‘Many bristled at Nikephoros’ tactless behaviour’
Peter Frankopan, Professor of International Historical past on the College of Oxford
Historical past, as we all know, doesn’t repeat itself. It’s merely a coincidence that within the Byzantine Empire within the second half of the 11th century an adviser who was too intelligent and crafty for his personal good polarised well mannered society, compromised the chief and helped wreck the economic system.
Byzantine emperors, like British prime ministers, typically relied closely on a trusted adviser. Within the 1070s, Michael VII turned to a person named Nikephoros, a high-flyer who had loved a number of brushes with scandal prior to now, primarily for rubbing individuals up the unsuitable manner.
However, he had his admirers, reminiscent of Kekaumenos Katakalon, who thought he was ‘beneficiant and really intelligent’, ‘an especially affordable man’ – simply what the stuffy civil service wanted at a time of change and rising stress from Byzantium’s neighbours.
Few others noticed it that manner. Many bristled at Nikephoros’ tactless and aggressive behaviour, on the manner he locked others out of essential selections and restricted entry to the ruler. He was accused, too, of giving his associates a leg up and exhibiting them favours they’d not earned and didn’t deserve. He was conceited, clumsy and scorned those that criticised him.
The adjustments he launched had been supposed to permit the empire to take again management and regain momentum. They sounded good on paper, however had been a catastrophe in follow. A tax hike to spice up public spending went unsuitable from the beginning, whereas the plan to stabilise grain provide and costs, centred on the introduction of a system of centralised distribution, had the impact of inflicting shortages, inflation – and chaos.
Though he was a extremely divisive determine, nicknamed ‘Nikephoritzes’ (‘little Nikephoros’) as a time period of contempt, some turned their ire on the emperor. Michael VII ‘lacked regular judgement’, wrote one modern, ‘and confirmed no lack of infantile immaturity’. Too lazy to do the job correctly or to make selections, he merely handed management over to his adviser.
It didn’t finish effectively. The emperor was deposed; Nikephoros was exiled and abused; and the empire slumped to its knees. Nikephoros would have blamed the elites in glitzy Constantinople for most of the issues going through Byzantium, and maybe not with out cause. None of it, in fact, was his fault. That’s the factor with advisers: it by no means is.
‘The accolade for worst adviser should certainly go to Sejanus’
Catharine Edwards, Professor of Classics and Historic Historical past at Birkbeck, College of London
Advisers to Roman emperors typically get a nasty press. The emperor Claudius, bookish and absent-minded, was on the mercy of self-serving ex-slaves – Narcissus, Pallas and Polybius – or so snobbish Roman aristocrats, their noses out of joint, insistently claimed. Poor previous Seneca did his greatest to information his wayward pupil Nero and possibly doesn’t deserve among the accusations in opposition to him, however it’s onerous to defend the letter he ghost-wrote explaining away Nero’s homicide of his personal mom.
The accolade for worst adviser, although, should certainly go to Sejanus, prefect of the praetorian guard for a lot of the reign of the emperor Tiberius. The emperor himself was wily sufficient, however Sejanus appears to have performed on his paranoia, persuading him to pay attention the praetorians in barracks on the sting of Rome, the place their menacing presence made clear the army underpinnings of imperial rule. Sejanus was rumoured to have seduced the emperor’s daughter-in-law Livilla and, along with her, to have plotted the poisoning of the emperor’s son, Drusus, who died in AD 23. Inspired by Sejanus (historians declare), Tiberius ultimately retreated to the island of Capri in AD 26 – leaving Sejanus in management in Rome. Outstanding figures who challenged Sejanus had been picked off in a collection of treason trials. And Tiberius was induced to chop a swathe by his circle of relatives.
His widowed daughter-in-law, Agrippina, the emperor Augustus’ granddaughter, had lengthy been a thorn in Tiberius’ facet. Accused of treason and declared a public enemy, she was despatched into exile. Badly crushed (she misplaced an eye fixed), Agrippina died in suspicious circumstances, as did her oldest son. One other son was imprisoned in AD 30 – and later starved to loss of life.
However Sejanus overreached. A letter, from his sister-in-law Antonia, lastly acquired by to Tiberius on his island retreat and the emperor moved in opposition to Sejanus. Condemned by the Senate, he was summarily executed. Public loathing for this political adviser was such that his physique was torn to items by the mob and thrown into the river Tiber, his statues had been torn down – and even his kids had been executed.
