Domitian


from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Domitian (born October 24, 51 in Rome , † September 18, 96 ibid) was Roman emperor from September 14, 81 until his death . As the successor to his brother Titus , he was the third and last ruler of the Flavian family . His full birth name was Titus Flavius ​​Domitianus ; as emperor he was called imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus .

In the historiography traditionally written by senators, Domitian was portrayed as a bad princeps and tyrant (pessimus princeps) because he did not show the senate the respect he wanted and made decisions without consulting it. After his death, his self-portrayal as emperor was to be officially erased. Only modern research from the end of the 20th century revised the Domitian image. His military successes in Germania and Pannonia as well as his financial and provincial policy make him appear as a capable ruler. At the same time, his personality and conception of power remain inexplicable in parts.

Life until rule

Domitian was born on October 24, 51 in Rome as the second son of Titus Flavius ​​Vespasianus , who later became emperor, who had risen from knighthood to senator . Little is known about his youth. According to Suetonius , he spent her in poor circumstances, which, however, may not have been true. As the son of a senator, Domitian should have been brought up appropriately.

When Vespasian was proclaimed emperor in 69, Domitian, in contrast to his uncle Titus Flavius ​​Sabinus , was able to escape persecution by the followers of Vitellius and, after the victory of the Flavians, was the political governor of the new emperor in Rome together with Gaius Licinius Mucianus . In the following years Domitian was not deliberately reset by his father, but played only a subordinate role alongside his brother Titus, who was exposed as co-ruler and successor, and was not prepared for the role of princeps . He was given the title of Caesar , became a suffect consul five times, and held a full consulate once in 73 . Until Titus came to power, he was once less consul than his brother and twice less than his father. When Titus succeeded Vespasian in 79, he made his brother a colleague in the ordinary consulate in 80, but did not give him the tribunicia potestas that he himself had received during Vespasian's reign.

The principate

Taking office

Ancient authors thought it possible that Domitian had caused the death of his brother Titus on September 13, 81, but the contradicting sources do not allow a clear assessment, especially since unexplained deaths of rulers often led to rumors of murder. On the same day the Praetorians proclaimed Domitian to be Emperor , he promised them a donative . On September 14th he succeeded him as emperor. The Senate awarded him the titles of Imperator , pater patriae , pontifex maximus , Augustus and the tribunicia potestas , thereby recognizing the transfer of power. Domitian strove for personal and legislative continuity. The emperor's circle of friends (amici) had largely the same composition as under Vespasian and Titus, his decisions on the matter tied to those of the Julio-Claudian dynasty as well as those of his father and brother.

At the beginning of his reign, Domitian proved to be a capable head of government in the eyes of the Senate. He fought vigorously against corruption , continued to increase the efficiency of the administration like his two predecessors and kept the state finances in order. Among the numerous construction projects realized by Domitian, the monumental stadium on the Marsfeld , the Arch of Titus , the Forum Transitorium and his larger than life equestrian statue (Equus Domitiani) on the Forum Romanum should be mentioned.

Relationship with the Senate

Bust of Domitian

Domitian raised the Senate against himself not long after he came to power because he hardly consulted him and allegedly let his environment address him as dominus et deus (“Lord and God”). Not unlike his predecessors, Domitian set up a consilium principis , a kind of informal privy council. However, knights also took part in this council, which partly offended the Senate, especially when the emperor spoke of the best men from both classes who had gathered around him. In addition, the few meetings of the consilium in the villa of the Princeps in the Alban Mountains - and not in Rome - were called for secrecy and deliberate demarcation. As presumably under Tiberius , Domitian appointed a former quaestor to take care of the Senate's affairs and look after it.

