Augustus and Nero are probably the best known Roman Emperors, but their historical estimation couldn?t have been more different. This paper should give an overview and a comparison to their politics, self-presentation, and the criticism on them. On the one hand it should be shown, which forms of propaganda existed and what?s actually behind it. On the other hand criticism of the state and opposition according to those rulers should be handled. There were lots of commonalities, but also differences between both emperors. Under their reign a new golden age was proclaimed in each case and both had a connection to Apollo. Political opponents were outmatched and every aspect of life was used for propaganda. In addition Nero was not more ruthless than Augustus, and he also cared about the people. In literature in contrast, a more positive image of Augustus can be found. Writers, mainly senators or Christians, created a negative image of Nero, which was the result of anti-monarchy tendencies and the persecution of Christians. The greatest discrepancy is found in the sector of self-presentation. The focus lay with a different importance on the singular areas of life, which were rated differently by people and nobility. Nero besides, driven by his affinity to art, was in uncharted waters. Augustus showed himself classically as a morally politician and general. Nero with his role as a poet, singer and charioteer excited an unusual image. The negative image of Nero depends on the fact, that at the end of his reign he got especially on the bad side of the senators, who generally condemned the murder of mother and wife, neglected politics, majesty processes and the role as an artist. Augustus could effect a positive image for most of the writers, because of finishing the civil-wars, the military success, the consideration of senatorial desires and the morally presentation.