The Ancients - 69 AD: Rise of Vespasian

Episode Date: October 15, 2020

69 AD was a tumultuous year in Roman history. 4 Romans assumed the title of emperor; only one remained standing by the year’s end. His name was Vespasian, veteran of Claudius’ invasion of Britain and the builder of the Colosseum. Jonathan Eaton (@DrJEaton) joined me on the podcast to talk through the rise of Emperor Vespasian. In particular, we focus on what this father of the Flavian Dynasty was doing during 69 AD and assess how influential soldiers across the empire were in his bid for power. Jonathan is the author of Leading the Roman Army: Soldiers and Emperors, 31 BC – 235 AD.Jonathan's Twitter: @DrJEatonTristan's Twitter: @ancientstristan

Hi, I'm Tristan Hughes, and if you would like the Ancient ad-free, get early access and bonus episodes, sign up to History Hit. With a History Hit subscription, you can also watch hundreds of hours of original documentaries, including my recent documentary all about Petra and the Nabataeans, and enjoy a new release every week. Sign up now by visiting historyhit.com slash subscribe. by visiting historyhit.com slash subscribe. 69 AD, a pretty tumultuous year in the history of ancient Rome. It was called the year of the four emperors.

And you can probably guess why. Yes, you're right. There were four Roman emperors during 69 AD in the aftermath of the suicide of Emperor Nero. Ultimately, by the end of the year, there would be one emperor left standing and that emperor would go on to create the next great dynasty of ancient Rome, the Flavian dynasty. The man's name was Vespasian and I'm delighted to say that in this podcast I was joined by the one and only Jonathan Eaton, who has recently written a book exploring the relationship between the early Roman emperors and the soldiers. And in this podcast, Jonathan, he talks through the rise of Vespasian and in particular,

focusing on what Vespasian was doing in 69 AD, because he was not in Rome for most of that year. He was in the East. He was campaigning in Judea. He was in Alexandria. He was in Egypt. So how was this soldier, how was this commander able to become the new emperor? Jonathan explains all. This was an absolutely fascinating chat. Jonathan is a brilliant communicator and I have no doubt that you're going to absolutely love this one. Enjoy! Jonathan, thank you for joining me today. Thank you for inviting me on. It's tremendous to be part of the podcast. I've really enjoyed listening to some of the previous episodes. Oh, you're too kind. You are too kind, Jonathan. Today, we're talking about a really interesting topic, the Emperor Vespasian and his rise to power. And Vespasian, is it fair to say he's a great general that rises to power thanks to the army? Yeah, I think that's a really interesting

way of starting, really. I think that concept is the image that many of the writers who are recording the Flavian dynasty are trying to perpetuate, that Vespasian is some kind of military genius who is driven to power by the armies themselves. And in fact, the overall picture is far more nuanced than that. And the reason that I'm so interested in the rise of Vespasian is that in many ways the events of AD 69, this critical year in Roman history when there were a series of four emperors of whom Vespasian was the last, really demonstrates the power and the sway that the army had over politics itself and this is why I think understanding how Vespasian came to power and the various factors which supported his bid for the throne is incredibly important in understanding how the empire itself actually operated as a very dynamic political system. But what's certainly true is that Vespasian did have a significant amount of military experience, though it's debatable the extent to which,

A, that set him apart from his contemporaries, and B, how significant that actually was for his bid for power. So prior to the fall of the Emperor Nero, there are really two important military episodes in Vespasian's life. The first one was when he was a young legionary commander and he participated in the conquest of Britain under the Emperor Claudius. And the sources we have which describe how Vespasian performed in the conquest are incredibly complementary, as we might expect given his later rise to power and in particular this is Suetonius in his Lives of the

Twelve Caesars whose pen portrait of Vespasian is almost tabloid quality really in terms of the anecdotes of who Vespasian was and how he saw the world. But what Suetonius tells us is that Vespasian was incredibly competent as a legionary commander, He subdued a number of tribes, he conquered 20 towns, although what the Latin actually means is it's an opida, it's a fortified hilltop settlement, and he took over the Isle of Wight as well. So very successful is Suetonius's verdict. Later on in his career, and in fact in the final three years, two to three years of Nero's reign, Vespasian was selected as the pre-eminent Roman commander to deal with the Jewish revolt, which was a revolt of various Jewish factions within the province of Judea, which became a real crisis

