Why did Pompey disband his army when he returned to Italy in 61 BC?

Pompey disbanded the army, then went to Rome and demanded that the Senate should give his veterans land and that his dispositions in the east should be accepted. This was refused. So, why did he disband his army? If he had brought it to Rome, his demands would no doubt have been accepted. Pomepy had earlier been willing to bring down parts of Sulla´s attempt to restore the aristocratic republic, so it does not seem that he had any strong attachment to the republic.
 
Crossing the Rubicon without permission is something that would make him a de jure traitor. The only person who did so successfully was Sulla, and by Pompey's time I don't think he's remembered fondly by anyone who didn't know him personally, even the strangers who benefited from him. Pomepy's easilier actions against Sulla was sanctioned by the Senate, or at least s majority of it.
 
Pompeius was an Optimate, just like Sula, but unlike Sula he doesn't seems to want to become dictator or to directly cause a new civil war, if he had advanced to Rome with his army and with the popular support he had, he could had easily make himself Dictator for as long as he wished.

Instead he accepted the defeat of the Land Redistribution Law and allied himself with Caesar, a known leader of the Populares and who supported the Redistribution of Lands, to the position of Consul and with the support of both him and Crassus, Caesar passed the law.

In the end he got what he wanted without having to overthrow the Senate, which, from his POV, was the best option available.
 
My impression is that both Pompey and Caesar were prepared to ally with whomever furthered their own political ambitions. For instance, as consuls, Pompey and Crassus in the year 70 BC removed the restriction introduced by Sulla that an ex-tribun could not become a consul. Like Marius, they also used the equites to weaken the senators by using them as judges. I have also read (though I am not sure if the source is reliable) that his army was camped just outside Rome when he became consul. He does not really seem like a champion for the republic. He did fight for the republic later, and against Caesar, but this might just as well be seen as something he did to avoid that his rival should become to powerful. Also, after all, he did ally with Crassus and Caesar when the senate refused his demands, so at this stage he did attack the republican system. The only difference was that he had to share power with the other two, while he could have become a dictator if he had not disbanded the army.
 
Caesar was the politic of the two, Pompeius was a general not a politician what mattered for him was glory and adulation. That he appointed Equited to the courts doesn't means he's not a Optimates, Cicero wasn't a Patrician and yet he defended the Optimates during his time as Consul, as far as we know those Equites could had been members of the Optimates and the Judges they replaced Populares.

Now there is a big difference between an political alliance and a coup, Pompeius going for the Dictatorship would go bad for him in the long run, Sulla wasn't particularly loved by anyone by the time he left the office. By doing an alliance instead of a coup he could keep the mantle of the "Defensor of the Republic" and still managing to get what he wanted. While if he did a coup he would be had to go for the Dictatorship and after achieving his ends what would he do? Steeping down would be a danger for him, he had just opposed and remove from power the most powerful men in Rome and staying too long a dictator would be unpopular, it would look too much like a Monarchy for the taste of the Romans.

Now why they reinforced the powers of the Plebeians I don't know, but I think that Pompeius did it to gain the love of the people, and Crassus probably had an agenda of his own in supporting it.

According to Appian both him and Crassus didn't disbanded their armies mostly because of a "You do it first! No you do it!" between the two.

Caesar was a Populare, but he was no Catilinia, a man that may had been a true Populare Radical, much like Gaius Gracchus, he was willing to compromise with the Optimates.
 
Because pompey didn't want control, he wanted the respect of his peers and the love of the people. Keeping his army to threaten Rome might make him lose all of chance of having those thing
 
Part of the answer is very simple.... armies are expensive to maintain. There are salaries, food for troops, fodder for animals, and of course you have to make promises regarding bonuses and retirement (land grants).

Add in the political costs and his personality issues and the decision to disband is a lot easier than it might appear.
 
Part of the answer is very simple.... armies are expensive to maintain. There are salaries, food for troops, fodder for animals, and of course you have to make promises regarding bonuses and retirement (land grants).

Add in the political costs and his personality issues and the decision to disband is a lot easier than it might appear.

But that is the exact point. If Pompey had marched to Rome with the army, he could have got what he wanted without helping Caesar.

Is it true that Pompey and Crasus had their respective armies camped just outside when they became consuls for 70 BC?
 
Pompey disbanded the army, then went to Rome and demanded that the Senate should give his veterans land and that his dispositions in the east should be accepted. This was refused. So, why did he disband his army? If he had brought it to Rome, his demands would no doubt have been accepted. Pomepy had earlier been willing to bring down parts of Sulla´s attempt to restore the aristocratic republic, so it does not seem that he had any strong attachment to the republic.

Pompey disbanded his army because he did not intend to establish himself as tyrant.

Pompey had always wanted to be accepted within the ruling oligarchy. This is why he had married Sulla's stepdaughter Aemilia and then Mucia (who was parent to the Metelli).

And when he came back in Italy in december 62, he then thought that he would succeed to have a law granting lands to his veterans passed.

This is why he had no reason to make a coup.

@Karolus Rex : I would definitly not say that Pompey was not a politician. By many standards, he was the political model of Augustus (who happened to be a distant parent of Pompey through the Atii Balbi).

Pompey definitly was very skilled at arcane politics (manipulating public opinion, the courts, concluding alliances with aristocrats, using allies, lieutenants and clients to act on his behalf).

The point is that he was not talented as an orator nor as a legislator in the Senate.
 
But that is the exact point. If Pompey had marched to Rome with the army, he could have got what he wanted without helping Caesar.

Is it true that Pompey and Crasus had their respective armies camped just outside when they became consuls for 70 BC?
He didn't want to dictate policy completely thourgh his army like his old boss Sulla, he wanted to get stuff done because everyone agreed he was awesome
Pompey disbanded his army because he did not intend to establish himself as tyrant.

Pompey had always wanted to be accepted within the ruling oligarchy. This is why he had married Sulla's stepdaughter Aemilia and then Mucia (who was parent to the Metelli).

And when he came back in Italy in december 62, he then thought that he would succeed to have a law granting lands to his veterans passed.

This is why he had no reason to make a coup.

@Karolus Rex : I would definitly not say that Pompey was not a politician. By many standards, he was the political model of Augustus (who happened to be a distant parent of Pompey through the Atii Balbi).

Pompey definitly was very skilled at arcane politics (manipulating public opinion, the courts, concluding alliances with aristocrats, using allies, lieutenants and clients to act on his behalf).

The point is that he was not talented as an orator nor as a legislator in the Senate.
which makes sense. His first election campaign was for consul.
 
Top