¥ CT hah ge ifeaes Se saan 33 Telnet ahh $d) eects pibTh En Som, rs is is Pegigs 4 *, ean te r is +> 7} | heats : a ; ae * reine ne oa RMU ef Strata aerate oe eens Ueber cH nay hate \: . ee iets M4 Porn AG oes “ere = Coat thas ‘ + £ sty bh Nee is ps eben vie ENO eo 7 * 2 “ - « x lan ~~ : rate FON cr Senn. et A EMS Wee ES Se x ™. Ot Fiviet sateirl >) i DEO A 1907 Y, & Se oeign4 sew Division DG 87 Section A 5 ia a ' oe . ine fe ae he MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE This book is published on the Shreve Foundation established at Princeton University in memory of Benjamin Davis Shreve of the Class of 1856 by the bequest of his widow “‘ for the study of the history of nations, both ancient and modern, to ascertain the cause of their decay, degeneracy, extinction, and destruction, and to show the dangers that now exist and are arising which, if not checked, will injure, if not destroy, our free government.’ In 1924 Professor Abbott was elected as the first Fellow on this Foundation. LONDON: HUMPHREY MILFORD OXFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION IN THE ROMAN EMPIRE By aunt OF PRIA, a> FRANK PROSE ABBOTT [00 4 7 aa, x Late Kennedy Professor of Latin, Princeton Universi ee AND ALLAN CHESTER JOHNSON Professor of Classics, Princeton University PRINCETON PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS MCMXxXVI PRINTED IN GREAT BRITAIN PREFACE The studies set forth in this volume were first planned by Professor Frank Frost Abbott in 1914. In collaboration with the present writer the work was carried on with many interruptions under the general editorship of Professor Abbott until his death, July 23, 1924. For his kindly criticisms and generous help I shall always remain pro- foundly grateful. The municipal institutions of the Roman Empire contain in large measure the secret of the vitality and the decay of that ancient civilization which controlled the destinies of the world for a longer span than any imperial power whose history has yet been recorded. For this reason it has been our aim to trace the history of the rela- tions of these municipalities to Rome, their differing status, the development of Roman policy towards them, and the circumstances attending their decline, and there- fore the decline of the empire. These matters and certain others clearly relating to them are set forth systematically in the Introduction. In this portion of the book we have made a study of the juridical and fiscal relations to Rome of communities of various classes, of the political organiza- tion and financial systems of these communities, of the attempts which were made to combine them into larger political entities through the provincial assemblies, of the development of the municipal policy of Rome, and the decline of the municipality. The last chapter, on municipal documents, may serve as a technical introduction to Part 11 of the book, in which are brought together inscriptions and papyri that throw light on the relations which the municipalities bore to Rome. These documents have hitherto been so widely vi PREFACE scattered that it was thought advisable to gather them together in order that those interested in municipal institutions might be able to gain a first-hand compre- hensive survey of the problems involved in their study. No collection of this kind exists and the information which such a corpus provides is definite and accurate. The lower limit of time for this collection has been set at the end of the third century, for the reason that most constitutions antedate the fourth century and the influences which determined the course of events are clearly discernible in the earlier period. Moreover, it would be impossible to deal fully with the Byzantine period without doubling the compass of the book. | - It has been the aim of the editors to include all in- scriptions which furnish information of importance bearing upon the relations of Rome to her municipalities. Very fragmentary inscriptions and those which gave no information, known from documents already included, have been omitted. In the case of the documents from Egypt our choice has been limited more especially to the more important and representative papyri dealing with the towns and villages from the Roman occupation to the beginning of the Byzantine period. In general it should be stated for the purpose of de- fining the work of the two collaborators, that Mr Abbott directed his attention to conditions in the West, and the present writer to those in the East. This means, practically, that the former is primarily responsible for the Latin inscriptions and for the commentaries on them, and the latter for the Greek and bilingual inscriptions, the papyri, and the commentaries on the documents of these three classes. The authorship of each chapter in the Introduction is indicated in the Table of Contents. The manuscript of Mr Abbott’s portion was fortunately in final form, and is here published with slight editorial revision. In view of the cost of printing, critical notes have been reduced to a minimum, typographical devices in the texts PREFACE Vil have been used as sparingly as possible, and in the Latin inscriptions in particular deviations from the text of a stone or tablet have been indicated simply by the use of italic letters. In the text of the papyri indications of obscure or doubtful letters by the customary convention have been omitted, but in all cases where the interpretation of a document depends upon the reading, the fact has been indicated in the commentary. In conclusion, thanks are due to Professor John W. Basore for reading the manuscript; to Professor Paul R. Coleman-Norton for undertaking the arduous task of verifying references and reading proof; to Professor D. M. Robinson for furnishing in advance of publication his text and commentary on the inscription discovered by him at Antioch; to Professor Edward Capps for his generous and helpful interest in these studies; and finally, to the Secretary and staff of the Cambridge University Press for their unfailing courtesy and care. ALLAN CHESTER JOHNSON PRINCETON March 20, 1926 ‘ at eae A seni” Fam 4 VI. VII. XV. II. CONTENTS PART COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA (4bdbot?) PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, CONCILI- ABULA, CANABAE, PAGI, GENTES, SALTUS (4dbott?) VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT (‘fohnson) THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT (Fohnson) CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE (Abbott) THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST (4bbo?t) THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST (fohnson) HONORES AND MUNERA (‘fohnson) IMPERIAL TAXES AND REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES (Abbott) MUNICIPAL FINANCES (Abbott) ARBITRATION AND TREATIES (‘fohnson) PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES (fohnson) THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY (‘Fohnson) THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES (‘Fohnson) MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS AND THEIR PREPARA- TION (Abbott) PAR T.LI MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT page 3 IO Faq 31 39 TE ey 232, 247 507 hve he te yy, VAT, J x vs De fs ; . ' ‘ . } id ma t oh 7 iikucva te Ani owe. ae a BOR ‘Tat 7 eg ny Piemes , 4 Been a ee > 7 fie 7 ner , : a oe A # A mero a rie ft te ad ae? Pies Sex) a tN te WY bhbe ‘ i , . PART I INTRODUCTION an f Ae ht PCO er vin er be Mp A" a me Rl): nari) tb } ‘ fi ; Whe Hae A a BG i" At CHAPLET ER. tf COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA! i ONG before the republic came to an end Rome had placed the different communities which had been brought under her control in five or six well defined _ categories, according to their political status. But these distinctions do not hold for the earliest settlements or acquisitions of territory outside the physical limits of the city. The little market-towns which sprang up in early days on Roman territory had no separate political existence, and those who lived in them enjoyed no political rights or privileges because of their residence in them. Even Ostia had no local magistrates at the outset?. It was a part of the city-state of Rome. In other words Rome did not recognize the possibility of local self-government in any community dependent upon her or under her suzerainty. This policy was violated when Rome took certain com- munities under her control, but allowed them to retain some part of their previous sovereignty. She adopted the new practice for the first time, according to tradition, in the case of Antium, whose people were made up partly of Roman colonists and partly of earlier settlers3. Livy tells 1 ‘The early chapters of this Introduction are intended to present in out- line the characteristic features of the different classes of municipalities under the Roman government, and to observe the changes in the political status of these towns or in the method of founding them which we notice in passing from one period to another, or from one part of the Roman world to another. It should be observed, however, that no description can be given which will be applicable to all the members of a class, because they did not all enjoy identical rights and privileges. Some of the differences between towns of the same class in the matter of autonomy will be discussed in the commen- taries on the several inscriptions. 2 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 775. 3 Mommsen, S¢. R. 3, 778; Kornemann, R.£. 4, 585. He el ah COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA us: Antiatibus quoque, qui se sine legibus certis, sine magis- tratibus agere querebantur, dati ab senatu ad 1ura statuenda ipsius coloniae patroni. Communities of this sort had their own charters, and elected magistrates took the place of the prefects heretofore sent out by Rome. Local pride prob- ably played a part in bringing about this change, and a desire to retain as much as possible of the old institutions and customs of the place, and the feeling that residents could administer the affairs of a village better than non- residents. Whether Rome thought it a wise policy to yield to these pleas for self-government, or whether she followed the line of least resistance, it is hard to say. At all events the way was open for the incorporation into the Roman state of communities possessing some measure of local autonomy. Such a political unit was called a civitas, whether it took the form of a city or not, whereas the term oppidum was used only of a city. The free use of the word civitas for Roman as well as for non-Roman com- munities begins in the second century of our eral. Before that time it was usually applied to native communities only, while those of Roman origin were styled coloniae or municipia. It is convenient for us to make this early distinction in the present discussion. Colonies were cities or villages made up of settlers sent out by Rome?. They fell into two classes, coloniae civium Romanorum and coloniae Latinorum, according to the political rights of the settlers and the status of the colony. The founding of a colony was a sovereign act, and, there- fore, under the early republic it was effected by a J/ex, while under the empire it was the prerogative of the em- peror. Before the period of the revolution the establish- 1 Kornemann, R.E. Suppl. Erstes Heft, 302 f. 2 Much use has been made in this discussion of colonies of Kornemann’s excellent article colonia in R.E. 4, 511 ff. Other important articles are de Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. 2, 415 f.; Lenormant, Dict. Dar. 1. 1303 f.; Momm- sen, St. R. 3 passim; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1 passim; Abbott, Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 365 f. foun COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA ment of a colony called for the enactment of a special law by the popular assembly. This law specified the location of the colony, and the amount of state-land to be assigned, fixed the number of commissioners entrusted with the duty of making the settlement, and determined their duties. A typical instance of the method of founding a colony is the case of Antium!. In the period of transition, Sulla, Caesar, and the triumvirs did not trouble themselves to secure the passage of a special law, but acted by virtue of the general powers given to them. Thus Urso is styled a colonia iussu C. Caesaris dictatoris deducta®. Octavius, Antony, and Lepidus based their right to found colonies on the /ex Titia, which established the triumvirate. When this transfer of authority had come about, of course the new sovereign named the commissioners, as the people had done in earlier days. It was the duty of the commissioners to lead the colonists out, settle them upon the land, estab- lish the form of government, and nominate the first incumbents of office. The colonists were given conquered land set aside for the purpose. The settlers in a Roman colony were Roman citizens, with an occasional admixture of soc#i, and in Italy they had full right of ownership in their land (ex iure Quiritium), and the Roman settlers enjoyed all the other public and private rights of Roman citizens, except in the matter of holding Roman magistracies. In the enjoyment of this privilege they were for a time restricted?, When Roman colonies in the later period were established in the provinces, the land was usually left subject to the burdens of other pro- vincial land. The Latin differed from the Roman colonies in size, composition, and political status. Three hundred was the normal number sent out to a Roman colony*, rarely as many as 2000 or 3000°%, while Latin colonies usually 1 Livy, 3. I. 5-7. 2 Cf. no. 26, chap. 106. ° Cf. no. It. SiC As ek. IVY, S024 vit ts ° Cf. Livy, 39. 553 41. 13. or COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA numbered several thousand!. The majority of those who were sent out to a Latin colony were Latins or Italian allies, but Romans who were willing to accept Latin in place of their Roman citizenship were also enrolled. ‘The Latin colonies of the early period bore the same relation to Rome that the members of the Latin League had held. They were free from the payment of tribute. They had the right of coinage. They had their own magistrates and laws, and they enjoyed the same private rights as Roman citizens?. On the other hand, while the settlers in the early Roman colonies were excused from regular military service, each Latin colony was required to furnish a military con- tingent to serve in the a/ae or cohortes. However, the twelve Latin colonies which were founded after 268 B.c. suffered a diminution in their privileges. They lost the right of coinage and the zws conubii, and they found it more difficult to obtain Roman citizenship®. Still another change in the situation came about in 89 B.c., for by virtue of the grant of Roman citizenship to the Italians in this year, all Latin colonies south of the Po were transformed into Roman municipia. In the same year the cities in Transpa- dane Gaul were given the rights of Latin citizenship, to be transformed in 49 B.c. into those of Roman citizenship. Consequently Latin colonies henceforth disappear from the peninsula. In Italy and the provinces the Latin colonies numbered about sixty-one, and the Roman colonies, about three hundred and eighty-one*. The earliest colonies were estab- lished as military outposts to hold and Romanize newly acquired territory. The most characteristic feature of the Roman colonies was the fact that they were established on the coast. This practice was followed without exception until 183 B.c., when the rule was broken by sending 1 Cf. Livy, 10. 1. 1-2. 2 Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 627 ff. 3 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 518; cf., however, Steinwenter, R.E. 10, 1267 f. 4 Kornemann, R.£. 4, 514_/7.; v. Premerstein, R.E. 10, 1240. Raw COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA Roman colonies to Mutina, Parma, and Saturnia. A change in the motives which led to the founding of colonies appears under the Gracchi, who used colonization for the purpose of relieving the needy population of Rome, of promoting the prosperity of the country districts, and of stimulating trade. The admission of the proletariat to the army by Marius naturally led him to found colonies for needy veterans. A step which looked to this change in policy had been taken as early as 171 B.c. in the case of Carteia in Spain, which was settled by the sons born of Roman soldiers and Spanish women. The precedent thus set at Carteia, and taken up by Marius, of providing for veterans in colonies, was freely followed by the triumvirs and under the empire. Narbo Martius, established in Gallia Narbonensis in 118 B.c., is the first clear instance of a colony outside the peninsula of Italy, a precedent which was not fully accepted until we come to the time of Caesar and the triumvirs, under whom between forty and fifty such settle- ments were made in the provinces?. Under the empire this policy was gradually discontinued. From the time of Hadrian almost all the new colonies in the provinces were not newly established settlements, but existing municipia or native civitates to which the title and rights of a colony were given by the emperor. This change in status was usually in the provinces the first step towards the acquisi- tion of Latin rights and of immunity from the payment of tribute?. The change which the republican system of nomencla- ture underwent under the dictators of the first century B.c. is significant of a change in the seat of power. The earliest instance of the new practice of naming a colony in honor of its autocratic founder is probably that of the colonia Mariana. The practice became the accepted one under the 1 Abbott, Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 372f- 2 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 566. Bea COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA empire, and is helpful in determining the foundation-date of a colony’, A municipium was not a new settlement, as a colony was, but resulted from the incorporation of a ‘conquered town into the Roman state?. The functions of its local magis- trates and the limitations put upon their powers were determined in each case by the charter granted to it. Some interesting specimens of charters granted to colonies and municipia have come down to us from the time of the late republic, for Tarentum in Italy? and for the colony of Urso in Spain4, and from the time of the empire, for the municipia of Salpensa and Malaca in Spain®. The inhabit- ants of a municipium received complete Roman citizenship, as in Lanuvium and Aricia®, or received it in a restricted form, sine suffragio, as in Fundi and Formiae, or with such limitations as the provincial municipia of Salpensa and Malaca had at a later date’. As we have already noticed, all the civitates sine suffragio south of the Po were given Roman citizenship by the /eges Iulia et Plautia Papiria of go—89 B.c. Like Roman colonists the citizens in municipia were liable to service in the legions, and were subject to all the munera to which Roman citizens were subject. Indeed the ancients believed that the word municipium was derived from munus and capere. In their juridical position the munictpia differed from the colonies in the fact that they could retain their traditional procedure in cases heard by their local magistrates, whereas the colonies 1 For a list of the imperial appellatives used, cf. de Ruggiero, Le Colonie dei Romani, 96. 2 Recent literature: Comparette, 4. F. PZ. 27 (1906), 166 #7; Decla- reuil, Quelgues problémes d'histoire des institutions municipales au temps de LEmpire romain; Heisterbergk in PAilo/. 50 (1891), 639 77.3 Jouguet, Vie munic.; Jung, Hist. Zeitschr. 67 (1891), 1 ff.3 Levy, Rev. d. é. grecg. 8 (1895), 203 #3 12 (1899), 255 #3 14 (1899), 350 /.; Liebenam, Sz. Verw.; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 293 f7.; Toutain, Dict. Dar. 5.0. munici- pium; aronein: Les cités romaines de la Tunisie. BiNOW eo. £ No. 26: 5 Nos. 64 and 65. 6 Livy, 8. 14. 2-3. 7 Livy, 8. 14. 10; no. 64. [ 8 ] COLONIAE AND MUNICIPIA followed Roman law. If a municipium in Italy adopted Roman law, it was known as a municipium fundanum}. In the provinces we find two main classes of municipia, those whose citizens had Roman, and those whose citizens were restricted to Latin citizenship*. Some cities of the second class had the maius Latium, others only the minus Latium, Citizens in communities having the maius Latium gained Roman citizenship when admitted to the local senate. In towns having minor Latin rights only election to a local magistracy could win this privilege for them®. Provincial municipia, like colonies and peregrine ctvitates, were subject to tribute, and did not enjoy full ownership of land, although perhaps the ius Italicum was granted to favored munictpia. This right by a legal fiction made their land part of Italy, and therefore conferred full ownership, or dominium, on the holders, as well as freedom from the payment of tribute*. So far as local administration was concerned, most municipia were more or less under the control of the governor of their province, whereas the colonies were strictly autonomous in the matter of local affairs®. ‘This difference explains in part why so many provincial municipia begged the emperors to make them colonies. 1 Cf. Elmore, Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 4.7, 35 ff. 2 Toutain, Dict. Dar. s.0. municipium, 2030 f. 3 Gaius, I. 95-96; no. 64. 4 Cf. v. Premerstein, R.E£. 10, 1242 ff. 5 On the possession of /idertas by Roman colonies, cf. Toutain, M#/. d. arch. 18 (1898), 141 ff; v. Premerstein, op. cit. 1248. [9 ] CHAPTER II PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, PAGI, GENTES, SALTUS! she: writer of the lex de Gallia Cisalpina, in desig- nating the communities in Cisalpine Gaul to which a certain provision is to apply, mentions oppidum municipium colonia praefectura forum vicus conciliabulum castellum territorium®. Oppidum is a generic word for an autonomous community, and serritorium is used of the country district outside the limits of a settlement, but belonging to it. The other words in the list have more or less definite technical meaning, and if to them we add the terms pagus, gens, canabae, and saltus, we shall probably have a complete catalogue of the names given in the West to the smaller administrative units. The first three of these terms, municipium, colonia, and praefectura, stand apart from the rest to indicate communities of a clearly marked, general type, and again the praefectura, which did not enjoy all the rights of self-government in local affairs, stands opposed to the more fortunate municipium and colonia. Praefectura, in fact, may be thought of as a generic term applicable to any community which lacked the full right of self-government. In this sense, as we shall see, 1 Outside of the discussions in the standard treatises of Mommsen (Sz. R. 3,765 f.), Marquardt (St. Verw. 1, 34 f.), Willems (Droit public rom. 357 f.) and Madvig (Verf. u. Verw. 1, 44, 49), some of the most recent literature on the communities treated in this chapter are papers by Schulten in Pilol. 53 (1894), 629-686; Hermes, 29 (1894), 481-516; and R%. Mus. 50 (1895), 489-557; Hardy, Six Roman Laws, 143 ff. and articles under the pertinent headings in Dict. Dar., R.E. and the Diz. Ep. For a convenient list of the praefecturae, fora, vici, castella, pagi, and saltus mentioned in Dessau’s collection of inscriptions, cf. Dessau, 3, pp. 619, 660-664, 669. PONG. 27:02 15 Le 2 fs [ 10 ] PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, ere. it comprehends all the terms, except serritorium, which follow it in the list given above. The title praefectus was given to an official to whom some higher authority had delegated the power to perform certain functions. So far as the villages and cities of the empire were concerned, the source of authority might be the central government at Rome or some one of the civitates. ‘The officials of the first sort were the praefecti iure dicundo sent out by the urban praetor to administer justice in the settlements founded by Rome or annexed . by her, as well as the special praefecti iure dicundo Capuae Cumis who were elected in the comitia on the nomination of the praetor. The term prefecture could also be applied to the small communities which did not have an inde- pendent status, but were attached to a neighboring civitas. In this case the authority of the prefect came, not from Rome, but from the civitas. The residents in Italian prefectures connected with Rome lacked in the early period some of the qualities of citizenship, but later these communities either attained the position of municipia, or while retaining the name of praefecturae, differed from municipia only in the fact that they did not have L/ viri or IV viri1, As for the other class of prefectures, they maintained their existence down to a late date. Civitates usually had zerritoria dependent upon them. In these territoria hamlets were scattered here and there, and in the _ villages at a distance from the governing city justice was administered and certain other powers were exercised by a prefect sent out for that purpose by the municipal authorities. To such an official, for instance, reference seems to be made in CYL. x, 6104, an inscription of the Augustan age: Carthagine aedilis, praefectus iure dicundo vectigalibusque quinquennalibus locandis in castellis Lxxx111. Similarly the magistrates of the Genuenses ex- ercised jurisdiction over the residents of the castellum 1 Cagnat, Dict. Dar. s.v. praefectura. [a1 J PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, Vituriorum!, In one case we hear of the duovir of a colony acting as prefect of a castellum*. It is impossible to draw an exact line of distinction between the several minor com- munities, but for purposes of convenience in discussion the fora, conciliabula, vici, and castella may be put together. These in turn fall into two groups, the fora and conciliabula on the one hand, and the vici and castella on the other. Settlements of the first two classes were always authorized by the central government and thus bore a certain re- semblance to colonies. Indeed it is quite possible that in the earliest period Roman colonies held the same legal relation to Rome as the fora and conciliabula did in later times*. This official relation for the fora is indicated by such typical names as Forum Popili and Forum Livi. Most of them were founded by Roman magistrates charged with the construction of a highway, and the name is found most frequently in northern Italy®, and for settle- ments made under the republic. In the last century of the republic most of the fora and conciliabula were erected into communities with full rights of local self-government. On a somewhat lower plane stood the vici and caste/la. Of them Isidore remarks®: vici et castella et pagi sunt, quae nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, sed vulgari homi- num conventu incoluntur et propter parvitatem sui maioribus civitatibus attribuuntur. The vici, at least, were usually private settlements, and the caste//a may be re- garded as fortified vici, although in the founding of a castellum probably the initiative would ordinarily be taken by a military authority, and the commandant may well have acted at the outset as the local magistrate’, Most of 1 No. ro, ll. 43-44. For a specific illustration of the relations between a civitas and its attributi, see commentary on no. 49 on the question at issue between the municipium of ‘Tridentum and the Anauni. P.GLL. Vill, 115720. 3 Schulten, R.E. 4, 799 f. 4 Mommsen, St. R. 3, 775 ff. 5 Schulten, R.£. 7, 62. ORO S08 F207 ? Mommsen, Hermes, 24 (1889), 200. [ 12 ] CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, Etc. the caste/la were naturally on the frontiers}, Some of the vici and castella were in time made independent com- munities. This happened, for instance, in the case of Sufes*, and occasionally a cévitas was reduced to the position of a dependent vicus. An interesting instance of this sort is furnished by the petition of the people of Orcistus?, In a few cases we find the name vicus cana- barum* applied to a community, but settlements of this sort do not seem to have differed from canabae, which come next in the order of discussion. This word in its general sense was applied to the temporary shops and booths put up by merchants. It was natural to use it also of the settlements of merchants and camp-followers which sprang up about the camps. They were usually located so as to leave a free space between the fortifications of the camp and the hamlet in question. The organization was based on the resident Roman citizens, and, with its magistri or curatores®, prob- ably bore a close resemblance to the conventus civium Romanorum, of which we have a reasonably complete record®, Probably the native women by whom the soldiers in the camp had children lived in these nearby villages, so that it was natural for the veterans on receiving their discharge and the legalization of their marriages to settle in the canabae with their wives and children. To them we have reference in an inscription from Aquincum’ and elsewhere. In the history of the Roman municipality the canabae have a special interest for us, because we can, 1 For a list, not absolutely complete, cf. Diz. Ep. 2, 130 f. The cas- tellum Carcassonne has preserved its external features up to the present day. 2 CIL. vin, 11427; Kubitschek, R.£. 3, 1757. 3 No. 154. 4 Schulten, PAilol. 53 (1894), 671. 5 CIL. 111, 6166; v, 5747; and the phrase civibus Romanis consistenti- bus ad canabas leg. v (4. ép. 1920, no. 54). 6 See Kornemann, s.v. conventus, R.E. 4, 1182-1200. Mommsen’s theory (Hermes, 7 (1873), 299 /-) that the cazabae had a military organiza- tion is no longer held; cf. Schulten, R.L. 3, 1452; Hermes 29 (1894), 507. MCIAINI2 SOs. Rascal PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, in some instances, trace their growth from the earliest settlement by Roman citizens up to the granting of a municipal charter. This is true, for example, of Apulum}, Aquincum’, Carnuntum®%, and notably of Lambaesis*. Some of these settlements, like Carnuntum, even attained the dignity of a colony®. The pagus® differed essentially from all the communities which have been mentioned thus far. The meaning of the term varied somewhat from one period to another and from one part of the Roman world to another, but the canton was always thought of as a rural administrative unit, and was opposed in sense to ctvitas, urbs, or oppidum. The Romans found these rural subdivisions in their con- quest of Italy and of other parts of the western world, and they were frequently preserved intact, but were usually given a Roman name. Caesar uses the term to indicate part of a native tribe’, but under the empire it came to designate very definitely a territorial unit. The inhabitants of a canton might live dispersed or in hamlets (vici). They formed a commune for such religious purposes as the celebration of festivals and the mainten- ance of the local cult, and for such administrative purposes as the repairing of roads and the apportionment of the water supply. The religious side of the community life is indicated by such names as pagus Martius and pagus Apollinaris, although other cantons bore a local name, e.g. pagus Veronensis, or even a gentile name, as was the case, for instance, with the pagus Valerius. The cantons enjoyed a certain degree of autonomy. We read in the inscriptions 1 'Tomaschek, R.E. 2, 290/f. . 2 ‘Tomaschek, R.F. 2, 333. 3 Kubitschek, R.E. 3, 1601 f. 4 Wilmanns, Comm. Mommsen, 190 f7.; Cagnat, L’armée romaine a’ Afrique, passim. PCL tt, 4236. 6 An extended discussion of the subject is given by A. Schulten, Die Landgemeinden in rim. Reich, Philol. 53 (1894), 629-655. For recent literature, see Toutain in Dict. Dar. and Liibker, Reallexikon, s.v. pagus. Liat eM ED Op Ge E t4.] CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, erc. of their magistri and their decrees. In most cases probably the decrees were passed in popular assemblies, but in one case at least, we hear of the decurions of acanton!, In later days the pagi must have lost largely their rights of self- government, because after Diocletian’s time we hear fre- quently of the praefecti or praepositi pagorum*. A larger rural unit than the pagus was the gens or populus. In Spain and Gaul, for instance, the Romans found it convenient to deal with the tribal organizations, and to accept the division of these tribes into the tradition- ally accepted smaller cantons. The Helvetii, for example, were divided into four cantons in Caesar’s time®, A judicial prefect was put in charge of a tribe or group of cantons. Thus we hear of a praef. gentis Cinithiorum* and a praefectus civitatium in Alpibus Maritumis®. In these cases Rome dealt with a whole people, not with single cities. Each tribe, however, had one or more villages, which were made centres of administration. If these grew in importance, they might develop into autonomous cities, and receive Latin or Roman rights as the principal village of the Voconti did ®. At the bottom of the scale, so far as the enjoyment of self-government was concerned, were the co/oni on large private and imperial estates. Our information about the political and economic organization of these estates in the West comes almost entirely from inscriptions found during the last forty years’. All but one of these docu- 1 CIL. vi, 1548. : 2 The conventus civium Romanorum scarcely belong among the com- munities under discussion here. we Gat 1: 4° CIL. vit;; 10800, 5 GIL. v, 1838. 6 Cf. Kornemann, R.£. 4, 545 and Schulten, R4. Mus. 50 (1895), 521. ? ‘These inscriptions are the Epistula data a Licinio Maximo et Feliciore Augusti liberto procuratoribus ad exemplum legis Mancianae (no. 74) found in 1896 at Henchir-Mettich, the Ara legis Hadrianae (Bruns, 115) found in 1892 at Ain-Ouassel, the Sermo et epistulae procuratorum de terris vacuis excolendis (no. 93) found in 1906 at Ain-el-Djemala, the Rescriptum Com- modi de saltu Burunitano (no. 111) found in 1879 at Souk-el-Khmis, and [ae 5.8] PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, ments come from Africa, so that a description of the organization of the sa/tus based on them applies strictly to that region, although the same system in its general outlines probably prevailed in other parts of the empire. The growth of great estates is closely connected with the policy which Rome adopted in dealing with the ager publicus. The land of a conquered people passed auto- matically under Roman ownership. Some of the cultivated land might be used as the site of a colony, some turned back to the natives in return for a rental. As for the un- cultivated land, capital was needed for its development, and it was occupied to a great extent by rich Roman landlords. Under this system immense estates came under the control of private owners both in Italy and the pro- vinces. This was particularly true of Africa, of which Pliny tells us that in Nero’s time sex domini semissem Africae possidebant, cum interfecit eos Nero princeps'. The early emperors, as one may infer from Pliny’s remark, saw clearly the political and economic danger with which this situation threatened the government and society, and set themselves to work to remove it?. The land must belong to the state. This change in ownership was accomplished partly by way of legacies, but in larger measure through confiscation. The land became again public land, to be administered henceforth by the emperor, and by the time of the Flavians most of the great estates had become crown-lands*. They were too large to be made the territoria of neighboring cities. They were therefore organized on an independent basis, and with the formation of the sa/tus a new and far-reaching principle was intro- duced into the imperial system. Hitherto Rome had made the Rescriptum Philipporum ad colonos vici cuiusdam Phrygiae, found in 1897 in Phrygia (no. 141). Cf also nos. 122 and 142. Information con- cerning the system followed on each of these imperial domains may be found in the commentaries on the inscriptions mentioned. tN. 18. 6) 35. 2 Cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 378. 3 Rostowzew, Op. cit. 379. [ 16 ] CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, erc. the cévitas the political and social unit. It had dealt administratively with the individual through the magis- trates or decurions of his community. The co/oni on an imperial estate had no political organization, or at most only a rudimentary one. They were, therefore, brought into direct relations with the emperor or his personal representative. In carrying out this plan of government for the domains located in a given region, a method was adopted not unlike that which had been followed in the case of a newly acquired province. Just as a senatorial commission under the republic had drawn up a /ex pro- vinciae to fix the relations of the civitates to the central government and the form of government for the province within which they lay, or just as emperors granted charters to municipalities, so representatives of the emperor drew up a statute for the domains of a given district. The earliest of these statutes to which we have any reference is the lex Manciana', which was probably not a system of regula- tions drawn up by the owner of a private estate, as is commonly supposed”, but was rather the work of an im- perial legate, perhaps of the Emperor Vespasian®. The lex Manciana continued in force in Africa until it was supplanted by the /ex Hadriana, to which reference is made in a document of the time of Commodus® and in another of a later date®. From a study of these docu- ments, supplemented by information to be had from other inscriptions, it is possible to determine the administrative system which was introduced into the imperial domains. Fach estate, or sa/tus, was in charge of a procurator saltus, who was usually a freedman, and all the procurators of a given region were under a procurator tractus, of equestrian EONo: 74.11.63 2 Hirschfeld, 123, n. 3; Seeck, R.E. 4, 484; Toutain, Nouv. rev. hist. de droit fr. et dtr. 21 (1897), 393.f-3 23 (1899), 141 ff. 3 Rostowzew, op. ctt. 329. SNo\. bit, \ll.,5,)26- ® Bruns;.115, 1..7. AMA ea 2 PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, rank!, Sometimes between these two officials was a procurator regionis. ‘The procurators were not under the control of the proconsul, but were directly responsible to the emperor?. The business affairs of an estate were in charge of a conductor, who was a freeman or a freedman and was responsible for the management of the entire estate. Most of the land was rented to tenants under five-year contracts, and each tenant was personally re- sponsible for the payment of the rental to the imperial collector. In case of non-payment the conductor proceeded against him. Part of the land in an estate could be leased by the conductor and worked directly by him or leased to tenants*. For the purpose of working this land he could require a certain number of days’ labor annually from each tenant. With this sketch in mind of the administrative arrange- ments on an estate, let us fill in some of the details of the plan. No specimen of the fundamental law for an estate has come down to us in its entirety, but the articles of the lex Manciana and lex Hadriana which are extant prove that it provided in the minutest detail for the regulation of the affairs of the imperial domains. It established a system of administration; 1t specified the powers and duties of the procurator, the conductor, and their assistants; it determined the rights and duties of the co/onus, fixed his rental, and provided for him a method of appeal. Such a law was drawn up for a large region. Consequently it might violate the usage of a particular locality. There were two points especially in which this seems to have happened, viz. in determining the amount of corn, wine, or other 1 For a list of the ¢ractus in Africa, cf. Schulten, Die rémischen Grund- herrschaften, 62 ff. For a list of the imperial domains in other parts of the Roman world, cf. Hirschfeld, Der Grundbesitz d. rim. Kaiser in d. ersten drei ‘Fahrhunderten, Klio, 2 (1902), 45-72; 284-315. 2 Hirschfeld, K/io, 2 (1902), 295. 3 Rostowzew, Geschichte d. Staatspacht, 443. 4 Rostowzew, op. cit. 443-4. [ 18 ] CONCILIABULA, CANABAE, ere. produce which the tenant should pay as rental1, and in fixing the number of days’ labor which the conductor might require of the tenant. In case of dispute on such points the matter was referred to the procurator saltus, or was carried up to the emperor or his deputy, the pro- curator tractus. The same method of appeal was followed if the fundamental law was violated. ‘Thus the tenants on the sa/tus Burunitanus complain that they are required to give more than six days’ labor each year to the conductor, that the conductor is very wealthy and has secured the support of the procurator of the estate, and that they have been flogged and maltreated by soldiers, although some of them are Roman citizens*. In the case of such petitions as this the emperor caused his decision to be engraved on a tablet and to be placed where it could be seen by all the tenants. Within the limitations of, and in accordance with, the forms imposed by the statute and by subsequent decisions of the emperor, the procurator was the administrative and judicial officer of the domain. It is his duty to maintain order, and he may even employ soldiers for this purpose®. The tenants on the sa/tus Burunitanus recognize their lowly condition in their petition to the emperor by speak- ing of themselves as rustict tui vernulae et alumni saltuum tuorum®, Inasmuch as they had the right to petition the emperor and had a magister, they evidently had a rudi- mentary political organization, but they had no form of local government’. ‘They did not even have the political rights which attributi enjoyed, because they were attached to no civitas. The fact that the domains were extra- municipal carried with it certain advantages as well as 1 Hyginus, Gromatici veteres (Lachmann), 205. 2 Cf. no. 111, Col. 1, ll. 12-13. 3 Tbid. Col. 111, Il. 1-12. 4 Ibid. Col. u, ll. 11-16. Rulord, Cou, Litt. 6 [bid. Col. 11, Il. 28-29. 7 Ibid. Col. tv, 1. 27; cf. also Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. 3, 963 f- [ 19 ] 2-2 PRAEFECTURAE, FORA, VICI, CASTELLA, ere. disadvantages!, The co/oni were thereby relieved from all the municipal charges which in the later period weighed so heavily on the civitates. The evil side of their political situation layin the fact that they formeda special social class, ina territory of well marked limits, under officials with large powers whose sympathies lay with their masters, the conduc- tores. Their only recourse was to the emperor, and appeal to him was difficultand dangerous. As the control of the cen- tral government over the outlying regions became weaker, the co/oniwere moreand moreatthe mercy of the conductores*. As we have noticed in another connection®, the de- basement of the coinage and the pressing need of food for the Roman rabble and for the armies, forced Diocletian to make contributions in kind a fixed part of the tribute from the provinces. This heavy demand, coming as it did at a time when the amount of cultivated land was de- creasing, and the productivity of the soil declining, called for higher rentals than tenants were willing to pay. Their only recourse was to abandon their holdings, but this would have made matters still worse. It must be pre- vented at all hazards, and Constantine made it illegal for tenants to leave their farms. But probably his edict only gave legal recognition to a situation which already ex- isted. In earlier times tenants had been inclined to retain their holdings, the renewal of leases was probably taken for granted, and tenancies descended from father to son. As for the conductor also, some time after the third century, he ceased to take a sa/tus for a fixed period, but settled on it for life, became its practical owner, and bequeathed it to his heir*. It was ruinous for him to have frequent changes in his tenants, or to have his land pass out of cultivation, and this he prevented. When this point had been reached, the co/onus had become a serf. 1 For the history of extra-territoriality, which seems to be of eastern origin, cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 375 ff. 2 For a few instances of the development of vici of tenants into civitates, cf. Pelham, Essays, 298. 3 Cf. pp. 129 f. 4 Rostowzew, op. cit. 396 ff. [ 20 ] CH Apis Benet) VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT | N the early history of Greece the union of villages and cities (ouvvoxucpos) had led to the grouping of a large number of tribes (€6vn) in city-states. These became the political centres of the groups, although a large part of the population remained in the original villages and retained some form of administration in the management of local affairs, such as games and religious festivals?. Occasionally we find some political legislation, as, for example, in the Mesogaea of Attica where, in the third century, certain demes united to protect their lands against raids?. When Demetrius founded Demetrias by the union of neighboring cities and villages, the former of these, as demes of the new town, still retained a local assembly and local magistrates, although the sovereignty which they possessed must have been limited®. In some of the more backward districts of Greece, such as Aetolia, Arcadia, and Epirus, villages existed with an independent organization, and were not attached to any city. The records of such communities, however, have not been pre- served*, In Thrace the tribal organization was governed by a phylarch. The people lived in villages, several of which sometimes united in a xowov, whose chief magis- trates were called comarchs®. In this province we also find toparchies, which seem to have had a central govern- ment modelled on that of the Greek city ®. 1 Dict. Dar. s.v. coun; Kuhn, Die Entstehung der Stadt, 188 f.; R.E. 5.0. KO.TOLKiO, KOLN. 2 Ferguson, Hellenistic Athens, 207. 3 Ath. Mitt. 14 (1889), 196 ff. 4 Dict. Dar. s.v. noun; Kuhn, op. cit. 24 ff, 79 ff. 5 Cagnat, (GRR. 1, 721, 728. «No. r3ri [ ar ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT Villages sometimes developed independently into cities, or were detached by force from the municipality, and con- stituted as independent communities. A case like the dispersion of Mantinea by Agesilaus was rare’. Mantinea and Corinth were, for a time, made villages of Argos as a result of war?, but, in general, the loss of civic status by a municipality was due to economic weakness, especi- ally in Hellenistic and Roman times. In Asia Greek culture had not penetrated beyond the maritime regions before the conquests of Alexander, and the interior of the Persian kingdom was almost entirely composed of village-communities. Under Roman rule we find these organizations still existing in various forms. Such names as O7H0s, KOU, KWPOTOALS, pNTpoKopia, TOMO PA, TEpLouKts, TOALXVN, TOiXvLoV, KATOLKIG, KTOWG: TOTOS, XOpa, X@ptor, su Tone Epuua, PpovpLov, TUpyos, and tetyos are common. To these might be added Stationes, regiones, and mansiones which came in under Roman administration, In inscriptions dnmos, Keun, and Katoukia are the terms usually applied to villages®. Under Roman rule village-communities which were not under the control of a municipality might be found on private or imperial estates, or under the control of priests in a temple-state, or grouped in a sort of commonwealth (kowov or émapxia) whose administrative centre was a PyTpokwpia. Since the Romans followed the Greek policy of extending the municipal organization wherever possible, 1 Xenophon, Hellenica, 5.2.7. For the dispersion of Phocian towns by the Amphictyonic Council in 346, see Diodorus, 16. 60. 2. 2 Plutarch, 4ratus, 45; Xenophon, op. cit. 4. 4. 6. 3 ‘These terms are found constantly in Strabo. 4 Kuhn, Die stadt. u. birgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 238, 317 n. The development of military cazadae into municipalities is not common in the Orient. Leggin in Syria probably took its name from the military camp established in the town Caparcotna (RZ. Mus. 58 (1903), 633). Cf. Briinnow, Prov. Arab. 2. 24 ff. 5 For the distinction between kw and xartorxia, cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. a’ Asie, 97 f. RE. 5.0. karoukia. [ 22 ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT many of these villages were transformed into cities. The pnTpoKwpia usually became the metropolis and the de- pendent districts formed the serritorium of the new city. In founding Zela, Pompey added to its territory several eparchies!. The temple-states, which were a characteristic organization in Asia, were composed of groups of villages under the administration of the priests attached to the temple. Although the residents in these communities were usually Aierot or hierodoulot, whose status was vir- tually serfdom, some form of political organization was probably permitted. The temple-states were deprived of their power either by the Greek kings or by the Roman rulers, and the seat of the temple usually became the civic centre, while the estate was converted into the territorium of the city. The worship of the god became the civic cult. Some of these temple-states were added to the estates of the emperors’. In Judea the destruction of Jerusalem brought an end to the power of the temple as an adminis- trative factor in the control of the Jewish villages. On the imperial estates the agent of the emperor was probably the administrator of the smaller communities, where the tenants were chiefly serfs. In the larger villages there was a quasi-municipal organization which probably developed as a result of the settlement of free tenants who formed the nucleus of a curia, or it arose from a collegium of residents formed for social or religious purposes. The development of political institutions seems to have been encouraged, for many of the imperial estates were incor- porated as municipal ¢erritoria. A good example of this may be seen in the inscription from Pogla which shows the two stages of its development?#. Since the Romans were eager to extend the municipal system over the provinces as soon as possible, many of the 1 Strabo, 12. 37. I. 2 Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 1, 1023 Strabo, 12. 3. 13 12. 34-37. 3 Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 276 ff. MNO ULe2 fins 32. Bese s VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT new cities founded by them were given territory of vast extent. In the course of time many of the larger villages within the serritorium were given municipal charters of their own. Tymanda may be cited as an example of this development, and Orcistus, which had once been a city before it was reduced to the status of a village under the jurisdiction of Nacoleia, was restored to its former status in the fourth century1. ‘The process of development and decay may be traced in different parts of the empire at all periods. Ilium had degenerated into a sort of village- town (xwpdmonus) before it was restored by the emperors?. Strabo describes Chrysopolis as a village in his day?. Byzantium and Antioch were penalized by the emperors for political reasons and were deprived of civic rights for a time by being made villages of neighboring cities*. The large number of cities named Hierapolis shows how the temple-states were transformed into municipalities, and among the seats of Christian bishoprics such names as Chorio Myliadica, Agathe Come, Demulycaon, Panemo- teichus, Regepodandus, Chora Patrimonia, Ktema Maxi- mianopoleos, and Salton Toxus may serve to illustrate the development of cities out of villages, of which some were originally part of an imperial estate5. Constantine is credited with great activity in transforming villages into cities, and all emperors encouraged this policy in order to create a body of curiales who would be responsible for the collection of imperial taxes ®, In distinguishing between a village and a city, ancient writers imply that the former possessed no _ political sovereignty, but it is evident that most villages had some form of organization whereby the members could legislate 1 Nos. 151, 154. 4 Strabo, tauedk, 3 Strabo, 12. 42. 2; Cicero, ad fam. 4. 5. 4. 4 Herodian, 3. 6. 9. ® Ramsay, op. cit. 1. 84 7.3 Kuhn, op. cit. 238-9, 289, 299, 301, 304, 368; no. 122. 8 Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 1. 18; cf. nos. 151, 154. [ 24 | VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT in social, religious, and administrative matters, however much their freedom in initiative and performance may have been restricted. Many communities copied their metropolis by adopting civic institutions, such as the ecclesia and gerousia. Sometimes a group of villages united in a xowvov for the celebration of festivals and games!. We find frequent records of honorary decrees passed by village- assemblies, and of public works undertaken at their ex- pense*. They had revenues under their control, some of which came from lands which they owned and could dis- pose of by sale?. They had advocates (€kdixor) to defend their interests, and judges to administer the law*. Officials such as comarch, demarch, brabeutae, logistae, prytaneis, recorders (avaypadets), agoranomi, secretary, and ot Baowdevovres are found, and even the summa honoraria is sometimes exacted®. In Syrian villages mention is made of cutvdiKol, miotol, Sto“KNTal, mpovonrat, oTpaTnyotl, and émuednrai®. We cannot tell whether the officials in the villages were elected locally or were appointed by the municipal government. According to the Codes the government of villages and mansiones in the fourth century was entrusted to citizens as a municipal liturgy’. It is doubtful if this system was universal, since Syrian in- scriptions and the statements of Libanius imply that the village-officials were independent of the municipal govern- 1 Dict. Dar. s.v. won. 2 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 692, 13973 4, 756, 1367; Ramsay, op. cif. no. 498. Juristic Bae recognized by law, cf. Dig. 3. 4. 13 30. 1. 733 47. 22. 43 Gods Fine 5x2. Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1387, 1607; Lebas-Waddington, 2556; Ditt. Or. Gr. 488. eile kb aa ge 5 Cf. indices to Lebas-Waddington, Cagnat, JGRR, and JG. The como- grammateus of Judaean villages shows the persistence of Ptolemaic in- fluence. In Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1371 of Bacidevovres imply the priest- kings of a temple-state. For the summa honoraria, cf. no. 150 and Fourz. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff. 8 Lebas-Waddington, 2127, 2130, 2240, 2399, 2547, 2556; Prentice, Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 43 (1912), 113 ff. Made RTS) 211355 )3 Cog pmtonge. a. [ 25 ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT ment1, It is evident that, in the disorder which prevailed during the third and fourth centuries, villages distant from the metropolis and unprotected by it had either fortified themselves and become semi-independent, or had placed themselves under the protection of some powerful noble, to whom they gave their full allegiance. The development of this type of patronage was an important cause of the decline of municipal institutions, since great stretches of territory passed out of the control of the cities, especially when brigandage and war were factors of every- day life. In the Byzantine empire the spread of indepen- dent village-communities was a characteristic feature of the revival of oriental influences and the decay of Hellen- ism, although their development was also due in large measure to the peculiar political and economic conditions of the age?. | The relation of the village to the metropolis in financial matters cannot be traced in detail, since few documents throw light on the subject. The revenues of the city were chiefly derived from the ¢erritorium, and the villagers were, in effect, regarded as lessees in perpetuity of the lands which they worked. The rental which they paid not only contributed to the support of the municipality, but also helped to make up the quota of imperial tribute. Other requisitions, such as the head and house tax, were levied °. Villagers, drafted for the settlement of the emporium at Pizus, were granted exemption from the quota of grain usually demanded from the villages, from the tax for the support of the 4urgarii or border police, and from garrison duty. No levies could be imposed upon them for beasts of burden required for the public post*. The recruiting tax (aurum tironicum) was levied on villages as well as on towns in the third century, but we cannot determine 1 Libanius, De patrociniis. 2 Ramsay, Tekmorian Guest Friends, 306 ff. 3 Cicero, ad fam. 3. 8.5; Cod. Th. 11. 24. 6. BAN Gin s C4 [ 26 ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT whether the municipality collected it, or whether imperial agents enforced the payment!. Valens imposed the tax directly on the villages?. In Hierapolis the municipal police (7apadvdAaxes), who were assigned to guard-duty in the country districts, were not allowed to make requisitions upon the villagers except for certain specified require- ments*, It would seem that every imperial tax and liturgy imposed upon the municipality was passed on to the de- pendent communities, while a few more were added by the civic authorities as a special act of grace. The plaint that every curialis was a tyrant was probably not unjustified. Above all, the imperial requisitions for service in the public post were applied directly to the villages. The drafting of their cattle for angary was particularly burden- some on farmers. Frequent complaints from villages on imperial estates happen to be preserved, since they pre- sented their wrongs to the emperor direct and were able to secure some relief, but the municipal serritoria must have suffered far more from the exactions of troops and imperial officials*. Since the cities were unable to protect the country districts, the villagers were forced to turn for help to the powerful proprietors in their vicinity, and where this protection could not be secured, their im- poverishment was only a question of time. In Egypt the Ptolemaic system was perpetuated for the first two centuries of Roman rule. The country was organ- ized in nomes composed of village-communities, each with a metropolis which, by courtesy, was often called a awodus. Lhe village is usually styled képuy, but such terms as émoukia, émouKiov, ywpiov, and rézos are also found?. The chief official (kwpoypapparevs) was an agent of the 1 No. 150; Fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff. 2 Socrates, Hist. Eccl. 4. 34. eNO TT '7. 4 Nos. 113, 139, 141-144, 152. 5 Musée Belge, 10 (1906), 38 f., 160 f7.; Engers, De Aegyptiarum kwpov administratione qualis fuerit aetate Lagidarum; Wilcken, Grundziige, c. 1; Jouguet, Vie munic. 202 ff. [ 27 ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT imperial government, and sometimes combined two or more villages under his jurisdiction4. Police duties were under the supervision of the archephodus and phylaces of various kinds?. The office of epistates seems to have dis- appeared soon after the Roman occupation 3. The board or council of elders (rtpeoBvrepor) acted with the secretary as the governing body. In this capacity the councillors had no initiative of their own, but served merely as agents of the imperial government. Their responsibility was fixed by law, and the proper performance of their duties was guaranteed by sureties*. Each member of the board had to possess a certain standard of wealth which varied according to the importance of the village®. Nominations to office were made by the secretary and elders, sometimes jointly, sometimes separately. The appointments were made by the epistrategus®. The larger villages were some- times divided into wards, each of which had officials of its own. The religious and administrative centre of each nome was called a metropolis, and its organization differed from the villages but slightly. The council of elders was re- placed by a council of magistrates (kowdv Tov apydvTov) as a concession to the Greek element which had settled in the community. The magistracies have been classified in three grades as follows: (1) gymnasiarch, (2) exegete, cosmete, eutheniarch, (3) archiereus, agoranomus’. The hypomnematographus rarely appears in the records, and his official rank is a matter of dispute®. Some of these offices were shared by several persons. There were at least six, and probably twelve, gymnasiarchs, but the variation in 1 BGU. 91, 163; P. Fay. 40; P. Fi. 8; Jouguet, op. cit. 269 ff. 2 Jouguet, op. cit. 261 ff. 3 Oertel, Die Liturgie, 385; Jouguet, op. cit. 259. 4 Jouguet, op. cit. 231; nos. 172, 182, 187, 196. 5 Jouguet, op. cit. 219 f.; Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 506 ff.; P. Giess. 58. 6 Jouguet, op. cit. 222 ff. ’ Preisigke, Sradtisches Beamtenwesen im rimischen Agypten, 30 ff.; Jouguet, op. cit. 292 ff. 8 POs Are: [ 28 ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT numbers was regulated by the size of the community and its prosperity at different periods. There were two annual secretaries who acted as imperial agents!. They drew up the list of candidates for the manifold liturgies, probably in consultation with the board of magistrates. They also nominated their successors in office. The method of ap- pointment to magistracies cannot be definitely determined for all periods. As a general rule, however, the outgoing officials nominated their successors?. At the beginning of the third century Severus intro- duced several reforms in the administration of Egypt. A senate was constituted in each metropolis of the nomes. In form each of these towns became a municipality, and its later history need not concern us in this study. The villages of the nome, however, were not included in the territorium of the city at first. They continued to be ad- ministered by the state, although the nomarch was appointed by the municipal senate which acted merely as an agent of the imperial government in the nome?. The villages were also placed under a different adminis- tration, for the comogrammateus and the elders disappear from the records before the middle of the century4. They were replaced by comarchs who seem to have been associated with other officials in a council®, The comarchs nominated the sitologi, ephorus, quadrarius, and other local officials, and were responsible for the proper discharge of the duties to which the nominees were assigned. In the fourth century the nome was divided into pagi, which were now included in the territory of the city and under its jurisdiction®, The Egyptian village was originally a part of the estate 1 Jouguet, op. cit. 291. aS No, 181. 3 Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 625; Jouguet, op. cit. 387, 390; cf. however, no. 200. 4 Jouguet, op. cit. 214,f. 5 [bid. 393. 6 Gelzer, Studien zur byzantinischen Verwaltung Agyptens, 57 ff-3 cf. however, Jouguet, op. cit. 397. [ 29 ] VILLAGES IN THE ORIENT of the emperor, and it was organized and exploited solely in the interest of the fiscus. Here the liturgy was developed in its most oppressive form}, and here the peasant was first bound to the soil. The development of municipal government in the third century, which we have described elsewhere, was powerfully influenced by the methods of administration which prevailed in the village-communities in Egypt. 1 We have omitted a discussion of the Egyptian liturgy here. Cf. pp. 99/7. and especially the comprehensive work by Oertel, Die Liturgie. ON] CHAPTER IV VREVSAT TU SIN GAs DAM AN, Duk GY IPT: HE Greek cities in Asia, under the Diadochi, were allowed the right of ownership of land within their own zerritoria, but, unless especially exempted, they were required to pay to the king a tax on property under their jurisdiction! The remainder of the royal dominions consisted of crown-lands, which could either be leased or worked by royal agents with slave or free labor, or by tenants who paid a tithe of their produce to the king. These tenants held their leaseholds in hereditary suc- cession, and, in case the land was sold, they passed with the property into the possession of the new owner. They were grouped in villages (karoukiot, Kamat, Or ywpia), where they enjoyed a limited measure of political activity. The royal estates were frequently reduced in extent by the foundation of military colonies, by the grant of civic status to villages, by sale, or by gift?. When the king transferred his right of possession to another, the land was usually included within the territory of the city in which the new owner resided. Hereditary tenants, therefore, were not peculiar to the royal possessions, but were often found on the lands belonging to the cities, or on private estates within their bounds. Such was the system of land tenure which the Romans found in Asia, and it is apparent that they adopted it with slight change. The crown-lands became the ager publicus of Rome and the cities retained possession of their territory, for which they paid rental in the form of an annual tribute to Rome. The Roman 1 The history of land tenure on the royal and imperial estates of Asia is summed up by Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 229 ff. Cf. R.E. 5.0, Domdnen. 2 Rostowzew, op. cit. 248 f7. Cf. Buckler and Robinson, 474. 16 (1912), 11 ff Rati k OS THE, SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT governors followed the policy of the Hellenistic kings in extending the municipal system at the expense of the public lands as well as of the temple-states. This move- ment was doubtless favored by the pudbficani since it simplified the problem of tax-gathering and facilitated the collection of loans!. Under the empire, the private estates of the emperor and the ager publicus came ultimately under the same administration. The imperial possessions were augmented by confiscation, fines, and bequests. As the kingdoms of client princes came into the empire, many of the royal estates were added to those of the emperor, while others were devoted to the foundation of cities. Fortunately, the tendency to over-expansion in the imperial estates was counterbalanced by the policy of extending the municipal system as widely as possible. The inscription from Pogla shows the transition from a village on one of the estates to municipal rank, and the names of the early Christian bishoprics indicate that many of them had once been imperial property?. Little is known of the actual methods of administration of the Asiatic imperial estates. We have, however, traced elsewhere the details of the western organization, and, since the latter was probably borrowed from the East, we refer the reader to the description of the western sa/tus*. The tenants were largely of the class of hereditary serfs, although we also find records of citizens from the muni- cipalities who held imperial leaseholds*. The position of imperial tenants was probably more favorable than that of landowners in the towns since the former were assured of imperial protection, and were free from the oppressive municipal liturgies. With the development of imperial liturgies, however, the inhabitants of the villages on the 1 Rostowzew, op. cit. 277 ff.3 cf. no. 14. CLINGS 25h oh > GS, PPT 5s 4 Ramsay, The Tekmorian Guest Friends, 361 ff. Cf. no. 142. ie eA THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT estates of the emperor were subjected to these charges, and in the third century we have several records of their complaints against the exactions of soldiers and officials!. When a municipal charter was granted to a village on an imperial estate, some change must have been made in the status of the residents. The free tenants would naturally form the nucleus of the senate, and the imperial agents may have become the first magistrates of the new town. Of the hereditary tenants, some continued to hold the position of serfs on the public lands of the city, but the more wealthy were undoubtedly raised to the rank of free citizens in order to create a sufficient number of curiales who would be responsible for the various obligations of the municipality. Unfortunately, no evidence has been preserved which enables us to determine definitely these points, but inscriptions from Asiatic towns sometimes reveal that the population was divided into classes of different status?. The lower grades may represent the original stock or the class of hereditary serfs. In order to understand fully the Roman administration of Egypt, it is necessary to describe briefly the system of land tenure under the Ptolemies?. With the exception of the few cities which were founded by them, the Nile valley was the personal property of the sovereign. The crown lands (yj Baowdixy) were under the direct adminis- tration of the Toyal bureaus. The remainder was called y7 ev adéoe or ‘‘surrendered”’ land. The ‘‘surrendered’’ land may be subdivided as sacred (tepa), military (xkAnpovyiKy), and private (idvdxryTOos). Royal agents administered the sacred assignments in the interests of the temples*. The cleruchic land was assigned to the soldiers and to certain members of the bureaucracy. 1 Nos. 139, 141-144. 2 Liebenam, St. Verw. 216 ff.; no. 122. 3 Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 1 ff; Wilcken, Grundzige, 270 ff.; Bell, Fournal of Egyptian Archaeology, 4 (1917), 86 f. 4 Wilcken, op. cit. 278 ff. AMA [ 33 ] 3 THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT The lessees, who were usually Greeks, were under obliga- tion to render military service when called upon, and to pay a small ground rent. In making these grants the Ptolemies had a double purpose in view. The Greek soldiers were given a stake in their new home, and the cultivated area of the Nile valley was extended, for the military leases usually covered lands technically classified as sterile (bwddoyor, yépoos), and the lessee was under obligation to cultivate his holdings. The lease could be cancelled at the will of the king, but the lessee had the right to sublet his property, and it could pass to his heirs as a virtual inheritance!. Land “‘surrendered”’ to private individuals (y7 idudKrynTos) consisted of two main classes: (1) Vineyards and orchards called «rjpara. These hold- ings are generally supposed to represent property privately owned in Persian times, or new land brought under cultivation by the owner. (2) Lands held on hereditary leasehold which could be bought, sold, mortgaged, or bequeathed with the same freedom as if held in full private ownership. The ‘‘surrendered”’ land was taxed with an annual rental to the crown, and if the tenant fell into arrears in his rental, his lease was liable to confisca- tion®. There was also another class which might properly be included under private ownership: favorites of the king were often given grants (yy év dwpea), on which no rental was imposed. The greater part of Egypt and the most fertile soil was crown land (yy Baowduxr), which was worked by royal tenants (yewpyot Bacdtxot). The leases ran for a term of years (usually five), and were granted to the highest bidder at public auction. The lessees were under oath not to leave their holdings between seed-time and harvest. In this arrangement we may find the beginning of the system which was later to bind the tenants to the soil as were the royal serfs of Asia. While the interests of his tenants were 1 Wilcken, op. cit. 280 ff. 2 Op. cit. 284 ff. [ 34 ] THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT safeguarded by the king, they were subjected to unusual burdens in times of economic stress, and were often com- pelled to take over leases against their will. In some cases they even resorted to flight to escape their obligations!. Under Roman rule the “‘surrendered’’ land dis- appeared as a separate class, and in its place we find land which was held in complete private possession(y7 iduwruK7, YR KaTOLKLKH, yn KAnpovyiKy, and ovoiar). The public lands fell into two great categories: the Adyos SiovKycews (including the Yn BaowtKh, yy Onpocta, yn Lepa, and probably the yy wpoaddov), and the Adyos otavakds. The royal lands were leased under the same conditions as before. The “public” lands (yy Syuwoota) cannot be dis- tinguished from the royal lands except in details of ad- ministration?. The term dypocior yewpyot came to be applied to tenants on both crown and public lands. The sacred lands were very materially diminished by the Romans?. The confiscated properties were added to the imperial possessions, while the remainder was administered by imperial agents in the interest of the temples. In the third century the temples seem to have been brought under the control of the local senate in each metropolis, and the sacred lands gradually passed into the municipal serrito- rium. ‘The “‘revenue”’ lands (yn mpooddov) appear as a new class under Roman rule, and their characteristics cannot be clearly determined. Rostowzew believes that they represent sequestered property which remained in the hands of the original owner until the obligations to the state were discharged’. Meanwhile the land formed a special class, and the revenue went to a special division of the imperial bureaus. The yn ovavaxy consisted largely of estates which had once been held by members of the imperial family, favorites, or friends in the senatorial and equestrian order, 1 Wilcken, op. cit. 272 ff. 2 Op. cit. 288 ff. 3 Op. cit. 300 ff. 4 Rostowzew, op. cit. 135 7. Gf. Wilcken, op. cit. 296 ff. [ 35 ] 3-2 THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT and had probably been free of any tax or rental. In the course of the first century these estates came into the possession of the emperors, and constituted a curious sort of imperial patrimony within Egypt, which as a whole was regarded as a personal possession of the crown!. While the y7 otcvaxy was under the administration of a separate bureau (Adyos ovovakds), the tenants, known as yewpyot ovovaxol, seem to have received the same treat- ment as those on public property. The pucdwrat ovovakoi are also found as tenants, apparently with the same status as the yewpyot, although it is believed that their leases were for fixed periods and were assigned to the less valu- able land. Such leaseholds could be sublet, but the sublessees were directly responsible to the imperial agents from whom also they received the right of taking over the lease. The administration of Egypt as an imperial domain was under the control of a prefect assisted by an elaborate bureaucracy*. Apart from the Greek cities, the whole Nile valley was divided into three administrative districts over each of which an epistrategus exercised authority as the deputy of the prefect. These districts were again divided into nomes under the supervision of a strategus. The nomes were divided into toparchies in which were the villages. The administrative centre of each nome was the metropolis. The organization of the village-communities and the metropolis has been described elsewhere®. Here we need only recall the fact that the officials of the villages acted as agents of the bureaucracy rather than as servants of the community. Corporate liability was early recognized and enforced*. ‘The community as a whole was liable for the default of any of its members, and in some cases the village was compelled to take over leaseholds which had been vacated, or for which no tenant had bidden at the official auctions. 1 Rostowzew, op. cit. 119 ff. 2 Wilcken, op. cit. 28 ff. 3° Ch pp.27 ts 4 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 345 [36 THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT One of the most noteworthy features of the Roman administration of Egypt was the growth of private owner- ship of land. The descendants of the soldiers of the Ptolemies were no longer subject to military service and the cleruchic land, in so far as it had not been confiscated by Augustus, passed into the private possession of the former occupants!. The catoecic lands were also treated in the same way. Both paid an annual tax to the bureaus. Thus there was created a large class of landowners with small holdings. The development of the liturgical system probably had decisive influence in the new policy. Litur- gies could not be imposed upon a citizen unless he owned property which could be held as surety for the proper discharge of his obligations, and the Romans doubtless found that tenants could evade their responsibilities more easily than owners. Private ownership must have been common when the municipal organization was extended to the metropolis of each nome in a.p. 202. In the fourth century the yn Baowdtuxy and the yn dypocia disappear from the records. These lands either became the property of private individuals who were given possession under an obligation to cultivate them, or they had been incorporated in the territory of the municipalities. As the economic pressure increased in Egypt, it became more and more difficult to find tenants for the imperial lands. Two solutions of the problem were attempted. Compulsory tenantry was adopted, which led to the development of serfdom. In some cases tenants were arbitrarily transferred to abandoned districts from profit- able holdings, in the hope that successful farmers might be able to reclaim the exhausted land?. The second device was the principle of adiectio(émuBody). This was a form of compulsory leasehold, whereby lands, for which no tenants had applied, were arbitrarily assigned to private owners, or to tenants on the imperial estates, or even to the villages 1 Bell, Joc. cit. 89 ff. 2 Wilcken, Grundziige, 293 /f. yey) Al THE SALTUS IN ASIA AND EGYPT as corporate communities!. As a rental was imposed, the unwilling lessee was obliged to cultivate the land in some fashion. In a few cases we find records of leases which specified ‘‘that the land was free from the obligation to cultivate royal or public lands,” and where this clause does not appear it is probable that the liability to adiectio was implied?. ; In a narrow sense, the history of Egypt under Roman rule may be viewed as a struggle for supremacy between two systems of administration; the bureaucratic imperial estate versus the municipal organization. The victory rested, though only in name, with the latter, since the imperial estates were gradually merged in the municipal territorium, but in fact the city became a mere instrument in the hands of the bureaucracy and functioned solely as an agent of the imperial government. This development and its influence on the cities in other parts of the empire are subjects treated elsewhere®. The failure of the Romans to carry out the system of the Ptolemies is due to a variety of causes. Egypt was too remote from the capital, and the natives were exploited by the official class. ‘The tribute imposed upon the country exhausted its resources. De- population and abandonment of the less fertile areas followed. Finally, the exaction of imperial requisitions and the development of the liturgical system resulted in the restraint of personal liberty and reduced the population to political and economic serfdom+. 1 Wilcken, op. ciz. 292; Zulueta, de patrociniis vicorum, 43. 2 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 355-359. ° Cf. pp. 194 f7- ee 4 For the development of the principle of origo in Egypt, cf. nos. 168, 175, 192, 193 and pp. 194, 217 ff. [. Sa CHAPTER V CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE E have tried to classify communities in the Roman \ \ | empire according to their origin, character, and juridical relation to Rome or to other cities. It is convenient to group them also on the basis of their freedom from the payment of tribute, or their obligation to pay it. From 89 B.c. to the time of Diocletian Italy was free from this charge!, but from land outside Italy a rental in kind (decumae), or a fixed sum of money (stipen- dium or tributum) was expected. Exemption from this pay- ment could be had only as a privilege. We find, therefore, in the provinces two classes of communities, civitates stipendiariae and civitates immunes, or, to use for the second class the term more commonly employed in antiquity, civitates liberae et immunes. The circumstances which often led Rome to grant freedom or exemption from taxation to a city are illustrated in the case of Utica which assisted Rome in the third Punic war?. For asimilar reason Antony made Laodicea a civitas libera et immunis, because of the sturdy resistance which it had offered to Cassius in 43 B.c.2 Sometimes the fortunate city owed its privileges to the generosity of the Roman people, as Delphi did4, or to the favor of a Roman general, as in the case of Aphro- disias°. 1 Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 177 ff. 2 Appian, Puz. 75, 135; cf. CIL. 1, 200, 1. 75. 8 Appian, B.C. 4. 6235: 7. 4 Cf. Henze, De civitatibus liberis, 34. SeChtienze,.on. cls igziy [Asous CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES The recognition of a community as a free city usually carried along with it exemption from the payment of tribute, but under the republic the free cities were not always safe from the imposition of taxes at the hands of greedy governors or needy generals?, and under the early empire cities made ‘‘free”’ did not necessarily have even a technical claim to immunity from taxation’. However, in the great majority of cases in both periods it is probable that cities of this class enjoyed the privilege mentioned, so that in a particular instance, when evidence to the con- trary is not available, it is wise to take it for granted that a free city was immunis. Freedom might be granted to a city by a treaty, in which case the city bore the title of a civitas foederata?, or in the second place it might come through a law, or through a decree of the senate. Cities of the latter sort were called civitates sine foedere liberae et im- munes. Vhe rights of these two classes of communities 1 It is important to notice that cities which are styled free by the ancient historians are sometimes not technically civitates Liberae."Thus, for instance, Flamininus in 196 B.c. declared (cf. Livy, 33. 32. 5-6) the Corinthians and certain other peoples free, because they were released from the domina- tion of Philip, but this action did not make them civitates liberae (cf. Henze, op. cit. 2). The term avrovopio, used in the East, must also be distin- guished from /idertas. It indicates the granting to a city of the privilege suis legibus uti (cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 724), but these laws may be adminis- tered under the supervision of Roman magistrates. 2 Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 1, 72, n. 13 Henze, op. cit. 4. 8 ‘This seems to have been true, for instance, of Magnesia and Sipylum, Chios and Apollonidea (cf: Mommsen, S+t. R. 3, 683, n. 4; 682, n. 3). 4 The fact that Pliny in his lists characterizes only a few free cities as civitates immunes does not prove that many others were not free from the payment of tribute (cf: Mommsen, 8+. R. 3, 683, n. 4). 5 ‘This term is used in its technical sense only once in the Latin inscrip- tions, but it is frequent in literature; cf. Diz. Ep. 2, 255 f. To the list of civitates foederatae given by Marquardt (St. Verw. 1, 75 f.) Kabbadias has recently added ‘T'roezen (cf. JG. 1v, 791), Thurreium of Acarnania (cf. IG. 1x, 483), and Epidaurus (cf. "Ed. “Apx. 1918, 166 7.). The term socit was a purely honorary title, and did not imply a treaty nor the possession of special rights; cf. Henze, op. cit. 6. [ 40 | AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE were essentially the same, but the privileges of a federated city were based upon a treaty, and, therefore, irrevocable}, whereas a law or a decree of the senate, upon which the claims of cities of the second class were based, could be repealed at the will of the Roman people or senate?. Reference is frequently made to the treaties into which Rome had entered with other cities, but none of the treaties has been preserved in its entirety®. Almost all of them, so far as we can determine their dates, belong to the period of the republic*. Evidently, as time went on, Rome be- came less generous than she had been in earlier days in granting rights in perpetuity. Her early acts of generosity had come out of a grateful recognition of services rendered in times of great peril. Then too these favors granted to her supporters and her stern treatment of hostile cities would serve to show in future wars what friend and foe 1 Occasionally the Romans did not observe the sanctity of these treaties. Suetonius writes (4ug. 47): urbium quasdam, foederatas sed ad exitium licentia praecipites, libertate privavit. From Cassius Dio, 54. 7. 6, Cyzicus, Tyre, and Sidon would seem to be the cities concerned. Rhodes and Malaca were at one time federated cities. Later they lost this status. Perhaps they were thought to have denounced the treaty with Rome, when they took sides against her. 2 An interesting commentary on the uncertain position of the civitates sine foedere seems to be furnished by the statement of Suetonius concerning the exceptional good fortune of the people of Ilium. Of them he says: Iliensibus quasi Romanae gentis auctoribus, tributa iz perpetuum remisit (Claud. 25). 3 Such references may be seen in Livy, 38. 8. 10 and Tac. Azz. 2. 53. For fragments of the treaty with Astypalaea, cf. Viereck, Sermo Graecus, p. 42, no. 21 and Rhein. Mus. 44 (1889), 446. 4 £.g. the treaty with Massilia is perhaps as early as 389 B.c. (cf. Justin, 43. 5. 10); that with the Vocontii is known in the first century B.c. (CJL. XII, p. 160); the treaties with ‘Tauromenium and Neaetum are mentioned by Cicero (iz Verr. 2. 1603 3. 13 and ibid. 5. 56; 5. 133); the treaty with Rhodes grew out of the war with Perseus (Livy, 45. 25. 7), and the treaty with Astypalaea belongs to the year 104 B.c. The treaty with Aphrodisias (cf. no. 29) is also of the republican period. Perhaps an example of a treaty, made under the empire, conferring the rights of a free city, exists in the case of Tyrus (Henze, op. cit. 76). [41 ] CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES might expect from her. With the world at her feet, she had no more crises to face. The lex Antonia de Termessibus of 71 B.c. gives us a typical specimen of a plebiscite establishing a free city, and there is a decree of the senate with the same object in view in the case of Stratonicea!. The initiative in granting this privilege was frequently taken by some successful general or by the emperor?. The rights of free cities, whether guaranteed by a treaty with Rome or granted in a law or in a decree of the senate, were liable to cancellation or abridgment on the ground that the cities had broken faith with Rome or had not been loyal to her. On the other hand, a city sometimes regained its lost rights, or the privileges of a free city were con- ferred on a community which previously had lacked them. Thus Tyre was free under the republic, lost its freedom - under Augustus, but regained it later+. Mitylene had the right of receiving exiles in Cicero’s time® and was, there- fore, probably free, lost its privileges, apparently in the first Mithradatic war®, but received them later again at the hands of Pompey’. The people of Locri Ozolae seem to have been immunes at the beginning of the reign of Augustus, but to have been reduced to the position of attributi of Patrae before the close of it®. Altogether in the Roman world there were two hundred or more cities which permanently or temporarily bore the title of “‘free cities *.”” Of these, Africa and Asia, with approximately 1 The Lex Antonia is no. 19 in this book. ‘The decree in the case of Stratonicea is no. 17. An inscription found in the ruins of Tabae (no. 16) is a senatus consultum, apparently conferring the rights of civitates liberae on a group of cities; cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 38 ff. 2 Cf. Tac. Aun. 12.61 and Kuhn, Die stadt. u. biirgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 20 f. 3 Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 1, 395, n. 2. SUGPIDILIES. UST. Pe Gfa GicuBrati2soriad Ar. Cot 140: Of. suet. Laf-2: LG Ea ell re 718: ® Cf. Henze, op. cit. 34. 2 Gh rienze, Op. cit. [ 42 ] AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE thirty-nine and thirty-five respectively, could boast the largest number}. The nature of the rights and privileges which a free city enjoyed may be best inferred from the /ex Antonia de Termessibus. The first privilege mentioned in this docu- ment is the right uti suis legibus®. It gave Termessus the right to govern under its own laws, to repeal and amend them, and to pass new ones, subject only to the limita- tion, guod advorsus hanc legem non fiat®, It implied also the administration of justice by local courts. Next in order in the law is the right to hold land free from the land tax‘. This freedom from taxation is set forth more fully in the case of certain free cities in Africa®. Inasmuch as the people of Termessus are made masters of their own terri- tory by this concession, the Roman governor may not exercise authority in it, and it is thought of as lying outside of his province’, He may not even enter the city in his official capacity’. The two rights which have just been mentioned are the most fundamental ones, and the auto- nomy of the free city was based primarily on them. The third right guaranteed in the /ex Antonia is freedom 1 For the free cities of Asia, cf. Brandis, R.E. 2, 1540-1543. 2 Cf. no. 19, Col. 1, ll. 8-9. For similar expressions, cf. Livy’s statement (38. 39. 12) concerning the Phocaeans: ut legibus antiquis uterentur per- missum, and ‘T'rajan’s remark concerning Amisus (Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 92): Amisenorum civitas libera et foederata beneficio indulgentiae tuae legibus suis utitur. 3 No. 19, Col. 1, Il. ro—11. 4 Ibid. Col. 1, ll. 12-35. 5 Cf. lex agraria (= CIL.1, 200), ll. 85 ff. 6 ‘This is the significance of the account which Suetonius gives (Ju/. 25) of Caesar’s arrangements in Gaul: omnem Galliam,...praeter socias ac bene meritas civitates, in provinciae formam redegit eique [cccc] in singu- los annos stipendii nomine imposuit; cf. Suet. Vesp. 8: Achaiam, Lyciam, Rhodum, Byzantium, Samum libertate adempta...in provinciarum for- mam redegit. 7 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 1, 378, n. 13 3, 689. When we find Roman governors holding court in certain free cities in later times (cf. op. cit. 3, 689, n. 4) we may surmise that permission had been granted by the cities themselves, whose trade would profit by the influx of litigants, witnesses, and officials; cf. the case of Apamea in Dio Chrys. 35. 14. [agi] CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES from the establishment of winter quarters for Roman troops in Termessus!. This provision does not prevent Roman soldiers from passing through the city or being billeted temporarily in it, and by special authorization of the Roman senate troops may be quartered in ‘Termessus?. In the same paragraph the right of Roman officials to requisition supplies in accordance with the limitations of the unknown Porcian law is recognized 3, The next paragraph in the law seems to reestablish certain preexisting rights of the people of Termessus in their relations with the Romans‘. The local courts could take cognizance even of cases where Roman citizens were concerned, but probably in such cases certain restrictions were put on the exercise of authority by the local magis- trate. The last article recognizes the right of Termessus to levy inland and maritime customs dues®. This privilege was not restricted to civitates liberae. Indeed the one ex- tant specimen of a table setting forth port dues or octroi is from Palmyra, a city which was not free’. In the matter of allowing the imposition of customs dues by local authorities the policy of the central government changed from one period to another. Under later emperors, like Alexander Severus and Julian, Rome was more liberal than she had been under Tiberius®. This change in policy 1 No. 19, Col. 11, ll. 6-13. 2 Tbid. Col. uy, Il. 11-13. 3 Cf. G. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani, 269. 4 No. 19, Col. 11, Il. 18-30. > Cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 701-706. § No. 19, Col. 1, ll. 31-37. 7 Cf. Dessau in Hermes, 19 (1884), 486-533. The Palmyra tariff is clearly municipal; cf. ibid. 527 ff.; Rostowzew, Geschichte d. Staatspacht, 405; Hirschfeld, 81, n. 1; cf also commentary on no. 61 and p. I40, n. 2. The dues collected at Zarai (cf. CJL. vist, 4508) were probably imperial; cf. Cagnat, Les impéts indirects chez les Romains, 116; Rostowzew, op. cit. 403. For the case of Koptos in Egypt, cf. Dittenberger, Or. Gr. 674; Rom. Mitth. 