The Forgotten Master And God

[caldrail]

It was recorded that on September 18th, in the year 96, a man named Apollonius of Tyana stood upon a rock at Ephesus and praised 'Stephanus' for bloody violence. His curious audience did not know that at the same time, a freedman named Stephanus would burst into the bedchamber of the Caesar Domitian to stab him. Parthenius, Sigerus, and Entellus, seniormadministrators of one sort or another, rushed in and finished the job of murdering the ruler of the Roman world, apparently making sure that Stephanus would die as well. Domitian could not defend himself against this suprise attack. His sword, habitually kept under his pillow, had been disabled by removing the blade.

 

Nerva moved quickly to replace the dead man, having himself declared Caesar as predicted by astrologers the same day, fully aware that Domitian was to be murdered.He had reason to ensure the act was committed for Domitian had already marked him down for death, not only because of an obscure prophecy, but also possibly because a young Domitian had been debauched by the older Nerva.

 

The plot was already known because a list of those to be executed had been stolen by one of his 'naked whispering boys' , subsequently found by his divorced wife, terrified of her husbands hatred after the actor Paris was killed in the street because of her, and she had narrowly avoided being put to death for adultery. Many men were approached with a view to dispatching their emperor, but most refused for fear it was a test of loyalty.

 

By all accounts, Domitian was a very dangerous character. He was suspicious of flattery and intolerant of those who did not offer praise. He hated the successful and blamed those who failed. We read how he deliberately played on peoples fears or enjoyed creating a false sense of security, pretending to like those he despised. He would, reputedly, turn on those who helped him. Domitian was the first Caesar to overtly demand the status of God.

 

Domitian exceeded all his predecessors in cruelty, luxury, and avarice...
Nea Historia (Zosimus)

 

For nearly two millenia Roman emperors have been portrayed as the worst examples of human excess. Yet this popular image rests on the shoulders of merely two of them. Whether it's the madness of Caligula, or the decadence of Nero, we acknowledge their sins, admire their unlimited extravagance, or raise our eyebrows at their antics. Domitian was described in the same tone, but remains a shadowey figure in Roman history who does not attract the same attention to the modern audience.

 

He certainly fits the popular image of a Roman emperor. Clearly however there is a common theme here, a facet of Roman mindset that survives in these descriptions. For all their positive acts and behaviour, those Caesars who find themselves rejected by senior Roman opinion attract the same sort of vilification in the sources. Some historians have pointed at mentions in the sources of his diligence in administration, debating whether Domitian has been miscast.

 

He was equally free from any suspicion of love of gain or of avarice, both in private life and for some time after becoming emperor; on the contrary, he often gave strong proofs not merely of integrity, but even of liberality....
Life of Domitian (Suetonius)

 

Tacitus had no illusions about him, for Agricola, a relative of his, had been recalled to Rome when his campaign to conquer Caledonia was on the point of success. Asked whether he wanted a triumph, Agricola had wisely refused, aware that Domitian was preparing an excuse to rid himself of a potential rival. Domitian may have raised the troops pay to four hundred sesterces a year, an increase of a third, but he had also reduced the number of legions and knew his frontiers were insecure. He was also aware that a victorious general commanded more loyalty from his men than a distant Caesar who was remarked upon for his lack of personal attention to Rome's military activities.

 

... But he did not continue this course of mercy or integrity, although he turned to cruelty somewhat more speedily than to avarice.
Life of Domitian (Suetonius)

 

Domitian was not only bold and quick to anger but also treacherous and secretive; and so, deriving from these two characteristics impulsiveness on the one hand and craftiness on the other, he would often attack people with the sudden violence of a thunderbolt and again would often injure them as the result of careful deliberation.
Roman History Book 67 (Cassius Dio)

 

Domitian was clearly attracted to the spectacular. He was noted for giving frequent games, including a naval contest in the Amphitheatre, more sea battles staged in an artifical lake, mock battles in the Circus Maximus, adding two new chariot teams to plentiful race meetings and even reducing the number of laps so a hundred races could be staged in one day. Notably, he features contests involving women. Various writers mention women fighting dwarves, women fighting each other, or against lions in hunts staged within the arena. This was not a new innovation - Nero had done similarly - but Domitian seemed especially keen to see such things. His own gladiators entered the arena to pomp and ceremony. He pleased the fans of the gladiators Myrinus and Triumphus by summoning both to fight each other.

