Hubbry Logo
Caesar (title)Caesar (title)Main
Open search
Caesar (title)
Community hub
Caesar (title)
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Caesar (title)
Caesar (title)
Caesar (title)
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia

Caesar
Sculpture depiction of Julius Caesar
PronunciationEnglish: /ˈsiːzər/ SEE-zər
Classical Latin: [ˈkae̯sar]
GenderMale
LanguageLatin
Origin
MeaningShort hair (disputed), nickname then title
Region of originRoman Republic
Other names
Variant forms
Popularitysee popular names

Caesar (Latin: [ˈkae̯.sar] English pl. Caesars; Latin pl. Caesares; in Greek: Καῖσαρ Kaîsar) is a title of imperial character. It derives from the cognomen of Julius Caesar. The change from being a surname to a title used by the Roman emperors can be traced to AD 68, following the fall of the Julio-Claudian dynasty. When used on its own, the title denoted heirs apparent, who would later adopt the title Augustus on accession.[1] The title remained an essential part of the style of the emperors, and became the word for "emperor" in some languages, such as German (Kaiser) and Slavic (Tsar).

Origins

[edit]

The first known individual to bear the cognomen of "Caesar" was Sextus Julius Caesar, who is likewise believed to be the common ancestor of all subsequent Julii Caesares.[2][3] Sextus's great-grandson was the dictator Gaius Julius Caesar, who seized control of the Roman Republic following his war against the Senate. He appointed himself as dictator perpetuo ("dictator in perpetuity"), a title he held for only about a month before he was assassinated in 44 BC. Julius Caesar's death did not lead to the restoration of the Republic, and instead led to the rise of the Second Triumvirate, which was made up of three generals, including Julius' adopted son Gaius Octavius.

Following Roman naming conventions, Octavius adopted the name of his adoptive father, thus also becoming "Gaius Julius Caesar", though he was often called "Octavianus" to avoid confusion. He styled himself simply as "Gaius Caesar" to emphasize his relationship with Julius Caesar.[4] Eventually, distrust and jealousy between the triumvirs led to a lengthy civil war which ultimately ended with Octavius gaining control of the entire Roman world in 30 BC. In 27 BC, Octavius was given the honorific Augustus by the Senate, adopting the name of "Imperator Caesar Augustus". He had previously dropped all his names except for "Caesar", which he treated as a nomen, and had adopted the victory title imperator ("commander") as a new praenomen.[5]

As a matter of course, Augustus's own adopted son and successor, Tiberius, followed his (step)father's example and bore the name "Caesar" following his adoption on 26 June 4 AD, restyling himself as "Tiberius Julius Caesar". Upon his own ascension to the throne, he styled himself as "Tiberius Caesar Augustus". The precedent was thus then set: the Emperor, styled as "Augustus", designated his successor by adopting him and giving him the name "Caesar".

The fourth emperor, Claudius (in full, "Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus"), was the first to assume the name without having been adopted by the previous emperor. However, he was at least a member of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, being the maternal great-nephew of Augustus on his mother's side, the nephew of Tiberius, and the uncle of Caligula (who was also called "Gaius Julius Caesar"). Claudius, in turn, adopted his stepson and grand-nephew Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus, giving him the name "Caesar" in addition to his own nomen, "Claudius". His stepson thus became "Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus".

Dynastic title

[edit]
Politics of ancient Rome
Periods
Constitution
Political institutions
Assemblies
Ordinary magistrates
Extraordinary magistrates
Public law
Senatus consultum ultimum
Titles and honours

The first emperor to assume both the position and name without any real claim was Galba, who took the throne under the name "Servius Galba Caesar Augustus" following the death of Nero in AD 68. Galba helped solidify "Caesar" as the title of the designated heir by giving it to his own adopted heir, Piso Licinianus.[6] His reign did not last long, however, and he was soon killed by Otho, who became "Marcus Otho Caesar Augustus". Otho was then defeated by Vitellius, who became "Aulus Vitellius Germanicus Augustus", adopting the victory title "Germanicus" instead. Nevertheless, "Caesar" had become such an integral part of the imperial dignity that its place was immediately restored by Vespasian, who ended the civil war and established the Flavian dynasty in AD 69, ruling as "Imperator Caesar Vespasianus Augustus".[7]

The placement of the name "Caesar" varied among the early emperors. It usually came right before the cognomen (Vespasian, Titus, Domitian, Trajan, Hadrian); a few placed it right after it (Galba, Otho, Nerva). The imperial formula was finally standardised during the reign of Antoninus Pius. Antoninus, born "Titus Aurelius Antoninus", became "Titus Aelius Caesar Antoninus" after his adoption but ruled as "Imperator Caesar Titus Aelius Hadrianus Antoninus Augustus Pius". The imperial formula thus became "Imperator Caesar [name] Augustus" for emperors. Heir-apparents added "Caesar" to their names, placing it after their cognomen.[7] Caesars occasionally were given the honorific princeps iuventutis ("First among the Youth") and, starting with the 3rd century, nobilissimus ("Most Noble").[1]

Later developments

[edit]

Crisis of the Third Century

[edit]

The popularity of using the title caesar to designate heirs-apparent increased throughout the third century. Many of the soldier-emperors during the Crisis of the Third Century attempted to strengthen their legitimacy by naming their sons as heirs with the title of caesar, namely Maximinus Thrax, Philip the Arab, Decius, Trebonianus Gallus, Gallienus and Carus. With the exception of Verus Maximus and Valerian II all of them were later either promoted to the rank of augustus within their father's lifetime (like Philip II) or succeeded as augusti after their father's death (Hostilian and Numerian). The same title would also be used in the Gallic Empire, which operated autonomously from the rest of the Roman Empire from 260 to 274, with the final Gallic emperor Tetricus I appointing his heir Tetricus II as caesar and his consular colleague.

Despite the best efforts of these emperors, however, the granting of this title does not seem to have made succession in this chaotic period any more stable. Almost all caesares would be killed before, or alongside, their fathers, or, at best, outlive them for a matter of months, as in the case of Hostilian. The sole caesar to successfully obtain the rank of augustus and rule for some time in his own right was Gordian III, and even he was heavily controlled by his court.

Tetrarchy and Diarchy

[edit]

In 293, Diocletian established the Tetrarchy, a system of rule by two senior emperors and two junior colleagues. The two coequal senior emperors were styled identically to previous Emperors, as augustus (in plural, augusti). The two junior colleagues were styled identically to previous Emperors-designate, as nobilissimus caesar. Likewise, the junior colleagues retained the title caesar upon becoming full emperors. The caesares of this period are sometimes referred as "emperors", with the Tetrarchy being a "rule of four emperors", despite being clearly subordinate of the augusti and thus not actually sovereigns.[8]

The Tetrarchy collapsed as soon as Diocletian stepped down in 305, resulting in a lengthy civil war. Constantine reunited the Empire in 324, after defeating the Eastern emperor Licinius. The tetrarchic division of power was abandoned, although the divisions of the praetorian prefectures were maintained. The title caesar continued to be used, but now merely as a ceremorial honorific for young heirs. Constantine had four caesares at the time of his death: his sons Constantius II, Constantine II, Constans and his nephew Dalmatius, with his eldest son Crispus having been executed in mysterious circumstances earlier in his reign. He would be succeeded only by his three sons, with Dalmatius dying in the summer of 337 in similarly murky circumstances.[9] Constantius II himself would nominate as caesares his cousins Constantius Gallus and Julian in succession in the 350s, although he first executed Gallus and then found himself at war with Julian before his own death. After Julian's revolt of 360, the title fell out of imperial fashion for some time, with emperors preferring simply to elevate their sons directly to augustus, starting with Gratian in 367.[9]

The title would be revived in 408 when Constantine III gave it to his son Constans II,[10] and then in 424 when Theodosius II gave it to his nephew Valentinian III before successfully installing him upon the western throne as augustus in 425.[9] Thereafter it would receive limited use in the Eastern Empire; for example, it was given to Leo II in 472 several months before his grandfather's death. In the Western Empire, Palladius, the son of emperor Petronius Maximus, became the last person bearing the title caesar in 455.

