
"Roman Emperor" is the title historians use to refer to rulers of the Roman Empire, after the epoch conventionally named the Roman Republic. In ancient Rome there was no actual title of "Roman Emperor", and there was never a ''single'' office corresponding to it. Rather, the title "Roman Emperor" is a convenient shorthand for a complicated collection of offices and powers. Discussion of Roman Emperors involves a high degree of historian's editorial discretion, for the Romans themselves did not share the modern understanding of the monarchical concepts of "empire" and "emperor". The Roman Empire had kept all the political institutions and traditions of the Roman Republic, including the Roman Senate and Roman assemblies. In general, the Emperors cannot truly be described as "''de jure''" rulers (nominally the Emperor was merely ''primus inter pares''), and many were not "''de facto''" rulers either (Emperors were frequently themselves figureheads for powerful bureaucrats, functionaries, women, and generals). The present article discusses the nature of the imperial dignity, and its dynastic development throughout the history of the Empire. * For a discussion of the Emperor's claimed godhead, see "imperial cult". * For a more comprehensive listing of names of emperors, see "List of Roman Emperors". ==Overview== There was no constitutional office of "Roman emperor" (the first person actually to bear that title was Michael I in the early 9th Century, who was styled ''Basileys Rhomaiôn'', "Emperor of the Romans" - if appreciating that by that time the meaning of "Basileys" had moved from "King" to "Emperor"), nor any title or rank directly analogous to the title of "emperor"; all the titles traditionally associated with the Emperor had pre-existing, Republican meanings. "Roman Emperor" is a convenient shorthand used by historians to express the much more complicated nature of being the "First Man" in the Roman state, and as a result there are many differing opinions as to precisely who was Emperor when, and how many Emperors there were. The emperor's legal authority derived from the extraordinary concentration of individual powers and offices extant in the Republic rather than from a new political office (emperors regularly had themselves elected to the consulship and the censorate); the emperor actually held the non-"imperium" offices of ''princeps senatus'' (parliamentary leader of the Senate) and ''pontifex maximus'' (chief priest of the Roman state Roman religion; lit. "greatest bridge-maker"), both of which had existed for hundreds of years before the Empire. (Gratian was the last emperor to be ''pontifex maximus''; he surrendered the pontificate ''maximus'' in 382 to Pope Siricius and it permanently became an auxiliary honour of the Pope.) However, these offices only provided great ''dignitas'' (personal prestige) and ''auctoritas'' (influence or clout); the emperor's powers derived from the fact that he held ''ad personam'' (i.e. without holding office) both ''imperium'' (greater power or command) and ''tribune'' (tribunician power). As a result, he formally outranked the provincial governors and the ordinary magistrates (''magistratus ordinarii''), had the right to enact capital punishment, could command obedience of private citizens (''privati''), enjoyed personal inviolability (''sacrosanctitas''), could rescue any plebeian from the hands of any patrician magistrate (''ius auxiliandi''), and interpose his veto on any act or proposal of any magistrate, including the tribune (''ius intercessio''). "Emperor" was not a magistracy or office of state (note that there was no formally prescribed "uniform" such as those of curule magistrates, senators, and knights; later emperors were distinguished by wearing ''togae purpurae'', purple togas -- hence the phrase "to don the purple" for the assumption of imperial dignity), nor was there even a regular title until the 3rd century. The titles customarily associated with the imperial dignity are ''imperator'' ("commander", lit. "one who prepares against"), which emphasises the emperor's military supremacy, ''Caesar (title)'', which was originally a name but came to be used to refer to the designated heir (as ''Nobilissimus Caesar'', "Most Noble Caesar") and was retained upon accession, and ''augustus'' ("majestic" or "venerable"), which was adopted upon accession (the three titles were rendered in Greek language as ''autocrat'', ''kaisar'', and ''augustos'' or ''sebastos'' respectively). After Diocletian established the Tetrarchy, ''caesar'' designated the two junior sub-emperors and ''augustus'' the two senior emperors. The Emperors of the first lineages are rather to be considered as quasi-head of state. As ''princeps senatus'' (lit., "first man of the senate"), the Emperor could receive foreign embassages to Rome (but for example Tiberius saw that as a typical task for any group of senators not including himself). All in all, by analogy, in modern terms these early Emperors would tend to be identified as chiefs of state. The office of ''princeps senatus,'' however, was not a magistracy and did not own ''imperium''; in terms of the modern Westminster system, this is approximately comparable to diplomatic agents being accredited to the Leader of the House (the consuls functioned as a sort of hybrid between the Speaker of the House and the Prime Minister). At some points in the Empire's history, the Emperor's power was only nominal; powerful praetorian prefects and magister militum (and even at one point Imperial mothers and grandmothers) occasionally acted as the power behind the throne (also called "emperors who weren't"). The word ''princeps'' (plu. ''Principes''), meaning "first citizen", was a republican term used to denote the leading citizen(s) of the state. It was a purely honorific title with no attached duties or powers. It was the title most preferred by Augustus as it's use implies only primacy, as opposed to Imperator which implies dominance. ''Princeps'', because of it's republican connotation, was most commonly used to refer to the emperor in Latin (although the emperor's actual constitutional position was essentially "pontifex maximus with tribunician power and ''imperium'' superceding all others") as it was in keeping with the facade of the restored republic; the Greek language word ''basileus'' ("king") was modified to be synonymous with emperor (and primarily came into favour after the reign of Heraclius) as the Greek had no republican sensibility and openly viewed the emperor as a monarch. In the era of Diocletian and beyond, ''princeps'' fell into disuse and was replaced with ''dominus'' ("lord"); later emperors used the formula ''Imperator Caesar NN. Pius Felix (Invictus) Augustus''. The use of ''princeps'' and ''dominus'' broadly symbolise the differences in the Empire's government, giving rise to the era designations "Principate" and "Dominate". ===The first Roman Emperor=== In the discussion of who was the first Roman Emperor one has to understand that at the end of the Roman Republic there was no new, and certainly not a ''single'', title created with which to indicate the individual who had the supreme power as a monarch. In so far as ''Emperor'' could be seen as the English translation of imperator, then yes, Julius Caesar had been an ''emperor'', like several Roman generals before him. Instead, by the end of the Roman Republican civil warss in which Julius Caesar had led his armies, it became clear on the one hand that there was certainly no consensus to return to the Roman Kingdom, and that on the other hand the situation where several officials, bestowed with equal power by the senate, fought one another had to come to an end. In order to realise that monarchy-without-naming-it Julius Caesar, and a few years later Octavian in an even more subtle and gradual way, worked towards (1) accumulating offices and titles that were of the highest importance in the Republic, (2) making the power attached to these offices permanent, and (3) preventing anyone with similar aspirations from accumulating or maintaining power for themselves. In that way Julius Caesar had gone a considerable part of the road: He held the Republican offices of consul (four times) and Roman dictator (five times), was appointed perpetual dictator (''dictator perpetuus'') in 45 BC, had been "pontifex maximus" for several decades and had handsomely prepared for his deification (see Imperial cult). While he was the last dictator of the Republic, he died several years before the final collapse of the traditional Republican system, to be replaced by the system modern historians call the Principate. By the time of his assassination in 44 BC Julius Caesar was the most powerful man in Rome. But if being "princeps" is seen as the determinating office he should have held for modern historians to call him Emperor, then no, he was not Emperor. Still, he realised something that only a monarch could achieve, but what would only become evident many decades after his death: he had made his high power in the republic ''hereditary'', by his will, in which he had appointed Octavian as his only heir. But not until over a decade after Caesar's death did Octavian achieve supreme power, after the civil wars first avenging Caesar's murder, then the step-by-step process of neutralising his fellow Second Triumvirate, culminating in his victory over Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII of Egypt. When then did Octavian become Emperor? In fact there was no single instant at which he did. Was it when he became Pontifex Maximus? Was it when he was acclaimed ''Augustus'' (more a solemn and official nickname than a "title" when he got it)? Was it when he became "princeps"? Was it when the Senate ordained that he held the "tribunicia potestas" ("power of a tribune") without needing to be one of the tribunes? Was it when he started to use Imperator as a praenomen? Note that all this time the organisation of the state remained the same as during the ''res publica.'' Even at Augustus' death, some later historians like Tacitus would say, it might have been possible to return to the republic properly, without even needing to change anything, if