Who were the best and worst Roman emperors?

I have made a table of all Roman emperors until the end of the Western Roman Empire. The • sign means that an emperor is the (biological) son of the previous one. I also listed empresses of the Severan dynasty as they held considerable power as regents of Elegabal and Severus Alexander.

I gave my rating for each emperor based on their achievements, reforms, legacy, buildings, military abilities, popularity, and so on. Emperors who ruled for less than one year or who were appointed emperors when they were children (usually co-emperor with their father) have no rating [-].

The last column shows the ethnic and social origin of each emperor. For ethnic Roman emperors, I tried to research whether their ancestors came from patrician or plebeian families.


EmperorsRatingOrigins
Augustus (31 BCE–14 CE)*****Rome (Patr. + Pleb)
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (31-12 BCE)*****Central Italy (Plebeian)
Tiberius (14–37 CE)***Rome (Patrician)
Caligula (37–41 CE)*Rome (Patrician)
Claudius (41–54 CE)****Rome (Patrician)
Nero (54–68 CE)**Rome (Patrician)
Galba (68–69 CE)-Rome (Patrician)
Otho (January–April 69 CE)-Etruria (Patrician)
Aulus Vitellius (July–December 69 CE)-Rome (Patrician)
Vespasian (69–79 CE)*****Sabine (Pleb.)
Titus (79–81 CE)*****Sabine (Pleb.)
Domitian (81–96 CE)****Sabine (Pleb.)
Nerva (96–98 CE)****Rome/Umbria (Pleb.)
Trajan (98–117 CE)*****Roman (Patr. + Pleb.)
Hadrian (117–138 CE)*****Roman (Pleb.)
Antoninus Pius (138–161 CE)*****Roman (Patr. + Pleb.)
Marcus Aurelius (161–180 CE)*****Roman (Plebeian)
Lucius Verus (161–169 CE)***Roman (Plebeian)
Commodus (177–192 CE)*Roman (Plebeian)
Publius Helvius Pertinax (January–March 193 CE)-Piedmont (freedman)
Marcus Didius Severus Julianus (March–June 193 CE)-Roman (Plebeian)
Septimius Severus (193–211 CE)****Punic/Roman
x Julia Domna***Syrian
Julia Maesa (sister of Julia Domna and mother of Julia Soaemias)***Syrian
Julia Soaemias (daughter of Julia Maesa and mother of Elagabalus)*Syrian
Julia Avita Mamaea (daughter of Julia Maesa and mother of Alexander)***Syrian
• Geta (209–211 CE)*Punic/Roman/Syrian
• Caracalla (198–217 CE)*Punic/Roman/Syrian
Macrinus (217–218 CE)***Berber (equestrian)
Elagabalus (218–222 CE)*Syrian
Severus Alexander (222–235 CE)***Syrian
Maximinus Thrax (235–238 CE)*Thracian
Gordian I (March–April 238 CE)-Anatolian?
• Gordian II (March–April 238 CE, co-emperor with father Gordian I)-Anatolian?
Pupienus Maximus (April 22–July 29, 238 CE)-Roman (Plebeian)
Balbinus (April 22–July 29, 238 CE)-Roman (Plebeian)
Gordian III (238–244 CE)**Roman/Anatolian
Philip the Arab (244–249 CE)**Syrian
• Philip II (247-249 CE, co-emperor with father Philip)-Syrian/Roman
Trajan Decius (249–251 CE)**Illyrian
• Herennius Etruscus (May-June 251, co-emperor with father Decius)-Illyrian/Roman
• Hostilian (251 CE, son of Decius, co-emperor with Trebonianus)-Illyrian/Roman
Trebonianus Gallus (251–253 CE)*Etruria (Plebeian)
• Volusianus (251–253 CE, , co-emperor with father Trebonianus)-Etruria (Plebeian)
Aemilian (253 CE)--Berber
Valerian (253–260 CE)*Roman (Patr. + pleb.)
Gallienus (253–268 CE)****Roman (Patr. + pleb.)
• Valerian II (256–258 CE, caesar under father Gallienus)-Roman (Plebeian)
