Editing Domitian (section)

==Legacy==

===Ancient sources===

[[Image:Domitian statue Vatican.png|thumb|190px|Domitian as Emperor ([[Vatican Museums]]), likely recut from a statue of Nero]]

The classic view of Domitian is usually negative, since most of the antique sources were related to the Senatorial or aristocratic class, with which Domitian had notoriously difficult relations.<ref name=jones-160/> Furthermore, contemporary historians such as [[Pliny the Younger]], Tacitus and Suetonius all wrote after his reign when his memory had been condemned to oblivion by the Senate. The work of Domitian's court poets [[Martial]] and [[Statius]] constitutes virtually the only literary evidence concurrent with his reign. Perhaps as unsurprising as the attitude of post-Domitianic historians, the poems of Martial and Statius are highly adulatory, praising Domitian's achievements as equalling those of the gods.<ref>Jones (1992), p. 32</ref> The most extensive account of the life of Domitian to survive was written by the historian Suetonius, who was born during the reign of Vespasian, and published his works under Emperor [[Hadrian]] (117–138). His ''[[De vita Caesarum]]'' is the source of much of what is known of Domitian. Although his text is predominantly negative, it neither exclusively condemns nor praises Domitian, and asserts that his rule started well, but gradually declined into terror.<ref>Waters (1964), p. 51</ref> The biography is problematic, however, in that it appears to contradict itself with regards to Domitian's rule and personality, at the same time presenting him as a conscientious, moderate man, and as a decadent [[libertine]].<ref name=jones-198/>

According to Suetonius, Domitian wholly feigned his interest in arts and literature, and never bothered to acquaint himself with classic authors. Other passages, alluding to Domitian's love of [[epigram]]matic expression, suggest that he was in fact familiar with classic writers, while he also patronized poets and architects, founded artistic Olympics, and personally restored the library of Rome at great expense after it had burned down.<ref name=jones-198/> ''De Vita Caesarum'' is also the source of several outrageous stories regarding Domitian's married life. According to Suetonius, Domitia Longina was exiled in 83 because of an affair with a famous actor named [[Paris (actor under Domitian)|Paris]]. When Domitian found out, he allegedly murdered Paris in the street and promptly divorced his wife, with Suetonius further adding that once Domitia was exiled, Domitian took Julia as his mistress, who later died during a failed [[abortion]].<ref name=jones-35/><ref name="suetonius-domitian-22">Suetonius, Life of Domitian [https://penelope.uchicago.edu/Thayer/E/Roman/Texts/Suetonius/12Caesars/Domitian*.html#22 22]</ref> Modern historians consider this highly implausible however, noting that malicious rumours such as those concerning Domitia's alleged infidelity were eagerly repeated by post-Domitianic authors, and used to highlight the hypocrisy of a ruler publicly preaching a return to Augustan morals, while privately indulging in excesses and presiding over a corrupt court.<ref>Levick (2002), p. 211</ref>

Nevertheless, the account of Suetonius has dominated imperial historiography for centuries. Although Tacitus is usually considered to be the most reliable author of this era, his views on Domitian are complicated by the fact that his father-in-law, Gnaeus Julius Agricola, may have been a personal enemy of the Emperor.<ref name=jones-58>Jones (1992), p. 58</ref> In his biographical work ''[[Agricola (book)|Agricola]]'', Tacitus maintains that Agricola was forced into retirement because his triumph over the Caledonians highlighted Domitian's own inadequacy as a military commander. Several modern authors such as Dorey have argued the opposite: that Agricola was in fact a close friend of Domitian, and that Tacitus merely sought to distance his family from the fallen dynasty once Nerva was in power.<ref name=jones-58/><ref>{{cite journal | last = Dorey | first = T. A. | title = Agricola and Domitian | journal = Greece & Rome | volume = 7 | issue = 1 | year = 1960 | pages = 66–71 | jstor = 640729 | doi=10.1017/s0017383500014029| s2cid = 162793177 }}</ref>

