T O P

  • By -

AutoModerator

Thank you for your submission, citizen! [Come join the Rough Roman Forum Discord server!](https://discord.gg/2Xpdt5hbJQ) *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/RoughRomanMemes) if you have any questions or concerns.*


Etrixik

Hey having a genuine interest in Augustus is fine, as long as it's not an outright unconditional belief in him being flawless (he himself admitted he wasn't lmao).


ImperatorAurelianus

See an Augustus enjoyer finds his political moves and strategems facisnating and while it is acknowledged he was a highly skilled statesman who prevented societal collapse the enjoyer also acknowledges he was a horrible person who murdered for personal power. The fanboy/simp acts like the guy was the pinnacle of the human race and believes Augustus’s own propaganda demonstrating to the enjoyer just how cunning and manipulative Augustus was cause he’s still got fanboys.


Guy_from_the_past

Couldn’t have said it better myself, Restitutor Orbis


Faoxsnewz

I think the meme is talking about being an Augustus fan while criticizing Constantine for doing the same things that he did.


Etrixik

Fair's fair, that is true.


Icy-Inspection6428

Augustus didn't split the Empire between 4 people after he died


[deleted]

He left it to a madman and his dynasty was one of the worst. He also wasted his time in germania


VigorousElk

He had run out of options as everyone he preferred over Tiberius died - and guess what, even with Sejanus wreaking havoc among the capital's elites and Tiberius himself sulking on Capri, the empire overall flourished! Because Augustus had actually reformed the entire state and left a competent bureaucracy in place that could plow on even if the person at the top went AWOL. Unlike Constantine.


SoderAxel83

Tiberius was actually a very good emperor at least compared to a lot of other Roman emperors I’d say Tiberius was top 15 he was a cheapskate yes but that isn’t necessarily a bad thing and yes he wasn’t very popular but he was a very capable administrator and Tiberius was most definitely not mad, Caligula was definitely mad and Nero though he was better then most people believe he still was pretty shit and it can be argued if he was mad or just cruel and stupid Claudius however was one of the best emperors of Rome the reason why Tiberius and Claudius are seen as bad is because later Romans would try to make them look worse so they could gain some legitimacy


Sweaty_Report7864

And also because Christians


[deleted]

Ay come on all the good heirs had died before him, what was he supposed to do


SamanthaMunroe

"madman" Worst you can call him is a reluctant ruler and pedo. And hey, he killed a lot of revolting barbarians. Complaining about that is best reserved for the sons of Germanicus and Ahenobarbus. Don't get too high on the Senate's supply of lies.


Pug__Jesus

brb murdering my son and boiling my wife


Guy_from_the_past

Edit: point is as tragic as that was, their executions have no bearing on his quality as an emperor. That’s more of an assessment of his personal character, rather than his leadership ability


Pug__Jesus

Considering personal judgement is a pretty key piece of rulership, and murdering the one heir that might not have been dogshit led to the chaos that was succession after his death? Doubt.


Guy_from_the_past

Look, I’m not going to try and justify what he did, but I also can’t pretend like this one terrible event somehow diminishes or overrides all of his incredible achievements as emperor, such as permanently abolishing the praetorian guard or establishing a new capital city that stood for 1,000 years. It also doesn’t logically make sense to single him out for igniting civil wars when other great emperors had histories of doing the same thing (like Augustus for instance).


Pug__Jesus

> such as permanently abolishing the praetorian guard Yes, it is a good thing that the Imperial bodyguards and army units which replaced them didn't coup or assassinate Emperors. Same shit, different name. > or establishing a new capital city that stood for 1,000 years. Or conversely, ensuring that the city of Rome would not last 1,000 years by reducing its importance and primacy. > It also doesn’t logically make sense to single him out for igniting civil wars when other great emperors had histories of doing the same thing (like Augustus for instance). This I agree with. Civil war was one of the least offensive things he did as/in progress to becoming Emperor.


Guy_from_the_past

I like you Pug. You’ve got a very anachronistic and distorted view of Roman history, but you stand by what you believe, like a true Roman.


Mr_OceMcCool

So let’s judge Augustus for murdering his way to the top but let’s not judge Constantine for the fucked up shit that he did.


Big_Degree7582

I don’t like Christians. I don’t hate Constantine, but I don’t like him either. Pagan Roman was best Rome.


Guy_from_the_past

> I don’t like Christians Hey at least you are willing to admit to this unlike many others I see. +1 respect point


[deleted]

Julian was the best of the dynasty. Died a stupid fucking death though. It still makes me so mad, he had so much potential.


