Michael Jaffee Patterson Independent Project 2/1/13

Pompey, the Great Husband

Abstract:

Pompey the Great’s traditional narrative of one-dimensionally striving for power ignores the possibility of the affairs of his private life influencing the actions of his political career. This paper gives emphasis to Pompey’s familial relationships as a motivating factor beyond raw ambition to establish a non-teleological history to explain the events of his life. Most notably, Pompey’s opposition to the special command of the Lex Gabinia emphasizes the incompatibility for success in both the public and private life and Pompey’s preference for the later. Pompey’s disposition for devotion and care permeates the boundary between the public and private to reveal that the happenings of his life outside the forum defined his actions within.

1 “Pompey was free from almost every fault, unless it be considered one of the greatest faults for a man to chafe at seeing anyone his equal in dignity in a free state, the mistress of the world, where he should justly regard all citizens as his equals,” (Velleius Historiae Romanae 2.29.4).

The annals of history have not been kind to Pompey. Characterized by the unbridled ambition attributed as his impetus for pursuing the civil war, Pompey is one of history’s most one-dimensional characters. This teleological explanation of

Pompey’s history oversimplifies the entirety of his life as solely motivated by a desire to dominate the Roman state. However, a closer examination of the events surrounding the passage of the Lex Gabinia contradicts this traditional portrayal.

Pompey is not the character so conventionally portrayed but rather an individual influenced by his familial ambitions. Although scholars confine Pompey to a character of unconquerable political ambition, the inclusion of Pompey’s personal affairs in the analysis of history reveals that his aspirations for familial success at times surpassed the political.

Passed in 67 BCE, the Lex Gabinia appointed Pompey to a special command against piracy. Endued with imperium infinitum, Pompey had dominion over the entirety of the Mediterranean extending inland for 50 miles.1 The severities of the times warranted the exceptional command. For, earlier that year, pirates had sacked Rome’s port city of Ostia.2 By this time, the city of Rome had outgrown its agricultural capacity and was dependant upon the importation of Egyptian grain.

1 Plutarch Pompey 25. 2 Dio Roman History 36.23.5.

2 The activities of the pirates had halted commercial trade in the Mediterranean and prevented the grain supply from reaching the city.3 Rome’s urban poor were the most afflicted by the abrupt spike in grain prices and faced the threat of starvation.

The daily affairs of the city were interrupted as hunger and civil unrest multiplied.

Under such circumstances was the Lex Gabinia introduced.

Indeed, Pompey’s command was not unique but rather the revival of an earlier commission for the same purpose. In 74 BCE, the praetor Marcus Antonius had assumed a failed command against the pirates with the same designation of imperium infinitum.4 In both cases, on account of the pirates’ prolificness, the task of their defeat demanded a command that extended beyond the boundaries of a single province to encompass the entirety of the Mediterranean.5 The nature of a command against the pirates necessitated the exceptional power of imperium infinitum. As Rome’s most decorated general, Pompey was naturally the first choice for such a command.

Prominent for his restoration of the Tribunate as well as the fame of being the only equestrian to have ever celebrated even a single triumph, not to mention two, Pompey was one of Rome’s most popular politicians.6 It was apparent that

Pompey was the most qualified general for achieving the immediate restoration of the grain supply and that the Roman populace would no doubt demand that Pompey assume the command against the pirates.7 Thus, the young Tribune Aulus Gabinius

3 Appian The Mithridatic Wars 63; Dio Roman History 36.20; Plutarch Pompey 25. 4 Velleius Historiae Romanae 2.31.4. 5 Appian The Mithridatic Wars 63; Dio Roman History 36.20; Plutarch Pompey 24. 6 Plutarch Pompey 14, 21. 7 Dio Roman History 36.23.

