TRUMP, AMERICA'S NERO OR COMMODUS; Looking to history to figure this mess out

      

“Those who don’t learn from history are doomed to repeat it.” I first heard this quote from my high school history teacher. This is actually a misquote from philosopher George Santayana’s, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it.” This idea has survived over a century because of its seemingly simple truth. Reality is more complicated because every situation is different making direct parallels between historical events and current situations problematic. Still, history can provide context that is difficult to see when you’re in the middle of events and the future is uncertain.

In the wake of a mob of Qanon inspired Trump supporters storming Congress in an attempt to prevent the transfer of power to the new administration of President-elect Joe Biden, perhaps it’s worth looking to history for an analogous situation. However, first we have to define the current situation. President Trump’s inciting of a treasonous mob to march on the capital is only the latest in a long list of Presidential norms that have gone out the window since he took office.

Part of the problem is the Constitution doesn’t go into much detail on the constraints on the President’s power. It’s largely been traditions with the possibility of impeachment that has restrained Presidential behavior in the past. Trump has broken with precedent by continuing to profit from private business activity while in office and refusing to release his taxes. He has rejected all Congressional oversight, often in violation of laws he claims don’t apply to him. He’s avoided Congressional confirmation of cabinet positions by abusing the rules for using interim appointees. He has ignored information from America’s intelligence agencies and demeaned our allies while cozying up to authoritarian leaders. And of course, there are all the completely unhinged self-serving lies that are often completely divorced from reality.

Trump’s personal conduct since taking office has consistently violated traditional expectations of Presidential behavior. Conduct that leaders of both parties would have agreed was unacceptable four years ago, has become the norm. The historical period this calls to my mind is the late second century Roman Empire. Frankly, there is more than one period of Roman history that resonates with our current time. However, it’s the breakdown of executive norms that brought the period following the death of Emperor Marcus Aurelius to mind.

When Marcus Aurelius died in 180 C.E. he left the Roman Empire at its zenith. His death marked the end of an era that has become known to history as the period of the Five Good Emperors which began with the ascension of Emperor Nerva in 96. It was in this period that the Roman Empire reached its greatest expanse and formerly troublesome territories were brought fully under Roman administration. These Emperors constructed much of what we think of as Roman architecture and the arts flourished. Perhaps more than anything, historians associate this age with long periods of peace which was a rarity in ancient times.

The era of stability in Rome really began even before the Five Good Emperors. The Emperor Nero was a famously disastrous leader who committed suicide in 68. Chaos followed his death as numerous would-be emperors attempted to seize power. Finally, Vespasian came out on top of the power struggle the following year in 69. From then through Marcus Aurelius, Rome had over 110 years of continuous competent emperors. Equally important was the long stretch of peaceful transfers of power. With the lone exception of the assassination of Domitian in 96, each emperor died of natural causes followed by a smooth transition to the new emperor. Even in the case of Domitian there was a surprisingly smooth transition of power despite his violent death.

By 180 Rome had a long-established tradition of capable emperors and orderly transfers of power. No living Roman had ever experienced anything other than emperors who died of natural causes with a prearranged successor ready to go. There was every reason to believe this would continue to be the case upon Marcus Aurelius’ death in 180. Some historians point to his breaking of tradition by selecting his son rather than adopting a hand-picked successor. However, the previous four emperors only adopted a successor because they didn’t have any surviving sons. Marcus Aurelius actually did adopt a successor but he died prematurely. Hoping to see a smooth transition following his death, Marcus Aurelius promoted his son, Commodus, to Co-emperor in 176. Clearly Marcus Aurelius left large shoes to fill, but initially things went to plan with Commodus transitioning from Co-emperor to sole Emperor.

It didn’t take long for centuries of traditions to start falling by the wayside. Unlike the previous five emperors, Commodus was born the son of an emperor. Probably not surprisingly, being an eighteen-year-old spoiled brat, he was more interested in having fun than the affairs of state. Soon after coming to power he tired of his imperial duties and began turning over ever increasing power to subordinates. Without his father to check his baser instincts he soon gave into lust and cruelty. An empire that hadn’t seen an assassination in nearly a century saw a series of coup attempts. His inattention to his duties and growing list of enemies started giving others in his inner circle ideas about making a power grab.

