DE IMPERATORIBUS ROMANIS

An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers

DIR Atlas

Hadrian (117-138 A.D.)

Herbert W. Benario, Emory University

Abb.: http://www.luc.edu/roman-emperors/trjan-s1.jpe

Introduction and Sources

„During a happy period of more than fourscore years, the public administrationwas conducted by the virtue and abilities of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the two Antonines. It is the design of this and of the two succeeding chaptersto describe the prosperous condition of their empire, and afterwards, fromthe death of Marcus Antoninus, to deduce the most important circumstancesof its decline and fall, a revolution which will ever be remembered andis still felt by the nations of the earth.“

So Edward Gibbon concluded the first paragraph of his massive TheDecline and Fall of the Roman Empire, referring to a period which healso styled the happiest of mankind’s history. Hadrian was the centralfigure of these „five good emperors,“ the one most responsible for changingthe character and nature of the empire. He was also one of the most remarkableand talented individuals Rome ever produced.

The sources for a study of Hadrian are varied. There is no major historianfor his reign, such as Tacitus or Livy. The chief literary sources arethe biography in the Historia Augusta, the first surviving lifein a series intended to continue Suetonius‘ Lives of the Caesars.[[1]]Debate about this collection of imperial biographies has been heated andcontentious for more than a century. The most convincing view is that whichsees the whole as the work of a single author writing in the last yearsof the fourth century. The information offered ranges from the preciselyaccurate to the most wildly imaginative.[[2]]

Cassius Dio, who wrote in the decade of the 230s, produced a long historyof the empire which has survived, for the Hadrianic period, only in anabbreviated version.[[3]] Fourth century historians,such as Aurelius Victor and Eutropius, occasionally furnish bits of information.Contemporaries or near-contemporaries of Hadrian, such as Arrian, Fronto,Pausanias, and Plutarch, are also useful. Papyri, inscriptions, coins,and legal writings are extremely important. Archaeology in all its aspectscontributes mightily to any attempt to probe the character of a man andemperor whose personality and thoughts defy close analysis and understanding.

Early Life and Career

Hadrian was born on January 24, 76. Where he saw the light of day was,even in antiquity, matter for debate. Italica, in Hispania Baetica, wasthe birthplace of Trajan and was also consideredthat of Hadrian. But the HA reports that he was born in Rome, andthat seems the more likely choice, since it is the more unexpected. Theactual place of one’s birth was, however, unimportant, since it was one’spatriawhich was crucial. Hadrian’s ancestors had come to Spain generations before,from the town of Hadria in Picenum, at the end of the Second Punic War.Italica’s tribus, to which Hadrian belonged, was the Sergia.His father, P. Aelius Afer, had reached the praetorship by the time ofhis death in 85/86, his mother, Domitia Paulina, came from a distinguishedfamily of Gades, one of the wealthiest cities in the empire. His sisterPaulina married Servianus, who played a significant role in Hadrian’s career.Trajanwas the father’s cousin; when Afer died, Trajanand P. Acilius Attianus, likewise of Italica, became Hadrian’s guardians.[[4]]

At the age of about ten, Hadrian went to Italica for the first time(or returned, if he had been there earlier in his childhood), where heremained for only a brief time. He then returned to the capital and soonbegan a rapid rise through the cursus honorum; he was a militarytribune of three different legions in consecutive years, a series of appointmentswhich clearly marked him for a military career, and reached the consulateas a suffect at the age of 32, the earliest possible under the principate.At Trajan’s death, he was legate of theprovince of Syria, with responsibility for the security of the east inthe aftermath of Trajan’s Parthian War.

His career as a privatus follows:

decemvir stlitibus iudicandis
sevir turmae equitum Romanorum
praefectus urbi feriarum Latinarum
trib. militum legionis II Adiutricis Piae Fidelis (95, in Pannoniainferior)
trib. militum legionis V Macedonicae (96, in Moesia inferior)
trib. militum legionis XXII Primigeniae Piae Fidelis (97, inGermania superior)
quaestor (101)
ab actis senatus
tribunus plebis (105)
praetor (106)
legatus legionis I Minerviae Piae Fidelis (106, in Germaniainferior)
legatus Augusti pro praetore Pannoniae inferioris (107)
consul suffectus (108)
septemvir epulonum (before 112)
sodalis Augustalis (before 112)
archon Athenis (112/13)
legatus Syriae (117)

(Some of these dates are less than secure; important for much of thisinformation is the Athens inscription [Smallwood 109]).

Relationship to Trajan, Marriage, and Adoption

Hadrian’s only male relative after the death of his father was M.Ulpius Traianus, his father’s cousin, hence his own first cousinonce removed. Trajan and his wife, PompeiaPlotina, had no children, and were surrogate parents to the child Hadrian.Trajan’s influence in government was steadily increasing, both throughhis own merits and because of his father’s great services to Vespasianin the civil wars and afterwards.[[5]] WhenTrajanwas adopted by Nerva and designated successorin late 97, Hadrian carried the congratulations of the Moesian legionsto him along the Rhine, and was kept there by Trajanto serve in a German legion. In 100, largely at the instance of Plotina, Hadrianmarried Trajan’s grand-niece Vibia Sabina,ten years his junior. This marriage was not a happy one, although it endureduntil her death in 136 or 137. There were no children, and it was reportedthat Sabina performed an abortion upon herself in order not to produceanother monster.[[6]] In spite of marital unhappiness,the union was crucial for Hadrian, because it linked him even more closelywith the emperor’s family. He got along very well with his mother-in-lawMatidia and with the empress, whose favor enhanced his career.

In mid-summer 117, when Trajan was returningfrom his Parthian campaigns, he fell ill while at Selinus in Cilicia anddied on August 8. The following day his adoption of Hadrian was announcedby Plotina and Attianus, the praetorian prefect who had earlier been Hadrian’sguardian, with some question whether Trajanhad indeed performed the act or whether it was posthumous, thanks to hiswidow. On August 11, which he considered his dies imperii, the armyof Syria hailed its legate, Hadrian, as emperor, which made the senate’sformal acceptance an almost meaningless event. This was an example of thehistorian Tacitus‘ famous dictum that an emperor could be made elsewherethan at Rome.[[7]]

Succession and the Affair of the Four Consulars

Hadrian chose as his official title Imperator Caesar Traianus HadrianusAugustus (for much of the decade of the 120s, he was simply known asHadrianus Augustus). He must then have proceeded to Selinus at once fromAntioch, to catch up with Attianus, Plotina, and Matidia. He then returnedto his province no later than September and stayed there at least intothe new year, consolidating his administration. He began the year as cos.II; whether he had been so designated by Trajanis unknown. On January 3, 118, the Arval Brethren met in Rome to offervows for the well-being of the emperor, which shows that he was not inthe capital. In June or July they sacrificed because of the arrival ofthe emperor who is present at the ceremony. He therefore may have takenas much as eleven months from his accession to return to Rome. He saw tothe deification of his predecessor and celebrated games in honor of theconsecration. Trajan’s ashes were placedin the base of his column, by special dispensation, since burials wereprohibited within the pomerium.

