Augustus

Augustus

Augustus

Tough choice.
Napoleon

Oh, so how much better was your namesake, Oct?

Abraham Lincoln or George Washington should win in my opinion both big inspirational figure.

Looking through the nomination thread, I have no idea how he never made it into the tournament. Several people mentioned him, and I think there was an actual nomination for him. No clue what happened. And Washington lost to Genghis Khan first round.

^"he" refers to Lincoln.

Augustus

Still waiting on someone to give actual reasons as to why Augustus outdoes Napoleon.

As someone who isn't well versed on Roman history, but is very well versed on Napoleonic history, could someone give me an in depth review of what Augustus accomplished? I just know he was the first real 'Emperor', had lots of good policies and kicked of Pax Romana. Don't know the details though.

He was super awesome. He became the first emperor, which was no small feat, and then he spent his time helping the plebs, restoring temples, building cool shit, writing cool shit, inspiring others to write even cooler shit, replacing the existent "rich people get governorships and then tax the living hell out of the people in their lands" with a direct taxation system that both exploited less and helped Rome more. He positively shaped the course of Western history. He established the Pax Romana, bringing an era of prosperity and extreme cultural significance. There's definitely some stuff I'm forgetting, but the guy was amazing.

He set the precedent for every Roman emperor. Not only did he establish the seat itself, but he established the idea of total power, pater patriae, and, whether you agree with it or not, going from the leader of half of a split empire (between him and Marc Antony, who he brilliantly deposed) to the unquestioned "father of the country" in all respects, politically, religiously, socially, and otherwise, is pretty damn amazing. Napoleon got here based on his achievements in establishing a monarchical rule and doing so favorably to his subjects, and Octavian did the same to a much greater degree in the Roman Empire, which, no matter where your biases lie, is a much greater force in history than a dysfunctional French nation.

That and what ghug said.

i'm not troll voting, augustus is clearly more important than napoleon. the winner of this tournament will not be from the last 500 years - the greatest people in history are in some sense by definition from ancient history - they shaped our world more profoundly than any. jesus, alexander, these will be our finalists. the possible exception is einstein, who reshaped everything we know about the universe.

Thanks bo and ghug. For the most part, I agree with what you said. I suppose I just put more weight on military accomplishments than others do here. Militarily, Napoleon is nigh untouchable by anyone, save perhaps Alexander, Hannibal, and a few others.

I wrote a spiel about Julius Caesar, but apparently I didn't post it. He's more responsible for a lot of the things no said than Augustus is. Augustus inherited so much from Caesar that it's almost laughable to say in any way that his achievements weren't handed to him in a hand basket.

I wouldn't disagree - hell, he used Caesar's name to justify his emperorship (is that a word?) - but it's what he did with the things that got handed to him that are amazing. Same goes for Napoleon. And, by the way, in terms of land expansion, Octavian beats Napoleon.

Caesar was a narcissistic, destructive, genocidal douchebag. Caesar destroyed the republic and Augustus immediately restored it, made it better, and quite literally made it his.

Oh, and as for the "handed to him in a hand basket" thing, ditto Napoleon.

Augustus didn't restore the republic, he just restored a broken nation. He did so in a similar fashion to Napoleon, only the nation he restored is much more impressive.

ghug, all of Augustus's ideas originated from Caesar. And it was Brutus and senators that broke the Republic.

I'd expect more Caesar hate from a Latin student, Tr. You're really going to argue that Caesar was the "good guy" there?

And at least Napoleon went up against considerable generals throughout his tenure, as opposed to the few Augustus had to deal with (there was Antonius and Cleopatra and the Germanic Arminius, but the Gallic considerables were already handled by Caesar). And the Germanic tribes really did a number on Augustus's Roman military.

I, as a Latin student, having nothing but love for Caesar.

You clearly haven't read any Caesar yet.

I've read Caesar. They've added him to the AP test.

We need to have a thread for "greatest genocidal asshat" or something...

Bo we all know who would win that.

But it would be interesting learning about more folks like Hitler throughout history.