This is also why the adoptive emperors functioned especially well. They were the few who actually had rhe principate work as intended

@@PRODAt3 Indeed. His system of power was difficult to replicate by his successors who were not as talented and subtle as he was. In the long run the upper echelon's mobility in political power stagnated and their advancement relied more on personal connection to the emperor. Later emperors are less secure about their position compared to Augustus and stifled any talented senators. It would seem that later ambitious talents, knowing how caesar and augustus came to power, instead of being offered a shot at the top leadership spot through the relative merit system of military success against foreign enemy during the republic era, had to more often resort to pure military career and civil wars in succession dispute as the only path to the top spot. The adoptive emperors were probably the closest replication of the Augustus' power structure but its still unreliable as it was still one man at the top and suitable candidates are not always guaranteed.

Exactly. He took what many did before him and ran with it to its most extreme. He made himself so essential to the badoc framework of Rome that the Senate couldn't simply restore the Republic from a dictator. He made sure he was the only part of the "Republic" that mattered and surrounded himself with the combined arms of his personal provinces.

@@PRODAt3 if all his family heirs didn't die, history would be very different, though

"Look I am not going to do anything during the funeral of Caesar's assassination but I will complain about others screwing it up. " -Cicero

The problem with Cicero is that he never stopped talking

@@PRODAt3 In fact, that's what got him killed(by Mark Antony) in the end. He just couldnt stop himself from endlessly insulting the man. Even if they hated each other, that wasnt wise. And Mark Antony remembered when it came time for the proscriptions in the second triumvirate.

What's talking like Cicero? "My beloved peers, you know me and my past achievements, and today I have come to tell you, this man right here is evil, he will destroy everything I stand for. Now that your eyes are open thanks to me, I urge you to take action and have him stop living. If someone asks, I deny any responsibility."

We simple men are easily pleased.

@@midweekcentaur1050 😩

Bars

Yeah watching his series of video really brought nostalgia of my time taking classics courses in first year. A 6-9pm course on a weds night but I never missed a session! =)

Ever read on the eastern empire? On how long it managed to survive thanks to its bureaucracy?

@@MohamedRamadan-qi4hl Ever read on the Western empire? how it fall to constant civil wars from its generals due to lack of proper bureaucracy? lol, in any case, this is something that Octavian never developed, a government based on personal prestige will never go well vs well established bureaucracy.

Yeah specifically slavery in Rome was ironically a double edged sword. China had peasants that made it possible for small markets to develop and new innovation. Rome was very backwards domestically.

Part of the reason why Rome avoided implementing a bureaucracy was because the emperors could get Senators and Equestrians to do work essentially for free even if it was never quite professional. All of the emperors who did move in that direction, starting with Claudius who had a tiny household bureaucracy, incurred sneers from the aristocracy who still furnished all of the governors and generals in the Empire. The reluctance to develop a bureaucracy had a lot to do with emperors trying to avoid alienating the Roman elite.

@@ThersitestheHistorian That totally make sense now! On a related note, do you think US faces the same issue today, do we have lack of bureaucracy or too much bureaucracy or have enough but ineffective bureaucracy.

Maecenas and Agrippa were with him throughout this period and he trusted both of them implicitly. I am sure that they played a role, but it is hard to say exactly what they contributed in terms of specific ideas. Augustus did have a leg up on his predecessors insofar as he could see how they had failed and try to avoid repeating the same mistakes.

Probably a lot of the difference is life experience and being a quick learner from those experiences. Also there is going to be a considerable difference between the methods of a young man with a shaky, uncertain power base and a fully grown adult man who has proven himself through conquest and who posses a power base that is both broad and deep.

