Dr. Alex Imrie

In terms of his His immediate political legacy, it's almost non-existent, is condemned. He is a road hump, it seems, or a bump in the road, rather, in the otherwise uninterrupted Severan story. His legacy is condemned by the new Severan regime, and that's really pretty much the end of it. As you say, it is so short, he's not really had enough time to lay down any more significant roots or

In terms of his His immediate political legacy, it's almost non-existent, is condemned. He is a road hump, it seems, or a bump in the road, rather, in the otherwise uninterrupted Severan story. His legacy is condemned by the new Severan regime, and that's really pretty much the end of it. As you say, it is so short, he's not really had enough time to lay down any more significant roots or

create any kind of significant legacy. And certainly, while the senators seem to have been happy enough to accept him in the short term, equestrian as he was, Dyer's account is just characterized start to finish by a rank snobbery as a senator against this absolute upstart. Now, Herodian's account is interesting because it's written slightly later.

create any kind of significant legacy. And certainly, while the senators seem to have been happy enough to accept him in the short term, equestrian as he was, Dyer's account is just characterized start to finish by a rank snobbery as a senator against this absolute upstart. Now, Herodian's account is interesting because it's written slightly later.

create any kind of significant legacy. And certainly, while the senators seem to have been happy enough to accept him in the short term, equestrian as he was, Dyer's account is just characterized start to finish by a rank snobbery as a senator against this absolute upstart. Now, Herodian's account is interesting because it's written slightly later.

It's written probably in the 240s, maybe even into the 250s AD, at which point Who gets to be a Roman emperor is slightly different. So we find a little bit more emphasis in Macrinus' identity and Macrinus' apparent attempts to explain that identity in Herodian's account. But that's probably because Herodian was writing under the emperor Philip the Arab, who himself was of equestrian origin.

It's written probably in the 240s, maybe even into the 250s AD, at which point Who gets to be a Roman emperor is slightly different. So we find a little bit more emphasis in Macrinus' identity and Macrinus' apparent attempts to explain that identity in Herodian's account. But that's probably because Herodian was writing under the emperor Philip the Arab, who himself was of equestrian origin.

It's written probably in the 240s, maybe even into the 250s AD, at which point Who gets to be a Roman emperor is slightly different. So we find a little bit more emphasis in Macrinus' identity and Macrinus' apparent attempts to explain that identity in Herodian's account. But that's probably because Herodian was writing under the emperor Philip the Arab, who himself was of equestrian origin.

descent and had risen to imperial power through military strength and through a coup that way. So that's quite an interesting way that Macrinus' identity is squared away by one writer owing to history repeating a little bit later down the line. Only a couple of decades, mind you, but still the divergence in the sources there is quite obvious. Dio of his time arch senatorial.

descent and had risen to imperial power through military strength and through a coup that way. So that's quite an interesting way that Macrinus' identity is squared away by one writer owing to history repeating a little bit later down the line. Only a couple of decades, mind you, but still the divergence in the sources there is quite obvious. Dio of his time arch senatorial.

descent and had risen to imperial power through military strength and through a coup that way. So that's quite an interesting way that Macrinus' identity is squared away by one writer owing to history repeating a little bit later down the line. Only a couple of decades, mind you, but still the divergence in the sources there is quite obvious. Dio of his time arch senatorial.

Even though he's glad Caracalla's dead, he just cannot swallow this lower class person. Again, still obscenely wealthy, holding the imperial throne.

Even though he's glad Caracalla's dead, he just cannot swallow this lower class person. Again, still obscenely wealthy, holding the imperial throne.

Even though he's glad Caracalla's dead, he just cannot swallow this lower class person. Again, still obscenely wealthy, holding the imperial throne.

Oh, that's a bold statement. I think we're kind of heading that direction, maybe regardless, but it is a really interesting counterfactual. I tend to agree with Matilda. I think Macrinus deserves a lot more attention. I think he... is completely overwhelmed by the circumstances that he inherits. I think that's really the defining feature of him.

Oh, that's a bold statement. I think we're kind of heading that direction, maybe regardless, but it is a really interesting counterfactual. I tend to agree with Matilda. I think Macrinus deserves a lot more attention. I think he... is completely overwhelmed by the circumstances that he inherits. I think that's really the defining feature of him.

Oh, that's a bold statement. I think we're kind of heading that direction, maybe regardless, but it is a really interesting counterfactual. I tend to agree with Matilda. I think Macrinus deserves a lot more attention. I think he... is completely overwhelmed by the circumstances that he inherits. I think that's really the defining feature of him.

Now, I'm somebody who would like to go back and revisit his rise to power, though, because this whole prophecy declaring that he will be an emperor seems a very neat way to explain it in narrative terms and to kind of almost... give him a blank slate or a green light towards this. I would like to know whether he was a little bit more calculating, you know, the protege of Plotianus at one point.

Now, I'm somebody who would like to go back and revisit his rise to power, though, because this whole prophecy declaring that he will be an emperor seems a very neat way to explain it in narrative terms and to kind of almost... give him a blank slate or a green light towards this. I would like to know whether he was a little bit more calculating, you know, the protege of Plotianus at one point.

Now, I'm somebody who would like to go back and revisit his rise to power, though, because this whole prophecy declaring that he will be an emperor seems a very neat way to explain it in narrative terms and to kind of almost... give him a blank slate or a green light towards this. I would like to know whether he was a little bit more calculating, you know, the protege of Plotianus at one point.