3 proposed the Lex Gabinia for the political gain of simultaneously championing the popular cause and strengthening his public association to Pompey.8 Indeed, despite the Lex Gabinia’s open-ended proposal that the general be chosen from among the ex-consuls, the masses immediately clamored for Pompey’s appointment.9

Pompey’s military successes were so well known that many felt that the mere name of Pompey would end the war.10 The desperation of the people was so great and their support of Pompey’s candidacy so strong that, faced with political opposition, they rushed the Senatorial assembly with the intention of killing any who opposed the motion.11 Eventually, fearful of the Roman mob, the Senate scheduled the bill for a vote.12

However, there is no indication that Pompey was complicit in the proposal of the Lex Gabinia. Upon hearing the proposed commands, Pompey delivered a speech recognizing the honor of his consideration but nevertheless asked the assembly to elect another man.13 Furthermore, Pompey excused his behavior by indicating his preference for the private life, “Allow me to remain undisturbed and to attend to my own business, so that now at last I may bestow some care upon my private affairs,”

(Dio Roman History 36.26). However, consistent with Pompey’s characterization as a megalomaniac, ancient and modern historians alike dismiss Pompey’s statements as insincere. Dio provides us with the two most repeated explanations for the

8 Dio Roman History 36.23.4; Velleius Historiae Romanae 2.31.2; Plutarch Pompey 25. 9 Dio Roman History 36.23-24. 10 Plutarch Pompey 26. 11 Dio Roman History 36.24.2. 12 Plutarch Pompey 25. 13 Dio Roman History 36.25.

4 unction of Pompey’s speech.14 Either that Pompey wished to avoid the jealousy of his fellow Senators or to enhance the glory of the command by appearing to receive its appointment against his will.15 However, both these explanations contradict the egotism of unrelenting ambition. Firstly, an aspiring autocrat would welcome jealousy rather than avoid it. Secondly, the exceptionality of the command already constituted such glory as to make the manner of its appointment inconsequential.

Finally, if indeed desirous for the command, it would be irrational for Pompey to risk appointment with feigned opposition; he needed only to express approval and his popularity with the mob would assure his selection.

However, they say that actions speak louder than words and Pompey’s subsequent conduct confirms the validity of his speech. With the vote for the Lex

Gabinia postponed until the following day, Pompey fled the city to be with his family at his country estate.16 In silent rebellion, Pompey chose to be absent while poised to receive the highest honor of his political career. Furthermore, upon receiving the news of his appointment, Pompey avoided celebration and returned anonymously to the city under the cover of darkness.17

Although dismissed by the sources, Pompey’s opposition to the Lex Gabinia becomes intelligible in the context of his private affairs. By the time of the Lex

Gabinia’s proposal in 67 BCE, Pompey had been absent from politics for three years.

In 70 BCE, he was elected to the consulship in the wake of his second triumph.18

14 Dio Roman History 36.24.6. 15 Dio Roman History 36.24.6. 16 Plutarch Pompey 26. 17 Plutarch Pompey 26. 18 Plutarch Pompey 14, 21, 22.

5 Although he secured the consulship with ease, having bypassed the cursus honorum, he was inexperienced in the affairs of Roman politics. 19 Indeed, Pompey lacked not only oratorical skills but also a basic understanding of the procedures of the Roman

Senate.20 Finding difficulty in advancing his political agenda from within the Senate itself, he became dependant on the support of the masses and restored the

Tribunate to its pre-Sullan power.21 However, this instigated a competition for popular appeal between Pompey and his colleague Crassus, fracturing their relationship and preventing any further political achievements.22 The experiences of Pompey’s first year as a Senator must have been frustrating at the least. Upon conclusion of his term in office, he retired from public life, refusing requests to appear in court and only infrequently visiting the forum.23 Pompey’s absence from politics represents his affinity for the private life, as expressed in his speech three years later.

