What exactly means "save"? You may reform and stabilise your empire for your own lifetime but if it's all just your achievements, it's doomed to go south. The most astonishing thing about Rome is how long it survived, given economic decline, all the civil wars and the partly inept leaders two of whom managed to kill their best generals - in times of increasing barbarian invasions. Not even its "fall" was really a fall, for two reasons: The eastern part survived, and both Odoacer and Theoderich at least formally reigned in the name of the eastern Roman emperor. There were still the Senate, there were still magistrates such like consuls. Yes, the East transformed so much in the following centuries that modern scholars treat it as if it were a completely different empire they call 'Byzantine' but this is an exonym.
Partinax is a great example of how even a good man cannot always reverse the course of a State's downfall, the people must be willing to accept the change. Partinax did not fail the Imperium, The Imperium failed Partinax.
@@jensphiliphohmann1876 the praetorians fought for Maxentius at the Milvian Bridge - many died in the fighting and so Constantine naturally turned to his loyal troops to serve as bodyguards.
A second Nerva? The time-server who betrayed Piso to Nero, and proceeded to remain "loyal" to each of Nero's six immediate successors? As Syme noted, Nerva is universally adored by modern historians, with no good reason whatever. His uncontrolled over-spending and total mismanagement of the Praetorians brought his reign to near catastrophy, and was saved only by his fortuitous adoption of Trajan. And as a side note, how much longer Trajan would have waited after that adoption before having Nerva quietly removed is very much a mute point..
The situation in Rome in the time of Pertenax sounds all too familiar at the present moment in the United States. History may not repeat, but it does rhyme.
A video on Septimius Severus would be interesting, as he's a very polarizing figure to this day among those who study roman history. While he was certainly a good military leader, I feel that his policies were a big reason for the chaos that would ensue during the 3rd century.
I've always wished that Pertinax was included in Ridley Scott's Gladiator - they had a character similar to him in the Senator played by Derek Jacobi and wish they had just had him use the name Pertinax
The fucking praetorians. I remember listen to a audiobook of Gibbon at work, this part ruined the rest of my work day. I lived in Los angeles, stuff like this makes you see the writing on the wall.
Diocletian and Galerius were good but turned out to be too viscous towards Christians. Galerius realized how wrong he had been & converted on his death bed.
As a successful general, Pertinax certainly knew how to speak with soldiers and command their loyalty but he made a huge mistake walking into a room with 300 of them without anyone to back him up
@@tribunateSPQR As Cassius Dio tells it, Pertinax actually nearly managed to successfully calm down the soldiers, who bowed their heads in shame and sheathed their swords, until one single soldier cried out and struck Pertinax, thus "breaking the spell"...
Excellent use of the Marx quote. Roman history may have some interesting and impressive figures in it, but we as historians must remember that they were only human and affected by the constraints of their time, no matter how wise and/or talented they were.
100% agreed, I don’t subscribe to every aspect of Marx’s historical theory but this is an excellent example of how the forces of our age can constrain individuals and that even “great” men doing the right thing may not prove successful when operating against the grain of history.
Exactly! and we need to think about it the other way as well - that even the greatest Romans were only able to achieve as much as they did because historical circumstances were ideal. It cuts both ways.
What could he have done to reign for longer without just tolerating the decay of the state? How could Diocletian reform the state and stay alive? How could Constantine even dissolve the guard without being assassinated?
The guard effectively made Claudius emperor so he likely felt he could trust them. But you’re 100% right - abolishing the guard would have been the best move in the long term
If Pertinax had brought one of the Legions(5th, 7th or 12th)to Rome after they tried to make Falco Ceasar, the Praetorians would of thought twice before TRYING anything.
The problems of Roman Society were far too pronounced for any one man to address them properly, but had he held power for longer who knows what could have happened differently
The Praetorian Guard was the real sovereign in this period of the Roman Empire, their greed was just incredible. Why don’t you use Latin pronunciation?
Thanks for the correction- I meant to say that Commodus was the first to ascend to the throne having been born as heir. Drawing the distinction with Titus and Domitian who were raised outside the imperial household. However after listening again I realized that my language isn’t clear and would naturally lead to the conclusion that you came to. Apologies for the confusion!
It goes to show that being to logical, to honest, and fair don’t make for a great ruler. Had he waited till he was more established to then reform or even remove the pretorian guard he might have survived. Most people don’t like change especially if the status quo serves them. Side note, being a vindictive and crazy ruler like Commodus isn’t great either.
This story sounds like mostly an invention: he was so good that he was killed for being good. He belonged to the senate party, that's very clear. Also there was a conflict between the senate party and the pretorians. So there was some conflict between the senate party and the pretorians, and then ... ?
Once again proving that the Praetorian Guard was the Achilles' Heel of the Roman Empire. Seeing this trend continue would make someone think that perhaps the Praetorians ought to be liquidated, for the long-term stability of the empire. These men always want more, ravenous wolves drunk on blood and gold, one taste and it never becomes enough At least that's what I think
I think you're spot on - our next episode is actually about the Praetorians and their role in destabilizing the empire, hopefully you find that one informative as well
Ugh. Master and commander was a good film. Yaknow. Imagine. A hair lip that ends up becoming Napoleon. It’s important to get an aged comedy’s Commodus to be a petite corporal.
What do you think - Could Pertinax have saved Rome had he remained emperor?
It was inevitable, the corruption, the barbarian invasions, the sheer size of the empire.... 3 strikes, youre out
pissed too many praetorians off...a trusted bodyguard wouldn't have hurt ...if Mac Antony were with Ceasar. ?
What exactly means "save"?
You may reform and stabilise your empire for your own lifetime but if it's all just your achievements, it's doomed to go south.
The most astonishing thing about Rome is how long it survived, given economic decline, all the civil wars and the partly inept leaders two of whom managed to kill their best generals - in times of increasing barbarian invasions.
Not even its "fall" was really a fall, for two reasons:
The eastern part survived, and both Odoacer and Theoderich at least formally reigned in the name of the eastern Roman emperor. There were still the Senate, there were still magistrates such like consuls.
Yes, the East transformed so much in the following centuries that modern scholars treat it as if it were a completely different empire they call 'Byzantine' but this is an exonym.
@@Wiseguy3301 yes, that was one (of too many) lowpoints
Couldn't have hurt!
Partinax is a great example of how even a good man cannot always reverse the course of a State's downfall, the people must be willing to accept the change. Partinax did not fail the Imperium, The Imperium failed Partinax.
A tragic figure, he tried to restore Rome to an age that had already passed and was never to come again
Well said
Pertinax was such a gigachad, people don't talk about him enough
He really did everything right and got killed for it, a real shame
Not massacring every Praetorian on the spot, classic emperor blunder.
Many paid for this exact mistake with their lives!
How could Constantine dissolve the Pretorian guard without being assassinated?
@@jensphiliphohmann1876 the praetorians fought for Maxentius at the Milvian Bridge - many died in the fighting and so Constantine naturally turned to his loyal troops to serve as bodyguards.
@tribunateSPQR my question is why the Palatinii and subsequent excubitor guard didnt fall into the same corruption
Pertinax had the potential for being a second Nerva, but his fate was that of a second Galba
Absolutely. A true tragedy that he was unable to hold the throne any longer than he did
He also reminds me of Aurelian who was cut down due to palace intrigue while on the cusp of rescuing Rome from chaos
A second Nerva? The time-server who betrayed Piso to Nero, and proceeded to remain "loyal" to each of Nero's six immediate successors? As Syme noted, Nerva is universally adored by modern historians, with no good reason whatever. His uncontrolled over-spending and total mismanagement of the Praetorians brought his reign to near catastrophy, and was saved only by his fortuitous adoption of Trajan. And as a side note, how much longer Trajan would have waited after that adoption before having Nerva quietly removed is very much a mute point..
Ah, yes the praetorians killing an Emperor. A tale as old as time
He wasn’t the first and he wouldn’t be the last
The situation in Rome in the time of Pertenax sounds all too familiar at the present moment in the United States. History may not repeat, but it does rhyme.
Rome has much to teach us if we know where to look
A video on Septimius Severus would be interesting, as he's a very polarizing figure to this day among those who study roman history. While he was certainly a good military leader, I feel that his policies were a big reason for the chaos that would ensue during the 3rd century.
Thanks for the idea - I know that we'll get around to him eventually as the year of the 5 emperors is an era we want to touch on soon
1st to 3rd century AD: Soldiers murder their emperor.
5th century AD: Incapable emperors murder their best generalissimi.
Too true, great way of putting it
@@tribunateSPQR
Why on Earth did these incapable emperors for so long whereas more capable ones soon met their demise?
@@jensphiliphohmann1876 the tragic death of Aurelian is one of the greatest examples of this trend
I've always wished that Pertinax was included in Ridley Scott's Gladiator - they had a character similar to him in the Senator played by Derek Jacobi and wish they had just had him use the name Pertinax
Agreed! They’re making a sequel so maybe Pertinax will show up (briefly)
In my mind he always was Pertinax lol
According to the cast list on Wikipedia, it looks like Geta and Caracalla are in Gladiator II, but no Pertinax.
a true deep cut from Roman history right here!
That’s our specialty!
The fucking praetorians. I remember listen to a audiobook of Gibbon at work, this part ruined the rest of my work day. I lived in Los angeles, stuff like this makes you see the writing on the wall.
Pertinax wasn’t the first to die at their hands and wouldn’t be the last.
If you're looking for "Emperors who rose from the bottom" then Diocletian also fits the bill.
Great point! We really should do a video on him soon
Diocletian and Galerius were good but turned out to be too viscous towards Christians. Galerius realized how wrong he had been
& converted on his death bed.
