Pompeii: The Electoral Programmata, Campaigns and Politics, A.D.71-79 (American Academy in Rome: Papers & Monographs)

.. r:'RS., "N.I). pAp ... C ' 11 .1 .

l·rvfOI'r()G~I) . . . -'I \

OF TJ-JE

fDvfi;RI u . ·"-'Al\J "· 1

AC:AI')f"NP ... lJl

IN ROME VOLt:·\JF '\''\V!JI

l%0

7

A· PH." . . L~

POJ\i1PE1 I: TH>' ELECTORAL PROGRAMMAT A, CAMPAlGNS /\ND POLJTJCS, A.D, 71-79

A _'\.1" L R f CA ?\: /\ C _v Excavations, howevcr, and particularly between doonvays 3 and 4 of insula 9.11, programmata are protected from thc elcment.s. by glass and give a dearer notion of the heavily inscribcd fa.,vith the nearly illegiblc graffiti of the unskilled serves to underscore the high qu.ality of the programmata. Nor is the impression of professional scriptotes ill-founded, for, as Emilio Magaldi dcmonstrated in an important study, hints in the prograrnmata and notices of games attest to the profession and its modus operandi. ' 2 And, at 1.7.16. Della Corte even identified an ojficina scriptorum. 3 ' Occasionally attachcd to the programmata is some form or abbreviation of the \VOrd s·cribo follo\-ved by the name of a man \vho must be the scriptor and/or the phrase hic et ubique, which Mag8.ldi referred to the movemem of the scriptores around tmvn as they palnted programmata, Jr. In all, tvienty-five such narrles appear at one place or another in the city. Yet of these, (Os?)sius (222), Sabinus (230), Ascaules (636), Phyloterus (653), Florillus (803), Paris (821), Sexti , , , , (1200), Protog, , , , (2975), L Livius Severus (2993a), Istmus (2994), PhiL . , . (7027), Ataude (9968b), and Prim. , (9971) occur only once. 35 ln addition, Onesimus is once named (222) as a whitewasher, dealbator, and Ocella once as scriptor by the appearance of his name in a gamcs advcrtiscment, CIL IV. 7993. It ls undear \Vhether these mcn only once attestcd as saiptores >vere >

24

•

professional letterer::;, or whether they regularly pursued other trades and only upon occasion painted notices. Evidence for thE' lattcr comes from CIL IV. 3529, clcarly painicd by a fuller, Mustius: Mustins fullo facit et dealbat scr(ibit) unicus s(in)e reliq(uis) sodalib(us) non(ls) In contrast, Astylus, P. Aemilius Celer, Florus, Frucrus, Ffinnulus, Iarinus, Infantio, l\iJelicertes, Papilio, Polybius, Sccundus, and Victor arc frequently attestcd and can safely be regarded as professional scriptores. 3" As Magaldi has shmvn from analysis of comments painted up with the noüces, the scriptores worked gcneraUy in teams, different mcmbers doing different pans of ihc work - as, for example, the whitevv·ashlng or the actuallettcring - and al night. Evidemly as at Rome, the candidate hirnself was forbiddcn to takc up activc campaignlng. \Ve see that the signcd programmata are at least ostensibly posted by men who support thc candidatc rather than by the office seekcr himse!f. Yet the llUmerous noticcs pos1ed by groups of supporters such as vicini suggest somc organiz.ation above the lcvel of the individual. Probably a candidatc bad an ad hoc committee for his clection, composed of his pm.verful friends and relatives, who hired scriptores to post programmata throughout the city -"v]Jerever the owner of a hause permitteil It is likely that mosi programmata found their origins in individual choices and emhusiasms, yct smdy of the locations of programmata reveals ccrtaln patterns of postings wo cleverly designed tobe unplanned. 3' The life span of any given programma \Va.s thc time it remained visibie before bcing covered over by anmhcr. In some cases, as \-VC shall see, this was a considerable number of years, especially, one would assume, if the candidate had grown to be a powerful politician and influence was wieldcd by reminding him of past support. A programma which had been painted on the fa allered to v.o.f. mg.

s Ir; C&A 9-23 Deila Cone estab!ishes the rule, the basis of his pioneering srudy of th<e poputation of Pompeii. There are variations, however. Programmata posted by T. Arrius Polites, e.g., appear not only on bis own h01.1se facade at 3.4.2 (CJ.L IV. 7682, 7685, 768SL bur also may to hls ncighbor's fa~Rde at 3.4.3 (Cll. lV. 7502. 7503, 7516), tht house nf l\-l. fpidius Hymcmeus (C&A 778-781). 6 Willems 79-85 contendcd that rogo v..-as used by a

