Chapter 24
Despite the murderous intrigues of the Julio-Claudians and those who challenged them for the imperial throne, under Claudius and Nero the Empire had been mostly well run. Nero, however, alienated the upper classes in Rome with his attempts to outshine all others. Worse trouble began after the great fire of 64, when his oppressive fiscal policies undermined his support in the provinces and the armies stationed there. Nero had failed to learn the lessons of Augustus’ success: to gain at least the acquiescence, if not the willing cooperation, of powerful aristocrats, a princeps could not openly flaunt his power at the center of the Empire; he also had to cultivate assiduously the loyalty of the legions in the provinces to prevent challenges from the periphery.
The lack of an heir only encouraged ambitious men to attempt replacing Nero as princeps. His death in 68 threatened the Empire with the same kind of destructive competition for preeminence that had destroyed the late Republic. The office of princeps became a revolving door through which four emperors passed in rapid succession as a result of assassination and civil war in 69. If the process had continued, the Roman Empire would have been irreparably damaged. Fortunately, Titus Flavius Vespasianus (Vespasian) was able to bring stability and calm.
Sources
The most important ancient source for the events of 69 and the Flavian emperors (Vespasian, Titus, and Domitian) is the historian Tacitus. His Histories covered the years from 69 to 96. Unfortunately, only the books that cover the years 69 and 70 survive. Tacitus also wrote the Agricola, a biography of his father-in-law, Cn. Julius Agricola, who governed Britain from 77 to 84; a discussion of the state of oratory during the Principate (Dialogue on Oratory); and a rather fanciful ethnographic account of the Germans (Germania). The Jewish War by the pro-Flavian historian Josephus is useful but, naturally, limited in scope. The only connected historical narrative is provided by Byzantine epitomes of Books 65 to 77 of Cassius Dio’s history of Rome. Suetonius wrote extant biographies of the three emperors who followed Nero (Galba, Otho, and Vitellius), as well as of the three Flavians. Plutarch wrote two longer biographies of Galba and Otho.
Much valuable material can be extracted from the Natural History of Pliny the Elder, the Letters of Pliny the Younger, Quintillian’s Institutes of Oratory, Frontinus’ collection of military strategems (Strategemata) and his treatise on Rome’s aqueducts (De Aquis [De Aquaeductu] Urbis Romae), and the poems of Statius, Martial, and Juvenal (pp. 481–4). Numerous official and private inscriptions, works of art, buildings, public works, fortifications, coins, and artifacts also supply useful information.
Galba (68 to 69 c.e.)
Servius Sulpicius Galba, the first to succeed Nero, fell in 69 after reigning only a few months. Although of an old aristocratic family connected with Livia, he showed little talent for practical politics as emperor. Before fully consolidating his power, he attempted two contradictory and impossible things: quickly balancing the budget and winning support from the armies. He alienated the Roman populace by cutting down the grain dole; the Praetorian Guard by failing to pay promised donatives; and the two armies on the Rhine, already hostile and sullen, by unwisely recalling the highly regarded commander in upper Germany, Verginius Rufus. The two armies mutinied and proclaimed the newly appointed commander in lower Germany, Aulus Vitellius, emperor of Rome.
Even then, Galba might have saved himself by adopting Verginius Rufus as heir and co-regent. He chose instead the aristocratic L. Calpurnius Piso Frugi Licinianus, whose main qualifications were his deep roots in the old aristocracy. He was a descendant of both Crassus (through adoption) and Pompey. His grandfather was Scribonia’s grandnephew L. Scribonius Libo. His oldest brother was the Pompeius Magnus who had married Claudius’ daughter Antonia and had been executed as a threat to Claudius and Messallina. His second-oldest brother had been executed under Nero, and his sister was married to the grandson of Germanicus’ foe Cn. Calpurnius Piso. Unfortunately, he was totally devoid of popularity or of political and military experience. Piso’s adoption turned Galba’s former ally and would-be successor, Marcus Salvius Otho (the compliant ex-husband of Poppaea Sabina), into a dangerous enemy. Otho hurried off to the camp of the Praetorian Guard and by liberal promises of money persuaded its men to proclaim him emperor. They promptly murdered Galba and Piso.
Otho (69 c.e.)