Byzantine Empire

[edit]
The Roman emperor Constantine the Great, mosaic in Hagia Sophia, Constantinople

Caesar or Kaisar (Καῖσαρ) remained a senior court title in the Eastern or Byzantine Empire. Originally, as in the classical Roman Empire, it was used for the heir apparent, and was first among the "awarded" dignities. From the reign of Theodosius I, however, most emperors chose to solidify the succession of their intended heirs by raising them to co-emperors, i.e. augustus. Hence the title was more frequently awarded to second- and third-born sons, or to close and influential relatives of the Emperor: for example, Alexios Mosele who was the son-in-law of Theophilos (ruled 829–842), Bardas who was the uncle and chief minister of Michael III (r. 842–867), and Nikephoros II (r. 963–969) who awarded the title to his father, Bardas Phokas.[11][12] An exceptional case was the conferment of the dignity and its insignia to the Bulgarian khan Tervel by Justinian II (r. 685–695, 705–711) who had helped him regain his throne in 705.[12] The title was awarded to the brother of Empress Maria of Alania, George II of Georgia in 1081.[13]

The office enjoyed extensive privileges, great prestige and power. When Alexios I Komnenos created the title of sebastokrator, kaisar became third in importance, and fourth after Manuel I Komnenos created the title of despot, which it remained until the end of the Empire. The feminine form was kaisarissa. It remained an office of great importance, usually awarded to imperial relations, as well as a few high-ranking and distinguished officials, and only rarely awarded to foreigners.[14]

According to the Klētorologion of 899, the Byzantine caesar's insignia were a crown without a cross, and the ceremony of a caesar's creation (in this case dating to Constantine V), is included in De Ceremoniis I.43.[15] The title remained the highest in the imperial hierarchy until the introduction of the sebastokratōr (a composite derived from sebastos and autokrator, the Greek equivalents of augustus and imperator) by Alexios I Komnenos (r. 1081–1118) and later of despotēs by Manuel I Komnenos (r. 1143–1180). The title remained in existence through the last centuries of the Empire. In the Palaiologan period, it was held by prominent nobles such as Alexios Strategopoulos, but from the 14th century, it was mostly awarded to rulers of the Balkans such as the princes of Vlachia, Serbia and Thessaly.[12]

Seal of the caesar Michael Angelos

In the late Byzantine hierarchy, as recorded in the mid-14th century Book of Offices of pseudo-Kodinos, the rank continued to come after the sebastokratōr. Pseudo-Kodinos further records that the caesar was equal in precedence to the panhypersebastos, another creation of Alexios I, but that Emperor Michael VIII Palaiologos (r. 1259–1282) had raised his nephew Michael Tarchaneiotes to the rank of protovestiarios and decreed that to come after the caesar; while under Andronikos II Palaiologos (r. 1282–1328) the megas domestikos was raised to the same eminence, when it was awarded to the future emperor John VI Kantakouzenos (r. 1347–1354).[16] According to pseudo-Kodinos, the caesar's insignia under the Palaiologoi was a skiadion hat in red and gold, decorated with gold-wire embroideries, with a veil bearing the wearer's name and pendants identical to those of the despotēs and the sebastokratōr. He wore a red tunic (rouchon) similar to the emperor's (without certain decorations), and his shoes and stockings were blue, as were the accouterments of his horse; these were all identical to those of the sebastokratōr, but without the embroidered eagles of the latter. Pseudo-Kodinos writes that the particular forms of another form of hat, the domed skaranikon, and of the mantle, the tamparion, for the caesar were not known.[17]

Ottoman Empire

[edit]
Main article: Ottoman claim to Roman succession
Mehmed II and Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople Gennadios.

"Caesar" is the title officially used by the Sasanid Persians to refer to the Roman and Byzantine emperors.[18][19] In the Middle East, the Persians and the Arabs continued to refer to the Roman and Byzantine emperors as "Caesar" (in Persian: قیصر روم Qaysar-i Rum, "Caesar of the Romans", from Middle Persian kēsar). Thus, following the conquest of Constantinople in 1453, the victorious Ottoman sultan Mehmed II became the first of the rulers of the Ottoman Empire to assume the title (in Ottoman Turkish: قیصر روم Kayser-i Rûm).

After the Fall of Constantinople, having conquered the Byzantine Empire, Mehmed took the title Kayser-i Rûm, claiming succession to the Roman imperium.[20] His claim was that, by possession of the city, he was emperor, a new dynast by conquest, as had been done previously by the likes of Heraclius and Leo III.[21] Contemporary scholar George of Trebizond wrote "the seat of the Roman Empire is Constantinople ... and he who is and remains Emperor of the Romans is also the Emperor of the whole world".[22]

Gennadius II, a staunch antagonist of the West because of the Sack of Constantinople committed by the Western Catholics and theological controversies between the two Churches, had been enthroned the Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople-New Rome with all the ceremonial elements and ethnarch (or milletbashi) status by the Sultan himself in 1454. In turn, Gennadius II formally recognized Mehmed as successor to the throne.[23] Mehmed also had a blood lineage to the Byzantine Imperial family; his predecessor, Sultan Orhan had married a Byzantine princess, and Mehmed may have claimed descent from John Tzelepes Komnenos.[24] Ottoman sultans were not the only rulers to claim such a title, as there was the Holy Roman Empire in Western Europe, whose emperor, Frederick III, traced his titular lineage from Charlemagne who obtained the title of Roman Emperor when he was crowned by Pope Leo III in 800, although he was never recognized as such by the Byzantine Empire.

In diplomatic writings between the Ottomans and Austrians, the Ottoman bureaucracy was angered by their use of the Caesar title when the Ottomans saw themself as the true successors of Rome. When war broke out and peace negotiations were done, the Austrians (Holy Roman Empire) agreed to give up the use of the Caesar title according to Treaty of Constantinople (1533) (though they would continue to use it and the Roman imperial title until the collapse of the Holy Roman Empire in 1806). The Russians, who defined Moscow as the Third Rome, were similarly sanctioned by the Ottomans, who ordered the Crimean Khanate to raid Russia on numerous occasions.[25] The Ottomans stopped claiming political superiority over the Holy Roman Empire with the Treaty of Zsitvatorok in 1606, and over the Russian Empire with the Treaty of Küçük Kaynarca in 1774, by diplomatically recognising the monarchs of these two countries as equals to the Ottoman Sultan for the first time.

List of holders

[edit]

Note: Caesars who later became Augusti and thus emperors are highlighted in bold.

Coin Name Acceded Relinquished Reason Reigning Emperor Relation R.
Piso Licinianus 10 January 69 15 January 69 murdered Galba Adopted son [26]
Titus 21 December 69 24 June 79 succeeded as augustus Vespasian Son [27]
Domitian 21 December 69 14 September 81 succeeded as augustus Vespasian/Titus Son/Brother [28]
Flavius after AD 74 before AD 83 (?) died as a child Domitian Son [29]
Trajan Late October 97 28 January 98 succeeded as augustus Nerva Adopted son [30]
Lucius Aelius June/August 136 1 January 138 died of illness Hadrian Adopted son [31]
Antoninus Pius 25 February 138 10 July 138 succeeded as augustus Hadrian Adopted son [32]
Marcus Aurelius Late 139 7 March 161 succeeded as augustus Antoninus Pius Son-in-law [33]
Annius Verus 12 October 166 10 September 169 died of a tumor Marcus Aurelius/Lucius Verus Son/Nephew [34]
Commodus 12 October 166 Summer 177 proclaimed augustus Marcus Aurelius/Lucius Verus Son/Nephew [35]
Pertinax Junior c. January 193 c. March 193 title revoked Pertinax Son [36]
Clodius Albinus c. 194 c. 196 title revoked Septimius Severus – [37]
Caracalla 4 April 196 28 January 198 proclaimed augustus Septimius Severus Son [38]
Geta 28 January 198 c. October 209 proclaimed augustus Septimius Severus Son/Brother [39]
Diadumenian April 217 May 218 proclaimed augustus Macrinus Son [40]
Severus Alexander June 221 14 March 222 succeeded as augustus Elagabalus Adopted son and cousin [41]
Sallustius (?) c. 227 c. 227 executed Severus Alexander Father-in-law [42]
Verus Maximus January/May 236 May/June 238 murdered Maximinus Thrax Son [43]
Gordian III April/May 238 August 238 succeeded as augustus Balbinus/Pupienus – [44]
Philip II August 244 July/August 247 proclaimed augustus Philip the Arab Son [44]
Herennius Etruscus September 250 May 251 proclaimed augustus Decius Son [44]
Hostilian September 250 June 251 succeeded as augustus Decius Son [44]
Volusianus c. July 251 c. August 251 proclaimed augustus Trebonianus Gallus Son [45]
Valerian II c. September 256 Summer 258 murdered? Valerian/Gallienus Grandson/Son [46]
Saloninus c. June 258 c. July 260 proclaimed augustus Valerian/Gallienus Grandson/Son [46]
Carinus November (?) 282 Spring 283 proclaimed augustus Carus Son [47]
Numerian November (?) 282 July 283 succeeded as augustus Carus/Carinus Son/Brother [48]
Maximian (?) 21 July (?) 285[a] 1 April (?) 286[b] succeeded as augustus Diocletian (East) – [49]
Constantius I 1 March 293 1 May 305 succeeded as augustus Maximian (West) Son-in-law [50]
Galerius 21 March 293 1 May 305 succeeded as augustus Diocletian (East) Son-in-law [51]
Severus II 1 May 305 August 306 succeeded as augustus Maximian (West) – [52]
Maximinus II 1 May 305 May (?) 310 succeeded as augustus Galerius (East) Nephew [53]
Constantine I August 306[c] May 310[d] recognized as augustus Galerius/Licinius (East) Brothers-in-law [54]
Licinius Junior 1 March 317 19 September 324 deposed Licinius (East) Son [55]
Crispus 1 March 317 c. March 326 executed Constantine I Son [56]
Constantine II 1 March 317 9 September 337 succeeded as augustus Constantine I Son [57]
Constantius II 8 November 324 9 September 337 succeeded as augustus Constantine I Son [57]
Constans I 25 December 333 9 September 337 succeeded as augustus Constantine I Son [58]
Dalmatius 18 September 335 June/Aug. 337 murdered Constantine I Nephew [59]
Decentius July/August 350 18 August 353 committed suicide Magnentius (West) Brother [60]
Constantius Gallus 15 March 351 Late 354 executed Constantius II Half-cousin [61]
Julian II 6 November 355 3 November 361 succeeded as augustus Constantius II Cousin [62]
Constans II 408 409 / 410 proclaimed augustus Constantine III/Honorius (West) Son/- [63]
Valentinian III 23 October 424 23 October 425 proclaimed augustus Theodosius II (East) Half-cousin [64]
Palladius 17 March 455 31 May 455 executed by Avitus Maximus (West) Son [65]
Patricius c. 470 c. 471 deposed or executed Leo I (East) Son-in-law [66]
Leo II c. October 472 17 November 473 proclaimed augustus Leo I (East) Son [67]
Marcus 475 475 proclaimed augustus Basiliscus (East) Son [68]
Basiliscus 476 477 executed Zeno (East) – [69]
Justinian I 525 1 April 527 proclaimed augustus Justin I Adopted son [70]
Tiberius II 7 December 574 26 September 578 proclaimed augustus Justin II Adopted son [71]
Germanus 5 August 582 by 11 August 582 rejected the title Tiberius II Son-in-law [72]
Maurice 5 August 582 13 August 582 proclaimed augustus Tiberius II Son-in-law [73]
Theodosius c. 587 26 March 590 proclaimed augustus Maurice Son [74]
Heraclonas 1 January 632 4 July 638 proclaimed augustus Heraclius Son [75]
David Tiberius 4 July 638 November 641 proclaimed augustus Heraclius Son [76]
Martinus 4 July 638 (?) November 641 deposed Heraclius Son [76]
Constans II c. February 641 c. July 641 title revoked (?),
later proclaimed augustus 		Heraclius Constantine Son [77]
Byzantine nobles
Serbian rulers
Ottoman rulers