there had been a real will to accomplish that (that is, by not allowing Tiberius to accumulate the same powers, which he did, however, very quickly). Even Tiberius continued to go to great lengths to keep the "republican" governement system untouched. The historians of the first centuries saw the continuity in the first place: if a hereditary monarchy-not-by-kings existed after the republic, it had started with Julius Caesar. In this sense Suetonius wrote of ''The Twelve Caesars,'' meaning the emperors from Julius Caesar to the Flavians included (where after Nero the ''inherited name'' had turned into a ''title''). Most more recent history books, however, noting that immediately after the assassination of Julius Caesar, the Roman State had in all respects returned to the republic and that the second ''Triumvirate'' could hardly be called a ''monarchy'', see Augustus as the first "emperor" in the proper sense and (somewhat arbitrarily) say he became emperor when he "restored" power to the senate and people and was given the name Augustus in 27_BC. ===The Fall of the West=== By the end of the Third century, taking a few steps, the Roman Empire was split in a Western and an Eastern part, each with their own Emperors (and/or Caesars). In the West, which included Rome, the succession of Emperors had stopped by the end of the Fifth century, kicking off the period known as the Middle Ages ===Eastern lineage=== The line of Roman emperors in the East continues unbroken until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 under Constantine XI. These emperors eventually normalised the imperial dignity into the modern conception of an emperor, incorporated it into the constitutions of the state, and adopted the aforementioned title ''Basileys Rhomaiôn'' ("Emperor of the Romans"; these Emperors ceased to use Latin as the language of state after Heraclius). Historians have customarily treated the state of these later Eastern Emperors under the name "Byzantine Empire", though ''Byzantine'' is not a term that the Byzantines ever used to describe themselves. ===New Western lineage=== The concept of the Roman Empire was renewed in the West with the coronation of the king of the Franks, Charlemagne, as Roman emperor by the Pope on Christmas, 800. This line of Roman emperors was actually generally Germanic peoples rather than Roman, but maintained their Romanness as a matter of principle; it lasted until 1806 when Francis I of Austria dissolved the Empire during the Napoleonic Wars. These emperors used a variety of titles (most frequently "''Imperator Augustus''") before finally settling on ''Imperator Romanus Electus'' ("Elected Roman Emperor"). Historians customarily assign them the title "Holy Roman Emperor", which has a basis in actual historical usage, and treat their "Holy Roman Empire" as a separate institution. ==Titles, Positions, and Powers== Although these are the commonest offices, titles, and positions, one should note that not all Roman Emperors used them, nor were all of them used at the same time. The consular and censorial offices especially were not an integral part of the Imperial dignity, and were usually held by persons other than the reigning Emperor. *Augustus (also "Augoustos" or "Sebastos"), "Majestic" or "Venerable"; an honorific cognomen exclusive to the emperor *Autocrat, "Autocrat" (lit. "Self-ruler"); Greek title equivalent to imperator i.e. Commander-in-Chief *Basileus, Greek title meaning king, popularly used in the east to refer to the emperor; a formal title of the Roman emperor beginning with Heraclius *Caesar (title) (also "Kaisar" or "Nobilissimus Caesar"), "Caesar" or "Most Noble Caesar"; an honorific name later used to identify an Emperor-designate *Censor, a Republican office with a five year term and one coequal officeholder *Consul, the highest magistracy of the Roman republic with a one year term and one coequal officeholder *Dominus, "Lord" or "Master"; an honorific title popular in the Empire's middle history *Imperator, "Commander" or "Commander-in-Chief"; a Victory titles taken on accession to the purple and after a major military victory; the praenomen of most Roman emperors *''Imperium'', "greater ''imperium''"; absolute power to a degree greater than any other, including power of enacting capital punishment *Invictus, "Unconquered"; an honorific title *Pater Patriae, "Father of the Fatherland"; an honorific title *Pius Felix, "Pious and Blessed" (lit. "Dutiful and Happy"); an honorific title *Pontifex Maximus, "Supreme Pontiff" or "Chief Priest" (lit. "Greatest Bridgemaker"); a title and office of Republican origin - could not be used by "Catholic" Emperors, while by that time only the pope had a claim on the title of highest religious authority. *Princeps, "First Citizen" or "Leading Citizen"; an honorific title denoting the status of the emperor as Primus_inter_pares *Princeps Iuventatis, "Prince of Youth"; an honorific title awarded to a presumptive Emperor-designate *Princeps Senatus, "First Man of the Senate" a Republican office with a five year term *''Tribune'', "tribunician power"; the powers of a Tribune including sacrosanctity and the veto ==The lineages and epochs== In the listings of Roman Emperors below, the common name is given first, followed by the more formal name adopted upon accession to the purple, the name given at birth, and the years of his reign. So-called victory titles and other titles not forming an integral part of the name (''Pontifex Maximus'', ''Princeps Senatus'', ''Pater Patriae'', &c.) are not listed. Co-Emperors are listed in inferior text, along with notes identifying senior Emperors who had hitherto served as co-Emperors. Following abbreviations are used: *A. - Aulus *Aug. - Augustus (as a title) *C. - Gaius *Germ. - Germanicus *Imp. - Imperator *L. - Lucius *M. - Marcus *Max. - Maximus *Nob. - Nobilissimus *P. - Publius *P.F. - Pius Felix *Princ. Iuv. - Princeps Iuventutis *Q. - Quintus *Ser. - Servius *T. - Titus *Ti. - Tiberius ===The Principate=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Principate) The nature of the Imperial office and the Principate was established under Julius Caesar's heir and posthumously adopted son, Caesar Augustus, and his own heirs, the descendants of his wife Livia from her first marriage to a scion of the distinguished Claudius clan. This Julio-Claudian dynasty came to an end when the emperor Nero—a great-great-grandson of Augustus through his daughter and of Livia through her son—was deposed in AD 68. Nero was followed by a succession of usurpers throughout 69, commonly called the "Year of the four emperors". The last of these, Vespasian, established his own Flavian dynasty. Nerva, who replaced the last Flavian emperor, Vespasian's son Domitian, in 96, was elderly and childless, and chose therefore to adoption an heir, Trajan, from outside his family. When Trajan acceded to the purple he chose to follow his predecessor's example, adopting Hadrian as his own heir, and the practise then became the customary manner of imperial succession for the next century, producing the "Five Good Emperors" and the Empire's period of greatest stability. The last of the Good Emperors, Marcus Aurelius, chose his natural son Commodus as his successor rather than adopting an heir. Commodus's misrule led to his murder on 31 December 192, following which a brief period of instability quickly gave way to Septimius Severus, who established the Severan dynasty which, except for an interruption in 217-218, held the purple until 235. ===The Crisis of the Third Century=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Crisis of the Third Century)'' The accession of Maximinus Thrax marks both the close and the opening of an era. It was one of the last attempts by the increasingly impotent Roman Senate to influence the succession. Yet it was the first time that a man had achieved the purple while owing his advancement purely to his military career; both Vespasian and Septimius Severus had come from noble or middle class families, while Thrax was a born commoner. He never visited the city of Rome during his reign, which marks the beginning of a series of "Barracks Emperors" who came from the army. Between 232 and 285 over a dozen emperors achieved the purple, but only Valerian (emperor) and Carus managed to secure their own sons' succession to the throne; both dynasties died out within two generations. ===The Dominate=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Dominate) The accession to the purple on November 20, 284, of Diocletian, the lower-class, Greek-speaking Dalmatian commander of Carus's and Numerian's household cavalry (''protectores domestici''), marked a major departure from traditional Roman constitutional theory regarding the Emperor, who was nominally first among equals; Diocletian introduced Oriental despotism into the Imperial dignity. Whereas before Emperors had worn only a purple toga (''toga purpura'') and been greeted with deference, Diocletian wore jewelled robes and shoes, and required those who greeted him to kneel and kiss the hem of his robe ''(adoratio)''. In many ways, Diocletianus was the first monarchical Emperor, and this is symbolised by the fact that the word ''dominus'' ("Lord") rapidly replaced ''princeps'' as the favoured word for referring to the Emperor. Significantly, neither Diocletian nor his co-Emperor Maximian spent much time in Rome after 286, establishing their Imperial capitals at Nicomedia and Milan (modern Milan), respectively. Diocletian established the Tetrarchy, a system by which the Roman Empire was divided into East and West, with each having an Augustus to rule over it and a Caesar (title) to assist him. The Tetrarchy ultimately degenerated into civil war, but the eventual victor, Constantine the Great, restored Domitian's system of dividing the Empire into East and West. He kept the East for himself and founded his city of Constantinople as its new capital. The dynasty Constantine established also was soon swallowed up in civil war and court intrigue until it was replaced, briefly, by Julian the Apostate's general Jovian and then, more permanently, by Valentinian I and the dynasty he founded in 364. Though he was a