3 ms·
>did thrice offer him a kingly crown that he did thrice refuse, is this naracism It's politicking. He already had the power of a king, and knew the title would
by boomboomsubban 3y ago
>did thrice offer him a kingly crown that he did thrice refuse, is this naracism
It's politicking. He already had the power of a king, and knew the title would only harm him. It's why August called himself the "first citizen of Rome" rather than king or emperor. They weren't forgoing the power, just the title.
>The people that killed him got to write history so they made him into a bad guy.
Augustus got to write history on him, and that provided an overly rosy view that wasn't heavily questioned for centuries, likely still providing a rosy view of him two millennia later.
- throwaway2048 3y agoImperator (in English Emperor) was a title specifically invented by Augustus to avoid the title king. It might be roughly translated as "Commander", in a military sense.
- boomboomsubban 3y agoYou're right, he did go by imperator, my memory is poor, but his primary titles provided by the senate were "augustus" and "princeps."
- scott_w 3y agoThat's definitely not correct. The first sentences in Wikipedia date its use to the Roman Kingdom and Republic, long before Augustus: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperator
- JumpCrisscross 3y agoSoldiers hailing their commanders Imperator on the battlefield was a requirement for a triumph under the Republic. Octavian did not invent the title.