Similar to before him Caligula and after him Commodus broke Domitian so that the rules of the principality , according to which the emperor, although in fact held all the power in their hands, to the outside but had to cherish the role of the people and the Senate. Domitian seems to have cultivated this façade , which has been common since Augustus, at least in the second half of his government, and he snubbed the Senate more and more by revealing the actual power relations. In 85 he finally took over the post of censor for life and with it the right to appoint and dismiss senators. Domitian was the only emperor to officially hold the title of censor perpetuus . However, Domitian did not claim to be a god himself, and he did not demand any divine worship for himself, rather he saw himself standing under divine protection.

Domitian's autocratic rule led to resistance from senatorial circles and some philosophers who took a stand against the principate. The hostility of these circles, which is attested in the letters of Pliny , contributed decisively to the darkening of Domitian's image after his death. Most ancient historians today therefore assume that the emperor was far more successful in domestic and foreign policy than the sources suggest. Research sees Domitian's dealings with the Senate in a more nuanced manner. He chose incumbents, especially military ones, according to their ability and not according to their list of ancestors. This had a direct impact on the advancement of the senatorial elite. Domitian also opted for commanders from the equestrian order, such as Iulius Ursus or Cornelius Fuscus , while he recalled patrician legates or did not promote them as expected. Still, the princeps sought the support of the Senate and did not prevent able senators from pursuing their careers.

When the Chatten wanted to support the Upper Germanic governor Lucius Antonius Saturninus against Domitian in the winter of 88/89 AD , Domitian responded to this offer with a campaign against them after the revolt was suppressed. It is telling that the revolt collapsed very quickly, which suggests that the emperor continued to have the support of the army and its commanders. Domitian had several senators executed, others he sent into exile and confiscated their property. In most cases, the reasons for the measures were either incitement to overthrow or insult the ruler and the ruling house. The consistently summary description of Domitian's “terror” in Suetonius points to a large number of murders and exiles, although only 14 senators are named. For Claudius, however, 35 executions of senators and over 300 of knights are recorded.

Like most Roman emperors, Domitian promoted art and artists and was among other things a patron of the poets Statius and Martial . Minerva was depicted on the reverse of his coins with remarkable frequency.

Activities in Germania

An aureus Domitian with the nickname Germanicus; on the reverse the defeated, grieving Germania

Under Domitian, the phase of renewed Roman expansion to the right of the Rhine began in the area of ​​the Upper German Army Group. When a war in Germania seemed inevitable, the emperor decided after a council meeting to march across the Rhine under the pretext of a census in Gaul in 83. Probably in the spring of 83 the war against the Chatten began, the aim of which was to weaken the Chatten as the last major trouble spot near the Rhine. Domitian advanced deep into the Chatti heartland, so far into today's Hesse . In autumn the campaign against the Chatten in Germania was brought to a successful conclusion. This succeeded in subjugating the area between Taunus , Lahn and Main ( Wetterau ). Domitian finally started building the Limes , the Roman border wall between the Rhine and the Danube. In addition, Domitian took on the winning name Germanicus between June and August 83 . This was the second time after Vitellius that a princeps had not inherited it, but claimed it for himself through his own military achievements. At the end of the year 83 he celebrated his triumph in Rome and received further honors from the Senate. Above all, this includes being allowed to appear before the Senate in triumphant garb and to be accompanied by 24 lictors . In addition, October was renamed Domitianus .

After another Chattenkrieg in 85, Domitian managed to consolidate his success in Chattenland by setting up the Taunus fort and deploying troops; the areas of the Upper and Lower Germanic Army were converted into two ordinary provinces. For a long time the Chattenkrieg represented the last major military demonstration of power in Germania on the right bank of the Rhine. There is some evidence that the hostile tradition of Domitian belittles the success of these operations; in fact, the border with free Germania remained largely peaceful for almost 100 years. There is no evidence that Domitian failed to achieve his goals in this room.

