DE IMPERATORIBUS ROMANIS

An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers

DIR Atlas

Titus Flavius Vespasianus (A.D. 69-79)

John Donahue

College of William and Mary

Abb.: http://www.roman-emperors.org/vescoi.gif

Introduction

Titus Flavius Vespasianus (b. A.D. 9, d. A.D. 79, emperor A.D. 69-79) restored peace and stability to an empire in disarray following the death of Nero in A.D. 68. In the process he established the Flavian dynasty as the legitimate successor to the Imperial throne. Although we lack many details about the events and chronology of his reign, Vespasian provided practical leadership and a return to stable government – accomplishments which, when combined with his other achievements, make his emperorship particularly notable within the history of the Principate.

Early Life and Career

Vespasian was born at Falacrina near Sabine Reate on 17 November, A.D. 9, the son of T. Flavius Sabinus, a successful tax collector and banker, and Vespasia Polla. Both parents were of equestrian status. Few details of his first fifteen years survive, yet it appears that his father and mother were often away from home on business for long periods. As a result, Vespasian’s early education became the responsibility of his paternal grandmother, Tertulla. [[1]] In about A.D. 25 Vespasian assumed the toga virilis and later accepted the wearing of the latus clavus, and with it the senatorial path that his older brother, T. Flavius Sabinus, had already chosen. [[2]] Although many of the particulars are lacking, the posts typically occupied by one intent upon a senatorial career soon followed: a military tribunate in Thrace, perhaps for three or four years; a quaestorship in Crete-Cyrene; and the offices of aedile and praetor, successively, under the emperor Gaius. [[3]]

It was during this period that Vespasian married Flavia Domitilla. Daughter of a treasury clerk and former mistress of an African knight, Flavia lacked the social standing and family connections that the politically ambitious usually sought through marriage. In any case, the couple produced three children, a daughter, also named Flavia Domitilla, and two sons, the future emperors Titus and Domitian . Flavia did not live to witness her husband’s emperorship and after her death Vespasian returned to his former mistress Caenis, who had been secretary to Antonia (daughter of Marc Antony and mother of Claudius). Caenis apparently exerted considerable influence over Vespasian, prompting Suetonius to assert that she remained his wife in all but name, even after he became emperor. [[4]]

Following the assassination of Gaius on 24 January, A.D. 41, Vespasian advanced rapidly, thanks in large part to the new princeps Claudius, whose favor the Flavians had wisely secured with that of Antonia, the mother of Germanicus, and of Claudius‚ freedmen, especially Narcissus. [[5]] The emperor soon dispatched Vespasian to Argentoratum (Strasbourg) as legatus legionis II Augustae, apparently to prepare the legion for the invasion of Britain. Vespasian first appeared at the battle of Medway in A.D. 43, and soon thereafter led his legion across the south of England, where he engaged the enemy thirty times in battle, subdued two tribes, and conquered the Isle of Wight. According to Suetonius, these operations were conducted partly under Claudius and partly under Vespasian’s commander, Aulus Plautius. Vespasian’s contributions, however, did not go unnoticed; he received the ornamenta triumphalia and two priesthoods from Claudius for his exploits in Britain. [[6]]

By the end of A.D. 51 Vespasian had reached the consulship, the pinnacle of a political career at Rome. For reasons that remain obscure he withdrew from political life at this point, only to return when chosen proconsul of Africa about A.D. 63-64. His subsequent administration of the province was marked by severity and parsimony, earning him a reputation for being scrupulous but unpopular. [[7]] Upon completion of his term, Vespasian returned to Rome where, as a senior senator, he became a man of influence in the emperor Nero’s court. [[8]] Important enough to be included on Nero’s tour of Greece in A.D. 66-67, Vespasian soon found himself in the vicinity of increasing political turbulence in the East. The situation would prove pivotal in advancing his career.

