entertaining video. I'm looking forward to seeing more. It brings to mind the French saying (please pardon my errors) "Plus que ca change, c'est la meme chose".

[@mariano98ify]

Even if the images might not be accurate, I won't lie about how amazing it is that we can "recreate" how people were then and thanks to the AI, content creators won't lack visual references for the audience, they literally can put any character in any situation than fit the script.

[@generationclash5004]

Very pleasantly surprised to see my boy Valentinian I on the list, even at a meagre #10. ❤

[@shaldar44]

One of the most comprehensive and concise documentaries spanning 1400 years of the Roman Empire I have seen. Also one of the better uses of generative AI art. 🤗

[@tomegert8857]

Great list, although I was surprised Alexios I didn't make it.

[@paulmer87]

I agree. In addition, I’d argue that the restoration of the komnennoi was the last time the Empire was still an Empire, not Basil II. The state still controlled vast territories, fielded large and effective armies capable of victory, sponsored the buildings and cultural development, maintain a large treasury and still command the respect of allies and enemies alike. All this after the disaster of the post-Manzikert era.

[@colbystearns5238]

I think I would rank these emperors (in chronological order): 1. Augustus (obviously) 2. Trajan (also obviously) 3. Hadrian (consolidated most of Trajan's achievements and had a good succession plan) 4. Aurelian (saved Rome during its darkest hour) 5. Diocletian (took a sad wreck of an empire and made it functional again) 6. Constantine (Constantinople alone justifies his place here) 7. Anastasius (reformed the economy and left a massive surplus that would eventually be used by Justinian) 8. Justinian (had ambitious plans to reconquer the West that backfired in the long run but the Hagia Sophia and Corpus Juris Civilis are a great legacy) 9. Basil II (was basically the Byzantine Trajan and the climax of the Macedonian Dynasty) 10. Alexios I Komnenos (took an empire collapsing after Manzikert and made it strong again) Honorable Mentions: -Claudius (cleaned up Caligula's mess, expanded the empire to Britannia and built a lot of infrastructure like new aqueducts) -Vespasian (restored order after the Year of the 4 Emperors and built the Colosseum) -Marcus Aurelius (crushed the Marcomanni so hard there wouldn't be any invasions from the Danube for 70 years, also wrote some timeless philosophy) -Gallienus (held on to a collapsing empire as best he could, introduced the mobile cavalry and the Illyrian generals like Aurelian who succeeded him) -Majorian (gave it his best shot in trying to restore the Western Empire even though he was betrayed and executed). -Heraclius (crushed the Persians, only to get crushed by the Arabs, he at least reorganized the armies which helped the Romans adapt in the long run) -Leo III (bravely defended Constantinople during the Arab siege and ended the Twenty Years' Anarchy, though Iconoclasm was a pointless culture war) -Basil I (kicked off the Macedonian dynasty with its long line of capable emperors who made the empire the strongest it's been in centuries) -John III Doukas Vatazes (laid the groundwork for Nicaea's recapture of Constantinople, though there wouldn't be much of an empire left to retake) -Constantine XI (went out swinging despite all of the odds stacked against him and the city's capture being inevitable, you gotta respect that)

[@SeaDemon25]

love the AI images with the dialog. Thx

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

For some reason, the oldest university in Europe, that of Constantinople, is always overlooked. It was founded many centuries before the one normally given “the First” ranking, Bologna. They all really had a model in the Mouseion of Alexandria (commonly called “The Library”, but it was so much more than that, it was a center for supported scholarship, founded c. 300BC).

[@paulcapaccio9905]

Love your channel. Been into it for a long time

[@marcocecini]

Thank you so much for considering Maxentius inside this outstanding list of the greatest roman Emperors of all times! Splendid video, as always!

[@michaeldunne338]

Maxentius is an interesting one. Yes, Constantine had much time to direct negative propaganda at him, like with Licinius after AD 324, but Maxentius may have been a thug who actually did want to revive Rome as the capital. especially given Roman superstition. He successfully held out against the armies of Severus II and Galerius, in the city of Rome. And he invested in building programs in the city and vicinity. The falling out with his father Maximian was a bit odd though.

