Promotion of the faction – Optimates

In the early stage of his career, Pompey, like his father Gnaeus Pompeius Strabo (135-87 BC) supported Sulla, who belonged to the optimates – a pro-aristocracy faction. He participated in the final part of the Social War (91-88 BC) and when his father died, he inherited the lands and estates as well as loyalty of his legions. When another civil war between Marius and Sulla broke out in 83 BC, Pompey again supported the latter. He helped him in his march on Rome and later chased survivors of the Marians gaining his cognomen Magnus and his first triumph in 80 BC. Later on, Pompey developed his political and military career first in Spain fighting Sertorius and gaining a second triumph in 71 BC, and finally in the East where he put vast territories under Roman control culminating in his third triumph in 61 BC. It was in 60 BC when Pompey entered a coalition with Marcus Licinius Crassus (c. 115-53 BC) and Julius Caesar (100-44 BC). It survived until Crassus’ death in 53 BC, but in fact from 60 BC down to his death in 48 BC Pompey was a fierce rival of Caesar’s. For all these years, he was the leader of optimates party and even though his propaganda actions were mostly focused on him, he must have solicited the support of other prominent Roman politicians, senators and aristocrats. Because engraved gems were strictly private objects, they seem the best to manifest political allegiances as it was the case for instance with philosophical views.⁷⁹ In previous chapters I have discussed gems bearing Pompey’s portrait excluding the glass ones, which as has been said were most likely intended for Roman soldiers fighting under Pompey. One supposes that other gems could be gifted by Pompey to his friends and supporters as a sort of recognition for their loyalty. They will be further used by their recipients as tokens of membership of his party. Of course, some of those gems could have been commissioned by Pompey’s followers too and not only to manifest their loyalty to their patron, but also to show that they belong to his circle and are supported or could even avenged by him. This seems to be the case of governors of eastern provinces as evidenced by a cameo that probably comes from Egypt and sealing found in Edfu featuring Pompey’s portrait. There is no other sensible explanation for the existence of so many portrait gems with Pompey’s likeness or any other political leader.⁸⁰ One wonders if there were any other

79  Lang 2012: 105-106; Yarrow 2018: 35-37.

80  Yarrow 2018: 38.

motifs that could be cut for the same purpose e.g. to integrate Pompey’s political faction.

It is believed that since Sulla, the head of Apollo was a symbol commonly recognised as related to the optimates faction and thus, it became a sort of a party token.⁸¹ But the evidence is scanty and controversial.

It has been argued here that Apollo in the case of Sulla appears in his coinage and contemporary gems due to the politician’s special veneration of the god which could be followed by his supporters, especially soldiers (cf. chapter 7.1.5). Nevertheless, there is no definitive proof or trace for that motif working as a symbol of the optimates faction. Maaskant-Kleibrink explained the various types of Apollo’s head appearing on gems in the late 2nd and 1st century BC and their potential origins.

As a result, there is no particular reason to claim that the head of Apollo was cut upon engraved gems in the time of Pompey as a sort of token of optimates party.⁸² The same applies to another, highly popular motif – the head of Heracles. It is a fact that Pompey identified with the hero, but at the same time, it is unclear if the motif in question became a sort of a universal symbol of allegiance to him and thus, indirectly of the optimates.

None of the examples I have analysed include a direct reference to Pompey and the subject was highly popular throughout the whole 1st century BC for a number of other reasons (but cf. discussion in chapter 8.1.9).

It seems that there was no specific symbolism or motif that supporters of Pompey could have used to manifest their membership of the political faction he was a leader of except for his portraits. However, it should be highlighted that the practice of having one’s own portrait cut upon a gem could have been popularised by Pompey among his contemporaries too. As Vollenweider observed in her study of Roman portrait gems, the optimates used to commission gems with their portraits far more frequently than members of the populares party.⁸³ The reason for that could be, of course, financial, but it is tempting to suggest that indeed, those related to Pompey wanted to copy his actions and thus became more Hellenised than others as their leader was. The imitation of someone’s lifestyle, customs and traditions is a clear identification with him and thus, should be accounted as propaganda.

In other words, even if Pliny criticises Pompey for his

81  Barcaro 2008/2009: 16-17.

82  Maaskant-Kleibrink 1989/1993: 196-200. It is noteworthy that Pompey only occasionally and in very specific circumstances referred to Apollo, for instance, the head of Apollo appears on coins minted under his patronage in 49 BC in Greece when he was recruiting soldiers to his army to fight Caesar, see RRC, nos. 444/1-3 (denarii of Q. Sicinius and C. Coponius, 49 BC). This was due to the fact that Apollo was one of the most popular gods in Greece, so his image was used to gain Pompey new recruits (Kopij 2017: 118-119). In terms of glyptics, such actions are untraceable alas and even more direct references of Pompey to Apollo are undiscernable.