Anticipation of his arrival had been overshadowed by the execution offour men of great importance, who had all held consulates and commands.This action had been ordered by the senate, perhaps at the instigationof the praetorian prefect Attianus. Hadrian always disclaimed responsibiltybut his relations with the senate were irrevocably damaged, never reallyto improve until his death, when the senate hoped to have posthumous revenge.The four men were Cornelius Palma (cos. II 109), who had been withTrajanin the east and had been governor of Syria, Avidius Nigrinus (cos.110), governor of Dacia, Publilius Celsus (cos. II 113), and LusiusQuietus, a Moorish chieftain (cos. 117), governor of Judaea andone of Trajan’s chief generals. Personalenmity toward Hadrian certainly existed, perhaps because of Hadrian’s moveaway from Trajan’s policy of expansion,perhaps because of jealousy that Hadrian had been preferred for the succession.Be that as it may, they were all Trajan’smen,and their elimination certainly made Hadrian’s course easier. But the odiumthereby raised caused him dismay until the end of his days.[[8]]He was cos. III in 119, which proved to be the last consulship heheld. He thereby showed himself to be different from many of predecessors:Augustus held 13, Vespasian 9, Titus8, Domitian 17, Trajan 6. He was similarly sparing in his acceptance of other titles; he becamepaterpatriae only in 128.

Foreign policy, wars, and travel

In two important passages, Cassius Dio sets the tone for this section:

„Once, when a woman made a request of him as he passed by on a journey,he at first said to her, ‚I haven’t time,‘ but afterwards, when she criedout, ‚Cease, then, being emperor,‘ he turned about and granted her a hearing.“(69.6.3)

„Hadrian travelled through one province after another, visiting thevarious regions and cities and inspecting all the garrisons and forts.Some of these he removed to more desirable places, some he abolished, andhe also established some new ones. He personally viewed and investigatedabsolutely everything, not merely the usual appurtenances of camps, suchas weapons, engines, trenches, ramparts and palisades, but also the privateaffairs of every one, both of the men serving in the ranks and of the officersthemselves, – their lives, their quarters and their habits, – and he reformedand corrected in many cases practices and arrangements for living thathad become too luxurious. He drilled the men for every kind of battle,honouring some and reproving others, and he taught them all what shouldbe done. And in order that they should be benefited by observing him, heeverywhere led a rigorous life and either walked or rode on horseback onall occasions, never once at this period setting foot in either a chariotor a four-wheeled vehicle. He covered his head neither in hot weather norin cold, but alike amid German snows and under scorching Egyptian sunshe went about with his head bare. In fine, both by his example and by hisprecepts he so trained and disciplined the whole military force throughoutthe entire empire that even to-day the methods then introduced by him arethe soldiers‘ law of campaigning.“ (69.9.1-4; both passages in the translation of E. Cary in the Loeb edition)

These views of Hadrian stem from an historian who lived a century afterthe emperor’s reign. He appears as a conscientious administrator, an inveteratetraveler, and a general deeply concerned for the well-being of his armies,and thus of the empire. There was generally peace throughout its lands,although his principate was not entirely peaceful.

First of all, he had to quash the Jewish uprising which had begun underTrajanand spread throughout the diaspora. Then there were disturbances in Mauretania,Dacia, and in northern Britain. Late in his reign, after deciding to resettlethe site of Jerusalem as the city of Aelia Capitolina and build a templeto Jupiter on the site of the Jewish temple, another uprising occurred,more bitter still than its recent predecessor.

Hadrian’s goal as emperor was to establish natural or man-made boundariesfor the empire. He had realized that its extent had severely strained theempire’s capacity to maintain and protect it. Consolidation was his policy,not expansion, and this brought him enmity in the early years, when Trajan’seastern conquests were abandoned (a process already begun by Trajan)and withdrawal from Dacia was contemplated.

Hadrian’s own military experience was extensive. He had served in provincesin the east, along the Danube, and along the Rhine. Soon after his arrivalin Rome, he began the lengthy journeys which took him to almost every province.He was absent from Italy from 121 to 125, from 128 to 132, and from 134to 136. He spent more than half his reign traveling; he displayed a Wanderlustunlike that of any of his predecessors, and sharply contrasting with thepractice of his successor, who never left Italy.

Evidence for his precise routes and his goals is often entirely absent.One must frequently infer from what is known, and most lists differ insome details. The following is exemplary:

121 Gallia
Germania superior
Raetia
Noricum
Germania superior
122 Germania inferior
Britannia (where he began the construction of the
Wall which bears his name)
Gallia
Gallia Narbonensis (Nemausus)
Hispania (Tarraco)
123 Mauretania (?)
Africa (?)
Libya
Cyrene
Crete
Syria
The Euphrates (Melitene)
Pontus
Bithynia
Asia
124 Thrace
Moesia
Dacia
Pannonia
Achaia
Athens
125 Achaea
Sicily
Rome
128 Africa
Rome
Athens
129 Asia
Pamphylia
Phrygia
Pisidia
Cilicia
Syria
Commagene (Samosata)
Cappadocia
Pontus
Syria (Antioch)
130 Judaea
Arabia
Egypt (Nile trip; death of Antinous; Alexandria)
131 Libyan desert
Syria
Asia
Athens
132 Rome
134 Syria
Judaea
Egypt (?)
Syria (Antioch)
135 Syria
136 Rome

His stay in the East these last years was necessitated by the JewishWar. His recurrent visits to Athens stemmed from his devotion to Greekculture and the city itself, which had elected him archon while he wasstill a private citizen (112). He much preferred the eastern provinces,the Greek lands, to the western ones. After 128/9, he was hailed as Olympios,after 132 as Panhellenios, and also as Panionios. Otherwise,his travels were intended to gain intimate knowledge of people and provinces,of the military in all its aspects, and to help produce a better and securerlife for almost all his subjects.

Domestic policy and legal activity

Hadrian was so little in Italy, compared with his time abroad, thathis governmental policies at home play a lesser role in consideration ofhis entire principate. Yet they have significance, because they displaythe same tendency toward order and consolidation as his external policies.When he arrived in Rome in July 118 to a hostile reception on the partof the senate, because of the death of the four consulars, he devoted attentionto matters of significance to the people. He pursued the honors due Trajan,their favorite, examined the financial ledgers of the empire and discoveredthat there was an enormous sum of uncollectable debts, some 900,000,000sesterces. He determined to remove these from the accounts and begin hisreign with a clean slate. Consequently the records of these debts werepublicly burned, an event which, obviously, gained him public favor.[[9]]It was represented in the relief of the plutei Traiani, presentlydisplayed in the Senate house in the Forum.[[10]]He also continued and expanded the practice of the alimenta, wherebystate money was lent to individuals who paid interest to their local communities.This money supported the local economy and helped maintain orphans.[[11]]He also ensured that the grain supply upon which Rome depended became moresecure with his dramatic building program in Ostia.[[12]]

The most significant legal achievement was the codification of the praetorianand aedilician edicts. This task was assigned to Salvius Julianus, whoproduced one of the glories of Roman legal science.

Underscoring the importance of Hadrian’s work, Kunkel in his magisterialsurvey of Roman law indicates, „Edicts were magistral proclamations whosecontent and scope might be very diverse. . . . At least from the late Republiconwards litigants could, vis-à-vis a magistrate, rely onthe contents of the edicts as confidently as on a statute, for magistrateswere by lex Cornelia of 67 B.C. strictly bound by their edicts.“[[13]]

These edicts, covering centuries, Julianus brought together into a straightforwardand modern document, which became the basis of subsequent praetorian andaedilician activity in the field of law. The Edict has been lost, but manyexcerpts made by commentators upon it have survived in Justinian’s Code.[[14]]

Many letters and rescripts of Hadrian have survived, which, in theirvariety, illustrate the almost infinite range of matters which were referredto the emperor. Two important ones may be exemplary. In 121, at the requestof Plotina, who was deeply interested in the Epicurean School at Athens,he permits the presidency of the school to be assumed by someone who isnot a Roman citizen, thereby increasing the pool of potential candidatessubstantially.[[15]] Hadrian’s rescript toMinicius Fundanus is crucial for our understanding of the development ofRome’s relations with the Christians. He essentially reiterates Trajan’sresponse to Pliny (Ep. 10.97). Minicius was governor of Asia in124/5. Hadrian’s communication replied to a question put to him by Minicius’predecessor, Serennius Granianus.[[16]]

