Promotion of the faction – Populares

In 60 BC, Julius Caesar, Marcus Licinius Crassus and Pompey the Great formed a political alliance that dominated Roman politics for several years. Although Caesar was born into a patrician family, he engaged himself in this pact on the side of the populares faction favouring the cause of the plebeians, particularly the urban poor. He supported laws regarding the provision of a grain dole for the poor by the state at a subsidised price as well as reforms which helped the poor, in particular those focusing on redistribution of land to the poor for farming and debt relief. His activities towards reaching those goals may have caused a situation where his portraits on gems discussed above were used for identification not only with him but also with his political party in general. Caesar quickly became a leader of the populares; thus, gems with his portraits may have been the sort of tokens people used to manifest their political preferences. If that was the case, it could explain why there are some informal portraits of Caesar as well as those presenting him as a senator or consul made mostly on glass gems. The latter objects must have been popular among poorer people (middle class), however, as I have already remarked, they do not outnumber gems with portraits of Pompey, so it is difficult to say if such observations can lead to any reliable conclusions.

I have already discussed in this study whether popular motifs in 1st century BC Roman Republican glyptics such as the head/bust of Apollo or Heracles could be regarded as symbols of optimates or populares, but no such conclusion can be made based on the preserved material and information extracted from literary sources (cf. chapters 7.1.5 and 8.1.11).²³³ Recently, Yarrow has argued that some images of Gauls are strikingly close to their heads appearing on Caesar’s coinage (cat. nos 8.132-134, Figures 248-249).²³⁴ She thinks that such images were put on glass gems to manifest affiliation to Caesar’s political party, especially by soldiers and veterans, through

232  As already stated, the image of Venus Victrix was initially reserved for Caesar’s seal only, therefore, all attempts of numismatists to attribute one of Venus’ heads or images appearing on denarii as Victrix is pointless, see for example a discussion in: RRC: 496.

233  However, some scholars are of a different opinion, see, for example: Barcaro 2008/2009: 18-19. See also a discussion of this issue but in terms of coinage in: RRC: 731-732.

234  Yarrow 2018: 40-41. Regarding coins, see for example, RRC nos.

448/2a-3 (denarii of L. Hostilius Saserna, 48 BC).

identification with his major military success – the conquest of Gaul. This is possible because that subject was much promoted in glyptics in figural forms (cf.

chapter 8.2.7 below) as well as on coins or in literature (for example, Caesar’s treatise entitled Commentarii de Bello Gallico). Furthermore, she notices that images on glass gems were improved and altered by their makers in comparison to those known from coins, for instance in terms of the coiffure. The goal would have been to add them status similar to the Hellenistic kings. This intentional intervention would have added value to the images of defeated Gauls and hence, enhance the authority of Caesar who defeated them.²³⁵ This would be proof of deliberate actions of a propagandist (in this case Caesar himself) who controlled the production of glass gems so that it met his requirements. However attractive the view is, Yarrow probably misses the fact that many gem engravers working at the time in Rome were immigrant artists of Greek origin who travelled there from the Hellenistic East. It seems to me more reasonable to link the Hellenistic-like coiffure features with their own eastern tradition which they could not shake off at once rather than adding those according to a carefully designed plan. Still, copies of the images of Gauls on glass gems from the mentioned coins are definitely proofs of Caesar’s propaganda employed and those gems testify that it was successful since his followers used to refer to him that way but proving his direct engagement in the process is problematical.

Finally, a noteworthy fact is that portraits of populares on gemstones and glass gems are considerably less frequent than in the case of the optimates (cf. chapter 8.1.7).²³⁶ Such a situation may be due to the smaller financial capacities of the populares. They could not afford to commission expensive artists to cut their own likenesses on intaglios and perhaps also they were generally less interested in art forms such as glyptics.

