Just some late night curiosity. I was wondering which Roman republic/empire leader resembled Trump the most in terms of:
- stupidity
- narcissism
- harm done to the republic/empire
Basically, someone who was hilariously stupid, narcissistic and just really harmful to the state. Byzantine emperors can be considered as well, okay?
Crassus.
He got obscenely rich from real estate speculation, bought his way into high political office, and started an unnecessary and disastrous war with Iran.
Let’s hope it ends the same way.
With his severed head used as a prop in a production of The Bacchae?
I don’t see it
I get your post is likely humor but indeed it’s not that similar, crassus actually fought on the battlefield while Trump never did.
Elagabalus is the one who immediately comes to mind, you can’t get more narcissistic than trying to change the entire religion of Rome.
Commodus is less well known, but is infamous for leading the empire into a civil war, debasing the currency, rampant corruption even by Roman standards, and being more interested in gladiatorial spectacles than actually running the empire.
Commodus seems like the right fit.
I don’t know much about any Roman leaders other than Caesar but I remember watching a series about Caesar and constantly being reminded of Trump. Not just in terms of constantly breaking laws and norms or demanding personal loyalty above all else, but also in really specific ways.
Like how Trump wrote about how he’s like the “King of Israel” and the “second coming of God” in the same way that Caesar implied that he was/should be a king. Or how Caesar demanded several Triumphs (big parades) for all of the wars he won, many of which were tenuous or ridiculous claims. Doesn’t that sound exactly like how Trump claims that he’s ended 6 or 7 or 100 wars and deserves a Nobel prize?In the same way that American politicians today can be put into the category of “blindly loyal to Trump”, Roman politicians could also be Ceasar-ists whose primary political priority was doing whatever Caesar wanted them to.
Disclaimer: I’m not an expert on this topic at all, this is just my impression.
Isn’t Caligula up there too?
Commodus
Syphilus?
Who was the guy who was murdered by his wife and some other guy, who insisted on putting golden statues of himself everywhere?
Byzantine empire can be considered.
Okay then what about holy roman emperors and spanish monarchs? Hehehehehe
The Eastern Roman Empire was every bit as Roman as the Western Empire.
At the point when the empire split in two the capital had already been moved to Constantinople, so if anything it’s the Western Empire that was the pretender (though that is also a stupid take, both empires were clearly roman, unlike the much later HRE).
Im…im doing a joke…
Can you explain what is the joke and why is it funny?
…HRE, Francish Empire and the spain all claim(ed) to be the heir of rome while the roman empire (byzantium still lived on). Everyone and their mother claimed the mantle of rome. Even in modern age, Emperor Wilhelm II claimed the mantle. And that is the joke. Yeah now you can laught because a joke isnt funny when its explained. Humor is also subjective You dont have to find it funny but i do :)
I’m too dumb to get your joke, but I support this. Post the comments you’d want to read, and find your people among those who appreciate them.
My history is littered with unappreciated comments, but I enjoyed writing them so that was time well spent.