83  Vollenweider 1972-1974: 103-105.

ostentatious exhibition of gems during his triumph and Pompey’s portrait in pearls in particular, it does not mean that for other Roman aristocrats this kind of behaviour was unappealing, and they eagerly imitated it. Pompey was a creator of a trend that was continued by his followers which is recognised as a band-wagon propaganda technique. Apart from that, perhaps subjects like Mithridates’ and Medusa’s head were briefly popular around 61 BC during Pompey’s triumph and served his veterans as symbols of identification with the victory of their leader (cf. chapter 8.1.3).⁸⁴ 8.1.8. Commemoration

Engraved gems were frequently used to commemorate important events like military victories or appointments to important titles and offices. The political and military career of Pompey the Great was abundant in events that should have been immortalised in material objects which would further influence people of Rome as a part of his propaganda campaigns. This is noticeable in sculpture and coins, and consequently, one wonders if engraved gems could have been employed for the same purpose.⁸⁵

I have already discussed Pompey’s seals which so obviously, like his coinage, commemorated his victories, especially the conquest of the East and three triumphs for military accomplishments on three continents (Europe, Africa and Asia). Moreover, I have also discussed the popularity of gems presenting the head of Medusa or Mithridates VI Eupator that could have been used by Pompey’s followers to advertise their input in the victory over the king of Pontus. They possibly were encouraged to do that by Pompey himself. This is also the case with the commemoration of the triumph in 61 BC and a carnelian in Paris does the same in a more direct way (cf. no. 8.1, Figure 171, chapter 8.1.1). There is little evidence that Pompey’s military successes or other events related to him were directly commemorated on gems. Even though Vollenweider linked several gems to Pompey’s census equitum ceremony, to my mind they are not related to him but to Marcus Licinius Crassus and his son (cf. chapter 8.3.4). Yarrow suggests that head of Africa appearing on glass gems could serve to commemorate Pompey’s victory over Africa and the gems with that iconography were used by his soldiers (cat. nos 8.27-28, Figure 192).⁸⁶ She bases her reasoning on the fact that one aureus issue minted and signed by Pompey the Great features on the obverse the head of a woman wearing the elephant headdress and she

84  Yarrow 2018: 38-39.

85  Regarding the commemoration of Pompey’s successes and accomplishments reflected in coinage, sculpture, architecture and other branches of art and craftsmanship, see: Kopij 2017: 74-157 (coinage), 201-219 (architecture), 229-237 (sculpture) and 245-252 (honorific inscriptions).

86  Yarrow 2018: 41-43.

accepts the dating of that issue to 71 BC. Nevertheless, numismatists do not agree the date and meaning of this coin. Recently, Kopij convincingly argues that the aureus of Pompey in question should be linked with his rivalry with Julius Caesar in 49-48 BC and the female head in exuviae elephantis identified him with Alexander the Great and his conquest of the East being a suitable reminiscence of his past accomplishments for the Greek and eastern recruits he sought while stationed in Greece.⁸⁷ In consequence, the female head wearing elephant’s scalp clearly appears for the first time as a personification of Africa in Roman art in 47 or 46 BC on the denarius struck by Q. Caecilius Metellus Pius Scipio as a reference to his famous ancestor (on which cf. chapter 8.3.3).⁸⁸ It should not be recognised as such prior to this coin especially if there are no other symbols linking her to that land. I believe the gems cited by Yarrow should be recognised as Hellenistic creations, especially cat. no. 8.27, Figure 193 which is possibly made after a coin minted by one of the Hellenistic kings. Plantzos proved that such iconography was in use by unidentifiable Hellenistic rulers who tended to identify themselves with Alexander the Great that way.⁸⁹ Furthermore, there is a unique group of frontal female busts wearing the elephant scalp that probably depict Hellenistic queens, possibly from the Ptolemaic dynasty, which is suggested by a presence of cornucopia on an unusual nicolo in Krakow (cat. nos 8.29-31, Figures 193-194).⁹⁰ Yarrow’s mistake is probably due to her presumption that glass gems were mostly produced in Rome, but they were abundant in the Hellenistic Greece and beyond too.⁹¹ In any case, the glass and hardstone intaglios presenting the female head with exuviae elephantis should not be attributed to Pompey and considered as commemorating his triumph over Africa.

A similar case is a desperate search for any traces of commemoration of the first triumvirate in glyptics.