[@alkiskosh6536]

@@michaeldunne338 Maxentius was such reckless and idiot, thought he was able to win against military capable emperor like Constantine and thought that with his praetorian guards nobody able to defeat him, he was manipulated by seers and wait for Constantine to reach to Rome and defeat him at Tiber river

[@Tijjain]

I always have hard time faulting Marcus Aurelius for chosen Commodus. There really was no 'good' option. 1. He could've simply disinhereted Commodus. But that pretty much sets up civil war as no doubt Commodus would feel his birth right was taken away. And there would be generals who would agree and fight for him. 2. He could've had Commodus killed. But let's be honest, no sane and rational person like Marcus would kill his own son

[@daguroswaldson257]

Too bad Maximus didn't exist in this universe. Then again, Commodus would have killed Marcus Aurelius and took the throne for himself.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@daguroswaldson257 Marcus Aurelius had several people equivalent of Maximus of fiction: Claudius Pompeianus, Claudius Candidus, Clodius Albinus, Helvius Pertinax, etc. ... Despite snobbery and conservatism, plague and military losses, Marcus Aurelius ended up with a deep bench of quality military professionals and leaders. I believe he tried to set up a council to advise and guide Commodus after his death. Instead, seems Commodus moved away from such advisors (if not actually purge them), and turned to court favorites.... I assume after AD 182/183, when there was one last set of campaigns in Dacia, where possibly Clodius Albinus and Pescennius Niger distinguished themselves well, and after the weird conspiracies/imbroglios with his sister Lucilla and his wife....

[@Vakator-29]

well depending on rumors maybe commodus wasnt his blood

[@michaeldunne338]

@@Vakator-29 Malicious rumors about Faustina? For a woman who gave birth to 13 to 14 kids with Marcus, have doubts about rumors of assignations with sailors, gladiators and what not, especially for the time period between AD 157 and AD 162 (she was birthing quite a bit then). Especially for an age when 1 out of 50 women giving birth ended up dead in the process. She herself would pass at the age of around 45. As for Commodus, possibly power just went to his head (combine with insecurities, leading to all sorts of behaviors).

[@geert574]

Commodus wasnt all that bad bro

[@rochebaudelaire]

1) Auguste 2) Trajan 3) Hadrien 4) Marc-Aurèle 5) Antonin le pieux 6) Nerva 7) Constantin 8) Justinien Ier 9) Claude 10) Septime Sévère + 11) Théodose Ier 12) Vespasien

[@karenbrown938]

I love your videos! So informative, with great graphics. You inspire all of us to keep learning!

[@flaviusaetius8042]

Greatest Emperors: 1. Augustus 2. Trajan 3. Vespasian 4. Marcus Aurelius 5. Hadrian 6. Constantine the Great 7. Aurelian 8. Diocletian 9. Antoninus Pius 10. Heraclius Greatest Generals: 1. Gaius Iulius Caesar 2. Gnaeus Pompeius Magnus 3. Scipio Africanus 4. Flavius Aetius 5. Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa 6. Belisarius 7. Gnaeus Iulius Agricola 8. Avidius Cassius 9. Lucius Aemilius Paullus Macedonicus 10. Stilicho I see your focus is on Late Antiquity and Medieval era.

[@EduardoAbietarQuevedo]

Pompeius?? 😂😂😂

[@flaviusaetius8042]

@@EduardoAbietarQuevedo Pompeius was a living legend and the greatest general in Roman history, until he was defeated by Caesar at Pharsalus. Pompeius defeated the Pirates of the Mediterranean. He defeated Mithridates VI. and conquered Pontus, deposed the Seleucids and annexed Syria, defeated Armenia and reached the Caspian Sea. Furthermore he defeated Sertorius and secured Hispania for the Republic.

[@EduardoAbietarQuevedo]

@@flaviusaetius8042 For what reason??

[@flaviusaetius8042]

@@EduardoAbietarQuevedo I already listended his military achievements.