 

Costs were rising. A ruler cannot pay huge sums of money for public entertainment, impressive building projects, extravagant living, and military budgets without finding the cash to do it. Whilst Domitian was not as ruthless as Nero had been in raising money, Domitian too followed that precedent and quickly turned Rome's elite against him as the list of dead patricians began to rise, many executed for the most trivial reasons. Perhaps this is partly the history written by the survivors, as some believe, but the pattern is familiar. Rumours of conspiracies and plots began to circulate. A rebellion in the provinces was put down. Tyrants do face the prospect of inevitable escalation - Domitian was no exception and his behaviour condemns him. Was he the cruellest of all Caesars? The evidence cannot be ignored.

 

As a consequence of his cruelty the emperor was suspicious of all mankind, and from now on ceased to repose hopes of safety in either the freedmen or yet the prefects, whom he usually caused to be brought to trial during their very term of office.
Roman History Book 67 (Cassius Dio)

 

When news of Domitian's death reached the public, they seemed oddly indifferent. The legions wanted Domitian deified officially but no-one spoke for them. The Senate wanted him damned, his images removed, and of course they got their way. As for the conspirators who had rushed into the bedchamber that day, they were never brought to justice. Domitian's wife however was deemed innocent. The Senate asked what boon she wanted for her loss, and all she desired was the body parts of her dead husband. It was said she had the parts sewn together and used to model a brass memorial that remained in public view from that day.

Was he the cruellest of all Caesars? Perhaps, but for all his civic beautification, frontier wars, public entertainment, and capable administration, Domitian is nonethless a strangely diminished personality in th history of the Roman Empire.

[Onasander]

Good post. I never researched him to nearly that degree.

 

I do however, have just the smallest of quibbles, and that is the Apollonius of Tyana reference in Ephesus.

 

I seriously have doubts about the legitimacy, rather I should say the reality of anything that fool said about his travels. I had started reading his book several years ago, and gave it up in his travels through Baghdad, it was obvious he didn't really go anywhere, and the local rulers were made out to be cowardly idiots instead of secured sovereign rulers talking to a fool traveler who really wasn't in a place to do much to them. I couldn't even figure out how he got admitted into the palaces just to screw with them, then moving on to the next kingdom to perpetuate his con, whatever it was.

 

So I stopped reading, as it didn't constitute either Philosophy OR History, anymore than Gulliver's Travels did.

 

Its been a sore point for me as of late because of the time and resources I've dropped on Numenius of Apamea, many on the net namedrop Apollonius of Tyana and him together in the same breath as Neo-Pythagoreans, even though I cant really recall him having a philosophy at all other than his ability to talk smack to unseemingly bewildered soveigns. He must bust out the deep thinking in a later book.

 

So obviously I have my doubts about any later Antioch speech, as I'm seriously thinking he just made that all up and never left his home. One of the worst works from antiquity I've ever bothered with.

Edited March 29, 2015 by Onasander

[Onasander]

Philostratus implies on one occasion that Apollonius had extra-sensory perception (Book VIII, Chapter XXVI). When emperor Domitian was murdered on September 18, 96 AD, Apollonius was said to have witnessed the event in Ephesus "about midday" on the day it happened in Rome, and told those present "Take heart, gentlemen, for the tyrant has been slain this day...". Both Philostratus and renowned historian Cassius Dio report this incident, probably on the basis of an oral tradition.[citation needed] Both state that the philosopher welcomed the deed as a praiseworthy tyrannicide.[27]

 

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apollonius_of_Tyana

 

It was recorded that on September 18th, in the year 96, a man named Apollonius of Tyana stood upon a rock at Ephesus and praised 'Stephanus' for bloody violence. His curious audience did not know that at the same time, a freedman named Stephanus would burst into the bedchamber of the Caesar Domitian to stab him. Parthenius, Sigerus, and Entellus, seniormadministrators of one sort or another, rushed in and finished the job of murdering the ruler of the Roman world, apparently making sure that Stephanus would die as well.