Tacitus' major historical works, including ''The Histories'' and Agricola's biography, were all written and published under Domitian's successors, Nerva (96–98) and Trajan (98–117). Unfortunately, the part of Tacitus' ''Histories'' dealing with the reign of the Flavian dynasty is almost entirely lost. His views on Domitian survive through brief comments in its first five books, and the short but highly negative characterization in ''Agricola'' in which he severely criticizes Domitian's military endeavours. Nevertheless, Tacitus admits his debt to the Flavians with regard to his own public career.<ref name="tacitus-histories-i-1">Tacitus, ''Histories'' [[s:The Histories (Tacitus)/Book 1#1|I.1]]</ref> Other influential 2nd century authors include [[Juvenal]] and Pliny the Younger, the latter of whom was a friend of Tacitus and in 100 delivered his famous ''Panegyricus Traiani'' before Trajan and the Roman Senate, exalting the new era of restored freedom while condemning Domitian as a tyrant. Juvenal savagely satirized the Domitianic court in his ''[[Satires of Juvenal|Satires]]'', depicting the Emperor and his entourage as corrupt, violent and unjust. As a consequence, the anti-Domitianic tradition was already well established by the end of the 2nd century, and by the 3rd century, even expanded upon by early Church historians, who identified Domitian as an early persecutor of Christians, such as in the [[Acts of John]].

=== Modern revisionism ===

[[File:Domiziano da latina, 81-96 dc..JPG|thumb|left|170px|Bust of Domitian wearing the [[civic crown]], from the [[Palazzo Massimo alle Terme]], [[Rome]]]]

Over the course of the 20th century, Domitian's military, administrative and economic policies were re-evaluated.  Hostile views of Domitian had been propagated until [[archeology|archeological]] and [[numismatics|numismatic]] advances brought renewed attention to his reign, and necessitated a revision of the literary tradition established by Tacitus and Pliny. It would be nearly a hundred years after [[Stéphane Gsell]]'s 1894 ''Essai sur le règne de l'empereur Domitien'' however, before any new, book-length studies were published.<ref name=gowing-domitian-review/> The first of these was Jones' 1992 ''The Emperor Domitian''.  He concludes that Domitian was a ruthless but efficient autocrat.<ref name=gowing-domitian-review>{{cite journal | last = Gowing | first = Alain M. | title = Review: The Emperor Domitian | journal = Bryn Mawr Classical Review | year = 1992 | url = http://ccat.sas.upenn.edu/bmcr/1992/03.06.10.html }}</ref> For the majority of his reign, there was no widespread dissatisfaction with his policies. His harshness was limited to a highly vocal minority, who exaggerated his despotism in favor of the [[Nervan-Antonian dynasty]] that followed.<ref name=gowing-domitian-review/>  His foreign policy was realistic, rejecting expansionist warfare and negotiating peace at a time when Roman military tradition dictated aggressive conquest. Persecution of religious minorities, such as Jews and Christians, was non-existent.<ref name=jones-114-119>Jones (1992), pp. 114–119</ref>

In 1930, [[Ronald Syme]] argued for a complete reassessment of Domitian's financial policy, which had been largely viewed as a disaster.<ref>His article begins with "The work of the spade and the use of common sense have done much to mitigate the influence of Tacitus and Pliny and redeem the memory of Domitian from infamy or oblivion. But much remains to be done." ''Imperial Finances'' p. 55</ref>  His economic program, which was rigorously efficient, maintained the Roman currency at a standard it would never again achieve. Domitian's government nonetheless exhibited [[totalitarianism|totalitarian]] characteristics. As Emperor, he saw himself as the new Augustus, an enlightened despot destined to guide the Roman Empire into a new era of Flavian renaissance.<ref name=jones-72/>  Using religious, military and cultural propaganda, he fostered a [[cult of personality]]. He deified three of his family members and erected massive structures to commemorate the Flavian achievements. Elaborate triumphs were celebrated in order to boost his image as a warrior-emperor, but many of these were either unearned or premature.<ref name=jones-127/> By nominating himself perpetual censor, he sought to control public and private morals.<ref name=jones-106/> He started several major construction projects in Rome including the [[Aqua Traiana]] and the [[Baths of Trajan]].<ref>Anderson, J. C. 1985. "The Date of the Thermae Traiani and the Topography of the Oppius Mons". American Journal of Archaeology 89, 507</ref>

He became personally involved in all branches of the government and successfully prosecuted corruption among public officials. The dark side of his censorial power involved a restriction in freedom of speech, and an increasingly oppressive attitude toward the Roman Senate. He punished libel with exile or death and, due to his suspicious nature, increasingly accepted information from [[delatores|informers]] to bring false charges of treason if necessary.<ref name=jones-180>Jones (1992), p. 180</ref> Despite his vilification by contemporary historians, Domitian's administration provided the foundation for the Principate of the peaceful 2nd century. His successors Nerva and Trajan were less restrictive, but in reality their policies differed little from his. Much more than a "gloomy coda to the...1st century", the Roman Empire prospered between 81 and 96, in a reign that [[Theodor Mommsen]] described as a somber but intelligent despotism.<ref name=gowing-domitian-review/><ref>Syme (1930), p. 67</ref>