Home | Category: Famous Emperors in the Roman Empire / Government and Justice
ROMAN EMPEROR
Roman Emperor Antoninus Pius
Andrew Wallace-Hadrill of the University of Reading wrote for the BBC: “ One image of the imperial system is of strong, effective central control. The figure of the emperor himself, as defined by Julius Caesar and Augustus, stands for good order in contrast to the chaos of pluralism - squabbling city-states or competing aristocrats. [Source: Professor Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, BBC, February 17, 2011 |::|]
“Look at the figures of the Caesars themselves and what fascinates us now is their arbitrary nature. We see not an efficient system of fair and sober government, but a gamble at work. From Augustus's ruthless intelligence, to Caligula's scary insanity, or Nero's misplaced parade of rockstar popularity, we seem to be dealing with a system which throws the individual and his personal foibles into excessive prominence. |::|
“The 'mad' and 'bad' Caesars seem more interesting than the good, sober ones - certainly, from Quo Vadis to I Claudius to Gladiator, they are the ones who have fired the popular imagination. It is as if we do not want to learn the secret of Roman success, but scare ourselves by looking deep into the irrationality of an apparently successful system. In that sense, the Caesars now serve us not as a model of how people ought to rule but a mythology through which we reflect on the terrifying power of the systems in which we may happen to find ourselves entrapped.” |::|
RELATED ARTICLES:
CREATION OF THE ROMAN EMPEROR BY CAESAR AND AUGUSTUS europe.factsanddetails.com ;
AUGUSTUS AS EMPEROR OF ROME: GOVERNING STYLE, WORSHIP, ADMINISTRATION europe.factsanddetails.com ;
AUGUSTUS'S POLICIES AND REFORMS europe.factsanddetails.com ;
WEALTH AND EXTRAVAGANCE OF ROMAN EMPERORS factsanddetails.com ;
ROMAN EMPEROR WORSHIP europe.factsanddetails.com ;
CRUELTY OF ROMAN EMPERORS factsanddetails.com
Websites on Ancient Rome: Internet Ancient History Sourcebook: Rome sourcebooks.fordham.edu ; Internet Ancient History Sourcebook: Late Antiquity sourcebooks.fordham.edu ; BBC Ancient Rome bbc.co.uk/history; Perseus Project - Tufts University; perseus.tufts.edu ; Lacus Curtius penelope.uchicago.edu; The Internet Classics Archive classics.mit.edu ; Bryn Mawr Classical Review bmcr.brynmawr.edu; Cambridge Classics External Gateway to Humanities Resources web.archive.org; Ancient Rome resources for students from the Courtenay Middle School Library web.archive.org ; History of ancient Rome OpenCourseWare from the University of Notre Dame web.archive.org ; United Nations of Roma Victrix (UNRV) History unrv.com
Leadership and Governing by Roman Emperors
Up to the time of Claudius, the imperial "cabinet" was composed almost exclusively of slaves. They received the petitions of the empire, issued instructions both to provincial governors and to the magistrates of Rome, and elaborated jurisprudence of all the tribunals including the highest senatorial court. The emperors from Claudius to Trajan inclusive recruited their cabinet from their freedmen. [Source: “Daily Life in Ancient Rome: the People and the City at the Height the Empire” by Jerome Carcopino, Director of the Ecole Franchise De Rome Member of the Institute of France, Routledge 1936]
Andrew Wallace-Hadrill of the University of Reading wrote for the BBC: “ “Historians have underlined the benefits of provincial government restrained by imperial control and the development of a sophisticated and complex law code which still underlies continental legal systems. They have pointed to the benefits of the central bureaucracy built up by the early emperors, especially Claudius, which provided a structure for long-term continuity amid changing dynasties. That bureaucratic mentality, you could say, transmitted from late antiquity through the papacy to modern nation states, is what makes contemporary Brussels possible. [Source: Professor Andrew Wallace-Hadrill, BBC, February 17, 2011]
Pomp and Ceremony of the Roman Emperors
Even if the emperor had simple tastes, like Trajan, and hated ceremony and ostentation, he could not fulfil his sacred function in the eyes of his subjects without the pampered splendour which surrounded his existence in the capital. His official activity was hedged in a semimythological pageantry in which the "King of Kings" would have felt at home. To make a straightforward although a halting comparison, the court of the Valois might have envied the delights, and the court of Versailles the pompous magnificence and the solemn ritual of the court of Imperial Rome. The Roman Caesar might have anticipated the Roi Soleil by taking for his motto the nee pluribus impar of Louis XIV. [Source: “Daily Life in Ancient Rome: the People and the City at the Height the Empire” by Jerome Carcopino, Director of the Ecole Franchise De Rome Member of the Institute of France, Routledge 1936]
The mansions of the Roman magnates no doubt did their best to ape the emperor's palace. But they were left far behind, and vast as they were, and complex as was their organisation we can read it between the lines of the epitaphs of their freedmen and their slaves they gave but a feeble, small reflection. Caesar overwhelmed even the mightiest of his subjects, and the feeling of his unchallengeable superiority, of which all were conscious, helped to reconcile the humbler of them to the great discrepancy between their own straitened and inferior state and the luxury of the dominant classes.
