As stated in the Austenasian Constitution of 2011, the Empire of Austenasia is a continuation of the indivisible and perpetual Roman Empire: both a restoration of direct imperial rule over certain parts of the Empire and an expansion of the Empire’s imperium beyond its former borders. It is to the immeasurable honour, privilege and blessing of the Austenasian nation that its Monarch has been vouchsafed by the Grace of God to hold the title and rank of Emperor of the Romans, yet such a great honour also bestows great responsibilities.
Although more than one Emperor is required at the present time for practical reasons, the more individuals hold the supreme rank, the more the title is devalued and the more opportunity is created for dissension amongst the consortium imperii; it is therefore the responsibility of Austenasia to aim for a minimum of Emperors in the world.
It is also the responsibility of Austenasia to aim – where possible, and forever conscious of the inalienable right to political self-determination – for the growth of the Roman Empire, and for those who live within Roman lands to acknowledge the heritage and status of such.
The glory of Rome has inspired many nations and governments, both explicitly and unintentionally, and so many have claimed the title of Emperor for their monarch or the title of Empire for their country. Where a nation is called an Empire, this can mean one of two things. Regarding the Empire of Austenasia, the Holy Roman Empire, the Empire of Adammia, the Reylan Imperial Triumvirate, the Basileia (Empire) of the Romans, the Empire of Imvrassia, and the Empire of Pavlov, the naming of said nations as empires refers to their status as independently ruled jurisdictions within the one true Roman Empire, in the same way as the Empire of the West and the Empire of the East existed under the sons of St Theodosius the Great. Regarding the Empire of Iustus, the word can also be used with a more inclusive definition to refer merely to a political unit comprising a number of different territories, regardless of any descent from Rome, in the same way that it is used to refer to the realms ruled by Assyria or the Achaemenids.
Likewise, there are different ways in which the title of Emperor can be applied. The primary distinction is between those who hold the rank of Augustus (namely, at present, Our own Imperial Majesty, Quentin I, Naruhito, and Adam I) and those who hold the rank of Caesar (namely, at present, out of those who hold said rank by virtue of a sovereign throne, Taeglan I Nihilus, Aikaterini I, Stamatios I, and Emmanuel I & II). Both may be referred to as emperors, as was the practice during the Tetrarchy, but for simplicity and clarity we discourage the practice of referring to Caesars as emperors except where out of diplomatic courtesy. The title of Emperor should properly be reserved for those with full Augustan rank, and for the purposes of disambiguation, where used for Caesars should not be capitalised. Should Our own Imperial Majesty or any one of our Augustan colleagues refer to a Caesar as an emperor, it does not bestow Augustan rank.
The Emperors who rule the Empire of Austenasia and the Holy Roman Empire hold the title Emperor of the Romans, whereas the Emperors who rule Japan and Adammia hold a title bound to their national jurisdiction. The relations between the Emperors ruling from Constantinople with those of Trebizond, the medieval Holy Roman Empire, Bulgaria and Serbia show that this explicit affiliation of an imperial throne with the Romans is of some special honour, but we shall neither presume to claim some higher precedence nor extra rights on this basis without the consensus of the other Augusti, and consider precedence amongst the Augusti to be based on the length of one’s reign rather than the precise style of one’s title.
Since the start of 2020, Austenasia has found itself in a state of mutual recognition with four countries claiming an imperial style. To clarify the respective stances of the imperial government on each nation:
In accordance with the provisions made earlier in this same decree for such cases, the titles of Aikaterini I and Stamatios I of Imvrassia may be translated when necessary as “empress” or “emperor”, but shall be recognised as being of the rank of Caesar.
Emmanuel I & II of Rhōmanía is recognised as holding the title Basileus and Kaisar Autokratōr of the Romans, with the rank of Caesar. Rhōmanía – the Basileia of the Romans – is acknowledged as holding a special right to this name as comprising of a population of ethnic Rhōmaîoi, but with the agreement of their Basileus this right does not entail an exclusive or pre-eminent claim to Roman heritage.
Alexander IV of Pavlov, by his proposal and with his consent, shall not be recognised as holding an imperial title, but he is recognised in all other respects as the sole legitimate and monarchical head of state of Pavlov, the reservation being purely of titulature.
The title “Emperor” claimed by Austin I of Iustus, by his proposal and with his consent, shall be translated as “Princeps” and not recognised as or considered an imperial title. He is recognised in all other respects as the sole legitimate and monarchical head of state of Iustus, the reservation being purely of titulature.
Finally, we hereby direct that, upon the confirmation of this Imperial Decree by the House of Representatives, Parliament shall legislate to amend Austenasian recognition of Pavlov from being a sovereign state to a sovereign entity under international law, and to revoke recognition of Glastieve entirely.
Decreed at Chester this fourteenth day of July during the eighth year of our reign, in the year of the consulship of Hannah Augusta and Brenda Bargerii Nova Richmondiae Domina, anno mundi 7528.