The Civil War

Vespasian was proclaimed emperor largely because of the friendship he had developed with the Jewish king, Julius Agrippa II. The king’s father, Agrippa I, had been sent to Rome to be educated and was a close friend of Antonia (occasionally receiving a loan of money from her). Agrippa II, like his father, was sent to Rome for his education in the court of Claudius where he may have met Vespasian (Josephus, Jewish Antiquities 18).

Following the fall of Nero and the subsequent civil war, Agrippa II and his brother-in-law Tiberius Alexander, the prefect of Egypt, were critical in supporting Vespasian’s decision to rebel against Vitellius. Alexander was the first military commander to declare allegiance to Vespasian on July 1, 69 and later served as Titus's deputy at the siege of Jerusalem (J.A. 20). Vespasian was saluted emperor by his own troops on July 3 and the governor of Syria, C. Licinius Mucianus, declared his allegiance and began a march on Rome through Asia Minor with 20,000 troops to challenge Vitellius. Vespasian remained in Alexandria intending to cut Rome off from the vial Egyptian grain supply and force his acceptance as emperor, doubting that Mucianus would achieve much by marching on Rome.

Much to the dissatisfaction of Mucianus, the legions of the Danube declared in favor of Vespasian and stole the march on the governor led by Antonius Primus. Disregarding Mucianus's instructions to wait, the army marched into Italy and defeated the forces of Vitellius at Cremona, ironically near the place where Otho had been defeated in the spring. In the most violent action of the civil war, the Danubian troops overwhelmed the Vitellians and charged their camp where a massacre took place; Cremona was sacked and destroyed. News of the defeat stirred Vitellius into action but he discovered that the only troops at his disposal were his praetorians, and frequent desertions lowered their number considerably. [1]

Vitellius found a way out of his dilemma when Mucianus, still on his way to the war zone, offered the emperor safety in return for his abdication. Sabinus was still the prefect of Rome, as Vitellius had not thought of removing him, and negotiations were carried out with his mediation. It is assumed that Domitian was living with his uncle who had a house on the Caelian Hill. He was briefly placed under arrest by Vitellius and released so as not to provoke the Flavians (Hist. 3.59). Vitellius abdicated on December 18 without a formal announcement that would provoke hostilities. Because of the precarious situation, Sabinus gathered the members of his family, including Domitian, on the Capitoline hill to ensure their safety. On December 19, the praetorians got wind of the abdication and besieged the Capitol, lynched Sabinus and set fire to the temple of Jupiter Capitolinus. A few days later the Danubian troops stormed the praetorian camp and captured Vitellius, who was tortured and murdered. For several days the Danubian troops unleashed a reign of terror in Rome uncontrolled by Primus (Hist. 3.83.)

There are conflicting stories by Tacitus and Suetonius of how Domitian escaped the Vitellians. Tacitus has him disguised as a devotee of Isis leaving the Capital to spend the night with a client of Vespasian (Hist. 3.70-2). Suetonius has him taken in by a temple attendant who concealed him for the night and made good his escape the next day in a procession of Isis worshipers. Domitian remained a devotee of Isis and rebuilt the temple of Isis in the Campus Martius (which burnt down in 80). He embellished it with an obelisk that depicted him crowned by Isis. Also, relief fragments from the Domus Flavia indicate that an Egyptian chapel existed for the emperor’s devotions, which infuriated Pliny the Younger (Panegyricus 49,8). Regardless how his escape was accomplished, Domitian presented himself to the Flavian forces, which saluted him as Caesar (Hist. 4.86).

The last days of December saw Primus and the praetorian prefect Arrus Varrus in nominal of Rome, but Mucianus arrived at last and acted promptly to assume full control as Vespasian's representative dismissing both Varrus and Primus. Domitian moved into the imperial palace (Hist. 4.2), was appointed praetor by the Senate (in spite of his youth (Hist. 4.3)) and represented his family in urging restraint toward the defeated supporters of Vitellius. He further suggested that awkward matters be referred to Vespasian (Hist. 4.40). Power, however, lay in the hands of Mucianus with Domitian acting as a figurehead. Among the governor's first acts was to execute Calpurius Galerianus because he could have become a possible candidate for emperor (Hist. 4.11).

