What would be the best succession system for the throne of Roman Empire, in order to make civil wars and usurpations as minimal as possible?
A written law? Could that really work?
A written law? Could that really work?
I'm thinking of the Chinese system whereby the emperor wrote down his desired heir and put the document or tablet in a safe, defended inner sanctum to be opened after his death; he could revise the tablet at any time to reflect which of his sons was most favoured. The Roman system means they would probably be able to pick anyone rather than just blood relatives.
Of course this system wasn't exactly foolproof either.
I don't understand the point here - the Roman Empire did have a stable system of succession, and a flexible one at times. The only time it broke down was when emperors were seriously incapable (and deposition can happen in every monarchical system) or when there was chronic political instability which was irrelevant to the succession.
Errr, what? If some generals were able to take the throne by using their army, I wouldn't call it a "stable" system of succession.
But one could still argue that it was the lack of clear system of succession that drove various generals into claiming the throne for themselves. E.g. Year of Four Emperors after the death of Nero, Year of Five Emperors after the death of Commodus, Crisis of Third Century after the death of Alexander Severus, etc.What does this have to do with the succession?
Now that was the problem that the Romans faced: their OTL system of succession was too greatly depending on sheer luck. (it might be argued that the late empire simply has ran out of luck). Especially when we look into peaceful transitions of dynasties from Flavian to Nervan-Antonine, from Constantinian to Valentinian, etc. The question is: was there any succession system available for the Romans that less depend on luck?The system of succession used in the Empire in the later centuries of instability was the exact same one used in the early centuries under the five good emperors. This supposedly wildly deficient system was the same one of military and popular acclamation, used at the height of Rome's successs.
Well, actually it was more like 'how can we establish a clear, stable, and definitive system of succession, in order to prevent the generals into thinking about rebelled and claimed the throne in the first place?'.What you actually mean in this thread is 'how can we prevent successful coups in the Roman Empire?' This has absolutely nothing to do with succession, anymore than a modern coup would.