See also

[edit]

Notes

[edit]

References

[edit]

Bibliography

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Caesar (title)

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Caesar was the of the Roman statesman and general (100–44 BC), which posthumously evolved into a hereditary title of imperial rank within the , denoting the or his designated heir. Originating as a family name in the Julian gens, it gained prestige through Julius Caesar's conquests and dictatorship, and was adopted by his adopted heir Octavian (later ) as part of his nomenclature Caesar Divi Filius, blending it with other honorifics to signify supreme authority without overt . Under the and subsequent emperors, Caesar became a standard element in imperial titulature, often paired with Augustus—the latter reserved for the senior ruler while Caesar designated juniors or successors, as formalized in Diocletian's (c. 293–313 AD) where it explicitly marked deputy emperors ruling provinces. This usage persisted into the , where the Greek form kaisar denoted vice-emperors or high officials, eventually influencing titles like the Slavic and German in the and , symbolizing continuity of Roman imperial legitimacy amid fragmented successor states. The title's endurance reflects its causal role in perpetuating dynastic claims and administrative hierarchy, outlasting the Western Empire's fall in 476 AD and embedding Roman autocratic ideals in medieval Europe.

Etymology and Pre-Imperial Origins

Linguistic and Familial Roots

The Caesar served as a distinguishing branch name within the patrician gens Julia, an ancient Roman family of equestrian and senatorial rank that had faded from prominence by the late Republic despite its legendary prestige. The gens Julia claimed descent from Iulus (or ), the son of the Trojan prince and thus the goddess , a mythic genealogy first explicitly attested in Suetonius's account of 's ancestry, which served to elevate the family's status amid political rivalries. This patrician lineage, coalesced among Rome's original aristocracy by the fourth century BC, produced few consuls until the 150s BC, reflecting a period of relative obscurity before figures like Gaius Marius's ally Lucius Julius Caesar revived its influence. The Julii Caesares branch emerges in historical records with Sextus Julius Caesar, in in 208 BC during the Second Punic War against , whose role in defending against Carthaginian threats marked the family's first documented consular path. His son, another Sextus, advanced further as in 187 BC and possibly , indicating gradual ascent through provincial commands and alliances, though the branch remained secondary to other Julian lines until Gaius Julius Caesar's era. Linguistically, Caesar's origins predate secure Indo-European attestation, with ancient Roman sources offering speculative ties to Latin roots that likely represent folk etymologies rather than historical derivations. Suetonius enumerates four contemporary theories: from caesaries ("head of hair"), for an ancestor's abundant locks; caesius ("bluish-gray"), describing eye color; caesura matris utero ("incision of the mother's womb"), implying a caesarean delivery; or from an elephant slain in battle named caes- (a possible Punic term), yielding Caes- elephas as an epithet. Pliny the Elder similarly emphasizes the caesarean birth for Caesar's ancestor, but these explanations, rooted in second-century AD biographies, prioritize phonetic resemblance over empirical linguistics. Scholars now favor a non-Latin substrate, potentially Etruscan or Adriatic, due to the rare -ar suffix uncommon in Italic nomenclature, suggesting adoption from pre-Roman Italic peoples during Rome's early expansion.

Adoption by the Julii and Julius Caesar

The cognomen Caesar served as a hereditary for one branch of the patrician gens Julia, an ancient Roman family claiming descent from Iulus, the son of and legendary founder of the Julian line. Its remains uncertain, with ancient sources proposing derivations such as caesaries (Latin for "head of hair"), possibly alluding to an noted for abundant hair, or caesus ("cut"), referencing a supposed caesarean birth; other theories link it to caesius ("blue-gray," perhaps for eyes) or even an Etruscan or non-Indo-European root. The name's adoption within the Julii likely occurred generations before its historical prominence, distinguishing this subfamily from others bearing cognomina like Caesaris or Bursio. The earliest documented bearer was Sextus Julius Caesar, who served as in 208 BC amid the Second Punic War and received the province of , where he commanded legions including the legiones Cannenses formed from survivors of . This branch otherwise produced few notable figures until the late Republic, with the holding no consulates and maintaining modest influence compared to the broader gens Julia, which had earlier consuls under different cognomina dating back to at least the . The family's relative obscurity persisted through the 2nd and early 1st centuries BC, with limited records of praetorships or military commands. Prominence arrived with Gaius Julius Caesar (c. 100–44 BC), born to Julius Caesar the Elder, a who died in 85 BC, and Aurelia of the Aurelii Cottae. Inheriting the full tri nomina Gaius Julius Caesar, he leveraged the through exceptional military and political exploits, including the conquest of (58–50 BC), which expanded Roman territory by some 500,000 square kilometers and yielded vast spoils, and his victory in the civil war against the Great, culminating in his from 49 BC. These achievements transformed Caesar from a familial identifier into a symbol of autocratic power, posthumously adopted by his heir Gaius Octavius (later ) in 44 BC, who combined it with his own name as Gaius Julius Caesar Octavianus to claim continuity. This personal elevation, rather than any formal adoption ritual, cemented the cognomen's legacy within and beyond the Julii, foreshadowing its institutionalization as a title denoting imperial heir or authority.

Establishment in the Early Empire

Augustus's Integration into Imperial Nomenclature

Following the assassination of on 15 March 44 BC, his great-nephew Octavius learned of his adoption in Caesar's will and assumed the name Julius Caesar Octavianus, incorporating "Caesar"—originally a of the Julian —as his own to claim hereditary legitimacy. By 42 BC, after victories at , Octavian styled himself Caesar , elevating "" (a republican ) to a praenomen-like position and appending "" (son of the divine Julius, deified by the in January 42 BC) to reinforce his divine lineage. This emphasized "Caesar" as the core identifier linking him to his adoptive father's authority, distinct from traditional Roman tria nomina where denoted branches rather than ruling prestige. On 16 January 27 BC, the conferred the honorific "" upon him during a ceremony restoring the Republic's facade, transforming his official style to Caesar ; "," meaning "the revered one," was positioned as a new or title following "Caesar," without replacing it. In his autobiographical (composed circa 14 BC and inscribed posthumously), Augustus consistently paired "Caesar" with "," as in phrases like "Caesar ," embedding "Caesar" as an indispensable element of imperial self-presentation on monuments, coins, and official documents. This fusion preserved the Julian heritage while innovating nomenclature: unlike republican norms where adoptive names retained original nomina, Augustus subordinated traditional praenomina (dropping "" publicly) to prioritize "Caesar" as a dynastic marker of . Augustus's precedent extended to succession: in 4 AD, he adopted , renaming him Tiberius Julius Caesar and granting him tribunician power, ensuring "Caesar" passed as a nomen or to heirs, independent of biological descent. Upon Augustus's death on 19 August 14 AD, acceded as Tiberius Caesar , solidifying "Caesar" not merely as a but as a titular component evoking perpetual imperial continuity, detached from its original familial specificity. This integration masked monarchical evolution under republican veneer, with "Caesar" functioning causally as a propagandistic anchor—its repetition in titulature (e.g., over 700 inscriptions by Augustus's reign's end) associating rule with 's conquests and deification, rather than inventing wholly new titles that might alarm the elite.