• Saloninus (260 CE, co-emperor with father Gallienus)-Roman (Plebeian)
Claudius II Gothicus (268–270 CE)***Illyrian
Quintillus (270 CE)-Illyrian
Aurelian (270–275 CE) - monetary reform XXI****Illyrian (Serbia?)
Marcus Claudius Tacitus (275–276 CE)-Umbria
Florian (June–September 276 CE)-Umbria?
Probus (276–282 CE)****Illyrian (Serbia?)
Carus (282–283 CE)**?
Numerian (283–284 CE)*?
Carinus (283–285 CE)*?
---Tetrarchy---------------
- Diocletian (east, 284–305 CE)***Illyrian (Dalmatia)
- Maximian (west, 286–305 CE)**Illyrian (Serbia)
-- Galerius (east, 305–311 CE)**Illyrian (Bulgaria)
• Maxentius (west, 306–312 CE, son of Maximian, son-in-law of Galerius)*Illyrian
-- Valerius Severus (west, 306–307 CE)*Illyrian
-- Maximinus II Daia (east, 308-313 CE, nephew of Galerius)*Illyrian
-- Licinius I (308–313, then eastern Augustus 313-324 CE)**Dacian
• Licinius II (317–324 CE as eastern Caesar of father Licinius I)*Daco-Illyrian
- Constantius I Chlorus (west, 305–306 CE)**Illyrian (Kosovo)
• Flavius Dalmatius (half-brother of Constantine I)-Illyrian
• Constantine I (306–337 CE) reunified the empire**Greco-Illyrian
• • Flavius Julius Crispus (317–326 CE as western Caesar)-Greco-Illyrian
• • Constantine II (337–340 CE, western emperor)*Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
• • Constantius II (337–361 CE, eastern emperor)*Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
• • Constans I (337–350 CE, emperor of Italia & Africa)*Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
Magnentius (usurper 350-353 CE)**Celto-Frankish?
Constantius Gallus (351–354 CE, half-brother of Julian)*Illyrian-Roman-Syrian
Julian the Apostate (361–363 CE)***Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
Jovian (363–364 CE)**Illyrian (Serbia)
Procopius (usurper 365-366 CE, Julian's cousin)*Greek
Valens (east, 364–378 CE, co-emperor with brother Valentinian)*Illyrian (Croatia)
Valentinian I (west, 364–375 CE, co-emperor with brother Valens)*Illyrian (Croatia)
• Gratian (west, 367–383 CE; coemperor with father Valentinian I)*Illyrian (Croatia)
• Valentinian II (375–392 CE; crowned as child, son of Valentinian)-Illyrian (Croatia)
Theodosius I (east, 379–392 CE; east and west, 392–395 CE)*Hispano-Roman?
• Arcadius (east, 383–395 CE, coemperor; 395–402 CE, sole emperor)*Hispano-Roman?
Magnus Maximus (west, 383–388 CE)*Hispano-Roman?
• Honorius (west, 393–395 CE, coemperor; 395–423 CE, sole emperor)*Hispano-Roman?
Constantine III (usurper 407-409, co-emperor 409-411 with Honorius)*?
Constantius III (Feb-Sept 421, with Honorius)-Illyrian
• Valentinian III (west, 425-455 CE, son of Constantius III)*Illyrio-Hispano-Roman
Petronius Maximus (west, Mar-May 455 CE)-
Eparchus Avitus (west, 455-456 CE)*
Majorian (west, 457-461 CE)*
Libius Severus (west, 461-465 CE)*
Anthemius (west, 467-472 CE)*
Olybrius (west, 472 CE)*
Glycerius (west, 473-474 CE)*
Julius Nepos (west, 474-475 CE)*
Romulus Augustulus (west, 475-476 CE)*
 
I have made a table of all Roman emperors until the end of the Western Roman Empire. The • sign means that an emperor is the (biological) son of the previous one. I also listed empresses of the Severan dynasty as they held considerable power as regents of Elegabal and Severus Alexander.