Literary and artistic achievements

Hadrian was a man of extraordinary talents, certainly one of the mostgifted that Rome ever produced. He became a fine public speaker, he wasa student of philosophy and other subjects, who could hold his own withthe luminaries in their fields, he wrote both an autobiography and poetry,and he was a superb architect. It was in this last area that he left hisgreatest mark, with several of the empire’s most extraordinary buildingsand complexes stemming from his fertile mind. The anonymous author of theHistoriaAugusta described Hadrian as Fuit enim poematum et litterarum nimiumstudiosissimus. Arithmeticae, geometriae, picturae peritissimus.[[17]]

He rebuilt Agrippa’s Pantheon into the remarkable building that survivestoday, reconstructing the accustomed temple facade, with columns and pediment,but attaching it to a drum which was surmounted by a coffered dome. Thelatter was pierced by an oculus nine meters in diameter, which wasthe main source of illumination. Height and diameter were identical, 43.3meters. The dome remained the largest in the world until the twentiethcentury. As was his custom, he replaced the original inscription of Agrippaon the architrave; seldom did he put his own name on a monument.[[18]]
To complete Trajan’s Forum, which hadbeen planned by Apollodorus on a tremendous scale, he added a large templededicated to the deified Trajan and Plotina.He thereby made this forum more similar to its four imperial predecessors,each of which had a temple as its focus.[[19]]

On April 21, 121, the dies natalis of the city of Rome, Hadrianbegan construction of a temple unique in design and larger than any otherever built by the Romans. Its length of more than 100 meters made it theonly Roman addition to the short list of temples built by the Greeks whichwere at least that long. Even more extraordinary was the interior, withina fully peripteral colonnade. There were two cellae, back to back, withan apse at the end in which were placed the statues of the goddesses Venusand Roma, gigantic statues which, Apollodorus is said to have sneered,would bang their heads if they got up.[[20]]The temple dominated the east end of the Roman forum, built on the heightsof the Velia, overwhelming Titus‘ Arch andfacing the Amphitheatrum Flavium. He thereby linked his own achievementsas conqueror of the Jews and great builder with his Flavian predecessors.Unlike Vespasian and Trajan,who built new fora which bore their names, Hadrian was more interestedin individual monuments, the novelty and magnitude of which would keephis name alive.[[21]] Late in life, he beganconstruction of a mausoleum, larger than that of Augustus, on the otherside of the Tiber and down river from it. It was approached by a new bridgeacross the river, the Pons Aelius. The mausoleum had not been completedat the time of his death.[[22]]His most imaginative,nay stupendous, architectural achievement was his villa at Tibur, the modernTivoli, some 30 kilometers ENE of Rome, in the plain at the foot of theSabine Hills. It covered some 700 acres and contained about 100 buildings,some of which were among the most daring ever attempted in antiquity. HereHadrian reconstructed, so to speak, many of the places which he had visitedin his travels, such as the Canopus of Alexandria and the vale of Tempe.[[23]]

He also left his mark on almost every city and province to which hecame. He paid particular attention to Athens, where he completed the greattemple of Olympian Zeus, some six centuries after construction had begun,and made it the centerpiece of a new district of the city.

Hadrian’s relationship with philosophers and other scholars was generallyfractious. He often scorned their achievements while showing his own superiority.An anecdote about an argument which he had with the eminent philosopherand sophist Favorinus revealed the inequity of such disagreement. AlthoughFavorinus was correct, he gave way to Hadrian, and when rebuked by friends,replied, „You advise me badly, friends, since you do not permit me to believethat he who commands thirty legions is the most learned of all.“[[24]]

Hadrian’s literary taste inclined toward the archaic and the odd. Hepreferred Cato to Cicero, Ennius to Vergil, Coelius Antipater to Sallust,and disapproved of Homer and Plato as well. Indeed, the epic writer Antimachusof Colophon supplanted Homer in Hadrian’s estimation.[[25]]The biographer Suetonius held office under Hadrian but was discharged in122 for disrespect to the empress.[[26]] Thehistorian Tacitus, who may have lived into Hadrian’s reign, seems to havefound no favor with the emperor.

His best known literary work is the short poem which he is said to havecomposed shortly before his death. These five lines have caused commentatorsmuch interpretative woe.

animula vagula blandula
hospes comesque corporis
quae nunc abibis in loca
pallidula rigida nudula
nec ut soles dabis iocos! (25.9)

„Little soul, wandering and pale, guest and companion of my body, youwho will now go off to places pale, stiff, and barren, nor will you makejokes as has been your wont.“[[27]]

Another four lines of verse are preserved by the HA, part ofan exchange with the poet Florus. [[28]] Mentionis also made of his autobiography, which he had published under someoneelse’s name.[[29]]

Antinous

Probably the aspect of Hadrian’s life which is most widely known ishis relationship with the handsome youth Antinous. He was a Bithynian,born about 110, whom Hadrian met when the lad was in his mid-teens. Hejoined Hadrian’s entourage and was with him in Egypt in the fall of 130.During the course of the emperor’s Nile cruise, Antinous drowned. The reason(or reasons) were not known. Conjecture of course abounded. The HAsuggests that Antinous offered himself to save Hadrian’s life and thatthere was a homosexual relationship between them. Tradition also reportedthat Antinous committed suicide because an oracle had stated that, if hedid so, the remaining years of life that he could expect would be transferredto the emperor. There is even the unsensational possibility that the childlessemperor, whose relationship with his wife was at best cool, looked uponthe attractive young man as the son whom he had never had. Whatever thefacts, Hadrian’s grief was extravagant, and he caused the youth to be worshippedas a god throughout the empire and cities in his honor were establishedin many places. An Antinoopolis rose along the Nile near the spot wherehe drowned. Many statues of Antinous have survived, which reveal his fleshyand attractive appearance.[[30]]

End of life and problems of succession

When Hadrian returned to Rome in 136 from the east with its great responsibilitiesof the Jewish War, his health had deteriorated markedly. He was now 60years old, lonely and despondent. The empress Sabina had died, Antinouswas gone, few remained to whom he felt close. He therefore began to contemplatea successor, in order to avoid a situation such as had occurred beforehis own accession. Then, he was the obvious, indeed the only sensible choice;now, there was no one who, by military distinction or close relationshipwith him, would stand out. His choice, L. Ceionius Commodus, was surprising,although he was cos. ord. when adopted. Nothing particularly recommendedhim other than powerful political connections. His health was bad and hehad no military experience, his career having been entirely in the civilianarena. Some scholars have suggested that he was Hadrian’s bastard son,but that need not be believed. Nonetheless, his only recommendation washis good looks; his life was frivolous, his tastes luxurious. Hadrian’schoice seems to have been an aberration of judgment.

Commodus died on the first day of the year 138. Hadrian’s next choice,a much happier one, was T. Aurelius Fulvius BoioniusArrius Antoninus known to history as AntoninusPius. The scion of a distinguished consular family, he had beenborn near Rome in 86, although his patria was Nemausus in GalliaNarbonensis. Consul in 120, at an early age, he soon thereafter servedas one of the four consulares who had jurisdiction of Italy.[[31]]He reached the acme of a senatorial career with his governorship of Asiaabout 134/5. He was one of the most distinguished men of the age.

Hadrian caused Antoninus to adopt twoyoung men, who were intended to succeed him in the fullness of years. Onewas the seven-year-old son of Commodus, now named LuciusAelius Aurelius Commodus, the later LuciusVerus. The other was the seventeen year old MarcusAnnius Verus, now Marcus Aelius AureliusVerus, the later Marcus Aurelius.Upon Antoninus‘ death in 161, they succeededas co-emperors; Hadrian’s foresight was thus rewarded.

