Talk:Five Good Emperors
 | This redirect does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: |
|||||||
| ||||||||
Older[edit]
Ack, what's the deal with that picture? It needs changed or at least fixed. Mkilly 11:47, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
The Gibbon quote is appropriate but blindly elitist and ethnocentric. To declare that the rest of the world was happy at the time of the Pax Romana is a pretty broad statement. ABraidotti 28 March 2005
Eeerm...[edit]
"Marcus Aurelius was a good emperor because he was well known as a Stoic philosopher"
With all due respect to the stoic philosophy, you don't become a good leader just because you have stoic view on things. Fred26 08:02, 13 August 2006 (UTC)
Modern Terms, Passive Voice, Citation[edit]
One way to tell if something isn't really supported is the use of passive voice. "They were known for their moderate policies...". They were known by whom? One doesn't say.
Placed in the active voice, as it should be, it sounds like this: "Some people know them for their moderate policies...". The lack of source comes screaming out.
Who came up with "Five Good Emperors"? Who came up with "Pax Romana"? These are dubious and disputed terms. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Hoshidoshi (talk • contribs) 17:45, 15 April 2007 (UTC).
- Well, Hoshidoshi, the article says that Niccolò Machiavelli, Italian philosopher, came up with the term "Five Good Emperors." Passive voice and active voice do not have to do with supportability of statements on Wikipedia. References are the key. -BlueCaper (talk) 19:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Removal of last section[edit]
I removed the last section about adopted emperors being judged as bad by Macchiavelli: Nerva was mentioned among these which is apparently a contradiction; Octavianus, though adopted by his uncle Caesar was the first emperor; Tiberius was the closest surviving heir as son of Augustus' wife Livia, as was Caligula as the only surviving male descendant of Augustus. Clearly, Macchiavelli was referring to adoptions outside of the royal dynasty.Sponsianus (talk) 16:50, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
- You have it backward. Macc said adoption made good emperors.
- With regards to Augustus, Macc said
"He will also learn from this lesson of history how a good Kingdom can be organized, for all, except Titus, were bad: (and) those who succeeded by adoption were all good, such as were those five from Nero to Marcus (Aurelius)."
- Also, Augustus had a choice with Tiberius as Postumus was still alive, Tiberius had a choice with Caligula as Gemellius was still alive
- As for "outside" of royal dynasty being a factor, they were all in the royal dynasties. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoshidoshi (talk • contribs) 21:32, 17 June 2008 (UTC)
I don't see what I got backwards? I removed the section
Additionally, Machiavelli's theory that adoption, rather than birth, led to moderate rule is also questionable. A number of Roman Emperors that Machiavelli did not feel were good rulers were adopted including Augustus, Tiberius, Caligula and Nerva.
as Tiberius and Caligula (he certainly also mentions Nero) came to power through their birth, even though they were adopted as heirs. Augustus was adopted by Caesar in the Republic, he is an exception. Nerva certainly wasn't adopted - he was elected by the Senate.
The five good emperors were all from outside any royal dynasty, whereas the "bad" adoptions were inside the royal dynasty, even though - according to the quotes you mentioned - Macchiavelli stresses other differences than that. The effect is that Macchiavelli praises non-dynastical adoptions and comes with excuses regarding intra-dynastical adoptions. I have a feeling that he hesitated to follow his argument through to its all too republican conclusion.
Anyway, with some leeway Macchiavelli could be understood to say such adoptions which had nothing to do with birth are good. Sponsianus (talk) 22:09, 21 July 2008 (UTC)