 |
December 2, 2025 |
Rulers redux
Good, bad, deadly, dumb?
The USA seems to have a president who wants to be our ruler, unencumbered by law or by a desire to reconcile justly the inevitable conflicts that arise among citizens of a free republic. One cannot but conclude that he thinks of himself as the modern model of the Roman emperors and the inheritor of the mantle of great Christian leaders, so let's look at the extremes of those ancient souls.
Just for fun, we asked Perplexity about the best and worst of the emperors who followed the end of the Roman Republic.
The prompts and responses follow. Readers may wish to consider which list is more reflective of Mr. Trump.
Just for fun, we asked Perplexity about the best and worst of the emperors who followed the end of the Roman Republic.
The prompts and responses follow. Readers may wish to consider which list is more reflective of Mr. Trump.
The Good
Prompt # 1: Based on achievement, beneficence and any combination of the qualities of Jesus exemplified by the behavioral admonitions expressed in the Sermon on the Mount, who were the five best Roman emperors?
Response:
Most historians would name the same “Five Good Emperors” as the best Roman emperors on grounds of beneficence, justice, and relative clemency: Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius.[1][2] Their period (96–180 CE) is widely treated as a high point of Roman prosperity and relatively humane, law‑focused governance, which maps reasonably well to traits such as mercy, peacemaking, concern for the poor, and humility emphasized in the Sermon on the Mount.[3][4]
Criteria and Sermon-on-the-Mount virtues
The Sermon on the Mount highlights humility, mercy, purity of heart, peacemaking, righteousness, and care for the poor and persecuted.[5][6] In Roman political terms, rough proxies are: restraint in violence, legal fairness, clemency to opponents, protection of subjects, relative modesty in personal conduct, and efforts to avoid or end civil war, all of which these five emperors are noted for more than most of their peers.[3][7]
Nerva (r. 96–98)
Nerva stabilized the empire after Domitian’s tyranny, halted treason trials, recalled exiles, reduced oppressive taxes, and restored confiscated property, signaling clemency and a desire for reconciliation.[1][8] His decision to adopt Trajan as heir instead of promoting a family claimant is often read as an unselfish, peace‑seeking act that put the needs of the empire above dynastic pride.[9][10]
Trajan (r. 98–117)
Trajan combined military success with reputation for justice and generosity: he expanded the empire to its greatest territorial extent while also funding extensive public works, roads, harbors, and social welfare for poor children (the alimenta schemes).[2][7] Ancient sources and modern historians emphasize his personal accessibility, mildness in judgment, and care for soldiers and civilians, which echo ideals of servant leadership and concern for “the least” in society.[9][11]
Hadrian (r. 117–138)
Hadrian ended Trajan’s aggressive expansion, consolidated frontiers, and invested in fortifications like Hadrian’s Wall rather than seeking glory in endless conquest, reflecting a more peace‑oriented posture.[2][4] He devoted large resources to legal reforms, provincial infrastructure, and cultural patronage, and is generally portrayed as a thoughtful, sometimes philosophically inclined ruler who traveled widely to know and address provincial needs.[9][7]
Antoninus Pius (r. 138–161)
Antoninus Pius has one of the most “Beatitude‑like” reputations: sources stress his gentleness, refusal of bribes, even temper, and reluctance to execute, as well as a notably peaceful reign largely free of major wars.[9][11] He is praised for consistent fairness, charity, and piety, with a government focused on legal order, humanitarian responses to disasters, and avoiding unnecessary bloodshed.[4][7]
Marcus Aurelius (r. 161–180)
Marcus Aurelius, though forced into near‑constant frontier wars and a devastating plague, is remembered as a philosopher‑emperor who sought to rule justly, live modestly, and restrain cruelty.[2][4] His personal writings portray a ruler committed to self‑discipline, mercy, and duty to the common good; policies such as softening gladiatorial combats and maintaining respect for the Senate suggest a genuine concern for human life and shared governance, even under severe pressure.[9][7]
