Watermark conquers transdoor breezeway (the porch)

You know, I just feel I randomly have to take this space to make an object to Mike Duncan's reiteration of Edward Gibbons claim that the best successive string of emperors Rome had, the first five emperors of the Nerva-Antoinine dynasty, were appointed purely by merit and not by birth. Trajan was basically a powerful general who intimidated Nerva into adopting him as a compromise to ensure stability. In many ways, his claim to power really wasn't any greater than Septimius Severus's, although he was never as tyrannical. Hadrian was Trajan's cousin, and the only living relative at the time of his death (the claim that he was even Trajan's cousin has been met with some skepticism; some think that it was basically an usurpation, while the claim about being his cousin and being adopted as his son merely being a lie).

Antoninus Pius was, in fact, appointed mostly be merit, but he was actually the really the least notable out of all of these emperors. Marcus Aurelius was conditionally adopted by Antoninus Pius because he was Hadrian's great-nephew, so this greatest of Roman emperors (ranking up there with Augustus and Trajan) was actually adopted as a child, without showing any merit, solely because of his birth, even if it wasn't a direct father-son connection. Lucius Verus, on the other hand, was conditionally adopted merely because he was the son of Hadrian's gay lover. Sure, Domitian was somewhat tyrnical, and was made emperor based on birth rather than merit, but few of these great emperors were actually chosen by anything that could seriously be considered merit either, besides, again, Antoninus Pious. Adoption /= merit.
 
USFREEDOM911 said:
When I read the thread title, on the forums page, I misread it, thought it said "Watermark conquers trapdoor", and figured that you had finally figured out how to open the back of your long johns. :D

You do realize that you could have waited until nightfall and then sprayed them, without worrying about being stung. :palm:


Forgot to add that is they were paper wasps or mud wasps, either being a high possibility, and you didn't knock down the nest; you are probably going to have more in the same spot, tomorrow.
This is because they don't all make it back to the nest by nightfall and if the nest is still there, they will restart the colony.
Click to expand...

Nah, the poison remains and when they re-enter the nest they die.
 
I have long asserted that the Nervan-Antoinine dynasty from Trajan through Marcus Aurelius was the greatest. While the Julio-Claudian dynasty was strong with Augustus, Tiberius, and a frequently underrated Claudius, that's still only three greats, and Tiberius can be as overrated as Claudius is under. Then there's Nero and Caligula. At least in defense of the JC maniacs, their damage was ultimately nothing compared to the NA maniac who was Commodus, and who ushered in the military brutes and Rome's lost century.
 
Thomas Edison said:
I have long asserted that the Nervan-Antoinine dynasty from Trajan through Marcus Aurelius was the greatest. While the Julio-Claudian dynasty was strong with Augustus, Tiberius, and a frequently underrated Claudius, that's still only three greats, and Tiberius can be as overrated as Claudius is under. Then there's Nero and Caligula. At least in defense of the JC maniacs, their damage was ultimately nothing compared to the NA maniac who was Commodus, and who ushered in the military brutes and Rome's lost century.
Click to expand...

Yes, Nervan-Antoinine is generally considered to be the best. Again, the only one that really rivals it is the Judeo-Claudian dynasty, which was much more of a mixed bag. Augustus was of course awesome, while even at their best the others were generally just mediocore, while the Nervan-Antoinine dynasty was basically all excellent emperors up until Commodus. I was just pointing out how their all being chosen purely based on merit was a bit of a myth.

Is Tiberius considered a great emperor? I have heard of him called a mediocre emperor. I don't think he really excelled in military matters, and he was rather tyrannical, especially in his later years. Not a terrible emperor, not a particularly good one either, much like Claudius. Caligula, of course, is accused in the literary record of some rather extreme crimes which alone would make him singularly the worst emperor. But, in all honesty, I find some of the things he's accused of rather difficult to believe, and there's little outside of the literary record to back them up. And, regardless, he ruled for a short time.

Nero himself actually had an earlier record as a rather good emperor, but later grew more tyrannical. Again, I think the literary record probably exaggerates his tyranny somewhat. From what non-literary sources we have, we know he was actually a bit of a popular emperor amongst the people, because, for one thing, he kept the empire at peace. He was actually deposed largely because his peaceful policy lost him respect amongst the military establishment. And he is remembered poorly in the literary record because he wasn't so nice to rich senators, and rich senators wrote the literary record (this really explains much about the disposition of those who wrote the literary record to any particular figure or emperor). As for Commodus, again, he sort of has the same pattern as Nero, starting out decently and slowly getting more and more tyrannical. Like Nero he is, of course, known for participating in vulgar entertainments that the upper class scoffed at.
 
And, in this period, the only other emperor from another dynasty who was really good was the first Flavian emperor. That dynasty didn't last too long, though.
 
Now, to continue the story of Watermark's conquest of the Wasps, earlier today I opened the front door, and low and behold, saw a wasp. Then that wasp just flew right into the house before I could close the door. Afterwards, screaming was heard, though from which side it emanated, we know not. Suddenly, I found myself outside, out the back door. Collecting myself, I ran back in and shut the sliding door the separates the breezeway and the rest of the house from the living room. And thus began the great Watermarkian siege of 2012...
 
Actually, I might be confusing Commodus with Domitian, and Commodus may have just been bad through and through. It's kind of difficult sorting out all of these bad and mediocore emperors from each other.
 
Sigmund Freud said:
Now, to continue the story of Watermark's conquest of the Wasps, earlier today I opened the front door, and low and behold, saw a wasp. Then that wasp just flew right into the house before I could close the door. Afterwards, screaming was heard, though from which side it emanated, we know not. Suddenly, I found myself outside, out the back door. Collecting myself, I ran back in and shut the sliding door the separates the breezeway and the rest of the house from the living room. And thus began the great Watermarkian siege of 2012...
Click to expand...

I told you. :D
 
Commodus has been the villain in tons of stories, such as Gladiator and The Fall of the Roman Empire. Pretty well explains how much he sucks...
 
Chip_the_Wasp.gif



1299872015_man-grabs-wasps.gif



wasp2.gif
 
Thomas Edison said:
Commodus has been the villain in tons of stories, such as Gladiator and The Fall of the Roman Empire. Pretty well explains how much he sucks...
Click to expand...

Gladiator had good set design. Also, incredibly accurate Roman battles. As for it's understanding of the military, political, and cultural world that the Romans lived in, it's total bullshit.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top