for Nero's government. Now what's interesting is why Vespasian was selected for that. We might think that he was selected because he was the most important military commander, the tactical genius who was going to deliver victory. That's probably not the case. In fact, there were probably three reasons why he was selected. First of all, he happened to be in Greece, so he was on hand. He could travel quickly to the war zone compared to some of his contemporaries who were elsewhere in the empire. Secondly, he was a very safe pair of hands because he wasn't a threat to the emperor and wasn't perceived as such, so he was virtually expendable. And thirdly, of course, he had demonstrated in Britain that he could operate in a military context, but I don't think we should read too much into it. Nevertheless, it's worth saying that Vespasian was a very credible candidate, but there are a series of factors which contributed to his

accession. So you mentioned the revolt in Judea there, and from what you were saying just there, it sounds like a key reason why he was selected was because he was seen as this safe pair of hands. why he was selected was because he was seen as this safe pair of hands. Yeah, that's absolutely right. Vespasian comes from very humble and modest origins, really, and this is something that Suetonius really flags up in his biography, that despite his humble background, he was the one who really brought stability back to the empire, in some ways emulating what Augustus did when he created the empire out of the ruins of the Republic. What sets Vespasian apart really is how he comes from very lowly backgrounds. So in terms of his family, we know that his grandfather had been a centurion in the Roman army. He'd fought in the civil wars with Pompey, Caesar's great rival. He'd subsequently been

rehabilitated by Caesar and took on some kind of career in the financial sector. It's a little bit obscure, possibly something around debt collection. Vespasian's father was likewise working within finance, possibly a banker, but certainly not of any political significance. And in fact, Vespasian and his elder brother were the first individuals in their immediate family to become senators. There's a distant uncle who was also in the senate but otherwise they're relatively new men and in fact Suetonius tells us that Vespasian in fact was very reluctant to pursue a political career and almost had to be forced into it by his family. So we really get this sense of

a man who came from modest backgrounds, had a successful career, but at no point until the breakdown of the empire in 1869 was he considered a contender in any way. What the Judean war gave him was access to a network and I think that's incredibly significant when we look at the mechanisms that brought Vespasian to power. It's probably worth perhaps if I set the context around what happened at the fall of Nero and how from out of that chaos and four emperors Vespasian became the prime contender and established the new Flavian dynasty. So the Emperor Nero, as you'll be aware, was the final emperor of the Julio-Claudian dynasty, the dynasty which had been founded by Augustus from the ashes of the Republic. Nero's downfall was caused by a series of factors, some of which

was linked to his political behaviour, he gradually lost the support of the upper classes, but it was also around the economic situation which was becoming dire and there was a number of reasons for that. Some of that was linked to his personal spending which was extravagant on an unprecedented level. Some of it was the legacy of military campaigns, particularly in the East. So there's significant financial pressures and an economic crisis is beginning to brew. What happens in AD 68 is that a governor in Gaul called Vindex withdraws his allegiance from Nero and at this point the dominoes begin to topple. Certainly Vindex doesn't survive, his revolt is

crushed, but he appeals to a governor in Spain a man named Galba that he should also withdraw his support because Nero is no longer legitimate as an emperor and that's what Galba does he essentially offers his services to the senate in Rome to form a new government the senate turns against Nero and Nero commits suicide that's the end of the dynasty. So AD 69 begins with a new emperor, Galba. But Galba himself has a number of problems. The first problem is that although he's experienced and he's distinguished, it's not quite clear what his constituency of support actually is. And he has a manner which has a very strong conservative streak, which means that he is a keen proponent for discipline and for restraint in one's actions. That is perceived

very badly by the population in Rome as being unsuitable in an emperor. He also makes some disastrous political decisions, so he selects as his heir a young senator called Paizo and what that does is immediately turn other senators against him. The most interesting of these is Otho. Now Otho is significant because he sees what the fundamental weakness is in Galba's rule which is he doesn't have military support. So what Otho does is pursue a really clear policy of winning the support of the Praetorian Guard. And the Guard, of course, are those soldiers who protect the life of the Emperor in Rome. But Otho does this in very flagrant ways, really. So we're told that when Galba would arrive at Otho's house for a

dinner party or vice versa, Otho would go round the room and essentially give a tip to all of the Praetorian guards who were there protecting the emperor. We know he also intervened in some of the legal disputes that Praetorian guards are involved in on an individual basis. So he's really building this constituency of support and that ultimately translates into action. So the Praetorian guard is loyal to Otho and in the end Galba is forced out and in fact commits suicide. Otho has a really unusual relationship with the guard because of how close it actually is. So there's a number of elements of this which come through very clearly, particularly in the work of Tacitus and his histories. And there's two things which I think

show how unusual this is. There's an incident during Otho's brief reign where members of the Praetorian Guard believe that a coup is underway and that rival members of the Senate are about to assassinate Otho at a dinner party. Now this is completely unfounded really, there's no truth in it, but the soldiers go on what's described as a rampage where they storm the palace itself in order to protect Otho, but it's a complete breakdown in discipline and in fact what Tacitus tells us is that over time the Praetorian guardsmen wouldn't let their officers near the emperor because they were so afraid that the officers would turn upon him and assassinate him. So all of this is very complex and it shows up some of the dynamics that are taking place in Rome between various political factions and the internal mechanisms of the Praetorian Guard.