1897, 75 ff.; Wilcken, Ostraka, 1, 347 ff. 8 Liebenam, St. Verw. 22 f. [ 44 ] AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE may be due to the general demoralization of civic finance. In Termessus the produce belonging to Roman tax far- mers was exempt from the payment of duty?. In other cases Roman citizens and even Latins were not required to pay local portoria. ‘Three considerations probably in- fluenced the central government to limit and, in some cases, to cancel the local right to levy customs duties: (1) the desire to give preferential treatment to Roman citizens, and to bring the trade of the world into the hands of Rome; (2) the importance of lowering the cost of mer- chandise brought to Italy, and (3) the establishment of an imperial tariff for revenue®. Two privileges which were frequently enjoyed by free cities are not mentioned in the /ex Antonia, viz. the right of receiving exiles and the right of coinage, although it may be noted in passing that the right ofa city in the Orient to coin money is not evidence that it was a free city. Up to the time of the first Punic war the federated cities re- tained their unrestricted right of coinage, although their coins were not legal tender in Rome*. However, by the close of the republican period, or in the early empire, with few exceptions, these cities were allowed to issue small coins only, and even the exercise of this privilege was subject to the consent and the control of the central government®. By these means Roman coins were made the medium of circulation throughout the world, trade was fostered, and a long step was taken toward making Rome 1 No. 19, Col. 11, ll. 34-37. 2 Cf. Livy’s statement (38. 44) of the concession to the people of Am- bracia: portoria, quae vellent, terra marique caperent, dum eorum immunes Romani ac socii nominis Latini essent. 3 ‘The way in which the Roman world was divided into tariff districts with stations for the collection of imperial customs in each may be seen in Cagnat, op. cit. 19-82. By the side of this imperial system non-imperial tariff arrangements could not be expected to survive in many cases. 4 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 710. > Mommsen, 87. R. 3, 713, n. I, notes ona coin of the free city of Cercina in Africa the phrase permissu L. Volusi procos. [545%] CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES the banking and commercial centre of the world. In- cidentally nothing illustrates better than the history of local coinage Rome’s policy, as time went on, of restricting more and more the traditional rights of the free cities. The foreign relations of a free city were determined by Rome. Even the federated cities suffered this limitation of complete sovereignty. The treaty with them was a foedus iniquum. Perhaps the nearest approach to the ex- ercise of international rights which they had, lay in the privilege of receiving exiles—a privilege of doubtful value to them. This right was enjoyed by free cities of both classes1. While the privileges mentioned above were those com- monly granted to free cities, the fact should be borne in mind that Rome’s policy changed from period to period, that she was more generous to one city than to another, and that in the case of some cities “dertas may have been little more than an honorary distinction. The system of taxation which the Romans followed in their provinces was first adopted in Sicily, and it is clearly set forth by Cicero in one of his Verrine orations?. In this passage he remarks: Between Sicily and the other provinces there is this difference in the matter of the land tax, that on the others a fixed contribution, called a stipendium, is levied, representing the fruits of victory or a punishment for engaging in war with us. This plan is followed in the Spains and with many districts of the Carthaginians. Or the contract system under the censors has been adopted, as it was in Asia under the Sempronian law. As for the cities of Sicily we accepted jurisdiction over them with the proviso that they should retain the same legal status (eodem iure) which they had before, and should submit to the Roman people on the terms (eadem con- 1 ‘There is no evidence that Smyrna, whither Q. Caepio went into exile (cf. Cic. pro Balbo, 28), or Patrae, where the exile C. Maenius Gemellus stayed (cf. Cic. ad fam. 13. 19. 2), were federated cities. 2 3. 12-14. [ 46 ] AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE dicione) on which they had submitted to their own rulers. A very few of these cities were brought under our rule by our ancestors by force of arms, and, although their territory was made ager publicus populi Romant, still it has been given back to them. There are two federated (foederatae) cities, viz. Messana and Tauro- menium}, where it is not our practice to collect tithes. Then there are five cities sine foedere immunes ac liberae, Centuripae, Halaesa, Segesta, Halicyae, and Panormus. Outside of these, all the land of the cities of Sicily is subject to tithes, and was so before the Roman people ruled it, in accordance with the wish and under the institutions of the Sicilians themselves. In this statement Cicero tells us plainly that when the Romans acquired Sicily they took over the system of taxation which the Syracusans and Carthaginians had em- ployed before them, the /ex Hieronica, as he’ calls it else- where”. The system may be traced back to Persia through the monarchies of the East and the arrangements of Alexander’, The territory of Sicily falls into three main categories. Certain districts which had made a deter- mined resistance were converted into imperial domains‘, a few were exempted from taxation, and all the rest of the island was subject to the payment of tribute. The tax-free cities are of two kinds, as we have already noticed, those whose privileges were guaranteed by a treaty, and those whose rights were granted in some other way. The third class of communities were the civitates stipendiariae. In Sicily there were sixty-five civitates®. Now eight of these were exempt from taxation, because to the two allied cities mentioned here Cicero elsewhere adds a third, Netum ®, The land of very few (perpaucae), perhaps of six cities, styled civitates censoriae, was declared ager publicus. 1 In 5. 56a third city, Netum, is added. VM VCIT AD AB 2. 3 Cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 229-240, and the illuminating treatment by Frank, Roman Imperialism, 93-99, 108, n. 17. Supp Tb yy: © Cf Cie, ge Kerrs2.0133-and 137. tat te VEL er Lath ed CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES Consequently, the rest of the cities, about fifty-one in number, were civitates stipendiariae. Exact figures for the other provinces are difficult to obtain, but in all of them the taxed communities far outnumbered those which were free from taxation by the central government. Thus, in the time of Pliny the Elder, in Baetica one hundred and twenty out of one hundred and seventy-five cities were tributary cities, in Tarraconensis, one hundred and thirty- five out of one hundred and seventy-nine, in Lusitania, thirty-five out of forty-six!. We do not find evidence that in all Asia more than thirty or thirty-five cities out of a total of about five hundred were free at any time?. It was the payment by these communities of taxes ?, in Sicily in the form of tithes, which constituted the chief mark of difference between them and the free cities. The other essential feature in their status which distinguished them from the free cities was the fact that each of them belonged to the province, and its internal affairs were subject to the supervision and control of the governor of the province. Such rights as these cities had they received in the first instance through a /ex provinciae, drawn up usually by the general who brought the district into subjection or by a senatorial commission*. Their status in certain matters was still further defined by the successive edicts of em- perors and provincial governors and by occasional decrees of the senate concerning a particular city®. Under the 1 Cf. Schulten, R.Z. 8, 2037-8. 2 Cf. Brandis, R.E. 2, 1540-3; Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 114— 121; Kuhn, Die stédt. u. biirgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 6. 3 For a discussion of taxation in the provinces, see pp. 117 ff. 4 For senatorial commissions in the second and first centuries B.c., cf. Willems, Le sévat de la républigue rom. 2, 507, n. 2. 5 ‘The large number of special measures in existence in the first century of our era, conferring certain privileges on provincial cities, is attested by Suetonius (Vesp. 8): aerearumque tabularum tria milia quae simul con- flagraverant restituenda suscepit...instrumentum imperii pulcherrimum ac vetustissimum, quo continebantur...senatus consulta, plebiscita de societate et foedere ac privilegio. . . concessis. [wABi AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE republic the power to organize a newly acquired territory into a province rested with the senate, and it was necessary for this body to draw up the fundamental statutes of the province or to ratify the arrangements made by a Roman generalt. None of the /eges provinciarum has come down to us, but we have frequent references to them in ancient literature*, and from these references we can get a con- ception of the contents of the constitutions drawn up for provincial cities. Thus, under the /ex Rupilia, the citizens of a given Sicilian community in dealing with one another enjoy the privilege of being subject to their own laws. In an action brought by a citizen of one Sicilian town against another, the Roman praetor chooses the jurors. In an action brought by a Roman against a Sicilian, the judge must be a Sicilian; in the reverse situation, the judge is a Roman®. The /ex Pompeia, among other matters, fixed certain conditions of eligibility to the local magistracies and senates in Pontus and Bithynia, and regulates admis- sion to local citizenship*. Outside the /eges provinciarum, the leader or the commission which organized a province often drew up a special charter for a particular city. Rupilius, for instance, in 132 B.c. gave Heracleia in Sicily a charter, one of whose articles prescribed the method of choosing the members of the local senate®, and the charters granted to various cities in Bithynia and Pontus, perhaps by Pompey, seem to have differed from one another in some particulars®. Probably each city was 1 Cf. Willems, op. cit. 2, 703-717. 2 For the /ex Rupilia which P. Rupilius drew up for Sicily in 132 B.c., after the Slave war, cf. Cic. iz Verr. 2. 323 2. 38-40; 2. 903 2. 1253 3. 40. For the /ex Pompeia in Bithynia, cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 112, 114, Huss) otrabo,21 2253-92 3) Cass. Dio, 37 220m esivyy Lp.it02.0 Fon the ver Metel/i in Crete, cf. Livy, Ep. 100, and for the ex Aemilia in Macedonia, Livy, 45. 32. For Pompey’s general arrangements in the East, cf. Dru- mann-Groebe, Geschichte Roms, 4, 477 ff. SnC fCientn err. 12232) 4 Cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 79, 112. BRC CiCh ia err ones, 6 Cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 109: quo iure uti debeant Bithyniae vel AMA [ 497] 4 CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES allowed to preserve in large measure its traditional usages. These original grants were reaffirmed, extended, re- stricted, or cancelled in subsequent periods by the Roman senate, or by the emperor, and defined in the successive edicts of provincial governors. ‘I'wo specimens of senatus consulta, regulating in some respects the affairs of Teos! and Thisbe?, are extant, but these decrees were adopted in 193 and 170 B.c. respectively, before ‘Teos and Thisbe became parts of a Roman province. We may form a general conception of the part which the edict of the governor of a province played in building up the law of the land by looking at the summary which Cicero gives his friend Atticus of his Cilician edict’. This edict is an edictum tralaticium, inasmuch as Cicero has taken over in large measure the edict of his predecessor‘. He has, however, introduced some provisions from the ‘* Asiatic edict’’ of Q. Mucius Scaevola. In the same way the edictum Siciliense for a given year was modelled on Ponticae civitates in lis pecuniis quae ex quaque causa rei publicae debe- buntur ex lege cuiusque animadvertendum est. 1, GIG). 3045 = Viereck, op. cit. p..2, NO. 2. whl OF Pas atom fps 3 Cf. Cic. ad Att. 6. 1. 15: De Bibuli edicto nihil novi praeter illam ex- ceptionem, de qua tu ad me scripseras, “‘nimis gravi praeiudicio in ordinem nostrum.”’ Ego tamen habeo icodvvapotcayr sed tectiorem, ex QO. Mucii P. F. edicto Asiatico, “‘extra quam si ita negotium gestum est, ut eo stari non oporteat ex fide bona,” multaque sum secutus Scaevolae, in iis illud, in quo sibi libertatem censent Graeci datam, ut Graeci inter se disceptent suis legibus. Breve autem edictum est propter hanc meam diaipeow quod duobus generibus edicendum putavi; quorum unum est provinciale, in quo est de rationibus civitatum, de aere alieno, de usura, de syngraphis, in eodem omnia de publicanis; alterum, quod sine edicto satis commode transigi non potest, de hereditatum possessionibus, de bonis possidendis, vendendis, magistris faciendis, quae ex edicto et postulari et fieri solent, tertium de reliquo iure dicundo aypadov reliqui. Dixi me de eo genere mea decreta ad edicta urbana accommodaturum, itaque curo et satis facio adhuc omnibus. Graeci vero exsultant, quod peregrinis iudicibus utuntur. Nugatoribus quidem, inquies. Quid refert? [amen se a ‘rovoyiav adep- tos putant. Cf. also Cic. ad fam. 3. 8.4; ad Att. 5. 21. I. A Csi Gichad Aas, 21. 19 Osis aga fam, 318.145 [7507] AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE that of the preceding year+. Cicero tells us that his edict was in three sections. The second part dealt with such matters as the granting of bonorum possessiones and mis- stones in bona, and the third section, which was modelled on the edict of the urban praetor, treated de reliquo iure dicundo. \t is the first section, the part which Cicero characterizes as provinciale, which is of special interest to us. This portion of the edict described the policy which Cicero would follow and the rules which he would adopt in handling the accounts of cities, and in dealing with questions involving debt, the taking of usury, transac- tions in bonds, and the business of the tax farmers. Arrangements were made to relieve many cities of their debts”, to force dishonest local magistrates to return their ill-gotten gains 3, to keep down the expenses of the Cilician cities4, to prevent usurers from exacting more than the legal rate of 12 per cent.®, to save the cities from exorbitant requisitions ®, and to secure their rights alike to the pro- vincials and the tax farmers’. These were some of the practical applications of the principles laid down in the first section of Cicero’s edict. Governors of provinces, even under the empire, retained the ius edicendi which Cicero exercised, but after the codification of the provincial edict under Hadrian, and its legalization by a decree of the senate ®, this right had little practical meaning ®. Under the empire changes in the status of cities in imperial provinces Che CICHIA Metre 2200352: 3: ahe. pe Cic: ad Att. 6. 2. 4% Bite OIC aa iil, O12 8. 4 Cf. Cic. ad fam. 3. 8. 5. ee Cie aa AAD OTT I. SOT. Cich ad) Att. 5.10.3. Ci Cicad Ait! 6; 2415: 8 It is still a disputed question whether after the reforms of Salvius Julianus there was an edictum perpetuum for each province or a uniform edict for all the provinces; cf. Karlowa, 631 f. and Girard, Manuel ¢lém. de droit rom. 52 ff. ® In this connection it is interesting to notice that Anicius Maximus, a governor of Bithynia under ‘Trajan, ruled that in certain cities of his pro- vince men chosen to the local senates by the censors should pay an initiation fee (cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 112). as ae 4-2 CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES at least were made under direct instructions from the emperor!, Legally these changes held good only during the reign of the emperor who made them, but after the middle of the first century of our era it was customary for an emperor to ratify the acts of his predecessor?. To sum up our conclusions then, the working constitu- tion and the laws of the city of Apamea, for instance, in the second century of our era would be based on the /ex provinciae of Cilicia, as modified by special concessions, restrictions, or changes made by the senatorial com- mission or the general who organized the province, and as subsequently changed by decrees of the senate, by edicts or rulings of the governors of Cilicia, or by imperial constitutions or mandata. It is impossible, therefore, to give a list of the rights enjoyed by provincial cities of a certain class which will hold for all the cities of that class. This statement is true in particular of the cévitates stipen- diariae. ‘Ne can, however, specify the privileges which were frequently granted to cities of this sort. The privilege most highly prized by the people of these cities was the retention of their local codes? and the right of having their actions at law decided by their fellow-citizens. They re- tained also their local organs of government—magistracies, 1 See pp. 233.7. For literary specimens of these imperial communi- cations, see the two epistles of Domitian and an edict and epistle of Nerva in Plin. Ep. ad Trai. 58. In the seventy-ninth letter an edict of Augustus fixing the minimum age for incumbency of the local magistracies in Bithynia is mentioned by Pliny; in the sixty-fifth letter he speaks of various imperial edicts concerning Asia, Sparta, and Achaea. aC foouet, 277. 8, 3 Cf. Cicero’s remark in a letter from Cilicia (ad 4¢t.6. 1. 15): multaque sum secutus Scaévolae, in iis illud, in quo sibi libertatem censent Graeci datam, ut Graeci inter se disceptent suis legibus, and, in speaking of the court which he held at Laodicea, he says (ad Att. 6. 2. 4): omnes (civitates) suis legibus et iudiciis usae, avrovouiay adeptae, revixerunt. Cf. also Cic. in Verr. 2. 32. Scaevola had been governor of Asia, so that the same prin- ciple must have held in that province also. For the method of choosing jurors in Sicily when Romans or Sicilians of different towns were involved, cf. Pp. 49. eee AND CIVITATES STIPENDIARIAE senates, and popular assemblies—as we can see clearly from Pliny’s letters to Trajan, and communities on the frontier probably had the privilege of raising an armed force in an emergency for self-defence. Cities of this class, with the approval of the emperor or governor, also had the right to lay taxes on their citizens4, and in some cases to issue copper coins, although the minting of other coins was in the hands of the central government?. The rights of the tributary cities do not at the first glance seem to differ materially from those of the free cities. Communities of both classes retained their local codes, had their own senates, assemblies, and courts, and had the right to lay taxes and make contracts. But, as we noticed above, the stipendiary cities were subject to the payment of tribute and to all the abuses attendant upon it; they were liable to the constant interference of the governor of the province in their internal affairs, as we can infer from the letters of Pliny, and they had to submit to the billeting of troops and to the requisitions and exactions of Roman officials and soldiers*. The two classes of cities discussed in this chapter shared with the municipia the privilege of retaining their traditional procedure*+. Only colonies were required to adopt Roman law. In other words all provincial cities of native origin, except those which were raised to the status of a colony, had the common characteristic of being governed by their own local codes of laws. The edict of Caracalla went far toward raising the stipendiary cities to a level with the other cities of the empire. Up to A.D. 212 the Romans residing in these cities enjoyed a general immunity from local liturgies. Their exemption 1 See the permission to levy vectiga/ia granted by Augustus to the Saborenses and confirmed by Vespasian, no. 61. 2 Cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 762. 3 How vexatious were the requisitions of the soldiers and imperial freed- men is brought out in the appeals for relief made to the emperor in the third century by the Aragueni (no. 141) and the people of Scaptoparene (no. 139). SACHA DRO. Cesena CIVITATES LIBERAE ET IMMUNES, eErc. made the financial burdens of their less fortunate fellow- citizens very heavy. Consequently the granting of Roman citizenship to the natives of tribute-paying cities by Cara- calla! put all the residents of these cities on an equality, and removed the financial disabilities from which the non- Roman element had suffered. This chapter brings to an end our study of the various political units which the Romans used in the administra- tion of the empire, and we may stop for a moment to survey the growth of the policy which Rome adopted in her rela- tions with the rest of the world. As Schulten has well said?, the history of Rome illustrates the steady development of the imperial idea. At the outset the city of Rome stands alone. In time she gains hegemony over the members of the Latin League. Through the conquest of Italy comes her supremacy over the whole peninsula, with the forced concession of liberal rights to Italian communities as a result of the Social war. The acquisition of the provinces brought her into relations not only with cities, which were granted autonomy under treaty rights, but also with sub- ject towns and tribes, and finally the theory, not that Rome, but that the emperor was master of the world developed, and the city of Rome sank to the level of the other cities of the empire. 1 See especially the commentary on no. 192. 2 Rh. Mus. 50 (1895), 556. [ 54 ] [Mey] oAeU pue ‘drysuezn19 uney 10 [ ary ‘diysueznto uewmoy pue ueulOY diysuezn1o pasty Jo 70.7] uewoy | winidrorunyyy e1UO]OD ae eS SSS snyeg snjndog suas snseg praes e lee | BIIeIPUSdNg seyAD seqeueD UINTAIseD sNdIA UIN[NQeIIOUOD eINDaJovIg | | | | | SHU.) [e019 T, | sase]]iA puke Satzd JUIWIUIAAOS-jJJEg aofduroouy YIU yusMIUIeAOS-jJag ao_duI0D YUMA SHU) SAT eIISIUINI PY UeumoOrYy CIA Pav aval THE MUNICIPALSYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST under their control forms of government which differed from oneanother in many particulars. ‘They differed in respect to the numbers, titles, and functions of the city magistrates, and in the share which the people or the aristocracy had in the control of affairs. The chief magistrate, for instance, in many of the old Italian cities was called praetor}, or dictator”, or interrex*, or consult. In Africa he was usually styled sufes®, while in Greek lands the commonest titles were apywyv and otparnyds. Usually the college of chief magistrates was composed of two members, but we occasionally find /// viri and even X viri mentioned in the inscriptions®. In the East the local senate was, nominally at least, more quickly re- sponsive to the popular will than it was in the West, because its members in Greek cities were frequently chosen by a direct vote of the people and held their positions for a year only, whereas in the West senates were largely made up of ex-magistrates who served for life. In the West a large measure of uniformity was introduced into the municipal system before the close of the re- publican period. This change was largely due to the fact that the cities in the western provinces rarely had long political traditions behind them, so that they found no great A HE Romans found in the cities which were brought E.g. at Anagnia, Auximum, Beneventum. Cf. Dessau, 3, p. 694. E.g. at Aricia, Caere, Lanuvium. Cf. op. cit. p. 686. E.g. at Formiae and Fundi. Cf. op. cit. p. 690. E.g. at Ariminum. Cf. op. cit. p. 684. E.g. at ‘Thugga and Avitta Bibba. Cf. op. cit. p. 698. Cf. op. cit. pp. 686, 698. aw F&O pre [iS Ons) THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM IN THE WEST difficulty in accepting a ready-made system. In fact in this quarter of the world Roman institutions and the Latin language made rapid headway, and partly by voluntary imitation, partly by legislation, the system which had developed in the city of Rome prevailed. In the East, however, Greek culture and the Greek language stood in the way of the ready adoption of Latin institutions, and titles and practices which had existed for generations could not be easily changed. But it is true that, while old titles and forms were tenaciously held, magisterial func- tions and essential governmental methods were brought into greater conformity with western practice, and after the promulgation of Caracalla’s constitution the tendency toward uniformity was very marked. It will be con- venient therefore to take up separately the municipal systems of the West and the East, while recognizing the fact that even in the West! no description in all its details will be applicable to every city. Municipalities all over the Roman world enjoyed com- plete or limited self-government. They chose their own magistrates and passed their own ordinances. The govern- ing powers in them were the local magistrates, the local senate, and the popular assembly. In the West the titles and functions of these three organs of government were made reasonably uniform toward the end of the republic. Whether the natural tendency toward uniformity was stimulated by drawing up model municipal charters or not is a matter of much doubt?. The populus or plebs urbana was made up of citizens 1 Our principal sources of information concerning the municipal system are the inscriptions, and in particular eleven municipal laws and charters, of which seven are given in this book (cf. nos. 20, 24, 26, 27, 28, 64 and 65). The others, which are very fragmentary and add little, if anything, to our knowledge of the subject, are Bruns, 31, 32, 33 and 33 ¢. All these legal documents come from the West and four of them belong to Caesar’s time. 2 Many scholars have supposed that the lex Iulia municipalis was in- tended as a model, but cf. commentary on no. 24. Bayicdl THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC (coloni, municipes, cives) and of resident aliens (incolae). Both classes were subject to the munera, and both had the right to vote, but resident aliens were not allowed to hold office until a later period in the empire. Resident aliens were also subject to the court processes and to the munera of their native city. Local citizenship was gained, as at Rome, by birth or adoption, by manumission}, or through the gift of the emperor or the local senate. For voting purposes citizens were grouped in curiae, tribes, or cen- turies. In Malaca resident aliens, who were Roman or Latin citizens, were assigned by lot to one of the curiae in the popular assembly?, and a similar practice was prob- ably followed in other municipalities. We are particularly concerned with the relations of the central government to the municipalities, and in connection with resident aliens there is an exercise of imperial power in the municipalities which is of interest to us*. An instance in point is the transfer of the citizenship of a certain C. Valerius Avitus by Pius from the municipium Augustum to the colonia Tarraconensis*. Another interesting case is the adlectio by Hadrian of a certain Valerius into the colonia Caesar- augustana®. Under the republic the people seem to have exercised freely their power to legislate on many matters, but under the empire the principal function of the popular assembly was the election of magistrates or priests for which elaborate provisions are made in chapters 52-60 of the lex municipalis Malacitana of Domitian’s time. Many municipal inscriptions record the fact that a statue has been set up in honor of a certain individual postulante populo or ex consensu et postulatione popult, but the formal AHDI2. 50.1 13 God. J. 10, 401 Fe 2 Cf. no. 65, chap. 53. This is the custom followed in the case of resident Latins at Rome in early days; cf. Livy, 25. 3. 3 Mommsen, S¢. R. 2, 883 77.3; 1081, nn. 2 and 4. Peer, 4277, ° CIL. 11, 4249; cf. also Schmidt, R.E. 1, 369 and Diz. Ep. 1, 414 ff. ® Cic. de leg. 3. 16. 36: et avus quidem noster singulari virtute in hoc municipio, quoad vixit, restitit M. Gratidio. . .ferenti legem tabellariam. Post] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST action in such cases was taken by the local senate, and popular approval was probably indicated in some informal way. The chief magistrates in western municipalities were usually styled duoviri iure dicundo. Below them were the duoviri aediles. Sometimes these two boards formed a single college and the members of it were known as quattuorviri ture dicundo and quattuorviri aediles. Usually the magistrates in colonies were called duovirs, and in municipia, quattuorvirs!. Every fifth year the chief magis- trates took the census and then received the title guin- quennales. In the absence of the duovirs their place was taken by a prefect. The treasury was managed by quaestors, usually two in number. The conditions of eligibility to the duovirate are laid down with great precision in the tabula Heracleensis* and in the /ex municipalis Malacitana®, and in the /ex coloniae Genetivae Iuliae* it is provided that no one shall be eligible to a magistracy who may not be made a decurion. In the tabula Heracleensis of Caesar’s time the age require- ment is thirty years®, but toward the close of the first century of our era it has been reduced to twenty-five at least. Perhaps this change was made by Augustus®. A candidate must of course be a free-born citizen, solvent, never convicted in the courts or brought into disrepute by following an ignoble trade, and he must follow the cursus honorum through the quaestorship and aedileship. Nomination and election proceeded as at Rome. The /ex municipalis Malacitana, however, has a significant pro- vision’ to the effect that, if an insufficient number of candidates offer themselves, the official who is to preside may make the necessary nominations, but the men thus 1 Liebenam in R.E. 5, 1804. 2 No. 24, ll. 89 ff. 3 No. 65, chap. 54. 4 No. 26, chap. 101; cf. also no. 24, ll. 135 7. 5 No. 65, chap. 54. 6 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79. 2. 7 No. 65, chap. 51. [ 59 ] THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC nominated by him may propose the names of other people in place of their own. As chief magistrate one of the duovirs presided at meetings of the popular assembly and senate, and carried out measures passed by either of these bodies. A good illustration of his functions in such matters is furnished by the famous inscription of 105 B.c. from Puteolit. He had general charge, not only of public works and buildings, but also of public funds. He managed public festivals and games, and every five years took the census. Reference seems Clearly to be made to the criminal and civil juris- diction of the municipal magistrate in the tabula Herac- Jeensis*, in the lex [ulia agraria®, and in the lex de Gallia Cisalpina*, while in the ex col. Gen. Iul.° we read: ne quis in hac colonia ius dicito neve cuius in ea colonia iuris dictio esto nisi [I viri aut quem II vir praefectum reliquerit aut aedilis uti hac lege oportebit, neve quis pro eo imperio potestateve facito, quo quis in ea colonia ius dicat, nisi quem ex hac lege dicere oportebit. The criminal juris-~ diction which the duovir exercised in Italy under the republic was transferred under the early empire to the praetorian prefect and the city prefect. In the provinces the governor absorbed the judicial powers of the local magistrate. This encroachment of the imperial govern- ment on the functions of the municipal magistrate came about gradually, and it is important for our purpose to trace briefly the development of the process. To the office of praefectus praetorio, as established by Augustus, only military functions were assigned®. The appointment of Sejanus to the post and the long absence of ‘Tiberius from Rome gave it a political significance. Later Burrus, as one of the chief councillors of Nero, held the position, and 1 CIL. 1, 577 = x, 1781 = Dessau, 5317 = Wilmanns, 697. Cf. also Wiegand, Fahr. f. class. Phil. suppl. 20 (1894), 661 ff. ile tp od bp gy Grate 3 Bruns, 15, chap. 3. “INow27, chap..20, 11.7515; 23, 314 Chaps thd 5 No. 26, chap. 94. § Herzog, 2, 20377: [ 60 ] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST under Commodus the praetorian prefect Perennis became practically prime minister!. From this time on the civil functions of the office predominated, and that its judicial importance increased is clearly proved by the appointment to it of such eminent jurists as Papinian, Paulus, and Ulpian?. Like the office of praetorian prefect that of city prefect gained greatly in importance during the absence of Tiberius from Rome. It was the duty of the praefectus urbi to maintain order, and naturally the power was given him to try and to inflict punishment on those guilty of crimes. In this way his court soon crowded out the guaestiones in Rome and put an end to the criminal juris- diction of municipal magistrates in villages up to one hundred miles from Rome. Criminal jurisdiction in the rest of Italy beyond that point was under the control of the praetorian prefect®, while in the provinces it was administered by the governor. By this transfer of power municipal magistrates lost an important part of their functions, and their dignity was correspondingly lessened. In the middle of the first century B.c., in civil actions the duovirs or quattuorvirs were competent to hear cases involving as much as ten thousand or fifteen thousand sesterces*, and in certain cases they had jurisdiction irre- spective of the amount involved. In Latin municipia they could also legalize manumission, emancipation from the patria potestas and adoption®, and could impose penalties for the violation of local ordinances®. ‘These various 1 Hist. Aug. Com. 5. 2 Hist. Aug. Pesc. Nig. 7; Alex. Sev. 26. Cf. also ibid. Ant. Phil. 11; net Sev. 4. 3 See the passage quoted by Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 969, n. 2 from Ulpi- anus, Jib. 9 de officio proconsults (written under Caracalla; Co//. Mos. Rom. Leg. 14. 3. 2): iam eo perventum est constitutionibus, ut Romae quidem praefectus urbis solus super ea re cognoscat, si intra miliarium centesimum sit in via commissa. Enimvero si ultra centesimum, praefectorum praetorio erit cognitio, in provincia (vero) praesidum provinciarum. 4 Cf. commentary on nos. 27 and 28. 5 Liebenam, R.F. 5, 1834. eOpecti ihe lath [ 61 | THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC powers were much curtailed in the later period as we shall have occasion to notice in another connection}. The same principle of collegiality held good for the duovirs as was observed by the consuls in Rome. In Salpensa and Malaca each could veto the action of the other within certain limits?. In matters where only one duovir could officiate, preference was given to the older one in Malaca®. Municipal aediles were colleagues of the duovirs, just as praetors at Rome were colleagues of the consuls, but like the praetors they were col//legae minores, and could not oppose the action of the duovirs. In many cities a magistrate on taking office was re- quired to pay an initiation fee’, and during his term to contribute to the public games®, and he was expected to give large sums for the improvement of his native city, or for the entertainment of his fellow-townsmen. While in office he was served by attendants, had a special seat in the theatre, and enjoyed certain other marks of distinction®. It is interesting to notice that the emperor was not infrequently chosen duovir, and provision was made for this purpose in the charter of Salpensa’. ‘The usage in this matter becomes more sharply defined as we advance into the empire. Three early instances of an honorary duovirate occur in the case of T. Statilius Taurus®, a prominent political leader under Augustus®, and M. Barbatius!®, another supporter of Augustus, and T1. Statilius Severus!. 1 See pp. 200 f. 2 No. 64, chap. 27; no. 65, chap. 58. PY No. 65,:chap.152. 4 Liebenam, St. Verw. 54 ff. 5 No. 26, chap. 70. § Liebenam, R.Z. 5, 1815/f,. ? No. 64, chap. 24. 8 See the inscription from Dyrrhachium (CJL, 111, 605) praefectus quing. T. Statili Tauri. 9 Prosop. 3, 263, no. 615. Taurus held the consulship for the first time in 37 B.c. and was consul again in 26 B.c. Inthe year 16 B.c. (cf. Tac. Ana. 6. 11) he was very advanced in age, so that he must have been honorary duovir at Dyrrbachium early in the reign of Augustus. 10 Mommsen, 8%. R. 2, 828, n. 5. He was quaestor in 41 B.c.; cf. Klebs, Jed BS Sale RENT LLAX, ROLOs [ 62 ] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST These are the only known cases in which the honor was granted to anyone not connected with the imperial family}. Under Augustus, and for a time under Tiberius, it might be conferred on any member of the imperial family?, but from the closing years of Tiberius’ reign no other repre- sentative of the ruling house than the emperor or his destined successor could hold it?. When a private citizen or a prince held the office he had a colleague, but appa- rently from the last years of Tiberius’ reign it was pro- vided that the emperor should have no colleague in the offiice*, When an honorary duovir was appointed, the actual duties of the office were performed by a prefect?. In other words an imperial appointee became chief magis- trate in a city in such a case. The number of imperial prefects of whom we have a record is not large enough to make this official an important factor in bringing the cities under the control of the central government, but the im- portance of the office lies in the fact that we have here the earliest instance of the appointment of an imperial official to take charge of the affairs of a city. The praefectus im- peratoris is the progenitor of the curator rei publicae who played so important a rdéle in robbing local magistrates of their authority® and in bringing local affairs under the control of Rome. It may, in fact, be significant that the imperial prefect disappears at about the time when the curatorship was established’. The functions of the municipal aedile were identical with those of his counterpart in Rome, and, therefore, 1 Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus, who was honorary duovir in Pisidian Antioch (cf. CIL. 111, §. 6809), was the father of Nero. 2 Cf. ¢.g. CIL. 11, 1534, 8. 5617; 111, 8. 6843; v, 7567; x, gor, 902, 904, 6101. 3 Mommsen, Stadtrechte von Salpensa u. Malaca, 415. PeOP Nett AzT. 5 'This procedure involved the exercise within well defined limits of an autocratic power granted to Caesar in the /ex co/. Gen. Iu/. no. 26, chap. 125. © Cf. pp. 90 f- 7 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 1806 f.; Hist. dug. Had. 19. Races THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC need not be described here. In fact it is reasonably certain that the office did not develop independently in the various Italian cities, but that it was directly introduced into their municipal systems by Romet. In a very small number of Italian cities, where there had been in early times a praefectus iure dicundo, on the removal of this official, the aedile became the chief magistrate and even held the census?. 7 Most municipalities had quaestors whose powers were similar to those of the quaestor in Rome. Where the office of quaestor was lacking, its duties were taken over by a third aedile chosen for the purpose or by one of the duovirs?. In connection with the magistrates we should also notice the local priests, the pontiffs, augurs, sacerdotes, and, under the empire, the flamens*. Provision is made in the /ex col. Gen. Iul.° for the election of certain of these priests in the local comitia. Of these priests the flamens who were attached to the cult of the emperor and of the imperial house are of the most interest to us, because they played an important part in developing loyalty to the emperor and in giving unity to the empire; through the imperial cult which they fostered, the conci/ia of the pro- vinces developed, which exerted considerable influence in bringing the cities, the provinces, and the imperial govern- ment into closer relations®. In the cities of Italy the municipal senate was often called sezatus’, but 1t was repugnant to Roman sentiment to allow Roman official titles to be used by magistrates or 1 Kubitschek, R.Z. 1, 459. 2 Kubitschek, op. ciz. 1, 461. 3 Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 167. 4 For the various priestly offices, cf. Dessau, 3, 568-584. 5 No. 26, chap. 66. 6 For a list of imperial flamens in the municipalities, see Dessau, 3, 571-574: ? Kibler, R.E. 4, 2319 f. Constant use has been made of Kiibler’s excellent article in the rest of this chapter. [poa i) AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST organizations outside Rome, and in new colonies senators were commonly called decuriones and the body to which they belonged, ordo decurionum. In all the different classes of cities or villages described in chapters 1 and 11, except the vict, castella, and canabae, there was a local senate. Usually this body had one hundred members. This is the case, for instance, at Canusium!, Cures, and Veii?. Smaller numbers are occasionally found, however*. The rolls of the ordo were prepared at intervals of five years by the guinguennales from the list of ex-magistrates, with such additions as were needed to make up the normal number. In some Greek cities, however, we find the method of popular election or of cooptation followed*. Under the republic venal or autocratic governors interfered with the free choice of local senators®. Under the empire governors acted within the law, but, if we may draw an inference from Pliny’s experience in Bithynia®, questions of eligi- bility and conditions of admission to local senates were settled by the governor. Occasionally the emperor directly nominated a senator’. [he senatorial lists from Canusium® and Thamugadi® show us the composition of senates in the third and fourth centuries respectively. In the senate of Canusium there were sixty-eight ex-magistrates and thirty-two members who had held no office. In addition to this list of one hundred active members there stand in the album the names of thirty-nine patroni, who were honorary members, and of twenty-five praetextati, or sons of senators, who of course did not have the right to speak or vote. Inasmuch as most senators were ex-magistrates, 1 Cf. commentary on no. 136. 2 Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 845, n. I. 3 Cf. commentary on no. ISI. 4 Kiibler, op. cit. 4, 2324 f. 5 Cic. in Verr. 2. 120: quorum ex testimoniis cognoscere potuistis tota Sicilia per triennium neminem ulla in civitate senatorem factum esse gratis, neminem, ut leges eorum sunt, suffragiis, neminem nisi istius imperio aut litteris. 6 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 112, 113. OLE 3129 r=. Dessau, -034:3. 8 No. 136. ® CIL. vit, 2403 = Dessau, 6122. AMA [ 65 | 5 THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC conditions of eligibility for a magistracy were applicable to membership in the ordol. In almost every municipality free birth was a prerequisite to membership, but in certain ultramarine colonies, like Urso, Corinth, and Carthage, to which Caesar probably took out many freedmen, the requirement of free birth was relaxed for a time*. Although local citizenship was a condition of eligibility, we occasion- ally find a resident alien admitted to the senate®, and in other cases citizens of one community were also granted the right of citizenship in another municipality, and in this way could hold office in both places*. The minimum age requirement in the early period for a magistracy, and consequently for the senate, was thirty years®. Later it was reduced to twenty-five years®, and an edict of Augustus perhaps set it at twenty-two’, but Trajan interpreted the edict as requiring a minimum of thirty years from those who had not held a magistracy. The property qualification was usually one hundred thousand sesterces®. The initia- tion fee varied in amount from one city to another®. In Rusicade it reached the exceptional sum of twenty thou- sand sesterces!®, Decurions wore a characteristic dress, had special seats at the plays and games, were exempt from certain forms of punishment, and could appeal to the emperor when under a capital charge". * Cf. pp. 59f. 2 Hardy, Three Spanish Charters, 49, n. 116. 3 Dessau, 6916: ex incolatu decurio; cf. also 6992. * Dessau, 6624: C. Alfius C. f. Lem. Ruf. II vir quinq. col. Iul. Hispelli et IT vir quing. in municipio suo Casini; 7005: omnibus honoribus in colonia Equestr. et in col. Viennensium functus. ‘The case of a certain M. Valerius is interesting (cf. Dessau, 6933). He was a citizen of the res publica Damanitanorum, adlectus in coloniam Caesaraugustanam ex bene- i divi Hadriani, and then is spoken of as omnib. honorib. in utraq. re p. unct. 5 No. 24, ll. 89 f. 6 No. 65, chap. 54. 7 Cf. supra, p. 59, n. 6. 8 Plin. Epp. 1. 19. 2; Petronius, 44. ® Kibler, R.Z. 4, 2329. 10 CIEL. viii, 7983. 11 Kibler, R.Z. 4, 2331-2. [ 66 ] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE WEST The procedure in a local senate was modelled on that of the Roman senate. Indeed many probable conclusions concerning the method of transacting business in the Roman senate may be drawn from a study of the municipal charters and from pertinent inscriptions. Not only do the articles found in the charters providing for the presence of a fixed number of senators when certain matters are being settled remind one of the practices of the Roman senate, but they also indicate the items of business which were considered of the most importance. Two-thirds of the members of the ordo of the colonia Genetiva Iulia must be present to authorize the building of new aqueducts}, or the choosing of festival days?, and under the J/ex municipalis Malacitana the same number must be present to audit accounts%, or to settle the question of bondsmen?. Fifty members constituted a quorum in the colonia Genetiva lulia in authorizing the sending of embassies®, the demolition of buildings®, in legislating concerning public funds, public buildings, public squares’, and roads§, in assigning places for the people at the public games?, and in choosing patrons?®, except that, if a Roman senator or the son of a Roman senator were proposed as patron, the presence of three-fourths of the decurions was re- quired!!, Favorable action could be taken in the colonia Genetiva Iulia to grant citizens the right to use waste water from the reservoirs, if forty senators were present!®, and an act could be passed empowering the duovirs to pay the contractors who had provided sacrifices, if twenty 1 No. 26, chap. 99. 2 Ibid. chap. 64. 3 No. 65, chap. 67. 4 Ibid. chap. 64. 5 No. 26, chap. 92. 8 [bid. chap. 75; cf. also no. 65, chap. 62. ? No. 26, chap. 96. 8 Ibid. chap. 98. 9 Ibid. chapp. 125, 126. 10 Jbid. chap. 97. 11 Jbid. chap. 130. In Malaca a quorum of two-thirds of the members was required when patrons were chosen; cf. no. 65, chap. 61. 12 No. 26, chap. 100, and commentary on no. 33. [ 67 ] 5-2 THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM IN THE WEST members were present!. The calling out of the militia, which did not permit of delay, could be authorized with- out the presence of any specified number?. These items of business illustrate the wide range of powers which the decurions enjoyed. It is clear that, in the first century, they, and not the magistrates, were the directing power in the municipality. It is rather surprising that Caesar, in founding the colonia Genetiva Iulia after his hard struggle with the Roman senate, did not magnify the power of the magistrates or the popular assembly at the expense of the ordo, but he adopted the pure Roman tradition for the three branches of the government. The municipal assembly, as we have already noticed, exercised practically no legislative powers. In view of the fact that the senate’s power predominated in the municipality, it is not strange that in the later period, when the central government found it difficult to collect taxes, it should put the responsibility for them on the decurions. We shall see later that the curator rei publicae exercised at times the power of annulling decreta decurionum. The encroachment of the imperial power on the legislative rights of municipal senates is noticeable as early as the beginning of the second century. Pliny writes? to ask Trajan what shall be done about the aqueduct at Nicomedeia, the theatre at Nicaea, and whether he shall audit the accounts of Apamea. In Byzantium he cuts off the appropriation for a legate. All of these matters, as we have noticed, were within the jurisdiction of the local senate. These are indications of an overshadowing of the local senate by the imperial government and of a decline in its importance, but, in the main, membership in it seems to have been prized up to the close of the second century of our era. 1 No. 26, chap. 69. 2 [bid. chap. 103. 2 Gfipp. 143 fe [ 68 ] CHAPTER VII THE MUNICIPALSYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC AND EARLY) EMPERE JIN) THE RASTS HEN the Romans first entered Greece, the era \ \ of the independent city-state had already passed. Some of these had come, directly or indirectly, under the control of the Macedonian monarchy. Others had already joined a federation wherein they preserved their autonomy in local affairs, while the control of their armies and the conduct of their foreign relations were under the direction of a federal council. Membership in the Achaean League seems to have been voluntary, if we except the case of Sparta. On the other hand, the Aetolian League seems to have brought some of its members into the federation by force, and in such cases the local govern- ment must have been controlled by a pro-league party, or by force of arms. The development of these great Leagues was an important factor in restraining the Mace- donian kings from exercising despotic sway over the Greek cities under their hegemony. While many states retained their traditional forms, the local government was con- trolled by a system of tyrannies, or by royal agents who effectively checked any expression of the ancient political freedom. When the freedom of the Greek cities had been pro- claimed by Flamininus, the Roman senate became in- volved as arbiter in all the disputes which broke out as 1 'This subject is treated in the following works: Kuhn, Die stadt. u. biirgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2. 144 ff.; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1. 316 7.3 Mommsen, The Provinces of the Roman Empire, 1. 252 ff.; Levy, La vie municipale de l Asie Mineure, Rev. d. ét. grec. 8 (1895), 203 ff, 12 (1899), 255 7, 14 (1901), 350.3 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie; Ramsay, The Cities and Bishoprics of Phrygia; Reid, The Municipalities of the Roman Empire; Jouguet, La vie municipale dans l’ Egypte romaine. [ 69 ] THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC soon as the Roman forces were withdrawn. The commis- sions sent out to settle the local quarrels of the various cities usually threw their influence on the side of oligarchy ; and, since the Roman senate preferred to treat with the aristocratic party represented by the magistrates and local senate rather than with the fickle popular assembly, the democratic institutions steadily declined in political im- portance}, When the kingdom of Perseus was finally overthrown by the Romans, Paullus established four republics on the ruins of the Macedonian Empire. It is unfortunate that we have no evidence as to the form of government estab- lished in the individual cities, or their relation to the federal administration. We may safely assume, however, that the municipalities were controlled by an oligarchy friendly to Rome. When Macedonia was finally organized as a Roman province, the republics were abolished, but traces of their existence may be discerned in later times®. After the destruction of Corinth Mummius modelled the constitutions of Peloponnesian cities on oligarchical lines, and revolutionary tendencies on the part of demo- cratic factions were rigorously checked®. In other parts of Greece the aristocratic party, emboldened by the support of Rome, usurped the powers of the popular assemblies. This movement was fostered, directly or in- directly, by Roman magistrates and commissioners. In Greece the Romans had found the country wholly organized in civic communities, but in Asia conditions were very different. Here the Persians, in their advance to the shores of the Mediterranean, had found tribal organizations, villages grouped in principalities or king- doms, temple-states of various oriental cults, and Greek commonwealths in various stages of development between 1 Colin, Rome et la Gréce, 652. 2 Frank, Class. Phil. 9 (1914), 49 ff. 3 Pausanias, 7. 16. 93 no. 9. [ go:% AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST tyranny and democracy. The conquerors made no attempt to found new cities. Those already established they governed through a system of tyrants, which was ended by Alexander. His biographers claim for him the credit of restoring democracy, but it may be doubted whether he was more liberal in Asia than he had been in Greece. The system of Persian satrapies was continued by the appoint- ment of governors in the various provinces. The cities were given a measure of independence in local affairs, and their administration was vested in the hands of the Greeks, who thus constituted a ruling oligarchy. Some features of the oriental bureaucracy must have been retained for the administration of the royal estates. Very little is known of the constitutions granted to the cities founded by Alexander. Apparently Alexandria had a senate and a popular assembly, at least for a time!. The Diadochi posed as patrons of Hellenism, and this attitude found ex- pression in the foundation of new cities. The extension of this policy was made possible by the great influx of Greek soldiers, merchants, and farmers who settled in every part of Asia. Cities sprang up along the great trade-routes, around military stations, and at other strategic centers. Above all, the city served as a useful unit in governing the country and in securing its loyalty. Many of the towns became very wealthy and powerful, and in time of war, or when the royal exchequer was low, they were able to secure concessions which gave them greater liberty in self-government. When the Romans extended their sway over Asia Minor, they adopted the same policy which they had pursued in Sicily. A few cities were allied to Rome; others were given their freedom with the right to use their own laws and institutions, and these cities probably enjoyed im- munity from tribute; the majority, however, became civi- tates stipendiariae, and paid tithes to Rome. The honorary 1 Plaumann, K/io, 13 (1913), 485 ff. La] THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC title of colonia, with or without the zus [talicum, was con- ferred by Caesar and later emperors on cities already established. After the age of Augustus new colonies were seldom founded in the eastern provinces}, The Roman senate appointed a commission to draw up a lex provinciae and to organize each province as it was admitted, although some commanders, as Pompey and Sulla, formulated laws for the provincials without the aid of a senatorial committee. The acts of military comman- ders, however, had to be ratified by the senate. We cannot tell how far the commissions interfered with the problems of local administration, but it is evident that no attempt was made to secure uniformity in municipal government?. The /ex Cornelia regulated the amount which might be spent on embassies, and required the cities to elect their magistrates fifty days before the end of the year®. The /ex Pompeta determined the age at which a candidate should stand for office, and provided that ex-magistrates should be enrolled as members of the local senate. The law also specified the reasons for which the censor might remove a senator from his seat*. These laws could be modified by edicts of the emperor or of the provincial governor, and some of the provisions were disregarded by the muni- cipalities themselves®. Gabinius is said to have revised the constitutional forms of Syrian cities in favor of olig- archy, and it is probable that this was the general tendency of Roman governors’, The Romans followed the Greek policy by founding new cities. Pompey alone is said to have founded thirty- nine’, Since he was a representative of the equestrian order, we may suppose that his purpose was to simplify 1 RE. 5.0. colonia; cf. pp. 3 ff. 2 Marquardt is of the opinion that laws were devised for each autono- mous city, op. cit. 1. 65, 78. ® No. 34. 4 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 112, 113, 114, IIS. 5 Ibid. 55, 65, 72, 79, 84, 108, 109, ITI, I12. § Josephus, Aut. Iud. 14. 5. 4. 7 Plutarch, Pompeius, 45. Fad AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST the collection of taxes. The creation of a municipal organi- zation, whose members would be responsible for the payment of the tribute from their district, not only made it easier to collect taxes, but also gave the pub/icani greater opportunity for making loans and greater’ security for their repayment. It is not necessary to dwell upon the terrible exploitation of the Asiatic cities by tax-gatherers and Roman officials, as well as by the leaders of the various factions, who supported their armies by forced levies during the civil wars!. There is no evidence that the economic pressure resulted in any constitutional changes in the municipalities, but we may suppose that those interested in the collection of tribute would favor the election of the wealthier members of the community to office, while the constant arrears in the annual quota would give the governor unlimited opportunities to inter- fere in the problems of local administration. This state of affairs may explain the statement of Strabo that the ancient institutions of Cretan cities had fallen into abeyance, because the towns of Crete, as well as those of other provinces, were governed by the edicts of Roman rulers?. In their long experience in provincial government the Romans had found that the city, with its dependent serri- torium, was the unit through which the province could be best administered and the taxes most easily collected. For this reason the emperors devoted their attention to the spread of the municipal organization in every province. As the client kingdoms were incorporated in the empire, their territory was divided among cities or added to im- perial estates. The tribal units of Galatia and the pre- fectureships of Cappadocia were replaced by towns’. The territoria granted to many of the new foundations were often necessarily of vast extent. The larger village- communities, therefore, had an opportunity to develop 1 Chapot, op. cit. 18 ff. 2 Strabo, ro. 4. 22. 3 Kuhn, op. cit. 2. 231; Perrot, de Galatia provincia Romana, 83. Lv7erl THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC along independent lines, and many of them ultimately attained the rank of cities. By the beginning of the fourth century of the Christian era municipal institutions had spread throughout the Orient as the chief instrument of imperial administration. It would be impossible to outline, even in brief, the manifold forms of government found in the Greek cities. The ancient states had developed along individual lines, and all of them cherished their traditional customs with peculiar reverence. The Romans also had great respect for Jonga consuetudo, and since it was their policy to accept existing institutions as they found them, they contented themselves with modifying the powers exercised by the different branches of local administration. The /ex Pompeia, which was followed in the cities of Pontus and Bithynia, determined the qualifications of senators and magistrates and the method of their appointment, but, apparently, abolished none of the traditional offices. For this reason a great variety of titles survived until late in the empire in the older towns, and especially in the free cities. Unfortunately we know nothing of the charters granted to eastern cities, if we except the fragmentary letter of an unknown emperor to the citizens of ‘Tymanda. While the constitution given to new foundations may have varied according to local conditions, yet precedent was powerful in Roman law and custom, and it is equally possible that imperial charters followed some model, such as the lex Iulia municipalis. Special commissioners (cor- rectores) were sometimes sent out to regulate the affairs of provincial cities, but we do not know whether they made any attempt to revise the constitutions of the towns under their jurisdiction. The emperors in their travels occasion- ally devoted their attention to municipal problems, but the nature of their reforms cannot be determined!. Caesar is said to have made some changes in the administration 1 Hist. Aug. Hadr. 19, 21; Herodian, 4. 8. 3; Tarsus was given laws by Augustus, Dio Chrys. 34. 8. Logg] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST of Athens}, and in later times Hadrian attempted to revive the laws of Solon for the Athenians?; but, for the most part, it is probable that the emperors contented themselves with financial and legal problems, and that in return for such benefits as were conferred the Greeks called them the benefactors and founders of their cities. The popular assembly declined steadily as a political influence in the Greek cities under Roman rule. In the republican period the ecclesia in a few cities retained a certain amount of initiative and took some share in the work of local administration. Under the empire the evi- dence shows that the popular assembly was called together largely for the purpose of ratifying honorary decrees and such proposals as the magistrates chose to present to the people. The right of debate or amendment does not seem to have been exercised at any of these meetings*. Ina few cities, however, exceptions may be found. The Athenian assembly retained some power as late as the third century”. At Tarsus Dio rebuked the citizens because the council of elders, the senate, and the people each strove for its own interest, and failed to cooperate for the common good®, The same orator also urged the citizens of Prusa, who had recently recovered the right to meet in assembly (exx\no.dlewv), to exercise their powers with discretion so that they might not again lose their privileges?. In some of the eastern cities we find a distinction drawn between members of the ecclesia (€xx\novaorat), citizens, and other residents of the community’. This does not necessarily imply that there was an active popular assembly 1 Swoboda, Gr. Volksbeschl. 192. 2 Cf. no. go, commentary. 3 'The title xréorys is frequently applied in Greek inscriptions to the emperor, governor, and even to private citizens. Cf. Anderson, Fours. Hell. Studies, 17 (1897), 402; B.C.H. 17 (1893), 2473; Ditt. Or. Gr. 471. 4 Swoboda, op. cit. 176 ff.; but cf. R.Z. 5.0. éxxAnaia, p. 2199. 5 Swoboda, op. cit. 190 ff. § Dio Chrys. 34. 16. ? Ibid. 48. 1 ff. 8 Lanckoronski, St@dte Pamphyliens und Pisidiens, 58 ff.; Liebenam, St. Verw. 216 ff.; no. 122. ysl THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC in such cities, while it is true that, if the membership was limited in some way, the ecclesia naturally gained greater prestige and had a longer lease of life in the affairs of government. The edict of Caracalla, however, swept away the distinctions between the various classes in the community, and after the beginning of the third century the assembly disappeared as a legislative body. By the /ex Pompeia the membership of the senate in Bithynian towns seems to have been limited to a pre- scribed number. The senators held office for life; magis- trates were admitted to the order on the completion of their term of office; the revision of the rolls was entrusted to a censor; honorary members could be appointed with the consent of the emperor and on the payment of a fee; it was illegal to enroll citizens from other cities in the provincel, These provisions show that Pompey took the Roman senate as his model in framing the law, and senates of this type are sometimes called “‘western’”’ in contrast to those of the Greek cities which retained their former regulations. As a matter of fact, however, we know practically nothing of the method of appointing senators in eastern cities under Roman rule?. Censors are found in cities outside the province of Bithynia, but we do not know whether they had any duties in con- nection with the enrolment of senators. It is probable that selection by lot had been abandoned in the republican period, since 1t was necessary that men of wealth should be enrolled. Hadrian wrote to the magistrates and senate of Ephesus, requesting that his friend Erastus be admitted to the senate. He agreed to pay the summa honoraria required from new members if the official scrutiny of the candidate proved satisfactory. It would seem as if ap- pointments were made at the time when the senate (?) was called together to elect the magistrates for the coming year. Distinguished actors and athletes were often re- 1 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80, 114, 115. 2 Chapot, op. cit. 195 ff. 3 No. 85. Lge) A AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST warded by being admitted as honorary senators. In the golden age of Greek democracy a senator held office for a year only, but with the development of oligarchy, it is probable that longer terms became the rule. Life-mem- bership may have been introduced soon after, if not before, the cities came under Roman rule. In the later empire membership in the senate became hereditary. In a number of cities we find other organizations acting with the senate and assembly, especially in adopting honorary decrees. At Athens the council of the Areo- pagus was revived and attained great influence. In the Asiatic cities the gerusia, the véou, the conventus of Roman citizens, the trade-guilds, and even villages united with the city to do honor to benefactors. The nature of the gerusiae is disputed. Their functions were not always political, and in some cities they appear to have been purely social or religious organizations!. The Roman citizens resident in Greek cities usually united in’a guild and held themselves aloof from local affairs?. They were probably exempt from magistracies and liturgies and rarely held such offices. They were usually free from the jurisdiction of the local courts. Their privileged position, however, was destroyed by Caracalla, who gave Roman citizenship to the provincials. The guilds of the various trades were not encouraged by the earlier emperors. Trajan had forbidden all associations of this kind fearing that they might become centres of political agitation and disaffection’, In the second and third centuries, however, these organizations were widely established. An extraordinary variety of titles may be found in the magistracies of the Greek cities, and no uniformity was attained or desired by the imperial government*. Many 1 Chapot, op. cit. 216 ff. 2 bid. 186 ff. Ath. Mitth. 16, 144 ff. 3 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 34, 96. 4 Owing to the difficulty of distinguishing between magistracies and liturgies we have not attempted to classify the different offices in the Greek cities; cf. indices to JG.; Cagnat, JGRR.; Liebenam, op. cit. 539_f7. 7A THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC of the offices, however, were modified under Roman rule. For example, the strategus became an important official although he had long since lost all trace of military power, and with the increasing importance of the senate the secretaryship of this body rose into prominence. In many eastern cities a board of magistrates (kowdv Tov apyovTwr) is found!, This usually consisted of the generals (who are sometimes identified with the archons), the archons, and the secretary. ‘These annual officials were dominated by the senate, and their powers were limited by the supervision of the provincial governors and of imperial agents, especially the curator ret publicae and the defensor. We have traced elsewhere the decline of the local magistracies under the pressure of the imperial bureaucracy. In the late empire the curator ret publicae was replaced by the matnp THs modews?. In the fourth and fifth centuries the office of defensor (exdixos) attained great importance in municipal government. By this time the traditional magistracies had either disappeared or had become mere liturgies. Election by lot or by popular vote had probably ceased soon after the Roman occupation, if not before®. For the most part officials seem to have been elected by the senate’. There is no evidence that the cursus honorum, required in the West, was followed in the East, and the law, enunci- ated by Paulus, that decurions only should be elected to public office, does not seem to have been applied to Greek 1 Levy, Rev. d. ét. grec. 12 (1899), 264, 268 ff. 2 Declareuil, Quelgues problémes ad’ histoire des institutions municipales au temps de 1’ Empire romain, 269 ff. 3 For a late example of the lot, cf. Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 259. For a priest- hood, cf. Ditt. Or. Gr. 494. 4 Cod. Th. 12. 5. 1 (326). Election to office seems to have been regu- lated by the provincial edict and the /ex provinciae; cf. no. 34; Cicero, ad Att. 6.1.15; Pliny, Epp. ed Trai. 79. For the dpyatpeoia of the senate, cf. no. 117; of the ecclesia, cf. Fourn. Hell. Studies, 15 (1895), 118; 17 (1897), 411; B.C.H. 12 (1888), 17; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 649. fe 78e ] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST cities. Women were not infrequently named for office. In such cases it is unlikely that they exercised the duties of the magistracy, but were content with making a generous contribution towards the expenses attached to the position. The summa honoraria was usually exacted from magistrates on entering upon the duties of their office”. In the cities of the Orient the system of liturgies was one of their most characteristic features, and here it was developed to its fullest extent as a regular part of the civic administration. In his discussion of magistracies and liturgies Aristotle observed the varying practice of different cities, and regarded the distinction between the two kinds of public service as largely an academic matter?. This is especially true in the case of the more important liturgies, such as the priesthoods, the choregia, and the gymnasiarchy. In many cases the liturgies and the magis- tracies cannot be distinguished. Aristotle called the humbler duties émipédevar or dvaxoviar. These terms do not appear in the inscriptions, but they correspond in general to the Latin curae, and are described in the Codes and Digest as munera. In one case we find liturgies classified as Bovdeutixat and Syporixai*. These terms are not defined, and it is possible that the former refer to magistracies. Under Roman administration the appoint- ment to liturgies was probably made in the local senates?. In a few cases liturgies were undertaken voluntarily, and sometimes endowments were provided by wealthy citizens to meet the expenses of a particular service. The priest- hoods, in a few instances, were sold to the highest bidder®. As new liturgies were devised from time to time, especially in the imperial service, uniform regulations were applied Bei 5O, 26.75 COs ET. 2 Chapot, op. cit. 158 ff. 3 Aristotle, Politics, 6. 12. 2. 2 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 623. 5 ‘This, at least, was the rule in the third century; cf. Cod. F. 10. 32. 2. 6 Bischoff, Kauf und Verkauf von Priestertiimern bei den Griechen, Rh. Mus. 54 (1899), 9.f-3 cf. Otto, Hermes, 44 (1909), 594 f- 79a THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC to them throughout the empire. Ultimately the older municipal liturgies and the magistracies, which had vir- tually become liturgies, came under imperial regulation, and all were governed by uniform principles. The right of coining gold was forbidden, but in a few instances silver coins were struck under imperial super- vision. Permission to issue bronze or token-money was freely granted in the East. The exchange of the local coins for foreign money was a municipal monopoly, and some revenue was derived therefrom!. When the local mints were abolished by Aurelian, this source of income ceased. The relation of the provincial governors to the municipal administration cannot be definitely determined. The state- ment of Strabo that most provincial cities were governed by edict is doubtless exaggerated, but it is evident that the governor had the right to interfere in the administration of the civitates stipendiariae at any time, and that the privileges of free states were not always regarded by un- scrupulous officials*. Cicero, who was fairly conscientious in his administration of Cilicia, devoted himself to lessen- ing the expenses of the municipalities, to correcting the license of civic officials, and to the administration of justice. He delighted the cities by restoring to them their autonomia, which former governors had apparently taken away. He incurred the ill-will of Appius by restricting the embassies which the provincials sent to Rome with decrees in honor of their departing governor. Under the republic most questions concerning the internal adminis- tration of the province were decided by the governor with- out consulting Rome. Under the empire, as is shown by the correspondence of Pliny, paternalism had developed. While minor problems were referred to the emperor for decision, it is evident that the provincial governor still retained considerable power. All appeals were submitted to him before they were allowed to go to Rome. Not 1 Nos. 81, 133, 199. 2 Marquardt, op. cit. 1. 85 f.; Chapot, op. cit. 126 ff. [ 80 ] AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST infrequently decrees of the municipalities were presented for approval or for veto, and it is probable that no city could engage in any important outlay of public money without securing the approval of the governor!. In the third and fourth centuries the duties of the imperial legates were probably closely defined in the writings of the jurists, but of these only fragments are now extant. The civic rivalries, peculiar to Asiatic towns, may have served to divert the attention of the provincials from the loss of political freedom. The honor of preeminence in rank and the privilege of the neocorate were eagerly sought?. While the imperial government permitted this rivalry, it was costly to the cities, because local pride led them to indulge in extravagant expenditures upon public buildings, games, and festivals in their efforts to outdo their neighbors. When this extravagance was combined with an inefficient and corrupt oligarchical government, many cities were reduced to serious financial straits. As a result the appointment of special commissioners, such as the curator and the corrector, to regulate the administra- tion of provincial cities became a common practice 1n the second century. The influence of these officials in the history of the municipalities has been traced elsewhere?. Although the Romans found in the East a fully deve- loped legal system which had a profound influence in modifying their own jurisprudence, yet the use of Roman law gradually prevailed. ‘This was due to the influence of the provincial edict and of the provincial assizes, at which the governor presided and dispensed justice in accordance with Roman juristic principles. The extension of Roman citizenship, especially by Caracalla, must have increased the use of Roman law, but the Greek elements in the Syrian Code of the fifth century and in the Egyptian papyri of the Byzantine age show that the native law never 1 Nos. 69, 71, 80, 98, 99, I14. 2 Chapot, op. cit. 136 ff. ° Cf. pp. 90f': AMA eae 6 THE MUNICIPAL SYSTEM OF THE REPUBLIC wholly disappeared}. ‘The supremacy of Roman law may be due, in part, to the fact that advancement in the legal profession depended upon a knowledge of Roman juris- prudence, and for this reason the scientific study of Greek law received little attention in the schools. The evidence for the administration of law in the eastern cities is scanty. A few cities had the right to try cases which arose between Romans and civilians, but there is no evidence that they retained this privilege beyond the age of Augustus?. The courts instituted by the governor were held according to a fixed circuit, and were open to provincials as well as to Romans. Plutarch rebuked the Greeks for abandoning their local courts in favor of those held by the praetor’. The governor’s court, however, could only take cognizance of a small proportion of the cases arising in a large and busy province, and the local courts must have retained jurisdiction over minor cases until late in the empire. The right of cities to use their native law was probably determined by the lex provinciae, but the privilege could be withheld or restored by the governor, or the senate, or the emperor. For example, Cicero restored autonomia to the Cilician cities, and Chios was granted the right to use her own laws and courts by the senate*. The question as to the administration of law in those cities which did not possess autonomy cannot be definitely decided®. Probably all cases involving sums of money in excess of a certain minimum were referred to the governor’s court; regulations of this kind are found in western charters. The powers of the local courts were weakened by the appointment of the curator rei publicae, who exercised judicial authority. The subdivision of the provinces under Diocletian and the separation of the civil 1 Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht, 313 ff.3 Grundziige (Furistischer Teil), I. Introduction. 2 No. 40. 3 Plutarch, reip. ger. praec. 19. ®iad itl. Os Te) 153 D0.04.0, > Marquardt, op. cit. 1. 78; Chapot, op. cit. 103 ff. [ 82 | AND EARLY EMPIRE IN THE EAST and military powers gave the governor greater opportunity to supervise the administration of justice. This is indicated by the fact that he is usually styled praeses or iudex in the juristic literature of the period. His power to appoint iudices pedanei to deal with minor offences implies that the municipal courts were no longer of any importance}. Since we have described the liturgies and magistracies of Egyptian cities in another chapter?, we need only out- line the development of their municipal system at this point. In the Ptolemaic period there were only three Greek cities, Alexandria, Naucratis, and Ptolemais, and of their organization little is known. The remainder of Egypt was divided into administrative districts called nomes, the units of which were village-communities. The Romans adopted the Ptolemaic system in its main out- lines. Hadrian was the first emperor to found a city in this part of the empire, and he thus set a precedent for future emperors in recognizing the fact that the Egyptians were capable of self-government. Early in the third cen- tury Septimius Severus gave to the capital of each nome a senate whose members not only bore the responsibility of administration, but also assumed the liabilities for the collection of the tribute. The senate thus created consisted of members who held office for life. The magistracies differed from those in the western cities in that the in- cumbents, apparently, did not have to be chosen from the senate. At first the nome was not regarded as the territory of the city, but in the course of time the responsibility of governing it and collecting the revenues therefrom was transferred to the city. By the beginning of the fourth century the Egyptian municipalities were brought into conformity with the system which prevailed in other parts of the empire. NOLL PIS AA Pe va > 2 Cf. pp. 99 f7. [easel 6-2 CHA PEE RGN DE HONORES AND MUNERA! legislative, judicial, and religious powers. When the republican form of government was created, these functions were transferred to several magistrates whose offices were appropriately called honores. As for the citizen, the most important duty which he owed to the com- munity was the defense of its lands and flocks. This was a munus in the true sense of the word, and it is not strange that the same term should have been applied to any service rendered to the community, when the needs of society became more numerous?. While the development of Greek and Roman cities followed the same general lines, there was great diversity in matters of detail, and it would be difficult to discover a definition of honores and munera applicable to all periods or to all cities of the Roman empire. Callistratus, the Roman jurist, defined a municipal magistracyas an admini- strative office in the cursus honorum which might or might not involve the incumbent in personal expense. The liturgy differed only in the fact that it carried with it the right to spend money without receiving the distinction of an official title*. Callistratus probably lived in the third or early fourth century, when it was evident that the distinction between magistracy and liturgy rested largely on ancient tradition. In fact, many liturgies in Greek cities carried the title of apy7 although they were in no sense regarded as magistracies. ] N the regal period of Roman history the king exercised 1 The best treatment of this subject is found in Kuhn, Die stadt. u. birgerl. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 7 ff; cf. Houdoy, Le droit municipal, 441 ff. * The Greek term corresponding to honor is dpyn. Munera is repre- sented by Aerroupyia or éruédcra. did DET Ra copy Wee v Cshid HONORES AND MUNERA In Rome the cursus honorum was fixed by law, and municipal charters in the West followed the Roman system in general outline with minor variations in detail. The Greek cities inherited a varied and complicated adminis- trative machinery from the past, and the Romans made few changes in outward form. The system of popular election gave way to a more oligarchic method in Roman times, and some of the magistracies were gradually modified?!. Even the oriental cities founded by Roman generals or governors followed Greek patterns in regard to magistracies, except in the case of a few early colonial settlements. Under the earlier western charters municipal magis- trates were chosen by the residents voting in comitia or tribes*. If candidates did not present .themselves in suficient numbers, nominations were made by the magis- trate who presided over the election. Such nominees had each the right of nominating another. In later times, when public office became undesirable because of the heavy expense attached to it, the outgoing magistrate nominated his successor, or, if he failed to do so, the pro- vincial governor presented a name to the curia which then made the election by formal vote®. It is not clear when the election was transferred from the people to the curia. In the fourth century only a few African towns elected their magistrates by popular vote+. As oligarchical tendencies developed, plebeians were barred from honors, and at the beginning of the third century only decurions were eligible for public office®. It is probable that the method of popular election was discontinued when this qualifica- tion was introduced, or soon thereafter. Apparently some 1 For example the orparnyds became an important magistrate in some Greek cities under Roman rule, although the office no longer carried military power. 2 No. 65, chapp. 51-54. SRDICT AQ: AT, Ze God. LA, Tat GX: 5 Dig. 50. 2. 7. There are a few exceptions, ¢.g. Cod. F. 10. 44. 2 provides for a citizen holding office without being a decurion. [ 85 ] HONORES AND MUNERA system of rotation was now followed, and nominations were made in order of seniority with due regard to the financial standing of the members of the curia!. Magis- trates entrusted with the administration of public funds were required to furnish bondsmen, whom the munici- pality held responsible for their candidate. The sureties were examined by a third party, who also shared the liability of the bondsmen if he approved their securities. In magistracies shared by two or more there was always joint responsibility, unless the contrary was stipulated in the nomination?. When a candidate refused to discharge the duties of the office to which he was elected, his bonds- men and nominators were liable for his obligations. The governor, however, had the power to compel a magistrate. to fulfil his duties*. If he sought to escape office by flight, his property was surrendered to his successor; and if the fugitive was brought back, he was punished by being compelled to serve two years instead of one’. Any nominee had the right of appeal to the governor. Until a decision was rendered, his colleague held office alone. If both appealed, an interim appointment was made, but if the city suffered any loss, the candidate who appealed without just cause was held responsible®. The qualifications of candidates varied in different localities and in different periods. The Julian law fixed the minimum age for magistrates in Italian cities at thirty, although concessions were made to those who had served a certain term in the army’. Pompey had previously established the same minimum in Bithynian cities, but his law was modified by Augustus, who permitted can- didates to enter the minor offices at twenty-five, and this 1 This seems to be implied in Dig. 50. 2.73 50. 4. 6, 14. GRO OSs COAD hOs 1Pi 50. 1.053 on mrt. BAL so dae Ree DT Ont' BD Je NRO TTT, 4 Ibid. 50. 4. 9. PeGodsul Za 2.11, £0'( 220). CIIgaAO, 1225s 7 No. 24. [ 86 | HONORES AND MUNERA appears to have become the universal practice in the third century4. In a few cases minors were elected to magis- tracies, for the proper conduct of which their parents were held responsible. No candidate could secure exemption on the plea of old age. The amount of property which he must possess was undoubtedly determined by local con- ditions, since it would be impossible to frame a uniform law applicable to every city within the empire. No magis- trate received a'salary, and the expenses of his office were heavy. When honors were eagerly sought, it was not illegal nor unusual for candidates to promise money for public works, games, banquets, or other entertainments, but it was forbidden to canvass for office by gifts or dinners to private individuals?. It was also customary for a magis- trate on entering office to contribute a sum of money to the municipal treasury. This summa honoraria seems to have originated as a freewill offering, but it later became obligatory unless waived by special enactment*. During his term of office the magistrate was also compelled by law to contribute to various forms of municipal welfare®. The Julian law specified that no auctioneer, beadle, or undertaker should hold office; and all those who were barred from membership in the local senate by virtue of their profession or because of legal disabilities were for- bidden to stand for a magistracy®. Freedmen were disqualified except in colonies composed of citizens of this class’. Appointments of women to magistracies were purely honorary, and seem to have been made chiefly in the Rast ®. 1 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 79, 80: Dig. 50. 4. 8; 50. 5. 2. SUL OoEn ON Can 2g Te 8. No. 26. 4 Liebenam, St. Verw. 54 ff.; Cod. Th. 12. 1.169 (409). 5 No. 26. 6 No. 24. Other reasons for disqualification are added in Dig. 50. 1. 17, 203 50. 2. 7, 9, 123 50. 4. 6, 7, 12, 16. For professions exempt, cf. Dig. ROMA. TS 2 S00 TO. 7 No. 24. 8 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 158 ff.; Paris, Quatenus feminae res publicas in Asia minore, Romanis imperantibus, attigerint; Cod. F.10.64.1. [asa HONORES AND MUNERA Ordinarily a magistrate was exempt from holding the same office twice. If, however, there was a lack of eligible candidates, he could be compelled to serve a second time, but not until five years had elapsed. In case of voluntary service an interval of a year was prescribed. Between magistracies of different rank the legal interval was three years!, If a citizen had served as an ambassador of his city, he could not be nominated to another office for two years, but Diocletian limited the application of this law to those who had undertaken an embassy to Rome?. Magistrates could not hold office 1n two cities at the same time. In the case of such elections the birthplace of the candidate determined priority®. Magistrates wore the toga praetexta, possessed the privilege of the fasces within their own territory, and were entitled to special seats in the theatre. In cities possessing Latin rights magistrates were granted Roman citizenship on completing their term of office. Not more than six could receive this gift in one year, but 1n each case, ap- parently, their parents, wives, children, and grandchildren in the male line were included*. During his term of office no liturgies could be imposed upon him, and as ex-magis- trate he was free from the imposition of burdens of inferior rank®. There is a bewildering variety of municipal offices in every province, and it is difficult 1n many instances to dis- tinguish between honors and liturgies®. The Codes use the general title magistratus municitpales for the whole AOU SOL 1: 103350. .4..5as Chae joa La2s A112. 50. 7:93 Gods fe 10. 41s eel Or O53. Brie. 50.1. 17, 4. 4 No, 64; RE. 5.0. Fus Latii. Pu Div, 50. 4.110; Cod. F210. 43) 2! 6 Chapot, op. cit. 231 ff; Preisigke, Stadtische Beamtenwesen im rimis- chen Aegypten, 11; for different titles of municipal magistrates, see indices to the corpora of Greek and Latin inscriptions, Dessau, and Cagnat, JGRR. 5.0. magistratus municipales. Cf. Liebenam, St. Verw. 279 ff.; Prentice, Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 43, 113 ff. [ 88 ] HONORES AND MUNERA empire and never specify the offices in detail. In the common type of western municipality we find duumvirs, aediles, and quaestors ranking in the order named. The principle of collegiality was followed in most magistracies, but when the emperor was elected to any municipal office, he appointed a prefect who, as an imperial agent, divided his authority with no one. In case of an interregnum the local senate could appoint a prefect who had dictatorial power*. In the third century the quaestor and aedile are seldom found, and the latter office was regarded as a liturgy in many cities®. In Egypt the municipal form of government did not develop until the third century, and in this period the liturgies can be distinguished from magistracies only with great difficulty. Municipal offices were divided into three classes, and a citizen might hold the different offices in each class without observing any rule of seniority?*. Appointments to municipal magistracies were apparently made in the local senate in conjunction with the pryzanis. At the end of the third century we find nominations made by outgoing magistrates or by the senate as a body®. Peculiar to Egypt is the plan of appointing supervisors for the newly elected magistrate, apparently to prevent his escape by flight from the burdens of his ofice®. A nominee might avoid office by offering to surrender his property to his nominators. In such cases the nominee transmitted his offer to the prefect, who, if he gave his approval, in- structed the szrategus to see that the appellant suffered no hurt nor loss of status during the period while his property was being administered by the nominators. * Cf pp. 62 ff. 2 Hardy, Three Spanish Charters, p. 88. A magistrate absent from office more than a day nominated a prefect in his place. BEL i2.PSO0AwsT 8: 4 Preisigke, op. cit.; Jouguet, /7e munic. 292 ff.; no. 181. PENGS2033 6 No. 203. This is probably a substitute for the cauzio usually required. [ 89 ] HONORES AND MUNERA Apparently the law permitted them to devote not more than two-thirds of the revenue to defray the expense of the magistracy and the remainder was returned to the owner. Even after the prefect had given his consent to the surrender of the property, the local senate apparently had the privilege of rejecting the offer and compelling the nominee to accept officet. In other respects also the pro- cedure in Egypt seems to have differed from that in the provinces. For example, citizens who were not members of the senate were eligible for office much later than was customary in the rest of the empire. In the eastern provinces magistrates were usually appointed by the local senate at a meeting specially devoted to that purpose?. Little is known about methods of nomination or qualifications, but it is probable that old customs survived, for we find many of the ancient magis- tracies still existing in the Greek cities until late in the Christian era?. There was, however, a tendency towards uniformity in all parts of the empire especially after Roman citizenship had been extended to all free subjects by Cara- calla. No distinction is made between the East and the West in the laws recorded in the Digest and Codes, but the jurists were not concerned with local peculiarities and customs, and it would be unsafe to assume that local privileges and customs did not persist. The curator rei publicae and the defensor civitatis held offices which were not regarded as municipal honores, but as curae. heir importance in civic government is such that they should be mentioned here. The curator was first 1 No. 198. For the procedure in a metropolis before the introduction of the municipal system, cf. no. 181 and pp. 28 f. 2 No. 34. 