Domitian declared the Germania problem, which had not been resolved since Augustus, to be over with the official establishment of the two provinces Germania superior ("Upper Germania") and Germania inferior ("Lower Germania "). In the year 82 official documents only mentioned Germania . Shortly afterwards, the first inscriptions appear that speak of duae Germaniae . Tilmann Bechert therefore assumes that Germania inferior received its lex provinciae around the years 83/84 , which legally and definitively regulated all questions of jurisdiction, tax legislation and administration in the province. On the basis of military diplomas, however, the official institution of the two provinces seems to be dated to the period between 82 and 90. The exact official title of the Lower Germanic governor was now: legatus Augusti pro praetore Germaniae inferioris (previously: legatus Augusti pro praetore exercitus Germanici inferioris ).

Since the end of the 1980s, the legates of the Germanic armies became consular governors of the two narrow border provinces of Upper and Lower Germany. In rank and career they stood roughly between the governors of the two Moesic provinces and those of the large provinces occupied by three legions, such as Britain, where the military and political ascent often led the governors of the Germanic provinces. The census and financial administration and with it the entire tax system remained under the authority of the Gaul Procurator (seat: Augusta Treverorum ). The capitals of the two provinces and the seats of the governors remained in Colonia Claudia Ara Agrippinensium (Cologne) and Mogontiacum (Mainz), where the high command of the two armies was located.

Domitian and his advisors quickly realized that the value of the contractual relationships with the Germanic tribal elites was not to be rated highly given the strength of the Roman border troops. Active intervention in internal Germanic conflicts in the sense of a protective power was never up for discussion. When, a year after the Chatten War, the Cheruscans, besieged by Domitians, asked Rome for help, they received financial support, not military. After that there was almost no recognizable diplomatic activity beyond the Limes.

In foreign and military policy practice, Tiberius could have been a model for Domitian. He continued the policy that brought him the greatest accusations in Senate circles: he only waged wars when they were unavoidable, and otherwise strengthened border security. Like his father and brother, Domitian wanted to show military success.

Dacian and Pannonian Wars

The campaigns against the Chatti brought rich booty and led to smaller territorial gains for the Romans; they had to be canceled because the legions on the Danube were needed. In the middle of 85 strong Dacian warrior associations of the tribal prince Diurpaneus invaded the Roman province of Moesia from the northeast and met the Romans completely unprepared. The governor Gaius Oppius Sabinus fell during the failed defensive battles, the Dacians looted and pillaged many settlements and forts. The emperor ordered a transfer of legions from all parts of the empire and went himself with his Praetorians to the Moesian front under the command of Cornelius Fuscus . On the march from Rome, Domitian reinforced his troops from Pannonia and Dalmatia. The emperor led the supreme command, Fuscus received the supreme command, and the legates Marcus Cornelius Nigrinus Curiatius Maternus and Lucius Funisulanus Vettonianus were assigned to him . With two successful expeditions Diurpaneus was driven back across the Danube, Domitian received three imperial acclamations and returned to Rome, where he celebrated his first Dakertriumph.

Fuscus stayed in Moesia as commander in chief, reorganized the province and the army and prepared the campaign of revenge against the Dacians. In the middle of 86 he crossed the Danube, captured Diurpaneus and lost almost the entire expeditionary army in the first battle that cost him his life. This second defeat within a short period of time could have brought Domitian not only the damage to foreign policy but also domestic political difficulties, so that he set out again for Moesien and relocated troops. One consequence of the relocation was the abandonment and razing of the Scottish fort Inchtuthil and thus the restriction of the Roman area to the areas south of the Forth-Clyde Canal. By the end of 86 Cornelius Nigrinus fought as the new commander-in-chief at least two successful battles against the Dacians and primarily Diurpaneus. In the late autumn of 86 Domitian returned to Rome and renounced a triumph.