Supported by the Praetorian Guard and the Roman populace, Otho soon won recognition by the senate. No doubt, many senators were pleased by his execution of Nero’s praetorian prefect Tigillinus, whom he conveniently blamed for Nero’s murderous acts. On the other hand, Otho further ingratiated himself with the common people by emphasizing his close relationship with the still-popular dead emperor. He restored the fallen statues of Nero and Poppaea, married Nero’s widow, Statilia Messallina, and took the name Nero for his own.
The armies on the Rhine, however, had already declared for Vitellius and were marching toward Italy. An early spring prevented Otho from blocking them at the Alpine passes. He managed to defeat part of the enemy forces. Then, fearing that he would be outflanked by the much larger main body if he delayed, he attacked it head on rather than wait for reinforcements. Defeated after a long, hard-fought battle and hoping to prevent further bloodshed, he terminated his short reign by suicide.
Significantly, Otho was the first emperor who did not have roots in the old aristocracy. The Julio-Claudians had recruited men like him in order to have a group of loyal followers to counterbalance champions of the old order in the senate: Otho’s grandfather had been raised in Livia’s household and reached the praetorship. Otho’s father had been a very good friend of Tiberius and had received patrician status from Claudius. Otho’s own close association with Nero, of course, had ensured his own rise in imperial service. With the end of the Julio-Claudians, there were no loyalties to prevent newcomers like Otho from attempting the throne themselves.
Vitellius (69 c.e.)
Vitellius was also a newcomer. His grandfather was one of Augustus’ equestrian procurators. His father reached the consulship late in Tiberius’ reign and twice under Claudius, with whom he was also censor. The father had also backed Agrippina the Younger, which turned out to be a wise move. It gave Vitellius the chance for friendly relations with Caligula, Claudius, and Nero, who advanced his career. Galba then appointed him commander in lower Germany in the mistaken belief that he was too lazy and decadent to pose a threat. Hostile sources portray him as one of the most inept and helpless emperors ever to disgrace the Roman throne. His failure to prevent looting and violence after victory is a black mark, but stories that he bankrupted the treasury by extravagant living during a reign of only seven months are not credible. His greatest significance is that he owed his elevation solely to legions from the frontier.
With Vitellius, the armies of the Rhine had already created one emperor. Now, those stationed in the East were about to create another—Vespasian (T. Flavius Vespasianus). He was a man of even more recent equestrian origin and the general whom Nero had sent to Judea in 66 to suppress the Jewish revolt (p. 434). Leaving his son Titus in charge of the siege of Jerusalem, Vespasian hastened to Egypt in order to prevent the shipment of grain to Rome. Meanwhile, the governor of Syria set off with his army to invade Italy on Vespasian’s behalf. The Danubian armies did likewise and brutally sacked Cremona after defeating Vitellius’ forces there.
Vespasian’s brother Flavius Sabinus was already in Rome, where he was serving as prefect of the city. When Vitellius tried to surrender to Sabinus, Vitellius’ soldiers refused and forced him to besiege Sabinus on the Capitoline. During the siege, fire destroyed the great temple of Jupiter Optimus Maximus, and Sabinus was captured and executed. Vespasian’s younger son, Domitian, managed to escape Rome by disguising himself as a priest of Isis. When the Danubian troops arrived, they defeated the forces of Vitellius, killed him (December 20, 69), and rampaged through the city until Vespasian’s Syrian legions appeared and restored order. The senate then chose Vespasian as the new emperor. He was able to gain permanent control and replace the defunct Julio-Claudian dynasty with his own Flavian family.
Vespasian (69 to 79 c.e.)
The accession of Vespasian in the last days of 69 gave Rome a man who was able to end the civil wars and bloodlettings, just as Augustus had brought to an end the strife and anarchy of the dying Republic. Vespasian lacked the glamour and prestige of Julius Caesar’s shrewd heir, and his reign was not quite as memorable. It did, nevertheless, usher in a new phase in the history of the Roman Empire and many of the policies typical of the second century.
Born in 9 c.e., Vespasian came from an equestrian family that lived near the hilltop town of Reate in the Sabine country. His grandfather had been an auctioneer; his father an imperial tax collector in Asia Minor and, after his retirement, a moneylender in the province of Raetia (southern Bavaria and eastern Switzerland). The father later returned to Italy, married into a family slightly above his own social station, and settled down on a medium-sized estate near Reate.