What Otho doesn't have, although he has the support of the Praetorian Guard, What Opho doesn't have, although he has the support of the Praetorian Guard, is the support of the soldiers in the legions and increasingly over the development of the empire the legions have acquired really a political base. So at this moment in time there's around 28 legions scattered across the periphery of the empire and particularly those on the Rhine, on the Danube and in Syria have a particular influence because of their strength as a military force. The governor in Germany Vitellius is elevated by his troops to emperor and therefore seeks to take power from Otho. Why do his troops do that? Well, there are no legitimate candidates at this particular point. The Julio-Claudian dynasty has ended. There's no legitimate candidate, just a

series of individuals claiming power. So what Vitellius' men do is realise that here is an opportunity to seek advancement for themselves. Vitellius marches on Rome. Otho moves out to defeat him, but can't do so because he doesn't have the military strength. In the end, Vitellius marches on Rome. Otho moves out to defeat him but can't do so because he doesn't have the military strength. In the end Vitellius overruns Rome and Otho is killed and hence we have the third emperor of this year of four emperors which is Vitellius. That's all very interesting what you're saying there if we're talking about the first of the four emperors. This is before Vespasian enters the picture as it were. That's right. But we're already seeing the army playing a prominent part, whether that be the Praetorians or the legions themselves. Absolutely. Probably what we're seeing for one of

the first times in the empire itself is evidence of political awareness by the soldiers and a dawning recognition of the power that they themselves held. I mean, Tacitus captures it beautifully, I think, when he describes the events of this year as revealing a secret of empire that an emperor could be made elsewhere than at Rome. And he's absolutely right, because really what we're seeing is how centres of power have drifted within the empire and it's no longer about Rome as the centre of the action, it's about what those provincial armies have to say. It's interesting that the way these events are depicted is often this narrative approach that I've just outlined of emperor after emperor coming forward and being defeated and being replaced but of course Vespasian is there in the background and there's some really interesting

things taking place there which I think provide further evidence of this level of information flow and communication between the provincial armies as decisions were made as to which candidate they would support. Now the big challenge that the army faces, and in fact the whole government of the empire faces, are communication speeds. Because obviously we take for granted nowadays that communication is instantaneous, but the emperor was running an empire and communication speed was incredibly variable. So we know that many roads, for example, couldn't be traversed in the winter because they were in disrepair. We know that in some areas

there were real problems with bandits, as an example. It's very difficult to quantify some of this, but there's a really good example of an altar from Juriropos in the east, which was dedicated to the safety and wellbeing of the Emperor Commodus but it also gives the date when it was set up and it was actually over 70 days after he died so we know at that point you've got an incredibly important piece of information which hadn't got to an eastern

garrison 70 days later so what all of this means is that there are real difficulties in terms of understanding how decisions are communicated and how allegiances are cemented between quite a disparate deployment of troops. But on the other hand, we know from sources like the letters at Vindolanda that there's a surprising level of connection and connectivity between army units of soldiers who are writing to each other over great distances because they previously served together and certainly what we see in the descriptions of AD69 is this movement of information by agents, by emissaries who are making decisions, who are convincing soldiers to back particular candidates. And in some ways, of course, with all of this, it's a little bit like Game of Thrones,

where you may have supported a particular candidate who has been unsuccessful, and there's a new emperor. But unless you suddenly back a winner, you're in a very, very difficult position. So we see this jockeying, we see these switching of allegiances, and the army is absolutely critical for this. Absolutely indeed, and I'm sure we're going to hammer into that now because Vespasian in the east at this time, when does he start to hear news about this series of tumultuous events occurring in Rome? It's a really good question. What's interesting is how the decisions that Vespasian makes and those of his colleagues and his allies are presented in the historical record.