Many Augustan reforms were begun by Julius Caesar, and he used the exact same powers to achieve them, that is: A combination of Tribunician potestas, intermittent consular power, and Proconsular power. They both also took up the power of censor, and both carried instituted similar morality laws. Augustus continued and expanded on Caesar's land reforms, magistrate and governorship reforms, public works at Rome, expansion of citizenship(and the overall push to make the empire a single homogeneous polity), reforming the army and placing it under the control of one man, many legal reforms that Caesar had been introducing or trying to introduce since before his first Consulship, etc. He also was granted many of the same honors, such as "Imperator" as title kept for life(Thus Caesar _really_ was the first emperor), Pater Patriae(Father of the country, a title of Romulus that had thus far only been granted to Cicero, Julius Caesar, then Augustus, then every emperor after him. Also Pontifex Maximus, which would also be passed down to every emperor after him. The big difference was that Caesar would be granted "Dictator," accept it, then resign it, then the Senate would offer it again. He'd accept it, then resign it, then just before his death the Senate gave him "Perpetual Dictator." Caesar already had all the power of the dictator whether he held the title or not. Augustus also attained all the power of the dictator, but when the Senate tried to give Augustus the title of dictator, he turned it down. I'm sure it was all very dramatic with a large audience in attendance.

Remember that Rome was a rotten mess at the time of his prescriptions and his opposition literally stabbed his adoptive father. If people want you dead and have the capacity to do so it's not a very clever idea to leave them alive. The upper-class of Rome who were targeted by Augustus were the people who supported his political opposition. Whatever you think about the Proscriptions and how ethical they were, it's not really correct to call them arbitrary because given the situation you'd most likely do it too. Once all your opposition is out of the way and your new goal is keeping the peace, it then stands to reason that you'd do as much as possible to not make people hate you. He had all the power, the authority and no one else who could oppose him so it's not really amazing at all. In fact its actually predictable considering that Augustus wasn't the first person to make such political moves and wasn't the last to do so either.

When did Augustus stop being great?

The Greatest of the Romans followed by the greatest Emperor of the Romans

It was part of Germania Superior.

I would go with Septimius Severus more or less mocking the notion that the Senate mattered as being the big break with Augustus. Severus Alexander tried to be a throwback Princeps, but he ended up getting murdered by his own soldiers, which kind of proved Septimius' point.

@@ThersitestheHistorian *Ironic…he could save others from death, but not himself.*

We'll see. I might do something on that in the spring.

The Senate held meetings as it had always done, or at least that is my understanding. Augustus could use his powers to call meetings, but some meetings were regularly scheduled. I think that it was still possible to put forward proposals, but that most Senators didn't dare propose anything of substance without consulting the emperor or his inner circle.

@@ThersitestheHistorian I see, thank you.

If he had died in the 20's BCE, the empire would have gone to Marcus Agrippa, so he almost did initiate the adoption system.

@@ThersitestheHistorian It would have been interesting to see if The Senate would have accepted a plebeian successor.

I have no reason to disbelieve it, especially since Augustus merely praised Cicero for his style and never endorsed his politics or anything that would be out of character.

It sounds neater if you imagine Eric Cartman saying it.

I'm sure that I will find an occasion to talk about Elagabalus at some point.

Hahaha. I cant wait for the Elagabalus video. That guy was easily the weirdest and freakiest pervert to ever be an Emperor. Guys who dont know, go look up some a summary on that dude. Its hilarious(and disturbing).

@chucknorris202 what's disturbing?

Everything that I know about AEW comes from Jim Cornette. LOL. When I saw that image pop up, I knew that I had to include it.

True. That is the most common map that most people seem to prefer since it includes Britain and Dacia.

Quite so.

🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣the most stupid idea ever

He was so stupid and stubborn and we can see this by the way he acted

I have thought that before too, but I respect Augustus too much to utter such thoughts aloud.

@@ThersitestheHistorian actually it's Caligula, not Augustus.

Not at all.

No he doesnt at all look like Mark Zuckerberg. Not even in the slightest. The only similarities are that their haircuts and outline are similar - but its the same with most people.

You could always go down to your local courthouse and make that dream a reality.

@@ThersitestheHistorian that would be sweet!! I think I will….. How bout’ “Robertimicus Germanicus Hanabalus”. Love it!! I have German ancestry ya know?