- Oct 2018
I suppose it is relevant in the sense of whether or not Romans understood there to be a position of 'emperor.' But as I pointed out many pages back, Augustus is only tangentially relevant to that question. How Augustus established the foundations for Roman emperorship through the building up of his own de-facto power is one question. Whether or not the Romans understood there to be an imperial position that transcended any one individual is another. Augustus is mostly relevant to that second question insofar as we consider his dynastic plans and the nature of the power of his successors, which fairly quickly evolved into the transferral of Augustus' powers and authority as a single package (and with legal support - thus the Lex de imperio Vespasiani).You've been repeating this over and over again. Why? Nobody disagrees with you there. There were many causes to Augustus' power. We all agree. There's no need to keep rephrasing and resaying it. You can drop this strawman and save your fingers some typing.