I gave my rating for each emperor based on their achievements, reforms, legacy, buildings, military abilities, popularity, and so on. Emperors who ruled for less than one year or who were appointed emperors when they were children (usually co-emperor with their father) have no rating [-].

The last column shows the ethnic and social origin of each emperor. For ethnic Roman emperors, I tried to research whether their ancestors came from patrician or plebeian families.


EmperorsRatingOrigins
Augustus (31 BCE–14 CE)*****Rome (Patr. + Pleb)
Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa (31-12 BCE)*****Central Italy (Plebeian)
Tiberius (14–37 CE)***Rome (Patrician)
Caligula (37–41 CE)*Rome (Patrician)
Claudius (41–54 CE)****Rome (Patrician)
Nero (54–68 CE)**Rome (Patrician)
Galba (68–69 CE)-Rome (Patrician)
Otho (January–April 69 CE)-Etruria (Patrician)
Aulus Vitellius (July–December 69 CE)-Rome (Patrician)
Vespasian (69–79 CE)*****Sabine (Pleb.)
Titus (79–81 CE)*****Sabine (Pleb.)
Domitian (81–96 CE)****Sabine (Pleb.)
Nerva (96–98 CE)****Rome/Umbria (Pleb.)
Trajan (98–117 CE)*****Roman (Patr. + Pleb.)
Hadrian (117–138 CE)*****Roman (Pleb.)
Antoninus Pius (138–161 CE)*****Roman (Patr. + Pleb.)
Marcus Aurelius (161–180 CE)*****Roman (Plebeian)
Lucius Verus (161–169 CE)***Roman (Plebeian)
Commodus (177–192 CE)*Roman (Plebeian)
Publius Helvius Pertinax (January–March 193 CE)-Piedmont (freedman)
Marcus Didius Severus Julianus (March–June 193 CE)-Roman (Plebeian)
Septimius Severus (193–211 CE)****Punic/Roman
x Julia Domna***Syrian
Julia Maesa (sister of Julia Domna and mother of Julia Soaemias)***Syrian
Julia Soaemias (daughter of Julia Maesa and mother of Elagabalus)*Syrian
Julia Avita Mamaea (daughter of Julia Maesa and mother of Alexander)***Syrian
• Geta (209–211 CE)*Punic/Roman/Syrian
• Caracalla (198–217 CE)*Punic/Roman/Syrian
Macrinus (217–218 CE)***Berber (equestrian)
Elagabalus (218–222 CE)*Syrian
Severus Alexander (222–235 CE)***Syrian
Maximinus Thrax (235–238 CE)*Thracian
Gordian I (March–April 238 CE)-Anatolian?
• Gordian II (March–April 238 CE, co-emperor with father Gordian I)-Anatolian?
Pupienus Maximus (April 22–July 29, 238 CE)-Roman (Plebeian)
Balbinus (April 22–July 29, 238 CE)-Roman (Plebeian)
Gordian III (238–244 CE)**Roman/Anatolian
Philip the Arab (244–249 CE)**Syrian
• Philip II (247-249 CE, co-emperor with father Philip)-Syrian/Roman
Trajan Decius (249–251 CE)**Illyrian
• Herennius Etruscus (May-June 251, co-emperor with father Decius)-Illyrian/Roman
• Hostilian (251 CE, son of Decius, co-emperor with Trebonianus)-Illyrian/Roman
Trebonianus Gallus (251–253 CE)*Etruria (Plebeian)
• Volusianus (251–253 CE, , co-emperor with father Trebonianus)-Etruria (Plebeian)
Aemilian (253 CE)--Berber
Valerian (253–260 CE)*Roman (Patr. + pleb.)
Gallienus (253–268 CE)****Roman (Patr. + pleb.)
• Valerian II (256–258 CE, caesar under father Gallienus)-Roman (Plebeian)