Young Vespasian had received a good enough education to be able to express his rather corny and at times slightly obscene humor even in Greek. His financial and military abilities had attracted attention in high places. His career received boosts at the imperial court from the advocacy of the powerful freedman Narcissus and the influential freedwoman Caenis, who became his mistress (p. 502). He received a number of important posts under Caligula, Claudius, and Nero. Vespasian’s elder son, Titus, was even raised at court with Claudius’ son, Britannicus. Vespasian suffered a setback after Agrippina the Younger, with whom he was on bad terms, came to the fore, but he rebounded under Nero after her death. Then, his failure to show proper appreciation of Nero’s musical talents caused another setback. Vespasian still had advocates like Caenis, however, and Nero turned to him when someone competent was needed to suppress the Jewish revolt.
Coming to the throne in 69 at the age of sixty, bald, wrinkled, and tough, Vespasian had behind him much administrative and military experience. In one capacity or another, he had known Thrace, Spain, Gaul, Germany, Britain, Africa, Syria, and Egypt. He had the respect of the armies and could command their loyalty and obedience. He was also a tireless worker. Although he often took his time making up his mind on a specific course of action, he carried out his decisions with determination and steadfastness. Knowing the value of money, he gave Rome a sound fiscal policy and took endless pains in balancing the books. Such was the man who rescued Rome from the brink of financial and political disaster and made possible more than another century of internal peace and prosperity.
The restoration of peace
Most urgent in 70 was the task of breaking the continued resistance of Vitellius’ supporters in Gaul and Germany as well as crushing the revolt in Judea. In Gaul and Germany, Julius Civilis, a chief of the Germanic Batavi and a Roman citizen, had raised a revolt in favor of Vespasian against Vitellius. Apparently, Vespasian’s attempts to compromise with Vitellius’ defeated forces in 70 led to Civilis’ disaffection and an attempt to combine with those still hostile to Vespasian. They constituted themselves as the Empire of the Gauls, Imperium Galliarum, probably to secure a base from which they could raise up their own candidate for Roman emperor and not, as is frequently claimed, to create an independent Gallic nation. The able Quintus Petilius Cerialis, son-in-law of Vespasian, destroyed their hopes in the spring of 70.
Capture of Jerusalem, 70 c.e., and Masada, 73 c.e.
Meanwhile, in the Jewish War, Vespasian’s son Titus had stormed and captured Jerusalem. Neither side showed any mercy to the other. The slaughter was frightful. Large numbers of Jews who survived were sold into slavery. A relief on the Arch of Titus, completed by Titus’ brother, Domitian, commemorates the capture and destruction of Jerusalem. It shows a triumphal procession bearing the spoils taken from the Temple—the seven-branched candlestick, the table of the shewbread, and other spoils. Not only did the depicted spoils finance this arch, but they also were used to erect the famous Flavian Amphitheater, better known as the Colosseum (p. 495). Finally, to demonstrate the inevitable punishment that awaited any resistance to Rome, three legions spent three years in crushing pockets of rebels. During the final six months, they built a huge earthen ramp to reach the fanatical defenders of Masada, a sheer rock fortress 1700 feet above the Dead Sea. When the Romans finally breached their walls, the defenders set fire to their buildings. Josephus says that all but two women and five children committed suicide (Jewish War, Book 7.389).
FIGURE 24.1 Relief from the Triumphal Arch of Titus (81 c.e.), depicting spoils from Jerusalem.
To reduce the chance of organized rebellion in the future, the Jewish council of the Sanhedrin and the office of high priest were abolished, the Temple was destroyed, and worship there was forbidden. Furthermore, the Jews were forbidden to seek converts, and the Jewish population of the whole Empire was forced to donate the tax formerly paid to the Temple at Jerusalem to Jupiter Capitolinus at Rome. All those born into the Jewish faith, however, were still exempted from Caesar worship. Of the various Jewish factions, the Pharisees survived most successfully. They devoted themselves chiefly to the study of Jewish law. With Jerusalem destroyed, the small Christian sect was further cut off from its Jewish roots and began to take on an identity more of its own. That change helped its spread among non-Jews but soon caused problems over Caesar worship.
Reform of the army
The provincial soldiers’ role in the havoc of 69 clearly indicated to Vespasian a need to reform the army. First, he disbanded the legions that had opposed him in Gaul and Germany. After creating two new ones, he seems to have maintained an army of twenty-nine legions, one more than under Nero. He stopped the practice of stationing some of the legionary and most of the auxiliary troops in the frontier regions from which they had been recruited. He feared that otherwise they were apt to sympathize with local leaders’ political ambitions. To counteract such sympathies, he either formed new auxiliary units of mixed tribal and national origin or transferred units to frontiers far from their homelands and under the command of Italian officers. Finally, to reduce the chances of military coups by provincial commanders and provide for tighter defense at the same time, Vespasian tended to break up large concentrations of legions and space them out singly on the frontiers.
