Talk:Caesar Augustus
|
|
How did Augustus Caesar die? DRBennett
Is his name Octavianus or Octavius? AxelBoldt
Octavianus JHK
His name was Octavius before adoption, and Octavianus after, wasn't it?
now there's a question....Imperator or just Princeps? Augustus would have claimed not to have been an Emperor, I think. JHK
- he was given the title of Augustus princeps in 27 BC, then in 23 BC senate gave him the Tribunicia potestas for life and maximum imperium (some prefer the form maius imperium) for 5 years, later renewed. In 19 BC he received consularis potestas for life and in 2 BC was named Pater patriae. The word Emperor could be a later synthesis.
- Knew the titles and their history, thanks. I'm just not certain that the synthesis is valid. I'd like to think we were trying to enlighten people, not dumb down the information. JHK
The title of "Emperor" in the modern sense was something that would have been alien to Augustus and the people of his time. The title of "Imperator", from which we get Emperor, essentially meant "commander in chief" to the Romans.
Augustus would have referred to himself as Princeps, but avoided claiming anything that smacked of kingship--the fear of which got his adoptive father killed.
The first Emperors to blatantly act as monarchs and get away with it were Aurelian and Diocletian.John
Isn't he much more commonly known as simply Augustus? If yes, he should be at Augustus. Jeronimo 02:26 Aug 29, 2002 (PDT)
The page Augustus, unfortunately, is about the title right now.
I think the picture is not of Augustus; but maybe Tiberius.
Not a chance. I have seen the bust in person, and it is undoubtedly Augustus. The boyish hairstyle, nose, strong chin, clear eyes set behind thin eyebrows, and the ghost of a smile on lips are all Augustan traits. Tiberius's face is usually flat, expressionless, and has a weaker chin. Also, Tiberius is often pictured with small sideburns.
Some things that should be mentioned about Augustus:
- He was known as a family man and actively promoted family values - playing to the famous Roman prudery on matters like adultery
- He held elections for such posts as consul, and he and his friends would make a great show of giving big parties for the masses, etc. - very much like modern dictators using the form of elections to cement a dictatorship
- He, much more than Julius, set the formal institutions and tone for what is now known as the Roman Empire, and is usually considered to be the actual prototype of Emperor's behaviour - the one others are compared to.
I have noted all these comments and included most of these points in the rewritten version of the article. Adam 14:26, 15 Oct 2003 (UTC)
Where is the cognomen "Thurinus" attested? I have never seen mention of this name. Publius 05 Dec. 2003
- Seventh paragraph of Suetonius bio, who cites various evidence including a "bronze statuette that I once owned". Stan 05:18, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
It seems to me that this particular use is along the lines of Maximinus Thrax's surname Thrax ("the Thracian"), as an unofficial addition to the name rather than an integral part of it. I could be mistaken, of course; Suetonius is the first source I've seen mention it. Publius
- While we're discussing names, it seems to me that the main article should be Caesar Augustus and Augustus Caesar should be the redirect; the name was always rendered in inscriptions as "IMP CAESAR DIVI F AVG", never as "IMP AVG CAESAR DIVI F" ("Augustus" was appended to his stylised name "Imperator Caesar Divi f.", which he had been using since 40 BC). It is correct to call him Caesar Augustus, but not Augustus Caesar; all of his successors as 'emperor' maintained the same order, first "Caesar", then "Augustus". Publius
- I agree. Muriel Victoria 10:52, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
- I think the confusion comes from whether to use "English" order or "Latin" order, both of which are rational, so it's not really a correctness issue. Google favors C-A over A-C by about 50%, but in an attempt to exclude skewing by ignorant websites, I plugged them into book titles in Amazon (on the theory that writers and editors are careful about titles), and A-C shows up in 13 titles, C-A in 7. So "most common form in English" is unclear. I'd be happy with just "Augustus" - when I see that, I think of the person first, generic title second, but the "Caesar" addition is a good way to finesse the ambiguity. Stan 15:13, 6 Dec 2003 (UTC)
The problem is that he was never called "Augustus Caesar"; the form "Augustus Caesar" implies a title, like "King Wenceslas" or "Emperor Palpatine", which is grossly inconsistent with the historical fact that "Augustus" was a new name added to his existing name. This is like calling Scipio Africanus "Africanus Scipio" or Pompeius Magnus "Magnus Pompeius"; it may work in poetry, but it's simply not correct.
"Augustus Caesar" is a misunderstanding, and should therefore be used as a redirect to the correct form, "Caesar Augustus". "Commonest in English" doesn't really change "correct in Latin". I suggest that we switch the articles and add an editorial note to the article explaining the matter. Publius
The absolute 'correctness' of a name is often not where the title of a page goes. The wikipedia standard is that the most commonly used name in english is to be used, see Wikipedia:Naming conventions (common names). Not sure which version is more common, but whichever is should be used. Maximus Rex 03:40, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
Yep, ironically we may end up titling an article in a way that was never used of the person in his/her lifetime, just because that is now most common. For instance, did Titus Livius's contemporaries call him Livy? I suspect not. Similarly for Virgil. Now in the case of Augustus, if we're uncertain as to the most common usage, that suggests that maybe there isn't one - for instance with "Livy" vs "Livius" you instantly "know" which one is most common, no need to look at Google or anywhere else - in which case we're free to pick the most correct version. Stan 05:48, 10 Dec 2003 (UTC)
I note for the sake of comparison: Britannica (http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=117173&tocid=0&query=augustus&ct=) uses "Augustus, Caesar";Encarta (http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_761558568/Augustus.html) and Columbia (http://www.bartleby.com/65/au/Augustus.html) use just "Augustus". But since Augustus is already a separate article, I would advocate moving to Caesar Augustus, as Britannica has essentially done, and as Augustus seems to advocate. If there is no objection, then I shall move the article. -- Emsworth 01:54, Feb 4, 2004 (UTC)
| Contents |
Augustus Caesar's death
how did he die and when?