Judaea and the Accession to Power

In response to rioting in Caesarea and Jerusalem that had led to the slaughter in the latter city of Jewish leaders and Roman soldiers, Nero granted to Vespasian in A.D. 66 a special command in the East with the objective of settling the revolt in Judaea. By spring A.D. 67, with 60,000 legionaries, auxiliaries, and allies under his control, Vespasian set out to subdue Galilee and then to cut off Jerusalem. Success was quick and decisive. By October all of Galilee had been pacified and plans for the strategic encirclement of Jerusalem were soon formed. [[9]] Meanwhile, at the other end of the empire, the revolts of Gaius Iulius Vindex, governor of Gallia Lugdunensis, and Servius Sulpicius Galba , governor of Hispania Tarraconensis, had brought Nero’s reign to the brink of collapse. The emperor committed suicide in June, A.D. 68, thereby ensuring chaos for the next eighteen months, as first Galba and then Marcus Salvius Otho and Aulus Vitellius acceded to power. Each lacked broad-based military and senatorial support; each would be violently deposed in turn. [[10]]

Still occupied with plans against Jerusalem, Vespasian swore allegiance to each emperor. Shortly after Vitellius assumed power in spring, A.D. 69, however, Vespasian met on the border of Judaea and Syria with Gaius Licinius Mucianus, governor of Syria, and after a series of private and public consultations, the two decided to revolt. [[11]] On July 1, at the urging of Tiberius Alexander, prefect of Egypt, the legions of Alexandria declared for Vespasian, as did the legions of Judaea two days later. By August all of Syria and the Danube legions had done likewise. Vespasian next dispatched Mucianus to Italy with 20,000 troops, while he set out from Syria to Alexandria in order to control grain shipments for the purpose of starving Italy into submission. [[12]] The siege of Jerusalem he placed in the hands of his son Titus.

Meanwhile, the Danubian legions, unwilling to wait for Mucianus‘ arrival, began their march against Vitellius ‚ forces. The latter army, suffering from a lack of discipline and training, and unaccustomed to the heat of Rome, was defeated at Cremona in late October. [[13]] By mid-December the Flavian forces had reached Carsulae, 95 kilometers north of Rome on the Flaminian Road, where the Vitellians, with no further hope of reinforcements, soon surrendered. At Rome, unable to persuade his followers to accept terms for his abdication, Vitellius was in peril. On the morning of December 20 the Flavian army entered Rome. By that afternoon, the emperor was dead. [[14]]

Tacitus records that by December 22, A.D. 69, Vespasian had been given all the honors and privileges usually granted to emperors. Even so, the issue remains unclear, owing largely to a surviving fragment of an enabling law, the lex de imperio Vespasiani, which conferred powers, privileges, and exemptions, most with Julio-Claudian precedents, on the new emperor. Whether the fragment represents a typical granting of imperial powers that has uniquely survived in Vespasian’s case, or is an attempt to limit or expand such powers, remains difficult to know. In any case, the lex sanctioned all that Vespasian had done up to its passing and gave him authority to act as he saw fit on behalf of the Roman people. [[15]]

What does seem clear is that Vespasian felt the need to legitimize his new reign with vigor. He zealously publicized the number of divine omens that predicted his accession and at every opportunity he accumulated multiple consulships and imperial salutations. He also actively promoted the principle of dynastic succession, insisting that the emperorship would fall to his son. The initiative was fulfilled when Titus succeeded his father in A.D. 79.[[16]]

Emperorship

Upon his arrival in Rome in late summer, A.D. 70, Vespasian faced the daunting task of restoring a city and a government ravaged by the recent civil wars. Although many particulars are missing, a portrait nevertheles emerges of a ruler conscientiously committed to the methodical renewal of both city and empire. Concerning Rome itself, the emperor encouraged rebuilding on vacated lots, restored the Capitol (burned in A.D. 69), and also began work on several new buildings: a temple to the deified Claudius on the Caelian Hill, a project designed to identify Vespasian as a legitimate heir to the Julio-Claudians, while distancing himself from Nero ; a temple of Peace near the Forum; and the magnificent Colosseum (Flavian Amphitheatre), located on the site of the lake of Nero ’s Golden House. [[17]]

Claiming that he needed forty thousand million sesterces for these projects and for others aimed at putting the state on more secure footing, Vespasian is said to have revoked various imperial immunities, manipulated the supply of certain commodities to inflate their price, and increased provincial taxation. [[18]] The measures are consistent with his characterization in the sources as both obdurate and avaricious. There were occasional political problems as well: Helvidius Priscus, an advocate of senatorial independence and a critic of the Flavian regime from the start, was exiled after A.D. 75 and later executed; Marcellus Eprius and A. Alienus Caecina were condemned by Titus for conspiracy, the former committing suicide, the latter executed in A.D. 79.