3 There is no evidence that the Greek cities were subject to the law of Antoninus which required that magistracies should be held according to a fixed cursus (Dig. 50. 4. 11). The inscriptions from eastern cities record honors and liturgies indiscriminately, and the classification of the various kinds of public duties varied from city to city (cf. Aristotle, Politics, 4. 14 ff). [ 90 ] HONORES AND MUNERA appointed in the reign of Trajan as an imperial agent whose chief duty was the supervision of the financial administration of the municipality to which he was at- tachedt. In some cases his jurisdiction extended over several towns. At first he was chosen from the senatorial or equestrian ranks, although men of humbler position sometimes filled the office. In the third century he was chosen from the members of the curia by the votes of his fellow-senators, and his election was ratified by the em- peror. Constantine permitted no one to be a candidate until he had performed all his civic liturgies, and he cancelled all appointments gained by corrupt practices. In the Greek cities the curator was known as hoy.torns and in the fourth century his duties were taken over by the TaTyp THS Toews. The latter official was elected by the bishop, the primates, and the possessores in the reign of Justinian. The bishop and five primates had the power to depose their candidate if, in their annual survey, they found his administration unsatisfactory?. Since the curator was an imperial appointment,. the principle of collegiality was never applied to the office, even when it became in form a municipal magistracy. Nothing can be determined about the length of appoint- ment except that it was not limited to one year and re- appointments were not forbidden®. In some cases the office was combined with other imperial duties. While it is probable that many cities came under the jurisdiction of the curator, the record of the office on stone is com- paratively rare, and in very few cities do we find the name of more than one, although there must have been a 1 Liebenam, P2i/o/. 56 (1897), 290f,., gives a full treatment of this office. Cf. R.E. 5.0. curator. 2 Justinian, Novel/ae, 128. 16; Declareuil, Quelgues problemes a’ histoire des institutions municipales au temps de l Empire romain, 276 ff. 3 At Timgad three curatores rei publicae are recorded between 360 and 367 (CIL. vitt, 2387, 2388, 2403), and their term could not have been longer than five years in any case. An inscription published in B.C.H. 17 (1893), 98, records a term of ten years. Lon] HONORES AND MUNERA succession of curatores when once a city had come under their control}, Since the curator controlled the municipal revenues, and had the power to veto municipal legislation, his appointment dealt a serious blow to the development of the principle of local self-government?. When the em- perors transferred the election to the curiae, the power of the landed proprietors who constituted the senates was greatly increased, as they were able to choose a candidate favorable to their own interests. The corrupt administra- tion of the curatores led to such abuses that the imperial government was led to create a new office to care for the interests of the common people. The defensor civitatis (€xdixos) is found in Egypt in the first half of the fourth century. Apparently the office was not established in other parts of the empire before 364 when it appears in Illyria?. At this time the appointments were made by the pretorian prefect and confirmed by the emperor. In 387 the nominations were made by the local curiae subject to the emperor’s approval*. Under Hono- rius the bishop, clergy, honorati, possessores, and curiales chose the defensor®. Majorian gave the plebeians a voice in the election, and Justinian made the office a municipal liturgy imposed for a term of two years in rotation from an album of suitable candidates ®, While the duties of the defensor were ill-defined at first, the office soon acquired great prestige, and overshadowed that of the curator and other magistrates. It was ap- parently conceived as an imperial patrocinium to offset the growth of private patronage, which was undermining state and civic authority and imposing serious hardships 1 de Ruggiero, Diz. Ep. s.v. curator. 2 Dig. 39. 2. 46; 50. 8. 2, 5, 113 50. 9. 4. His judicial powers were limited (Cod. F. 1. 54. 3 (239)). 3 P. Oxy. gor; Cod. Th. 1. 29. 1 (364). Cf. ibid. 12. 1. 20 (381). a°Ceds Dh. 1.29. 0364), 3 (368), 6204587). > Cod. F. 1. 55. 8 (409). 6 Majorian, Novellae, 3. 1; Justinian, Nove//ae, 15. [ 92 ] HONORES AND MUNERA on citizens who had no other means of protecting them- selves against the evils of the age. The defensor was especially charged with the protection of the lower orders against illegal exactions and other abuses. He supervised the revision of the tax lists and the collection of taxes from the smaller landowners. Municipal property was under his jurisdiction and he kept the public records (acta). At first he exercised no police or judiciary power except in minor cases, but his authority was extended by various rescripts until he had jurisdiction in civil cases up to 300 solidi. These functions brought the defensor into all branches of municipal administration and the other magistracies declined greatly in importance. In the fifth century he appears to have exercised sole power in many cities. Un- fortunately the development of the office of defensor followed the same lines as that of the curator and instead of defending the interests of the common people, he became their oppressor}. As the magistrates administered civil affairs, so the religious life of the community was in the charge of priests of the local and imperial cults, and these priesthoods were sometimes regarded as liturgies, sometimes as honores*. Usually those citizens were elected to priesthoods who had already discharged their municipal obligations, and they were thus exempt from liturgies of a personal character, but their patrimony remained liable to the customary charges. While priests were usually chosen by election or cooptation, the honor was in some cases hereditary, in others it was sold to the highest bidder. The term of service was annual, or for a prescribed period, or for life®. After Christianity was officially recognized, the pagan cults began to fall into disrepute, and their priesthoods were finally abolished. 1 RE. 5.0. defensor. 2 ‘The codes vary in their classification of priesthoods. Cf. Cod. Th. 12.1. 75 (371), 77 (372), 103 (383). 3 Liebenam, St. Verw. 342 ff. [ 93 ] HONORES AND MUNERA In the fourth century the Codes give to the principales (primarit, primates, summates), or leading men of the local curiae, a position which seems to have been regarded as a virtual honor}, As the magistracies weakened or dis- appeared, the principales acquired administrative power, and they are grouped sometimes with the decurions, sometimes with the defensor, in municipal duties. The title was conferred in some cases by a vote of the senate, and was even granted to minors, although it was usually re- served for those who had satisfied all their municipal obligations. The zpomodurevopuevor of Egypt are probably the eastern equivalent of the principales. The primus curiae or the chief member of the senate received special honors and privileges, and on the fulfilment-of certain conditions was eligible for the imperial rank of comes primi ordinis. Next to the municipal magistracies, the liturgies or munera were the most important factor in carrying on the civic organization. The imposition of a direct tax on the commonwealth had never been popular in democratic states and the liturgy was resorted to in supplementing municipal revenues. The extension and development of this method of administration is one of the most important features of municipal history in the Roman empire. Liturgies (munera publica) were classified as munera personalia and munera patrimoniorum. Under the latter might be placed those called munera locorum*. ‘The former did not require the expenditure of money, while the patrimonial liturgies were virtually a form of taxation on the estate of the incumbent. Certain liturgies were called munera mixta®, ‘The oriental decaprotia is an example of this class, for those who undertook the office were re- sponsible for the payment of the imperial tribute from their municipality. Ifthe full assessment was paid by the citizens, the liturgy involved no expense, but if the deca- proti had to make up the deficit, the liturgy became a 1 Declareuil, op. cit. 164 ff. BED Ie. (COCA RO STAD SDT Ae Re Bh tp | [ 94 ] HONORES AND MUNERA munus patrimoniorum. Extraordinary liturgies (munera extraordinaria) were devised to meet special needs, par- ticularly in the imperial service, and ultimately many of this class were incorporated in the regular burdens of the municipality as munera personalia or patrimoniorum. In the Greek cities we sometimes find liturgies described as Onpotikat and Bovdevrixai, which may imply that members of the senate were not called upon to undertake liturgies beneath their station, or those which called for the performance of menial labor}. The classification of liturgies varied naturally in different cities and in different periods. When there was plenty of money in the municipal treasury, the expense of most liturgies could be met from public funds, but in times of economic depression there was a tendency to transfer personal liturgies to charges on estates. The provincial governor or emperor often made such changes in the classification if the municipality refused to act?. In the third century the laws governing munera were framed by the imperial bureaus, and in the case of liturgies in the imperial service the regulations were applied uniformly throughout the empire. It 1s probable that municipal liturgies of all kinds were ultimately regulated by universal laws. Personal liturgies are described in the Codes and Digest as munera personalia, corporalia, or sordida. \t is probable that the last-mentioned liturgies required manual labor, since women and decurions were excused therefrom?, The charter of Urso provided that not more than five days’ labor could be required from any property-holder within the bounds of the colony*. A similar law is found in Egypt regulating the amount of labor to be given annually by the peasant to ditches and dykes®. In the fourth century no distinction seems to be drawn between munera personalia 1 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 623. ANCog sap e LO. 42154. PIS LEOOT LZ ih5O, 1.22, ‘379 Sot On An sac3. ay NO..20. > Oertel, Die Liturgie, 64 ff. [95 04 HONORES AND MUNERA and sordida. In his treatise on liturgies Arcadius Charisius included under munera personalia such duties as the care of aqueducts, temples, archives, and public buildings, the heating of public baths, the purchase of grain and oil, the management of civic revenues, the collection of the annona, and the convoying of recruits, horses, and other beasts of burden for the imperial service. Irenarchs (police officials), limenarchs (harbor masters), public advocates, local judges, ambassadors, scribes, and other minor officials discharged liturgies of this classt. Other duties, which, in different cities, had been recognized by custom as personal charges, may be added to this list. Charges on estates (munera patrimoniorum or pecuntaria) included such liturgies as the holding of the gymnasi- archy, or of priesthoods, the provision of transport for the imperial service, the sheltering of troops, and the per- formance of any public duty for which the incumbent had to provide funds from his private means?. Certain liturgies were classified and apparently held according to a fixed cursus. When the series was once com- pleted, a citizen could not be compelled to discharge further obligations in that series unless there was a lack of other candidates?. Laws were also devised determining the intervals which should elapse between the different liturgies, but in times of stress evasions are known to have been frequent?. Every resident of the municipality could be required to undertake his share of the liturgies unless he was excused by law. Aliens were also subject to the liturgies of their SBT gal Corey. legs go 2 ‘These munera were also classified according as the owner of an estate was a citizen of the municipality or an alien. In the latter case the munus was called an intributio (Dig. 50. 4. 6), and was apparently a direct tax levied on the owner (Dig. 50. 4. 18, 25). 3 Dig. 50. 4. 3,153 Cod. F. 10. 42. 13 10. 43. 3. While the usual term was annual, shorter periods are known; cf. Athen. Mitth. 8, 318, for four- month terms at ‘['ralles. 4 Cod. F. 10. 41. 13 Oertel, op. cit. 388 7.3; nos. 180, 194, 203. [ 99 ] HONORES AND MUNERA native city in addition to those of the city in which they resided. If, however, they lived outside the town limits, they were exempt from regular munera, but their property was subjected to a special tax called iztridutiol. It is probable that the laws regulating the liturgies of aliens were devised to prevent the migration of wealthy citizens from communities where such burdens were heavy to more favored municipalities such as Roman colonies, or federated states which enjoyed special privileges or were subject to lighter taxation. Citizenship in such cities would be eagerly sought after and the right of conferring it must have been closely guarded. In Tyra decrees of naturalization were required to be submitted to the governor for approval and we may infer that this city enjoyed certain privileges which made citizenship in it desirable?. In later times the rigid application of the laws regarding alien residents made it practically impossible for anyone to reside elsewhere than in his place of birth. The law, however, might be evaded by adoption. To pre- vent this practice an adopted son was required to perform the liturgies of his native city as well as of his new home, and on being emancipated he ceased to be a citizen of his adopted city?. On the other hand, when a woman married a citizen of another city, she became a resident of that city, and was under no obligation to perform the munera patri- montorum to which her estate might be subjected in her native place, nor could her dowry be reckoned as part of her husband’s property*. In the fourth century this law was modified in the case of heiresses of curial estates®. When public funds were appropriated for the discharge of municipal liturgies, the appointee was required to pro- BS Digs cO.%. 29,353.50. 4.03 cf. GOmam tome ti. 2 No. 130. Cf. Cass. Dio, 54.7, where Augustus is said to have deprived the Athenians of the right of granting citizenship because of the abuse of the privilege. es Paa Oil Sel Os BO DIZ komt Qe 30, Fa. 5 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 124 (392). AMA L 9a) 7 HONORES AND MUNERA vide bondsmen as sureties for the proper fulfilment of his duties!. If he died before the end of his term, the obliga- tion fell on his heirs?. In cases of mal-administration the nominator and bondsmen were liable for the obligations of the defaulter®?, Sometimes, especially in the case of im- perial liturgies, the whole curia was held responsible*. It may be doubted whether the cuvia was responsible as a corporate body for all candidates nominated by it in regular session, but where a large number of liturgies were imposed, it is probable that every member was involved either as a candidate, or as nominator, or as surety. In those cases where the liturgy was shared by two or more, the principle of solidary liability was enforced unless it was stipulated otherwise in the appointment®. Outside Egypt we find various methods of appoint- ment to liturgies. Sometimes the emperor or the provincial governor sent nominations to the curia, or made the ap- pointment directly®. The curator rei publicae had power to act in certain cases’. Usually appointments were made by the magistrates and decurions at a regular meeting of the curia, at which a quorum of two-thirds of the members was required by law®. We may suppose that, when the principle of liability had developed to such an extent that members of the senate were heavily burdened, they pre- ferred to escape the obligations of nomination and surety by allowing the appointments to pass into the hands of imperial officials. The financial gain, however, was far outweighed by the loss of independence which was entailed thereby. In the fifth century it is probable that the decurions drew up lists of citizens for each liturgy and ROP 50.) Osid 1s 0d, 7. LOT Ques Be DigecO, Ont ae RCO J Alin30u%, 23.01. 87.13 Godage 2. 6.118, Op Dis. cOnnaay muGed. (1 A112. 6..9(4667). Pedy) 10. 4300 S11 g6. 2p re CBs 12. CON Sagar, 6 Julian, Misopogon, 370-371; Dig. 49. 4. I, 33 50. 5. 2, 73 Cod. Th. II. 16. 4 (328); Cod. F. 10. 77. 1 (409). (iC Ode aT alin 37w is BU GOGs 7 10.3 212s 10.72. 0% ies COM mete SCO. 1 ite Uy Owes ae [ 98 ] HONORES AND MUNERA forwarded them to the provincial governor who made the appointments. This at least was the method of appointing the irenarch according to a law of Honorius!. Extra- ordinary liturgies were assigned by the magistrates at first; in the fourth century by the principales, and later by the governor’. The latter also decided appeals, although they were frequently carried to the emperor, and after 313 the imperial court decided all such questions®. Those who made illegal nominations were compelled to defray the expenses of the appeal#. The liturgical system in Egypt was governed by special laws owing to the peculiar organization of this region®. Very little is known of the system which prevailed in the three Ptolemaic cities, although it is probable that they did not differ from other Greek cities in their forms of administration, if they possessed public lands from which they derived revenues. In the rest of Egypt the Ptolemies forbade private ownership of land, and munera patrimo- niorum were consequently impossible. The Romans created a land-owning class and replaced the voluntary Greek bureaucracy with a liturgical system which was gradually extended throughout Egypt to apply to all but a few of the highest positions in the administration. The precise date of the introduction of the liturgical system cannot be determined, but it was already in existence in A.D. 91, and in the following century there is abundant evidence that liturgies were compulsory and extremely burdensome ®, The Egyptian liturgies are usually classified as ywpukai and voNurixat. Che former probably denote those peculiar SeCog py ctOe7 Fate 2 Cod. F. 10. 46.1; Cod. Th. 11. 16. 4 (328). ERDiG ALO ATA ICOM G2, 79 COdM heb Ra es TOs 50.492 10s, 50.3 $ Cod. Th 12. 1.t (313) 4) Gods Fui10s 32. 2. 5 Jouguet, op. cit. 227 f7.; Wilcken, Grundziige, 347 ff.; Oecrtel, Die Liturgie. § Bell, Fournal of Egyptian Archaeology, 4. (1917), 86 f.; nos. 180, 181, 187, 189, 194. [ 99 ] 7-2 HONORES AND MUNERA to the administration of the nome and the village; the latter belong to the municipal administration of the cities and the metropolis. It is often difficult to distinguish between the imperial and municipal liturgies and the variations in the methods of appointment and appeal in the villages and in the metropolis at different periods make the study of the liturgical system in Egypt particularly difficult! In the villages the nominations were made by the elders or, more commonly, by the secretary. The latter forwarded the list of nominees to the strategus, from whose office it went to the epistrategus who, if there were sufficient candi- dates, chose by lot and made the appointments. In some cases the prefect made appointments?. The sureties of the nominee were responsible for the proper discharge of the liturgy, but in case of their failure the obligation fell upon the entire village. After the introduction of the municipal system the evidence for the methods of nomi- nation in the villages is scanty. In some cases outgoing officials named their successors, in others the candidates were designated by the comarch who sent the list to the strategus for appointment. In the metropolis of the nome the scribe drew up the list of eligible candidates in consultation with the Council of Archons. The list was probably transmitted to the epistrategus through the office of the szrategus. After 202 the nominations were probably made in the senate. A system of tribal rotation was followed, but if the tribal repre- sentatives in the senate failed to make sufficient or proper nominations, the duty fell upon the senate as a whole?. For extraordinary liturgies the prytanis might make ap- pointments, but confirmation by the senate was required ®. 1 Jouguet, op. cit. 98; Oertel, op. cit. In an unpublished papyrus in the Princeton collection the distinction is made between BovAcutixal Accroupytau and dnuorikai trnpeciat. 2 Nos. 181, 185, 198, 200; cf. pp. 89 ff. B Nofi203, 4 No. 203. © Cf. Wilcken, op. cit. 399 f- Li 100; J] HONORES AND MUNERA The senate seems to have had authority to make the final appointment for purely local liturgies. In the case of imperial or state liturgies the appointments seem to have been made from the lists forwarded from the senate to the epistrategus, and in some cases to the prefect!. Certain liturgies could be transferred by the incumbent to others by mutual agreement. In other cases any transfer or commutation by a money payment was strictly forbidden?. Appeals were directed to the prefect, or, more commonly, to the epistrategus. In some cases they were forwarded to the strategus, but probably he was only a medium of communication with the epéstrategus?. A nominee had the right to surrender his property to his nominator if the latter was better able to perform the liturgy, and if the nominee claimed that his own resources were insufficient. Apparently the entire revenue was surrendered for the discharge of liturgies, whereas in magistracies only two- thirds of the revenue could be taken for the expenses of the office’. As the liturgies in the empire increased in number and severity, the privilege of exemption became especially desirable. Antoninus withdrew the right of cities to confer immunity (aréeva), except in the case of physicians, teachers, and philosophers, and the number of exemptions which a city could grant was strictly limited according to its rank®, The provincial governors exercised some authority in this matter until Constantine transferred all questions of exemption to the imperial bureaus ®. The Codes contain a vast number of laws on the subject, regulating the grants of immunity in minute detail. It would be 1 Jouguet, op. cit. 410 f7.; nos. 172, 180, 181, 182, 187, 200. | 2 No. 181; P. Fior. 3-9, 382; BGU. 1073; P. Gen. 73. 3 P. Fior. 57; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 263; Cod. F. 10. 48. 9. 4 Nos. 185, 198. . 5 Dig. 27. 1.6; Cod. F. 10. 47. 1. It should be noted that the rescript of Antoninus was addressed to Asia only, but it is probable that it came to be applied to other provinces as well. $eGoe TAAL 2H 3i( 3 t 3). BRE Seo ey HONORES AND MUNERA impossible, within the limits of this study, to record the legislation in its entirety, and we shall attempt to give only the main outlines}. Individual citizens received the grant of immunity from liturgies by imperial decree. In the case of personal liturgies the grant was not heritable, while immunity from munera patrimoniorum passed to descendants in the male line. Any grant was revocable when the safety of the state was endangered?. Personal liturgies were not imposed on those suffering from physical disability, on minors, on those over seventy years of age, on women, or on parents of five or more living children. Owners of estates subject to liturgies could not escape their obligations on any claim based on age, sickness, number of children, or sex. It was forbidden to commute the personal service required in munera patrimoniorum by a money payment or by providing a substitute*. The latter provision seems to have been disregarded in Egypt and the Orient?. 1 Bks. 6, 7, 8, 11, 12, 13, 16 in the Theodosian Code; 10-12 in the Justinian Code; 50 in the Digest, passim. 2 Dig. 50. 6. 13; Cod. F. 10. 48. 13 (385); Cod. Th. 10. 49. 1-3; 11. 16. 16 (385); Bruns, 41. PED ig ,15 06/2): O17 8950.54 03515 Osa Veen nA: (G0G.) Jea1O.04 2.47 1Or HO. HO. 25.33 TO..614 I-43 TO. 02.2, 35 Codie. 1.2. L.t710320)010 (3 4cu 35 (343); 12. 17. I (324). From these laws it may be seen that the age limit was reduced from 25 to 16. Oéertel thinks that 14 was the lower limit in Egypt (op. cit. 374). Parents often undertook liturgies in the name of a son who was a minor, and sometimes minors were nominated without the consent of the parent. In the latter case the estate of the parent could not be held responsible for any obligations which might be incurred bythe son (Dig. 50. 2.6). In Rome the father of three children, in Italy the father of four, and in the provinces the father of five children was excused from liturgies (Justinian, /wst. 1. 25). Special grants were sometimes made personally to fathers of large families (Dig. 50. 6. 6; Cod. Tz. 12. 1. 55 (363); Cod. F. FO, 52.'1). 4 Dig. 50. 4. 16. 5 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 350; P. Fior. 57. In the fourth century members of the local senates who had received appointments in the im- Be Deo HONORES AND MUNERA The following classes of citizens were excused from liturgies: members of the imperial nobility, officials in the state bureaus, soldiers and officers in the army, veterans, members of guilds in the imperial service and of certain local guilds in the service of the municipality, or engaged in trades under imperial charter, teachers, physicians, actors, athletes, priests of pagan cults and of the Christian church after its recognition by Constantine, tenants on imperial estates (provided that their leasehold covered twenty-five zugera), Roman citizens resident in non-Roman towns previous to the edict of Caracalla4, and citizens of Alexandria and Antinoopolis resident in other towns and villages in Egypt. As the property of conductores of the imperial taxes was pledged to the fiscus as security, they were also exempted. Tenants of waste land who brought it back into cultivation were released from all extraordinary liturgies as also were farmers at seed-time and harvest. The clarissimi or members of the imperial nobility were the most important class of citizens who enjoyed exemption perial body were required to provide substitutes for the discharge of muni- cipal liturgies (Cod. TZ. 12.1. 69(369?), 91 (382), 98 (382), 111 (386), 312 (391) inter alia). 1 Ulpian says (Dig. 50. 4. 3) that a citizen of Rome ought also to perform the liturgies of his domicilium. ‘This is probably later than the Edict of Caracalla as the compilers of the Digest would probably not include regula- tions prior to that period. ‘There are very few inscriptions which record liturgies of Roman citizens in non-Roman towns and these cases may be ex- plained as an act of voluntary generosity, or because the liturgy was held before the grant of citizenship was conferred. In the dip/omata issued to veterans on their discharge, immunity was conferred upon them and their children, and in the single decree of the Senate which we possess conferring citizenship upon an alien (Bruns, 41), he was granted immunity from taxa- tion and all duties, and the gift was transmitted to his heirs, who would also be Roman citizens. In Egypt citizens of Alexandria were exempt from liturgies outside their native place, and since an Egyptian could not become a Roman citizen without being made a citizen of Alexandria first (Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 5, 6), it follows that Romans enjoyed immunity in Egypt. The same rule undoubtedly applied in all Roman provinces, and the guilds of Roman citizens which are found prior to the Edict of Caracalla were probably formed of members of this privileged class. [i FOS NT] HONORES AND MUNERA from municipal obligations sincethey controlled most of the wealth of the community. Membership in the order was hereditary and, while the title was legally secured through imperial favor, it was often purchased fraudulently through the connivance of palace officials, and in some cases it was assumed by powerful citizens without any warrant what- soever. Since every accession to the order weakened the municipality by depriving it of citizens or estates subject to liturgies, the emperors were ultimately compelled to restrict grants of this class. In the fourth and fifth cen- turies elaborate legislation was devised regulating the elevation of decurions or members of the curial order to the rank of imperial nobility. In 340 the fulfilment of all municipal obligations was required before any senatorial honors were conferred!. Two years earlier a decree had been issued compelling those who had no legal claim to imperial honors to return to the curial order?. Twenty years later the situation in the municipalities again be- came serious, and all decurions who had obtained the rank of imperial senator were compelled to resign this title. A few exceptions were made, but even in these cases those who held the rank in question were required to fulfil the munera patrimoniorum upon their estates within the municipality or to resign the property to the curia®. The next step in imperial legislation was to attack the principle of hereditary succession. Hitherto the senatorial rank had been transmitted to a senator’s children with all the privileges which it entailed. After 364 the newly elected senator (c/arissimus) was required to leave one son in the curial order to discharge the obligations of the estate towards the municipality*. After 390 senatorial appointments no longer carried the hereditary privilege®. 1 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 29 (340). 2 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 25 (338). ® Cod. Th. 12. 1. 48 (361), 58 (364), 69 (365), 74 (371), 111 (386), 118 (387). 4 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 57 (364), 90 (382). 5 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 130 (393), 160 (398). [ 104 ] HONORES AND MUNERA This law was later amended, permitting sons born after the appointment to inherit their father’s title and privi- leges, while in the case of the highest class, the é/ustres, all the sons enjoyed the right of hereditary succession}. At the same time permission was given senators to pro- vide substitutes to discharge municipal liturgies. In 436 members of the curia elevated to the rank of spectabiles were compelled to undertake the municipal liturgies in addition to those imposed upon the imperial order, while those appointed to the higher rank of. i//ustres were ordered to provide substitutes to discharge the munera patrimoniorum. The sons of spectabiles and illustres of curial origin remained in the order to which they were born?. This law must have made it impossible for residents in the municipality to hold municipal and imperial honors at the same time, but it is probable that members of the senatorial order found means of escaping their municipal obligations. Accordingly Theodosius closed the senatorial order to all curia/es and this method of securing immunity from liturgies ceased. Exemption from municipal duties was one of the privi- leges granted to those who held the title of perfectissimi or egregii, if this honor was conferred in recognition of public service or after all liturgies had been duly per- formed. Constantine ordained that this honor should no longer be conferred on citizens who were eligible for membership in their local curia‘. Those engaged in imperial service abroad (absentes ret publicae causa) were exempt from municipal obligations®. This class of persons included the retinue of the pro- vincial governors, members of the imperial bureaucracy, God ata ais5 (307). PaCods TBs 12\ 1.1187, (436). 3 Theodosius, Nove//ae, 15. 1 (439), 2 (441). Zeno and Justinian gave immunity to curiales only after reaching the highest offices in the imperial service (Cod. F. 10. 32. 64, 67). 4 Cod. Th. 12. 1.5 (317)3 6f. ibid. 12. ¥. 15 (327), 26 (338), 42 (354), AA FER) s Gods 7020 52.°3. SeDigN4. 6.135 F315 50: 5. 4. Cf Codmfetorasn1.s. [ 105 ] HONORES AND MUNERA ambassadors to Rome or neighboring cities, and soldiers or officers in the army. Similar privileges were naturally extended to members of the palace bureaus who were ultimately organized on military lines!. The curiales sought to escape from their local obligations by securing positions in one or other of the great bureaus, and in the fourth century there was a constant succession of enact- ments forbidding their employment. The frequent adop- tion of such measures shows that the laws were con- stantly evaded. Occasionally attempts were made to seek out all curiales in these positions and to compel them to return to their cities, but evasions were always possible and provision was usually made whereby those who had served for some time or had attained a certain rank were allowed to remain at their posts?. It is, however, probable that the members of the bureaucracy did not always secure complete exemption from their municipal obligations, especially as the higher officials of curial origin were not exempt from all munera patrimoniorum?. In a few depart- ments the privilege of exemption was hereditary for a time in the case of officers of higher rank*. The liberality of emperors varied. Sometimes officials enjoyed exemption from certain specified liturgies, sometimes from all of them, and in times of stress all privileges might be sus- pended®. The laws of Zeno and Justinian gave exemption from municipal obligations only to those curiales who had attained positions of very high rank in the palace®. The laws governing the exemption of soldiers and 1 Cf. bks 6—8 in the Theodosian Code, and bk 12 in the Justinian Code, passim. ? Cod. Th. 12. 1. 26 (338), 31 (341), 36 (343), 44 (358), 78 (372)5 Hina: 4 (393), © (398)5 6. 35 passim. ® Cod. Th. 6. 35. 1 (314), 3 (319). 4 Cod. Th. 12. 3. 14 (326); cf. pp. 205 ff. 5 Cod. Th. 6. 35. I (314), 3 (319)3 11. 16. 18 (390); 6. 26. 14 (407); Cod. F. 12.23.13 12.26. 1-4; 10. 48. 11-123 12. 19. 43 10. 4g. I (408), 2 (445); 3 (472). 8 God. J. 10..32.' 04, 67. [EG] HONORES AND MUNERA veterans are of interest. While soldiers were excused from most municipal obligations, they were liable to certain charges upon their estates!. A soldier home on furlough was technically liable for any liturgies which might be imposed?, When military service became hereditary, sons of soldiers, who did not enter the army, were compelled to join the curial order’. Veterans were given special privileges*. In the second century the Egyptian veteran enjoyed immunity from liturgies (on estates?) for five years after his discharge®. In other parts of the empire no term is ever specified, and it is usually assumed that exemption was for life. It may be questioned, however, whether the law applying to Egypt did not extend over the whole empire. If a veteran entered the curia of his own accord, he was liable for all the liturgies of the order unless he had especially reserved his privilege of ex- emption®. In the third century the veterans were obliged to do road-work and to pay certain vectigalia and intribu- tiones*. Apparently their privileges were steadily encroached upon, since Constantine was compelled to confirm them by special laws 8. Members of guilds engaged in the imperial service— especially in the alimentation of the capital and in supply- ing the armies—enjoyed special privileges and were exempt from all municipal obligations; in fact, shipowners were forbidden to take up the duties of a decurion in their A LDig 80, 405183 50. 507; 103.40. Loaiza 2 Dig. 4. 6. 34-35. 8 Hist, dug. Alex. Sev. 58; Cod. Th. 7. 22. 1.(319), 4 (326)3 7. 1. 5 (364); 12. 1. 18 (329), 35 (343), 79 (379)3 Cod. F. 12. 33. 2-4. 4 BGU. 628. 5 No. 1 177. 6 Cod. F. 10. 44. 1; Dig. 49. 18. 2. Loss of privilege through mis- conduct: Cod. Th. 7. 20. 7 (353)- ? The testimony of Arcadius Charisius, Ulpian, and Hermogenianus Warles, cf. i2.'40.,18..45)50. 4. 183 .5Ougs D1. 8 Cod. Th. 7. 20. 2 (320), 3 (320), 6 (342), 9 (362). Apparently the first promises of Constantine were made under compulsion, and the veterans later found that there was a tendency to ignore them. [home] HONORES AND MUNERA native cities!, Membership in this guild was not only hereditary, but also obligatory in the fourth century”. The estate of a navicularius was bound to the service of his order, and if he bequeathed it to anyone not a member of the guild, the legatee was required to assume the obliga- tions of the estate towards the guild by becoming a member®. On the other hand, a member of the curia was strictly forbidden to attempt the avoidance of his municipal duties by entering the guild of navicularii*. There was a large number of other guilds devoted to the imperial service, and it is probable that the rules for membership in these societies were ultimately brought into conformity with those governing the shipowners?. Besides the imperial guilds there were local corporations in each municipality formed for the special needs of the community, whose members were excused from other liturgies as a recompense. These guilds were under the control of the municipal authorities by whom their duties were designated. The earlier emperors discouraged the formation of these local societies for political reasons, but the ban was later removed®, and numerous records show that these organizations were widespread throughout the empire. A law of Honorius at the end of the fourth century even went so far as to order all citizens to enroll themselves either in the curial order or in some guild’. Constantine granted exemption from personal liturgies to artisans in a large number of professions, and it is prob- 1 At first the period of immunity was five years (Dig. 50. 4. 5), but later immunity was conferred as long as one remained a member of his guild (Dig. 50. 5. 35 50. 6. 6). * Cod. Th. 13. 5. 2 (315), 3 (319), 11 (365), 14 (369), 19 (390), 20 (392), 21 (392), 35 (412); Valentinian, Nove//ae, 29. od. Th. 13. 5. 19 (390). 4 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 149 (395). 5 Waltzing, Les corporations professionnelles chez les Romains; R.E. s.v. collegium; Dig. 50. 6. 7. § Many of these were organized by Alexander Severus (Hist. Aug. Alex. Sev. 33). For legislation in regard to immunity, cf. Dig. 50. 6. 6. 7 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 179 (415); cf. 7. 21. 3 (396). f ireoey) HONORES AND MUNERA able that they were grouped in guilds at that time!. Wealthier members of the guilds were sometimes drafted into the curiae, but it is probable that in the fourth century membership in these societies was hereditary and could not be resigned at will?. Physicians, teachers, and professors of philosophy were excused from all personal liturgies and from providing billets as early as the reign of Vespasian®. Antoninus divided the cities of Asia into grades, and limited the number in each of these professions which might be granted immunity by the municipal authorities according to the rank of the city4.. Elementary teachers were ex- cluded from these privileges®. Instructors in civil law enjoyed immunity in Rome but not in the provinces, a law which must have had considerable importance in the spread of Roman jurisprudence’. Constantine granted physicians and teachers exemption from all charges, and this privilege was later extended to their wives and children’. Architects and members of allied professions were also excused from personal liturgies. Constantine sought to revive the architectural profession by con- ferring immunity on the parent as well as the student®. Priests of local and imperial cults were free from per- sonal liturgies, but were not excused from charges im- posed upon estates ®. Their children also enjoyed the same privileges. In Egypt the number of exemptions granted aT Cod. Th. 13: 4. 2 (337); Cod:- J. 10. O0ur, 2 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 96 (383); Julian, Misopogon, 368. 3 Dig. 27. 1. 6; 50. 4. 18; 50. 5. 103 cf. ibid. 50. 5. 8, where the law- giver ironically remarks that philosophers, since they despise wealth, should not be exempt from munera patrimoniorum, or, if they desire exemption, they are not true philosophers. A Dige27minOs SO: 6283 Cod: Foto sar sa oat a REDIFICOL ATT. OFT s 07M ead ep * Cod. Th. 13.3.1 (321), 2 (324), 5 (344) 4 (362), 15 (393) 16 (414), 17 (414). 8 Cod. Th. 13. 4. 1 (334) 3 (344), 4 (374); cf Dig. 50. 6. 7. * Nos:)164, 1783 Dig. .50,.4.:185 Cod. Tk. 12. 1.123 (335)3. 12. 5. 2 (337)- [ 109 ] HONORES AND MUNERA to the priesthood in each district appears to have been limited under Roman rule!. A provincial priesthood could not be held until all local liturgies were discharged by the candidate, but this high office carried with it the honorary title of comes and conferred immunity from all other charges”. Since magistracies were open to members of the Jewish faith, it may be assumed that Jews were also required to perform municipal liturgies, although those in the Orient claimed exemption?. Constantine required the Jews to be enrolled as curiales, granting exemption to a few—pre- sumably the priests—in each community. By later laws those who devoted their time to the synagogue were excused from personal and civil obligations*. In 383 and again in 398 the immunity of all sects, and particularly of the Jews, was revoked®. The emperor Theodosius again withdrew all privileges in regard to exemption from liturgies which the Jews may have enjoyed at that time and forbade them to be appointed to administrative posts or to imperial honors ®. Christians were not distinguished from Jews at first, but when the political significance of the new religion was realized the government granted them no favors. While their religious beliefs may have prevented Christians from participating voluntarily in municipal duties which in- volved the performance of pagan ritual, it is evident from the proceedings of the Council of [liberris that Christians held magistracies and even pagan priesthoods’. Imperial legislation dealing with Christians who avoided their civic duties began with Constantine who, in 313, granted 1 Otto, Priester und Tempel, 2. 250; Oertel, op. cit. 392; no. 178. BukeGe ee L2012175 (371),077 1 272): PiCoas DAT 20:1 s,.158'(398)s 10) 8,\24ka 8); Dig.-50: 2.03, piteg.th 2. 1G. 8.2 (320); 3220) mean), 3.(397). 5 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 99 (383), 158 (398); Cod. F. 1. 9. 5, IO. 8 Cod. F. 1. 9. 18; Theodosius, Nove//ae, 3; Justinian, Nove/lae, 45. * Declareuil, op. cit. 97 ff. Fae ced HONORES AND MUNERA clerict exemption from all municipal charges!. Evidently the suffering curiales found in this law an easy way of escape from taxation, and shortly afterwards the emperor was forced to issue an edict by which members of the curiae or wealthy plebeians were forbidden to enter holy orders. The frequent re-enactment of this law in later times shows that it was persistently violated, and the general trend of the legislation of the fourth and fifth centuries followed the principle applied to curtales who aspired to membership in the imperial nobility. The Church as a career or as means of escape from liturgies was closed to members of the curial order as far as possible. If they sought to enter the priesthood, their convictions were put to a severe test by laws requiring that their property must be surrendered to the curia in whole or in part, and by the provision of substitutes to perform their curial liturgies*. Valentinian cancelled all exemptions from tribute and from munera patrimoniorum*. Majorian ordered all curiales in the lower offices of the Church to return to their former station in life, while deacons, presbyters, and bishops were compelled to fulfil all their liturgies as citizens®. According to a law of Justinian, curiales were forbidden to enter the priest- hood except in early life, and on condition of surrendering a fourth of their estate to the municipality ®. Tenants on imperial estates were excused from muni- cipal charges unless they owned other property privately. Even these tenants were exempted by a law of Con- stantine if their lease of crown lands covered twenty-five tugera or more’. Since the emperors wished to increase the area of land under cultivation, special immunity was 1 Cod. Th. 16. 2. 1 (313); cf. ibid. 16. 2. 2 (319), 7 (330), 24 (377). *G0d., F416. 2.'3.(320). 3 Cod. Th. 12. 1. 49 (361), 59 (364), 99 (383), 104 (383), 163 (399)5 16. 2. 19 (370), 21 (371). ay 4 Valentinian, Nove//ae, 10. 5 Majorian, Novel/ae, 7, 7 (458). § Justinian, Novel/ae, 6,1 (535). 7% Cod. Th. 12. 1. 33 (342). Be ot HONORES AND MUNERA granted to those who brought waste land under tillage, and full ownership was given to the occupants?. In studying the numerous documents dealing with honores and munera we may easily discern certain ten- dencies which have an important bearing on the history of the municipalities. The magistracies were coveted in the earlier period of the empire, when economic con- ditions were favorable and civic life was distinguished for its splendor. Even then indications are not lacking that decay had already set in. The charter of Malaca pro- vided for a possible lack of candidates for civic positions, and we may infer that some municipalities had already been confronted with this difficulty. Doubtless many weaker communities had already been impoverished be- cause of the loss of citizens through various economic changes. In the third century when famine, plague, civil war, and social disorders were widespread, the magis- tracies became serious burdens on the incumbents, and willing candidates ceased to present themselves for office, except possibly in a few cities which enjoyed unusual economic advantages. The Codes now lay more stress on the burdens attached to magistracies than upon the dis- tinction which they conferred, and while some traces of the former privileges still remained, the honores differed but little from liturgies. In Egypt it is difficult to dis- tinguish between the classes of public service, and the charges attached to certain magistracies were so ruinous that they involved not only the annual income of the incumbent, but trenched upon his capital resources. The laws reveal the fact that citizens designated for office often preferred to abandon their property rather than to accept a magistracy, and that many sought to escape their obligations by flight. While the decay of the traditional offices may be ascribed in part to the development of their liturgical character, the creation of the imperial curatores and defensores contributed greatly in diminishing the 1 1Ged. Th..45.:3. 1 (319)s6fe pp. 217 f [ea HONORES AND MUNERA powers and prerogatives of the local magistrates. Officials designated by the emperor naturally usurped authority because of their greater prestige, and it is not surprising to find that the ordinary magistracies disappeared in many towns to which a curator had been assigned. In the development of liturgies the decurionate fell into greater disrepute than the magistracies. Membership in the curia became hereditary, probably about the begin- ning of the third century, and in the fourth we find an order of curiales which apparently included all citizens who were landowners and eligible for membership in the local senate. Their rank was not only hereditary but also com- pulsory. The history of imperial legislation concerning curiales may be briefly traced. When the collection of taxes was transferred from the publicans to the munici- pality, the duty was assigned to a committee of ten chosen from the senate (decemprimi) or, as in the East, from wealthy citizens (dexdmpwrot), who were not necessarily members of the order. It is probable that many cities farmed their own taxes and the senate as a whole was responsible for their payment. When Septimius Severus granted a municipal senate to the metropolis of each nome in Egypt, he made the members of this body responsible for the collection of the taxes from their nome. The Egyptian system was soon extended to other munici- palities throughout the empire. At least, in the reign of Aurelian, the curiales were responsible for the taxes on abandoned property, and there is no reason to doubt that other deficiencies were made up by them. When they attempted to shift this burden to others, the villagers were oppressed and the charge was made that every curialis was a tyrant. As liturgies and taxes grew in severity, as great landed estates arose owned by proprie- tors who enjoyed immunity from municipal obligations either by virtue of their patents of imperial nobility or by their ability to defy the municipal authorities, and as a system of patronage developed whereby many of the rural AMA ene 8 HONORES AND MUNERA population escaped their share of taxation by placing them- selves under the protection of some wealthy and powerful landowner, the curia/es themselves had to bear alone the increasing burdens placed upon their order. Their un- happy lot was further aggravated by the loss of revenues from the public lands, which were frequently confiscated by the emperors or forcibly occupied by wealthy citizens. In order to preserve the municipal institutions from the danger of disintegration, since many curiales were aban- doning their property rather than facing the burdens placed upon them, the emperors devised stringent legis- lation to control citizens who were members of the order. Not only were severe penalties imposed upon those who attempted to evade their obligations, but every avenue of escape was closed. The curiales became a guild in which membership was hereditary and compulsory. In the fourth century the laws regarded the estate as more important than the citizen in the imposition of taxes and liturgies, and the owner was virtually reduced to the position of an imperial serf. While the unfortunate position in which the curiales found themselves in the later empire was due to a variety of causes, the most important factor was the development of the liturgical system. When a volume of tribute flowed into the treasury at Rome sufficient to relieve her citizens of all taxes, an elaborate system of liturgies was un- necessary. In western municipalities our records are un- fortunately incomplete, and the clauses of the charters pertaining to liturgies are lacking, but it is probable that sufficient revenue was derived from the public lands in each city to defray the ordinary administrative expenses. The citizens could be called upon to give their labour to an amount not exceeding five days in public service, and the magistrates were expected to supplement the revenues by contributions towards public amusements or in other ways, such as by the summa honoraria. In the Greek cities, however, the Romans found a fully developed system of aa] HONORES AND MUNERA liturgies. This they adopted and in the course of time they extended it over the empire. An important factor in the extension and development of this system as a form of imperial taxation was the depreciation of the coinage by successive emperors. By reducing the gold and silver content in the various issues, embarrassing financial difficulties could be avoided, and the consequent rise in prices produced an appearance of prosperity, at least among the agricultural classes. When the taxes returned to the fiscus in the depreciated coinage, there was trouble. It was found that the revenues were no longer sufficient to meet the increased cost of administration. Since it would be extremely unpopular and possibly dangerous to in- crease the rate of taxation, the rulers were left with the alternative of further depreciation or of extending the municipal system of liturgies to cover various forms of the imperial service. As a matter of fact both methods were resorted to, until the emperors refused to accept their own coinage and demanded the taxes paid in kind. In collect- ing these and transporting them to the public storehouses, an additional burden was placed upon the municipality. The liturgies, which we may call imperial, were distributed throughout the provincial cities and were regulated by laws applied uniformly to the whole empire. In the course of time the local liturgies came under similar provisions and tended to become universally applied. Of the imperial liturgies the most exacting were those in connection with the imperial post and the billeting of troops or public servants. The severity of these liturgies was increased by the venality and extortion practiced by the officials, and although the emperors frequently sought to correct abuses they were powerless to cope with the widespread corruption which permeated the bureaucracy. In addition to the imperial liturgies, the local munera grew more burdensome. This was due to economic causes. The decline in the fertility of the soil, the alienation of municipal lands by confiscation or otherwise, and the Pars 8-2 HONORES AND MUNERA appropriation of a large part of the municipal revenues by Valentinian and his successors were instrumental in impoverishing the municipal treasury and causing the transfer of many munera personalia to the class of munera patrimoniorum. In this way another burden was imposed on the citizens already struggling to meet the increasing cost of the administration and the defense of the empire. For these reasons it was necessary that the right of im- munity from liturgies should be carefully restricted. The earliest legislation on this question dates from the reign of Antoninus, who limited the power of the municipalities to confer this privilege. We believe that the edict of Cara- calla was actuated by similar motives. By granting citizen- ship to all free subjects in the provinces, the privilege of immunity which Romans had hitherto enjoyed was taken away, and the liturgies were more equitably distributed. In the fourth and fifth centuries there is a constant succession of laws which steadily narrowed the right of persons holding property in the municipalities to avoid the charges which such possession entailed. In the age of Zeno and Justinian no citizen of curial origin could escape his municipal obligations except by appointment to the highest positions in the imperial bureaucracy. Un- fortunately the general trend of this legislation aggravated rather than mitigated the lot of the curiales. In fact the study of the laws governing the magistracies, the liturgies, and immunities reveals to the modern student the most significant phases in the decline of municipal life in the Roman Empire. Hekate f CHAPTER IX IMPERIAL TAXES AND REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES N O adequate conception may be had of the relations which the municipalities bore tothe central govern- ment, nor of certain important influences which affected the welfare of the cities, unless one knows some- thing of the imperial taxes which were levied in the provinces, of the methods employed in collecting them, and of the requisitions made by imperial officials}. The principal tax in the provinces was on land, and in Sicily, the first district acquired outside of Italy, it took the form of tithes. The Romans simply took over the system of taxation there which their predecessors had followed?. Had they not found taxes already being collected there by the central government which they dis- possessed, it is not impossible that the municipalities in Sicily and elsewhere might have gone untaxed, and might have been incorporated into the Roman state as the civitates in Italy had been. In that case the organization of the Roman empire would have taken an entirely different course, and the provincial cities would have had a very different history from that which they did have. But finding a careful system of taxation worked out in Sicily, and finding machinery in operation which would pour a large revenue into the treasury, the Romans con- tinued the system. In a similar way, on acquiring Mace- donia, they took over the method of collecting taxes there which their predecessors had followed, as we shall see later. Iwo centuries after the conquest of Sicily Cicero 1 The munera are treated in another chapter. The Roman financial system and its administration have been left out of account in this chapter, as not pertinent to our purpose. 2 Cf. pp- 47 ff. Paeao IMPERIAL TAXES AND thought of the provincial contribution to the treasury as ‘‘representing the fruits of victory, or as a punishment for engaging in war with the Romans.” And this may well have been the conception which the Romans held, down to the close of the second century B.c. But in the /ex agraria of 111 B.c.® the theory is taking shape that the Roman state owned all conquered territory outside Italy. By the early empire the new theory, which came perhaps from Egypt, was generally accepted by Roman lawyers. From this time forth the essential part of the tribute paid by the provinces is thought of as rent. This rent may be paid in the form of a quota, usually a tenth of the produce (decuma), or as a fixed contribution (stipendium). Sicily, as we have noticed, paid tithes, and it seems probable that the next important province to be acquired, Spain, made her contribution to the imperial treasury in a similar way at the outset*. In course of time the Spanish assess- ment was commuted to a fixed money payment?®. The first sure instance of the imposition of a stipendium on subduing a new territory occurs in the case of Macedonia. Here again, as in Sicily, the Romans took over the system of taxation which they found in existence in the newly conquered region®, By 168 B.c., then, two different 1 Cf. the quotation from Cic. in Verr. 3. 12-14, given on p. 46. Bilis ZOO; ? Mommisen (8+. R. 3, 731) thinks that this theory was recognized in the Sempronian law of 123 B.c. under which Asia was organized, but cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, p. 431, col. 2. 4 Livy (43. 2. 12) speaks of the demand of the Roman magistrate in 171 B.C.: ne cogeret vicesimas vendere Hispanos nisi quanti ipse vellet. From this remark it looks as if the Spaniards originally contributed one- twentieth of their grain. For a different explanation of this passage, cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2, 197. See also Rostowzew, R.E. 7, 154. The earliest arrangements in Sardinia cannot be made out with certainty; cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, p. 432, n. 2. At all events a decuma was exacted of the people in the island. BAC PACiCr i Br ef wl 2 . Frank (Roman Imperialism, 209 f.) makes the interesting suggestion that this fixed annual payment was in lieu of a war indemnity. Thus Car- thage at the end of the first Punic war was required to pay an indemnity of 3200 talents, and at the close of the second, 10,000. Macedonia, how- onde | REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES methods of levying tribute in the provinces had been adopted. In some provinces one of these systems pre- vailed to the exclusion of the other. In others the two methods were combined, and in still other cases part of a province paid tithes, and the other part a fixed sum of money. Thus Sicily and Asia for many years paid tithes only, Gaul always paid a stipendium, one part of Africa contributed money, another part, a quota of its produce, while Sardinia for some time apparently contributed both. It was clearly the general policy of Rome to substitute a money payment for a payment in kind. This change was made probably in Spain and Sardinia, and certainly in Asia, Judaea, and Africa. Undoubtedly it lightened the burdens of the provincial cities, because a system of tithes always bears heavily on the farmer. So far as the rate of taxation goes, assuming that it was Io per cent. on the average, it was not exorbitant. While the land-tax was the commonest and most important tax outside Italy, it was not the only impost peculiar to the provinces in the time of the republic. In the regions conquered by them the Romans found not only a tributum soli but also a tributum capitis. The latter tax was levied in Judaea, Africa, Cilicia, Asia, and Britain, and in some of these districts at least Rome continued to levy it regularly or occasionally!. This impost seems to have taken a variety of forms, according to the usages and economic conditions of a province. In some cases it was a simple poll tax, in others, a license paid by pedlars, shopkeepers, and men engaged in other trades, and in still others, an income or property tax?. Probably the tributum capitis, however, was thought of under the ever, after the victory of Paullus was not in a position to pay down an adequate amount. The annual payment, therefore, required of her may have been thought of as interest upon such a sum. It is more natural to suppose, however, that Rome simply continued the Macedonian system of a fixed payment of money each year. ‘This conclusion seems to harmonize with the fact that the amount which the Romans exacted each year was exactly half that required by the kings. 1 Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2. 198 and nn. 2 Op. cit. 200. [Rog IMPERIAL TAXES AND republic as a tax intended to supplement or fill out the contribution required under the sributum soli’. But as the policy of substituting payment in money for payment in kind developed, it was natural that this tax should become more important. The census which Augustus began in 27 B.c. in the provinces would furnish a sound basis not only for a just valuation of property?, but for the imposition of a tax on all kinds of property, and the tributum soli took into account, not only the acreage and the character of land, but also the number of slaves employed and the equipment owned, while the tributum capitis was extende to cover other kinds of property®. | In this connection a word may be said about the scriptura, or payment made by those who pastured their flocks and herds on state-land. Under the republic the right to collect the fees due for pasturage was let out to companies, but in imperial times the privilege of using public pasture-land was let out to the owners of large herds, or the lands were occupied by herds belonging to the emperor?. We have had occasion to notice in a preceding chapter that in the provinces the unit with which Rome dealt was rather the community than the individual®. In accordance with this principle the tribute was ordinarily paid, not by the homo stipendiarius, but by the civitas stipendiaria®. The 1 Marquardt, op. cit. 203. * Humbert, Dict. Dar. s.v. census, p. 1007, col. 1 and Kubitschek, R.E. 3, 1918 f. 8 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 331. The house tax exacted in Cilicia (Cic. ad fam. 3. 8. 5) was an old Jewish tax (Josephus, Az. Iud. 19. 6. 3) and was also levied in Egypt. This tax may explain the law against removing or tearing down houses in some municipalities. * Cf. Humbert, Dict. Dar. s.v. scriptura; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. Staats- pacht, 410 (62). BSG ESD 7 § Cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 185, n. 7; Hirschfeld, 74, n. 6. This is clearly shown, for instance, by the statement of Apuleius (4po/. ror) that the ¢ridutum soli of Pudentilla was paid in for her to the quaestor of the village of Oea: Pudentillae nomine pro eo agello tributum dependi; prae- _ Sens est quaestor publicus, cui depensum est, Corvinius. Lazo REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES provincial municipality therefore was made responsible for the payment of a certain amount, and this fact proved to be of tremendous significance in the subsequent history of Roman municipalities. When a government lays an obligation on a corporation, it must look to the officials of that corporation to satisfy it. If the obligation is a financial one, and if the corporation cannot or will not meet it in full, the officials must make up the deficit. This was the situation to which a municipality in the provinces was brought in the course of time by Rome’s method of im- posing a tax upon it and not on the individual subject. Just as the Romans had taken over Hiero’s system of taxation in Sicily, so they adopted his method of collecting taxes. Instead of collecting the tribute by means of government officials, they divided Sicilyt, and later the other provinces, into districts, and farmed out the privilege of gathering the taxes in each district to the highest bidder. The difference between the amount bid by a redemptor and the sum which he was able to squeeze out of the taxpayers represented his profits under the contract, and Livy, Cicero’s Verrine orations, and his letters from Cilicia set forth clearly the sufferings of the municipalities in the republican period under this iniquitous practice. Julius Caesar introduced a measure of reform into this system in Asia®. Augustus probably took the collection of the tribute away from the publicans in the imperial provinces*, and by the time of Nero their activities were confined to the collection of the vectigatia®. It would be D Gh Cicutmi Perr .3. 67,.75, 84, 803,00: 2 For the organization of the societates publicanorum, the technical terms applied to the officials in these organizations, and the method of collecting taxes, cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 184 f7, 298 #7; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. Staatspacht, 374 ff.; Hirschfeld, 68 f#; Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 324 f7.; Arnold, Roman Provincial Administration, 201 ff. 3 Cf. Chapot, op. cit. 328. 4 Cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, 433, col. 2. > Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 379; Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 1017 f. and n. I end. one an IMPERIAL TAXES AND hard to imagine a more vicious method of collecting taxes than that which had grown up in the Roman world during the last century of the republic. Hiero’s system in Sicily of farming the taxes out to local contractors made the tax- farmers amenable in some measure to local public senti- ment. But when the Sempronian Law in 123 B.c. provided for the letting of the Asiatic tax-contracts to companies in Rome, it removed this salutary restraint on the greed of the tax-gatherer, and, what was worse, it led to the growth of financial organizations in Rome, which were strong enough to bend governors to their purpose and influence the senate and the courts. It was the irony of fate that this vicious system which bore so heavily on the subject peoples of Rome should have gained its strength from a law fathered by the great democratic leader, Gaius Gracchus. The empire not only did away with this method of collecting tribute, but it introduced other important reforms in provincial taxation. It substituted a money payment in most cases for the more harassing payment in kind. Provincial governors were kept under a stricter and more constant supervision. Their terms were long enough to enable them to inform themselves of con- ditions in their provinces and to remedy abuses. The taking of a careful census furnished a more equitable basis for taxation than had existed under the republic, and cities had the right of appealing to Rome from unjust decisions on matters of taxation. _ Up to this point we have been discussing the principal imperial tax paid by the provincial civitares. But in addition to the tridutum the central government levied portoria, the vicesima libertatis, the vicesima hereditatium, the centesima rerum venalium, the vicesima quinta venalium manciptorum, the capitulum Jenocinii, a tax on gladiatorial shows’, and, in the later period, the annona, the collatio lustralts, the capitatio plebeia, not to mention certain vecti- 1 Cfhonomric: ( Deaen REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES galia of a temporary character}. The first of these imposts were laid under the republic. The portoria go back to the beginning of the republic?, while Livy refers the vicesima iibertatis to the fourth century ®. The Romans applied the term portorium to a duty levied on merchandise in transit at a frontier, or when brought into a harbor or a city, or when transported over a bridge or along a road*. The establishment of an imperial customs duty was the result of natural development. At a very early period the Romans collected a duty on goods brought into their city. In the territory which they con- quered they found states collecting such a tax on their frontiers or at the gates of cities. The victors took over from these subject communities the right to the duties, and deve- loped in course of time a tariff system for the whole Roman world®. In other words they adopted the portorium from the conquered cities just as they had taken over the tribute from Hiero in Sicily®. Of the tariff districts in the West we can clearly make out four, viz. Spain, the Gauls, Illyricum, and the four divisions of Africa’. At the frontiers of these districts and also within the districts themselves, at river crossings or on the main highways, posts were established for the collection of customs®. The tariff was a flat ad valorem duty, levied for revenue only, and varied somewhat from district to district and from one period to another. Under the early empire it was 24 per cent. in Gaul and Asia, and probably 5 per 1 Cf. Hirschfeld, 92, nn. 2, 3. A salt tax is recorded in Priene, Jzschr. von Priene, 1113; cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 411 ff.; Cod. F. 4. 61. 11. 2 Cf. Cagnat, Les impots indirects chez les Romains, 6 f. SOG he HLASLI7 ALO 4 Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 390, n. 115 and Liibker, Reallexikon, 373, Collits 5 Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 17 /f,. 8 Cf. pp. 47 ff. ? Cf. Hirschfeld, 78; Rostowzew, op. cit. 391. Cagnat (op. cit. 17) gives seven districts in the West. Hirschfeld and Rostowzew omit Spain. 8 For the Gallic region, cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 47-69; cf. also dz. ¢p. 1919, no. 10, ll. 65-70. fy t2an IMPERIAL TAXES AND cent. in Africa and Illyricum!. Shortly after the time of Theodosius it seems to have been raised to 124 per cent.? All articles intended for sale were subject to this duty, and it was exacted of all persons except those officially connected with the central government and excepting the members of certain privileged classes, like the veterans and the zavicularii*. ‘This tax and the method of collecting it were open to two serious objections. In the first place it interfered grievously with the freedom of trade, and enhanced the prices of raw material and manufactured wares. The trade of the empire suffered in the same way from the multiplicity of tariff districts as did that of France in the eighteenth century. It is only necessary to glance at a map of the Roman world to appreciate the delays and the expense to which a merchant would be subject, for instance, in importing wares into Italy from the East. The situation was made worse by the extortionate practices and the high-handed methods which the pub- licans adopted*. Literature is full of complaints of their conduct, and certain emperors went so far as to propose the abolition of the tax altogether®. But it was such a fruitful source of revenue that it lasted into the later empire. The vicesima libertatis or manumissionum continued into the empire, but was probably abolished by Diocletian®. We may infer from the large number of freedmen of whom we hear in the late republic and the early empire that this tax brought a large sum into the treasury’. The master would naturally pay it when he rewarded a slave by granting him his freedom, the slave, when the en- franchisement was bought from the master. It was * Cf. Hirschfeld, 79 f. 2 Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 15 ff. ° Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 119-125. Now and then people of a favored city were exempted from the payment of the portorium; cf. ibid. 125. 4 Cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 88 f. BiGF Carnatop ie. 6 Cf. Hirschfeld, rog. if. Cag ly of. ’ For an attempt to calculate the amount in an early period, cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 173. [ 124 | REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES collected by publicans under the republic and the early empirel, It is interesting to notice that in some cases this tax went into the treasuries of the municipalities”. Augustus introduced the centesima rerum venalium, the vicesima quinta venalium manctpiorum, and the vicesima heredi- tatium. The first-mentioned tax was levied on goods sold at auction, and must have been regarded as oppressive, because several attempts were made to abolish or reduce it, It continued however into the later empire. The 4 per cent. impost on the sale of slaves involved only an increase in the rate of the cextesima when applied to a particular kind of property. In this chapter we are not making a survey of Roman finances nor even of the Roman system of taxation. We are only concerned with the bearing of that system on the municipalities of the empire. We are interested therefore, primarily, in the imperial taxes which the provincials were required to pay. Now the inheritance tax was levied on citizens only, and, so far as the provinces were directly concerned, would affect merely the Roman citizens resident in them*. However, after. the publication of Caracalla’s edicts of a.p. 212 and 213, this tax was payable by all freemen throughout the Roman world, and from this time on the burden of it fell as heavily on provincial municipalities as in the earlier period it had fallen on Italian cities®. The tax was levied on estates above 100,000 sesterces bequeathed to heirs other than blood-relations®. The collection of it was farmed out up to the time of Hadrian. Thenceforth it was collected directly by the 1 Cf. Hirschfeld, 106 f.; Rostowzew, op. cit. 380. ar GPO Do aOs te Ov 3 Cf. Hirschfeld, 93. 4 Cf. Pliny, Panegyricus, 37-39. > For certain probable limitations on the extension of Roman citizenship, cf. Girard, Textes, 203-204, and the literature there cited. 6 Outside of the fact that Augustus established it primarily as a source of revenue, he may well have thought that its provisions would help check race suicide. On this point cf. Hirschfeld, 98, n. 1. ee} IMPERIAL TAXES AND central government!. In the time of Justinian we hear no more of it?, One important point in the incidence of this tax in the provinces is not clear to us. Did it apply to land owned and bequeathed by Roman citizens? Ifit did, such land must have been subject to a double tax, since a tribu- tum was also levied upon it. Possibly in the provinces only movable property was liable to this impost. The history of this tax illustrates at the same time the gradual leveling of Italy and the provinces and the influence of an economic factor in bringing abouta political change. When Augustus proposed an inheritance tax, to fall on Roman citizens, Italy had been free from the payment of the tributum for many years. The proposed tax, while not a tributum, was viewed in the light of a tribute*. It was a step toward removing Italy from the favored position which she had hitherto held when compared with the provinces, and Augustus carried out his purpose against the strong opposition of the senate only by threatening to impose the tribute on Italy. The extension of Roman citizenship by Caracalla to all freemen in the provinces is the last important step in the process of equalizing the political rights of provincials and Italians. The result of his action was to bring the provincials under the operation of the inheritance law®. Consequently the history of this tax, from Augustus to Caracalla, is synchronous with the process of reducing Italy to the political and social level of the provinces, and is intimately connected with it. The 1 Cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 385. > Cf. Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2, 269. ° Hyginus (Lachmann, Gromatici veteres, 197) says: Excepti sunt fundi bene meritorum, ut in totum privati iuris essent, nec ullam coloniae munifi- centiam deberent, et essent in solo populi Romani. This raises the point whether Roman citizens living in non-Roman communities owned their property by Quiritary law. If so, their real estate would be virtually Roman soil. ‘The statement of Hyginus would imply that the possessions of favored individuals were so regarded. We cannot tell whether Hyginus includes Romans under the class of bene meriti. 4 Cf. Hirschfeld, 98, n. 2. ° For Caracalla’s purpose, cf. no. 192 and pp. 191 ff. D120 REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES last step in this movement was taken by Diocletian. The vectigal lenocinit or capitulum Jenocinit was at first farmed out, but later collected by agents of the government!. In the later empire four important changes were made in the imperial system of taxation. For the first time, under Diocletian, a property tax was imposed on all the free cities in the provinces and on the cities of Italy. By this action the free cities lost in large measure their ex- ceptional position, and Italy, in the matter of taxation, was reduced to the level of the provinces. A systematic contribution of food, in the form of the aznona, was re- quired throughout the empire. In the third place assess- ments were based on certain fixed fiscal units, and finally comprehensive changes were made in the method of collecting taxes. To take up the second change, as we have already noticed, when the Romans acquired Sicily they took over the system of taxation which they found in existence there. They exacted from the Sicilian cities the payment of a tenth part of their produce. Part of this contribution was used for the army of occupation, part of it for the city of Rome. As the population of the capital grew and agriculture in Italy declined, the quantity of grain which the Romans needed from the island increased correspond- ingly. Consequently, in addition to the regular decumae, which constituted the sridutum of the island, alterae decu- mae were called for in times of need under a special law or decree of the senate. For this contribution a fixed price was paid’. Not infrequently a third contribution, the frumentum imperatum, was required. For this also payment was made. Rome paid too for the supplies delivered to the governor, the frumentum in cellam, or frumentum emptum, or PNG hoAOAt 2. CDT Ay 3 Cf. Cic. in Verr. 3. 42: senatus cum temporibus rei publicae cogitur ut decernat ut alterae decumae exigantur, ita decernit, ut pro his decumis pecunia solvatur aratoribus; ut, quo plus sumitur quam debetur, id emi non auferri putetur. Cf. loc. cit. 3. 163, 172. [ 127 ] IMPERIAL TAXES AND annona, as it was called! It is significant of the future that even the civitates immunes were required to join in furnishing these extra supplies. Payment in kind, as in the case of Sicily, either in the form of a quota of the produce or a fixed number of measures of grain, was required in certain other provinces. On the other hand, from Macedonia and some other provinces a tribute in money was exacted. In the arrangements which were made in the early period we find all the elements out of which the system of Diocletian developed. Tribute was required from the civitates of the provinces in kind or in the form of money payments. Food was provided for the city of Rome and for the armies of occupation from the supplies which were levied as tribute and from those which were requisitioned, and the free cities, of Sicily at least, had to submit to requisitions. The development of the earlier system into that of Diocletian can be followed with some confidence. In the early days subject cities fell into classes. ‘Those of the first class were called upon each year for a fixed sum of money. Residents in the other cities were required to contribute a quota of their produce, or a poll tax, or both. Gradually the exaction of a quota from the second class of cities gave way to the contribution of a fixed annual amount in kind, and still later for the contribution in kind a fixed money payment was established for most of the provinces. The first change made it possible to do away with the tax-farmers; the second one relieved the state from the trouble and expense attendant on storage and carriage. Two circumstances, 1 Cf. Rostowzew, R.E. 7, 165; Liebenam, R.£. 4, 2310; Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 113. * Hyginus (Lachmann, Gromatici veteres, 205) says: Agri vectigales multas habent constitutiones; in quibusdam provinciis fructus partem prae- stant certam, alii quintas, alii septimas, alii pecuniam, et hoc per soli aestimationem. Certa pretia agris constituta sunt, ut in Pannonia arvi primi, arvi secundi, prati, silvae vulgaris, pascuae. His omnibus agris vectigal est ad modum ubertatis per singula iugera constitutum. ‘The taxes on public lands varied as the provincial tribute seems to have varied. [1284 REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES however, in the later situation brought about a reversion to the earlier practices. The first of these two factors was the debasement of the currency, which began under Nero and had reached such a point under Gallienus that silver coins contained but 4 per cent. of silvert. The tax receipts in this depreciated currency left the treasury in great straits, and this situation in itself would have been sufficient to force a return to the practice of requiring payment in kind, but it was reinforced by the increasing demands for food of the city of Rome and of the armies. Weare not surprised, therefore, to find Diocletian making a contribution of grain a fixed part of the tribute levied on all the provinces, and, since this contribution was in- tended primarily for the annual supply of Rome, it was naturally called the annona*, The decision of the govern- ment to collect a large part of the taxes in kind put a tremendous strain on the imperial post, which was charged with the transportation of this produce, and we may thus understand the bitter protests against the post made by the agricultural classes, for the burden of its maintenance fell largely on them. Grain could be had only from farm land, and consequently this tax was laid only on the owners of such land. The objects of it were land, men, and animals. After a.p. 289 the rate of taxation and other pertinent matters were set forth each year in the indictio of the em- peror*. The owners of other property than farm-land continued to pay the tribute. Subject cities were called on for both the anzuona and the tribute, while civitates immunes probably contributed only the axnona?. 1 Cf. Seeck, R.E. 3, 1515. Probably the mines of the empire did not produce a quantity of gold and silver sufficient for trade, and large amounts of the precious metals were exported to Arabia, India, and China; cf. Pliny, N.H, 12. 18, 82-84. 2 Egypt and Africa, upon which Rome depended for supplies, had always continued to pay their tribute in kind. Consequently when the contributions of the other provinces, hitherto paid in depreciated currency, were converted into payments in kind, these two provinces were much less heavily taxed than the others; cf. Seeck, R.EZ. 3, 1516. S$ Cfenosps tars 6: 4 CfiSeeckn Rebs, E16, 5 [bid. AMA [ 129 ] 9 IMPERIAL TAXES AND Diocletian based the assessment of taxes on a fiscal unit called the caput or iugum. A uniform tax was collected on all capita and iuga. A caput was the working power of a man in good health'. In the West this was the term commonly used of the fiscal unit. Less frequently the terms millena and centuria were employed. ‘Two women, a certain number of animals, or a fixed amount of land of a specified sort also constituted a caput. In the East the unit, when made up of men, women, or animals, was called a caput, when composed of land, a iugum. ‘Thus in the Diocese of the Orient a vineyard of five iugera, cultivated land of twenty iugera, or a certain number of olive trees made up a iugum*. The amount due on each iugum or caput was fixed by an imperial edict, and the taxes thus assessed were levied under the general supervision of the praetorian prefects, the vicarit, and the governors of pro- vinces. When the amount to be paid by a province had been determined, the governor apportioned it among the several cities within the province according to the number of taxable capita or iuga®. Diocletian’s system was devised to bring within its sweep all the property in the empire, and for convenience 1 Cf. Seeck, R.E. 3, 1517, 1564 and the passage from the Cod. Th. 13. 11. 2 there quoted: cum antea per singulos viros, per binas vero mulieres capitis norma sit censa. See also in general Seeck, R.E. 3, 1513 7; Lécri- vain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, 434 f7. and Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 224 ff. The value of the caput was somewhat changed by Theodosius the Great in A.D. 386. He rated five men or eight women as two capita; cf. Seeck, R.E. 3, 1517 and Cod. Th. 13. 11. 2. 2 Cf. Seeck, RE. 3, 1519; Marquardt, St. Verw. 2, 221 ff. See also the description of the ivgum in a passage cited by Mommsen (Hermes, 3 (1869), 430) from a Syriac collection of laws of a.p. sor and CJL. x, 407 and JG. XI, 3, 180, 182, 343-9. _® The inscription of the year 323 from Vulceii in Lucania (CJL. x, 407) cited by Marquardt, Sz. Verw. 2, 229, is very illuminating in this con- nection. It specifies the sum to be paid by the entire commune, and gives a list of the possessores, arranged according to pagi, with the amount to be paid by each taxpayer. Inscriptions from Thera and Astypalaea (JG. x1, 3, 180, 182, 343-9) and fragments of inscriptions from Lesbos and Tralles (B.C.H. 4 (1880), 336, 417 #7) contain other pertinent information. [tees] REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES in discussion the people may be thought of as falling into three great classes, the possessores, the negotiatores, and the coloni. ‘The possessores, or owners of land or of other pro- perty, paid the azxoua or the tribute. The tax on the coloni or plebs rusticana extra muros, who presumably had no property, was the capitatio plebeia or humana. Perhaps this impost may be thought of as the lineal descendant of the tributum capitis of the earlier period, but limited in its incidence to the lowest class of freemen, and amounting essentially to a poll tax. The merchants, or xegotiatores, were subject to an impost called the co/atio lustralis or, more fully, the /ustralis auri argentive collatio. We find it first mentioned as aurum negotiatorium in the reign of Alexander Severus+. With few exceptions it fell upon all those who sold articles of any sort, and it was levied on the basis of the capital invested in the business?. As the name of the tax indicates, it was properly collected every five years or every four years, but evidently it was also frequently collected when a new emperor ascended the throne. Each new emperor found it very important to win the support of the troops by giving them largesses, and these gratuities had to be given in money. Thus, for instance, Julian on being made Augustus in the fourth century gave to each soldier five so#di and a pound of silver®. Each city was required to contribute a specified sum. Similar in character was the aurum oblaticium, theo- retically a voluntary gift of money made by the Roman senate on the accession of an emperor and on certain other occasions. The officials directly responsible for the collection of the taxes were the annually chosen exactores, who based the collection on the lists drawn up by the municipal tabularii, and gathered the taxes with the help of groups of susceptores, each group being chosen to take charge of LS CfOHUTS Aue. Ales 32.5. * Cf. Seeck, R.E. 4, 370. 3 Cf. Ammianus, 20. 4. 18 and Seeck, op. cit. 4, 374 ff. Reick i 9-2 IMPERIAL TAXES AND a particular kind of impost?. Decurions were generally selected as susceptores, and the exactores also were usually curiales. Even in Egypt, where the civic and fiscal arrange- ments at first differed in many respects from those which had been adopted elsewhere in the Roman world, the tax system under the later empire resembled in many ways that which has just been described?. The fact that a fixed amount was expected of each city and that the decurions of the city were called upon to collect this sum dealt a fatal blow to municipal government when the prosperity of the empire declined. Diocletian’s system presupposed periodical revisions of the census. If these had been made regularly and systematically, and if the taxes of a city had been reduced as its property declined in value, the cities could have borne their burden, but frequent and thoroughgoing revisions were not made, land was aban- doned, and tax-payers became insolvent’. In point of fact the imperial government could not see its way clear to reduce the running expenses of the civil and military establishments, and the situation was made worse by civil and foreign wars. When land was abandoned, some efforts were made to collect the lost taxes from adjacent owners4, to bring lands into cultivation again by settling co/oni upon them’, but in the end the responsibility of paying over the taxes to the government rested on the shoulders of the curiales®; their lands were made inalienable, they were forbidden to leave their civitas, or to escape their responsi- bility by entering the army, the civil administration, or even a cloister’, | The Egyptian tax system differed in some respects * Cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. s.v. tributum, 436, col. 2. 20Gf: pp. 133 f. infra and Wilcken, Grundziige, 356 ff. 8 Cf. Lécrivain, op. cit. 434, col. 2. * Cf. Lécrivain, op. cit. 437, col. 1. ; Cf. Humbert, Dict. Dar. s.v. deserti agri, 107, col. 2. Cf. Humbert, op. cit. 108, col. 1 and the references there given to Cod. Th. 12. 1. 543 Cod. F. 10. 72 (70). 2, and other sources. " Cf. pp. 103 fF, 206 fF. [aaa REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES from the system in vogue elsewhere in the Roman world and requires a few words of explanation. The revenues of the Ptolemies came chiefly from the rent of the land, for all the land in Egypt was owned by the crown. Certain monopolies also were controlled by the state and must have yielded a good profit. Taxes were levied on buildings, stock, and slaves, and a head tax was imposed from which Greeks and Macedonians were exempt. Artisans and traders paid a license fee. Export and import duties were levied. In addition to these taxes liturgies were imposed for such public purposes as surveying, the construction of irrigation works, the maintenance of the police, the entertainment of the court or of public officials on their journeys, and the billeting of troops!. The Romans made very few changes in the Ptolemaic system, and in respect to taxation the period from Alex- ander the Great to Diocletian may be regarded as a unit?. Two important changes were made, however, which were destined to affect the economic life of Egypt profoundly. The court at Alexandria to which tribute had hitherto gone was abolished by Augustus, and a tax of twenty million Roman bushels of wheat was demanded annually for the provisioning of Rome. The tribute paid to the Ptolemies had for the most part remained within the country, but there was no economic return for the wheat sent to the capital. In the second place certain changes were introduced in regard to the ownership of land by which private tenure was recognized. With the conse- quent growth of a propertied class, the introduction of such a liturgical system as prevailed in other parts of the Orient was made possible. The Ptolemaic administration had been carried on by a highly organized bureaucracy, in which service was voluntary and requited by the 1 The subject of taxes in Roman Egypt is treated by Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 422 ff.; Grundziige, 169 ff.; eee Vie munic. 