Pompey’s habit of, “frequently neglecting and ignoring public business in order to gratify his wives,” provides a rare insight into the relationship between

Roman spouses.24 Indeed, love best explains Pompey’s valuation of familial ambition above political. Although marriages among the Roman elite functioned primarily as a means of forming political alliances, this does not negate the

19 Plutarch Pompey 22. 20 Aulus Gellius Noctes Atticae 14.7; Seneca Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales 11.4. 21 Plutarch Pompey 21. 22 Plutarch Crassus 12. 23 Plutarch Pompey 23. 24 Plutarch Pompey 2.

6 possibility of love. 25 Cicero’s letters to Terentia from his exile provide insight into the doting relationship that could develop between a Roman husband and his wife,

“If these misfortunes are permanent, I truly desire to see you, light of my life, as soon as possible and for you to remain in my embrace, since neither the gods whom you have cultivated so virtuously nor the men whom I assiduously served have rendered us our proper return,” (Cicero fam. 14.4).

Certainly, Cicero was not unique in loving his wife. In addition to Pompey’s preference for spending time with his wives over engaging in the affairs of the forum, Pompey also expressed his love through strict fidelity.26 Sexual chastity was not required of the Roman husband and it was indeed rare for a Roman aristocrat not to court a mistress. 27 Thus, enhanced by its uniqueness, Pompey’s sexual devotion is a testament of his love.

The heartbreak of Pompey’s first marriage explains his appreciation of love and his propensity for husbandly devotion. Unsurprisingly, Pompey’s marriage to

Antistia appears politically motivated. In 86 BCE, Pompey was forced to stand in for his deceased father in a trial regarding the stealing of public funds.28 Antistia’s father, Antistius, was the arbitrator for the trial and Plutarch suggests that the arrangement of Pompey and Antistia’s marriage was instrumental in securing

Pompey’s acquittal.29 However, Pompey’s first marriage is unique in that it lacked the influence of a paterfamilias who traditionally arranged the match.30 On account of Strabo’s death, Pompey was the legal paterfamilias of his household and thus had

25 Dixon The Roman Family 62 26 Plutarch Pompey 36, 53 27 Treggiari Roman Marriage 232 28 Plutarch Pompey 4 29 Plutarch Pompey 4 30 Dixon The Roman Family 64

7 the authority to choose his own bride rather than have one chosen for him.31

Accordingly, the twenty-year-old Pompey had the ability to marry for the sake of personal affection. With the possibility of a romantic basis for his marriage to

Antistia, not to mention the natural development of passions in a young couple both married for the first time, the tragic termination of this marriage would have had a traumatic effect on the youthful Pompey.

In 82 BCE, while Pompey was on campaign fighting for Sulla in North Africa,

Antistia lost both her parents when Antistius was murdered and her grief stricken mother committed suicide.32 Murdered as a suspected Sulla sympathizer, Antistius met his end on account of his marriage connection to Pompey.33 Partially responsible for the death of both his wife’s parents, Pompey would have been deeply troubled by the events to follow. Pompey’s display of youthful ambition in raising his own army revealed his value as an adept military commander and a powerful political ally.34 Thus, wishing to deeper incorporate Pompey into his fold, on the threat of death, Sulla commanded him to divorce his recently orphaned wife to marry his stepdaughter Aemilia, who at the time was pregnant with another man’s child.35∗ Further compiling misery upon misery, Aemilia died 3 years later while giving birth to what would have been Pompey’s first child.36 Having

31 Plutarch Pompey 4. 32 Plutarch Pompey 9. 33 Plutarch Pompey 9. 34 Plutarch Pompey 6. 35 Plutarch Pompey 9, Sulla 33. ∗ For an alternate view see Haley The Five Wives of Pompey the Great 50. 36 Plutarch Pompey 9.

8 concluded two marriages with pain and heartbreak before the age of 27, Pompey developed his unique appreciation for the specialness of his spouse’s company.