• Saloninus (260 CE, co-emperor with father Gallienus)-Roman (Plebeian)
Claudius II Gothicus (268–270 CE)***Illyrian
Quintillus (270 CE)-Illyrian
Aurelian (270–275 CE) - monetary reform XXI****Illyrian (Serbia?)
Marcus Claudius Tacitus (275–276 CE)-Umbria
Florian (June–September 276 CE)-Umbria?
Probus (276–282 CE)****Illyrian (Serbia?)
Carus (282–283 CE)**?
Numerian (283–284 CE)*?
Carinus (283–285 CE)*?
---Tetrarchy---------------
- Diocletian (east, 284–305 CE)***Illyrian (Dalmatia)
- Maximian (west, 286–305 CE)**Illyrian (Serbia)
-- Galerius (east, 305–311 CE)**Illyrian (Bulgaria)
• Maxentius (west, 306–312 CE, son of Maximian, son-in-law of Galerius)*Illyrian
-- Valerius Severus (west, 306–307 CE)*Illyrian
-- Maximinus II Daia (east, 308-313 CE, nephew of Galerius)*Illyrian
-- Licinius I (308–313, then eastern Augustus 313-324 CE)**Dacian
• Licinius II (317–324 CE as eastern Caesar of father Licinius I)*Daco-Illyrian
- Constantius I Chlorus (west, 305–306 CE)**Illyrian (Kosovo)
• Flavius Dalmatius (half-brother of Constantine I)-Illyrian
• Constantine I (306–337 CE) reunified the empire**Greco-Illyrian
• • Flavius Julius Crispus (317–326 CE as western Caesar)-Greco-Illyrian
• • Constantine II (337–340 CE, western emperor)*Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
• • Constantius II (337–361 CE, eastern emperor)*Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
• • Constans I (337–350 CE, emperor of Italia & Africa)*Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
Magnentius (usurper 350-353 CE)**Celto-Frankish?
Constantius Gallus (351–354 CE, half-brother of Julian)*Illyrian-Roman-Syrian
Julian the Apostate (361–363 CE)***Greco-Illyrian-Syrian
Jovian (363–364 CE)**Illyrian (Serbia)
Procopius (usurper 365-366 CE, Julian's cousin)*Greek
Valens (east, 364–378 CE, co-emperor with brother Valentinian)*Illyrian (Croatia)
Valentinian I (west, 364–375 CE, co-emperor with brother Valens)*Illyrian (Croatia)
• Gratian (west, 367–383 CE; coemperor with father Valentinian I)*Illyrian (Croatia)
• Valentinian II (375–392 CE; crowned as child, son of Valentinian)-Illyrian (Croatia)
Theodosius I (east, 379–392 CE; east and west, 392–395 CE)*Hispano-Roman?
• Arcadius (east, 383–395 CE, coemperor; 395–402 CE, sole emperor)*Hispano-Roman?
Magnus Maximus (west, 383–388 CE)*Hispano-Roman?
• Honorius (west, 393–395 CE, coemperor; 395–423 CE, sole emperor)*Hispano-Roman?
Constantine III (usurper 407-409, co-emperor 409-411 with Honorius)*?
Constantius III (Feb-Sept 421, with Honorius)-Illyrian
• Valentinian III (west, 425-455 CE, son of Constantius III)*Illyrio-Hispano-Roman
Petronius Maximus (west, Mar-May 455 CE)-
Eparchus Avitus (west, 455-456 CE)*
Majorian (west, 457-461 CE)*
Libius Severus (west, 461-465 CE)*
Anthemius (west, 467-472 CE)*
Olybrius (west, 472 CE)*
Glycerius (west, 473-474 CE)*
Julius Nepos (west, 474-475 CE)*
Romulus Augustulus (west, 475-476 CE)*