are depicted as almost being forced upon Vespasian, that in fact he's not the one making decisions, it's the troops who are clamouring for him to take the throne. And there's a really good example of this, which is the first time that Vespasian's name is linked directly into the Caesar of Power. And that in fact comes not from the east east it comes from a group of soldiers from the Danubian legions they've been marching towards Rome to support Otho and as they're on their journey they learn that Otho is dead and Vitellius is the new emperor so for reasons which are a little bit unclear they then go on some kind of orgy of pillaging and destruction on local communities they then come to their senses and realize they've got an awful problem in that discipline is completely broken down nor do they now have an imperial candidate so the way it's depicted is they literally have almost a town hall meeting of the soldiers, to say, well, we need an emperor, we can't use Vitellius,

who have we got that would be any good? And in this telling of the tale, they choose Vespasian, but they've gone through a list of possible candidates and reached him, so he wasn't at the forefront of their mind. Why did they choose him? Well, in this story, it's because some of them had been previously in Syria and had come across him then and thought he might be quite good. Now it's difficult to tell the reality of this but there's clear benefits for Vespasian to create a picture that he hasn't pushed himself forward, that the troops are demanding that he takes power. So that's really the first inkling of what's happened. The next critical date is the

1st of July because on the 1st of July the legions in Egypt swear allegiance to Vespasian as emperor and that date is significant because for the remainder of his reign Vespasian used the 1st of July as the anniversary of his accession and it was only several days later that the soldiers under Vespasian's direct command saluted him as emperor. So there's an element of stage management going on here. There's an element of very clear propaganda of making Vespasian appear as a very reluctant emperor. It's very interesting what you're saying there, how the first soldiers who salute Vespasian as emperor aren't actually his soldiers. Yeah, absolutely. And I think there's a number of reasons for this. I think in some ways, although the soldiers throughout this period across the empire are depicted as acting

irrationally often, they're out of control. In fact, I think sometimes they're operating very rationally in what they're doing. And Vespasian has real strengths that were probably obvious on the ground, particularly within the empire. There's really two key strengths that I think are significant. The first one is that he has two sons. So he offers stability in a way that many of the other candidates don't. He has Titus, who at this stage is 29. He's a successful legionary commander under his father. He has Domitian waiting in the rings, who's around 19 at this particular stage. So when you support

Vespasian, you're supporting a dynasty, not just an individual candidate. The second element that was important for Vespasian was the propaganda that was beginning to circulate and there were a number of elements of this. The first one was a story around a letter that the Emperor Otho had sent to Vespasian demanding that he avenge Otho's death caused by Vitellius. It's almost certainly a forgery, but what it demonstrates is that there were real benefits to identifying those people who backed a losing candidate and bringing them on board. And we know that Vespasian was very, very successful in that regard. In fact, we know for certain that when Vitellius reaches Rome and you'll remember the Praetorian Guard had been incredibly loyal to Otho, he got rid of many of

them and sent them away from Rome. Many of those ended up in the Danubian legions who would take Rome and therefore they moved directly to support the Flavian cause to win back their status, their position in the guard. The second rumour that appears to be circulating among the legions at this point is that Vitellius, because his loyalty was to the German legions, was considering switching some of the legion redeployments, in particular moving some of the German legions over to the east where it was believed to be a bit of a cushy number it was far more comfortable being a soldier there and that as well created tremors amongst the eastern legions around we have to do something to stop this. And just before we really go on

Vespasian's road to Rome as it were which you were talking about just then the situation in Judea and in Syria in the east at this time, how successful has Vespasian been up to this point? I think that's a very good question and the challenge with this is how much imperial propaganda is influencing the picture that's presented. Our most significant source for the Jewish war is Josephus and Josephus had in fact been a rebel commander who'd fought against Vespasian's troops. He was captured, he was a high value target and therefore his life was preserved and in fact he basically switched camps and was therefore incredibly loyal to Vespasian in particular his son Titus. He subsequently travelled to Rome with

them and spent the remainder of his days in Rome and he writes this account of what happened during the war. The difficulty of course is this is heavily coloured by Flavian propaganda. What seems to come through from the sources nevertheless is that Vespasian is successful and ultimately it was his son Titus who quelled the revolt completely and subsequently they would go on to hold the triumph in Rome. Vespasian comes across as the sort of military commander that you would idealise in this. So there's a famous story that in fact he's so involved in taking a particular enemy position that he's wounded in battle because of his enthusiasm to be amongst the thick of it.

