In order to assess how the conception of the role of a Roman emperor changed over this period of time, and how his subjects reacted to him, we must first ascertain how the original role of the emperor was presented. For an emperor to have subjects to reign, and in order to gain himself the title of emperor, there must first be an empire to rule over. The Roman Empire formed after the fall of the Roman Republic and following the victory at the Battle of Actium, Augustus, nephew of Julius Caesar, became the first emperor of Rome. Contrary to popular belief, Julius Caesar was not officially an emperor but a dictator, a title that granted him great power, but not that of an emperor. Those who did hold the status of the emperor could choose from a variety of titles such as princeps, imperator or consul. The first 200 years of the empire saw relative peace and stability,
a time in which many emperors ruled and was often referred to as Pax Romana, translating to Roman Peace, a time of prosperity. Two prominent emperors from this period are Augustus, born Gaius Octavian Thurinus, and Trajan, born Caesar Nerva Trajan. In this essay it is Augustus and Trajan that I will discuss, focusing on how each emperor presented himself, how he defined, or in Trajans case redefined, the role of the emperor and how his subjects reacted to him. Firstly, I will discuss how Augustus presented himself as the saviour and restorer of Rome and traditional Roman values, how he incorporated his family into his role as emperor and how he was perceived by his subjects as a pater. Secondly, I will discuss how Trajan came to be considered the best emperor and so-called Optimus Princeps, and how he garnered respect from his subjects, army, curia and senate alike.