According to ancient sources, Domitian occupied himself by seducing women (Dom. 1.3; Hist. 4.2; Dio 65.3.4). However, there is no agreement on where he carried on his affairs (Dio says Alba, Tacitus the Palatine Hill and Suetonius mentions no specific place). On the other hand, Domitian is charged with making so many appointments (Dio includes Mucianus in making appointments 66.2) that Vespasian commented he was surprised his son had not named his successor (Dom. 1). Stories of a power-hungry Domitian seducing women were meant to blacken his reputation and prove that he had never had any scruples.

Domitia is described as a victim of the lecherous Domitian, but she emerged as more than a casual conquest when she divorced her husband, L. Aelius Lamia, to become Domitian’s wife in 70. Such wife-stealing was nothing new in Roman history, particularly for political reasons, and there probably was a gentleman’s agreement between Lamia and Domitian. [2]  Because Domitia was the daughter of the famous general Cn. Domitius Corbulo, whom Nero forced to commit suicide, the marriage was probably arranged by Vespasian to gain the support of the anti-Nero faction. Love and passion can be ruled out as the force behind the marriage, replaced by filial obedience. [3]

Meanwhile, in Alexandria Vespasian heard ugly rumors about Domitian's conduct prompting him to embark for Rome where he arrived in the summer of 70. Titus placated his father by suggesting that not too much faith should be placed in rumors, which pleased Vespasian, underscoring the loyalty of his elder son and arrogance of the younger (Hist. 4.51-52.) Tacitus does not tell us precisely what Domitian's misconduct was but from what he does relate, noted above, there was nothing Domitian, the figurehead, had done that should alarm his father. Mucianus, on the other hand, was acting the role of emperor and claimed he had bestowed power on Vespasian (Dio 65.2). With Rome in the tenuous hands of the Flavians and a revolt in Germany Vespasian's presence was necessary and it is unlikely he returned because of rumors.

A revolt broke out in Germany led by Julius Civilis, who had rendered service for Vitellius against Otho in 69. He had initially declared his loyalty to Vespasian but when news of Vitellius’ death arrived Civilis rebelled. Two Gallic chiefs, Julius Classicus and Julius Tutor joined him. With this alliance the Roman defenses on the Rhine from Basel to Strassbourg were abandoned, posing the threat of invasion. Seven legions marched from Rome led by Q. Petilius Cerialis, possibly a son-in-law of Vespasian, [4] in the summer of 70 followed later by Mucianus and Domitian leading additional troops. At the approach of Cerialis many of the Roman troops deserted Civilis and the rebellion collapsed.

Mucianus and Domitian had gone as far as Lyons when they were informed the revolt had been crushed. Tacitus asserts that Domitian asked for a command in Gaul from Mucianus and when the latter refused (on the grounds that Domitian was too young and lacked experience) Domitian turned to Cerialis, asking him to hand over his troops only to be rebuffed again (Hist. 4.86.) That Domitian may have approached Cerialis is not surprising given their family connection. It would only be natural for Domitian in a society where military glory was eagerly anticipated by youths to gain experience of command, so requesting a command would be nothing unusual. Dio, who does not mention Domitian in connection with the rebellion, has the Caesar seducing Domitia at Alba (Dio 65.2).

The story presented by Tacitus is another attempt to support accusations that Domitian was a schemer thereby setting the scene for his future conduct. Instead of Domitian plotting, sulking and feigning madness on the arrival of his father, the evidence of the Cancelleria frieze of Domitian welcoming his father (if that is what the scene is meant to represent) may be correct in representing what happened instead of Vespasian publicly upbraiding his son. [5]

Domitian as Caesar

Unlike Domitian, Titus had enjoyed a long, trusting association with his Vespasian. When Domitian was a child his father had been absent in Africa followed by the Judean war; Titus had married and joined Vespasian in Judea remaining away until 71. Father and brother were both strangers to Domitian and there probably was little affection between them; however, their true feelings for each other remain unknown. Domitian displayed scant concern for Titus during his last illness and was more interested in the necessity of securing his own succession. As it was, the Senate voted to honor the dead emperor before proclaiming the new one (Titus 11), which could not have been reassuring to Domitian. During Titus’ short reign there might have been some tension between the brothers simply because care had to be taken over their choice of associates. If Domitian was friendly with someone Titus disapproved of, such as Bassus, a distance between them would be understandable (Pliny, Ep. 4.9).

