Editing Principate (section)

==History==

The title, in full, of ''princeps senatus'' / ''princeps civitatis'' ("first amongst the senators" / "first amongst the citizens") was first adopted by [[Augustus|Octavian Caesar Augustus]] (27 BC–AD 14), the first [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] "emperor," who chose not to reintroduce a legal [[monarchy]]. Augustus likely intended to establish political stability desperately needed after the exhausting [[Roman civil wars|civil wars]] by a [[Second Triumvirate|''de facto'' dictatorial regime]] within the [[Roman Constitution|constitutional]] framework of the [[Roman Republic]] – what [[Edward Gibbon|Gibbon]] called "an absolute monarchy disguised by the forms of a commonwealth"<ref>D Wormersley ed, ''Abridged Decline and Fall'' (Penguin 2005) p. 73</ref> – as a more acceptable alternative to, for example, the early [[Roman Kingdom]].

Although dynastic pretenses crept in from the start, formalizing this in a monarchic style remained politically perilous;<ref>J Burrow, ''A History of Histories'' (Penguin 2007) pp. 124–125</ref> and Octavian was undoubtedly correct to work through established Republican forms to consolidate his power.<ref>J Boardman ed. ''The Oxford History of the Classical World'' (1991) p. 538</ref> He began with the powers of a [[Roman consul]], combined with those of a [[Tribune of the plebs]]; later added the role of the [[Roman censor|censor]] and finally became ''[[pontifex maximus]]'' as well.<ref>D Wormersley ed, ''Abridged Decline and Fall'' (Penguin 2005) pp. 70–71</ref><ref>Cassius, D. (1987). ''The Roman history : the reign of Augustus'' (I. Scott-Kilvert, Trans.; pp. 140–142). Penguin Books.</ref>

In addition to these legal powers, the principate was also characterized by the emperor being the "[[Patronage in ancient Rome|ultimate source of patronage]]".<ref>Goldsworthy, A. (2010). ''How Rome Fell Death of a Superpower.'' (pp. 45–46). Yale Univ Pr.</ref> This was due in part to their immense wealth, being named ''[[Pater Patriae]]'' or "father of the country''"''<ref>Adrian Keith Goldsworthy. (2014). ''Augustus : first emperor of Rome'' (pp. 395–396). Yale University Press.</ref>'','' and by having a monopoly on political power. To this, emperors would satisfy the senatorial class with appointments to the high offices and to the provinces, effectively removing threats to their power in [[Rome]]. As such, emperors went to great lengths to control and satisfy the needs of the army (their ultimate source of power) by proving gracious [[Donativum|donatives]] to the troops upon their ascension and for special events; limiting senatorial control over the legions by way of controlling military provinces through "extraordinary military commands"; and using oaths to bind the military to the emperor personally.<ref>Bleicken, J. (2015). ''Augustus'' (A. Bell, Trans.; pp. 496–503). Penguin UK.

See for emperors monopoly on military power</ref><ref>Bleicken, J. (2015). ''Augustus'' (A. Bell, Trans.; pp. 286- 290). Penguin UK.

See for emperors justification for holding "extraordinary military command was still needed" and relationship between imperial and senatorial provinces.</ref>

[[Tiberius]], like [[Augustus]], also acquired his powers piecemeal, and was proud to emphasize his place as first citizen: "a good and healthful ''princeps'', whom you have invested with such great discretionary power, ought to be the servant of the Senate, and often of the whole citizen body".<ref>Gaius Tranquillus Suetonius. (2006). ''The Twelve Caesars'' (p. 121). Penguin</ref> Thereafter, however, the role of princeps became more institutionalized: as [[Dio Cassius]] puts it, [[Caligula]] "took in one day all the honours which Augustus had with difficulty been induced to accept".<ref>Cassius Dio, Cary, E., & Herbert Baldwin Foster. (1924). ''Dio’s Roman History'' (p. 268). Harvard University Press; London.</ref>

[[File:Principate under the rule Augustus.jpg|400px|thumb|Principate under Augustus<ref>Digital Reproduction of diagram found in The Anchor Atlas of World History, Vol. 1 (From the Stone Age to the Eve of the French Revolution) Paperback – December 17, 1974 by Werner Hilgemann, Hermann Kinder, Ernest A. Menze (Translator), Harald Bukor (Cartographer), Ruth Bukor (Cartographer)</ref>]]

Nevertheless, under this "Principate ''stricto sensu''", the political reality of [[autocratic]] rule by the [[Roman emperor|Emperor]] was still scrupulously masked by forms and conventions of [[oligarchy|oligarchic]] self-rule inherited from the political period of the 'uncrowned' [[Roman Republic]] (509 BC–27 BC) under the motto {{Lang|la|Senatus Populusque Romanus}} ("The Senate and people of Rome") or ''[[SPQR]]''. Initially, the theory implied the 'first citizen' had to earn his extraordinary position (''de facto'' evolving to nearly absolute monarchy) by merit in the style that Augustus himself had gained the position of ''[[auctoritas]]''.