2347-3 385 f.3 415 ff. 2 Wilcken, Grundziige, 186. [eras IMPERIAL TAXES AND government. With the development of liturgies by the Romans, the Egyptians were forced to give their services to the state, and their property was liable to distraint in case of default or losses incurred in the discharge of their duty}. The Romans introduced a few new levies such as the tax on Jews, on manumissions, and on inheritances. The poll tax, which is mentioned only once in the Ptolemaic period, was applied more generally than had been the case in the previous period. The fixed price for the pur- chase of military supplies, in so far as it was below current market quotations, virtually constituted a tax on the pro- ducer?. The metropolis of each nome acted merely as an agent of the state in collecting the taxes. Apparently the city had no public revenue of its own, but in cases where ex- penses were incurred, the officials of the metropolis could draw upon the reserves of the state funds still on deposit in the local treasury, possibly under the supervision of the strategus of the nome®, When Septimius Severus gave a senate to the capitals of the nomes, it is probable that there was some reorganiza- tion of the financial status of the new cities, but the evi- dence bearing on the question is so slight that no clear picture of conditions can be presented. The chief revenues of cities in other parts of the empire came from lands in their territoria. ‘There is no evidence that Severus trans- ferred any of the crown lands to the new cities, but since, in creating a senate, it was his evident purpose to provide greater security for the proper discharge of liturgical duties, the new order may have had a greater measure of control of the imperial treasury in the metropolis which virtually guarded the revenues of the nome. Jouguet points out that the powers of the ozparnyds steadily 1 Bell, Fournal of Egyptian Archaeology, 4 (1917), 86 ff. * Wilcken, Grundziige, 187, 356 ff, 374f. $ Jouguet, op. cit. 309 ff. [ eae REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES diminished in the third century until the office finally disappeared}. Its decadence may indicate that the state recognized in a passive way that the nome was municipal territory. Temple property (iepa yn) seems to have come under control of the local senates to a certain extent, and the state often assigned lands to communal organizations for forced cultivation?. By gifts, confiscation, and by the surrender of land which had been abandoned by owners for various reasons, the city acquired a certain amount of revenue and became the owner of new territory, although in the case of abandoned estates the city ex- perienced an increase in burdens rather than in revenues?. We hear also of water rates, rents of stands in the public market, and taxes on buildings*. It is possible that monopolies of mines and of oil were in some cases taken over from the state by the city and exploited in the latter’s interest®. It is probable, however, that the local adminis- tration was largely supported by the personal charges of the magistrates and of incumbents of liturgical offices. Legislation was enacted to restrain the extravagance of ambitious office-holders, who had raised the standard of outlay so high that it was often difficult to find candidates for office®. In some cases endowments were provided to relieve the expenses attached to liturgies’. Under the reorganization of the fourth century the system of taxation in the Egyptian municipality conformed to that in the rest of the empire®. To return now to another phase of general financial conditions in the empire, nothing need be said of the imperial taxes levied for a short period, but no clear idea can be had of the financial demands made on the 1 bid. 386. 2 Wilcken, Grundziige, 126. 3 Jouguet, op. cit. 418. 4 Ibid. 426. 5 Ibid. 428; cf. no. 204, where the municipality exercises a certain amount of control over the guild of weavers. Ll. 1 ff. bear on the relation of the nome to the municipality in financial matters. BENNO 100, ? No. 189. Sel GCA GEE: [ 135 ] IMPERIAL TAXES AND provincials by the central government, unless one takes into consideration also the requisitions and other exactions to which the people in the provinces were subject especially under the republic. The Verrine orations of Cicero, his letters from Cilicia, the 4uzna/s of Tacitus, and the letters of Pliny give us abundant information on this point. Rich provincials, like Heraclius?, suffered the confiscation of their property on some legal pretext. Country districts were required to furnish wild animals for games to be given in Rome by some friend of a governor?. Extortion was practiced in securing the grain needed for the governor’s household?, and cities paid large sums for altars, statues, and festivals in honor of the governor’, for honorary deputations to Rome®, and for the privilege of being relieved from the billeting of soldiers®. The disastrous effect on the provinces of such practices as these is clearly shown in Cicero’s account of the condition of Cilicia when he took over this province from his pre- decessor, Appius’. With the establishment of the empire these abuses diminished. Provincial governors received an adequate salary, so that the temptation to fill their pockets by irregular means decreased. They held their offices for a longer term than republican governors had, and therefore came to know better the needs and difficulties of the provincials. The building of roads, the introduction of a postal system, and the establishment of provincial bureaus at Rome kept them constantly under the super- vision of the emperor, and the favor which the early emperors showed for the provincial assemblies gave the provinces an opportunity to lodge formal complaints against extortionate governors. Tacitus records eight nuCicuin Fer. 2. 35—42. S°Cicnad amet fia. My. Cic. in Verr, 2. 169-173. A CiCOpe tila 2A AAy? ® Cic. ad fam. 3. 8. 2 ff. 8 Cionagea th Ghia Tg ” Cic. ad Att. 5. 16. 2: Audivimus nihil aliud nisi imperata ériuxeparia solvere non posse, wvas omnium venditas; civitatum gemitus, ploratus: monstra quaedam non hominis, sed ferae nescio cuius immanis. Quid quaeris? taedet omnino eos vitae. [ 136 ] REQUISITIONS IN THE PROVINCES cases of provincial governors tried by the senate under Tiberius, two under Claudius, and eleven under Nero, and in most of these cases the accused governor was convicted and punished. The bad practice of making contributions to the emperor, which were ostensibly voluntary, still continued, and in the later period these contributions, as we have seen, were converted into required money payments!. One new form of exaction under the empire, that connected with the cursus publicus, gave rise to endless complaints on the part of the pro- vincials?, In this connection the restriction placed on private enterprise in the provinces by the government ownership of mines and quarries, by the state monopoly in salt, and by the refusal to allow wine and oil to be pro- duced in certain districts may be mentioned ®, but does not call for extended comment. 1 Cf. supra, pp. 131 f.3; Seeck, R.E. 3, 1543 /f6 2 Nos. 51, 156. 3 Frank, Roman Imperialism, 210, 280 f. Maeva CHAPTER X MUNICIPAL FINANCES! 1S HE residents of a civitas were practically exempt from the payment of municipal taxes. Local taxation could not be introduced, because the tax was a sign of servitude. Rome could exact tribute, because she was mistress of the world, but for citizens of a municipality to pay taxes to a government which they themselves had established was out of harmony with their way of thinking. At the most, municipal charges could be made for the enjoyment of certain privileges. A city’s revenues came largely from the serritorium owned by it. The cities con- quered by Rome usually owned land adjacent to their walls, and Rome commonly allowed them to retain at least a part of it. To the colonies an outlying district was assigned when they were founded?. Generals under the republic and emperors not infrequently gave large districts to a friendly or favored city. Thus S. Calvinus made large additions to the territory of Massilia, and the mother city, Ilium, received similar favors at the hands of em- perors. Occasionally a city received gifts of land from private persons®. Many of these dependent districts were of great extent. Nemausus had twenty-four oppida attri- buta, and Centuripae owned lands in many parts of Sicily?. Sometimes a ferritorium was far away. Arpinum, for in- stance, drew most of its revenue from land in Cisalpine Gaul®. For the use of such land dependent communities * In this chapter, in discussing municipal revenues and expenditure, frequent use has been made of the large amount of material collected by Liebenam, Sz. Verw. Cf. also Laum, Stiftungen in der gr. u. rim. Antike, for endowments in ancient cities. 2 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 573 ff. 3 Liebenam, op. cit. 10 f. 4 Pliny, N.H. 3. 4. 373 Cic. in Verr. 3. 108. ° Cic. ad fam. 13. 11.1; CIL. v, 7749, 1. 25. [ 138 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES paid a fixed sum to the city treasury each year, as we can see from the famous award made to Genua in its action against the Langenses in 117 B.c.' Monopolies formed a source of municipal revenue in some cases. The banking privilege was controlled by eastern cities where they still preserved the right to issue a local coinage. The exchange of the native money for foreign currency was usually regulated by the municipality under imperial supervision and leased to private corporations?. The problem of industrial monopolies is obscure and little evidence can be found. Ferries seem to have been controlled by some seaport towns®. At Urso the charter threatens confiscation if anyone owns a tile or pottery factory above a limited capacity*. This clause may have been inserted because the industry was a municipal monopoly. In Egypt the towns took over certain industries from the state in later times®. A source of revenue came from the sale of the privilege of citizenship in more favored communities ®. Some cities owned the fishing privileges in adjacent lakes or rivers’, and these privileges were farmed out’. The municipal charges which came nearest to being taxes were the portoria, the octroi, and the water rates. Probably in the early period many towns were allowed to cover port duties into the municipal treasury. Athens, for instance, enjoyed this privilege at one time, and, as late as the fifth century, the Carian city of Mylasa recovered this right, 1 No. ro. 2 Nos. 81, 133, 199; J.B.M. 1000. 3 Nos. 70, 128; cf. P. Oxy. 1454 for municipal bakers, and no. 124 for a strike at Ephesus. 4 No. 26, chap. 76. 5 No. 204. 6 No. 130; at Tarsus a fee of 500 drachmae was exacted for the grant of citizenship (Dio Chrys. 34. 23). Augustus forbade the Athenians the right of conferring such decrees for a price (Cassius Dio, 54. 7). 7 No. 68. In this case the fisheries seem to be the sole source of municipal income. Cf. Strabo, 12. 8, p. 576. PUD ie ea) a Atay ® Liebenam, op. cit. 24. In no. 96 the senate grants permission to establish a market (cf. nos. 147, 148). Was this permission required because of a state or municipal tax which was involved in the concession? [ 139 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES which it had enjoyed under the republic, for its harbor of Passalal. But gradually Rome took over in most cases the right to fix and receive port duties. An interesting list of duties imposed for the benefit of a municipality is furnished by the tariff of a.p. 137 of the inland city of Palmyra?. The dutiable articles include among other things slaves, cattle, salt fish, olive oil, and cloth. From an edict of Augustus found at Venafrum3, from the Palmyra list*, and from references in literature®, it seems clear that many municipalities laid an annual charge at least upon the proprietors of industrial establishments and private baths, upon the owners of large houses and villas, and upon others who drew a large quantity of water from the public supply. Some inscriptions, coming from Thessalian towns, show that in certain municipalities manumitted freedmen paid the fee for manumission into the municipal treasury. It is possible that these muni- cipalities acted as receivers for the imperial government, but it is more probable that the fee in these cases con- stituted a municipal charge and not an imperial tax®, In some oriental cities also priesthoods were sold to the highest bidders’, * CIL. 1, 8.7151; Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 531. Possibly Vespa- sian’s edict made a similar concession to Sabora in Baetica, cf. no. 61. ® This list was published in Aramaic and Greek. For the Aramaic version, cf. de Vogiié, Fournal asiatique, 8 (1883), série 1, 231 f3 ul, 149 f/.; Schroeder, Sitzungsber. d. Berl. Akad. 1884, 417 ff. For the preface to the Greek version, cf. no. 89. The tariff at Zarai (CJL. vii, 4508) was imperial, not municipal, although the dutiable articles are similar to those mentioned at Palmyra. The tariff at Koptos (Ditt. Or. Gr. 674) was imperial. ° No. 33. 4 Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 522. > E.g. Cic. de lege agr. 3. Q. 6 The fee for manumissions was usually taken by the imperial govern- ment (¢/. pp. 124 f.). That the payment was made to the municipal treasury in the case of the towns mentioned, cf. the inscriptions published in Eg. Apx. 1915, 8 f., 1916, 28 f., 73 ff, 1917, 7 ff 111 ff. in which the fact is recorded that certain manumitted freedmen paid the fee to the municipality according to law (card tov vopov). ” Cf. p. 79 and n. 6. [ 140 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES Fines imposed for the violation of local ordinances or of the fundamental law of a city of course came into the municipal treasury, so long as the local magistrates ex- ercised judicial functions. Offenses of the first sort included infringement of traffic ordinances, displacement of termini, injuring public property, defiling sacred or public places, burying the dead within certain proscribed limits, and maltreatment of a tomb or place of burial. Hundreds of epitaphs have been found, especially in Italy and the Greek East, which threaten with heavy fines anyone who violates the sanctity of the tombs on which the inscriptions are engraved!. Sometimes payment is to be made to the imperial fisc?, sometimes to a priest- hood’, but commonly to the municipal treasury*. The fine threatened amounts in some cases to as much as 100,000 sesterces®. Under what authority such fines could be im- posed is a matter of great dispute®. Was action taken under local ordinances, and did these ordinances fix the penalty or leave it to be determined by the builder of the tomb? These are difficult questions, which admit of no satisfactory answer as yet’. It would seem highly im- probable, however, that so many epitaphs should threaten the imposition of a fine, if it could not be collected by legal action. Perhaps the difficulty 1s explained by the fact that municipalities and imperial estates often laid out ceme- teries on their land and sold burial lots. In that case there would have been legal authority for the imposition of these fines. From this source therefore, in certain parts of the Roman world, some revenue would come into the 1 Liebenam, op. cit. 43-53. = CIT. 111), 168. 3 Wilmans, 291. 4 A typical case is CJL. 111, 2098: veto autem in hac arca alium corpus inferri aut ossua poni; si quis autem intulerit, dabit rei publicae Salonitarum nummum x milia. SE PVCIL: x, 2015: 6 Liebenam, op. cit. 37 ff. and the literature cited by him, p. 37, n. 4. 7 Some references to local ordinances have been found (Liebenam, op. cit. 42, n. 4) and sometimes the statements on tombstones specifying the fine are couched in legal form. [ 141 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES municipal treasury. The penalties for malfeasance in office or for corrupt practices in the elections were very severe. A duovir, for instance, convicted of receiving a gift from a contractor was subject to a fine of 20,000 sesterces in the colonia Genetiva Julia, and in the same city any person making a gift with a view to his candi- dature for office was required to pay 5000 sesterces?. A surer and larger revenue, however, came into the city treasury from the voluntary or required gifts made by magistrates or priests on their accession to office. The charter of the colonia Genetiva Julia required each duovir and aedile to contribute out of his own pocket at least 2000 sesterces toward the cost of the public games. The initia- tion fees in this case were unusually small, because the colonists were drawn from the Roman proletariat, and the sum mentioned in the charter is the minimum amount required, the summa legitima, to which officials often made large additions*. Inscriptions record the payment into the city treasury by magistrates and priests of sums ranging from 3000 to 35,000 sesterces. In one instance, at Calama in Africa, a newly elected pontifex contributed 600,000 sesterces®. Mention of these initiation fees is made more commonly in the West than in the East. Their place was taken in the Greek Orient by the liturgy which was imposed there on the richer people in a city without regard to their incumbency of office. In fact the practice of requiring or expecting contributions from newly elected officials in the West may well have been suggested by the eastern liturgy. In addition to the required or voluntary contributions made by officials large gifts were made by private citizens for public pur- poses. The spirit of rivalry between the towns of a province made each one anxious to surpass its neighbors in the 1 No. 26, chap. 93. * Ibid. chap. 132. 3 Ibid. chaps. 70, 71. * CIL, vit, 8300: statuam quam ob honorem aed. super legitimam ex sestertium 1111 mil. mun. pollicitus ampliata pec. anno suo posuit. Cf. also vill, 4594. > CIL. vit, 5295. [ 142 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES beauty and magnificence of its buildings and streets, and the local pride which this sentiment developed laid an obligation on the wealthy to contribute generously to the construction and maintenance of temples, markets, and baths, the laying of pavements and sewers, and to the cost of public games and festivals. During the early centuries of our era, while the empire was prosperous, gifts of this sort must have formed an important part of municipal revenues. Let us turn now to the expense side of an ancient municipal budget. One of the items which bulks largest in its modern counterpart, the outgo for salaries, found no place in it. As we have just noticed, magistrates, instead of receiving salaries, helped to pay for the public improvements and running expenses of the city, and menial labor was performed by slaves which the city owned, so that only a few minor officials received pay. The public slaves cleaned the streets, took care of the public buildings, and performed other similar duties. We have left then to consider the construction and repair of public works, the prevention of fires, the policing and lighting of the streets, and provision for amusement, education, charity, the preservation of health, and the maintenance of religion. Of these items the expenditure for public works and for the amusement of the people made the heaviest drain on the city treasury. Those who visit today the sites of ancient cities like Pompeii or Timgad are surprised at the number and size of the basilicas, colonnades, baths, theatres, market halls, arches, and aqueducts which they find. Immense sums of money were spent on public works of these kinds, and thereby the financial condition of many cities was im- perilled. One may recall in this connection the expen- diture at Nicomedeia of 3,000,000 sesterces on an aqueduct which had to be given up?, and the appropriation 1 Abbott, T’Ze Common People of Ancient Rome, 179 ff. 2 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 37. 1. EAN MUNICIPAL FINANCES of 10,000,000 sesterces at Nicaea for a theatre which was found to be structurally defective before it was com- pleted!. As we learn from the inscriptions, municipal funds for the construction of public buildings were lavishly supplemented by private gifts, and sometimes legacies were left for the maintenance of the buildings, but many cities must have found themselves the proud possessors of theatres, colonnades, and market halls, whose repair and maintenance made an intolerable drain on the public treasury when prosperity declined. Baths in particular were a source of great expense. Not only did they have to be repaired, but the cost of heating them and of furnishing oil to the bathers was heavy. The small city of Pompeii had three large public baths, and it would seem as if no town in the empire was small enough to get on without them. In 387 the emperor could find no more severe way to punish the people of Antioch for an uprising than to close the public baths of that city. An ancient item which is not to be found in a modern municipal budget was the cost of building and repairing the city-walls. This expense naturally varied from one period to another and was different for the different parts of the Roman world. For many generations after the position of Italy had been made secure, walls were allowed to fall into decay, but the pressure of the northern barbarians spurred the Italians on to improve their defenses. City-walls in the provinces, especially near the frontier, were always kept in better repair than those of Italy, and in the later period, when the empire was threatened on all sides, a large part of a city’s revenues had to be devoted to this object?. The paving of the streets and the nearby roads was of course a charge on the municipal budget, and must have been heavy because of the costly nature of the ancient system of paving. In the early empire the state assumed the cost of building and maintaining the main highways, but from the third century on this burden fell mainly on the 1 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 39. 1. Aled. \12u5.054. 35. [ 144 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES municipalities. The cost of constructing and maintaining the water and drainage systems in an ancient city must have been an important item in the municipal budget. The treatise of Frontinus for the city of Rome, the remains of aqueducts elsewhere, the large number of public and private baths, and the elaborate drainage system brought to light in Pompeii all testify to this fact}. Next in size to the outlay for public works, as we noticed above, came the expenditure for amusement, especially in the form of public games and festivals. The public udi circenses, ludi scaenict, munera gladiatoria, and venationes were given in connection with some religious festival or were in commemoration of some important public event, and rapidly increased in number under the empire*, until under Constantius II there were one hundred and seventy-six festivals each year in Rome?®. Numerous inscriptions referring to local public games, found in all parts of the empire, show that this form of amusement was as popular outside of Rome as it was in the capital. The cost of these games, except in so far as it was met by the contributions required of magistrates and by private gift, was defrayed by the municipality. The central government made earnest efforts to check this form of local extravagance, but probably without much success4. While the celebration of religious festivals constituted a heavy charge on the local treasury, a city was required to pay very little for the maintenance of religious cults, because most temples had endowments of their own®. The cost of policing and lighting the streets, and of protecting a city from fire, must have been very small, because little attention was paid to these matters®, Except in rare cases, 1 Puchstein, R.Z. 4, 58 f. and literature there cited. 2 For a history of this development, see Wissowa, Re/igion u. Kultus d. Rémer, 365-399. | 3 CIL. 1, 293 f. and Wissowa, op. cit. 492-515. 4 No. 110. The imperial tax upon the gladiators virtually fell upon the municipality or those who gave the shows. 5 Liebenam, op. cit. 69 ff. LOMA AES 33 B57 for AOSy Mee: AMA i tat IO MUNICIPAL FINANCES municipalities paid out little money for education’, for public libraries?, or for charity®. In one respect only did the cities make a systematic effort to relieve the poor. Many of them imitated the capital in supplying grain to the needy at a low price*. This form of charity, if it de- serves to have that word applied to it, must be distin- guished of course from the a/imenta. Italian municipalities had some control over the a/imenta®, but they did not supply the funds for the purpose®, and therefore a consideration of this subject does not come within. the scope of this chapter. We are especially concerned with the attitude which the central government took toward the municipalities in the matter of their finances. In general it adopted the policy of rewarding those who were friendly and of punishing those who were hostile. For the firm stand which it took in favor of Rome in the Mithradatic war Sulla made several neighboring villages dependent on Stratonicea in Caria’. Amisus in Pontus won the favor of Lucullus and received an addition of one hundred and twenty stadia to its territorium®. On the other hand Caesar deprived Massilia of most of its zerritorium because of its opposition to him in 48 B.c.® Other instances of a similar kind occur in the later period. So far as the portoria were concerned, we have already 1 Barbagallo, Lo stato e /’istruzione pubbl. nell’ Imp. rom. * For the city of Rome, cf. Boyd, Public Libraries and Literary Culture in Ancient Rome; for other cities, cf. Ltibker’s Reallexikon, 169 f. and the literature there cited, and Cagnat, Les bibliothéques municipales dans Lempire romaine. 3 Liebenam, op. cit. 98 ff. * Ibid. 109 ff. ‘The compulsion to sell supplies at a fixed price, in so far as this was below the current quotations, virtually formed a tax upon the producers. Cf. no. go. 5 Hirschfeld, 215 ff. 8 Kubitschek, R.Z. 1, 1484 f7. ” B.C.H. 9 (1885), 437-474 and Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 26 7337, 38, 81; no. 17. ® Appian, Mitdr. 83; Plutarch, Luc. 19. ° Cassius Dio, 41. 25; Florus, 2. 13; Oros. 6. 15. 7. [ 146 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES noticed that Rome followed the general policy of taking these over for her own use. She probably adopted this policy not only for the sake of the revenue which the customs duties brought her, but, if she had left the right of imposing them to the municipalities, some coast towns might have abolished their tariffs altogether, and diverted all the seagoing trade from their rivals. Perhaps reference is made to the assumption by the central government of the right of collecting the portoria in the brief account which Suetonius gives of the policy of Tiberius in this matter*. Certain of the later emperors, for instance, Hadrian, Alexander Severus, and Julian, reversed this policy and allowed the vectigalia to be paid into the municipal treasury®. In Hadrian’s case this act of gene- rosity may have been due to his interest in the provinces. Alexander Severus and Julian may well have made their concessions because of the financial needs of the munici- palities concerned. With the establishment of the empire came a better acquaintance with provincial conditions and greater sym- pathy with provincial needs. It is an interesting thing to notice that the last paragraph of the Res Gestae Divi Augusti records the generosity of Augustus toward cities destroyed by fire or earthquake*. The statement does not come from the pen of Augustus. It stands in a supple- ment which was added, probably, under the instructions of a local magistrate of “Ancyra. The rest of the appendix simply summarizes the document proper. The item in question, however, is not mentioned in the main body of the text. It seems therefore to be a tribute to Augustus, spontaneous or official, from the point of view of a * Cf. pp. 123 ff. 2 Plurimis etiam civitatibus et privatis veteres immunitates et ius metal- lorum ac vectigalium adempta, Suet. 774. 49. 3 For Hadrian’s action in the case of Stratonicea, cf. no. 83. Alexander Severus (Hist. Aug. Alex. Sev. 21) “‘vectigalia civitatibus ad proprias fab- ricas deputavit.”” Cf. Ammianus (25. 4. 15) who says of Julian, vectigalia Civitatibus restituta cum fundis. #\No. 38: Wee acl 10-2 a MUNICIPAL FINANCES provincial living in a part of the world where the generosity of the emperor had been especially shown, and it may not be unnatural to think that the writer of it felt that the generous efforts of Augustus in behalf of cities in distress marked a new era in the relations between Rome and the municipalities. Both Suetonius! and Cassius Dio? speak of the help which Augustus gave to many cities injured by earthquakes, and we hear specifically of assistance rendered to Neapolis® and Paphos*. Tiberius followed this policy®, notably in the case of the fourteen cities of Asia which were destroyed by an earthquake ®, and similar acts of generosity are set down to the credit of Claudius, Nero, Vespasian, Titus, and of emperors of the second century’. The personal interest of Trajan and Hadrian in the provincial cities went still farther. Trajan built roads and bridges and dug canals in the Danubian region, in Spain and Egypt®, and the tribute of Hadrian’s bio- grapher that iz omnibus paene urbibus aliquid aedificavit® is abundantly confirmed by the records?®, The emperors were especially generous in helping cities to construct their aqueducts, and we have many inscriptions commemo- rating the assistance which they rendered for this purpose!. We have already had occasion to notice that as the danger from the barbarians increased it was necessary to rebuild and strengthen the walls of many cities!2, This measure was so vital to the safety of the empire that the central government sometimes devoted a part of the imperial revenue to this purpose and sometimes compelled a city to apply to it a fixed portion of its receipts. Alexander Severus helped cities to restore their walls, and Liebenam recalls the fact that Constantius in the year 358 turned 1 No. 38 and cf. Suet. Aug. 47. * Cass. Dio, 54. 23 and 30. 3 Ibid. 55. ro. * Jbidinauegt 5 Suet. Tid. 8. ® CIL. x, 4842; Tac. Ann. 2. 473 4. 13. * Liebenam, op. cit. 172 /f. 8 Schiller, Gesch. d. rim. Kaiserzeit, 1, 567 f, ° Hist. dug. Hadr. 19, 2. 10 vy. Rohden, R.Z. 1, 516f. 1 £.g. Liebenam, of. cit. 158, n. 1. 2 Of. supra, p. 144. [ 148 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES over one-fourth of the revenue from the vectigalia to be used in building the walls of the cities of Africa, and Diocletian recommended the diversion to a similar purpose of municipal funds collected for public games!. On the other hand, there was a growing tendency to put imperial charges on the treasuries of the municipalities. Cases in point are the building and mending of the roads and the maintenance of the cursus publicus*. We shall have occasion in another connection to see how the cities lost control in large measure of their own funds?, but it may not be inappropriate here to notice the way in which the imperial government was led to undertake the supervision of municipal finances. In his Verrine orations and in his letters from Cilicia Cicero describes the de- sperate condition in which the cities of Sicily and Cilicia found themselves in his day in consequence of the taxes and requisitions imposed upon them and the exactions of money lenders*. Many of these evils grew less under the empire, but the unwise and extravagant expenditure of money, in the eastern cities especially, frequently got them into serious difficulties. It was this situation which led the central government to interfere in their financial affairs. Perhaps a way was paved for such intervention by the establishment of imperial commissions to super- intend the spending of money appropriated from the imperial treasury for the rebuilding of cities destroyed by earthquakes or fire®. If the central government was to bring relief and assume a certain measure of control of local finances when the property of a city had been lost in a fire or destroyed by an earthquake, why should it not take some responsibility for the finances of a city which 1 Cf. an inscription of a.p. 227 (Az. ép. 1917-8, no. 68): Infatigabile indulgentia domini Severi Alexandri Pi Felicis Aug. auctis viribus et moenibus suis castellan(i) cito Factenses muros extruxerunt curante Licino Hieroclete procuratore Aug(usti) praeside provinciae a(nno) p(rovinciae) cLxxxvill; cf. also Liebenam, op. cit. 144, n. and commentary on no. 157. 2 Nos. 51, 156 and supra, p. 137. 3 Cf. pp. 200 ff. S.Gsapp..t2t ff. 5 "Tac. dan. 2,47 and supra, p. 147. [ 149 ] MUNICIPAL FINANCES was wasting its funds in elaborate stadia or theatres? To Pliny there seemed to be only one answer to this question for the cities under his jurisdiction, and when he found that the people of Nicaea had almost completed a theatre, which was structurally defective, at a cost of 10,000,000 sesterces, and a gymnasium which was badly built, he at once intervened and turned to Trajan for advicet. In like manner, Claudiopolis was constructing a bathhouse on a badly chosen site”, and Nicomedeia had spent 3,000,000 sesterces for an aqueduct which had to be abandoned?, and again Pliny asks Trajan what steps he shall take in the matter. Prusa petitions the emperor for permission to build a bathhouse*, and Amastris to cover a sewer’. Even for the free city of Sinope Pliny asks of Trajan the right to construct an aqueduct®, He takes cognizance of many other matters connected with the finances of the municipalities. Annual allowances made by Byzantium for the expenses of one legate to Rome and another to the governor of Moesia are cut off’. The extravagance attendant on weddings and festivals is limited 8. The propriety of requiring an initiation fee from men whose names are put on the rolls of the municipal senates is referred to Trajan ®. To him is referred the claim of Nicaea to the property of citizens who die intestate!®, and the right of the cities of Bithynia and Pontus to be preferred creditors!!, In one of his letters Pliny submits to Trajan a question that is one of the earliest indications which we have of the coming of the later ruinous policy of holding the decurions of a city personally responsible for its financial obligations!?, Some of the towns in Pliny’s province find it hard to loan their public funds at 12 per cent., and Pliny asks Trajan if he may force the decurions to borrow the money at this rate. The empire was not yet ready for this step, and Trajan did not approve the pro- 1 Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 39. 1, 4. 2 Jbid. 39. 5, 6. 3 Thid. 27. 4 Ibid. i *% Ibid. 98.-) eye eat Be 7 Ibid. ro ® [did 116, 117. ° [bid 112. 1 Tbid. 84. 4 Tbid. 108. © Ibid. 54. Lig bows MUNICIPAL FINANCES posal. The most far-reaching question in the correspond- ence, connected with the imperial control of municipal finances, concerns the right of the governor to inspect municipal accounts. Pliny examined the accounts of Prusa without hesitation!, but when he proposed to look into those of Apamea, the people, while expressing a willingness in this particular case to submit to the scrutiny, stated that (rationes coloniae) numquam tamen esse lectas ab ullo proconsulum, habuisse privilegium et vetustissi- mum morem arbitrio suo rem publicam administrare?. Trajan, in his reply, advises Pliny to proceed with the examination, with the understanding that it will not prejudice their existing privileges. We can readily see, however, that this procedure in the case of a Roman colony set a dangerous precedent. We have followed the policy of Pliny in these matters in some detail, because it illustrates the paternal motives which actuated the im- perial government in exercising a close oversight over the finances of provincial cities. Under the republic such supervision was impossible, but in the time of Trajan, with a governor well supplied with subordinates, and holding office long enough to be thoroughly familiar with local conditions, and with bureaus in Rome ready to answer promptly all sorts of provincial inquiries, it was possible to supervise carefully the finances of every city of the empire, and it does not surprise us to find the practices which Pliny followed in controlling municipal expenditures given a systematic form by his imperial master through the establishment of the new imperial office of curator rei publicae®. No discussion of the finances of the municipalities would be complete without some reference to the method followed in the adjustment of financial controversies between neighboring cities, but the way in which these and other disputes were settled will be discussed in another connection 4. W101 170 PT bid.a7 > | * See ppigo gs) \* See pp.1s2'if: Litoey CHAPTER XI ARBITRATION AND TREATIES cH HE principle of arbitral settlement of international disputes was familiar in the ancient oriental king- doms almost from the beginning of recorded history, but in the growth of great empires that equality between independent powers which is essential for the proper development of arbitration was destroyed!. In Greece the rise of a large number of small independent city- states produced ideal conditions for fostering this system of settling disputes, since war was uncertain in its results, and the loss of power and resources, even in a successful campaign, was not always compensated by gaining the point at issue. For this reason the disputants often pre- ferred to refer their quarrel to the decision of some neutral and impartial judge, or some friendly state might intervene with an offer of mediation or arbitration. Whether the Greeks borrowed this idea from the Orient or discovered it for themselves cannot be determined, but we owe to them the introduction of arbitration into Europe®. There are well authenticated examples of arbitral settle- ments in the seventh century, and as early as the fifth the Greeks had developed the principle so far that treaties were made containing a clause whereby the contracting parties agreed to settle in this way disputes which might arise in the future. Unfortunately the Greek states were + The best treatment of the subject of arbitration in Roman history is found in De Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico presso i Romani. His classifica- tion of the different examples in Roman history has been followed in this chapter. Tod (International Arbitration amongst the Greeks) and Raeder (L’arbitrage international chez les Hellénes) have recently discussed briefly those cases of arbitration wherein Rome was called upon to decide disputes arising between Greek cities. Cf. Boak, Am. Fournal of International Law, 15 (1921), 375 f. > Westermann, C.F. 2 (1906), 198; Tod, op. cit. 169 ff. [ 152 ] ARBITRATION AND TREATIES no better than modern nations in observing treaty obliga- tions, and this provision was not always kept. A notable instance is the refusal of the Spartans to submit their dispute with Athens to arbitration before the outbreak of the Peloponnesian war. In the third century examples of international arbitra- tion among the Greeks are frequently recorded. Under this head we may include the disputes which arose between members of the great federal leagues that were usually settled by the central government, which also enforced the decision under the necessity of preserving internal peace and concord. In most cases of arbitration in this period we may note a tendency to appeal to some power or state whose prestige was great enough to make the decision respected. Thus the kings of Macedon were frequently requested to act as arbiters. After the conquest of Macedon, when Rome became a factor in eastern politics, the Greek cities frequently referred their disputes to the senate, and, in so doing, introduced the principle of arbitration into Roman political life. The history of Rome’s part in international arbitration is somewhat complicated by the relations existing between Rome and Greece after the issuance of the edict of Flami- ninus. While the Greek states remained virtually inde- pendent, Rome exercised a modified form of protectorate, and did not hesitate to interfere in the settlement of internal or inter-state quarrels. But so long as a city was nominally free and not incorporated in a Roman province, the settlement of its disputes with a neighbor by an appeal to Roman magistrates or to the senate may be considered as a true case of international arbitration. Since all such appeals came from Greek cities, the history of international arbitration in Rome began with her first contact with the East and ended when she became mistress of the Orient. Since the senate controlled the conduct of foreign rela- tions, all these disputes were referred to this body or to her agents who transmitted the appeal to Rome. The only fArsaay ARBITRATION AND TREATIES recorded exception is the settlement of the dispute between Cnossus and Gortyna, which was decided by Appius Claudius and his fellow-commissioners!. In this case, however, the commission probably had plenipotentiary powers to examine the condition of Greek cities and to settle disputes. While the senate decided some of the disputes referred to it, certain questions such as the determination of boundaries could not be settled at a distance, and these were delegated to a special commission or to another state. The delegation of powers was made 1n a sexatus consultum, and the question to be decided by the arbitrator was often very narrowly defined. Thus in the dispute between Athens and Oropus, Sicyon was asked merely to deter- mine the penalty to be inflicted on Athens?. Magnesia on the Maeander was asked by Rome to arbitrate between Hierapytna and Itanus, but in so doing the only point to be determined was which state occupied the disputed territory at a certain date*. The dispute between Magnesia and Priene was delegated to Mylasa under the same conditions‘. | In the instructions given by the senate we find that there is often a desire on the part of Rome not so much to render a judicial decision on the point at issue, as to preserve the status which the disputants had held when they came into political relations with Rome. This policy may have been adopted for the purpose of cementing treaty rela- tions, but it is not altogether in accord with the principles of strict justice. Rome cannot justly be accused, however, of using the arbitral awards as a means of extending her power over the eastern cities. She did not use her extra- ordinary power either in enforcing the decisions which she or her delegates had pronounced, or in guaranteeing * Polybius, 33. 15. We may assume that Roman agents settled many other similar disputes in Greece. ¢ Pausanias, 7-11. 4-8. 3 Inschriften von Magnesia, 105. Inschriften von Priene, 531; Inschriften von Magnesia, 93. Lat sany) ARBITRATION AND TREATIES the terms of settlement. Athens not only appealed from the decision of Sicyon against her in the quarrel with Oropus, but even evaded the reduced penalty which the senate imposed by making a private settlement with Oropus!. In the dispute between Samos and Priene the senate confirmed a previous award made by Rhodes. In 136 the case was again referred to Rome, but no change was made in the decision. Even after both cities had become incorporated in the province of Asia, the quarrel broke out afresh, and this time Mylasa was deputed to review the case*. Likewise the dispute over temple-lands at Delphi was reopened at least twice after Greece had become a Roman province*. In arbitrating the dispute between the Achaean League and Sparta the Romans exceeded their function in violating the sovereign power of both disputants. Sparta was required to remain a member of the League, but the latter was compelled to resign her judicial authority over Spartan citizens*. Where states were quasi-independent, possessing juris- diction over their internal affairs, but acknowledging the hegemony of Rome in foreign relations, inter-state dis- putes could only be adjudicated by a direct appeal to Rome, since the reference of the question to any other state would have been regarded as an offense to the sovereign power. In these cases the arbitration was not always purely voluntary, for if one side appealed to Rome, the other was virtually compelled to present its case unless it chose to let the judgment go by default. This class of arbitration is known as federal, since one or both of the parties to the dispute were bound to Rome by treaties of alliance. In the earliest recorded case of federal arbitration, if the traditional account in Livy is to be believed, two members of the Latin League quarreled over a piece of land, and when the dispute was referred to Rome, the comitia tributa 1 Pausanias, 7. 11. 4-8. 2 Tod, op. cit. nos. 61-65. 3 [bid. no. 26. 4 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 240 ff. Psst ARBITRATION AND TREATIES took the matter out of the hands of the senate and voted that the land in question should belong to Rome?. There is much about this story which renders it unlikely, but if it is true, we can well understand why arbitration did not become popular amongst Rome’s allies in Italy. The dispute between Sparta and Messene over the possession of the ager Dentheliates forms one of the most interesting cases which come within the scope of federal arbitration. Philip of Macedon in 338 and Antigonus in 221 had acted as arbiters in this long-standing dispute. Then Mummius in 146—5, if we may believe the account in Tacitus, pronounced a decision, but from the wording of the decree of the Milesians, it would appear that he merely recognized the status quo. Between 146 and 137 the dispute was again brought before the senate, which referred the question to Miletus, at that time an inde- pendent state. The Milesians were instructed to determine only which of the two parties occupied the disputed terri- tory when Mummius was consul or proconsul. The Milesians chose by lot a court of 600, and when the evidence was heard the court voted 584 to 16 in favor of Messene*. It may be noted that no attempt was made to determine the legality of the claim of either party, but that Rome was concerned solely in determining the status of the territory when one or other of the two states became politically related to Rome. This solution of the problem was manifestly unjust, and showed undue favor to Rome’s allies. So Caesar, in his interview with Ariovistus, states it as an axiom of Rome’s foreign policy that her allies should suffer no loss, but rather should be increased in influence, dignity, and honor’, In this respect, then, Rome’s arbitral judgments were dictated by the desire to extend her influence and to bind her allies to her by shaping the arbitral awards in their favor. A somewhat similar situation is found in the dispute between Carthage and Masinissa, which seems to have 1 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 268 ff. 2 Ibid. 283 7..7°% Caesar, 0 .G1. 43. [ 156 ] ARBITRATION AND TREATIES been deliberately prolonged by the senate in order to weaken the power of her former enemy, now, however, formally regarded as an ally. In 193 the senate appointed a commission which made no decision, probably in obedience to secret instructions from the home authorities. Masinissa was thus encouraged in his acts of aggression and occupied other territory which, when Carthage appealed to Rome, was apparently granted to Masinissa. In 160 the injustice of Rome was still more flagrant in her award to the Numidian king, for Carthage was compelled to cede the town of Emporia in addition to the land which he had already occupied and to pay an indemnity of 500 talents. When Masinissa seized further territory some three years later and Carthage appealed to Rome, the Carthaginians refused to entrust their cause to the arbitrators whom Rome sent out, and, apparently, the Numidian was allowed to remain in possession!. In Rome’s conduct of arbitral relations in these disputes we find one of the darkest chapters in her judicial history. No doubt the bitter prejudice against Carthage and high imperial policy dictated her decisions, but these con- siderations furnish no excuse for the violation of the principles of justice, and her guilt is the greater in that Carthage was bound to her by a treaty of friendship and alliance. In later federal arbitration Rome recovered her judicial sanity, since her position as a dominant power in the Mediterranean was secure. In the few cases of this class which belong to later times none gives any indication of favoritism on the part of Rome. As a matter of fact, the extension of Roman power in the last century of the republic had brought most of the ancient city-states under the Roman provincial system, and cases of inter- national and federal arbitration could no longer occur. While it is true that many of the cities still retained the nominal title of ‘‘free’’ or ‘‘allied’’ states, there are no records of disputes which arose involving them, and 1 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 270 ff. Ly S57 ARBITRATION AND TREATIES apparently when once they had become incorporated in provinces, their disputes were settled by the central authority on the same basis as the disputes of other states under Roman dominion. This method of settling disputes is called administrative arbitration, and of this class we possess a large number of records, ranging from the begin- ning of provincial government up to the end of the third century of the Christian era, and found in every part of the empire. Most questions of administrative arbitration concern boundary disputes arising between adjacent municipalities, or between municipalities and state or imperial domains. Some of these quarrels were inherited from pre-Roman times, but others developed under Roman administration in cases where boundaries had not been definitely determined in the settlement of a province, or where the creation of new municipal organizations gave rise to litigation in the delimitation of territorial possess- ions. Disputes also arose over water rights in connection with rivers, or over roads, or took the form of quarrels like that between Pompeii and Nuceria. In these cases the local authorities were without jurisdiction, and the sovereign power was called upon to settle the dispute. It was impossible for cities in such cases to have recourse to war or to choose some foreign state as arbiter, since either procedure would have been offensive to the sove- reign power of Rome. While the /ex Rupilia allowed Sicilian towns to call upon another city to decide disputes arising between them and their citizens, there is no evidence that similar latitude was allowed in boundary settlements, although Mucius Scaevola invited Sardis and Ephesus to settle their differences by arbitration and to call in any city which they chose as arbiter!, Not in- frequently a third state was appointed as arbiter in dis- putes which arose between Greek cities, but more com- monly the senate, or emperor, named a special commission or some official to act. In such cases the delegated power * Cicero, in Verr. 2. 12. 13; Inschriften von Pergamum, 268. [E5378 ARBITRATION AND TREATIES was plenipotentiary, and the decision was not subject to review by the central authority. When the local authorities were not able to control internal factions, and the magistrates appealed to the central government, or, as 1n one case, to the patron of the city, the settlement of the dispute was sometimes arranged by arbitration, which may be classed as administrative. Sulla was delegated by the senate to settle a quarrel among the citizens of Puteoli, and to frame a new constitution for the city!. In imperial times the senate appointed two of its members to settle a similar dispute in this city. In Pompeii the patron of the town was accepted by both factions as arbiter apparently without any reference of the quarrel to the senate*. Doubtless the numerous commissions and special agents sent out from Rome to the provinces acted as arbiters in settling the disputes of party factions, and in so doing they favored the aristocratic class. Although the local authorities were empowered to settle all questions concerning internal affairs, the sovereign power exercised by the senate or by the emperors gave them authority to interfere in the local affairs of all provincial cities. By virtue of this authority Trajan and his successors appointed the curatores rei publicae and correctores, by whom local dis- putes were settled by administrative processes without recourse to arbitration. A third class of cases of arbitration may be distinguished in the disputes which arose between cities and private individuals, whether alien or resident citizens®. As we have already indicated, the /ex Rupilia allowed Sicilian cities to call upon the services of another city in arbitrating such disputes, and this arrangement was probably allowed in other provinces. But where the local authorities possessed jurisdiction, cases of appeal to arbitration are comparatively rare, nor was the appeal necessarily made to Rome, or to the governor, but could be made to another 1 Plutarch, Su//a, 37. 2 Cicero, pro P. Sulla, 21, 60, 61. 3 de Ruggiero, op. cit. 96 ff. [up BSO.0} ARBITRATION AND TREATIES city in the province or to a private citizen. In most cities, however, the local magistrates did not have jurisdiction over Roman citizens, and in disputes arising between a city and Romans the case must of necessity be referred to the governor, who, however, had the right to appoint arbiters if he so desired. Finally, there is a series of disputes which arose between the cities and the Roman state, or rather its representatives —the publicanst. We may also include here the boundary disputes arising over the municipal lands and those of the state or of the emperor. In such cases the state might settle the dispute by regular administrative methods, but in some instances the question was referred to the decision of an arbiter appointed by the senate or by the emperor. Arbitral procedure was foreign to Roman policy and was introduced only through contact with, and under the influence of, Greek culture. Its continuance in imperial times was apparently determined by a desire on the part of the central government to flatter the vanity of the city- states which had been incorporated in the empire. In the third century the military autocracy was no longer in- fluenced by these motives, and records of arbitral judg- ments disappear. Henceforth the settlement of all disputes passed to the regular provincial courts or became a matter of ordinary administrative routine. The special relation which civitates foederatae bore to Rome ceased to exist in Italy after the towns received Roman citizenship. In other parts of the empire very few states enjoyed the privilege of foedus aequum with Rome, Some of these jealously maintained their rights, as, for example, when the Amiseni appealed to Rome in regard to the law forbidding the organization of clubs in Bithynia2. Trajan replied that if the laws of the city permitted such associations, the imperial authorities could not forbid them provided the clubs were not devoted to seditious or illegal gatherings. There is an undertone in Trajan’s letter which * de Ruggiero, op. cit. 99 ff; nos. 12,18. 2 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 92, 93. [ 160 ] ARBITRATION AND TREATIES implies that treaties would be respected only if they did not contravene the best interests of Rome. In 210 the Camerinians thanked Septimius Severus for confirming the right of foedus aequum, and in Astypalaea the treaty with Rome was maintained as late as the reign of Gordian}. The lex de imperio Vespasiani placed the power of making treaties in the hands of the emperor, confirming the privilege which Augustus had held. The economic pressure which began to be severe in the second century probably led many cities to surrender their special privi- leges. Thus we find an imperial corrector in Athens under Hadrian*. The edict of Caracalla probably swept away other treaties when the cities accepted Roman citizenship, although it is evident that Astypalaea preserved her status as a civitas foederata for some time longer. In the eastern empire coins were frequently struck celebrating the oudvora of various states®. It is impossible to determine exactly what is meant by this term under Roman rule, but it seems to indicate that the Romans permitted these states to conclude some form of treaty which flattered their vanity and infringed in no way on Roman sovereignty. With the development of the bureaucracy and the military autocracy the fiction of sovereignty which the Romans had permitted as a matter of policy soon disappeared. 1 GIL, x1, 5631. 2 CIL. vin, 7059. 3 Head, Historia Nummorum, 5.0. 6povou.a. AMA [UsrO tsa II CHAPTER XII PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES senate treated with each city and each tribe as an in- dividual unit. Under the republic the governor, who was sent out with the imperium, had no tribune to interpose a veto on his acts, and the provincial subjects had no means to check illegal action or extortion except through indirect pressure applied by their patron in Rome. After the governor laid down his command, he might be prosecuted before a jury made up of members of the senate, but it was difficult and practically impossible to secure a con- viction before a court of his peers. Later, when the juries were composed of members of the equestrian order and party feeling had become intensified, convictions were easier to obtain, although the court was not so much prompted by a desire to secure justice for the provincials as it was concerned in furthering the interests of the equites. In appearing before the court the provincials had no other bond than their common interests, and each city acted singly, or their delegates represented munici- palities which had united to present their complaints before the senate. Since it was the policy of the Romans to discourage combinations of the different communities in each province, it is very unlikely that the Jex provinciae provided any machinery for common action, but in the informal meeting of representatives of two or more towns for the discussion of matters of mutual interest we may discern the beginnings of a provincial assembly}. |: the organization of a conquered province the 1 Marquardt, de Romanarum provinciarum conciliis et sacerdotibus; Guiraud, Les assemblées prov.; Carette, Les assemblées prov. de la Gaule rom.; Fougéres, de communi Lyciorum; Monceaux, de communi provinciae Asiae; Dict. Dar. s.0. xowédv; Kornemann, R.E. 5.0. concilium, xowov; BEAter a7 PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES In the East the Romans found a large number of rowa already existing, of which some were religious organiza- tions, and others political federations. In Greece Flami- ninus encouraged those which might serve to check the power of Macedon. After the sack of Corinth by Mum- mius political unions were suppressed in the fear that they might form centres for the revival of a national consciousness!, Later the ban was removed and the assemblies were permitted to meet for religious purposes. Similar organizations existed in Asia, and shortly after the province was established we find games instituted by the cities in honor of the governor, Mucius Scaevola, who held the office about 98 B.c.2 Antony addressed a letter to the xowdv of Asia granting certain privileges to the guilds taking part in the provincial games?. This action must have been taken in response to a request from the assembly and, although no political issue was involved, it is apparent that the delegates from the cities of Asia were developing an organization in which questions of common interest might come up for discussion. In 29 B.c. the cities of Asia in their provincial organiza- tion requested that they be allowed to establish the cult of Roma and Augustus at Pergamum?#._ In granting their request the emperor established a precedent which was soon followed by the other provinces. In some cases we find two distinct provincial assemblies, as in Bithynia- Pontus, Galatia, Lycia-Pamphylia, and Syria. In Achaea the local xowd of Central Greece united their assemblies in a joint federation which seems to have represented the province®. Thessaly preserved the independence of its Krascheninnikoff, Philol. 53 (1894), 147 f7.; Ramsay, Fourn. Rom. St. 12 (1922), 154 ff. 1 Pausanias, 7. 16. 9. 2 Ditt. Or. Gr. 438; Ditt. Sy//3 760. 3 Brandis thinks that Antony established the provincial cozci/ium in Asia about 33-32 (Hermes, 32 (1897), 512 f7-). SY Lac Aanas 47 3 Cass. Did, 5Tai20 5 We find this prescript: TO Kxowdv tov “Ayatov Kai Bowrov Kai Aoxpov kat EvBoéwv kat ®woxéwv, LG. vit, 2711. Dey pus: PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES assembly, since this district was separated for adminis- trative purposes from the rest of Greece and placed under the control of the governor of Macedon in the imperial period. While the meeting-place of the provincial cowov was usually fixed in some convenient centre, the leading cities of Asia, Lycia, and Lycaonia shared the honor in rotation. In the West the provincial assemblies were slower in developing than in the East. Municipal institutions re- placed the tribal units slowly and the majority of the provinces lacked the political traditions of the Orient which might have given them a feeling of unity. Outside Gaul there was no common cult such as had united many Greek cities in their xowa. Moreover, the religious mentality of the western peoples differed widely from that of the Orient, and was less facile in adopting new cults, especially in accepting a cult which deified a reigning emperor. We have already seen that even under the republic the western provinces had informal organizations in which the cities could unite in conducting prosecutions. of officials and in sending embassies to Rome. An edict of Augustus forbade the provincials to take any action in praising a governor until sixty days after he left his province}, but it is not necessary to infer that provincial assemblies existed generally at this period (2 B.c.). The first formal organization of such an assembly may be found in Tres Galliae when Drusus called representatives of the various civitates to Lugudunum in 12 B.c. The worship of the imperial cult was founded at that time 2. This gathering formed the nucleus ofa provincial assembly which met annually thereafter at the same place. Ina.p. 15 the cities of Hispania Tarraconensis requested the privi- lege of founding a temple of Augustus in Tarraco, and Tacitus observes that the granting of this petition formed a precedent for other provinces. This would imply that 1 Cass. Dio, 56. 25. 2 Kornemann, op. cit. 809 f. 8 ‘Tac. dun. 1. 78. i He [ 164 ] PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES the initiative was taken by the provincial cities and not by the central government, although the theory has been advanced that the assemblies were founded by the em- perors in some cases in order to hasten the Romanization of the provincet. We might infer from the remark of Tacitus that the example of Spain was soon followed by other provinces, but there is no evidence which enables us to date the foundation of the other assemblies, nor can we determine whether they were created in all the pro- vinces of the empire. In the fourth century these organiza- tions were made obligatory by imperial mandate. Primarily, the provincial assemblies were charged with the annual services of the imperial cult, the care of the temple, and the celebration of games in honor of the deified emperor. However, when the delegates met to transact their official business, they discussed also matters of general interest, and the administration of the governor and his subordinates came under review for praise or blame. For the first time, therefore, the provincial cities had an official organization in which they could voice their opinion collectively in regard to the administration of their governor, and since his future career in public ser- vice might be largely determined by the action of the assembly, it was a powerful influence in securing better government in the province. In the case of dishonest and corrupt officials, the assembly under the empire took upon itself the duty of prosecuting the offender at Rome before the senate or the praetorian prefect. The earlier emperors doubtless encouraged this phase of the assembly’s activity in order to keep a closer check on governors, especially in senatorial provinces. At any rate a large number of accusations were lodged in Rome against pro- vincial officials during the first century”. Later, when the imperial bureaucracy had developed more fully and agents of the emperor were sent out to the provinces and to individual municipalities, the number of prosecutions 1 Krascheninnikoff, op. cit. 168 ff. 2 Guiraud, op. cit. 172 ff. [ 165 ] PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES steadily diminished, and the influence of the assemblies was apparently weakened. m The relation of the provincial assemblies to the munici- palities is obscure. Each municipality, or each tribal unit, sent a certain number of delegates to the assembly, and in Achaea it is possible that the smaller kowa were repre- sented in the provincial organization, either by delegates or, though less probably, in a body. The chief priest was elected annually by the assembly from candidates nomi- nated by the municipalities. He presided over the meetings of the assembly, and defrayed the expenses of the sacrifices and games as a form of liturgy?. In the ancient Kowvov of Lycia the delegates were appointed according to a system of proportionate representation, the cities being graded in three classes, of which the first sent three delegates, the second two, and the third one each. In the age of the Antonines the cities of Asia, and presumably those of the other provinces, were graded in a similar way for the distribution of the gift of immunity to teachers and physicians*, It is therefore possible that the Lycian system of representation was universally adopted in im- perial times, but there is no evidence on the subject beyond the fact that some cities sent more than one delegate, and that there were at least 150 members of the xowdv of Asia*, In Bithynia the members were sometimes appointed for life, although this distinction may have been purely honorary, as was true in the case of the life-appointment of the provincial priest, and of other liturgies which had been discharged with special merit. In the proceedings of the assembly there is no evidence that mandatory instructions were given to its delegates by the civic government, but they were undoubtedly aware of + Guiraud, op. cit. 82 fF. ? Strabo, 14. 3, p.664. 3 Dig. 27. 1.6, * Buckler and Robinson, 474. 18 (1914), 356. In Aristides (p. 767 Dind.) 407 votes are recorded as cast in a meeting of the assembly. © Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 7. Brandis, however, believes that the title does not refer to membership in the provincial assembly. [1664 PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES public opinion and were guided accordingly. In the in- scription from Thorigny it is recorded that the delegates gave up their attempt to attack Paulinus on the protest of Sollemnis!. Had they received a mandate from their respective cities, they would hardly have desisted on the protest of a single delegate from one state. Timarchus of Crete is said to have boasted that the power of granting an honorary decree to the retiring governor rested in his hands*, In later times the governor undoubtedly found means to control the election of deputies through the power which he exercised in municipal affairs, and this fact may account in part for the decreasing importance of the assembly in the second and third centuries in indicting provincial governors. Since the assemblies met but once a year, administrative matters of local interest were probably referred directly to the governor, or a delegation was sent to the emperor by individual cities who were eager to bring themselves to imperial notice. Occasionally, however, joint action was taken. Thus Asia honored T. Claudius Amphimachus for an embassy by which he undertook to secure a remission of the inheritance tax (eixoary)?. When Domitian forbade the cultivation of the vine in Asia, the provincial assembly sent Scopelianus to Rome, and he succeeded in having the decree revoked*. The same assembly asked Caracalla to fix Ephesus as the port where the new governor should land in coming to his province®. While an advocate (€xduxos) is mentioned in the case of the provincial assembly in Asia only ®, it is probable that this official was attached to other assemblies as well, and, although his duties are nowhere defined, we may assume that he bore the same relation to the assembly as the municipal 1 No. 140. 2 aca etag.nb 20, 3 Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1236; Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 54 (1911), no. 53. 4 Philostratus, Vit. Soph. 1. 21. 12. S DIE A. L084, t5: Vie AES (1934 )s-95 9: skeen PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES advocate to the city, and that one of his most important duties was in connection with the prosecution of provincial officials. The only example of a provincial decree which was man- datory in the cities is found in Asia, where the assembly, at the request of the governor, adopted the Julian calendar throughout the province}. This business was apparently entrusted to the assembly because of the importance of the matter in connection with religious observances— especially with those relating to the imperial cult. Titus wrote to the Achaeans, probably to the assembly, about the exposure of infants, although Domitian and Trajan communicated with the provincial governors on this sub- ject?. Antoninus wrote to the province of Asia forbidding the unrestricted grant of immunity from liturgies by the municipalities, and regulating the number of such grants which could be made in each city%. It is probable that this letter was addressed to the provincial assembly. It would seem that the assemblies had no administrative power over the cities of the province except in matters pertaining to the imperial cult, the games in honor of the emperor, and in cases where they received a mandate from the governor or emperor. The governor had the right of taking part in the regular proceedings of the assembly, and even in the case of honorary decrees could exercise the right of veto. The assembly could, however, appeal to Rome over the governor’s veto, and in one case the emperor reversed the action of the governor, whereupon the decree became law4. The ancient xowdv of Thessaly had the privilege of granting citizenship and the right of owning property in any city of the federation®, Under Roman rule similar 1 No. 34; Ditt. Or. Gr. 458; Keil and Premerstein, of. cit. no. 166. 2 Pliny, Ep. ad Trai. 65. 3D 12.02.74 14.03 4 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, chaps. 24, 26, 28. Whether the governor called together the provincial assembly may be doubted, cf. Ditt. Or. Gr. 494, Nn. SAG SAK 92 1507515 00s (Croom PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES privileges were apparently enjoyed by a few provincial assemblies. In Lycia officers of the assembly were some- times recorded as citizens of one or more towns, and the additional qualification is added qodurevdpevos dé Kal év Tats Kata Avkiav 7odeot wacats. This phrase seems to imply that the official named exercised the rights of citizen- ship in all Lycian cities!. The citizenship in specified municipalities is contrasted with that in all the cities, and it may be possible that a form of honorary citizenship was conferred by the assembly. The cowov of Asia con- ferred the title of "Acuavos on Isidorus, the son of Meno- genes, who was provincial advocate*. It is probable that this title implies a kind of honorary provincial citizenship. The tragic actor C. Julius Julianus was a citizen of Smyrna and enjoyed the rights of citizenship in all Hellas, Macedonia, and Thessaly (wohurevbets de & On TH ‘EAAdOt Kat Makedovia kal SBecoadia). This claim may be an idle boast, but more probably his services at provincial festivals won him the grant of honorary citizen- ship?. The various municipalities which were members of the assembly contributed to the expenses of the organization, such as those required for the games, the religious cere- monies, buildings, repairs, maintenance of staff, embassies. They also met the charges in connection with the prosecu- tion of officials and the erection of statues*. There is a record of an endowment fund for the games in Asia, but the games were usually regarded as a liturgy pertaining to the priesthood. An African inscription dated a.p. 366 shows that this liturgy had become so burdensome to the candidates that the governor intervened by reducing the scale of extravagance which had hitherto prevailed®. Not 1 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 527, 539, 603, 628, 704, 739, chap. 5. In some cases, however, the phrase seems to imply the discharge of municipal liturgies, cf. Cagnat, op. cit. 563, 584, 680. SATA AES COTA) AZ22 if. 3 IG. v, 1, 662. 4 Guiraud, op. cit. 128 ff. 5 No. 110; cf. Dessau, 1256. Reet eren iy PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES infrequently the cost of buildings or of statues was de- frayed by the emperor; embassies were undertaken by private citizens at their own expense; and statues were often erected by the individual on whom the honor had been conferred. If we except the ‘‘Altar’’ series of Lugudunum issued by the authority of the emperor, western assemblies possessed no right to coin money?. In the East silver coins were issued by towns and provinces, usually with imperial sanction and control. In Crete the provincial issue re- placed that of the individual towns*. Bronze or token money seems to have been issued by any organized city- community that chose to exercise the right, and the pro- vincial xowa not infrequently issued communal bronze coinage®. There is no evidence that the provincial assembly exercised any control over the coinage of the cities. Since the imperial government probably determined the rate of exchange between the various currencies, it is probable that the revenue derived from the mint was slight, if any. Officials of the provincial assemblies sometimes held other positions. In Gaul the chief priest was appointed to some duty in connection with the census, and another official was patron of a guild of boatmen, but it would be unwise to infer from these examples that the assembly exercised any control over taxation or trade*. Opramoas, archiphylax of Lycia, made arrangements for securing order (eipyvy) and supplying provisions (ev@nvia) at an annual meeting of the assembly®. He alsoadvanced money as a loan to those provincial cities which had been unable to make up their annual quota of imperial tribute. Rostow- zew thought that the assembly, through its officials, con- trolled the municipal irenarchs, sitonae, and decaproti, but this interpretation of the activities of Opramoas is hardly 1 Coins of the Roman Empire in the British Museum, 1, xvii ff. 2 Ibid. 1, xxv; R.E. 5.0. xowov. 3 Tbid. 1, xxvii. 4 Kornemann, op. cit. 815 ff. 5 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, chap. 5. [ 170 ] PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES justified!. There must have been some co6peration between local and provincial officials at every meeting of the assembly, but it is unlikely that the local government surrendered its autonomy in any respect. The loan made by Opramoas to the cities was a political investment against the time when he should be a candidate for higher office in the assembly. Other Lycian inscriptions show that provincial officials sometimes contributed to the taxes, erection of public buildings, or cost of games”. These payments were not a regular liturgy attached to their post in the assembly, but were undoubtedly voluntary obligations undertaken from the same motive which in- fluenced Opramoas. It is also recorded that the chief priest of the Macedonian assembly paid the head tax for the province and provided grain at reduced prices during a famine which occurred in his year of office®. The assumption of these voluntary obligations was a dangerous precedent, which might easily have developed into a regular liturgy attached to officials in the provincial assemblies, especially if the pressure for the payment of imperial taxes had become severe at the time the gifts were made. Apart from the prosecution of government officials, the provincial assemblies seldom, if ever, took the initiative in political matters. One doubtful instance may be men- tioned here. In a.p. 70 the Treveri sided with Sabinus in his revolution. —The Remi summoned a provincial con- cilium which asked the Treveri to lay down their arms*. The appeal was not heeded and the assembly—whether regularly constituted or not, it is difficult to determine— had no power to enforce its request. When the city of Sidyma established a gerusia, the governor of the province was notified of the fact by the Lyciarch. The latter, however, was a citizen of Sidyma 1 Rostowzew, Gesch. d. Staatspacht, 418 ff. 2 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 704; 739, p. 298. 3 *Apx. AeAr. 1916, 148. Ob aGuliiss,. 42:67, 0917/7. [oar h} PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES and it is probable that he acted in his private capacity as a resident of the city, rather than as an official of the pro- vincial assembly}. The assemblies frequently appealed to Rome for decisions on points of law and procedure, as we may infer from the frequent communications of the emperors to the provincials recorded in the Digest and Codes?. Only in Lycia, however, do we find any evidence of a provincial court under the control of the assembly. The records of the xowov of this province refer to specially summoned courts which were apparently under the control of the assembly. Unfortunately we have no other information which would help us to determine the relation of these courts to those of the Romans or of the municipalities. It is probable that they were constituted by the xouvdv to settle disputes between municipalities which preferred the native to the Roman law, or they may have been called together to decide violations of the law in connection with the annual games and ceremonies of the assembly. Opra- moas, as archiphylax of Lycia, was entrusted with judicial power by the governor, although it is doubtful whether he received his commission as an official of the assembly or as a citizen of Rhodiapolis, and we cannot determine whether he had any connection with the special court of the assembly*. One of the officials of the Lycian xowdv was called the recorder (vopoypadevs), and the title implies that laws were enacted by the assembly®. The xowov of Thessaly was asked by the governor to act as arbiter in a boundary dispute between Cierium and Metropolis ®, The decision was rendered by a secret vote— probably because of the necessity of preserving harmony * No. 114. Note that the ratification of this act by the provincial governor seems to be required. 2 Kornemann, op. cit. 820 f. ® Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 563, 680, 736, 739, chap. 12. These may refer to settlements of disputes between members of the concilium; cf. no. 46. 4 Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, chap. 12. > Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 680. 6 No. 46. Wee eX) PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES within the assembly. It would be interesting to know whether the cities concerned took part as advocates as well as judges. The growth of Christianity and the abolition of the imperial cult turned the provincial assemblies into purely secular organizations in the fourth century. Their prestige had already been lowered by the redistribution of the provinces of Diocletian, and the creation of diocesan assemblies must have affected the smaller provincial organizations materially. In the late empire our chief evidence for the history of the assemblies comes from the Theodosian Code. The rescripts which this Code contains, addressed directly to concilia, deal with points of law, the right of appeal, and the immunity of provincial priests and civic magistrates from certain liturgies. Other re- scripts addressed to provincials are usually interpreted as directed to the assemblies”. If this is the case, the concilia discussed taxation, the regulation of curiales, the public post, extortion by imperial officials, and similar matters. In all these cases the assembly had no powers beyond that of bringing the questions to the notice of the emperor in appeals or complaints against the injustice and corruption of imperial agents in the province. Various rescripts addressed by the emperor to the praetorian prefect safe- guard the right of assembly in ordinary and special meetings, as well as the freedom of discussion and appeal, In all of these there is an implication that these privileges were often disregarded, and that the provincial assembly, where it existed, was brought under the control of governors to serve their personal interests. Ammianus tells us that Iphicles brought to the praetorian prefect the honorary decree conferred upon the governor by the Epirotes. On seeing the emperor afterwards and being questioned as to the sincerity of this expression of praise, Iphicles replied that his fellow-citizens passed the decree 1 Guiraud, op. cit. 228 ff. 2 Kornemann, op. cit. 825 ff. SiCGd. 1 hoi 2, 12..8 (355) 12.0302) LER 3a PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES with groans and in spite of themselves’. Some of the em- perors made an honest attempt to re-establish the councils on their former independent basis as a means of checking the corruption of provincial officials, but the forces of venality and extortion combined with bureaucracy to nullify their efforts. When the Justinian Code was com- piled, the assemblies had ceased to exist as a political force, and their organization survived only in the institutions of the Christian church. It has been said that the provincial assemblies con- tained the germ of representative government. It 1s true that they were representative, and elected organizations, but they never acquired any legislative, administrative, or judicial power, save in the rare cases when they acted on the direct authority of the emperor or governor in pro- mulgating their edicts or publishing their decisions. The assemblies commanded no armies, and had control of no revenues beyond the contributions made by the munici- palities for minor expenses and the funds from minor endowments. The money expended in the imperial worship and games was provided by the generosity of the officials appointed to the several liturgies. The primary function of the assemblies was religious, and through the grandeur of their display they undoubtedly acquired con- siderable prestige. In their secondary capacity as a board of review of the governor’s policies, they were, we believe, encouraged by the emperors who desired to keep a close check on provincial administration, especially in the senatorial provinces. Most of the accusations lodged against corrupt officials came from provinces governed by the senate, and it must have been especially galling for this body to try its own agents. When the provinces all came under imperial control, the activities of the assemblies ceased. At least the records of impeachments disappear. In the late empire the imperial government sought to 1 Ammianus, 30. 5. 8. bbe) PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES revive this function of the assemblies, but we have already seen that the attempt failed. The assemblies were seriously handicapped by meeting, usually, but once a year, and with a membership which was constantly changing, no continuous political traditions could be established. The appointment of the curator as an imperial agent, and the closer supervision of municipal affairs by the governors were important elements in check- ing the development of the provincial organizations. Moreover, the ingrained individualism of ancient states persisted long after they became municipalities of the empire and prevented concerted action for a common cause. Most of these cities, through their inordinate vanity, preferred to bring their difficulties directly to Rome by means of expensive embassies which might commend them to imperial notice. As a result of this practice, bureaus were created to deal with all phases of municipal administration, and in the development of imperial bureaucracy we have perhaps the most potent factor in preventing the political growth of the concilia, for legislative, administrative, and judicial powers were gradually concentrated in the hands of the palace officials. For these reasons we believe that it is not altogether accidental that scarcely any records of the assemblies are preserved in the third century, and while the emperors sought to revive the assemblies in the fourth century in order to correct abuses in provincial government, they were powerless against the forces of the corrupt bureau- cracy. Although this sketch of the provincial assemblies in their relation to municipal institutions shows that the assemblies were relatively unimportant politically, we must not disregard them as wholly negligible. Itis possible that the Councils of the early Church based their organiza- tion on that of the provincial assemblies, for the bishops were virtually the delegates of their municipal dioceses, and although the Councils were not always provincial in [eae RS aa PROVINCIAL ASSEMBLIES scope, the representative principle may well have been borrowed from this pagan source. The modern parlia- ment also resembles the provincial assembly in form, but it would be unsafe to trace its development in a direct line through the medium of the Church Councils, although the latter may have transmitted the representative idea to the modern world. But the provincial assemblies served a more immediate purpose. They bound the whole empire together in a common cult, and, in the universal worship of Rome and the emperors, the subject states acknow- ledged the temporal and spiritual sovereignty of Rome. One may question whether the annual provincial rites, though celebrated with great pomp and splendor, were really as important, politically, as the local municipal cults, for only a small proportion of the population could attend the annual ceremonies. But the assemblies served their most useful purpose in safeguarding the interests of the municipalities against the excesses of imperial officials, and, in the common bond of mutual protection, they contributed in no slight measure to the breaking up of the old individualistic spirit, especially in the Greek states, and, by uniting all the municipalities in a province in a common interest, they gave birth to the spirit of nationalism; and though the importance of the assemblies had greatly diminished before the empire disintegrated, and though the separatist movement did not always follow the lines of the provincial organization, nevertheless the development of nationalism may be traced in no small measure to the influence of the provincial assemblies. [yai7.000) GHAP UE ROGET THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL FOLIC’ corporated the peoples of conquered territory in her own state or permitted them to unite with the various members of the Latin League!. The ancient con- ception of the city-state did not allow an unlimited extension of this policy, and the principle of founding Latin colonies was already formulated in 384 B.c. At the close of the war with the Latins in 338 B.c. Rome was for the first time faced with the problem of imperialism. _In dealing with her former allies she was fortunately guided by the statesmanship of wise and generous leaders, who repudiated the oriental idea that the sovereign state was entitled to be supported at the expense of the subject peoples. Some of the Latin states, hereafter to be known as municipia, were given full Roman citizenship, retaining their own territories and apparently also their own local governments. Others, the civitates sine suffragio, were not admitted to full citizenship, but enjoyed the privileges conferred thereby, except the right to vote or to hold office in Rome. These states, also, were left with complete jurisdiction over their local institutions. At the seaport of Antium a Roman colony was founded to which three hundred Roman citizens were assigned. The relation of the colonists to the native population is obscure, but ultimately the two groups were united politically and all enjoyed the privileges of Roman citizenship. Other Latin cities retained their former status and government, but as allied states (civitates foederatae) their treaties with Lex the middle of the fourth century Rome in- 1 Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 21 ff. AMA egy al 12 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY Rome either tacitly or explicitly recognized her supremacy?. The Latin colonies, whether founded before or after 338, were bound to Rome in the same relationship which they had formerly had with the Latin League. In all cases Rome controlled their foreign relations, and in the event of war military contingents had to be furnished by every member of the federation to defend the common cause. By this system of graduated relationship and by binding the various states of Latium to herself individually, Rome was able to maintain her supremacy in the federation without difficulty and, as a result of her fair treatment, the various members remained uniformly loyal, and many non-Latin cities voluntarily sought treaties of alliance with the state whose power was so rapidly expanding on the banks of the Tiber. The treatment of her Latin allies presents in miniature Rome’s policy towards the Italian cities and tribes in extending her dominion over the peninsula. Roman and Latin colonies were planted throughout Italy. By friendly negotiations or by war Rome brought every tribe and state from the Apennines to the Sicilian Straits within the sphere of her influence, and by the beginning of the first Punic war Italy formed a federation, under the hegemony of Rome, which was composed of Roman and Latin colonies, muntcipia, civitates sine suffragio, and civitates foederatae. We hear also of organizations, such as praefecturae, fora, and conciliabula, whose status was beneath that of the more fully developed civic communities. For the most part people living under the tribal form of government were encouraged to settle in municipalities, since the Roman senate preferred to deal with a more stable form of govern- ment than was usually found amongst the primitive mountain tribes of Italy. The policy of differentiating the status of the various members of the federation was prob- ably devised as a means of rewarding or punishing those 1 Reid, Municipalities of the Roman Empire, 51 ff.; Frank, Roman Im- perialism, 33 ff. Citzon THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY communities which had entered the federation willingly or by compulsion, but it also served to prevent disloyal combinations amongst the various states against the supre- macy of Rome. Rome continued her policy of liberalism towards the members of her Italian federation until the close of the third century. The right of Roman citizenship was gene- rously granted to the more favored communities. Common service in the army spread the knowledge of the Roman language and institutions over Italy, and the colonial foundations helped the prefects and praetors in intro- ducing the principles of Roman law throughout the peninsula. The second Punic war marks a turning-point in the policy of Rome towards the federation. This was due in part to the disintegration of political ideals as a result of the exhausting struggle, and partly to the influence of imperialistic principles acquired from her experiences in provincial government. Members of the federation who had joined Hannibal were punished with the utmost severity. In the century following the close of the war Rome began to regard the federated states as subjects. Roman citizenship was seldom granted to the Latin or Italian cities, and the Latins were no longer invited to share in the colonial foundations of Rome. In many ways the rights of the allies were violated. Fields which had been laid waste or abandoned during the war with Hannibal were apparently regarded as ager publicus of Rome, and the allies were deprived of their jurisdiction over.them. In 193 the courts were authorized to apply only Roman law to cases of usury!. In the Bacchanalian conspiracy (186 B.c.) the senate assumed criminal juris- diction over Romans, Latins, and allies, condemning all classes with fine impartiality*. Other infringements of local rights by Roman magistrates were cited by Gracchus in pleading the cause of the Italians. On the other hand, AD Livy) 3 5. %s 2 Livy, 39. 