Role in Julio-Claudian Succession

In the , the Caesar—inherited from —functioned primarily as a marker of into the Julian and designation as a potential successor, ensuring continuity of imperial authority through familial and symbolic linkage to the dictator's legacy. , seeking to secure the succession after the deaths of his preferred heirs and , adopted his stepson on 26 June AD 4, incorporating Caesar into his name as Tiberius Julius Caesar and granting him imperium maius and tribunician power, which positioned him as co-ruler and . This adoption was conditional: Tiberius was required to adopt his nephew (originally ), renaming him Julius Caesar and elevating him as Tiberius's own heir, thus establishing a layered succession line from Augustus through Tiberius to . Tiberius further reinforced this system by associating Caesar with his natural son Drusus, who received the name Drusus Julius Caesar and shared consular honors, though Germanicus remained the favored successor until his suspicious death in AD 19. Germanicus's sons, including Gaius (later Caligula) and the younger Drusus, inherited the nomenclature as Gaius Julius Caesar Germanicus and Drusus Julius Caesar, respectively, underscoring Caesar's role in perpetuating the bloodline's claim even after Germanicus's demise; Tiberius also named his grandson Tiberius Gemellus as Tiberius Julius Caesar, jointly designating him heir alongside Caligula before his own death in AD 37. Upon accession, Caligula formalized his name as Gaius Julius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, while eliminating Gemellus, illustrating how Caesar denoted presumptive heirs vulnerable to intra-familial rivalry. Claudius, elevated by the in AD 41 without prior imperial adoption, adopted Caesar into his official style as Tiberius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, marking an early shift from strict to honorific title independent of direct Julian descent and linking his rule to the dynasty despite his origins. applied the name to his natural son as Tiberius Caesar Britannicus and, in AD 50, adopted his grand-nephew (originally Lucius Domitius Ahenobarbus), renaming him Caesar Drusus to groom him as co-heir and successor over , who was later poisoned in AD 55. acceded in AD 54 as Caesar Germanicus, completing the Julio-Claudian sequence where Caesar distinguished junior heirs from the senior Augustus-bearing emperor. This usage of Caesar emphasized adoptive and dynastic politics over strict , with the name bestowed via senatorial decree or imperial fiat to signal legitimacy and deter challenges, though it often fueled purges and instability as seen in the deaths of potential Caesars like , Drusus, Gemellus, and . By Nero's reign (AD 54–68), Caesar had evolved from a familial into a title for the , setting precedents for post-Julio-Claudian emperors who continued granting it to designated successors alongside military commands and tribunates.

Evolution During the Principate and Dominate

Use Across Dynasties and Heirs Apparent

Following the extinction of the in AD 68, subsequent emperors from non-Julian families incorporated "Caesar" into their nomenclature to evoke continuity with Julius Caesar's legacy and imperial authority. , founder of the , assumed the style Caesar Augustus upon his acclamation in , setting a precedent for later rulers. This adoption persisted through the reigns of (AD 79–81) and (AD 81–96), who both utilized "Caesar" as a core element of their official names despite lacking direct descent from the Julii. The designation "Caesar" increasingly signified the , distinguishing junior successors from the senior and facilitating smooth transitions via or elevation of sons. Nerva adopted as his successor in October AD 97, granting him the name Caesar Nerva Traianus, which Trajan retained upon becoming Augustus in January AD 98. similarly adopted , who was proclaimed Caesar on 11 August AD 117 following Trajan's death. In the Antonine dynasty, Hadrian appointed in AD 136, and after his death, adopted in AD 138 on condition that Antoninus adopt and as co-heirs, both styled Caesares from that year. This pattern extended into the , where elevated his elder son to Caesar in AD 196 and Augustus in AD 198, followed by Geta as Caesar in AD 197 and Augustus in AD 209, underscoring the title's role in designating imperial co-rulers or successors irrespective of dynastic bloodlines. By the late second century, "Caesar" had evolved into a standardized marker for the designated heir, often paired with and military commands to prepare for rule, thereby institutionalizing adoptive or hereditary succession mechanisms during the .

Adaptations in the Crisis of the Third Century

During the Crisis of the Third Century (235–284 AD), characterized by over 20 emperors in rapid succession, frequent usurpations by military commanders, and external invasions, the title Caesar underwent adaptations to provide a veneer of dynastic continuity and legitimacy in an era where senatorial endorsement and hereditary claims often yielded to army acclamation. Emperors, many of low birth and reliant on troop loyalty, increasingly conferred the title on young sons or junior colleagues shortly after their own accession, invoking the nomen Caesar's prestige as a shorthand for imperial authority derived from Augustus's precedent. This practice aimed to preempt challenges by embedding heirs within the imperial nomenclature, but its efficacy was limited by the era's anarchy, with many Caesars dying young or being overthrown before assuming full power. In 238 AD, during the "," the Senate under and elevated 13-year-old Marcus Gordianus to Caesar in April to appease the Roman populace amid civil strife following Maximinus Thrax's murder; he was promoted to Augustus by July after his predecessors' assassination. Similarly, , proclaimed emperor in 244 AD after Gordian III's death in Persia, immediately named his infant son Marcus Julius Severus Philippus (Philip II) Caesar, later co-Augustus in 247, to consolidate family rule during celebrations of Rome's millennium. Decius, emperor from 249 AD, followed suit by designating his sons Quintus Herennius Etruscus Messius Decius as Caesar in 250 AD and Gaius Valens Hostilianus Messius Quintus posthumously after Decius's death at Abritus; Herennius was briefly Augustus in 251 before perishing alongside his father against Goths. Trebonianus Gallus, succeeding in 251 AD, appointed his son Gaius Vibius Trebonianus Gallus (Volusianus) Caesar, promoting him to Augustus by 253 amid ongoing Gothic threats and plague. Valerian, from 253 AD, elevated son Publius Licinius Egnatius Gallienus to co-Augustus immediately, while Gallienus later named grandsons P. Licinius Cornelius Valerianus (Valerian II, Caesar 256–258, died young) and Publius Licinius Cornelius Saloninus Valerianus (Caesar 258, killed during Postumus's Gallic revolt). By the late crisis, in 282 AD swiftly made sons Carinus and Marcus Aurelius Numerianus Caesars upon his accession after Probus's murder, dispatching Carinus to the West; both were elevated to Augusti by 283, though Carus died in Persia. These instances reflect a tactical shift: the Caesar title, once reserved for mature heirs under the , became a rapid tool for paternal emperors to signal dynastic intent, often minted on coins for , yet undermined by the military's preference for competence over lineage, contributing to the crisis's instability until Diocletian's reforms.

Late Roman Reforms and Multiple Holders

Diocletian's Tetrarchy and Diarchy

In 286 AD, , ruling as from in the East, elevated his trusted general to the rank of co-, establishing a that divided the empire's administration between the eastern and western provinces to address ongoing instability from invasions and civil strife. Under this dual rule, focused on the richer and more threatened East, while governed the West from , with each exercising independent authority in their respective domains but coordinating on major policy. To further decentralize power, ensure dynastic succession, and provide military leadership against external threats, Diocletian expanded the system in 293 AD by appointing two junior emperors as : as his subordinate in the East and as Maximian's in the West, thereby instituting the , or rule by four. The , bearing the traditional title Caesar—evoking Julius Caesar's legacy of command and implying status—were assigned specific territories, with overseeing the frontier and Constantius the Gallic and British regions, while remaining operationally subordinate to their Augusti and expected to succeed them after a 20-year term. This structure revived the Caesar title as a formal designation for vice-emperors, distinct from Augustus, emphasizing collegiality and merit-based promotion over hereditary claims, though familial ties influenced selections like Constantius's relation to Maximian through marriage. The Tetrarchy's use of Caesar underscored a hierarchical yet governance, where juniors handled frontline defense—Galerius against the Persians and , Constantius against the Germans—freeing the Augusti for oversight and reforms like fiscal and army expansion to 500,000 troops. associated the rulers with divine protectors, styling himself and as Jovians (under ) and and Constantius as Herculeans (under ), but the Caesar title retained its core function as marker of imperial deputy, promoting stability without full equality. This arrangement temporarily quelled of the Third Century by multiplying leadership, though it presupposed loyalty and lacked mechanisms for smooth transitions beyond planned abdications.

Post-Tetrarchic Fragmentation

Following the voluntary abdication of and on May 1, 305 AD, the Tetrarchic system initially persisted with and elevated to Augusti, while Flavius Severus and Maximinus Daia were appointed as their subordinate , tasked with governing specific provinces and preparing for succession. However, the death of Constantius on July 25, 306 AD in (modern ) triggered immediate fragmentation, as his legions acclaimed his son Constantine as , defying the planned hierarchy; reluctantly recognized Constantine only as Caesar and promoted Severus to Augustus in the West. Concurrently, on October 28, 306 AD, —son of the retired —seized control in , styling himself initially as before adopting Augustus, thus operating outside the Caesar title and exacerbating rival claims without Tetrarchic sanction. This proliferation of unapproved titles eroded the system's collegial structure, leading to civil conflicts as regional armies backed personal loyalties over institutional order. Severus's failed siege of in 307 AD resulted in his capture and coerced suicide, while briefly reemerged to ally with and Constantine. The Conference of in November 308 AD, convened by with Diocletian's counsel, sought restoration by naming Augustus in the West alongside in the East, formally acknowledging Constantine and Maximinus Daia as Caesars under them—yet excluding , whose Italian power base persisted independently. Subsequent wars highlighted the instability: Galerius's eastern campaigns faltered, Maximinus Daia clashed with after 313 AD, and Constantine defeated at the on October 28, 312 AD, consolidating his hold while the Caesar title signified contested junior authority amid usurpations. By 317 AD, amid uneasy truces, Constantine and jointly designated their sons as on March 1 at Serdica: Constantine's eldest and second son Constantine II, alongside Licinius's son , marking a shift toward dynastic designation over merit-based Tetrarchic selection. Constantine's decisive victory over in 324 AD unified the empire under his sole rule, but he executed soon after and, following 's execution in 326 AD for alleged conspiracy, relied on his remaining sons: Constantine II and retained as Caesars, with the youngest, , elevated to Caesar on December 25, 333 AD. This period's fragmentation thus transformed the Caesar title from a structured vice-regal role into a precarious marker of status, vulnerable to familial purges and military revolts, as evidenced by the post-337 AD among Constantine's sons that further splintered imperial control.