## Snapshot comparison
| Emperor | Noted beneficent traits | Ways they echo Sermon-on-the-Mount ideals |
|------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
| Nerva | Clemency, tax relief, reconciliation with elites and exiles[1][8] | Peacemaking after tyranny; mercy toward former enemies; restraint from vengeance. |
| Trajan | Generosity, justice, social welfare for poor children, personal humility[2][9] | Care for the vulnerable; using power in service of subjects, not merely self‑exaltation. |
| Hadrian | Preference for consolidation over conquest, legal and infrastructural reforms[2][4] | Valuing order and peace over glory; attentive governance across provinces. |
| Antoninus Pius | Mildness, refusal of bribes, peaceful reign, humanitarian measures[9][11] | Meekness joined to authority; merciful judgment and peacemaking. |
| Marcus Aurelius | Philosophical self‑restraint, respect for Senate, limits on gladiatorial bloodshed[2][9] | Inner moral discipline, concern for life, striving for justice amid unavoidable conflict. |
Response:
Most historians would name the same “Five Good Emperors” as the best Roman emperors on grounds of beneficence, justice, and relative clemency: Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, Antoninus Pius, and Marcus Aurelius.[1][2] Their period (96–180 CE) is widely treated as a high point of Roman prosperity and relatively humane, law‑focused governance, which maps reasonably well to traits such as mercy, peacemaking, concern for the poor, and humility emphasized in the Sermon on the Mount.[3][4]
Criteria and Sermon-on-the-Mount virtues
The Sermon on the Mount highlights humility, mercy, purity of heart, peacemaking, righteousness, and care for the poor and persecuted.[5][6] In Roman political terms, rough proxies are: restraint in violence, legal fairness, clemency to opponents, protection of subjects, relative modesty in personal conduct, and efforts to avoid or end civil war, all of which these five emperors are noted for more than most of their peers.[3][7]
Nerva (r. 96–98)
Nerva stabilized the empire after Domitian’s tyranny, halted treason trials, recalled exiles, reduced oppressive taxes, and restored confiscated property, signaling clemency and a desire for reconciliation.[1][8] His decision to adopt Trajan as heir instead of promoting a family claimant is often read as an unselfish, peace‑seeking act that put the needs of the empire above dynastic pride.[9][10]
Trajan (r. 98–117)
Trajan combined military success with reputation for justice and generosity: he expanded the empire to its greatest territorial extent while also funding extensive public works, roads, harbors, and social welfare for poor children (the alimenta schemes).[2][7] Ancient sources and modern historians emphasize his personal accessibility, mildness in judgment, and care for soldiers and civilians, which echo ideals of servant leadership and concern for “the least” in society.[9][11]
Hadrian (r. 117–138)
Hadrian ended Trajan’s aggressive expansion, consolidated frontiers, and invested in fortifications like Hadrian’s Wall rather than seeking glory in endless conquest, reflecting a more peace‑oriented posture.[2][4] He devoted large resources to legal reforms, provincial infrastructure, and cultural patronage, and is generally portrayed as a thoughtful, sometimes philosophically inclined ruler who traveled widely to know and address provincial needs.[9][7]
Antoninus Pius (r. 138–161)
Antoninus Pius has one of the most “Beatitude‑like” reputations: sources stress his gentleness, refusal of bribes, even temper, and reluctance to execute, as well as a notably peaceful reign largely free of major wars.[9][11] He is praised for consistent fairness, charity, and piety, with a government focused on legal order, humanitarian responses to disasters, and avoiding unnecessary bloodshed.[4][7]
Marcus Aurelius (r. 161–180)
Marcus Aurelius, though forced into near‑constant frontier wars and a devastating plague, is remembered as a philosopher‑emperor who sought to rule justly, live modestly, and restrain cruelty.[2][4] His personal writings portray a ruler committed to self‑discipline, mercy, and duty to the common good; policies such as softening gladiatorial combats and maintaining respect for the Senate suggest a genuine concern for human life and shared governance, even under severe pressure.[9][7]