Many historians have sought to explain Domitian's suspicious attitude because Vespasian forced him into the background, keeping him from holding power. [6]  Titus was heir apparent and virtual co-emperor but this does not mean that Domitian was not intended for the throne after Titus or perhaps as colleague. Domitian held the consulship seven times (71, 73, 75, 76, 77 and 79) during his father's reign. Each was a suffect consulship with Domitian following his father and brother into office except for 73, when he held an ordinary consulship (because Vespasian and Titus had assumed the censorship.) As coins attest, Vespasian had two more consulships than Titus and Titus had one more than Domitian. Thus the number of consulships indicated the order of succession. At a time when the highest honor of a senatorial career was to have a single consulship Vespasian instituted a system that practically excluded ordinary consulships outside the imperial family.

Vespasian honored Domitian with the titles caesar and princips iuventutis, priesthoods and the authority to issue coins in his name. Stories that Domitian spent his days sulking and impaling flies are exaggerations. He may have been dissatisfied but there was little Vespasian could do short of upsetting the succession of Titus. When Titus became emperor nothing changed for Domitian as his brother needed to keep his options open expecting to have a long reign and perhaps heirs of his own. As for Domitian hatching plots against his brother, the execution of A. Caecina by Titus (during Vespasian’s last illness) for attempting to seduce the household guards was warning enough. The accusation appears to have been passed to Domitian (Dom. 2). [7]

Vespasian had no wish to restore the supremacy of the Senate and declared that either his son or sons would succeed him (Vesp. 25.) The notion that Titus and Domitian were joint heirs was nothing new, and had been the practice since Augustus adopted Gaius and Lucius Caesar. It was Titus alone who succeeded his father; Domitian’s place in the succession remained secure, if tenuous. Domitian was ordinary consul with Titus in 80 but enjoyed no additional power. He is said to have accused Titus of altering Vespasian’s will to cut him out of his share of the empire. Given Vespasian’s comments before the Senate, his intentions may have been for the brothers to share the empire with Titus as the senior emperor. Titus was noted for his skill as a forger, so it is possible he could have altered his father’s will (Titus 3.2; Dom. 2.3.) Titus had such a short reign that it is impossible to speculate on what plans he might have entertained to raise his brother in rank. Titus was young and could anticipate a reign of perhaps twenty years, during which the succession could undergo significant alteration.

Suetonius alleges (Titus 9.3; Dom. 2.3) that Domitian openly plotted against Titus. Feuding between the brothers is further substantiated by the claim Titus seduced Domitia (Titus 9.2; Dio 66.26.4) and he awarded a consulship to Aelius Lamia, Domitia’s first husband, as a dig to Domitian. There is no evidence that Lamia was not persuaded to provide an amicable divorce and the awarding of a suffect consulship ten years after the alleged seduction does not indicate spite on Titus’ part. Even Suetonius gives no credence to stories of Titus’ seduction of Domitia since the empress would have boasted about it (Titus 10.)

Titus became ill on a journey from Rome to the Sabine country and died on September 13, 81. Domitian was with him, leading to various stories that he had murdered his brother. We are

informed that Titus had been poisoned without naming the agent (Aurelius Victor, De Caesaribus, 10.1), that Domitian put a deadly fish (known as a "sea-hare") in his food (Vita Apol. 6.32), or was put in a vessel packed with snow by order of Domitian to hasten his death (Dio 66.26.2-3). Suetonius tells us that Domitian merely ordered Titus be left for dead when he had not breathed his last (Dom. 2.3) hastening to Rome to secure his succession. The fact these stories do not agree provides an indication of the gossip current at the time. Titus died of natural causes, possibly a brain tumor. [8]  Domitian promptly had Titus deified and delivered the funeral oration himself (Dio 67.2.6) renaming the Flavian cult temple to templum Vespasiani et Titi.

(C) David A. Wend 2000.

Footnotes