soldier from a low middle class background, Valentinian was not a Barracks Emperor; he was elevated to the purple by a conclave of senior generals and civil officials. ===The Late Empire=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Late Empire) Theodosius I acceded to the purple in the East in 379 and in the West in 394. He outlawed paganism and made Christianity the Empire's official religion. He was the last Emperor to rule over a united empire; the distribution of the East to his son Arcadius and the West to his son Flavius Augustus Honorius after his death in 395 represented a permanent division. In the West, the office of Emperor soon degenerated into being little more than a puppet of a succession of Germanic tribes tribal Monarchs, until finally the Heruli Odoacer simply overthrew Emperor Romulus Augustulus in 476, shipped the imperial regalia to the Emperor Zeno in Constantinople and assumed the title "King of Italy". Though during his own lifetime Odoacer maintained the legal fiction that he was actually ruling Italy as the viceroy of Zeno, historians mark 476 as the traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. In the East, the Empire continued as the Byzantine Empire until the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. :''For rulers of Italy after Romulus "Augustulus" and Julius Nepos, see list of barbarian kings of Italy''. :''For Roman Emperors in the West after Romulus "Augustulus" and Julius Nepos, see list of "Holy Roman Emperors".'' :''See also list of "Byzantine Emperors".'' ==See also== *Julio-Claudian family tree - Severan dynasty family tree *Victory titles - List of Imperial Victory Titles *Praetorian Prefect *Roman usurpers - List of Roman usurpers *Byzantine Empire - Latin Empire of Constantinople *Holy Roman Empire - List of German Kings and Emperors ==External links== * [http://www.roman-emperors.org/impindex.htm De Imperatoribus Romanis] * [http://www.ghg.net/shetler/rome/rulers/ Rulers of Rome] * [http://www.friesian.com/decdenc1.htm "Decadence, Rome and Romania, and the Emperors Who Weren't"], by Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. ==Further reading== * Chronicle of the Roman Emperors: The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome ''by Chris Scarre, (c) 1995 Thames and Hudson Ltd, London.'' Roman emperors Lists of office-holders Ancient Roman titles Positions of authority Ancient Romans by occupation
As can be seen at Talk:List of Roman Emperors, my more complicated listing of Roman Emperors is far from a finished or satisfactory project. I would greatly appreciate any input as to how it ought to be refined or improved. User:Publius --- As I mentioned elsewhere, I think it would be a good idea for this page's list of the Emperors to focus on dynastic and non-dynastic changes (so as to justify its separate listing of the Emperors). I put together an example of how this might be accomplished with the Julio-Claudians as an example: :Julio-Claudian Emperors: :*Caesar Augustus ("Imp. Caesar Augustus"; b. C. Octavius), d. 14 :**Agrippa, 18 BC – 12 BC :**Tiberius, 6 BC – 1 BC, 4 – 14 (as "Ti. Iulius Caesar") :*Tiberius ("Ti. Caesar Augustus"; b. Ti. Claudius Nero), 14 – 37 :**''Note:'' Tiberius had been co-Emperor with Caesar Augustus from 6 BC to 1 BC, and again from AD 4 until his own accession to the purple :*Caligula ("C. Caesar Augustus Germ."; b. C. Iulius Caesar Germ.), 37 – 41 :*Claudius ("Ti. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germ."; b. Ti. Claudius Drusus), 41 – 54 :*Nero ("Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germ."; b. L. Domitius Ahenobarbus), 54 – 68 :Dynastic Relationships: :Caesar Augustus's third wife Livia Drusilla (subsequently "Iulia Augusta") had previously borne two children by her first husband, Tiberius Claudius Nero: Tiberius and Drusus. Tiberius's second wife was Iulia, Marcus Agrippa's widow (his first wife had been Vipsania, Agrippa's daughter by his first marriage); Caesar Augustus adopted Tiberius on June 26, 4, whereupon Tiberius himself adopted his brother Drusus's son by Marcus Antonius's daughter, Germanicus. Germanicus married Agrippina the Elder, Agrippa's daughter by Iulia and Tiberius's stepdaughter, and had by her one surviving son, Gaius \"Caligula\" ("Bootkins"), and a daughter, Agrippina the Younger, whose second husband was Germanicus's brother by blood, Claudius (she was his fourth wife); Agrippina had already borne a son (Lucius) by her first husband, Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus. Claudius adopted Lucius under the name Nero in 40; Nero married Claudius's daughter Octavia in 53. What does everyone think about using this as a general model for the article's second part? It will of course take some time to modify the whole article, and will necessarily make the article somewhat lengthier, but I think it would go a long way toward demonstrating the complicated (dare I say, "byzantine"?) often-familial nature of the Roman Emperor's succession. Comments? User:Publius It sounds an interesting idea. But speaking of "byzantine", the familial connections get more complicated from the Tetrarchy and till Anastasius I. Any ideas how to cover the following connections (from a modern Greek encyclopedia)?: *Diocletian (284 - 305) was father-in-law to Galerius. *Maximian (286 - 305, 307 - 310) was father to Maxentius, father-in-law to both Constantius Chlorus and Constantine I of the Roman Empire, grandfather-in-law to Licinius, grandfather to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II, and Constans, great-grandfather to Julian and great-grandfather-in-law to Gratian. *Galerius (305 - 311) was son-in-law to Diocletian and father-in-law to Maxentius. *Constantius Chlorus (305 - 306) was son-in-law to Maximian, father and brother-in-law to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, father-in-law to Licinius, grandfather to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II, Constans and Julian, and great-grandfather-in-law to Gratian. *Constantine I of the Roman Empire (306 - 337) was son and brother-in-law to Constantius Chlorus, son-in-law to Maximian, brother-in-law to Maxentius and Licinius, father to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II and Constans, uncle and father-in-law to Julian and grandfather-in-law to Gratian. *Maxentius (306 - 312) was son to Maximian, son-in-law to Galerius, brother-in-law to both Constantius Chlorus and Constantine I of the Roman Empire, uncle by marriage of Licinius, uncle by blood of Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II and Constans, great-uncle to Julian and great-great-uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Licinius (308 - 324) was grandson-in-law to Maximian, son-in-law to Constantius Chlorus, nephew by marriage to [[Maxentius], brother-in-law to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, uncle by marriage to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II, Constans and Julian, great-uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Constantine II of the Roman Empire (337 - 340) was grandson to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, son of Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by blood of Maxentius, nephew by marriage of Licinius, older brother of Constantius II and Constans, first cousin and brother-in-law to Julian, uncle by marriage of Gratian. *Constantius II (337 - 361) was grandson to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, son of Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by blood of Maxentius, nephew by marriage of Licinius, younger brother of Constantine II of the Roman Empire, older brother of Constans, first cousin and brother-in-law to Julian, father-in-law to Gratian. *Constans (337 - 350) was grandson to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, son of Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by blood of Maxentius, nephew by marriage of Licinius, younger brother of Constantine II of the Roman Empire and Constantius II, first cousin and brother-in-law to Julian, uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Magnentius (350 - 353's widow was later second wife to Valentinian I. *Julian (361 - 363) was great-grandson to Maximian, grandson to Constantius Chlorus, great-nephew to Maxentius, nephew by blood to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by marriage to Licinius, first cousin and brother-in-law of Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II and Constans, uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Valentinian I (364 - 375) was married to the widow of Magnentius, brother to Valens, father to Gratian and Valentinian II, father-in-law to Theodosius I, grandfather-in-law to Constantius III, great-grandfather to Valentinian III and great-great-grandfather-in-law to Olybrius. *Valens (364 - 378) was brother to Valentinian I, uncle by blood to Gratian and Valentinian II, uncle by marriage to Theodosius I, great-uncle by marriage to Constantius III, great-great-uncle to Valentinian III and great-great-great-uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Gratian (375 - 383) was great-grandson-in law to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, grandson-in-law to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, grandnephew by marriage to Maxentius and Licinius, nephew by marriage to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constans and Julian, son-in-law to Constantius II, son to Valentinian I, nephew by blood to Valens, half-brother to Valentinian II, brother-in-law to Theodosius I, uncle by marriage to Constantius III, great-uncle to Valentinian III and great-great-uncle to Olybrius. *Valentinian II (375 - 392) was son to Valentinian I, nephew to Valens, half-brother to Gratian, brother-in-law to Theodosius I, uncle by marriage to Constantius III, great-uncle to Valentinian III and great-great-uncle to Olybrius. *Theodosius I (379 - 392) was son-in-law to Valentinian I, nephew by marriage to Valens, brother-in-law to Gratian and Valentinian II, father to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, father-in-law to Constantius III, grandfather to Theodosius II and Valentinian III , grandfather-in-law