Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Welshhoppo t1_iyewt20 wrote

So it's less a case of having children. Which a lot of Emperors did have. It was a case of having children survive to adulthood in a political world where murdering your enemy was a viable tactic for getting ahead. Augustus had his daughter Julia, who gave him loads of grandchildren, in fact she seemed to have problems not being pregnant. Tiberius also had a son, who died due to interference from the Praetorian Prefect Sejanus. Caligula, his successor, had a daughter who was murdered. Claudius had four and all of them were murdered. And Nero also had a daughter, who died in early childhood.

So it was a very hard environment for children to actually survive. Especially when blood relation to the ruling Emperor and Augustus was very important for maintaining power. But you had the low survival rates combined with the seemingly deadly game of politics combined with various other dangers that come from ruling a state, such as death in warfare or on campaign. It's one of the reasons why adoption was seen as being as legitimate as being blood related, because sometimes you just have bad luck.

2,127

taint-juice t1_iyfb2yd wrote

To add on this, they were murdered by political opponents to the previous regime when they came into power. Any lingering family members from previous leaders represented a real threat from which other actors could rally behind.

Those who did not engage in the practice of killing their old political rivals children often came to regret the decision. Unless they were married into the current regimes family tree with the outward notion of unity.

649

WayneKrane t1_iyf9iwx wrote

Only 1/3rd of Roman emperors died of natural causes, the rest were murdered or killed in battle.

197

teplightyear t1_iyf3stc wrote

Often the adopted children were nephews/cousins/etc, as well, so practically it was a means of keeping power and prestige in the family even if your own line died off, as well.

122

[deleted] t1_iyf1x0f wrote

[removed]

26

DarkTreader t1_iyf97y7 wrote

Bastards were not as much of a thing in Roman times. Like another comment said, you just adopt. Bastards being an issue in succession were products of other times and other regimes and is not a universal issue in all eras.

106

Welshhoppo t1_iyf203c wrote

That doesn't matter so much. That's why you adopt them.

44