26

st~pportt:r

bcforc the

27

offidal nomination of candida!cs to encouragc hi' man, whlle' far:io wao emp1oycd oniy aftcr the nomination ccremony. He r:quatcd tbe thcn atte-sted voto and cupio with rogo; now probo ;, also known. Hi~; srgument is undm1c by the ;non~ gcently recovercd programma 77R7, \\"hieb rcads faciemes rogant. Facientes must simply reflcn tbe post~rs' intemions, ror;ant their rcqwcsL Similar is 1059, Suedius Cfemens sanctissimus iudex jaci! vicini's rorproved :'dommsen's conteruion {C!L X. Pompeji 17, p. 109) lh81 thc ktters ~tand for votis Augusta!ibus sacris pubficis procurandis, which would associmr: the aedi!e-s v.:i1h 1he minisrri Au_gusli, rather 1hm1 lhe city governmcnt. On this tlt:C, sec now AHilio Dcgrassi, "Duo\·iri aeJilicia potcstJ.te, duovh-i aedilc>. aediles duovirL" Sfl/(li in onore di Aristide Caiderini e Roberio Paribeni, vol. l:

!·.t

lbitL 60-71- Also C&A

76.'1~67.

1' cn 1v. 15&:·286~31{ 31~(372';··4s6:-··.w;·,·671';~7o:. 706:·· ..!0.9. no, 749~.­ ;ssa:--94f 95( 1007'; 1022~· 1048:· 1059·:' Hl&s;-· 1145, .. 1169,-'3409'. 34f\3;· 346', 3524:··--3537·:· , 6615:··6668;-6669';· fif\84·:·7o49;/720l. 7456,7482,7560,7579, 779L 7793, 7822c, 7854. 9869. Of \h~sc, 319. 372. 1048, 7822c, 7854 are itKO~ple1e. The word wilh near cenaintv can be rcstored to 7793. !h Prorammata oosted by vicini appe:u passim. Sec ah,o CIL IV. 77R7, which vari~; from the. us-ua1 vicini in empioyin_fl propin., clcarly a shoncned form of propinqui. !n oniy onc plate is therc confusion rcsulting: from a P''o•e··i hv a candidate's 1•icini. C!L !V. 443 snppons' Va1i.vord to signify "garlic,dealcrs.'' Della Corte. C&A 3f\Ra, citcs remains of whal scems to be anmher, though older and fragmcntary. in~criplirm naming o!iari, Cll. l\', 3584, fmmd outsid~ what is probably a gamblin9: housc at 7.15.4"6. Similarly, CJL JV. 7851, ai!hough pos1ed by the latruncufari, chess,players, secms not \0 be meant humorom\y, panicularly ns they po.stcd the programma jointly wi!h a l'dontanus who identifies himsdf as cliens of his candidare, Popidius Ampliatus. J_(>

CIL IV. 1011: Cuspium Pansm-n aed, Popidius Notdis cliens cum Isiacis

rog.

:: CIL !V, 1146 is at 2.4.4-5, 7791 m 3.7.1, and 7978 outside H1e Porta Ve-suvio; the proximity of the first two to ;)w bmhs su~gest'. this in:crprc1a1ion. CJL JV. 1!43 i.\\ 2.4.5-6 Bnd 1162 nt 2.3.4 may aisn bear the narne Veneri, but arc mu1ila\ed. The nnme of the·. -'" i ·'-387. S81, H1Pnuh,s ,n 2993do, 2993z" 3366 {?}:'"3367.~7J7j: 7F4'.-985T;~hrinlF in 124.223,821, 1092. 1228, 3397(?), !243: lnfantif' in 120. 230. 2J9, 465,709, 785Cl, 789, 984, 1226, 3680. 7191, 7343, 7348. 73!4. 7618, 7658. 7665 ('?); \'leliccncs in 2903n, 7JS6: Pilpi\io in 480,908, 1()80, 1157. 3367, 725!, !2.98, 7418·, 7465;·75:W,' 7X29a: PoiYbius in l (!7, 7992; Sez:undno; ir; 5.58. 840 ('!), 1190: Vic;N in 55R, 652, !'.53. f54, 818 (?). ll<JO. ,_~

.,~.·-

37 See below. pp. 87-94. -'~ On the date d' thc eanhqual<e, sce G" 0. Onorato, "'La data öel terremoto di Pompei 5 febbraio 62 d .C.," RendUne series 8, vol. 4 (1949) 644-61.

}9 Othcr o!der programmata are preserved among lhe Tiwfi Pkti Recentiores. Theseare nolcd as antiquiores or prisall; by 1he various dilors. Cll. IV. 412, e.g. i~ in iitu?ris antiquioribus, as is 475; fill is in lf'Cior{( stratura antiquiore.