8.2.7. Commemoration

Engraved gems were frequently employed to commemorate important events such as military victories or appointment to titles and offices as well as the creation of political pacts. The career of Julius Caesar was full of tremendous victories and his campaign in Gaul was widely promoted by the general himself in his own writings and many other ways. It seems that glyptics was particularly productive in these terms too. For example, Sagiv observes that the motif of a horse rider attacking a Gallic or Celtic footman is fairly popular and ancient in glyptic art. Its origins may lie in the defeat of the Gauls at Pergamum in the second half of the 2nd century BC. It is probable that people wore such gems as a reminder of the iconic defeat of

235  Yarrow 2018: 41.

236  Vollenweider 1972-1974: 132-135.

the northern barbarians by the Attalids.²³⁷ In a Roman context, the function of pieces representing fights with Gallic or Celtic warriors could be the same and I have already suggested and commented on the potential commemoration of Roman wars with Gallic tribes on gems produced in the 3rd and 2nd century BC (cf.

chapters 6.3.3 and 6.3.4). A new boost of production of such gems is evidenced in the mid-1st century BC. There is a good number of intaglios presenting fights between Romans and barbaric Celts which could have been stimulated only by Julius Caesar’s campaigns in Gaul in the 50s BC. The variety of illustrations of those fights is vast, from multifigured compositions such as on a large glass gems preserved in Hannover and London (cat. nos 8.135-136, Figure 250) down to combats of individual warriors and single figures, for example on glass gems in Perugia, Boston and Geneva (cat. nos 8.137-138, Figure 251). A good number of gems with such subjects is made of glass which indeed suggests they were mass-produced, certainly for Roman soldiers taking part in Caesar’s campaigns. It was surely considered a great honour to be a veteran and one of the conquerors of a new Roman province. This pride could be immortalised and illustrated by such gems set in rings. Moreover, these objects could not only commemorate important military victories, but also manifest support and loyalty to Julius Caesar in the same way as the heads of Gauls on glass gems imitated images known from the dictator’s coins discussed above.

There are several gems of exceptional quality and iconography relating to this theme and scholars have speculated if they present Julius Caesar himself engaged in conflict with barbarians. One of them is a sard intaglio presenting a Roman general whose rank is suggested by a cuirass and paludamentum, riding a horse attacking a Gallic footman with a large shield and sword dropped on the ground (cat. no. 8.139, Figure 252). This monumental and dynamic composition stands out from the bulk of other intaglios presenting similar scenes. Zwierlein-Diehl suggests that due to exceptional military attributes (cuirass and paludamentum) the engraver might have meant to depict Julius Caesar.²³⁸ In Boston, there is a glass gem presenting another Roman general wearing a cuirass on a horse engaged in a combat with a Gallic footman (cat. no. 8.140, Figure 253). Again, the distinctive military dress and armour suggest a high-ranking officer or general, maybe Julius Caesar himself and according to Sena Chiesa and Facchini the person presented in a similar scene on an impression in Verona should be identified with Caesar too (cat. no. 8.141).²³⁹ Of particular interest are two glass gems housed in the Villa Giulia Museum in Rome. They were made from the same matrix and present a naked heroized male figure

237  Sagiv 2016: 40-41.

238  Zwierlein-Diehl 1979, no. 1092.

239  Facchini 2012, no. 67; Sena Chiesa 2010: 242.

on the right with his mantle wrapped around his left arm and holding a spear in his right. He stands next to a trophy erected from armour, helmet, swords and Gallic shields, while next to it kneels a bearded man with long hair whose physical appearance suggests a Celt (cat.

nos 8.142-143, Figure 254). Vollenweider suggested these gems depict Julius Caesar and Vercingetorix, the famous leader of Gallic tribes whom Caesar defeated and displayed during his triumph.²⁴⁰ The interpretation is a bit problematic due to the fact that one does not recognise any other gem or coin presenting a heroized figure of Caesar e.g. naked and with a spear and cloak, but depictions of Roman imperators in this kind of scheme are known (cf. chapter 6.3.3) plus glyptics was by definition intended to promote bolder propaganda messages. Another plausible identification would be the god Mars who used to be depicted with a spear, but he wears no helmet here, which would be unusual, and the kneeling barbarian indeed might be a Gallic war-chief. The composition resembles to some degree a coin of Julius Caesar struck in 48-47 BC, but a sole, defeated Celt kneeling or seated on the ground exists already in the Hellenistic glyptics.²⁴¹ All in all, it may be only surmised that the two intaglios in question here and other similar compositions could have been executed on the occasion of Caesar’s triumph when Vercingetorix was presented in the precession.