[@EduardoAbietarQuevedo]

@@flaviusaetius8042 "living legend" and "greatest Roman general history" you think that's and strong argument to put above Scipio and others ? 😂😂😂

[@CueS_]

Very interesting list and good explanation. Most of the emperors are actually really close to each other when it comes to their "greatness" and personally, I'd might shift the list marginally, but your argumentation for the respective emperors is plausible as well! Thank you also for adding the honorable mentions. I do like to know though, how do you feel about Alexios I.?

[@eclipsesolar8345]

Marcus Aurelius was probably the greatest Roman Emperor, if not the most balanced lider the planet as ever produced.

[@Gwaithmir]

I have a late 1880's edition of his "Meditations" in near mint condition.

[@alkiskosh6536]

if he just arise his son to be good emperor he would deserve higher

[@vaevictis5878]

Can you do a video on the greatest underrated generals(not soldier emperors) in roman history? Also, can you do a video on people that could have replaced the bad emperors at the time?

[@michaeldunne338]

Interestingly enough, there could be several under the Julio-Claudians, Flavians and Marcus Aurelius.

[@aaronTGP_3756]

Germanicus or Drusus could've been Emperor instead of Caligula. Britannicus was a candidate for Emperor against Nero, as Claudius' son. Pompeianus was offered the throne three times, refusing each offer (including one from Marcus Aurelius).

[@aaronTGP_3756]

Count Theodosius, Timesitheus, Aulus Plautius, Agricola, Nero Claudius Drusus, Tiberius (before he was Emperor), and Avidius Cassius can be considered.

[@FazeParticles]

Agrippa will be up there because he carried Augustus every time he got sick which was every other year.

[@truthseeker9400]

Great work...and I love all of your "top 10" videos.

[@robbabcock_]

Great video! I'm not a fan of the AI art but the actual script/analysis was terrific. ⚔🔥🙌

[@ghostcat5303]

Extremely happy to see my boy Majorian in there.

[@ivanilves]

Great video, love to see Heraclius mentioned ❤

[@Freedom2111]

Very good choice of Trajan as the best emperor, and recognizing Aurelian and Majorian. Perhaps Basil II should have been in included in the top ten.

[@thomasbachschmid1629]

11:36

[@lerneanlion]

While I know that Aurelian will be among the top ten, I am surprised and happy to know that Heraclius is also among the top ten as well. Speaking of Emperor Heraclius, I wished to use this as an opportunity to speak to the AOT fans that I've come up with a plan to save Paradis and the rest of the world from committing genocide against one another. And the plan was inspired by how Emperor Heraclius forced Shah Khosrow II to accept peace on his own terms, which is why I called it the Heraclius Plan. Sadly, KZbin does not allow me tp explain this plan in details. However, I believed that the people who are the fans of this channel most likely know about the Roman-Persian War of 602-628 in details already. So it might not be required for me to tell how this plan worked because it basically functioned just like that. Sure, there are some adjustments there and there. But the primary objective remained the same and that is to force the enemy's nation to accept peace on the other side's terms. Sure, Marley might resented Paradis even more but both sides will be too economically too exhausted to fight each other just like the Romans and Persians in the aftermath of the Roman-Persian War of 602-628. Also, I am a bit surprised that Emperor Constans II did not get to be among the honorable mentions. After all, he tried his best to hold what left of the Empire together in the face of the expansion of the Umayyad Caliphate before being unjustly and unceremoniously murdered by his own chamberlain with a bucket.

[@FalseNomen]

Great video! I hope you'd consider a list of the top 10 worst emperors.

[@ash4_0_4]

Marcus, Aurelian and Trajianus? My man, ur tier list is Goated. Goated I say.

[@MultiEvil85]

Diocletian was an underrated emperor. It's a good list though !

[@robertthompson9574]

But he very vindictive.

[@Emi_14_]

My list: 10 Domitian 9 Hadrian 8 Alexios Komnenos 7 Anastasios 6 Marcus Aurelius 5 Justinian the Great 4 Constantine the Great 3 Basil II 2 Trajan 1 Augustus

[@watermunteconomie3938]

I was fixed to my screen, this was a great vid.