 

------

 

Hmmmm...

Edited March 29, 2015 by Onasander

[caldrail]

Portents were important in the story of Domitian. Nerva was due to be killed but Domitian decided to forestall that on the basis of a prophetic interpretation. It seems our Domitian was a very superstitous man among a superstitious people. As for sixth sense in the ancient world, it might merely be an attempt to rouse local support for a known assassination attempt, or even a coincidence. Or simply never actually happened.

[indianasmith]

Many scholars think that the "Beast" in the book of Revelations was not just a reference to the end-time Anti-Christ, but also a reference to the Emperor Domitian, who some people in the Eastern Empire thought was Nero come again . . .

[Onasander]

The issue is, this guy may not even existed. The only evidence for him actually existing is a single book on sacrifices, and it appears he was a Platonist of some sorts.

 

This makes the situation very, very awkward, given the Platonists focused heavily on Plato and Homer, and had, though varied, related ideas on how the soul metamorphed after death. I'm knee deep on this on personally right now, trying to balance a few contradictory beliefs Numenius of Apamea had on soul travel through the Tropics of Capricorn and Cancer, how they seek Moisture or Ether, and Homeric and Platonic Analogies that Proclus and someone named Nonnos explained in greater depth.... I don't have all the answers to complete a full schema yet, but I can say with fair certainty that Philostratus, who wrote this story as well as a few other works, like his smaller work on Heros, where some Trojan War ghosts hang out in a vineyard and beach, don't really mesh with the system the real life Apollonius would of accepted as a Planonist. Were dealing with the imagination, in actuality, of a writer who was hired by a empress to write a story about a cult figure from Syria several generations (centuries) after the fact, and who's myths very closely intertwine with that of Jesus, in a related geographical and temporal area. A religious cult grew around thus guy, and Philostratus added a lot of the same bullshit to his story that we see in his other stories that deal nothing with him.

 

Add to this, we have a good sense of what Apamea (a town in Syria famous for its Philosophers) put out intellectually....

 

I think were dealing with a horrible little fraud at worst, a very poorly fact checked work at best by a author more interested in getting played than historical accuracy.

 

I seriously doubt anyone prior to this text being written worshipped Apollo' like in the form written, save in much shorter tidbits.

 

It really should of made a impact ELSEWHERE. I should be bumping into NeoPlatonists discussing him a bit more than never.

 

I have no doubt given the empress' interest in him as a saint of sorts that there wasn't a cult around him, and centuries can fill it with superstition, but this is too much for someone who dealt in Platonic terminology to be realistic, in a society that had high intellectuals locally who would of heard such stories and called bull on them.

 

But as a solitary literary device, so be it. I just hope this isn't going to be a trend in a much larger book, constantly quoting him, as the work is of dubious accuracy and realism at best. A lot of people don't even think he existed.

[Onasander]

I can't apparently quote off my phone, Robert Lamberton's "Homer the Theologian" is a good source for arguments for and against. On Kindle.

[caldrail]

Many scholars think that the "Beast" in the book of Revelations was not just a reference to the end-time Anti-Christ, but also a reference to the Emperor Domitian, who some people in the Eastern Empire thought was Nero come again . . .

 

Possibly. However, since the Romans had occupied Judaea and fought a war there (Nero had sent Vespasian to settle the 'Great Revolt', the one leading to the destruction of Jerusalem and the siege of Masada) , the Book of Revelations takes on the character of a political rant, rather like the pseudo-religious threats and propaganda that islamic militants spread on the internet today. (I seriously do not believe that the Book of Revelations has any modern day context or prophetic value whatsoever).

 

However, the issue of Nero coming again? The sins of both Nero and Domitian were distant, not affecting Judaea directly, however much rumour had disturbed judaean sentinent. Further, the issue of who ruled Rome would have been well known to the Judaeans. Images of the current Caesar would have been seen, both in monumental form, sporadically, or at the head of legionary gatherings, never mind official notices. The imperial cult, particularly for a caesar that demanded the status of a god and to be addressed as such, must have been clearer to them than your point suggests. After all, aside from the lives of the wealthy and well-connected, native life in Judaea predominated under Roman aegis, and indeed, a later war in the reign of Hadrian was ignited because Hadrian had reneged on his promise to rebuild Jerusalem, choosing to create a new Roman city on the same site.