14. Cf. Bruns, 36. [ 179 ] 12-2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY Roman law was being adopted more and more throughout Italy, and many cities had the privilege of incorporating in their statutes the laws of the Roman senate or assemblies. Rome does not appear to have exerted any influence on the constitutional forms of the allied states, but allowed them to preserve their traditional institutions unchanged. It is possible that Roman commissioners or officials devised charters for some of the cities, but in most cases the changes were made at the request of the municipality itself and were not imposed by Rome. A case in point is the charter devised for Puteoli by Sulla. When colonies were founded, a commission was appointed to draw up their laws. These charters were not necessarily uniform, and doubtless varied in different localities and in different periods, but, in general, the commissioners must have followed the models framed by their predecessors. The Social war brought the gift of Roman citizenship to all Italians, but it is probable that no immediate changes were made in the forms of municipal government, since the troubled times which followed were not suitable for the settlement of constitutional problems. During the revolutionary period the Italian cities suffered from the tyrannical acts of both senatorial and popular factions. Sulla and his successors freely confiscated the territory of cities unfriendly to their cause, and colonies of veterans were often settled on these lands, where they enjoyed a quasi-municipal organization of their own, independent of the local government. Such a situation was intolerable, and could only be remedied by the fusion of the two classes of citizens. In the cities where the two groups combined, some changes would have to be made in constitutional forms. Probably the /ex Iulia municipalis was devised to bring some uniformity out of the chaos which had deve- loped in Italy when Italian towns were transformed into Roman municipalities, and in the confusion incident to the civil wars. The Julian law marks the first attempt at uniformity in civic government. The law, however, was [ 180 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY limited in scope, and affected only certain details of ad- ministration, such as the election and qualifications of officials and decurions and the administration of law. In other respects the municipalities preserved their tradi- tional forms and customs, although it is probable that the tendency to ape Roman institutions had long been active}, and that, in the course of time, the cities conformed more and more to a uniform pattern. Rome acquired her first province at the close of the first Punic war, and in Sicily she came into contact with the oriental conception of imperialism, according to which the conquered races paid tribute to the conqueror. Three cities in Sicily were admitted as allies of Rome and five were given the status of civitates liberae. The latter were regarded as independent communities, but their right to conduct negotiations with other states was circumscribed, and in actual practice they probably differed but little from the federated states of Italy. The territory of certain cities which had shown bitter hostility to Rome was confiscated and became ager publicus of Rome. These cities were called civitates censoriae, because the leasing of their land was under the control of the Roman censor. The remainder of Sicily was divided among the civitates stipendiariae, which paid an annual tithe of their produce to the sovereign state”. In organizing the pro- vince a commission was sent out to draw up a /ex pro- vinciae, which determined the rights and privileges of the various cities in the district. It is uncertain how far the constitutions of the various cities were modified by this law, but it is probable that traditional forms were pre- served as far as possible, while the control of the municipal government was placed in the hands of an oligarchy friendly to the conquerors. No attempt was made to 1 For the municipia fundana which had the right in republican times to copy Roman statutes, cf. Elmore, T'rams. Am. Phil. Assoc. 47 (1916), 35 ff. 2 Cf. pp. 47/7. On the various theories concerning the /ex Iulia, cf. no. 24. Sie THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY provide uniform charters for the provincial cities, although the system of collecting the tribute and of administering the law may have tended to standardize the legal and financial administration in the towns within the bounds of each province. In adding new provinces to their dominion the Romans were guided in some measure by the results of their ex- perience in dealing with older acquisitions. In general the principle of exacting tribute was followed. We also find that some cities were given more liberal privileges than others, probably with the idea of lessening the danger of disloyal combinations in alien lands. In Africa and in the eastern provinces which were thoroughly Hellenized, the Romans found the municipal system generally established, and no changes were made in it, except to modify the government of the more democratic cities by strengthen- ing the oligarchy. It is probable that most of the Greek cities had already become timocratic under the rule of the Macedonian and Seleucid princest. Wherever the civic commonwealths had not fully developed, the Romans set themselves the task of organizing them as soon as possible. New cities were founded or the territory of older ones was extended. In some cases the serritorium assigned to cities was very extensive, and as the villages developed in im- portance, new cities were created within the territory of the old. No uniform laws were prescribed for the new foundations so far as we can discover, although Bithynian cities were given senates formed on western models, and the charters of other cities, established by later governors, probably followed similar lines. Great flexibility was per- mitted, since the political development of the inhabitants and other local conditions were undoubtedly taken into account. : While little effort was made to secure uniformity in municipal government, the legislation of the Gracchi took an important, if ill-advised, step in this direction when 1 Cf. no. 9; Colin, Rome et la Gréce, 651 ff. [real THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY provision was made that the contracts for the collection of the tribute from Asia should be let in the city of Rome. By this law tax-gathering became the special prerogative of the eguites. They and their agents were absolutely unscrupulous in carrying out their contracts. In raising the quota from each city they held the magistrates and senators responsible for all deficiencies, as well as for loans contracted by the city to meet the obligations to the state. This is well illustrated by the story of the agents of Brutus, who enforced the payment of a loan by shutting up the senators of Cypriote Salamis in the town hall until some of them perished from starvation!. The theory of collective liability was probably borrowed from the practice of the old Hellenistic bureaucracy, or it may have developed from the Sicilian custom, where the municipalities often availed themselves of the privilege of farming their own quota of taxes in order to save collectors’ profits. The Gracchan legislation applied, in the first instance, to Asia, but the system was soon extended to other provinces. Under these conditions cities suffering from the burden of taxation would insensibly abandon their more demo- cratic institutions by choosing their official class from the wealthier members of the community—a tendency which was, no doubt, fostered by the Romans, whose chief in- terest was the collection of revenue. In the administration of law the rights of individual cities were usually defined by the /ex provinciae. ‘The cities were usually permitted to use their own laws, at all events in certain cases, and the republican senate brought no pressure upon them to adopt the laws of Rome. The governor, however, had large judicial powers, and in issuing his edict he not only followed the provisions of the lex provinciae, but also copied extensively from the praetor’s edict”. In his circuit, therefore, the principles of Roman law were made familiar to the various cities, and just as their law influenced the development of Roman 1 Cicero, ad Att. 6. 2. * Cicero, ad fam. 3.8.4; ad Att. 6.1.15. [ 783) 9 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY jurisprudence, so it is probable that many cities, in turn, adopted the better features of Roman law’. \ The colonial policy of the Romans was at first dictated by military requirements, although it served the secondary purpose of providing lands for the indigent populace. Colonial foundations of the Latin type ceased after 181 B.c., and Rome thereafter shared none of the privi- leges of the new settlements with her Latin allies. In 172 B.c., however, Carteia in Spain was given Latin rights by the comitia. An important precedent was thus estab- lished by which the provincial lands could be recognized as Italian soil. The foundation of transmarine colonies was not popular at Rome, and Gracchus met with bitter opposition when he attempted to carry his proposal to found a Roman colony on the site of Carthage. After his death the portion of the Rubrian law providing for the settlement of Carthage was repealed. The motives which led the senate to reverse its policy by the foundation of Narbo Martius in 118 B.c. cannot be determined. There- after the senatorial party was opposed to colonial founda- tions beyond the bounds of Italy and bitterly fought the proposals of those democrats who sought to establish colonies in various provinces, and who succeeded in con- ferring Latin rights on the trans-Padane cities of Northern Italy. Marius initiated the policy of settling his soldiers in colonies of veterans, and later military leaders followed his example. Sulla and Caesar established their veterans, for the most part, on Italian farms confiscated from those opposed to them in the wars. Augustus and later emperors purchased lands for the purpose. Caesar was the first Roman statesman to comprehend fully the fact that the safety of Rome as the capital of the empire could be secured only by fair and equitable government of the provinces, which now constituted the real source of imperial revenue and power. He and his 1 Mommsen, Rémisches Strafrecht, 113 ff. 2 Abbott, Class. Phil. 10 (1915), 365 ff. [ 184 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY successors devoted their best efforts to administrative problems, and they eliminated most of the abuses which had grown up during republican times. The equestrian order was deprived of its privilege of farming the pro- vincial taxes, and in placing the collection of the imperial revenues as a charge upon the municipalities themselves, the emperors returned to a policy of decentralization. The convenience of this system led to important results in the extension of the municipal organization. Where a district was not sufficiently advanced for self-governing municipal institutions, various devices were adopted. For example, client princes were placed over certain kingdoms in Asia; Egypt was governed through a prefect; Cappadocia was divided into orparnytar; in Thrace we find toparchies; and in Illyria regiones were established. In all parts of the empire, however, the rulers fostered the development of municipal life, and by the beginning of the fourth century the whole empire might be considered as a group of administrative units made up of municipalities and im- perial estates. Caesar also set an imperial precedent for the practice of regarding the provinces as Roman soil by founding transmarine colonies of Roman citizens, and he thus prepared the way for the grant of citizenship to provincial cities. The /ex Iulia municipalis played an im- portant réle in developing the idea that municipal institu- tions in a particular district or province should be regulated by uniform laws; the reorganization of Gaul by Augustus, and of Spain by Vespasian was undoubtedly governed by this principle. In the first century of the empire the municipalities were left with a great amount of freedom and independ- ence. Universal peace brought general prosperity. The borders of the empire were for the most part undisturbed, and there were no costly wars to lay any undue burden 1 For the organization of the provinces, cf. Marquardt, op. cit. 1, 241 ff; Kuhn, Die stadt. u. birger!. Verfassung d. rim. Reichs, 2, 41 ff.; Mommsen, Roman Provinces, passim. [ 185 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY upon the imperial treasury. Until the principate was secure, provincial governors were under close scrutiny, since the danger to the succession lay in that quarter. As a result there was a tendency to encourage the independ- ence of the municipalities in their relations to the governor. This may be seen in the revival and extension of the pro- vincial assemblies which served as an important check on the governors, especially in the senatorial provinces, and in the encouragement afforded to embassies which came from the provincial cities direct to Rome. The emperor was universally regarded as the great benefactor who had released the provinces from the iniquities of senatorial government and from the miseries which had befallen them in the last century of the republic. The worship of the imperial godhead, established in every province and in every city, was not inspired by senseless flattery, but by areal sense of obligation. To the emperor, accordingly, the cities were eager to appeal on every conceivable question which affected their interests, although many embassies, from a desire to bring themselves to the im- perial notice, were inspired by motives of vanity. It was inevitable that bureaus should be created to handle the great variety of business which was referred to Rome. Thus the paternal benevolence of the central administration and the servility of the local oligarchies reacted constantly on each other, until the central bureaus absorbed local legislative and administrative functions, while the municipal govern- ments gradually lost their political initiative and power. Under the imperial administration the decline of democracy in the provincial cities continued. In the West the popular assembly had never been important. The people expressed their will largely through their power of election, and this privilege seems to have been trans- ferred to the senate before the beginning of the third century except in the case of a few cities in Africal. The local senate was the chief organ of administration; and 1 Cod. Th. 12. 5. 1 (326). [ 186 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY since its members held office for life, they controlled the annual magistrates as thoroughly as the Roman senate had once controlled the consuls. In the East democratic forms were cherished as a heritage of the past, but it is doubtful if the popular assemblies had exerted any real influence on the local administration even during the last century of the republic!. The loss of political instincts in the mass of the population was fatal to the best interests of municipal government. During the first century of the Christian era the administration came more and more under the control of vested interests which were no longer held in restraint by the scrutiny of a popular assembly. In spite of the outward brilliance of municipal life at this period and the intense rivalry of cities in building public works and in celebrating magnificent games and spec- tacles, it is undoubtedly true that corruption and mis- government flourished. The eagerness with which wealthy citizens sought high office and undertook expensive liturgies was not always due to patriotic motives and to civic pride, but was more often inspired by a desire to enrich themselves at the expense of the municipality. Cicero had observed this tendency in Cilicia?, and Ger- manicus was called upon to correct the abuses of local magistrates in the East®. Tacitus records the incident of Atilius of Fidena, who gave a gladiatorial show from motives of sordid gain, when, by the collapse of the flimsy stands which he erected, fifty thousand people were killed or injured4. Had we the full records of municipal history from the standpoint of the common people, we should undoubtedly find that many a record of brilliant service carved on enduring marble was amply repaid by the emoluments of office. Proof of this statement is not absolutely lacking, for the appointment of imperial agents 1 Cf. pp. 69 f. The Athenian assembly exercised important powers in the reign of Hadrian; cf. no. go, Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 205 ff. 2 Cicero, ad Ait. 5. 16. 62. Si Pan 4anh2.. 64, 4 Vac. dan. 4. 62. (PRS Za) THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY and commissioners was not unknown in the first century; moreover, early in the second century, the curator ret publicae was created as a regular official for managing those communities whose internal affairs had become so entangled that the local authorities were incapable of solving their problems’. In the first two centuries of the Christian era the great achievement of the empire was the Romanization of the West. The early emperors may have dreamed of accom- plishing the same task in the East, but the forces of Greek tradition were too strong to be successfully overcome. The extension of the municipal system in the western provinces was an important factor in this movement, and, as the native population was for the most part unhampered by any cultural traditions, greater uniformity was attain- able in the West than was possible in those provinces where Rome came into contact with older civilizations. For the empire as a whole uniformity was impossible; the effective obstacles were the fundamental differences be- tween East and West, the division of administration between the senate and the emperor, and the inequalities of status in the various provincial cities, which continued from republican to imperial times. While few new colonies were founded after the age of Hadrian, the honorary title colonia was often conferred upon older cities, although the honor did not, necessarily, involve any change in con- stitutional forms®, Roman citizenship, however, was con- ferred with great liberality upon individuals and entire communities. Similarly, the ius Italicum and ius Latii were freely granted to provincial cities*. Since provinces were composed of federated, free, and stipendiary com- munities, and of Roman, Latin, and provincial citizens, uniformity in legislation was difficult. However, the knowledge and use of Roman law, as it was extended over the Roman world, carried the idea of universal legislation. 1 Cf. pp. 90 ff; no. 65 a. a_Gy. pps Zt 3 RE. s.v. ius Italicum, ius Latii. Wo THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY The regulations in regard to the fiscus and the imperial liturgies were undoubtedly universal in their application. In the course of time it is probable that the imperial regulations were adopted by the municipalities to apply to purely local liturgies. Furthermore, the imperial will was supreme in every province, and while it is evident that the earlier emperors legislated for each city indivi- dually, yet it is probable that the tendency to frame universal regulations for all parts of the empire steadily developed. An edict of Augustus, lowering the age limit of municipal magistrates, and one of Trajan, forbidding the formation of clubs, were effective in the senatorial province of Bithynia!. Finally, the development of bureau- cracy implies that the details of administration passed more and more into the hands of the civil service, and it was inevitable that uniform laws should become the prevailing practice in these departments. The appointment of the curator rei publicae, to whose office we have already referred, shows the trend of pater- nalistic legislation under Trajan*. The evidence implies that the office soon became widespread, and if this was the case, inefficiency and corruption in the local municipal administration must have been general. As the personal representative of the emperor, the curator played an im- portant part in undermining the power of the local authorities, and in later times he seems to have supplanted them in many cities. The office became so important that Ulpian devoted a special treatise to its duties. The corre- spondence between Trajan and Pliny shows the attitude of a benevolent and painstakingly conscientious emperor, and reveals the unhappy state into which the cities of Bithynia had fallen, when, for example, one of them could not decide on its own initiative whether a sewer should be covered. Hadrian devoted particular attention to the problems of municipal government in his travels. He also reorganized the civil service and placed it upon a more 1 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 34, 79, 92, 93, 963 cf. 65. 2 Cf. pp. 90 ff- [ 189 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY efficient basis. To him, also, is probably to be ascribed the codification of the provincial edict. By this act the administration of justice by the governor was placed on a uniform basis in the provincial courts. During the first two centuries of the Christian era the imperial policy in respect to municipal government, in so far as a policy can be discovered, was consistent and uniform. In the third century the attitude of the central government towards the provinces changed. The new policy was due, in part, to the character of the govern- ment. The senate was now reduced to a very minor part in the administration, and all the provinces were under the control of the emperor. The army was all-powerful. The emperors, who were usually chosen by it, were not selected from the Roman nobility, but were successful or popular military leaders, unfamiliar with Roman traditions and unacquainted with the problems of civil administration. The government thus became a military autocracy, whose chief concern was the collection of sufficient revenue to secure the loyalty of the legions, and this consideration determined its attitude in framing the imperial policy towards the municipalities in the third century and the later empire. Professor Rostovtseff has recently advocated the theory that the imperial policy of the third century was dictated by the hostility which existed between the army and the citiest. He believes that, since the legions were made up of conscripts drawn from the villages, where they had been exploited by the civic authorities, the peasant soldiers forced the emperors, chosen by them, to avenge past in- juries by oppressing the cities. The military autocracy sought to bring about a levelling, politically, socially, and economically, of the wealthy governing class in the cities. Rostovtseff believes, somewhat inconsistently, that the emperors sought to strengthen the municipalities by t Rostovtseff (formerly Rostowzew), Mus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233.7. Gf. Nos. 139, 192. [ 190 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY creating a strong peasantry. Here, however, they only succeeded in intensifying the antagonism between town and country. The peasant began to be conscious of his power and looked to the emperor as his protector against the city. We have discussed this theory more fully else- wheret. The chief objection to it is the fact that the majority of the complaints lodged by the villagers in the third century are directed against the soldiers and imperial officials who were supposed to protect them. Early in the third century the edict of Caracalla, ex- tending the Roman franchise to all provincials, is one of the most important acts of the imperial government in the history of Roman municipal legislation. The motive of the emperor in issuing this edict has been variously inter- preted. Cassius Dio, the only ancient historian who refers to it, states that the purpose was to collect more revenue ?, This might have been done, however, by extending the inheritance tax, hitherto levied only on Romans, to all provincials*. Rostovtseff advances the theory that Cara- calla, being of non-Roman origin, took delight in reducing the Romans to the same level as the provincials*. From the standpoint of municipal history, we believe that the edict served a different purpose, and we venture the following interpretation. Heavy taxation and burdensome liturgies had already begun to press with great severity on the governing bodies of the municipalities, especially since the resources of the empire were dwindling and the cost of administration and defense was increasing. The necessary revenue could not be raised unless the municipal organization continued unimpaired. But, as we have pointed out in our discussion of liturgies, it was more and more difficult to find suitable candidates for public office®. Before adopting compulsory legislation, the government had resorted to various devices in order to secure eligible candidates for the local senate and magistracies, chief of eR O2.40; 2 Cf. n0.\392. 8 Hirschfeld, 97. PACH ELOO NI Lal ee Cie Dp tt aie [toa THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY which was the grant of Latium maius or minus, whereby members of the curia or magistrates, respectively, earned the right of Roman citizenship. For a time this legislation may have succeeded in inducing candidates to stand for office, but ultimately it defeated its purpose, since no one who became a Roman citizen could be required to hold office or to perform liturgies in any other city unless he chose to do so voluntarilyt. Since those chosen for this honor were usually the wealthier citizens, and since the number of Romans steadily increased in each community, the local government became proportionately weaker. It is probable, therefore, that the edict of Caracalla was de- vised as a means of reviving the municipal administration in non-Roman communities. The conventus civium Romanorum disappeared, and all members of the com- munity were placed upon the same footing in regard to municipal obligations. In this way the collection of the imperial revenues was better secured. Furthermore, the edict must have swept away the inequalities in the status of provincial cities. It has been noted that the title civitas began to supplant municipium and colonia about this time, and the distinction between free, federated, and tributary states must have been largely eliminated, although it is probable that the privileges of some cities were renewed or confirmed by special grant. For example, the ius [talicum was cherished by a few cities until later times, and Antino- opolis in Egypt seems to have retained the privileges granted by Hadrian as late as the end of the third century?. Unfortunately, the amelioration of conditions in the cities, which was accomplished by the edict, was more than nullified by the famines, plagues, civil wars, and the com- plete demoralization of economic life in the century which followed. Moreover, the wealthier class was still able to secure exemption from municipal obligations by obtaining the rank of imperial senator. TG OaT3, 1.7) 2 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 397; cf. nos. 137, 170, 183, 184. [ 192 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY The social effects of the edict may be seen more clearly in the oriental cities. Here the administration had been controlled by a Greco-Roman oligarchy which was very much in the minority. When all citizens obtained Roman rights, the ruling aristocracy was submerged in a rising tide of orientalism, and as the central government became weaker, the spirit of nationalism began to manifest itself in various provinces. Native law, however, was supplanted by Roman jurisprudence much more rapidly under the new conditions, and it is probable that the municipal courts declined rapidly in the following century. More- over, since the status of all cities was now the same, and since the military emperors cared little for local traditions, a policy of uniform legislation for the whole empire developed more rapidly. It must not be understood from this that the internal constitutions of all cities were brought into conformity. The imperial government cared little for such details so long as tribute continued to be paid. There is, however, some evidence that local charters were overridden, as for example, in the law which required that magistrates should be elected from among the de- curions!. Ulpian defined the duties of the curator rei publicae in a special treatise, and Arcadius Charisius wrote a book on municipal munera. The Digest contains numerous extracts from the jurists dealing with municipal administration. Paulus, Ulpian, Hermogenianus, and others dealt with the office of governor, and his relations with the municipalities were closely defined. The power of veto, the right of making nominations for magistracies and liturgies, the oversight of public works, the formation of the a/bum, the administration of justice, the enforce- ment of laws regarding honors and liturgies, and other details of municipal administration were vested in the governor or curator. 1 The laws in regard to the privileges, responsibilities and status of de- curions seem to have been enacted before the time of Ulpian. Cf Dig. 50. 2 passim. AMA [ 193 ] 13 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY The preservation of the municipality as a medium for the collection of revenues offers the best explanation of the imperial policy of the third century. This was undoubtedly the reason why Severus extended the municipal system to Egypt in a.p. 202. The formation of local guilds of workmen in various trades was also dictated by a desire to create a new class that would be responsible for a portion of the liturgies which were pressing so heavily upon the municipalities. We cannot determine at what period the principle of origo was extended from the Orient to other parts of the empire. The emperors early recognized that a citizen’s birthplace had priority in claiming his services for magistracies and liturgiest. According to a law recorded by Ulpian, the provincial governor had the power to compel decurions, who had left their native city, to return and fulfil their obligations in the curia*. This is the beginning of a long line of legislation dealing with the curiales, the purport of which was to bind them to their birthplace and to reduce them to virtual serfdom. This development was slow, but it was accelerated by the legis- lation of Diocletian, who by separating the civil and military power in the provincial administration and by his subdivision of the empire and the provinces greatly in- creased the cost of administration. To meet the additional outlay a new system of taxation was devised which not only placed a heavier burden upon the subject peoples, but also forced them to exploit their lands to the point of exhaustion. The imperial policies of the fourth and fifth centuries do not differ from those of the third, except that the em- perors resorted to more desperate expedients in order to preserve the civic organization. The curiales and members of guilds were bound to their order and their place of 1 This principle seems to be indicated in the /ex provinciae of Bithynia when Pompey forbade the cities to grant rights of citizenship to anyone who was already citizen of another town within the bounds of the province, Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 114. SUIE SOL 2.1 [ 194 ] THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY origin, and all citizens transmitted their rank and their profession in hereditary succession to their descendants. The misery of the civilian population was aggravated by the oppression of the bureaucracy, whose members ex- ploited the provincials in every conceivable way. The last great act of imperial charity was the creation of the office of defensor plebis, whose duty it was to protect the common people and to safeguard their interests. How far he succeeded it is impossible to say. In the later empire he seems to have joined with the wealthy proprietors in their work of spoliation. He also contributed to the weakening of the powers of the local municipal magistrates, especially in legal and in administrative functions}. We have traced elsewhere the results of Rome’s failure to develop a sound social, political, and economic policy in municipal administration®. Her statesmen were usually opportunists, and few clearly defined policies which were steadily or consciously pursued can be discovered. The greatest achievement of Rome was the extension of the municipal system over the greater part of her empire, thereby preparing the way for the more rapid infiltration of the cultural ideas of the age. One of the gravest defects in her policy was the preservation of the particularism of the ancient city-state. Had the provincial councils been allowed to develop, they might have created an organiza- tion along modern lines where there would have been cooperation for the common good, and where a national consciousness might have arisen which would have united and strengthened the empire. As it was, each city was encouraged to preserve its individuality as an isolated unit. More fatal still was the elimination of the democracy as a factor in local government. Thus the mass of the people was deprived of the power of exercising its political instincts. An irresponsible oligarchy gained control of the municipal administration, and the way was opened for widespread corruption and inefhciency. Finally the central 1 Cf. pp. 92f. 2 Cf. pp. 197 ff. [ 195 ] 13-2 THE DEVELOPMENT OF MUNICIPAL POLICY government was compelled to come to the rescue, but the statesmen of that age could discover no other remedy for the situation than by the creation of new bureaus and by the multiplication of officials. When the imperial power became a military autocracy, the city was regarded chiefly as a convenient agent for the collection of taxes to support the army and the bureaucracy, and thereafter the preserva- tion of this instrument was the motive of all legislation dealing with municipal institutions, [ 196 ] CHAP DE Rv xy THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES ode SA HE world,’ wrote Tertullian1, “‘is every day better known, better cultivated, and more civilized than before. Everywhere roads are traced, every district is known, every country opened to commerce. Smiling fields have invaded the forests; flocks and herds have routed the wild beasts; the very sands are sown; the rocks are broken up; the marshes drained. There are now as many cities as there were formerly cottages. Reefs and shoals have lost their terrors. Wherever there is a trace of life there are houses, human habitations, and well ordered governments.” While the rhetorical exaggeration of this panegyric of the Roman world under Aurelius may be readily discounted, and exceptions to the general happiness and content may be granted, the prosperity of the empire in the first and second centuries of its history is everywhere apparent. In the long era of peace trade and commerce developed unhindered, and agricultural or industrial communities were free from the wastage of foreign wars and internal strife. Municipal institutions spread far and wide until the empire became in great part an aggregate of city-states. In each of these the citizens displayed an intense pride in public welfare, and endowed their native town with splendid monuments, buildings, and gifts for special purposes, such as libraries and schools. Offices and honors were eagerly sought, and lavish contributions were made in attaining them. Public spirited citizens, civic pride, and keen urban rivalries combined to produce a brilliant municipal life throughout the empire. 1 Tertullian, de anima, 30 (Ferrero’s translation). [ 197 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES In bitter contrast to the prosperity of the early days of the empire, the records of the fourth century present a far different picture. The citizens now sought every possible means of avoiding public service. Oppressed by heavy burdens of taxation and liturgies, they often preferred to abandon their property and take refuge in flight rather than discharge their obligations. Local senates no longer had members sufficient in numbers to preserve the muni- cipal organization, and many cities had degenerated into villages, or had been completely abandoned. ‘The law codes are filled with references to deserted curiae and fugitive citizens!. Desperate remedies were applied to restore civic life, but so severe was their nature that the process of decline was aggravated. It is everywhere apparent that the ancient city-state had become bankrupt in its social, political, and economic life, and had passed into the hands of an imperial receivership administered by an autocratic bureaucracy. The problem of the decay of municipal institutions has not received the same attention as the decline of the empire, but the factors which determined the fate of each were essentially the same, for the vitality of a nation depends on the strength of its component parts. Many theories have been set forth to account for the disintegra- tion of Roman power, of which none can be accepted as the sole explanation”. Many factors played a part, and the most difficult problem, after the lapse of centuries, is to determine their relative importance. In some cases purely local conditions, such as the shifting of trade-routes, or * Cod. Th. 12. 1. 6 (319), 11 (325), 13 (326), 22 (336), 24 (338), 25 (338), 40 (353), 43 (355), 49 (361), 63 (370), et alia. * There is a good summary and critique of theories advanced by earlier scholars in 4m. Hist. Rev. 20 (1915), 724.7. Cf. Declareuil, Quelgues problémes a’ histoire des institutions municipales au temps de l’ Empire romain; Hadley, Rome and the World Today; Heitland, The Roman Fate; Ferrero, The Ruin of Ancient Civilization; Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt; Simkhovitch, ‘‘Rome’s Fall Reconsidered,” one of the essays in Towards a Better Understanding of Fesus; Heitland, Iterum. [ 198 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES the exhaustion of mines, clay deposits, or forests, affected the prosperity of communities depending upon them. It is our purpose, however, to outline briefly the history of the political, social, and economic developments in municipal life under the empire, and to determine if possible what factors were universally operative in reducing municipal institutions to their unhappy plight in the fourth century. The most important problem of statecraft in the Roman Empire was the adjustment of the political relations be- tween the central government and the municipalities. The civic organization had been retained wherever the Romans found it existing, as a convenient unit of administration; and where the native population lived under a more primitive social organization, municipal government was introduced as soon as it was found practicable to do so. The cities already established in conquered territory were deprived of their military authority, and usually lost, or were seriously limited in, the power of conducting negotia- tions with other states. The privilege of using their own laws in their courts was highly prized by them, and the right was sometimes accorded, but in most cases the law was administered by the governor in accordance with the provisions of his own edict. The Romans seldom con- cerned themselves with constitutional changes in subject cities, but since they preferred to deal with a stable oligarchy rather than with a fickle democracy, the popular assemblies gradually ceased to exercise any power, and the senate became the chief organ of municipal govern- ment®. Theoretically, each municipality was responsible for the administration of its own territory, but governors often found excuses, legitimate or otherwise, for inter- ference. The system of farming out the collection of taxes to publicani was especially fruitful in involving the cities in financial troubles; and in the regulation of these and other matters the decision of the governor was final. * Cf. pp. 487. > Cf. pp. 186 ff. [ 199 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES With the establishment of the empire the position of the subject races improved immeasurably. The paternal- istic administration relieved the provincials from the countless exactions of the old régime, and the emperor was always willing to hear complaints and to remedy them. It is little wonder that the cities regarded the head of the state as an all-wise, all-powerful, and beneficent prince, and we may well believe that their decrees of adulation were thoroughly sincere. Partly from gratitude, partly from servility, they constantly referred their difficulties to the emperor, and the roads to Rome were thronged with embassies from senatorial and imperial provinces alike. This practice led to the creation of bureaucratic offices which, once inaugurated, tended to perpetuate themselves. Since a great number of problems were decided by the central administration, precedents and rules of procedure were established which were ultimately in- corporated in laws and applied to the whole empire without regard to local charters or privileges. The bureaus thus played an extremely important part in transferring the legislative functions of the municipal governments to Rome, and in clearly defining the relations of the pro- vincial governors to the cities by formulating universal laws in regard to the magistracies, the curator, the defensor, the decurions, the liturgies, and other details of civic life?. While the legislative functions of municipal govern- ments had largely passed into the hands of the central authorities by the beginning of the third century, the usurpation of administrative powers was a matter of slow growth. The sporadic practice of sending out imperial commissions, vice-imperial prefects, and special agents (curatores) who controlled the expenditure of money from the imperial treasury, gave way to a more systematic control of municipal affairs under Trajan. In his reign many cities had become involved in serious difficulties either through mismanagement of their funds, or decline * Cf. pp. 84 f,. [200%] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES in their revenues, and special officers were appointed by the imperial government to examine and regulate methods of civic administration. There were two classes of these, the curator rei publicae (Noytorys) and the legatus Augusti ad corrigendum statum liberarum civitatum, more commonly known as corrector (Svop$wrys or éravopOwrys). In a few instances in the East the titles were combined. The curator rei publicae’ was found in all parts of the empire, and apparently very few cities escaped his super- vision. Although he was elected in later times by the local senate, he probably retained the dignity of an imperial agent, outranking the other magistrates and gradually usurping their functions. As controller of the revenues and public lands, and possessing the right of veto, the curator played an important réle in undermining the in- stitutions, and in paralyzing the political initiative and independence of the municipalities with which he came in contact. The corrector exercised functions somewhat similar to those of the curator, but his powers were greater”. This official was usually appointed in senatorial provinces, in free cities (4iberae civitates), and in Italy and Sicily, and was a powerful factor in bringing those municipalities enjoying special privileges to the same footing as other towns in the empire. He also paved the way for the transfer of senatorial provinces to imperial jurisdiction. In the latter half of the fourth century the office of defensor civitatis (plebis) was created, primarily, to safeguard the interests of the common people®. While his duties were ill-defined at first, his high rank, long tenure of office, and the privilege of easy access to the governor or his superiors soon gave the defensor such prestige that the other muni- cipal authorities were completely overshadowed, and by the beginning of the fifth century he was the sole magis- trate in many towns. There is ample evidence that he sometimes allied himself with the land-holders and 1 Liebenam, PAi/o/. 56 (1897), ago ts R.E. 5.0. curator; cf. pp. 90 ff. 2 RE. s.v. corrector. . 5.0. defensor; cf. pp. 92 ff. [oni THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES cruelly oppressed the people whom he was supposed to protect. The office thus fell into disrepute, and in the reorganization effected by Justinian it became a liturgy imposed upon the leading citizens in rotation. The provincial governor in the republican period was supreme in the territory over which he exercised jurisdic- tion. His powers were limited only by the /ex provinciae, his own conscience, and the force of public opinion at Rome. Verres in Sicily and Cicero in Cilicia busied them- selves with the details of municipal administration, and the former had little regard for the interests or privileges of the cities under his authorityt. In the early empire the rights of the towns were more jealously guarded, especially in senatorial provinces, and many cities, disregarding the governor, appealed directly to Rome. The correspondence of Pliny reveals how far he was restricted in initiative even in matters of trifling detail?. In the latter part of the second century the governor exercised more extensive powers. He had the privilege—frequently exercised—of taking part in the deliberations of the local senates, and of making nominations for magistracies and liturgies®. Since civilians were usually responsible as sureties for the candidates whom they nominated, the governor was called upon to exercise this duty more and more frequently as the burdens of office and public service became more oppressive. If any candidate refused to hold office or to discharge a liturgy, the governor had the power to compel him to do so. Many other matters of municipal administration came under his jurisdiction, such as the formation of the a/bum, the construction of public works, the sending of embassies, and the enforcement of the laws regarding curiales and guilds®. In the reorganization of the empire effected by Diocletian, the limitation of the size of the provinces 1 Cicero, in Verr, 2. 15, 22, 24, 25, 40; Cowles, Gaius Verres, 27 ff. > Cf. pp. 149 f. ° Dig. 49. 4. 1, 3,43 S pp. 85 7, 98 f. * Cf. pp. 97 f- § Dig. 1.16. 185 50. 3. 1, 23 50. 4. 3, 8, 93 §0. 10. 2, 3, 53 of. pp. 193 ff [ 262h] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES greatly increased the powers of the governor by enabling him to exercise a closer supervision of the municipalities within his district. ; While the growth of vast imperial and private estates checked the spread of municipal institutions, it is difficult to determine how far the presence of such estates in municipal territories limited the administrative powers of the local authorities. In the civil wars of the third century and in the late empire when the central government was powerless to check the oppressive exactions of the bureau- cratic officials or the ravages of lawless troops and local brigands, individual citizens, and sometimes entire villages, placed themselves under the protection of some wealthy landlord!. As a result their properties passed from municipal control, although the local senate was still liable for the taxes on such lands. The emperors sought in vain to check the growth of private patronage. The owners of the great estates were able to defy the tax- collectors; and since any deficiency in the quota of taxes assessed upon the municipality had to be made up by the curiales, many of them were impoverished by the increase of Jatifundia, and the municipal organization was so seriously weakened that it ceased to fulfil its functions in many cities*. The same effect was produced by the de- velopment of great imperial estates which rapidly increased in all parts of the empire through bequests, fines, and confiscations?. Not only were these lands withdrawn as a source of municipal revenue, but tenants of the emperor were exempted from municipal charges. In 342 a law was passed by which curiales who leased less than twenty- five tugera were required to discharge their curial obliga- tions, but in view of the increasing difficulty of finding 1 Zulueta, de patrociniis vicorum; Libanius, de patrociniis, 4 ff. 2 Libanius, /oc. cit.; cf. no. 190. 3 Mommsen, Strafrecht, 1005 ff.; Cod .F. 10. 38. 1 (396); nos. go, TS [ 203 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES suitable tenants, it is doubtful if the law was ever rigidly enforced}. The extant municipal charters show that the local magistrates had jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases within certain limits®. The /ex provinciae probably defined the right of individual cities in the administration of justice. In cases where local jurisdiction was not per- mitted, the law was administered by the governor or by his agents delegated for the purpose’. The governor’s edict, according to which he dispensed justice in his circuit, was based on that of the Roman praetor, and was instru- mental in spreading familiarity with Roman jurisprudence among the provincials. In Spain and Gaul the native law was primitive and had little importance under Roman rule. Under the republic the Greek cities clung jealously to their own legal system, and valued the right to use their own laws as an evidence of fancied autonomy. While the influence of Greek jurisprudence may be traced in the Byzantine age, the existence of local courts is rarely proved after the third century4. In the imperial period the Roman law and the Roman courts seem to have grown steadily in favor. Various causes may have influenced this. development. The dominance of the state and of imperial legislation, the partiality and corruption of a local judiciary in an oligarchical government, the appointment of iuridici in Spain and Italy and of curatores rei publicae in provincial cities, the right of appeal, and the extension of Roman citizenship all tended to weaken the local courts and extend the use of Roman law. The reorganization of the provinces by Diocletian gave the civil governor (now usually styled iudex) greater opportunity to supervise the administration ofjustice. Legislation enabling the governor to decide cases summarily without the assistance of a 1 God. Th. 12. 1. 33 (342); no. 142. 2 Nos. 27, 64, 65; cf. pp. 60 ff. 8 Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 352 and note. * Cf. no. 133 and C/L. 111, 412 for late examples of municipal courts. [ 204 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES bench of iudices!, and to appoint judges (iudices pedanei) for petty cases must have weakened the power of local magistrates very considerably”. The Codes of Theodosius and Justinian scarcely mention them in a judicial capacity. In the fourth century the defensor plebis and the Christian bishops probably absorbed whatever judicial power still remained in the hands of the local magistrates. While resort to the ecclesiastical courts was purely voluntary, their simplified procedure and the moral weight of their decisions made them so popular that they attracted cases even from the courts presided over by the governor?. As the political institutions of the municipalities were decaying, the structure of their social life was being slowly transformed. The citizens might be divided into two great classes, those who were under obligation to discharge municipal liturgies, and those who were exempt from such burdens. The privilege of exemption was enjoyed by priests of the local and provincial cults, soldiers and veterans, members of the imperial bureaucracy, a limited number of physicians and teachers in each community, and, after the beginning of the fourth century, by officers of the Jewish and Christian churches. But the most important group was composed of those who held patents of imperial nobility, for in their hands was concentrated the wealth of the municipality. The passion for imperial honors almost became a mania amongst provincials, and the emperors bestowed the grant freely, either as a means of purchasing the loyalty of the provinces, or as a source of revenue, or as a reward for public service. The privileges of the senatorial order were hereditary, and in the fourth century, when municipal duties became a burden to 1 Arnold, Roman Provincial Administration, 189. 2 Cod. Th. 1. 16. 8 (362). The office of index as a municipal liturgy is referred to in Dig. 50. 4. 18, 14. Cf. Mitteis, Reichsrecht und Volksrecht and Grundziige zur Papyruskunde. TA Cog tT Ze 8s 8t 1.0315); 112 31s GOs), 4 Vinogradoff, Cam. Med. Hist. 1, 565 f. [ 205 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES citizens, the titles of nobility were illegally purchased or fraudulently assumed by wealthy families in order that they might escape their local obligations. This evil be- came so serious that the order of curia/es was in danger of disappearing in many cities, and the emperors sought to remedy conditions by cancelling all honors illegally secured, and by raising the standard of requirements for future grants. In 390 the hereditary privileges were withdrawn, except in the case of the highest rank (z//ustres), and three years later it was decreed that the property of those receiving senatorial honors should remain subject to its former liturgies. Theodosius II finally closed the ranks of the nobility to those of curial origin. In the fourth century the curia/es constituted the great middle class in the municipalities, and they were grouped by the laws into a distinct order composed of all citizens eligible for public office, or capable of discharging the liturgies imposed for the maintenance of civic and 1m- perial administrationt. In consequence of their oppressive burdens members of this class attempted in every possible way to escape from their order, and the emperors were continually devising legislation to hold them to their obligations. Membership became hereditary, and no one could leave his native place except on pain of discharging the liturgies of his former as well as of his new home. He was even forbidden to take up his residence on his country estate to escape the liturgies of the city. No one of curial birth could enter the army, the clerical orders, the monastic life, the imperial service, the guilds, or the service of a wealthy proprietor as a steward or a co/onus. The goal of imperial honors was only possible under conditions which were made increasingly difficult, and was finally denied to curiales altogether. Those who sought to enter any order or profession which carried the privilege of exemption from liturgies, were compelled to return to their former station. ‘he emperors finally found a simple i'Cfhopp ney. [ 206 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES remedy to prevent defection from the order by attaching the liturgies to the estate instead of to the individual. Property of curiales could not be sold without the consent of the governor or of the curia. The purchaser of such an estate assumed the civic liabilities attached to it. Bequests to non-members of the order were penalized by partial confiscation, and special legislation was devised in regard to the property of heiresses who married outside of their order or of their city. In spite of the laws, the curiales steadily diminished in number, although they were re- cruited in various ways. Sons of veterans who did not enter the army were regularly enrolled, although it is difficult to see what strength they could have given to the order. On occasion, plebeians and members of guilds who had acquired a certain amount of wealth were com- pelled to joint. Provincial governors even condemned criminals to the order as a punishment, although it is probable that such cases were limited to those of curial origin, or to those who were avoiding military service?. Members of guilds of various trades were granted partial immunity from liturgies in return for some specific duty which they undertook for the common weal*. Most of these guilds were in the imperial service, such as the alimentation of Rome, the mint, the mines, the factories for textiles and arms, and the like. A few were under the control of the municipal authorities and their members were required to act as firemen, to provide for public baths, to furnish entertainment in the theatres, or to dis- charge other duties. While we are fully informed about the imperial guilds, the Codes give little attention to the municipal corporations, but it is probable that the legisla- tion governing the former applied to the latter as well. 1 The fullest treatment of the subject of guilds may be found in Walt- zing, Etudes historigues sur les corporations professionnelles chez les Romains; cf. R.E. s.v. collegium; Abbott, Te Common People of Ancient Rome, 205 ff.; Declareuil, op. cit. 153 ff, 185 ff. 2 Declareuil, op. cit. 192/f. 3 GRippsit07 ff. [ 207 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES In 337 Constantine granted complete exemption to a large number of trades in the municipalities, without specifying that they should be united in corporations for any special duty, but the evidence from inscriptions would lead us to believe that the guilds had become universal, at least throughout the western provinces, by that time. Early in the fifth century all citizens of towns were required to enroll themselves either in the order of curtales or in one of the guilds. Under the early empire the service rendered to the state by the guild was not compulsory, and partly by grants of immunity, partly by pay, the government was willingly served. But in time the burdens became intolerable. Membership became hereditary, and the choice of a pro- fession was no longer a matter of personal preference but of birth®. Once enrolled in a guild, no member could escape, and he was confined for life to his profession and his place of origin®. One suspects that this legislation was devised in favor of vested interests as a means of con- trolling the supply of labor, but it is also possible that it was demanded by the guilds themselves to protect their own organization when the duties imposed upon them became so heavy that it was difficult to retain their mem- bership. Be that as it may, the most important source for recruiting new curiales was closed, and the development of trades and industries in new places was checked because the free movement of skilled labor ceased. The only class in the municipalities not affected by imperial legislation was the proletariat or ima plebs. The practice of Rome in maintaining this parasitic element by public charity was unfortunately widely copied, and 1 Cod. Th. 12. 1.179 (415). This law does not reappear in the Justinian code and may not have been long enforced. 2 RE. s.v. collegium. 3 In 371 Valentinian ordered that zavicularii should be perpetuo obnoxii functioni (Cod. Th. 13. 5. 14). Other guilds were soon brought under the same regulations (Declareuil, op. cit. 186). [ 2o8 y THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES imposed a serious charge on the civic budget. Not only that, but the glamour of ancient urban life attracted labor from farms and other industries where a bare livelihood was gained by arduous toil. In the city one could be fed and. amused at the expense of the state, and when the capitatio plebeta was removed from the residents of the towns, we cannot wonder that the urban movement went on apace. This survey of the social organization in the fourth century reveals the deplorable plight into which the citizens of the municipalities had fallen. While it is doubtless true that the heavy taxes and the oppressive liturgies contributed a great deal to the distress of the curiales and guilds, these burdens could have been borne if they had been imposed while the municipalities were enjoying uninterrupted prosperity. But it is clear that the favorable economic conditions which prevailed in the first century had given way to widespread and long continued depression. The population was decreasing in numbers, and the revenues of the towns as well as the wealth of the citizens were diminishing. There was grave danger that the municipal organization, which was still of the highest importance, especially as an instrument of tax-gathering, might disappear. This was the compelling reason which led the central government to interfere in municipal adminis- tration, to build up elaborate bureaucratic machinery, and to devise stringent legislation controlling the private life of the individual citizen. In studying the economic conditions of municipal life in the ancient world we must bear in mind that the in- dustrial city of the modern type was unknown. Labor costs were practically uniform throughout the empire, and inland towns could not build up a foreign trade because of the difficulties and costs of transportation. Only in cases where there was a monopoly of some natural product, such as papyrus, dyes, metals, special clays, or finer grades of wool, could industries develop and com- pete successfully in distant markets. Cities favored by AMA [he2OOmt 14 THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES exceptional facilities for transportation, either on some great trade-route or with easy access to the sea, often developed important industries, but manufacturers usually depended on the local market within the bounds of their own terri- torium!. In the vast majority of cases the wealth of the city and the prosperity of its industries depended upon the economic welfare of its agricultural class. In the modern world all industrial activities are powerfully affected in normal times by rich harvests or by the failure of crops; and in the ancient world industry and agriculture were even more closely related. Besides, the revenues of the cities were largely derived from public lands, and the majority of wealthy citizens were owners of great estates. It is, therefore, apparent that the most powerful factors affecting both public and private economic life must be sought in an investigation of agricultural conditions throughout the empire. There is ample evidence that the soil was being gradually exhausted in the older provinces even under the republic’. The early colonial assignments were seven iugera. ‘(hese were increased to thirty by Gracchus and to sixty-six by Caesar?. While it might be unsafe to draw the inference that land which once supported nine persons hardly sufficed for one at the beginning of the empire, yet the increased area of the later assignments is significant of a progressive decline in fertility. Columella, writing about A.D. 60, states that a fourfold return in grain was unknown on Italian farms at that time*. The soil of Sicily, Sardinia, Spain, Gaul, and Africa was exhausted in turn. The eastern empire undoubtedly gained its longer lease of life from the bounty of the Nile and the rich lands bordering on the Black Sea. As the soil grew sterile, * Westermann, 4m. Hist. Rev. 20 (1915), 724f7.; Meyer, KJeine Schriften, 79 ff.; RE. s.v. Industrie. 2 Weber, Handwirterbuch der Staatswissenschaft, s.v. Agrargeschichte; Simkhovitch, Political Science Quarterly, 31 (1916), 201 f.; Heitland, Agricola. 3 Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 2. 87 ff. 4 Columella, 3. 3. [eZ tony THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES agriculture became unprofitable and farms were aban- doned. Under such conditions there would naturally be a shift of the agricultural population to more fertile areas, but the law of origo, which forbade the free movement of settlers from one municipal territory to another, was fatal to the best interests of agricultural development. The poorer farmers had the choice of two alternatives, either to join the urban movement, or to attach themselves to some patron as his coloni. The problem of resettling the waste fields was attacked by all the emperors. Augustus and his successors founded colonies. Tiberius forced capitalists to invest in lands!. Nerva spent sixty million sesterces in purchasing estates to be distributed among farmers”. Generous alimentary laws were enacted for the support of the agricultural classes. Veterans were given free allotments. Pertinax allowed squatters to occupy uncultivated fields, even on imperial estates, and if they brought their land under cultivation, full title of owner- ship was granted. Three years’ exemption from taxes was also allowed. Later more drastic legislation was attempted. Owners of fertile fields were required to take over deserted plots, and taxes were imposed in order to compel them to cultivate these lands. This system, called adiectio*, was oppressive and naturally unpopular, and was finally abandoned in 412. Restrictive laws were also drafted. An owner who found his estate unprofitable was forbidden to sell his farm slaves without a proportionate amount of his land5. The slaves were thus bound to the soil; and the same law was ultimately applied to the tenants or coloni®. 1 Tac. Ann. 6. 16, 17; Suet. Tid. 48. Trajan required provincials who were candidates for office in Rome to invest a third of their wealth in Italian teal estate (Pliny, Epp. 6. 1. 9). 2 Heitland, Agricola, 272. 3 Herodian, 2. 4, 6. * Cod. F. 11.58. 15 11.59. 5 (364-375), 9 (394), II (400), 14 (415), 16 (419). PY Cod. Ff. 11. 48. 2 (357), 0 (366), 7,00 6 The co/oni were virtually bound to the soil by the legislation of Con- stantine (Heitland, op. cit. 393_f7-). [ 2are a] 14-2 THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES It was also forbidden to sell a fertile part of an estate without a proportionate amount of sterile land?. That all these measures failed in their purpose may be seen from the fact that in 395 there were over half a million iagera of deserted farms in the single district of Campania’. The exhaustion of the soil was due in large measure to the primitive methods of agriculture which had been 1n- herited from prehistoric times®. Such antiquated tools were used that two or even three plowings were necessary before the ground was ready for seeding. Shallow cultiva- tion was the rule, and the resources of the subsoil were never tapped. Under these conditions the surface soil soon lost its accumulated store of humus. The supply of natural fertilizer was insufficient to restore the necessary elements to the land when it had become impoverished by frequent cropping. Artificial fertilizers were not avail- able, and the modern practice of restoring nitrogenous elements by sowing clover was unknown. While the theory of rotation of crops was familiar to writers on agriculture, the majority of the farmers preferred to allow the land to lie fallow in alternate years*. It cannot be determined whether the general desiccation, which spread over central Asia about the beginning of the Christian era, extended also over the Mediterranean basin and affected the fer- tility of the soil; but it is probable that cities of Syria and northern Africa developed under conditions of greater humidity than now prevail in those regions. Deforestation played a large part in destroying agri- cultural lands. As cities developed, the hills were stripped of forests to supply building material. As a result the moisture was not conserved in the ground, and the rain, flowing in torrential streams down the mountain-sides, not only left them bare of soil, as they are at the present 1 Simkhovitch, of. cit. ; SuPeAT Tae: } Mig. LA LT 8. 2 Gan pate: aie ® Simkhovitch, Political Science Quarterly, 28 (1913), 383 f. 4 Heitland, op. cit. 291. [oo 2aewa THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES day, but also filled up the water-courses in the plains below, creating malarial swamps where rich fields had once supported a large population. In Syria ruins of numberless towns are found in a region where wastes of barren rock now render the country absolutely impossible for human habitation. Yet this district once supported a great population enriched by the culture of the vine and olive. Recent investigation has shown that lumber was once plentiful in this region, and that the reckless stripping of the forests on the hillsides was the chief cause of the desolation which exists todayt. In Greece, Italy, and in fact in every part of the Mediterranean basin where forests could be exploited for their lumber, the same process may be traced ?. Not only was the fertility of the soil declining, but other adverse economic conditions faced the agricultural class. Those settled in the older provinces were brought into competition with farmers exploiting the virgin soil of each new addition to the empire. In particular, Egypt was not only endowed with a marvellous system of transporta- tion, but also renewed its rich fertility annually. Although Egypt as a granary was a source of strength to the empire, its possession dealt a serious blow to agriculture in other provinces where the yield per acre and per unit of labor was immeasurably less. Moreover, the great estates which rapidly developed in every province could be worked more economically than the small farm. The owner of small holdings was compelled either to exploit his land and exhaust it more rapidly, or to bring larger areas under cultivation, although the latter alternative was almost impossible because of the difficulty of securing labor. In 1 Butler, Geographical Review, 9 (1920), 78 ff. 2 Cf. no. 118. The effects of deforestation in Greece and Italy are well known, but no study of the ancient problem has yet been made. 3 On the great estates there was greater opportunity for diversity of crops, and probably more scientific methods were followed there than on the small farms. The wealthier landowner could tide over a succession of bad years in certain crops where his poorer rival must succumb. [ 213) THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES the era of peace which followed the establishment of the empire, cheap slaves disappeared from the market, and the constant demand for recruits for the army drained the country districts of their vigorous manhood?. The poorer farmers were unable to meet the new conditions and many became involved in debt to the wealthy proprietors in their neighborhood. In the course of time they were obliged to surrender their property in payment of debts, and many were compelled to work out their obligations by remaining on their farms as tenants, and thus the way was prepared for the introduction of the colonate. Others abandoned their farms and flocked to the cities to be supported by municipal charities? The lack of a cheap and adequate system of trans- portation was a most serious handicap to farmers living in inland districts. Grain is a difficult commodity to transport by land, and only those living within easy access to water- routes could hope to compete in distant markets. In the fourth century even the sea became practically closed to free commerce, partly because of the rigorous control of shipping by the government and partly because of civil wars. In the case of those farmers who were compelled to seek a market within the limits of their own township, prices were often controlled by the system of municipal charities whereby grain was purchased at a fixed price and distributed to the proletariat as a free gift, or at a nominal charge. Where transportation was difficult, the burden on the agricultural class was further increased by the heavy cost in time and labor of the liturgies imposed for convoying supplies for the army, or for the taxes paid in kind. The charges for the imperial post were particu- larly severe, especially in the later empire. Municipalities not only suffered a loss in revenues from the decline in value of their public lands, but also lost 1 The aurum tironicum was later substituted, cf. Journ. Rom. Stud. 8 (1918), 26 fF. 2 Heitland, of. cit. 336 to end, passim. [ 214 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES large portions of their territory, either through enforced sales to discharge public indebtedness, or by confiscation. Some of the emperors regarded municipal ownership lightly, and rounded out their own estates or gave gene- rous gifts to friends from this sourcet. Prosperou villages often gained municipal status, and were assigned a part of the territory of their mother city. Similar losses were incurred in the anarchy which prevailed during long periods of wars, when fortified villages usually became isolated and independent communities (castra, oppida). Some of these villages adopted the magistracies and forms of municipal administration, but the majority were governed by an imperial or municipal official such as a curator, defensor, or magister vici®. In consequence of the development of private patronage, as we have already seen, village-communities and private property passed out of the control of the municipalities. On the other hand, gifts and endowments in the early empire were often made by transferring landed estates to a commonwealth. The problem of making an endowment perpetual was a matter of genuine concern in the ancient world, and the method devised by Pliny, though expensive, probably represented the best policy which the jurists could devise in that age?. He also confesses the defect in the system which must have applied to all public leases, especially to those of short terms, namely, that the lessee was prone to exploit the land during the tenure of his contract, and to surrender the property at the expiration of the lease with its value seriously depreciated. A certain amount of territory was acquired through fines, but this source disappeared as the local magistrates lost judicial power. The estates abandoned by curiales could be added to the territorial possessions after three years, but it is doubtful if such additions were any gain’, If property could not be successfully managed 1 Nos. 90, 157. 2 Declareuil, op. cit. 310 ff. PO PINV EO. 7a ros 4 Cod. F. 10. 59. 1. ‘The property of decurions who died intestate went to the curia in later times (Cod. T'2. 5. 2. 1). [ 215 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES under private ownership, it was likely to be still less profitable under public administration. Shortly before the second Punic war a law was passed forbidding Roman senators to engage in foreign trade?. This legislation was destined to play an important part in the history of Roman agriculture, for the senatorial class was forced to invest in land. The possession of great estates soon became desirable in acquiring social prestige, and the growth of /atifundia began. But the prosperity of an agricultural state rests on the welfare of the small independent farmers in the community. This class, as we have seen, gradually disappeared as a few acquired wealth and gained senatorial honors, while the vast majority, unable to meet the competition of great estates or foreign producers, either joined the urban movement, or became tenants. As land became concentrated in the hands of a few, who were usually exempt from municipal obligations by virtue of their title of imperial nobility, the burdens of taxation and liturgies for the remaining citizens were greatly increased. Since the curiales were usually land- owners, their increasing charges became intolerable as their property steadily depreciated. In order to meet these charges, they were forced to exploit the land still more, and the process of deterioration was thus accelerated. Finally, many of them abandoned their property and fled 2. Others sought to enter some vocation which would give them exemption from municipal charges. The emperors strove to check this movement by binding the curiales to their place of origin, and by forbidding them to enter any of the privileged professions. Since these measures were ineffectual, laws were passed requiring that the property of anyone who gained exemption should remain under the jurisdiction of the curia. The sole recourse left to the distressed curial, short of abandonment of his property and flight, was the right of disposing of his property by sale. This privilege was virtually withdrawn when it was Lp Livy; 21.03: SOs pp. 113 ff. [25654 THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES decreed that the consent of the governor or the curia was necessary before any legal transfer could be made. Viola- tions of the civil code were frequently punished by con- fiscation of property, which was added to the imperial estates. The municipalities accordingly suffered serious losses not only in the growth of private /atifundia, but also in the development of imperial holdings. In the fourth and fifth centuries the Church also gained control of great estates by gifts and bequests. These estates were all exempt from municipal obligations, until Leo and Anthe- mius decreed that all curial property should remain under the jurisdiction of the curia, even if it passed out of the hands of the curiales}. The legislation pertaining to the coloni may be traced in part to the scarcity of labor as the supply of slaves decreased, but the depreciation of the soil was also an important factor®. In early Roman husbandry voluntary tenancy was a familiar practice, but when Rome acquired her eastern provinces, she found a system of compulsory tenancy developed which differed little from medieval serfdom. The latter institution gradually spread over the whole empire, probably from the example set by the imperial estates. As we have already seen, the decline in the fertility of the soil led large numbers of farmers to incur indebtedness, which could only be discharged by working out their obligations in an involuntary tenancy from which they or their children could not escape. The spread of private patronage also fostered the development of the colonate, as farmers placed themselves under the protection of some neighboring land-baron, and, in return for the security of life and property granted them, entered his service in a relationship which ultimately became that of a colonus®. ‘The emperors were forced to hold these 1 Cod. F. 10. 19. 8 (468). 2 For the history of the colonate, cf. especially Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. and Heitland, Agricola. 3 Zulueta, de patrociniis vicorum. [ 217 | THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES tenants in a form of perpetual leasehold in the effort to check the urban movement, and to secure an adequate supply of trained agricultural workers on imperial and private estates. By the beginning of the fourth century the coloni were bound to the soil in all parts of the empire, and in 367 it was further enacted that no land could be sold without the tenants attached to itl. A powerful instrument of oppression was put in the hands of the proprietors when they were held for the taxes of their tenants, and were authorized to collect them?. They were thus enabled to pass on the increasing weight of taxation to their co/oni, who were thus reduced to greater poverty. While the laws provided means of redress in cases of over- exactions, it is doubtful if any tenant ever dared to enter an action against his landlord®. In the fourth century the colont were reduced almost to the level of agricultural slaves. Keen civic rivalries led to the construction of great public works to vie with those of neighboring towns without regard to economic advantages or necessities, and in this way the civic treasuries were so often ex- hausted that the emperors forbade such undertakings without the approval of the provincial governor. Wealthy citizens were usually not averse to providing temples, baths, or other public works as a memorial for themselves, or as a means of securing civic honors, but there was no glory in providing an endowment for maintenance, and this charge usually fell on the municipality. From the modern point of view the ancient city spent a dispro- portionate part of its revenues on the amenities of life, for example, games, theatres, baths, banquets, religious ceremonies, and the like, while little was used for the development of economic resources. The widespread system of municipal charities, whereby the urban poor were fed and amused, was also based upon a vicious policy, tCog.\N 7.11.48, 2 (357). 2 Cod. Th. 11. 1. 14 (366). 3 Cf. nos. 175, 180, 186, 190, 192. [i208 an THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES for it placed a premium on idleness, and fostered the movement from country districts to the towns. Moreover, the system of financial administration did not provide reserve funds from prosperous years against seasons of adversity. When hard times came, deficits were inevitable, and loans had to be made at ruinous rates of interest; and when a city once became involved in debt, escape was difficult. The cost of defending and governing the Roman empire steadily increased, while its resources in men and in wealth were steadily diminishing. The long series of defensive wars, and the struggles for the imperial power in the third century drained the resources of the citizens. When the power of choosing the emperor passed into the hands of the soldiers, they were quick to take advantage of their privilege, and increases in pay were often de- manded and granted?.: Besides, the donatives were liberal and all too frequent in the quick succession of imperial rulers. Fresh levies of recruits were constantly required because of the steady and severe fighting, and the virile man-power was heavily drawn on, or if levies were not provided, an equivalent in money was exacted. A serious burden was imposed by the billeting of troops in towns and villages. The unfortunate residents suffered from their greed and licentiousness, and frequent appeals were directed to the emperor, but although stringent legislation was enacted to check the evil, the laws were not backed by any power which could enforce them, and the evil appears to have continued unabated’. In the gradual concentration of power in the hands of the central government, the number of bureaus was 1 The notorious case of the auction of the imperial throne by the prae- torian guard may be cited (Herodian, 2. 6. 6). 2 It is recorded as one of the merits of Pescennius Niger that he re- strained the exactions of the soldiery (Hist. dug. Pescennius, 3). Cf. nos. 113, 139, 141, 142, 143, 144, 152, 162, 163; Rostovtseff, Mus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233f. [ 219 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES steadily increasing. The reorganization of Diocletian, by which the empire was divided into prefectures, dioceses, and small provincial units, while at the same time civil and military commands were separated, saved the empire from civil war and lessened the political power of mili- tarism; but the number of officials was vastly increased, and the expense of administration was more than doubled with, unfortunately, no corresponding increase in efh- ciency!, There was no effective method of controlling the various departments, and the elaborate system of espionage, created partly through a genuine desire on the part of the emperors to control abuses, and partly as a result of the natural suspiciousness of an autocratic government, only served to create new methods of oppression and cor- ruption. An edict of Constantine in 331 reveals the deplorable inefficiency of the central government in controlling abuses, and the widespread corruption of officials of all classes, not even excepting the provincial governors themselves*. The complaint that there were more people living upon taxes than paying them was undoubtedly an exaggeration, but there was a sufficient basis in fact to justify the statement®. In the fourth century the proportion of consumers and producers had become too nearly equalized for an agricultural common- wealth whose resources were declining, and which could not exchange its manufactured goods for food and raw materials from other nations in any appreciable quantity. The depreciation of the currency which had begun under Nero was continued by successive emperors, ig- norant of fundamental economic principles, as a means of replenishing their exhausted treasuries and of meeting the mounting expenses of bureaucratic administration. By the time of Aurelian gold had disappeared from circu- lation. The coins purporting to be silver contained about § per cent. of that metal. Where the tribute or dues were 1 Cam. Med. Hist. 1. 24 ff. 2 Cod. Th. 1.16.7 (331). 3 Lactantius, de mort. persec. 7. 3. [Kpezonr THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES fixed, the depreciated currency meant a lightening of taxation, but when Aurelian made payments in debased coin and demanded taxes in another standard, he virtually multiplied the rates by eight. Diocletian devised a new system of taxation which applied to all provinces alike, and he abolished the tributes, which had been very un- equally apportioned. Under the new arrangement the privileges of immunity, which free cities and Italian towns enjoyed hitherto, were revoked!. The taxes were laid on land, which was classified according to its use for growing grain, or producing oil or wine. The various units were called iuga, each of which represented the number of acres which one man could work, and in the case of vine- yards or olive orchards were often rated by the number of vines or trees. Pasture lands were assessed according to the number of cattle. A head-tax was also imposed upon the agricultural laborers, men, women, and slaves. These taxes were levied in addition to those which had long been customary, the inheritance tax, customs dues, the aurum coronarium, the aurum oblaticium, and the tironicum. ‘The taxes instituted by Diocletian were reckoned in the produce of the soil and notin coin. He thus extended the system which had already begun under Alexander Severus when salaries were paid in kind. While Diocletian’s system of taxation was uniform in its applica- tion throughout the empire, and undoubtedly secured greater revenues, its injustice is apparent in that no dis- crimination was made between rich and poor iwga*. The assessment thus fell with undue severity upon the owner of unproductive farm land while his richer neighbor would escape with a comparatively light tax. The fact that the law-givers of the empire failed to devise an equit- able system of taxation based on sound economic prin- ciples must be considered as a very important factor in the decline of the middle and lower classes of land- * Cf. pp. 127 ff. 2 Seligman, Essays on Taxation, s.v. Regressive Taxation. eee od THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES owners, on whom the assessments fell with disproportionate severity. The collection of taxes had been placed in the hands of local authorities ever since the system of farming out the revenues to the publicani had been generally abolished. The decemprimi and decaproti were responsible for the collection!, and any deficiencies were made up by them, but there is no evidence that this system was continued after Diocletian. A rescript of Aurelian made the whole order of curiales responsible, after the third year, for the taxes on estates abandoned by their fellow-members. In case they were unable to bear the burden, the land was to be distributed among the various local villages and estates*. Constantine issued an edict forbidding decurions to be held for the taxes of others?, but he later revived the law of Aurelian. Special imperial agents, called exactores, were deputed to assist in collecting arrears, but the prin- ciple of collective liability of the curiales seems to have been the rule. Not only were the curia/es responsible for the taxes on their own lands, but also, at least in certain periods, for those on senatorial estates. This burden was particularly heavy, because powerful land-owners could not be compelled to pay taxes. An interesting illustration of this is found in a law of 396 which separated senatorial and curial property, but when in the following year it was found that the revenue from the former had decreased by half, the old custom was revived whereby the curiales were responsible for both4. In addition to the taxes on land and on the agricultural classes, whether free, serf, or slave, the liturgies, both municipal and imperial, were imposed upon curiales with increasing severity. The maintenance of the imperial post was most oppressive; and the confiscation of municipal revenues caused the transfer of many liturgies, which had hitherto involved only personal service, to charges on PPS Oud. 0.18, 20. COM rT. Eis hO. sls Gog 2utt..7 22 (319). 4 Cod. Th. 6. 3. 3 (396), 4 (397). ete 720 THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES propertyt. All these burdens fell on the land-owners, and were fatal to the development of agriculture. The im- position of the plebeian head-tax on the farmer and his help, while the city proletariat was exempt, gave, as a direct result, great impetus to the urban movement. Normally, the shifting of the population from the country to the town would inevitably adjust itself by bringing grain to a price which would encourage the revival of farming, but other factors prevented it. The population of the whole empire was decreasing as the result of plagues and famine, of the wastage of civil and foreign wars, and of religious persecutions”. The birth-rate also was steadily declining, although the emperors sought to encourage large families by elaborate alimentary laws and by grants of special privilege to families of three or more children. The maintenance of a large standing army where soldiers served long terms, although marriage was permitted them by Severus, the rapid rise of Christianity with the consequent increase in the number of men entering religious orders, and the development of monas- ticism increased the number of people who lived in celibacy. Towns dwindled to villages and finally dis- appeared. Only the few favored by exceptional environ- ment, or protected by secure walls of defence, survived the general decay. The growth of great estates and the disappearance of the small farmer deprived the local industries of their chief market®. Most of the estates had their own workshops where the simple tools and equipment were made, and much, if not all, of the food and clothing of the tenants was produced on the estate. There was little trade with the city, and this was carried on by primitive barter, since the depreciated coinage had no value as a medium of exchange. Foreign trade also declined as the local markets » GF Pp: 95.f- * Seeck, Geschichte des Untergangs der antiken Welt, 1, 296 ff. 3 Westermann, op. cit. 723 ff. [ 223 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES weakened. The division of the empire served to break trade-connections between the East and West, while the creation of the new capital at Constantinople put an end to many of the old trade-routes, and seriously affected the cities depending on them. The frontiers were fre- quently closed by wars, and trade with peoples outside the empire was broken off for long periods. The heavy burdens imposed upon ship-owners for the alimentation of the capitals strained the transportation system to the utmost. The cost of the government service was charged to the freight carried for private interests, and this practice served to discourage trade by sea. In the fourth century the feeling of imperial unity disappeared, and each pro- vince began to develop its own independent life as inter- course with other provinces ceased, and most of them became self-supporting and self-sufficient by necessity. Methods of manufacture were never improved in the ancient world, either because an adequate supply of slaves removed any incentive to develop mechanical devices so long as labor was cheap, or because inventive genius was lacking, or because traditional methods could not be varied by conservative people!. The restrictions imposed upon guild members controlled the supply of workmen, but were fatal to the establishment of new industries and to intellectual or material progress on the part of the skilled worker. The influence of state and municipal monopolies and the imperial workshops for munitions, clothes, and other articles may have played some part in the economic life of the municipalities in which they were located, but it is doubtful if they were important factors. While the worship of local deities undoubtedly con- tributed to the development of patriotism in the ancient city-state, the growth of scepticism and the influence of various philosophic systems had impaired the vitality of local cults long before the founding of the empire. The worship of the emperor was universal, and in this way may 1 Meyer, Kleine Schriften, 79 f.; R.E. s.v. Industrie. [ 224 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES be said to have prepared the way for the adoption of Christianity, but it may be doubted if either of these cults had any real importance in municipal history in the im- perial period. The religious observances of pagan magis- tracies may have deterred Christians from seeking positions in the local government, but the early Church drew its members largely from a class which was ineligible for ofice. In the later period, when the Church began to attract members of the wealthier class, there is ample evidence that Christians took their part in municipal government!, After the recognition of Christianity as an official religion of the state every member of the com- munity stood on equal footing in regard to civic duties. When Julian sought to re-establish paganism, Christians “‘struck”’ in protest, but this is the only evidence of their unwillingness to take part in local affairs after Con- stantine?. The legislation dealing with the relations of Christians to the local curiae begins with Constantine. When he ex- empted officers of the Church from municipal liturgies, the curiales at once sought to enter holy orders, more from a desire to escape civil obligations than from any sincere religious conviction. There must have been a large number of Christians in the curial order, for Constantine was soon obliged to issue an edict forbidding them to enter the service of the Church. Similar laws were fre- quently issued by later emperors, but the very frequency of such legislation shows that the laws were continually violated®. In this way the municipality suffered a loss of curial members, but a remedy was found, as we have already seen, by subjecting the property of curia/es to the curiae when any member of the order took up a profession which gave him exemption from local obligations. Church estates also developed at the expense of the municipalities, and the burdens on the laity increased proportionately. 