Byzantine Continuation and Transformation

Early and Middle Byzantine Periods

In the early Byzantine period, the title kaisar (Greek: Καῖσαρ), derived from the Latin Caesar, retained its late Roman function as a marker for junior imperial colleagues or designated heirs, often bestowed on young sons to preempt usurpations amid military crises. Emperor Heraclius (r. 610–641) proclaimed his second son, Heraclonas (b. c. 626), as kaisar on January 1, 632, when the boy was approximately seven years old; this is attested by solidi coinage bearing Heraclonas' name alongside his father's. Heraclonas was elevated to augoustos (Augustus) on July 4, 638, during a ceremony in the chapel of Saint Stephen, reflecting a progression from kaisar to full co-emperor status typical for securing dynastic lines. Heraclius also named his sixth son, David Tiberius, kaisar in 638, and a relative or nephew named Martinus held the title from c. 639 until his death or disgrace in 641, possibly as the first non-immediate heir to bear it exclusively. These elevations coincided with existential threats, including the Avar siege of Constantinople (626) and Arab conquests post-636, where clear succession helped rally loyalty and deter internal rivals. During the middle Byzantine period (c. 7th–11th centuries), kaisar continued primarily as a title for imperial heirs or co-rulers under dynasties like the Isaurians (717–802) and Macedonians (867–1056), emphasizing associative rule to stabilize the throne against frequent rebellions and thematic armies' ambitions. Leo III the Isaurian (r. 717–741) crowned his son Constantine V (b. 718) as co-emperor on Christmas Day 720, following the established pattern of initial kaisar designation for infants or youths to legitimize them early, as seen in prior Heraclian practice. Constantine V reciprocated by crowning his son Leo IV co-emperor in 751 at age three, integrating the boy into administration and military oversight. Under the Macedonian dynasty, Basil I (r. 867–886) positioned his son Leo VI (b. 866) in the succession line by 870, though Leo's kaisar status is implied through familial promotions amid Basil's favoritism toward elder siblings; Leo succeeded as sole emperor in 886. Usurper Romanos I Lekapenos (r. 920–944) exploited the title to embed his lineage, crowning son Christopher kaisar and co-emperor in 921, and brothers Stephen and Constantine in 924, while sidelining legitimate heir Constantine VII until dynastic backlash forced restoration. By the 11th century, amid the Macedonian dynasty's decline and rising aristocratic factions, kaisar evolved into a prestigious court dignity for extended imperial kin or allies, ranking fourth in hierarchy below despotēs, sebastos, and nobelissimos, but retaining undertones of potential succession. This shift accommodated fragmented power, as emperors like Constantine VIII (r. 1025–1028) and Zoe (r. 1028–1050) distributed titles to kin without immediate co-rulership, reducing its strict heir-apparent role while preserving symbolic continuity with Roman imperial nomenclature. The practice underscored causal priorities of legitimacy and deterrence: early associations minimized coups, as unstable frontiers (e.g., Bulgarian wars 913–927, Arab raids) demanded undivided command, though over-reliance on familial kaisares sometimes fueled intra-dynastic strife, as in Lekapenos' fall.

Komnenian and Palaiologan Eras

![Seal of the Caesar Michael Angelos](./assets/Seal_of_the_Caesar_Michael_Angelos_SchlumbergerSchlumberger%252C_1900 During the Komnenian era (1081–1185), the title of kaisar maintained its position as a prestigious rank but experienced a relative decline in due to innovations by . Alexios created the sebastokrator title in 1081 for his brother Isaac I, elevating it above kaisar and relegating the latter to third in precedence among non-imperial dignities. The title was typically reserved for imperial relatives or trusted allies, as exemplified by Ioannes Doukas, Alexios's uncle, who held it from 1081 until his death in 1092 while serving as a key advisor and regent during Alexios's early reign. (r. 1143–1180) further adjusted the system by introducing the despotēs rank, pushing kaisar to fourth place, though it continued to denote significant authority within the aristocracy. In the Palaiologan era (1261–1453), kaisar persisted as a senior honorary title, often granted to secure loyalty or military support amid the empire's contraction. appointed his brother Konstantinos Angelos Komnenos Doukas kaisar in 1259 while in , prior to the , with Konstantinos later advancing to sebastokrator in 1260 and participating in campaigns in the until his death in 1271. (r. 1282–1328) bestowed the title on the mercenary leader in 1304 to enlist the Catalan Company's aid against Ottoman incursions in ; de Flor, elevated from megaduke, wielded considerable influence before his assassination later that year amid growing tensions. As the empire fragmented, such grants to outsiders highlighted the title's utility in and warfare, though its prestige waned with fewer native holders and the proliferation of rival dignities like despotēs.

Fall of Constantinople and Title's End

The siege of began on April 6, 1453, when Ottoman , aged 21, deployed an army estimated at 80,000–100,000 troops against the city's defenses manned by roughly 7,000 Byzantine and mercenary soldiers. Advanced Ottoman artillery, including massive bombards cast by Hungarian engineer capable of firing stone balls weighing up to 1,200 pounds, relentlessly pounded the Theodosian Walls over 53 days, exploiting weaknesses despite chains blocking the and defenses. On May 29, 1453, Ottoman forces breached the walls following a coordinated assault involving janissaries and bashi-bazouks, overwhelming the defenders amid internal divisions exacerbated by the 1439 Union of , which had alienated Orthodox hardliners. Emperor , who had ruled since January 6, 1449, led a final sally and perished in combat near the gates, his body mutilated and identity confirmed only by a post-conquest search; his extinguished the direct Roman imperial lineage tracing to . The conquest dismantled the Palaiologan court, where the title kaisar (Caesar) lingered as a vestigial amid a dominated by despots and megadukoi, thereby terminating its millennium-long evolution within the Eastern Roman institutional framework. No designated heir or subordinate bore the title prominently in Constantine's final years, reflecting the empire's contraction to a reliant on alliances rather than dynastic succession rituals. This event precluded any further Byzantine conferral of the title, severing its ties to the Roman autocratic tradition amid the Ottoman subjugation of surviving Greek polities like the Despotate of by 1460.

Western and Northern European Adaptations

Holy Roman Empire and the Title Kaiser

The revival of the Western imperial title, tracing its lineage to the Roman Caesar, culminated in Charlemagne's coronation as emperor on 25 December 800 by , which restored claims to Roman sovereignty after the deposition of in 476. This act positioned Frankish rulers as successors to the Caesars, though the Latin Romanorum predominated initially. Otto I's coronation as emperor on 2 February 962 by in formalized the 's foundation, with subsequent German rulers adopting —the vernacular evolution of Caesar through keisar—to denote supreme authority. The designation Römisch-deutscher Kaiser (Roman-German Emperor) encapsulated the empire's dual identity: a Germanic polity asserting from , blending electoral with imperial prestige derived from Caesar's legacy. This , distinct from the junior Roman Caesar for heirs, signified the elected emperor's role as head of a loose confederation encompassing German principalities, Italian kingdoms, and Burgundy, elected by prince-electors after the formalized the process. Emperors like Frederick I Barbarossa, crowned in 1155 and styled Kaiser Rotbart in German chronicles, invoked the title to legitimize campaigns for centralization, such as the Diet of Roncaglia in 1158, where he claimed regalian rights over as direct heir to Roman caesars. By the , under the Habsburgs, reinforced universalist pretensions amid rivalry with the Ottoman sultans, who styled themselves Kayser-i Rûm (Caesar of ). The title's Roman-Caesarian resonance persisted through 84 emperors until Francis II's abdication on 6 August 1806, prompted by 's , ending the empire without formally renouncing the Kaiser designation, which briefly co-opted in his own imperial claims. This adaptation of Caesar into Kaiser thus symbolized not mere linguistic inheritance but a ideological continuity of autocratic legitimacy amid medieval fragmentation.