to Marcian, great-grandfather-in-law to Olybrius. *Arcadius (395 - 408) was son to Theodosius I, brother to Flavius Augustus Honorius, brother-in-law to Constantius III, father to Theodosius II, father-in-law to Marcian, uncle to Valentinian III, great-uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Flavius Augustus Honorius (395 - 423) was son to Theodosius I, brother to Arcadius, brother-in-law to Constantius III, uncle to Theodosius II and Valentinian III, uncle by marriage to Marcian and great-uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Theodosius II (408 - 450) was grandson to Theodosius I, son to Arcadius, nephew by blood to Flavius Augustus Honorius, nephew by marriage to Constantius III, brother-in-law to Marcian, first cousin to Valentinian III and uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Constantius III (421) was grandson-in-law to Valentinian I, great-nephew by marriage to Valens, nephew by marriage to Gratian and Valentinian II, son-in-law to Theodosius I, brother-in-law to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, father to Valentinian III, uncle by marriage to Theodosius II and Marcian, grandfather-in-law to Olybrius. *Valentinian III (424 - 455) was great-grandson to Valentinian I, great-great-nephew to Valens, grandson to Theodosius I, great-nephew to Gratian and Valentinian II, son to Constantius III, nephew to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, first cousin by blood to Theodosius II, first cousin by marriage to Marcian and father-in-law to Olybrius. *Marcian (450 - 457) was grandson-in-law to Theodosius I, son-in-law to Arcadius, nephew by marriage to Flavius Augustus Honorius and Constantius III, brother-in-law to Theodosius II, first cousib by marriage to Valentinian III, father-in-law to Anthemius, uncle by marriage to Olybrius, grandfather-in-law to the daughter of Leo I of the Byzantine Empire. *Leo I of the Byzantine Empire (457 - 474) was brother-in-law to Basiliscus, father-in-law to the son of Anthemius, Zeno of the Byzantine Empire and Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire, grandfather to Leo II. *Anthemius (467 - 472) was son-in-law to Marcian and father-in-law to the daughter of Leo I of the Byzantine Empire. *Olybrius (472) was great-great-grandson-in-law to Valentinian I, great-great-great-nephew by marriage to Valens, great-grandson-in-law to Theodosius I, great-great-nephew by marriage to Gratian and Valentinian II, grandson-in-law to Constantius III, great-nephew by marriage to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, son-in-law to Valentinian III, nephew by marriage to Theodosius II and Marcian. *Leo II (474) was grandson to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, great-nephew to Basiliscus, son to Zeno of the Byzantine Empire, nephew by marriage to the son of Anthemius). *Zeno of the Byzantine Empire (474 - 475, 476 - 491), was son-in-law to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, nephew by marriage to Basiliscus, brother-in-law to the son of Anthemius, father to Leo II. His widow married Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire. *Basiliscus (475 - 476) was brother-in-law to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, uncle by marriage to the son of Anthemius, Zeno of the Byzantine Empire and Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire, great-uncle to Leo II. *Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire (491 - 518) was son-in-law to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, nephew by marriage to Basiliscus, brother-in-law to the son of Anthemius and married to the widow of Zeno of the Byzantine Empire. As you can see those Emperors are connected to each other but far from consitute a single Royal House. Any ideas of how to indicate this in the article? User:Dimadick :Yes, I've been working on upgrading the whole article to my new proposed format, and the Tetrarchy and beyond is definitely a snag. I've been thinking that perhaps we ought to delineate the later houses into separate lines based on Constantinian, Valentinian, Theodosian, and Leonine lines, and add clarification as to how the lines are related. Something along the following lines: ::Constantius I's first wife St. Helena bore him a son, Constantinus I, whose second wife Fausta (sister of Maxentius and daughter of Maximian by Eutropia, mother of Constantius's second wife Theodora) bore him three sons (Constantinus II, Constantius II, and Constans I) and two daughters (Constantia and Helena). Constantius II's daughter Constantia married Gratianus (see below), son of Valentinianus I (see below), while Helena married her half-cousin, Julianus \"the Apostate\". What do you think? (As it happens, I'm glad someone was amused by my "byzantine" pun.) User:Publius 18:13, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) Hmmm... pretty good but some connections of lesser significance should perhaps be clarified to avoid confusion. How about: Constantius I was married twice. First to St. Helena and then to Theodora, daughter to Maximian by Eutropia and sister of Maxentius. He had a single son by the former known as Constantinus I and by the later two more sons (Dalmatius and Julius Constantius) and two daughters (Eutropia and Constantia). Constantine also married twice. First to Minervina and then to Fausta, a sister of his step-mother. The former was mother to Caesar (title) Crispus and the later to three sons (Constantinus II, Constantius II, and Constans I) and two daughters (Constantia and Helena). Julius Constantius in turn became father to two sons: Caesar (title) Gallus and Julian. Their sister Constantia was wife to Licinius. Constantia the younger was wife to Gallus and Helena to Julian. An even younger Constantia, daughter to Constantius II later became consort to Gratianus (see below), son of Valentinianus I (see below). I am in turn glad to see someone trying to clarify the various conceptions and misconceptions about the Roman and "Byzantine" Emperors. User:Dimadick What is your opinion of the current revisions (up to but not including Theodosius and his successors)? I'm not entirely satisfied with the Tetrarchical and Constantinian sections, but do you feel that they adequately convey what was happening with the Imperial dignity at the time? Or is more clarification necessary for the average reader? User:Publius 13:53, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC) ----- Well, it's finally finished. I have completed the systematic upgrade of the article, including dynastic relationships and other topical information (like economic backgrounds and increasingly non-Italian origins of the Emperors), but I'm afraid I won't be around to discuss further improvements. I can only hope that the article is informative, and that others enjoy reading it as much as I have enjoyed writing it. User:Publius 06:58, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC) == Splitting == This page is really, ''really'' long (67kb right now; over twice the recommended maximum length). Would anyone object to splitting it up? Four sub-articles seem rather obvious to me: *Roman Emperor (Principate) *Roman Emperor (Crisis of the Third Century) *Roman Emperor (Dominate) *Roman Emperor (Late Empire) What does everyone else think?User:Binabik80 20:04, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) :As a general rule, whenever splitting away material, it's necessary to leave a condensed version of it at the parent article, with an indented note in italics telling the reader where to find the more complete material. As long as this is done, there's little harm in splitting. --User:Wetman 21:58, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) ::See Talk:Roman Empire#Splitting up Roman Empire too for my answer.--User:Hippalus 09:33, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC) == The Holy Roman Empire == Are we really going to insinuate that the HRE was a legitimate continuation of the actual Empire, and not merely an imitator? -User:Chris5369 18:15, 20 Apr 2005 :I think the edit you've made ("as a separate instution") sums it up sufficiently. User:Binabik80 23:05, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::Touche. Just didn't want to start an ideological war again... -Chris5369 04:01, 21 Apr 2005 The idea that it is treated by historians as a separate institution might be okay to say. But as it stood it just mucked up the meaning of an already existing sentence, which was saying that historians called them Holy Roman Emperors. At any rate, it seems POV to say that the HRE was not a legitimate continuation of the actual empire - it considered itself to be, certainly. But something talking a bit more about how to distinguish the two might be in order. User:John Kenney User_talk:John Kenney 03:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I've had a go at it while you've been writing this message; what do you think? Saying that the HRE wasn't a legitimate continuation might verge on POV, but I don't think there should be a problem with saying that modern historians don't view it as such. I mean, they don't, do they? User:Binabik80 03:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::Is it POV? The only sources that seem to agree with the HRE continuation theory are the occasional German historians. Should we list the Sultans? The Tsars? To even include them, sounds POV. -User:Chris5369 00:41, 22 Apr 2005
{{succession box | before={} | title=List of Roman Emperors | years=
{}
'' {} '' | after={} }}
--User:Flockmeal 05:31, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
#REDIRECT Roman Emperor
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
Words begining with Roman_emperor:
Roman_Emperor
Roman_Emperor
Roman_Emperor
Roman_Emperor
Roman_emperor
Roman_Emperors
Roman_emperors
Roman_emperors
Roman_Emperors/JulioClaudian
Roman_emperors_killed_by_own_troops
Roman_emperors_killed_in_battle
Roman_emperors_murdered_by_the_Praetorian_Guard
Roman_Emperor_(Crisis_of_the_Third_Century)
Roman_Emperor_(Crisis_of_the_Third_Century)
Roman_Emperor_(Dominate)
Roman_Emperor_(Late_Empire)
Roman_Emperor_(Principate)
Roman_Emperor_Anastasius_I
Roman_Emperor_Anastasius_II