""So .t'L W, V an Buren, "Wa>Time ?roductivity in [talyvhich fade and Oakc and permit programmata to show !hrough overlapping layers, making the latest. one difficult to read "-vhile giving tantalizin_>; glimpscs of inscriptions beneath. Fortunately, the supplcmcnts of Della Corte and Della CorteWeber try ro record full delails of the relative age ancl ac-mal layering of the programmaLa. Zangemeister and tvlau only rarely spedfied that onc programma was older than another, whereas Della Corte carefully noted v,·hich programmata overlay others and which could be read through the overlylng coats of white\vash. These additional details have made an entirely DC\'-' approach to a reconstruction of the annual slates of candidatcs possible. Obviously, those programmata \vhich overlie or overlap others must be more recent than those they cover, This basic stratigraphlcal principle permhs dming of the prograrnmata relative to one another: by stud;iing their interrelationships, tlw actual progression of the candiclacies can be in !arge part \'>'Orked out. Thosc candidades supponed by notices overlaid by no others at any place throughom the city can be assigned ro 79, and solicitations for the quinquennial duovlrate can, as Mommsen showeci, bc dat.cd w 75, 70, or shou!d there be sufficient evidence, even 65.;; These are the fixed points in relatlon to >-vhich other candidades can be assigned lO the intervening years. i l In this analysis, the evidence for candidates who stood in the same year, cu!led from notices \vhich support more than one candidate, is very important, for whcn it is kno\Yll that t\vo n1en stood for office in thCf' !! :;,>\1 iTCi,C''11' o1!(!1\ i;,;_,•. l::d-«1 ..: ''''" ii~ncc ''' :hc· t'i:;,.,· ··:•c·,·;li ·:U)"1p0nd :can' Cil!!ciidacic' ;,_,: th· dc
222, 660

C. Gavius Rufus, duo. \"!. Hokonius Priscus, ducL C, Cuspiu~ Pamn. acd. L. Popidius Secundus, aed.

lVl. Hok0nius

Priscu~.

duo.

623

(C. Cuspius) Pansa, acd.

!v:L Satfius Vakns, quin. P. Vedius Nummianus. duo, _,\, Venius Caprasius Fe1ix. ae-d. - Vibius Scvcrus, duo.

";'564

SRS

Q. Brunius Balbw:, aed. P. V\'!tius Synicus, duo.

these three tables a slz.able numbcr of men for office in palrs, and ln any reconstructlon attested must belong w the samc year, bc tV·iO nwn seeking either thc duoviratc- or .:[';

acdilcship, bm frorn rlle thlrd table v.:c can pmd:ucc candldmes for both the duoviratc and aedileshir in the same year.

I

The !ayering of tlw prngrammatn

In additlon w these palrs, rhere is for our reconstruction a second dass of cvidence, the details of layering prescrved especial!y in thc CIL supplcments of Della Cone and Della Corte\Veber. In fact, on!y thcse pro,·ide acmal observmions of laycring, bllt Zangemeister ancl Mau occasionallv nxord that a givcn programma is oider than another, and s.uch inf ormation can supplcrnent thc la~ycring" Bccause they rcly ultimare!y on thc recorder's cw, ho\vever. we s\1a!l sce thm Zangemci:>ter's and Mau's reports a~c sornetime.~ amiss, a~ can be proven from morc trustworthv evldcnce. So fc)r cxam~le, 7angemeisLer recordcd that 961 seen~ed to be of e'qud age Wlth 960: 961 supra 960, eiusdem aetatis ur videmr. Tn 960 Cuspius Pansa is supportccl for thc aedileship, and in 961 . . . . . us Sabinus is supportcd for 1hc duoviratc. This ]atter rnust be l\-L Epidius Sabinus, 1hc only Sabinus known to have stood for duovlr in this period. Zangemeisrer's Observations would date the two candidades to the sarne yem, -yet a\ 7772-73 Della Corte recorded that a programma supporting Cuspius Pansa (7772) overlay an older noricc (7773) supporting an Epidius for duovir, :vho again must be Epldius Sabinus. ClearJy one of thc reports is m error. Inasmuch a.s Della Corte was recordim: overlavs and not his impression of the relative ages of prollr;mmata,· we must prcfer his observation. The significance of i'.:J:aü's phra~c eiusdem _".·c! W?tatis, morcover, is unclear. Rather than :--"of the samc vear." this rnay better bc translated "of the same period" in cont~ast :tO his antifJJuior and antiquissimus. Other comments: also will _prove of no value to us. At CIL lV. 3831 and 3833, for example, Mau wrote that thc ?r~gr.ammata were , .. in muro qui amw p. C. 63 posterior esL fh1s JS no doubt true, bur inasmuch as we .shaJl be dealin1z onlv v.:hh .candidates of at least eight years afrer 63, such a co;me;t prondes no useful inforrnalion. Similarly Zangemeister wrotc of 657: . : . in porta [sc. marinaj prope priscan; [sc. JH'Of?T~mma antrqwus] n. 79 in tectorii stratura recentiore. By \vriting that 44

