Why are the emperors of Western empires called Caesar?

Let me answer it for you. I am proficient in ancient European history and modern history. The following is completely typed by hand. I hope you can respect it.

First of all, before Napoleon, there would only be one emperor in Europe - --The so-called Roman Emperor

Others can only be called kings. Let me explain the reason in detail

First of all, we must start with Caesar himself

Uri Us Caesar was born into a noble family and served successively as treasurer, chief priest, chancellor, consul, censor, dictator and other positions. In 60 BC, he secretly formed the first three alliances with Pompey and Crassus, and then became the governor of Gaul. He spent eight years conquering all of Gaul (approximately what is now France), and also attacked Germany and Britain. In 49 BC, he led his army to occupy Rome, defeated Pompey, consolidated power into one man, and implemented a dictatorship.

Since Caesar's victory in the civil war, the principal system in Rome has been a certainty. Although Caesar was assassinated (in 44 BC, Caesar was assassinated by members of the Senate led by Ibrutus), his adopted son Octavian defeated Antony to create the Roman Empire and became the first imperial emperor - here is It should be noted at the beginning that the title of emperor did not exist in Europe before this. In the era of Octavian, the nominal monarchy still existed - since Octavian obtained "Augustus" in 28 BC "Capital" title - in fact, this is no different from the emperor.

So later generations called Octavian the first emperor of the Roman Empire

In this way Augustus They all became synonymous with emperor

However, the term Caesar became emperor had another setback - it happened 300 years later

Between 235 and 284 AD , there were twenty-six emperors in Rome, who only reigned for an average of two to three years. This chaotic situation is called the Crisis of the Third Century---In 284, Derrick took the throne first and carried out a series of reforms--first of all, he deposed some of Rome's imperial and state remnants-- -It was the implementation of the imperial system----and the most important thing was the establishment of the political system of the Four Emperors

Diocletian concluded from the experience of constant wars in the empire in the first nine years of his rule that the empire was too It was too large for one emperor to rule alone; and it was difficult for just one person to resist the constant intrusions of the barbarians from the Rhine River to the Egyptian border. The radical solution was to split the empire in half and draw a straight line on the map dividing the empire into the east and west.

The Four-Emperor system refers to the rule of the eastern and western parts of the empire by two main emperors, each assisted by a deputy emperor. Among the many titles of Roman emperors, Augustus was the most important, so it was awarded to the two main emperors, while the two deputy emperors were awarded the less important title of Caesar. Diocletian intended that when the main emperor retired or died, the deputy emperor would succeed him, and the succeeding main emperor would appoint a new deputy emperor to solve the problem of succession to the throne. This system was officially implemented in 292 AD.

This system actually did not last long, mainly because of the issue of inheritance, and it paved the way for the subsequent division of Rome

In 306 In 2012, Constantine I launched a civil war in the western empire and won in 312. He then occupied the eastern empire in 324 and unified the empire until his death in 337 - the four emperors system It was ended

But after that, the name of the deputy emperor, Caesar, became synonymous with the emperor

However, in 395, the Roman Empire was divided into two-- --Two European Emperors Appeared

After the Roman Empire was split into east and west parts, the last emperor of the Western Roman Empire was deposed by King Odoacer of the Ostrogothic Kingdom in 476. Odoacer What he did was to give the imperial emblem to Zeno, the emperor of the Eastern Roman Empire at that time, and declared that Western Rome no longer needed a monarch of its own, and the only emperor in the world was enough, and asked the Eastern Roman Empire to grant him the political power of the Italian provinces. .

Legally speaking, this move is not the "destruction of the Western Roman Empire" as we learned from textbooks, but the reunification of the Eastern and Western Roman Empires!

In this way, for the Middle Ages, and Europe before the Middle Ages, there was only one empire, and that was the Roman Empire. There is no ambiguity in this. There is no such thing as "the country where the king is located will only have the chance to be declared an empire by the Vatican if it becomes the most powerful country." This is really a big joke.

After that, at least nominally and legally, the Eastern Roman emperor had suzerainty over the Western Empire. It was not until 800 that Charles I, King of the Carolingian Dynasty of the Frankish Kingdom, entered Rome and was crowned "Emperor of the Romans" by the then Pope Leo III. This move actually marks that the western empire has its own imperial line again!