The difficulty with this and the reason for my caution is that emperors wanted to portray themselves in a military light. And in particular, they use this phrase of Camillito, which means fellow soldier. phrase of Camillito, which means fellow soldier. So they wanted to be seen in various differing degrees as a soldier themselves, and therefore being at the forefront of action, being an able commander is incredibly important, even if in fact they've delegated that responsibility to their officers. Fascinating. I guess, as you say, it's trying to sort the fact from the fiction, which seems quite difficult in this situation. It does, absolutely. I suppose it's trying to sort the fact from the fiction which seems quite difficult in this situation. It does absolutely I suppose it goes back to that old maxim that history is written by the winners. In fact what I find quite interesting is that Suetonius's account of

Vespasian really creates this picture of what Vespasian was like as an individual in a way that you suspect is genuine and not just propaganda. In particular that he had a pretty good sense of humour and found certain things to be slightly ridiculous. So we're told this story that when he became emperor for example there was a group of individuals who were trying to link Vespasian's genealogy with the mythical past, and in particular to say that Vespasian's family was in some way linked to the legendary Hercules. When Vespasian heard this, he burst out laughing because he thought it was absolutely ridiculous that they would try and do that. So there are elements of him that really come across as being quite humane in a way and someone who understood the

ironies of the situation and saw through some of the pomp that was attached to the emperor. Well there you go then. So he's been proclaimed emperor by the troops in Egypt and now by his own troops as well. What is the next step for Vespasian? What Vespasian does is slightly unusual and the reason for that is one of his real skills is delegation. So he does something which is different from what you might expect from someone in his position of risking everything to seize power, which is he doesn't march on Rome. In fact he moves to Egypt and his armies move on Rome. So I'll dig into this a little bit more. What's happened at the moment exactly as we've said is that some of the Danubian troops were the first to identify that Vespasian should seize power and are prepared to support him. Likewise the legions of the east have done the same.

The Danubian legions are the ones who make the swiftest move on Rome and they're the ones in fact who fight their way through to the city itself. Now why do they do this? Well there's really two reasons. One is broader and political which is the current emperor Vitellius has been put in place by the Rhineland legions there's always competition between the Rhine and the Danube they are afraid in the Danubian legions that they won't get the benefit of this unless it's their candidate on the throne so that's why they move but there is another reason which is they have a very energetic legionary commander, a man named Antonius Primus, who is the one who seems to be the catalyst for moving this army to face Vitellius. Primus is an interesting character.

In fact, he's got a criminal past. So he was exiled for forgery under Nero. And that wasn't political in any sense. He was probably guilty. It was a criminal act he'd been found guilty of he is rehabilitated and he's given command of a legion on the Danube and he uses this as a springboard for the assault on Rome it's him alongside the elements of the Praetorian Guard that were disbanded under Otho who who form the assault force, really. In the meantime, there are

discussions going on in Rome itself, because you'll recall that Vespasian had an elder brother who joined the senate before him. Well, his career has progressed as well, and in fact, at this moment in time, he's prefect of the city of Rome, which means he's the official responsible for maintaining order in the city and as the picture becomes clear he begins a series of negotiations along with his supporters with Vitellius to find his way through this and in reality what they're trying to do is to force Vitellius to abdicate from his position and allowing a smooth transition of power. The troops from the east are also on the move heading towards Rome behind the Danubian legions. Vespasian as I mentioned has moved to Egypt so he's delegated the seizure of power to others but it's not as stupid as it may appear in fact it's a very very

rational decision for a number of reasons. First of all Egypt is strategically important for the empire. It really feeds Rome in terms of the grain supply. So if Vespasian can hold Egypt no matter what happens next in terms of the success of his forces who are moving on Rome itself he has the opportunity to have a second act if you like, a second attempt at seizing power. It also maintains his safety if his legions are to fail, but it also distances himself from the unpleasant acts which are to follow, the necessary destruction of enemy forces, the executions, etc. He keeps his hands very clean and that, I think, is really indicative of how Vespasian operates. He's a very rational actor.

He's a very competent administrator. He understands how the empire works and what he needs to do to seize power. In Rome, things go from bad to worse. The negotiations break down. Fighting begins in the city itself between those loyal to Vespasian and those loyal to Vitellius. Vespasian's brother Sabinus is killed in Rome itself and that ends the negotiations. The Flavian forces that have been on the move take Rome, Vitellius is killed, the Flavian dynasty is established, building upon the previous Julio-Claudian dynasty. What I find fascinating is how this has been achieved,

because all of those background moves, that element of delegation, rested on the networks that Vespasian had built across the East, and it's those connections which really provide the platform which allow a man of relatively modest origins to become the most important and powerful person in the empire. How far across the east are we talking about when we're talking about these connections? It's a very, very useful point to think through, really, around how deep did they go. Most of this sprang from the Jewish war and the connections which Vespasian had to make at really top-tier levels in how the Empire and associated client kingdoms were being run. Because Vespasian's command was an extraordinary command, he was specifically dealing with a war as opposed to dealing with running a province.