As Suetonius claims, however, in financial matters Vespasian always put revenues to the best possible advantage, regardless of their source. Tacitus, too, offers a generally favorable assessment, citing Vespasian as the first man to improve after becoming emperor. [[19]] Thus do we find the princeps offering subventions to senators not possessing the property qualifications of their rank, restoring many cities throughout the empire, and granting state salaries for the first time to teachers of Latin and Greek rhetoric. To enhance Roman economic and social life even further, he encouraged theatrical productions by building a new stage for the Theatre of Marcellus, and he also put on lavish state dinners to assist the food trades. [[20]]

In other matters the emperor displayed similar concern. He restored the depleted ranks of the senatorial and equestrian orders with eligible Italian and provincial candidates and reduced the backlog of pending court cases at Rome. Vespasian also re-established discipline in the army, while punishing or dismissing large numbers of Vitellius ‚ men. [[21]]

Beyond Rome, the emperor increased the number of legions in the East and continued the process of imperial expansion by the annexation of northern England, the pacification of Wales, and by advances into Scotland and southwest Germany between the Rhine and the Danube. Vespasian also conferred rights on communities abroad, especially in Spain, where the granting of Latin rights to all native communities contributed to the rapid Romanization of that province during the Imperial period. [[22]]

Death and Assessment

In contrast to his immediate imperial predecessors, Vespasian died peacefully – at Aquae Cutiliae near his birthplace in Sabine country on 23 June, A.D. 79, after contracting a brief illness. The occasion is said to have inspired his deathbed quip: „Oh my, I must be turning into a god!“ [[23]] In fact, public deification did follow his death, as did his internment in the Mausoleum of Augustus alongside the Julio-Claudians.

A man of strict military discipline and simple tastes, Vespasian proved to be a conscientious and generally tolerant administrator. More importantly, following the upheavals of A.D. 68-69, his reign was welcome for its general tranquility and restoration of peace. In Vespasian Rome found a leader who made no great breaks with tradition, yet his ability ro rebuild the empire and especially his willingness to expand the composition of the governing class helped to establish a positive working model for the „good emperors“ of the second century.

Bibliography

Since the scholarship on Vespasian is more comprehensive than can be treated here, the works listed below are main accounts or bear directly upon issues discussed in the entry above. A comprehensive modern anglophone study of this emperor is yet to be produced.

Atti congresso internazionale di studi Flaviani, 2 vols. Rieti, 1983.

Atti congresso internazionale di studi Vespasianei, 2 vols. Rieti, 1981.

Bosworth, A.B. „Vespasian and the Provinces: Some Problems of the Early 70s A.D.“ Athenaeum 51 (1973): 49-78.

Brunt, P. A. „Lex de imperio Vespasiani.“ JRS (67) 1977: 95-116.

D’Espèrey, S. Franchet. „Vespasien, Titus et la littérature.“ ANRW II.32.5: 3048-3086.

Dudley, D. and Webster, G. The Roman Conquest of Britain. London, 1965.

Gonzalez, J. „The Lex Irnitana: A New Copy of the Flavian Municipal Law.“ JRS 76 (1986): 147-243.

Grant, M. The Roman Emperors: A Biographical Guide to the Rulers of Rome, 31 B.C. – A.D. 476. New York, 1985.

Homo, L. Vespasien, l’Empereur du bons sens (69-79 ap. J.-C.). Paris, 1949.

Levi, M.A. „I Flavi.“ ANRW II.2: 177-207.

McCrum, M. and Woodhead, A. G. Select Documents of the Principates of the Flavian Emperors Including the Year of the Revolution. Cambridge, 1966.

Nicols, John. Vespasian and the Partes Flavianae. Wiesbaden, 1978.