Excellent work here
Thank you so much, glad that you found it informative
these have been fantastic.
Thanks! So glad you’ve found our content useful!
In your conclusion, I feel like you are describing the last century of the USA.
the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce
No, but
CAREFUL!!!!!! Watch what's going these days my friend.
This is so concise it hurts.
Glad you liked it! I’m amazed we were able to stretch the video out for as long as we were considering he only had the job for 87 days.
thats a tragic and funny end to his tale, wonder if any of his man-servants asked him "are you sure you wanna speak with the angry armed warriors?"
As a successful general, Pertinax certainly knew how to speak with soldiers and command their loyalty but he made a huge mistake walking into a room with 300 of them without anyone to back him up
@@tribunateSPQR As Cassius Dio tells it, Pertinax actually nearly managed to successfully calm down the soldiers, who bowed their heads in shame and sheathed their swords, until one single soldier cried out and struck Pertinax, thus "breaking the spell"...
Very obscure stuff. Awesome
Thanks, That’s our specialty!
Excellent use of the Marx quote. Roman history may have some interesting and impressive figures in it, but we as historians must remember that they were only human and affected by the constraints of their time, no matter how wise and/or talented they were.
100% agreed, I don’t subscribe to every aspect of Marx’s historical theory but this is an excellent example of how the forces of our age can constrain individuals and that even “great” men doing the right thing may not prove successful when operating against the grain of history.
Exactly! and we need to think about it the other way as well - that even the greatest Romans were only able to achieve as much as they did because historical circumstances were ideal. It cuts both ways.
What could he have done to reign for longer without just tolerating the decay of the state?
How could Diocletian reform the state and stay alive? How could Constantine even dissolve the guard without being assassinated?
The Love of Sin.
very informative
Glad you think so!
I always wondered after the assassination of Caligula why the Emperor didn't just disband the Patoerian gaurd and establish something safer.
The guard effectively made Claudius emperor so he likely felt he could trust them. But you’re 100% right - abolishing the guard would have been the best move in the long term
And replace them with what?
Like the janissaries of the Ottoman empire, they were too powerful, effectively becoming kingmakers.
Well done!
If Pertinax had brought one of the Legions(5th, 7th or 12th)to Rome after they tried to make Falco Ceasar, the Praetorians would of thought twice before TRYING anything.
This guy died like Ned Stark, with honor.
Also, didn't Marcus Aurelius attempt to exterminate and entire Germanic tribe because they really pissed him off?
Sounds like he made the same mistakes that doomed Galba, dunno how he hadn't learned from the past, at this point he could've read Tacitus
Septimus Severus had the right idea when he told his sons "Be harmonious, enrich the soldiers, scorn all others"
@@tribunateSPQR - at the very least, don't promise them money then not give it to them, or start decimating the troops for discipline
Great vid! If only he had held onto the throne
The problems of Roman Society were far too pronounced for any one man to address them properly, but had he held power for longer who knows what could have happened differently
This is pertinent to today
Absolutely
He was already 66. How long he would have lived?
Emperor Huberman
I'd give my vote to Gallienus for most tragic Roman Emperor.
The Praetorian Guard was the real sovereign in this period of the Roman Empire, their greed was just incredible. Why don’t you use Latin pronunciation?
is that were the word pertinent originated
Pertinax should have sent the Praetorians off to die in a war or something.
Great video, however Commodus wasn’t the first biological son to become emperor. Titus predated Commodus by a century.
Thanks for the correction- I meant to say that Commodus was the first to ascend to the throne having been born as heir. Drawing the distinction with Titus and Domitian who were raised outside the imperial household. However after listening again I realized that my language isn’t clear and would naturally lead to the conclusion that you came to. Apologies for the confusion!
@@tribunateSPQR No worries, recently found your channel and I’m greatly enjoying it.
It goes to show that being to logical, to honest, and fair don’t make for a great ruler. Had he waited till he was more established to then reform or even remove the pretorian guard he might have survived. Most people don’t like change especially if the status quo serves them. Side note, being a vindictive and crazy ruler like Commodus isn’t great either.
👍👍👍
This story sounds like mostly an invention: he was so good that he was killed for being good. He belonged to the senate party, that's very clear. Also there was a conflict between the senate party and the pretorians. So there was some conflict between the senate party and the pretorians, and then ... ?
Once again proving that the Praetorian Guard was the Achilles' Heel of the Roman Empire.
Seeing this trend continue would make someone think that perhaps the Praetorians ought to be liquidated, for the long-term stability of the empire. These men always want more, ravenous wolves drunk on blood and gold, one taste and it never becomes enough
At least that's what I think
I think you're spot on - our next episode is actually about the Praetorians and their role in destabilizing the empire, hopefully you find that one informative as well
Ugh. Master and commander was a good film. Yaknow. Imagine. A hair lip that ends up becoming Napoleon. It’s important to get an aged comedy’s Commodus to be a petite corporal.
I understand that Karl Marx was the correct solution?