The title of Roman Emperor, although in some ways a modern concept, effectively summarises the position held by those individuals who wielded power in the Roman Empire. The Roman Empire developed from the Roman Republic after its ascent to the dominant power in Europe, and is characterised by the concentration of power in one individual, rather than the "Senate and People of Rome". However, Augustus, universally accepted to have been the first emperor, was careful to maintain the facade of republic rule, and took no specific title to mark his rule (which began in 27 BC).[1] Instead, he simply concentrated the pre-existing powers of Roman magistrates upon his own person, taking the existing honorific of 'Princeps Senatus' (the 'first' man of the senate).[1] This style of government, which lasted for nearly 300 years, is thus called the 'Principate'. The modern word 'emperor' derives from the title 'Imperator', which was granted by an army to a successful general; as such, during the initial phase of the Roman Empire, it still had to be earned by the 'Princeps'. The term 'emperor', though modern, is used when describing rulers of the Roman Empire, since it a) emphasises the strong links between the ruler and the army (on whose support the ruler's power depended), and b) does not discriminate between the style of rule in different phases of the Empire.
In the late 3rd century AD, after the Crisis of the Third Century, Diocletian formalised and embellished the recent manner of imperial rule, establishing the so-called 'Dominate' period of the Roman Empire. This was characterised by the explicit investment of authority in the person of the Emperor, and the use of the style 'Dominus Noster' ('Our Lord'). From Diocletian onwards, there were often multiple simultaneous emperors, dividing the rule of the vast territories between them. After 395 AD, and the death of Theodosius I, the Empire became more firmly split into an Western and Eastern halves[2] They were not legally separate however, and the Emperor of the more stable Eastern Empire often imposed his authority over the Western half. The Western Empire was heavily troubled after 395 AD, and collapsed completely after 455 AD, the last Western Emperor abdicating in 476 AD; after which the Eastern Empire maintained claim to the territories in the west. The Eastern Empire would continue until 1453, and the capture of Constantinople by the Ottoman Turks.[3] The Eastern Emperors, nowadays generally known as the Byzantine Emperors, continued unbroken succession of Roman Emperors. The listing of the earlier Byzantine Emperors in this article ends with Justin II, last of the Justinian dynasty.
The emperors listed in this article are those generally agreed to have been 'legitimate' emperors (e.g. not usurpers, etc.). However, since the emperorship was rather vaguely defined legally, which persons were 'legitimate' is not easy to define; many of the 'legitimate' emperors accessed to the position by usurption, and many 'illegitemate' claimants had a legitimate claim to the position. The following criteria can be used to derive the list:
Any individual who undisputedly ruled the whole Empire, at some point, must, in point of fact, be a 'legitimate emperor'(1).
Any individual who was nominated as heir or co-emperor by a legitimate emperor (1), and who succeeded to rule in their own right, is a legitimate emperor (2).
Where there were multiple claimants, and none were legitimate heirs; the claimant accepted by the Roman Senate as emperor is the legitimate emperor (3), at least during the Principate.
So for instance, Aurelian, though acceeding to the throne by usurption, was the sole and undisputed between 274-275 AD, and thus was a legitimate emperor. Gallienus, though not in control of the whole Empire, and plagued by other claimants, was the legitimate heir of (the legitimate emperor) Valerian. Claudius Gothicus, though acceeding illegally, and not in control of the whole Empire, was the only claimant accepted by the Senate, and thus, for his reign, was the legitimate emperor. Equally, during the Year of the Four Emperors, all claimants, though not undisputed, were at some point accepted by the Senate and are thus included; conversely, during the Year of the Five Emperors neither Pescennius Niger or Clodius Albinus were accepted by the Senate, and are thus not included. There are a few examples where individuals were made co-emperor, but never wielded power in their own right (typically the child of an emperor); these are legitimate, but are listed together with the 'senior' emperor.
The above formula holds until 395, when the Western and Eastern halves of the Empire split. After that, it continues to hold, with the caveat that a legitimate emperor had undisputed control over one half of the Empire. Towards the end of the Western Empire (after 455), the emperor ceased to be a relevant figure and there was sometimes actually no claimant. For the sake of historical completeness, all Western Emperors after that point are included, even though Romulus Augustus, traditionally the "last Roman Emperor" was technically a usurper.
Son of Septimius Severus; co-emperor with Severus from 198 AD; with Severus and Geta from 209 AD until February 211 AD; co-emperor with Geta until December 211 AD
8 April217 AD
Murdered by a soldier; probably as part of a conspiracy involving Macrinus
Praetorian Prefect to Caracalla, probably conspired to have Caracalla murdered and proclaimed himself emperor after Caracalla's death; appointed his son Diadumenian junior emperor in May 217
aThe other claimants for the throne in the Year of the Five Emperors were Pescennius Niger and Clodius Albinus, supported by the Syrian and British legions respectively. Although not completely defeated until 197 AD, they were not formally accepted by the senate and were therefore not technically reigning emperors;
Proclaimed emperor, whilst Pro-consul in Africa, during a revolt against Maximinus. Ruled jointly with his son Gordian II, and in opposition to Maximinus. Technically a usurper, but retrospectively legitimised by the accession of Gordian III
April 238 AD
Commited suicide upon hearing of the death of Gordian II.
Gordian II
CAESAR MARCVS ANTONIVS GORDIANVS SEMPRONIANVS ROMANVS AFRICANVS AVGVSTVS
Proclaimed emperor, alongside father Gordian I, in opposition to Maximinus. Technically a usurper, but retrospectively legitimised by the accession of Gordian III
Governor under Philip the Arab; proclaimed emperor by Danubian legions and defeated Philip in battle; made his son Herennius Etruscus co-emperor in early 251 AD
Governor of Moesia Superior, proclaimed emperor by Danubian legions after Decius's death (and in opposition to Hostilian); made his son Volusianus co-emperor in late 251 AD.
August 253 AD
Assassinated by their own troops, in favour of Aemilianus
Aemilianus
CAESAR MARCVS AEMILIVS AEMILIANVS AVGVSTVS
Adopted as senior co-emperor ('Augustus') in the west by Diocletian in 286 AD
310 AD
Abdicated with Diocletian; twice tried to regain throne with, and then from Maxentius; captured by Constantine I and commited suicide at his behest
Son of Constantius Chlorus, proclaimed emperor by his father's troops; accepted as Caesar (west) by Galerius in 306 AD; promoted to Augustus (west) in 307 AD by Maximian after death of Severus; refused relegation to Caesar in 309 AD
Appointed Augustus in the west by Galerius in 308 BC, in opposition to Maxentius; Became Augustus in the east in 311 AD after the death of Galerius (shared with Maximinus); Defeated Maximinus in civil war to become sole eastern Augustus in 313 BC; Appointed Valerius Valens in 317 AD, and Martinianus in 324 AD as western Augustus, in opposition to Constantine, both nominally ruled for a few months before being executed
325 AD
Defeated in civil war against Constantine I in 324 AD and captured; executed on the orders of Constantine the next year
Constantine II
CAESAR FLAVIVS CLAVDIVS CONSTANTINVS AVGVSTVS
Son of Theodosius I; Appointed as 'junior' Augustus for the east by Theodosius in 383 (after the death of Gratian); became 'senior' Augustus for the east after his father's death