Hadrian was at an imperial villa at Baiae, on the Bay of Naples, whenhe died on July 10, 138. The senate now felt it could repay the emperorfor the wrongs done it from the beginning of his reign and undertook tocondemn his memory, in other words, damnatio memoriae. But Antoninusfought against this condemnation of his adoptive father and gained deificationinstead. It is generally thought that it was for this action that he receivedthe name of Pius.[[32]]

Hadrian’s ashes were placed in his mausoleum and he received the customaryhonors of having been recognized as a divus, which above all recognizedthat he had ruled constitutionally. A great temple in the Campus Martiuswas built to his memory in the early 140s, now called the Hadrianeum, oneof the largest in Rome. A substantial part survives. The tall stylobatewas decorated with alternating reliefs of provinces and victories. In alllikelihood, there was a relief of each of the 36 provinces which existedat the time of Hadrian’s death.[[33]]

Reputation

Hadrian died invisus omnibus, according to the author of theVita.[[34]]But his deification placed him in the list of „good“ emperors, a worthysuccessor to the optimus princeps Trajan.Hadrian played a significant role both in developing the foreign policiesof the empire and in its continuing centralization in administration. Fewwould disagree that he was one of the most remarkable men Rome ever produced,and that the empire was fortunate to have him as its head. When AeliusAristides delivered his oration To Rome in 143, he had Hadrian’sempire in mind when he said,
„But there is that which very decidedly deserves as much attention andadmiration now as all the rest together. I mean your magnificent citizenshipwith its grand conception, because there is nothing like it in the recordsof all mankind. Dividing into two groups all those in your empire – andwith this word I have indicated the entire civilized world – you have everywhereappointed to your citizenship, or even to kinship with you, the betterpart of the world’s talent, courage, and leadership, while the rest yourecognizedas a league under your hegemony. Neither sea nor intervening continentare bars to citizenship, nor are Asia and Europe divided in their treatmenthere. In your empire all paths are open to all. No one worthy of rule ortrust remains an alien, but a civil community of the World has been establishedas a Free Republic under one, the best, ruler and teacher of order; andall come together as into a common civic center, in order to receive eachman his due.[[35]]

That being the case, it seems somewhat odd that he is best known tomost people, not from Gibbon’s narrative nor from any specific scholarlytreatment, but from a work of fiction. This is the quite splendid Memoirsof Hadrian by Marguerite Yourcenar, which became a best-seller abouthalf a century ago. She presents a Hadrian as he might have been, and,although she commands a wide range of source material, the reader mustalways be alert to the fact that this Hadrian is not necessarily the historicalHadrian.[[36]]

Scholarly work on the emperor, above all biographies, has been variedin quality. Much the best, as the most recent, is by A.R. Birley, who presentsall that is known but underscores how much is conjecture, nay even guesswork.We still do not really know the man. An enigma he was to many while alive,and so he remains for us. Semper in omnibus varius; omnium curiositatumexplorator; varius multiplex multiformis: these are descriptions ofhim from antiquity.[[37]] They are still validmore than 1900 years after the emperor’s death.
Appendix: Historians and their Craft: TheEvolution of the Historical Hadrian by Andrew Hill

Bibliography

Bardon, H., Les Empereurs et les Lettres Latines d’Auguste àHadrien (Paris, 1968²)
Benario, H.W., A Commentary on the Vita Hadriani in the HistoriaAugusta (Chico, CA, 1980)
Birley, A.R., Lives of the Later Caesars (Harmondsworth, 1976)
________., Hadrian, The Restless Emperor (London, 1997)
Boatwright, M.T., Hadrian and the City of Rome (Princeton, 1987)
Bowersock, G.W., Greek Sophists in the Roman Empire (Oxford,1969)
Braund, D., Rome and the Friendly King: The Character of theClient Kingship (London, 1984)
Chevallier, R., and R. Poignault, L’Empereur Hadrien (Paris,1998)
Clark, E., Rome and a Villa (Garden City, NY, 1952) 141-94
Crook, J.A., Consilium Principis. Imperial Councils and Counsellorsfrom Augustus to Diocletain (Cambridge, 1955)
de Serviez, J.R., tr. B. Molesworth, The Roman Empresses (London,1752; New York, 1913) II 1-20
Eck, W., „Hadrianus,“ in Der Neue Pauly 5 (1998) cols. 59-64
Fein, S., Die Beziehungen der Kaiser Trajan und Hadrian zu den litterati(Stuttgart and Leipzig, 1994)
Garzetti, A., From Tiberius to the Antonines (translated by J.R.Foster, London, 1974)
Gibbon, E., The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. 1,(London, 1776)
Halfmann, H., Itinera principum (Stuttgart 1986)
Hammond, M., The Antonine Monarchy (Rome, 1959)
Lambert, R., Beloved and God. The Story of Hadrian and Antinous(New York, 1984)
Levi, M.A., Adriano Augusto. Studi e ricerche (Rome, 1993)
________. Adriano. Un Ventennio di Cambiamento (Milan,1994)
Macdonald, W.L., The Pantheon (Cambridge, MA, 1976)
Mattern, S.P., Rome and the Enemy. Imperial Strategy in the Principate(Berkeley, 1999)
Millar, F., A Study of Cassius Dio (Oxford, 1964)
________., The Emperor in the Roman World (Ithaca, NY, 1977)
Nash, E., Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome, two volumes (London,1961-62)
Perowne, S., Hadrian (London, 1960)
Smallwood, E.M., Documents Illustrating the Principates of NervaTrajan and Hadrian (Cambridge, 1966)
Syme, R., „Hadrian and Italica,“ in Roman Papers II (Oxford,1979) 617-28
________., „Hadrian and the Vassal Princes,“ in Roman Papers III(Oxford, 1984) 1436-46
________., „Hadrian as Philhellene,“ in Roman Papers V (Oxford,1988) 546-62
________., „The Career of Arrian,“ in Roman Papers V (Oxford,1988) 21-49
________., „Hadrian and the Senate,“ in Roman Papers V (Oxford,1988) 295-324
________., „Hadrian the Intellectual,“ in Roman Papers VI (Oxford,1991) 103-14
________., „Fictional History Old and New: Hadrian,“ in Roman PapersVI (Oxford, 1991) 157-81
________., „Journeys of Hadrian,“ in Roman Papers VI (Oxford,1991) 346-57
________., „Hadrian’s Autobiography: Servianus and Sura,“ in RomanPapers (Oxford, 1991) 398-408
Toynbee, J.M.C., The Hadrianic School (Cambridge, 1934)
Weber, W., „Hadrian,“ in Cambridge Ancient History XI (Cambridge,1936) 294-324
Yourcenar, M., Memoirs of Hadrian (New York, 1954)