Interesting, where this data is coming from?


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
Interesting, where this data is coming from?

What do you mean? The names and length of reign of emperors can be found on Wikipedia and many other sites.
 
What do you mean? The names and length of reign of emperors can be found on Wikipedia and many other sites.

I mean if there is any valid academic research behind this list, especially how their ethnicity was determined.


Sent from my iPhone using Eupedia Forum
 
I mean if there is any valid academic research behind this list, especially how their ethnicity was determined.

The ethnicity is based on the information available for each emperor, their parents and grandparents.

The rating, as stated, is mine, and is based on the dozens of books I have read about ancient Rome + Wikipedia articles on each emperor. I have summarised the pros and cons of the main emperors above.

I would like to encourage debate about this from other knowledgeable members. Despite my best efforts my knowledge of each emperor is limited and I would like to compare points of views, citing sources whenever possible.
 
there is no such a thing as ''best emperor''. No need to glorify killers. Conquered people suffered immensely, their wealth was stolen to build Rome and satisfy the lifestyle of wealthy Romans, people were forcefully drafted in Roman military and killed for no reason, other ethnicities disappeared from landscape. So take no pride of them, just hate them.
 
Oh, give it up. Every civilization in the ancient world did the same thing.

In the vast majority of cases, Romans never forced conquered people to join their forces. They knocked each other over volunteering, or trying to get taken on as mercenaries and later as auxiliary troops. To quote, "Money talks baby, and **** **** walks." You have a very uninformed view of how things worked in the classical world. They even went to war "with" Rome to "get" Roman citizenship.

Do yourself and all of us a favor and pick up a history book, and particularly a book on the Romans.
 
I have summarised the list of emperors with pictures and descriptions here.
 
Oh, give it up. Every civilization in the ancient world did the same thing.

In the vast majority of cases, Romans never forced conquered people to join their forces. They knocked each other over volunteering, or trying to get taken on as mercenaries and later as auxiliary troops. To quote, "Money talks baby, and **** **** walks." You have a very uninformed view of how things worked in the classical world. They even went to war "with" Rome to "get" Roman citizenship.

Do yourself and all of us a favor and pick up a history book, and particularly a book on the Romans.

True I have not read many history books! What I have seen on TV, Aleksander the Great for instance, was a cold blooded killer, equivalent of todays Sadam Husein. He would get drunk and kill his friend, round up Persian women and hand them over to his soldiers, all kind of crimes, and still people today glorify his behavior. Roman emperors were no any better. They worked for their personal well being, they never had in mind the common good.
 
True I have not read many history books! What I have seen on TV, Aleksander the Great for instance, was a cold blooded killer, equivalent of todays Sadam Husein. He would get drunk and kill his friend, round up Persian women and hand them over to his soldiers, all kind of crimes, and still people today glorify his behavior. Roman emperors were no any better. They worked for their personal well being, they never had in mind the common good.

That's another gross over generalization. Augustus cared about the good of the empire. Marcus Aurelius cared about the good of the empire. There are numerous other examples.

Look, I don't want to be harsh in my responses to you, but you have to have some background in a subject, some actual knowledge of the facts, before you express such dogmatic opinions. It's a failing of your whole generation but it still doesn't make it any the less annoying.

There's a book by Nigel Waters called "The Roman Empire". I picked it up for eight dollars. It's a fair summary, great photographs and illustrations, and will give you a broad overview.

Or, if you don't want to read, there's a series of podcasts (available on Itunes) called "The History of Rome" by Mike Duncan, and they're pretty good. Listen while you're driving or laying outside in the sun.
 
the best roman emperor would be nero for burning down the city.
 
the best roman emperor would be nero for burning down the city.

That's such an asinine, sociopathic and psychopathic comment that it almost leaves me speechless. Too bad there isn't come blanket category to be used to get rid of insane idiots.

I really have to see about getting one.
 
I’m afraid he thinks this is funny. This is not unlike those people who post videos that show cars running down people with opposing views, or chopping their heads off, and then act surprised that you take offense.
 
no i really don't think it's funny. i didn't say he was best because of the people he burned or did i? or maybe i kind of forgot what a burning city means for the people living inside it. just like when people measure an emperors value by the land he was able to conquer or "pacify" which is already sociopathic. if you don't like that then take in modern moral values. btw when someone says the people who were conquered and killed just chose the wrong side, that is way more sociopathic than my comment ever was.
 
no i really don't think it's funny. i didn't say he was best because of the people he burned or did i? or maybe i kind of forgot what a burning city means for the people living inside it. just like when people measure an emperors value by the land he was able to conquer or "pacify" which is already sociopathic. if you don't like that then take in modern moral values. btw when someone says the people who were conquered and killed just chose the wrong side, that is way more sociopathic than my comment ever was.