Imperial [[propaganda]] developed a paternalistic [[ideology]], presenting the ''princeps'' as the very incarnation of all virtues attributed to the ideal ruler (much like a Greek ''[[tyrannos]]'' earlier), such as clemency and justice, and military leadership,<ref>C Edwards Intro, ''Lives of the Caesars'' (OUP 2000) p. xxi</ref> obliging the ''princeps'' to play this designated role within [[Ancient Rome|Roman]] society, as his political insurance as well as a moral duty. What specifically was expected of the ''princeps'' seems to have varied according to the times, and the observers:<ref>C Edwards Intro, ''Lives of the Caesars'' (OUP 2000) pp. xxiii–xxv</ref> [[Tiberius]], who amassed a huge surplus for the city of [[Rome]], was criticized as a miser,<ref>Gaius Tranquillus Suetonius, Graves, R., & Grant, M. (2006). ''The Twelve Caesars'' (pp. 129–130). Penguin.</ref> while his successor [[Caligula]] was criticized for his lavish spending on games and spectacles.<ref>Gaius Tranquillus Suetonius, Graves, R., & Grant, M. (2006). ''The Twelve Caesars'' (pp. 165–167). Penguin.</ref>

Generally speaking, it was expected of the Emperor to be generous but not frivolous, not just as a good ruler but also with his [[Fiscus|personal fortune]] (as in the proverbial "bread and circuses" – ''[[panem et circenses]]'') providing occasional public games, gladiators, chariot races and artistic shows. Large distributions of food for the public and charitable institutions also served as popularity boosters, while the construction of public works provided paid employment for the poor.

=== Redefinition under Vespasian ===
With the fall of the [[Julio-Claudian dynasty]] in AD 68, the ''principate'' became more formalized under the Emperor [[Vespasian]] from AD 69 onwards.<ref>J Boardman ed, ''The Oxford History of the Classical World'' (1991) p. 561</ref> The position of ''princeps'' became a distinct entity within the broader – formally still republican – [[Roman constitution]]. While many of the same cultural and political expectations remained, the civilian aspect of the Augustan ideal of the ''princeps'' gradually gave way to the military role of the imperator.<ref>J Boardman ed, ''The Oxford History of the Classical World'' (1991) pp. 561, 573</ref>  Rule was no longer a position (even notionally) extended on the basis of merit, or ''[[auctoritas]]'', but on a firmer basis, allowing Vespasian and future emperors to designate their own heir without those heirs having to earn the position through years of success and public favor.

=== Under the Antonines ===
Under the [[Nerva–Antonine dynasty|Antonine dynasty]], it was standard for the Emperor to appoint a successful and politically promising individual as his successor. Though later scholars would often cite this as an ideal system in which succession to the position of princeps was determined on the basis of ability rather than heredity, that this was the intention of the emperors themselves has generally been rejected by modern scholarship.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Geer |first1=Russel Mortimer |title=Second Thoughts on the Imperial Succession from Nerva to Commodus |journal=Transactions and Proceedings of the American Philological Association |date=1936 |volume=67 |pages=47–54 |doi=10.2307/283226 |jstor=283226 |url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/283226 |access-date=10 February 2025 |issn=0065-9711|url-access=subscription }}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Grainger |first1=John D. |title=The Roman Imperial Succession |date=30 June 2020 |publisher=Pen and Sword History |isbn=978-1-5267-6605-2 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VwLoDwAAQBAJ&dq=rome+dynastic+succession&pg=PT96 |access-date=10 February 2025 |language=en}}</ref>

This period saw several firsts for the imperial office, including the first recognised period of rule by two emperors during the co-rule of [[Marcus Aurelius]] and [[Lucius Verus]] from their accession in 161 AD until the latter's death in 169 AD, and the succession of [[Commodus]] marking the first transfer of power to a son born to a sitting emperor. Often ranked amongst the worst Roman emperors, Commodus's 12-year reign was followed by [[Year of the Five Emperors|a civil war between rival generals]] and the final dynasty of the Principate, the [[Severan dynasty]].

=== Tetrarchy ===

The autocratic elements in the Principate tended to increase over time.<ref>H M Gwatkin ed., ''The Cambridge Medieval History Vol I'' (1924) p. 25</ref>

It was after the [[Crisis of the Third Century]], which almost resulted in the Roman Empire's political collapse, that [[Diocletian]] firmly consolidated the trend to autocracy.<ref>H M Gwatkin ed., ''The Cambridge Medieval History Vol I'' (1924) p. 25</ref> He replaced the one-headed ''principate'' with the [[Tetrarchy]] ({{Circa|AD 300}}, two ''[[Augustus (title)|Augusti]]'' ranking above two ''[[Caesar (title)|Caesares]]''),<ref>H M Gwatkin ed., ''The Cambridge Medieval History Vol I'' (1924) p. 27</ref> in which the vestigial pretense of the old republican forms was largely abandoned. The title of ''princeps'' disappeared, together with the concept of only one emperor. New forms of pomp and awe were deliberately used in an attempt to insulate the emperor(s) and the civil authority from the unbridled and mutinous soldiery of the mid-century.<ref>H M Gwatkin ed., ''The Cambridge Medieval History Vol I'' (1924) p. 25</ref>

The political role of the Senate went into final eclipse,<ref>J Boardman ed. ''The Oxford History of the Classical World'' (1991) p. 808</ref> no more being heard of the division by the Augustan Principate of the provinces between [[imperial province]]s and [[senatorial province]]s.<ref>H M Gwatkin ed., ''The Cambridge Medieval History Vol I'' (1924) p. 29</ref> Lawyers developed a theory of the total delegation of authority into the hands of the emperor.<ref>H M Gwatkin ed., ''The Cambridge Medieval History Vol I'' (1924) p. 28</ref>