Footnotes

[[1]] See Benario, A Commentary, and Birley,Lives.
[[2]] See Syme, The Historia Augusta.
[[3]] See Millar, Cassius Dio.
[[4]] HA Vita Hadriani 1, PIR²A 184.
[[5]] M. Durry, „Sur Trajan père,“ in LesEmpereurs Romains d’Espagne (Paris, 1965) 45-54.
[[6]] Epitome de Caesaribus 14.8.
[[7]] Historiae 1.4.2.
[[8]] Dio 69.2.5-6.
[[9]] Dio 69.8.1.
[[10]] Nash II 176-77.
[[11]] See M. Rostovtzeff, Social and EconomicHistory of the Roman Empire (Oxford, 1957) chap. 8.
[[12]] See W.L. MacDonald, The Architecture ofthe Roman Empire
II (New Haven, 1986) 253-54.
[[13]] W. Kunkel, An Introduction to Roman Legaland Constitutional History, tr. J.M. Kelly, (Oxford, 1966)88-89.
[[14]] S. Riccobono, Fontes Iuris Romani Antejustiniani(Florence, 1941) 335-91.
[[15]] Smallwood 442.
[[16]] Eusebius, Historia ecclesiastica 4.8.6,4.9. See R. Freudenberger, Das Verhalten der römischen Behördengegen die Christen im 2. Jahrhundert (Munich, 1967) 216-34.
[[17]] VH 14.8-9; see also Dio 69.3.
[[18]] See MacDonald (above, note 12) I (New Haven,1965) 94-121; Nash II 170-75.
[[19]] Nash I 450-56.
[[20]] MacDonald (above, note 12) I 129-37; Dio69.4.
[[21]] Nash II 496-99.
[[22]] Nash II 44-48.
[[23]] W.L. MacDonald & J.A. Pinto, Hadrian’sVilla and Its Legacy (New Haven, 1995)
[[24]] VH 15.12-13.
[[25]] VH 16.2; Dio 69.4.6.
[[26]] VH 11.3.
[[27]] See B. Baldwin, „Hadrian’s farewell to life.Some arguments for authenticity,“ CQ 20 (1970) 372-74.
[[28]] VH 16.3-4.
[[29]] See Bardon, 393-424.
[[30]] Dio 69.11; see Lambert.
[[31]] VH 22.3.
[[32]] Dio 69.17.
[[33]] Nash I 457-61; see Toynbee.
[[34]] VH 25.7.
[[35]] J.H. Oliver, The Ruling Power (Philadelphia,1953), chaps. 59 and 60, 901.
[[36]] See Syme, Fictional History.
[[37]] VH 14.11; Tertullian, Apologetica5.7; Epitome de Caesaribus 14.6.

Copyright (C) 2000, Herbert W. Benario. This file may be copied onthe condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyrightnotice, remain intact.

Comments to: Herbert W. Benario.
Updated: 24 September 2008

Unveränd. Zweitpubl. v. Herbert W. Benario: Hadrian (98-117 A.D.), in: De Imperatoribus Romanis. An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers [24.09.2008], http://www.luc.edu/roman-emperors/hadrian.htm.

DE IMPERATORIBUS ROMANIS

An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers

DIR Atlas

Trajan (98-117 A.D.)

Herbert W. Benario, Emory University

Abb.: http://www.luc.edu/roman-emperors/trjan-s1.jpe

Introduction and Sources

„During a happy period of more than fourscore years, the public administration was conducted by the virtue and abilities of Nerva, Trajan, Hadrian, and the two Antonines. It is the design of this and of the two succeeding chapters to describe the prosperous condition of their empire, and afterwards, from the death of Marcus Antoninus, to deduce the most important circumstances of its decline and fall, a revolution which will ever be remembered and is still felt by the nations of the earth.“ [[1]]

This is perhaps the most important and best known of all Edward Gibbon’s famous dicta about his vast subject, and particularly that period which he admired the most. It was a concatenation of chance and events which brought to the first position of the principate five men, each very different from the others, who each, in his own way, brought integrity and a sense of public duty to his tasks. Nerva’s tenure was brief, as many no doubt had expected and hoped it would be, and perhaps his greatest achievement was to choose Trajan as his adoptive son and intended successor. It was a splendid choice. Trajan was one of Rome’s most admirable figures, a man who merited the renown which he enjoyed in his lifetime and in subsequent generations.

The sources for the man and his principate are disappointingly skimpy. There is no contemporaneous historian who can illuminate the period. Tacitus speaks only occasionally of Trajan, there is no biography by Suetonius, nor even one by the author of the late and largely fraudulent Historia Augusta. (However, a modern version of what such a life might have been like has been composed by A. Birley, entirely based upon ancient evidence. It is very useful.) Pliny the Younger tells us the most, in his Panegyricus, his long address of thanks to the emperor upon assuming the consulship in late 100, and in his letters. Pliny was a wordy and congenial man, who reveals a great deal about his senatorial peers and their relations with the emperor, above all, of course, his own. The most important part is the tenth book of his Epistulae, which contains the correspondence between him, while serving in Bithynia, and the emperor, to whom he referred all manner of problems, important as well as trivial. Best known are the pair (96,97) dealing with the Christians and what was to be done with them. These would be extraordinarily valuable if we could be sure that the imperial replies stemmed directly from Trajan, but that is more than one can claim. The imperial chancellery had developed greatly in previous decades and might pen these communications after only the most general directions from the emperor. The letters are nonetheless unique in the insight they offer into the emperor’s mind. [[2]]

Cassius Dio, who wrote in the decade of the 230s, wrote a long imperial history which has survived only in abbreviated form in book LXVIII for the Trajanic period. [[3]] The rhetorician Dio of Prusa, a contemporary of the emperor, offers little of value. Fourth-century epitomators, Aurelius Victor and Eutropius, offer some useful material. Inscriptions, coins, papyri, and legal texts are of major importance. Since Trajan was a builder of many significant projects, archaeology contributes mightily to our understanding of the man.

Early Life and Career

The patria of the Ulpii was Italica, in Spanish Baetica [[4]], where their ancestors had settled late in the third century B.C. This indicates that the Italian origin was paramount, yet it has recently been cogently argued that the family’s ancestry was local, with Trajan senior actually a Traius who was adopted into the family of the Ulpii.[[4a]] Trajan’s father was the first member of the family to pursue a senatorial career; it proved to be a very successful one. Born probably about the year 30, he perhaps commanded a legion under Corbulo in the early sixties and then was legate of legio X Fretensis under Vespasian, governor of Judaea. Success in the Jewish War was rewarded by the governorship of an unknown province and then a consulate in 70. He was thereafter adlected by the emperor in patricios and sent to govern Baetica. Then followed the governorship of one of the major military provinces, Syria, where he prevented a Parthian threat of invasion, and in 79/80 he was proconsul of Asia, one of the two provinces (the other was Africa) which capped a senatorial career. His public service now effectively over, he lived on in honor and distinction, in all likelihood seeing his son emperor. He probably died before 100. He was deified in 113 and his titulature read divus Traianus pater. Since his son was also the adoptive son of Nerva, the emperor had officially two fathers, a unique circumstance. [[5]]

The son was born in Italica on September 18, 53; his mother was Marcia, who had given birth to a daughter, Ulpia Marciana, five years before the birth of the son. In the mid seventies, he was a legionary legate under his father in Syria. He then married a lady from Nemausus (Nimes) in Gallia Narbonensis, Pompeia Plotina, was quaestor about 78 and praetor about 84. In 86, he became one of the child Hadrian’s guardians. He was then appointed legate of legio VII Gemina in Hispania Tarraconensis, from which he marched at Domitian’s orders in 89 to crush the uprising of Antonius Saturninus along the Rhine. He next fought in Domitian’s war against the Germans along Rhine and Danube and was rewarded with an ordinary consulship in 91. Soon followed the governorship of Moesia inferior and then that of Germania superior, with his headquarters at Moguntiacum (Mainz), whither Hadrian brought him the news in autumn 97 that he had been adopted by the emperor Nerva, as co-ruler and intended successor. Already recipient of the title imperator and possessor of the tribunician power, when Nerva died on January 27, 98, Trajan became emperor in a smooth transition of power which marked the next three quarters of a century.