[@quartodecimani6908]

Great explanations and entertaining ranking! 👌 We would have placed on 1st place Constantine the Great. We may make a video on the topic at some point. 😊

[@dank2583]

John III definitely belongs in the top ten for me, he's the only reason that Constantinople was ever reconquered and without him the empire might have just been known to end in 1204, meaning he likely gave it another two centuries of life, albiet a declining life. Andronikos III could also be a contender as he was the last one to really have any powerful presence as an emperor and not just being known as "the guy who lets us send ships through the Bosporus" John II is my personal all time favorite as he was the most competent of the Komnenos choosing to make gradual but lasting advances, also being a humble and king character and supposedly not executing anyone throughout his reign. Maurice was quite capable but his final mistake is potentially what led to the empire losing half its land a few decades later, he ordered the army to winter beyond the danube leading to Phocas's revolt and the war with the Persians despite the fact that he had ordered the same thing a few years prior and it had only not led to revolt due to the general disobeying his orders, but he for some reason decided to do the same thing again potentially leading to the loss of half the empire and the rise of islam.

[@gm2407]

Only way he was going to get away with ordering a winter encampment beyond the Empire was to actually be on campaign with the troops in person and share the missery with them. But it is a rather large blunder he shouldnt have made and is actually not in character for the writer of the Strategikon. So since he did that twice it looks like other people may have wrote it under his commission. Such is life. Even if he had not been usurped I think the Persians would have found another pretext to war, maybe Heraclius would not have been in a position to come as saviour, we never would know how well Maurice's successor would do, or who would be Exarc in Africa. Islam was certainly going to rise and the Romans had a problem with divisions among Christian populations, as the Levant, Roman, Egyptian and Greek chruchs all had very different and contentious views on many subjects. It is a problem they rarely saw past and made the state weak to occupying forces when people do not wish to fight for what they had as they never agreed with it.

[@fredhercmaricaubang1883]

Ave, Frater Sebastianus! A VERY GOOD video! Not many know this but Maurice was a subordinate of my FAVORITE Romano-Byzantine general Flavius Belisarius! Which brings up a proposal, should you be interested: How about a Top Ten of the Greatest Romano-Byzantine generals of all time? Alternatively, how about a Top Ten Greatest Romano-Byzantine Empresses of all time? As I said, Frater, these are merely suggestions so take them as you will. Bene via, mi Amicus et Frater!

[@Somerandomguy-b9z]

Maurice was a good emperor unlike Phocas :(

[@fredhercmaricaubang1883]

@@Somerandomguy-b9z Yeah, I AGREE! In fact, Phocas' name sounds like an Insult in English! I think you know what I mean.

[@CryptoNews2]

I still rank Octavian #1

[@aleksander5279]

Even though I disagree with you on Constantine, the fact that you included him in honorable mentions despite your dislike of him earn you respect on my behalf.

[@kimberlyperrotis8962]

Maybe you should make an episode “Ten More Great Roman Emperors”. It seems that many commentators want their own favorites mentioned. I don’t have a preference for any, I think your list is a good one. Can you recommend any book that gives a complete list and history of all the Roman Emperors, West and East? I thought I had ordered one, but it turned out to be just a paragraph or so on a few emperors, more suitable as a grammar school library reference book for a young student’s first “paper”.

[@Maiorianus_Sebastian]

Hi Kimberly, unfortunately I am not aware of any compendium apart from Edward Gibbon's famous volume of books, but that might be a bit too old and outdated. Maybe there is such a book somewhere, but I am not aware of one :(

[@nathanpangilinan4397]

3:34 "Is this how you ruled the Empire, scum?" "Will you run it better?"

[@followerofjulian1652]

Thank you for mentioning Julian!

[@callidus9421]

Great video! I have only one question: What do you think about emperor Claudius? Many people seem to hold him in high regard due to his successful consolidation of the emperor's office after Caligula, his domestic reforms and the conquest of Britain. Is there a particular reason not to include him?

[@alkiskosh6536]

he was great emperor but he was easy manipulated by his wives

[@Shthophyckq]

My top 10 Easterners: 1. Justinian 2. Basil II 3.Heraclius 5. Alexeios Komnenos 4. Michael VIII Palailogos 5. Maurice 6. Constantine XI 7. John I Tzimiskes 8. Leo I 9. Manuel Komnenos 10. Constantine IV

[@Shthophyckq]

In my opinion, the Eastern Roman Empire needs itš own top 10. There are so many good Macedonian, Komnenos and Palailogos emperors.