Regarding kneeling barbarians and trophies, they exist on intaglios produced in the times of Caesar also in compositions involving more than just one figure, but not all of them should be automatically linked to the wars in Gaul, but also to those in Spain and Germania (cat. nos 8.143-145, Figures 255-256). This is clear when one compares these gems to the motifs known from coins commemorating such events like the denarius of Julius Caesar minted in 46-45 BC (Figure 257).²⁴² The case of the gem now in Bonn but found in Xanten (cat. no. 8.144, Figure 255) is interesting due to the findspot suggesting that the piece was used by a soldier, perhaps a descendant of one of Caesar’s veterans. Less obvious subjects can make reference to Caesar’s military victories as well and a good example of that are a carnelian intaglio found in Lebrija in Spain and chrom-chalcedony in London presenting a volute crater flanked by two palm trees (cat. nos 8.146-147, Figure 258). Finally, regarding military victories, the goddess Victory is sometimes employed on gems to indicate an important success of a propagandist. This is the case of a sard intaglio in Vienna where she stands to the right holding a palm branch and a laurel wreath,

240  Vollenweider 1972-1974: 127.

241  Compare the barbarian kneeling or seated under a trophy from Julius Caesar’s denarii minted in 48-47 BC: RRC, nos. 452/4-5.

Regarding the Hellenistic type, see for instance: Richter 1956, no.

235 and an unpublished glass gem from the British Museum: inv. no.:

1814,0704.1989.

242  RRC, no. 468/2.

a globe is at her foot, sceptre and a writing tablet in front of her, and a rudder (?) behind (cat. no. 8.148, Figure 259). Zwierlein-Diehl remarks that the globe and sceptre stand for rule over land and sea which is a combination of total power, that Caesar obtained once he defeated the Pompeians in the battle of Thapsus in 46 BC.²⁴³ On the tablet in front of the goddess, the name of the victorious general was meant to be inscribed.

Because a similar configuration of symbols appears on the denarius of T. Carisius minted in 46 BC for Caesar, it is indeed tempting to suggest that Caesar’s victory at Thapsus was intended to be commemorated on this intaglio (Figure 260).²⁴⁴

Apart from military victories, engraved gems were used to commemorate other important political events.

For example, Zwierlein-Diehl suggests that a glass gem bearing the sella curulis with a roll of parchment (?) and a laurel wreath in Vienna might refer to Julius Caesar (cat. no. 8.149, Figure 261). According to Cassius Dio, after his victory at Thapsus Caesar was privileged to sit in the Senate on a curule chair between consuls and early in 44 BC the Senate’s decree granted him the curule seat everywhere except in the theatre, where his gilded chair and jewelled crown were carried in, putting him on a par with the gods.²⁴⁵ Moreover, according to Zwierlein-Diehl, a similar motif appears on denarii struck by C. Considius Paetus in 46 BC and (Lollius) Palicanus in 45 BC (figs 262-263 respectively).

Both moneyers were related to Julius Caesar and most likely the choice of the curule chair was meant to commemorate the privileges mentioned above.²⁴⁶ The similarity between the gem from Vienna and the coins is, however, not extremely striking. Furthermore, one must keep in mind that the motif of the sella curulis in glyptics and coinage alike was fairly popular much earlier too. On coins the sella curulis appears for the first time in 84 BC perhaps in the context of the curule aedileship of the moneyer.²⁴⁷ Perhaps then, the iconography involving the sella curulis on gems meant a title or office rather than referred to a specific situation or event related to Caesar. It seems to be a similar case to the gems bearing augural symbols discussed above (cf.

chapter 6.1). Because the very precise dating of gems bearing that motif is impossible to be established, one cannot dismiss Zwierlein-Diehl’s view entirely. Perhaps some gems were produced once Caesar obtained his privileges to commemorate that, but at the same time, one should be aware that some of those engraved with the sella curulis were possibly tokens or seals used by curule aediles and maybe consuls as a part of their official equipment.

243  Zwierlein-Diehl 1979, no. 1074; 2007: 137.

244  RRC, nos. 464/3a-c.

245  Dio Cassius, Historia Romana, 43.14.5.

246  RRC, nos. 465/1a-2b and 473/1a-d respectively.

247  RRC, nos. 356/1a-d (denarii of P. Furius Crassipes, 84 BC).

Regarding the commemoration of other political events related to Julius Caesar, the first triumvirate pact comes to mind and it has been suggested that it was reflected on gems presenting the so-called scene of the ‘dream of Sulla’. However, as I have discussed above, this motif has nothing to do with politics and the same conclusion was drawn by Toso.²⁴⁸ Another class of objects that is supposed to commemorate the first triumvirate established in 60 BC by Pompey, Crassus and Caesar are the gems bearing the dextrarum iunctio motif sometimes combined with other symbols.