Russian Tsardom and Eastern Slavic Variants

The Slavic title tsar (Russian: tsarʹ, царь), denoting an or supreme ruler, derives from the Latin Caesar through tsěsarĭ, which entered around the 11th century via Byzantine Greek kaisar or Gothic kaisar. Initially applied in East Slavic texts to designate foreign sovereigns such as Byzantine emperors or Mongol khans of the , the term carried connotations of imperial authority inherited from Roman and Byzantine traditions. In the Grand Principality of Moscow, the title gained domestic prominence under III (r. 1462–1505), who employed it in diplomatic correspondence to assert equality with the and the Ottoman Sultan, reflecting Muscovy's expanding influence after the Mongol yoke's decline. However, formal adoption occurred with IV Vasilyevich, who, at age 16, was crowned the first Tsarʹ of All Rusʹ on January 16, 1547, in 's Assumption Cathedral, elevating the state to the (Tsarstvo Russkoye). This coronation, conducted with Byzantine-inspired rituals by Metropolitan Makary, symbolized autocratic sovereignty and ideological continuity with fallen , positioning as inheritor of Orthodox imperial legitimacy amid post-1453 power vacuums in Eastern . The Tsardom persisted until 1721, when Peter I proclaimed himself (imperator), though tsarʹ remained integral to the composite title Imperator i Samoderzhets Vserossiyskiy ("Emperor and Autocrat of All the Russias"), underscoring the title's enduring prestige. Successive Romanov tsars, from Michael (r. 1613–1645) onward, invoked tsarʹ to legitimize absolutist rule, centralizing power through reforms like Ivan IV's and Peter's westernizations, which expanded territory from 4.3 million square kilometers in 1547 to over 15 million by 1721. In Eastern Slavic contexts beyond , tsarʹ appeared in Ukrainian and Belarusian chronicles primarily to reference Russian overlords, without independent titular usage, as these regions fell under or Polish-Lithuanian ; for instance, Bohdan Khmelnytsky's 1654 acknowledged Tsar Aleksei I's over Cossack hosts. Variants in other Slavic spheres, such as Bulgarian Tsar Simeon I's 10th-century claim or Serbian Tsar Dušan's 14th-century adoption, influenced East Slavic perceptions but remained distinct from the Russian model's centralized , which prioritized Orthodox universalism over feudal fragmentation. The title's phonetic evolution in Russian—retaining the initial /ts/ sound unlike Western czar—preserved its Byzantine pedigree, reinforcing causal links to Caesar's legacy of dynastic and territorial consolidation.

Other Regional Usages in Medieval Europe

In the , the title —the Slavic form derived from Latin Caesar—was adopted by s to signify imperial status equivalent to that of Byzantine basileis. Khan Tervel (r. 700–721) received the title kaisar (Caesar) from Byzantine Emperor in 705, the first instance of a non-Roman being granted this honor, in recognition of Tervel's in Justinian's restoration to the after . I (r. 893–927) formally assumed the title following his victory over Byzantine forces at the Battle of in 917, proclaiming himself tsar of the to legitimize territorial expansions into and Macedonia. This usage persisted in the Second Bulgarian Empire (1185–1396), where tsars like (r. 1218–1241) employed it to assert sovereignty amid conflicts with both Byzantium and the . Serbian rulers similarly adapted tsar during the 14th century to challenge Byzantine dominance in the . Stefan (r. 1331–1355), initially king, proclaimed himself tsar and autocrat of the Serbs, , and on 1346 in , coinciding with the promulgation of his legal code and conquests that expanded Serbian control over much of the peninsula, including Thessalonica and . His son Stefan (r. 1355–1371) inherited the title amid the empire's fragmentation, though effective authority waned. These Balkan adaptations of Caesar underscored local rulers' aspirations for universal sovereignty, often invoking Roman imperial precedents while navigating Orthodox ecclesiastical recognition from .

Eastern Perceptions and Derivative Titles

Islamic and Ottoman Contexts as Kaisar-i-Rum

In Islamic sources from the early medieval period, the Byzantine emperor was designated as al-Qaysar or Qaysar al-Rum, adapting the Roman title Caesar to denote the ruler of the eastern Roman domains. This terminology appears in Quranic and , where the Prophet Muhammad referenced the "Qaysar" as the Roman sovereign in contexts foretelling imperial shifts, such as the prophecy of Byzantine victory over in Surah Ar-Rum. Arabic chronicles portrayed the Qaysar as a formidable overlord governing Christian territories adjacent to Islamic realms, influencing diplomatic and military interactions from the 7th century onward. Following the Ottoman conquest of on May 29, 1453, Sultan proclaimed himself Kayser-i Rûm (Caesar of ), invoking the title to legitimize his rule over the former Byzantine capital and its Orthodox population as the direct heir to Roman imperial authority. This assertion stemmed from the conquest's symbolic restoration of Roman governance under Muslim sovereignty, with Mehmed employing Byzantine administrative structures, Greek scholars, and even reinstalling the Ecumenical Patriarch Gennadios II to maintain continuity and secure loyalty from Christian subjects. The title underscored Ottoman ambitions to embody universal empire, drawing on the Qaysar tradition while rejecting Western European claims to Roman legacy, though it faced dismissal from Latin . Subsequent Ottoman sultans perpetuated the claim to Roman succession through auxiliary titles like Sultan-i , but Kayser-i Rûm remained most closely tied to II's immediate post-conquest ideology, appearing in official correspondence and coinage to affirm dominion over (the Ottoman European territories). By the , as the empire consolidated power, emphasis shifted toward caliphal and universal sultanic attributes, diminishing the title's prominence amid evolving geopolitical rivalries with Habsburg and Russian powers asserting their own Roman derivations. This Ottoman adaptation thus bridged Islamic perceptions of the Qaysar with practical governance, prioritizing conquest-derived legitimacy over doctrinal continuity with pre-Islamic Roman .

Symbolic Role in Non-Christian Polities

In the (224–651 CE), a Zoroastrian state that preceded the rise of in Persia, the title Caesar—transliterated into as forms akin to Kaisar or Tsr—served as the standard designation for the Roman and, later, Byzantine emperors in official records and diplomacy. This usage symbolized acknowledgment of the Roman ruler's imperial authority as a parallel to the Sasanian shahanshah (""), framing the two realms as twin poles of sovereignty in Eurasian . Sasanian monarchs employed the term not to claim it for themselves but to elevate their victories over a recognized peer power, thereby bolstering narratives of dominance in inscriptions that detailed captures, tribute, and territorial gains. For example, (r. 240–270 CE) explicitly referenced "Valerian Caesar" as the captured following the in 260 CE, and "Philip Caesar" in accounts of enforced payments, portraying these events as subjugation of an equivalent sovereign. The symbolic weight of Caesar lay in its evocation of Roman organizational and military might, often invoked to underscore Sasanian superiority amid chronic frontier wars. In Shapur I's inscription at , the title frames Roman leaders as fallible yet formidable adversaries whose defeat validated Persian claims to overlordship over "Iranians and non-Iranians." Similarly, the Band-e Kaisar (" of Caesar") at , constructed circa 260 CE using Roman prisoners of war including skilled engineers, perpetuated the title's association with captured Roman expertise, serving as a tangible to imperial humiliation and technological appropriation. This infrastructure, still extant, exemplifies how Caesar transcended mere to embody the of the western empire's and vulnerability in Sasanian worldview. Beyond direct military contexts, the title facilitated diplomatic exchanges, as seen in treaties and correspondence where Sasanians negotiated with "Caesar" as the locus of Roman power, reinforcing a bipolar imperial without implying religious or cultural alignment. Unlike in Christian successor states, where Caesar evolved into self-applied honorifics denoting continuity, its role in Sasanian Persia remained external and adversarial, highlighting causal dynamics of : mutual recognition of titles preserved strategic parity while justifying expansionist campaigns. No indicates adoption by Sasanian rulers, whose titulary emphasized indigenous Achaemenid heritage, but the persistent use of Caesar influenced later Persianate terminology for foreign emperors, bridging pre-Islamic traditions into Islamic-era adaptations.

Legacy and Scholarly Assessments

Linguistic Descendants and Modern Equivalents

The title Caesar, evolving from the of Gaius Julius Caesar (100–44 BC), transitioned into a generic imperial designation by the AD and spawned linguistic derivatives across denoting supreme rulers. In , it yielded , attested in as keisur by the 9th century AD, reflecting phonetic shifts from Latin Caesar through prehistoric Germanic borrowings; this form was applied to Holy Roman Emperors starting with I's coronation in 962 AD, emphasizing continuity with Roman authority. The term persisted as the official style for German emperors until Wilhelm II's abdication on November 9, 1918. In , Caesar entered via cĕsarĭ (from Gothic and Greek intermediaries) around the 9th–10th centuries AD, manifesting as tsar (Russian: tsarʹ) or czar; Bulgarian khans adopted variants like tzar by 705 AD for Tervel, and formalized it with IV's assumption on January 16, 1547, signaling imperial equality with and the West. Nearly all Slavic tongues, including Bulgarian, Serbian, and Croatian, retain car or tsar for , with over 30 languages deriving emperor terms from this root via direct or mediated paths. The Russian usage endured until II's on March 15, 1917. Central European variants include Dutch keizer (from the same Germanic stem, used for Habsburg rulers) and Czech císař, both tracing to Caesar and denoting emperors in Austro-Hungarian contexts until 1918. In Romance languages, direct imperial derivatives are rarer, favoring imperatore from Latin imperator, though Italian Cesare endures as a given name evoking autocratic leadership. Modern non-titular equivalents persist informally: English "czar" (from Russian tsar, entering in the 1550s) denotes a powerful appointee, as in "drug czar" since the 1970s under U.S. policy; German Kaiser appears in historical or metaphorical senses, such as branding or Kaiser Wilhelm memorials post-1945. These usages underscore Caesar's semantic shift from personal name to archetype of absolutist rule, without implying endorsement of any political ideology.

