Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

happyslug

(14,779 posts)
112. Actually he was an "Impertor", which was what a successful General was called in the Republic
Thu Mar 28, 2013, 06:33 PM
Mar 2013

The English term Emperor is just a corruption of the Latin Term Impertor. Thus Julius Caesar was AN EMPEROR. In fact so was Augustus, who held many titles including "Pontifex Maximus" "Tribune of the people" another, "First Senator" a third, and finally a Proconsul. Under the Republic and the Empire, every Legion had to be under the command of a Consul or former Consul.

The title of Impertor, derived from Imperium, which was "The power to command". The Imperium was the ability to order people do due what the holder of the Imperium wanted done, and such orders had to be obeyed UNLESS you held a superior Imperium OR were a Tribune. Thus the Emperor held command over anyone below him in command BUT not his equal or his superiors AND not the Tribunes. Imperium was an absolute power, but restricted by who held the Imperium and over what territory. An Imperium tied in with the Army (An Imperium Pro-consulship) meant absolute command over the Army AND the area the Army was operating or stationed in. This is what Julius Caesar and Augustus wanted, the Imperium over the Legions AND BOTH HAD IT.

More on what is an "Imperium":
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperium

Both Caesar and Augustus also had held the title of "Dictator", which was a temporary absolute ruler of Rome during times of Crisis. A person could only be a Dictator for Six months till Sulla had himself made Dictator for life in 81 BC. Due to Sulla's abuse of the power of Dictator it had become a title of tyranny, so both Julius Caesar and Augustus thought it was better to give up that title then retain it.

The next most important position for Julius Caesar And Augustus was the Pontifex Maximus, chief priest of Rome. The Chief Priest controlled the highways, the bridges AND the communication system of the Rome State (i.e. how do you get the people to know what the State wants them to do, today it is done by newspapers, Televisions, Radio and the net, but prior to about 1850 it was done by the Church and prior to 376 the various pagan priests that reported to the Pontifex Maximus. In many ways due to the Catholic Church wanting EVERYONE to attend a church every Sunday appears to be the Reason Constantine embraced Christianity, it did a better job then the Pagan Priests at both getting messages to the peasants AND from the peasants. The Pagan Priest's temples tended to be quite small, limited to just the priests who took the sacrifices of the people from outside the temple into the temple to sacrifice. The Christian Church of having everyone INSIDE the Church made it easier for the Christian priests to reach more people quicker then the old Pagan Priests who had to talk to the people directly OUTSIDE of their temple IF they were willing to talk to the people).

The third most important was the position of Consul or Proconsul (Someone who had been a Consul in the past) over every legion, Julius Caesar did NOT quite have this power, his legions each had their own Proconsul, but Augustus made himself the Proconsul of every legion, and the legionary actual commander was his Lieutenant (Legate of the Emperor, The Emperor was the Proconsul of the Legion, The Legate was just the Emperor's agent in command of the Legion).

The Fourth most important power was that of the Tribune, the Tribune could convent the Senate AND the People's assembly. They could also veto anything passed by the Senate. As a patrician Augustus could NOT be the Tribune, but he had the People's Assembly given him the POWER of the Tribune, which is all he really wanted, the ability to veto anything the Senate passed.

The Fifth power was that of First Senator, prior to Augustus this had been an elected position, but a position generally held by the eldest Senator. Augustus made sure he was elected First Senator. The First Senator controlled the Agenda of the Senate, thus Augustus controlled the Senate.

Given that all the Judges of the Roman Republic were elected by the Senate from among themselves, the power of First Senator AND the Power of the Tribune, meant Augustus could prevent anyone he did NOT want into the Senate AND with the Veto power prevent the Senate from picking anyone to any Judaical, Executive, military position or other position that Augustus did NOT want (This included naming the Proconsul and Legates to the Legions).

More on the Position of Pontifex Maximus:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pontifex_Maximus

More on the Tribune:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tribune

Thus Julius Caesar was an Emperor, as had been Sulla and Sulla's rival (and Julius Caesar's uncle) Marius.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaius_Marius

Please note, no one called Augustus and his successor "Emperor" or "Impertor" till Diocletian. Diocletian decided he needed a title as fancy as the Persians' King of Kings title and found the traditional term "Impertor" convenient. The term seems to have been used as to the Emperors since Augustus, but it was NOT a formal title, it was a Declaration by the Troops that they would follow the Orders of whoever they declared to be Emperor since he had one at least one victory. Please also note, by the time of Diocletian no leader of a Roman Legion dare have his troops declare him Impertor without Imperial permission UNLESS he wanted to go to war with the ruling Emperor. Thus by the time of Diocletian, Impertor had become a term restricted to the Emperor, unlike its earlier use for any successful general.

