In AD 59, a notorious riot occurred in the Amphitheatre between Pompeians and Nucerians (D34). Nuceria was a nearby colony, where extra veteran soldiers had been settled by Nero as recently as ad 57. It is possible that the land allotments accompanying this move exacerbated feelings of local rivalry that may already have existed. As a result of the bloodshed, the Roman Senate banned gladiatorial shows for ten years from Pompeii (D34), and probably removed the duumvirs of the time from office (D35—36). Even so, some Pompeians clearly basked in the glory of their victory over their neighbours, and commemorated it in a painting and in graffiti (D37—38) and the Amphitheatre remained the venue for other types of spectacle (D39). Some scholars have argued that the emperor Nero may have lifted this ban before the end of that period (D40-42).
D34 Tacitus, Annals 14.17
At around the same time, there arose from a trifling beginning a terrible bloodbath among the inhabitants of the colonies of Nuceria and Pompeii at a gladiatorial show given by Livineius Regulus, whose expulsion from the senate I have recorded previously. Inter-town rivalry led to abuse, then stonethrowing, then the drawing of weapons. The Pompeians in whose town the show was being given came off the better. Therefore many of the Nucerians were carried to Rome having lost limbs, and many were bereaved of parents and children. The emperor instructed the senate to investigate; they passed it to the consuls. When their findings returned to the senators, the Pompeians were barred from holding any such gathering for ten years. Illegal associations in the town were dissolved; Livineius and the others who had instigated the trouble were exiled.
Penalties for the local magistrates? (D35—36)
The wax tablets of Lucius Caecilius Iucundus recording business deals (H69—82) incidentally show extraordinary repercussions of the riot and senatorial inquiry on local politics. These tablets, as usual, record the date in the standard way, giving the names of the consuls at Rome and those of the duumvirs at Pompeii. This system of dating allows us to work out that the duumvirs served their year from 1 July to 30 June (consuls at Rome served from 1 January to 31 December). D35—36 show an extraordinary situation in two respects. First, if the two Grosphi were duumvirs on 10 July AD 59 (D35), their term of office should not have ended until the end of June AD 60; but D36 shows a different pair of duumvirs in place by early May AD 60. Second, by this time there is also a prefect as well as the duumvirs, an office only used in exceptional circumstances (compare F107—108). Thus the riot seems to have led to the duumvirs being replaced before the end of their year, and an extra magistrate with legal powers being chosen.
D35 CIL IV 3340.143
On 10 July when Gnaeus Pompeius Grosphus and Grosphus Pompeius Gavianus were duumvirs with judicial power
{ . . . details of the business follow. . .]
Transacted at Pompeii when Marcus Ostorius Scapula and Titus Sextius Africanus were consuls (AD 59).
D36 CIL IV 3340.144
On 8 May when Numidius Sandelius Messius Balbus and Publius Vedius Siricus were duumvirs with judicial power and Sextus Pompeius Proculus was prefect with judicial power
{ . . . details of the business follow. . .]
Transacted at Pompeii when Nero Caesar Augustus for the 4th time and Cossus Lentulus were consuls (ad 60).
Painting of the riot, House of Actius Anicetus (I. iii.23), peristyle ga'rde'n (D37)
The painting gives an aerial view of the Amphitheatre and its surroundings. The viewer can see the open space around it, with trees and perhaps temporary stalls (see also H65), the Large Palaestra and town walls. Painted inscriptions are even legible on the exterior walls of the Palaestra, acclaiming Lucretius Satrius Valens and Nero (D37b; compare D15 and D24). Only part of the awning over the Amphitheatre is represented, to provide a view of the interior of the building. Fights have broken out not just in the arena, but in the seating and outside. We do not know who commissioned the painting, or why, but it may have been intended to celebrate the reopening of the Amphitheatre after the ban or simply the trouncing of the Nucerians.
Plate 4.3 D37a Painting of the riot (NM inv. 112222)
D37b CIL IV 2993x, y
(Latin) Good fortune to Decimus Lucretius.
(Greek letters) Good fortune to Satrius Valens, Augustus Nero.
Celebration of the Nucerians’ defeat (D38)
This graffito drawing itself (from the facade of the House of the Dioscuri, VI. ix.6) — a triumphal gladiator brandishing a palm of victory — does not clearly relate to the riot, but the text beneath it may well be an allusion to the slaughter of Nucerians in the riot. It is unclear exactly who is referred to as Campanians (Campania was the name for the whole region).
Figure 4.6 D38a Celebration of the Nucerians' defeat
D38b CIL IV 1293 = ILS 6443a Campanians, in our victory you perished with the Nucerians.
Games during the ten-year ban (D39)
The following notice from AD 62 advertises a show including a hunt and athletics. The games advertised in this notice are most unlikely to have been displayed, given that a massive earthquake struck the town on 5 February. What this notice does seem to indicate, therefore, is that games might be advertised three weeks or so in advance of their presentation. It is unclear why the number 373 appears at the end.
D39 CIL IV 7989a, c, in red, Large Palaestra, north external wall
For the well-being of Nero Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus, at Pompeii, there will be a hunt, athletics and sprinklings of Tiberius Claudius Verus on 25—26 February. 373.
Good fortune to Claudius Verus.
The judgements of Nero and Poppaea (D40—43)
Eight graffiti from around the town hail ‘judgements’ of Nero and Poppaea. Poppaea was Nero’s mistress and then wife from AD 62 until her death in 65, being granted the title ‘Augusta’ in 63, following the birth of a daughter. We do not know what these judgements were, but one hypothesis is that, as a result of Poppaea’s intervention, Nero revoked the ban on gladiatorial games. Wealthy Poppaei lived in Pompeii during the mid-first century AD and have been tentatively linked with the grand House of the Menander (I. x.4). It is often assumed that the empress Poppaea also originated from Pompeii, and that she owned the magnificent villa at Oplontis. Neither of these hypotheses can be proved, although we can be sure from a wooden tablet at Herculaneum that she did own an estate in the area of Pompeii.
In the light of D42, however, the ‘judgements’ of Nero seem to have more to do with honorific grants of colonial status than with lifting a ban on gladiators. The emphasis on Pompeii being a ‘true colony’ may well be a response to Nero’s settlement of veterans at Nuceria. Tensions between Pompeians and Nucerians also appear in a graffito found in the area of a brothel, which wishes on the Pompeians the hook used for dragging away the bodies of executed criminals (D43). Compare also CIL IV 1329 for an expression of ill will towards Nucerians. Nero made grants of colonial status to the harbour town of Puteoli on the Bay of Naples, his birthplace Antium in Latium, and Tegianum in southern Italy. The writer of this text, therefore, is claiming that Pompeii too has been granted colonial status by Nero.
D40 CIL IV 3726 = ILS 234, IX. vi, ad 63-65
Good fortune to the judgements of Augustus, father of his country, and of Poppaea Augusta.
D41 CIL IV 1074, AD 63-65
Good fortune to the judgements of Augustus and Augusta; while you are safe, we are fortunate for ever.
D42 CIL IV 3525 = ILS 6444, VI. xv
Good fortune to the judgements of Augustus. Puteoli, Antium, Tegianum, Pompeii: these are true colonies.
D43 CIL IV 2183
Good fortune to the Puteolans; good luck to all Nucerians; the executioner’s hook to Pompeians.
World History