Historical Significance in Governance and Power Structures

The title Caesar, originating as the cognomen of Gaius Julius Caesar, became emblematic of autocratic consolidation following his appointment as on February 14, 44 BC, which centralized military and legislative authority in one individual, eroding republican checks like the senate's veto power. This shift, justified by Caesar's victories in the (58–50 BC) and Civil War (49–45 BC), where he commanded over 20 legions, prefigured imperial governance by prioritizing personal loyalty and over collegial magistracies. Although Julius did not formalize Caesar as an imperial title, his on the Ides of March, 44 BC, prompted his adopted heir Octavian to adopt the name, leveraging it to claim supreme command after defeating at in 31 BC. Under (r. 27 BC–14 AD), Caesar integrated into the nomenclature of rulers, pairing with Augustus to denote the as holder of perpetual tribunician power and proconsular maius, enabling oversight of provinces with 25 legions totaling approximately 150,000 men. This structure perpetuated power through designated heirs bearing Caesar, as seen with (r. 14–37 AD), promoting dynastic succession over elective consulships and stabilizing administration amid expansion to 5 million square kilometers by 100 AD. In the era, Diocletian's (293–313 AD) employed two Augusti and two Caesares to delegate rule over quadrants, each with 100,000 troops, yet preserved hierarchical deference to seniors, illustrating the title's role in scalable rather than diffusion. In the , kaisar denoted junior co-emperors or elite courtiers, reinforcing the basileus's unchallenged suzerainty within a sacral where emperors like (r. 527–565 AD) codified 4,000 laws in the , merging Roman legalism with Orthodox oversight. This , with kaisar ranking below sebastokrator, facilitated intrigue-laden successions—evident in 11th-century coups averaging every 20 years—but underpinned resilience against invasions by centralizing fiscal extraction of 10–15 million solidi annually. The title's persistence evoked Roman precedents to legitimize absolutism amid feudal fragmentation. Western adaptations, such as in the from I's coronation in 962 AD, invoked Caesar to assert , blending elective kingship with imperial prestige to arbitrate among 300 principalities, though emperors controlled only core domains yielding 100,000 florins yearly. Similarly, Russian from Ivan III (r. 1462–1505) repurposed it to supplant Mongol legacies, enabling Muscovy's unification of principalities into a 15-million-subject by 1547 under Ivan IV, who convened the for acclamation. Across these structures, Caesar derivatives furnished ideological scaffolding for monarchs to transcend tribal or feudal limits, prioritizing vertical command chains that endured until absolutism's 19th-century erosions, as in Austria's 1806 title retention post-Napoleon.

Debates on Autocracy Versus Stabilization

Scholars have long debated whether the Caesar title, originating with and adopted by Octavian as , primarily enabled rule or provided essential stabilization to Roman governance after decades of civil strife. incorporated "Caesar" into his nomenclature to evoke republican legitimacy through adoptive kinship with , while centralizing military and administrative powers under the , which many historians view as a masquerading as a restored . This system, formalized in 27 BCE, quelled internal conflicts and initiated the , lasting over two centuries, suggesting the title's role in stabilizing a vast empire by blending autocratic efficiency with traditional forms. However, critics like have argued that it marked a revolutionary shift to personal , prioritizing one man's dominance over collective republican institutions. The title's evolution into a designation for imperial heirs further underscores this tension, as its use in succession mechanisms aimed to mitigate dynastic instability. Under the established by in 293 CE, junior co-emperors bore the title Caesar to prepare for ascension to , theoretically ensuring orderly transitions and administrative continuity across divided provinces amid threats from barbarian incursions and economic strain. This arrangement temporarily stabilized the empire by clarifying lines of authority, though it often devolved into rivalries upon an Augustus's death, highlighting how the title's stabilizing intent coexisted with autocratic hierarchies that discouraged in favor of familial or appointed loyalty. In post-Roman adaptations, the Caesar-derived titles and reflect contextual variations in this debate, with outcomes depending on prevailing power structures. The Holy Roman Empire's adoption of by I in 962 CE invoked Carolingian and Roman imperial continuity to legitimize elective kingship over a decentralized of principalities, fostering nominal unity without imposing ; emperors relied on electoral consensus and , which preserved feudal balances rather than centralizing absolute rule. Conversely, in , III's formal use of from around 1472 CE symbolized the consolidation of authority over fragmented principalities, enabling autocratic centralization that unified territories against Mongol remnants and internal opposition, though it entrenched divine-right absolutism culminating in figures like IV. Historians contend that while the title provided symbolic stability by linking rulers to ancient imperial prestige, its autocratic implications were amplified in expansive, threat-prone realms like , where decentralization risked collapse, versus more consensual systems like the Empire.

Notable Holders and Claimants

Roman Imperial Caesars

Following the adoption of Gaius Octavius by Julius Caesar via testament in March 44 BC, Octavius assumed the name Gaius Julius Caesar, incorporating "Caesar" as a cognomen to signify hereditary claim to authority. In 27 BC, the Roman Senate conferred upon him the honorific title Augustus, marking the formal inception of the principate, yet "Caesar" persisted as a core element of imperial nomenclature, denoting dynastic legitimacy. Successive rulers, including Tiberius (r. 14–37 AD), who was adopted by Augustus and thus took the name Tiberius Julius Caesar, perpetuated this usage, embedding "Caesar" within their official titles to evoke continuity from Julius Caesar's prestige. By the , "Caesar" increasingly designated heirs apparent or junior co-rulers, as seen with , who served as Caesar under from 69 AD before succeeding as emperor in 79 AD. This pattern solidified in the adoptive emperors of the , such as (Caesar under from 97 AD) and (Caesar under from 117 AD), where the title underscored preparatory roles in governance and military command. , unique as a biological son of , retained Caesar during his father's reign (177–180 AD) before assuming Augustus upon accession in 180 AD, highlighting the title's association with imperial apprenticeship rather than mere nomenclature. The Diocletianic of 293 AD formalized the distinction: two senior emperors bore the title , while their designated successors held Caesar, each governing a with autonomy yet subordination to the Augusti, as exemplified by and . This system aimed to ensure stable succession and administrative efficiency amid 3rd-century crises, though it dissolved after Diocletian's abdication in 305 AD. Post-, "Caesar" continued for junior emperors in the , such as Constantine's sons, but by the time of (r. 364–375 AD), it often merged into fuller imperial styles without rigid hierarchy, persisting until the Western Empire's fall in 476 AD. Throughout, the title's invocation on coins, inscriptions, and decrees reinforced claims to Roman imperial tradition, with over 80 individuals bearing it across the empire's duration.

Byzantine and Post-Roman Successors

In the Eastern Roman Empire, commonly known as the Byzantine Empire, which succeeded the undivided Roman Empire after the deposition of Romulus Augustulus in 476 AD, the title kaisar—the Greek form of Caesar—endured as a designation of imperial proximity and authority. Initially linked to the Tetrarchic system of Diocletian (293–313 AD), where it marked junior emperors destined for senior rule, the title shifted by the 5th century to an honorific primarily for the emperor's designated heir or close kin, while the senior ruler adopted basileus and autokratōr. Emperors continued incorporating kaisar into their full style alongside augoustos, reflecting unbroken Roman nomenclature, though basileus gained precedence in Greek usage from Heraclius (r. 610–641). By the Komnenian era (1081–1185), kaisar had integrated into the stratified court hierarchy as a rank for imperial relatives, often sons-in-law or generals, ranking below sebastokratōr (introduced by Alexios I Komnenos in 1081) and later despotēs (created circa 1143 by Manuel I), but above titles like panhypersebastos. Holders enjoyed privileges such as purple footwear and precedence in ceremonies, symbolizing quasi-imperial status without full co-rulership. Notable Byzantine kaisares included Nikephoros Bryennios the Younger (d. after 1137), historian and husband of Anna Komnene, and foreign allies like Bulgarian khan Tervel (granted 705 AD for restoring Justinian II) and Simeon I (927 AD, post-peace treaty). Such grants to non-Romans underscored diplomatic utility, as with Catalan leader Roger de Flor (1304 AD, for anti-Turkish campaigns under Andronikos II). After the Fourth Crusade's in 1204 AD, which splintered Byzantine territories into successor entities like the , , and , kaisar persisted in these Greek polities as a marker of legitimacy and hierarchy. In , Michael Angelos (fl. late 12th–early 13th century), a relative of emperors Isaac II and Alexios III, held the title, attested by his seal depicting imperial motifs. The restored Palaiologan dynasty (1261–1453) maintained it for high nobles, with mid-14th-century protocol in pseudo-Kodinos' Book of Offices placing the kaisar second to the despotēs in processions. This usage affirmed continuity of Roman imperial amid fragmentation, though diluted by proliferation of honorifics, until the Ottoman of 1453 terminated indigenous application.

