The reign of the emperor Domitian (81 – 91 CE) is one characterised by infamy. Domitian comes down to us as the runt of the Flavian family: a tyrannical leader who purged the Senate, revelled in degeneracy, and was rumoured to have been involved in the untimely death of his niece.
Among the anecdotes that illustrate Domitian’s cruelty was his macabre hobby of torturing flies, a perturbing pastime that paints a vivid picture of his sadistic tendencies. His rule is frequently compared to Nero’s, earning him the nickname calvus Nero or ‘the Bald Nero,’ a comparison his contemporaries no doubt made behind his back.
When Domitian was finally stabbed to death by his freedman in the imperial chambers on the Palatine Hill, the Senate celebrated. They swiftly enacted the practice of Damnatio Memoriae, erasing his presence from public memory by demolishing his statues and removing his name from inscriptions throughout Rome and its empire.
Pliny the Younger, the ancient author who provides our historical account of Vesuvius’ eruption and Pompeii’s destruction in 79 CE, describes the joy with which senators attacked his statues:
How delightful it was, to smash to pieces those arrogant faces, to raise our swords against them, to cut them ferociously with our axes, as if blood and pain would follow our blows.
Pliny the Younger, Letter 52. 4-5
But while the Senate revelled in his demise, the army and the people did not. The general populace and the military held widely differing views on Domitian, not least due to the contributions he had made to Rome’s urban architecture. His rule, which lasted an impressive 15 years, brought forth significant constructions, not least the imperial palace on the Palatine Hill, and reconstructions in the wake of the Great Fire of 80 CE. But it was in the arts and entertainment that Domitian invested most, constructing the stadium beneath Piazza Navona, and the odeon whose shape is still preserved in the façade of Palazzo Massimo alle Colonne.
Through a mixture of micromanagement and authoritarianism, Domitian sowed the seeds for the peace and prosperity that Rome’s good emperors would reap during the second century.
So where does Domitian’s terrible reputation come from?
In the shadow of his family
As the youngest son of the emperor Vespasian (reigned 69 – 79 CE), Domitian was never the heir apparent. This burden of expectation fell on his older brother Titus, admired for his military victories in Judaea and handling of natural disasters such as the eruption of Pompeii. Titus’ reputation among our surviving sources is too good to be true. He was the “darling of the human race,” according to Suetonius, and a man so dedicated to doing good that once, remembering at dinner that he had done nothing for anybody all day, he remarked, “Friends, I have lost a day.”
But Titus’s untimely death from fever, on September 13, aged 41, catapulted Domitian into power.
Domitian’s reign
Our sources portray two phases to Domitian’s 18-year reign: moderation and good governance, followed by a descent into despotism. This follows a familiar pattern in the lives of ‘bad’ emperors. Caligula too was said to have started with promise before descending into tyranny (“I have told you of the man, now I must write about the monster”, Suetonius famously quipped halfway through his biography). Poets would liken the beginning of Nero’s reign to the return to a Golden Age. The first five years were praised in lofty terms by no less than Trajan, the GOAT of Roman emperors, who wrote of the neronis quinquennium: the five years under Nero in which the Roman administration was unmatched.
Domitian suffered similar treatment from the stylus of Suetonius. Like a tabloid journalist today, Suetonius, a biographer writing under the emperor Hadrian (117 – 138 CE), delights in detailing Domitian’s cruelty, writing:
After his victory in the civil war he became even more cruel, and to discover any conspirators who were in hiding, tortured many of the opposite party by a new form of inquisition, inserting fire in their privates; and he cut off the hands of some of them.
Suetonius, Life of Domitian, 10.5
Nor, according to Suetonius, did Domitian limit his cruelty to only the men of the Roman elite. He tells us Domitian would harass the wives of men of high reputation, following a precedent set by Augustus, Caligula, and Nero.
Domitian was said to be sexually depraved, removing the hair from his lovers’ bodies with his own hands (a particularly repugnant practice by ancient Roman standards) and swimming in the baths with common prostitutes. He was even said to have committed adultery with his niece, Julia Flavia, forcing her to abort their child before ultimately killing her. Domitian’s litany of misdeeds goes on. But even the ancient biographer had to concede that Domitian also ruled with efficiency and success: political and financial, both at home and abroad.
Modern historians cannot but acknowledge Domitian’s administrative effectiveness. His reign was marked by economic stability and diplomatic finesse, contrasting the grim portrait painted by ancient biographers. As well as embarking upon a monumental building project in Rome, he constructed an impressive imperial residence at Castel Gandolfo, where the papal estate now stands.
Where does this negative image of Domitian come from?
As ever, when reading the history of Roman emperors, we should be aware of the wider historical context surrounding court politics and patronage. It was common practice for successors to employ writers to vilify their predecessors (see Claudius’ treatment of Caligula or Vespasian’s treatment of Nero) in order to give the people a good reason to celebrate a regime change.
Domitian’s reign was some 100 years into the establishment of one-man rule in Rome, but there was still considerable tension between the emperor and the elites. It was the literate class, comprising senators and equestrians who lost power under Domitian, who wrote the histories — true or not — since dead dynasts have no way of defending themselves from allegations.
We should always keep in mind who was writing the history that comes down to us today.
Domitian ruled Rome with a mixture of micromanagement and authoritarianism, which riled the relatively recently disenfranchised senatorial class. The question of how much power an emperor should wield was still a hot topic in the first century CE, and Domitian was perhaps the first emperor since Nero to put himself front and centre of imperial power. To the extent that when he travelled and toured the provinces, the entire court – and thus the centre of Roman power – was seen to travel with him.
Domitian also established a cult of personality at odds with the politics of the Roman Republic, which at least pretended that real power lay with the Senate. A modern parallel might be the cult of the Kim dynasty in North Korea, and it’s hard to imagine that once that dynasty has passed, the Korean politicians writing the histories will have much positive to say.
So where does the truth lie? Who was Domitian, really?
As an emperor, Domitian was certainly ruthless. At least by today’s standards. But while the senators hated him, his policies and reforms went a long way in setting the tone for the next century of peace.