!

the noticc is painted on a coat of plaster morc rccent than one of thc oldest programmata preserved, Zangemeister has provided no>hing of value for our reconstructlon. In Tab!e 4, a list of the overla:ys, the programmata arc so arranged as to reproduce the actua! layering, Tlms in the first pair 583 overlics (and is morc reccnt than) 584. In each case the name l1as been put in the nominative an_d the office sougJTt recorded, A dash indicatcs lhat rhc offlce is. not specifled on 1tc programma as it survives. An asterisk indicates that tbe programma is explained or ernended in the subsequent discussiorL \Vith thcse instances of layerlng, there is agaln the nroblcm of confusion among names" \Vhen a notlce supports' only a Popidius, for example, it is impossible to ascenain >vhether it shou\d be assigned to L. Popidius Sccundus or L Popidius Ampliatus. \\'hile ü seems probable that any notices still remaining from the candidacy of whichever Popidius stood for office first wcrc takcn to support also lhe second in his candidacy, for a programma tobe of use in a reconstruction, the original ycar of posting must be known. If we cannot defin1telv attributc a programma to thc man for whom it was orü6nall~, postcd, i1 mu~I be discarded as evidence. Fortunatel}·, th~ probl-el'n ls l'tmi'tcd to somc of thc most common]y acclaimcd candidates -- Ceius and Popidius, both Secundi, and thc Popidii - so tllat therc are numcrous other programmata on chcir behalf for use in tlw study of layering. As a rule, the scriprares posted sufficiem name elements to avoid the possibility of confusion, for the candidates thcmselves, of course, -...vjjj not have \vish-ed tobe confused. lt is cspecially programmata surviving only in pan tha1 could mislead. There is a similar problem \\'it.h notlces in whlch thc ofüce sought by a candidate kno>vn 10 have swo-d for hoth acdile and duovir is not preserved, There regularly are other notices \Nhich do specify the office, hm these rarely stand in the same rclation 10 a sccond programma as the undcar reference, and valuable int.orm3.tion is thereby lost. The loss is not complete, hm-vevcr, for both those programmma with incomplete names and thosc lacking indication of office can be employed as a check afler rhe recons!ructlon is completcd from thc other CYidencc. They -c.an confirm a scquence when the overlays thcy re-cord can be placcd within it, or call it into question if noL

TAB!E 4 CIL IV

LA YERING JN THE PROGRAMMATA

,,1004 '1003

Programma'tJ are so arranged as to reproduce the actual Jayering. Thus in thc firstpair 583 overties (and is more recent than) 584. In each case the name has been put in the nominative and the offic-e sought recordcd. A dash indica1es that rhe office is not specificd on the programma as it survives. An asterisk indicates that the programma is explained OT emended in the subsequenl discussion.

C!L IV

Caudidates and Offlees

. 58J ,}84

Casel!ius, aecL Priocus. --

·.-81 8 ii25

M. Ce;_Tini1J;;,:aed. Gavius Procuius, -·· U-f. Add. on 825)

891 2954h

l\I. Cerrinius,Priscus, -·-·

,1[!57

)056 1066 '1067 _1075 ,!077

-,1075

Posturnius, aed. N. Popidius Rufus, aed.

SR9

46

- - - · · - - .....--"""'--·--·---···-

Secunduo, aed. Caprasius. duo. A. Sueuius, aed,-~-\ 1VLE.(S,),d110.~ /

Cn. Helvius Sahinus, cttd. C. Lol!ius, ··-

CrL Heh·ius, ad. P. Sittius, aed,

Cn. H dvius, aed.

c. L. (f.),-

29742975

L Popldius, aed. Lucretius, duo.

2974 __2976

L Popidius, aed.

2979 2978

L. Albudus. aed. Ampliatus, aed.

3410 3411

CrL Hehim Sabi.nm, aed.

3410 3412

Cn. Htlvim Sabinus. Be-::!. Prob.s,-

; 3460

Gavius, acd. Ti. C!audius V,;-rus, duo.,

-_3462 3463

Vt'rus, -·

LDll .

Trebius Vaiens et Gavius Rufus, -· Litinius. ,...

,_,3474 '3475

Albucius et 1\larcellus, ··:!\. ac:d,

7281

Severus, duo.