Scarre, C. Chronicle of the Roman Emperors. The Reign-by-Reign Record of the Rulers of Imperial Rome. London, 1995.

Suddington, D. B. The Development of the Roman Auxiliary Forces from Caesar to Vespasian, 49 B.C. – A.D. 79. Harare: U. of Zimbabwe, 1982.

Syme, R. Tacitus. Oxford, 1958.

Wardel, David. „Vespasian, Helvidius Priscus and the Restoration of the Capitol.“ Historia 45 (1996): 208-222.

Wellesley, K. The Long Year: A.D. 69. Bristol, 1989, 2nd ed.

Notes

[[1]] Suet. Vesp. 2.1. Suetonius remains the major source but see also Tac. Hist. 2-5; Cass. Dio 65; Joseph. BJ 3-4.

[[2]] Suetonius (Vesp. 2.1) claims that Vespasian did not accept the latus clavus, the broad striped toga worn by one aspiring to a senatorial career, immediately. The delay, however, was perhaps no more than three years. See J. Nicols, Vespasian and the Partes Flavianae (Wiesbaden, 1978), 2.

[[3]] Military tribunate and quaestorship: Suet. Vesp. 2.3; aedileship: ibid., 5.3, in which Gaius, furious that Vespasian had not kept the streets clean, as was his duty, ordered some soldiers to load him with filth;,they complied by stuffing his toga with as much as it could hold. See also Dio 59.12.2-3; praetorship: Suet. Vesp. 2.3, in which Vespasian is depicted as one of Gaius‘ leading adulators, an account consistent with Tacitus‘ portrayal (Hist 1.50.4; 2.5.1) of his early career. For a more complete discussion of these posts and attendant problems of dating, see Nicols, Vespasian, 2-7.

[[4]] Marriage and Caenis: Suet. Vesp. 3; Cass. Dio 65.14.

[[5]] Nicols, Vespasian, 12-39.

[[6]] Suet. Vesp. 4.1 For additional details on Vespasian’s exploits in Britain, see D. Dudley and G. Webster, The Roman Conquest of Britain (London, 1965), 55 ff., 98.

[[7]] Concerning Vespasian’s years between his consulship and proconsulship, see Suet. Vesp. 4.2 and Nicols, Vespasian, 9. On his unpopularity in Africa, see Suet. Vesp. 4.3, an account of a riot at Hadrumentum, where he was once pelted with turnips. In recording that Africa supported Vitellius in A.D. 69, Tacitus too suggests popular dissatisfaction with Vespasian’s proconsulship. See Hist. 2.97.2.

[[8]] This despite the fact that the sources record two rebukes of Vespasian, one for extorting money from a young man seeking career advancement (Suet. Vesp. 4.3), the other for either leaving the room or dozing off during one of the emperor’s recitals (Suet. Vesp. 4.4 and 14, which places the transgression in Greece; Tac. (Ann. 16.5.3), who makes Rome and the Quinquennial Games of A.D. 65 the setting; A. Braithwaite, C. Suetoni Tranquilli Divus Vespasianus, Oxford, 1927, 30, who argues for both Greece and Rome).

[[9]] Subjugation of Galilee: Joseph. BJ 3.65-4.106; siege of Jerusalem: ibid., 4.366-376, 414.

[[10]] Revolt of Vindex: Suet. Nero 40; Tac. Ann. 14.4; revolt of Galba: Suet. Galba 10; Plut. Galba, 4-5; suicide of Nero: Suet. Nero 49; Cass. Dio 63.29.2. For the most complete account of the period between Nero’s death and the accession of Vespasian, see K. Wellesley, The Long Year: A.D. 69, 2nd. ed. (Bristol, 1989).

[[11]] Tac. Hist. 2.76.

[[12]] Troops in support of Vespasian: Suet. Vit. 15; Mucianus and his forces: Tac. Hist. 2.83; Vespasian and grain shipments: Joseph. BJ 4.605 ff.; see also Tac. Hist. 3.48, on Vespasian’s possible plan to shut off grain shipments to Italy from Carthage as well.

[[13]] On Vitellius‘ army and its lack of discipline, see Tac. Hist. 2.93-94; illness of army: ibid., 2.99.1; Cremona: ibid., 3.32-33.