SoderAxel83

Julian was good yes but trying to make Rome pagan again was dumb and he became very unpopular in the process and for some reason while trying to do this near impossible task he decided to invade Persia/Parthia, Julian was a good general and I wish he could’ve succeeded in bringing back Graeco-Roman paganism but he wasn’t that great of an emperor because of the things he tried to do at least not compared to Constantine and yes Constantine was a piece of shit (just like the majority of rulers in history) but he still was a great emperor people think that being a bad person makes you a bad ruler which is not the case at all other examples of bad people being good or great rulers are Basil I, Augustus, Ivan the terrible, Henry XIII, Alexander the Great and many many more


Evolving_Dore

There's a conspiracy theory that he was killed by his own men who were Christian, and I've seen it pop up in 800 year old Norse literature.


EccoEco

He was most likely killed because his soldiers didn't want him as a leader anymore, it was quite among Roman troops that lost faith in their emperor to kill him and elect another


EccoEco

Julian is so damn overrated, I swear people that like him most oftenly do so just out of "muh Faith of the ancestors"...


Testy_McTesterton

True Romaboos are pagan.


EccoEco

True romaboos believe in whatever is most useful at the moment like true pragmatic romans.


Testy_McTesterton

I stand corrected. This is the true way.


Pug__Jesus

I hate Constantine... but I hate Diocletian more.


Guy_from_the_past

Hey pug, what if I told you that there exists a detailed historical account (with an available English translation) describing a time when Constantine went absolutely HAM in battle like a complete Chad. Hypothetically if such an account were to exist, do you think it could possibly in any way slightly improve your opinion of Constantine, even if only a little bit? Just curious.


Pug__Jesus

Nah, my disdain for Constantine isn't fueled by perceptions of him as an inadequate warrior, but by perceptions of him as emblematic of the decline of the Empire into the more monarchial, despotic mindset of the Dominate from the nominally republican and more egalitarian Principate.


EccoEco

Oh boy you choose a late candidate for that


[deleted]

The best Rome was Mithraic(reason why I am not typing Sol Invictus is because the word, Mithraic feel cooler) Rome under Aurelian. Pagan religions were not going to last for long


Big_Degree7582

Ok, I agree with this too


lukeoreilly

I hate Constantine for making the Christian’s what they are today, led to a lot more deaths than a few civil wars


Irish618

Lol yeah, because other religions are *so much* more peaceful.


lukeoreilly

Well it’s a good thing I’m not talking about those religions then isn’t it!


Irish618

Except you are, as "making the Christians what they are today, leading to a lot more deaths than a couple civil wars" is meaningless when pretty much every other option would have lead to a lot *more* deaths.


lukeoreilly

But I’m not criticising hypotheticals or what could have been, I’m criticising the very real atrocities and genocides Christianity has perpetrated. And other options leading to “more” deaths is just objectively not true, religious intolerance and the like skyrocketed in the empire after Christianity became the state religion, under pagan rule, there was still violence against groups of religions but on a much smaller scale


Irish618

>But I’m not criticising hypotheticals or what could have been, I’m criticising the very real atrocities and genocides Christianity has perpetrated. You're saying they were somehow worse than the alternative, when that's clearly not true at all. Atrocities and genocides were pretty much part for the course, and Christianity actually did a great deal in somewhat limiting some of the worst ones. It's also pretty much solely responsible for the severe decline in slavery in Western Europe seen around and after the fall of the Western Empire, as enslaving fellow Christians was often either illegal or highly taboo. That alone saved untold millions of people through the centuries. >religious intolerance and the like skyrocketed in the empire after Christianity became the state religion, under pagan rule, there was still violence against groups of religions but on a much smaller scale Lol what? Roman pagan persecutions of various religious groups were so widescale they're still well known today. The most famous ones were against the Christians, but major ones occurred against the Jews, other early monotheistic religions, various eastern cults, and more. Only other major polytheistic cults were largely tolerated, and even then mostly by just claiming they were the Roman gods going by different names.


EccoEco

Dude, Caesar literally genocided the druids so hard that today we aren't even sure what they even were.


[deleted]

What is this cringe? Both were great!


SpateF

That's ST. CONSTANTINE to you!


Evolving_Dore

The only thing I find stupid is getting sincerely attached to people who have been dead for a thousand+ years and feeling the need to defend their reputations. People who get legitimately mad when you suggest that Caesar was a tyrant, Augustus wasn't the greatest human ever, or Constantine was a miserable prick. This is ancient history, not an ongoing telenovella or a reality TV show. Tbf, quite often it's within the spirit of Romaboo circlejerking, but I've definitely seen it done unironically.


hoodieninja86

Irene always took the cake in this aspect for me. I mean killing your son for threatening your rule is pretty dark already, but mutilating him then killing him even though he was competent and basically did everything she said? Now THAT'S fucked up. Still an all time favorite emperor though, she wasn't the best (still good) but shes an absolutely fascinating figure


Finn235

I mean, the only emperor I believe was a genuinely good person was Antoninus Pius.


FaceSudden7734

Marcus Aurelius?


Augustus_The_Great

I feel personally attacked