Who was the best Roman general?

[TheLastDays]

He died and did not reunite the empire.

As did Flaevius?

[CashMunny]

Well, if we're into the debate of whether or not Sulla did good for Rome, and ignoring his command acumen, I'll throw in my opinion.

If we're judging him by today's ethical standards and our own (USA, anyways) values, then I'd say he was not very ethical, not very moral, and a pretty elitist sort of guy in general.
However, going by the standards of the time, and ROMAN values and ethics, he was an excellent Roman. He was skilled at battlefield command and politics, and he tried to keep the Republic's values upheld even though it was clear that eventually the mob would win out. We have to remember that Rome was not a democracy, and it wasn't even really a representative republic as we would consider one to be today. It was an oligarchy first and foremost, and the plebians had advocates merely to ensure there was no extreme exploitation going on by the landed gentry against the plebians.

Unlike today's ideas of universal suffrage and equality, Roman society was ruled by the wealthy landed class, and the plebians were definitely considered a second class. And this was OK. It wasn't like classism, racism or sexism today, where whenever an incident happens there's an uproar, but on the contrary the plebians were generally fine with their lot. And truly a Roman plebian had it better off than most any other commoners of the time, so they didn't have much to complain about unless something truly scandalous occurred.

[Constantius III]

He died and did not reunite the empire.

As did Flaevius?

Indeed. Came a lot closer than Aetius did, too, with arguably fewer resources. And his death was probably one of those few instances of disease actually having a macrohistorical impact.