There are three categories for historians and their source material:
Primary: ancient historians existed at the time of the event
Secondary: ancient historians existed after the event and analysed/used primary sources
modern: Modern historaians who use either of the above
majority of the primary sources do not criticize Augustus and idolize him, in contrast some secondary sources like Tacitus hate Augustus
Overall however it is agreed(by many modern historians) that Augustus was emperor because of his freinds Marcus vipsanius Agrippa and Gaius Maecanus.
The primary sources(historians) were either sychophantic or terrified of persecution by Augustus, the Secondary sources are also biased because they were hired by patrons with vested interests in Augustus's depiction.
In short thereare a range of views all with their own bias.
Chat with our AI personalities
That's easy: Gaius Julius Caesar (known as Caesar), Caesar Augustus (known as Augustus - or Octavianus), Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus (called Nero).
Gauis Octavian Thurinus was the great nephew of Julius Caesar, Julius Caesar adopted him as his heir and he became Gauis Octavian Caesar and when he became emperor he adopted the name Augustus Caesar, he was the first Roman Emperor. Julius Caesar only had the title 'dictator for life'
the republic was the government that disappeared when Caesar Augustus replaced it with the principate.
Augustus Caesar is considered to have ruled from the battle of Actium in 31 BC to his death in 14 AD. That would be 45 years.
The Latin term for king is rex. The term Roman emperors has been coined by historians. The Romans did not use it. They said princeps of called them by the titles Caesar and Augustus.