Aurelian, The Great

[King of Rome]

Does anyone think that spared from assasination, Emperor Aurelian would be viewed on the same level as say Diocletian as far as 'saving the empire'? I am not nescessarily asking the ramifications of his survival (though I think they are very interesting) because the topic was already brought up a couple months ago. I am just wondering, would Aurelian's survival put him in the pantheon of famous Roman Emperors?​

The reason I ask, is due to the fact I have a hard time understanding why Aurelian is not well-known; that could just be my preception though. If you can help enlighten me on any point I brought up, I would appreciate it.​

 

[Derek Pullem]

Does anyone think that spared from assasination, Emperor Aurelian would be viewed on the same level as say Diocletian as far as 'saving the empire'? I am not nescessarily asking the ramifications of his survival (though I think they are very interesting) because the topic was already brought up a couple months ago. I am just wondering, would Aurelian's survival put him in the pantheon of famous Roman Emperors?​

The reason I ask, is due to the fact I have a hard time understanding why Aurelian is not well-known; that could just be my preception though. If you can help enlighten me on any point I brought up, I would appreciate it.​

Arguably Diocletian did not save the empire but merely ensured its gradual decline by fragmenting it "officially". Aurelian tried to maintain a centralised administration (possibly the last to do so) and was assassinated due to his autocratic (and brutal) methods of maintaining discipline.

If Aurelian survived and he managed to defeat all comers in terms of rebellious army commanders and external enemies it is arguable that the Roman Army would be in much better shape. Whether or not a military man operating under military discipline could reorganise the empire's bureaucracy and economic activity to operate more efficiently I doubt.

 

[Hapsburg]

Diocletian recognised reality and tried to use the existing fragmentation as a federalised political structure, in order to keep the peace. Didn't work in the long run, but he was being far more realistic about the state of the Empire.

 

[Magnum]

Arguably, a lot of Diocletian's reforms did more harm than good. However, he is remebered because he reigned long enough to carry them out, and the Empire didn't immediately succumb after having implemented them, thus leading to the (false) notion that the reforms helped stave of disaster.

If Aurelian lives long enough to carry out massive reforms that don't end up screwing the empire in the short term, he might be more famous.

 

[SlyDessertFox]

Aurelian is not known well, because he's overshadowed by the man who came to power 9 years after his death, Diocletian. I feel Aurelian would have been a better emperor than Diocletian personally had he not been assassinated.