The ceremonial of his receptions was regulated by several kinds of ushers : the velarii who raised the curtains to let the visitor enter, the ab admissione who admitted him to the presence, the nomenclatores who called out the name. A heterogeneous troop were employed to cook his food, lay his table, and serve the dishes, ranging from the stokers of his furnaces (fornacarii) and the simple cooks' (cod) to his bakers (pistores), his pastry-cooks (libarii) and his sweetmeatmakers (dttlciarii), and including, apart from the majordomos responsible for ordering his meab (structores), the dining-room attendants (triclinarii), the waiters (ministratores) who carried in the dishes, the servants charged with removing them again (analectae), the cupbearers who offered him drink and who differed in importance according to whether they held the flagon (the a lagona) or presented the cup (the a cyatho), and finally the tasters (praegustatores), whose duty it was to test on themselves the perfect harmlessness of his food and drink and who were assuredly expected to perform their task more efficiently than the tasters of Claudius and Britannicus. Finally, for his recreation, the emperor had an embarrassing variety of choice between the songs of his choristers (symphoniaci), the music of his orchestra, the pirouettes of his dancing women (saltatrices), the jests of his dwarfs (nani), of his "chatterboxes" (fatui), and of his buffoons (moriones).
Emperor Worship and Miracles in Ancient Rome
Augustus
Emperor worship was a key part of Rome state religion. Generally referred to as the imperial cult, it regarded emperors and members of their families as gods. Starting with Caesar and Augustus emperors that considered themselves gods ruled the Roman Empire. The Roman emperors seemed to believe in their divinity and they demanded that their subjects worship them. Marcellus was honored with a festival. Flaminius was made a priest for three hundred years. Ephesus had a shrine for Serilius Isauricus. Antony and Cleopatra referred to themselves as Dionysus and Osiris and named their children Sun and Moon. Caligula and Nero demanded to be worshiped like gods in their lifetime. And Vespasian said on his deathbed "Oh dear, I'm afraid I'm becoming a God."