7487 7488

C. Ca1vcntiu;; Sit1lm Magnus, duo. A- Trebiu;; \'alem c:t Cn. Audius B~bsus, quir\.

7489 7490

P0pidius Secund1.1s. aed. L. Ceiu> Scccmdm, duo.

7495 7496

Popidiu> Secundus, _.... A. Suettiv; Cenus,-

7503 7504

VeHius firmus, aed.

7506 7507

A. Veniu> Firmu:,, L. Popidius, -~

7509 75!0

L Popidius Secundus, aed,

:?509 l1

L. T'opidius Secundus, aecL L. Albucius, ... -

7~18

Cuspius Pansc;, ad. .s Ro, . us, acd.

7282

Sc~undus,

7283

Ve.

aed. .us, quiTJ. ~­

)291

L. Popidills A.mp!ifnll-S, Vihius Sevcrm, duo.

7312

A, Suettius Cenus, duo.

7313

L. Popidius Ampiiaws, -·

_]290

..7325

A.S. V.,-

)324

Rufus, duo.

._7JJO

C. Gavim Ruht;-, dcw .

7332

Siricus, quirl.

7348

Hclvius Sabim:s, HecL L Ceius Secundus_. aed.

7347

7401 7402

Scverus,-

"7408

(C. Gav\u' R ufus) et Trt>bim \.' alf'nS, --··

,7519

Popidi11s. duo. ~­

L. Popidiw, A.rnplia< us, aed.

L PopiCEm Ampli·a.n s, ow:L

Sccundus. aed,

752.6 7529

74!1

C. LoHius. aed.

.-7539

7421

S!tüus lvJagnus, duo. *

7543

L. Ccius Secundus, duo . p_ Paquh:s, duo,

7422

Le.llius, acd,''

7556

;,.·). Smrius, quin.

7555

D. Luc. V.

7428

,7429

Licinius- F<wstinus, acd.

..7559

!'vl. Ovidius Vekmo.

J430 7431 7451

Pri~cus,

... --

7452

Popidius Senwdus. at'd. L Albudus,-

74:55

Tr~bius

7456

M, Licinius Homam.1s _aed.

7469 .. 7470 . 7476

M. Holconius,-

7604 7605

Caln:ntiu5 Quietus, duo. *

7607

P. Paquius Proculus, d110.

Epidius Sabinus, duo.

(. Gavim Rufm, duo. (, Lol!ius Fuscus, aecL

.}612

Cn. Hdvlus Sabinus, sed. Holc-onitts Priscus, aed .

,.7614 .}615

L. Popidius Secundtls, a!ed.

7799

Secundus, ---

7/)j 4

P- Paquius Proc'(J]us, dun.

7815

C. GaYius,-

-7818

Trebius, aed.

.7819

Caprasius el (Paquius),-....

.. 7825

:'vl. Hdconius Siricus, aed . Ri:stit:.:tus, - ..

:/7722 ,)723

A, Suenius Verus, aed.* LA!budus,aed.*

7726 .7725

A. Suettius Vcrm, aed. L. Ceius Secundus. i.\(~d.

7826

7737 7738

Cdus Se'c are faced with a chaHenging riddle. Evidcnce from the reconstructlon can supply a partial solution, Programma 7605, Viflieh 7604 overlies, supports l'vL Epidius Sahlnus for thc duovirate" The reconstructed slates show !hat Epidiu~ Sabinus stood for duovir in 77, and therefore Calvcntius' apparent candidacy must havc been in 78 or 79. Jn 78 another Calvcntius, C. Calventius Sittius Ivlagnus, possibly the 64

adopted son of Calvenilus Quietus 4 \ was candidate for duovir; our programma must somehow belong to this candidacy, pcrhaps intended 10 recall the glory of the generous auf?USta!is when his dcsccndant stood for office. The details are beyond recovery, but it is clcar thm C Calventius Quietus was not really a candidate for duovir and that cvidence from layering dates programma 7604, which commends him as candidate, to 78 at earllest, the year of the candidacy of C Calvemius Sittius l\.1agnus.