Early Years through the Dacian Wars

Trajan did not return immediately to Rome. He chose to stay in his German province and settle affairs on that frontier. He showed that he approved Domitian’s arrangements, with the establishment of two provinces, their large military garrisons, and the beginnings of the limes. [[6]] Those who might have wished for a renewed war of conquest against the Germans were disappointed. The historian Tacitus may well have been one of these. [[7]]

Trajan then visited the crucial Danube provinces of Pannonia and Moesia, where the Dacian king Decebalus had caused much difficulty for the Romans and had inflicted a heavy defeat upon a Roman army about a decade before. Domitian had established a modus vivendi with Decebalus, essentially buying his good behavior, but the latter had then continued his activities hostile to Rome. Trajan clearly thought that this corner of empire would require his personal attention and a lasting and satisfactory solution. [[8]]

Trajan spent the year 100 in Rome, seeing to the honors and deification of his predecessor, establishing good and sensitive relations with the senate, in sharp contrast with Domitian’s „war against the senate.“ [[9]] Yet his policies essentially continued Domitian’s; he was no less master of the state and the ultimate authority over individuals, but his good nature and respect for those who had until recently been his peers if not his superiors won him great favor. [[10]] He was called optimus by the people and that word began to appear among his titulature, although it had not been decreed by the senate. Yet his thoughts were ever on the Danube. Preparations for a great campaign were under way, particularly with transfers of legions and their attendant auxiliaries from Germany and Britain and other provinces and the establishment of two new ones, II Traiana and XXX Ulpia, which brought the total muster to 30, the highest number yet reached in the empire’s history.

In 101 the emperor took the field. The war was one which required all his military abilities and all the engineering and discipline for which the Roman army was renowned. Trajan was fortunate to have Apollodorus of Damascus in his service, who built a roadway through the Iron Gates by cantilevering it from the sheer face of the rock so that the army seemingly marched on water. He was also to build a great bridge across the Danube, with 60 stone piers (traces of this bridge still survive). When Trajan was ready to move he moved with great speed, probably driving into the heart of Dacian territory with two columns, until, in 102, Decebalus chose to capitulate. He prostrated himself before Trajan and swore obedience; he was to become a client king. Trajan returned to Rome and added the title Dacicus to his titulature.

Decebalus, however, once left to his own devices, undertook to challenge Rome again, by raids across the Danube into Roman territory and by attempting to stir up some of the tribes north of the river against her. Trajan took the field again in 106, intending this time to finish the job of Decebalus‘ subjugation. It was a brutal struggle, with some of the characteristics of a war of extirpation, until the Dacian king, driven from his capital of Sarmizegethusa and hunted like an animal, chose to commit suicide rather than to be paraded in a Roman triumph and then be put to death.

The war was over. It had taxed Roman resources, with 11 legions involved, but the rewards were great. Trajan celebrated a great triumph, which lasted 123 days and entertained the populace with a vast display of gladiators and animals. The land was established as a province, the first on the north side of the Danube. Much of the native population which had survived warfare was killed or enslaved, their place taken by immigrants from other parts of the empire. The vast wealth of Dacian mines came to Rome as war booty, enabling Trajan to support an extensive building program almost everywhere, but above all in Italy and in Rome. In the capital, Apollodorus designed and built in the huge forum already under construction a sculpted column, precisely 100 Roman feet high, with 23 spiral bands filled with 2500 figures, which depicted, like a scroll being unwound, the history of both Dacian wars. It was, and still is, one of the great achievements of imperial „propaganda.“ [[11]] In southern Dacia, at Adamklissi, a large tropaeum was built on a hill, visible from a great distance, as a tangible statement of Rome’s domination. Its effect was similar to that of Augustus‘ monument at La Turbie above Monaco; both were constant reminders for the inhabitants who gazed at it that they had once been free and were now subjects of a greater power. [[12]]

Administration and Social Policy

The chief feature of Trajan’s administration was his good relations with the senate, which allowed him to accomplish whatever he wished without general opposition. His auctoritas was more important than his imperium. At the very beginning of Trajan’s reign, the historian Tacitus, in the biography of his father-in-law Agricola, spoke of the newly won compatibility of one-man rule and individual liberty established by Nerva and expanded by Trajan (Agr. 3.1, primo statim beatissimi saeculi ortu Nerva Caesar res olim dissociabiles miscuerit, principatum ac libertatem, augeatque cotidie felicitatem temporum Nerva Traianus,….) [13] At the end of the work, Tacitus comments, when speaking of Agricola’s death, that he had forecast the principate of Trajan but had died too soon to see it (Agr. 44.5, ei non licuit durare in hanc beatissimi saeculi lucem ac principem Traianum videre, quod augurio votisque apud nostras aures ominabatur,….) Whether one believes that principate and liberty had truly been made compatible or not, this evidently was the belief of the aristocracy of Rome. Trajan, by character and actions, contributed to this belief, and he undertook to reward his associates with high office and significant promotions. During his principate, he himself held only 6 consulates, while arranging for third consulates for several of his friends. Vespasian had been consul 9 times, Titus 8, Domitian 17! In the history of the empire there were only 12 or 13 privati who reached the eminence of third consulates. Agrippa had been the first, L. Vitellius the second. Under Trajan there were 3: Sex. Iulius Frontinus (100), T. Vestricius Spurinna (100), and L. Licinius Sura (107). There were also 10 who held second consulships: L. Iulius Ursus Servianus (102), M.‘ Laberius Maximus (103), Q. Glitius Atilius Agricola (103), P. Metilius Sabinus Nepos (103?), Sex. Attius Suburanus Aemilianus (104), Ti. Iulius Candidus Marius Celsus (105), C. Antius A. Iulius Quadratus (105), Q. Sosius Senecio (107), A. Cornelius Palma Frontonianus (109), and L. Publilius Celsus (113). These men were essentially his close associates from pre-imperial days and his prime military commanders in the Dacian wars.

One major administrative innovation can be credited to Trajan. This was the introduction of curatores who, as representatives of the central government, assumed financial control of local communities, both in Italy and the provinces. Pliny in Bithynia is the best known of these imperial officials. The inexorable shift from freedmen to equestrians in the imperial ministries continued, to culminate under Hadrian, [[14]] and he devoted much attention and considerable state resources to the expansion of the alimentary system, which purposed to support orphans throughout Italy. [[15]] The splendid arch at Beneventum represents Trajan as a civilian emperor, with scenes of ordinary life and numerous children depicted, which underscored the prosperity of Italy. [[16]]

The satirist Juvenal, a contemporary of the emperor, in one of his best known judgments, laments that the citizen of Rome, once master of the world, is now content only with „bread and circuses.“

Nam qui dabat olim / imperium, fasces, legiones, omnia, nunc se / continet, atque duas tantum res anxius optat, / panem et circenses. (X 78-81)

Trajan certainly took advantage of that mood, indeed exacerbated it, by improving the reliabilty of the grain supply (the harbor at Ostia and the distribution system as exemplified in the Mercati in Rome). [[17]] Fronto did not entirely approve, if indeed he approved at all. [[18]] The plebs esteemed the emperor for the glory he had brought Rome, for the great wealth he had won which he turned to public uses, and for his personality and manner. Though emperor, he prided himself upon being civilis, a term which indicated comportment suitable for a Roman citizen. [[19]]

There was only one major addition to the Rome’s empire other than Dacia in the first decade and a half of Trajan’s reign. This was the province of Arabia, which followed upon the absorption of the Nabataean kingdom (105-106). [[20]]

Building Projects

Trajan had significant effect upon the infrastructure of both Rome and Italy. His greatest monument in the city, if the single word „monument“ can effectively describe the complex, was the forum which bore his name, much the largest, and the last, of the series known as the „imperial fora.“ Excavation for a new forum had already begun under Domitian, but it was Apollodorus who designed and built the whole. Enormous in its extent, the Basilica Ulpia was the centerpiece, the largest wood roofed building in the Roman world. In the open courtyard before it was an equestrian statue of Trajan, behind it was the column; there were libraries, one for Latin scrolls, the other for Greek, on each side. A significant omission was a temple; this circumstance was later rectified by Hadrian, who built a large temple to the deified Trajan and Plotina.