## Snapshot comparison
| Emperor | Noted beneficent traits | Ways they echo Sermon-on-the-Mount ideals |
|------------------|-------------------------|-------------------------------------------|
| Nerva | Clemency, tax relief, reconciliation with elites and exiles[1][8] | Peacemaking after tyranny; mercy toward former enemies; restraint from vengeance. |
| Trajan | Generosity, justice, social welfare for poor children, personal humility[2][9] | Care for the vulnerable; using power in service of subjects, not merely self‑exaltation. |
| Hadrian | Preference for consolidation over conquest, legal and infrastructural reforms[2][4] | Valuing order and peace over glory; attentive governance across provinces. |
| Antoninus Pius | Mildness, refusal of bribes, peaceful reign, humanitarian measures[9][11] | Meekness joined to authority; merciful judgment and peacemaking. |
| Marcus Aurelius | Philosophical self‑restraint, respect for Senate, limits on gladiatorial bloodshed[2][9] | Inner moral discipline, concern for life, striving for justice amid unavoidable conflict. |
Sources: The Good
[1] The Five Good Emperors of Rome | List of Roman Rulers - Study.com LINK
[2] Five Good Emperors | Summary, Accomplishments, History, & Facts LINK
[3] The Nerva-Antonine Dynasty | Western Civilization - Lumen Learning LINK
[4] Nerva-Antonine Dynasty - History Guild LINK
[5] 7. The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12) - Bible.org LINK
[6] The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12) | Theology of Work LINK
[7] The Five Good Emperors: The High Point of the Roman Empire LINK
[8] Five Good Emperors - 84 years - the best and most prosperous ... LINK
[9] Who Were the 5 Best Emperors of Ancient Rome? LINK
[10] Nerva–Antonine dynasty - Wikipedia LINK
[11] History of the Five Good Emperors – What Made Them Great LINK
[12] With many options, who do you think was the greatest Roman ... LINK
[13] The Five Good Emperors of the Roman Empire - Facebook LINK
[14] Sermon on the Mount – the Merciful, Pure in Heart, and Peacemakers LINK
[15] Roman empire's five good emperors period - Facebook LINK ">LINK
[16] Four of the Five Good Emperors of Rome -- Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian ... LINK
[17] Enduring Word Bible Commentary Matthew Chapter 5 LINK
[18] Blessed Are the Peacemakers | Desiring God LINK
[19] Sermon on Matthew 5:9 – What It Means to Be a Peacemaker | Lifeway LINK
[20] Blessed Are the Peacemakers (Matthew 5:9) - PASTOR AND PEN LINK
[2] Five Good Emperors | Summary, Accomplishments, History, & Facts LINK
[3] The Nerva-Antonine Dynasty | Western Civilization - Lumen Learning LINK
[4] Nerva-Antonine Dynasty - History Guild LINK
[5] 7. The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12) - Bible.org LINK
[6] The Beatitudes (Matthew 5:1-12) | Theology of Work LINK
[7] The Five Good Emperors: The High Point of the Roman Empire LINK
[8] Five Good Emperors - 84 years - the best and most prosperous ... LINK
[9] Who Were the 5 Best Emperors of Ancient Rome? LINK
[10] Nerva–Antonine dynasty - Wikipedia LINK
[11] History of the Five Good Emperors – What Made Them Great LINK
[12] With many options, who do you think was the greatest Roman ... LINK
[13] The Five Good Emperors of the Roman Empire - Facebook LINK
[14] Sermon on the Mount – the Merciful, Pure in Heart, and Peacemakers LINK
[15] Roman empire's five good emperors period - Facebook LINK ">LINK
[16] Four of the Five Good Emperors of Rome -- Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian ... LINK
[17] Enduring Word Bible Commentary Matthew Chapter 5 LINK
[18] Blessed Are the Peacemakers | Desiring God LINK
[19] Sermon on Matthew 5:9 – What It Means to Be a Peacemaker | Lifeway LINK
[20] Blessed Are the Peacemakers (Matthew 5:9) - PASTOR AND PEN LINK
The Bad
Prompt # 2: Based on incompetence, cruelty and any combination of the seven deadly sins, who were the five worst Roman emperors?
Most historians would rank Caligula, Nero, Domitian, Commodus, and Caracalla among the very worst Roman emperors for a mix of cruelty, incompetence, and conspicuous pride, lust, greed, wrath, and gluttony.[1][2] Others (Vitellius, Elagabalus, Maximinus Thrax, Phocas) are strong contenders, but these five appear most consistently in modern scholarly “worst emperors” discussions.[3][4]
See whether any of these descriptions sound familiar.