Vollenweider thought that a combination of three animal heads on a glass gem in Geneva stood for the members of the pact: bull – Caesar, ram – Pompey and goat – Crassus (cat. no. 8.32, Figure 195).⁹² She believed that such gems were used as cheap amulets that were distributed to the people shortly after establishing the pact. Other scholars followed her, for instance Middleton recognises competing Caesar and Pompey in conjoined protomes of a bull and lion respectively engraved upon a gem found in Epidaurum in Dalmatia (cat. no. 8.33, Figure 196).⁹³ However, such explanations

87  See a full discussion including also points of views of other scholars in: Kopij 2017: 126-144. See also a further commentary in: Campagnolo and Fallani 2018: 192.

88  RRC, no. 461/1.

89  See a full discussion on that matter in: Plantzos 1999: 58.

90  See discussions in: Gołyźniak 2017, nos. 18 and 32.

91  Plantzos 1999: 38.

92  Vollenweider 1979, no. 396.

93  Middleton 1991, no. 252.

are unacceptable. These constellations are often a part of more complex iconography class appearing on the so-called baskania/grylloi gems and they occur in various configurations.⁹⁴ They symbolise either zodiacal signs (goat – Capricorn, bull – Taurus, ram – Aries, lion – Leo etc.) or specific deities (goat – Ceres, horse – Mars, ram – Mercury and so forth).⁹⁵ The most obvious argument contradicting Vollenweider’s hypothesis is the fact that configurations of more than three elements exist as for instance on an intaglio contemporary with her Geneva example, once in the Ionides collection presenting the heads of a bull, goat, boar and ram conjoined together.⁹⁶ In addition, the bull has an ear of corn in its mouth which does not stand for free grain supply in Rome ensured by the triumvirs but it is a symbol of plenty and abundance instead. In my survey I did not find any intaglios or cameos related to Pompey’s propaganda of his titles as well as offices he was appointed to throughout his career. In contrast to Sulla and later propagandists, he did not promote ideas of peace and prosperity (cf. chapters 7.1.6, 8.2.9 and 10.8). As a result, I suggest considering the gems like the ones described in this paragraph as private amulets having no social or political applications.

8.1.9. Divine and mythological references

A successful political and military career of every prominent Roman was impossible without the blessing and support of various deities which in turn resulted in their extensive veneration. There were some commonly distinguished gods and goddesses; for example, the cult of Venus received special treatment from Sulla, who venerated her as Venus Felix, Pompey as Venus Victrix and Julius Caesar as Venus Genetrix. The second had given her title Victrix because he dedicated his military accomplishments to her and promoted them as obtained due to her advocacy.⁹⁷ Meanwhile, each prominent Roman general had his particular divine patrons. In the case of Pompey, Neptune took such a role shortly after his naval victories in the campaign against the pirates.⁹⁸ Pompey’s attitude to the gods is particularly interesting because it involves, on the one hand, cherishing well established deities of the Roman pantheon like Venus, Neptune, Heracles or even Diomedes and, on the other hand, the promotion of new ideas that he had adopted while travelling through the East (imitatio or comparatio Alexandri). In this sub-chapter I am going to analyse if there are any traces in glyptics of Pompey’s special bonds with the

94  Gołyźniak 2017, nos. 185 (a bird standing on a bucranium), 283 (a combination of a horse’s protome and bull’s head) and 554 (heads of a horse, boar and goat).

95  Gołyźniak 2017, no. 554.

96  Boardman 1968, no. 52.

97  Kopij 2017: 93.

98  Barcaro 2008/2009: 212 (with a list of ancient authors comparing Pompey to Neptune).

mentioned deities and heroes because as Henig writes legionary officers and possibly regular soldiers too used gems for their private veneration of various heroic figures.⁹⁹ There is no argument to think differently about the political leaders and their veneration could be instructive for their followers helping to integrate them around the patron.

One of the first gods that received special treatment in the propaganda of Pompey was Neptune. After his brilliant campaign against the pirates Pompey started to be compared with the chief marine deity.¹⁰⁰ For this reason some scholars link the increasing popularity of maritime subjects on 1st century BC engraved gems with Pompey’s veneration of Neptune.¹⁰¹ Vollenweider supposed that the head of Pompey accompanied with trident and dolphin appearing on some gems could be related to the general’s promotion as under the auspices of Neptune.¹⁰² However, it has recently been established that these gems should be dated to much later period and were related to Sextus Pompey’s reception and allusion to his divine father (cf. chapter 9.1.4). Consequently, the maritime subjects, although indeed abundantly carved upon intaglios and cameos in the 1st century BC, ought to be regarded as a sort of new phenomenon and general trend rather than reflecting Pompey’s and his successors’ naval victories.