1 Declareuil, op. cit. 97 ff. **C0ae LA. 12.1550 (362), 3 Cod. Th. 12. 1 passim; 16. 2 passim; cf. pp. 110 ff. AMA [iyo mel 15 THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES On the other hand, where the revenues of Church pro- perties were distributed in local charities, there was no economic loss to the community. While it may be true that Christianity turned the attention of its votaries to the future life rather than to the problems of the world about them, yet the identification of the municipality with the bishopric gave the Church a real interest in the preservation of the civic common- wealth. The development of the power of the bishop in judicial and administrative matters detracted from the influence of local magistrates, but the decline of municipal institutions began long before Christianity had become an important factor in the Roman empire. The biological theory of the decline of nations has received considerable attention in recent years. The prob- lem of race-mixture in the municipalities of the ancient world is a difficult study not only because of the lapse of so many centuries, but also because of the conflicting nature of the evidence. It is probable that most Italic and Greek stocks were themselves a mixture of different races. [here is, however, little doubt that races of the Italic peninsula in the era of republican Rome were, in the course of time, replaced by other nationalities. Few of the old Roman families can be traced far down in the imperial period, and recent investigation has shown that the population of Rome in the imperial period was largely of foreign origin!. Many of the Italians went out to the provinces where they were ultimately submerged in the native population. Italy became peopled by provincials and aliens, many of whom had risen from slavery. In all provincial cities the liberal attitude of slave-owners led to the development of a large class of freedmen whose descendants were politically indistinguishable from the original members of the community. The development of the doctrine of origo in the imperial period tended to keep each city a self-contained unit as far as race-mixture 1 Frank, dm. Hist. Rev. 21 (1916), 689 f. [p22Gnn) THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES is concerned. Thus when the older members of the curial stock died out, their places would usually be taken by more progressive members of freedman origin. From the economic point of view, such replacements could hardly be considered as a loss to the community. The large influx of Nordic races in the later empire was far from being a source of strength to the community from the admixture of a purer and more virile stock. We are inclined to believe that the blending of races had less importance than the economic factors which we have already described in the decline of municipal life. Not less important is the fact that in the ancient city-state intellectual progress was closely related to political freedom and independence. Under the empire the government of each municipality came into the hands of a narrow oligarchy, which in turn was closely supervised by a paternalistic state. In the general atrophy of political institutions, even when the municipalities were enjoying great material prosperity, we must find the explanation of the loss of intellectual vigor, and the decline of literature, art, science, and philosophy. The influence of a court based upon military power and inspired by military traditions was also un- favorable to the development of any of the arts. Christi- anity turned its back on pagan culture, and when the new religion was adopted by the wealthier classes, the system of education which was devised for Christian youths led to a general disregard for the heritage of the past. In the later empire, when Hellenic culture had spent its force, the revival of Orientalism seems to have con- tributed to the return to the ancient village-communities which are characteristic of the Byzantine empiret. In the West the barbarian invasions caused the submergence of many municipalities and a form of tribal government appeared in many districts. Here also the village-com- munity was established and extended until it became a most important factor in the medieval period. It is, 1 Ramsay, The Tekmorian Guest Friends, pp. 357-8. [ 227 ] 15-2 THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES however, beyond the scope of this investigation to study the conflict of municipality, tribe, and village in the Middle Ages. To sum up briefly the principal causes which contributed to the decline of municipal life, economic decay was due primarily to widespread depreciation of the agri- cultural resources of the ¢erritoria through unscientific methods of farming and the exhaustion of the soil. The independent farmers who owned small estates constituted the most important class in the community, and they went down in the struggle for existence under unfavorable conditions of production and competition. Their farms were swallowed up in the /atifundia, or great estates in private or imperial hands, or they were abandoned and became waste. Rural desolation was aggravated by the urban movement, and as wide areas lay uncultivated, malaria, famine, and plagues followed, each taking its toll of vital energy and of the productive power of the empire. Trades and industries in the towns depended largely on the purchasing power of the local markets, and as these declined factories became idle and trade with other pro- vincial cities fell off. While the resources of the munici- palities and of their citizens were steadily declining, financial burdens were steadily increasing. The necessity of supporting a highly organized bureaucracy and of maintaining a huge standing army, almost constantly engaged in costly defensive wars, proved too great a task for a nation whose resources were largely agricultural and were in process of exhaustion. An attempt was made to meet financial difficulties by successive depreciations of the gold and silver content in the currency, but finally the imperial coinage ceased to have any value, and trade was carried on by barter, while taxes were collected in kind. Finally, Diocletian attempted a reform in the currency and in the system of taxation. The latter, although it swept away certain inequalities of the old levy, fell with especial severity on the agricultural classes, and [ 228°] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES was economically unsound in its discrimination against the owners of less fertile land. The farmers were forced to exploit their lands for immediate returns, and the process of exhaustion was accelerated. In addition to the heavy taxes, the liturgies imposed for municipal and imperial service became more and more burdensome as the number of citizens liable to such duties not only decreased, but also found their capital resources declining. When the fixed charges approximated to or surpassed the income of curiales, many of them abandoned their estates, or sought some way of escape from their obligations. Thus it is that we hear of deserted curiae, abandoned towns, and the rapid decline of municipal institutions. We have already traced the history of the transfer of judicial and administrative power from the municipalities to the central bureaucracy. To some extent this was due to economic causes, but imperial autocracy and local ineficiency played an important part. The whole ten- dency of Roman administration was to discourage demo- cratic government in the cities, and to place all power in the hands of an oligarchy. Thus the vast mass of the people lost the political instincts which they had developed in their ancient city-states, which had played so important a part in the growth of intellectual vigor. Under the empire the local senatorial oligarchy, usually limited to a hundred men in each city, became an hereditary organiza- tion, and as its members were secured from all danger of overthrow by internal revolution, we must believe that they ultimately became dominated by personal interests. The wealthy senators gradually withdrew from the local organization as they became members of the imperial nobility. The remainder, secure in their hereditary privi- leges, squandered the resources of the city and oppressed the people. For this reason imperial appointments of curatores and defensores were made, and the transfer of legislative, judicial and administrative power to provincial governors and bureaucratic officials began and speedily [ 229 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES developed. A vicious circle was established as the atrophy of municipal institutions led to increased imperial super- vision, and bureaucratic control stifled political inde- pendence and initiative. Finally, the curiales, facing economic ruin, were reduced to the position of an imperial guild, whose sole purpose seems to have been the collection of taxes and the performance of liturgies. As the municipal governments lost political responsibility, political ideas, and political instincts, the vital spark of ancient civic life perished, and this factor, no less than the economic forces, had a powerful influence on the decline of municipal institutions, and reacted with deadly effect on the political vigor of the whole empire. | The paralysis of social institutions, manifested in the creation of a rigid caste-system, binding the curiales, members of guilds, and agricultural workers to their place of origin and to the station of life in which they were born, was due in large measure to economic and political factors. The emperors owning vast landed estates, and controlling industrial monopolies, favored legislation which bound the laborer to the farm or factory. While this policy provided a temporary solution of the labor problem, and served vested interests, the result was not only fatal, economically, to the development of new in- dustries, but by depriving the individual of all power of initiative or free choice in his vocation, and of all incentive to material and intellectual progress, his powers of production were lessened; and the reduction of the bulk of the population to a condition of serfdom affected the cultural standards of the empire far more than did the barbarian inroads. In the effort to preserve the municipal organization, the curia/es were bound by legislation similar to that governing the guilds and co/oni. When the citizen became less important to the state than his property, the ‘““sinews of the commonwealth,” as the curiales were styled in some of the Codes, were also paralyzed. It is futile to attempt to date the beginning of municipal [ 230 ] THE DECLINE OF ROMAN MUNICIPALITIES decline. Many of the forces which combined to destroy civic prosperity and political vigor were already operative in the days of the republic. Their development was some- what arrested and obscured by the expansion of the empire, and by the prosperity which followed the restora- tion of peace and security. But the newer provinces soon came under the influence of the forces of decay, and the weakness of the municipal units quickly reacted on the empire as a whole, This was clearly revealed in the civil wars and barbarian invasions of the age preceding Dio- cletian. Thereafter the history of municipal institutions as a vital element in the Roman empire draws rapidly to'a close. The outward forms survived, but the breath of political life had departed. [ 231 J CHAP DERTLAY MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS AND THEIR PREPARATION ments on which our knowledge of the relations of the municipalities to the central government rests, it is important for us to have in mind the different forms which documents affecting the cities took, to know the procedure which was followed in receiving petitions from the muni- cipalities or from citizens of municipalities, or inquiries from the governors of provinces, and to be familiar with the method of reaching decisions on the points involved, and of transmitting them to the persons or communities concerned. In such an inquiry it is convenient to consider the republic and empire separately, because the attitude taken by the government at Rome toward provincial communities and its method of dealing with them changed from the one period to the other. We shall limit our dis- cussion to the period preceding the accession of Diocletian, because almost all our documents antedate his assumption of the imperial purple. The documents under the republic with which we are concerned fall into three classes: /eges, senatus consulta, and edicta. Leges, including under this head p/ebis scita, were enactments of the popular assembly under the chairman- ship of a Roman official. Measures whose precise terms were specified in the bill submitted to the assembly, and which the people were asked (rogatus) to adopt, were styled leges rogatae1. When the people delegated to a magistrate or to several officials the right to draw up a measure, the 1 Specimens of these laws preserved to us on tablets are the /ex Antonia de Termessibus (no. 19) of 71 B.c. which isa plebiscite, and the /ex de Gallia Cisalpina (no. 27) enacted between 49 and 42 B.c. Fora full list of known leges rogatae, cf. Rotondi, Leges publicae populi Romani, 189-486. [ 232 ] “NOR the purpose of interpreting correctly the docu- MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS enactment was called a /ex data. Among the earliest of these measures were the /eges provinciarum1, which were prepared by commissions of ten senators. Municipal charters are commonly /eges datae*, and in one of them reference is made to the appointment of a commissioner to draw up the measure®. Less important matters affecting municipalities sometimes came before the senate*, and not infrequently the decision of the senate was communicated to the community in question in the form of a letter from a magistrate®. Of the edicts which magistrates of a certain rank were empowered to issue, we are concerned primarily with the edicts of the governors of provinces, which have been described in another connection®. The originals of the leges or senatus consulta were kept in the aerarium at Rome in the care of the quaestors’, and copies were sent to the communities concerned. The edicts of governors were also of course published in the provinces. Under the empire we find the two classes of /eges mentioned above, sexatus consulta, and edicts, as well as the constitutiones principum. During the principate of Augustus and in the first half of that of Tiberius we find some /eges rogaiae®, but before the close of Tiberius’ reign the popular assembly ceased to play an important part in legislation®. It was summoned, however, to confer the * Cf. pp. 487. ; ! 2 Good specimens for the republican period are the tabula Heracleensis (no. 24) of 45 B.c. and the /ex coloniae Genetivae Iuliae (no. 26) of 44. B.c. For a list of known /eges datae, see Rotondi, op. cit. 487-507. S5G fanOu20eil. LEO. 4 Cf. nos. 5, 7, 10, and Bruns, 41. 5 The 8.C. de Tidurtibus (no. 7) takes the form of a letter from the praetor who presided over the senate. The 8.C. de Oropiis (no. 18) of 79 B.c. is a letter of the consuls embodying the decree of the senate. PEG Aippe sO fisino, 2. 7 Cf. Servius on Aen. 8. 322; Livy, 39. 4. 8; Cic. PAi/. 5. 4. 12. 8 Cf. Rotondi, op. cit. 44.1 ff. ® Sporadic instances of the calling of the comitia for legislative purposes occur under Claudius (‘T'ac. 4zn. 11. 14) and Nerva (Dig. 47. 21. 3, 1). Cf. Liebenam, R.E. 5.v. comitia, 711. [ 233 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS tribunician power on the princeps and to define the func- tions of that office!, and probably in this measure he was empowered to found colonies*, to change the status of a colony or a municipium, to grant Latin rights to provincial communities, to give Latin communities Roman rights, and to grant municipal charters. One may say therefore that all the /eges of the imperial period, with which we are concerned, were /eges datae®. With the disappearance of the popular assembly, the importance of the senate as a legislative body increased for a time. This was a very natural result, and the prince may not have been unwilling to see the change come about, because the time was not yet ripe for him to make himself the sole law-making power in the state. A survey of the known decrees of the senate of the early empire confirms from the negative side the conclusion which we have just reached from the positive point of view in dis- cussing the /eges datae, for although we have a long list of senatorial decrees of this period of a legislative character?, none of them, except the ‘‘discourses of the prince,’’ deals with the relations of the imperial government to the civitaies. It is clear therefore that measures affecting the cities emanated directly from the emperor, and that the oratto principis in senatu habita is important for our dis- cussion. In the year 238.c. Augustus received the privilege of bringing up any matter in the senate which he chose to submit®. This right was later extended, so that the prince could make as many as five proposals, all of them to take precedence of motions made by other mem- bers of the senate®. In the absence of the emperor these messages, or “‘discourses of the prince,” were read by a quaestor and adopted as decrees of the senate without 1 Cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 346, 349, n. 4. 2 Op. cit. 2, 888 77. ® Cf. the /eges Salpensana et Malacitana (nos. 64 and 65) of a.v. 81-84. 4 Cf. Karlowa, 1, 644-646 and Rudorff, Rim. Rechtsgeschichte, 1, 106— 1209. 5 Cf. Cassius Dio, 53. 32. 6 Cf. Herzog, 2, 691, n. 2. [ 234 ] AND THEIR PREPARATION change. Perhaps from the time of Hadrian no one but the emperor proposed a measure in the senate. From the close of the second century the jurists cite decrees of the senate as orationes rather than senatus consulta, and the language of command takes the place of conventional parliamentary forms!. Several of these ‘‘discourses”’ concern the municipalities?. The most noteworthy is the oratio Claudii de iure honorem Gallis dando®. Historically the “‘discourses of the prince’’ were related in their origin to the decrees of the senate, but later took legally the character of constitutiones imperatorum. The part which the senate played in the trial of provincial governors has been discussed elsewhere’. If we turn to the edicta, in addition to the edicts of the emperor, which will be discussed later, we find decreta concerning provincial communities®, especially to settle matters in dispute between them®. Along with the /eges datae the most important measures affecting the cities were the imperial constitutions. Of the constitutions we read in the Institutes: quodcumque igitur imperator per epistulam constituit vel cognoscens decrevit vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat: haec sunt, quae constitutiones appellantur’. This is essentially the definition of Ulpian, quoted later in the Jmstitutiones*: Quod principi placuit, legis habet vigorem;...quod- cumque igitur imperator per epistulam et subscriptionem statuit vel cognoscens decrevit vel de plano interlocutus est vel edicto praecepit, legem esse constat. Haec sunt quas vulgo constitutiones appellamus. These two lists 1 Cf. Girard, Manuel élém. de droit rom® 57. 2 For a list of the principal orationes, cf. Cuq, *“‘ Mémoire sur le consilium principis d’Auguste 4 Dioclétien’’ in Mém. prés. par div. sav. 9, 2, 424-426. See especially no. 11. SyCfno. SOland Lac. A2f, 11°24: 4 Cf. pp. 1357, 165 ff. 5 Cf. nos. 58, 109, 165 and C/G. 11, 2222. §& Cf. pp. 1527 ? Cf. Justinian, Jzst. 1. 2. 6. 8 Cf. Dig. 1.4.1.1. Gaius (Jast. 1. 5) writes ‘‘constitutio principis est, quod imperator decreto vel edicto vel epistula constituit.”’ exiee MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS agree in their inclusion of the epistula, decretum, and edictum. They differ only in the fact that Ulpian adds the subscriptio, a special form of the letter, and mentions the interlocutory decree along with the decretum. To these three classes of constitutions most scholars add the mandatum, and the term rescriptum, rather than epistula, is a more exact general term for a public letter of the emperor!. Imperial edicts were similar in form to those issued by republican magistrates, but the right to issue them seems to have been conferred on Augustus by a special act about 19 B.c.2 They were written in black letters on a white background?, and displayed in Rome and in the provinces, in both Latin and Greek, when necessary. Sometimes it was provided that the edict should be engraved on a bronze? or marble tablet®. They were sometimes addressed to a community. In this case they were published un- changed®. At other times they were addressed to an imperial official or the governor of a province. Such edicts the official incorporated in a proclamation of hisown’. A fair number of edicta principum are extant®, and some of 1 For discussions of the different classes of comstitutiones and their nature, cf. Cugq, op. cit. 424-461; Mommsen, S¢. R. 2, 905 #7; Karlowa, 1, 646— 654; Krueger, Gesch. d. Quellen u. Litt. d. rim. Rechts, 92-100; Bruns- Pernice in Holtzendorff’s Excyclopddie d. Rechtswissenschaft, 1, 1433 Girard, op. cit. 58-61; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 2_f7.; Haberleitner, Philol. 68 (1909), 283 ff. Haberleitner adopts the following classification: I (a) edicta, (4) orationes, (c) adlocutiones; II (a) epistulae, (6) rescripta, (c) subscriptiones; III (a) decreta, (4) interlocutiones. Faass, Archiv fir Urkundenforschung, 1 (1908), 221 f, finds one hundred and sixty-four imperial constitutions extant in epigraphical form. Of these one hundred and twenty-one are in Greek and forty-three in Latin. The most prolific emperors are Pius, Hadrian and Severus, with thirty-two, twenty-six, and sixteen respectively to their credit. Of the one hundred and forty epigra- phical constitutions which can be dated, one hundred and twenty-three antedate Diocletian. 2° Gy. blerzog; 2, 1515 n. 1. 8 Gf a hivy; 1. 325. 23:9.746./5. BLOF. Gea. 12, '2.27. 1,6; 14. AAs NOGAOS B Gino. '5 I, 6 Cf. no. 49. 7 Cf. no. 165. 8 Rudorff, op. cit. 1, 132-1363 Cugq, op. cit. 456-459. [ 236 ] AND THEIR PREPARATION them concern the citiest. Technically edicts held good only during the reign of the emperor who issued them, but frequently by formal act or tacit observance they con- tinued in force after his death?. The subject-matter of an imperial edict was introduced by the characteristic formula: Jmperator...dicit or Avroxpdrwp.. .déye®. After this phrase the first person is used. The date and place of composition are indicated, usually at the begin- ning, sometimes at the end of the document*. The edicza, which have been discussed above, like the orationes, and the ad/ocutiones®, with which we are not concerned here, were addressed to the public. The other constitutions, viz. the rescript, the decretum, and the mandatum, were not necessarily intended for publication. Rescripts were sent in reply to the inquiries (re/ationes, consultationes) of provincial governors or other officials or in answer to the petitions (preces, ibe//i) of individuals or communities. Replies to officials usually took the form of independent letters (epistu/ae). In answering private persons or communities the emperor either appended his answer to the request or made notes upon it. His reply in the first case was called a subscriptio, in the second, adnotationes. The letters which passed between Pliny and Trajan furnish us with the best specimens to be found in literature of the inquiries of an official and the replies of the emperor. There are extant several important 1 Cf. nos. 33, 49, 51; Gaius, Jzst. 1. 33, an edict of Nero conferring the right of Roman citizenship upon any Latin, who, having a fortune of 200,000 sesterces, devotes half of it to the construction of a house in Rome; Dig. 50. 7. 5, 6, an edict of Vespasian forbidding cities to send a deputation of more than three members to Rome; Pliny, N.H. 3. 3. 30, an edict of Vespasian conferring the ius Latii on Spain; Gaius, Jwst. 1. 93, defining the rights of peregrini admitted to citizenship; Dig. 50. 4. 11, an edict of Pius prescribing the cursus honorum for cities; Dig. 1. 5. 17, Caracalla’s edict of A.D. 212 (cf. no. 192). SrG FTO: at 3\Cf. no. 49 and Bruns, 68, 69; Cod. F.3.13.23 3. 11.:13'7. 62. 6. 4 Cf. no. 49 and Bruns, 94; Cod. F. 10. 61. I. 5 Cf. for instance, Hadriani adlocutiones ad exercitum Africanum, CIL. Vill, 2532 = Dessau, 2487. [ 237 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS epigraphical rescripts dealing with municipal affairs'. Many imperial letters are of course to be found in the Justinian Code?. An epistula opened with the name and titles of the emperor in the nominative and the name of the addressee in the dative, sometimes with sa/utem or salutem dicit added’. This part of the letter is called the iuscriptio. At the end of the letter there is usually a word of greeting, and an indication of the date and place of composition 4. Rescripsi or scripsi found in subscriptiones is in the hand of the emperor, and recognovi, which appears at the end of them®, is probably the counter-signature of the official in charge of the bureau and certifies that the document correctly represents the decision reached in the case’. Proposita, which is common at the end of certain rescripts up to a.p. 291 8 and rare thereafter, indicates the date and 1 Cf. nos. 61, 63, 151. The most complete specimens of subscriptiones on municipal matters are nos. 111, 139, Bruns, 84, and CJL. vi, 3770. No. 139, after certain introductory formulae, contains the preces of the Scaptopareni, followed by the decision of the emperor. For an analysis of no. 154, see the commentary on that inscription. For the character of the subjects covered in an adnotatio, cf. Seeck, R.E. 1. 382f. 2 On relationes and consultationes, cf. especially Cod. F. 7. 61 and 62. For references to subscriptiones, cf. Cod. F.7.43.1; Dig. 4. 8. 32, 14. 3 Cf. nos. 61, 63. 4 Cf. no. 61. > Cf. no. 111, col. 1v, 1. 8; no. 139; Bruns, 84. 6 F.g. nos. 111, 139, and Bruns, 84. ? Cf. Preisigke, Die Inschr. v. Skaptoparene, especially p. 63. ‘The term recognovi has given rise to much discussion. Mommsen holds (Ges. Sc&r. I, 479; 2, 179 #.) that the memorandum, as prepared by the official, and the final document, were laid before the emperor. Upon the former he wrote vescripsi, on the latter recognovi. Karlowa (Neue Heidelberger Fahré. 6, 214 and Rom. Rechtsgesch. 1, 652, n. 1) thinks that the words attest the correctness of the document, when compared with the official copy kept in the archives. Cf. Brassloff, R.E. 6, 207 f., Kriiger, Gesch. d. Quellen u. Litt. d. rim. Rechts, 96, Preisigke, op. cit. 4-12, and Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 55, 56, n. 3. 8 Cf. for instance Bruns, 87, 88 and Kriiger, op. cit. 96, n. 43. Wilcken (op. cit. 14 ff.) thinks that the propositio applied to sudbscriptiones, but that epistulae were only published on order of the emperor, or the magistrate receiving them. [2B Rie AND THEIR PREPARATION place of publication!. Latin was the language regularly employed in rescripts, but some of those sent to Greek lands were in Greek?. Rescripts might confer a privilege or immunity on an individual or community, or decide an administrative matter, or they might settle a legal question. The influence of a letter of the former kind did not usually extend beyond the person or corporation concerned. Letters of the second sort furnished pre- cedents or legal principles for the future. Judicial epistulae increase in number with Hadrian. The increase may well be due to the issuance of the edictum perpetuum by Hadrian, and the consequent necessity of consulting the emperor on doubtful points?. As we noticed above, the jurists speak of three classes of constitutions, viz. edicts, rescripts, and decreta. In the early period, however, the expression decretum principis was applied to any announcement of the emperor’s will. In this early wide sense, therefore, it included all classes of imperial constitutions. In the narrower meaning which it commonly took in the later period, it is applied to the emperor’s decision on judicial questions submitted to him in the first instance or on appeal. To the list of constitu- tions given by the ancient jurists, modern scholars com- monly add the mandata or individual instructions given to governors and other officials, by which they were to be guided in the administration of their offices. Naturally in course of time a somewhat fixed set of principles or methods of government in the provinces had developed, so that a large part of the mandates given to one governor was identical with that of another governor. The practice of sending out the governor of a province with instructions goes back to the republican period®. The mandates were 1 Cf. Karlowa, 1, 651; Brassloff, R.L. 6, 208; Preisigke, op. cit. 65. Oy ea ene lo 37 3/58 Tod Sa Same) RCO Os 2) 3 Cf. Girard, Manuel élém. de droit rom. 59. 4 Cf. Hesky, R.E. 4, 2289. A document which some scholars style a decretum is called by others a rescriptum. > Cf. Kriiger, op. cit. 99, n. 59. [ 239 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS of great importance to the municipalities, because they dealt especially with police regulations, criminal law, and the competence of a governor!. Mandates, for instance, forbade cities to make grants of money, instructed governors to apprehend and punish culprits wrongfully released by municipal magistrates*, and ordered them to send to the emperor for trial a decurion when charged with an offense which was punishable by exile or death?. If we turn now from a consideration of the documents themselves to their preparation, we notice that for a long time under the republic the senate directed the foreign policy of the Roman state. It appointed a commission of senators to draw up the /ex provinciae*; it received requests from cities for charters®, for a recognition of their independence’, for the granting of privileges ®, and the redress of grievances®. With the coming of the new régime, the princeps took over the provinces in which an army was needed, appointed his own financial repre- sentative in senatorial provinces, and exerted a great moral influence over all the provinces. The growing importance of the “‘discourses of the prince’’ must also have lessened the authority of the senate in foreign affairs. Naturally, therefore, inquiries and petitions from abroad came to be addressed more and more frequently to the emperor. In making his replies he needed helpers and advisers. As foreign questions grew in importance and numbers, the business was systematized, bureaus were established, and a board of imperial counsellors was organized. These bureaus were known as the officia or scrinia a rationibus, ab epistulis, a libellis, a memoria, a studtis, and a cognitionibus 19, The officials a rationibus had charge of imperial finances, 1 For a list of items from certain mandata, cf. Cuq, op. cit. 460/f. 2 Cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trai. 111. Be DigA8. 35 TO. SOI NAS YOU. 27,(1,°2: . 75 IC fiom a Sup SeCic.an ery. 2.5122. “Ohno. 5. 8 Ditt. Sy3 601. 9% Cf. Bell. Afr. 97. 10 For the development of these bureaus, cf. Hirschfeld, 29 f.,, 318 7; Cuq, op. cit. 363 ff.; Karlowa, 1, 544 7.3; Rostowzew, R.£. 6, 210 f7.; von Premerstein, R.Z. 4, 220 ff. [ 240 ] AND THEIR PREPARATION supervised, for instance, the collection of taxes, appro- priations for the army, for frumentationes, and for the construction of public works. The officials ab epistulis prepared and despatched imperial replies to the letters of governors and generals, and drew up instructions for imperial officials. The bureau a /ibe/iis had charge of the petitions addressed to the emperor by private persons or by communities, and concerned itself primarily with legal questions arising between subjects, or subject communities, and between them and the state. The bureau a memoria, which is not mentioned until rather late, assisted the emperor in cases requiring immediate action. It probably set down in writing the official speeches and oral decisions of the emperor and adnotationes. ‘The department a studtis grew out of the bureau a /bellis and perhaps in- vestigated questions outside of administration and law, such as those of religion. The officials a cognitionibus took up minor judicial questions, perhaps in civil cases only, which were not laid before the consilium. Matters which were too important to be submitted to a bureau came before the consilium principis, which owed its definite organization to Hadrian}. It was made up of certain trained jurists, receiving salaries, and known as consitiariu Augusti and adsumptt in consifium, and the amici and comites of the emperor who had no fixed salary”. The emperor presided and rendered the decisions. A vote was taken, usually by ballot, but the emperor was not bound by the opinion of the majority. It remains for us to consider briefly the method of preparing, publishing, and preserving state documents. An edict was of course drawn up by the magistrate issuing it. Sexatus consulta under the republic were put into their final form by a committee of senators?, and the method 1 Hist. dug. Hadr. 18. 1. 2 On the consilium principis, cf. Cugq, op. cit. 328 f.; Hirschfeld, 339 7.3 Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 989 ff.; Seeck, R.E. 4, 926 f7.; Herzog, 2, 756 /7- 3 Cf. the 8.C. de Bacchanalibus (Bruns, 36) and 8.CC. de ludis saecularibus of 17 B.c. (Bruns, 46). AMA fv 2400rt 16 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS of bringing bills before the popular assembly is so well known as to need no comment here. Important measures of any one of these three classes were engraved on wood, stone, copper, or bronze, displayed where they would be seen by people concerned, and copies of them kept in the temple of Saturn or in some other depository in Rome!. With the centralization of foreign affairs in the hands of the emperor, a large number of departments was organized, as we have already noticed. We can see in some detail the course which would be followed by a petition or an inquiry from a provincial community or a private person ®. The request might come through the governor of a pro- vince %, or it might be delivered at Rome in person or by a messenger*. On arrival at Rome it went to the proper department, and from there, if an important document, to the consilium. The emperor in the consiiium gave his decision in general terms; and the appropriate depart- ment put the reply in proper form. The head of the department wrote recognovi upon it to indicate that it conformed to the emperor’s decision and met the require- ments in the case, and to attest its authenticity the em- peror set down on it the word rescripsi or scripst. In cases of minor importance the facts and precedents were collected, and a tentative answer for the approval of the emperor was drawn up in a department. ‘The answer might take the form of an epistula, or independent letter, sent alone®, or accompanied by the /e//us®, or the form ofa subscriptio’ or of adnotationes. It might be sent directly to the inquirer’, or to him through an imperial official ® or some representative of the supplicant!®, Sometimes it 1 Cf. Dziatzko, R.E. 2, 561 f.; Mommsen, S8¢. R. 3, 418 f.; Kubitschek, RELY, 287 ff - 2 Cf. Preisigke, op. cit. 44 ff.; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 38/7. 3 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 58, 59. 4 ‘The protest from the Scaptopareni (no. 139) was delivered by a certain Aurelius Pyrrhus, acting as an intermediary. SGFPn0; 01: 6 Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 59. CE noe 3g: S Cyimos.59, 61,03.’ * Pliny, Bparadiran59-0 A Cf nossa [ 242 ] AND THEIR PREPARATION reached the petitioner in the form of a copy made at Rome by such a representative!. A brief analysis of one of the documents in which the last method of procedure was followed may illustrate many of the processes outlined above®. In Gordian’s rescript we have at the beginning the words Bona fortuna prefixed by the Scaptopareni when the rescript was engraved. Then come the date and place at which the copy of the original in the archives was made: Fulvio. . .scripta sunt. It is made at the instance of Aurelius Pyrrhus, the representative of the Scaptopareni, whose name and position are given. Immediately thereafter stand the preces of the Scaptopareni, followed by the de- cision of the emperor (/mp.. .debeas). The emperor has written rescripst and the director of the department, recognovi. In place of the names of the witnesses to the copy the Scaptopareni have had the word signa engraved. The original document in the archives, therefore, began with the preces and closed with recognovt. Interesting facts concerning a particular inscription may often be learned from an examination of it. An imperial letter sent directly to a community was usually addressed to the magistrates, senate, and people®, but sometimes to the magistrates and decurions only*. Occa- sionally reference is made to the deputies who brought the petition®, or to the intermediary at Rome who pre- sented it®, or the deputy records the fact that he has de- livered the emperor’s reply to the local magistrate’. In one letter we are informed that it was written in Latin and translated into Greek’, This letter, intended for certain troops, was published in their winter quarters?, and still another the duoviri had cut on stone!®, In those S.C fe. 1139; * This analysis of no. 139 is based on Preisigke, op. cit. 74, 76, 78-79 and Wilcken, op. cit. 38 ff. See also the literature cited in note 7, p. 238. 3° Cf no. 130. $) Ghia. 61. 5 Gf, no. 61. 6 In no. rr1 a certain Lurius Lucullus. 7 Cf. no. 83. 8 Cf. Riccobono, no. 66. 9 Lbid. 10 Gf. no. 615 [ 243 ] 16-2 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS which have been copied from the originals in the archives, the copyist sometimes notes the change from one hand- writing to another in the original?. All subscriptiones were publicly displayed, as well as those epistulae whose publication the emperor or the magis- trate receiving them should order. Those concerning provincial communities were displayed both in Rome and in the community concerned?. They were also preserved in the Commentarii principum®, being assigned to different sections according to their contents. Inside these sections they were probably grouped under the several provinces, with subsections for each year*. Perhaps undevicensimus in the rescript of Pius to the Smyrnaei® indicates that this document is No. 19 in the roll for a certain quarter of the year®, With certain comparatively unimportant changes made in the organization and management of the archives in the period after Diocletian “ we are not concerned here®. In Egypt the imperial will is expressed by means of the oratio®, edictum™, rescriptum', and epistula\*. ‘The language employed in these documents is usually Greek, but Latin is also found. Edicts were commonly promulgated from Alexandria, but were also issued from other cities!®. Im- Buse DOMLUL, COL tv, Qs 2 Cf. Preisigke, op. cit. 64 f7.; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 1-42. 3 von Premerstein, R.E. 4, 737 ff. 4 Cf. Preisigke, op. cit. 72. > Cf. Bruns, 84. 6 Cf. Wilcken, op. cit. 40. * For these changes cf. Lécrivain, Dict. Dar. 4, 845 /f. 8 There is little definite information to be had about the archives, or commentarit, of the western municipalities except that which is to be found in two or three inscriptions (e.g. CJL. vit, 8. 15497; x1, 3614). Cf. Kubitschek, R.Z. 1, 298 f. For the Greek cities cf. Fahreshefte d. ist. archdol. Inst. 7, Beiblatt, 44; 16, 17 ff, 270, and especially, Wilhelm, Bettrage zur gr. Inschr. 258 ff. By the time of Justinian town records were no longer kept with any care, cf. Novellae, xv, praef. ‘“‘cum (defensores) nullum habeant archivum, in quo gesta apud se reponant, deperit quod conficitur.” ® Mitteis, Chrestomathie, 370. 10 Mitteis, op. cit. 372, 377; Ditt. Or. Gr. 664, 665. 11 Mitteis, op. cit. 375, 376; Wilcken, Hermes, 55 (1920), 1 f.; Bruns, gr. 12 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 153, 158; no. 189. pSaNO/ 195: [ 244 ] AND THEIR PREPARATION perial rescripts, as a general rule, were forwarded to the prefect and published in Alexandria. In a few cases they were sent direct to a local magistrate, although it is prob- able that a copy was also sent to the prefect. Imperial epistulae were sent to private citizens of Greek or Roman birth, Copies of these documents are comparatively rare. The prefect also issued edicts in Greek. They were pub- lished in Alexandria and usually forwarded with an epistula to the strategi with instructions to post them in an appropriate public placet. In one instance local magis- trates append their signatures to indicate their cognizance of the document, which seems to have been circulated for this purpose*. In another case the magistrate takes oath that the document had been published by him as directed 3, It is evident that edicts of the emperor and of the prefects and their rescripts were widely known to the public, since copies are found throughout Egyptian nomes and they are frequently cited by the natives. The minor officials of the bureaucracy also issued their instructions in writing, usually in the form of epistulae or émuard\para. Since the bureaucracy in Egypt was highly developed and the number of secretaries very large, the task of caring for the official records must have been very serious. That the archives were not always properly housed is evident?, and very little can be learned about the method of pro- viding for the municipal or village records. None of the numerous buildings or offices recorded in the papyri can with certainty be ascribed to purely municipal purposes’. Possibly, since the relation of state and municipality was so close, the records of both may have been combined. 1 Nos. 162-165. 2 Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 13. SOPRA EE Bed & 4 Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung, 6, 100 ff. 5 ‘The more important buildings for preserving records in Egypt are the following: ypadetov, dyopavopetov, wvynEtov, dpxetov, ypappatopvAdktov, xopixy BiBrAvoOnKy ev Tdi TpvtTaveiwt, Snwooia BiBrArtobyKy and BuBrv.oOyKy éyxtnoewv. Cf. Mitteis, Chrestomathie, 188; Grundzige, 78 ff. [ 245 ] Atta Hi \3 yony Bia POT Te Ve nee YeaGg: Ay saikesen an he OENEY Qa 3% ie ‘ony. walt . a win * in} Ak bo iaial ee Roshi tt aa rial: fe Weer hala ch iy tit es ft + EN is THC RL airs TT bh “1; aye) aay Ty yay a vithud na ij i igs, Lev bit re dvs ‘ , by 7 9 ist 2. Drv ls & TF A tide a payor , The & ; Rinker eran drt les ff. | ih nk boi eS) y dhe iy ie hey Lal bi GV oXee aie irae PART II Po dVEUNGT GC. Py AST DO .GaU IVC AING is oem LIN GREEK @*LATING FROM ITPALY AND THE PROVINCES SIGLA LATIN INSCRIPTIONS: Italics indicate the restoration of a lacuna, or minor corrections in the text. < > indicate ancient interpolations in the text. (_ ).indicate the expansion of an abbreviation. GREEK INSCRIPTIONS: [ ] indicate the restoration of a lacuna. < > Indicate an erasure by the editor. ( ) indicate the expansion of an abbreviation or an addition by the editor. GREEK PAPYRI: [ ] indicate the restoration of a lacuna. [[ ]] indicate an erasure by the scribe. <<>> Indicate an erasure by the editor. < > indicate additions by the editor. (_) indicate the expansion of an abbreviation. [ 248 ] I. MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES I. EPISTULA FLAMININI AD CHYRETIENSES (196-194 a. Chr.) Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 13 IG. 1x, 2, 338; Ditt. Sy//.3 593; CIGH 770. Tiros Koivetios, crparnyos Urratos ‘Pwpaiwy, Xupetiéwv | Tots Tayots Kal THe mode yaipew. ‘Eset Kal év Tols Nowtrols Tracuv | pavepav werronkapev THY Te Olav Kal TOV Shou TOD Pwpaiar | Tpoaipecty hv éxomuev els UMaS ONOTKEPHS, BeBovrAnpeba Kai || év Tois é&hs émidetEas Kata Trav wépos TpoeaTynKOTes | Tov évdd£ov, iva pnd év tovTows éxwow Huds Kkata|Nadely of ovK ard TOD Bertictou eiwOotes avalatpépecOar. “Ocat yap morte amroXei- Tovrar KTHoes | eyyerot Kal oixiat TOY KaOnKoVaC@Y Eis TO dnpoctov || TO ‘Pwpyaiwy, rdcas Sidopev THe bueTépat ToOXeL, | OTWS Kat év TOUTOLs UaOnTE THY KadoKayaliavy Hua | Kal STE Tehews €v ovOevi hirapyupha|[a|e BeBovrAnuea, | mepl wreicrov ToLovpevot YapiTa Kal pirodokiav.” Ocos pév| Tot wn KeKopiguévot elalvy TaV émtBaddOvT@y avTots, || éav buds didaEwow Kal paivavTat evyvamova ré|yovTes, cTOXaCoMévMV UuoY eK THY um éuod yeypap|uévor éyxpicewy, kpivw diKxatov elvat atroKa- iotac|Oae adrtois. | *Eppwcbe. From Chyretiae. This is the earliest document from inscriptional sources which deals with the relations of Rome and the Greek states. For this reason we have included it here, although Greece was not subject to Rome at this time. The Aetolians as allies of Rome had captured and sacked the city of Chyretiae in 200 B.c. (Livy, 31.41. 5). The property of the partisans of Philip in the city after the battle of Cynoscephalae was confiscated, and became part of the public property of Rome. When war with Antiochus threatened, Flamin- inus instituted a milder policy towards the Greek cities. Accordingly he restored to the Chyretiaeans all lands confiscated from their [ 249 ] Io I5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN citizens still held by the Roman state. The restoration was made to the city with the right of reinstating the former owners if they satisfied the magistrates of the justice of their claim. While the tone of the letter is that of one desirous of securing the goodwill of the Greeks, the terms laid down for the restoration of the land to the former owners indicate the attitude of a master towards a subject people. It is also evident that, in settling the affairs of Chyretiae after the war with Philip, Flamininus favored the pro- Roman parties in the state (cf. pp. 69 ff; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 286). 2. DECRETUM PROCONSULIS HISPANIAE ULTERIORIS (189 a. Chr.) CIL. 11, 5041; Dessau, 15; Bruns, 70; Riccobono, p. 248. L. Aimilius L. f. inpeirator decreivit, | utei quei Hastensium servel | in turri Lascutana habitarent, | leiberei essent; agrum 5 oppidumqu., || quod ea tempestate posedisent, | item possidere habereque | iousit, dum poplus senatusque | Romanus vellet. Act. in castreis | a. d. x11 k. Febr. A bronze tablet found in 1866 on the probable site of Lascuta in Spain, now in the Louvre. Paullus probably received the title of imperator, which he bears in this inscription, in consequence of his victory over the Lusitani in 190 B.c. (cf. Livy, 37. 57. 5). Since he probably left Spain in the autumn of 189 B.c., and since this decree is dated Jan. 19, the date of the inscription is probably 189 B.c. The people of the turris Lascutana were made free in the sense that they were taken from under the control of the Hastenses. Control of them was now transferred to the Romans. There are no cases known of attributi attached to communities which were not autonomous; cf. Mommsen, S¢. R. 3, 766. The Lascutani do not acquire full right of ownership to their land, but hold it at the pleasure of the Roman people and senate; cf. Momm- sen, St. R. 3, xvi, n. 13 Karlowa, 1, 447. The order of the words poplus senatusque, as opposed to the imperial order, senatus populusque, is significant. [ 250 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 3. EPISTULA SPURI POSTUMI, PRAETORIS, AD DELPHOS (189 a. Chr.) Ditt. Sy//.3 612; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 10. w+2+-.0ug Kal...|...[mepl THs morews eAEvVOepilas Kai Tod iepo[d dovAias... | (vacant versus duo) , , Le fe \ ¢e / lal Zmoptos Uoaropysos Aeviov vids, otpatnyos Popaiwr, Tar n A A / e > ig la] > / koilvar tov Aertdov yaipev. Oi tap vey amootanéertes mperBev||tat BovrAwv, OpacuvcrAjs, Opéotas mepi THs acvdias ToD lepov Kali THs TOAEwS Siedéynoay PiroTipias ovOev édrei- movres| | Kal mept THs eXevOepias Kai averogopias nEiovy, brws > / V5 A te ef / ans, 2 , An A al vTOvopot Kal aTerEts Bow TE TOALS Kal n Yopa TOV Aerdor |. | Tuvackerte ody Sedoypévov THL TVYKANT@L, TO TE Lepov To[D “AmoA- Awvos Kal THY TOALY AovAoY elvat, avecapopnrov Sé Kab] || THY y al A \ \ , \ \ \ > / Tomy Tav AeAdhov Kal THY yopay, Kal O[ta TavT os avTovo[ uous of \ / > / ey \ elvat TOUS ToATaS..........-€dAEVOEpous Gy||Tas Kal Trod- Tevovtas avtovs Kal’ avtlovs. .xal] kuplevolyras....TO Te fepov Kal TO Té]|wevos, KaO@s matpLov avTots e€ apxys [omIipyev: val 5 ” , e a b] / ovp elo| nTe, oTéAAOMEV Upiv avTiypadgor |. (vacant versus duo) IIpo spepav teccdpwv vovav Mailwv Sropios Uooropios Aevxiou vids, otparnyos év Kometiwt(?) cuve]|Bovrevcato Tht auykAnta.? ypadlopévar traphnoay o Seiva Tov Seivos. .., 0 Seiva Tov deivos... ],| Paios ’Ativuos Vatov, TeBépsols KrXavdios...... mept wv Aeddol Aoyous éroinaavTo, Trept tepov|| AavAOv, TOAECWS édevOepilas, ywopas dvevohopytov Kal avTovoyov, Tept TovTOV a) / A 4 \ / al a Tov Tpayuwatos ovTas| || do£ev> Kalas mpotepolv AcrAdols tavta e nA x / > / » / A / vanpyev xkai Maviwr “Axirtwr édofe, TovTws TOL KpipaTt €upeé ||very edo€ev. (vacant versus duo) [A ]evxcos Dovpios Alevxiov vios, atpatnyos.... | [Ac]Adav €[AevOepias... . 2] From Delphi. After the Aetolian domination was ended the Romans displayed great kindness to the Delphians. We publish one [ 251 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN of a series of documents which bear upon the relations of Rome and Delphi (Ditt. Sy//.3 607-615, 821, 822, 825-827). In settling the affairs of Delphi Manius Acilius defined the limits of the territorium, a settlement which was later a subject of dispute (Tod, International Arbitration, nos. 23, 26). He also con- fiscated the lands of Aetolians and Locrians resident in this area and gave them to the city and to the temple (Ditt. Sy//.3 610). The Delphians had difficulty in dispossessing the owners and appealed to Rome. The ambassadors were slain on their return journey, and a new embassy was sent to complain of the outrage and to secure a copy of the senatorial action on their former request. ‘Che answer of the senate is given in the letter of the consul (Ditt. Sy//.3 611). ‘The Delphians are permitted to expel those aliens whom they choose, and may allow others to remain who are amenable to the laws. It is evident that the Delphians were afraid of the vengeance of the Aetolians for the expulsion of their fellow-citizens, and desired the support of Rome before taking action. When the war was ended the Delphians sent another embassy to Rome to secure the confirmation of the acts of Manius.’ The document which is published above contains the record of the proceedings. At least four inscriptions were recorded on the stone. Of the first, only the last two lines are preserved, but it probably contained the plea of the ambassadors. The second is a letter of the praetor to the Delphians giving a summary of the decree of the senate and enclosing a copy which is recorded in the third document. The right of asylum is acknowledged; the city is granted freedom and immunity from tribute; the citizens are to be autonomous for all time and left in the enjoyment of their own laws. The subject of the fourth document is unknown. Compare the letter of the praetor Valerius to the Teians (Ditt. Sy//.2 601), where the Romans promise immunity from taxation although there is as yet no question of ‘Teos being subject to Rome. [ 252 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 4. EPISTULA CONSULIS AD HERACLEOTAS (ca. 189-188 a. Chr.) CIG. 3800; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 3; Ditt. Sy//.3 618; Rev. ét. an. 19 (1917), 237 ff. [Peter etsaapsrcicretiie ietatat ]otpatnyos Umraros ‘Pwpator | [Kal Sypapyoe kal 7 avyKAntlos ‘Hpaxrewrav the Bovdhe kal ToL 67|[ wor yaipe]. “Evéltvyov] juty ot trap’ buav mpéoBes Aras, Avs, Acovd|[ovos,.... jufav]dpos, [Ev ]dnwos, Mooyos, Apiotei- dns, Mévns, dvdpes xal|[Aol xayabot], of to Te [Wydliopa améb@xay Kal avtot Sueherynoav akorov|[Ows toils év Tale Wen |dbicpare KAT aKexmpta wevors ovdev ehreiTrovTes |[@eroTe]uias- nplet|s dé ™pos mavtas tovs “EXAnvas edvows Staeiper[or | Tuyxd|vomey Kai TeipacducOa, TapayeyovoTay vua@y Eis THY nuetépalu | miote]u, mpovorav Trovetobar THhv evdexomévny, dei Tivos ayabod trapalil|tvoe yer ]owevoe’ cvyywpodper Sé buiv THv te édevOepiay Kabore cat | [Tals d]ANaus TOdEoL, Boat Huiv THY émitpotny édwxayv, éyovow tld | avtods malyTa Ta avTou ToduTever Oat KaTa TOUS DpmeTépous vopous, | [Kal év Tlots aAXous Tetpacoucla evypnatovrTes Duty aet Tivos ayabod | [rapaiT cox yiveoOar* amrodexoucOa Sé Kai TA Tap bwap dirdvOpwTa Kal ras || [wiores, clat adrol dé metpacopeba pundevos Aeltrec Oar ey ydpitos atrodoce | [amectad|\Kapev Sé€ mpos vas AevKcov "OpBvov tov émipednodopevov ths | [1oAews x]Jalt] THs yopas OTws pnodels Vas TapevoxAH.. "EppwoGe. From Heraclea at Latmus. We have adopted the readings of Holleaux (Rev. ét. an. 19 (1917), 237 ff.). The period is evidently the first invasion of Asia Minor by the Romans in the war against Antiochus. The Heracleans hastened to join the Romans and apparently sent an embassy to Rome to secure the ratification of the promises made by the commander of the Roman forces in the field. The consul at Rome promises the embassy that their state shall have its freedom and the right to use its own laws. Henzen (Ann. Inst. 1852, 138) restored the name of Gnaeus Manlius Volso in the first line and assumed that this was a letter issued by him as proconsul in 188 B.c., when he had been sent out at the head of a commission of ten to settle the affairs of Asia. Holleaux shows conclusively that this restoration and interpretation is incorrect. Ape zwei 15 Io T5 20 25 30 35 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 5. SENATUS CONSULTA DE THISBENSIBUS (170 a. Chr.) Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 11; Bruns, 37; IG. vit, 2225; Ditt. Sy/1.3 64.6; Riccobono, p. 199. Kéivros Maimos Titov vidos otpatnyos THe cvvKAH|TwL cUVeE- Vo 5 / AD fal e A > a b] / Bovretcato év Kometiot Tpo nuEp|[@lvérra eldvav OxtopuBpior. A > Tpadopévar| raphaoav Mavios Axidsos Maviov vids OAre[«||vi Ja, Tiros Nowiowos Titov vidos. Uept dv Gial|[B]ets Adryous érroun- cavto Tept Tov Kal ad|[T]ovs mpaypydrar, ottives év The didcar a ¢€ Vd peed 4 ¢€ lal a @ ¥ > The | hperépac évémervar, draws avtois do0acw, | [olis ta Kal avtTovs mpaynata éEnynowvrTat: twepl Tod||Tov Tov Tpayp"aTos otws édo&ev: Srrws Koivros | Maivos orparnyos trav é« Tihs auverntou | [wlévte atrordEni, of av avtar é€x TaV Snuocior / \ a ANG / f BY wpa|[yuldtav cal Ths idias wictews hatvwrvrar é0€e. | IIpotépat eldvav OxtopuBpiov: ypadopuévwr traph||cav Ildomdcos Movtos Koivrovu vios, Mdapxos KrXad| dos Madpxovu vids, Mavios Sépysos Maviov vids. | “Qcavtws tepi dv of avtol Adyous éroimocavTo mept yopas | [xlal epi ALlpévwv Kai Tpocddwy Kal Tepi dpéwv: & avtav éye|[yloveccayv, tadta nuay plély evexev éyew é&eivar &£o||Eev.—Ilepi apyov kal rept iepov Kai Tpocddav Tras avToi | [xluptedwor, Tept TOUTOU TOU TpdypuaTos OUTwS EdoEEv: | olTeves ? \ , \ ¢€ , \ la) X fv / \ eis THY pidtav THY uetépay po Tov } Tdios Aoxpé|ttos To otpaToTredov Tpos THY TOW BicRas mpoonyalyev, dws ovTOL ” / \ + rd wv \ / érn Séxa tla] éyysota Kupievwow. “Kédo€glev]. || Ilept yopas, oiKiay Kal THY UTapXOVT@Y avToOis* ov TroTé| TL a’TAY yéyover, ef \ e a > lal ” Sea x ¢ , \ @ étras [Ta] éavtadv adtois Exew e&ju | E0Eev. ‘Acatvtas rept wv € 3 \ / > Ve va ¢ 3 Uf deed > a of avTol Aoyous errouncavTo, GTra[s] | of avToOporos of id.0L exe? huyades Ovtes, THY akpav avTois Oras | Tevyioas €EHt Kat éxel KATOLK@OLY OUTOL, KaDOTL évehadvicay, ov||Tws EdoEEv* Straws exer a A \ / KATOLKOOLW Kal TOUTO TerXiowoty. "Kdo|Eev.—T Hv rorduv Tevyioas b] BA € / \ e e i] \ f b] 4 ov éd0€ev. ‘Oca’tws mepl by of avtol | Adyous érroincayTo, ypuaiov, 6 cuvnveyxav eis otépavor, 6|mws eis TO Kamretodcov atéhavov KatacKevacwcw, TovTos, Kab|[oTt] evepavicay, Tas > al b] ma a \ / ? \ , avtots amro600n, 6[1@|s TovTov Tov ctépavor «is || [To] Kazrero- Mov KaTacKevdowolv ovTws aTrododvaL edogev. ‘Ocad|[T]os Tept @Y ol avTOL NOYouS ErroLncaVTO, avOpwrrous, oiTLVES UTeE- P3543] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES va[v| tila rots Snwoctows mpaypwace Tots HueTépots Kal TOls EavTOV eau, | [6ar]ws ovToL KaTéX@VTaL* Tepl TOUTOU TOU TpdypyaTos, \ BAN oh ys a > A / Kabas av Koiv|[ro|s Mawiws otparnya. éx Tav Snpoociwv Tpaypatwv Kal THs idtas ri||[o]rews S0x7, obTws Trotety dokev. —Oitives eis ddXas TONES al7HAdAOoGaY Kal ovyl mpds TOY Tap’ HOY oTpaTHYOV TrapeyévoyTo, STrws | pun Els TAELY KaTATTOPEvwD- Tau’ wepl TovTOV Tov mpayuaTtos mpos AvAov | ['O]oriAcov vratov ypdupata atootetNas edokev, OTws Tepl TovTOV Tht 8:|[av ]lotar mpocéyni, Kabas dv atta. éx tav Snpwociwy Tpay- / \ fol *Q7 / / ” ¢ / patev Kat || [T]hs tdvas mictews haivntas. "Kdokev. | “Ocattas Tepl WY of avTOL AOYous ETroincavTo Tep[t | T]av Suc@v Hevore- Gidos Kal Mvaci6os, d7rws €« Xadkidos apeOaar, | kat Aawoxpita Avovuaiouv éy OnBav: tavtas éx TovtTwy Tév Tore|wv adeivat édo£ev, cal Orrws eis Dic Bas wn KaTéenOwow. ”Kdbo€er. ||['O]oavtas Tepl ov TavTas Tas yuvaikas Ddpias adv apyvpials | ei|s Tov oTpaTnyov évevKeiy eltracay’ epi TovTov Tod mpdy[ualTo|s votepov évavte L'atov Aoxpetiou Bovrevoacbar éeboéev. | —Ocavtos trepi dv ot avtot Ora Beis evepavicar Tepi citouv Kai ér[al]|ov éavtois Kowvwviav mpos Tvatoyv Uavdecivoy yeyovévar: \ / A “4 x DS) a / mept Tov||[T]ov Tov mpayuwatos Kav Kpitas KaPelv BovrwvTat, / \ a 7 AQ) , \ ® e > \ rovtos Kpitas So[d]|vat edofev.— Qcavtas trepi dv ot avtol Adyous érroujcavTo wept Tov | ypaupata Sovva OicBedow eis AitaXlav cat Bwxida: rept TovTou | Tod mpayuwatos Oia Bedor kal Kopwvetow eis Aitodiav cai Poxi|da Kat édy Tov eis das movers BovrAwvTat, ypaupata pirdv||Opw7ra Sodvar eo€er. From Thisbe. In the Macedonian war Thisbe, Haliartus, and Coronea remained loyal to Perseus, driving out the Roman party in their cities. When C. Lucretius advanced against Thisbe, it sur- rendered without a contest. “he Roman praetor restored the city to the partisans of Rome, who were recalled from exile, and the Macedonian supporters remaining in the city when it surrendered were sold into slavery (Livy, 42. 46, 63, where Mommsen reads Thisbas instead of Thebas in both chapters). The pro-Roman party in control of the city sent an embassy to Rome for the settlement of problems which had not been adjusted by the praetor. The public lands, revenues, harbor, and mountains, which had appa- rently been confiscated, were restored to the city. For the next ten Bits d 40 45 50 55 60 IO T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN years, only those citizens who had been friendly to Rome before Lucretius captured the city were eligible for magistracies, or priest- hoods, or as treasurers of the public revenues. In view of the fact that there was danger of the anti-Roman party returning and driving out the supporters of Rome, the latter asked permission to fortify the citadel and dwell there. This request was granted, but the Romans refused permission to rebuild the walls of the city, probably with an eye to possible future complications. ‘The Roman party was small and weak, and there was danger of their being driven out. The senate instructed Quintus Manius to take necessary steps to prevent an uprising on the part of residents of ‘Chisbe whose loyalty was suspected. ‘he direct request of the ambassadors to imprison these men was refused. The consul, Aulus Hostilius, then in Macedonia, was ordered to take such action as he deemed ad- visable about the return of the exiles. The senate probably left these questions 1n abeyance intentionally in order to have a reason- able ground for interference in the affairs of “Vhisbe at any time. The senate thereby definitely abandoned the policies of Flamininus in his first settlement of the affairs of Greece. It is interesting to note that the Italian trader had soon penetrated Greece after the first invasion by Roman troops. Gnaeus Pandosinus, a native of Pandosia in southern Italy, had leased a part of the public lands of ‘Thisbe, paying a certain percentage of the yield in grain and oil to the municipal treasury as rental. here arose some dispute in connection with this contract, which the senate referred to arbiters. 6. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE DELO | (164 a. Chr.) Ditt. Sy/2.3 664. Ol otpatnyoi Xappides éripednn| tet Anrov xatpew. Vevouéver| TrELoVwY Noywv ev Tet Bourel | Trepl TOD SoypaTos ov Hvey«ey || éx “Popns Anuntpsos ‘Pnvarleds trép TH Kata TO Yaparr.|eiov: éd0€ev un Kwdvew av|rov avoiyew Kal Oepatrevey | TO lepov KaOamep Kal tpote||pov, ypawat 6é Kal mpos oe melpt TovTwv iva el6ns* vrote|tTdyapev S€ cot Kai Tod éve|yOévTos UT’ avdTod ddypatos | TO avtiypadoy.|| Koivtos Muvuxios Koivrou | vids otparnyds tet cvyxkdn|Tor [ 256 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES auveBovretaato év Ko|eTiws eidusois évtepK(a)ral[p |ious* ypa- douévov maphnaav || Ildmdvos Lopxvos Ilordiov, Te|Bépsos 20 Kravdios TeBepiou | Kpvoropivas, Mdvios Bovty|tos Taiov: mept ov Anuntptos | ‘Pnvatos Adyous érrouncaro, || dws TO év 25 Anrqwt tepov Lapalmidos adtar Ocparrevery €| Fei, Andlovs dé Kw- Avewv Kal | Tov €E "AOnvadv érapyov | mapaytwvopevov wt EXac||coV 30 Jeparrever* tepl tovrou | Tod mpaypuatos oUTws ébo|Eev: Kalas TO mpoTepov €|Pepdrrevev, Evexev Huav | Oeparrevery EEeoTLv TOD || 35 un TL UTrevayTiov THL THS | TUyKAHTOV Soypate yivntar. | "EdoEev. From Delos. Although Delos at this time was under the ad- ministration of Athens, and the latter was a free city allied with Rome, the senate did not hesitate to interfere in the internal government of the island. Demetrius appealed to Rome to permit the opening of the Serapeum on Delos and the renewal of the cult which the Athenians had forbidden. He secured a decree of the senate in his favor, and, armed with this, he came to Athens and presented it to the senate. It is apparent from the wording of the letter which the Athenians sent to the governor of Delos that considerable opposition had arisen in Athens over this decree which is extremely brusque and softened by no diplomatic amenities. It is not even addressed to the Athenians nor is any request made to them to respect the wishes of Rome. Contrast with this the letter of Flamininus (no. 1). For the date of this document cf. note by Hiller, Ditt. Sy//.3 664. 7. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE TIBURTIBUS (ca. 159 a. Chr.) CIL. 1, 201 = x1v, 3584; Dessau, 19; Bruns, 39; Riccobono, p. 204. Cornelius Cn. f. pr(aetor) sen(atum) cons(uluit) a. d. 11 nonas Maias sub aede Kastorus. | Scr. adf. A. Manlius A. f., Sex. Iulius .. +) L. Postumius S. f. | Quod ‘Teiburtes v(erba) f(ecistis) quibusque de rebus vos pur- gavistis, ea senatus | animum advortit ita utei aequom fuit—nosque ea ita audiveramus, || ut vos deixsistis vobeis nontiata esse—: ea nos 5 animum nostrum | non indoucebamus ita facta esse, propterea quod AMA Pos7s 4 17 IO MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN scibamus, | ea vos merito nostro facere non potuisse, neque vos dignos esse | quei ea faceretis, neque id vobeis neque rei poplicae vostrae | oitile esse facere; et postquam vostra verba senatus audivit, || tanto magis animum nostrum indoucimus, ita utei ante | arbitra- bamur, de eieis rebus af vobeis peccatum non esse. | Quonque de eieis rebus senatuei purgati estis, credimus vosque | animum vos- trum indoucere oportet, item vos populo | Romano purgatos fore. Bronze tablet found at Tibur in the sixteenth century, now lost. The use of the second person in the verbs shows that this document is a letter from the praetor, containing the substance of a senatus consultum. Itisin the form ofa statement first made to the Tiburtine deputies in the senate. For the conventional form of a S.C., ef. Abbott, 230, 413 ff. he date is fixed by the fact that L. Cornelius Lentulus Lupus, who was consul in 156 B.c., held the praetorship in 160 or 159 B.c. (cf. Miinzer, R.F. 4, 1386 f.). For confirmation of this date, cf. also Willems, Le sénat de la république rom. 1, 2.50 f. Tibur had belonged to the old Latin League. It was at this time a civitas foederata, being one of the soci Latini nominis. Whether or not it was under the aeguum foedus of Sp. Cassius is not clear (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 47, n. 3). It became a munictpium by the legislation of 90 B.c. A not uncommon cause of complaint against Italian cities was their failure to furnish the required contingent of troops (cf. Willems, op. cit. 2, 692). What the question at issue in this case was we do not know, but the point of interest in the document is that Tibur’s explanation of the incident is laid before the senate, probably by a legation (cf. guod Tetburtes verba fecistis), and that the senate speaks for the Roman people and communicates its decision through its presiding officer. 8. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE NARTHACIENSIBUS ET MELITAEENSIBUS (159-147 a. Chr.) IG. 1x, 2, 89; Ditt. Sy//3 674; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pub- blico, 8; Vod, xxx1v; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 12. [{rpat layéovtos tOv Ococarav Acovto[s | Tod “Ay |noiaaov Aapuoaiou, év 6€ NapOaxia[e | apxovt wv Kpitwvos rod’ Apevia, Ilorv«réos | [tod Pec |Siarmov, Traveéta Tod Ayeddov, av[ell- 25a FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES ypadn To] ddypa TO yevomevov Ud auyK[Ay| TOV él c]TpaTHYyoD 5 Tov Oercarav Oecca|[Aod Tod] Opacupndeos Depaiov. | [T dios ‘Oc]rituos At’dov vids Maryxivos otpal[tnyos thie cvyxrAnrar auveBovrevoato mTpol||[....va]vav Koivtirt@v éy Kopetior: ypado|[uévar mlaphoav Koivtos (&)tatirunvos Koivrov | [vids Kop |ynria, Cvatos Aorarvos C'vaiov viols |’A....nv]on, Adros Lewmpwvios Airov vids Pal[Aépva]. Hepl dv Oeacadol Medu- Tavels “Appol|[Eevos Av]odvdpov, Aaumpopayos Ionita | [ape- aBev|ral Aoyous érroincavto, avdpes Kal[Aol Kaya ]Ool Kai hirou mapa OyHwouv Karov | [xayabo]d nai dirov cuppdxov (Te), ydpita | [pirtav oluppayiav te dvevedoavTo, Te||[pi yopas | Snuwooias Kat mepl ywpiov épyuov | [elrracay], we? Hs yw@pas els THU pirtay Tod | [nwov Tod “Pwyaiwy mapeyévovto, iy yo|[pav Nap@a|xceis wera Tatra éavToy adicas | [érouncayt jo, Tept TOUTOV TOU TpaymaTos Sires || [THY dsdvos lav 1poc(c)xwour, dT ws TODTO TO TPa|[yua aKépa |tov avTois aToKaTacTay ovT | [xaOe@s mporepoly éri Mnoeiws cai emt Oeccadav |.......... Kat émt Tov tept LIvAXov Maxe|[Sovwv Kexps|uévov avtois jv, TavTd te Ta k[pi||uata Kupia avTot|s n° Tept TovTOV Tov Tpa- yual[ros avvevddx |ncev nuiv cal NapOaxtedow | [bares tov ayav la Tov Twapovta Kpivn éw M[ers|Telac...... ély TavTnt THe Yopale......|..audotépwv] Tov Show é[reTpetrovTar] || .. €oTiv wr pa..|..1n..val. Kal mept dv Beccarol | NapGaxceis IN Tok roe Lali | vi. << , pea Be |utat Noyo[ vs | érr[oujoavto Kata mpoowrov év Thu] cuyxAntl@L..avdpes Karol || KayalOol Kai girot rapa Sypou Kxa[rod Kal|ya0od cali Pidlou cuppdyou Te nuetépov, xalpita pirjiav oulplualyiav te avevedoayto Kat | Tept TOV Tpayluataly Tov Kal avbTovs Sieré|y|ncalv] epi xepas [at] [e]p[av wept rH]s Te || ab[y]pn[mevns] z[is Kara Menir Ja[cléas apis [Na]p|@axcelw]v [trav] ev r[H Axar|iale- Kai yap| wera talvrns] | [4 ]s y@pas ets tHlv d]crca[v] z[od Sy ]uov [rod ‘Polwlaiwoly] Nap@axets rapayleyovéev ja, [x Jai [7 lept | THs x@pas Kat [Tov] tep@v KpeTnpio.s [vev |ixnx[é]||\vac KaTa vouovs Tos MecccalA@]y, ots [vo]|wors ews talv]dv ypav- [r]at, ods vopuous Tiros | Koiyxrios brratos amo ths Tav déxa mpea|Revtav yvouns eaxev, Kal Kata Soypa | cuyKAHTOU, TeEpt Te TOUTMY TaYV T[playual|[Tw |v eres avwTepoy Tpitw él TpLaY Reso 17-2 Io 30 =), 60 65 79O MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Sixac|[tn]piov vevixneévas, él Lapiwr, Koro[d]or[t|av, | Mayvyjrwv, xex[ ps ]uéva eivat cata vopuor[s], | 6rws Tabra Kupia 4 otTws Kabds Kal Grdots | yeyovds éeotivs Tepl ToUTOU TOD mpdypatos || otrws édofev: ydpita didiav cvppayiar | [a]va- veooac bat rovtois Te HriavOpwrras a|toKpLOnvat, dvdpas Kadovs xayabovs mpoc|ayopedaat, doa Kexpiméva eotly Kata vomovs | ods Tiros Koiyetios trratos &axev, tadta Kal\O@s Kexpiméva éotiy otw Soxet xvpia elvat Seiv: | ToUTO Te wn EvXEpES Elva, Soa Kata vomous Ke|Kptéva éotly dKkvpa Trovety. Eévid Te éxatépors Tdilos “Ootidtos otpatnyos tov Ttapiay Sdodvar xe|[Alevon ard onoTteptiwv vowwv éxaTov elxocr || [7é]vTE Ets éxdotny wpecBelav, ovTw Kabas av | [adtar éx] Tov Snuociwy mpayudrwv micte|[os Te THS] (dias haivntas. "Edokev. This inscription is engraved on two sides of a stone found at Narthacium in Thessaly. It is probably earlier than 146 B.c., since no reference is found in it to the provincial organization of Achaea by Mummius and his commission of ten in that year (cf. Willems, Le sénat de la république rom. 2, 705, n. 3; de Ruggiero, op. cit. 254), and because the two peoples in the controversy are spoken of as friends and allies of the Roman people—terms which would hardly be applied to provincial cities. On the other hand the fact that Hostilius, the praetor who presided over the senate, was not consul until 137 B.c. prevents us from dating the inscription much earlier than 150 B.c. ‘The inscription records the settlement of a dispute between the cities of Melitaea and Narthacium by the Roman senate. The Melitaeans claimed that they owned the territory in question when they were admitted into the friendship of Rome and that the land had been awarded to them by arbitration in previous decisions. The ambassadors of Narthacium claimed that the land had been awarded to them by Titus Quinctius and that his action had been ratified by a decree of the senate. Furthermore, the dispute had been arbitrated recently bya mixed tribunal from Samos, Colophon, and Magnesia, which had given a decision in their favor. The senate decided in favor of Narthacium, thus confirming the arrangement of Flamininus. In the same way, in deciding a similar question at issue between Priene and Samos, the senate upheld the arrangements [26074] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES made by Manlius and the senatorial commission (Ditt. Sy//.3 688), which had been confirmed by a judicial decision rendered by the Rhodians acting as arbiters. Cf. pp. 153 ff- g. EPISTULA Q. FABI MAXIMI AD DYMAEOS (ca. 139 a. Chr.) Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 4; CIG. 1543; Ditt. Sy//.3 684. "Et Oeoxorov A€wvos, ypappatélos Tod cuvedpiov Ytpato- Kréos. | Kéivtros PaBios Kolvrov Mdgiuos, avOdtrartos ‘Pwopaior, Avpailwv tots dpyoves Kal cvvédpors Kal The ores Yaipew. Tév rept || KuAXaviov cuvédpwrv éudavicdvtwy jot tepit TOV ouvTere|cbévtwy map wiv adiknudtav, rAéyo 6b brép Tis éumpnoe|ws kal P9opas TOV apy(el)wv Kat TOV Snuociwy ypap- pdtov, av éyelyoves apynyos THS 6AnS cuvyyUTEws Hoos Tavpopéveos 6 | Kat Tovs vomous ypdas trevavtiovs The atrobobetane Tois || TA]yasots bd ‘Papaiwy rortt[eta]s, Trept Gv Ta Kata pépos Sun[r]O[o| wev ev Ild]rpacs peta tod tral[p jov- [ro]s cupBovrtov: érrel ody ot Stamrpa|[ Ed |wevor tabra ébaivovTo pot THS Yeupiotns Kaltac |rdcews | [Ka]l Tapayhs xaltacKevny] Totovpevolt tots “EXAnot waa|w* od pol[vov yap] TAs mplos a|AAnrou[s] acvvard[a ]E[tas] Kai ype[l@xorrias oi||Keta], aAXra cai [rt ]hs aroSeSouévns Kata [x louvov rots EAA[ now é]|NevOeplas GaAXOTpLa Kat THls] Hwere[pa]s mpoatpécews, éyl@, Ta]|pacyxo- pévov TOV KaTnyOpaVv adnOiwas atrodei~ets, YO|oov pév, Tov yeyovota apynyov [Tt ]av mpaxyOevtwv Kal vo|woypadyjacayta éri Katarvoe THS aobobetons TonsTel||[a]s, Kpivas évoyoy eivas Pavatw. Tapeyopica, opoiws dé Kai | [Pop ]uloxov “EyeaGéveos Tav Samlopyov Tov cuumpdéavta | [Trois] éeumpnoace Ta apyeia kat Ta Onpooia ypaupata, érel Kal | [avTos] @poroynoer’ Tipodeov 5¢ Nuxia toy peta Tod Loaov | [yeyove |ra vouoypador, érrel EXacoov Epaiveto HOLKNKAS, €||[ KEXeVeA | Tpoayety eis‘ Pawunr, opkiaas ep [@]e THe vouunvias Tod év|[drov unvod|s éora[c] éxe?, Kal éudavioas tL ae er |i Tov Eéevwv ctparn|[yas, d7a@|s av [ur m |porepov érraly Jeva[ev et ]s otxov, éd[v uly ad.. From Dymae. Shortly after the destruction of Corinth by Mummius the Romans restored to the Greek cities their ancient i 2667} Io 15 20 25 T5 25 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN assemblies (Pausanias, 7. 16. 10), but apparently with a constitution modelled on oligarchical lines (ll. 9 ff). In Dymae there was a party led by Sosus which attempted a revolution. The public records were destroyed by fire, and the revolutionary party enacted laws contrary to the spirit of the constitution proposed by Rome. ‘The pro-Roman party appealed to Fabius who restored them to power and condemned Sosus to death together with Phormiscus who was one of the magistrates associated with the conspirators. “Timotheus, another conspirator, was banished to Rome. This document is important evidence for the influence of Rome in shaping the constitutions of the Greek cities along oligarchical lines. 10. SENTENTIA Q. M. MINUCIORUM INTER GENUATES ET VITURIOS (117 a. Chr.) CIL. 1, 199 = v, 7749; Dessau, 5946; Bruns, 184. O. M. Minucieis QO. f. Rufeis de controvorsieis inter | Genuateis et Veiturios in re praesente cognoverunt, et coram inter eos con- trovosias composeiverunt, | et qua lege agrum possiderent et qua fineis fierent dixserunt. Eos fineis facere terminosque statu luse- runt; | ubei ea facta essent, Romam coram venire iouserunt. Romae coram sententiam ex senati consulto dixerunt eidib. || Decemb. L. Caecilio O. f. O. Muucio Q. f. cos.—Qua ager privatus casteli Vituriorum est, quem agrum eos vendere heredemque | sequi licet, is ager vectigal. nei siet—-Langatium fineis agri privati. Ab rivo infimo, qui oritur ab fontei in Mannicelo ad flovium | Edem; ibi terminus stat. Inde flovio suso vorsum in fovium Lemurim. Inde flovio Lemuri susum usque ad rivom Comberane........ Agri poplici quod Langenses posident, hisce finis videntur esse. Ubi comfluont | Edus et Procobera, ibei terminus stat. Inde Ede flovio sursuorsum in montem Lemurino infumo; ibei terminus || stat. Inde sursumvorsum iugo recto monte Lemurino; ibei terminus Stat; i wists Quem agrum poplicum | iudicamus esse, eum agrum castelanos Langenses Veiturios poszdere fruique videtur oportere. Pro eo agro vectigal Langenses || Veituris in poplicum Genuam dent in anos singulos vic(toriatos) n(ummos) cccc. Sei Langenses [2620] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES eam pequniam non dabunt neque satis | facient arbitratuu Genua- tium, quod per Genuenses mora non fiat, quo setius eam pequniam acipiant: tum quod in eo agro | natum erit frumenti partem vicen- sumam, vini partem sextam Langenses in poplicum Genuam dare debento | in annos singolos.—Quei intra eos fineis agrum posedet Genuas aut Viturius, quei eorum posedeit k. Sextil. L. Caicilio | ©. Muucio cos., eos ita posidere colereque liceat. Ezs, quei poside- bunt, vectigal Langensibus pro portione dent ita uti ceteri || Lan- genses, qui eorum in eo agro agrum posidebunt fruenturque. Praeter ea in eo agro niquis posideto nisi de maiore parte | Langensium Veituriorum sententia, dum ne alium intro mitat nisi Genuatem aut Veiturium colendi causa. Quei eorum | de maiore parte Langen- sium Veiturium sententia ita non parebit, is eum agrum nei habeto nive fruimino.—Quei | ager compascuos erit, in eo agro quo minus pecus pascere Genuates Veituriosque liceat ita utei in cetero agro | Genuati compascuo, niquis prohibeto, nive quis vim facito, neive prohibeto quo minus ex eo agro ligna materiamque || sumant utanturque.—Vectigal anni primi k. Januaris secundis Veturis Langenses in poplicum Genuam dare | debento. Quod ante k. Januar. primas Langenses fructi sunt eruntque, vectigal invitei dare nei debento.— | Prata quae fuerunt proxuma faenisicei L. Caecilio QO. Muucio cos. in agro poplico, quem Vituries Langenses | posident et quem Odiates et quem Dectunines et quem Cavaturineis et quem Mentovines posident, ea prata, | invitis Langensibus et Odiatibus et Dectuninebus et Cavaturines et Mentovines, quem quisque eorum agrum || posidebit, inviteis eis niquis sicet nive pascat nive fruatur. Sei Langueses aut Odiates aut Dectunines aut Cavaturines | aut Mentovines malent in eo agro alia prata inmittere defendere sicare, id uti facere liceat, dum ne ampliorem | modum pratorum habeant, quam proxuma aestate habuerunt fructique sunt.—Vituries quei controvorsias | Genuensium ob iniourias iudicati aut damnati sunt, sei quis in vinculeis ob eas res est, eos omneis | solvei mittei lei- berareique a Genuenszbus videtur oportere ante eidus Sextilis primas.—Seiquoi de ea re || iniquom videbitur esse, ad nos adeant primo quoque die et ab omnibus controversis et hono publ. li. | Leg. Moco Meticanio Meticoni f., Plaucus Peliani. Pelioni f. ]. 45. et hono publ. li; something like abstineant required. [ 263 ] 30 ab, 40 45 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Bronze tablet found in 1506, near Genua, now in Genoa. Most of those parts of the inscription which describe the boundaries of the ager privatus (ll. 8-12) and the ager publicus (ll. 14-23) of the Langenses are omitted here. The document is dated in |. 5. It contains the settlement of a controversy between the czvitas foederata of Genua and the neighboring tribe of the Viturii or Langenses and certain other tribes (I. 38). So far as the relations of the munici- palities to the central government are concerned, its interest for us lies in the fact that it gives us the fullest account which we have in the republican period of the part which Rome played as arbitrator between dependent communities, and that it discloses the control which a czvitas had over its attributz. The Viturii and the other tribes mentioned in |. 38 were attributi of Genua (cf. Mommsen, St. R. 3, 765 ff; cf. pp. 138 f, and commentary on no. 49). It is clear that the Viturii had some form of local government, because they were able to receive rental from those who occupied certain lands (Il. 29-30), and to decide certain questions de maziore parte L. V. sententia (ll. 30-31, 32). They were, however, not autono- mous. ‘Ihe questions at issue between them and Genua have been heard by the local magistrates of Genua (ll. 43-44). So far as private rights go, the citizens may own land (¢f. Il. 5-6), but, if they occupy any of the ager publicus of Genua, they must pay an annual tax to Genua in money or in kind (ll. 24-28). ‘The magistrates of Genua had proceeded to hear the cases which had arisen (Il. 43-44), but the Viturii appealed to the Roman senate. Such an appeal was quite in accordance with the Roman theory of her relation to all czvitates in her confines. They were under her hegemony, and consequently their dealings with one another and with independent states, and their relations to communities sub- ordinate to them, were regulated by her. As she expressed it in certain treaties (cf. Cic. pro Balbo, 35-37), the allied cities were required matestatem populi Romani comiter conservare. The senate in this case appointed two of its members, the Minucii, as arbitrators. “hey were descendants of QO. Minucius Rufus, who conquered the Ligurians in 197 B.c. (of. Livy, 32. 27-31; Cic. Brut. 73), and were probably patrons of Genua. They proceeded to the locality concerned (cf. |. 2), investigated the matter, made [ 264 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES certain rulings, set up boundary stones, ordered local deputies to come to Rome (ef. ll. 4, 46), and reported to the senate. Their decision is: (1) that the Viturii may own certain ager privatus which shall be free from taxes (Il. 5-6); (2) that for the ager publicus of Genua which they occupy, they shall pay an annual vectigal to Genua (Il. 24-32); (3) that the common pasture land may be used by any Genuan or Viturian (ll. 33-34); (4) that the meadows in this public land are reserved for the Viturii (Il. 37-42); (5) that the Viturii who have been imprisoned by the Genuan magistrates shall be set free (Il. 43-44), and (6) that later grievances are to be referred to Rome (1. 45). For arbitration under Rome, cf. pp. 152 ff, and nos. 8, 57, 90, etc. It LEX OSCA TABULAE BANTINAE (150-100 a. Chr.) Bruns, 8; Girard, p. 26; Riccobono, p. 130; Buck, Oscan and Umbrian Grammar, p. 230; v. Planta, Gramm. d. osk.-umbr. Dial. 2, 599; Conway, Exempla Selecta, 2. STAGE L aWitive utes is .... Sl... quaestor multam proposuerit ety Riess lurabit maximae partis senatus sententia dummodo non minus xu adsint, cum ea res consulta erit. Siquis peremerit, prius quam peremerit, iurato sciens in comitio sine dolo malo, se ea comitia magis rei publicae causa quam Culuspiam gratiae aut inimi- citiae causa, idque se de senatus sententia maximae partis perimere. Cui sic comitia perimet qguisquam, is eo die comitia ne habuerit. Chap. 2. Quis quandoque post hac comitia, habebit magistratus de capite vel in pecunias, facito ut populus turati sententiam dicant, se de iis id sententiae dicere, quod optimum publicum censeat esse, neve fecerit quo quis de ea re minus iuret dolo malo. Siquis contra hoc fecerit aut comitia habuerit, multa tanta esto: n. MM. Et siquis eum potius magistratus multare volet, dumtaxat minoris partis pecuniae multae multare liceto. Chap. 3. Siquis pro magistratu alteri capitis aut pecuniae diem dixerit, is comitia ne habuerit nisi cum apud populum quater ora- verit sciens sine dolo malo et guartum diem populus perceperit. Quater, neque plus quinquiens, cum reo agito prius quam iudica- [ 265 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN tionem dabit, et cum postremum cum reo oraverit, ab eo die in diebus xxx proximis comitia ne habuerit. Siquis contra hoc fecerit, eum siquis volet magistratus multare, liceto, dumtaxat minoris partis pecuniae liceto. Chap. 4. Cum censores Bantiae populum censebunt, qui civis Bantinus erit, censetor ipse et pecuniam qua lege 11 censores censere proposuerint. At siquis in censum non venerit dolo malo, et eius convincitur, ipse in comitio caedatur praetoris magistratu, populo praesente sine dolo malo, et immercato cetera familia et pecunia omnino quae eius erit, quae incensa erit, publica esto. Chap. 5. Praetor, sive praefectus post hac Bantiae erit, siquis apud eos cum altero lege agere volet, aut pro iudicato manum ad- serere de eis rebus quae hisce in legibus scriptae sunt, ne quem prohibuerit plus diebus x proximis. Siquis contra hoc prohibuerit, multa tanta esto: n.M. Et siquis eum magistratus multare volet, liceto, dumtaxat minoris partis pecuniae multae multare liceto. Chap. 6. Praetor censor Bantiae me quzs fuerit, nisi quaestor fuerit, neve censor fuerit nisi praetor fuerit. Et siquis praetor et SIGUES CONS OTA Ss nee virum fuerit, is post ea tr. pl. ne fuerit. Siquis contra hoc tr. pl. factus erit, is improbe factus esto. Id magis- ET1UT neo y betes quandoque Bantiae......... magisterium an- morum VI proximorum....quod....magisterium. A bronze tablet, about 15 by 10 inches, found in 1790 at Bantia, near the borders of Lucania and Apulia, now in the museum at Naples. On one side it has an Oscan inscription, written in Latin letters, and reproduced here in the Latin translation made by Buecheler, as modified by Buck. On the other side is a Latin inscription, of a somewhat later date, with which we are not con- cerned here. The Oscan inscription was in two columns, of which the right-hand column has been lost. Of the extant left-hand column, the upper and lower parts are broken. Six chapters, which represent about one-sixth of the original law, are preserved. The inscription contains a series of municipal regulations for the federated town of Bantia. This municipal charter was either granted to Bantia by Roman commissioners, and is, therefore, a /ex data, or more probably, as Mommsen (S¢. R. 3, 701) and Girard think, was adopted by the local assembly. Its primary interest for us lies in [ 266 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES the fact that it is a fragment of the earliest extant municipal charter. It is also important, because it illustrates the policy of Rome in the second century B.c. of entering into relations with individual cities, rather than with tribes or large sections of country. It is also important as illustrating for the early period the blending of Roman institutions with local autonomy and traditional titles and practices. The law prescribes the presence of a quorum in the local senate when certain action is taken. It defines the functions and procedure of the local assembly in hearing criminal cases. It lays down certain provisions concerning the census, describes the jurisdiction of the praetor, and establishes a cursus honorum. The characteristics of autonomy which we notice in this law are the regularly ordered magistracies, senate, and popular assembly, the taking of the census by the local authorities, the holding of court and the imposition of fines by the praetor of Bantia, and the exercise of criminal juris- diction by the popular assembly. No mention is made of the exemption, even of Romans or Italians, from the jurisdiction of this popular court, although in most treaties probably Rome stipu- lated that they should not be tried by the local court (¢f Mommsen, St. R. 3, 702). The specification of a senatorial quorum for the transaction of certain business is characteristic of Roman practice and is found in later municipal charters. The right of zntercessio is exercised at Bantia, as well as at Rome, but in the former city it may be used to prevent a meeting of the assembly only on the approval of the senate, and on the taking of an oath by the official exercising it; cf. the oath taken by Ti. Gracchus (Aul. Gell. 6. 19). ‘The procedure of the assembly when sitting as a high court was, except for small details, identical with that at Rome (cf. Cic. de domo sua, 45; Livy, 26. 3). The census followed the same course at Bantia as at Rome, except that in Bantia the penalty for non- appearance was lighter. A still more striking instance of the adoption of a Roman institution occurs in the last paragraph which fixes legally the cursus honorum. In this matter the people of Bantia have outdone the Romans who had arrived indirectly at the same end by prescribing in the /ex Villia annalis the minimum ages at which the several offices should be held (Livy, 40. 44. 1). Inci- dentally this fact shows that our law is later than 180 B.c. It is [ 267 ] nn MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN surprising to find that one of the municipal magistrates is a tribune (cf. last paragraph), but parallels are found at Nuceria (Dessau, 6445 e), and Teanum Sidicinum (zhzd. 6298). For recent literature on this law, see Bruns and Girard. 12. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE CONTROVERSIA INTER PUBLICANOS ET PERGAMENOS (in. saec. I a. Chr.) E.E. 4, 213 ff; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 15. ....Lortplat[ny lov | [po nuepav tpt Ov caravdav | [PeBpoa- ptwv (?) év] Kopetio peta | [cvpBovdrtov é]reyvwxdra 6||[ yware guyKkdy |tov mept yopas, H|[Tus ev avte]royia éotly Snpoorw-| [vats mpos] Tepyapnvovs: év rat | [ovpBovrA]io tapjoav— (sequuntur nomina). The date of this decree of the senate cannot be determined with accuracy. Willems (Le sénat de la république rom. 1, 693 ff-) has dated it ca. 98-94 B.c. The dispute between the pudb/icani and the city of Pergamum was referred to the senate. Nothing is known about the nature of the dispute, but it is probable that the tax-collectors attempted to bring the temple-lands under their jurisdiction as at Ilium and Oropus (nos. 14, 18). If, however, Pergamum still enjoyed the privileges which were conferred upon it by the testa- ment of Attalus, the dispute may be over lands claimed by the city and therefore exempt from tribute. 13. DECRETUM CN. POMPEI STRABONIS (90 a. Chr.) CIL. 12, 709; Bull. arch. com. 38 (1910), 2753 An. ép. 1911, no. 126; Girard, p. 61; Dessau, 8888. Cn. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator virtutis caussa | equites Hispanos ceives Romanos fecit in castreis apud Asculum a. d. xtv k. Dec. | ex lege Iulia. In consilio fuerunt: | L. Gellius L. f. Tro. Cn. Octavius O. f. (et alia nomina quinquaginta septem) TURMA SALLVITANA Sanibelser Adingibas f. (et alia nomina viginti novem) (2085) FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Cn. Pompeius Sex. f. imperator | virtutis caussa turmam | Salluitanam donavit in | castreis apud Asculum | cornuculo et patella, torque, | armilla, palereis; et frumen¢um | duplex. A bronze plate, which, with some fragments missing, was first published in the Bul/. arch. com. 36 (1908), 169 ff. Later a small but important fragment was found, and the inscription was brought out in its present form in the Bull. arch. com. 38 (1910), 273-280. The decree was issued in the camp at Asculum, but this copy of it was kept on the Capitol in Rome. It has been much discussed, both before and after the discovery of the new fragment; cf. e.g., An. ép. 1909, No. 303 1910, pp. 30, 38, 41, 553 1911, pp. 29-303 Pais, Studt storict, 2, 113-162; Rendiconti della r. accad. dei Lincet, Ser. V, 19 (1910), 72-87; de Sanctis, Atti della r. accad. delle sctenze di Torino, 45 (1910), 144 ff.; V. Costa, Rend. della r. accad. delle scienze dell instit. di Bologna, 2 (1908-1909), 37-403 zbid. 4 (1910— IQII), 44-49; Girard, op. cit.; Stevenson, Fourn. Rom. Studies, 9 (1919), 95-101. It confers Roman citizenship and other rewards, mentioned in the last paragraph, on certain persons. The first grant, that of Roman citizenship, is made with the approval of the con- siltum, which was composed ordinarily of the military tribunes and the chief centurion of each legion. The names of the members of the constlium, sixty in all, are given in the early part of the in- scription. L. Caesar, after his great victory over the Samnites and Lucanians, and sometime in 90 B.c., secured the passage of a law which granted citizenship to the allies and Latins; cf. Rotondi, Leges publicae popult Romani, 339. Probably the same law also authorized the grant of citizenship to provincial auxiliaries of federated and stipendiary cities, who had contributed by their valor to Roman success. The grant of these rights to provincials at such an early date is surprising. It seems to indicate an unusually liberal attitude on the part of Strabo. ‘The award in this case was made by him after the battle near Firmum (cf. Appian, B.C. 1. 6. 47; Livy, Ep. 74,76). The decree was drawn up zm castreis apud Asculum, and no mention is made in it of the consulship which Strabo held in 89 B.c. It belongs therefore to 90 B.c., and it bears the date of Nov. 17. For the arguments in favor of the date 89 B.c., cf. Dessau, Joc. cit. and Stevenson, /oc. cit. Perhaps similar rewards were given [ 269 | Io ore MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN to other Spanish squadrons and to auxiliary troops from other provinces and recorded elsewhere, but no other tablets of this sort have yet been found. It is the first example of a /ex data issued by a general, based on a /ex rogata, cf. pp. 232 ff., and Girard, op. cit. Ata later date Pompey the Great was authorized to confer Roman citizenship de consiliu sententia singillatim (Cic. pro Balbo, 8. 19), and under the empire the award was frequently made in military diplomas (cf. also no. 42). An interesting supplement and a parallel to Strabo’s decree is furnished by a S.C. of 78 B.c. (Bruns, 41), which declared three Greek ship captains as amici populi Romani, and granted them immunity and other privileges for the services which they had rendered to Rome in time of war. 14. ILIENSES HONORANT LUCIUM IULIUM CAESAREM (89 a. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 440. ‘O Ojos | Aedxcov ‘lovrAov | Aevaiov viov Katcapa, | tyuntiv yevouevoy || Kal atoxatacty|cavta Thy lepav | yopav The "AOnvas | tHe Iridds cai eEeromevor | avtHv éx THs Snwootwvias. From Troy. Lucius Julius Caesar, as censor, restored the sacred lands of the city to the goddess Ilian Athena, and thus exempted them from the tribute collected by the publicani (cf. Strabo, p. 642). The city of Priene appealed to Rome ca. 100 B.c. for a remission of the tax on salt and of the Snuwoovdvar (Inschriften von Priene, 111). Cf. nos. 12, 18, and Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 284 f. 15. TABULAE AD MEMORIAM LIBERTATIS RESTITUTAE SERVANDAM APTAE (81 a. Chr.) (4) . Populus Laodicensis af Lyco | populum Romanum quei sibei | . Salute fuit; benifici ergo quae sibei | benigne fecit || o S#yos o ... Aaodixéwy tov pos | THe AtdKat Tov Sjpov Tov | “Pwopaiwr . .yeyovota éavTa. | cwthpa Kal evepyérnv | apeThns evexev Kal .euvoias || THS eis EauToV. CIL. 1, 587, 588, 589. The dots at the left in (2) mark a break in the stone. [ 270 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES (2) Populus Ephesius populum Romanum | salutis ergo quod optinutt matorum | sovom leibertatem i... | legatei Heraclitus H. . .fdzus || Hermocrates Demetrz filus 5 (<) Communi restituto in maiorum leibertatem | Roma Iovei Capito- lino et poplo Romano vzrtutis | benivolentiae benificique caussa erga Lucios ab commun | Avxiwv Td Kowdv Kopucdpevov THV matp.ov on||moxpatiay thy ‘Pwywny Aw Katretordiot Kal Tar | 5 Snuwe TH[L] ‘Pwopaiwy aperis evexev Kal evvoias | cal evepyecias THs eis TO KoLvov TO AvKiov. Three stone tablets found in Rome. Ephesus and the Commune Lyciae express their thanks to the Roman people for the gift of libertas, and Laodicea likewise shows its gratitude. The inscriptions probably belong to the year 81 B.c., when Sulla and Murena settled the affairs of Lycia (cf. Appian, Mithr. 