Criteria and the seven sins
The seven deadly sins are pride, greed (avarice), lust, envy, wrath, gluttony, and sloth, systematized in late antique and medieval Christian thought.[5][6] Applied to emperors, historians usually emphasize pride, greed, lust, wrath, and gluttony, along with political incompetence (poor governance, economic mismanagement, or military failure).[1][7]
Caligula (r. 37–41)
Caligula’s short reign is notorious for extreme cruelty, arbitrary executions, and sadistic public spectacles, giving his government an atmosphere of terror.[1][2] Ancient and modern accounts emphasize excessive pride and lust, financial extravagance that strained state finances, and erratic decision‑making that destabilized the principate.[2][8]
Nero (r. 54–68)
Nero combined theatrical vanity and extravagance with brutal repression, including the execution of family members and prominent senators and savage persecution of Christians.[3][1] His spending, self‑indulgence, and political indecision contributed to fiscal problems and provincial revolts, culminating in civil war after his fall.[3][9]
Domitian (r. 81–96)
Domitian ruled as an openly autocratic, paranoid princeps, using informers, treason trials, and executions to crush real and imagined opponents.[1][10] His pride, heavy taxation to fund building projects and military ventures, and hostility to the senatorial elite fostered a climate of fear that ended in his assassination and damnatio memoriae.[1][10]
Commodus (r. 176–192)
Commodus is remembered as vain, self‑indulgent, and politically negligent, preferring gladiatorial display and personal cult to competent administration.[4][11] His cruelty toward perceived enemies, readiness to execute elites, and abandonment of effective governance undermined stability and helped precipitate the empire’s later second‑century crises.[12][4]
Caracalla (r. 198–217)
Caracalla’s reign was marked by fratricide (murdering his brother Geta) and subsequent purges of supporters, reflecting both wrath and ruthless self‑preservation.[1][2] Though militarily active, he financed campaigns and largesse with heavy taxation and debasement, while his paranoia and brutality deepened internal instability.[1][2]
How they compare
| Emperor | Key vices (deadly sins) | Cruelty / repression | Incompetence / damage |
|----------|--------------------------|----------------------|------------------------|
| Caligula | Pride, lust, greed, wrath[2][8] | Arbitrary executions, sadistic spectacles[1][2] | Financial extravagance, political chaos in early principate[2] |
| Nero | Pride, lust, gluttony, wrath[3][1] | Persecution of Christians, killings of family and elites[3][1] | Fiscal strain, revolts, civil war after his fall[3][9] |
| Domitian | Pride, greed, wrath[1][10] | Treason trials, executions, informers’ terror[1][10] | Alienated Senate, fostered conspiracies, ended in violent overthrow[1] |
| Commodus | Pride, lust, gluttony, sloth (in governance)[4][11] | Executions of opponents, abuses tied to court favorites[12][4] | Neglected administration, destabilized succession and army loyalty[4] |
| Caracalla| Pride, wrath, greed[1][2] | Murder of brother, mass purges of supporters and rivals[1][2] | Heavy taxation, monetary strain, intensifying internal tensions[1][2] |
Most historians would rank Caligula, Nero, Domitian, Commodus, and Caracalla among the very worst Roman emperors for a mix of cruelty, incompetence, and conspicuous pride, lust, greed, wrath, and gluttony.[1][2] Others (Vitellius, Elagabalus, Maximinus Thrax, Phocas) are strong contenders, but these five appear most consistently in modern scholarly “worst emperors” discussions.[3][4]
See whether any of these descriptions sound familiar.
Criteria and the seven sins
The seven deadly sins are pride, greed (avarice), lust, envy, wrath, gluttony, and sloth, systematized in late antique and medieval Christian thought.[5][6] Applied to emperors, historians usually emphasize pride, greed, lust, wrath, and gluttony, along with political incompetence (poor governance, economic mismanagement, or military failure).[1][7]
Caligula (r. 37–41)
Caligula’s short reign is notorious for extreme cruelty, arbitrary executions, and sadistic public spectacles, giving his government an atmosphere of terror.[1][2] Ancient and modern accounts emphasize excessive pride and lust, financial extravagance that strained state finances, and erratic decision‑making that destabilized the principate.[2][8]
Nero (r. 54–68)
Nero combined theatrical vanity and extravagance with brutal repression, including the execution of family members and prominent senators and savage persecution of Christians.[3][1] His spending, self‑indulgence, and political indecision contributed to fiscal problems and provincial revolts, culminating in civil war after his fall.[3][9]