Oh, please. For people like you everything has to be my ethnic group against yours. Who was a better conqueror; who was worse? The answer has to depend on the group to which you happen to belong.

Are you incapable of understanding that some people can actually remove their own ethnicity from the equation and just look at the situation logically and objectively? Do you think the dozens of books which have examined why the Roman Empire worked as well as it did, despite its problems, were all written by Italians? I have news for you: they weren't. Not one of my Classics or Roman History professors was Italian.

Let's see, let's take Britain for example. Nothing left of their specific type of WHG. Then came the Neolithic farmers: almost wiped out, partly because of the arrival of the Beakers. Then came some more people from the Continent. Then the Romans. Were the British wiped out? It doesn't seem so. They seem to have survived, became "Romano-British", got some running water, some nice buildings, lots of better trade goods, their diet improved, and they could worship whatever Gods they wished. They could become Roman citizens and many did. Were British people killed in the conquest? Yes. Do I think that was great? No, I don't. However, as conquerors go, the Roman Empire wasn't as bad as most. Then the empire fell. Troops were withdrawn. Uh, oh. Another dark ages, no learning, no sanitation, barely any trade, roads dangerous and impassable, and, oh, you think it was violence free? You don't know anything about the Vikings or the Danes. Churches were burned and priests set alight. Towns were destroyed. Anything of value was destroyed. Oh, and the "locals"? They became serfs, second class citizens, those that didn't flee to the Welsh mountains or the Scottish highlands.

Human behavior is distressingly predictable.

Don't they teach history in schools anymore?

Let me spell it out elementary school style: conquering other nations is wrong, but nations or tribes have been doing it since the dawn of history, certainly before recorded history. If you have a brain in your head, distinctions can still be made between them. Would you rather have been conquered by the Russians of the 19th century or the Huns? All I have to do is think of the mountains of skulls the Huns left behind, and how they permanently changed the demography of Central Asia and even parts of the Near East to know the answer to that question.

The Roman Empire lasted for 400-500 years; the Nazi Reich (only about 80 years ago, so nation conquering has certainly not gony e out of style, and some young men who fought the Germans are still alive) didn't even last 10 years, and part of the reason is the brutality with which they treated the people they conquered. There was no gain from submitting. Get it?
 
Not an Emperor, but I like his Swagger: Mark Antony :)

He wasn't very sophisticated, but he knew how to have a good time.
I'd rather have a beer with Marc Anthony, than hang out with that Stiff of Augustus. lol

That said:

If Augustus is to be considered Emperor, my favorite Emperor is Augustus.
He was boring, but he was smart.
His Leadership skills transcended his personality shortcomings.

imho
 
Last edited:
hi
thes best of the emperors is august and tiberius and trajan and hadrian and mark antoniy and marcus auelius and septimius severus and constantine
the worst emperors is caligula and nero and caracalla
 
hi
thes best of the emperors is august and tiberius and trajan and hadrian and mark antoniy and marcus auelius and septimius severus and constantine
the worst emperors is caligula and nero and caracalla

I think in evaluating the emperors we should consider the situation they inherited. While I particularly like Antoninus Pius, he inherited a stable empire from Hadrian and a clear inheritance. One of the reasons Augustus is rated so highly is that he came to power in the aftermath of a generations long period of turmoil (Sulla, etc) and created an Empire so well founded that it lasted through hundreds of years and through many incompetent successors.

That being said, perhaps we should rate Nerva higher. It was he who began the so successful Adoptive Emperor period after the turmoil of Domitian. Perhaps it wasn't all his doing, or all on purpose, but it worked. That is why I downgrade Marcus Aurelius because he ended that period by the awful decision to break the adoptive precedent and give his son the throne.

Vespasian and Septimus Severus also created prosperity out of turmoil, but both failed to create a long-lasting legacy because of the failures of their sons (to which I give them at least some responsibility).

As to the worst emperors I'd apply a similar system, what did you inherit and what did you leave? Some, like Elagabulus, didn't have much of a chance.
 

This thread has been viewed 33504 times.

Back
Top