A.O. 77 Programmata supponing A, Sucttius Verus for the aedileship are overlaid not only by notices recommending candldates we havc assigned 10 79, but also by onc supporting Ceius Secundus for the duovirate in 78 {7767-68). Suettius Verus will consequently probablJ·' have stood in 77, and \Yith him \\·iJl have becn the candidates of a second of our blocks of four men known to have \tood in the same year. These are A. Suettius Certt1s and !VL Epidius Sabinus, candidate~ for duovir, and N. Herennius Celsus, candidate for aedilc. Also in 77 \vill have stood the tcam of Cerrinius Vatia aml PostumJus Proculus. Programmata supporting a Q. Postumius with no off\ce specif\ed are covered b:;,: others supporting Helvius Sablnus, sure candidatc of 79 (7914-15), as wcll as a Popldius {3761-62), pcrhaps Popidius Secundus also candidatc in 79. But Q. Postumius Modestus stood for 1.he quinquennial duovirate in our period, and we sha!l sec that his candidacy for that office belongs to 75; 4" our programmata may havc bcen posted for ;'v1odestus rather than Procu\us. Programmata supporting our men overlic only those supporting unidentifiable or far carlier candidatcs (818-25, 89l-29:54b, 984+86, 9832-33), a!though the Priscus of 2954b may well be Holconius Priscus, aedilician candidate in 76, as v.;"e shall see. At notio:cs 862-64 there ls evidcnce for an overlay between prograrmnata supporting CaselJius, who must be Casdlius Marcellus, who stood for aedile in 78, as we have seen, and PostumJus Proculus, candidatc for aedile, but Jt is undear 'v.illich overlies \vhich, It is unlikely that we can assign Postumius and with hlm Ccrrinius to 79, for that wouid lcave us with six aedilician candidatcs in 79, thrce in 78,

65

nvo in 77< Besides, as >ve have se-en, posten; in support of Postumius may be ovcrlain by those of candidates of 79. \Vere we Lo assirrn the candidades to 78, therc would bc conflict with thc overla~· 862-64 as well as fivc aedilician candidates in that year, only. two in 77. And as \ve shall sec from a subseque:11 study of patterns of snpport, it is impossible that they all stood m 78.46 PostumJus Proculus and Ccrrinius Vatia must have stood for thc aedileship in 77, the latest year in which they could have done so.

A.D. 76 To 76 can bc dated the duovira'J candidac-ies of L Caecilius Capella and N. Popidius Rufus. A sharcd programma (3548) shcnv~ that thev stood in the same year, and Programmata recommending both are covered by notices \vhich favor Suettius Vcrus for aedile in 77 (7616-17 and 7324-25). Thc )'ear 76 is the iatest in which our rnen could have stood, and \Ve shal! date their candidades to iL Hcrc there are no ovcrlays to rcveal what candidates thcy followed, bm we shall not be far wrong in dating them to as late a year as possible on the assumption that the latcr a candidacv will have bccn. thc better attestcd it will bc. Since 76 is the latcs; year for \\-'hich -there is evidence for the candidacies of Cacci!ius Capella and Popidius Rufus, the)' almost certainly v,:iJl have stood in that veaL Programma 7726, \Yhlch also supports Sucttlus Verus, overlies 7725, which recommends L Ceius Secundus for the aedilcship. Sccundus, who shares no recommendation of a programma with anyone else, will havc been an aedl1ician cand.idalc in 76. To 76 wc shall also date the acdilidan candidacy of lvL Holconius Priscus, another who sharcd no programmata whcn standinrr for thc aedileship, There ls but one overlay of a progra~ma f~voring him for this officc {904-904a), which reveals that he stood prlor to Albucius Celsus' candidacy in 78, Holconius thus conceivably could have stood in 77, Bm this wmi]d bc thc fiflh candidacy for aedile in that year, 'Nhile vve would have but one in 76. Not only is it unlikely that five men stood in 77, but also that \VC cannot date another candidacy to 76. Holconlus' is thc only rcmaining candldacy which can be

66

dan:d to 76, and \Ye can with near certaimy placc lt in that yeaL

A.D. 75 There are very fcv,· overlays involving programrnata for candidalcs of 75, but imerconnectlons among the known candidatcs permit the rcconstruction of much of the year's slaLe, Shared programmata connect L Popidius Ampliatus, P. Vedius Nummianus, and l'vt Satrius Valens, whom \VC know to have been a candidate for the quinquennial duoviratc. Their candidades can be datcd to 75 because overlays (7700, 7702, 7703) revcal that Ampliatus stood for acdile betwecn Ovidius Veiento, aedilician candidate of 72, and Suettius Ccrtus, duoviral candidate of 77. The quinquennial year 75 is thc only onc between these dates, and our candidatcs rmm belong w iL Flnal!y we can add Q. Posrumius Modestus, \Yho is supported as a quinquennial candidate by programma 7970, which overlics 7971, postcd for Vettius Firmus, candidate for aedlle in 72."'"