The column was both a history in stone and the intended mausoleum for the emperor, whose ashes were indeed placed in the column base. An inscription over the doorway, somewhat cryptic because part of the text has disappeared, reads as follows:

Senatus populusque Romanus imp. Caesari divi Nervae f. Nervae Traiano Aug. Germ. Dacico pontif. Maximo trib. pot. XVII imp. VI p.p. ad declarandum quantae altitudinis mons et locus tant[is oper]ibus sit egestus

(Smallwood 378)

On the north side of the forum, built into the slopes of the Quirinal hill, were the Markets of Trajan, which served as a shopping mall and the headquarters of the annona, the agency responsible for the receipt and distribution of grain. [[21]]

On the Esquiline hill was constructed the first of the huge imperial baths, using a large part of Nero’sDomus Aurea as its foundations. On the other side of the river a new aqueduct was constructed, which drew its water from Lake Bracciano and ran some 60 kilometers to the heights of the Janiculum Hill. It was dedicated in 109. A section of its channel survives in the basement of the American Academy in Rome. [[22]]

The arch in Beneventum is the most significant monument elsewhere in Italy. It was dedicated in 114, to mark the beginning of the new Via Traiana, which offered an easier route to Brundisium than that of the ancient Via Appia. [[23]]

Trajan devoted much attention to the construction and improvement of harbors. His new hexagonal harbor at Ostia at last made that port the most significant in Italy, supplanting Puteoli, so that henceforth the grain ships docked there and their cargo was shipped by barge up the Tiber to Rome. Terracina benefited as well from harbor improvements, and the Via Appia now ran directly through the city along a new route, with some 130 Roman feet of sheer cliff being cut away so that the highway could bend along the coast. Ancona on the Adriatic Sea became the major harbor on that coast for central Italy in 114-115, and Trajan’s activity was commemorated by an arch. The inscription reports that the senate and people dedicated it to the providentissimo principi quod accessum Italiae hoc etiam addito ex pecunia sua portu tutiorem navigantibus reddiderit (Smallwood 387). Centumcellae, the modern Civitavecchia, also profited from a new harbor. The emperor enjoyed staying there, and on at least one occasion summoned his consilium there. [[24]]

Elsewhere in the empire the great bridge at Alcantara in Spain, spanning the Tagus River, still in use, [[25]] testifies to the significant attention the emperor gave to the improvement of communication throughout his entire domain.

Family Relations; the Women

After the death of his father, Trajan had no close male relatives. His life was as closely linked with his wife and female relations as that of any of his predecessors; these women played enormously important roles in the empire’s public life, and received honors perhaps unparalleled. His wife, Pompeia Plotina, is reported to have said, when she entered the imperial palace in Rome for the first time, that she hoped she would leave it the same person she was when she entered. [[26]] She received the title Augusta no later than 105. She survived Trajan, dying probably in 121, and was honored by Hadrian with a temple, which she shared with her husband, in the great forum which the latter had built.

His sister Marciana, five years his elder, and he shared a close affection. She received the title Augusta, along with Plotina, in 105 and was deified in 112 upon her death. Her daughter Matidia became Augusta upon her mother’s death, and in her turn was deified in 119. Both women received substantial monuments in the Campus Martius, there being basilicas of each and a temple of divae Matidiae. Hadrian was responsible for these buildings, which were located near the later temple of the deified Hadrian, not far from the column of Marcus Aurelius. [[27]]

Matidia’s daughter, Sabina, was married to Hadrian in the year 100. The union survived almost to the end of Hadrian’s subsequent principate, in spite of the mutual loathing that they had for each other. Sabina was Trajan’s great niece, and thereby furnished Hadrian a crucial link to Trajan.

The women played public roles as significant as any of their predecessors. They traveled with the emperor on public business and were involved in major decisions. They were honored throughout the empire, on monuments as well as in inscriptions. Plotina, Marciana, and Matidia, for example, were all honored on the arch at Ancona along with Trajan. [[28]]

The Parthian War

In 113, Trajan began preparations for a decisive war against Parthia. He had been a „civilian“ emperor for seven years, since his victory over the Dacians, and may well have yearned for a last, great military achievement, which would rival that of Alexander the Great. Yet there was a significant cause for war in the Realpolitik of Roman-Parthian relations, since the Parthians had placed a candidate of their choice upon the throne of Armenia without consultation and approval of Rome. When Trajan departed Rome for Antioch, in a leisurely tour of the eastern empire while his army was being mustered, he probably intended to destroy at last Parthia’s capabilities to rival Rome’s power and to reduce her to the status of a province (or provinces). It was a great enterprise, marked by initial success but ultimate disappointment and failure.

In 114 he attacked the enemy through Armenia and then, over three more years, turned east and south, passing through Mesopotamia and taking Babylon and the capital of Ctesiphon. He then is said to have reached the Persian Gulf and to have lamented that he was too old to go further in Alexander’s footsteps. In early 116 he received the title Parthicus.

The territories, however, which had been handily won, were much more difficult to hold. Uprisings among the conquered peoples, and particularly among the Jews in Palestine and the Diaspora, caused him to gradually resign Roman rule over these newly-established provinces as he returned westward. The revolts were brutally suppressed. In mid 117, Trajan, now a sick man, was slowly returning to Italy, having left Hadrian in command in the east, when he died in Selinus of Cilicia on August 9, having designated Hadrian as his successor while on his death bed. Rumor had it that Plotina and Matidia were responsible for the choice, made when the emperor was already dead. Be that as it may, there was no realistic rival to Hadrian, linked by blood and marriage to Trajan and now in command of the empire’s largest military forces. Hadrian received notification of his designation on August 11, and that day marked his dies imperii. Among Hadrian’s first acts was to give up all of Trajan’s eastern conquests.

Trajan’s honors and reputation

Hadrian saw to it that Trajan received all customary honors: the late emperor was declared a divus, his victories were commemorated in a great triumph, and his ashes were placed in the base of his column. Trajan’s reputation remained unimpaired, in spite of the ultimate failure of his last campaigns. Early in his principate, he had unofficially been honored with the title optimus, „the best,“ which long described him even before it became, in 114, part of his official titulature. His correspondence with Pliny enables posterity to gain an intimate sense of the emperor in action. His concern for justice and the well-being of his subjects is underscored by his comment to Pliny, when faced with the question of the Christians, that they were not to be sought out, „nor is it appropriate to our age.“ [[29]] At the onset of his principate, Tacitus called Trajan’s accession the beginning of a beatissimum saeculum, [[30]] and so it remained in the public mind. Admired by the people, respected by the senatorial aristocracy, he faced no internal difficulties, with no rival nor opposition. His powers were as extensive as Domitian’s had been, but his use and display of these powers were very different from those of his predecessor, who had claimed to be deus et dominus. Not claiming to be a god, he was recognized in the official iconography of sculpture as Jupiter’s viceregent on earth, so depicted on the attic reliefs of the Beneventan arch. [[31]] The passage of time increased Trajan’s aura rather than diminished it. In the late fourth century, when the Roman Empire had dramatically changed in character from what it had been in Trajan’s time, each new emperor was hailed with the prayer, felicior Augusto, melior Traiano, „may he be luckier than Augustus and better than Trajan.“ [[32]] That reputation has essentially survived into the present day.

