Regarding Pompey\'s title

[Gladius Hispaniensis]

Ave
Tom Holland in his book "Rubicon" suggests that it was Pompey's veterans that gave him the title Magnus. Elsewhere I have read that this was actually a nickname given to him by Sulla, out of sarcasm IIRC. What is the truth of the matter? Thanks in advance for the reply/

[Sardaukar]

What I have read, he gave the title to himself and Sulla agreed to use it (probably because he had good sense of irony).
But he did deserve his title until he was surpassed by Caesar.

[Gladius Hispaniensis]

What I have read, he gave the title to himself and Sulla agreed to use it (probably because he had good sense of irony).
But he did deserve his title until he was surpassed by Caesar.

Thanks for that info. And greetings to the all in the island of Melita, the land where I grew up! What part of the island are you in?

[Aetius Helvius Merula]

I've read Rubicon too. Great book! I've also read about Sulla being sarcastic with 'Magnus'. As I recall, Pompey was only 20 or so when he got his career rolling (the Sicilian revolt and the pirates' destruction come to mind), and was very full of himself. And he was also a man on the make, to steal Holland's phrase. He just made it work, though. So I can surely support the sarcasm theory. But for the life of me I can't recall my sources.

[Sardaukar]

What I have read, he gave the title to himself and Sulla agreed to use it (probably because he had good sense of irony).
But he did deserve his title until he was surpassed by Caesar.

Thanks for that info. And greetings to the all in the island of Melita, the land where I grew up! What part of the island are you in?

Living in South part, in Safi now. Soon moving to Naxxar, though. 8)

[Quintus Sertorius]

Before we get to carried away with Pompey, let us not forget that he crossed swords with Sertorius in Spain and to be kind, he was not quite as Magnus as one might have expected! As I recall, he had to plead with the Senate for re-inforcements or he would lose the campaign to Sertorius!

[SOCL]

Plutarch explicitly states that Sulla greeted Pompey as Magnus and ordered that the Senate ratify the title. The way Plutarch makes it sound, I do not believe it was quite as sarcastic as popular opinion states. In truth, I seem to believe this was more a political move by Sulla in order to keep power and yet still appease Pompey, who had a sizable force likely capable of causing much damage to Sulla.

I have also heard the theory that he bestowed upon himself said title, but what documentary evidence is there to support this? :?

Here is a previous discussion on this very same topic:
http://www.romanarmy.com/rat/viewtopic.php?t=14290

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Pompay was demanding a triumph from Sulla, and I think it was in this vein that Sulla called him 'Magnus' not so much as bestowing him a title, but tolerantly mocking him with the title he himself had adopted.
Still, it is no surprise he had trouble with the Spanish, as he had hardly faced real opposition up till then.

[Sardaukar]

Sertorious was one of the best military minds in Roman history. I have no doubt he'd given for example Scipio Africanus, Scipio Aemilianus, Marius, Sulla, Lucullus, Caesar or Agrippa etc. a good match any given day. Pompeius just was not very good to adapt and thus was quite helpless vs. Sertorius.

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Sertorious was one of the best military minds in Roman history. I have no doubt he'd given for example Scipio Africanus, Scipio Aemilianus, Marius, Sulla, Lucullus, Caesar or Agrippa etc. a good match any given day. Pompeius just was not very good to adapt and thus was quite helpless vs. Sertorius.

Yes he was good, no doubt.

But Caesar beat Pompey! Pompey was a great administrator/organizer,
but ws beaten by Caesar, who was no light weight in any skill required by a Roman General!

[M.H. White]

Methinks it was probably a combination of most of the above factors. Sulla keeping Pompeius happy, giving him a little praise, and having a laugh at Pompeius's expense all at the same time. Pompey seems to have not gotten the joke, otherwise why would he keep up the usage of the name?

[Sardaukar]

Sertorious was one of the best military minds in Roman history. I have no doubt he'd given for example Scipio Africanus, Scipio Aemilianus, Marius, Sulla, Lucullus, Caesar or Agrippa etc. a good match any given day. Pompeius just was not very good to adapt and thus was quite helpless vs. Sertorius.

Yes he was good, no doubt.

But Caesar beat Pompey! Pompey was a great administrator/organizer,
but ws beaten by Caesar, who was no light weight in any skill required by a Roman General!

Yes. Pompey was excellent organizer indeed. That's how he won most of his battles and did some amazing feats (like defeating the pirates).

He just do not strike me as superb battlefield commander though, which was his downfall. But, considering he was facing one of the greatest captains of antiquity (Caesar), he did not do too badly. Also, he did not have full authority in his command then in Pharsalus and was hectored to give battle against his plan. His plan of attrition was good one, but it was made to come nothing by one battle he probably should have never fought.

[Sardaukar]

To add, Pompeius had remarkable lack of political and interaction skills for man of his position. It was well-demonstrated by many occasions, for example saying "many more worship rising sun that setting sun"..which was not that wise thing to say to Dictator...

His lack of political acumen was also seen when he disbanded his troops and suddenly discovered that he was not able to get his laws thru the Senate. That mistake was duly noted by Caesar, who had no intention to do same mistake. Ditto with Octavianus/Augustus and following "warlords".

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Considering how he outnumbered Caesar, and also had been better supplied, I think Caesar summed it up succinctly when he made the comment on some eastern armies, something along the lines of, 'if these are the armies against which Pompay gained his reputation, it is no wonder he won such repute so easily" :!: :roll:

[Sardaukar]

Considering how he outnumbered Caesar, and also had been better supplied, I think Caesar summed it up succinctly when he made the comment on some eastern armies, something along the lines of, 'if these are the armies against which Pompay gained his reputation, it is no wonder he won such repute so easily" :!: :roll:

Well...Pompeius won in Dyrrachium..albeit aided by good luck. But still his operation to break siege was a good one. I'd consider him a good general and masterful organizer. His problem was that he was good ordinary general without much imagination and was rarely able to adapt to his enemies...humiliations he suffered against Sertorius point that out quite well. And I think that experience changed him quite a lot towards cautious.

Pharsalus was bad battle and he was forced to accept it against his own wish. He did have decently good strategy in Civil War, but he devised it against opponent like himself. He always thought what he would do in situation and thus was constantly surprised by Caesar who was willing to take enormous risks with confidence that his abilities and luck would get him thru it (not to mention the quite outstanding faith his troops had towards him).

So, I'd say that Pompeius did deserve the title Magnus, but not as battlefield commander.