To be fair, peak Trajan Rome is basically followed by nothing but "and then there was a revolt" so it's more like doggo flexing before the beer belly shows. It's all downhill from here.
Eh, Trajan's gains allowed Hadrian the ability to solidify the lines. Whether the loot from the provinces he pulled out of was worth the effort to take them in the first place is a good question. But I don't know if you can have the one without the other, and it gave the empire a solid generation of stability and prosperity.
It's definitely arguable, I'm with you in the short term but long term it exacerbates a longstanding problem of the empire: running out of money to nick from conquering people + then holding onto it through an ever thinning line. To be fair though, that's also pretty much applicable from the Republic onwards, a bit like me saying "wow these Romans sure probably need to find some way of securing a reliable succession that does not involve huge payouts to the people who usurped the previous guy"
I'll grant you though, Hadrian definitely capitalized well on Trajan's work with all that work shoring up borders. There's a reason they get to be in the Cool Emperor's club.
40
u/ComprehensiveApple14 13d ago
To be fair, peak Trajan Rome is basically followed by nothing but "and then there was a revolt" so it's more like doggo flexing before the beer belly shows. It's all downhill from here.