[[14]] On Vitellius‘ last days, see Tac. Hist. 3.68-81. On the complicated issue of Vitellius‘ death date, see L. Holzapfel, „Römische Kaiserdaten,“ Klio 13 (1913): 301.

[[15]] Honors, etc. Tac. Hist 4.3. For more on the lex de imperio Vespasiani, see P. A. Brunt, „Lex de imperio Vespasiani,“ JRS (67) 1977: 95-116.

[[16]] Omens: Suet. Vesp. 5; consulships and honors: ibid., 8; succession of sons: ibid., 25.

[[17]] On Vespasian’s restoration of Rome, see Suet. Vesp. 9; Cass. Dio 65.10; D. Wardel, „Vespasian, Helvidius Priscus and the Restoration of the Capitol,“ Historia 45 (1996): 208-222.

[[18]] Suet. Vesp. 16.

[[19]] Ibid.; Tac. Hist. 1.50.

[[20]] Suet. Vesp. 17-19.

[[21]] Ibid., 8-10.

[[22]] On Vespasian’s exploits in Britain, see esp. Tac., Agricola, eds. R. M. Ogilvie and I. A. Richmond (1967), and W. S. Hanson, Agricola and the Conquest of the North (1987); on the granting of Latin rights in Spain, see, e.g., J. Gonzalez, „The Lex Irnitana: a New Copy of the Flavian Municipal Law.“ JRS 76 (1986): 147-243.

[[23]] For this witticism and other anecdotes concerning Vespasian’s sense of humor, see Suet. Vesp. 23.

Copyright (C) 1998, John Donahue. This file may be copied on the condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyright notice, remain intact

Comments to: John Donahue.
Updated: 23. September 2004

Unveränd. Zweitpubl. v. John Donahue: Titus Flavius Vespasianus (A.D. 69-79), in: De Imperatoribus Romanis. An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers [23.09.2004], http://www.roman-emperors.org/vespasia.htm

DE IMPERATORIBUS ROMANIS

An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers

DIR Atlas

Otho (69 A.D.)

[Additional entry on this emperor’s life is available in DIR Archives]

John Donahue

College of William and Mary

Abb.: http://www.roman-emperors.org/otho.jpg

Introduction

In January 69 Otho led a successful coup to overthrow the emperor Galba. Upon advancing to the throne, he hoped to conciliate his adversaries and restore political stability to the Empire. These ambitions were never to be realized. Instead, our sources portray a leader never fully able to win political confidence at Rome or to overcome military anarchy abroad. As a result, he was defeated in battle by the forces of Vitellius, his successor, and took his own life at the conclusion of the conflict. His principate lasted only eight weeks.[[1]]

Early Life and Career

Marcus Salvius Otho was born at Ferentium on 28 April 32 A. D. His grandfather, also named Marcus Salvius Otho, was a senator who did not advance beyond the rank of praetor. Lucius Otho, his father, was consul in 33 and a trusted administrator under the emperors Tiberius, Gaius and Claudius. His mother, Albia Terentia, was likely to have been nobly born as well. The cognomen „Otho“ was Etruscan in origin, and the fact that it can be traced to three successive generations of this family perhaps reflects a desire to maintain a part of the Etruscan tradition that formed the family’s background.[[2]]

Otho is recorded as being extravagant and wild as a youth – a favorite pastime involved roving about at night to snare drunkards in a blanket. Such behavior earned floggings from his father, whose frequent absences from home on imperial business suggest little in the way of a stabilizing parental influence in Otho’s formative years. These traits apparently persisted: Suetonius records that Otho and Nero became close friends because of the similarity of their characters; and Plutarch relates that the young man was so extravagant that he sometimes chided Nero about his meanness, and even outdid the emperor in reckless spending.[[3]]

Most intriguing in this context is Otho’s involvement with Nero’s mistress, Poppaea Sabina, the greatest beauty of her day.[[4]] A relationship between the two is widely cited in the ancient sources, but the story differs in essential details from one account to the next. As a result, it is impossible to establish who seduced whom, whether Otho ever married Poppaea, and whether his posting to Lusitania by Nero should be understood as a „banishment“ for his part in this affair. About the only reliable detail to emerge is that Otho did indeed become governor of Lusitania in 59, and that he assumed the post as a quaestor, a rank below that of praetor or consul, the minimum usually required for the office.[[5]] From here he would launch his initial thrust towards the imperial throne.