Dr Nigel Pollard of Swansea University wrote for the BBC: “On his death, Julius Caesar was officially recognised as a god, the Divine ('Divus') Julius, by the Roman state. And in 29 B.C. Caesar's adopted son, the first Roman emperor Augustus, allowed the culturally Greek cities of Asia Minor to set up temples to him. This was really the first manifestation of Roman emperor-worship. [Source: Dr Nigel Pollard of Swansea University, BBC, March 29, 2011 |::|]
“While worship of a living emperor was culturally acceptable in some parts of the empire, in Rome itself and in Italy it was not. There an emperor was usually declared a 'divus' only on his death, and was subsequently worshipped (especially on anniversaries, like that of his accession) with sacrifice like any other gods. |::|
A handful or Roman Emperors were said to have performed miracles and magic. Candida Moss and Joel Baden wrote in Daily Beast: Jesus's miracles (if you believe he performed any) weren’t that unusual. Emperors could do those too, and there were plenty of travelling doctors, minor deities, and semi-official magicians touting miracle cures. A number of Roman historians tell us that the Emperor Vespasian could cure blindness, restore a “withered hand,” and even assisted in a case involving a damaged leg (all things Jesus is supposed to have done). The Emperor Augustus were said to have healed “pestilences.” [Source: Candida Moss, Daily Beast, November 1, 2020; Candida Moss, Joel Baden, Daily Beast, October 5, 2014]
See Separate Article: ROMAN EMPEROR WORSHIP europe.factsanddetails.com
Emperor Succession in the Roman Empire
J. A. S. Evans wrote: Succession was to present the gravest problem for the well-being of the empire. How could one emperor succeed another peacefully? Augustus was in theory a magistrate and hence could not have a successor in a formal, dynastic sense. Nonetheless, it is clear that he wanted to transfer his charisma to a successor chosen by himself, and it was equally clear that he wanted an heir who would carry the genes of the Julian family. Though the principate was not a hereditary monarchy, still there was a certain ambivalence about it from the beginning. Augustus, like any Roman noble, took pride in his family and wanted to secure the position he had won for his descendants. [Source: J. A. S. Evans, New Catholic Encyclopedia, Encyclopedia.com]
“The Romans were descended from Aeneas of Troy, and Aeneas was the ancestor of the Julio-Claudians [the first five Roman emperors: Augustus, to Nero]. So history would come to an end when this dynasty ruled Rome and ruled the world, because Jupiter said so,” John Drinkwater, an emeritus professor of Roman history at the University of Nottingham, told Smithsonian magazine. “That works very well while the dynasty is going, but what happens when it stops? How do you transfer all that credit from one dynasty to a totally different family? “The amazing thing is, the Flavians managed to pull this off, but one way to do this was to destroy the memory of what came before. So they said that the Julio-Claudians were worth displacing because they had become corrupt. And the more you can denigrate them, the better. The anti-Neronian tradition came into play very quickly. When Tacitus and Suetonius came along later, they were working within a tradition of historiography that had already been well established.” [Source: Joshua Levine; Smithsonian magazine, October 2020]
Tom Metcalfe wrote in Live Science: There was no established procedure for transferring power when a Roman emperor died, regardless of his cause of death, in spite of various attempts to establish the rules of succession. In total, there were about 77 emperors who led the Western Roman Empire, from Augustus in the first century B.C. to Romulus Augustus in the fifth century A.D. The Eastern Roman (or Byzantine) Empire had about 94 emperors between Constantine the Great in the fourth century and Constantine XI Palaeologus, who lost Constantinople to the Ottoman Empire in 1453. And almost every time an emperor died, the entire empire was thrown into chaos by the issue of who would assume power. Here's a list of some of the ways Roman emperors secured the coveted throne for themselves. [Source Tom Metcalfe, Live Science, August 15, 2022]
Ways Emperors Gained the Throne in Ancient Rome
1) Inheritance: Tom Metcalfe wrote in Live Science: Inheriting a throne may seem straightforward in the modern world, where established royal families traditionally (and usually peacefully) pass on their titles to the next generation, but it wasn't so easy in the Roman Empire. "One of the weaknesses of the Roman imperial political system was that there were never any clear rules or principles for succession," Richard Saller, a professor of classics and history at Stanford University in California, told Live Science. "That weakness goes back to the claim of the first emperor Augustus that he was restoring the [Roman] Republic in which public offices could not be inherited." [Source Tom Metcalfe, Live Science, August 15, 2022]
2) Praetorian Guard: Claudius aka Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus was Roman emperor from A.D. 41 to 54. Because he was afflicted with a limp and slight deafness due to sickness at a young age, he was initially excluded from public office. In A.D. 41, Caligula was assassinated in a conspiracy involving the Praetorian commander Cassius Chaerea and several senators. Following the murder, Claudius witnessed the guards execute several noblemen, including his friends and fled to the palace to hide, where a Praetorian named Gratus found him behind a curtain and declared him imperator. (Image credit: De Luan via Alamy Stock Photo)
3) Buying It: After the emperor Commodus' assassination in A.D. 192 (instigated by the leader of the Praetorian Guard), the Roman Empire entered a period known as the "Year of the Five Emperors." Pertinax, who was a senior senator of Rome, was installed first; but the Praetorian Guard quickly became disappointed in him because he refused to pay them for their continued support. The Praetorians soon killed Pertinax, just three months after they proclaimed him emperor.