Roman_Emperor_Caligula
Roman_Emperor_Titus
Roman_emperor_Titus
Roman Emperor
"Roman Emperor" is the title historians use to refer to rulers of the Roman Empire, after the epoch conventionally named the Roman Republic. In ancient Rome there was no actual title of "Roman Emperor", and there was never a ''single'' office corresponding to it. Rather, the title "Roman Emperor" is a convenient shorthand for a complicated collection of offices and powers. Discussion of Roman Emperors involves a high degree of historian's editorial discretion, for the Romans themselves did not share the modern understanding of the monarchical concepts of "empire" and "emperor". The Roman Empire had kept all the political institutions and traditions of the Roman Republic, including the Roman Senate and Roman assemblies. In general, the Emperors cannot truly be described as "''de jure''" rulers (nominally the Emperor was merely ''primus inter pares''), and many were not "''de facto''" rulers either (Emperors were frequently themselves figureheads for powerful bureaucrats, functionaries, women, and generals). The present article discusses the nature of the imperial dignity, and its dynastic development throughout the history of the Empire. * For a discussion of the Emperor's claimed godhead, see "imperial cult". * For a more comprehensive listing of names of emperors, see "List of Roman Emperors". ==Overview== There was no constitutional office of "Roman emperor" (the first person actually to bear that title was Michael I in the early 9th Century, who was styled ''Basileys Rhomaiôn'', "Emperor of the Romans" - if appreciating that by that time the meaning of "Basileys" had moved from "King" to "Emperor"), nor any title or rank directly analogous to the title of "emperor"; all the titles traditionally associated with the Emperor had pre-existing, Republican meanings. "Roman Emperor" is a convenient shorthand used by historians to express the much more complicated nature of being the "First Man" in the Roman state, and as a result there are many differing opinions as to precisely who was Emperor when, and how many Emperors there were. The emperor's legal authority derived from the extraordinary concentration of individual powers and offices extant in the Republic rather than from a new political office (emperors regularly had themselves elected to the consulship and the censorate); the emperor actually held the non-"imperium" offices of ''princeps senatus'' (parliamentary leader of the Senate) and ''pontifex maximus'' (chief priest of the Roman state Roman religion; lit. "greatest bridge-maker"), both of which had existed for hundreds of years before the Empire. (Gratian was the last emperor to be ''pontifex maximus''; he surrendered the pontificate ''maximus'' in 382 to Pope Siricius and it permanently became an auxiliary honour of the Pope.) However, these offices only provided great ''dignitas'' (personal prestige) and ''auctoritas'' (influence or clout); the emperor's powers derived from the fact that he held ''ad personam'' (i.e. without holding office) both ''imperium'' (greater power or command) and ''tribune'' (tribunician power). As a result, he formally outranked the provincial governors and the ordinary magistrates (''magistratus ordinarii''), had the right to enact capital punishment, could command obedience of private citizens (''privati''), enjoyed personal inviolability (''sacrosanctitas''), could rescue any plebeian from the hands of any patrician magistrate (''ius auxiliandi''), and interpose his veto on any act or proposal of any magistrate, including the tribune (''ius intercessio''). "Emperor" was not a magistracy or office of state (note that there was no formally prescribed "uniform" such as those of curule magistrates, senators, and knights; later emperors were distinguished by wearing ''togae purpurae'', purple togas -- hence the phrase "to don the purple" for the assumption of imperial dignity), nor was there even a regular title until the 3rd century. The titles customarily associated with the imperial dignity are ''imperator'' ("commander", lit. "one who prepares against"), which emphasises the emperor's military supremacy, ''Caesar (title)'', which was originally a name but came to be used to refer to the designated heir (as ''Nobilissimus Caesar'', "Most Noble Caesar") and was retained upon accession, and ''augustus'' ("majestic" or "venerable"), which was adopted upon accession (the three titles were rendered in Greek language as ''autocrat'', ''kaisar'', and ''augustos'' or ''sebastos'' respectively). After Diocletian established the Tetrarchy, ''caesar'' designated the two junior sub-emperors and ''augustus'' the two senior emperors. The Emperors of the first lineages are rather to be considered as quasi-head of state. As ''princeps senatus'' (lit., "first man of the senate"), the Emperor could receive foreign embassages to Rome (but for example Tiberius saw that as a typical task for any group of senators not including himself). All in all, by analogy, in modern terms these early Emperors would tend to be identified as chiefs of state. The office of ''princeps senatus,'' however, was not a magistracy and did not own ''imperium''; in terms of the modern Westminster system, this is approximately comparable to diplomatic agents being accredited to the Leader of the House (the consuls functioned as a sort of hybrid between the Speaker of the House and the Prime Minister). At some points in the Empire's history, the Emperor's power was only nominal; powerful praetorian prefects and magister militum (and even at one point Imperial mothers and grandmothers) occasionally acted as the power behind the throne (also called "emperors who weren't"). The word ''princeps'' (plu. ''Principes''), meaning "first citizen", was a republican term used to denote the leading citizen(s) of the state. It was a purely honorific title with no attached duties or powers. It was the title most preferred by Augustus as it's use implies only primacy, as opposed to Imperator which implies dominance. ''Princeps'', because of it's republican connotation, was most commonly used to refer to the emperor in Latin (although the emperor's actual constitutional position was essentially "pontifex maximus with tribunician power and ''imperium'' superceding all others") as it was in keeping with the facade of the restored republic; the Greek language word ''basileus'' ("king") was modified to be synonymous with emperor (and primarily came into favour after the reign of Heraclius) as the Greek had no republican sensibility and openly viewed the emperor as a monarch. In the era of Diocletian and beyond, ''princeps'' fell into disuse and was replaced with ''dominus'' ("lord"); later emperors used the formula ''Imperator Caesar NN. Pius Felix (Invictus) Augustus''. The use of ''princeps'' and ''dominus'' broadly symbolise the differences in the Empire's government, giving rise to the era designations "Principate" and "Dominate". ===The first Roman Emperor=== In the discussion of who was the first Roman Emperor one has to understand that at the end of the Roman Republic there was no new, and certainly not a ''single'', title created with which to indicate the individual who had the supreme power as a monarch. In so far as ''Emperor'' could be seen as the English translation of imperator, then yes, Julius Caesar had been an ''emperor'', like several Roman generals before him. Instead, by the end of the Roman Republican civil warss in which Julius Caesar had led his armies, it became clear on the one hand that there was certainly no consensus to return to the Roman Kingdom, and that on the other hand the situation where several officials, bestowed with equal power by the senate, fought one another had to come to an end. In order to realise that monarchy-without-naming-it Julius Caesar, and a few years later Octavian in an even more subtle and gradual way, worked towards (1) accumulating offices and titles that were of the highest importance in the Republic, (2) making the power attached to these offices permanent, and (3) preventing anyone with similar aspirations from accumulating or maintaining power for themselves. In that way Julius Caesar had gone a considerable part of the road: He held the Republican offices of consul (four times) and Roman dictator (five times), was appointed perpetual dictator (''dictator perpetuus'') in 45 BC, had been "pontifex maximus" for several decades and had handsomely prepared for his deification (see Imperial cult). While he was the last dictator of the Republic, he died several years before the final collapse of the traditional Republican system, to be replaced by the system modern historians call the Principate. By the time of his assassination in 44 BC Julius Caesar was the most powerful man in Rome. But if being "princeps" is seen as the determinating office he should have held for modern historians to call him Emperor, then no, he was not Emperor. Still, he realised something that only a monarch could achieve, but what would only become evident many decades after his death: he had made his high power in the republic ''hereditary'', by his will, in which he had appointed Octavian as his only heir. But not until over a decade after Caesar's death did Octavian achieve supreme power, after the civil wars first avenging Caesar's murder, then the step-by-step process of neutralising his fellow Second Triumvirate, culminating in his victory over Mark Antony and Cleopatra VII of Egypt. When then did Octavian become Emperor? In fact there was no single instant at which he did. Was it when he became Pontifex Maximus? Was it when he was acclaimed ''Augustus'' (more a solemn and official nickname than a "title" when he got it)? Was it when he became "princeps"? Was it when the Senate ordained that he held the "tribunicia potestas" ("power of a tribune") without needing to be one of the tribunes? Was it when he started to use Imperator as a praenomen? Note that all this time the organisation of the state remained the same as during the ''res publica.'' Even at Augustus' death, some later historians like Tacitus would say, it might have been possible to return to the republic