Domitian (r. 81–96)
Domitian ruled as an openly autocratic, paranoid princeps, using informers, treason trials, and executions to crush real and imagined opponents.[1][10] His pride, heavy taxation to fund building projects and military ventures, and hostility to the senatorial elite fostered a climate of fear that ended in his assassination and damnatio memoriae.[1][10]
Commodus (r. 176–192)
Commodus is remembered as vain, self‑indulgent, and politically negligent, preferring gladiatorial display and personal cult to competent administration.[4][11] His cruelty toward perceived enemies, readiness to execute elites, and abandonment of effective governance undermined stability and helped precipitate the empire’s later second‑century crises.[12][4]
Caracalla (r. 198–217)
Caracalla’s reign was marked by fratricide (murdering his brother Geta) and subsequent purges of supporters, reflecting both wrath and ruthless self‑preservation.[1][2] Though militarily active, he financed campaigns and largesse with heavy taxation and debasement, while his paranoia and brutality deepened internal instability.[1][2]
How they compare
| Emperor | Key vices (deadly sins) | Cruelty / repression | Incompetence / damage |
|----------|--------------------------|----------------------|------------------------|
| Caligula | Pride, lust, greed, wrath[2][8] | Arbitrary executions, sadistic spectacles[1][2] | Financial extravagance, political chaos in early principate[2] |
| Nero | Pride, lust, gluttony, wrath[3][1] | Persecution of Christians, killings of family and elites[3][1] | Fiscal strain, revolts, civil war after his fall[3][9] |
| Domitian | Pride, greed, wrath[1][10] | Treason trials, executions, informers’ terror[1][10] | Alienated Senate, fostered conspiracies, ended in violent overthrow[1] |
| Commodus | Pride, lust, gluttony, sloth (in governance)[4][11] | Executions of opponents, abuses tied to court favorites[12][4] | Neglected administration, destabilized succession and army loyalty[4] |
| Caracalla| Pride, wrath, greed[1][2] | Murder of brother, mass purges of supporters and rivals[1][2] | Heavy taxation, monetary strain, intensifying internal tensions[1][2] |
Sources: The Bad
[1] The 8 Worst Roman Emperors and Their Dastardly DeedsLINK
[2] The Five Worst Roman Emperors: A Legacy of Tyranny and ExcessLINK
[3] The Worst Roman Emperors, from Incompetent to InsaneLINK
[4] 7 of the most Inept Roman Emperors - History CollectionLINK
[5] A Brief History of the Seven Deadly Sins - The Thoughtful CatholicLINK
[6] Seven deadly sins - WikipediaLINK
[7] Sinful History: The Strange and Unknown Origins of the Seven ...LINK
[8] 7 most notorious and excessive Roman Emperors - Big ThinkLINK
[9] 7 Deadly Sins: List of the Biblical Violations and Their OriginsLINK
[10] The Worst Roman Emperors: Mad, Bad & Dangerous To KnowLINK
[11] Who Were The Most UNHINGED Roman Emperors? - YouTubeLINK
[12] 6 Misjudged Roman Emperors Who Were Not So Bad after AllLINK
[13] 6 Misjudged Roman Emperors Who Were Not So Bad after All - RedditLINK
[14] Pope Gregory I & His Connection To The Seven Deadly SinsLINK
[15] What are the 5 worst Roman emperors?LINK
[16] Ancient Rome's Worst Emperors by - FacebookLINK
[17] The Worst Roman Emperor of All? - Coin TalkLINK
[18] Roman - 1. Nero (54-68 AD) Nero's reign is infamous for its brutality ...LINK
[19] We're the 7 deadly sins an early Christian critique of Roman culture?LINK
[20] The Saga of Sin, or How We Moved From Renunciation to ...LINK
[2] The Five Worst Roman Emperors: A Legacy of Tyranny and ExcessLINK
[3] The Worst Roman Emperors, from Incompetent to InsaneLINK
[4] 7 of the most Inept Roman Emperors - History CollectionLINK
[5] A Brief History of the Seven Deadly Sins - The Thoughtful CatholicLINK
[6] Seven deadly sins - WikipediaLINK
[7] Sinful History: The Strange and Unknown Origins of the Seven ...LINK
[8] 7 most notorious and excessive Roman Emperors - Big ThinkLINK
[9] 7 Deadly Sins: List of the Biblical Violations and Their OriginsLINK
[10] The Worst Roman Emperors: Mad, Bad & Dangerous To KnowLINK
[11] Who Were The Most UNHINGED Roman Emperors? - YouTubeLINK
[12] 6 Misjudged Roman Emperors Who Were Not So Bad after AllLINK
[13] 6 Misjudged Roman Emperors Who Were Not So Bad after All - RedditLINK
[14] Pope Gregory I & His Connection To The Seven Deadly SinsLINK
[15] What are the 5 worst Roman emperors?LINK
[16] Ancient Rome's Worst Emperors by - FacebookLINK
[17] The Worst Roman Emperor of All? - Coin TalkLINK
[18] Roman - 1. Nero (54-68 AD) Nero's reign is infamous for its brutality ...LINK
[19] We're the 7 deadly sins an early Christian critique of Roman culture?LINK
[20] The Saga of Sin, or How We Moved From Renunciation to ...LINK