Vollenweider argued that the motif of two clasped hands – symbol of Concordia – could have had a political meaning and was primarily referring to the triumvirate (either the first or the second) since it was a pact of consensus between political leaders who had been previously fighting each other. It is true that the first gems involving this particular subject appeared in the first half of the 1st century BC; however, the coinage to which she referred does not support the view that some gems bearing that motif could have been produced under Pompey in order to commemorate his pact with Crassus and Caesar because all the coin types featuring dextrarum iunctio are related to Caesar.²⁴⁹ Besides, the combinations of dextrarum iunctio and other symbols on coins differ from those known from gems. Therefore, I believe that many intaglios were produced on the commissions of ordinary people or by gem engravers who distributed them as amulets because there was a constant need for peace and prosperity and hope for the end of the Civil War.

Unrest must have been considerable at the time of the rivalry between Pompey and Caesar and the symbolic gems involving the dextrarum iunctio motif were produced to express and address these feelings and hopes among common people and soldiers. For instance, in Krakow there is an amethyst bearing two clasped hands (dextrarum iunctio) holding the caduceus and palm branch and an ear of corn (cat. no. 8.150, Figure 264). These symbols should be explained as follows: the clasped hands and the caduceus as a wish for peace, a palm branch as a symbol of victory, while the ear of corn stands for a wish for prosperity and abundance of food that was scarce during the Civil War.

People who carried such gems in their rings wished for better times to come. It is true that in the coinage this symbolism as well as other emblems like cornucopia, sceptre and globe – all often appear on aurei and denarii minted under Caesar and it seems that he was the one who answered the needs of people sending out coins

248  Toso 2007: 217-219.

249  The earliest examples of putting the dextrarum iunctio motif on coins are the following denarii, none related to Pompey the Great but to his opponent Julius Caesar, see: RRC, nos. 450/2 (denarius of D.

Iunius Brutus, 48 BC), 451/1 (denarius of C. Vibius Pansa Caetronianus and D. Iunius Brutus, 48 BC) and 480/6 (denarius of L. Aemilius Buca, 44 BC).

and perhaps stimulating the fashion for symbolic gems referring to the same subjects. Caesar must have been aware of people’s feelings, thus, he preferred subjects on his coins related to the promotion of peace, prosperity and ordo rerum that could be guaranteed only by him.²⁵⁰ It is difficult to say if the dictator directly encouraged the production of gems related to these matters too as suggested by Vollenweider and Sena Chiesa,²⁵¹ but his political programme was influential and possibly had an impact on the current gem production in Rome and Italy in a broader sense. In other words, his political programme encouraged his followers to carry such gems in order to manifest their affinity with him.

Naturally, there is a good number of reason other than political why such symbolism was popular on gems, especially in the 1st century BC context and later. For instance, a popular subject on symbolic gems is an eagle standing on an altar between two legionary standards and two clasped hands are located below which surely was meant to express a soldier’s fidelity to his legion (cat. no. 8.151, Figure 265).²⁵² Gems with the dextrarum iunctio motif were surely used as betrothal gifts and amulets which is suggested by additional elements accompanying them such as lizards, corn ears, poppies, eagles, ram’s heads and so on (cat. nos 8.152-158, Figure 266).²⁵³ Some scholars rightly suggest a funerary function for gems bearing this iconography too.²⁵⁴ Sometimes, the amuletic function is confirmed by an inscription accompanying the motif. For instance, on a sardonyx intaglio in Berlin two clasped hands co-exists with PAVLINVS FELIX inscription – clearly suggesting the gem to be an amulet intended to ensure good luck, fortune and happiness to the owner who might have been a just married man (cat. no. 8.159, Figure 267).

Another similar example is a burnt carnelian that might have been put on a funeral pyre and buried with the deceased as suggested by the discolouration of the stone as well as the inscription (YГIA – meant for

‘salute’ or Hygeia?) (cat. no. 8.160). For establishing the function of gems with dextrarum iunctio, it is crucial to analyse their provenance and the potential location of workshops where they were made. The results of my investigations indicate that those gems were widely produced not only in Rome but also in Aquileia and

‘salute’ or Hygeia?) (cat. no. 8.160). For establishing the function of gems with dextrarum iunctio, it is crucial to analyse their provenance and the potential location of workshops where they were made. The results of my investigations indicate that those gems were widely produced not only in Rome but also in Aquileia and