properly, without even needing to change anything, if there had been a real will to accomplish that (that is, by not allowing Tiberius to accumulate the same powers, which he did, however, very quickly). Even Tiberius continued to go to great lengths to keep the "republican" governement system untouched. The historians of the first centuries saw the continuity in the first place: if a hereditary monarchy-not-by-kings existed after the republic, it had started with Julius Caesar. In this sense Suetonius wrote of ''The Twelve Caesars,'' meaning the emperors from Julius Caesar to the Flavians included (where after Nero the ''inherited name'' had turned into a ''title''). Most more recent history books, however, noting that immediately after the assassination of Julius Caesar, the Roman State had in all respects returned to the republic and that the second ''Triumvirate'' could hardly be called a ''monarchy'', see Augustus as the first "emperor" in the proper sense and (somewhat arbitrarily) say he became emperor when he "restored" power to the senate and people and was given the name Augustus in 27_BC. ===The Fall of the West=== By the end of the Third century, taking a few steps, the Roman Empire was split in a Western and an Eastern part, each with their own Emperors (and/or Caesars). In the West, which included Rome, the succession of Emperors had stopped by the end of the Fifth century, kicking off the period known as the Middle Ages ===Eastern lineage=== The line of Roman emperors in the East continues unbroken until the fall of Constantinople in 1453 under Constantine XI. These emperors eventually normalised the imperial dignity into the modern conception of an emperor, incorporated it into the constitutions of the state, and adopted the aforementioned title ''Basileys Rhomaiôn'' ("Emperor of the Romans"; these Emperors ceased to use Latin as the language of state after Heraclius). Historians have customarily treated the state of these later Eastern Emperors under the name "Byzantine Empire", though ''Byzantine'' is not a term that the Byzantines ever used to describe themselves. ===New Western lineage=== The concept of the Roman Empire was renewed in the West with the coronation of the king of the Franks, Charlemagne, as Roman emperor by the Pope on Christmas, 800. This line of Roman emperors was actually generally Germanic peoples rather than Roman, but maintained their Romanness as a matter of principle; it lasted until 1806 when Francis I of Austria dissolved the Empire during the Napoleonic Wars. These emperors used a variety of titles (most frequently "''Imperator Augustus''") before finally settling on ''Imperator Romanus Electus'' ("Elected Roman Emperor"). Historians customarily assign them the title "Holy Roman Emperor", which has a basis in actual historical usage, and treat their "Holy Roman Empire" as a separate institution. ==Titles, Positions, and Powers== Although these are the commonest offices, titles, and positions, one should note that not all Roman Emperors used them, nor were all of them used at the same time. The consular and censorial offices especially were not an integral part of the Imperial dignity, and were usually held by persons other than the reigning Emperor. *Augustus (also "Augoustos" or "Sebastos"), "Majestic" or "Venerable"; an honorific cognomen exclusive to the emperor *Autocrat, "Autocrat" (lit. "Self-ruler"); Greek title equivalent to imperator i.e. Commander-in-Chief *Basileus, Greek title meaning king, popularly used in the east to refer to the emperor; a formal title of the Roman emperor beginning with Heraclius *Caesar (title) (also "Kaisar" or "Nobilissimus Caesar"), "Caesar" or "Most Noble Caesar"; an honorific name later used to identify an Emperor-designate *Censor, a Republican office with a five year term and one coequal officeholder *Consul, the highest magistracy of the Roman republic with a one year term and one coequal officeholder *Dominus, "Lord" or "Master"; an honorific title popular in the Empire's middle history *Imperator, "Commander" or "Commander-in-Chief"; a Victory titles taken on accession to the purple and after a major military victory; the praenomen of most Roman emperors *''Imperium'', "greater ''imperium''"; absolute power to a degree greater than any other, including power of enacting capital punishment *Invictus, "Unconquered"; an honorific title *Pater Patriae, "Father of the Fatherland"; an honorific title *Pius Felix, "Pious and Blessed" (lit. "Dutiful and Happy"); an honorific title *Pontifex Maximus, "Supreme Pontiff" or "Chief Priest" (lit. "Greatest Bridgemaker"); a title and office of Republican origin - could not be used by "Catholic" Emperors, while by that time only the pope had a claim on the title of highest religious authority. *Princeps, "First Citizen" or "Leading Citizen"; an honorific title denoting the status of the emperor as Primus_inter_pares *Princeps Iuventatis, "Prince of Youth"; an honorific title awarded to a presumptive Emperor-designate *Princeps Senatus, "First Man of the Senate" a Republican office with a five year term *''Tribune'', "tribunician power"; the powers of a Tribune including sacrosanctity and the veto ==The lineages and epochs== In the listings of Roman Emperors below, the common name is given first, followed by the more formal name adopted upon accession to the purple, the name given at birth, and the years of his reign. So-called victory titles and other titles not forming an integral part of the name (''Pontifex Maximus'', ''Princeps Senatus'', ''Pater Patriae'', &c.) are not listed. Co-Emperors are listed in inferior text, along with notes identifying senior Emperors who had hitherto served as co-Emperors. Following abbreviations are used: *A. - Aulus *Aug. - Augustus (as a title) *C. - Gaius *Germ. - Germanicus *Imp. - Imperator *L. - Lucius *M. - Marcus *Max. - Maximus *Nob. - Nobilissimus *P. - Publius *P.F. - Pius Felix *Princ. Iuv. - Princeps Iuventutis *Q. - Quintus *Ser. - Servius *T. - Titus *Ti. - Tiberius ===The Principate=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Principate) The nature of the Imperial office and the Principate was established under Julius Caesar's heir and posthumously adopted son, Caesar Augustus, and his own heirs, the descendants of his wife Livia from her first marriage to a scion of the distinguished Claudius clan. This Julio-Claudian dynasty came to an end when the emperor Nero—a great-great-grandson of Augustus through his daughter and of Livia through her son—was deposed in AD 68. Nero was followed by a succession of usurpers throughout 69, commonly called the "Year of the four emperors". The last of these, Vespasian, established his own Flavian dynasty. Nerva, who replaced the last Flavian emperor, Vespasian's son Domitian, in 96, was elderly and childless, and chose therefore to adoption an heir, Trajan, from outside his family. When Trajan acceded to the purple he chose to follow his predecessor's example, adopting Hadrian as his own heir, and the practise then became the customary manner of imperial succession for the next century, producing the "Five Good Emperors" and the Empire's period of greatest stability. The last of the Good Emperors, Marcus Aurelius, chose his natural son Commodus as his successor rather than adopting an heir. Commodus's misrule led to his murder on 31 December 192, following which a brief period of instability quickly gave way to Septimius Severus, who established the Severan dynasty which, except for an interruption in 217-218, held the purple until 235. ===The Crisis of the Third Century=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Crisis of the Third Century)'' The accession of Maximinus Thrax marks both the close and the opening of an era. It was one of the last attempts by the increasingly impotent Roman Senate to influence the succession. Yet it was the first time that a man had achieved the purple while owing his advancement purely to his military career; both Vespasian and Septimius Severus had come from noble or middle class families, while Thrax was a born commoner. He never visited the city of Rome during his reign, which marks the beginning of a series of "Barracks Emperors" who came from the army. Between 232 and 285 over a dozen emperors achieved the purple, but only Valerian (emperor) and Carus managed to secure their own sons' succession to the throne; both dynasties died out within two generations. ===The Dominate=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Dominate) The accession to the purple on November 20, 284, of Diocletian, the lower-class, Greek-speaking Dalmatian commander of Carus's and Numerian's household cavalry (''protectores domestici''), marked a major departure from traditional Roman constitutional theory regarding the Emperor, who was nominally first among equals; Diocletian introduced Oriental despotism into the Imperial dignity. Whereas before Emperors had worn only a purple toga (''toga purpura'') and been greeted with deference, Diocletian wore jewelled robes and shoes, and required those who greeted him to kneel and kiss the hem of his robe ''(adoratio)''. In many ways, Diocletianus was the first monarchical Emperor, and this is symbolised by the fact that the word ''dominus'' ("Lord") rapidly replaced ''princeps'' as the favoured word for referring to the Emperor. Significantly, neither Diocletian nor his co-Emperor Maximian spent much time in Rome after 286, establishing their Imperial capitals at Nicomedia and Milan (modern Milan), respectively. Diocletian established the Tetrarchy, a system by which the Roman Empire was divided into East and West, with each having an Augustus to rule over it and a Caesar (title) to assist him. The Tetrarchy ultimately degenerated into civil war, but the eventual victor, Constantine the Great, restored Domitian's system of dividing the Empire into East and West. He kept the East for himself and founded his city of Constantinople as its new capital. The dynasty Constantine established also was soon swallowed up in civil war and court intrigue until it was replaced, briefly, by Julian the Apostate's general Jovian and then, more permanently, by Valentinian I and the