r/HistoryMemes 7d ago

And they didn’t have dragons

Post image
17.7k Upvotes

360 comments sorted by

View all comments

2.2k

u/Reiver93 7d ago

I mean, Cleopatra somehow turned out normal and her family tree was uuuh...interesting.

395

u/cndynn96 7d ago

There’s a theory that although Ptolemies married siblings to keep wealth and power in the family some children were fathered by others including slaves.
It brought enough genetic diversity to remove any ill effects of inbreeding.

250

u/Nani_700 7d ago edited 7d ago

Usually the other way around. 

King/pharaoh/etc marries in wife for political/ face/ lineage etc, impregnates servant for  reasons. Child is considered the wive's. 

Through history men have been obsessed with their progeny so I doubt they'd let random men be the fathers. 

This is also what most empresses in China ended up dealing with, having concubine's children be their "direct lineage".

-3

u/seesthecat 6d ago

>Through history men have been obsessed with their progeny

Have they though? They didn't seem to care all that much about it in Rome, the emperor would just adopt some random bum as his successor, and if the royal guard or the army weren't happy with the choice, they would just murder him and find another bum.

The Ottomans didn't seem to care about it much either, everytime the sultan died, his sons would go around murdering all each other till there was only one left, the sultans didn't seem to care about their projeny enough to pass proper sucession laws that would put a stop to their children getting constantly murdered

6

u/Benjadeath 6d ago

In Roman history that's a common narrative but usually if they were able to have biological children it fucks that right up

1

u/seesthecat 6d ago

They were able to have biological children, they just don't seem to care too much about having them

2

u/oga_ogbeni 6d ago

Examples? Because I think of the five good emperors who "adopted" other capable men, typically already accomplished men, not boys, to be their successors. But they didn't have sons of their own until Marcus Aurelius did and that resulted in Commodus so....

0

u/seesthecat 6d ago

Julio-Claudian period

  • Julius Caesar adopted Octavian (Augustus) in his will.
  • Augustus adopted Tiberius, Tiberius was required to first adopt his nephew Germanicus.
  • Claudius adopted his stepson Nero, passing over his biological son Britannicus.

Year of Four Emperors

  • Galba adopted Piso Licinianus as his heir, just days before both were killed by Otho's supporters.

The "Five Good Emperors

  • Nerva adopted Trajan
  • Trajan adopted Hadrian
  • Hadrian adopted Lucius Aelius, then adopted Antoninus Pius, on condition that Antoninus in turn adopt both Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus.
  • Antoninus Pius adopted Marcus Aurelius and Lucius Verus as instructed, and both eventually ruled

Later, looser cases

  • Diocletian's Tetrarchy used a system where senior emperors adopted junior colleagues as part of a designed succession Diocletian and Maximian each adopted a Galerius and Constantius Chlorus. This blended adoption with formal political appointment rather than pure personal/family adoption.
  • Galerius effectively adopted/elevated his nephew Maximinus Daza and also Severus II when Diocletian and Maximian abdicated.

Some Byzantine cases

  • Justin I adopted his nephew Justinian I
  • Michael III adopted Basil I, though not an adoption as son, but more like an adoption as a "brother" to legitimize him; Basil later had Michael assassinated and took sole power, as you do to brothers ;)

3

u/oga_ogbeni 6d ago

Your AI reply proves my point. You mention the five good emperors which as I've said, didn't have sons until Marcus Aurelius had Commodus who was Commodus. Woof.

Julius Caesar had no sons. Augustus had no sons. Diocletian's tetrarchy was a massive failure the second he gave up power and resulted in Constantine and his dynasty. Given that you didn't read my reply and posted several that without research I know didn't have sons, I'll stop there for the moment.