Bibliography

Bennett, J., Trajan Optimus Princeps. A Life and Times (London and New York, 1997)

Birley, A., Lives of the Later Caesars: The First Part of the Augustan History with Newly Compiled Lives of Nerva and Trajan (London, 1976)

Bourne, F.C., „The Roman Alimentary Program and Italian Agriculture,“ TAPA 91 (1960) 47-75

Bowersock, G.W., Roman Arabia (Cambridge, MA, 1983)

Canto, A.M., „Los Traii béticos: revisiones y novedades sobre la familia y el origen de Trajano,“ in XIX Centenario del emperador Trajano, Actas del Curso de Verano 1998, Universidad Complutense de Madrid, dir. J.M. Blázquez Martinez, in press.

Cizek, E., L’Epoque de Trajan. Circonstances Politiques et Problèmes Idéologiques (Paris, 1983)

Duncan-Jones, R., „The Purpose and Organisation of the Alimenta,“ PBSR 32 (1964) 123-46

Durry, M., Pline le Jeune. Panégyrique de Trajan (Paris, 1938)

________. „Sur Trajan père,“ in Les Empereurs Romains d’Espagne (Paris 1965) 48-57

Fears, J.R., Princeps A Diis Electus: The Divine Election of the Emperor as a Political Concept at Rome (Rome, 1977)

Fell, M., Optimus princeps?: Anspruch und Wirklichkeit der imperialen Programmatik Kaiser Traians (Munich, 1992)

Garzetti, A., From Tiberius to the Antonines (translated by J.R. Foster, London, 1974)

Gibbon, E., The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire, vol. 1, (London, 1776)

Hammond, M., The Antonine Monarchy (Rome, 1959)

________. „Res olim dissociabiles: Principatus ac Libertas – Liberty Under the Early Roman Empire,“ HSCP 67 (1963) 93-113

Hands, A.R., Charities and Social Aid in Greece and Rome (Ithaca, NY, 1968)

Hassel, F.J., Der Trajansbogen in Benevent: ein Bauwerk des römischen Senates (Mainz, 1966)

Lepper, F.A., Trajan’s Parthian War (Oxford, 1948)

Lepper, F., and S. Frere, Trajan’s Column. A New Edition of the Cichorius Plates (Gloucester, 1988)

Longden, R.P., „Nerva and Trajan“ and „The Wars of Trajan,“ in Cambridge Ancient History (Cambridge, 1936) 188-252

Masi, F., Traiano (Il principe che portò l’Impero Romano alla massima espansione) (Rome, 1993)

Millar, F., A Study of Cassius Dio (Oxford, 1964)

________. The Emperor in the Roman World (Ithaca, NY, 1977)

Nash, E., Pictorial Dictionary of Ancient Rome, two volumes (London, 1961-62)

Packer, J.E., The Forum of Trajan in Rome: A Study of the Monuments (Berkeley, CA, 1997)

Paribeni, R., Optimus Princeps: Saggio sulla storia e sui tempi dell’imperatore Traiano, two vols., (Messina 1926-27)

Raepsaet-Charlier, M.-T., Prosopographie des Femmes de l’Ordre Sénatorial(Ier-IIe siècles) (Louvain, 1987)

Richmond, I.A., „Trajan’s Army on Trajan’s Column,“ PBSR 13 (1935) 1-40

________. „Adamklissi,“ PBSR 35 (1967) 29-39

________. „The Arch of Beneventum,“ in P. Salway, ed., Roman Archaeology and Art (London, 1969) 229-38

Rossi, L., Trajan’s Column and the Dacian Wars (London, 1971)

Sherwin-White, A.N., The Letters of Pliny. A Historical and Social Commentary (Oxford, 1966)

Smallwood, E.M., Documents Illustrating the Principates of Nerva Trajan and Hadrian (Cambridge, 1966)

Strobel, K., Untersuchungen zu den Dakerkriegen Trajans: Studien zur Geschichte des mittleren und unteren Donauraumes in der Hohen Kaiserzeit (Bonn, 1984)

Syme, R., Tacitus (Oxford, 1958)

Talbert, R.J.A., The Senate of Imperial Rome (Princeton, NJ, 1984)

Temporini, H., Die Frauen am Hofe Trajans: Ein Beitrag zur Stellung der Augustae im Prinzipat (Berlin, 1978)

Waters, K.H., „Traianus Domitiani Continuator,“ AJP 90 (1969) 385-404

________. „Trajan’s Character in the Literary Tradition,“ in J.A.S. Evans, ed., POLIS AND IMPERIUM. Studies in Honour of Edward Togo Salmon (Toronto, 1974) 233-52

________. „The Reign of Trajan, and its Place in Contemporary Scholarship (1960-72),“ in ANRW II 2 (Berlin/New York, 1975) 381-431

Footnotes

[[1]] The end of Gibbon’s first paragraph

[[2]] See Sherwin-White and Millar, Emperor

[[3]] See Millar, Cassius Dio

[[4]] Syme, Tacitus, 30-44; PIR Vlpivs 575

[[4a]] See Canto.

[[5]] Durry, „Sur Trajan père“

[[6]] Syme, CAH XI (Cambridge, 1936) 158-87; A. King, Roman Gaul and Germany (Berkeley, CA, 1990); C.-M. Ternes, Die Römer an Rhein und Mosel (Stuttgart, 1975)

[[7]] See H.W. Benario, Tacitus Germany (Warminster, 1999)

[[8]] See Syme, „Domitian: The Last Years,“ in idem, Roman Papers IV (Oxford, 1988) 252-77

[[9]] Tacitus, Agricola 1-3

[[10]] Waters, „Traianus Domitiani Continuator“

[[11]] See Lepper and Frere, Packer, and Richmond, „Trajan’s Army“

[[12]] See P. MacKendrick, Roman France (London, 1971) 86-89

[[13]] See Hammond, „Res olim“

[[14]] See Millar, Emperor

[[15]] See Bourne, Duncan-Jones, and Hands

[[16]] See Hassel

[[17]] R. Meiggs, Roman Ostia (Oxford, 1973²) and Packer

[[18]] Principia Historiae 20, ut qui sciret populum Romanum duabus praecipue rebus, annona et spectaculis, teneri; imperium non minus ludicris quam seriis probari atque maiore damno seria, graviore invidia ludicra neglegi.

[[19]] I. Lana, „Civilis, cililiter, civilitas in Tacito e in Suetonio. Contributo alla storia del lessico politico-romano nell’età imperiale,“ Atti Acc. Sc. Torino. Cl. Sc. Mor. Stor. Filol. 106 (1972) f.II, 465-87

[[20]] See Bowersock

[[21]] See G. Rickman, The Corn Supply of Ancient Rome (Oxford, 1980)

[[22]] See P.J. Aicher, Guide to the Aqueducts of Ancient Rome (Wauconda, IL, 1995) 44, 76-79

[[23]] See G. Radke, Viae publicae Romanae (Stuttgart, 1971) cols. 96-98

[[24]] Epist. 6.31

[[25]] Smallwood 389; C. O’Connor, Roman Bridges (Cambridge, 1993) 109-11

[[26]] Dio 68.5.5

[[27]] See Nash

[[28]] See Temporini, Raepsaet-Charlier 631, 681, 802, 824

[[29]] Epist. 10.97.2, nam et pessimi exempli nec nostri saeculi est

[[30]] Agr. 44.5

[[31]] See Fears

[[32]] Eutropius, Breviarium 8.5.3

Copyright (C) 2000, Herbert W. Benario. This file may be copied on the condition that the entire contents, including the header and this copyright notice, remain intact.

Comments to: Herbert W. Benario.

Updated: 23 July 2003

Unveränd. Zweitpubl. v. Herbert W. Benario: Trajan (98-117 A.D.), in: De Imperatoribus Romanis. An Online Encyclopedia of Roman Rulers [23.07.2003], http://www.roman-emperors.org/trajan.htm