Divine and mythological references

During his whole political career, Sulla venerated various deities. He highlighted his connections with Venus, Apollo, Victory, Libertas and Heracles in particular.⁷¹ Apart from these, in his propaganda he less frequently referred to mythological and legendary figures such as Romulus (in the beginning) and Diomedes (later).⁷² In contrast to architecture or coinage, in glyptics one identifies a relatively small number of subjects that might be related to Sulla’s propaganda highlighting divine protection over him and his special connections with specific deities. I have already discussed the issue of potential employment of a Greek gem engraver Protarchos by Sulla and the significance of his cameos in relation to the dictator’s veneration of Venus (cf. chapter 7.1.1 above). One of the issues touched on was the warlike qualities of Venus highlighted on the Chaeronea trophies which possibly refer to her role as ancestress of the Roman state. Following this unusual attribution, one wonders if early representations of armed Venus (Victrix) on gems could be related to Sulla’s special connection with the goddess. I did not find a single proof of this and it should therefore be accepted that these gems are more likely to be related to the gens Julia Caesarea and Julius Caesar’s propaganda activities (cf. chapters 8.2.8 and 8.3.3).

Concerning Apollo, his cult was much promoted by Sulla especially among his soldiers and the god was a symbol of libertas so much venerated by the dictator

70  Vollenweider 1955: 102.

71  Barcarro 2008/2009: 16-17 and 100; Morawiecki 2014: 50-52; Noble 2014; Plantzos 1999: 85-86; Ramage 1991.

72  Evans 1992: 89-90 and 107 (a sort of reception performed by Sulla’s son Faustus); Toso 2007: 55-64.

too.⁷³ Sulla is even said to carry a small gold figurine of the god in his bosom to which he prayed during the battle of the Colline Gate (82 BC).⁷⁴ One observes a significant number of gems cut with the head of Apollo produced in the 1st century BC. This trend seems to start while Sulla was in charge of the government of Rome and a good number of those intaglios can be dated to the early 1st century BC, also if compared to similar representations appearing on coins (cat. nos 7.11-12, Figure 111).⁷⁵ Although there are plenty of other reasons for Apollo’s heads and busts appearing on gems popularity other than political ones,⁷⁶ the abrupt and significant increase in the early 1st century BC is hard to explain in another way than that his cult was promoted by top Roman politicians, in this case Sulla. I do not find any example clearly indicating that Apollo’s head was engraved upon a gem related to the dictator. Therefore, it is difficult to regard engraved gems with the image of this god as propaganda objects the production of which was encouraged by Sulla himself, but they could work as such on a much less obvious level which due to the lack of sufficient context escapes us today. Plutarch suggests that Sulla’s veneration of Apollo was targeted to influence the army and one surmises that since the commander gave an example, his followers cherished the same god.⁷⁷ As a result, carrying rings with gems bearing Apollo’s images could be one of the variants of this practice. It would have strengthened the bonds between a propagandist and his audience. Ultimately, the image of Apollo might have been automatically associated with Sulla and thus, gems with the god’s head were desirable products also for showing one’s allegiance to the group of Sulla’s supporters.

Regarding other motifs involving Apollo and potentially referring to Sulla, Toso suggests that some intaglios presenting the punishment of Marsyas by Apollo may be related to Sulla’s propaganda (cat. nos 7.13-14, Figure 112). She bases her hypothesis on the fact that an original Hellenistic statuary group illustrating that myth created in Pergamon in the second half of the 3rd century BC was copied in the times of Sulla in Rome.⁷⁸ This was due to the fact that the group was a perfect allegory of Sulla’s victories over barbarians (Cimbri and Teutones) as well as the East (the First Mithridatic War).

This concept is illustrated on a glass gem from London where Apollo plays a lyre standing next to Marsyas who hangs on a tree and on the other side stands Victory (cat. no. 7.13, Figure 113). The subject of Marsyas’

punishment became indeed popular from the early

73  Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 29. On Apollo as symbol of libertas, see: RRC:

732.74  Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 29.6.

75  See an extremely important iconological analysis of that motif in:

Maaskant-Kleibrink 1989/1993: 196-200.

76  Maaskant-Kleibrink 1989/1993: 196-200.

77  Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 29.

78  Toso 2007: 222.

1st century BC. However, one should remember that Sulla’s opponents used that motif for their own political reasons too. For instance, L. Marcius Censorinus issued coins depicting Marsyas, at a time when the augural college was the subject of political controversy during the Sullan civil wars of the 80s BC (Figure 165).⁷⁹ He was later killed by Sulla for this mockery. As a matter of fact, it is debatable if the subject of Apollo punishing Marsyas could be applied in glyptics in favour of Sulla, for his propaganda, or whether it was also used by his opponents. An argument in favour of Sulla is that the motif could have been used in his integrational propaganda focusing on Apollo. Later, it was employed for similar reasons by Octavian (cf. chapter 9.3.1.7).