After the failure of Diurpaneus, Decebalus became the leader of the Dacian tribes. So far he had behaved neutrally and assured the emperor of his neutrality during both stays in Moesien and presumably offered an alliance. Now he allied himself with the Sarmatian armored riders of the Roxolans who were seated in Wallachia . Domitian responded with troop transfers and reorganization. The separation of the Roman province into Moesia superior (Upper Moesia ) and Moesia inferior (Lower Moesia ), which was carried out in autumn 86 , shows that the emperor planned a systematic pacification of the Dacians, which he is now implementing. While Cornelius Nigrinus kept order in Moesia Inferior and expanded the Roman position, Lucius Tettius Iulianus attacked Sarmizegetusa , the Dacian power center in the Western Carpathians , from Moesia superior in 88 . After losses, the Romans had to withdraw and overwintered in Obermoesien. After the battle of Tapae , which ended with a defeat for Decebalus, this Domitian offered a peace treaty, which the emperor refused. Instead, the legions from Mainz and Britain were to be reinforced, which was delayed due to the Saturnine Uprising. In the summer of 89 the second punitive expedition started against Decebalus and Sarmizegetusa, which was first directed against the Marcomanni , whose offer of alliance Domitian had rejected. However, the resistance was so great that the Romans had to retreat across the Danube. As a result of the attack and Roman defeat, the Quaden and Jazygen entered the war and formed a threatening Pannonian alliance against the Romans. After deliberations, the emperor changed his strategy: he began peace negotiations with Decebalus. The Dacian king submitted to Rome, Domitian himself traveled to the Dacian hinterland, where the brother of the king, Diegis, the Roman clientele prince was crowned. Decebalus received civil and military support as well as subsidy payments, and economic relations prospered in the period that followed. The not uncommon payments to the Dacians were one of the reasons for Trajan's campaign against the Dacians. Domitian received three Imperial acclamations and celebrated a triumph on his return in the autumn of 89.

In 92 Domitian was again on the eastern Danube front to put down the incursions of the Sarmatian Jazygens who had previously destroyed the Legio XXI Rapax near Brigetio . This Sarmatian war was subsequently glorified by the poet Arruntius Stella .

Britain

In Britain , with the help of the governor Gnaeus Iulius Agricola , the father-in-law of the historian Tacitus , Domitian succeeded in expanding the Roman sphere of influence to the border of the Scottish highlands. In 83 or 84 Agricola crossed the Firth of Clyde on the orders of the Emperor to finally pacify the Scottish territories. The resistance of the Caledons under their leader Calgacus was massive, so that Agricola had to lead seven campaigns. The last battle took place on mons Graupius , the Caledons fled and Rome had the way to the north. A Roman naval formation circumnavigated Scotland and accepted the submission of the Orkney Islands .

Shortly after the successes in Britain, Domitian had the troops relocated. Agricola's forced withdrawal and the associated abandonment of Scotland and the consolidation of the Roman sphere of influence are justified by Tacitus with the envy and bad nature of Domitian. In fact, due to the situation in Pannonia, the emperor had good reasons to shut down this front and relocate the legions; he had Agricola honored by the Senate with triumph insignia and a statue. Fort Inchtuthil, which had just been built, was razed by 86, and the troops withdrew near what would later become Hadrian's Wall . Agricola's successor as legate in Britain was Sallustius Lucullus, whom Domitian probably had executed in 96. The retreat secured the Scottish front and brought calm to the north; under Trajan the border line was laid still further south.

death

The murder of Domitian came from the inner circle at court and from personal motives. It is justified by the fact that the emperor became increasingly suspicious, feared conspiracies against himself and acted accordingly brutally. Among other things, it is stated that he had his cousin Titus Flavius ​​Sabinus , the husband of his niece Julia , the daughter of Titus, executed for just as marginal reasons as his cousin Clemens , the father of the designated heirs to the throne Vespasian and Domitian the Younger. The triggering moment for the conspirators is said to have been the murder of Epaphroditos , which made Domitian's closest collaborators fear for their lives. It is controversial who exactly belonged to the group and who was privy to it. It is certain that Stephanus , the procurator of Domitian's niece Domitilla, and Maximus, a freedman of Domitian's valet Parthenios, carried out the deed; Stephen faced embezzlement charges. The rest of the cast differs, lower-ranking soldiers, other freedmen and valets as well as gladiators are said to have been involved. Whether Domitian's wife Domitia Longina was the driving force, whether Nerva at least had knowledge and whether the Praetorian prefects approved the conspiracy cannot be said.