[@pukalo]

I’m surprised Domitian isn’t on this list

[@Eazy-ERyder]

Im glad

[@asmundukkelberg8741]

Domitian seems to be the most controversial of all the emperors. He is in som many top ten worst lists as well as top ten best list. I suspect that he was hated by the ritch and loved by the poor.

[@pukalo]

@@asmundukkelberg8741 The people and the military loved him, but he and the senate had a mutual hatred for each other.

[@AllpostsFilms]

The ai art was a nice touch really brings everything together 💜

[@TheMelbournelad]

Agrippa, one of the greatest generals that was never an emperor.

[@prototropo]

I have often thought the same. Scipio Africanus, too.

[@aaronTGP_3756]

As for the Byzantine Emperors: 1. Basil II 2. Justinian I 3. Anastasius I 4. John II 5. Alexios I 6. Mauricius 7. Heraclius 8. Constantine V 9. Constantine VII 10. Basil I HM: John III, Manuel I, Michael VIII, John I, Romanos I, Zeno, Leo I, Theophilos

[@waltonsmith7210]

Justinian: If you go for it, go big or go home

[@ozgurceltikci9106]

Great job! There are disagreements here and there but no matter; this was a visually and historiographically very pleasing effort. The great iconoclast emperors (Leo III and Constantine V) not getting in never surprises me in these lists anymore; however, kicking the romance of the “last emperor drama” aside, what is Constantine XI doing on this list? A ruler who somehow fails to set up his own marriage is given way too much credit for his foolhardy bravado while moderation and patience could have kept the empire alive longer. Yet still, this is genuinely great content! Very very well made! ✌🏻

[@Liam-zu3yz]

Hadrian should be on here

[@czeslawrossinski2465]

Superb video, now it's time for the bottom 10 emperors.

[@whiteflash4444]

I dont know how you created the images for format of a video, but it was unique and fantastic

[@michaeldunne338]

Interesting list. Would of helped if more exposition on the criteria were given (but liked the point of a short reign could be more impactful than a long reign). Top ten lists are great - spurs on parlor game kind of dialogue that can be fun. Some thoughts (spoilers alert): Valentinian was a surprise choice for number ten but see how that is possible, given his military record during his 11 year reign. Heraclius is a tough one, given that around 615 he may have been ready to throw in the towel, in conceding inferiority to the Persians, and of course, with the loss of the Levant to the Arabs and invasion of Egypt. Still not sure about Majorian either, with his 3 year plus reign (yes, there were areas in Gaul reconquered briefly, with a Foederati army as mentioned here)? And don't think number 7 flies, with an "Alamo story" with a decadent city state basically (Constantinople suffered from the Black Death too). Could see Basil II making the list, as the Bulgur slayer. Augustus should have been number one (Trajan's eastern conquests were very short lived, in contrast to Augustus's conquests in the Balkans, Alps and along the Danube. ); and his choice of Tiberius probably helped entrench the Principate (Augustus ruled for about 41 years counting from the First Settlement, with Tiberius following with another 22 or so years, over 60 years combined). Would have flipped position for Aurelian and Marcus Aurelius. Disagree on Nerva - his selection of Trajan didn't represent a premeditated plan for instituting a stable process for succession but a possibly panicked, knee jerk response to instability, to secure his regime. He as one of the good emperors seems more a case of propaganda. Up in the air about Hadrian, given the character flaws, purges of opponents, the erratic/cruel end of his reign and the fact he gave up territory (which by Roman standards, was pretty bad). Antoninus and Gallienus were interesting additions to the honorable mention list. With Claudius II and Probus believe along with brevity of reign is also the lack of detail, or written records, on their reigns. Diocletian and Constantine should have been on the list. With Constantine, he had a strong winning record in military conflicts, both civil and foreign, that met that key criterion of Romans for their Emperors. Maurice is an interesting one. If he wasn't stabbed in the back by Phocas and the mutinying troops, the history of the Eastern Roman Empire could have been much different. I think Tiberius and Vespasian should have also been on the honorable mention list too.