The empire that was reborn in 800 was already a pure concept of a universal empire and a world empire. Whether or not there was a Senate was just a matter of form. The new empire also had something similar to a parliament and a Senate. Even the emperor was elected. The words on the imperial seal of Charles I in 800 AD: "Rebirth of the Roman Empire" clearly expressed the unmistakable meaning

For Christianity, it is limited to western Europe. It is said that the divine right of kings is its own system. Since there is only one true God, God must have an agent in the world. Then the agent of divine power is the Pope, and the agent of secular power is the emperor of the Roman Empire. The two men are, at least in theory, equals. Just like China's "Tian Wu Er Sun" and "Gu Wu Du Zhu", there is only one secular agent of God in the world, and there is absolutely no second one.

So in theory, any monarch is qualified to be the emperor, not necessarily limited to which country. But unfortunately, after the death of Charles I (better known as Charlemagne), his son, Emperor Louis I, was too weak. As a result, Charles's three grandsons fought over uneven distribution of the spoils, leading to the division of the empire. The eldest son received the Kingdom of Middle Francia, which later evolved into a series of territories—Italy, Burgundy, and Lorraine; the third child received the Kingdom of East Francia, which later evolved into Germany; and the fourth child received the Kingdom of West Francia, which later evolved into France.

So Charles I and the subsequent Louis I, Rother I, Louis II, Charles II, Charles III, etc. are both Charles I and Louis I of France... and Charles III of Germany. Charles I, Louis I... Charles III. Whether it is Louis XIV and Charles X of France, or Charles VII and Louis IV of Germany (called Karl and Louis respectively in German), they are all arranged in this order. .

In the early days of the rebuilt Western Roman Empire, the throne rotated among the kings of France, Germany, and Italy and was not fixed.

But what is interesting is that in the early Middle Ages, the East Frankish/German king was the most powerful among all kings. German King Otto I was crowned emperor in Rome in 962, and his throne lasted for a long time. Being controlled by the German king, in the end, it became a tradition, but this does not mean that other kings cannot get involved, because legally speaking, this emperor is the emperor of the Roman Empire, and all kings

Everyone has the right to be the owner. The later King of Spain, Charles I, was successfully elected as the emperor of the empire (the emperor's title was Charles V), which is proof of this. In addition, Richard, Duke of Cornwall in England, King Alfonso of Castile, William of the Netherlands, and others all once competed for the throne and once won the support of some princes, but they did not succeed in the campaign.

So, it is nonsense to say that "after being conferred an empire by the Vatican, the king was upgraded to the Holy Roman Emperor". The empire was not conferred by the Vatican/Pope, nor was the king "promoted" to the emperor.

In addition, neither Isabella nor Elizabeth was called Queen. They can only be queens! Some people in China translate it as Queen, which is purely a blind translation and they don’t understand European history at all. It has nothing to do with whether it has contributed to the Holy See.

On the contrary, Victoria can be called the Queen, but you have to understand, the Queen of Victoria refers specifically to the Queen of India! She is still Queen of the United Kingdom in Europe!

For Western Europe, there can only be one emperor at a time, the Emperor of the Holy Roman Empire, and there can be no other emperors or empresses!

This is why the emperor is called Kaiser in German - to prove his legitimacy as a European emperor and a Roman emperor

This rule was first broken by the Russians. After Constantinople was captured in 1453, the Russians believed that they had inherited the orthodoxy of the Byzantine Empire (Eastern Roman Empire)—identifying Moscow as the Third Rome

Russian Tsar (Tsar) Comes from the transliteration of the Latin Caesar--in fact, the Russians originally called the Byzantine emperor Tsar

By the time of Ivan IV, Russia officially continued the so-called Byzantine orthodoxy---- -So in 1547 Ivan IV was crowned Tsar.

When Napoleon proclaimed himself emperor in the early 19th century, the rules of orthodoxy completely collapsed. After that, no one abided by the ancient rules anymore. German emperors, French emperors, etc. all appeared-- --The name Caesar also appeared in various European countries----as the honorific title of the emperor

The explanation is detailed enough, my friend, I hope you will be satisfied

Reference materials

John Bagnell Bury A History of the Roman Empire from its Foundation to the death of Marcus Aurelius

Edward Gibbon, History of the Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire