Pompey in the Mirror of Byzantine Historiography

This study explores how Pompey the Great is portrayed in Late Antique and Byzantine historiography, focusing especially on how Christian and pagan traditions merge in recounting his actions in the East. Pompey appears as a “meteor”: briefly but significantly illuminating the historical narrative, particularly through his conquest of Jerusalem in 63 BCE, an event connected to Biblical prophecy and universal history. Eusebius’ Ecclesiastical History presents Pompey’s siege of Jerusalem as a pivotal moment fulfilling Biblical prophecy and marking the transition of the Jewish nation into Roman rule. Pompey is depicted as both violator of the Temple and necessary agent in God’s historical plan. Eusebius draws on Josephus and possibly Julius Africanus, integrating Pompey into a syncretic framework where Biblical chronology and Roman expansion intertwine. Pompey’s role in synchronizing sacred and secular history is essential to Eusebius’ larger narrative of divine providence. John Malalas’ Chronography emphasizes a strongly Eastern perspective: Pompey appears as a benefactor to Antioch, opponent of Caesar, and precursor to Augustus’ ideal imperial rule. Malalas reshapes events to support the teleological idea that the Roman Empire was prepared for Christ’s incarnation. Occasionally this yields counterfactual historiography, such as altered motivations or invented documentation, reflecting local Antiochene interests. Pompey also becomes a symbol of Fortune’s instability. Synesius highlights Pompey’s legendary luck, contrasting it with Caesar’s superior fortune. Appian underscores Pompey’s undefeated record before Pharsalus and presents Caesar’s praise of Pompey’s past victories. Photius, summarizing Appian, insists that Fortune turned decisively toward Caesar, pushing Pompey toward ruin. Conversely, Zosimus criticizes the Roman overreliance on Fortune, blaming the civil wars (Sulla/Marius, Caesar/Pompey) for the Republic’s collapse. Byzantine sources inherit a long literary tradition that depicts Pompey as tragic, especially after Pharsalus. Plutarch’s dialogue between Pompey and Cornelia, reproduced by Zonaras, emphasizes lost fortune, human vulnerability, and hope of recovery even in defeat. In Constantinople, statues associated with Pompey and Tyche survived into the sixth century, possibly influenced by beliefs about the emperor Anastasius’ descent from Pompey. These monuments, however, carried politically delicate associations after the Nika revolt. The Suda entry on Pompey is based on John of Antioch, who was (unusually) interested in Roman Republican history. Furthermore, this study emphasizes the importance of the Excerpta Constantiniana (10th c.), a massive imperial project extracting historical material into thematic anthologies. Here Pompey appears 56 times, especially in contexts of embassies and civil war. A Case Study: Mithridates’ Embassy in Cassius Dio, reveals transcription errors and thematic reshaping in the Excerpta against Cassius Dio’s original text. This illustrates the Excerpta’s challenges: copying errors, thematic rearrangements, and editorial intervention. Yet the episode highlights oikeiosis (reconciliation), a crucial political concept in Byzantine imperial thought—connecting Roman, pagan, Jewish, and Christian historical traditions. A surviving fragment of Diodorus (book 40), preserved only in the damaged palimpsest of the Excerpta de Sententiis, celebrates Pompey’s triumph and enumerates his vast conquests: liberation of the Mediterranean from piracy; subjugation of Asia, Bithynia, Armenia, Pontus, and multiple kingdoms; extension of Roman frontiers; enormous dedications of gold and silver to a goddess. Carolla notes uncertainty regarding which goddess received the dedication (possibly Artemis of Ephesus or another Eastern deity), suggesting an Asian rather than Roman context. A prophecy preserved in John Lydus describes Pompey as a young noble destined to defeat piracy and gain fame quickly. This image might be emblematic: Pompey is like a flash of lightning—brief, brilliant, impactful, and quickly gone. Pompey thus becomes both a mirror of Constantinople’s imperial identity and a reminder of historical fragility: a conqueror whose legacy Byzantium reshaped to serve its own narrative needs.