Another problem was that the popularity of military service had been steadily declining among the population of Rome and Italy as peace and prosperity increased under the emperors. To take up the slack, Vespasian increased legionary recruitment from the more martial youth of Gaul and Spain, where military academies for the training of future Roman officers (collegia iuvenum) became ever more common. Thus Vespasian’s military reforms were part of a process that Romanized the provinces and integrated them with Italy.
Provincial policy
Vespasian inaugurated a new age of municipalization in the Roman world. Completing the work of former centuries, he made Spain an integral part of the new imperial state by extending Latin rights to about 350 Spanish cities and towns. Dalmatia began to acquire a degree of urbanization and municipalization which it had not known before. Even the Danubian provinces began to receive Roman citizen colonies.
Vespasian did more to make the western provinces full partners in the government and administration of the Empire than simply using them for recruiting grounds or for granting Roman citizenship to grateful officeholders in the newly chartered municipia. He went beyond Claudius or any of his predecessors in employing the local aristocracy of Gaul and Spain in imperial administration. Becoming censor in 73, he even added members of the municipal aristocracy of southern Gaul and of Baetica in southwestern Spain to the rolls of the Roman senate. Previous purges and the recent civil war of 69 had depleted its ranks. By utilizing the talents and services of the Gallic and Spanish provincials, Vespasian gave them a stake in both defending the imperial frontiers and maintaining internal peace through loyal service to him. When the Flavian dynasty ended, however, members of their families would be in a position to seek the imperial purple for themselves.
Vespasian greatly strengthened the defenses of the northern frontiers by restoring to eight the number of legions serving along the Rhine in upper and lower Germany. Later, those two military commands, which had been attached to Gaul, became individual provinces. Along the Danubian frontier, Vespasian built numerous military roads and new stone fortresses. Moreover, he shortened the Rhine-Danube frontier by annexing the triangle of land called the Agri Decumates. It is now largely occupied by the Black Forest, between the upper reaches of the two rivers in what is today southwestern Germany and Switzerland (map, p. 368). Vespasian also sent three men of great renown to resume the conquest of Britain, which Claudius and Nero had left unfinished: Petilius Cerialis (71–74), who had vanquished Civilis in Germany; Julius Frontinus (74 to 77–78), who wrote the Strategemata and On the Aqueducts; and Cn. Julius Agricola (77–78 to 84), about whom Tacitus wrote the Agricola.
The Near East
In the Near East (see end map and p. 379), Vespasian tried to remedy some of the fundamental weaknesses in his predecessors’ defensive arrangements. He attempted to maintain peaceful relations with Parthia, even to the extent of resigning control, direct or nominal, over the kingdom of Greater Armenia. Still, he did not seek Parthia’s friendship at the expense of Rome’s own interests. His least friendly act toward the Parthians was his refusal to cooperate with them in repelling the Alans, a Sarmatian tribe living beyond the Caucasus. They had overrun Media Atropatene and Greater Armenia and were then a threat to the very existence of the Parthian state. Instead, he only helped the king of Iberia (modern Georgia) to occupy the Porta Caucasica (Dariel Pass), and he built a fortress near what is now Tblisi in 75. Some of Vespasian’s other measures were also less than pleasing to the Parthian king. First, he strengthened Roman control over the great caravan city of Palmyra and made Judea a separate procuratorial province, with one full legion stationed at Jerusalem. He extended the province of Syria from the northern edge of the Lebanon mountain range eastward from Damascus to the upper reaches of the middle Euphrates. That required annexing the kingdom of Commagene, whose king he deposed. To the north, he created a huge province in Anatolia by adding Cappadocia and Lesser Armenia to the former province of Galatia. There he stationed two legions: one guarded the vital Euphrates crossing at Melitene; the other protected the important road junction of Satala, whence roads led to Trapezus (Trebizond) and other naval bases on the Black Sea. Thus, except at Zeugma and Samosata (now legionary strongholds), Vespasian diminished the responsibility of Syria for defending the Near East. Simultaneously, he created stronger bulwarks for protecting Rome’s eastern provinces against Parthia.
