Ranking Roman Emperors

I'm going to go out and say the Elagabalus does not deserve to be on the list of top 5 worst Emperors. The guy was just emotionally depraved and people like Constantine did political actions that had much more lasting effects that were bad for the empire as a whole.

>>2657187
>If guys like Augustus and Aurelius can still be considering two of the greatest emperors ever despite the fact that their succession plans were bad
Augustus had good succession plans but all his successors kept fucking dying.

File: Louis-XIV-Victorious.jpg (357KB, 550x746px) Image search: [Google]

357KB, 550x746px

>>2657187
the roman succession of emperors is really sad to read

the best monarchy in this regard is probably Denmark, a nice neat line of kings stretching back to mythic times

other european monarchies that had sallic law are up there too, especially France before they got revolution'd

say what you will about the germanic barbarians, but when it came to honor and respect and succession laws they had no rival, romans were pretty disappointing in this regard

>>2657351
probably shouldn't have married that psycho bitch then :)

Hadrian himself also qualifies for getting two generations of good emperors in the bag.

>>2657351
They should've followed the Arsacid and Sassanid examples, there's a reason why those two families combined last nearly a 1000 years.

File: ;_;.jpg (89KB, 677x782px) Image search: [Google]

89KB, 677x782px

>>2657374
seriously the storyline is so depressing

>finally, a good emperor!
>oh fuck he died
>oh shit civil wars again
>finally, another good emperor!
>oh fuck he died
>oh shit civil wars again
>oh shit foreign invaders
>better fight a civil war instead

literally reeee'ing as I read