In addition to Pompey’s proclivity for the pleasures of the private life, his respect for his mutually inclusive roles of husband and father provides an additional motive for Pompey’s opposition to the Lex Gabinia. In 79 BCE, Pompey married

Mucia as a childless widower.37 The next year, Mucia gave birth to Pompey’s first child, a girl named Pompeia. However, that same year, Rome became embroiled in the civil war that erupted after Sulla’s death and Pompey was forced to leave Rome to fight Brutus in Cisalpine Gaul.38 The brief conflict ended in 77 BCE but the conclusion of one threat brought another to the forefront, and the Senate immediately diverted its attention to Sertorius in Spain. Pompey received the command and left for Spain in 76 BCE.39 While in Spain, Mucia gave birth to

Pompey’s first son, also named Gnaeus. Thus during his six year absence while on campaign, Pompey had missed the birth of his first born son and the growing up of his first two children.

Similarly, the year 67 BCE, when the Lex Gabinia was proposed, is commonly accepted as the birth year of Sextus Pompey. This would indicate that Pompey was either a new or expectant father at the time. Having already missed the birth of his first-born son, Pompey may have put an increased sentimental value on being present for the birth of his third child. Additionally, having already lost one wife to childbirth, Pompey may have desired to be present as much for Mucia’s sake as for

37 Haley The Five Wives of Pompey the Great 50 38 Plutarch Pompey 16 39 Plutarch Pompey 17

9 the child’s. Or, conversely, if the child had already been born, Pompey may have wished for at least one of his children to grow up in the presence of his father.

Nevertheless, the timing of Sextus’ birth would have increased Pompey’s opposition to the Lex Gabinia in favor of his private affairs.

The celerity and success of Pompey’s campaign against the pirates is a testament to his skill as a general. Within a year, Pompey had rid the Mediterranean of piracy.40 Having fulfilled his obligation to the state, Pompey again removed himself from politics and took pleasure in a vacation to Greece.41 However, the overwhelming success of Pompey’s campaign against the pirates furthered the

Senate’s dependence on the abilities of one man and, in his absence, Pompey was appointed to the command against Mithridates.42 Expelling the doubts surrounding the sincerity of his opposition to the Lex Gabinia, Pompey bemoaned having been appointed to the Mithridatic command against his will and once again expressed his desire for a private life with his family rather than continuous military service.43

Indeed, Pompey’s opposition to both the Lex Gabinia and the Lex Manilia is intelligible only with regards to his preference for a private life.

History’s conventional interpretation of Pompey has been perpetuated by the continuity it provides in explaining the ultimate conclusion of civil war.

Nevertheless, the often-overlooked events of Pompey’s private life necessitate reconsideration. Given that Pompey did indeed oppose his appointment in the Lex

Gabinia, additional aspects of Pompey’s public life must certainly be influenced by

40 Plutarch Pompey 29 41 Plutarch Pompey 30 42 Plutarch Pompey 30 43 Plutarch Pompey 30

10 motivations beyond political ambition. The interplay between private and public affairs must be given greater recognition when interpreting the events of Pompey’s life.

11

Works Cited

1. Appian. Appian’s Roman History. Trans. Horace White. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1912. 2. Dio, Cassius. Dio's Roman History. Trans. Earnest Cary. London: Heinemann, 1914. 3. Dixon, Suzanne. The Roman Family. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins UP, 1992. 4. Gellius, Aulus. The Attic Nights of Aulus Gellius. Trans. John C. Rolfe. Vol. 3. Cambridge, MA Harvard UP, 1978. 5. Haley, Shelley P. "The Five Wives of Pompey the Great." Greece & Rome Second Series Vol. 32.No. 1 (1985): 49-59. 6. Plutarch. Roman Lives. Trans. Robin Waterfield. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999. 7. Seneca. Ad Lucilium Epistulae Morales. Trans. Richard M. Gummere. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1970. 8. Treggiari, Susan. Roman Marriage: Iusti Coniuges from the Time of Cicero to the Time of Ulpian. Oxford: Clarendon, 1991. 9. Velleius, Paterculus. Compendium of Roman History. Trans. Frederick W. Shipley. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 1979.

I have neither given nor received any unauthorized aid on this assignment.

Michael J Patterson

12