Vespasian’s relations with the senate
The senate had remained an influential sounding board of upper-class opinion. Still, it had been declining steadily as an independent organ of the government since the reign of Tiberius. Physically, it had been reduced to about 200 by the actions of Nero and the civil war of 68–69. The few remaining old families must have been annoyed when Vespasian held the censorship in 73: he removed some objectionable or recalcitrant senators and added 800 new ones to his own liking from Italy and the western provinces. Aside from enhancing Vespasian’s personal security, the new members increased the pool of senatorial talent that he needed to administer the Empire. Of course, as often happens in such cases, some newcomers absorbed the values and traditions of the institution which they joined and defended its prerogatives against later emperors. Often their efforts were futile, but pushing senators too far could engender deadly hatred.
The expansion of executive power
The weakening of the senate accompanied a steady concentration of powers and functions in the imperial executive and an increase in appointed officeholders. Their value as the sole means of preserving administrative continuity under rapidly changing emperors had come to light more clearly than ever before in 69. In appointing such officials, Vespasian made two important innovations: he replaced with equestrians many, but not all, of the freedmen who had held some of the highest positions under Claudius and Nero, and he appointed more and more Italians and provincials. Equestrians were less offensive to the senate than were freedmen, who had been offensive to the equestrians as well. Also, equestrians usually had considerable business and administrative experience and, often having greater private sources of income, were somewhat less tempted than freedmen to embezzle public funds. Men from the provinces and Italian municipalities brought with them knowledge of local conditions that must have been quite useful for administering a highly diversified empire.
Fiscal administration
Vespasian’s greatest claim to fame was his success in handling fiscal problems. He balanced the books and restored public finances, which had been thrown into chaos by Nero’s extravagance and the civil wars of 69. He was personally frugal and financially experienced. He also had firm control over the armies, so that he did not need to buy their loyalty by expensive donatives. Using his powers as censor, Vespasian had a careful census taken of the financial resources of the Empire. He discovered that the provinces, after a century of peace and prosperity, were able to pay much more tribute than before. He assigned certain “free” cities and islands previously immune from taxation, such as Rhodes, Samos, and Byzantium, to provinces and forced them to pay taxes. He restored to the senate the province of Greece, to which Nero had granted freedom and immunity from taxes, and took back under imperial control the richer provinces of Sardinia and Corsica. He asserted the government’s claim to land seized surreptitiously by private owners or occupied illegally by squatters. He even took back on behalf of the Fiscus many estates given by former emperors to their friends. Finally, he reorganized the revenues of the other imperial estates, especially those containing mines, quarries, fisheries, and forests. In short, no source of income, however unorthodox or unsavory (such as a tax on public latrines, see Box 24.1), was beneath Vespasian’s notice.
24.1 Latrines in the Roman world
One common feature of Roman cities is the presence of latrines (Latin, latrina) in private homes and public spaces. Private toilets found in Roman homes were usually designed for one person at a time, although two-seat toilets have been found. Families often tucked toilets into corners near the kitchen or underneath stairwells. Most public toilets were accessible from the street through a door and were located next to bath or other industrial complexes in order to use water run-off from those enterprises to flush the sewer trench that ran under the bench toilet seats. A second, smaller gutter is often also present: presumably, this was used for washing the communal sponge stick, the Roman equivalent of toilet paper. Other items used for cleaning oneself were smooth stones, seashells, potsherds, and papyrus, though this last will have been much rarer given the expense. Basins for handwashing were also usually provided. Privacy was at a minimum in these large structures (one on the Aegean island of Kos could seat ninety): walls separating individual seats are rare, and it appears that men and women did not have separate facilities. Small windows set very high into the walls allowed for sunlight and fresh air to enter, and they at least protected the user from the prying eyes of passers-by. Decorations in most public restrooms were sparse: plaster walls and basic tile floors. In the second and third centuries c.e., however, there was a trend toward “luxury latrines” decorated with statues, mosaics, and wall-paintings.
FIGURE 24.2 Ostia, Schola di Traiano, four-seater latrine. From A. Koloski-Ostrow’s The Archaeology of Sanitation in Roman Italy; Toilets, Sewers, and Water Systems. (University of North Carolina Press, 2015), p. 152, figure 38. Reproduced with permission.