A.D. 74 Programma 7129b, whlch suppons Cclus Secundus for aedilc, overlies 7129c, \Vhich recommcnds P. Paquius Proculus for duovic Paquius cannot have stood in 75, for that \0\-as a quinqucnnial ycar, and Paquius is recommended for the ordinary duo-,.irate, \Ve must date the candidacy of Paquim and the group of men linked \vith him by programma 222 to 74, the latest ycar in >vhich 1hev could have stood. These are A, Vettius Caprasius Felix for du~vir and Q_ Marius Rufus and M. Epidius Sabinus for aedllc. "-~

A.D. 73 Prograrnma 7814, a sccond notke- V'>'hich rccommcnds Paquius for the duovirate, ovcrlies 7815, a recommendation of Gavius Rufus for thc aedileship. Sevcral shared programmata join his candidacy with that of A, Trebius Valens for the

67

l.:tj'-''"0 '1-!UU!l(5 l\J

U Cek,-, - . CandiJa~y can bc J~1~li b.;,w.~un 7--\ (uverby "N70"76l ;,w,i 79 i ,_,,·erby 7-JW... '!OJ_ P. SüTi1.1> -··,:milk. CwJi;Ll.,;y pnor to 75 (ovcrlay 7)2.(:7l--~·---•-••-~--"'' ____ ",_"", ___ "" _______ ,__

'11lc fc\lo'"iq; (Ctn'ring_:

htd afttr ~2

((!l'~rlay

7142-4.').

73 IGVf.r!ay '455-56).

-,ctn '74 \01'et!ily 7471} 76) and 79 1_0\'~riay 7469-iü), l'f 7526-29),

"

-··----7208-09

Sevcrus

c. Sal!usiius

A. Vcnius

l. Ovidius

Capito

FimlUS

Vekl-1to

Rufus

-

---~·---7970-71-·-··------==.:::=:-:-:.:::===-

--7814-15- --"

A.D,/1 Vibius

Fronto

_______ _(._ (Javius

Q. !\·1arim / __ X, __ \l. EDidius

--

A,D.n M. Lnaetius

--

--"

7227 ·28 ----

··-·

-----=~

--.

I

A. Vetti_!l~ ___ ,.._,_E..:J:uquius Caprasius Felix Proculus

7280-8! - - - .

---=~-~:==~~8-19--------

---

--~---

men iinkt•d with him in sharcd noticcs covers anothcr prog_ramma. A diagram of these rcsul1s follow.s in ·rablc 6. Bclow cach year's slate of candidatcs, lines brokcn to include C!L numbers indlcme the ovcrlays we havc just discusscd. V-n from funerary in;;criptions,

9 Wi]iems 1 12 and !22. \Vithoulexpre%]y ~lGting the ruk Wi'llems seerm \;~ have fch that six candidat.es for the acdileship and four fm the duovir:>te made a normal.slate. Theseare the numbcrs of candidateo: he asoipw-d to 1be dcqions of 79 (Vi/iilcms 9 and 1 i 1-24), though he \·aricd the numbcr~ in earlier ycal':n. ~,

il

1' See the Appendix for a discussion of '-Vhat criieria are required of the prog:rummata: used in this study and why certain programmara apparcntly recommcndinp.:1>vo candidates are excluded. lf This corrcction, withom explamnlon, \-Vf!S suggesteJ by Pio CiprotLi in an early reviev: of Dcllil Cone, SDHJ I 8 {1952) 267. :~ Richardson 84 takes the Lmclear rcadings of CJL IV, 193 and 394 to suppon a tvl elissaeus in his bid for the quinquenniG.l duovirHtc.

18 CIL X. 817, R24, 893 mcntion Cn. Melissaeus ApeL duovir for thesecond time in A.D. 3. Othcr !\'klissati ar·e named in the '->·ax tabkts of L. Caecilino Iumndus, TabCer8. 24, 37, 38, 57, 66, 93, 94, 103.

19 Richardson 84-85. 2\1 Sa!lustiw is mmed Jn CIL 1\i. 322 and 336; Alfius isin C'!L 1\'. 3441; Ateius in CIL JV. 99l8a and püssibly 7861c. Camion 133, follo1ving Della Cone's notc ai CJL IV. 9918a, suggeslo that Alfius may b~ a misreadi1'1g of Ateim. 2! As his soun::e for this programmn, Zangemeister notes only.

