Numismatic and History Discussions > Roman Coins

An overview of all Roman Augusti?

(1/2) > >>

Anton C:
Hi all,
does anyone know a good and accurate overview of all Roman augusti? I'm interest in the coins that are from augusti - accepted by the senate.
As you know there are many coin types of female augustae, co-ruling caesars, usurpers, etc. As well as overviews of the Roman emperors. But a list of the augusti I just can't find.

As I understand from Wikipedia also in the past this has been an issue:
Several ancient writers have tried to count the number of Roman emperors through history, but each of them has given a different count. The 4th-century historian Festus states that "From Octavian Caesar Augustus to Jovian, there were imperatores, 43 in number, through 407 years [reckoning from 43 BC]”.[17] The 6th-century Chronicon Paschale calls Diocletian the "33rd Roman emperor". Adding the eight other emperors mentioned in the work would give a total of 41 emperors up until Constantine I.[18] It's possible that the chronicle counts Julius Caesar as the first emperor, a view that is shared by most ancient writers.[19]
A few writers have also attempted to make their own lists of Roman emperors. The 4th-century calligrapher Filocalus, in his Chronographia, records 58 emperors from Augustus to Constantine.[20] His contemporary Epiphanius records 44 emperors in his work On Weights and Measures.[21] The 13th-century Chronicon Altinate records 46 emperors in the same time period.[22] These discrepancies arise from the fact that there was never a defining distinction between "legitimate emperors" and "usurpers".[23] The Chronicon Paschale, for example, describes Licinius as having been killed like "those who had briefly been usurpers before him".[18] In reality, Licinius was the legitimate emperor of the West (having been apointed by Galerius), while Constantine was the real "usurper" (having been proclaimed by his troops).[24] Other emperors had such uneventful or brief reigns that they are unmentioned by literary sources, like Licinius's co-emperors Valerius Valens and Martinianus.[25] In the later Eastern empire, co-emperors were no longer seen as "true" rulers given their submissive role to the senior emperor.

I know of course this list, but also in this one there seems many usurpers, etc. involved:
Many thanks for you thoughts and answers!

Marti Vltori:
I think that list is pretty accurate. Generally a legitimate emperor is:

1) Confirmed by the Senate.
2) named by the preceeding emperor or accepted by co emperor.
3) able to maintain control for a significant amount of time.

I think alot of ambiguity arises in the 3rd point and somewhat in the second point regarding being accepted by co emperors and that is where the variations in the lists arise.

Pekka K:

List suited to your purpose is created from eg this list:

by removing names you do'nt want to your collection.

Pekka K

Anton C:
Thank you for your replies!
Indeed from the 3rd century onwards it gets complicated.
Best wishes, Anton

"Legitimacy" is merely a construct that has applicability only in the legal and social context of a particular period of time. Emperors were raised and killed and damned within months, sometimes weeks. The "Senate" approved or did not get a choice to approve, or endorsed or withdrew endorsement, based on their perception of their self-interest, the number of Senators who had not been killed in last month's battle, and military exigencies.  Their endorsement was irrelevant if the closest army was bigger than the second-closest army.  A "usurper" was a person who died before commissioning an official history that survived long enough to be copied and survive to today. A "legitimate" emperor had better public relations staff.  Some of the women on the coins, "Augusta" or not, had more influence than the male "Augustus", and were often the conduit for that man's "legitimacy".
There's no magic involved, just politics.  So, collect the coins that interest you.


[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version