''This paper aims to consider the ways in which emperor Titus FlaviusDomitianus (81-96) was treated by historians between the end of the 19th century andthe dawn of the 21st century and to classify these perspectives in three categories: thetraditionalist perspective (1894- 1961), the revisionist perspective (1963-1997) and the new approaches (2011 – current). In our understanding, as Leite (2018) and Szoke(2020) have already pointed out, it is more useful for historical knowledge aboutDomitian and his government to discuss the fabrication of speeches on certain platformsand not the rehabilitation or degeneration of that emperor, by means of thedocumentation that has been left to us throughout the centuries.