Domitian was finally "cunningly murdered" on September 18, 96 in his palace in Rome. The act was carried out by Stephen, who a few days earlier had already bandaged an arm and pretended to be injured in order to hide a dagger in the bandages. The emperor died under strong resistance, the perpetrators were killed on site by the guards. Domitian's full title at the time of his death was Imperator Caesar divi Vespasiani filius Domitianus Augustus Germanicus, Pontifex maximus, Tribuniciae potestatis XVI, Imperator XXIII, Consul XVII, Censor perpetuus, Pater patriae . The Senate approved the act, and Domitian's memory fell to the damnatio memoriae . The Flavian dynasty ended with him. His successor was the long-time Senator Nerva. As a transition candidate, he was on the one hand from the Flavian circle and so acceptable to the Praetorians and especially the Senate; on the other hand, as a childless, older man, no long reign was to be expected from him. However, his position was in jeopardy, as Domitian had been very popular with the army and people.

Domitian image

Ancient authors

The two most important surviving historians of the early Roman imperial era, Tacitus and Suetonius , wrote their works in memory of the tyranny of the emperor they portrayed (sometimes called the "Domitian experience" in research) as well as in the reign of the adoptive emperors , the Domitian as negative foil of their own Saw politics. Accordingly, the traditional image of Domitian is very negative. Suetonius in particular describes the emperor's government work positively for the most part, but accuses him of waste, misuse of state funds and perversion of the law and, overall, paints the picture of a cruel ruler with an extremely bad character.

With regard to the work of Tacitus, this can no longer be said with certainty, since the parts of his histories that dealt with the reign of Domitian have not survived. On the basis of descriptions of the young Domitian, allusions in earlier books as well as statements by the author, however, it can be concluded that Tacitus described Domitian as unfavorably as Suetonius. Pliny the Younger also described Domitian as a tyrant in his Panegyric of Nerva's famous successor Trajan .

The Christians were pushed back regionally, for example in Rome and Asia Minor. In this context, the Revelation of John (also: Apocalypse ) , which was originally addressed to seven churches in Asia Minor, was written . The Christian authors of the 2nd and 3rd centuries describe Domitian as a cruel persecutor of Christians. Tertullian , Eusebius of Caesarea and Laktanz name him in line with Nero . Tertullian calls him "half Nero", for Eusebius he is the second persecutor of Christians, Laktanz puts him right after Nero and before other famous persecutors such as Decius or Diocletian . Although there was no systematic persecution of Christians under Domitian, Christian historiography in particular had a lasting negative impact on the image of Domitian.

Later ancient historians like Jordanes also briefly discuss Domitian. Still Procopius of Caesarea describes him 550 as a tyrant, claiming that the Romans had so suffered from him that they had chopped up his body after his assassination in small pieces.

Juvenal's 4th satire , also known as the “fish satire ”, gives a parodic description of a consilium meeting under Domitian: The emperor is portrayed as a cruel tyrant who stole Rome's best spirits “with impunity and without a judge”.

Modern research

With the first modern biography of Domitian, Stéphane Gsell established the image of Domitian for many years at the end of the 19th century. According to the sources, he saw the emperor as a haughty man who wanted to impose an absolutist government and completely disempower the Senate. Alfred von Domaszewski judged similarly ; he spoke of contempt, presumptuousness and autocracy as the only elements of the reign. The portrayal of Domitian as pessimus princeps correlated in particular with the positive image of Trajan as optimus princeps . The critics of the negative image of Domitian started with Tacitus and Pliny and emphasized the achievements of the emperor without being able to revise the overall picture due to the bad qualities ascribed to Domitian.

