Constantine the god of the bible

[Minimalist]

You may find this interesting, Nature.

http://www.jesusneverexisted.com/Constantine.htm

State Church: Christianity Goes Royal

"Nothing is more welcome to a military empire than a religious doctrine that counsels obedience and acquiescence."
– Hyam Maccoby, The Mythmaker, p163.


Constantine's desire to impose upon the Empire a religion that would identify obsequiousness to the deity with loyalty to the emperor found its perfect partner in Christianity – or at least in the Christianity he was to patronize.

[Oldandeasilyconfused]

So were most other mid-to-late Roman emperors starting around 200 AD, one possibly exception might be Julian the "Apostate".

Depends on how you define the word 'thug'. If you mean something like "brutally ruthless", the Julio-Claudians were a pretty rough bunch overall. In his early days, Octavius ( Caesar Augustus) was a real cunt. Tiberius had his moments,as did Caligula and Nero. Roman culture itself was pretty thuggish by our standards.

[Anomalocaris]

So were most other mid-to-late Roman emperors starting around 200 AD, one possibly exception might be Julian the "Apostate".

Depends on how you define the word 'thug'. If you mean something like "brutally ruthless", the Julio-Claudians were a pretty rough bunch overall. In his early days, Octavius ( Caesar Augustus) was a real cunt. Tiberius had his moments,as did Caligula and Nero. Roman culture itself was pretty thuggish by our standards.

But most of the successions prior to 200 AD were reasonably orderly, palace intrigues usually didn't mean civil war. Majority of the emperors were picked and groomed for the throne to some degree by their predecessor. The whole office of the emperor, while at times ruthless and despotic, had continuity and pipeline before 200 AD, and not populated by a string of usurpers who came through coup d'état and mostly go by the same route with in a year or two like between 200AD - 280 AD.

[Cerrone]

So were most other mid-to-late Roman emperors starting around 200 AD, one possibly exception might be Julian the "Apostate".

Depends on how you define the word 'thug'. If you mean something like "brutally ruthless", the Julio-Claudians were a pretty rough bunch overall. In his early days, Octavius ( Caesar Augustus) was a real cunt. Tiberius had his moments,as did Caligula and Nero. Roman culture itself was pretty thuggish by our standards.

How can you say that? Octavian was perhaps THE best Emperor Rome ever had. I kind of understand where you're coming from, but you're thinking about them in too much of a modern moderate way, i mean just because someone is a thug it doesnt nessecarily denote that they're a complete cunt. You should question forethought of any violent action before you decide whether it may or may not have merit depending upon who gets their nose broken, if you know what im saying

As for Caligula though, he was a bit of a cunt. Although he some wisdom when he made his horse a senator- clearly trying to demonstrate that an animal would do a better job at governance than the rest of the senate.

[Minimalist]

How can you say that? Octavian was perhaps THE best Emperor Rome ever had.

But he didn't get there by being a pussy.

As for Caligula though, he was a bit of a cunt.

Probably but it is important to remember that Caligula, and Nero and Herod the Great for that matter, were only written about by their enemies.

[Anomalocaris]

[quote='Minimalist' pid='102174' dateline='1288298272']

How can you say that? Octavian was perhaps THE best Emperor Rome ever had.

But he didn't get there by being a pussy.

Well, he sort of did, by Roman standards of pussiness. He was never worth a damn on the field. Plus he was probably impotent during his reign and never managed to father a second child. In the long run, the expedients he took during his reign was more or less responsible for the permanent, institutionalized state of dubious legitamcy of the western Imperial throne, and the eventually fatal geographic vulnerability of the Northwestern frontier. So I am not sure if I would call him the best. I might have called Trajan or Hadrian better, maybe even Diocletian.

[Cerrone]

[quote='Minimalist' pid='102174' dateline='1288298272']

How can you say that? Octavian was perhaps THE best Emperor Rome ever had.

But he didn't get there by being a pussy.

Well, he sort of did, by Roman standards of pussiness. He was never worth a damn on the field.

Even though he defeated Mark Antony and the Egyptian fleet at Actium. Give the guy some credit.

[Minimalist]

Octavian was a shrewd politician who just happened to have as his most trusted friend and confidant one Marcus Vipsanius Agrippa. A superb military mind on both land and sea. He'd have been a fool not to make use of his talents and Octavian was no fool.

[Anomalocaris]

He was no fool, but Roman standard of unpussiness calls for exhibition of personal martial virtues. This Octavian never had opportunity to show. So I imagine were it not for association with Caesar, he would have been seen as a unworthy pussy who weaseled his way into power through an unmannly style of cunning.

---

[quote='Minimalist' pid='102174' dateline='1288298272']

How can you say that? Octavian was perhaps THE best Emperor Rome ever had.

But he didn't get there by being a pussy.

Well, he sort of did, by Roman standards of pussiness. He was never worth a damn on the field.

Even though he defeated Mark Antony and the Egyptian fleet at Actium. Give the guy some credit.

To say Antony was incompetent by this time was to give him far too much credit. The guy clearly was broken and had no more justification to be in an army tent after the drubbing he took from the Parthians. Antony defeated himself by not using his much stronger army which he actually brought to the field.

[Minimalist]

Roman standard of unpussiness

He did take command of a campaign in Spain ( significantly leaving Agrippa in Rome to run things in his absence.) I'm not sure about that whole standard though. The Romans, as a people, were used to the idea of the senate sitting around on their asses in Rome deciding what had to be done. The consuls were generally senators elected for one-year terms to lead the armies. Octavian, who regarded himself as the "princeps" ( first citizen ) rather than imperator (emperor) was careful to always try to maintain the fiction that he was not an autocrat.

Until they made him a god.


That kind of screwed the pooch on that deal.