[@aaronTGP_3756]

Not to mention, since he included characters like Basil II and Constantine XI, Emperors like Basil I, Alexios I and John II should have been considered. These rulers were much better than figures like Nerva or Anthemius.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@aaronTGP_3756 John the II is interesting. I don't think Constantine XI Palaiologos should have been included - the territories were basically reduced to that of a city state that was a shadow of itself, for a polity that actually conceded vassalage under the Turks in the 1370s (so an empire no more in the literal sense of the word). Really no comparison to the Roman Empire of antiquity or that of the Eastern Roman Empire up to 1204. Anthemous doesn't really standout either, for a different set of reasons - just doesn't seem like the achievements merit getting into a next tier of best emperors receiving honorable mention. Not sure about Basil I - seems Basil II accomplished more. Even by AD 900, as commentators pointed out, "By the year 900 A.D. the Byzantine Empire consisted of most of modern Turkey and Greece as well as parts of what is now the Crimea, Albania and Italy:" Same for Alexios I - lost much of central Anatolia, if not much of the peninsula overall, even after a number of campaigns. Believe he was the first theoretical beneficiary of Crusades called by the Papacy? The problem with Emperors of the middle ages is that on many occasions the recoveries were limited, incremental, in contrast to the losses incurred. They never recovered Egypt or North Africa from the Arabs/Muslims after AD 700; and they never recovered central and eastern Anatolia in the decades after Manzikert (in 1071). Nor was there any substantial, sustainable recovery after 1204/1205, when the Empire could have been deemed to have fallen. The Nicaean rump state essentially ended up losing Anatolia in order to gain Constantinople and bits and pieces of hinterland and coastal territories, which didn't help in the end (as in 1370s, when they had to concede to vassalage under the Ottomans). Long story short, there was a lack of resources and scale, and at times a downward spiral in conditions, that the comparisons of various reigns don't compare well to say the likes of Maurice and prior Eastern Roman Emperors.

[@prototropo]

I'm curious why Hadrian is suddenly coming up for critique on his temper and character. I know of only two such incidents, and they don't surpass the imperiousness of any other leader in history. And deaccessioning land was a smart move, given that Rome hardly need it, and the far eastern stretches of empire were preposterously difficult to defend. Sheer aggression and annexation for their own sake spell the decline of empire, not a strength. I think Hadrian was a fantastic leader and was surpassed only by Augustus himself.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@prototropo Why do you say suddenly? The story of Antoninus having to work at persuading the Senate to deify Hadrian had been around for a long time. Hadrian's capriciousness toward the end of his reign probably made things difficult. Guess many didn't like Hadrian putting to death Julius Ursus Servianus and his grandson for instance? Maybe that brought back memories of he and his henchmen killing of ex-Consuls at the beginning of his reign, like Quietus and Nigrinus? Speculation about the rough ending of Hadrian's reign had been around since at least 1985. As for giving up land, well when it comes to the lower Danube, maybe many felt a security threat had been created by withdrawals in parts of Dacia? Given what happened with the Costoboci or Costobocae, in AD 165 or AD 170 or 171, in reaching as far as Greece, maybe not an unreasonable concern, especially since lands were given up only 11 or so years after a series of hard wars in Dacia (by Domitian as well as those conducted by Trajan). Note, other major invasions through the lower Danube were undertaken by the Goths in the third century. Imperator used to mean victorious general - but there is nothing victorious about retreating from areas, and knocking down bridges like one that Trajan erected across the Danube. And when it did come to conflict, it appears that Hadrian did not appear very skillful in tackling the Bar Kochba revolt in Judea, which it seems he was pretty much responsible for provoking. There was a costly three year war that didn't make him look good. That was noted in works of history going back to 1935, like the seminal work "A History of Rome" by Cary and Scullard. Augustus established the Roman principate and greatly expanded the territories of Rome, including securing the wealth of Egypt. Hadrian did nothing of the sort that could hold a candle to that.