In the 1960s, research began to revise the Domitian image. Rainald Goetz (1978) and Brian Jones (1979) approached the emperor prosopographically by examining his supporters and opponents. Their judgment is that Domitian as a person may have been difficult, his rule complex and much inexplicable. Overall, they view his reign as positive and the difficulties in disregarding the Senate. In the 1990s Christian Witschel and Pat Southern tried to interpret the emperor psychologically and saw him as a victim of his ambition, his childhood and youth, or his neglect behind Titus. The latest introduction to the time of the Flavians by Stefan Pfeiffer from 2009 rejects the psychologizing approaches. Pfeiffer, like Jones, categorizes Domitian as a capable ruler and administrator and sees the reasons for his failure in relation to the Senate and its clear exclusion from political participation.

Christiana Urner, who examines the sources and research literature up to 1989 in her dissertation, largely refrains from assessing the emperor. She notes that information that speaks for Domitian and his rule has been given far less consideration than that that speaks against him. She deduces from this that the image of Domitian is subject to a change from a tyrant to a prudent statesman. Based on the warfare on the Danube, Karl Strobel comes to a similar conclusion. He sees Domitian as the most successful general after Augustus, at the same time he interprets the defeats in the Dacian Wars as a trigger for the rift with the Senate and dwindling legitimacy. In his Trajan biography from 2010, Strobel expands on this point of view. A subchapter deals with the question of Domitian's achievements and the exercise of power. Strobel emphasizes that Domitian had a clear and systematic concept of his rule, in which autocratic and Hellenistic elements can be found; the devaluation of his rule as pessimus princeps results primarily from the staging and upgrading of Trajan as optimus princeps .

swell

literature

Secondary literature

Overview works

Representations

  • Jens Gering: Domitian, dominus et deus? Dominance and power structures in the Roman Empire at the time of the last Flavian. Marie Leidorf, Rahden 2012, ISBN 978-3-89646-736-2 (also dissertation, University of Osnabrück 2011; review ).
  • Rainald Goetz : Friends and enemies of the emperor Domitian. A prosopographical investigation. Dissertation, University of Munich 1978.
  • Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian. Routledge, London et al. 1992, ISBN 0-415-04229-1 .
  • Brian W. Jones: Domitian and the senatorial order. A prosopographical study of Domitian's relationship with the Senate, AD 81-96. American Philosophical Society, Philadelphia 1979, ISBN 0-87169-132-9 .
  • Jens Leberl: Domitian and the poets. Poetry as a medium for representing power. Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, Göttingen 2004, ISBN 3-525-25253-6 (also dissertation, University of Freiburg 2002; digitized version ).
  • Pat Southern : Domitian. Tragic tyrant. Routledge, London 1997, ISBN 0-415-16525-3 .
  • Karl Strobel : Domitian's Danube Wars. Habelt, Bonn 1989, ISBN 3-7749-2368-X .
  • Christiana Urner: Emperor Domitian in the judgment of ancient literary sources and modern research. Dissertation, University of Augsburg 1994.