Medieval and Early Modern Rulers

In the Holy Roman Empire, established in 962 with the coronation of Otto I as emperor in Rome, rulers adopted "Kaiser" as the vernacular equivalent of the Latin "Caesar," reflecting a deliberate linguistic link to Roman imperial heritage and authority over Germanic territories. This usage persisted through the medieval period and into the early modern era, with emperors like Frederick I Barbarossa (r. 1155–1190) and Charles V (r. 1519–1556) employing the title to legitimize their supranational rule, though official Latin diplomas often retained "Imperator Romanorum" without explicit "Caesar." The term "Kaiser" emphasized caesarian prestige amid rival claims from Byzantium and the Papacy, but its application was confined to the elected emperor, not subordinates. Slavic rulers in the independently adapted "" (from "caesar") to assert and imperial status. (r. 893–927) first proclaimed himself around 913 after military successes against , styling his realm as an equal to the and rejecting subordinate titles like "." This precedent influenced successors, including the Second Bulgarian Empire's tsars like (r. 1218–1241), who used the title to consolidate power amid fragmentation. In , (r. 1331–1355) elevated himself to and autocrat of the Serbs, , and in 1346 via self-coronation in , expanding his domain through conquests in Byzantine territories and codifying laws to underpin his caesarian claims. These adoptions signified bids for Roman succession but faced Byzantine diplomatic resistance and internal challenges, limiting their longevity. Early modern extensions included Ivan IV of Russia (r. 1547–1584), who formalized "tsar" as his title in 1547, invoking caesarian lineage through Kievan Rus' ties to and positioning Muscovy as the "Third " after Constantinople's fall in 1453. This usage endured under Romanov tsars until Peter the Great's 1721 assumption of "," blending caesarian tradition with Western influences. In , Habsburg Holy Roman emperors continued "" into the , as with Francis II (r. 1792–1806), whose dissolution of the empire amid Napoleonic pressures marked the title's effective end in that context. These instances highlight "caesar" derivatives as tools for legitimizing expansionist or revivalist agendas, often without universal acknowledgment beyond regional spheres.

References

  1. https://www.etymonline.com/word/Caesar
  2. https://www.academia.edu/2928733/Caesar_The_Origins_of_a_Title
  3. https://www.unrv.com/government/caesar-augustus.php
  4. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/auggiex.htm
  5. https://www.heraldica.org/topics/royalty/emperor.htm
  6. https://www.keytoumbria.com/ROMAN_REPUBLIC/Divine_Descent_of_the_Gens_Julia.html
  7. https://academic.oup.com/book/60589/chapter/524318545
  8. https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/L6VK-GJ4/sextus-julius-caesar-0250%2BBC-0190%2BBC
  9. https://www.jstor.org/stable/268766
  10. https://www.familysearch.org/en/surname?surname=CAESAR
  11. https://imperiumromanum.pl/en/curiosities/gaius-julius-caesar-the-elder-who-was-julius-caesars-father/
  12. https://www.unrv.com/culture/surnames-of-the-julii.php
  13. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/auggie.htm
  14. https://faculty.uml.edu/ethan_spanier/Teaching/documents/AugasPrinc.pdf
  15. https://works.swarthmore.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1049&context=fac-classics
  16. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Tiberius
  17. http://www.vroma.org/vromans/bmcmanus/augustus.html
  18. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Germanicus
  19. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/germanicus.htm
  20. https://www.uvm.edu/~bsaylor/rome/notes/julioclaudians.html
  21. https://www.thoughtco.com/roman-imperial-succession-julio-claudian-era-120625
  22. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/claudius.htm
  23. https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/acmcaesar.html
  24. https://followinghadrian.com/2017/08/09/9th-august-117-ad-trajans-letter-of-adoption-reaches-hadrian-hadrian1900/
  25. https://oxfordre.com/classics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-2912
  26. https://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/mintimperials/2015/02/25/1877-years-ago-today-hadrian-adopted-pius-on-the-proviso-pius-adopted-marcus-aurelius-and-lucius-verus/
  27. https://ancientcreations.com/caesars-of-the-roman-empire/
  28. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/philarab.htm
  29. https://www.forumancientcoins.com/dougsmith/feac54phi.html
  30. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/hehost.htm
  31. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/numerian.htm
  32. https://finds.org.uk/romancoins/emperors/emperor/id/47
  33. https://courses.lumenlearning.com/atd-herkimer-westerncivilization/chapter/diocletian-and-the-tetrarchy/
  34. https://penelope.uchicago.edu/encyclopaedia_romana/britannia/ruins/tetrarchy.html
  35. https://www.fourthcentury.com/evolution-tetrarchy/
  36. https://www.italianartsociety.org/2015/05/on-21-may-293-the-roman-emperors-diocletian-and-maximian-appointed-galerius-to-serve-as-caesar-or-second-in-command-to-diocletian-thus-beginning-the-roman-tetrarchy-or-rule-by-four/
  37. https://www.forumancientcoins.com/historia/coins/r6/r21621.htm
  38. https://blogs.nottingham.ac.uk/mintimperials/2015/07/25/on-this-day-in-ad306-the-emperor-constantius-i-died-in-york/
  39. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/maxentiu.htm
  40. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/daia.htm
  41. https://roman-emperors.sites.luc.edu/conniei.htm
  42. https://publications.ias.edu/sites/default/files/Lavin_AncientStatueEmpressHelenReidentified_1967.pdf
  43. https://www.forumancientcoins.com/catalog/roman-and-greek-coins.asp?vpar=2838
  44. https://www.jstor.org/stable/20476531
  45. https://www.doaks.org/resources/online-exhibits/gods-regents-on-earth-a-thousand-years-of-byzantine-imperial-seals/rulers-of-byzantium/constantine-v-and-leo-iv-751201375
  46. http://asiaminor.ehw.gr/forms/fLemmaBodyExtended.aspx?lemmaID=9120
  47. https://www.academia.edu/50090854/Byzantine_Rank_Hierarchy_in_the_9th_11th_Centuries
  48. https://openscience.ub.uni-mainz.de/bitstreams/605671a3-fcf0-44bc-8acd-b5741208f8b8/download
  49. https://fmg.ac/Projects/MedLands/BYZANTIUM%2012611453.htm
  50. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Roger-de-Flor
  51. https://www.britannica.com/event/Fall-of-Constantinople-1453
  52. https://www.almanachdegotha.org/id131.html
  53. https://www.historytoday.com/archive/otto-great-crowned-emperor-romans
  54. https://holyromanempireassociation.org/holy-roman-emperors-i
  55. https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/L8WY-WYP/friedrich-i.-%2527barbarossa%2527-kaiser-des-heiligen-r%25C3%25B6mischen-reichs-1122-1190
  56. https://www.etymonline.com/word/tsar
  57. https://www.rbth.com/history/330644-why-russians-called-their-sovereign-tsar
  58. https://brewminate.com/tsar-the-origin-and-history-of-a-title-for-russian-rulers-since-the-middle-ages/
  59. https://www.worldhistory.org/Tsar/
  60. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Ivan-the-Terrible
  61. https://www.worldhistory.org/image/17874/ivan-iv-the-terrible-and-the-tsardom-of-russia-c-1/
  62. https://www.ancient-origins.net/history-famous-people/first-tsar-russia-0011132
  63. https://thisisbulgaria.org/bulgarian-empire-vs-kingdom/
  64. https://archaeologyinbulgaria.com/2015/06/03/lead-seal-of-bulgarian-emperor-simeon-i-the-great-discovered-in-medieval-capital-veliki-preslav/
  65. https://royalfamily.org/about-serbia/emperor-dusan/
  66. https://islamicstudies.info/quran/ishraq.php?sura=30
  67. https://eternalcityistanbul.com/byzantines-in-the-ottoman-court/
  68. https://www.turkiyetoday.com/culture/why-ottomans-believed-they-were-true-heirs-of-rome-3204536
  69. https://www.academia.edu/129635335/The_Ottoman_Imperial_Project_of_Roman_Succession
  70. https://www.historymedieval.com/mehmed-ii-from-boy-sultan-to-conqueror-of-constantinople/
  71. https://topostext.org/work/561
  72. https://madainproject.com/naqsh_e_rostam
  73. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Shapur-I
  74. https://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/shapur-i/
  75. https://www.etymonline.com/word/kaiser
  76. https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/kaiser
  77. https://www.dw.com/en/from-kaiser-to-cheese-and-biology-the-etymology-of-german-words/a-61879465
  78. https://www.saturdayeveningpost.com/2020/05/in-a-word-julius-caesars-ongoing-contributions-to-language/
  79. https://www.dailywritingtips.com/caesar-kaiser-and-czar/
  80. https://www.etymonline.com/word/czar
  81. https://www.reddit.com/r/linguistics/comments/pctmw0/how_many_languages_take_their_word_for_king_from/
  82. https://education.nationalgeographic.org/resource/romes-transition-republic-empire/
  83. https://colorado.pressbooks.pub/originsofeurope/chapter/chapter-9-the-roman-empire/
  84. https://byzantium-blogger.blog/2020/05/07/roman-and-byzantine-comparison-series-part2-emperors-and-the-imperial-system/
  85. https://www.heraldica.org/topics/national/hre.htm
  86. https://resolve.cambridge.org/core/services/aop-cambridge-core/content/view/FAD38A5C7944FDF5A580B2676C90BD27/9781108485777c8_269-299.pdf/augustus-the-roman-plebs-and-the-dictatorship.pdf
  87. https://www.academia.edu/78617017/Republican_Lost_Cause_and_Augustus_a_Modern_Autocrat_in_Aske_Damtoft_Poulsen_and_Carsten_Hjort_Lange_The_Language_of_Autocracy_Ancient_and_Modern
  88. https://europe.factsanddetails.com/article/entry-340.html
  89. https://worldhistoryedu.com/difference-between-an-augustus-and-a-caesar/
  90. https://www.britannica.com/topic/Holy-Roman-emperor
  91. https://www.theproductiveteacher.com/the-tsardom-of-russia
  92. https://www.doaks.org/resources/seals/byzantine-seals/BZS.1958.106.3266
  93. https://history.stackexchange.com/questions/54239/why-was-caesar-borrowed-for-the-imperial-title-in-german-rather-than-augustus
  94. https://www.britannica.com/topic/tsar
  95. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Stefan-Dusan
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.