In fact not till Charlemagne did not any BUT the Roman and later Eastern Roman Empire ever used the Term Emperor. Charlemagne called himself "Emperor of the Franks" something the Eastern Empire refuse to accept (Through within 20 years the Eastern Emperor was using the Title "Roman Emperor" instead of just "Emperor", the later had been the norm since the days of Augustus 800 years before).

THANKS for the history lesson, cthulu! elleng Mar 2013 #1
Dividing Gaul in three parts? Richardo Mar 2013 #2
Galia est divisa in partes tres... leftieNanner Mar 2013 #92
The Romans had the right idea, but they didn't have the will to fully implement the plan slackmaster Mar 2013 #3
Off topic, dgibby Mar 2013 #82
Should that not be Theodosius? Trajan Mar 2013 #4
Considering their anachronistic reasoning, it might as well be... JHB Mar 2013 #5
You are correct. Don't know where that even came from. cthulu2016 Mar 2013 #10
Roman's had no problem with gays, or with young boys either lunatica Mar 2013 #6
Wasn't homosexualality actually encouraged in Rome? Or was it Greece? Initech Mar 2013 #7
Alexander the Great was gay and it was totally accepted in Greece and Rome lunatica Mar 2013 #8
I remember hearing/reading about a boy/young man being distraught that Socrates would not have him Ed Suspicious Mar 2013 #28
Man/boy??? onpatrol98 Mar 2013 #105
Greece encouraged homosexuality; Rome did not condemn homosexuality, BUT... Moonwalk Mar 2013 #38
They said of Julius Caesar-- eridani Mar 2013 #49
eridani Diclotican Mar 2013 #80
Actually he was an "Impertor", which was what a successful General was called in the Republic happyslug Mar 2013 #112
happyslug Diclotican Mar 2013 #115
well, he wasn't the emperor, he was the dictator, and being every man's "wife...." Moonwalk Mar 2013 #96
Nero's last "wife" Janecita Mar 2013 #39
It's difficult to translate the modern concepts of sexuality to the ancient world Recursion Mar 2013 #68
For those who enjoy this history Trajan Mar 2013 #9
I hate all these dumb people on DU WilliamPitt Mar 2013 #11
I thought the decline and demise of the empire was the topic. xtraxritical Mar 2013 #90
There are many who claim the "Dark Ages" was part of the plan to purge Paganism. Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #93
Plan? Whose plan? Why for? xtraxritical Mar 2013 #100
Do you honestly believe the wealthy went away just because religion changed? Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #101
Hell no, the empire declined because they outstripped their most basic resource, wood. That's what xtraxritical Mar 2013 #110
The same. But I consider this tidbit... Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #111
Ooooh, storing this one away in my quiver Duer 157099 Mar 2013 #12
It is a well known historical fact that teh gays made the Roman Empire fabulous before they Guy Whitey Corngood Mar 2013 #13
That is a beautifully written response to a deplorably stupid assertion 1-Old-Man Mar 2013 #14
"I have a vewy gweat fwiend in Wome named Biggus Dickus" edbermac Mar 2013 #15
LOL. I thought they saved the Empire from clashing togas/tunics Faygo Kid Mar 2013 #26
It's been years since I've seen that. Le Taz Hot Mar 2013 #76
Enthusiastic K&R. David Zephyr Mar 2013 #16
Or "Rome and Greece fell when they turned from Gods" hatrack Mar 2013 #61
K&R idwiyo Mar 2013 #17
Kick. Agschmid Mar 2013 #18
While I was channel surfing I stopped on Fox for 30 seconds and the topic was-oh yeah Boomerproud Mar 2013 #19
I'd never been particularly interested in that era... Blanks Mar 2013 #20
Good point! defacto7 Mar 2013 #22
Did the barbarians tear down the water supply? hunter Mar 2013 #44
Both, the Gothic war of 535-553 were one of the longest, most expensive wars in the history of Rome happyslug Mar 2013 #50
Thanks - great history lesson NewJeffCT Mar 2013 #95
They broke the aqueducts, reducing the supply of fresh water to the city. tclambert Mar 2013 #58
Actually the movement to Revanna was in the 400s, the Aqueducts were NOT breeched till 536 happyslug Mar 2013 #109
I had the timing wrong. Thanks. tclambert Mar 2013 #113
The way they told it in the documentary... Blanks Mar 2013 #97
need more details on the "paradise for homosexuals" please Skittles Mar 2013 #21
There used to be a poster here who thought EVERYTHING was analogous to the "fall of the Republic" alcibiades_mystery Mar 2013 #23
Oh yeah, I remember him. Was he banned? closeupready Mar 2013 #46
You cannot fix stupid. Rex Mar 2013 #24