Less controversial is the issue of Victory’s employment for Sulla’s propaganda and possible reflections of that on engraved gems. In Geneva and London there are two highly interesting glass gems presenting Victory flanked by two trophies (cat. nos 7.15-16, Figure 113).

As Vollenweider suggested, this iconography existed first in the Hellenistic East appearing, for instance, on the coins of Antiochos VIII Grypos among others.⁸⁰ A similar layout for trophies (without Victory, though) had been applied by Sulla on his coins celebrating his military success in the Battle of Chaeronea in 86 BC but the statue of Victory was a part of the trophies erected after the battle near Aphrodisias. Perhaps then, these intaglios served the same purpose and were supposed to commemorate this particularly important event in Sulla’s career. Noteworthy is that just as the bust of Apollo, the one of Victory gains popularity in the early 1st century BC. Vollenweider discussed whether the motif was a symbol of the populares or could stand for Sulla’s military victories (cat. no. 7.17, Figure 114).⁸¹ Finally, Weiß draws attention to another glass gem representing an unusual type: this time Victory is shown as holding a palm branch and throwing something into a hydria standing beside her (cat. no. 7.18, Figure 115).

She argues that the motif may commemorate the ludi Victoriae Sullanae or ludi Victoriae Caesaris.⁸² The first were the games performed in early 81 BC, after Sulla’s victory at Porta Collina in 82 BC. This exceptional occasion might have been commemorated on engraved gems by using just such unusual iconography.⁸³ It is probable because Victory was employed by Sulla on his coins proclaiming his expected victory just before the battle at Porta Collina.⁸⁴

Regarding Heracles, as Plutarch says, he was regarded by Sulla as his patron god to whom he dedicated a statue

79  RRC, nos. 363/1a-d (denarii of L. Marcius Censorinus, 82 BC).

80  Vollenweider 1979, no. 525.

81  Vollenweider 1979, no. 123.

82  Weiß 2007, no. 239.

83  Hölscher 1967: 143-147.

84  RRC, nos. 367/1-5 (aurei and denarii of Sulla, 82 BC).

on the Esquiline called Heracles Sullanus.⁸⁵ In Roman Republican glyptics the motif of a head of Heracles or his bust became popular in the early 1st century BC which is consistent with Sulla’s veneration of the Greek hero (cat. nos 7.19-20, Figure 116). The peak of popularity of that motif occurs around the mid-1st century BC, which might be related to another Roman propagandist referring to the hero – Pompey the Great (cf. chapter 8.1.9). Naturally, as has already been pointed out, there could be a plenty of reasons other than political for the popularity of Heracles on gems those days (cf. chapter 6.3.1). Nevertheless, the political factor should not be entirely ignored. One imagines a situation when the cult of this particular Greek hero is promoted by Sulla and the practice is further imitated by his followers (especially soldiers). Moreover, perhaps some of them even identified the propagandist with Heracles and thus chose to have had his likeness engraved upon their own rings. This would have testified to the considerable authority and influence of Sulla as well as to the fact that his propaganda was successful. As has been said in the introduction (cf. chapter 4.7), propaganda proves successful when the audience does not have to be stimulated anymore, but processes messages and issues related to the propagandist on its own and this might be the case here. Another consideration is the reception of Sulla’s propaganda performed by his son Faustus who struck an issue with Heracles’ head wearing a lion skin.⁸⁶ Due to the three wreaths appearing on the reverse, it is traditionally identified with the propaganda of Pompey the Great,⁸⁷ but one cannot exclude that the moneyer intended to compare Pompey to Heracles and Sulla (also as Heracles) at the same time. Interpreted that way, it is a confirmation of a subtle political language that was preferred by propagandists of all kinds. This instance makes one aware that even on coins equipped with legends and other helpful indicators, the proper meaning of the propagandistic message remains obscure for us today. Still, for the Romans just one symbol was often a sufficient allusion, thus the political significance of Heracles on gems should be taken into consideration.

Finally, one of the most discussed motifs in glyptics and coinage often associated with Sulla is the so-called

‘Dream of Sulla’ scene (cat. nos 7.21-23, Figure 117).

According to Plutarch, the following dream occurred to Sulla on the night before he attacked Sulpicius and Marius in Rome in 88 BC: ‘(…) the goddess whom the Romans had learned to worship from the Cappadocians, whether she is Selene or Athena or Enyo (Bellona), appeared to Sulla as he was sleeping. She handed him a thunderbolt and naming his enemies one by one, she ordered him to strike

85  Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 35; Barcaro 2008/2009: 100 (with more literature on the subject).