Overthrow of Galba

Nero’s suicide in June 68 marked the end of the Julio-Claudian dynasty and opened up the principate to the prerogatives of the military beyond Rome. First to emerge was Servius Sulpicius Galba, governor of Hispania Tarraconensis, who had been encouraged to revolt by the praetorians and especially by Nymphidius Sabinus, the corrupt and scheming praetorian prefect at Rome. By this time Otho had been in Spain for close to ten years. His record seems to have been a good one, marked by capable administration and an unwillingness to enrich himself at the expense of the province. At the same time, perhaps seeing this as his best chance to improve his own circumstances, he supported the insurrection as vigorously as possible, even sending Galba all of his gold and his best table servants.[[6]] At the same time, he made it a point to win the favor of every soldier he came in contact with, most notably the members of the praetorian guard who had come to Spain to accompany Galba to Rome. Galba set out from Spain in July, formally assuming the emperorship shortly thereafter. Otho accompanied him on the journey.

Galba had been in Rome little more than two months when on 1 January 69 the troops in Upper Germany refused to declare allegiance to him and instead followed the men stationed in Lower Germany in proclaiming their commander, Aulus Vitellius, as the new ruler. To show that he was still in charge Galba adopted his own successor, Lucius Calpurnius Piso Frugi Licinianus, an aristocrat completely without administrative or military experience. The choice meant little to the remote armies, the praetorians or the senate and particularly angered Otho, who had hoped to succeed Galba.[[7]] Otho quickly organized a conspiracy among the praetorians with promise of a material reward, and on 15 January 69 they declared him emperor and publicly killed Galba; Piso, dragged from hiding in the temple of Vesta, was also butchered. On that same evening a powerless senate awarded Otho the imperial titles.

Otho’s Principate in Rome

It is not possible to reconstruct a detailed chronology of Otho’s brief eight and a half weeks as princeps in Rome (15 January-15 March). Even so, Galba’s quick demise had surely impressed upon Otho the need to conciliate various groups. As a result, he continued his indulgence of the praetorian guard but he also tried to win over the senate by following a strict constitutionalist line and by generally keeping the designations for the consulship made by Nero and Galba. In the provinces, despite limited evidence, there are some indications that he tried to compensate for Galba’s stinginess by being more generous with grants of citizenship. In short, Otho was eager not to offend anyone.[[8]]

Problems remained, however. The praetorians had to be continually placated and they were always suspicious of the senate. On the other hand, the senate itself, along with the people, remained deeply disturbed at the manner of Otho’s coming to power and his willingness to be associated with Nero.[[9]] These suspicions and fears were most evident in the praetorian outbreak at Rome. Briefly, Otho had decided to move from Ostia to Rome a cohort of Roman citizens in order to replace some of Rome’s garrison, much of which was to be utilized for the showdown with Vitellius. He ordered that weapons be moved from the praetorian camp in Rome by ship to Ostia at night so that the garrison replacements would be properly armed and made to look as soldierly as possible when they marched into the city. Thinking that a senatorial counter-coup against Otho was underway, the praetorians stormed the imperial palace to confirm the emperor’s safety, with the result that they terrified Otho and his senatorial dinner guests. Although the praetorians‘ fears were eventually calmed and they were given a substantial cash payment, the incident dramatically underscored the unease at Rome in the early months of 69.[[10]]

Otho’s Offensive against Vitellius

Meanwhile, in the Rhineland, preparations for a march on Rome by the military legions that had declared for Vitellius were far advanced. Hampered by poor intelligence gathering in Gaul and Germany and having failed to negotiate a settlement with Vitellius in early 69, Otho finally summoned to Italy his forces for a counterattack against the invading Vitellian army. His support consisted of the four legions of Pannonia and Dalmatia, the three legions of Moesia and his own imperial retinue of about 9,000. Vitellius‘ own troops numbered some 30,000, while those of his two marshals, Aulus Caecina Alienus and Fabius Valens, were between 15,000 and 20,000 each.[[11]]

