Description
In this paper, the idea of new ways of imperial successorship during the last decade of the first c. CE will be critically assessed. It was largely due to Pliny in his panegyric to Trajan (see esp. Plin. Pan. 7.1), and later sources (e.g. Cassius Dio epitome 69.20.1-21.2, and the Early Lives of the Historia Augusta), combined with historiographical analysis in hindsight (Gibbon’s The Decline and Fall…), that the idea of a novel way to obtain the emperorship, namely by adoption, had taken root in Roman constitutional law. However, ‘adoptive ’ emperorship had been present in Roman successorship from the very first moment that Caesar adopted his grand-nephew Octavian (and also occurring in regal succession), while adoption had always been the one way to appoint a successor if a biological son were absent (which, in most cases, happened). It was by chance that imperial succession inbetween Nerva and Marcus Aurelius occurred by adoptive succession, as none of the emperors had a biological son – as soon as it was the case (i.c. Commodus), the ideology as allegedly established by Nerva and elevated by Pliny came to a sudden end. I suggest that Pliny’s novum ad principatum iter is nothing but rhetorical amplificatioof an instant historical situation, that was blown up to a kind of ideology ensuing from Nerva’s adoption of Trajan, whereas the successful creation of an Aelian dynasty was a case of historical chance.| Period | 16 Jul 2025 |
|---|---|
| Event title | 16th Celtic Conferenc in Classics |
| Event type | Conference |
| Location | Coimbra, PortugalShow on map |
| Degree of Recognition | International |
Keywords
- ancient history
- trajan
- panegyric
- Rhetoric