Who is the best Byzantine Emperor and why it is Anastasius?
>Proven statesman even before wearing the purple
>Reform the administration
>Reform the economy
>Filled the treasury (only to have it drained by the memeemperor later on)
>Can calm the crowds by just standing in front of them (when memeemperor did the same, people chimped out even more)
Ferdinand II of Aragon
I'm pretty sure you mean Roman Emperor, OP
there is no such title as "Emperor of Byzantium"
There is no "Emperor" either you pretentious prick. No one called himself Imperator.
I hope all Basileus's fuck you in your pretentious arrogant ass like a true greek pederast.
Mehmed the second
not pretenders please
It's not pretentious to not make arbitrary distinctions between two periods of the same civilization, friendo
Gaius Octavian and Constantine XI Paiologos held the same office
No they did not you faggot.
Augustus never called himself basileus-emperor etc he was Princeps
See I can play the pretentious game too.
He also had the title imperator
Emperor derives from imperator in English
It matters not, as all of these titles are intended to display the imperial dignity of their holders.
Augustus actually did take Imperator as a personal name. After his alliance with Antony at Brundisium, he changed his name from Gaius Julius Caesar Divi Filius to Imperator Caesar Divi Filius (after Actium, he added the Augustus). But it's definitely wrong to say that "imperator" was his title or position. For that matter, it's wrong to say that "princeps" was his position either -- that just means he was the first citizen of the state, it doesn't denote any office or really anything at all beyond "this guy is the most powerful".
Augustus' actual office, which empowered him to rule the whole empire, varied over the years and included spells as annual consul in Rome, proconsular imperium in the provinces, the authority and inviolability under the law of a plebeian tribune, and eventually unchallenged and permanent imperium within the city of Rome. His successors didn't all or even mostly bother to accrue these constitutional powers and shit became increasingly ad hoc as time went by. the office of basileus as it was employed in Byzantium had a lot more to do with the post-Diocletianic Roman dominate, where the ruler was viewed as master and the subjects as slaves, than with Augustus' collection of legal powers to enforce his will upon his fellow citizens.
Are you saying it is wrong to consider Gaius Octavian the first Roman Emperor?
I think he's saying it's wrong to think of Rome as a neat constitutional government and that it's better to think of it as one giant hodgepodge that resembles a very large gang or mafioso organization instead of, say, the governments of China, the US, the UK, Japan, etc.
Ferdinand wasn't a pretender
He was granted the title legitimately, by the last Byzantine emperor
>Noone called himself Imperator
What are you talking about? Yes they did. Latin was still the language of court and officialdom up until Heraclius in the 7th century. It was only then that imperator became baseileos.
>that headdress
metro bordering on homo
Wut lol last emperor died in Constantinople
Think you'll find the best Basileus is Edgar the Peaceable.
Anglo-Saxons will rule now and forever
How does that stop him from making Ferdinand his heir?
Justinian
Name calling does not help your flimsy argument, pal
Basil II and it's not even close