Actually it was constant wars that brought down the Roman empire. Crowman1979 Mar 2013 #25
Rome's decline and fall is still under both detailed scrutiny and debate. LanternWaste Mar 2013 #42
Thanks for the history lesson BrotherIvan Mar 2013 #48
do not forget the 1% angry citizen Mar 2013 #53
I heard there are something like 200 theories for the decline and fall of Rome. tclambert Mar 2013 #55
I prefer to think the empire didn't die... bobclark86 Mar 2013 #73
Was never just one thing. Rex Mar 2013 #103
same thing during hitlor rise 2Design Mar 2013 #27
Christianity killed the Roman Empire. That, and lead in the pipes. Warren DeMontague Mar 2013 #29
But...But...But, please tell me that Nero at least played his fiddle while the fire burned Tyrs WolfDaemon Mar 2013 #30
The violin was invented after 1500 AD... but sure. Why not? cthulu2016 Mar 2013 #31
Ok, I feel better now, thanks. Tyrs WolfDaemon Mar 2013 #32
He didn't, that is a myth:-( Janecita Mar 2013 #41
It was a guitar tclambert Mar 2013 #56
It was a lyre, and probably not Recursion Mar 2013 #69
Et tu, Bruce? Gregorian Mar 2013 #33
a few gays infected a good part of the (Roman) people," AlbertCat Mar 2013 #34
No no no. Ruby slippers, like Pope Benedict. Hekate Mar 2013 #51
KR&B...thanks! n/t ms liberty Mar 2013 #35
So,...the gays won and created the Vatican? Spitfire of ATJ Mar 2013 #36
de Mattei sounds like the Michele Bachmann of Italy Enrique Mar 2013 #37
The Italians are still mad at Hannibal Janecita Mar 2013 #40
What else did they do right, before they collapsed? ChairmanAgnostic Mar 2013 #43
Whate have the Romans ever done for us? hatrack Mar 2013 #63
LOL! ChairmanAgnostic Mar 2013 #72
Funny how these Xtian homophobes deplore Rome closeupready Mar 2013 #45
The level of cognitive dissonance required really is staggering. nomorenomore08 Mar 2013 #54
And the fact that "Empire" fell cbrer Mar 2013 #47
Well...we are following them in a few ways davidn3600 Mar 2013 #52
Now see....THAT is the REAL problem... BrainDrain Mar 2013 #57
........... trusty elf Mar 2013 #59
Love it! Demeter Mar 2013 #60
Rome collapsed because of it's greedy emperialism Puzzledtraveller Mar 2013 #62
That is facil and ahistoric. AngryAmish Mar 2013 #66
The fall of Rome; greiner3 Mar 2013 #64
Roman Empire fell in 1453 - AngryAmish Mar 2013 #65
AngryAmish Diclotican Mar 2013 #84
Diclotican: AngryAmish Mar 2013 #87
AngryAmish Diclotican Mar 2013 #88
But it tripped in 1301. ChairmanAgnostic Mar 2013 #120
Well it depends which "collapse" you're talking about Recursion Mar 2013 #67
It should be no shock... blackspade Mar 2013 #70
k&r nt steve2470 Mar 2013 #71
Best post ever. +1 this religious studies undergrad luvs you cecilfirefox Mar 2013 #74
Many scientists think we didn't even have full consciousness until 2000 years ago or so. randome Mar 2013 #75
Read: The Rise amd Fall of the Greatest Powers by Paul Kennedy. We are on the way. jwirr Mar 2013 #77
Every great empire that rises up will come down. I remember back in 1966 when my English southernyankeebelle Mar 2013 #78
Yep, thanking you for the history lesson as well Xyzse Mar 2013 #79
so maybe the real things that brought down Rome are happening today here klyon Mar 2013 #81
Dear God, save us from your followers. ZRT2209 Mar 2013 #83
"We are doing what the Roman Empire did right before it Collapsed" The CCC Mar 2013 #85
Another reason I've seen mooted... malthaussen Mar 2013 #86
This just proves that historians have edited the dates. Ian_rd Mar 2013 #89
The Heart of the Matter Anonymousecoview Mar 2013 #91
Holy geez! RoccoRyg Mar 2013 #94
This de Mattei fellow needs to chill.... markbark Mar 2013 #98
Yes. randome Mar 2013 #106
literally split it in half and Byzantinize the good half? MisterP Mar 2013 #99
Math and history challenged asshats...knr...thanks. joeybee12 Mar 2013 #102
happened to the spanish empire as well. we don't PRODUCE anymore. we just push money around. pansypoo53219 Mar 2013 #104
If I remember my history right Pakid Mar 2013 #107
Before the Roman Empire collapsed the Dow Jones reached record highs? grantcart Mar 2013 #108
"Rise And Fall of the Roman Empire" Suggests the same thing AnnieBW Mar 2013 #114
Rome lasted longer after Caligula caseymoz Mar 2013 #116
I would think area51 Mar 2013 #117
I don't think it was The Gay or The Christian King_Klonopin Mar 2013 #118
Best line... Javaman Mar 2013 #119
Latest Discussions»General Discussion»"We are doing what the Ro...»Reply #112