Editing Antoninus Pius (section)

=== Historiography ===
[[File:Sbeitla 04.jpg|thumb|Arch of Antoninus Pius in [[Sbeïtla]], [[Tunisia]]]]
[[File:Antoninus Pius, Palazzo Altemps, Rome (11383990114).jpg|thumb|Statue of Antoninus Pius, [[Palazzo Altemps]], Rome]]
The only intact account of his life handed down to us is that of the ''[[Augustan History]]'', an unreliable and mostly fabricated work. Nevertheless, it still contains information that is considered reasonably sound; for instance, it is the only source that mentions the erection of the Antonine Wall in Britain.<ref>Historia Augusta, ''Life of Antoninus Pius'' 5:4</ref>

Antoninus in many ways was the ideal of the landed gentleman praised not only by ancient Romans, but also by later scholars of classical history, such as [[Edward Gibbon]]<ref>{{cite book|last1=Gibbon|first1=Edward|title=Delphi Complete Works of Edward Gibbon (Illustrated)|date=2015|publisher=Delphi Classics|isbn=9781910630761|page=125|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-FB4BgAAQBAJ&pg=PT125}}</ref> or the author of the article on Antoninus Pius in the [[Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition|''Encyclopædia Britannica'' Eleventh Edition]].{{sfn|Chisholm|1911}}

{{Blockquote|A few months afterwards, on Hadrian's death, he was enthusiastically welcomed to the throne by the Roman people, who, for once, were not disappointed in their anticipation of a happy reign. For Antoninus came to his new office with simple tastes, kindly disposition, extensive experience, a well-trained intelligence and the sincerest desire for the welfare of his subjects. Instead of plundering to support his prodigality, he emptied his private treasury to assist distressed provinces and cities, and everywhere exercised rigid economy (hence the nickname κυμινοπριστης "cummin-splitter"). Instead of exaggerating into treason whatever was susceptible of unfavorable interpretation, he turned the very conspiracies that were formed against him into opportunities for demonstrating his clemency. Instead of stirring up [[Persecution of Christians in the Roman Empire|persecution against the Christians]], he extended to them the strong hand of his protection throughout the empire. Rather than give occasion to that oppression which he regarded as inseparable from an emperor's progress through his dominions, he was content to spend all the years of his reign in Rome, or its neighbourhood.{{sfn|Chisholm|1911}}}}

Some historians have a less positive view of his reign. According to the historian [[J. B. Bury]],
{{Blockquote|however estimable the man, Antoninus was hardly a great statesman. The rest which the Empire enjoyed under his auspices had been rendered possible through Hadrian's activity, and was not due to his own exertions; on the other hand, he carried the policy of peace at any price too far, and so entailed calamities on the state after his death. He not only had no originality or power of initiative, but he had not even the insight or boldness to work further on the new lines marked out by Hadrian.{{sfn|Bury|1893|p=524}}}}

German historian [[Ernst Kornemann]] has had it in his ''Römische Geschichte'' [2 vols., ed. by H. Bengtson, Stuttgart 1954] that the reign of Antoninus comprised "a succession of grossly wasted opportunities", given the upheavals that were to come. There is more to this argument, given that the Parthians in the East were themselves soon to make no small amount of mischief after Antoninus's death. Kornemann's brief is that Antoninus might have waged preventive wars to head off these outsiders. [[Michael Grant (classicist)|Michael Grant]] agrees that it is possible that had Antoninus acted decisively sooner (it appears that, on his death bed, he was preparing a large-scale action against the Parthians), the Parthians might have been unable to choose their own time, but current evidence is not conclusive. Grant opines that Antoninus and his officers did act in a resolute manner dealing with frontier disturbances of his time, although conditions for long-lasting peace were not created. On the whole, according to Grant, Marcus Aurelius's eulogistic picture of Antoninus seems deserved, and Antoninus appears to have been a conservative and nationalistic (although he respected and followed Hadrian's example of Philhellenism moderately) emperor who was not tainted by the blood of either citizen or foe, combined and maintained Numa Pompilius's good fortune, pacific dutifulness and religious scrupulousness, and whose laws removed anomalies and softened harshnesses.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Grant|first1=Michael|title=The Antonines: The Roman Empire in Transition|date=2016|publisher=Routledge|isbn=9781317972112|pages=14–23|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-FwfDAAAQBAJ&pg=PT28}}</ref>

Krzysztof Ulanowski argues that the claims of military inability are exaggerated, considering that although the sources praise Antoninus's love for peace and his efforts "rather to defend, than enlarge the provinces", he could hardly be considered a pacifist, as shown by the conquest of the Lowlands, the building of the [[Antonine Wall]] and the expansion of Germania Superior. Ulanowski also praises Antoninus for being successful in deterrence by diplomatic means.<ref>{{cite book|last1=Ulanowski|first1=Krzysztof|title=The Religious Aspects of War in the Ancient Near East, Greece, and Rome: Ancient Warfare Series, Volume 1|date=2016|publisher=Brill|isbn=9789004324763|pages=360–361|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=KX6kDAAAQBAJ&pg=PA358}}</ref>