Literary processing

Web links

Commons : Domitianus  - album with pictures, videos and audio files

Remarks

  1. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 1, 1.
  2. ^ Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, pp. 1-4.
  3. Suetonius, Domitian 1, 2–2, 1; Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 14 f.
  4. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 2, 3; see. Stefan Pfeiffer: The time of the Flavians . Darmstadt 2009, p. 54 f.
  5. ^ Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 20 f.
  6. ^ Sven Günther : Between gens Flavia and gens Iulia. Domitian's takeover and conception of the emperor . In: Hartwin Brandt , Katrin Köhler and Ulrike Siewert (eds.): Genealogical awareness as legitimation. Inter- and intra-generational disputes as well as the importance of kinship when changing office . Bamberg 2009, pp. 98-101.
  7. Suetonius, Domitian 13, 1. Statius, on the other hand, emphasizes in Silvae 1, 6, 84 that Domitian has forbidden the address dominus . Furthermore, there is no official document with this title.
  8. Juvenal describes a meeting of the council in the 4th book of his satires .
  9. ^ Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, pp. 28 and 178 f.
  10. For ab actis sentus see: Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 23 with sources and references.
  11. ^ Cassius Dio 67.4 .
  12. Pliny : Letters 1, 12 .
  13. ^ Brian W. Jones: Domitian and the senatorial order. A prosopographical study of Domitian's relationship with the Senate, AD 81-96 . Philadelphia 1979, pp. 83-87. See also Werner Eck: Senators from Vespasian to Hadrian . Munich 1970, pp. 55-75.
  14. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 6, 2.
  15. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 10, 2-4.
  16. Seneca , Apocolocyntosis 14, 1 .
  17. Juvenal 4,144-146 .
  18. Frontinus , Strategemata 1,1,8 .
  19. On the dating cf. Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian , p. 128 f.
  20. Frontinus, Strategemata 1,3,10 .
  21. So Reinhard Wolters: "Tam diu Germania vincitur": Roman Germanic Victories and Germanic Victory Propaganda up to the end of the 1st century AD Bochum 1989, p. 57.
  22. ^ Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian , p. 129.
  23. ^ Suetonius, Vitellius 8.
  24. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 6.1.
  25. On the question of the relocation of troops and their size, see Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian , pp. 130 f.
  26. ^ A b Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian , p. 131.
  27. ^ Tilmann Bechert: Germania inferior. A province on the northern border of the Roman Empire . Zabern, Mainz 2007, ISBN 978-3-8053-2400-7 .
  28. ^ A b Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian , p. 149.
  29. ^ Cassius Dio 67.5 .
  30. ^ Karl Strobel: Die Donaukriege Domitians , p. 42. The Dacian invasion is also dated to spring 85 or winter 85/85, current research tends to summer 85.
  31. ↑ The title and position of the diurpaneus are unclear. In Orosius , Historiae adversum paganos 7, 10 he is referred to as king, in Jordanes , Getica 13, 76 as the leader of the Goth. Cf. also Karl Strobel: Domitian's Danube Wars . Bonn 1989, p. 39 f.
  32. ^ Karl Strobel: Domitian's Danube Wars . Bonn 1989, p. 48 f.
  33. Jordanes, Getica , 13, 78.
  34. ^ Tacitus , Historiae 1, 2.
  35. ^ Karl Strobel: Domitian's Danube Wars . Bonn 1989, pp. 58-62.
  36. ^ According to Cassius Dio, 67.6, Decebalus was the leader of the Dacians and opponent of the Romans from the beginning. Jordanes and Orosius, on the other hand, name Diurpaneus first and then Decebalus. For an explanation see Karl Strobel: Domitian's Danube Wars . Bonn 1989, p. 64 f.
  37. Karl Christ: History of the Roman Empire. 3rd, through and exp. Ed., Munich 1995, p. 272.
  38. ^ Cassius Dio 67, 7.
  39. ^ Karl Strobel: Domitian's Danube Wars . Bonn 1989, pp. 88-91.
  40. Marcelo Tilman Schmitt: The Roman Foreign Policy of the 2nd Century AD Stuttgart 1997, p. 85.
