The colony of Pompeii was governed on a system modelled on that of Republican Rome. Magistrates were elected for a period of one year to lead a town council made up of men who had previously served as magistrates. An anecdote about the Roman author and politician Cicero (F1) represents him commenting favourably on democracy at Pompeii. The point of Cicero’s comment was that in the 40s BC, Julius Caesar as dictator appointed men directly to the Senate at Rome, whereas no such direct patronage operated at Pompeii: someone wishing to become a councillor had to stand for democratic election, though exceptions did occur later (see C5, G21, G24). The members of the town council (equivalent of the Senate at Rome) were all freeborn male citizens, of good character and reputable profession (e. g. not gladiators, actors or public executioners). Councillors had to live in the town or its immediate surroundings. A minimum level of property was required, but we do not know what this was at Pompeii. Membership of the council was for life. Councillors enjoyed various privileges, including the best seats at public shows in the theatres and Amphitheatre. The council as a whole controlled civic finances and public religion, and had authority over areas of public space (notably the Forum, but also streets of tombs). It would grant honorific tombs and statues to the town’s most important benefactors in specific areas of public space (B12, E40, E49?, F87, F91, G4-12; D70, F89, F93—95, F102—103). It supervised the construction of new public buildings and also the implementation of standard weights and measures (H64). For evidence of individual magistrates’ activities, see F86.
Each year, elections for two aediles and two duumvirs were held in March, with the newly elected magistrates beginning their year in office on 1 July. There were two junior magistrates each year, known as aediles, or sometimes called ‘duumvirs in charge of streets, sacred and public buildings’ (E28—29, E31). There were also two senior magistrates, known as duumvirs (literally ‘two men’, the equivalent of the consuls at Rome). They had to have held the post of aedile already, usually three to five years earlier. They presided over meetings of the council and were in charge of fulfilling decrees passed by the council. Prefects were appointed in exceptional cases (like the dictator
At Rome) (see D6, D36, F107-108). In the early years of the colony, the two pairs of duumvirs and aediles were collectively known as quattuorvirs (‘board of four men’) (B7). Important members of the elite might be elected as duumvir on more than one occasion (exceptionally, Marcus Holconius Rufus was elected five times D54, F89). The most important magistracy was elected only every five years. This office was the quinquennial (literally ‘five-yearly’), whose task it was to revise the roll of citizens (census) and update the membership list of the town council. Again this was a local equivalent of the censors at Rome.
One of the unique phenomena of the historical record preserved at Pompeii is the huge quantity of painted notices relating to local elections (F2—85). Around 2,800 examples have been found on the outside walls of houses and public buildings, clustered along major roads and at busy junctions. Tombs on the roads leading out of the town also displayed such notices, sometimes relating to towns other than Pompeii (F82—85). Most of the notices were produced by professional sign-writers (F74—81). The vast majority of notices date from the final years of Pompeii’s existence, but some earlier ones have also been traced, often preserved underneath more recent notices. A few very fragmentary ones are even in Oscan. Most of the notices recommend an individual for election to a particular magistracy. A few denigrate a candidate (F11—13, F65). Generally, the content of the notices is fairly formulaic and brief. In some cases they simply give the candidate’s name and the office being sought (F31). In others they give the name of his supporters, which may be an individual or apparently a whole group, usually of traders (F14—28, F35—64). Sometimes the supporter is also the resident or owner of the property upon whose facade the notice is posted (F17—19). A surprising number of supporters are women, even though they could not actually vote (F51, F54, F56—58). A few give some indication of the candidate’s personal qualities (strong and honourable) (F4—9, F31—33). Political parties in the modern sense did not exist. In addition to painted notices canvassing support for candidates before elections, one was apparently acclaimed after his success too (F73).
This exceptional documentation of elections at Pompeii has yielded some interesting insights into the functioning of local politics. It was quite usual for electoral notices of one year to be whitewashed over, and for the next year’s notices to be painted on top of them. By studying the relative layering of notices, Franklin (1980) reconstructed a list of candidates at Pompeii for the last nine years before the eruption.
In addition to these notices, our other main sources of information about local politics and career patterns are monumental inscriptions, chiefly honorific inscriptions on statue bases (F89, F90, F92—95) and epitaphs upon tombs (F87-88, F91, G4-5, G24). These tend to give an outline of the individual’s career. The most important area in the town where honorific statues were placed was the Forum, the centre of civic life. The size and shape of the bases indicate whether they originally supported an equestrian or pedestrian statue. Forty-one bases survive for standing statues and sixteen for equestrian statues, but few of these preserve their inscriptions. In fact, of these fifty-seven bases we can only identify with any certainty six members of the local elite who were honoured with a statue (or in the case of Marcus Lucretius Rufus with two statues) (F90—95). Some of these bases may have originally displayed honorific statues of members of the imperial family.
Men of rather humbler backgrounds appear to have played prominent roles in the Fortunate Augustan Suburban Country District. An inscription of 7 BC (F97) records the names of the first slave attendants (ministri) who supported the work of the presidents (magistri), implying that administration in the District was radically reorganized at this time, perhaps in imitation of Augustus’ reorganization of the city of Rome in the same year. Despite the location of this district beyond the town’s walls, its officials acted as public benefactors in the heart of the town, paying for seating in the Amphitheatre (see also D1). One of its presidents (magistri), though a mere freedman (and, as such, excluded from becoming a town councillor) even laid claim to the symbols of the highest Roman political authority upon his tomb (F98). Inhabitants of country districts appear in other inscriptions, but may not belong to this particular district (F96, F99, G12, G18).
The Senate and emperor at Rome could also impose their authority upon the local council, but apparently did so only rarely, such as when the Roman Senate imposed a penalty upon the Pompeians following the riot in the Amphitheatre (D34—36). This was in response to a particular local crisis. By contrast, the other major intervention from Rome — the recouping of public lands — occurred on an empire-wide scale under Vespasian (F109). The town was, naturally enough, always eager to secure the support of the reigning emperor, even of an emperor condemned by later history as a madman (F107—108), since the town council elected Gaius Caligula an honorary duumvir twice. Another sign of enthusiasm for the current regime was to vote an honorific statue to the emperor or a member of his family. What survives can only be a tiny fraction of the original number of honorific imperial inscriptions (F100—104).
World History