Eventually Commodus wised up that if he didn’t start actively ruling it was just a matter of time until one of his underlings stabbed him in the back, literally. Unfortunately, the abandonment of imperial traditions only went into hyperdrive at this point. He abandoned the traditional clothing of an emperor and wore a cloak made from a lion’s skin. He also began referring to himself as the reincarnation of Hercules and even renamed Rome after himself. Spoiler alert, the name didn’t take. Debasing the position of Emperor by entering the gladiatorial ring to fight handicapped people and beasts was the final straw.

Commodus’ years of excess, flaunting Rome’s traditional religions, demeaning the position of emperor and wanton cruelty finally caught up to him in 192. His plan to ring in the new year of 193 with himself as the star attraction in the gladiatorial ring was too much for his inner circle. In a hastily arranged plan his mistress poisoned his wine. When that failed to complete the job, the conspirators sent Commodus’ trainer in to strangle him. The twelve years Commodus ruled the Roman Empire saw all the norms surrounding the Emperor’s conduct ignored and resulted in the weakening of the position. Commodus’ tenure revealed the inherent weaknesses in the Roman system. Those who had imperial dreams of their own learned these lessons all too well.

Emperor Pertinax succeeded Commodus after his death. It seemed initially that he was exactly what Rome needed. He immediately began restoring discipline in the military and initiated much needed reforms. However, the elite Praetorian Guard was accustomed to lax discipline and having their loyalty bought through the Emperor’s largesse. When some angry Praetorians showed up at the Emperors palace he went out to reason with them. But they had just learned that when you don’t like the Emperor, getting stabby is an easy way to get a new one. Although some of the Guard were receptive to Pertinax, at least one soldier wasn’t interested in talk and struck him down.

Having dealt with Pertinax, the Praetorians wanted an Emperor who would show them appreciation in the form of a large bonus. One guard had the brilliant idea to just auction off the position of Emperor to the highest bidder. Although the plan worked in the short run, the new Emperor lacked legitimacy with the public. This doomed his reign and he only survived a couple of months himself. Without getting into all the details, 193 became known as the year of the five emperors as successive generals with a legion of troops behind them attempted to seize control.

In many ways the reign of Commodus and the ensuing chaos was reminiscent of Nero 125 years earlier. Despite the damage Nero had done to the Empire, his assassination was eventually followed by a long period of growth and stability. There was reason to think that would be the case again. Septimius Severus became the last man standing in the free-for-all for control of the Empire. And his reign did last 18 years and included several successful military campaigns along the way. However, things were also markedly different than the days of the Five Good Emperors. He never enjoyed the support of the Senate and in fact regularly executed Senators he didn’t like. Although he had success as Emperor, his reign took on the characteristics of a military dictatorship.

The breakdown of historical precedent and social norms during Commodus’ reign had ended the period of pax romana or Roman peace. For the rest of the century, power would rest with who ever had the military strength to keep it. Severus died of old age in 211 but he was the last Emperor of the 200s to do so. Where in the second century the assassination of an Emperor had been almost unimaginable, in the next century it became the norm. In the process the Empire which had always been marked by territorial growth began to see its neighbors whittle away at an empire in decline. By the 260s the Empire was on the verge of total collapse before being rescued by a series of powerful generals late in the century.

So, what does this mean for America as we move forward from Trump’s continual demeaning of the Presidency. Just like Rome had very different outcomes following Nero and Commodus, America could go either way as well. Biden might restore normalcy to the Presidency. The results of independent investigations into Donald Trump’s crimes could put out the last embers of Trumpism. Perhaps Congress will act on the deficiencies Trump has exposed in our system in a bipartisan effort to ensure transparency in government. Hopefully in 50 years Trumpism will be a weird historical curiosity.

On the other hand, partisan politics could result in both sides looking to exploit the lessons learned from Trump’s abuses of our governmental institutions. Future would-be presidents might see they can ignore the law without consequence. We might look back at this era in wonder of our ignorance of how bad it would get.

The future is uncertain, but it’s also not random. One thing leads to another. We have the power to right this ship, but that will only happen with accountability. Future leaders will learn the lessons of recent events. Will they learn demagoguery perfected, or will they learn the American people won’t accept unchecked corruption. It could go either way.