The emperor Nerva’s place in history is a minor one but pivotal. He is the first of Edward Gibbon’s so-called "Five Good Emperors" and is given credit for beginning the practice of adopting his heir rather than selecting a blood relative. Because all of the emperors down to Severus Alexander claimed him as their ancestor Nerva has been regarded with much good will over the centuries. He is given credit for remedying the ills of Domitian’s reign and that he did much to improve the condition of the state. This article will explore Nerva’s reputation and his achievements during his brief time as emperor.

Family and Career

Nerva had eminent ancestors on both sides of his family. His father’s side had long enjoyed the friendship of the Julio-Claudians. Nerva’s great-grandfather, M. Cocceius Nerva, was consul in 36 BCE and quindecimviri sacris faciundis, one of the priests in charge of the Sibylline Books, when Augustus held the Secular Games in 17 BCE. His brother, L. Cocceius Nerva, had played a part in the negotiations that secured a treaty between Octavian and Antony in 40 BCE. He accompanied Octavian and Maecenas (and the poets Virigl, Horace and L. Varius Rufus) to Tarentum to attend a critical meeting with Antony in 37 BCE, affecting the future of the Second Triumvirate. Octavian had suffered a defeat at the hands of Sextus Pompey and needed Antony’s ships. Antony, who complied by coming with a powerful fleet, was angered at having to break off his campaign in the east. The inclusion of Nerva in these sensitive negotiations shows the high regard the Julio-Claudian’s had for the future emperor’s family. Nerva’s grandfather and father had been distinguished jurists. His grandfather, also named M. Cocceius Nerva, had accompanied Tiberius on his retirement to Capri in 26 CE and remained with the emperor until his voluntary suicide in 33 (Tacitus, Annals 6.26).

Nerva’s mother, Sergia Plautilla, was even more exalted. Her sister-in-law was Rubellia Bussa, the great-grand-daughter of Tiberius. Bussa’s father had married Julia, the daughter of Drusus and Livilla. Even though Nerva had a remote connection to the Julio-Claudian’s the prestige of claiming such a lineage remained high, especially so following the death of Nero when the direct line was extinguished.

The future emperor Marcus Cocceius Nerva was born at Narnia in Umbria on November 8. [1] The exact year of his birth has not come down to us; suggested dates are 30 or 35 CE. Nothing is known of Nerva’s upbringing and early life. As a member of a senatorial family he followed a path that would take him to the Senate. It could be said that Nerva had little ambition. He did not pursue a military career nor was he a noted public speaker. What he had going for him were his family connections to the principate and his abilities as a politician and negotiator. He chose a quiet life out of the public eye and was content with an influential role behind-the-scenes.

Nerva became an honorary city prefect during the Latin festival, an augur, a member of the priesthood of Augustus (sodalis Augustalis) and was a priest of Mars. He served as urban questor. Nerva’s distant relationship to the Julio-Claudian’s and his family links to the imperial family guaranteed him a place at the center of power and eventually at Nero’s court. We become aware of Nerva’s devotion to the arts through the light verse he wrote that delighted Nero, who saluted him as the Tibullus of the Age (Martial, Epigrams 8.70.7; Pliny, Letters 5.3.5).

Nero had more to thank Nerva for than his abilities at poetry. When he was praetor-designate, in 65, Nerva was instrumental in revealing the conspiracy of Piso (Tacitus, Annals 15.72). Four people were honored by Nero for their parts in the suppression of the conspiracy: Petronius Turpilianus, Nymphidius Sabinus, Tigellinus the Praetorian Prefect and Nerva. The first two received triumphal decorations and Tigellinus, who had been critical in crushing the conspiracy, received triumphal ornaments and a statue in the Forum of Augustus. Nerva received triumphal ornaments and the exceptional honor of his statue being placed in the palace.