61; Tac. Ann. 3. 62). It is probable, though not certain, that Rome recognized these cities as civitates liberae (cf. Henze, De ctvitatibus liberis, 70-71; Momm- sen, St. R. 3, 670, n. 3; Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 337, n. 9). An inscription found at ‘Tabae (no..16), as interpreted by Mommsen (Hermes, 26 (1891), 145-148 = Ges. Schr. 5, 514), throws a little light on some of Sulla’s arrangements in Asia Minor (cf. nos. 17, 19). For a summary of them, cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 39. For Ephesus, cf. zizd. 116. “The Commune Lyciae was one of the oldest leagues in the empire and in Strabo’s time numbered twenty- three cities with the right of voting in the xowov (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 376 f.3 Reid, Municipalities of the Roman Empire, 363 f.; Guiraud, Les assemblées prov. 41). 16. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE TABENIS (82 a. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 442. fare ates Tots Te Bacidéws Hryenwoow | duvapeciy] Te érravdp0- talta vmép THv ToAcwY THS Acias | Kai T]As “EXAdSos avtuTe- Tay[Oac* apécKery opotws THL| svy]KrAnT@L Kal THL Sjwor [TOV ‘Pwyalov tavta Tavta Kata Ta] || dptota eivar éoecOai Te, 5 [27 ta Io 15 Io T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN [ty te miotiw mpos THv ovy|KrAn|Tov Kal Tov Shyov TaV ‘Pwopaliov rernpnuévny ae | dia wlvnuns éyew eew ter bolas Té Twas THs | Tov]TwY apeTHs Kat KaTaXroyhs E[vexev avTois | amo] cuvBovriov yvouns Aevetos [Kopyyduos || LUA ]as adro- Kpatop auvexopnoev [m]or[ers Smws | idi]ous Tots vopors aipéceaiv te wawv: | [drrw]s Te ywplov Ouyacor, 6 eat évTds trav [o|pio lv avtar, éav BovrAwvrat, oyupdaowow: [THY | Te ov ]v- KANnToV Tov Te OHwov TOV Pwpaiwr [d.||ara ]vBavewv tadta avdTois Kanes kat [mpoon|Kovt|ws Kai akiws adtay Seddc0at Te.... From Tabae. This city had remained loyal to the Romans during the invasion of Asia by Mithradates, and was rewarded by Sulla in a fashion similar to Stratonicea (cf. no. 17). It was given the revenues of certain towns and, as an ally of Rome, was permitted to use its own laws. Permission to fortify part of their territory was also granted (cf. no. 5; Viereck, Hermes, 25 (1890), 624 ff Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5. 514 ff). 17. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE STRATONICENSIBUS (ca. 81 a. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 441, ll. 1-129; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 16. [Aedxvos Kopyijduos A]eveiou [uios] 2vAXas ’Esradpdditos | [Suetadtwp XtTpatov|céwy ap[yo]vor Bovrre Sywar yaipe. | [Ove ayvoodpuev buds] S1a rpo[ylovev wavra ra Sixasa | [pos Thy nueTépa ly nyeu[ov tay memounKortas Kai év || [wavte Kapoor THhv pos was wilot |v eiAvKpives TeTHpHKOTAS | [év TE THE mpos MiOpadalrnv m[o]Aéu@s mpwtovs tov év tHe | [Acias avtTiTetaypmévous Kali va tadta Kivdvvous todnovs | [Te Kal TavtodaTrovs| vumép Tav nweTépwv Snuooiwy | [mrpaypatev mpoOvuol|rata alvladedeyuévous || ....-.- eee eee e eee Kal t[ovs Kowovs] Kal Tods ldtwtixods | [ptrcas E]velKev m]pds nas evvoias Te | [kal yapitos, Kal év THL TOV TroN|éwou KaLpaL mpos te | [tas adAXas THs "Acias modes temp lecBevKoras kal mp[ols | [tas THs “EXXabos........-- ]Acv«vos Kop[vndcos SvrAras ‘Esradpdditos Suxtlatwp || Xtpatolwxéwv apyover Bovarje djpat yatpev.| | WpecBevrais tyulerépors TO yevopevov i706 avykarnt jov Soypa | Todt [wapédaxa]. | Aevxios Kopvydilos Aevaiov vids XvAAas >Emadpoditos [ 272 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES dixt]atwp | cuyKkrjTtor ovri[veBovretcato mpd Apepav e ka ]Aavear || Ampiriov év Tat xowerion ypahouévar Taphoav PJaios | Bavvvos Patou [vids............+, DP Jaios | Bovdarvios Dai[ov vids........* wept dv Stpatovexe jis éx Xpv|cao[péwr ] | Tataivios) LéepfarXdougy iinet ait onisterde oad seid bfele sinus un | Lh Bice recog y Dla cis rateva syncs seer emai aed tah hcl a g.74 Atoviowos ‘EL... ....mperBevtal Noyous érrouy |oavTo | cup po'- Vows Kal akorovOws Tet UTpaToviKéwv Andiopate | a€vodvTes cuvndecbar emi tat TIA Snuocia mpay[wata Tod Snwov | [Tot ‘Pwpaiov év Bertiow xaltactdace, elvas || [67s ypucody otépavov tapa ths i|dias wovews THe cuyxrAntar | [avabetvar e&ht aro TaNavtov d|iaxociwr, | [Ovciav re év Tht KarretwrXios d7ws| womjoar é&Ht bmép THs v[t«|ns | [kal THs Hryeuovias Tod dyjwov ToD] ‘Pwpaiwyr, | [dws Te TO NovTov AevKiws Kopynriwr Alevxiov vids YvrArav “Enadpoditw: || [dictarops paivnras Xtpatovixéwy] SHuws diravOpwras Kexpho[O lac: | [érret Te 6 Shmos ev Tt Kalpar THS elpnv |ns cvvernpyaev THv Ldiav | [evvordy \ , \ / \ \ lel X c / \ Te Kal TiatLv Kal diriav] mpos Tov Shuov Tov Pwpator | [xal n al » a ? / ¢ / > > a / mpatos Tav ev TH Aciat, bre MiOp jadarns ev avt[ He | Secvorata > / / > / > \ as \ 2 21h eTupavveuer, mpoeireTo av |ruteTayOar: || [ere 5é 0 Bacireds és Thy ToAW émrHrOev], EXov 8 exparnole |v Hailes Whe ie Wished [Aevxios Kopynriws Acuxiov vids XvrAXraL] | deeTarope poled ET bo Amravati oie js) ves; nbn af ie)\ol esate AtekONe [GRIEG OF LOS COU eTnpnaev ael THY UTdpyovcayv avTw.]| evvoLav Kai TiLoTLY] Kal cuppayilav mpos Tov oAwov Tov ‘Popaiwy, Ta i]|dia mpaywata x \ , \ b] / / \ , kata T nv mpoaipecey [THv éxetv@v dtotxnoas, kat MiOpadarne | || 4 > / \ \ oy] , \ i TONE{LOV errolonae, Kat Tov idsov ont amas Oupov RRR UR anpenaxen] | tHe Bacrrsxje BlovAn |e cai Svvdper[.......... veceeeceeeees | Ocxatous Te Kal vopuors Kai ePiop[ots Tots Hod a > A > / v4 A e¢/ / LoLous, ols €yp@v|to érady|w, drws ypevTat, doa Te [Wndicpara émoincav tov|trov tov trojAéwou évexev, dv mpds Baal[tréa MiOpadarny avédecEar, || dws TlavtTa tavta Kvipia dow | [lIjndacov te], Oeunooorv, Képapov, ywpia [xwpas Arpévas mpoco|dovs te Tav]| 7drcwv, ov AevKtos Kopy[rjd0os SUAXAaS avtoxpatwp | THs ToUTwY] apEeTHs KaTadoyis Te élvexev Tpoc- 20 25 30 Bie) 40 45 50 , / 7 fal > cal ” b] A \ wWpicev cuvexopn|oev, Orws TlavTa avtois éxew éF[fe- || TO 55 AMA Rares 18 60 65 7O 75 80 85 90 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN iepov rhs] ‘Exarns, émepavertd[rns Kal peyiotns Oeas, éx TOA|NOD TE TL] WOpEvOY KAL TONAL... reece eee cece ee eeee| TO Te Téwev]os, Omws TovTO dov[Aov Vrapynt, | wept Te TOY &|r[orwr]or[wv avdrois ev THe Toréumt, d7rws]| 7 oLvy]er[nTos Ta. ap|xov7[e Tt]au eis “Aciay ropevopévwr évtoras || dau, va ppolyric|ne cal érvatpopyy wommontat, 67ws Ta Eeuhavy | avTois atrodso0nvar ppovtiont, TOUS TE aixYMarWTOUS | KOMicwYTAaL TrEpi re Tov [Nlourav iva TUXwot TOV Sixaiwy: | Strws Te TpETBeEv- tais Tois Tapa {tpatovixéwy eis ‘Padunv | mapecopuévols éxTOos Tod otixou of dpyovTes obyKANTOY S:dH0[ tv" ] || wept TovTOU Tod mpaynatos olTws édofev: mpecRevtais | Xtpatovixéwy Kata Tpocwtroyv év THe avyKAnTaL PiravOpa| mas arroxpLOnvat, xapiTa piriav cuppaxyiay avavedcacbat, | tos mpecBevtas av[dpa|s Kadovs Kat ayabods Kat dhirous | cummayous Te pel Tépo lus Tapa Snpov KaXod Kal ayabod || Kal hirou cuppdyou [Te Hp JeTE- pov mpocayopevaas edokev. | Ilepi te wv ovTos of [wpecRev]ral Novyous érroinoavto Kai Trep[t wv] | Aevevos Kopynrulos WAXAa|s "Exragpoditos Suxtdtwp Royolus | éroijoato, yvworoy eivat ‘Pw jatos [kata Tas atroataneicas | twap|a tov ’Aciav Thy Te ‘EdAdba [Staxatacyovtav taev Te év || TavTalis Tals émapyelass ampeaBevl_ tay yeyevnucvoy émiotoras | Tovs] Yrpatovixeis THv re hidiav KL al wiotey Kal evvotav pds Tov | dh ]nov Tov ‘Popaiwy dia TérOus [ev Katpat elpnvns Torémov | Te] (a)el cuvTETHPHKEVAL oTpatiol tas Te Kal ciTwL Kal weydrats | Samrdv jas ta Snmoota Tpaypata [tod dnuwov Tod Pwpaiwr || rpo|Oumotata UTepnoti- REVOLT bis NN ae cine (UR US DIrEp THON LeaNO pa- avvn[s THs.éavT@v avtots cvuptre| ron jeuncévat Tots Te Baciréo[s MiOpaddtov jyepoow | Suv |dpueciv te érravdporata Te pl Trav Todewr 7H5 Aocias kal | THs] “ENAdbos aly ]riteTay Oar: || [epi TOUT@Y TOV TpayuLaT@V oUTwS Edokev* ApécKey THL Tvy|KAHT@L avopav ayabay] Sixaiwy [te arroluvnulovedew Kai mrpol|voety dmws Aevxulos Kopyydcos LAAs ’Erradpodit[os | Suatatwp Tov av |riTamiav Eévia avrots Kata TO OcaTtalypa Sov| vat KeXevonL, ois] Te vomors eOrcpots Te idtows TpoTepor || [éxpavrTo, TovToLs] xpacbwaav: | [cous Te vomous avto |i Wndicpara Te éroinoay TouTou Tov [7oAé|uou evexev TOV mp los MiOpaddrny yevomévon, iva Tovtolis Tavta | tavta KUpLa UTap|X¥@otv: as TE TWAS THS [ 274 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES TOUTWY apeTHls KaTado|yns Te Evexev peT a cypBovrtLov yvomns Aevxtos SvrA[Aas adv||roxpatwp Tots av|rois tmpocwpiceyv cuv- exopnaoev [sodstei|as mpocddous xwlpia Kwpmas Awuévas TE TovTo[ts, va tadta | adtois éyew €Eju: TOlv Te Shpwov Tov ‘Po- POLLO Ls Persuegs ys cial si rai.) wie tekstas: oir nee DOD OPT ONS CLE LOS TOMGUT| OU is. cleue'n tc cis isuare dyete ene as tuak ciate teeenneee | t Carat TDG TOVULKEVT LPN LEN Dt [EVA siels e's a eee ER elal| aie ens «(| amobex[Ta bmdpyely Setv: | [Orw]s te Aevetos Kopyyri[os Lud ]ras Exradpoditos Sixtat[lwp, av aitar | ha jivntas, as adros avtoxpatwp Xtpatovixedaow Tori telas | K]opas yopas Aimévas Te TpocwpiceD, errvyvart SvaTakn[s boas Exdaotn| | tpoc- ddous Xrpatovxedow Terje’ || [ed]v te Scatdéni, pos Tavtas Tas ToXtTeias, ds Yrplatowxedow] | mpocw@picev, ypdupata atroareiAnt, iva TocovTov t[édos]| UTpatovixedow TerOow: | fe) f vf ” pies ih be / / ¢ / ’ / [rt ]odro Te, oiruves av Tote aei Aciav THY Te EAXASa el Trapyeias | dva|xatéxwow, ppovtifwcw dudaciv te épyaciay, ila tadta]|| ee / \ id \ an ¢ / v4 3 A obTas yir[wlvras. | To [fep lov tis “El karns] otras 7[t dovadov*] | > / ee vx ees Pte / > /, , >) avObTratos bots av dei “Aciav ér[apxetar] | diaxaréyni, érr- yvotw ativa avtois ale lore | of TE TLves TADTA Sunprracay ot Té Tivels Sltaxaré||youow avTd, va map avTav arrodoPhvar atroxatalaTrabfjvat dpovtiont’ iva te TOVS alxparwTous | ava- Kopicacba, Stvavrat bTrép Te TOV ALolira@v | Tpayudt@y TeV dixaiwyv tvyYwow o[U]tl@ xalOas av | avtois éx Tv Snpmociwv mpayuat[wv mial|teds || te THs idlas datyntar: dokev. | Lréhavov te Tov Tapa Tod Sywov | [THe cvyKAnTwL] arrectad- pévov, ob dv Aevxuos [Kopy7d]uos | LvAXas *’Eradpoditos duxtat[lwp | ay|jtas [ayabov brrws avabeivas avtois || é&hu, Ouaiay Te év THt KarretwXias av 0é|Nwawy Straws avtots rounoat é&fu. | Tots te mpecRevtais mapa XtpatovKéwy eis | “Pownv Tmapecopevors Gd0€€ a |UyxAntov | [Uo TOV apxovT@V éKTOs TOD atixou 616 joo Oat. "Kdo€gev. From Lagina. The city of Stratonicea had remained loyal to the Romans in the struggle with Mithradates. This decree of the senate confirms the action taken by the dictator Sulla in regard to the city. The alliance with Rome is renewed. The citizens are allowed to keep their own laws and customs. ‘Their legislation during the invasion of Mithradates is confirmed. Sulla is authorized [ 275 | 18—2 95 100 105 Ito II5 120 125 IO 15 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN to determine the amount of tribute which should be paid to the city by the towns and villages which he has assigned to Stratonicea. The shrine of Hecate is granted the privilege of asylum (Tac. Ann. 3. 62). Cf. nos. 15, 16, 67. 18. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE AMPHIARAI OROPI AGRIS (73 a. Chr.) Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 18; IG. vit, 413; de Ruggiero, L’arbi- trato pubblico, 25; Bruns, 42; Ditt. Sy//.3 747; Riccobono, p. 209. M[dapx]os Tepévtcos Madpxov vids Ovdppwv Aevxordos, Taios Kdovos Aevxilov vids | Aoy]yivos trratos ‘Opawrriov 7 a I / Pang d 9 x 4 dpyovaw BovrAn Snuw. yaipew. Ei éppwobe, ed av éx[or]. [“Yuds eidévar BovropueOa, Huds Kata TO THs cuvKAHTOV Soypa TO yevopevoy é[it Aevxillou Acciviov Madpxov Adpnrtov UmaT@V éTeyvMKéval Tepl avTiNoyLav ToV avaulecor] || Oeds "Audiapaws Kal TOV SnmooLtwvar yeyovoTav (éTeyVmKEvat). \ A 3 rn ’ / > a“ / > IIpo pds ei[dvov | | OxropSpiav ey Bacthiny Ilopxia ev cupBovriw: taphoav Maapxkos Kdavédcos Maapx[ov] | vids "Apynoons Madpxerros, Taios KrXavdsos Tatov vids “Apyncans [raBep, | Maapxos Kactos Madpxov vids Uapevtiva, Taios Auxivios Taiov vids | Wepertiva, Taios Avxivios Patou vids xTnrativals) Yaxépdas, || Aevxros Ovorvoxios Aeviou vids "Apyvinaons, Aevevos Adptoos Aevxiov vids | Inmipia, Tdios ‘Avvatos Taiov vids KrAutouiva, Maapxos TurXvos Maapxov vios | Kopyndia Kixépwr, Koivtos”A&tos Maapxov vidos Kupiva, Koivros Topuanios Koiv|rouv vies “Aplin loons “Poddos, AdXos Kaoxéddos Avdov vids 0 vios ‘Payrta, | Koivtos Muvixcos Koivrov vios Tnpnvtiva Oéppos, Maapxos Lom)ixcos || Maapeov vidos “Opatia Yxarovas, Titos Maivios Titov vids Aepovia, Aevxios | KrXavdios Acuxiou vids Acuovia. IIepi av “Epuodwpos Odvvrrixou vids, tepeds | “Avdrapdon, OOTLS TPOTEPOV UTO THS TUVVKAHTOU GUYLAXOS TpOTNnyopEevpE|VOS b) / LWibe-d / , ey, / / éotw, Kal Ade&idnuos Oeod@pov vids, Anpaiveros Oecotérov ey, ACL i, / b] / vios, mperBev|tal Opwrriwy, Aoyous érroinoavTo ém(e)i €v TR THS picO@cews vou@ avTat at || yo@par Urek- Bs Piswedd A vA s a > t e lal ecpnmevatr etolv, as ANevKios SUAXaS Oedv APavatwv iepav [ 276 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES | Tenevov | purakhs évexev cuveywpnoev (oTreFerpnuevas eiaiv), TaUTas TE TAS TpOG|ddoUS, TrEpl OV ayEeTal TO TPAypA, Aevxwos XwAras THs Oedse Apdiapdwe tp(o)cauips|cer(!), draws wmép TOUT@Y TaY Ywpev Tpocodoy TaL Snmoctwvy pn TeNOC LV * | Kal twept ov Aevxtos Aopérros AivoBarBos birép Snumooiwvav et7rev || ETEL EV TOL THS wicOa@ceEws VOMwL AUTAL al Yopat VTreEELpN- pévat eiciv, | as Aevxtos SvAXas Deady aBavatwy ‘epov Tepevov purakhs evexev | cvveywpncer, ote 0 Audiapaos, Ot avTaL ai YOpat cvvKeywpnpévat | NéyovTat, Yeds éEotuy, dtwsTavtas Tas YoOpas KapTric lea Oar €&7 | Tovs Snumootwvas: avo avvBovrjiov yvoOuns yvounv arednval|ucOa* 0 éréyvopev THLE TUVKANTWL Tposavoicouer, TOTO 6 Kai | es THY TOD UTopVnwaTw@Y OéENTOV KaTEXwpLTapeD * Tept yopas | Opwias, wept js avtiroyla Hv mpos TOUS Snpootwvas, Kata Tov THS | utcP@docews vowoy avTn UTeEE- pnuevn eotiv, iva wn o Snmootd|yns avtyy KapTiCntac: KATA TO THS TUVKAHTOV Sdyua érréyvaper. || "Ev t@® THs picOdcews vow treEecpnuévnv SoKxel eivar ottws: | éxtos te TovTar 7 el Te Soya cuvKEAHTOV, avTo- Kpatop avtoxparopés tle] | juérepoe Kataroyns Oeav aba- vaTwv iepav Teuevov Te hvrakhs | KapmiferOar Ewxav Katédtrov, extTos Te TOUT@Y, & AevKeos | Kopyndsos YvAAas avToKpatwmp amo ovvBovAtov yveuns Oewv || adavatwv lepOv Teuevav Te pvdrakhs evexev KapTrilerOar Edaxer, | d TO AUTO 1) TUVKANTOS ETEKUPWOEV OUTE META TAUTA SoypaT. | TUVKANHTOU aKupoV eyevnOn. Aevxwos Kopyydsos SvAXas ato cvv|Bovrtiov yrouns yrounv elpnkévas Soxet* THS EVXHS ATroddcews | Evexev TH iep@ Audiapaov yopay mpootiOnu travtn TavTobev Todas || ytALous, iva Kal abrn XOpPAa UTapyn Acvros acavtTws THt Oew “Audiapaws | cabrepwKévar THS TOAEwWS Kal THs KYOpas Nipévav Te TOV Opwtriwy | Tas Mpoaodous atacas eis TOvs ayavas Kal Tas Ouacias, as ‘Opwrvo | cuvtedovow Ged 'Audiapaws, opoiws 5é Kal as [ 277 ] 25 30 A 35 40 45 50 55 60 65 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN dv peta tadta brép Ths | vinns Kal THs Hryeu“ovias ToD Snuou tod “Pwpaiwv cvvtedécovaty, || exTos aypav TOV ‘Eppodwpou Orvrrrixou viod, tepéws Apdiapdov, tov | dia tédous év TH hiria Tod Syyov Tod “Papaiwy wewevnKoros. Ilepi rod|rov Tov mwpaypatos Soyua ouvedytov émi Aevtov LvAra “Eradpoditov, | Koivrov Merérrov EtvceBots trratwv émrixexupw@pevov Soxel elvat, | OTrep 7 obYKANTOS edoypaTiceD Eis TOUTOUS TOUS ANOYOUS* doa Te Ged. || “Audsapawe kal Tat iepo avtov Aev«Kios Kopyjdvos SUAXas aro cu(u)Bovriov | yvouns mporwpicev TUVEXWPNTEV, TA AVTA 1) TUVKANTOS TOUT WL TAL Dede | SoOFvat cvvxwpnOhvat Hyncato. "Ev tét cvpBovriwt taphnoay | of avtoi of éu mpaypatov cupBeBovrcvpévov SérATwL TpeTnL, | KNpwMaTL TecoaperKal- SeKaTwL. Adypa cuverntov TovTO yevopuevov || éoTiv* TPO nmEepav SexaeTTa Karavdav NoevBpiov év xopetios: | ypadopévov mapnoav Titos Matmos Titov vids Aewavia, | Koivros ‘Payxuos Koivrov vids KnXavdia, Tdios OdeédrArwos Taiov | vios Kupiva Ovdppwv’ rept ov Maapxos Aevcorrdos, Daios Kaatos | trratou émiyvoytes amnvyetkav trept Opwrias yw@pas Kal tov || dnpo- cLoaveav éavTovs éemeyvwKévat, acavtas THY Opwrioy | ydpav brreEetpnuévny Soxeiv elvar Kata Tov THS proOwcews vopoy, | 7 doxeiv Tovs Snuociwvas TadTa KapTrivecOat* ovTws, | Kafas av avTois €x TOV SnuociwYy TpayuaTav TictTEeds Te THs | dias édaiveto, édo€ev. From Oropus. We have included in this collection only a few of the examples of arbitration in the cities under the jurisdiction of Rome (cf. no. 8). The citizens of Oropus had received from Sulla certain revenues from lands and customs to be devoted to the worship of the god Amphiaraus. The sources of this income could not be taxed by the publicani in collecting the tithes from the province. After the death of Sulla the pudb/icani sought to collect the former tax from the Oropians, claiming that Amphiaraus was not a god, since he had once been a mortal (Cic. de deor. nat. 3. 49). Oropus protested their claim, sending an embassy to Rome. The senate referred the matter to the consuls for arbitration. They chose a [Vereen FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES committee of fifteen senators who reviewed the evidence and decided in favor of Oropus. The document contains the letter of the consuls to the Oropians, the decision of the committee appointed to arbitrate the case, the record of Sulla’s action, and the decree of the senate confirming it, and, finally, the decree of the senate confirming the decision of the court of arbitration. Cf. nos. 8, 46, 57, 104. 19. LEX ANTONIA DE TERMESSIBUS (ca. 71 a. Chr.) CIL. 1, 204; Bruns, 14; Dessau, 38; Girard, pp. 68-70; Ricco- bono, pp. 105-107. C. Antonius M. f., Cn. Corne/ius. .f., Q. Marctus..f., L. Hos- HAUS OL optus. . fey AL. OP Glens apy, Ge) ARI ee) CIEEUIUEO TELA Vie. toon f-, | C. Fundanius C. f. tr. pl. des. s. plebem zoure rogaverunt....... .....{ preimus scivit. | Quei Thermeses maiores Peisidae fuerunt, queique | eorum legibus ‘Thermesium maiorum Pisidarum | ante k. April., quae fuerunt L. Gellio Cn. Lentulo cos., | Thermeses maiores Pisidae factei sunt, queique || ab ieis prognati sunt erunt, iei omnes | posterei- que eorum Thermeses maiores Peisidae | leiberei amicei socieique populi Romani sunto, | eique legibus sueis ita utunto, itaque ieis | omnibus sueis legibus ‘Thermensis maioribus || Pisideis utei liceto, quod advorsus hanc legem | non fiat. | Quei agrei quae loco aedificia publica preivatave | Thermensium maiorum Pisidarum intra fineis | eorum sunt fueruntve L. Marcio Sex. Iulio cos., || quaeque insulae eorum sunt fueruntve ieis | con- solibus, quei supra scriptei sunt, quodque | earum rerum ieis con- sulibus iei habuerunt | possederunt usez fructetgue sunt, quae de ieis rebus | locata non sunt, utet antea habeant possideant ; quaeque || de leis rebus agrets loceis aedifictets locata sunt, ac ne | locentur sancitum est sanctione, quae facta | est ex lege rogata L. Gellio Cn. Lentulo cos., ea omnia | Thermeses maziores Pistdae habeant possideant, | ieisque rebus loceis agreis aedificiers utantur fruantur || ita, utei ante Mitridatis bellum, quod preimum | fuit, habuerunt possederunt uset fructeique sunt. | Quae Thermensorum mazorum Pisidarum publica | preivatave 2799) Col. 1 IO T5 20 25 30 35 Col. 11 Io 5 20 25 30 Se MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN praeter locata agros aedificia sunt | fueruntve ante bellum Mitri- datis, quod preimum || factum est, quodque earum rerum iei antea | habuerunt possederunt usei fructeive sunt, | quod eius ipsei sua voluntate ab se non abalienarunt, | ea omnia Termensium maiorum Pisidarum, utei sunt | fuerunt, ita sunto, Itemque leis ea omnia || habere possidere uutei frueique liceto. | | Ouos Thermenses maiores Pisidae leiberos servosve | bello Mitridatis ameiserunt, magistratus prove | magistratu, quoia de ea re juris dictio erit, quoguwe | de ea re in ious aditum erit, ita de ea re ious || deicunto iudicia recuperationes danto, utei lez eos recuperare possint. | Nei quis magistratus prove magistratu legatus nezve | quis alius meilites in oppidum Thermesum maiorum | Pisidarum agrumve Thermensium maiorum | Pisidarum hiemandi caussa introducito, neive || facito, quo quis eo meilites introducat quove ibei | meilites hiement, nisei senatus nominatim, utei Thermesum | maiorum Pisidarum in hibernacula meilites | deducantur, decreverit; neive quis magistratus | prove magistratu legatus neive quis alius facito || neive inperato, quo quid magis iei dent praebeant | ab ieisve aufe- ratur, nisel quod eas ex lege Porcia | dare praebere oportet oportebit. | Quae leges quodque ious quaeque consuetudo L. Marcio | Sex. Julio cos. inter civeis Romanos et Termenses || maiores Pisidas fuit, eaedem leges eidemque ious | eademque consuetudo inter ceives Romanos et | T’ermenses maiores Pisidas esto; quodque quibusque | in rebus loceis agreis aedificieis oppideis iouris | "Termensium maiorum Pisidarum ieis consulibus, || quei supra scriptei sunt, fuit, quod eius praeter | locata agros aedificia ipsei sua voluntate ab se non | ab- alienarunt, idem in eisdem rebus loceis agreis | aedificieis oppideis Termensium maiorum Pisidarum | ious esto; et quo minus ea, quae in hoc capite scripta || sunt, ita sint fiant, eius hac lege nihilum rogatur. | Quam legem portorieis terrestribus maritumeisque | “Termenses maiores Phisidae capiundeis intra suos { fineis deixserint, ea lex ieis portorieis capiundeis | esto, dum nei quid portori ab ieis capiatur, quel publica || populi Romani vectigalia redempta habebunt. Quos | per eorum fineis publicani ex eo vectigali transportabunt |........ (continuabatur in tabula deperdita). [goon FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Bronze tablet found in Rome in the sixteenth century, now in the museum at Naples. The inscription is engraved in two columns. ‘The second column begins with the words Quos Thermenses. The heading, I de Termest. Pisid. mai., shows that this is the first of several tablets which made up the original law. The Ambrosian Library at Milan has a copy of the first tablet, which purports to have been made by Mariangelus Accursius shortly after the dis- covery of the tablet. From this copy certain missing words have been supplied in the CJL.; but Bormann (Festschrift Hirschfeld, 434 ff.) has given reasons for believing that the tablet was defective when found, and that the added words are conjectures of Accursius. They are here printed in italics (col. 1, ll. 18 ff). Thermeses maiores Peisidae (or Tepunocets of meifoves) distinguishes this town from Tepynocets of mpos Oivodvdois. Many other inscriptions have been found on its site; cf. ‘fahreshefte d. ést. archdol. Inst. 3 (1900), 196 ff; B.C.H. 23 (1899), 165 ff, 280 ff; 24 (1900), 334 ff. The praescriptio shows that the law is a plebiscite, submitted by C. Antonius, Cicero’s colleague in 63 B.c., and certain other tribunes. The names of the other tribunes have been supplied from the list of the colleagues of Antonius given in CIL. 1, 593. The presence of the phrase de senatus sententia in the praescriptio seems to fix the date of the plebiscite before 70 B.c., because the legislation of Sulla forbidding the tribunes to submit a measure to the popular assembly until the senate has taken action on it is apparently still in force. The document is subsequent to 72 B.c., the year of the consulship of Gellius and Lentulus, and probably falls in 71 B.c. Probably these privileges were granted to Termessus because of her loyalty in the Mithradatic wars. For other cities whose loyalty was rewarded ina similar way, cf. nos. 15, 16,17, and 21. By virtue of this law Termessus became a czvitas sine foedere immunis et libera. For an analysis of the rights of such a city, cf. pp. 42 ff and Momm- sen, St. R. 3, 686 ff. The people of Termessus are styled /ezheret amicet socteique popult Romani. They are given the right /egebus sues utz, the possession of their land without the payment of a stzpendium, freedom from the billeting of troops, and payment for necessary requisitions made 2S ne IO T5 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN upon them. Their rights over against Roman citizens are guaranteed, and they may collect portoria terrestria marttumaque. Their right legibus sueis uti (cf. no. 40) is however limited by the proviso, quod advorsus hane legem non fiat, and the billeting of troops may be authorized by a special vote of the Roman senate. No mention Is made of the rights of coinage or of receiving exiles. With regard to the property rights granted to the people of Termessus in Il. 27— 35, of. Bormann, op. cit. 439. 20. LEX MUNICIPI TARENTINI (88-62 a. Chr. ?) Dessau, 6086; Bruns, 27; Riccobono, p. 1323 Girard, p. 61. . .ne esse liceat neive qués quod eius municipi pequniae publicae sacrae | religiosae est erit frawdato neive avortito neive facito quo eorum | quid fiat, neive per litteras publicas fraudemve publicum peius | facito d(olo) m(alo). Quei faxit, quanti ea res erit quadruplum multae esto, || eamque pequniam muzicipio dare damnas esto elusque pequniae | magistratus quei quomque in municipio erit petitio exactioque esto. | III Ivir(ei) aedilesque quei h. 1. primei erunt quei eorum ‘Tarentum venerit, | is in diebus xx proxumeis quibus post h. |. datam primum Tarentum venerit | facito quei pro se praes stat praedes praediaque ad 111Ivir(os) det quod satis || sit, quae pequnia publica sacra religiosa elus municipi ad se in suo magistratu | pervenerit, eam pequniam municipio ‘Tarentino salvam recte esse futuram, | eiusque rei rationem redditurum ita utei senatus censuerit. Isque mutvir, | quoi ita praes dabitur, accipito idque in tabu/ezs publiceis scriptum sit | facito. Quique quomque comitia duovireis aedilibusve rogan- deis || habebit, is antequam maior pars curlarum quemque eorum quei | magistratum eis comitieis petent renuntiabit, ab eis quei petent praedes | quod satis sit accipito, quae pequnia publica sacra religiosa eius municipi | zd quemque eorum in eo magistratu pervenerit, eam pequniam municipio | Tarentino salvam recte esse futuram, etusque rei rationem redditurum || ita utei senatus cemsuerit, zdque in tabuleis publiceis scriptum sit facito, | quodque guozque negoti publice in municipio de s(enatus) s(ententia) datum erit negotive | publicei bee? a) FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES gesserit pequniamque publicam dederit exegerit, is quoi ita negotium | datum erit negotive quid publice gesserz¢ pequniamve publicam dederit | exegerit, eius rei rationem senatui reddito refertoque in diebus X proxumers || quibus senatus eius municipi censuerzt sine 25 d(olo) m(alo). | Quei decurio municipi Tarentiei est erit queive in municipio Tarentizo im | senatu sententiam deixerit, is in oppido ‘Tarentei aut intra eius municzp: | fineis aedificium quod non minus Mp tegu- larum tectum sit habeto see | d(olo) m(alo). Quei eorum ita aedi- ficium suom non habebit seive quis eorum || aedificium emerit 30 mancupiove acceperit quo hoic legi fraudem faxzt, | is in annos singulos HS n. 199 municipio Tarentino dare damnas esto. | Nei quis in oppido quod eius municipi erit aedificium detegito neive demo/ito | neive disturbato nisei quod non deterius restituturus erit nisei de s(enatus) s(ententia). | Sei quis adversus ea faxit, quantz id aedificium fxerit, tantam pequniam || municipio dare damnas esto 35 eiusque pequniae guei volet petitio est. | Magi(stratus) quei exegerit dimidium in publicum referto dimidium in ludeis quos | publice in eo magistratu facief consumito, seive ad monumentum suom | in publico consumere volet lzcefo, idque ei s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) facere liceto. | Sei quas vias fossas cloacas muivir uvir aedilisve eius municipi caussa || publice facere immittere commutare aedificare munire 40 volet, intra | eos fineis quei eius municipi erunf, quod eius sine iniuria fiat, id ei facere | liceto. | Quei pequniam municipio Tarentina non debebit sei quis eorum quei | municeps erit neque eo sexennio proxumo, quo exeire volet, duovirum. (religui versus, maxime mutili, omissi sunt) The charter of Tarentum was engraved on a brass tablet. Of the original, only a fragment of the ninth table, found in an ancient well, is now preserved in the museum of Naples. Tarentum was founded as a Roman colony by Gracchus in 123 B.c. To this settlement the name Neptunia was given. After the Social war Tarentum obtained the czvitas Romana and became a municipium. The date of this charter, which was a /ex data, cannot be determined with exactness. It is not earlier than 89 B.c. and [28s 0 J MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN possibly should not be dated later than 62 8.c., when Cicero refers to Tarentum as a municipium (pro Archia, 5: 10). Yet Tarentum could be called a municipality at any time after the Social war, and the date of the speech for Archias is not necessarily a post quod non (cf. Hardy, Six Roman Laws, 104). It is possible that the charter was given as a result of Pompey’s act in establishing some of the eastern pirates on the site of the old Roman colony (cf. Momm- sen, Ges. Schr. 1, 151, n. 18). In this case the /ex would date from the year 59 when Pompey’s acts were finally ratified. The extant portion of the charter deals with the peculation of public, sacred, and religious funds (ll. 1-6). In ll. 7-25 the charter provides for the cautio of magistrates (cf. no. 65, chap. 70). Since the first magistrates could not furnish securities to their prede- cessors, they were required to give them to quattuorvirs, who may have been the commissioners sent out from Rome (Mommsen, op. cit. 1, 156), or the clause may mean that the first magistrates gave a cautio to their colleagues in turn (Hardy, op. czt. 106, n. 2). The members of the local curia are required to own a house within the territory of the municipality, and this dwelling must have not less than 1500 tiles on the roof. For this method of estimating property, cf. the tax paid by Roman senators in 43 B.c. of 4 obols for each tile (Cass. Dio, 46. 31). The law regarding the demolition of houses (ll. 32-38), and that regarding the right of officials to do paving or to dig drains (Il. 39-42) may be found with slight changes in the charter of Urso (no. 26, chapp. 75, 77). The clause contained in ll. 43 ff: was designed to check ex-officials from leaving the.city before they had discharged all the liabilities which might have been incurred in the performance of their office. 21. LEX GABINIA CALPURNIA DE DELIIS (58 a. Chr.) Durrbach, Chotx @inscr. Délos, 163; Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 335. A. Gabinius A. f. Capito cos., L. Calpurnius L. f. Piso cos. de s(enatus) s(ententia) populum iuure rogavere populusque iuure scivit. . pro aede Castor(is) a(nte) d(iem) vr ka/(endas) (mensis). Tribus. . principium fuit, A. Gabinius A. f. Capito pro tribu primus scivit : || 5 Velitis iubeatis. Quom res publica pot. ..divinis. . bus ac consilieis [ 284 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES . sit aucta quomque....clarissumae cCelvitatis sit confirmata.... decorata, in quo numero fanum Apollinis....antiquissumum ac religiosissumum sit constitutum. .||..em et sanctitatem caerimoni- asq(ue) pr... .De/um insulam, in qua insula Apollinem et Dianam natos esse arbitrantur?, vecteigalibus leiberari, quae insula post hominum memoriam semper fuit? regum ceivitatium nationumque imperieis sacra leibera tmmunis? quomque praedones, quei orbem terrarum .complureis annos vexarint? || fana delubra simu/acra deorum immorfalium loca religioszssuma devastarint, lege Gabinia superatei ac deletei sent, et omneis relzgua praeter insuf‘am Delum sedes Apollinis ac Dianae in anteiguom splendorem sit restztuta popu- leique Romani dignifatis maiestatisgue causa? pulcherrume adminis- trata, imperio amp/ificato pace per orbem terrarum || i/lam insulam nobilissumam ac samctissumam deis immortalibus restitui? et in- sulam lezberari. Neve... ..sit. . .quom vectigal eius. . ¢diudicatione quam I. C. A...sup. (?) Delei feceruzt..., neve quid aliud vec- teigal neve pro custodia publicei frument: neve quis postea insulas illas vicinas quae circum De/um tacent || Artemeitam C. Jadeam.... as locet neve...et eas insulas faciat. .quet (t) Delum incolunt queique postea incolent vectezgal...iure insulas?....verunt, fue- runt... Mitridates in...m iure insula Delus guezqgue eam incolent SInth Cage .Delumque ad...Delum queique eam incolent insulasve quae s(upra) s(criptae) s(unt)...sei eius familia pecuniave plus minus dimznuta sit. ..ere populei plebzsve . it magistratus prove magistratu. ua iudicatioque...interced... quominul||s setiusve d(e) e(a) r(e) iudicetur sive iudicium fiat liceto. S(i) s(acrum) s(anctum) e(st) q(uod) m(on) z(ure) s(tt) r(ogatum), e(zus) h(ac) U(ege) n(hil) r(ogatur). _ [Adros DP ]JaBeivios Adnov v[tos Katritay] tr[atos cal Aevxios Kandzrovpuos Aevxilov..viols Hetowv trrato[s..... | dexat]ws éxvpwloe....||...mpo juep lov && xadlavodv...... From Delos. The date of the document is fixed by the names of the consuls at the head of the Greek text. The law was passed by the senate and confirmed by the comuitia tributa (Cuq, B.C.H. 46 (1922), 201 ff.). Delos had suffered severely under Mithradates and from the raids of the pirates until Pompey cleared the latter from the seas. The Delians were granted immunity from certain [ 285 ] Io 15 20 25 30 oo 40 40 45 590 55 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN taxes—probably the tithes,—and from the accessory expense of convoying or transporting grain to Rome., The island was also made free although it was still under the control of Athens (Cuq, loc. cit. 209 ff.). The implications of this law are interesting. Delos, although under Athenian jurisdiction, seems to have paid tribute to Rome before the passage of the Gabinian law; otherwise the gift of immunity is meaningless. Similarly the Caunians paid tribute to Rome and Rhodes; cf. Dio Chrys. 31. 1253; see also Livy, 41. 6; and Cic. ad fam. 13. 56. The interpretation of Il. 30 ff. is uncertain. Apparently those who had suffered in the late wars and raids were given the right to appeal to Roman magistrates in preference to local or Athenian judges for the settlement of claims (cf. no. 19, col. uy, Il. 1 ff). Cug points out (foc. cit. 210 ff.) that this provision indicates the policy of the Roman senate in binding cities to Rome, even though they enjoyed the status of czvitates liberae, by giving them the advantages of appealing to Roman law and of being protected by Roman magistrates. 3 22. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD PROVINCIALES (ca. 56-50 a. Chr.) Knackfuss, Das Rathaus von Milet, p. 101, ll. 38 ff. ee DAS ry cele ér axupoce aly] aveidi[nde cat Madp|xac] Kixép[ov |e cuvtvyav evyapiornce [Ta tax ]|\Oévta érr[euleros cuvTnpav ta ém éulot ur dca(?) ||Avew. “Oley ras duels THY Tiwv mept [tTavta a]|vaidevay avécynobe, teOavpaxa: Su as Shig4 / \ N aA € Me / \ [arias] | wpds te TO Kowvdv Tov ‘EAXHVOY yéypada, [pos | v]uas, “Edectous, Tpardavots, “AXaBavédeis, M[v||\]aceis, Lpupvaiovs, Llepyaunvots, Lapdcavo[vs], | “Adpauutnvods, va Te vmels pos Tas év THe O[towlx]joes THe idiar ores SiaTro- / ” la) > / / é4 / oteiAnobe €v Te Tat er[t]| pavertatas TOTwL ev oTUAOTApacTabL > \ LO lal > aA 1g lal \ émt | AiGov revKod evyapayOjvar ppovticnte t[lad]||ta Ta ypappata, wa Kowas tTaone THe emapyetale TO] | Sixacov éxTapévov Hb eis TOV del Xpovov, ai Te AX|AaL TaGaL TONELS Kal Ofjot TO avtov Tap avtois | mouowow, eis Te TA Snudora ’ a / \ / \ \ | atoGa@vTat vouolpuvaAd]|kia Kat ypnwatiorypia. Try 8é aitiav dv jv “HAAg[ve]||Kots éypanva, un érelntionte: Kata vobv yap [ 286 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES [éo]|yov, ur} Te Tapa THY Epunveiav EXacaor Ta [yeypap| pu léva vonoar dvvnabe> thy Sé étiatoAn[y edaxa | Te|woxrHe “Avaka- yopov xal Yworxpatne Iv[Oiwvos | mplecBevtais Mayvynter Tav mpos tTL@t Mardy||dp lor. "EppwaGe. This inscription comes from Miletus. A fragment of the same letter is published in Inschriften von Priene, 106. Unfortunately both inscriptions are so fragmentary that the purpose of the letter cannot be determined. It is evident, however, that it was directed to the xowov of Greeks throughout the province, and probably contained regulations to be enforced uniformly throughout the district. In ll. 46 f. we have a reference to the regzones into which the province was divided by Sulla for administrative purposes (Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 339). It is interesting to note that the writer explains his motive in publishing his edict in Greek instead of Latin (ll. 54 ff). This might imply that letters and edicts issued by the Romans in the Greek provinces had hitherto been published in Latin, but, if so, they had been translated into Greek before they were recorded on stone in most cases where such records are found (cf. no. 65a). The governor also requires that copies of his letter be preserved in the proper archives in cities where copies were not engraved on stone. 23. PERGAMENI HONORANT PUBLIUM SERVILIUM ISAURICUM (ca. 46 a. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 449; Fraenkel, 4/terthiimer von Pergamon, 413. ‘O Simos éripnoev | Llomdcov Lepotdcov LlomdAtov viov Ioavp.|xov, Tov avOvTratov, yeyovota awtipa Kal | evepyéerny THS TOAEWS Kal aTrodedwKOTA THE || TONEL TOUS TraTpioUs VoLoUS kai THY SnpoKkpa|tiav adovdwrTov. From Pergamum. The reforms in provincial government intro- duced by Caesar brought great relief to the provinces suffering from the exactions of the publicanz. When Pergamum lost the right to use her own laws is unknown. Other inscriptions from Asia indi- cate the gratitude of the cities and the relief which they experienced under the new régime (cf. Inschriften von Magnesia, 1423; Ditt. Or. Gr. 450). [ 287 ] 60 Io I5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 24. TABULA HERACLEENSIS, VULGO LEX IULIA MUNICIPALIS (45 a. Chr.) CIL. 1, 206; Bruns, 18; Dessau, 6085; Girard, p. 80; Ricco- bono, p. 109. te iis Quem h(ac) I(ege) ad co(n)s(ulem) profiterei oportebit, sei is, quom eum profiterei oportebit, Romae non erit, tum quei elus | negotia curabit, is ea@dem omnia, quae eum, quoius negotia curabit, sei Romae esset, h. |. profiterei | oporteret, item isdemque diebus ad cos. profitemino. | Quem h. I. ad cos. profiterei oportebit, sei is pup(illus) seive ea pu(pilla) erit, tum quei eius pup(illi) pu(pillae)ve tutor erit, item eadem||que omnia in iisdem diebus ad cos. profitemino, ita utei ef quae quibusque diebus eum eamve, sei pup(illus) pu(pilla)ve non | esset, h. 1. profiterei oporteret. | Sei cos., ad quem h. |. professiones fiere1 oportebit, Romae non erit, tum is, quem profiterei oportebit, quod eum profiterei | opor- tebit, ad pr(aetorem) ur(banum) aut, sei is Romae non erit, ad eum pr(aetorem), quei inter peregrinos ius deicet, profitemzno, ita utei | eum ad cos., sei tum Romae esset, h. |. profiterei oporteret. || Sei ex eis cos, et pr(aetoribus), ad quos h. |. professiones fierei oportebit, nemo eorum Romae erit, tum Is, quem profiterei opor- tebit, | quod eum profiterei oportebit, ad tr(ibunum) pl(ebei) pro- fitemino, ita utez eum ad cos. pr(aetorem)gue urb(anum) eumque quel inter peregri|nos ius deicet, sei tum Romae esset, h. |. profiterei oporteret. | Quod quemquem h. 1. profiterei oportebit, is, apud quem ea professio fiet, eius quez profitebitur nomen, et ea quae pro|fessus erit, et quo die professus sit, in tabulas publicas referunda curato, eademque omnia, quae uteique in tabulas || rettulerit, zta in tabulam in album referunda | curato, idque aput forum, et quom frumentum populo dabitur, ibei ubei frumen|tum populo dabitur, cottidie maiorem partem diei propositum habeto, u(nde) d(e) p(lano) r(ecte) l(egi) p(ossit). | Queiquomque frumentum populo dabrt damdumve curabit, nei quoz eorum, quorum nomina h. |. ad cos. pr(aetorem) tr(ibunum) Biezeretad FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES pl(ebei) in ta|bula in albo proposita erunt, framentum dato neve dare iubeto neve sinito. Quei adversus ea eorum quai frumentum | dederit, is in tr(itici) m(odios) 1 Hs 1999 populo dare damnas esto, elusque pecuniae quel volet petitio esto. || Quae viae in urbe Rom(a) propiusve u(rbem) R(omam) p(assus) M, ubei continente habitabitur, sunt erunt, quoius ante aedificium earum quae | via erét, is eam viam arbitratu eius aed(ilis), quoi ea pars urbis h. |, obvenerit, tueatur; isque aed(ilis) curato, uti, quorum | ante aedificium erit, quamque viam h. |. quemque tueri oportebit, ei omnes eam viam arbitratu eius tueantur, neve eo | loco agua consistat, quominus conmode populus ea via utatur. | Aed(iles) cur(ules) aed(iles) pl(ebei), quel nunc sunt, queiquomque post h. |. r(ogatam) factei createi erunt eumve mag(istratum) in- ierint, iel in diebus v proxumeis, || quibus eo mag(istratu) designatei erunt eumve mag(istratum) inierint, inter se paranto aut sortiunto, qua in partei urbis quisque | eorum vias publicas in urbe Roma, propiusve u(rbem) R(omam) p(assus) M, reficiundas sternendas curet, elusque rei procurationem | habeat. Quae pars quoique aed(ile1) ita h. ]. obvenerit, eius aed(ilis) in eis loceis quae in ea partei erunt viarum reficien|darum tuemdarum procuratio esto, utei h. |. opor- tebit. | Quae via inter aedem sacram et aedificium locumve publicum et inter aedificium privatum est erit, eius || viae partem dimidiam is aed(ilis), quoi ea pars urbis obvenerit, in qua parte ea aedis sacra erit seive aedificium | publicum seive locus publicus, tuemdam locato. | OQuemquomque ante suum aedificium viam publicam h. |. tueri oportebit, quel eorum eam viam arbitratu eius aed(ilis), | quoius oportuerit, non tuebitur, eam viam aed(ilis), quoius arbitratu eam tuerel oportuerit, tuemdam locato; | isque aed(ilis) diebus ne minus X, antequam locet aput forum ante tribanale suom propositum habeto, quam || viam tuendam et quo die locaturus sit, ef quorum ante aedificium ea via sit; elsque, quorum ante aedificium | ea via erit, procuratoribusve eorum domum denuntietur facito, se eam viam locaturum, et quo die locaturus | sit; eamque locationem palam in foro per q(uaestorem) urb(anum), eumve quei aerario praerit, facito. Quamta pecunia eam | viam locaverit, tamtae pecuniae. eum eosque, quorum ante aedificium ea via erit pro AMA [ 289 ] 19 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 55 60 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN portioni, quamtum | quoiusque ante aedificium viae in longitudine et in latitudine erit, q(uaestor) urb(anus), queive aerario praerit, in tabulas || publicas pecuniae factae referundum curato. Ei quei eam viam tuemdam redemerit, tamtae pecuniae eum eos|ve adtribuito sine d(olo) m(alo). Sei is, quei adtributus erit, eam pecuniam diebus XXX proxumeis, quibus ipse aut pro|curator eius sciet adtributionem factam esse ei, guoi adtributus erit, non solverit neque satis fecerit, is | quamtae pecuniae adtributus erit, tamtam pecuniam et eius dimidium ei, quoi adtributus erit, dave debeto, | inque eam rem is, quo quomque de ea re aditum erit, iudicem iudiciumve ita dato, utei de pecunia credita || zwdicem iudiciumve dari oporteret. | Quam viam h. |. tuemdam locari oportebit, aed(ilis), quem eam viam tuendam locare oportebit, is eam viam per | q(uaestorem) urb(anum), queive aerario praerit, tuemdam locato, utei eam viam arbitratu eius, quel eam viam locandam | curaverit, tueatur. Quam- tam pecuniam ita quaeque via locata erit, t(amtam) p(ecuniam) q(uaestor) urb(anus), queive aerario praerit, | redemptorei, quoi e lege locationis dari oportebit, heredeive eius damdam adtribuendam curato. || Quo minus aed(iles) et murvir(ei) vieis in urbem purgandeis, Irvir(el) viels extra propiusve urbem Rom(am) passus ™ | purgandeis, queiquomque erunt, vias publicas purgandas curent elusque rel potestatem habeant, | ita utei legibus pl(ebei)ve sc(itis) s(enatus)ve c(onsultis) oportet oportebit, ezus h. |. n@hilum) r(ogatur). | Quoius ante aedificium semita in loco erit, is eam semitam, eo aedificio perpetuo lapidibus perpetueis | integreis continentem, con- stratam recte habeto arbitratu eius aed(ilis), quoius in ea parte h. |. viarum || procuratzo erit. | Quae viae in u(rbe) R(oma) sunt erunt intra ea loca, ubi con- tinenti habstabztur, ne quis in ieis vieis post k. Januar. | primas plostrum interdiu post solem ortum, neve ante horam x diei ducito agito, nisi quod aedium | sacrarum deorum inmortalium caussa aedificandarum, operisve publice faciumdei causa advehei porta|ri oportebit, aut quod ex urbe exve ieis loceis earum rerum, quae publice demoliendae locatae erunt, publi||ce exportarei oportebit, et quarum rerum caussa plostra h. |. certeis hominibus certeis de causeis agere | ducere licebit. | [ 290 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Quibus diebus virgines Vestales regem sacrorum, flamines plos- treis in urbe sacrorum publicorum p(opuli) R(omani) caussa | vehi oportebit, quaeque plostra triumphi caussa, quo die quisque trium- phadit, ducei oportebit, quaeque | plostra ludorum, quei Romae aut urbei Romae p(ropius) p(assus) m publice feient, inve pompam ludeis circiensibus ducei agei opus || erit; quo minus earum rerum caussa eisque diebus plostra interdiu in urbe ducantur agantur, e(ius) h(ac) l(ege) n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | Quae plostra noctu in urbem inducta erunt, quo minus ea plostra inania aut stercoris exportandei caussa | post solem ortum h(oris) x diei bubus iumenteisve iuncta in u(rbe) R(oma) et ab u(rbe) R(oma) p(assus) M esse liceat, e(ius) h. 1. n(@jhilum) rogatur. | Quae loca publica porticusve publicae in u(rbe) R(oma) p(ropius)- ve u(rbei) R(omae) p(assus) M sunt erunt, quorum locorum quoius- que porticus | aedilium eorumve mag(istratuom), quei vieis loceisque publiceis u(rbis) R(omae) p(ropius)ve u(rbei) R(omae) p(assus) M purgandeis praerunt, legibus || procuratio est erit, nel quis in leis loceis inve ieis porticibus quid in aedificatum inmolitwmve habeto, | neve ea loca porticumve quam possideto, neve eorum quod saeptum clausumve habeto, quo minus eis | loceis porticibusque populus utatur pateantve, nisi quibus uteique leg(ibus) pl(ebei)ve sc(itis) s(enatus)ve c(onsultis) concessum permissumve est. | Quibus loceis ex lege locationis, quam censor aliusve quis mag- (istratus) publiceis vectigalibus ultrove tributeis | fruendeis tuendeisve dixet, dixerit, eis, quei ea fruenda tuendave conducta habebunt, ut utei fruei liceat || gut utei ea ab eis custodiantur, cautum est; €i quo minus ieis loceis utantur fruantur ita, utei quoique eorum | ex lege locationis ieis seve d(olo) m(alo) utei fruei licebit, ex h. |. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | Quos lud(os) quisque Romae p(ropius)ve u(rbei) R(omae) p(assus) M faciet, quo minus ei eorum ludorum caussa scaenam pulpitum ceteraque, | quae ad eos ludos opus erunt, in loco publico ponere statuere, eisque diebus, quibus eos faciet, loco publico utei | liceat, e(ius) h. 1. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). || Quei scribae librarei magistratibus apparebunt, ei quo minus loceis publiceis, ubei is, guoz quisque eorum apparebunt, | iuserit, apparendi caussa utantur, e(ius) h.l. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | [ 291 ] 19-2 65 7O 75 80 85 gO 95 I0O MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Quae loca serveis publiceis ab cens(oribus) habitandei utendei caussa adtributa sunt, ei quo minus eis loceis utantur, e(ius) h. |. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). | Queiquomque in municipieis coloneis praefectureis foreis con- ciliabuleis c(ivium) R(omanorum) rvir(el) r11Vvir(ei) erunt aliove | quo nomine mag(istratum) potestatemve sufragio eorum, quel quoiusque municip# coloniae praefecturae || forz conciliabuli erunt habebunt: nei quis eorum quem in eo municipio colonia praefectura foro concilia|bulo zz senatum decuriones conscriptosve legito neve sublegito neve coptato neve recitandos curato, | nisi in demortuei damnateive locum eiusve, quei confessus erit, se senatorem de- curionem conscreiptumve | ibei h. 1. esse non licere. | Quei minor annos xxx natus est erit, nel quis eorum post k. Ianuar. secundas in municipio colonia praefe||ctura rvir(atum) IllIvir(atum) neve quem alium mag(istratum) petito neve capito neve gerito, nisei quel eorum stipendia | equo in legione 111, aut pedestria in legione vi fecerit, quae stipendia in castreis inve pro- vincia maiorem | partem sui quoiusque anni fecerit, aut bina semes- tria, quae ei pro singuleis annzeis procedere oporteat, | aut ei vocatzo rei militaris legibus pl(ebei)ve sc(itis) exve foidere erit, quocirca eum inveitum merere non | oporteat. Neve quis, quez praeconium dissignationem libitinamve faciet, dum eorum quid faciet, in muni-|| cipio colonia praefectura tvir(atum) 1ivir(atum) aliumve quem mag(istratum) petito neve capito neve gerito neve habeto, | neve ibei senator neve decurio neve conscriptus esto, neve sententiam dicito. Quei eorum ex eis, quei s(upra) s(criptei) s(unt), | adversus ea fecerit, is HS 1990 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pe- cuniae quei volet petitio esto. | Queiquomque in municipio colonia praefectura post k. Quinct- (iles) prim(as) comitia r1vir(eis) 1zzvir(eis) aleive quoi mag(istratui) | rogando subrogandove habebit, is ne quem, quei minor anneis XXX natus est erit, lvir(um), w1vir(um), queive ibei || alium mag(istratum) habeat, renuntiato neve renuntiarei iubeto, nisi quei stipendia equo in legione 111, aut stilpendia pedestria in legione vr fecerit, quae stipendia in castreis inve provincia maiorem partem sui | quoiusque anni fecerit, aut bina semestria, quae ei pro singuleis annuels procedere oporteat, cum eo | quod ei legibus pl(eibei)ve [ 292 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES sc(iteis) procedere oportebit, aut ei vocatio rei militaris legibus pl(ebei)ve sc(iteis) exve foedere | erit, quo circa eum invitum merere non oporteat. Neve eum, quei praeconium dissignationem libiti- namve faciet, dum eorum quid || faciet, 11vir(um) m11vir(um), queive ibei mag(istratus) sit, renuntiato, neve in senatum neve in de|curi- onum conscriptorumve numero legito, sublegito coptato neve sen- tentiam rogato neve dicere neve | ferre iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). Quei adversus ea fecerit, is Hs 1999 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae quel volet petitio esto. | Quae municipia coloniae praefecturae fora conciliabula c(ivium) R(omanorum) sunt erunt, nei quis in eorum quo municipio | colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo zz senatu decurionibus con- screipteisque esto, neve quoz ibi in eo ordine || sentemtiam deicere ferre liceto: quei furtei, quod ipse fecit fecerit, condemnatus pactusve est erit; | queive iudicio fiduciae pro socio, tutelae, mandatel, in- iuriarum, deve d(olo) m(alo) condemnatus est erit; queive lege | Plaetoria ob eamve rem, quod adversus eam legem feczt fecerit, condemnatus est erit; queive depugnandei | caussa auctoratus est erit fuit fuerit; queive | in iure Jonam copiam abiuravit abiuraverit, bonamve copiam iuravit iuraverit; queive sponsoribus creditoribusve sueis renuntiavit renuntiaverit, se soldum solvere non posse, aut cum eis || pactus est erit, se soldum solvere non posse; prove quo datum depensum est erit; quoiusve bona ex edicto | eius, quei z(wre) d(eicundo) praefuit praefuerit, praeterquam sei quoius, quom pu- pillus esset reive publicae caussa abesset, | neque d(olo) m(alo) fecit fecerit quo magis r(ei) p(ublicae) c(aussa) a(besset), possessa pro- scriptave sunt erunt; queive iudicio publico Romae | condemnatus est erit, quo circa eum in Italia esse non liceat, neque in integrum resti¢utus est erit; queive in eo | municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo, quoius erit, iudicio publico condemnatus est erit; quemve || k(alumniae) praevaricationis caussa accussasse fecisseve quod iudicatum est erit; quoive aput exercitum ingnominiae | caussa ordo ademptus est erit; quemve imperator ingnominiae caussa ab exercitu decedere iuszt iuserit; | queive ob caput c(ivis) R(omanei) referundum pecuniam praemium aliudve quid cepit ceperit; queive corpore quaestum | fecit fecerit; queive lanistaturam artemve ludi- cram fecit fecerit; queive lenocinium faciet. Quei | adversus ea [ 293 ] 105 Ito 115 I20 125 130 135 140 145 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo im senatu de- curionibus conscripteisve fuerit || sentemtiamve dixerit, is Hs 1999 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) esto, eiusque pecuniae quei voletpetitio esto. | Quoi h. |. in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo senatorem decurionem conscriptum esse, | inque eo ordine sentem- tiam dicere ferre non licebit, nei quis, quei in eo municipio colonia praefectura | foro conciliabulo senatum decuriones conscriptos habebit, eum in senatum decuriones conscriptos | ire iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo); neve eum ibei sentemtiam rogato neive dicere neive ferre iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo); neve quis, quez || in eo municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo sufragio eorum maxumam potestatem habebit, | eorum quem ibei in senatum decuriones con- scriptos ire, neve in eo numero esse neve sentemtiam ibei dicere | ferreve sinito sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo); neve quis eius rationem comi- tieis conciliove habeto, netve quis quem, set adversus ea comtttets conciliove creatum est renuntiato; neve quis, | quei ibei mag(istratum) potestatemve habebit, eum cum senatu decurionibus conscriptezs /udos spectare neive in convivio | publico esse sinzto sc(iens) d(olo) m<(alo). || Quibus h. |. in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo in senatu decurionibus conscripteis esse | non licebit, ni quis eorum in municipio colonia praefectura foro conciliabulo tvir(atum) I1Ivir(atum) aliamve | quam potestatem ex quo honore in eum ordinem perveniat, petito neve capito; neve quis eorum ludeis, | cumve gladiatores ibei pugnabunt, in loco senatorio decurionum conscriptorum sedeto neve spectato | neve convivium publicum is inito; neive quis, quel adversus ea creatus renuntiatus erit, ibei IIvir 111Ivir || esto, neve ibei m(agistratum) potestatemve habeto. Quez adversus ea fecerit, is HS 1999 p(opulo) d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae quei | volet petitio esto. | Quae municipia coloniae praefecturae c(ivium) R(omanorum) in Italia sunt erunt, quei in eis municipieis coloneis | praefectureis maximum mag(istratum) maximamve potestatem ibei habebit tum, cum censor aliusve | quis mag(istratus) Romae populi censum aget, is diebus 1x proxumeis, quibus sciet Romae censum populi |] agi, omnium municipium colonorum suorum queique elus praefecturae erunt, q(uel) c(ives) R(omanei) erunt, censum | ag/to, eorumque [ 294 ]| FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES nomina praenomina, patres aut patronos, tribus, cognomina, et quot annos | quisque eorum habet, et rationem pecuniae ex formula census, quae Romae ab eo, qui tum censum | populi acturus erit, proposita erit, ad ieis iurateis accipito; eaque omnia in tabulas publicas sul | municipi referunda curato; eosque libros per legatos, quos maior pars decurionum conscriptorum || ad eam rem legarei mitte! 150 censuerint tum, cum ea res consuleretur, ad eos, quel Romae censum agent, | mittito; curatoque, utei quom amplius dies Lx reliquei erunt, ante quam diem ei, queiquomque Romae | censum ager, finem populi cezsendi faciant, eos adeazt librosque eius municipi coloniae praefecturae | edant; isque censor, seive quis alius mag(istratus) censum populi aget, diebus v proxumeis, quibus legatei eius | municipi coloniae praefecturae adierint, eos libros census, quei ab ieis legateis dabuntur, accipito || s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) exque ieis 155 libreis, quae ibei scripta erunt, in tabulas publicas referunda curato, easque tabulas | eodem loco, ubei ceterae tabulae publicae erunt, in quibus census populi perscriptus erit, condendas curato. | Qui pluribus in municipieis coloneis praefectureis domicilium habebit, et is Romae census erit, quo magis | in municipio colonia praefectura h. 1. censeatur, e(1us) h. 1. n(ihilum) r(gatur). | Quei lege pl(ebeive) sc(ito) permissus est fuit, utei leges in muni- cipio fundano municipibusve eius municipi daret, || sei quid is post 160 h. |. r(ogatam) in eo anno proxumo, quo h. 1. populus iuserit, ad eas leges addiderit commutaverit conrexerit, municipzs fundanos | item teneto, utei oporteret, sei eae res ab eo tum, quom primum leges eis municipibus lege pl(ebei)ve sc(ito) dedit, | ad eas leges additae commutatae conrectae essent; neve quis intercedzto neve quid facito, quo minus | ea rata sint, quove minus municipis fundanos teneant eisque optemperetur. ]. 19. 1 2.¢. singulos. ]. 29. via inter; viam per, tad/et. ]. 64. ludorum, sc. caussa. ]. 92. oporteat; cum eo quod ei legibus plebeive sciteis procedere oportebit, omitted. Cf. ll. 102-103. ]. 117. abesset; Mommsen and Dessau add bona possessa proscriptave sunt erunt. [ 295 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN A very large bronze tablet, with a more ancient Greek in- scription on the back of it. It is broken into two parts. ‘The lower part (Il. 76-163) was found near the site of Heraclea in 1732. The upper part was discovered in 1754. Both parts are now in the museum at Naples. The beginning of the law has been lost. “The date of the inscription is fixed approximately or exactly from a letter of Cicero (ad fam. 6. 18. 1). In this letter he writes to Lepta, simulatque accept a Seleuco tuo litteras, statim quaesivi e Balbo per codicillos, quid esset in lege. Rescripsit eos, quit facerent praeconium, vetari esse in decurtonibus; qui fecissent, non vetart. The provision mentioned here is the exact point covered in our law (1. 94), and Cicero is evidently referring to this measure. He has obtained information in advance from an intimate friend of Caesar con- cerning the bill about to be submitted, which has not yet been promulgated. The date of Cicero’s letter, Jan. 45 B.c., fixes the probable date of the law as 45 B.c. on Caesar’s return from Spain (cf. Mommsen in Bruns, p. 102). For arguments in favor of the year 46, cf. Nissen, Rh. Mus. 45 (1890), 100 ff, Hackel, Wien. Stud. 24 (1902), 552, and others. Since Savigny’s time (cf. Verm. Schr. 3, 279 ff.) it has commonly been believed that this measure was intended to provide a normal charter for Italian towns. This conclusion was based largely upon certain apparent references in the Civil Law (cf. especially, Cod. F. 7. 9. 1; Dig. 50. 9. 3) toa general /ex municipalis, which was identified with Caesar’s measure, but most scholars have abandoned this identification (cf. however, Hardy, Six Roman Laws, 139 ff, 165 ff.) Mommsen has gone so far (Ges. Schr. 1, 153) as to deny the existence of a model charter at any period whatsoever, but cf. pp. 185 ff. The extant tablet covers four different matters, with a supple- mentary provision (Il. 159-163) ratifying such changes as the com- missioners may make in the measure during the first year after its adoption. ‘Uhese four subjects are: (1) rules governing the distribu- tion of corn in Rome (ll. 1-19); (2) regulations determining the duties of theaediles and other officials in Rome inrepairing, cleaning, and policing the streets (Il. 20-82); (3) conditions governing the eligibility of candidates for the magistracies and the senate (Il. 83— 141); (4) provisions regulating the taking of the census in the [ 296 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES municipality (ll. 142-158). It is very difficult to account for the appearance, on a single tablet, of laws dealing with such diverse matters as the corn supply and the functions of the aedile, and concerning Rome as well as Italian municipalities (cf. Herzog, 2, I, n. 1). Perhaps we have on the tablet parts of three different laws, viz. part of a municipal charter, and parts of two laws dealing with the corn supply and the aedile’s duties in Rome. The theory that the law is a /ex satura (Savigny, op. cit. 3, 327 ff-; de Petra, Mon. ant. d. Lincei, 6 (1895), 433 ff.) has been given up by most scholars. Still others believe that the law is a unit, being part of a comprehensive measure intended for Rome as well as for the Italian municipalities. Possibly, if we accept the first of these three theories mentioned above, we may surmise that we have on the tablet a municipal charter as the piéce de résistance, to which is added an article concerning the corn supply for the information of a muni- cipality, and a chapter prescribing the duties of a Roman aedile to serve as a guide for the municipal magistracy (cf. Herzog, Joc. cit.). Whatever relation the different parts of the inscription have to one another, from |. 83 on we have part of an early municipal charter which deals with the local executives and the local senate. Cf. no. 20. For the judicial powers of local magistrates, cf. no. 27. It seems probable from a comparison of |. 83 with Il. 89-90 that fora and conctliabula had local magistrates, but that these magistrates did not bear the title of duoviri or of quattuorviri. On similar grounds we infer (cf. Il. 142 ff.) that the census was not taken in fora and conciliabula. (For another list of communities, cf. no. 27, chap. xxu.) Although criminal courts held in fora and conciliabula are mentioned in Il. 118-119, they cannot have been presided over by local magistrates (cf. Schulten, R.F. 7, 63), but must have been conducted by praefectt sent from larger com- munities. From ll. 83-88 it is clear that magistrates were to be elected in the popular assembly, and that decurions could be named by the magistrates. On the technical terms in |. 86, cf, Mommsen, St. R. 3, 855 f.and nn. Apparently decurions could also be elected in the popular assembly (cf. 1. 132). Rome required the census to be taken in Italian towns as early as 209 B.c. (Livy, 29. 15), but this is the earliest extended formula- { 297 ] 15 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN tion which we have of the method of procedure. The charter of Bantia (no. 11, chap. 4) bears witness to the taking of the census in this Oscan town in the second century B.c., and prescribes a penalty for those who fail to report themselves. Under the princi- pate the census was also required in provincial towns (cf. Kubitschek, R.E. 3, 1918 f.). We do not know whether the system outlined here originated in Rome or was adopted from other Italian munici- palities. The fact that a person might have a domicile in several municipalities (1. 157) will be illustrated in concrete cases in later inscriptions (cf. no. 94), in which we shall find certain men as citizens in several czvitates. ‘The course of procedure which was followed in granting this charter is indicated in]. 159. An enabling act passed in the popular assembly authorized a commissioner or a commission to frame a constitution and, a year after the passage of the law, to make any necessary amendments. On the scope of this article, cf; Elmore, Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 47 (1916), 40 ff. For an extended commentary on the entire document, cf. Legras, La table Latine d Héraclée; Elmore, Fourn. Rom. Studtes, 5 (1915), 125 ff; Hardy, Class. Quart. 11 (1917), 27 ff.; Some Problems in Roman History, 239 ff. 25. SENATUS CONSULTUM ET EPISTULA CAESARIS AD MYTILENAEOS (45 a. Chr.) IG: X11, 2, 35, ll. 14-37; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 33; Ditt. Sy/7.3 764 (in part). [Iept ov wr]pecBevrai Mutirnvaior Morapov AeoBovaxtos, Paivias Daiviov tod Kanddi[m]|rov, Sépdhyos Acods, ‘Hpwdns Kréwvos, Avis Martpoxdéous, Anuntptos KrXewvipou, || Kpuva- yopas KadXitrmov, Zwiros’ Evyévous Noyous érroinocavTo, yapura, pirtav, cvppa|yiav aveveodrto, iva te év KarretorXiowe Ovo[l av Tomoat €Ent, a TE avTOLS | TpOTEpOY VITO THS TUYKANHTOU cUYKeE- xopnu|[élva nv, tadra év dérTwL yarkHe | yeypaupéva rpoc- nr@oat iva Eu: mept rovtov Tod mpdypuatos ovTws || &ofev- xapita, piriav, cvuppaxiay avaveocacOa, avdpas ayabods Kal pi|rous mpocayopetvoan, év Karretwriws Ovoiav moujoar éFetvas, & Te avTOLs TpO|TEpov U7r0 THS TUYKAHTOV PiiavOpwra cvyKeywpn- [ 298 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES péva Hv, Tadta év SéA|Tw@L YaArKHL yeypappméeva TPoTNAWTAL e ” A / 2\ éfetvat, drav Oédwowv: iva te Vdios | Kaitoap avtoxpatawp, av lal) rn al f avTat paivntat, TOTOUS YopHyLa avTols KaTA TO || TOY Tpoyover 2 a alt ped A €O0s Tapiav picOdoar KereVane O(UT)ws WS av avTwl ex TAY a) / / dn|poclwv mpaypatev Tictews Te THS idias paivntat. “Kdokev. [Ez] \ be \ , 2 / t AY Eg \ e a et O€ kal | mpdrepov éveTvyYeTE ot Kal éyparya Tpos Upas, / , an Tadw wvrréulew]av of | [iuétrepor mpecBevtal pnldéva dev atern ei[var] wap’ vpiv axorovO[ws Tois |.......-- Kab Tots | diravOpwras a éyete Tap Huav Tois Te [mpdre||pov Kal Tots dia TovTOV To |b Soypatos SeSouévois 76 e£etvar bpily...|... Tats | THS TOrEwWS Kal TIS Ywepas mpocddats Kal ALovyxiay | yphaGar. Bovdopar ody] atrodynvacbar Ste oddevt cvyywpe ovde cvy[Xo- pyjlow aterel wap vpiv eivar. Olitas odv memeropévor Oap- poovtes yxpnoO[e..|...aveumod|ictws: eyo tatta Te 75éws meTroinka wl mép || twav xal evYopas els T]O wéAdOV alEL TLVOS aya0od trapaitios byiv [yevérOar]. | From Mytilene. The inscription contains the correspondence and treaty between Rome and Mytilene. This city had been loyal to Pompey, but after the battle of Pharsalia it had sent an embassy to Caesar to sue for pardon (cf. Plutarch, Pomp. 75). A second embassy was sent to Rome in 45 B.c. to ask forthe renewal of the old treaty of alliance. Their request was granted by the senate, and Caesar sent this letter to the Mytileneans, of which we publish a part. This part includes the decree of the senate renewing the treaty and an edict of Caesar wherein he promises the city that no resident of Mytilene shall enjoy the privilege of immunity. In spite of the fact that this city enjoyed the status of an independent ally of Rome, it is apparent that complete autonomy was not implied. Since Roman citizens enjoyed special privileges of immunity in the cities of the empire, it is probable that the edict of Caesar was designed to subject them to the laws, customs, and duties of the Mytileneans (cf. p. 192). Mytilene was a free city under Augustus (Pliny, N.H. 5, 139). It may have lost its privileges under Vespasian (Philostratus, poll. 5, 41), but they were restored by Hadrian. Cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d Aste, 118. [ 299 ] 25 30 Bh Io 15 20 25 30 35 col. Iv MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 26. LEX COLONIAE GENITIVAE IULIAE SEU URSONENSIS (44 a. Chr.) CIL. u, S. 5439; Dessau, 6087; Bruns, 28; Girard, p. 89; Riccobono, p. 142. LXI....Cui quis ita ma|num inicere tussus erit, 1udicati 1ure ma|nus iniectio esto, itque ei s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) facere liceto. Vin|dex arbitratu tviri quive i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) locuples || esto. Ni vindicem dabit iudicatumve facilet, secum ducito. Iure civili vinctum habeto. | Si quis in eo vim faciet, ast eius vincitur, du|pli damnas esto colonisq(ue) eius colon(iae) Hs ccr99 ccI99 | d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae gui volllet petitio, 11vir(o) quive i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) exactio iudicati|oque esto. | LXII. [lIviri quicumque erunt, izs 11viris in eos singulos | lictores binos accensos sing(ulos), scribas bilnos, viatores binos, librarium, praeconem, || haruspicem, tibicinem habere ius potestas|que esto. Quique in ea colonia aedil(es) erunt, | iis aedil(ibus) in eos aedil(es) sing(ulos) scribas sing(ulos), publijcos cum cincto limo m1, prae- conem, haruspi|cem tibicinem habere ius potestasq(ue) esto. Ex eo || numero, qui eius coloniae coloni erunt, habe|to. lisque r1vir(is) aedilibusque, dum eum mag(istratum) ha|bebunt, togas praetextas, funalia, cereos ha|bere ius potestasq(ue) esto. Quos quisque eo|rum ita scribas lictores accensos viatorem || tibicinem haruspicem prae- conem habebit, iis | omnibus eo anno, quo anno quisque eorum | apparebit, militiae vacatio esto, neve quis eum eo anno, quo mag(istratibus) apparebit, invitum | militem facito neve fieri iubeto neve eum || cogito neve ius iurandum adigito neve aldigi iubeto neve sacramento rogato neve | rogari iubeto, nisi tumultus Italici Gallici|ve causa. Eisque merces in eos singul(os), qui I1vi|ris appare- bunt, tanta esto: in scribas sing(ulos) || Hsoo cc, in accensos sing(ulos) HS DCC, in lictores | sing(ulos) Hs Dc, in viatores sing(ulos) Hs cccc, in libra|rios sing(ulos) Hs ccc, in haruspices sing(ulos) us p, prae|coni HS CCC; qui aedilib(us) appareb(unt): in scribas | sing(ulos) Hs pccc, in haruspices sing(ulos) us c, in ti] bicines sing(ulos) Hs ccc, in prae- cones sing(ulos) Hs ccc. | Tis s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) kapere liceto. | LXIII. IIviri, qui primi ad. pr. k. Ianuar. mag(istratum) habe- bunt, appari|tores totidem habento guot sing(ulis) apparitores ex h(ac) [ 300 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES l(ege) ha||bere licet. Iisque apparitorib(us) merces tanta esto, | quantam esse oporteret, si partem III anni appar|uissent, ut pro portione, quam diu apparuissent, mer|cedem pro eo kaperent, itque lis s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) c(apere) I(iceto). | LXIIII. IIviri quicumque post colon(iam) deductam erunt, ii in die||bus x proxumis, quibus eum mag(istratum) gerere coeperint, at | decuriones referunto, cum non minus duae partes | aderint, quos et quot dies festos esse et quae sacra | fieri publice placeat et quos ea sacra facere place|at. Quot ex eis rebus decurionum maior pars, qui || tum aderunt, decreverint statuerint, it lus ratum|que esto, eaque sacra elque ies festi In ea colon(ia) | sunto. | LXV. Quae pecunia poenae nomine ob vectiga/ia, quae | colon(iae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) erunt, in publicum redacta erit, eam || pecuniam ne quis erogare neve cui dare neve attri|buere potestatem habeto nisi at ea sacra, quae in | colon(ia) aliove quo loco colonorum nomine fiavt, | neve quis aliter eam pecuniam s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) kapito, neve quis | de ea pecunia ad decuriones referundi neve quis || de ea pecunia sententiam dicendi ius potestat(em)|que habeto. Eam- que pecuniam ad ea sacra, quae | in ea colon(ia) aliove quo loco colonorum nomine | fient, r1viri s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) dato attribuito itque ei facere | ius potestasq(ue) esto. Eique cui ea pecunia dabi||tur s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) kapere liceto. | LXVI. Quos pontifices quosque augures G. Caesar, quive | iussu eius colon(iam) deduxerit, fecerit ex colon(ia) Ge|net(iva), ei pontifices eique augures c(oloniae) G/(enetivae) I(uliae) sunto, eiq(ue) | ponfifices auguresque in pontificum augu||rum conlegio in ea colon(ia) sunto, ita uti qui | optima lege optumo iure in quaque colon(ia) | pontif(ices) augures sunt erunt. ITisque pontificibus | auguribusque, qui in quoque eorum collegio | erunt, liberisque eorum militiae munerisq|ue publici vacatio sacrosancta esto, uti pon|tifici Romano est erit, geraque militaria ea omnila merita sunto. De auspiciis quaeque ad eas res per|tinebunt augurum iuris dictio iudi- catio esto. Eis||que pontificib(us) auguribusque ludis, quot publice ma|gistratus facient, et cum ei pontific(es) augures sa|cra publica c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) facient, togas praetextas haben|di ius potestasq(ue) esto, eisque pontificib(us) augurib(us)|q(ue) ludos gladiatoresq(ue) inter decuriones specta||re ius potestasque esto. | 301 | 5 Io 15 20 25 30 35 col. v Io 5 20 25 30 So IO T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN LXVII. Quicumque pontif(ex) quique augur c(oloniae) G(ene- tivae) I(uliae) post h(anc) l(egem) da|tam in conlegium pontific(um) augurumq(ue) in demor|tui damnative loco h(ac) l(ege) lectus co- optatusve erit, | is pontif(ex) augurq(ue) in c(olonia) [ul(ia) in con- legium [séc] pontifex || augurq(ue) esto, ita uti qui optuma lege in quaque | colon(ia) pontif(ices) auguresq(ue) sunt erunt. Neve quis | quem in conlegium pontificum kapito suble|gito cooptato nisi tunc cum minus tribus pon|tificib(us) ex ils, qui c(oloniae) G(enetivae) sunt, erunt. Neve quis quem || in conlegium augurum sublegito cooptato ni|si tum cum minus tribus auguribus ex eis, qui | colon(iae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) sunt, erunt. | LXVII(I). Ilviri praef(ectus)ve comitia pontific(um) augurum- que), quos h(ac) lege | facere oportebit, ita habeto, prodicito, ita uti || Itvir(um) creare facere sufficere h(ac) l(ege) o(portebit). | LXIX. IIviri qui post colon(iam) deduc¢am primi erunt, ei in sulo mag(istratu) et quicumq(ue) Irvir(i) 1n colon(ia) Iul(ia) erunt, ii in | diebus Lx proxumis, quibus eum mag(istratum) gerere coe|pe- rint, ad decuriones referunto, cum non minus || xx aderunt, uti redemptori redemptoribusque, | qui ea redempta habebunt quae ad sacra resq(ue) | divinas opus erunt, pecunia ex lege locationis | adtribuatur solvaturq(ue). Neve quisquam rem ali|am at decuriones referunto neve quot decuri|ljonum decret(um) faciunto antequam eis redemp|toribus pecunia ex lege locationis attribuatur | solvaturve d(ecurionum) d(ecreto), dum ne minus xxx atsint, cum | e(a) r(es) > consulatur. Quot ita decreverint, ei 11vir(i) | redemptori redemptori- bus attribuendum | solvendumque curato, dum ne ex ea pecunia | solvant adtribuant, quam pecuniam ex h(ac) l(ege) | ad ea sacra, quae in colon(ia) aliove quo loco pul|jblice fant, dari adtribui oportebit. | (L)XX. Ilviri quicumque erunt praeter eos, qui primi | post h(anc) I(egem) facti erunt, in suo mag(istratu) munus lu]dosve scaenicos Iovi lunoni Minervae deis | deabusq(ue) quadriduom m(aiore) p(arte) diei, quot elus fie||ri poterit, arbitratu decurionum faciun|to inque eis ludis eoque munere unusquis|que eorum de sua pecunia ne minus HS oo oo | consumito et ex pecunia publica in sing(ulos) | tvir(os) d(um) t(axat) Hs oo oo sumere consumere liceto, it||que els s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) facere liceto, dum ne quis ex ea | pecun(ia) sumat neve adtributionem faciat, | quam pecuniam [ 302 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES h(ac) l(ege) ad ea sacra, quae in collon(ia) aliove quo loco publice fient, dari | adtribui oportebit. || LXXI. Aediles quicumq(ue) erunt in suo mag(istratu) munus lu|dos scaenicos Iovi Iunoni Minervae tri|duom maiore parte diel, quot eius fieri pote|rit, et unum diem in circo aut in foro Veneri | faciunto, inque eis ludis eoque munere unus||quisque eorum de sua pecunia ne minus HS co oo | consumito deve publico in sing(ulos) aedil(es) HSoo | sumere liceto, eamq(ue) pecuniam mvir prae- f(ectusve) | dandam adtribuendam curanto itque lis | s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) c(apere) liceto. LX XII. Quotcumque pecuniae stipis nomine in aedis | sacras datum inlatum erit, quot elus pecunilae eis sacrés superfuerit, quae sacra, uti h(ac) l(ege) d(ata) | oportebit, ei deo deaeve, cuius ea aedes erit, fac|ta fuerint, ne quis facito neve curato neve intercel||dito, quo minus in ea aede consumatur, ad | quam aedem ea pecunia stipis nomine da|ta conlata erit, neve quis eam pecuniam alio | consumito neve quis facito, quo magis in | alia re consumatur. | LXXIII. Ne quis intra fines oppidi colon(iae)ve, qua aratro | circumductum erit, hominem mortuom | inferto neve ibi humato neve urito neve homi||nis mortul monimentum aedificato. Si quis | adversus ea fecerit, is c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) [ul(iae) HS 199 d(are) d(amnas) esto, | eiusque pecuniae gui volet petitio persecu|tio esto. Itque quot inaedificatum | erit irvir aedil(is)ve dimoliendum curanto. Si || adversus ea mortuus inlatus positusve erit, | expianto uti oportebit. | LXXIV. Ne quis ustrinam novam, ubi homo mortuus | com- bustus non erit, propius oppidum pas|sus p facito. Qui adversus ea fecerit, Hs 199 C(olonis) || c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae gui volet peti|tio persecutiog(ue) ex h(ac) l(ege) esto. | LXXV. Ne quis in oppido colon(ia) Iul(ia) aedificium detegito | neve demolito neve disturbato, nisi si praedes | rvir(um) arbitratu dederit se redaedificaturum, aut || nisi decuriones decreverint, dum ne minus L ad|sint, cum e(a) r(es) consulatur. Si quis adversus ea fece(rit), | q(uanti) e(a) r(es) e(rit), t(antam) p(ecuniam) c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) dire) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusq(ue) pecuniae qui volet pe|titio persecutioq(ue) ex h(ac) l(ege) esto. | [ 303 ] 20 aS 30 35 col. II [oO 15 20 col. 25 30 52 40 III Io T5 20 25 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN LXXVI. Figlinas teglarias maiores tegularum ccc tegu||larium- q(ue) in oppido colon(ia) Iul(ia) ne quis habeto. Qui | habuerit it aedificium isque locus publicus | col(oniae) Iuli(ae) esto, eiusq(ue) aedificii quicumque in c(olomia) | G(enetiva) Iul(ia) i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit), s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) eam pecuniam in publicum redigito. | LXXVII. Si quis vias fossas cloacas r1vir aedil(is)ve publice || facere inmittere commutare aedificare mu|nire intra eos fines, qui colon(iae) Iul(iae) erunt, volet, | quot eius sine iniuria privatorum fiet, it is face|re liceto. | LXXIIX. Quae viae publicae itinerave publica sunt fuerunt || intra eos fines, qui colon(iae) dati erunt, quicumq(ue) | limites quae- que viae quaeque itinera per eos algros sunt erunt fueruntve, eae viae eique limites | eaque itinera publica sunto. | LXXIX. Qui fluvi rivi fontes lacus aquae stagna paludes || sunt in agro, qui colon(is) hwzusc(e) colon(iae) divisus | erit, ad eos rivos fontes lacus aquas sta|gna paludes itus actus aquae haustus lis item | esto, qui eum agrum habebunt possidebunt, uti | 1is fuit, quieum agrum habuerunt possederunt. || Itemque lls, quieum agrum habent possident ha|bebunt possidebunt, itineris aquarum lex ius|que esto. | LXXX. Quot cuique negotii publice in colon(ia) de decu- r(ionum) sen|tentia datum erit, is cui negotium datum erit ellius rei rationem decurionib(us) reddito referto]que in dieb(us) cL proxumis guibus it negotium confecerit | quibusve it negotium gerere desierit, quot eius | fieri poterit s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). | LXXXI. Quicumque mvir(1) aed(iles)ve colon(iae) Lul(iae) erunt, ii scribis || suis, qui pecuniam publicam colonorumque | rationes scripturus erit, antequam tabulas | publicas scribet in contione palam | luci nundinis in forum ius iurandum adigi|to per lovem deosque Penates “‘sese pecuniam pu||blicam eius colon(iae) concustoditurum rationes|que veras habiturum esse, u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet) s(ine) d(olo) m(alo), ne|que se fraudem per litteras facturum esse sc(ientem) | d(olo) m(alo).” Uti quisque scriba ita iuraverit, in tabulas | publicas referatur facito. Qui ita non iuravellrit, is tabulas publicas ne scribito neve aes | apparitorium mercedemque ob e(am) r(em) kapito. | Qui ius iuran- dum non adegerit, ei Hs 199 mullta@ esto, elusq(ue) pecuniae gui volet petitio per|secutioq(ue) ex h(ac) l(ege) esto. || Lote {or bod FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES LXXXII. Qui agri quaeque silvae quaeq(ue) aedificia c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) | quibus publice utantur, data ad- tributa e|runt, ne quis eos agros neve eas silvas ven|dito neve locato longius quam in quinquen|nium, neve ad decuriones referto neve decul|rionum consultum facito, quo ei agri eaeve | silvae veneant aliterve locentur. Neve si ve|nierint, itcirco minus c(loniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) sunto. Quique iis | rebus fructus erit, quot se emisse dicat, is in | iuga sing(ula) inque annos sing(ulos) Hs c c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) d(are) d(amnas) || esto, elusque pecuniae qut volet petitio persecutiog(ue) ex h(ac) Lege) esto. (Deest tabulae pars dimidia) XCI. Si quts ex hac lege decurto augur pontifex coloniae G(enetivae) Tul(tae) factus creatusve | erit, tum quicumque decurio augur pon- tifex huiusque | col(oniae) domicilium in ea colonia) oppido pro- piusve it oppidum p(assus) oo | non habebit annis v proxumis, unde pignus elus quot satis | sit capi possit, is in ea col(onia) augur ponti- f(ex) decurio ne es||to quigue Irviri in ea col(onia) erunt, elus nomen de decurio|nibus sacerdotibusque de tabulis publicis eximendum | curanto, u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olent), idq(ue) eos I1vir(os) s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) f(acere) I(iceto). | XCII. Ilviri quicumque in ea colon(ia) mag(istratum) habebunt, ei de legatio|nibus publice mittendis ad decuriones referunto, cum || m(aior) p(ars) decurion(um) eius colon(iae) aderit, quotque de his rebus | maior pars eorum qui tum aderunt constituerit, | it ius ratumque esto. Quamque legationem ex h(ac) l(ege) exve | d(e- curionum) d(ecreto), quot ex h(ac) l(ege) factum erit, obire opor- tuerit | neque obierit qui lectus erit, is pro se vicarium ex eo || ordine, uti hac lege de(curionum)ve decreto d(ari) o(portet), dato. Ni ita dederit, in | res sing(ulas) quotiens ita non fecerit, Hs ccIo9 colon(is) huliusque colon(iae) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pe- cuniae qui volet petitio | persecutioque esto. | XCIII. Quicumque tvir post colon(iam) deductam factus creatusve || erit quive praef(ectus) ab r1vir(0) e lege huius coloniae relic|tus erit, is de loco publico neve pro loco publico neve | ab redemptore mancipe praed(e)ve donum munus mercedem | aliutve quid kapito neve accipito neve facito, quo | quid ex ea re at se AMA [ 305 ] 20 30 35 40 T5 20 25 30 col. 11 Io 15 25 30 35 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN suorumve quem perveniat. Qui at||versus ea fecerit, Is HS CCIO9 cc199 c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) Iul(iae) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eius|que pecuniae qui vo/et petitio persecutioque esto. | XCIIII. Ne quis in hac colon(ia) ius dicito neve culus in ea colon(ia) | iuris dictio esto nisi 11vir(i) aut quem i1vir praef(ectum) | reliquerit, aut aedil(is), uti h(ac) l(ege) o(portebit). Neve quis pro eo || imper(io) potestat(e)ve facito, quo quis in ea colonia | ius dicat, nisi quem ex h(ac) l(ege) dicere oportedzz. | XCV. Qui reciperatores dati erunt, si eo die quo iussi erunt | non iudicabunt, uvir praef(ectus)ve ubi e(a) r(es) a(gitur) eos rec(1- peratores) | eumque Culus res a(gitur) adesse iubeto diemque cer|tum dicito, quo die atsint, usque ateo, dum e(a) r(es) | iudicata erit, facitoque, uti e(a) r(es) in diebus xx | proxumis, quibus d(e) e(a) r(e) rec(iperatores) dati iussive e|runt iudicare, iudic(etur), u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet). Testibusque || in eam rem publice dum taxat h(ominibus) xx, qui colon(i) | incolaeve erunt, quibus zs qui rem quaere|¢ volet, denuntietur facito. Quibusq(ue) ita tes|ti- monium denuntiatum erit quique in tes|timonio dicendo nominati erunt, Curato, || uti at it iudicium atsint. Testimoniumq(ue) | si quis quit earum rer(um), quae res tum age|tur, sciet aut audierit, luratus dicat faci|to, uti q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet), dum ne omnino amplius | h(omines) xx in iudicia singula testimonium dice||re cogantur. Neve quem invitum testimo|nium dicere cogito, qui el, cuza r(es) tum age|tur, gener socer, vitricus privignus, pa- tron(us) | lib(ertus), consobrinus sit propiusve eum ea cogna|tione atfinitateve contingat. Si rvir || praef(ectus)ve qui ea re colon(is) petet, non-ade|rit ob eam rem, quot ei morbus sonticus, | vadimonium, iudicium, sacrificium, funus | familiare feriaeve demicales erunt, quo | minus adesse possit sive is propter magistra||tus potestatemve p(opuli) Romani) minus atesse poterit: | quo magis eo absente de eo Cul 7s negotium | facesset recip(eratores) sortiantur reiciantur res iu|dicetur, ex h(ac) I(ege) n(ihilum) r(ogatur). Si privatus petet et 1s, cum | de ea re iudicium fieri oportebit, non aderit || neque arbitratu tvir(i) praef(ecti)ve ubi e(a) r(es) a(getur) exculsabitur ez harum quam causam esse, quo minus | atesse possit, morbum sonti- cum, vadimonium, | iudicium, sacrificium, funus familiare, ferias | deicales eumve propter mag(istratus) potestatemve || p(opuli) [ 306 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES R(omani) atesse non posse: post ei earum rerum, quarum | h(ac) l(ege) quaestio erit, actio ne esto. Deq(ue) e(a) r(e) siremps | lex resque esto, quasz si neque iudices delecti neq(ue) recip(eratores) | in eam rem dati essent. | XCVI. Si quis decurio eius colon(iae) ab r1vir(o) praef(ecto)ve postulabit | u¢i ad decuriones referatur, de pecunia publica de||que multis poenisque deque locis agris aedificis | publicis quo facto quaeri iudicarive oporteat: tum | 11vir quzve iure dicundo praerit d(e) e(a) r(e) primo | quoque die decuriones consulito decurionum|que consultum facito fiat, cum non minus m(aior) p(ars) || decurionum atsit, cum ea res consuletur. Vti m(aior) p(ars) | decurionum, qui tum aderint, censuer(int), ita ius | ratumque esto. | XCVII. Ne quis vir neve quis pro potestate in ea colon(ia) | facito neve ad decuriones referto neve d(ecurionum) d(ecretum) facito || fiat, quo quis colon(is) colon(iae) patron(us) sit atoptetur|ve praeter eum, cuz c(olonis) a(grorum) d(andorum) a(tsignandorum) i(us) ex lege Iulia est, eum|que, qui eam colon(iam) deduxerit, liberos posterosgue | eorum, nisi de m(aioris) p(artis) decurion(um) gui tum aderunt per tabellam | sententia, cum non minus & aderunt, cum e(a) r(es) || consuletur. Qui atversus ea fecerit, Hs 199 colon(is) | eius colon(iae) d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae colon(is) etus | colon(iae) gui volet petitio esto. | XCVIII. Quamcumque munitionem decuriones huius|ce co- loniae decreverint, si m(aior) p(ars) decurionum || atfuerit, cum e(a) r(es) consuletur, eam munitionem | fieri liceto, dum ne amplius in annos sing(ulos) in|que homines singulos puberes operas quinas et | in iuga sing(ula) operas ter|nas decernant. Eique munitioni aed(iles) qui tum || erunt ex d(ecurionum) d(ecreto) praesunto. Vti decuriones censu|erint, ita muniendum curanto, dum ne in|vito eius opera exigatur, qui minor annor(um) xur | aut maior annor(um) Lx natus erit. Qui in ea colon(ia) | intrave eius colon(iae) finis domicilium praedi||umve habebit neque eius colon(iae) colon(us) erit, is ei}dem munitioni uti colon(us) pareto. | XCVIIII. Quae aquae publicae in oppido colon(iae) Gen- (etivae) | adducentur, mvir, qui tum erunt, ad decuriones, | cum duae partes aderunt, referto, per quos agros | aquam ducere liceat. Qua pars maior decurion(um), | qui tum aderunt, duci decreverint, Rie ieyedh ai 9 20-2 col. 11 wr Io 15 20 25 30 35 col. Iv Io 5 20 25 30 35 col. v MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN dum ne || per it aedificium, quot non eius rei causa factum | sit, aqua ducatur, per eos agros aquam ducere | i(us) p(otestas)que esto, neve quis facito, quo minus ita | aqua ducatur. | C. Si quis colon(us) aquam in privatum caducam ducere || volet isque at uvir(um) adierit postulabit|gue, uti ad decurion(es) referat, tum is I1vir, a quo | ita postulatum erit, ad decuriones, cum non mi{nus xxxx aderunt, referto. Si decuriones m(aior) p(ars) qui | tum atfuerint, aquam caducam in privatum duci || censuerint, ita ea aqua utatur, quotsine priva|tz iniuria fiat, i(us) potest(as)que e(sto). | CI. Quicumque comitia magistratzbus creandis subrogan|dis habebit, is ne quem eis comitis pro tribu acci|pito neve renuntiato neve renuntiari lubeto, || qui zz earum qua causa erit, e qua eum h(ac) I(ege) in colon(ia) | decurionem nominari creari inve decu- rionibus | esse non oporteat non liceat. | CII. Ilvir qui h(ac) l(ege) quaeret iud(icium)ve exercebit, quod iudicium | uti uno die fiat h(ac) l(ege) prestitutum non est, ne quis || eorum ante h(oram) 7 neve post horam xr diei quaerito | neve iudicium exerceto. Isque rvir in singul(os) | accusatores, qui eorum delator erit, ei h(oras) 1111, qui | subscriptor erit, h(oras) 11 accusandi potest(atem) facito. Si | quis accusator de suo tempore alteri con- cesserit, || quot eius Cuique concessum erit, eo amplius cui | con- cessum erit dicendi potest(atem) facito. Qui de suo | tempore alteri concesserit, quot elus cuique conces|serit, eo minus ei dicendi potest(atem) facito. Quot horas | omnino omnib(us) accusatorib(us) in sing(ulas) actiones di||cendi potest(atem) fieri oporteb(it), totidem horas et alter|um tantum reo quive pro eo dicet in sing(ulas) actiones | dicendi potest(atem) facito. | CIITI. Quicumque in col(onia) Genet(iva) rrvir praef(ectus)ve i(ure) d(icundo) praerit, eum colon(os) | incolasque contributosgue quocumque tempore colon(iae) fin(ium) | defendendorum causa armatos educere decurion(es) censuerint, || quot m(aior) p(ars) qui tum aderunt decreverint, id e(i) s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) f(acere) I(iceto). Fi|que tvir(o) aut quem ivir armatis praefecerit idem | ius eadem- que animadversio esto, uti tr(ibuno) mil(itum) p(opuli) R(omani) in | exercitu p(opuli) R(omani) est, itque e(i) s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) f(acere) I(iceto) i(us) p(otestas)que e(sto), dum it, quot | m(aior) p(ars) decurionum decreverit, qui tum aderunt, fat. || [ 308 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES CIIII. Qui limites decumanique intra fines c(oloniae) G(ene- tivae) deducti facti|que erunt, quaecum(que) fossae limitales in eo agro erunt, | qui iussu C. Caesaris dict(atoris) imp(eratoris) et lege Antonia senat(us)que | c(onsultis) pl(ebi)que sc(itis) ager datus at- signatus erit, ne quis limites | decumanosque opsaeptos neve quit immolitum neve || quit ibi opsaeptum habeto, neve eos arato, neve eis fossas | opturato neve opsaepito, quo minus suo itinere aqua | ire fluere possit. Si quis atversus ea quit fecerit, is in | res sing(ulas), quotienscumq(ue) fecerit, Hs oo c(olonis) c(oloniae) G/(enetivae) I(uliae) d(are) d(amnas) esto, | eiusq(ue) pecun(iae) gui volet petitio p(ersecutio)q(ue) esto. || CV. Si quis quem decurion(um) indignum loci aut ordinis de|curionatus esse dicet, praeterquam quot libertinus | erit, et ab Ivir(o) postulabitur, uti de ea re iudicijum reddatur, rvir, quo de ea re in ius aditum erit, | ius dicito tudiciaque reddito. Isque decurio, || qui iudicio condemnatus erit, postea decurio | ne esto neve in decurionibus sententiam dici|to neve 11vir(atum) neve aedili- tatem petito neve | quis 11vir comitis suffragio eius rationem | habeto neve t1vir(um) neve aedilem renuntiljato neve renuntiari sinito. CVI. Quicumque c(olonus) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) erit, quae iussu C. Caesaris dict(atoris) ded(ucta) | est, ne quem in ea col(onia) coetum conventum coniurationem... (Deest tabula continens capita leg. CVI fin. CVH-CXXIU, CXXIII princ.) CXXIII. IIvir ad quem d(e) e(a) r(e) in tus aditum erit, ubi tudicibus, apud quos e(a) r(es) agetur, matort parti eorum planum factum non erit, eum de quo iudicitum datum est decurionis loco indignum esse, eum | qui accusabitur ab his iudicibus eo iudicio absolvi | iubeto. Qui ita absolutus erit, quod iudicium praevari|cation(is) causa factum non sit, is eo iudicio h(ac) l(ege) absolutus esto. | CXXIIII. Si quis decurio c(oloniae) G(enetivae) decurionem c(oloniae) G(enetivae) h(ac) l(ege) de indignitate ac||cusabit, eumgue quem accusabit eo iudicio h(ac) l(ege) condemna|rit, is si volet, | in eius locum qui condemnatus erit sententiam dice|re, ex h(ac) l(ege) liceto itque [ 309 ] Io 15 20 25 30 Tab. Iv, col. Io 15 20 25 30 35 40 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN eum (sine) f(raude) s(ua) iure lege recteq(ue) falcere liceto, eiusque is locus in decurionibus sen||tentiae dicendae rogandae h(ac) I(ege) esto. | CXXV. Quicumque locus ludis decurionibus datus a¢signatus | relictusve erit, ex quo loco decuriones ludos spectare | o(portebit), ne quis in eo loco nisi qui tum decurio c(oloniae) G(enetivae) erit, quilve tum magistratus Imperium potestatemve colonor(wm) || suffragio iussuque C. Caesaris dict(atoris) co(n)s(ulis) prove | co(n)s(ule) habebit, quive pro quo imperio potestateve tum | in c(olonia) Gen(etiva) erit, quibusque loces in decurionum loco | ex d(ecreto) d(ecurionum) col(oniae) Gen(etivae) d(ari) o(portebit), quod decuriones decr(everint), cum non minus | dimidia pars de- curionum adfuerit cum e(a) r(es) consulta erit, || sedeto neve | quis alium in ea loca sessum ducito neve sessum duci | iubeto sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). Si quis adversus ea sederit s(ciens) d(olo) m(alo) szve | quis atversus ea sessum duxerit ducive iusserit s(ciens) d(olo) m(alo), || is in res sing(ulas), quotienscumque quit d(e) e(a) r(e) atversus ea | fecerit, HS 199 C(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(are) d(amnas) esto, elusque pecuniae gui eorum | volet rec(iperatorio) iudicio aput IIvir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio petitio perse|cutio ex h(ac) /(ege) e(sto). | CXXVI. IIvir, aed(ilis), praef(ectus) quicumque c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) ludos scaenicos faciet, si||ve quis alius c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) ludos scaenicos faciet, colonos Geneti|vos incolasque hospitesgue atventoresque ita sessum du|cito, uti d(e) e(a) r(e) decuriones, cum non min(us) | L , cum e(a) r(es) c(onsuletur), in decurionibus adfuerint, || decreverint statuerint s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). Quot ita ab decurionib(us) | esto. | CXXVII. Quicumque ludi scaenici c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) fient, ne quis in or] chestram ludorum spectandor(um) causa praeter ma(gistratum) | prove mag(istratu) p(opuli) R(omani), quive i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) et si quis senator p(opuli) R(omani) est erit | fuerit, et si quis senatoris f(ilius) p(opuli) R(omani) est erit fuerit, et si | quis praef(ectus) fabrum eius mag(istratus) prove magistratz, || qui provinc(iarum) Hispaniar(um) ulteriorem optinebit, erzt, et quos ex h(ac) I(ege) decurion(um) loco | sedeto, , neve quem quis sessum ducito, | neve in eo loco sedere sinito, uti q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) u(olet) s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). | CXXVIII. II (vir) aed(ilis) praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) quicumque erit, is suo quoque anno mag(istratu) | im- perioq(ue) facito curato, quod elus fier! poterit, | u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olet) s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) mag(istri) ad fana templa delubra, quem || ad modum decuriones censuerin(¢) fiant ezqu(e) suo quoque anno | ludos circenses, sacrzficia pulvinariaque | facienda curent, quem ad modum de tis | rebus, mag(istris) creandis, /w(dis) circensibus facien||dis, sacrificiis procurandis, pulvinaribus fa|ciendis decuriones statuerint decreverint, | . Deque iis omnibus rebus | quae s(upra) s(criptae) s(unt) quotcumque de- curiones statuerint | decreverint, it lus ratumque esto, eiq(ue) omnes, || at quos ea res pertinebit, quot quemque eorum | ex h(ac) l(ege) facere oportebit, faciunto s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). Si quis | at- versus ea fecerit quotienscumque quit atver|sus ea fecerit, HS CCI99 c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(@are) d(amnas) e(sto), eius- que pecun(iae) | gui eorum volet rec(iperatorio) iudic(io) aput [ 311 ] 45 col. II Lal oO - 5 30 35 40 4 Sr 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN I1vir(um) || praef(ectum)ve actio petitio persecutioq(ue) e(x) h(ac) l(ege) | esto. | CXXIX. IIvir(i) aediles praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) quicumgq(w)e erunt decurionesq(ue) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) qui|cumquwe erunt, ii omnes d(ecurionum) d(ecretis) dili- genter parento optemperanto s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) fa|ciuntoque uti quot guemq(ue) eor(um) decurionum.d(ecreto) agere facere o(porte- bit) ea om||nia agant faciant, u(ti) q(uod) r(ecte) f(actum) e(sse) v(olent) s(ine) d(olo) m/(alo). Si quis ita non fecerit sive quit at- ver|sus ea fecerit sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo), is in res sing(ulas) Hs CcI99 c(olonis) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pecuniae gui | eor(um) volet rec(iperatorio) iudic(io) aput I1vir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio petitio persecutioque ex h(ac) l(ege) | senten¢(éa) per tabellam et nisi de eo homine, e(sto). | CXXXI. Ne quis rvir praef(ectus) c(oloniae) G(ene- [eS teae FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES tivae) I(uliae) guicumque erit ad decuriones c(oloniae) G(enetivae) referto neve d(ecuriones) con|sulito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) ol. 11 facito neve d(e) e(a) r(e) in tabulas publicas referto neve referri iubeto | neve quis decurio d(e) e(a) r(e) in decurionib(us) sententiam dicito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) scribito ne|ve in tabulas publicas referto neve referundum curato, quo quis senator | sena- torisve f(ilius) p(opuli) Romani) c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) hospes atoptetur, hospitium tesserave hospita/s cum || quo fiat, isi 5 de maioris p(artis) decurionum sententia per tabellam et nisi | de eo homine, , qui, cum e(a) r(es) a(getur), in Italiam | sine imperio privatus erit. Si quis adversus ea ad decuriones rettulerit d(ecretum)ve | d(ecurionum) fecerit faciendumve curaverit inve tabulas publicas rettulerit re|ferrive iusserit sive quis in decurionibus sententiam dixerit d(ecretum)ve d(ecurionum) || scripserit Inve ro tabul(as) public(as) rettulerit referendumve curaverit, | zs in res sing(ulas) quotienscumque quit adversus ea fecerit, HS ccr99 c(olonis) c(oloniae) | G/(enetivae) Iuliae d(are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pecuniae gui eorum volet recu(peratorio) iudic(io) | aput 11vir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio petitio persecutioque h(ac) l(ege) esto. | CXXXII. Ne quis in c(olonia) G(enetiva) post h(anc) l(egem) datam petitor kandidatus, || quicumque in c(olonia) G(enetiva) 15 I(ulia) mag(istratum) petet, magistratusve peten|di causa in eo anno, quo quisque anno petitor | kandidatus mag (istratum) petet petiturusve erit, convivia facito neve at cenam quem | vocato neve conyivium habeto neve facito s(ciens) d(ole) m(alo), || quo quis suae petitionis causa convivium habeat | 20 ad cenamve quem vocet, praeter quod ip|se kandidatus petitor in eo anno, guo mag(istratum) petat, | vocarzt dum taxat im dies sing(ulos) h(ominum) vir , si volet, s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). Neve quis petitor kandidatus || donum munus 25 aliudve quit det largiatur peti|tionis causa sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). Neve quis alterius petitionis | causa convivia facito neve quem ad cenam yoca|to neve convivium habeto, neve quis alterius pe|titionis Causa cui quit dozum munus aliutve quzt || dato donato largito 30 sc(iens) d(olo) m(alo). Si quis atversus ea | fecerit, Hs 199 c(olonis) E 3k zes) She 40 45 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN c(oloniae) G(enetivae) I(uliae) d(@are) d(amnas) e(sto), eiusque pe- cuniae gui eor(um) volet | rec(iperatorio) iudic(io) aput Iivir(um) praef(ectum)ve actio petitio per|sec(utio)que ex h(ac) lege) esto. | CX XXIII. Qui col(oni) Gen(etivi) Iul(ienses) h(ac) I(ege) sunt erunt, eorum omnium uxollres, quae in c(olonia) G(enetiva) I(ulia) h(ac) lege) sunt, , quaecumque | in hac lege scripta sunt, omnium rerum ex h(ac) l(ege) haben|to s(ine) d(olo) m(alo). | CXXXIV. Ne quis vir praefectus c(oloniae) G(ene- tivae), quicumque erit, post || h(anc) I(egem) ad decuriones c(oloniae) G(enetivae) referto neve decuriones consu|lito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) facito neve d(e) e(a) r(e) in tabulas publicas re|ferto neve referri iubeto neve quis decurio, cum e(a) | r(es) a(getur), in decurionibus sententiam dicito neve d(ecretum) d(ecurionum) | scribito neve in tabulas publicas referto neve || referendum curato, quo cul pecunia publica a/zutve | quid honoris habendi causa mune- risve dandi polllicendi prove statua danda ponenda detur donetur.... Four bronze tablets found in 1870 and 1874 on the site of Urso in Baetica, now in,the museum at Madrid. Each tablet had ori- ginally five columns of text, as the third tablet, preserved in its entirety, shows. From each of the other three extant tablets two columns are missing. The tablets containing the early part of the law, perhaps four in number, and the eighth tablet, have not been found. Numbers added at a later date on the margins of the tablets indicate the division into chapters. Probably these tablets were not engraved until after Caesar’s death, cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 208 ff.; Hiibner, Ex. scr. ep. 805. Dessau places the date of the engraving in the reign of Domitian. The letters on the fourth tablet are smaller than those on the others and in it there are many redundant words and phrases which we have enclosed in obtuse- angled brackets. Some scholars think that this tablet takes the place of one that had been lost. Gradenwitz (Sitz. Ber. d. Heidel- berger Akad. 1920, Heft 17) explains the unevenness in form and manner found in this law as well as in the charters of Malaca and Salpensa on the theory that we have an Urtext and a Beischrift. [ 314 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES For a summary of the chapters, cf. Mommsen, op. cit. 1, 211 ff, 247 ff. For a translation into English, cf. Hardy, Three Spanish Charters, 23 ff. The law in its original form must have been drafted by Julius Caesar. In chap. 125 reference is made to any local magistrate holding office zussu C. Caesaris dictatoris consulis prove consule (cf. chap. 66), and similarly in chap. 106 we read quae (i.e. colonia) tussu C. Caesaris dictatoris deducta est. Caesar is nowhere called divus, so that the measure antedates the autumn of 43 B.c. (cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 756, n. 1). It probably belongs to the early part of the year 44 B.c. (cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 1, 207), and may have been one of the bills which Antony found, or maintained that he found, among the papers of Caesar (cf. Cic. Phil. 5. 