For the sea was of growing significance to the Romans who appeared to control Mediterranean Sea already in the late 2nd century BC and clear comparisons between Pompey and Neptune do not exist in glyptics.¹⁰³ This is consistent with the lack of such references in the coinage issued during Pompey’s lifetime. It was only during the period of fierce rivalry between younger generation that explicit references to political developments started to be used (cf. chapters 9.1.7 and 9.3.1.8).¹⁰⁴

Regarding Venus, as has been said, Pompey venerated her with the title Victrix suggesting that his military victories were won under her patronage.¹⁰⁵ The bust of Venus appears three times on Roman Republican denarii related to Pompey: those struck by C. Considius Nonianus in 57 BC and another minted by Faustus Cornelius Sulla, son of Sulla dictator in 56 BC most likely due to the special veneration of the goddess by Sulla and Pompey alike.¹⁰⁶ One should expect then some reference to Venus on gems as well, but in fact, all three bust types appearing on coins do not exist in glyptics,

99  Henig 1970.

100  Barcaro 2008/2009: 212.

101  Guiliano and Micheli 1989: 31-32.

102  Vollenweider 1972-1974: 116.

103  The famous Altar of Domitius Ahenobarbus constructed in the late 2nd century BC is probably the best early illustration of the general trend, see: Plantzos 1999: 96.

104  Morawiecki 2014: 59-104; RRC: 739.

105  Kopij 2017: 93-94.

106  RRC, nos. 424/1 and 426/1 and 3 respectively.

at least, in any considerable similarity. Moreover, I do not find any gem presenting Venus with a symbol or engaged in an allegorical scene that could be connected with Pompey in any meaningful way.

Concerning Pompey’s relationships with Heracles, these are far more often reflected in ancient literary sources and material culture than his already mentioned connections with deities. Pompey venerated Heracles with the title Invictus which was an allusion to his own military prowess. He renovated the Temple of Heracles located near Circus Maximus so that the previous title of the hero (Invictus) has been replaced with Pompeianus.¹⁰⁷ Pompey was frequently compared to the Greek hero, for instance by Pliny, Appian and Plutarch.¹⁰⁸ For these reasons, many scholars claim that Pompey identified with Heracles in his propaganda efforts.¹⁰⁹ The personal bond between Pompey and Heracles is possibly best reflected in coinage. On coins issued by Faustus Cornelius Sulla two types of head of Heracles wearing lionskin appears. These two variants refer primarily to Sulla and Pompey together since the first was the moneyer’s father and the second his father-in-law and that has been explicitly marked on the coins’ legends.¹¹⁰ Kopij drew an interesting conclusion that while on the first coin (related to Sulla) Heracles has been presented as older than on the second type (related to Pompey) which could be due to not only the identification of Pompey with the Greek hero, but also a sort of subtle message communicating that he should be regarded as Sulla’s successor in terms of politics.¹¹¹ Interestingly, Plantzos observes a class of intaglios featuring heads of the youthful Heracles with a lionskin and proposes to link them with propaganda of Pompey and the coins minted by Faustus Cornelius Sulla (cat. nos 8.34-42, Figure 197).¹¹² Their style is essentially Hellenistic but betrays the first symptoms of the classicising manner dominating in the second half of the 1st century BC. Naturally, it is difficult to judge whether those gems were created precisely around the mid-1st century BC, but according to their provenance, it is clear that they were produced both in Rome and the East at the same time which is an argument in favour of their relationship with Pompey.¹¹³ It cannot be ascertained for sure that the Roman statesman was directly engaged in their production or encouraged it as has been suggested by Plantzos though. There is

107  Kopij 2017: 98 and especially 206-207; Kühnen 2008: 77-78; Ritter 1995: 64-65; Weinstock 1957: 228-229.

108  Appian, BC, 2.76.319; Appian, Mithr. 478; Pliny, NH, XXXIV.57;

Plutarch, Life of Pompey, 1. See also more references listed in: Barcaro 2008/2009: 99.

109  Ritter 1995: 64-86.

110  RRC, no. 426/2 (denarius of Faustus Cornelius Sulla, 56 BC) is related to Sulla, while RRC, no. 426/4a-b (denarii of Faustus Cornelius Sulla, 56 BC) are related to Pompey.

111  Kopij 2017: 94.

112  Plantzos 1999: 85-86. A similar opinion has been expressed by Toso (2007: 190).

113  Plantzos 1999: 127.

no precise information as to why the head of youthful Heracles appears on coins of Faustus Cornelius Sulla; it

no precise information as to why the head of youthful Heracles appears on coins of Faustus Cornelius Sulla; it