21:
49:
This entire page has serious issues. Is it meant to be an examination of the constitutional status of emperors post-Diocletian? Or just a list of emperors and their dynastic relations? The initial paragraph, despite reading like Edward Gibbon, indicated the former - yet the body of the article is
50:
more a very confused treatment of the latter. The article doesn't currently do anything useful. I think what would be much more sensible would be to create a page about the constitutional status of Roman emperors, and how that changed over time, rather than this unreadable hodgepodge.
31:
51:
27:
55:
20:
70:
66:
74:
59:
15:
8:
45:Whole page needs reworking & rewriting
7:
30:on 17 October 2020. The result of
14:
19:
26:This article was nominated for
1:
75:19:14, 9 September 2019 (UTC)
91:
60:22:24, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
42:
41:
82:
23:
16:
90:
89:
85:
84:
83:
81:
80:
79:
47:
12:
11:
5:
88:
86:
78:
77:
65:Agree totally
46:
43:
40:
39:
32:the discussion
24:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
87:
76:
72:
68:
64:
63:
62:
61:
57:
53:
52:93.97.193.226
44:
37:
33:
29:
25:
22:
18:
17:
48:
35:
67:Rjdeadly
36:redirect
28:deletion
71:talk
56:talk
34:was
73:)
58:)
69:(
54:(
38:.
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