[@WilliamRP263]

I started following and supporting this channel since its beggining pretty much. I am surprised it got to grow this much, and congratulate its creator. Nowadays I hardly watch any videos, but was triggered by the title of this one. I simply cant stand the obsession of integrating the byzantine history within the history of the city of Rome, its monarchy, republic and then empire. There are many reason why calling it Byzantine empire is legit, but it wont matter because the "eastern roman empire" historians see themselves as talibans, crusaders or libertadores of some kind of hidden truth. Suggestion: as you wont desist from calling the Byzantine empire as "Roman Empire", make some specificir videos of the "Western Roman empire".

[@prototropo]

I would have agreed with you until about five years ago, but it seems indeed that Classicists and even Medievalist historians are now negotiating an intellectual consensus that the Empire we know as Roman never "fell," but continued for another thousands years in Constantinople. The people there even called themselves Romans, though Greek was the vernacular language, and admittedly a lot of Eastern cultural notions and trappings replaced the Western pagan mythology, art and literature, and their Gallic, Iberian and Britannic iterations. We in Europe and North America tend to think of Byzantium as exotic and "unEuropean" because Late Medieval and Renaissance writers, theologians, popes, kings and militarists operated under the same xenophobia toward Asia and Africa that we do today. And we inherited our world and ideas from them. For that unattractive reason I don't mind being challenged to rethink history, if it makes history more reflective of true reality. The entire history of Rome, however, is bittersweet for me; having grown up devout Catholic, studying Latin before English, singing Gregorian chant, visiting Hadrian's Wall, only dating or marrying other Roman Catholics and pivoting on Rome, not America, as the deepest wellspring for the philosophical, religious, literary, cultural and traditional identity of our family, church, academic, historic and global outlook. When other kids asked us what we were, "Irish Roman Catholic" was our reflexive response--not American, not Christian, not Anglo-Saxon. So I sympathize and empathize with your remarks above!

[@Fokas-n8t]

Interesting. I would pick at 90% the same list, perhaps including a couple later Eastern Roman Emperors such as Leo III and Nicephorus Phocas but overall, the list was very justified - all of these Emperors were remarkable in their times and beyond.

[@garethfire5853]

Great video! Well done

[@JonathanGoedeke]

One of the patterns I'm seeing here, particularly among the honorable mentions, is that Roman had many emperors who showed the potential to be great, but died early because they were really too good for the people they had to work with. The end up being killed because all the corrupt people don't really want a great emperor to reform things

[@marial8235]

I think we would be remiss not to mention Julius Caesar. In essence, he created the Empire. At the time of his death, he already wielded the powers of an Emperor. By reforming the dying Republic and extending the frontiers, eliminating all rivals and becoming Dictator for life, he was really the first and greatest Emperor. He then choose his obscure, but talented, grand nephew Octavian to succeed him, solidifying the dynasty. Julius Caesar stands above his successors.

[@michaeldunne338]

I think Julius Caesar deserves mention, but Octavian's first and second settlements did differ from where Caesar may have been heading (dictator, plus generalissimo, with a political machine holding down the fort in Rome). And Octavian did a good job delegating, which led to the conquests of northern Iberia, the Alps, much of the Balkans and the Danube river valley, which compared favorably with Caesar's conquests. And he did annex Egypt.

[@marial8235]

@@michaeldunne338 But most of Octavian’s military accomplishments were really those of Marcus Agrippa, perhaps the most underrated Roman of all.

[@michaeldunne338]

@@marial8235 Yes, which is why I mention the delegating. I feel the delegation of duties actually placed Augustus' Principate, in a better light as those institutions got off the ground - actual execution of policy was not all concentrated in one person. Drusus and Tiberius were other examples of those who took delegated power and met a good degree of success with military (and in the case of Tiberius, political) careers. There was also a Marcus Vinicius, who met success in the Balkans, along the Danube, and in Germania.

[@gabo1841997]

Sebastian these MidJourney images are insanely good!!! Did you prompt them yourself? (Also miss the space content 😢)

[@PK_Nox]

“An Empire is only as powerful as a ruler is capable.” Someone in the past

[@willo7734]

Very cool video. I was glad to see Eastern along with the Western emperors in the list.