Otho’s strategy was to make a quick diversionary strike in order to allow time for his own forces to assemble in Italy before engaging the enemy. The strategy worked, as the diversionary army, comprised of urban cohorts, praetorians and marines all from Rome or nearby, was successful in Narbonese Gaul in latter March. An advance guard sent to hold the line on the Po River until the Danubian legions arrived also enjoyed initial success. Otho himself arrived at Bedriacum in northern Italy about 10 April for a strategy session with his commanders. The main concern was that the Vitellians were building a bridge across the Po in order to drive southward towards the Apennines and eventually to Rome. Otho decided to counter by ordering a substantial part of his main force to advance from Bedriacum and establish a new base close enough to the new Vitellian bridge to interrupt its completion. While en route, the Othonian forces, strung out along the via Postumia amid baggage and supply trains, were attacked by Caecina and Valens near Cremona on 14 April. The clash, know as the Battle of Bedriacum, resulted in the defeat of the Othonian forces, their retreat cut off by the river behind them. Otho himself, meanwhile, was not present, but had gone to Brixellum with a considerable force of infantry and cavalry in order to impede any Vitellian units that had managed to cross the Po.

The plan had backfired. Otho’s strategy of obtaining victory while avoiding any major battles had proven too risky. Realizing perhaps that a new round of fighting would have involved not only a significant re-grouping of his existing troops but also a potentially bloody civil war at Rome, if Vitellius‘ troops reached the capital, Otho decided that enough blood had been shed.[[12]] Two weeks shy of his thirty-seventh birthday, on 16 April 69, he took his own life.[[13]]

Assessment

To be sure, Otho remains an enigma – part profligate Neronian wastrel and part conscientious military commander willing to give his life for the good of the state. Our sources are at a loss to explain the paradox. Perhaps, like Petronius, he saw it was safer to appear a profligate in Nero’s court? In the final analysis, Otho proved to be an organized and efficient military commander, who appealed more to the soldier than to the civilian. He also seems to have been a capable governor, with administrative talents that recalled those of his father. Nevertheless, his violent overthrow of Galba, the lingering doubts that it raised about his character, and his unsuccessful offensive against Vitellius are all vivid reminders of the turbulence that plagued the Roman world between the reigns of Nero and Vespasian. Regrettably, the scenario would play itself out one more time before peace and stability returned to the empire.

Bibliography

Bowman, Alan K. et al. The Cambridge Ancient History, X: The Augustan Empire. 2nd ed. (Cambridge, 1996).

Braun, Ludwig. „Galba und Otho bei Plutarch und Sueton.“ Hermes 120 (1992): 90-102.

Chilver, G. E. F. A Historical Commentary on Tacitus‘ Histories I and II. (Oxford, 1979).

Nagl, A. „Salvius.“ no. 21 Real-Encyclopëdie IA 2035-2055 (1920).

Greenhalgh, P. A. L. The Year of the Four Emperors. (New York, 1975).

Keitel, E. „Plutarch’s Tragedy Tyrants: Galba and Otho.“ Papers of the Leeds International Latin Seminar 8, Roman Comedy, Augustan Poetry, Historiography, edited by Roger Brock and Anthony J. Woodman. (Leeds, 1995): 275-288.

________. „Otho’s Exhortations in Tacitus’s Histories.“ Greece & Rome 34 (1987): 73-82.

Murison, Charles L. Galba, Otho and Vitellius: Careers and Controversies. (Hildesheim, 1993).

________, editor. Suetonius: Galba, Otho, Vitellius. (London, 1992).

Perkins, Caroline A. „Tacitus on Otho.“ Latomus 52 (1993): 848-855.

Syme, R. Tacitus. (Oxford, 1958).

Townsend, G. B. „Cluvius Rufus in the Histories of Tacitus.“ AJPhil 85 (1964): 337-377.

Wellesley, Kenneth. The Long Year A. D. 69. 2nd. ed. (London, 1989).