26 See alsn C!L !V. 7557, 7563, 7695. This cnrrecüon, without explanation was suggested also by Pio Ciprotti in his review of Della Corte, SDHf 18 (1952)

269. 27 A~ Dc!!a Cerfe observed at C&A 739, thereis little evidente for this ReriS at P.ompeiL CfL X. 1078 is a funcra! inscriplion for a Traebia F ortnnata, and a jar of garum found in the caupona at 1.7,8 was addressed to a Trebius Synhodus iClL !V. 9398: g(arijf(los) Scombr(l) I A. Tn·bio Synhodo). The only other e>:idence would seem to bc an honorary inscription carved on a clrcular Noccra tufa s1a1ue basc .55:rn tall, tapering in diametcr from lm at the base ro .80m at the top, perhap~ bwught to tl'rf peristyk of thc house of' rhe Trcbii aftt-r thc carthquake of 62. ll record~ the career of a Trebiuo who was four tim es military tribune and four times ciuovlr(h'Sc 1919: 242): tr. mit. Ilf! I duovir quater.

n lhere are in ai1 four nmices (CJL JV. 273, 8}0, 3448. 3528) for Vesonius Marcei1us; of 1hese only 3528 is clearly B recommc:ndation for lh(' duovirate. l\·1omms~n (CIL X. p. 92) has dated hls first duovirale w i\.D. 34 He could, of course, have stood again afler 1hat date. 2() Della Cone, lv'Sc 1913: 146, nn. l3 .and 15.

. Henricus

tVissen et Richardus Schoene amici qui a. 1867 i'Licriptiones haud paucas post m. Ju/ium a. 1865 ej[ossas descripserunt descriptasque mecum communicaru/11.

Y\ C!L !V. 7170: Sub 7166trans!uabat inceprus, d6m1e dealbarione defetus.

(CJL !V,p. xii).

Fathcr and son teams in Pompelan politic~ nrc no1 unkno-wn. Onc of thc most famous \1-·as rhat of Cn. Pompeius Gro>phm and hls adopted son Cn. Pompeius Grosphus Gavianus, duo\-iri in thc year 59, whcn a riot erup1ed in the amphithcatrc. Their duovirale is attested tn TabCer 143. 22

2.1 \\'crc we to accept as evidence ClL lV. 952, it too ,"_·ould recommend men fm quinquennial duovir and aedile. This notke rmmes a Postumius and a Popidius, b\11 it is fragmcntary and lacks a conjunclion: hence \':e have disqualified lt as l:'videncc. The only Pm•tumius and Popidius who did otand tn tl1e same year wen: candidales for quinquennial duovir (Postumius l\-lodestus) and aediie (Popidius Ampliatus) in 75.

l 24 Della Corte belicved 1his programma to support a C lullus Fronto (CJL IV. 7274). He cited ClL !V. 2923a as confirmation, bulthat programma is very fragmentary and undecipherable. Ncit.hcr of these notices can be accep1ed a:;. (:videm::e. 25 Regard1ess of which man this prograrnma supports, the same information is elscwhere provided by otlwr overtays. Programmata !066 and 1067 support Cn, Helvius Sabinus and C. Lotiiw; Fuscus, making rhe overlay in question, as do 1075 and 1078 c.f. Add. Although no over!ays are knnwn bctwcen Helvius Sabinus and C. luhus Poiybi1.1S, it is clear from numerous overlays that Polybius· candidacy preceded that ofHelvius,

72

31 The only possible candidates of 7615, if it is not L. Popidius Sccundus himsdL are N. Popidiw; Rufus, duoviral candidatc of 76, or L. Popidius Ampllntm. aedilician candidate of 75_ Progmmmatn ;;t;pponing both arc o.-crlaid by severa] oth~rs posred in r11c year scparating the candidacy of Popidius from chcir

32 At CJL f\'. 3534, l\-1au identified the programma for !Vl. Pupius Rufus as tiwlus antiquior. This must t!ren bc lme af 3529, another notice for PL:pius Rufus

and, comequcntly, 3528, v;hich ?vlau notedas olcler 1harJ 3529. 3'1 These arc the duoviral candidacy of Calventius Sittiu~ Magnus and the nedilician candidacics of Lol:ius Fuscus, Cerrinim Vmia, Ponrmius Procu!us, Ceiu;; Secundus, Hokonius Priscus, Trcbius Vaiens, Gaviu~ Rufus. JA

For an assemblage of the eYidcncc fer this gens at PompeiL see Castr&n

l6L

"!5 CIL fV,21WX,2947, '7304c. y; Sec above, p. 40.

37 De11a Corte a]so rec:mded :hat 7912 overlay 7915, for 7914, w1'1ic:h he though1 to be overlaid by 7912, dees overlie 791 S ao he reporied. The actuai

]]

iayeringl1Ne rnust haw bccn '7915 fin;f, 7912 next, $.üd 79i4 on the top< Hencc 7914 would havc appcared to ;:.ovcr ml::; 79]), for it ac1ually cwerlappcd only 1he ,,.hitcwa!;h, not thc lettering of 7912- 1f 7915 Slipports PostumJus \·lodesms who stood for quinquc:mial duovir in 75, cither his duo,-irai or. perhaps morc iikely, his acdil\cian candidacy couicl have precedecl Claudianus' duoviral candidacy. This m usr. b