Public expenditures
Despite a reputation for being tight with money, Vespasian spent freely on imperial armies; on roads, bridges, and fortifications in the provinces; on public buildings in Rome; and on literature and education. After repairing the damage wrought in Italy by the civil war of 69, he commemorated the end of the Jewish War by beginning major construction projects in Rome: the Forum of Vespasian, with the Temple of Peace in the center; the Arch of Titus; and the gigantic stone Flavian Amphiteater, or Colosseum (p. 495), a symbol of the might and majesty of Imperial Rome.1 Another great architectural achievement of the reign was the completion of a new temple to Capitoline Jupiter in 71.
To encourage literature, Vespasian liberally subsidized poets and other writers. From public funds, he endowed schools and established a chair of literature and rhetoric at Rome. Marcus Fabius Quintilianus, the celebrated Spanish rhetorician, was its first holder (p. 483).
The opposition to Vespasian
Despite his conspicuous achievements and services to the Empire, Vespasian never fully escaped the opposition of leading senators and of the Stoic and Cynic philosophers. Many senators objected to his numerous consulships (by which he sought to enhance the nobility of his family), his assumption of the censorship, his practice of admitting municipal Italians and provincials into the senate, and his ill-concealed intention of founding a new dynasty by handing down the office of princeps to members of his own family. Nevertheless, the senatorial opposition was more bothersome than dangerous. Vespasian paid little attention to it. Far more irritating were the attacks of the Stoic and especially of the Cynic philosophers. They finally nettled him into ordering their expulsion from Rome. The continued attacks of the Stoic Helvidius Priscus, son-in-law of Thrasea Paetus (p. 434), ultimately resulted in Priscus’ execution.
Vespasian’s death, 79 c.e.
In the spring of 79, after a decade of rule, Vespasian caught a fever. Continuing to work, he soon became worse and died on June 23. The hour of death did not deprive him of his sense of humor. Reportedly, as he lay dying he muttered, “Dear me, I think I’m becoming a god!” (Suetonius, Vespasian 23.4).
Before his death, Vespasian had settled the question of his successor. He had carefully prepared his son Titus (named Titus Flavius Vespasianus after his father), to be his successor. Titus had held army commands, the proconsular imperium, and tribunician power. He had shared the censorship and seven consulships with his father. Vespasian had also appointed him sole prefect of the Praetorian Guard, a wise precaution that enabled Titus immediately to thwart Aulus Caecina’s grab for the throne in 79.
Titus (79 to 81 c.e.)
After Vespasian’s death, the senate at once conferred on Titus the usual honors and titles belonging to the princeps, although not without some qualms and misgivings. Titus was handsome, charming, genial, and generous enough, but allegedly, his moral conduct had not been of the best. He had associated rather freely with the wilder elements of Roman aristocratic society. A love affair with Julia Berenice, a sister of the Jewish king, Herod Agrippa II, even revived memories of M. Antonius and Cleopatra.
Once seated on the throne, however, Titus became the ideal princeps, eager to promote the welfare of his subjects and much beloved by the people. He recalled the philosophers exiled by his father and halted all treason trials. He rewarded unscrupulous informers (delatores) with public flogging and enslavement or exile to unhealthy islands. He sent away Berenice to avoid giving offense to conservative senators, and he entertained the people with splendid games and shows, to their amazement and delight.
Three catastrophes marred his brief but brilliant reign. In August of 79, Mt. Vesuvius violently erupted and destroyed the cities of Herculaneum, Stabiae, and Pompeii near the Bay of Naples. Next, a plague, like none ever seen before, descended on Campania. In Rome, another great fire broke out and raged for three days. These disasters, occurring as they did in rapid succession, severely tested the energy and philanthropy of Titus.
In September of 81, after a reign of twenty-six months, Titus contracted a fever, just as his father had, and died at the family’s home. He was only forty-two. The Roman people mourned the death of their beloved ruler, and the senate showered him with posthumous praises and honors. Deification followed.
Domitian (81 to 96 c.e.)
The way was now open for Vespasian’s younger son, Titus Flavius Domitianus, known as Domitian. Leaving his brother’s deathbed, Domitian rode in haste to Rome, where he went to the barracks of the Praetorian Guard to be acclaimed emperor. The armies acquiesced; the senate approved. Neither had much choice. Vespasian had always made it clear that Domitian was to play a prominent role in the family. His cognomen, Domitianus, honored Nero’s martyred general Domitius Corbulo, who had been popular with the senate and the people. In 70, the link had become even stronger when Domitian married Corbulo’s daughter Domitia Longina, a significant force in her own right. Nevertheless, despite granting him seven honorific consulships, Vespasian had not entrusted him with early responsibilities comparable to Titus’, nor had Titus. Domitian had busied himself by writing Greek verse and studying the Acta (Deeds) of Tiberius, whom he admired. Later, gossip predictably accused Domitian of poisoning Titus, but that is unfounded.