What had a junior senator done to deserve such an honor? Tacitus does not elaborate. Certainly, at the time he was writing (ca. 100) Tacitus dared not cast Nerva, the deified adoptive father of Trajan, in an unflattering light. It is not known precisely what Nerva’s involvement was but he reaped a substantial reward. It is hard to agree with Ronald Syme that Nerva’s active part in detecting the plot against Nero need not be to his discredit. [2]

At the fall of Nero, Nerva had made a transition away from his old benefactor. Tacitus in his Histories does not include any mention of Nerva, however, the future emperor must have realized that support of the Flavian cause was in his best interests. The victors in the civil war of 69 had debts to pay their supporters. The Senate met for the first time following the success of the Flavian revolt on December 21, 69 to settle the consulships for the following year. Naturally enough, Vespasian, the new emperor, was first choice, and was joined by his son, Titus, as colleague. Suffect consulships were held by Licinius Mucianus and Petillius Cerealis, two of the Flavian’s most important supporters. There were other important supporters whose reward came after Vespasian arrived in Rome in October 70. Not only did Nerva survive the civil war but he was held in such high esteem by Vespasian that he became consul when the new emperor had been in Rome for four months. For the year 71, the quiet, unassuming civilian M. Cocceius Nerva was ordinary consul with Vespasian; the only time that Vespasian held the consulship without Titus.

What had Nerva done to deserve this extraordinary honor? The consulship cannot be ascribed to his slender Julio-Claudian family connection nor can it be suggested that his poetry had a special appeal to Vespasian. A mere five years earlier Nerva had been a chief supporter of Nero, and his shifting of sides had come off not only smoothly but with honors. In contrast, Tigellinus had been given the death sentence by Otho. Nerva possibly knew Vespasian in Nero’s court, but whatever presumed friendship there may have been it is not enough to bring him so close to the new ruling family. The reason he survived and amassed honors was because Nerva was indispensable. He was an important member of the councils of Vespasian, Titus and Domitian providing political advice and able to influence Flavian policy by subtle maneuvering. Nerva, always politically astute and with a good sense of survival, was never disposed to sacrifice his life in the cause of the truth.

Nerva and Domitian

Suetonius briefly noted that Domitian had been debauched by Nerva (Dom. 1.1). This remark was made in reference to the supposed poverty in which Domitian was reared that forced him to accept money for sexual services. This anecdote was meant to reflect poorly on Domitian’s conservative morality when he was emperor, suggesting that he had never had any morals. In this regard, the statement is mere gossip. The other side of this story provides an indication of Nerva’s sexual preferences. There is little beyond this to suggest that Nerva was homosexual, but it is striking that Suetonius recorded this anecdote when we usually only hear that Nerva was exiled or in fear of Domitian.

The revolt of Antonius Saturninus, the governor of Upper Germany, in January 89 was a grave crisis for Domitian, particularly since it occurred in the aftermath of the false Nero and disturbances along the Danube. The conspiracy was confined to the officers of the legions based at Mainz (XIV Gemina and XXI Rapax) and had not been supported by the Senate. No other legions joined the conspirators. The revolt was quickly put down by Aulus Bucius Lappius Maximus, the commander of lower Germany, who took the curious precaution of destroying Saturninus’s papers. Trajan had marched from Spain with his legion, VII Gemina, in support of Domitian but the revolt was over before he arrived (Pliny, Panegyricus. 14.5).

The emperor had many to thank as witnessed by the longer than usual fasti lists for 90. At the top of the list was Nerva who shared the ordinary consulship with Domitian. Trajan’s reward was an ordinary consulship in 91 with Acilius Glabrio, who was later charged with "atheism" and executed. Once again, it is not known precisely what Nerva did in support of Domitian. It is likely that his intelligence network had news of the revolt in advance, allowing a quick response when Saturninus acted. Whatever Nerva had done for his emperor it was substantial enough to warrant an unusual gesture of thanks.

In the final years of Domitian’s reign, the emperor was less willing to allow criticism of himself stand. Earlier in his reign, he had acted in his role of censor to punish libels by simply destroying the offending work (Dom. 8.3). In later years, Domitian relied more on the lex maiestatis and sometimes meted out harsh punishment. The culmination of this tendency in Domitian came in 93 when seven members of the so-called "Philosophic Opposition" were tried for making derogatory remarks on the Flavians or the principate (Letters 3.11), (Tacitus, Agricola. 45). This loosely formed group did not oppose Domitian out of philosophic ideas but had a common interest in Stoicism and a long history of hostility toward the Flavians. Two senators, Helvidius Priscus and Arulenus Rusticus, and Herennius Senecio were executed. Arulenus’ brother, Junius Mauricus, and his wife, along with Arria (wife of Thrasia Paetus who had been executed by Nero) and Fannia (the mother of Priscus) had their property confiscated and were exiled.