‘Eadric Streona bears a lot of the accountability for this disastrous flip of occasions’
Levi Roach, Affiliate Professor of Historical past on the College of Exeter
Few political advisers have obtained such justified opprobrium as Eadric Streona (‘the Grasper’). Eadric rose to prominence following the flip of the primary millennium and was the gray eminence of the later years of King Æthelred ‘the Unready’. This was a interval of political turmoil, which noticed successive conquests of England by the Danish rulers Swein Forkbeard and Cnut. Eadric bears a lot of the accountability for this disastrous flip of occasions.
Eadric hailed from the Midlands and his star rose within the wake of the ‘palace revolution’ of 1005-6. This was a dramatic altering of the guard at court docket, which noticed Ealdorman (i.e. Earl) Ælfhelm of Northumbria executed and his two sons blinded. Later sources implicate Eadric in these occasions and there might be little doubt that they’re appropriate. Ælfhelm got here from the Midlands himself and it was Eadric and his kin who benefited from the household’s eclipse.
As befits his moniker, Eadric’s later profession was marked by self-interest. His fortunes rose swiftly after 1006 – and with them, these of his brothers. But their loyalties had been to one another, to not king and nation. Already in 1008, combating between one in every of Eadric’s brothers and a Sussex magnate led to the loss of a giant a part of the English fleet. Then, at an meeting at Oxford in 1015, Eadric tricked Morcar and Sigeferth, two different main figures at court docket, into his quarters. There he had them ‘basely killed’, as a up to date observer has it. This act of intrigue was one other transfer in opposition to a rival faction and it’s no coincidence that Sigeferth was married to a relative of Ælfhelm.
However it’s above all Eadric’s actions throughout Cnut’s invasion which have earned him censure. He initially defected to the Danish king in the summertime of 1015. Then, following Æthelred’s loss of life and the accession of Edmund Ironside (within the spring of 1016), he returned to the English facet, solely to defect as soon as extra, on the decisive battle of Assandun, sealing Cnut’s conquest. The wily Danish monarch, nonetheless, noticed by the English quisling and Eadric was quickly executed alongside Cnut’s English opponents.
‘The worst has acquired to be Johann Friedrich Struensee’
Kate Maltby, critic, columnist and final-year PhD pupil within the English Division at College Faculty London
When there are daring new concepts within the air, it’s straightforward to fall for mental conmen. The world has by no means been wanting males who bulldoze their readers with million-word screeds – whether or not blogposts or pamphlets – or of simply impressed rulers who mistake verbosity for cerebral supremacy. Within the altering winds of the early 18th century, loads of chancers with half an understanding of Enlightenment rules discovered their technique to the centre of European courts.
Two of essentially the most harmful had been Scottish economists. John Regulation, as France’s Controller Basic of Funds, satisfied that nation to again his Mississippi Firm, the collapse of which started the financial turmoil that will lead 60 years later to the French Revolution. William Paterson, after travelling the world earning profits from the slave commerce, managed to cripple the governments of each Scotland and, after Union, Nice Britain. The previous by the ‘Darién Scheme’, a half-baked concept to arrange a Scottish empire in Panama, and the later by the South Sea Bubble, whose failure he didn’t dwell to see.
But when there’s one technique to screw over a king, it’s to undermine the legitimacy of his heirs. So of all of the disastrous royal advisers of the Enlightenment, the worst has acquired to be Johann Friedrich Struensee, a German physician who took cost of Denmark in 1770 whereas Christian VII descended into psychological decline. He didn’t do a nasty job by liberal norms: he abolished torture, slavery, censorship of the press and plenty of hereditary privileges. Not like Regulation and Paterson, he had a wholesome sense of fiscal prudence. However he acquired too near Christian’s spouse, the British princess Caroline Mathilde; it was extensively understood that her daughter, Princess Louise Auguste, was Struensee’s baby. In 1772, all of it acquired an excessive amount of for the courtiers of Copenhagen and a traditionalist coup seized energy, arranging the execution of Struensee and reasserting management over the ineffectual Christian. Struensee was stated to have saved the king locked in a cell and crushed usually, whereas he himself cavorted with the prisoner’s spouse. In the long run, the worst advisers – and people who meet sticky ends – aren’t those that suggest disastrous insurance policies, however those that search to usurp the workplace of a king.