The autocrat in charge
Having been overshadowed by his older brother most of his life, Domitian lacked a certain amount of self-confidence. He compensated by being domineering and autocratic, behavior that offended many senators. Appearing before them in triumphal regalia, he looked like an imperator with the power to command. In nonmilitary attire, he would have been a princeps seeking advice. His twenty-four lictors, his ten more consulships, and his censorship-for-life (censor perpetuus) not only defied tradition but also revealed his intention of establishing a more autocratic monarchy. Particularly galling were his appointment of equestrians to his judicial consilium to sit in judgment of senators and his naming an eques proconsul of the senatorial province of Asia. Worse still, he outdid even Caligula and Nero by permitting and encouraging people to address him as Lord and God (Dominus et Deus).
Domitian advanced his claim to divinity as a defender of the mos maiorum and the gods who had made Rome great. He enforced the execution of Vestal Virgins for unchastity and in the case of one even revived the traditional punishment of entombing her alive. He restored the Pantheon (p. 391) and built or rebuilt other major temples. The greatest was a new temple to Jupiter Optimus Maximus on the Capitol. With columns of Pentelic marble, gold-plated doors, and roof tiles overlaid with gold leaf, it replaced the newly built temple that had burned in the fire under Titus. He also erected a high temple to Jupiter the Guardian (Juppiter Custos) and, with great significance for his own divinity, a beautiful new temple to the deified Vespasian.
Domitian was usually hostile to exotic foreign cults, particularly Judaism and Christianity, whose rigid monotheism clashed with traditional Roman religion and rituals and did not tolerate the deification of emperors. Under him, treason became linked with impiety, and participation in the imperial cult became a test of loyalty. He did, however, favor the Egyptian cult of Isis. He had escaped danger during the civil war of 69 by disguising himself as one of her acolytes. Therefore, he rebuilt the temple complex of Serapis and Isis, which had been gutted in the recent fire.
Domitian tried to earn favor with the Roman populace as well as with the gods. Three times he distributed donations (congiaria) to citizens resident in Rome, for a total of 225 denarii a head. He completed the Baths of Titus and rebuilt the Baths of Agrippa. For popular amusement, he organized splendid spectacles: wild beast hunts; mock sea and land battles; gladiatorial contests in the Colosseum, the building of which he completed (p. 495); and chariot races in the Circus Maximus. He built both the Stadium and the Odeum (Music Hall) in Mars’ Field to encourage Greek-style competitions in both sports and literature.
At the same time, Domitian spent heavily on projects reflecting his power and leadership. He built many triumphal arches, the grand Domus August[i]ana palace on the Palatine (p. 390), and, on Mount Alba, a huge mansion overlooking the Alban Lake. In Italy, he constructed a road from Sinuessa to Cumae. In Britain, as well as along the Rhine and Danube, he established numerous fortresses and garrison camps. He raised the base pay of legionary solders from 225 to 300 denarii per annum and also fought several costly wars from 82 to 93.
Financial policies
Financing these expenditures earned Domitian a reputation for rapacity. His collection of taxes was rigorous, although he was liberal in some ways. He never accepted legacies from testators having five or more children. He canceled debts owed to the state for more than five years and, unlike Vespasian, gave clear title to occupiers of public land in Italy. To keep down expenses, he maintained only twenty-eight legions after 92 c.e. That he was able to pass on to his successors a fairly full treasury is quite surprising. He seems to have financed his wars by confiscating the property of wealthy persons condemned for treason, which did not improve his reputation.
War and rebellion, 82 to 93 c.e.
