The reign of the emperor Domitian (81 – 91 CE) is one characterised by infamy. Immortalized for posterity on account of his brutal and unforgiving nature, Domitian comes down to us as the runt of the Flavian family. A tyrannical leader who purged the Senate, revelled in degeneracy, and was rumored 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 the Empire.
Visiting Rome? Join me for my Damnatio Memoriae ‘Cancel Culture’ tour!
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, partly due to the contributions he had made to Rome’s architectural heritage. His rule brought forth significant constructions, including the imperial palace on the Palatine Hill and the stadium that underlies Piazza Navona,
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
Born as Vespasian’s youngest son, Domitian was not the designated successor. His older brother Titus, admired for his military victories in Judaea and handling of natural disasters such as the eruption of Pompeii, was the favoured heir. But Titus’s untimely death 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. 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.
He was also 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 even 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, diplomatic finesse, and a halt in persecutions against minority groups, 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 that the wider historical context infused into the narrative of Domitian’s reign. It was common practice for successors to vilify their predecessors (see Claudius’ treatment of Caligula or Vespasian’s treatment of Nero) in order to emphasise a regime change. Moreover, the literate class, comprising senators and equestrians who lost power under Domitian, were the primary recorders of history, thus shaping his legacy.
And dead dynasts have no way of defending allegations against them.
We should also keep in mind who was writing the history that comes down to us today.
Rome’s literate class were senators or equestrians, and these were precisely the people who lost power under Domitian.
Domitian ruled Rome with a mixture of micromanagement and authoritarianism which riled the 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.