dynasty he founded in 364. Though he was a soldier from a low middle class background, Valentinian was not a Barracks Emperor; he was elevated to the purple by a conclave of senior generals and civil officials. ===The Late Empire=== :''Main article: Roman Emperor (Late Empire) Theodosius I acceded to the purple in the East in 379 and in the West in 394. He outlawed paganism and made Christianity the Empire's official religion. He was the last Emperor to rule over a united empire; the distribution of the East to his son Arcadius and the West to his son Flavius Augustus Honorius after his death in 395 represented a permanent division. In the West, the office of Emperor soon degenerated into being little more than a puppet of a succession of Germanic tribes tribal Monarchs, until finally the Heruli Odoacer simply overthrew Emperor Romulus Augustulus in 476, shipped the imperial regalia to the Emperor Zeno in Constantinople and assumed the title "King of Italy". Though during his own lifetime Odoacer maintained the legal fiction that he was actually ruling Italy as the viceroy of Zeno, historians mark 476 as the traditional date of the fall of the Roman Empire in the West. In the East, the Empire continued as the Byzantine Empire until the fall of Constantinople to the Ottoman Turks in 1453. :''For rulers of Italy after Romulus "Augustulus" and Julius Nepos, see list of barbarian kings of Italy''. :''For Roman Emperors in the West after Romulus "Augustulus" and Julius Nepos, see list of "Holy Roman Emperors".'' :''See also list of "Byzantine Emperors".'' ==See also== *Julio-Claudian family tree - Severan dynasty family tree *Victory titles - List of Imperial Victory Titles *Praetorian Prefect *Roman usurpers - List of Roman usurpers *Byzantine Empire - Latin Empire of Constantinople *Holy Roman Empire - List of German Kings and Emperors ==External links== * [http://www.roman-emperors.org/impindex.htm De Imperatoribus Romanis] * [http://www.ghg.net/shetler/rome/rulers/ Rulers of Rome] * [http://www.friesian.com/decdenc1.htm "Decadence, Rome and Romania, and the Emperors Who Weren't"], by Kelley L. Ross, Ph.D. ==Further reading== * Chronicle of the Roman Emperors: The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome ''by Chris Scarre, (c) 1995 Thames and Hudson Ltd, London.'' Roman emperors Lists of office-holders Ancient Roman titles Positions of authority Ancient Romans by occupation
Roman Emperor
As can be seen at Talk:List of Roman Emperors, my more complicated listing of Roman Emperors is far from a finished or satisfactory project. I would greatly appreciate any input as to how it ought to be refined or improved. User:Publius --- As I mentioned elsewhere, I think it would be a good idea for this page's list of the Emperors to focus on dynastic and non-dynastic changes (so as to justify its separate listing of the Emperors). I put together an example of how this might be accomplished with the Julio-Claudians as an example: :Julio-Claudian Emperors: :*Caesar Augustus ("Imp. Caesar Augustus"; b. C. Octavius), d. 14 :**Agrippa, 18 BC – 12 BC :**Tiberius, 6 BC – 1 BC, 4 – 14 (as "Ti. Iulius Caesar") :*Tiberius ("Ti. Caesar Augustus"; b. Ti. Claudius Nero), 14 – 37 :**''Note:'' Tiberius had been co-Emperor with Caesar Augustus from 6 BC to 1 BC, and again from AD 4 until his own accession to the purple :*Caligula ("C. Caesar Augustus Germ."; b. C. Iulius Caesar Germ.), 37 – 41 :*Claudius ("Ti. Claudius Caesar Augustus Germ."; b. Ti. Claudius Drusus), 41 – 54 :*Nero ("Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germ."; b. L. Domitius Ahenobarbus), 54 – 68 :Dynastic Relationships: :Caesar Augustus's third wife Livia Drusilla (subsequently "Iulia Augusta") had previously borne two children by her first husband, Tiberius Claudius Nero: Tiberius and Drusus. Tiberius's second wife was Iulia, Marcus Agrippa's widow (his first wife had been Vipsania, Agrippa's daughter by his first marriage); Caesar Augustus adopted Tiberius on June 26, 4, whereupon Tiberius himself adopted his brother Drusus's son by Marcus Antonius's daughter, Germanicus. Germanicus married Agrippina the Elder, Agrippa's daughter by Iulia and Tiberius's stepdaughter, and had by her one surviving son, Gaius \"Caligula\" ("Bootkins"), and a daughter, Agrippina the Younger, whose second husband was Germanicus's brother by blood, Claudius (she was his fourth wife); Agrippina had already borne a son (Lucius) by her first husband, Gnaeus Domitius Ahenobarbus. Claudius adopted Lucius under the name Nero in 40; Nero married Claudius's daughter Octavia in 53. What does everyone think about using this as a general model for the article's second part? It will of course take some time to modify the whole article, and will necessarily make the article somewhat lengthier, but I think it would go a long way toward demonstrating the complicated (dare I say, "byzantine"?) often-familial nature of the Roman Emperor's succession. Comments? User:Publius It sounds an interesting idea. But speaking of "byzantine", the familial connections get more complicated from the Tetrarchy and till Anastasius I. Any ideas how to cover the following connections (from a modern Greek encyclopedia)?: *Diocletian (284 - 305) was father-in-law to Galerius. *Maximian (286 - 305, 307 - 310) was father to Maxentius, father-in-law to both Constantius Chlorus and Constantine I of the Roman Empire, grandfather-in-law to Licinius, grandfather to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II, and Constans, great-grandfather to Julian and great-grandfather-in-law to Gratian. *Galerius (305 - 311) was son-in-law to Diocletian and father-in-law to Maxentius. *Constantius Chlorus (305 - 306) was son-in-law to Maximian, father and brother-in-law to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, father-in-law to Licinius, grandfather to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II, Constans and Julian, and great-grandfather-in-law to Gratian. *Constantine I of the Roman Empire (306 - 337) was son and brother-in-law to Constantius Chlorus, son-in-law to Maximian, brother-in-law to Maxentius and Licinius, father to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II and Constans, uncle and father-in-law to Julian and grandfather-in-law to Gratian. *Maxentius (306 - 312) was son to Maximian, son-in-law to Galerius, brother-in-law to both Constantius Chlorus and Constantine I of the Roman Empire, uncle by marriage of Licinius, uncle by blood of Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II and Constans, great-uncle to Julian and great-great-uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Licinius (308 - 324) was grandson-in-law to Maximian, son-in-law to Constantius Chlorus, nephew by marriage to [[Maxentius], brother-in-law to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, uncle by marriage to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II, Constans and Julian, great-uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Constantine II of the Roman Empire (337 - 340) was grandson to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, son of Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by blood of Maxentius, nephew by marriage of Licinius, older brother of Constantius II and Constans, first cousin and brother-in-law to Julian, uncle by marriage of Gratian. *Constantius II (337 - 361) was grandson to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, son of Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by blood of Maxentius, nephew by marriage of Licinius, younger brother of Constantine II of the Roman Empire, older brother of Constans, first cousin and brother-in-law to Julian, father-in-law to Gratian. *Constans (337 - 350) was grandson to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, son of Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by blood of Maxentius, nephew by marriage of Licinius, younger brother of Constantine II of the Roman Empire and Constantius II, first cousin and brother-in-law to Julian, uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Magnentius (350 - 353's widow was later second wife to Valentinian I. *Julian (361 - 363) was great-grandson to Maximian, grandson to Constantius Chlorus, great-nephew to Maxentius, nephew by blood to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, nephew by marriage to Licinius, first cousin and brother-in-law of Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constantius II and Constans, uncle by marriage to Gratian. *Valentinian I (364 - 375) was married to the widow of Magnentius, brother to Valens, father to Gratian and Valentinian II, father-in-law to Theodosius I, grandfather-in-law to Constantius III, great-grandfather to Valentinian III and great-great-grandfather-in-law to Olybrius. *Valens (364 - 378) was brother to Valentinian I, uncle by blood to Gratian and Valentinian II, uncle by marriage to Theodosius I, great-uncle by marriage to Constantius III, great-great-uncle to Valentinian III and great-great-great-uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Gratian (375 - 383) was great-grandson-in law to Maximian and Constantius Chlorus, grandson-in-law to Constantine I of the Roman Empire, grandnephew by marriage to Maxentius and Licinius, nephew by marriage to Constantine II of the Roman Empire, Constans and Julian, son-in-law to Constantius II, son to Valentinian I, nephew by blood to Valens, half-brother to Valentinian II, brother-in-law to Theodosius I, uncle by marriage to Constantius III, great-uncle to Valentinian III and great-great-uncle to Olybrius. *Valentinian II (375 - 392) was son to Valentinian I, nephew to Valens, half-brother to Gratian, brother-in-law to Theodosius I, uncle by marriage to Constantius III, great-uncle to Valentinian III and great-great-uncle to Olybrius. *Theodosius I (379 - 392) was son-in-law to Valentinian I, nephew by marriage to Valens, brother-in-law to Gratian and Valentinian II, father to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, father-in-law to Constantius III, grandfather to Theodosius II and Valentinian III , grandfather-in-law to Marcian, great-grandfather-in-law to Olybrius. *Arcadius (395 - 408) was son to Theodosius