Notes

[[1]] The main ancient sources for the life of Otho are: Tac. Hist. 1.50-2.49; Suet. Otho; Plut. Otho; Cassius Dio 64.10-15. In addition, there were major works for this period by Cluvius Rufus, Fabius Rusticus and Pliny the Elder, but they have not survived. For an important discussion, see G. B. Townsend, „Cluvius Rufus in the Histories of Tacitus,“ AJPhil 85 (1964): 337-377.

[[2]] For a family tree of the Sulpicii Galbae, see Charles Murison, editor, Suetonius: Galba, Otho, Vitellius (Bristol, 1992), Appendix A.

[[3]] Suet. Otho 2.1; Plut. Galba 19.4.5; cf. Plin. NH 13.22.

[[4]] Poppaea possessed charm, beauty, fame and wit (Ann. 13.45.2) and was eventually married to Nero, for whom she bore a daughter, Claudia Augusta (PIR2 C 1061); she was pregnant again when Nero reportedly kicked her to death(Ann. 16.6.1; Suet. Ner. 35.3). There are five extant accounts of the Nero-Otho-Poppaea love triangle: Plut. Galba 19.2-20.2; Suet. Otho 3.1-2; Tacitus‘ two versions: Hist. 1.13.3-4; Ann. 13.45-46; and Dio 61.11.2-4. For a useful discussion of this episode and of all the problems of source criticism contained therein, see Charles L. Murison, Galba, Otho and Vitellius: Careers and Controversies (Hildesheim, 1993), 75-80.

[[5]] Plutarch records that Otho’s life was in danger after this episode but that Seneca persuaded Nero to send him to Lusitania. See Galba 19.9-20.1. No other source cites Seneca’s involvement.

[[6]] On gold and table servants, see Plut. Galba 20.3.

[[7]] On Otho’s reaction to Galba’s selection of Piso as his heir, see Tac. Hist. 1.21.1.

[[8]] On Otho’s indulgence towards the praetorians, see Tac. Hist. 1.46.1; on his shameless flattery of them, see Tac. Hist. 1.36, 45-46, 80-85; Plut. Otho 1.2; 3.11-13. On his relationship with the senate, especially appointments to the consulship, see Tac. Hist. 1.77.2 and G. B. Townsend, „Cluvius Rufus in the Histories of Tacitus,“ AJP 83 (1962), 113-124. On Otho’s interactions with the provinces, see Tac. Hist. 1.78.1, where the emperor tries to compensate for Galba’s shortcomings in Spain and Gaul. Significant in this regard was that Galba was also able to maintain the loyalty of the legions in Pannonia, Dalmatia and Moesia.

[[9]] On the praetorians‘ suspicions of the senate, see Tac. Hist. 1.80.2, 82.1; cf. Plut. Otho 3.3-10; on senatorial and popular horror at Otho’s manner of coming to power, see Tac. Hist. 1.50.1. Otho also appropriated funds to finish Nero’s Golden House, the Domus Aurea; see Suet. Otho 7.1. For a fuller description of the property, see Tac. Ann. 15.42-43; Suet. Nero 31.

[[10]] For accounts of the praetorian outbreak at Rome, see Tac. Hist. 1.80-85; Plut. Otho 3.3-13; Suet. Otho 8.1-2; and Dio 64.9.2-3.

[[11]] For a discussion of the size of the forces, see Murison, Careers and Controversies, 85-86.

[[12]] This decision was made despite the fact that Otho seemed to have had an adequate number of troops for a second engagement and that his forces were not demoralized by the defeat. See Suet. Otho 9.3.

[[13]] Otho’s dramatic death is treated in some detail by all of the sources. See: Plut. Otho 15-18; Tac. Hist. 2.46-50; Suet. Otho 9.3-12.2; Dio 64.11-15.

Copyright © 1999, John Donahue. This file may be copied on the condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyright notice, remain intact.

Updated: 17 August 1999

Unveränd. Zweitpubl. v. John Donahue: Otho (69 A.D.), in: De Imperatoribus Romanis. An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers [17.08.1999], http://www.roman-emperors.org/otho.htm