86  RRC, no. 426/4b (denarius of Faustus Cornelius Sulla, 56 BC).

87  Plantzos 1999: 85-86; RRC: 450-451.

them. When he did so, all his enemies fell down and vanished.

Sulla was encouraged by this dream and after he told it to his followers at dawn, he marched upon Rome.’⁸⁸ Based on this account, Vollenweider connected the imaginary of the goddess Selene appearing to Endymion occurring on a considerable series of gems with that dream of Sulla.

She claimed that a number of glass gems with that motif should be linked to Sulla’s propaganda practices because they were distributed to the soldiers faithful to the statesman and worn by them as amulets.⁸⁹ Vollenweider as well as some numismatists pointed out the denarius struck by L. Aemilius Buca in 44 BC presenting on the obverse side the head of Venus and the goddess approaching a sleeping man on the reverse (Figure 118).⁹⁰ Because Venus was venerated by Sulla (and Caesar), it was tempting to associate the scene from the reverse side with the ‘dream of Sulla’ story as Crawford did.⁹¹ However, over recent decades more attention has been given to that motif by numismatists and scholars focusing on glyptics.⁹²

For a start, one notices that in the dream described by Plutarch the goddess appearing to Sulla gives him a bundle of thunderbolts which is absent both on coins and gems. Crawford explains that this element is replaced on the coins by Victory with a staff, however, she does not appear on any intaglio except for one glass gem in Copenhagen which clearly copies the design of L. Aemilius Buca’s coin from 44 BC and thus, cannot be linked with Sulla’s propaganda (cat. no. 7.24). Instead, the Eastern goddess depicted on coins grasps her veil, while on gems she holds a torch. Vollenweider tried to justify this inconsistency between the iconography and Plutarch’s story by quoting other authors describing a similar event and combining some linguistic studies.

Moreover, she noticed that the goddess from the scene in question appears separately on a good number of gems but she explains that as a sort of a shortcut of the story, which is unacceptable.⁹³ Her hypothesis has been rejected and it is now a common view that the scene depicts Selene approaching Endymion in a deep sleep.⁹⁴ As Spier observes, the motif of Artemis-Selene (which is a more correct identification of the goddess) either appearing to Endymion or alone occurs on the gems of various kinds in respect of their shapes, materials, forms and style of engraving. They do not constitute a homogenous group and should be dated from the 1st century BC to the 2nd century AD.⁹⁵ I believe this to

88  Plutarch, Life of Sulla, 9.

89  Vollenweider 1958-1959.

90  RRC, no. 480/1.

91  For the coins, see: RRC, no. 480/1 (denarius of L. Aemilius Buca, 44 BC).92  Zazoff 1983: 295.

93  Vollenweider 1958-1959: 26-29.

94  See for instance a detailed discussion in: Fears 1975; Toso 2007:

217-219. The motif is sometimes related to the death of Caesar and his apotheosis, but this seems to be exaggerated as well.

95  Spier 2001, no. 35.

be the case and the increasing popularity of Artemis-Selene on engraved gems in the 1st century BC/AD is due to a general trend observed by Pliny the Elder who claims that many Egyptian and eastern deities were becoming popular as signet images at that time.⁹⁶ As regards coins, Venus on the obverse refers to Caesar and gens Julia in general, while the scene on the reverse is thought to be a personal choice of the moneyer.⁹⁷ A similar study of the goddess (recognised as Diana), though riding a biga, is presented on denarii of Faustus Cornelius Sulla minted in 56 BC, which Crawford also correctly explains as a personal preference for the deity of the moneyer.⁹⁸ This confirms the words of Pliny and might be the case for the issue of L. Aemilius Buca from 44 BC as well as the gems showing the so-called

‘dream of Sulla’ scene.

Regarding other possible identifications of Sulla with mythological or divine figures, Toso points out that similarly to Apollo and Heracles, representations of Diomedes became popular in the early 1st century BC (cat. no. 7.25, Figure 119). This might be due to the fact that the motif was related to a general concept of Roman power, imperium and even pietas towards Venus whom Sulla venerated so much.⁹⁹ Besides, Sulla, the victor of the First Mithridatic War and governor of Rome could be regarded as the new Diomedes which might have triggered production of gems with his figure.¹⁰⁰ Concerning Libertas – Sulla considered himself a champion of that personification, but she was mostly indirectly promoted on his coins through Apollo and the same probably happened on gems because her images, either heads or in figural form, do not occur on engraved gems.¹⁰¹