Suetonius informs us (Dom. 15.3 & 16.2) that Domitian knew the actual day and time of his death from his horoscope. [3]  This led to the emperor becoming increasingly unpredictable and desperate in the last year of his reign. The execution of his cousin, T. Flavius Clemens, and exile of Clemens’ wife, Domitilla, to Pandataria, on an accusation of athestes or impurity in regard to state religion, marked a turning point. To further underscore Domitian’s anxiety, the emperor had Epaphroditus, a libellis, executed because almost thirty years before he had helped Nero commit suicide (Dom. 14.4; Dio 67.14.4). [4]

During this time, we are informed that Nerva came under scrutiny. He was banished to Tarentum on suspicion of conspiracy according to Philostratus (Vita Apollonius 7.8), who also has the sage Apollonius of Tyana defending Nerva’s character before Domitian, claiming he was devoted to the emperor (Vita Apol. 7.33). Auelius Victor suggests that Nerva went into retirement out of fear of Domitian (DeCaesaribus 12). These sources are contradicted by Martial who reports the senator happy and living well in Rome in 93 (Epigrams 8.70) and in 94/95 (9.26).

We are told by Dio (67.15.5-6) that Nerva was in peril for his life because it was predicted that he would become emperor. Somehow, Domitian, who had taken careful note of such predictions, only became aware of Nerva’s horoscope in the days before his murder. He was persuaded from having the old man executed when an astrologer predicted that Nerva would die in a few days. Stories such as these served to distance Nerva from his benefactor and provide justification for his assumption of power.

The Assassination of Domitian

Domitian was murdered as the result of a palace conspiracy on September 18, 96, and was replaced with Nerva the same day. What persuaded the conspirators to act had been the executions of Flavius Clemens and Epaphroditus (Dio 67.14.4). Other reasons given by Suetonius include: that Domitian was hated because he executed senators (Dom. 10 - 11), that he was too rigorous in his enforcement of his financial policy (Dom. 12) and his increasing arrogance (Dom. 13).

The assassins came from the very heart of the imperial household. Parthenius, a highly influential chamberlain who was allowed to carry a sword, was the organizer of the plot (Dom. 16.2). The participants were: Stephanus, steward to the exiled Domitilla, and Maximus, a freedman of Parthenius. Suetonius alone names Clodius Satur and an unnamed gladiator (Dom. 17.1). Dio alone includes Sigerius and Entellus, a libellis, in the plot (Dio 67.15-16). Dio goes on to say that Domitian’s wife, Domitia, and the Praetorian Prefects Petronius Secundus and Norbanus knew of the conspiracy. Philostratus states that Nerva conspired with Apollonius of Tyana against Domitian, but this is certainly a fabrication (Vita Apol. 7.8, 20 & 32).

The conspirators sought someone who would be willing to succeed to the imperial office and approached several men who thought their loyalty was being tested by the emperor and refused (Dio 67.15.5). Nerva was then approached by the conspirators and when asked he accepted without hesitation. His quick and unquestioning acceptance means that Nerva was informed about the conspiracy beforehand. In any event, because of Nerva’s importance in Domitian’s court, the conspirators would have needed his support for their candidate. He may have had the support of Domitia for his assumption of power. Instead of remaining loyal to Domitian, as he had during Saturninus’s rebellion, Nerva decided, uncharacteristically and with no little risk, to back himself.

Why Nerva agreed to become emperor is problematic. Ambition on his part is only a partial answer. With no Flavian to succeed Domitian, except for two children, he possibly felt he represented the only acceptable candidate to the anti- and pro-Domitianic senators. With his political connections and ability to negotiate Nerva could resolve conflicts and relax tension. He quite possibly had social reforms in mind that he could only enact as emperor, as witnessed by the achievements in this area carried out in his reign.

At first, Nerva would appear an improbably choice. He was a longtime Flavian supporter and his close ties to Domitian would seem to disqualify him. However, as he demonstrated before, Nerva proved himself indispensable to the Senate. He was at least sixty years old and was sick and feeble. We are told he often had to vomit up his food (Dio 68.2.1). But was this caused by illness or his tendency to drink too much wine? (Victor, De Caes. 13.1). Upon consideration, Nerva’s disadvantages become virtues. He had no children thereby ensuring that the state would not become his hereditary possession, as Vespasian had done. His age and illness (Vita Apol. 8.7) recommended him as an interim emperor that could avert civil war and allow time for the selection of a more suitable candidate as the next emperor.

© David A. Wend 1997

Footnotes