4) Working Up Through the Ranks: Several Roman emperors were born into very humble beginnings but worked their way up through the ranks of the Roman army to become officers and then commanders. Pertinax, for example, was the son of a freed slave, although he only lasted for a few months as emperor. Perhaps the most famous examples are Diocletian, who was born into a low-status family in Dalmatia before rising to become emperor in A.D. 284; and his co-emperor Maximian, the son of a Pannonian shopkeeper, who ruled until A.D. 305. Diocletian and Maximian had met during their ascents through the Roman army and were a powerful combination; the British classicist Timothy Barnes suggested in his 1982 book, "The new empire of Diocletian and Constantine," that Diocletian had the political brains while Maximian had the military brawn. Maximian first supported Diocletian to the imperial throne and then was appointed co-ruler a few years later. According to Britannica, Diocletian also introduced the office of "Caesar"— a junior emperor for each of the two senior emperors, who were titled "Augustus"— and the Roman Empire was ruled for a time by a "tetrarchy," or four rulers. Diocletian was emperor for around 20 years after assuming the throne, and then retired to his palace at Aspalathos (modern Split) in Dalmatia, dying in about 316. Maximian abdicated the throne at the same time that Diocletian retired, in 305; but according to Britannica he claimed the title of Augustus again in 307 to help his son Maxentius to become emperor. After abdicating again in 308 Maximian lived at the court of the emperor Constantine; but he killed himself in 310 after a revolt he’d led against Constantine failed.
5) Marriage or Motherhood: Tradition decreed that the Roman emperor had to be a man, but several women wielded power behind the imperial throne even if they did not rule directly. "According to Tacitus's account, it was Livia, wife of Augustus and mother of Tiberius, who was thought by many to have determined the first transition of imperial power, by removing [murdering] all potential heirs who were close of Augustus, thereby paving the way for her own son," MIT historian William Broadhead told Live Science. Tiberius was Livia's son from her previous marriage, so he was not the obvious heir to the throne. But he became Rome's second emperor upon Augustus' death in A.D. 14, thanks to Livia's actions and marriage to Augustus.
Reforms of Diocletian
Diocletian
Dr Jon Coulston of the University of St. Andrews wrote for the BBC: “The denigration of the imperial office through a vicious cycle of usurpations and assassinations was halted long enough by Diocletian (ruled 284 - 305 AD) and his co-emperors for stable rule to be re-established. He established a 'college' of four emperors - two senior men with the title 'Augustus' who appointed two junior 'Caesars' - called the Tetrarchy. This ensured stability of succession and meant that four men could handle simultaneous crises on widely-spread frontiers. [Source: Dr Jon Coulston, BBC, February 17, 2011 |::|]
“Military and civil (judicial and financial) administrations were entirely separated for enhanced security against rivals. Currency reforms, regularisation of army supply, enlargement of the army, and successful operations against usurpers and foreign enemies contributed to internal stability. New legions were raised and new, imposing designs in fortifications were applied across the empire. A programme of regime propaganda and harnessed traditional cults enhanced loyalty to the state.” |::|
The general result of the new policy of Diocletian was to give to the empire a strong and efficient government. The dangers which threatened the state were met with firmness and vigor. A revolt in Egypt was quelled, and the frontiers were successfully defended against the Persians and the barbarians. Public works were constructed, among which were the great Baths of Diocletian at Rome. At the close of his reign he celebrated a triumph in the old capital. [Source: “Outlines of Roman History” by William C. Morey, Ph.D., D.C.L. New York, American Book Company (1901) \~]
“Diocletian attempted to use the state religion as a unifying element. Encouraged by the Caesar Galerius, Diocletian in 303 issued a series of four increasingly harsh decrees designed to compel Christians to take part in the imperial cult, the traditional means by which allegiance was pledged to the empire. This began the so-called "Great Persecution." ^|^
Diocletian’s Oriental-Style Monarchy
Abandoning the tradition of a citizen king, Diocletian elevated himself above the masses by initiating imperial ceremonies and requiring his subjects to prostrate themselves in his presence.