7.1.6. Political symbols

Gems bearing various configurations of symbols are often treated by scholars as a means of propaganda usually with some political references and messages decoded (cf. chapter 5.1.13). Sena Chiesa remarks that already in the times of Sulla symbolic gems were used for propaganda because similar constellations of symbols known from gems appear on coins. In her opinion, those symbolic gems were used by nobilitas to identify their political views.¹⁰² Such an opinion might be confronted with the one of Gesztelyi, who claims that symbolic gems were produced mostly to be delivered to soldiers wishing to express their political allegiances

96  Pliny, Historia Naturalis, XXXVII.41.

97  Woytek 2003: 428-430.

98  RRC, no. 426/2, see the commentary on p. 450.

99  Toso 2007: 61.

100  Toso 2007: 63.

101  Regarding coins, see: RRC, nos. 369/1 (denarius of M. Metellus Q. f., 82-80 BC), 370/1a-b (denarii of G. Servilius, 82-80 BC) and 371/1 (denarius of Q. Max, 82-80 BC) and p. 732 for a commentary on the issue.

102  Sena Chiesa 2012: 257.

that way too.¹⁰³ This reasoning is attractive as in the times of Sulla the political situation in Rome was far from stable and the dictator promoted his programme addressing the needs and desires of people through various channels. It should be examined whether the symbols appearing on his coinage and gems produced in the early 1st century BC conform with each other or not and whether they may have had any political applications.

Regarding the coinage of Sulla, the symbols used in it span from augural symbols (lituus, jug) and trophies to cornucopia, bundle of thunderbolts and wreath composed of an ear of barley, an ear of wheat and assorted fruits.¹⁰⁴ The first seems to be a standard set appearing on the coins of every moneyer that performed the augural office, though there is a fierce debate on the precise meaning of its application on this specific coin.¹⁰⁵ Of course, on coins the symbols played a significant propagandistic role highlighting the status and importance of the person to whom they refer, thus, also raising his authority. Augural symbols appear on engraved gems usually without any other symbols that would allow them to be associated with a specific politician (cf. chapter 6.1), unless they accompany busts or portraits, however, this is not the case with gems produced during Sulla’s political activity. Besides, as has been stated above, such symbolic gems were used by priests and other people performing sacrifices and rituals. This is most evident from a sard intaglio in London which apart from the symbols also carries an inscription: AV - probably a shortcut from augur or augurate (cat. nos 7.26-27, Figure 120). Naturally, it cannot be entirely excluded that one of those early 1st century BC gems with augural symbols once belonged to Sulla. I have already mentioned that Museo Archeologico Nazionale in Naples preserves an outstanding bronze statue of the emperor Tiberius depicted as chief priest of Rome wearing a veil over his head and a ring on his finger with lituus engraved upon it.¹⁰⁶ Another statue equipped with a ring with augural symbols is that of Augustus as a rider found in Cumae.¹⁰⁷ These statues give us a context for the use of gems with augural symbols by the most prominent personalities in the Roman Empire. However, it is not clear whether or not Sulla was an augur or whether he was making a claim to be one so the hypothesis of his potential use of a gem with augural symbols has no supporting evidence.

103  Gesztelyi 1982: 193-195.

104  For augural symbols see: RRC, nos. 359/1-2 (aurei and denarii of Sulla, 84-83 BC). Regarding the bundle of thunderbolts and cornucopia, see: RRC, no. 371/1 (denarius of Q. Fabius Maximus, 82-80 BC).

105  Nobel 2014: 169-172.

106  Inv. no. 5615. The statue was dedicated at Herculaneum’s Theatre in 37 and was found there in the 18th century, see: Lapatin 2015: 6.

107  Ergün 1999: 713, note 6.

Another matter is that augural symbols could stand for other offices or issues than the augurate or the priesthood in general. One of the hypotheses says that on the above-mentioned coin, jug and lituus appear due to the passing of the lex curiata which conferred imperium on Sulla.¹⁰⁸ Such a meaning makes sense when jug and lituus are set in combination with other symbols clearly related to Sulla, which does not happen on gems. As a result, I do not find any gem presenting augural symbols that could be convincingly associated with the dictator.

As to the trophies accompanying augural symbols on Sulla’s coins, their significance is explained as objects commemorating his military victories at Chaeronea and Orchomenus (Figure 121).¹⁰⁹ As already explained above (cf. chapter 6.3.4), trophies, as separate symbols, exist on gems in vast quantities from the late 2nd century BC. One wonders if some of them could stand for any

As to the trophies accompanying augural symbols on Sulla’s coins, their significance is explained as objects commemorating his military victories at Chaeronea and Orchomenus (Figure 121).¹⁰⁹ As already explained above (cf. chapter 6.3.4), trophies, as separate symbols, exist on gems in vast quantities from the late 2nd century BC. One wonders if some of them could stand for any