Edited March 31, 2015 by caldrail

[Onasander]

I'm not a supporter really of revelations, as it makes little sense to me that the Anti-Christ wouldn't just read it and be like 'crap, I'm certainly not doing it like this now'.... it barely got in on the canon list....

 

But to say it reads like a ISIS text is bull. There are several schools of prophetic revelation used in Christian and Jewish history, I can point indeed to a few old testiment books (Catholic bible) that reads like a Jihadi call to arms. But their not really prophecies.

 

We have prophetic schools, Jeremiah and his school stands out in particular. I found a fragment attributed to him in De Nugis Philisphocum I couldn't trace back to the bible, and it confused me, and started getting priests involved, and discovered he had a whole school of debatable aphocrapha attributed to him and his students.... whole purpose of which in their school's debate was to determine what was a legit prophecy, and what wasn't.

 

There just wasn't a long prophecy like Revelations, it was usually quite short. Revelations stands out in this regard.

 

Shortness obviously doesn't make it legit, in any school, but this size issue certainly stands out.

 

I can't say at all revelations resembles anything ISIS is walking around proclaiming. They say a lot of foolish bull, and look drugged up in their pronouncements at times, but that fits neither in prophecy or fatwa. Their just being obnoxious dicks. They lack authority to launch Fatwas (gotta be a recognized scholar within a larger community of scholars, not a middle eastern redneck, and custom is your asked before the fatwa is issued, and fatwa only applies to the one who issues it, not necessarily the one who requested the pronouncement).

 

They make the same pronouncements any Full of S soldier ever has made about success. Of the prophecies they use, I haven't heard too many Revelations class grand pronouncements. They expect a Roman army to show up, that's about it. I'm kinda intrigued in seeing where this lost roman legion is gonna come from myself. But this isn't revelations class in scope or character at all. Revelations is a full blown drama, a history of the future scene by scene in considerable detail.

 

Its this detail and storyline that makes it still relevant, even if its of debateable as a legit text, which I'm not too inclined to believe. It can be read hermeunetically, and is resistance against a unjust tyranny that disguises itself as something wonderful and good. Its a perennial fountain of scepticism in regards to government motivations.

 

Its very likely the reason the US has lasted so long as a moderate power when Europe over the last century swung so radically from the disturbing extremes of its political movements. As soon as its done with one system, quite often FORCED to stop their systems from World Wars, they just leap willy nilly into another absurd radical belief.

 

Revelations gives a lot of strength to those who seek to resist these tyranny of the majorities. It keeps a state honest, and within bounds. It takes several generations to see at times how government policies unwind into chaos. Here, its vehemently rejected a priori. We pay very close attention to ensuring were not making 'THAT' sort of a problem arise. And let's be honest, your country Caldrail is quite Nietzschean, and decadent. If it can happen anywhere, it can happen in England.

 

I'm of course approaching revelations as Socrates approached Myth. Its unlikely true, but has a kernal of truth in that is predicts how a tyranny and need to identify yourself as a just resistance arises. Its therefore is a essential religious text for any democracy to study. I can't imagine a more damning book for ISIS. It inspires resistance to the bootleg Caliphate.

 

Every resistance movement that ever existed is gonna have elements inherit in it that parallel revelations. Just the way it is, human psychology. Its eternally revelant. I don't think its legit as prophecy, but its been very useful. It kept America on the straight and narrow even as your country collapsed into a twisted nothingness. Yould be speaking Russian right now on your island if it wasn't for this effect. The English Civil War happened here in America as well, may of hit us harder in terms of cultural impact. It seriously affected our sense of self government, God, and severe aversion to tyranny. SEVERE. Book of Revelations is entwined in this. Why do you think Obama lost control?

[caldrail]

There was no similarity between English and American civil wars. Quite why you think the Book of Revelations has anything to do with either conflict is beyond me. Perhaps a little less metaphysics and more history might help your argument.