Diocletian made himself an Oriental, or at least Persian-style, monarch. He assumed the diadem of the East. He wore the gorgeous robes of silk and gold such a were worn by eastern rulers. He compelled his subjects to salute him with low prostrations, and to treat him not as a citizen, but as a superior being. In this way he hoped to make the imperial office respected by the people and the army. The emperor was to be the sole source of power, and as such was to be venerated and obeyed. [Source: “Outlines of Roman History” by William C. Morey, Ph.D., D.C.L. New York, American Book Company (1901) \~]
Ralph W. Mathisen of the University of South Carolina wrote: ““Following the precedent of Aurelian (A.D.270-275), Diocletian transformed the emperorship into an out-and-out oriental monarchy. Access to him became restricted; he now was addressed not as First Citizen (Princeps) or the soldierly general (Imperator), but as Lord and Master (Dominus Noster) . Those in audience were required to prostrate themselves on the ground before him. [Source: Ralph W. Mathisen, University of South Carolina ^|^]
Some of their ideas of reform no doubt came from the new Persian monarchy, which was now the greatest rival of Rome. In this powerful monarchy the Romans saw certain elements of strength which they could use in giving new vigor to their own government. \~\
Constantine's “Oriental-Style” Monarchy
Constantine
Constantine believed with Diocletian that one of the defects of the old empire was the fact that the person of the emperor was not sufficiently respected. He therefore not only adopted the diadem and the elaborate robes of the Asiatic monarchs, as Diocletian had done, but reorganized the court on a thoroughly eastern model. An Oriental court consisted of a large retinue of officials, who surrounded the monarch, who paid obeisance to him and served him, and who were raised to the rank of nobles by this service. All the powers of the monarch were exercised through these court officials. [Source: “Outlines of Roman History” by William C. Morey, Ph.D., D.C.L. New York, American Book Company (1901) \~]
These Oriental features were now adopted by the Roman emperor. The chief officers of the court comprised the grand chamberlain, who had charge of the imperial palace; the chancellor, who had the supervision of the court officials and received foreign ambassadors; the quaestor, who drew up and issued the imperial edicts; the treasurer-general, who had control of the public revenues; the master of the privy purse, who managed the emperor’s private estate; and the two commanders of the bodyguard. The imperial court of Constantine furnished the model of the royal courts of modern times. \~\
Deaths of Roman Emperors
Mary Beard wrote in The New Yorker: Before becoming gods, emperors famously died in all kinds of different, often unsavory, circumstances. Caligula was killed in an alleyway in the palace complex by some of his closest advisers, in 41 A.D.; Domitian was stabbed in his cubiculum, or “private room,” in 96 A.D.; Caracalla was knifed while relieving himself on a military campaign in the East, in 217 A.D. These violent ends are partly explained by the fact that death was the only recognized way for an emperor to leave the throne. Apart from one bungled abdication attempt in the civil war of 69 A.D., no Roman ruler ever gave up his title willingly until the sick and elderly Diocletian, in 305 A.D. Many emperors died of illness in or near their beds, of course, but in general, if you wanted a change of regime, you had to kill for it. [Source: Mary Beard, The New Yorker, July 3, 2023]
Sometimes the stories of an emperor’s behavior appear to have provided ample motivation for getting rid of him. Elagabalus was a teen-ager from Syria when he was made emperor of Rome, in 218 A.D., after having been engineered into power, so it was said, by his mother and his grandmother. He soon became known as an extravagant (and occasionally sadistic) host. His dinners often featured delicacies that were exotic even by upmarket Roman standards, such as camels’ heels and flamingos’ brains. His party tricks included planting whoopee cushions (the first ever recorded in Western culture) on dining couches; serving fake food made of wax or glass to the least important banqueters, who would be forced to spend the evening watching more illustrious guests enjoy their meals; and releasing tame lions, leopards, and bears among his guests as they slept off the excesses of the feast. The latter was such a surprise for some revellers that when they awoke they died of fright. He also once reputedly showered his dinner companions with flower petals in such generous quantities that they were smothered to death. Is it any wonder that Elagabalus ended up assassinated by the disgruntled soldiery, his body unceremoniously dumped in the Tiber?