  41. Tacitus, Agricola 28 f. Tacitus dramatizes both the resistance of the Scots and the situation of the Romans, cf. Stefan Pfeiffer: The time of the Flavians . Darmstadt 2009, p. 94 f.
  42. ^ The battle is described in detail in Tacitus, Agricola 36-38. Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 132 f. expresses doubts about the success of the conquests, especially about the possibility of taking all of Scotland and Ireland.
  43. ^ Tacitus, Agricola , 39.
  44. Stefan Pfeiffer: The time of the Flavians . Darmstadt 2009, p. 96; even clearer: Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 133.
  45. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 10, 3. How long Lucullus was governor is unclear, Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 135, assumed between 86 and 95.
  46. Suetonius, Domitian , 14, 1-3.
  47. ^ Cassius Dio, 67, 14.
  48. ^ Suetonius, Domitian , 15, 1.
  49. ^ Hermann Bengtson, The Flavians. Vespasian, Titus, Domitian. History of a Roman Imperial House . Munich 1979, p. 244; Karl Strobel: Emperor Traian. An epoch in world history . Regensburg 2010, p. 128.
  50. Suetonius, Domitian , 17, 2; Cassius Dio, 17th
  51. For the people and differences in the sources see Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 193 f.
  52. ^ Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 194.
  53. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 17, 1.
  54. ^ Suetonius, Domitian 17, 1-2.
  55. Prokopios, Historia Arcana 8.13 f.
  56. ^ Brian W. Jones: The Emperor Domitian . London 1992, p. 194 f.
  57. Stefan Pfeiffer: The time of the Flavians . Darmstadt 2009, p. 78 f.
  58. ^ Suetonius, Domitian , 8-10.
  59. ^ Suetonius, Domitian , 12, 1-2.
  60. ^ Suetonius, Domitian , 14 and 22.
  61. See Ralf Urban: Historical studies on the Domitian image of Tacitus . Munich 1971.
  62. ^ Tertullian, Apologetic 5.
  63. Eusebius, Church History 3, 17.
  64. Lactant, On the Ways of Death of Persecutors 4.
  65. Procopius, Historia Arcana 8.13 to 20.
  66. Juvenal 4,151 f. : claras quibus abstulit urbi illustresque animas impune et vindice nullo.
  67. Stéphane Gsell: Essai sur le règne de l'empereur Domitien . Paris 1894, pp. 37-41 ( online ).
  68. ^ Alfred von Domaszewski: History of the Roman Emperors . Volume 2, Leipzig 1909, pp. 158-167 ( online ).
  69. Martin Fell: Optimus Princeps? Claim and reality of the imperial program of Emperor Traian . 2nd edition, Munich 2001, pp. 4-8.
  70. So inter alia Julius Asbach: Roman Empire and Constitution up to Traian. A historical introduction to the writings of P. Cornelius Tacitus . Cologne 1896, p. 86 ff. And Hermann Schiller : History of the Roman Empire, Volume 1, Part 2. From the reign of Vespasian to the rising of Diocletian . Gotha 1883, p. 532 ff. ( Online ).
  71. KH Waters: The character of Domitian , Phoenix 18, 1964, pp. 49-77
  72. ^ Rainald Goetz: Friends and enemies of the emperor Domitian . Munich 1978, p. 143 f .; Brian W. Jones: Domitian . London 1992, pp. 196-198, cf. also Brian W. Jones: Domitian and the senatorial order . Philadelphia 1979, pp. 83-87.
  73. ^ Christian Witschel: Domitian . In: Manfred Clauss (Ed.): The Roman Emperors . Munich 1997, p. 99 f .; Pat Southern: Domitian . London 1997, pp. 119-125.
  74. Stefan Pfeiffer: The time of the Flavians . Darmstadt 2009, p. 79 f.
  75. ^ Christiana Urner: Emperor Domitian in the judgment of ancient literary sources . Dissertation Augsburg 1994, pp. 319-321.
  76. ^ Karl Strobel: Domitian's Danube Wars . Bonn 1989, p. 111 and p. 114 f.
  77. ^ Karl Strobel: Emperor Traian. An epoch in world history . Regensburg 2010, pp. 72-101.
  78. ^ Karl Strobel: Emperor Traian. An epoch in world history . Regensburg 2010, p. 73
  79. ^ Karl Strobel: Emperor Traian. An epoch in world history . Regensburg 2010, p. 128 f.
  80. ^ Karl Strobel: Emperor Traian. An epoch in world history . Regensburg 2010, p. 135
  81. ^ Werner Eck : Hermann Bengtson: The Flavier. Vespasian. Titus. Domitian. In: Gnomon . Volume 53, 1981, pp. 343-347.
predecessor Office successor
Titus Roman emperor
81–96
Nerva