Julian Bennett, Trajan Optimus Princeps: A Life and Times (affiliate link). New York: Routledge, 1997. 312 pages.
Over the years I have collected biographies on various Roman emperors. Some—like Augustus, Tiberius, and Nero—interest me because of their influence on the New Testament. Others, like Augustus, played an enormous role in the direction the Roman Empire took. A few, like Nero, are fascinating because of their enormous ego and evil. In my reading, I have come across many references to Trajan, but I knew little about him. This book provides a scholarly look at one of the better emperors.
Julian Bennett writes in a scholarly manner, including many Latin words and references to ancient Roman terms that may challenge someone who is unfamiliar with that historic period. He also gives detailed explainations of various customs and cultural practices of the period, which some readers might find tedious. Nevertheless, I have struggled to find good biographies on Roman emperors, so this book was helpful.
Bennett points out that few, if any, Roman emperors were more popular than Trajan with ordinary people (xvi). And not many had a more amicable relationship with the senate than he did. There is a tradition that St. Gregory actually prayed for the dead Trajan’s salvation, because he was impressed with all he had done to better the Roman empire (xvi). According to legend, God granted Gregory’s request but forbade him from praying for the salvation of anyone else who had already died!
Edward Gibbon, in his famed history of the Roman Empire, declared that Trajan introduced the “Golden Age” of the Roman Empire (xvii).
Trajan was born in 53 A.D. (13). His family grew up in the province of modern Spain. As with many famous people, history smiled upon Trajan’s family and granted them opportunities to rise up the ranks of society. In 67 A.D., Nero appointed Vespasian to lead the Roman army in suppressing the Jews in Judea (14). Trajan’s father would become a loyal and effective supporter of Vespasian, and Trajan’s family would rise along with Vespasian. On June 9, 68, Nero committed suicide (16). When the dust settled, Vespasian was emperor.
During this time, Trainus, Trajan’s father, served the emperor well in every assignment he was given. His son Trajan was raised along with the emperor’s household. Titus followed his father to the throne but died prematurely. This left Domitian the throne. Domitian was generally hated by those he led and was ultimately murdered by his own entourage (33). It is said that Domitian kept a list of people he feared under his pillow with the intention of having them killed at the earliest possible opportunity (33). Some of the people on that list rose up and killed him first on September 18, 96, which was Trajan’s 40th birthday (34).
Nerva became emperor in Domitian’s place. He was 63 years old and a stop gap after his hated predecessor. Much of Trajan’s reign can be explained as a reaction to Domitian’s.
Domitian attempted to make the empire stronger and to address some of its pressing issues. But his megalomania, cruelty, and paranoia caused him to become one of Rome’s most despised emperors. When he died, the senate voted to remove all statues of him and to banish his name and memory to infamy (34). Nerva tried to lighten the oppression. However, the Praetorian Guard pressured Nerva into turning over those who murdered Domitian so they could cruelly execute them (41). Once Nerva granted more freedom to the people, some took advantage of him and lost respect for him. Sensing he was losing control over the army and Praetorian Guard, Nerva adopted Trajan and made him his heir (41).
There seems to have been no resistance to Nerva’s choice from either the military or the senate (42). Trajan wascommanding four legions at the time, which gave him the largest army in the empire (49). He also had a track record of efficient and loyal service. He seems to have loved the military and spent half his adult life in the field. He walked with his men and shared their life, which made his troops extremely loyal to him (52).
In some ways, Trajan reminds me of Henry V of England. It was as if he had been raised for the role he eventually assumed. His father was a trusted servant of the emperor and a wise, efficient leader. He seems to have passed those traits on to his son. The old adage that absolute power corrupts absolutely seems to have been modified in Trajan’s case. Unlike leaders like Nero and Caligula, Trajan had the character to govern wisely and resisted the carnal urges common to absolute rulers.
Trajan had a knack for appealing to the common people. He entered Rome on foot, demonstrating a winsome (if somewhat orchestrated) humility (53). He carefully rejected the excesses that had alienated Domitian from the people (56). He exiled the despised informers and corrupt lawyers that were patronized under Domitian, much to the delight of those who had suffered at their hands (62). Trajan encouraged the senate to take a leadership role, all the while retaining the greatest power for himself. He also encouraged freedom of speech, even for those holding different views from him. This policy led to him earning enthusiastic support from a wide range of people. Trajan was warm and friendly and welcomed visits from senators, a stark contrast from Domitian.
Bennett suggests that Trajan was the first emperor to develop a unified political, economic, and military system for the empire (63). Trajan worked hard to secure the borders of the empire, to develop the economy, and to secure a steady food supply. He was a master at self-promotion, especially by supporting gladiatorial games for the masses and using coinage to promote his rule and successes.
Trajan also demanded efficiency. He replaced many corrupt administrators he had inherited with men whose virtue was beyond dispute (77). He rewarded good performance and provided advancement opportunities for ambitious young men.
Bennett notes that Trajan was certainly a man of his times. He suggests he may have indulged in homosexuality, though he was happily married to his wife. Such behavior was more than likely a common practice among his class and in his culture and does not necessarily speak to his sexual orientation. He dearly loved his sister. Trajan was a heavy drinker, but he instructed his servants to stop serving him alcohol once he became inebriated (58). He dealt with Christians firmly, though not as harshly as Domitian had (174).
Trajan was not shy about addressing issues in the empire. He built numerous buildings all over Rome. His forum and the marketplace were marvels of his time. He developed provincial cities to expand and strengthen the empire’s economy. He won decisive victories over the Dacians and brought wealth into his treasuries. He also curbed the practice common under Domitian of allowing people to be charged with crimes by anonymous sources.
Trajan’s last great undertaking was an invasion of the Parthians. He underestimated the effort the attack would require and was almost killed in an earthquake in Antioch (197). He grew ill while on the campaign and died on the way home. He had intended for Hadrian to be his successor, and his will was obeyed.
Bennett suggests that Trajan was, in many ways, as powerful of a ruler as Domitian, but he had much better people and public relations skills. He developed a professional government bureaucracy that answered directly to him. This structure was a way to make ruling the empire effective, but it also gave him greater control. Under a benevolent dictator like Trajan, this arrangement was generally good for Roman citizens. Under a tyrant, however, it could mean subservience to the emperor.
Interestingly, though a powerful and popular emperor, Trajan knew his rule depended on the people’s support. He was masterful at letting them know how he worked on their behalf and shared from his personal wealth to make their lives better. He had learned much from Domitian’s disastrous rule and was determined not to repeat his predecessor’s mistakes. Looking back, we cannot determine how many of Trajan’s actions were motivated by self-interest and what stemmed from a genuine concern for the empire. Fortunately for him, the two concerns often merged into the same actions.
Bennett criticizes Trajan for his final campaign against the Parthians. He claims that the war was unnecessary and ill conceived (212). It may have been that Trajan, to the end, was seeking to win glory for himself and the empire. Much of his final work was soon undone and consolidated under Hadrian. Nevertheless, history has been kind to Trajan and looks upon his reign as a “golden era” during which the Roman Empire ruled effectively and its people prospered.
Trajan’s legacy remains solid. Compared to many of his peers, Rome could only wish it had more emperors of his calibre.
Rating: 3