And there are a number of individuals that he had to work very closely with who were instrumental in what came next. Perhaps one of the key ones is the governor of Syria itself, a man named Moukianis. Now Moukianis was significant because the Syrian legions were incredibly powerful as a military force. They rivaled those on the Rhine and the Danube and traditionally the command of Syria was seen as a really significant job for a high status individual. Now what we know about Mucionis is that in fact he didn't initially get along with Vespasian at all. There seems to be some kind of envy, some kind of competition, probably because you have an incumbent governor of a senior province and then a military commander who is arriving in an extraordinary

command which doesn't quite seem to fit into the overall organization of the provinces and may in fact conflict with it. But Mucionis gradually begins to align himself with Vespasian and there's probably a couple of reasons for that. We know first of all that Mucionis really admired Titus, Vespasian's eldest son, and he may have been the force that really brought the two men together. Secondly Mucionis hasn't really been involved in a significant way with all of the political moves that have gone on in Rome and therefore it's difficult to see how he could profit politically from what's happening unless he's very close to a particular imperial

candidate. But thirdly and to come back to something we referenced earlier Mucionis has no sons and therefore he probably makes the calculation that Vespasian is a stronger candidate than him in terms of stability and that's why he throws his lot in with Vespasian and it's Mucionus who very quickly takes control in Rome, makes a lot of the decisions that need to be made, does some of the unpleasant tasks that are necessary when there's a transition of imperial power. The second individual in the east who's really significant is a man called Tiberius Alexander. He's the prefect of Egypt which means he controls Egypt on behalf of the emperor and we've already seen in our discussion that there's

two elements of this which have been beneficial for Vespasian. The first one was that it was Tiberius Alexander whose troops first proclaimed loyalty to Vespasian. That's no coincidence it's obviously part of the setup and it appears better for Vespasian if it's not those under his direct command who force him into this position. The second one is it's Tiberius Alexander who provides that safe harbour for Vespasian whilst Rome is being taken and they're really building that power base in the east. We also know that Vespasian has very good, probably through Mucianus we would suspect, with client kings and other rulers aligned to Rome on the periphery of the empire. That's important because if you're going to rebalance power and move some of your military forces from the east towards Rome,

you need to be confident that the east itself can be controlled and therefore those alliances are particularly important. And of course still at this time the Judean revolt is still raging so that must be a key consideration. It is. I think Vespasian has some confidence in that regard because of how his son Titus has performed. So he brought Titus to the east as one of his legionary commanders, and it really gave an opportunity for Titus to build his career. When Vespasian moves from the war zone, it's Titus who continues to move things forward. Now, there's probably two reasons for that. Firstly, obviously, Titus could be trusted by Vespasian.

But secondly, this is all good for propaganda. So I'm sure he had wise heads around him who were directing the action but it does allow Titus to build his career and I think Vespasian is looking two moves ahead not just about when he's emperor but actually when Titus will succeed him and how does he get to a position where Titus's strength and power can be consolidated so that that happens smoothly as well. Just going back to the communications briefly because that in itself the distances involved in all what we've been talking about is absolutely fascinating and Vespasian in this power base in the east in Egypt do we think that as all this is going on

as for instance Antonius Primus is getting closer and closer to Rome, that messengers are going to and from Primus to Vespasian, constantly relaying the information back and forth between them? Yeah, I think this is something that is very, very difficult to resolve. And there's been really polarised views on it, not specifically really around this particular example, but more broadly around the role of the emperor and how much control did the emperor actually have when there were such limitations in how fast information could travel. Now, it seems to me that there's two possible answers to this. One is that, well, basically communication was so challenging

that emperors had to rely on incredible levels of delegation and therefore they had to make sure that the right people were in the right posts and therefore would act in a way that would align with the emperor's thinking. And that's particularly important during the events of this year when they're so fast moving that the emperor needs trusted individuals who will respond in an appropriate way to events that can't be predicted. The alternative of course is that if communication is poor, if they can't be responded to quickly enough by the emperor, if the individuals who are in place locally aren't confident in their abilities you end up with stasis you end up with things not happening and in fact we see at different points in roman history there's some evidence of this during the reign of domitian and also the reign

of tiberius this is what sometimes happened people were so afraid of making decisions in the provinces that decisions didn't get made and things went quite badly wrong so there's a real need here for thinking through actually what's the payoff to this now what i suspect was happening is that vespasian was in a fortunate position because he had key individuals slaughtered across the empire so he has his brother up until his death situated in Rome. He has his allies from the east on the move towards Rome. We know he had very good connections with the Danubian legions anyway. So there are trusted men working on his behalf and it seems to be in that way that things get done rather than Vespasian making all of the decisions. And that seems to align