Denied opportunities for military glory under his father and brother, Domitian eagerly sought to obtain it as emperor. In 82 and 83 he personally led a successful war against the German Chatti on the Rhine frontier. In 85, he shifted Rome’s military focus to the Danube after Decebalus, the young and aggressive king of Dacia (roughly equivalent to modern Romania) had invaded the Roman province of Moesia, south of the Danube. The treason trials and confiscations used to pay for these wars seem to have spurred an unsuccessful conspiracy against Domitian in 87. The shift in focus to the Danube inspired a more serious plot by L. Antonius Saturninus, the governor of upper Germany and commander of two legions wintering in the double camp at Moguntiacum (Mainz). On January 1, 89, he seized his army’s savings and payroll and bribed the troops to proclaim him emperor. To crush that revolt, Domitian at once sped north with his Praetorian Guard after he ordered Trajan (the future emperor) to bring up a legion from Spain. Both got there too late for the battle. The governor of lower Germany had suppressed the rebellion and killed Saturninus. Upon arriving, Domitian ruthlessly punished the officers and accomplices of Saturninus. He sent the severed head of Saturninus back to Rome, while he faced a new threat from the Quadi and the Marcomani in Pannonia.
The revolt of Saturninus had disrupted Domitian’s conquest of Dacia. A Roman army had inflicted a great defeat on the Dacians in 88, so that in 89, both Domitian and Decebalus found it expedient to come to terms. Decebalus promised to surrender all Roman captives and accept the role of Roman client. In return, Domitian recognized him as the legitimate king of the Dacians, granted him an annual subsidy, and furnished him Roman engineers skilled in the art of building roads and fortresses.
The Dacian peace treaty was dictated by expediency. Many senators considered it an affront to Roman dignity. Still, it was of immense value to Rome. It turned Decebalus into a benevolent neutral, if not an active ally, when the Iazyges irrupted into Pannonia in 92 and badly mauled a Roman legion. It also helped Domitian isolate the hostile Marcomanni and Quadi: he added alliances with the Germanic tribes living to the north of them, with the Semnones east of the Elbe, and with the powerful Lugii of Silesia. Domitian was able to stabilize the Danubian frontier by concentrating nine or ten legions along the river in strongly fortified camps (to forestall chances of rebellion, however, there were no more double legionary camps). By 93, peace prevailed again along the entire Danubian frontier.
Fear, purges, and the murder of Domitian, 89 to 96 c.e.
The rebellion of Saturninus in 89 so upset Domitian that he began to imagine conspiracies forming against him everywhere. Spies and informers began to play upon his fears. In 89 and again in 95, he banished philosophers and astrologers from Rome. He also struck out most savagely against prominent senators and some able provincial governors. That he had no surviving children to succeed him increased his fear of such men. He attempted to bolster his position by adopting the sons of his cousin Flavius Clemens, who had married his own cousin and Domitian’s niece, Flavia Domitilla. In 95 or 96, however, Domitian turned against Clemens and Domitilla. Clemens was executed and Domitilla exiled.
Fearing for their own lives, members of the court, possibly including the Empress Domitia Longina, entered into a conspiracy. Flavia Domitilla’s devoted former butler, a certain Stephanus, pretended to have secret information about a conspiracy. Admitted to the emperor’s bedroom, he handed Domitian a list of names. As Domitian read the list, Stephanus stabbed him in the groin. The wounded emperor shouted for his attendant to get the dagger that he always kept under his pillow, but its blade was gone. Stephanus and others, who rushed in to help him, finished the deed. While some of the chief conspirators were later punished (p. 454), Domitia Longina lived for at least another thirty years as a respected and wealthy widow managing her estates. Her adopted sons, who had been tutored by the famous rhetorician Quintillian, disappeared from view. Perhaps they wisely chose a quiescent life with Domitia, or with their birth-mother, if she returned from exile.
Domitian, like Caligula and Nero, had failed to learn the value of downplaying the inherent autocracy of the Principate and maintaining the goodwill of the senate. Nevertheless, he had kept a firm grip on the frontier legions. In so doing, he had protected the integrity and preserved the internal peace and prosperity of the Empire, the greatest legacy of the Flavian dynasty.
Note
1 The Colosseum owes its name not to its own size, but to the colossal statue that stood nearby. It was originally intended for the entrance court to Nero’s Golden House (p. 432), but Vespasian erected it in the Sacred Way. Hadrian moved it near the Flavian Amphitheater to make way for his massive Temple of Venus and Rome (p. 496).
Suggested reading
Jones , B. W. The Emperor Domitian. London and New York: Routledge, 1992.
Levick , B. Vespasian. 2nd ed. Roman Imperial Biographies. London and New York: Routledge, 2017.
Rutledge , S. H. Imperial Inquisitions: Prosecutors and Informants from Tiberius to Domitian. London: Routledge, 2001.