Talk:Imperator

message: "It is also the root of the Albanian term for king, mrbet." A fun fact if it's not a ludibrium, but not very central, and the obscure etymology, if it is from Latin, is quite likely simply to derive directly from the sense of "emperor," no? Wetman 18:15, 27 Jun 2004 (UTC)
thread_title: Mrbet

message: An anonymous editor made the following change (in bold): "After 800, the title was used (in conjunction with augustus) in succession by the Carolingian and German Holy Roman Emperors until 1806 and by the Austrian Emperors until 1918. Over time, Kaiser became the title most often used by these emperors."  I zapped this because it implies that the emperors started off being called imperator and ended up being called kaiser.  In fact, from Charlemagne's time on, they had always been called kaiser in German, and were called imperator right down to 1918 in Latin.  I added a bit making it clearer that "imperator" is a more formal title used in Latin only, but perhaps it could be better clarified. --Jfruh 19:31, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  Kaisar 

message: The Latin word for 'emperor' was actually princeps, from where we get the modern word prince.
While certainly "princeps" was the term associated with the Emperors, there should be a bit of caution as to saying it means "emperor" in the way we in the modern era know it. Princeps was the title of Augustus and the early Emperors, and was roughly analogous to the English phrase "First Citizen." In fact, the word Princeps comes from the phrase Princeps Senatus, which means "First of the Senate," and is based on the idea of Primus inter pares, or "First among equals."
AFAIK, there was no single term that corresponds entirely to the word "Emperor" as we know it in English, at least, that would be interpreted as such by classical Romans. The word in English is a relatively new term when one considers all of the suggestions and nuances of the word. 
Further, the term Princeps becomes, in effect, obsolete once we reach Diocletian,and we come away from the Principate, which maintained at least an illusion of Republican government, and go towards the Dominate, wherein they, as I understand it, effectively ditched the entire Republican illusion and the Roman Emperor became a dominus, or lord. However, the Romans certainly maintained Emperors past Diocletian, even if they weren't titled Princeps. Thus, the caution in saying "Princeps" is the Roman translation of the word "Emperor" is in the fact that the Roman Emperors were given authority by a whole slew of changing titles, opposed to a singular title. 68.45.232.83 23:08, 30 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: The Latin word imperator in the Kingdom was probably an unimportant term for the king. In the early Republic it seems to have meant "commanding magistrate" (with imperium, in power of life and death; contrary to the article's claims I doubt a curule aedil would ever have been known as such). In the later Republic, and now we leave the area of "seems" and "probably", it meant "general field marshal" (that is, a general, still necessarily a magistrate with imperium, who has been awarded a special title for special military achievements). In the Imperial Area, it somewhen assumed the meaning of "Emperor", although still the number of victories were counted in the full titles (where would appear an "imperator quinquies", or so). --91.34.193.246 (talk) 11:20, 22 September 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Princeps versus Imperator 

message: Not sure how long that merge template has been up there, but I would strongly oppose the suggested merge.  Imperator was used in Roman society before the empire, and it was used by emperors who weren't Roman emperors. --Jfruh (talk) 23:09, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: I also strongly oppose the suggested merge. I am therefore removing the template. Gaia Octavia Agrippa Talk |  Sign 22:37, 24 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  no to merger 

message: While there is a separate Wikipedia entry for the SS Imperator, Wikipedia appears to lack any reference to the Star Destroyer bearing this name.  I assume this is an oversight, and a keen Wikipedian with more than my meagre skills will recognise the lack and act to correct it. Ambiguosity (talk) 07:22, 20 August 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Modern usage 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Imperator. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101230065124/http://recherche.univ-montp3.fr/cercam/article.php3?id_article=404 to http://recherche.univ-montp3.fr/cercam/article.php3?id_article=404
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:44, 12 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: 'So, after the comitia curiata, held to elect the king, the king also had to be conferred the imperium.'
. . .the imperium had to be conferred on the king/the king had to be invested with imperium (Pamour (talk) 23:45, 6 October 2018 (UTC)
thread_title:  english