with how he consistently delegates what has to be done. That's interesting that's as if it were a flashback to Octavian and Agrippa that's trust that they had of each other and it seems Vespasian has a certain level of trust with his subordinates as well. Absolutely absolutely and I think that's a very good analogy as well I think there are great similarities in terms of how things get done. We know that mistakes were certainly made. I mean, there is some evidence in the sources that Vespasian became slightly uncomfortable with decision making that was going on when he reached Rome so that when Vespasian arrives and obviously this is after he's become emperor in fact Rome is being handled by a combination of Mucianus and his youngest son Domitian and there are stories that they were making so many appointments so rapidly that Vespasian said to them when they told him they'd made 20 appointments in rapid succession on a

single day he said something along the lines of I'm surprised you didn't also appoint my successor at the same time so there's some tensions here but inevitably this is what happens when you've got a very fast-paced situation and you have to make really clear decisions as to what needs to be done to safeguard the new dynasty. And you mentioned Mucianus and Domitian there. Are they two key figures in removing the remnants of Vitellius's support and the Praetorian Guard, for instance, and in stating creating the new regime? Yeah, that's right. I mean, there's a number of steps which need to be taken. Now, we are told in the sources that Vespasian set out two key aims in securing imperial power. The first one was to stabilise the state, and I think that's a direct reflection,

not just of what happened previously in terms of civil war, but also what had happened under Nero, the economic crisis, the failure in confidence of the Senate in imperial power in the form of the Emperor Nero. So that's, I think, particularly significant. The second one is that he talks about burnishing the state. He wants to make Rome even greater. And we see that throughout the later Flavian dynasty, thinking about the building of the Colosseum, is a prime example of that, of how the Flavians really enrich Rome in terms of how it appears. But in the short term there's some really unpleasant things that need to be dealt with. What we're told is that there was an element of restraint used in all of this. It's difficult to unpick how much of this is propaganda, but we

do see some very key appointments being made. So first of all the Praetorian Guard. Obviously the Othonian Praetorian Guards, many of them had been dispatched from Rome and had ended up on the Flavian side. Vitellius had stacked the Praetorian Guard with his own troops and that's a reward for them, it safeguards his safety. Vespasian and the Flavians have to get control of that very very quickly. So what we know that Vespasian does the Flavians have to get control of that very very quickly so what we know that Vespasian does is he reduces the guard in size he slims it down and in fact that that links into what seems to be quite an unusual approach that Vespasian takes where he wishes to appear almost as if he is de-escalating and there's a prime example of this where we're told that even whilst

the civil war was raging he stopped his bodyguards from searching people for weapons when they came to meet with Vespasian and that's incredibly interesting isn't it that that you would take that step whilst your life is in most danger arguably but it shows that he really wanted to reduce this appearance of being brought to power by military means he also puts Titus as Praetorian prefect which means his son commands the guard again that's relatively unusual to use family members in that sense and we believe though it's not a hundred percent clear that Julius Alexander the former prefect of Egypt, was also made Praetorian prefect. So he's putting very trusted men in key security positions. What Vespasian then begins to do is introduce basically policy reforms. And his mantra here

is really what we see so often in Roman history, in fact, in other periods of world history as well, that something has gone wrong in the social fabric. Things used to be different in the old days, but they've gone wrong. There's licentious behaviour. Social order isn't working as it should. Therefore, we need to go backwards. And what Vespasian does,

but in a way which isn't perceived to be tyrannical, is begun to really re-engine policy within the empire so that an element of discipline is reinforced, both within the military, but you could argue within society as well. So John, so just what you were saying there, what I found really interesting, I just want to hang on the Praetorian Guard for a moment because you mentioned how Vespasian appointed his son Titus, Praetorian prefect, and I find that really astonishing because over the past few decades before this we've seen some pretty notorious figures as prefects of the Praetorians. I'm

thinking Sejanus, perhaps Macro, and of course Tigellinus in Nero's reign. But Vespasian here, he is appointing his son and successor, someone he could probably, he could very much trust in this position of power. The role of the Praetorian prefect was critical for the safety of the emperor in immediate terms in otherwise preventing the emperor from being assassinated. But there's also an inherent tension with how the post runs which is that on the one hand the emperor needs praetorian prefects and i used the plural because that's how it was set up to make sure that no single individual could use the praetorian guard as a platform to seize power but the tension was that on the one hand the emperor needed competent individuals to command

a military unit but on the other hand he needed to make sure that they weren't a threat to him and his security so when we look at the history of the praetorian prefecture we tend to have highlighted to us in the sources praetorian prefects who are perceived to be evil or overly ambitious or a threat to the empire. But in reality, the system seems to work reasonably well. What Vespasian was doing in terms of appointing Titus was making a very, very clear statement of what had gone before was not to be repeated. And I think probably what we were seeing in AD69 and these extraordinary emotional outbursts by the Praetorian Guard around Otho was almost a crisis of identity within the Praetorian Guard itself and if we think about what's happened the Praetorian Guard is