Augustus died of natural causes (unless you believe the rumors that his wife, Livia, poisoned him with toxin-smeared figs), at Nola, near Naples, in the month of August. Over the following days, his body was carried from Naples to Rome, a distance of almost a hundred and fifty miles. Embalming, an Egyptian custom, was regarded suspiciously and rarely practiced in Italy at the time. Hence, Suetonius delicately notes that, “because of the time of year” (that is, during the intense heat of summer), the retinue travelled by night. Even so, by the time the Emperor’s remains reached Rome, they must have been seriously decomposed — and the funeral did not take place for another week or so. This is probably why the body itself, when it was eventually put on display in the Forum, remained hidden, with a wax model of the Emperor placed above it for all to see. [Source: Mary Beard, The New Yorker, July 3, 2023]
Last Words of the Roman Emperors
Through the three hundred years of one-man rule after Julius Caesar, the last words of emperors — whether accurately recorded, embellished, or outright invented — were often grounded in all too human concerns. Suetonius portrays Vespasian, during his final bout of the runs, trying to get up and muttering, “An emperor should die on his feet.” It was an appropriate farewell from the workaholic ruler, who had been dealing with his papers and receiving embassies and delegations (emperors were usually more bureaucrats than libertines) almost right up to the end. [Source: Mary Beard, The New Yorker, July 3, 2023]
The biographer’s long description of Nero’s last hours and days, in 68 A.D., reveals what happens when a ruler loses power. Stuck in his palace, as the victory of the armies that had risen up against him became inevitable, Nero realized that his authority had gone when his bodyguard disappeared and no one answered his cries for help. “Even the caretakers had made a dash for it,” Suetonius observed, “taking the bedclothes with them.” The Emperor made his escape to an out-of-town villa and eventually, with some assistance from his remaining staff, managed to kill himself. Among many lamentations, feeble jokes, and quotations from poetry, he produced his famous utterance “What an artist is dying!” Clearly, in Suetonius’ view, Nero’s overconfident estimation of his own artistic talents lasted until the very end. These words were not, however, as barbed as the ones that Seneca — referencing Vespasian’s “Blimey, I think I am becoming a god” — gave to the dying Claudius in the “Apocolocyntosis”: “Blimey, I think I’ve shat myself.” And, just in case his readers missed the point, Seneca goes on, “Whether he had or not, I don’t know — but he certainly made a shit of everything.”
A few emperors were said to have taken a loftier tone. In Hadrian’s final hours, he is supposed to have written a poem to his own soul, sealing his reputation for melancholic mysticism. (The French novelist Marguerite Yourcenar wrote a twentieth-century fictional autobiography of the Emperor, and even used the poem for her ending: “Dear little wandering, lovely soul / the guest and companion of my body, / into what regions will you now depart / you pale little thing, naked and stiff / unable to crack jokes as usual.”) Antoninus Pius said just one word on his deathbed: “Composure,” which he gave as the day’s password for the soldiers of the imperial guard. Septimius Severus was imagined to have been more practical. According to Dio, he handed down some advice for ruling the Empire to his sons, Caracalla and Geta (“Do not quarrel, pay the soldiers, and take no notice of anyone else”), which — if the historical account is at all correct — they signally failed to follow. Within the year, Geta became the victim of his brother’s hit squad while clinging to his mother. His last words state the poignantly obvious: “Mummy, mummy, I’m being killed.”