I, brother to Flavius Augustus Honorius, brother-in-law to Constantius III, father to Theodosius II, father-in-law to Marcian, uncle to Valentinian III, great-uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Flavius Augustus Honorius (395 - 423) was son to Theodosius I, brother to Arcadius, brother-in-law to Constantius III, uncle to Theodosius II and Valentinian III, uncle by marriage to Marcian and great-uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Theodosius II (408 - 450) was grandson to Theodosius I, son to Arcadius, nephew by blood to Flavius Augustus Honorius, nephew by marriage to Constantius III, brother-in-law to Marcian, first cousin to Valentinian III and uncle by marriage to Olybrius. *Constantius III (421) was grandson-in-law to Valentinian I, great-nephew by marriage to Valens, nephew by marriage to Gratian and Valentinian II, son-in-law to Theodosius I, brother-in-law to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, father to Valentinian III, uncle by marriage to Theodosius II and Marcian, grandfather-in-law to Olybrius. *Valentinian III (424 - 455) was great-grandson to Valentinian I, great-great-nephew to Valens, grandson to Theodosius I, great-nephew to Gratian and Valentinian II, son to Constantius III, nephew to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, first cousin by blood to Theodosius II, first cousin by marriage to Marcian and father-in-law to Olybrius. *Marcian (450 - 457) was grandson-in-law to Theodosius I, son-in-law to Arcadius, nephew by marriage to Flavius Augustus Honorius and Constantius III, brother-in-law to Theodosius II, first cousib by marriage to Valentinian III, father-in-law to Anthemius, uncle by marriage to Olybrius, grandfather-in-law to the daughter of Leo I of the Byzantine Empire. *Leo I of the Byzantine Empire (457 - 474) was brother-in-law to Basiliscus, father-in-law to the son of Anthemius, Zeno of the Byzantine Empire and Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire, grandfather to Leo II. *Anthemius (467 - 472) was son-in-law to Marcian and father-in-law to the daughter of Leo I of the Byzantine Empire. *Olybrius (472) was great-great-grandson-in-law to Valentinian I, great-great-great-nephew by marriage to Valens, great-grandson-in-law to Theodosius I, great-great-nephew by marriage to Gratian and Valentinian II, grandson-in-law to Constantius III, great-nephew by marriage to Arcadius and Flavius Augustus Honorius, son-in-law to Valentinian III, nephew by marriage to Theodosius II and Marcian. *Leo II (474) was grandson to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, great-nephew to Basiliscus, son to Zeno of the Byzantine Empire, nephew by marriage to the son of Anthemius). *Zeno of the Byzantine Empire (474 - 475, 476 - 491), was son-in-law to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, nephew by marriage to Basiliscus, brother-in-law to the son of Anthemius, father to Leo II. His widow married Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire. *Basiliscus (475 - 476) was brother-in-law to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, uncle by marriage to the son of Anthemius, Zeno of the Byzantine Empire and Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire, great-uncle to Leo II. *Anastasius I of the Byzantine Empire (491 - 518) was son-in-law to Leo I of the Byzantine Empire, nephew by marriage to Basiliscus, brother-in-law to the son of Anthemius and married to the widow of Zeno of the Byzantine Empire. As you can see those Emperors are connected to each other but far from consitute a single Royal House. Any ideas of how to indicate this in the article? User:Dimadick :Yes, I've been working on upgrading the whole article to my new proposed format, and the Tetrarchy and beyond is definitely a snag. I've been thinking that perhaps we ought to delineate the later houses into separate lines based on Constantinian, Valentinian, Theodosian, and Leonine lines, and add clarification as to how the lines are related. Something along the following lines: ::Constantius I's first wife St. Helena bore him a son, Constantinus I, whose second wife Fausta (sister of Maxentius and daughter of Maximian by Eutropia, mother of Constantius's second wife Theodora) bore him three sons (Constantinus II, Constantius II, and Constans I) and two daughters (Constantia and Helena). Constantius II's daughter Constantia married Gratianus (see below), son of Valentinianus I (see below), while Helena married her half-cousin, Julianus \"the Apostate\". What do you think? (As it happens, I'm glad someone was amused by my "byzantine" pun.) User:Publius 18:13, 27 Dec 2003 (UTC) Hmmm... pretty good but some connections of lesser significance should perhaps be clarified to avoid confusion. How about: Constantius I was married twice. First to St. Helena and then to Theodora, daughter to Maximian by Eutropia and sister of Maxentius. He had a single son by the former known as Constantinus I and by the later two more sons (Dalmatius and Julius Constantius) and two daughters (Eutropia and Constantia). Constantine also married twice. First to Minervina and then to Fausta, a sister of his step-mother. The former was mother to Caesar (title) Crispus and the later to three sons (Constantinus II, Constantius II, and Constans I) and two daughters (Constantia and Helena). Julius Constantius in turn became father to two sons: Caesar (title) Gallus and Julian. Their sister Constantia was wife to Licinius. Constantia the younger was wife to Gallus and Helena to Julian. An even younger Constantia, daughter to Constantius II later became consort to Gratianus (see below), son of Valentinianus I (see below). I am in turn glad to see someone trying to clarify the various conceptions and misconceptions about the Roman and "Byzantine" Emperors. User:Dimadick What is your opinion of the current revisions (up to but not including Theodosius and his successors)? I'm not entirely satisfied with the Tetrarchical and Constantinian sections, but do you feel that they adequately convey what was happening with the Imperial dignity at the time? Or is more clarification necessary for the average reader? User:Publius 13:53, 14 Jan 2004 (UTC) ----- Well, it's finally finished. I have completed the systematic upgrade of the article, including dynastic relationships and other topical information (like economic backgrounds and increasingly non-Italian origins of the Emperors), but I'm afraid I won't be around to discuss further improvements. I can only hope that the article is informative, and that others enjoy reading it as much as I have enjoyed writing it. User:Publius 06:58, 24 Jan 2004 (UTC) == Splitting == This page is really, ''really'' long (67kb right now; over twice the recommended maximum length). Would anyone object to splitting it up? Four sub-articles seem rather obvious to me: *Roman Emperor (Principate) *Roman Emperor (Crisis of the Third Century) *Roman Emperor (Dominate) *Roman Emperor (Late Empire) What does everyone else think?User:Binabik80 20:04, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) :As a general rule, whenever splitting away material, it's necessary to leave a condensed version of it at the parent article, with an indented note in italics telling the reader where to find the more complete material. As long as this is done, there's little harm in splitting. --User:Wetman 21:58, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) ::See Talk:Roman Empire#Splitting up Roman Empire too for my answer.--User:Hippalus 09:33, Mar 12, 2005 (UTC) == The Holy Roman Empire == Are we really going to insinuate that the HRE was a legitimate continuation of the actual Empire, and not merely an imitator? -User:Chris5369 18:15, 20 Apr 2005 :I think the edit you've made ("as a separate instution") sums it up sufficiently. User:Binabik80 23:05, 20 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::Touche. Just didn't want to start an ideological war again... -Chris5369 04:01, 21 Apr 2005 The idea that it is treated by historians as a separate institution might be okay to say. But as it stood it just mucked up the meaning of an already existing sentence, which was saying that historians called them Holy Roman Emperors. At any rate, it seems POV to say that the HRE was not a legitimate continuation of the actual empire - it considered itself to be, certainly. But something talking a bit more about how to distinguish the two might be in order. User:John Kenney User_talk:John Kenney 03:11, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC) :I've had a go at it while you've been writing this message; what do you think? Saying that the HRE wasn't a legitimate continuation might verge on POV, but I don't think there should be a problem with saying that modern historians don't view it as such. I mean, they don't, do they? User:Binabik80 03:18, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC) ::Is it POV? The only sources that seem to agree with the HRE continuation theory are the occasional German historians. Should we list the Sultans? The Tsars? To even include them, sounds POV. -User:Chris5369 00:41, 22 Apr 2005
Roman Emperor
{{succession box | before={} | title=List of Roman Emperors | years=
{}
'' {} '' | after={} }}
Roman Emperor
--User:Flockmeal 05:31, Nov 21, 2004 (UTC)
Roman emperor
#REDIRECT Roman Emperor
See other meanings of words starting from letter:
R
RA | RB | RC | RD | RE | RF | RG | RH | RI | RJ | RK | RL | RM | RN | RO | RP | RS | RT | RU | RW | RX | RY | RZ |Words begining with Roman_emperor:
Roman_Emperor
Roman_Emperor
Roman_Emperor
Roman_Emperor
Roman_emperor
Roman_Emperors
Roman_emperors
Roman_emperors
Roman_Emperors/JulioClaudian
Roman_emperors_killed_by_own_troops
Roman_emperors_killed_in_battle
Roman_emperors_murdered_by_the_Praetorian_Guard
Roman_Emperor_(Crisis_of_the_Third_Century)
Roman_Emperor_(Crisis_of_the_Third_Century)
Roman_Emperor_(Dominate)
Roman_Emperor_(Late_Empire)
Roman_Emperor_(Principate)
Roman_Emperor_Anastasius_I
Roman_Emperor_Anastasius_II
Roman_Emperor_Caligula
Roman_Emperor_Titus
Roman_emperor_Titus
These materials are based on Wikipedia and licensed under the GNU FDL
YouTube.com videos better site than Turbo Tax 2007