established by the Emperor Augustus as his personal guard, building on the security force that would accompany a commander on campaign. And it's established to protect his dynasty. So it's the Emperor and his family. And it does so for a century. But then when Nero falls, there is no legitimate successor. And I think that must have caused a real crisis within the Praetorian Guard. They're in a very privileged position, they're based in Rome, they have high status for a soldier,

they have good pay etc and benefits. So I think something goes quite drastically wrong in how they perceive their position in AD 69. That explains why at the death of Otho there were extraordinary scenes of suicide by Praetorians going on at his funeral because they were so emotionally invested in this particular candidate now as we've said there's then a turnover in personnel when Vitellius arrives because what he wants to do is reward his troops from the German frontier with prime positions in the guard. When Vespasian comes in he has to pull off a pretty complex trick really. He has to change the culture of the Praetorian guard to re-establish their confidence and build their loyalty to his dynasty at the same time as he needs to deal with the Vitellians within their ranks. We know that he reduces the garden size,

we know that he gets rid of some of those Vitellian supporters, but otherwise what he's doing is binding them as a military unit to him and his family. And I think that's why he takes such an unusual step around Titus. But as you say, and as you said earlier, this regime change, this appointment as Vespasian as emperor thanks to Vespasian but also thanks to key subordinates you mentioned them earlier this change is able to happen and to be a success absolutely absolutely and I think what Vespasian

does successfully that none of the other candidates did was to balance these divergent interests. There's always been tension between the Praetorian Guard and the provincial armies around status, around power, proximity to the emperor, etc. But what he manages to do is to keep all of them on board and bind all of them to his new regime. And it's that really that cements his power because what the other candidates had done is built a limited constituency of power whether that's around the Victorian guard or a particular collection of legions in a particular geographic region it was Vespasian who knitted all of this together successfully and is therefore able to consolidate his regime. And do you think for later emperors, I'm thinking Septimius Severus here, but perhaps other emperors as well,

do you think Vespasian's success at emerging the victor of this crisis, do you think he serves as an example, as a precedent for others to follow in the future? I think he does. Sometimes I think we overstate the significance of what Vespasian does because he had such a good role model in looking at what Augustus had achieved and we shouldn't forget of course that Augustus very successfully created the framework of empire of how it would work and what Vespasian did was stabilizeise this crisis period, put in place a new dynasty but a dynasty that was very much built on the lines that Augustus originally conceived.

Then moving forward to Septimius Severus we see something very very similar there where an individual who much like Vespasian was a credible candidate because he offered stability because he had military background because he had sons that would come to power along with him does something very similar what's interesting by the time you get to Septimius Severus is that his reliance upon the army is more explicit it's far clearer that the Severan regime relies on military support and this very famous quote from Septimius Severus as he was dying to his sons which was basically stick together, enrich the soldiers, forget about everyone else and in some way it would have been appropriate for Vespasian to have said a very similar thing. What's interesting

of course is actually that Vespasian's death, according to Suetonius, there's two key quotes, one humorous, one perhaps more insightful, which is as he lay dying he struggled to get to his feet and said an emperor should die on his feet, just reinforcing again this image he creates of being dutiful, of being being competent of being what an emperor should be the more humorous one is that he was actually passing away and of course in this period the emperors were believed to be deified in some way he said oh dear i think i'm turning into a god so you see here there's there's some elements of both of where he came from in terms of his humor his modest

backgrounds, but also this sense of responsibility that I think really comes across in how he operates as an emperor. He's very, very competent in what he does. He understands the dynamics. He understands how Rome can be restored. He understands how Rome can be restored and then, as we see, has a good reign as well. So he's able to keep that going throughout his reign. It's not just seizing power, it's maintaining it as well. That's absolutely fascinating in its own right. Jonathan, that was fantastic. We must mention your book before we stop this. Thank you. That's very kind. So my interest in Vespasian is really around what he reveals about the dynamics of the Roman army and in particular how they engaged in politics itself. So my new book is Leading the Roman Army, Soldiers and Emperors

from 31 BC to 235 AD and it's the story of how the army involved itself in politics but most importantly how the emperors kept their loyalty. Given what we've talked about during this podcast, you might think they failed to do that consistently. But in fact, it's not true. The majority of the emperors were able to maintain the loyalty of the army. And my book really is the story of how they managed to do that. Fantastic. Jonathan, thanks so much for coming on the show.

Thank you very much. It's been a great pleasure.