But it is Suetonius’ description of the closing hours of the Emperor Augustus that encapsulates some of the most difficult truths of one-man rule. The Emperor, now seventy-five years old, had spent several days relaxing on the island of Capri and partying on board a ship in the Bay of Naples — even though he was already beginning to suffer from diarrhea. By the time he arrived at what had been his father’s house at Nola, he was feeling much worse. On what turned out to be his final day, while resting in the very room in which his father had died, Augustus requested a mirror and had his hair combed. He then had some friends brought in and, turning to them, asked “if he had played his part in the comedy of life” properly. He added a couple of lines of verse in Greek: “Since the play has gone down well, give us a clap / and send us away with applause.” The friends’ replies are not recorded. After he had dismissed them, he asked about the health of his step-granddaughter, who was sick, before kissing his wife, Livia. (No trace here of the rumor that she had been doctoring his fruit.) Then he uttered what were supposed to be his very last words: “Live on, remembering our marriage, Livia, and farewell.” The only sign of confusion was when he called out that he was being carried away by forty men, but this turned out to be an accurate prophecy, as forty soldiers would soon carry him out to begin that hot summer journey to Rome.
This wonderful concoction of a deathbed scene highlights many of the personal qualities you might hope to find in an emperor. We see the dying Emperor’s concern and care for his family. He refers to his enduring marriage and expresses loyalty to his ancestral line. There is also a sense of his being — like most “good” Roman emperors — “one of us,” whether in welcoming his friends to his deathbed or in wanting to present an agreeable image. Over all, it was a calm exit from the world, in which even what looked like delirium showed that the Emperor knew what the future held.
But most revealing of all was the quip about having “played his part in the comedy of life,” underlined by the theatrical allusion to the play having gone down well. It tells us so much about Roman autocracy that the founding father of the imperial system, one of its earliest emperors turned gods, was said to have summed up his career as a piece of theater, as an act.
Damnatio Memoriae
Damnatio memoriae is a process in which the memory of a person (usually an emperor but sometimes also other important people) was erased through the defacing of monuments and coins. Michael Van Duisen wrote for Listverse: “A practice common with nearly every ancient culture, and even some today, damnatio memoriae was the ritualistic and symbolic removal of a person from history. Seen as the worst punishment imaginable, worse than execution, the damned’s name was scratched from inscriptions, frescos with his face were painted over, and any statue was defaced, as if it was really him. It was normally reserved for the worst emperors in Roman history; Caligula escaped this punishment by having powerful friends, even after death. [Source: Michael Van Duisen, Listverse, February 13, 2014]
Damnatio memoriae of Commodus on an inscription; The abbreviation "CO" was later restored with paint
“Only a handful of emperors are known to have been officially given this punishment, including Maximian, whose friend and co-emperor Diocletian is said to have been so stricken with grief that he died shortly after hearing the news. Obviously, it didn’t work as well in practice as it did in theory; we still know about everyone who was the subject of damnatio memoriae. Some scholars feel it may have served a cathartic purpose for the public, enabling them to vent their frustration over the failures of their leaders.”
Candida Moss wrote in the Daily Beast: Nero was the victim of a damnatio memoriae. The problem with this process, as Princeton classicist Harriet Flower has written, is that it just doesn’t work. Excisions leave a mark that only draws more attention to what was once there. Erasure was especially ineffective in the case of Nero: The man who could not be controlled in life could not be controlled in death either.[Source: Candida Moss, Daily Beast, July 24, 2022]
Image Sources: Wikimedia Commons
Text Sources: Internet Ancient History Sourcebook: Rome sourcebooks.fordham.edu ; Internet Ancient History Sourcebook: Late Antiquity sourcebooks.fordham.edu ; “Outlines of Roman History” by William C. Morey, Ph.D., D.C.L. New York, American Book Company (1901) ; “The Private Life of the Romans” by Harold Whetstone Johnston, Revised by Mary Johnston, Scott, Foresman and Company (1903, 1932); BBC Ancient Rome bbc.co.uk/history/ ; Project Gutenberg gutenberg.org ; Metropolitan Museum of Art, National Geographic, Smithsonian magazine, New York Times, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, Live Science, Discover magazine, Archaeology magazine, Reuters, Associated Press, The Guardian, AFP, The New Yorker, Wikipedia, Encyclopædia Britannica, Encyclopedia.com and various other books, websites and publications.
Last updated November 2024