[@designsforutopia0.0]

Great video as always.

[@PK_Nox]

“An Empire is only as powerful as a ruler is capable.”

[@daniellinanmolina1044]

love the gallienus pick

[@ntonisa6636]

9:41 that is a little inaccurate... those coastal areas in the Black sea(Mesembria etc) you showed a few seconds earlier were still under Roman control when Constantinople fell (though Mehmed would mop them up in the months following) along with several islands in the northern Aegean and almost the entire Peloponnese(AKA the "Despotate of Moreas"), except for a couple Venetian strongholds, whose defenses he tried to strengthen and moreover I think Constantine had also managed to reduce the Duchy of Athens into vassalage while also briefly liberating Thessaly during his successful earlier campaigning, before becoming emperor. So he had proven to be a quite skilled commander, while simultaneously having to deal with constant nonsense from some of his plotting disloyal siblings. He also tried desperately to play any diplomatic card he had, either by trying to forge marriage alliances with Georgia and other powers, petitionioning Aragon and Hungary for help, or by exploiting internal ottoman dynastic divisions by giving refuge to Mehmed's male relative Orhan Çelebi (who would also die defending the City btw)... He definitely wasn't some idle fatalist, waiting for it to be over.

[@jackmack6217]

like always an amazing video! good job!

[@ntonisa6636]

Idea for future video: "Top 10 Roman Usurpers"

[@elisabettamacghille4623]

I partially agree and partially disagree with the list, my two cents on the matter: characters in strict order of appearance: 1- Julius Caesar (we can't avoid to put him in the list, do you understand my dear? Simply we can't, .. we can't, that's it!) 2- Octavian Augustus (possibly the greatest political mind of the whole history of Europe .. up to August 1999 a.D.) 3- Vespasian (Old chap! Good politician, good general, good soldier, good father, good man, GREAT EMPEROR!) 4- Trajan (conquered Dacia, expanded everything at its limits, almost conquered Persia, chose the best successor, but ..*) 5- Hadrian (the leader we all dream of, perhaps one of the greatest architects ever, then 'peace' wasn't just a f.....g word) 6- Antoninus Pius (who better than him? The word 'moderate' in its true meaning) 7- Marcus Aurelius (yes, yes, I agree: he was a great Caesar, possibly the greatest, at least this would say Julian, but ..*), 8- Gallienus (OMG! Finally one of them understands the capital cannot be left in Rome and we need a mobile army!) 9- Diocletian (THE BEST OF THEM ALL, without Diocle we would not be here, talking of Roman Civilization & similar BS), 10- Constantine (Bloody bastard! One of the best soldiers ever! Dammit!) About the others mentions and Caesars: I fully agree with you, even though I still like to call the Byzantines, "Byzantines" and their Greek Empire, "Byzantine Empire", but this is just a side note, a small irrelevant detail with no real meaning. Thanks & congrats. * Here I'd like to put few slimy doubts, all politically incorrect, unsupported by any evidence and almost historically unspeakable, so, in their place, I put an asterisk and .. keep silent.

[@prototropo]

Love your inclusion and description of Hadrian. In fact you sound like a true firecracker, Elisabetta! If you're ever in San Francisco, please let's meet for dinner and have a discussion of your imperial ratings. I find them very compelling. Obviously you're a Classicist professor, or a very, very well-read and traveled cosmopolite.

[@ronnieman87]

Have you ever heard of the the tragedy of Emperor Heraclius the Roman? I thought not. It’s not a story the Arabs would tell you. It’s a Roman legend. Emperor Heraclius was a Basileus of the Romans, so powerful and so wise he could use Warfare to influence the armies to create peace… He had such a knowledge of the Roman side that he could even keep the Empire he cared about from dying. The Roman side of Warfare is a pathway to many victories some consider to be unnatural. He became so powerful… the only thing he was afraid of was losing Egypt and Syria which eventually, of course, he did. Unfortunately, he spent years recapturing the East from the Persians, only for the Arabs to conquer it all over again. Ironic. He could save his Empire from death once, but not twice.