Additions 3/30/04
A major renovation of the Roman Empire page has been in the works for a while. As part of the renovation, I'm scooping up the excessive biographic material from the Roman Empire page and shovewling it out to the actual articles that discuss the Roman Emperors.
I think the only controversy there should be is over my amplification of Augustus's name in the first line. That said, it his name in the formal Latin style. Let me know if there are any problems :) -Ddama
Roman emperor category
I think Augustus should be included in the category of Roman emperors. Not only does the article say he is (and if the category is wrong, the article should be changed to be consistent), but the authorities agree - the first sentence of Michael Grant's The Roman Emperors says Augustus "was the first Roman princeps or emperor". Stan 16:31, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Dear Stan, you surely know that our smart Augustus only used titles and offices of the ancient Roman Republic. He was princeps senatus, governors of all important provinces, censor, tribune, you name it. He was not emperor, although its generally assumed as the first. Its not a big mistake, but nevertheless a mistake. If everybody wants it categorized like that, well... Muriel G 17:24, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
- Are you saying Michael Grant is mistaken then? You're braver than I am! :-) Augustus had the same titles as later people we call "emperors", so if you say he's not, and they were, you're in the awkward position of trying to pick somebody else as a first emperor, and I don't know of any authority who names a different person. Stan 17:41, 4 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Muriel, the statement that Augustus was the first emperor is a well-established historical convention, like saying that Walpole was the first Prime Minister. Walpole himself would have rejected this view, but it has become the established convention. Also, as Stan says, if Augustus wasn't the first emperor, who was? I think all the Julio-Claudians used the same titles that Augustus had - Claudius certainly thought of himself as a republican. The historical convention is that the empire began with Augustus, and the article ought to reflect that. Adam 16:16, 5 Jun 2004 (UTC)
Acceptance of Augustus
This is a fairly minor point, but in the article it says the people of Rome didn't want a despot. Although I can understand this, sort of (Romans always resented kings), I always read that they were tired of war and had been sufficiently purged of pro-republican elements (whether by the Second Triumvirate or by natural death) to accept a dictator like Augustus so long as he didn't overtly declare himself a king. Brutannica 03:13, 23 Jul 2004 (UTC)
I'm wondering why is there no mention of Jesus Christ in Ceasar Augustus's history? Also, that he "reigned" at a time when he willingly and proudly boasted of gladiators under his authority, isn't it a bit of a personal comment on the author's part here to say he ruled in peace?
- Why would you mention Jesus, since Augustus died while Jesus was still a youth? This article is primarily about Augustus' own life and career, it's not a general history of Rome. Also, "Peace" in this case means absence of war; gladiators were part of the entertainment of the time, and Romans took about as much notice of a gladiator's death as we would of a stock car driver dying in a wreck out on the track. The Romans had been in one civil war after another for half a century, they were so relieved that Augustus finally brought it to an end that they didn't complain much about the loss of liberty that came with his rule. Stan 06:25, 24 Aug 2004 (UTC)
- And the fact is, while the senatorial class migt have lost priveleges, nothing really changed much for the common people - the only difference is that they voted how Augustus bribed them, not how any other candidates bribed them.Kuralyov 21:32, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Revert because of apparent copyvio
The major edit by anonymous (68.12.208.244) is in fact a reworking of this material at UNRV (and successive pages there) (http://www.unrv.com/fall-republic/octavian.php). In order for this not to be a copyvio, the anonymous must prove that they are the author of the UNRV material. This also calls into question the other contributions of 68.12.208.244, and I suppose someone should check. (For all its cadences, by the way, that material has its share of very bad writing and sloppy editing; if it stays, it would need to be cleaned up — and where there is bad writing, there may also be a need to check the substance of the article very carefully. [B]efore ever for be forever, in doing so doing, At the age of twelve in 51 BC, Octavian’s grandmother and Caesar’s sister, died, etc.) Bill 09:57, 31 May 2005 (UTC)
More Information
I think that more information should be added to this page. Augustus is one of the most prominent figures in Roman, European, and Roman history, but there is very little information about him. The majority of the first three decades of his life, including Julius Caesar, the battles at Philippi, Mark Antony, the Second Triumvirate, Cleopatra, and the Battle of Actium are summed up in a mere four short paragraphs. Even that part of his life that we know the most about (life as "Augustus" and his reign) has little information. Also, unlike the pages of his contemporaries (ex. Mark Antony, Marcus Brutus), Augustus's page dose not contain a list of family and offspring or a chronology. As Bill Thayer pointed out in his comment, the edit made by anonymous (68.12.208.244) is a copy of the material at UNRV (see above for link), but that website does contain a great deal of information on the subject of Augustus. I would recommend to start researching Augustus there (or any website) and re-type the information as to avoid copyright laws. I ask all who hold knowledge of the traditonal "greatest Roman Emperor" to add what they know to this page.
Roman Emperor 11:46 P.M., June 6, 2005 (UTC)
Copyright Question
I recently added a good deal of information to this page and I used the information found on UNRV (http://www.unrv.com/fall-republic/octavian.php) website to write the information. I mainly cut and pasted and tryed to re-write the information the best I could to avoid copyright problems. I would ask that someone read the page and re-type or even revert the page if neccacry. I am not trying to seal copyrighted information, just trying to added material to Augustus's page.
Roman Emperor 01:58 A.M., June 8, 2005 (UTC)
Cutting and pasting, even with some word changes, is plagiarism, I think. If you want to use the material as a source, but write it in your own words, that's fine. john k 03:32, 8 Jun 2005 (UTC)