4. 10). The founding of the colony was authorized iussu C. Caesaris dictatoris imperatoris et lege Antonia senatusque consultis plebique scitis (chap. 104). This measure is then a /ex data authorized by a S.C. and plebiscite, proposed by Antony. The greater part of the document deals with strictly domestic matters, but certain chapters have to do with the relations which the municipality bore to the central government, or to Roman citizens, and only with those are we concerned here. The /egationes referred to in chap. 92 would include embassies sent to Rome, to the provincial governor, or to the provincial council (cf. p. 150, n, 7 and no. 126). ‘They sometimes played an important part in calling the grievances of a city or a province to the attention of the central government, but such missions were often useless and were expensive, and ultimately Vespasian limited the number of members to three (Dig. 50. 7. 5). In Urso, since the acceptance of an appoint- ment was compulsory, probably /egatz met their own expenses. For the part which patron took in composing local difficulties and in representing a municipality in Rome, cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 1202 ff. and the documents in this book dealing with public arbitration. Chapp. 97 and 130 prescribe rules for the election of patroni at Urso. The man who led the colonists out and the man who assigned land to them, together with their descendants, are made patrons ex officio. Other patrons must be chosen in the senate when at least fifty members are present (cf. chap. 97). Mommsen Bete d MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN believed (Ges. Schr. 1, 34.4. ff.) that the approval of the local popular assembly was also necessary for the choice of a patron, but ¢f. Hardy, op. cit. 108, n. 29. Chap. 130 requires the approval of seventy-five of the one hundred decurions, voting with secret ballots, for the election of a Roman senator or his son (cf. no. 64), and absolutely prohibits the election of such a person unless he Is a private citizen in Italy se imperio. All the governors of the provinces were at this time senators, and Rome wished to prevent municipalities from currying favour with the governor of their province by electing him to a position of honor. The same objection would attach in a less degree to the election of any senator, because he might at any time be put in charge of a province. The Album of Canusium of A.D. 223 (no. 136) has a list of thirty-nine patronz, of whom thirty-one are Roman senators and eight are knights. Mommsen finds (Ges. Schr. 1, 239) only three cases of patrons who were senators with the zmperium. Perhaps they were elected after the termination of their zmperzum (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. Isr 8O50n. 1). Patronatus and hospitium are often confused in the inscriptions (cf. Wilmanns, nos. 2850, 2852), but for the distinction between them, cf. Leonhard, R.E. 8, 2496. The fact that a senate could elect an hospes when only a majority of the decurions was present (chap. 131) shows that the position was held in less esteem than that of patronus. ‘The same discrimination is made against Roman senators and their sons in this case as holds in the case of the patron. Of the privileges granted to Roman officials and Roman senators the most noteworthy is the assignment to them of seats in the orchestra of the theatre (chap. 127). The provision in chap. 103 which authorized the duovir, on receiving the approval of a majority of the decurions present at a meeting, “‘to call to arms colonists, resident aliens, and attributed persons”’ for the defense of the colony is surprising and without parallel in other charters, unless we accept Bormann’s bold con- jecture (‘Fahreshefte d. dst. archdol. Inst. 9 (1906), 315 ff.) for the Fragm. legis Lauriscensis (Bruns, 33a) and read uter (i.e. ex Uviris) postea municipes incolasque....causa armatos educet. There is no intimation even that the municipal senate required the authorization [ 316 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES of the provincial governor in taking this step. Very likely this was a sovereign power granted to municipalities on the frontier or in unruly districts. Reference is made to the members of these armed forces in various inscriptions (cf. hastifert cevitatis Mattiacorum, CIL. xin, 7317). They could be quickly summoned to repress an uprising and to hold an attacking enemy in check until the legions could arrive (cf. Cagnat, De munictpalibus et provinctalibus militiis in imperio Romano, 93), and perhaps the provincial militia (Hirschfeld, 392 ff.) was made up of these municipal levies (cf Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 6, 154). It was in harmony with Roman practices in Italy to put this levy in charge of the local magistrate (cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 3, 675, n. 3). 27. LEX DE GALLIA CISALPINA, VULGO LEX RUBRIA DE GALLIA CISALPINA (49-42 a. Chr.) CIL, 15/205 = x1, 1146; Bruns, 16; Girard, p;. 92; Ricco- bono, p. 135. . . .lussum iudicatumve erit, id ratum ne esto; quodque quis|que quomq(ue) d. e. r. decernet interdeicetve seive sponsionem | fierei iudicaretve iubebit iudiciumve quod d. e. r. dabit, is | in id decretum interdictum sponsionem iudicium exceptio||nem addito addive iubeto: “O.d.r. operis novi nuntiationem | mvir, m1vir prae- fectusve eius municipei non remeisserit.”’ | XX. Qua de re quisque, et a quo, in Gallia Cisalpeina damnei infectei | ex formula restipularei satisve accipere volet, et ab eo quei | ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit) postulaverit, idque non k(alum- niae) k(aussa) se facere iuraverit: tum is, quo || d. e. r. in ius aditum erit, eum, quei in ius eductus erit, d. e. r. ex formu|la repromittere et, sei satis darei debebit, satis dare iubeto de|cernito. Quei eorum ita non repromeisserit aut non satis dede|rit, sei quid interim damni datum factumve ex ea re aut ob e(am) r(em) eo|ve nomine erit, quam ob rem, utei damnei infectei repromissio || satisve datio fierei tubeatur, postulatum erit: tum mag(istratus) prove mag(istratu) I1vir | 11Ivir praefec(tus)ve, quoquomque d. e. r. in ius aditum erit, d. e. r. ita ius | deicito iudicia dato iudicareque iubeto cogito, proinde [eB Lzun) Tab. 1 Io 20 25 30 Bo 40 45 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN atque sei | d.e. r., quom ita postulatum esset, damnei infectei ex formula | recte repromissum satisve datum esset. D. e. r. quod ita iudicium || datum iudicareve iussum iudicatumve erit, ius ratumque esto, | dum in ea verba, sei damnei infectei repromissum non erit, iudi|cium det itaque iudicare iubeat: “I(udex) e(sto). S(ei), ante- quam id iudicium | q. d. r. a(gitur) factum est, Q. Licinius damni infectei eo nomine q.d.| r. a(gitur) eam stipulationem, quam is quei Romae inter peregrei||nos ius deicet in albo propositam habet, L. Seio repromeississet: | tum quicquid eum Q. Licinium ex ea stipulatione L. Seio d(are) f(acere) opor|teret ex f(ide) b(ona) d(um)- ¢(axat) HS e(ius) i(udex) QO. Licinium L. Seio, sei ex decreto r1vir(el) | Illivir(ei) praefec(tei)ve Mutinensis, quod elus zs I1vir IIvir prae- fec(tus)|ve ex lege Rubria, seive id pl(ebei)ve sc(itum) est, decre- verit, Q. Licinius eo || nomine qua d. r. a(gitur) L. Seio damnei infectel repromittere no|luit, c(ondemnato); s(ei) n(on) p(aret), a(bsolvito)”’; aut sei damnei infectei satis datum non erit, | in ea verba iudicium det: “‘I(udex) e(sto). S(ei), antequam id iudicium gq. d. r. a(gitur) | factum est, Q. Licinius damnei infectei eo nomine q. d. r. a(gitur) ea | stipulatione, quam is quei Romae inter peregrinos ius deicet || in albo propositam habet, L. Seio satis dedisset: tum q(uic)- q(uid) eum | Q. Licinium ex ea stipulatione L. Seio d(are) f(acere) oporteret ex f(ide) b(ona) d(um) t(axat), | e(ius) i(udex) QO. Licinium L. Seio, sei ex decreto i1vir(el) 111Ivir(el) praef(ectei)ve Muti|nensis, quod eius is Ivir m1Ivir praefect(us)ve ex lege Rubria, sei|ve id pl(ebei)ve sc(itum) est, decreverit, QO. Licinius eo nomine q. d. r. a(gitur) || L. Seio damnei infectei satis dare noluit, c(ondemnato); s(ei) n(on) p(aret), a(bsolvito)”’; dum ivir | murvir i(ure) d(eicundo) praefec(tus)ve d.e.r. ius ita deicat curetve, utei ea no|mina et municipium colonia locus in eo iudicio, quod ex ieis | quae proxsume s(cripta) s(unt) accipietur, includantur concipiantur, | quae includei concipei s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) oporteret debebitve, ne quid || ei quei d.e. r. aget petetve captionei ob e(am) r(em) aut eo nomine esse | possit: neive ea nomina, quae in earum qua formula quae s(upra) | s(cripta) s(unt), aut Mutinam in eo iudicio includei concipei curet, nisez, | iel, quos inter id iudicium accipietur leisve contestabitur, | ieis nominibus fuerint, quae in earum qua formula s(upra) s(cripta) s(unt), || et nisei sei Mutinae ea res agetur; neive quis mag(istratus) Woe peer al FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES prove mag(istratu), | neive quis pro quo imperio potestateve erit, intercedito nei|ve quid aliud facito, quo minus de ea re ita iudictum detur | iudiceturque. | XXI. A quoquomq(ue) pecunia certa credita, signata forma p(ublica) p(opulei) R(omanei), in eorum quo o. m.c. p. | f. v. c. ¢. t. ve, quae sunt eruntve in Gallia Cisalpeina, petetur, quae res non | pluris Hs xv erit, sei is eam pecuniam in iure apud eum, quel ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), ei quei || eam petet, aut ei quoius nomine ab eo petetur, d(are) o(portere) debereve se confessus | erit, neque id quod confessus erit solvet satisve faciet, aut se sponsione | iudicio- que utez oportebit non defendet, seive is ibei d. e. r. in lure non | responderit, neque d.e.r. sponsionem faciet neque iudicio utei oportebit | se defendet: tum de eo, a quo ea pecunia peteita erit, deque eo, quoi eam || pecuniam d(arei) o(portebit), s(iremps) res lex lus caussaque o(mnibus) o(mnium) r(erum) esto atque utel esset esseve | oporteret, sei is, quei ita confessus erit, aut d.e. r. non responderit aut se | sponsione iudicioque utei oportebit non defenderit, eius pecuniae iei | quel eam suo nomine petierit quoive eam d(arei) o(portebit), ex iudicieis dateis iudi|careve recte iusseis iure lege damnatus esset fuisset. Queique quomque || vir r1Vvir praefec(tus)ve zbei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), is eum, quei ita quid confessus erit | neque id solvet satisve faciet, eumve quei se sponsione iudiciove utei | oportebit non defenderit aut in iure non responderit neque id solvet | satisve faciet, t(antae) p(ecuniae), quanta ea pecunia erit de qua tum inter eos am|bigetur, dum t(axat) ws xv s(ine) f(raude) s(ua) duci iubeto; queique eorum quem, ad quem || ea res pertinebit, duxserit, id ei fraudi poenaeve ne esto: quodque ita fac|tum actum iussum erit, id ius ratumque esto. Quo minus in eum, quei ita | vadimonium Romam ex decreto eius, quei ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), non promeisserit | aut vindicem locupletem ita non dederit, ob e(am) r(em) iudicium recup(erationem) is, quei | ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), ex h. |. det iudicareique d. e. r. ibei curet, ex h. |. n@hilum) r(ogatur). || XXII. A quo quid praeter pecuniam certam creditam, signatam forma p(ublica) p(opulei) R(omanei), | in eorum quo o. m.c. p. f.v.c.c. t. ve quae sunt eruntve in Gallia cis Alpeis, | petetur, quodve quom e¢o agetur, quae res non pluris Hs xv erit, et sei | ea Eyaront Tab. 11 Io T5 20 25 30 SP) 40 45 50 DD) MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN res erit, de qua re omnei pecunia ibei ius deicei iudiciave darei ex h. 1. o(portebit), | sei is eam rem, quae ita ab eo petetur deve ea re cum €o agetur, ei quel eam rem || petet deve ea re aget, aut iei quoius nomine ab eo petetur quomve eo age|tur in iure apud eum, quei ibei i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), d(are) f(acere) p(raestare) restituereve oportere aut | se debere, eiusve eam rem esse aut se eam habere, eamve rem de | qua arguetur se fecisse obligatumve se eius rei noxsiaeve esse confes|sus erit deixseritve neque d.e.r. satis utei oportebit faciet aut, sei || sponsionem fierei oportebit, sponsionem non faciet, aut non restituet, | neque se iudicio utei oportebit de- fendet, aut sei d. e. r. in iure | nihil responderit, neque d. e. r. se iudicio utei oportebit defendet: | tum de eo a quo ea res ita petetur quomve eo d.e.r. ita agetur, deque | eo, quoi eam rem d(arei) f(ierel) p(raestarei) restitui satisve d. e. r. fierei oportebit, || s(iremps) l(ex) r(es) i(us) c(aussa)q(ue) o(mnibus) o(mnium) r(erum) e(sto), atque utel esset esseve oporteret, sei is, quei ita | quid earum rerum confessus erit aut d. e. r. non responderit neq(ue) | se iudicio utel oportebit defenderit, de ieis rebus Romae apud pr(aetorem) | eumve quei de ieis rebus Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) p(rae)esset in iure con- fessus esset, | aut ibei d. e. r. nihil respondisset aut iudicio se non defendisset; || p(raetor)q(ue) isve quei d(e) e(is) r(ebus) Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit) in eum et in heredem eius d(e) e(is) r(ebus) om|nibus ita ius deicito decernito eosque duci bona eorum possideri | proscreibeive veneireque iubeto, ac sei is heresve eius d.e.r. in | lure apud eum pr(aetorem) eumve quel Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) praesser, confessus es|set aut d.e.r. nihil respondisse¢ neque se ludicio utei oportuis||set defendisset; dum ne quis d.e.r. nisei pr(aetor) isve quei Romae i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit) | eorum quoius bona possiderei proscreibei veneire duceique | eum iubeat. | XXIII. Queiquomque in eorum quo o. m.c. p. f. v. c. c. t. ve quae in Gal|lia Cisalpeina sunt erunt, i(ure) d(eicundo) p(raerit), is inter eos, quei de familllia erceiscunda deividunda iudicium sibei darei reddeive | in eorum quo o. m. c. p. f. v. c. c. t. ve, quae s(upra) s(cripta) s(unt), postu|laverint, ita ius deicito decernito iudicia dato iudicare | iubeto, utei in eo o. m.c. p. f. v.c.c. t. ve, in quo is, quoius de boneis agetur, domicilium habuerit..... Bronze tablet found in 1760 in the ruins of Veleia, now in [ 320 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Parma. ‘The number (1111) at the top of the tablet shows that three tablets which preceded it have been lost. Many scholars think that this law was passed after 42 B.c.. when Gallia Cisalpina was in- corporated into Italy. This is the view held by Savigny (Verm. Schr. 3, 319-326, 377-400), by Huschke (Gaius, Beitrdge, 203- 242), and by Karlowa (1, 440-443). Mommsen on the other hand maintains (Ges. Schr. 1, 175-191) that it belongs to the year 49 B.c. The reference to the region concerned in chap. xx as Gallia Cisalpina naturally points to a date earlier than 42 B.c. Mommsen holds also that the fragmentum Atestinum (no. 28) is a part of this law. Now in the second paragraph of this fragment a /ex rogata of L. Roscius is cited by day and month, but the year is not men- tioned. From this fact he concludes that the /ex de Gall, Cis. must have been passed later in the same year. ‘The /ex Roscia, mentioned in the Atestine fragment, belongs, he thinks, to the year 49 B.c., in which year L. Roscius was one of the praetors (Caes. B.C. 1. 3). The validity of the principal argument rests, therefore, on the relation which the fragment of Este bears to our law, and on the attribution of the /ex Roscia to the praetor, Roscius. For the serious difficulty which this explanation involves, cf. Pais, Ricerche sulla storia e sul diritto pubblico di Roma, Serie terza, 389. he theory of Nap, who ascribes the law to Sulla’s dictatorship (Themis, 1913, 194 ff.), isade- quately refuted by Hardy, Some Problems in Roman History, 207 ff. For the connection between the Atestine fragment and our law, cf. Hardy, Sex Roman Laws, 110-124, especially 123 f. Whether our law is identical with the /ex Rubria, cited twice in the formulae in chap. xx, is a matter of high dispute. If it is identical with our law, it is a /ex rogata. Mommsen, however, observes (/oc. cit.) that the other laws promulgated for a similar purpose were /eges datae, and that there are no formulae in our law to prove that it is a /ex rogata. He is therefore inclined to think that it is a /ew data and consequently distinct from the /ex Rubria. For the opposite view, cf. Kipp, Gesch. d. Quellen d. rim. Rechts*, 42, n. 10; Hardy, op. cit. 124. This inscription is of great importance for two reasons: (1) It gives us the procedure at the beginning of the formulary period (on the formulae, cf. Wenger, R.E. 6, 2859 ff.); (2) It gives us the most precise information which we have of the lines of demarcation AMA [ 321 ] 21 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN between the competence of the central government and of local magistrates in Italian communities, made up of Roman citizens, in judicial matters. We are concerned here with the second point only. The law applied to Gallia Cisalpina the same system long in vogue elsewhere in Italy. It was probably called forth by the grant of Roman citizenship to Gallia Cisalpina. Following in part the system, as analyzed by Hardy (op. ezt. 117-119), we find that it seems to cover the following points: (1) The municipal magistrate has full competence in matters in- volving 15,000 sesterces or less; (2) Even where larger amounts are at stake, he may take initial proceedings; (3) In certain cases he has jurisdiction irrespective of the amount claimed; (4) In the absence of a cautio damni infecti (cf. Leonhard, R.E. 3, 1816) the municipal magistrate may take action similar to that which would have been taken by the praetor peregrinus in like circumstances; (5) In certain cases of condemnation for debt, the municipal magis- trate may provisionally arrest the debtor and make him addictus (cf. Leist, R.E. 1, 352). For the practice at Venafrum, cf. no. 33. The local magistrates mentioned are the duoviri, quattuorviri, and praefecti (chapp. xx, xx). The praefectus is an official appointed in the absence of the regular magistrate. The duovirs were the usual magistrates in colonies, the quattuorvirs in municipia (cf. p. 59). For a description of the several communities mentioned in the early part of chap. xx1, of. pp. 10 ff. The phrase nezve quis magistratus prove magistratu netve quis pro quo imperio potestateve erit, etc. (chap. xx, end) seems to refer to the proconsul because Gallia Cisalpina continued to be a province until 42 B.c. Certain phrases indicated by abbreviations in this inscription are d(e) e(a) r(e), gu(a) d(e) r(e), h(ac) ege) or the grammatical forms needed in the con- nection, and o(ppzdo) m(unicipio) c(olonia) p(raefectura) f(ore) u(eico) c(onctliabulo) c(astello) t(erritorio) or the appropriate grammatical forms. 28. FRAGMENTUM ATESTINUM (49-42 a. Chr.) Notizie degh scavi, 1880, 213; Bruns, 17; Girard, p. 78; Ric- cobono, p. 140. Quez post hanc legem rogatam in eorum quo oppido municipio colonia [ 322 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES pracfectura foro veico concitliabulo castello territoriove, quae in Gallia Cisalpeina sunt eruntve, ad ivirum wWi1virum praefectumve in iudt- cium fiductae aut pro socio aut mandati aut tutelae suo nomine quodve ipse earum rerum | quid gessisse dicetur, adducetur, aut quod furti, quod ad ho|minem liberum liberamve pertinere deicatur, aut iniuri|- arum agatur: sel Is, a quo petetur quomve quo agetur, d(e) || e(a) r(e) In eo municipio colonia praefectura iudicio certa|re volet et si ea res HS CCI99 minorisve erit, quo minus ibei d(e) e(a) r(e) | ludex arbiterve addicatur detur, quove minus ibei d(e) e(a) r(e) iudi- cium ita | feiat, utei de ieis rebus, quibus ex h(ac) l(ege) iudicia | data erunt, iudicium fierei exerceri oportebit, ex h.]. n(ihilum) r(ogatur). || Quoius rei in queque municipio colonia praefectura | quoiusque IIvir(i) elusve, qui ibei lege foedere pl(ebei)ve sc(ito) s(enatus)|ve c(onsulto) institutove iure dicundo praefuit, ante legem, sei|ve illud pl(ebei) sc(itum) est, quod L. Roscius a. d. v eid. Mart. populum | plebemve rogavit, quod privatim ambigetur, iuris dictz||o iudicis arbitri recuperatorum datio addictiove fuit | quantaeque rei pequni- aeve fuit: elus rei pequnzaeve | quo magis privato Romae revocatio sit quove |mznus quei ibei i(ure) d(icundo) p(raerit) d(e) e(a) r(e) ius dicat iudicem arlitrumve det | utei ante legem, sive illud pl(ebei) sc(itum) est, guod L. Roscius a. d. || v eidus Mart. populum plebemve rogauit, | ab eo quet thet i(ure) d(ecundo) p(raerit) tus dici iudicem arbitrumve dart oportuit, ex h(ac) Kege) n(thilum) r(ogatur). Bronze tablet found in 1880 at Ateste in Cisalpine Gaul, now in the museum at Este. Mommsen held that it contained a fragment of the /ex de Gallia Cisalpina (no. 27); cf. Ges. Schr. 1, 175-191. This view has been opposed by Alibrandi, Opere giuridiche, 1, 395 ff-; Karlowa, 1, 441; Kriiger, Gesch. d. Quellen, 73; Esmein, AZélanges d histotre et du droit, 269-292; Appleton, Revue générale du droit, 24 (1900), 193 ff., and Kipp, Gesch. d. Quellen’®, 42, n. 10. The main objection to Mommsen’s theory lies in the fact that the /ex de Gall, Cis. grants municipal magistrates full competence in suits involving not more than 15,000 sesterces, whereas in this fragment, in certain cases, at least, the maximum Is set at 10,000. The date is uncertain. Some editors think that it deals with the enfranchise- ment of all communities south of the Po after the Social war, in spite of the fact that the tablet was found in the Transpadane region, [. 323°] 21-2 Io T5 20 On MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN and they attribute the /ex Roscia, mentioned in it, to Roscius, tribune in 67 B.c. Those who regard the fragment as part of the lex de Gall. Cis. put it in the year 49 B.c., while still others date it as not earlier than 49 or later than 42 B.c. The purpose of the law was to make certain changes in com- petence necessitated by the granting of new rights. In some cases, at least, involving a sum not exceeding 10,000 sesterces, the accused has the option of bringing his case before the municipal magistrate, and revocatio Romae is limited, temporarily or permanently, in its application in some circumstances. The nine classes of communities which are mentioned in no. 27, chap. xx1, and which Mommsen has included among the missing words at the beginning of this fragment, are reduced to three in the second paragraph of the fragment, because a local magistrate had judicial competence in a municipium, colonia, and praefectura only. ‘The powers of a local magistrate may rest on any one of three different bases, according to the second paragraph of the fragment. ‘They may be granted by a treaty (foedere), by an enactment of the popular assembly or senate (/ege, plebez scito, senatus consulto), or traditional usage (stituto) may be continued in force without special legal authorization. The phrase ante legem, setve illud plebet scitum est, quod L. Roscius...rogavit implies that the Roscian law was a plebiscitum, and, consequently makes it difficult to connect this measure with the praetor L. Roscius of 49 B.c., but Mommsen believes that the bill in question was submitted to the plebeian assembly by the praetor (St. R. 3, 159, n. 2), and he calls attention to a parallel phrase in the /ex Bantina (CIL. 1, 197, ll. 7, 15). 29. EPISTULAE ANTONI ET CAESARIS AD PLARASENSES ET APHRODISIENSES (39-35 a. Chr.) CIG. 27373; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 5; Bruns, 43; Ditt. Or. Gr. 453-4553 Riccobono, p. 217. [Mapxos ’Avtdvios Mapxov vids attoxpatwp tiratos azo- deder]|yuévos TO B’ Kal [7d ¥ | rév] tprdv avdpav rh[s] | Tov Snmociwy mpalyuatwv diatakews || WAapacéwy cat “Adpo|de- aléwy apxovow | BovrAme SHuwe yaiperv. | Ei éppwoGe, ed av [ 324 ] Io 5 20 25 30 5h 40 45 50 Re) FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES y € / \ \ RR \ a Ai f Elyour bytaive Sé Kal || adrds peta Tod oTpalTeduatos. Yorov | Anpntplov twérepos | tperBeuTns, ére|wereoTtata Teppor||tiKwsS TOV THS To|hews Uwaov mpay|uat@v, ov povoy | HpKécOn eri Tots | yeyovdow otkovol|[un|uaciv, adda Kal | Huds TwapeKa- Neclev els TO TOD yeyo|voTos bpety érs|KpipaTtos Kal Soyyal|Tos Kal opkiov Kal vo|you avrimepovnpe|va éx Tov Snpociwr | dér\T ov éEatroaret|Nas bpeiv TA avTiypal|pa. "E@’ ois ératvéloas \ S / A b) / 7 b) a CL AT 9 a TOV Lohwva pad| ov aTedeEaunv éo| ov TE EV TOLS UT EMOU | yelvmaKkopevors, || os Kal TA KAOnKOVTA | aTreu“épioa pidrav|Opwra, aEvov nyn|odpuevos tov avldpa ths €& nudy teu||uns, buety Te culyndomas ert Tat éyew | TovodTov Trodeitny. | "Koti dé avTi- ypaha | Trav yeyovotwr t||uciv diravOperwy | Ta vToyeypap- péva: | & twas Bovropmar | év tots Snuocios | Tois rap’ vpeir || ypaupacw évtaéat. Tpdupata Kaicapos [........| S¢]eava éoOra te [mwordr]a érevOépous ecivas, THL rs \ aA 4 a 2Q7 \ , \ [re] dexaiws xai tats [kpiceow rats idiars THY To|Auyv] THY TThapacéwv cai Adpoderorvéwv xpynoOat unre éyyvny e[is ‘Paunv avuTous Kata Sdyua Te | Kjat KéXevowv oporoyeiv’ & TE Tia érabna Texas piravOpa[ma............%.Tpels avdpes | ot THS TOV Snpocimy tpayuatov Svatakews Tat (dims émixpipate TlA[apacetdor cai’ Adpodsoced||or] tpocepepicav mpocpepsovary, cuvexopnoay cuvywpnoovaty, TalbTa mavta Kvpta eivas | vy jevé- aOat. “Opoiws te apécKen THL cuyKAnTwL, TOY SHmwov TOV IIda[pacéwy Kai “Adpodecaté| |wv thv éXevOepiay Kal tHv aré- Netayv avTovs TavTwv TaV Tpay[patav eyew KapTriverOa, | KaOlarep Kat Tis TodLTElLa THL KaACTwOL StKalML KAN CTL Te vowwr éotiv, [Tus Tapa tov | dyipuoly tod ‘Pwpyaiwy tiv 5) / \ \ > f ” } \ / / éNevOepiav Kal Thy atérevav Exes Pir Te Kal cv[upayos yeryé||- vntat. “O te] Téwevos Oeds “Adpoditns év more Ldapacéwv S, > / 4 n yy ” ? lal kat “Adpoderotéw[y xabtépwrtat, Todto | dovdov élotw TavTar (rat) Sixaiwr TadThe Te Serocarpovias, we Sixaiws cab He Seco[u- Saypoviar Apréus|dos “Edelotas éotiv év “Edéoar, KvKdwt TE éxeivou Tov lepod elite Téuevos eit[e AAcos éaTiv, od|Tos o| , ” y wi OR ¢e / \ € a Tomos adavros éoTw. “Omrws TE 1 TOoALS Kal ol TroNEtTAL of IIkapacéwv [kai “Adpodercicwv | we? lv copay yopiov [ 325 ] 15 Io 15 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN dXUpwudtav 6pav Tpocdday mpos THY didtav To[d Snuov Tpoc- HrAVov, tadra || éyoolw xpatdow ypeovtTat KapTifwrtai Te TavToV Tpaypwatov ate[Acts dvTEs. Mnbé twa| Popov b]va Tiva aitlay éxelvwv Sidovae pndé [a ]uvecohépery odetrwowy, [adr avtol 7a|ou TovT lous KaT ovcaY peTa TAadTA év EavTOls KYpwoLY xpor[ tas kaptifwvra: Kpat@ow. *Kédo€kev |. From Aphrodisias in Caria. The union of two cities in a common polity is not unusual. Plarasa and Aphrodisias issued coinage jointly (Head, Hust. Numm. 530). The third document engraved on the stone is the decree of the senate ratifying the acts of the triumvirs. Aphrodisias is mentioned by Pliny (N.H. 5. 109) as a free state. By this decree freedom was conferred, and exemption from tribute granted. The citizens could not be compelled to give bail for appearance before a court in Rome. The shrine of Aphrodite enjoyed the same rights of asylum as that of Diana at Ephesus (cf. Tac. Ann. 3. 61). The revenues from the territorzum were granted to the city without any liability to tribute. For the status of free cities, cf. pp. 39 ff. 30. EPISTULA AUGUSTI AD MYLASENSES (31 a. Chr.) Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 6; Ditt. Sy//.3 768. Avroxpatwp Kaicap Qeo0 “louvniov | vids brrarés Te TO TpiTov xaber|tapévos Muracéwr apxovor Bov|Ane Syuwe yaipev. Ki éppwobe x[a]||as av éyou" Kat avtos dé wera t[ov] | otpated- patos Uytawov. Kali rpo]|tepov pev 48n rept THs Kat[acyou ]|- ons Upas TUXNS TpoceTTEe[mrpaTé] | pol, Ka VOY Tapayevoméva| Vv tov | || mpecBevtav, OvALad[ov. . | ..§ TOV TOAEWioV TTaicat Kal TpaTr[Oei]|ons THs TodEws, TOANOVS EV aixwarwTo[us] | amroBadiv TodiTas, ovK drlyoUS pev hovevdé[y || tas, Teds S€ Kat cvveatapreye(v Tas TH TOAE| ¢], || THS TOV TOAELLMY WLOTNTOS OVSE TAY | VadV OSE TAY lepav TaV ayiwtatov a|torxopuévns vmédiEav 5é ot Kal Trept | THs yopas THS NeXenraTnuEevns Kal THY | éTravAEwY TOY éuTreTpnopévor, @aote eu || Taow bpas nTvxnKévar: ef’ ols taow auve[é|dov maGovras| Tatta mdons Tevuns Kal xapt|[Tos akiovs advdpas yevouey jous vas re[pi ‘Pwpatous .. | [ 326 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES From Mylasa. Unfortunately the major portion of the letter of Augustus is lost, and we cannot determine precisely its content, but it is probable that the Mylasans were given the rank of a free city (Pliny, N.H. 5. 108; cf. CIG. 26954). The city of Mylasa had been occupied by the troops of Labienus nine years before. During a festival the soldiers were massacred by the citizens, who abandoned their homes when Labienus advanced against them. He rased the city to the ground (Cassius Dio, 48. 26; Strabo, 14. 2. 24, p. 660). Cf. nos. 32, 133. 31. TITULUS OPERIS PUBLICI (31 a. Chr.) Notizie deg scavt, 1915, 139; An. ép. 1916, no. 60. Decuria | Q. Arrunti | Surai, cur(atoribus) | Q. Arruntio || C. Sabello | Pig(neratore) IT. Arrio. | Sum(ma) h(ominum) xcrrx. | In sing(ulos) hom(ines) | op(eris) p(edes) xx111. S||(umma) p(edum) 00 IDDCCXIV. Found at Saletto di Montagnana near Este in 1907. It refers to work performed by veterans, after the battle of Actium, in building levees along the river Atesis near Ateste. Another inscription from Ateste refers to the same matter (CIL. v, 2603). “To carry out the work the soldiers were divided into squads, each one of them bearing the name of some leader. This squad took the name of Q. Arruntius Sura, who was also one of the overseers. In it were ninety-eight men, and to each man forty-three feet were assigned. This is one of the earliest of those great constructive works carried out by soldiers, from which the provincial cities profited so much under the empire, and of which we have so many records in Africa; cf. nos. 72 and 103. 32. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS, VEL PROCONSULIS, AD MYLASENSES (ca. 30 a. Chr.) Le Bas-Waddington, 3. 442-443; CIG. 2695, 27008. phi es Bice 8 baer i eR Le kat [tas vrép tov Snuociar | [émre]etynoeus(?) els Te Tov Kowov [THs] Toews Kapha oY TLVOV avala|ra oes brrovobevery, ots 67 Kav érri[Tpé |rr@pev Poporoyetv [ 327 ] a oO Id Io 15 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN tHv [Mv]|Aacéwv modu els SovrcKny wepilou]oiav, juety per av lows je éd[opalllow aicypa Te kai nudv avakios, al dv lvatos dé dv 6uws Kakei[v]|ous yévotto tpd[.a |oovar Snuociattovs Onpwociat cuptous, pl) ]|Te XPNHAaT@V pHTE Tpoc0da[Vy] Snwooiwy wroKEl- pérlw]|v, ef pr Kata TEX@V erriperriy Noy[iC]ev Tods évds éxdotov.....| us Tas Te Kepadas ert TEAMY EL... OédoLEV, TIS Torews ove é THY] || erravepPwowy Tdv éx THS NaBinvo[v]AnaTHas épevtriwvy étoipas a[v]ladepovons, 0 6) Kat avtot mpoidopue[vor | mpodaveta pots idtwTav [eis] | ypéa Synwdota THY ToALY UTNYAa- yo[v]to, ov dua TO Kal’ vradrayily ava|A|ouatwv(t) THv Kaicapos tmép Mvuaacélov........... 1| From Mylasa. Cf. no. 30. This document appears to be a part of a letter of some emperor or governor relative to the collection of . taxes or tribute, but the interpretation is exceedingly obscure. The letter probably belongs to a period not much later than no. 30. 33. EDICTUM AUGUSTI DE AQUAEDUCTU VENAFRANO (17-11 a. Chr.) CIL. x, 4842; Bruns, 77; Girard, p. 186; Riccobono, p. 316; Dessau, 5743. Edictum imp(eratoris) Caesaris Augusti (finis huius versus et prae- hered sex fered LOtt) SUAUUCUTL)—— sinh path Poids ny pelotssl opt a ope aare oaks Venafranorum nomine....... tus sit liceatque. Qui rivi specus saepta fontes..........04. que aquae ducendae reficiundae || causa supra infrave libram factz aedificati structi sunt, sive quod | aliut opus eius aquae ducendae refzczundae causa supra infrave libram | factum est, uti quidquid earum rerum factum est, ita esse habere itaque | reficere reponere restituere resarcire semel saepius, fistulas canales | tubos ponere, aperturam committere, sive quid aliut eius aquae ducen||dae causa opus erit, facere placet: dum qui locus ager in fundo, qui | Q. Sirini (?) L. f. Ter. est esseve dicitur, et in fundo, qui L. Pompei M. f. ‘Ter. Sullae | est esseve dicitur, maceria saeptus est, per quem locum subve quo loco | specus elus aquae pervenit, ne ea maceria parsve quae elus maceriae | aliter diruatur to//atur, quam specus reficiundi aut inspiciendi caullsa; neve quid thi privati sit, quominus ea aqua ire fluere ducive possit | [ 328 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES ...... Dextra sinistraque circa eum rivom circaque | ea opera, quae eius aquae ducendae causa facta sunt, octonos pedes agrum | vacuom esse placet, per quem locum Venafranis eive, qui Venafranorum | nomine......., iter facere elus aquae ducendae operumve elus aquae || ductus factendorum reficiendorum causa, quod eius s(ine) d(olo) m(alo) fiat, ius sit liceatque, | quaeque earum rerum cuius faciendae reficiendae causa opus erunt, quo | proxume poterit advehere adferre adportare, quaeque inde exempta erunt, | quam maxime aequaliter dextra sinistraque p. vil iacere, dum ob eas res damnz | infecti iurato promittatur. Earumque rerum omnium ita habendarum || colon(is) (?) Venafranis ius potestatemque esse placet, dum ne ob id opus domi|nus eorum cuius agri locive, per quem agrum locumve ea aqua ire fluere | ducive solet, invius fat; neve ob id opus minus ex agro suo in partem agri | quam transire transferre transvertere recte possit; neve cui eorum, per quorum agros ea aqua ducitur, eum aquae ductum corrumpere abducere aver||tere facereve, quo minus ea aqua in oppidum Venafranorum recte duci | fluere possit, liceat. | Quaeque aqua in oppidum Venafranorum it fluit ducitur, eam aquam | distribuere discribere vendundi causa, aut ei rei vectigal inponere consti|tuere, 11viro Iviris praefec(to) praefectis elus co- loniae ex maioris partis decuri|jonum decreto, quod decretum ita factum erit, cum in decurionibus non | minus quam duae partes decurionum adfuerint; legemque ei dicere ex | decreto decurionum, quod ita ut supra scriptum est decretum erit, ius po|testatemgue esse placet; dum ne ea aqua, quae ita distributa discripta deve qua | ita decretum erit, aliter quam fistulis plumbeis d(um) t(axat) ab rivo p(edes) t ducatur; neve || eae fistulae aut rivos nisi sub terra, quae terra itineris viae publicae limi|tisve erit, ponantur conlocentur; neve ea aqua per locum privatum in|vito eo, cuius is locus erit, ducatur. Quamque legem ei aquae tuendae ope|ribusve, quae eius aquae ductus ususve causa facta sunt erunt, tuendis | zrverz praefecti ex decurion(um) decreto, quod ita ut s(upra) s(criptum) e(st) factum erit, dixerint, || eam... ..firmam ratamque esset placet | (undectm UCK SUS CUANIAL [ACtI).. 6 coer aie dele side waleie M ENALTANAES So. 65 cers ......atio quam colono aut incolae....|....da......1s Cul ex gotium datum decreto decurionum ita, ut supra comprensum est, ne| 32981 25 30 oh 40 45 590 65 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN erit, agenti, tum, qui inter civis et peregrinos ius dicet, iudicium | reciperatorium in singulas res Hs. x reddere, testibusque dumtaxat x denun|tiando guaeri placet; dum reciperatorum reiectio inter eum qui aget et | eum quocum agetur ita flet, ut ex lege, quae de iudicis privatis lata est, | licebit oportebit. On a block of marble at Venafrum. Venafrum is one of the twenty-eight colonies established in Italy by Augustus (cf Suet. Aug. 46), as its name, colonia Augusta lulta (cf. CIL. x, 4894, 48753 Lh. colon. 239. 7) indicates. These colonies, Suetonius says (4ug. 46), (Augustus) operibus ac vectigalibus publicis plurifariam instruxit. Very likely his gift to the colony was recorded in the first paragraph of the inscription. There is no reference in it to the penalties established by the /ex Quinctia de aquaeductibus (cf. Bruns, 22) of 9 B.c., and the settlement of disputes is referred to the peregrine praetor (cf. 1. 65, gui inter civis et peregrinos ius dicet), and not to the curatores aquarum, who took charge of such matters after I1 B.C.; cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 3, 97. On the other hand the /ex de iudicis privatis of the last paragraph is probably a /ex Iulia of 17 B.c. (cf. Wlassak, Rém. Processgesetze, 1, 173-188). Therefore the in- scription falls between 17 and 11 B.c. The document is an edict. No mention is made in it of the co-operation of the Roman senate; cf. Mommsen, op. cit. 3, 81. From this document it is clear (cf. l. 38, vendundi causa) that private persons did not receive water free in the municipalities, as they did in Rome, but they were charged a rental (cf Mommsen, op. cit. 3, 91), and the proceeds were covered into the local treasury; cf. p. 138. The distribution of the water was under the control of the magistrates and decurions, and the importance of the matter is indicated by the fact that the presence of a quorum of two-thirds of the decurions was required to make the action legal; cf. pp. 67 f. The most interesting point in the inscription for us is the fact that the adjudication of offenses is referred to Rome, not to the local magistrates. This is a logical outcome of the fact that the aqueduct was given to the city by Augustus. It is possible that cases involving a fine less than 10,000 sesterces were heard by the local magistrates. In the /ex de Gallia Cisalpina of 49-42 B.c., the municipal officials had full competence _ in matters involving 15,000 sesterces or less; cf. no. 27. It is [Egacne] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES probable, as Mommsen remarks (op. cit. 3, 96), that the Roman practice in this matter varied from place to place. With the establish- ment of the empire, gifts were more and more frequently made to the cities by the emperor, and this precedent shows us how these donations gave the central government the natural right to take part in the conduct of local affairs. 34. DECRETUM CONCILI ASIAE DE FASTIS PROVINCIALIBUS (ca. 9 a. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 458, ll. 78 ff-5 Inschriften von Priene, 105. "Edo€£ev trois emi tis “Acias"EdAnow, yudune Tod apyrepéws "AtrodAwviov Tod | Myvodirov Afeaveirou: érel tHv véav vov- enviav del det Eoravat Thy adtr[y] || drracw THs eis TAS apyas elaooou Kata te TO IlavAov PaBlov Maéipov tod av|Ouratou dtatayua Kal TO THs ’Acta(s) Whidiopa évrrodiferar S€ 4 TOD xpovou | Takis Tapa Tas év Tols apyaspecions emeKAHCELS, yel- verGar Ta KaTa Ta | apyatpéota pyri Sexata., os Kai év TOL Kopynrio vopor yéypat rat, évros | Sexarns totapévov. From Priene. We have omitted the first 77 lines of the inscription carved on this stone. Paullus Fabius Maximus, proconsul of Asia, wrote to the provincial assembly urging the council to adopt the natal day of Augustus as the beginning of the official year in the province, and to change from the lunar to the solar reckoning of the Julian calendar. The assembly adopted the recommendation enthusiastically as a means of conferring honor upon the deified emperor. Copies of the decree were ordered to be engraved and set up in the different cities. In addition to the copy from Priene, others have been found at Apamea (CIG. 3957), Dorylaeum (C/L. I, 13651), Eumenia (CIG. 39024), and Maeonia (Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 54 (1911), 80 ff.). The part of the document which we have included in this collection is a second decree of the provincial assembly regulating the elections of municipal magistrates under the revised calendar according to the Sullan constitution. The Sullan era had been adopted by many of the cities of Asia, probably those whose constitutions he had remodelled. According Fagan 78 80 n Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN to the Sullan law elections must be held fifty days before the be- ginning of the civil year. This arrangement was doubtless made to allow sufficient time for the settlement of appeals in the case of candidates who did not wish to serve in the office to which they had been elected. Very little is known of the Sullan constitution. It regulated the duties of the governor (Cic. ad fam. 1. 9. 253 3. 6. 3, 6) and the administration of the municipalities (Cic. ad fam. 3. 10. 6), and apparently defined the privileges of free cities (4th. Mitth. 24 (1899), 234, no. 74). 35. EPISTULA P. CORNELI SCIPIONIS, PROCONSULIS ASIAE, AD THYATIRENOS (7-6 a. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1211; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 8. IlomAcos Kopynrcos 2[xeriwy avOvrratos ‘Papaiwr] | Ovares- pnvots apyovo[s BovrAne dnuwe yaipery]. | Aicasov etvar vopifm PED TET a ha Sa A Oy A o>] | Kal voptpov éoriv tTLas yevopuévas vTrép Tov le||ljpav ypnuatay Kpicelis.....--. llyns Secactay Kedev- Leos kat ov||dév mdéov tots émexad[oupévors....... bre ||pwvnbeios TO mwapaBor[tov....... ola jola]n rots huyode- OVO bah! Oson Le easeaciar EUNV ATAVTA........4- \[e ]conynoa- pévov Avrovu ‘Pav(i)o[u.......... The subject of this fragmentary letter of the provincial governor to the citizens of Thyatira is obscure. Apparently the temple-lands had been leased for a high rental and the lessees had brought suit for an abatement of the terms. It would seem that the decision of the court had been unacceptable to the Thyatirans and they had persisted in holding the lessees to their contract. The latter had appealed to the governor, and he urged the city to abide by the decision of the court or of the arbiters. Cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 128, n. I. [agaas FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 36. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS AUGUSTI AD CNIDIOS (6 a. Chr.) Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 9; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1031; IG. xm, 330745) Ditte Syil2 330. [..].. dapslwopyod dé Kaspoyéveos Aev[ xa ]Péou (2). Avtoxpatap Kaicap Oeod vids SeBacrtos, apysepevs, | bratos To dwdéxaTtov aTrodeberypévos | Kai Onwapyixhs €Eovatas TO OKT@LKaL- déxaTor, || Kyidtav dpxover, BovrAnt, dnwwr xaipew. Oi rpéa| Bes bpav Avoviavos B’ kai Atovictos B Tov Acovulaiou évérvyou év ‘Paépne pot, kal 70 Whgdiopa atrodovtes | katnyopnoav EvBovrov pev TOV Avakavopioa TeOver|@Tos Hn, Tpudépas b€ THs yuva.Kds "Eyou | d¢ éEerdcat tpootagéas Vardar Acivios TH: Euds Pirwr | an >] n \ > / fal > , \ TOV OLKETOV TOUS EvhEpomévous THe aitia dia Balodvwy éyvov an \ / an lal Pireivoy tov Xpvoirrov tpels vi|xtas cuveyas éredndAvbdta THe oixtas THe EvBov||dov xai Tpudépas wcO UBpews nal tporae Tit TrodLlopKias, THe TpiTHL SE oUVETHIYMEVOY Kal TOV adenr| pov KvPovror, tovs b€ THs oixias Seamrotas EVBov|dov cat Tovdépar, @s ote ypnuatiCovtes mpos | TOV PDireivoy ovTe avTippaTTo- pevot Tais mpoo||Borais acdanetas év THe EavT@v oiKia tuyeiv novvav|To, TpoTTETAaYOTAS EVL TOV OLKETHY OVK ATroKTEl|VaL, ws / ” € RS an > »Q/ / > > > A lows dy Tus vm opyhs ov[K] adixov mponxOnt, ad|ra avetpEar KaTacKEbdcavTa Ta KOTTpLa avT@Y* TOV | O€ oiKéTHY adY Tots KaTayeouévors elite ExovTa || elTe AkovTAa—avTOs pev yap évé- pevvev apvovpevo[s | |—adetvar thv yadortpay, [Kall Tov EXBovrov uTrotreceiy Sixaso|[T lepov dv cwOévta taiedpov. Ilérovda Se € ta) \ > \ \ > / > V4 ed an > ipeiv Kai alvd|tlas tas avaxpioes. “EOavpaloy & av, ras eis / SA \ Ee la > / la / id / Tocov | éecav THY Tap vpelv eEeraciay THY SovrOr of d[evl|- \ , > / l SUR PSS Nh \ yovtes THY Sixny, eb pH Trot ohodpa avtois éd0€[ ate] | yaderrol yeyovévat Kai mpos Ta évavTia pLoorrovr| por], | wn Kata TOV > / an ¢ lal va b] 3 ? / Bay . SY akiov Tav oTLovy TraGetv, éw addol[Tpiar] | oikiav viKTwp we UBpews cal Bias tpls éwernrv[O0]|T@v cal tiv Kowny aravT@v pov acddrecap [avar|||povvTw@y ayavayTodyTes, AAAA KATA TOV OM fone / > le 6 / be 10 ” 7 Kat nv[ix« 7 || wvvovTo HTVXNKOTOV, NOLKNKOTwWY Oé OVS éat[LV 0,76]. aX X n > @ an BY A & A an n b] an \ / | "AAA viv pOds dv por Soxette ToLHoas THe euhe [Tept Tov || Tov yvoune TpovoncavTes Kat Ta év TOs Onulocioss] | buadv oporo- yelv ypaupata. “Eppwole. eseaat 5 Io 15 20 25 30 35 On Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN This inscription, containing the letter of Augustus to the Cnidians and the letter of Trajan to the Astypalaeans (no. 75), was found at Astypalaea. The letter of Augustus deals with the appeal of Eubulus and Tryphera to the emperor. ‘They were residents of Cnidus, a free town, and a slave in their household had accidentally killed a Cnidian who had assailed their house. As public opinion was against them, they feared to submit themselves to the juris- diction of the local court and they fled to Rome. The Cnidians sent an embassy to Augustus with a decree of the city accusing the fugitives and demanding their extradition or punishment. The emperor instructed the governor of Asia to investigate. When he made his report, Augustus rendered a decision acquitting the accused and rebuking the Cnidians for their attitude towards Eubulus and Tryphera (cf. Mommsen, Roman Provinces, 1, 352, n. 1; Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 126 f.). Free cities had jurisdiction over civil and criminal cases in their own courts, but the right of appeal to the emperor, granted to all citizens of the empire, marks the lessening of the power of local magistrates. This development was intensified, when, as at Cnidus, the local courts were swayed by partisan prejudice. Cf. nos. 25, 40. 37. IUSIURANDUM PAPHLAGONUM (3 a. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 137; Ditt. Or. Gr. 532. "Amd Adtoxpatopos Kaic[apos]| | Qe0d viod YeBacrod bra- tev[ovtos TO] | Sdwdéxatrov Etous TpiTov, m[potépar] | vwavav Maptiwv év Tayypous év [t]a[yopae] dp||cos 0 tereaO[ets b]rd to[v] Kcatotx[ovvtav Ma]|prayovialy Kai tov mpay]uarevo- pLévwv tral|p’ avrots ‘Plwpaiwy]. | “Ouriw Aia, Viv, “Hrx0ov, Geovs wavtal[s Kat ma]|cas Kal adrov tov LeBao[t lov, edvor- [cew Kai]||joaps YeBaotas nai trois tLéx]vous éyyo[vors re] | avtov rdv[ tla [Tov Tod [Biov] xpovor x[ai AO]|yar [x ]ai Epyos Kai yvoulne, pilrous Hyov[pevos] | ods av exetvor jyovtalc] éxy Opous Te v[opifer] | ods dv avtol Kpivwow, trép Té THY t[ov- Tots] || Svadepdvtwy ponte c@patos deioeoOlar wun ]|Te Wryijs unre Biov pnte téxvwov, ada Tav]|Ti Tporar brép Tay] éxelvors avnko[vt@y] | mavta Kivduvvov vmopéverv: Ste te Afv [ 334 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES aic||Owpas 4) akovow vrevavtioy TovT[ols re|||youevov 7) Bov- 20 Nevowevoy 1) Tpacco| pevov,| | TOUTO éyunvicery TE Kal eyOpov éa[ecOar Tae] | NéyovTs 7 Bovrevopévar 7) Tpdoco[yti Ts Tov-| Tov ovs Te dv ExYOpods adt[oll Kpiv[wauy, Tov]|ToOVs KaTAa YhV kal Oaraccav brrolts Te] || Kat cLdnpar diwEEL Kalb awuVeEi- 25 a[Oa.] | Kav S€ te vrevavtioy tovtas tL au bpxw.] | Toncw 7 “Ln oToryovvTes Kalals wpolloa, éemapmpmar avTos Te KAT Emov Kat o[@pa]|tos ToD ewavTod Kai :uyfs Kat Biov Kall Té]||kv@v 30 Kal TavTos ToD éwavTov yév[ous] | Kal cuvdépovtos é&odevav Kat tavl@nret|lav wéeypt maons dvadoyns THs [uns Kal] | Tov && éuod mavrov, Kal unte a[opata Ta] | Tov éuav é& éuod pnTe yf w[nTte Odrac|\|loa déEarto pndé Kaptrovs évéy[Kot adtots.] | 35 Kata Ta avta @pooav Kai ot élv THe ywpat] | mavTes ev Tots kata Tas w[mapyias Xe]|Bactyos mapa tois Bwpoils tov LeBarrov:] | opotws te Paliwwveitas ot [tHv vdv Nearro]||Aw 40 Neyouevnv KaToiKovr[ Tes Buooav aupl|ravTes ev LeBaotywe Tapa t[a@t Bwucs tov] | LeBacrod. From Phazimon (Neoclaudiopolis) in Paphlagonia. Paphlagonia was organized as a province of the empire in 6 B.c. The oath of loyalty to Augustus was taken three years later at Gangra, the seat of provincial government, and the same oath was administered throughout the province at the altars of Augustus. The restoration b[ wapyxias | in |. 37 is due to Reinach, and is conditionally accepted by Dittenberger. The hyparchy was the ancient satrapy (Hausoul- lier, Rev. Philol. 25 (1901), 22 ff.). Dittenberger suggests that the term may be applied to a conventus under the Roman administration. For similar oaths, cf. nos. 47, 48. Phazimon was raised from a village to a city by Pompey (Strabo, 12. 3. 38, p. 560). 38. RES GESTAE DIVI AUGUSTI (28 a. Chr.—6 p. Chr.) CIL, 111, pt. 1, pp. 769 ff; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 158. Chap. 3 (= col. 1, ll. 16 ff). Millia civium Romazorum adacta sacramento meo fuerunt cir- citer guingen|ta. Ex quibus deduxz zz colonias aut remisi in municipia sua stipendis emeri|tis millia aliquanto p/ura guam trecenta et Epics 25 30 40 30 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN lis omnibus agros adszgnavi | aut pecuniam pro praemis militiae dedi. Chap. 15 (= col. 1, ll. 17 ff). In colonzs militum meorum consul quintum ex manibiis viritim| millia nummum singula dedi; acceperunt id triumphale congiarium | in colovis hominum circiter centum et viginti millia. Chap. 16 (= col. rz, Il. 22 7f,). Pecuniam pro agris, quos in consulatu meo quarto et postea consulibus | M. Crasso et Cn. Lentulo augure adsignavi militibus, solvi municipis. Ea | summa sestertium circiter sexsiens milliens fuit, quam pro Italicis || praedzs numeravi, et circiter bis mil- lzens et sescentiens, quod pro agris | provincialibus solvi. Id primus et solus omnium, qui deduxerunt | colonias militum in Italia aut in provincis, ad memorzam aetatis | meae feci. Et postea Ti. Nerone et Cn. Pisone consulibus, itemgue C. Antistio | et D. Laelio cos., et C. Calvisio et L. Pasieno consulibus, et L. Lentulo et M. Messalla || consulibus, et L. Caninio et Q. Fabricio cos. militzbus, quos eme|riteis stipendis in sua municipia deduxi, praemia nume- rato | persolvi, quam in rem sestertzum quater milliens Lbenter | impendi. | Chap. 18 (= col. m1, Il. 40 ff). Inde ab eo anno, quo Cn. et P. Lentuli consules fuerunt, cum deficerent | vectigalia, tum centum millibus ham:num tum pluribus inlato fru|mento vel ad nummarios tributus ex agro et patrimonio meo opem tult. Chap. /2.1 {=‘coljav,abi2o jf-). Auri coronari pondo triginta et quin|que millia municipiis et colonis Italiae conferentibus ad triumphos | meos quintum consul remisi, et postea, quotienscumque imperator appel|latus sum, aurum coronarium non accepi decernentibus municipiis || et colonis aeque benigne adque antea decreverant. | [ 336 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Chap. 28 (= col. v, ll. 35 fF). Colonias in Africa Sicilia Macedonia utraque Hispania Achaia 35 Asia Syria | Gallia Narbonensi Piszdia militum deduxi. Italia autem xxvii coloni|as, quae vivo me celeberrimae et frequentis- simae fuerunt, mers auspicis | deductas habet. | Suppl., chap. 4. [Aam]dvar &€ | eis Oéas Kai povouayous Kal dOAnTAas Kai vav- palyiav kal Onpopaxiav dwpeai [re] arroixiats Tonreow | év ‘Itanrta, worecw év érrapxelats cerap@ Kall] éviru||ptouots memo- 5 ynkvtass } Kat avdpa diros Kat cvy|KANTLKOLS, OV TAS TELUNoELS mpoceteTTAnpwaenv | TreLpov TAOS. | This document was originally cut on bronze tablets and placed in front of the mausoleum of Augustus in Rome. Kornemann (Kho, 15 (1917), 214 ff.) thinks that the period of composition runs from 28 B.c. to A.D. 6, but cf. Koepp, Sokrates, 8 (1920), 289 ff. Kornemann’s views are elaborated in his Mausoleum u. Tatenbericht d. Augustus (1921). The extant copy comes from Ancyra. It was discovered, and part of the Latin portion copied, by Buysbecche in 1555. In 1746 Richard Pococke published a few fragments of the Greek text. More of it was copied by Hamil- ton in 1832. The copy on which present-day editions are based was made by Humann under the auspices of the Berlin Academy in 1882. The text with a full commentary was published by Momm- sen in 1865. A briefer commentary may be found in the editions of Peltier (1886), Fairley (1898), Cagnat, doc. cit., and Diehl (1918). The Latin text has been republished by R. Wirz (1922), and the entire text with commentary and English translation has been edited by E. G. Hardy (1923). The extracts which we have published from the Res gestae are of interest because of the light which they throw on the colonizing policy of the Romans under the early empire, on the provision made for veterans at the time of their discharge from the army, on the contributions offered to successful generals and to the emperor on special occasions by municipalities, and on the assistance given to needy cities in paying the vectzgalza. AMA Seeeied a2 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN In his statement Augustus does not include the colonies founded by his colleagues in the triumvirate, but mentions only those established by himself. On the foundations in Italy a passage in Hyginus (de /im. p. 177, ed. Lachmann) furnishes an important commentary: Divus Augustus, in adsignata orbi terrarum pace, exercitus, qui aut sub Antonio aut sub Lepido militaverant, pariter et suarum legionum milites colonos fecit, alios in Italia, alios in provinciis; quibusdam, deletis hostium civitatibus, novas urbes con- stituit; quosdam in veteribus oppidis deduxit et colonos nominavit; illas quoque urbes, quae deductae a regibus aut dictatoribus fuerant, quas bellorum civilium interventus exhauserat, dato iterum coloniae nomine, numero civium ampliavit, quasdam et finibus. In the case of Italian towns which had been hostile to him, he evidently followed somewhat the same policy which the Romans had adopted after the conquest of Sicily. Such places were turned over to the veterans and resettled by them. Other veterans were sent to established communities, which henceforth bore the title of colonies. Later in this record (chap. 28 = col. v, l. 36) Augustus can boast that twenty-eight of his Italian colonies were large and flourishing, and his boast is justified by the list of prosperous colonies in Italy bearing the title of Julia or of Augusta or both titles, such as Beneventum, Brixia, Minturnae, and Pisaurum. One might infer from chap. 16 (col. mm, |. 22) that the Italian and provincial settlements were both made in 30 B.c., but in fact the provincial settlements date from 14 B.c. The first sure case of a colony founded outside of Italy is that of Narbo Martius, settled in 118 B.c. (cf. p. 7), but this was a colony of civilians, whereas the ultramarine settlements of Augustus were military in character. In the last extract Augustus mentions ten different provinces in which he made these settlements, which in many cases served much the same purpose abroad as the Roman colonies had served in earlier days in pacifying and Romanizing Italy. This was the case especially with the military colonies planted in Galatia. ‘he payments made to provincial municipalities for the lands occupied by soldiers (ef. chap. 16 = col. m1, Il. 22 ff) would seem to be out of harmony with the legal theory that all the land in the provinces belonged to the Roman state (cf. p. 118). Whether this noteworthy pre- 3380) FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES cedent set by Augustus was followed by later emperors we do not know. When Marius adopted the revolutionary policy of admitting the proletariat freely to the army, it was inevitable that some provision should be made for veterans at the end of their term of service. At first lands were assigned to them in colonies (cf. p. 7). Augustus, however, follows an alternative plan, not unlike the “adjusted compensation” proposal under discussion in the United States of America, of giving veterans either grants of land or money gratuities or both, as he did in 29 B.c. (cf. chap. 15 = col. 11, ll. 17 ff). The land-grant policy was given up after 14 B.c. (Cass. Dio, 54. 25), and from 7 B.c. a fixed money payment, probably of 12,000 sesterces, was made to each soldier on the completion of his term of service (Cass. Dio, 55. 23). To make these payments he spent 400,000,000 sesterces before the close of his reign (cf. chap. 16 = col. 111, Il. 28 ff.). As the army became a more important factor in politics in the later years of the empire, great sums of money were given in the form of largesses to soldiers in active service, and this added heavily to the burden of taxes paid by the municipalities (cf. p. 219). The contributions made by the cities of a province to provide golden crowns to be carried in the triumphal procession of its governor are well enough known under the republic. Augustus checked the development of this practice in Italy (chap. 21 = col. rv, ll. 26 ff). As Mommsen has observed, chap. 18 (col. ur, ll. 40 ff.) is prob- ably to be interpreted in the light of Cassius Dio’s remark (54. 30) that: éresdy te 7) Acia TO éOvos émiKouptas Tivos bua cTEeLropovs pdr.ota édeito, Tov Te hopoy avTHs Tov éTevov ex TV éauTOD XENMATOV TO KoLV@™ eanveyKe. Specifically Augustus doubtless has in mind the remission of the vectiga/ia in the case of cities which had suffered from earthquakes or experienced some other serious loss. This interpretation would harmonize with von Premerstein’s emen- dation (Phil. Wochenschr. 1922, 135 ff.) of col. vi, l. 41 to read donata pecunia. . .colonis, municipits, oppidis terrae motu incendioque consumptis. The results of these generous acts of Augustus and of some of his successors are noted in another connection (cf. pp. 14.7 ff-). [330m 22-2 Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 39. EDICTUM PROCONSULIS ASIAE DE MURO EPHESIO (ca. 11 p. Chr.) I.B.M. 521; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 7; Ditt. Syll.3 784. Mapxos ‘Epévv.os Uixns av6[vratos Neyer]. |’ Apavods yeyevy- pévov Tov ral[pateryia ||uatos, Strep Snwocias KatacKelune UTO tov ]| Edeciwy petak&d ths ayopas cali Tob ALpé]||vos yeyovevas cuvepoveito, e[ite év Tut] | TOV Kalpov 7 Tod Todewov Tre[pl- oTacet, ei ||Te dua THY TOUTMY apéreELar, ot TLeTaypEévoL | HoaV.... From Ephesus. This edict of the proconsul refers to a wall erected by the Ephesians for the convenience of exacting customs dues on goods entering the city by sea. Unfortunately the major portion of the inscription has disappeared, but, since the wall was built by the city, it might be inferred that the portorzum at Ephesus was a municipal, and not an imperial tax (Cagnat, Les zmpéts indirects chez les Romains, 4 ff.). The fact, however, that the wall had fallen into decay, and that the governor issued the edict concerning it, leaves the question of the control of this tax in uncertainty. The portorium at Palmyra was a municipal tax, but elsewhere it seems to have been imposed by the imperial authorities (cf. no. 89 and pp. 122 ff). 40. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD CHIOS (5-14 p. Chr.) CIG. 2222; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 943; Ditt. Sy//.3 785. 4 e / N \ brat d Hd > ..| XtagpvrAou Urrapxovtwv pos Tovs Xeiwv mpécBets, ava- f > \ > of, 2S. A \ > n yewwo[Kor||tTwv ériotoAnyv “Avtectiov Ovétepos Tod Tpd éuod > / > \ > / la) a av@urrdt[ou], | avdpos émupavertatov, KataxoNovbayv 77 Kab- fal f a a \ e \ a \ 5) a onKh pov [7po]||Pélo lee rod [T]y[p]etv Ta v0 Tav mpd éwod > / ff / \ \ ec \ Z avOuTratwov ypadbévt[a, pul|NattTew Kal THY bTEép TovTwY depo- pévny ériatorny Ovéte[pos] | evroyov Hynoaunv: Uotepov Sé éxatépov pépovs €€ avtixalta]|otacews Tepi Tav Kata pépos Entnwatov év(T)vyéovTos Sin[Kouv]|ca Kal KaTa THY eurVy cUVN- Gevav Tap éxatépou pépous érripe|Aéa |||Tepa yeypaupéva rnoa vTopynpata’ [a NJaBav cal cata 76 émi[Bar]|rov éeriatHaas evpov Tots Mev Ypovo(s)s apyatotdrov Soypa[tos] | cuvKedAHTov Wee Key FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES avria[pplaysopa, yeyovotos Aovxiw YvrAArAq 7d Se[UTE]|pov UTatwl, €v @ paptul[pnO |etor Tots Xelous, doa trép “Popaiwv du[éOn || kav re Mc Opicdarnv avdpayabodbvres Kal Ur avTod érabov ¢ / > a > / 4 / Nop sh n ovr[ Kr |||Tos efdtxds éBeBaiwoev OTrws vomots TE Kal EOeowy Kat dixators [ypov]|tas, a éoxov OTe TH Pwpaiwr (fr)AL@ Tpoc- al 7 € \ > ® fa) y 5 b) le BS MOov, wa Te vTO pnO wtivi[ody] | TUTM Bow apyovTwY 1 avtapyovT@y, of Te Tap avTois dvtes ‘Pwlwai]|or tois Xetwy UTaKovwaoLy vopouss AvToKpaTopos Sé Oe0d viod S[e]| Bacrod ro oySoov UTdrou ériaToAH(Vv) mpds Xelovs ypagovt[os || . . us .ev THY TOA érrvOleTO .. | From Chios. This letter confirms the Chians in their privileges granted them by Sulla: the right of using their own laws, customs, and courts. Resident Romans were subjected to the jurisdiction of the Chian court. The latter concession is unusual, as Romans were usually tried by the governor under the principles of Roman law. Apparently some of the proconsuls had not observed the provisions of the decree of the senate passed under Sulla’s dictatorship, and the emperor Augustus and the present proconsul had been memo- rialized by the Chians who jealously guarded their privileges. This letter, therefore, furnishes evidence of the encroachment of the governors on the privileges which autonomous states enjoyed. It is true that the action of Antistius Vetus is apparently reversed, but it is evident that the governor is not instructed as to the varying status of the cities under his jurisdiction. His administration tends, accordingly, to be uniform in policy towards all the municipalities, until some of them choose to protest. In such cases they are required to furnish adequate proof for their claim to special treatment (cf. Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 47, 48, 92, 93). It is for this reason that cities, cherishing their ancient privileges, send embassies to the emperor on his inauguration asking for confirmation of their charters (cf. nos. 75, 130). For the autonomy of Chios see Livy, 38. 39; Appian, AMithr. 25. 46; Pliny, N.H. 5. 136; Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. a’ Aste, 114, 125. [3344/2] 15 20 Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 41, TITULUS HONORARIUS (ca. 14 p. Chr.) CIL. w1, 1741; Dessau, 938. P. Cornelio | Dolabellae cos. | vir viro epuloni, | sodali Titiensi, || leg. pro pr. divi Augusti | et Ti. Caesaris Augusti | civitates su- perioris | provinciae Hillyrici. Found at Ragusa in Dalmatia, on the probable site of Epidaurus. This is the only extant inscription concerning a concilium in Dal- matia. Dolabella was consul in a.p. 10 and /egatus from A.D. 14 on (cf. Vell. 2. 125). 42, TITULUS SEPULCHRALIS (p. 14 p. Chr.) CIL. 11, 5232; Dessau, 1977. C. Iulius Vepo donatus | civitate Romana viritim | et inmunitate ab divo Aug., | vivos fecit sibi et |] Boniatae Antoni fil. coniugi | et suls. Found at Celeia in Noricum. On the grant of Roman citizen- ship to individuals, cf. no. 13. For similar cases under the empire, cf. Dessau, 1978-1980. 43. DECRETUM CENTUMVIRORUM (26 p. Chr.) CIL. x1, 3805; Dessau, 6579. Centumviri municipii Augusti Veientis | Romae in aedem Veneris Genetricis cum convenis|sent, placuit universis, dum de- cretum conscriberetur, | interim ex auctoritate omnium permitti || C. Iulio divi Augusti 1. Geloti, qui omni tempore | municip. Veios non solum consilio et gratia adiuverit | sed etiam inpensis suis et per filium suum celebrari | voluerit, honorem ei iustissimum de- cerni, ut | Augustalium numero habeatur aeque ac si eo || honore usus sit, liceatque ei omnibus spectaculis | municipio nostro bisellio proprio inter Augus|tales considere cenisque omnibus publicis | inter centumviros interesse, itemque placere | ne quod ab eo liberisque eius vectigal municipii || Augusti Veientis exigeretur. | [ 342 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Adfuerunt | C. Scaevius Curiatius, | L. Perperna Priscus rvir., | M. Flavius Rufus q., || T. Vettius Rufus q., | M. Tarquitius 20 Saturnin., | L. Maecilius Scrupus, | L. Favonius Lucanus, | Cn. Octavius Sabinus, || I. Sempronius Gracchus, | P. Acuvius P. f. 25 Tro., | C. Veianius Maximus, | T. Tarquitius Rufus, | C. Iulius Merula. || Actum | Gaetulico et Calvisio Sabino cos. 30 Found at Veli. Only one other epigraphical case of the use of the title centumviri for the members of a municipal senate is known, viz. at Cures (CIL. 1x, p. 472). For the usual titles, cf. p. 56. For municipal decrees of the second and third centuries after Christ, cf. CIL. v, 532 and no. 146. 44. TABULA PATRONATUS (27 p. Chr.) CIL. v, 4919; Dessau, 6100. M. Crasso Frugi, L. Calpurnio | Pisone cos. | 11 non. Febr. | civitas Themetra ex Africa hospitium || fecit cum C. Silio C. f. 5 Fab. Aviola eum | liberos posterosque eius sibi liberis | posterisque suls patronum cooptave|runt. C. Silius C. f. Fab. Aviola civitatem Theme|trensem liberos posterosque eorum || sibi liberis posterisque suis in fidem | clientelamque suam recepit. | Egerunt Banno Himilis f., sufes; Azdrubal Baisillecis f., | Iddibal Bostharis f., leg. A bronze tablet found near Brixia, apparently kept in the villa of Silius Aviola. Other extant tablets record the election of Aviola in two other cities; cf. Dessau, 6099, 6099a. On the other hand a single city might have several patroni; cf. no. 136. On the election of priests in the colonia Genitivae Iuliae, cf no. 26. Azdrubal and Iddibal are deputies to announce his election to Aviola; cf. no. 135 and CIL. 1x, 3429. e O 45. FASTI MAGISTRATUUM MUNICIPALIUM (p- 33 p- Chr.) CIL. x, 1233; Dessau, 6124. suf. A. Plautius, L. Nonius. T. Salvius Parianus, A. Terentius m1vir.; Sex. Aponius Proculus, O. Nolcennius aed. [esaean] Io “a5 5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN L. Cassius Longinus, M. Vinicius cos., a. p. Chr. 30 suf. C. Cassius Longinus, L. Naevius Surdinus. M. Sentius Rufus, QO. Vibiedius Sedatus rrvir.; P. Subidius Pollio, Sex. Parianus Serenus aed. Ti. Caesar Aug. Vv Cos. a. p. Chr. 3% suf. vir id. Mai. Faustus Cornelius Sulla, Sex. Teidius Catull. cos. suf. k. Iul. L. Fulcinius Trio cos. T. Oppius Proculus, M. Staius Flaccus rivir. iter. q.; M. Atinius Florens, A. Cluvius Celer aed. suf. k. Oct. P. Memmius Regulus cos. Cn. Domitius Ahenobarbus cos. a. p. Chr. 32 suf. k. Jul. A. Vitellius cos. M. Valerius Postumus, QO. Luceius Clemens rivir. ; C. Sentius Severus, L. Ippellius Atticus aed. Ser. ae Mant L. Sulla Felix cos. a. p. Chr. 33 This Accutane contains che names fe the municipal magistrates at Nola from A.D. 29 to 33 inclusive. The inscription was probably cut subsequent to A.D. 33, because in that year Galba still retained the praenomen Lucius, which later he changed to Servius; cf. Prosop. 3, p. 284, no. 723. The appearance of the names of the magistrates of A.D. 31 after that of the consul suffectus named July 1, and before that of the suffectus named Oct. 1, probably points to July 1 as the date of election. This conforms to the practice in the col. Gen. lul.; cf. no. 26, |. 98. Not infrequently in the in- scriptions the names of the duovirs precede those of the consuls; cf., e.g., CIL. x, 1781. For a republican list of local magistrates, of. GL, ix, 422 = Dessau; 6122: 46. LITES INTER CIERENSES ET METROPOLITANOS (11-35 p. Chr.) IG. 1x, 2, 261; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 31; Tod, xx. rare diafé|pwrvtar mpds alAAyn]ras ovl[........] IH ai- Teiral, O7ws pel GpKov Kpudalilas....... Myr |porrorerrav Kpiwwovtwv, BpaBevor|[ros...... Tle wap vpety odirortos, Kad’ jv Kat tHS Kpta[ellos....]v nvéxOnoav pe? SpKov >Wwhdou [ 344 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Kuepsedo[e | Siaxdovas evevnxovta 6xt@, Myrpo|ronreirais tpia- KovTa pia, axvpo. weévte.|.... [Latwe Tlommjaiws YaBeiver mpeaBevtne TuBepiov Kaicap[os | 0 Seiva tod Setvos, ypaupa- Telvs tTav cuvédpwr TreioTa yaipew. “Eypal[Was jpiv rhv Keepréwy cat Mntlpororetév iaddeow Hv etyov Tepi Spor, 6||[te adtay HElwoas Tovs auvédpou|s Kpivat ods Kat édndous LoL Kat Oru év Aide|[Wau: ewe 8 6d icOu edOds olxade a lvayaysvta mpobeivas thy Kkpiow év tae ével[ornxdts Meocarav TeV év Aalpion: cvvedpios tae év THe Odors pyri: cvverOovra[v | Sé Kal audhotépav ent TH lv kpiow Kal NOyov br’ aditav yevouévor, evnvel[yOar Tas ynpous xkpudaiws we] Spxov Kiepredowv pev Ovaxocias évevnxor[ra || d6xt@, Mnrpoonretitais 88 tTpudKovt la piav, axvpous tévte. Tadta émitndevov iyn|[odueOa yparrat. "Eppoco. Vatwr Uor]maias SaB8elvor mperBevthe TuBepiov Katcap[os | 0 Setva Tod Setvos, otpaty|yos Ocooadrav yaipew. "Eypawas xapoi Kal tolis | cuvédpous thv Kiepséwv re Kat M |ntporod tov brobeow, Hv eiyov Tept dpear, 6|[Te TO cuvédpLov THY TEept TOVTwY] Sidyvoai avéreuev. LeivwoKe ody cipn- L[é||vous tovs cuvédpous tovs év Tat OVlor pnvl Kat évynvey- févous pel Gpxov Kpudail[ws Tas wWihdhovs Kuepsedow] peév dtakootas évernxovtTa dxT@, Mntpl[o| tore tars Oé TpLaKOVTE pay, aKupous wélvte* TavTa ody émiTHdesov Hyno[d|weOa yoda, OTWS...-- Jov to BéBatov 1) Kpiows bro cov AaGBne ere]... . From Cierium. Gaius Poppaeus Sabinus was governor of Moesia from A.D. 11-35. In a.p. 15 the provinces of Achaea and Macedonia were added to his jurisdiction, being transferred from the senate to the emperor (Lac. 4un. 1. 80; 6. 39). In this document we have an example of administrative arbitration (cf. pp. 158 ff.). The dispute between the two cities was referred by the governor to the xowvov of Thessaly for decision. We learn that there were at least 334 members in this assembly, each casting a single vote. It is not known whether the two cities Cierlum and Metropolis were per- mitted to vote in a case which affected them, but if not, we may assume that a larger number of votes could be cast at a full session of all the members. It is evident that some of the cities in Thessaly sent more than one delegate to the provincial assembly, as there could not be three hundred cities in this cowov. Cf. pp. 166 ff. [e345ia] IO 15 20 Io T5 20 S) MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 47. IURIS IURANDI ARITIENSIUM IN PRINCIPEM FORMULA (37 p. Chr.) CIL. u, 172; Dessau, 190; Bruns, 101. C. Ummidio Durmio Quadrato, | leg(ato) C. Caesaris Germanici imp(eratoris) | pro pr(aetore). | Ius iurandum Aritiensium. || Ex mei animi sententia, ut ego iis inimicus | ero, quos C. Caesari Germanico inimicos esse | cognovero, et si quis periculum el! salutiq(ue) eius | infert inferetque armis bello internicivo | terra mariq(ue)persequi non desinam, quoad || poenas ei persolverit: neq(ue) me zeque liberos meos | elus salute cariores habebo, eosq(ue), qui in | eum hostili animo fuerint, mihi hostes esse | ducam: si sciens fallo fefellerove, tum me | liberosq(ue) meos Iuppiter optimus maximus ac || divus Augustus ceteriq(ue) omnes di immortales | expertem patria incolumitate fortunisque | omnibus faxint. A.d. v idus Maias in | Aritiense oppido veteri Cn. Acerronio | Proculo, C. Petronio Pontio Nigrino cos., || mag(istris) | Vegeto allict, qui volet, cuique per h. 1. licebit, actio pe|titio persecutio esto. | R. De constituendis patronis causae, cum | rationes reddentur. LXVIII. Cum ita rationes reddentur, vir, qui decurio|nes conscriptosve habebit, ad decuriones | conscriptosve referto, quos placeat publijcam causam agere, iique decuriones con|scriptive per tabellam iurati d. e. r. decer||nunto, tum cum eorum partes non minus | quam duae tertiae aderunt, ita ut tres, qujos plurimi per tabellam legerint, causam | publicam agant, lique qui ita lecti erunt [ 380 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES tem|pus a decurionibus conscriptisve, quo cau||sam cognoscant actionemque suam or|dinent, postulanto, eoque tempore quod is | datum erit transacto eam causam uti quod | recte factum esse volet agunto. | R. De iudicio pecuniae communis. | LXIX. Quod m(unicipum) m(unicipii) Flavi Malacitani no- mine pe|tetur ab eo, qui elus municipi municeps incolave erit, quodve cum eo agetur | quod pluris us cro sit neque tanti sit, ut | de ea re proconsulem tus dicere tudiciaque dare ex hac lege oporteat: de ea're llvir praefectusve, qui iure dicundo praeerit etus municipit, ad quem de ea re in tus aditum erit, 1us dicito iudiciaque dato... . LXIV. 1. 56. pecuniam infore municipi, tab/et; perhaps pecunia in publi- cum municipum. LXVII, 1. 45. eius ea....Malacitani, dittography. See no. 64 and commentary. 65a. EDICTUM L. ANTISTI RUSTICI, LEGATI DOMITIANI, DE ANNONA COLONIAE ANTIOCHIAE (ca. 93 p. Chr.) Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 55 (1924), 5 ff.3 Fourn. Rom. Studies, 14 (1924), 180. L. Antistius Rusticus leg(atus) | imp(eratoris) Caesar(i)s Domi- tiani | Aug(usti) Germ(anici) pro pr(aetore), dic(it): | Cum mvir(i) et decurion(es) || splendidissim(ae) col(oniae) Ant(iochensis) | scripserint mihi propter | hiemis asperitatem an|nonam frumenti ex|arsisse petierintque ut || pleps copiam emendi haberet, | b. f- omnes, qui Ant(iochensis) col(oniae) aut | coloni aut incolae sunt, | profiteantur apud mrviros col(oniae) | Antiochensis intra tri||censimum diem quam | hoc edictum meum pro|positum fuerit quantum | quisque et quo loco fru|menti habeat et quan||tum in semen aut in | cibaria annua familiae | suae deducat, et reliqui | omnis frumenti copiam | emptoribus col(oniae) Antiochens(is) || faciat. Vendendi au(t)em | tempus cons(t)ituo in k(alendas) Aug(ustas) | primas. Quod si quis non | paruerit, sciat me, quid|quid contra edictum mel|lum retentum fuerit, | in commissum vindica-| turum, delatoribus prae/mi nomine octava por|tione constituta. [ 2g8.t.5] 60 65 Io 15 20 25 30 35 40 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Cum || autem adfirmatur mihi ante | hanc hibernae asperitatis per|severantiam octonis et | novenis assibus modium fru|menti in colonia fuisse || et iniquissimum sit famem | civium suorum prae- dae cui|quam esse, excedere sing(ulos) | (denarios) sing(ulos) modios pretium | frumenti veto. l. rr. b(ono) te(mpori), Rodinson: B (in margin), et, Ramsay. This inscription was discovered at Pisidian Antioch. The second column, containing the edict of Antistius Rusticus, is reproduced above. Prior to publication Professor D. M. Robinson kindly furnished us with the text and notes on the document. He believes that the famine referred to in the edict may be associated with that referred to in Revelation vi. 6, cf. Reinach, Rev. Arch. 39 (1901), 350 Ff. The local magistrates of Antioch had been unable to meet the situation caused by the famine and consequent hoarding of grain by farmers and speculators. They appealed to the governor for legisla- tion to compel the merchants and producers to sell. ‘The edict is an early example of imperial interference in the regulation of prices in provincial towns. Although the famine must have been wide- spread, it may be noted that the edict does not apply to the whole province, but deals only with conditions in the city which presented the petition. Similarly in the reign of Trajan, Pliny and the emperor dealt with each city in Bithynia individually. The confession of impotence on the part of the magistrates of Antioch may have been a factor in the development of the policy of appointing curatores ret publicae to deal with problems of municipal government a few years later. For regulations in regard to control of local markets, cf. nos. gO and gt. Antioch was probably founded as a Roman colony prior to 27 B.c. although Ramsay favors a later date (ff R.E. 4, 531 f.; Ramsay, ‘Fourn. Rom. Studies, 6 (1916), 83 ff.). In the proclamation of the governor the chief magistrates and members of the local senate are styled by titles current in the West rather than by the Greek equiva- lents. ‘he use of the Latin language in the eastern provinces for the edict of governors is rare (cf. no. 22). The Roman calendar and the Roman system of weights and coinage were also used. It may be noted that a distinction is made between co/oni, who were Dae te?3, J) FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES probably descendants of the veterans settled there by Augustus, and the zncolae, who probably represent the original members of Antioch. In the time of Domitian the two classes had not yet been placed on an equal footing politically, cf. Fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 107 ff. 66. TITULUS HONORARIUS (81-96 p. Chr.) CIL. 11, 1945; Dessau, 1982. Imp. Domitiano | Caesari | Aug. Germanico | L. Munius Quir. || Novatus et | L. Munius Quir. | Aurelianus |. f. c. R. per honorem | II vir. consecuti || d.s. p. d.d. Found at Iluro in Baetica. On the grant of Roman citizenship on election to a local magistracy (czvitatem Romanam per honorem duoviratus), cf. pp. 191 ff. 67. TITULUS HONORARIUS (96-97 p. Chr.) B.C.H. 44 (1920), 73; dn. ép. 1922, no. 30. ‘O Sipos éreiunoev tats Sevrépais | teats Mapxov Koxxniov Népovav | rov avtoxpatopa brratov Te atrodedet| ypwéevov, evepryéerny Kal radtpwva Kai ow||THpa yeyovoTa THs Toews, AtroxaberTa-| Kota O€ nuiv Kal tHv wWdrpLov édevOepil|av Te Kal qroNeTetar, érraivat, xpuoo. | orepdvar apioteiws, eixom yadrKhe épir|trat, mpoedptar €v Tois ayaa, apeThs || Evexa kai evvolas Kal evep- yeoias Ths | els EavTov. From Lagina in Caria. Lagina (Stratonicaea) was given freedom and autonomy by a decree of the Roman senate in 81 B.c. (no. 17). The city still enjoyed these privileges in the time of Pliny the Elder (N.H. 5. 109), and probably lost them asa result of the fiscal reforms of Vespasian. From this document we learn that Nerva restored the former privileges. It may be doubted whether Vespasian made any change in the municipal constitution when he cancelled the immunity from tribute, and the restoration of the ancestral zroAuteia ascribed to Nerva probably means nothing more than a return to the former status of Stratonicaea in the empire. [ 383 ] Io Io Io 15 20 25 30 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 68. EPISTULAE LABERI MAXIMI ET ALIORUM DE FINIBUS HISTRIANORUM (43-100 p. Chr.) An. ép. 1919, no. 103; Annales de Pacadémtie Roumaine, 38, no. 15; Wilhelm, Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 59 (1922), 78 ff.; Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 329. ‘Opobecia AaBepiov Makiuou. | Fines Histrianorum hos esse constitut........... Pe|ucem lacum Halmyridem a dominio.............. | Argamensium inde IUPO'SUMIMNON rere te iter ad c|ljonfluentes rivorum Picusculi et Gabrant inde ab im\o Gabrano ad capud eiusdem inde... .uxta rivum | Sanpaeum inde ad rivum Turgiculum.......... | a rivo Calabaeo milia passuum circiter D. VI...... | "EriotoAn LaBeivov. || Pra B.0s LaBetvos loetpiavav dpyovo[wv |, BovrAje, dyuor | yai- pevv. To rept llevxny bpeiv dixaco[y brrws | axépasov 81|aTnpn Oe, 54 > \ > / / a > id ef €otat émiperes “Apovytios Prd[umat] Tae erdpxywt. Od|Tas yap avta@u éréotera. Aadnow dé cal Aiwdrvaver diadoyar | pov Kal els TO TravTEAes GvaTHOw Upas. "AXAN éricTOAy || TOD avtov LaBelvov. Pra. LaBeivos m[pecBevtis] “lorpslavav ” a 5 / / AT Hits \ \ e°N5N e / / / / épewv THY Oada || els THY EvosS ExaoTOUV xXpelav diya TédovS: mept | yap Tov THs Dns ypeLov avaudioByTnTa exere Spra | Kal THY €& éxetvov yphow racav Tat TéAEL [av ]uTevOuvor. | ‘Exiotonn Tloprwviov Iletov. | / a > lal BA la) / / Hopmeveos ITetos lorpiavév apxovety, [Bourie, Sypwwr ya li- pew. || Kai €x Tov yeypaupevov vuetv UTO Pr. LaBeivov [Kai Aimirs]|avod avépav émicnwotarav [Kal é]uol rermro[tatwy jy > Tf 0 v4 ¢€ ] Oé Qn / z n , avtt||AaBécOar bt. 4» acbévia THs Torews Kudlv mpovolas [ 384 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Tuvydver* po ovv] | mavrwy dpovtifovtos Tov Gevordrov [Kai- Tapos Kai ws AXNOAs cwTH || pos Hudr, iva pn povov Siapvray he ad[ra kal av&nOhu] || ra THv 7orAewv Sixaca, éréexperva THY TO |v k[ata orm ja elven ]s adu|evopéever iyOvav mpdcodov twetépav eivat, [ds] Sixaiwr tTad|ta Ta TENN OF TPOyovoL Vuar Kal TaTépes [THe] ydpete TOV Ye[Bacta |v | advadeitTws Ecyov. “ANAM ETrI- atody Udavtifov Ainelavod. | Tdavtios Atdsavos ‘lotpiavav adpyovow [yx laiperv. || To Wyidiopa vudv arédocdy poe oi Tpéo- Be[s K]adriotpatos | Anunrpiov cai Medias “Apteusdadpov. "HEvodre 5é Sua Tod Wn|dicpatos wapatreudhOjvar tHv evya- ptotovla jay [Tas] Texprwrdtar | jyuaov LaBelvor TpeaBeiar, 6 Kat Ov avtTovy povoy tov YaBetvoy [a]lopévws av émoinaa. "HEvodre 8é nal ta ths Wevens vueliv] dOpavol|ra typety Sixaca. "Ey 6€ tocodTov améy[w] Tod Opadcai Tt TOV éx | ypovov dudac- gTomévov vpety Oixaiwv, ws Kal Tapeupety av 7délws bu’ Ov evérras Koopelv apyéav Tod Kai ‘EXAnvida Kal ets Tov L[e]|Balorov evoeBH Kal Wpos uds avTovs ovcav evol[e |V%. | "Emictovn Tovanriou Tepivou. || TovrAXwos Déutvos rpecRevtns Kai avtictpatnyos TB. KrXa(v)- dilov Kaicapos LEB. Teppavixod “lotpiavav apxovow, BovrAr, Sypuwe| xaipew. Ov mpéoBers tuov Anpyntptos XaBpias Xaipny- pov Anuntpsos Aicypiwv Ta.[...] [Me]idias | Avovucddwpos ‘Hynoayopas “Apiotayopas M[ntpddwp los év|ruyovtes pow év Tomer 76 Wyidicpa vor érédocayr Kat ets Tov L[eBa]o||rov nuav émriderEdpevot evvoray auvncOnoay él ri THe] jwetépar v[yrel || ar Kal Tapovalar oTrovdeaTaTnY TroLnoduevor THY [TrEpl Oy éveret- Nag ||Oe avrots opwevrtav. ’Eruyvods ody (T)jv Kat mpos [mas avTovs THS|| Toews Voy SidOeowy Teipdcopat aet TLVOS U[wety aryabod| | yevéo Oat trapaitios. Iepi é Levens cal trav oropl[a- Tov dwdax |Oellis vireo TV mpécBewv vudv edixaiwoa TypicAat vuety TLa TOV Tpo||yovwy Vuwr OpLa. Exemplum epistulae | Mari Laberi Maximi, leg. Aug. pr. pr. | Imp. Caesari T'raiano Aug. Germanico 11 Iulio Fron|tino 11 cos. vu ka. Novembres. Descriptum || et recognitum factum ex comm, Mari Laberi | Maximi leg. Aug. pr. pr. Permitt..... | Fabio Pompeiano. Quae iam era .scri........ | Charagonio Phicora- AMA f 385.) 25 35 40 45 50 35 60 65 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN | laestro conductore publici por|toriripae Thraciae postulante ut vectigal 70 Hal\|myridis et Peuci daretur secundum veterem legem?|...... bit. Ius exigendi portorz........ Les! Pigs te arum dimensium usque I Ta ea | This document contains the letters of several governors of Moesia to the officials of the town of Histria. Laberius Maximus was governor in 100, Tullus Geminus in 54, Plautus Aelianus in 52-53, Pomponius Pius in 51, Aemilianus in 50, and Flavius Sabinus in 43-49. From the frequency of the letters, we may infer that the privileges of the city in regard to their monopoly of salt fish, their forest rights, and even the extent of their terrz- torium, were being constantly called in question, probably by the agents of the imperial fiscus. From this document we also learn that the chief source of revenue of the city came from its fishing privileges, but there is no evidence to prove that these were a municipal monopoly, leased out to its residents. 69. DECRETUM CHIORUM DE PECUNIA ADMINISTRANDA (saec. 1 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 948. iA [etvas tHv Saverow | Tod ypynuatos]| arralvTo]s, [ov- devos €yovt |los eEovciay Tav Sarv[evotav]...... | cataBorr[v] Tomoaclar ovdleuiav tov] apy||[v]piov Kat tev érrax[o |Aov- [O]ovvtwy tox[wv mpiv | T]o SceAOetv THY mevtaetiav. Aipe- [Ojvar | de] dvdpas oxTw év tais apyatpecias [eri] r[d|v] Savei[o |uov TOV xpnudtov peta THY aiplecty Tod | ayw|vobéTov 10 TOV LeBactay ayovwv. “E[mevta O]é || TV weTaTTapdoocuy yet- veoOat vio Tov TeTe[AE]|KOT@Y TH[Y] Xpelav avdpady Sia arro- ypagdhs H(t) éval[rn](c) tH(c) Tod Tlowesdemvos, [€]oouéevns a[vt jar[o|y]pal js] va[6 rév] rapada[uBav ]ovt[ |v, ra[vto |s | 15 TOD x[py]uatos eoopévns THs S[aveta]ews Kal|[O]ote m[poyé- yleartlat, tpolxataBarovvtwv tovt[av] | Kxat tolv alel xetplo|t[o]vn[O]noopévar a[vdp]ov z[nv | tT]od mpw[rou é]rous pet TpLlo nwep lav tp[cdv | rhs] Tod X[eBact od Teppave- Ko[v Kaica |pos uel pas | ye JvePdiLo Ju dei[vd ]pia Oy’* Kali, élav 20 €uBorimos ayn||Tac jv, Kai tLov]rov mpocxataBanrxr0o(v)yT@v On eeeeeeee [ 386 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES This inscription from Chios is important for the regulation of endowment funds given to the city. Eight men are chosen to ad- minister the trust, which is to accumulate for four years. Then the accumulated interest is to be paid to the proper officials, In the case of similar endowments, e.g. that of Salutaris at Ephesus (no. 71), the consent of the provincial governor was sometimes secured. Such a provision may have been found in the portion of the decree which has disappeared. 70. SMYRNAEORUM PORTARIA (saec. fere I vel 11 p. Chr.) I.B.M. 1021; Ditt. Sy//.3 1262; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1427. neg Wal Cane oh ore Sst mater | [T]ovs 7roAAods Kw[AVO vce [xou|v ]wvety THs mopOueias, mplos] | dé TovTous avTi S00 dBo- A av] || So dcodpia tremroinkace tLdv] | vadrov, dv avto TodTO kai o[uv]lecrnKotes Kal K@dvovTes | TOV Bovddpevoy TropOwev- [ew, | O]arws éravlay]ces adtots of [dello]uevoe THs rop[Ouletas xpa[v|rlar: opotws dé x[ai] mepi tas a[d|A]as mropOueias Ka- Koupyova[s kl|alta tavtd: édo€e thu Bovane x[ai | tole Syuas, KAUAL LAIN | CATO |, solu pvt seve esis e ke From Smyrna. ‘The document is apparently a decree of the city regulating the ferry traffic across the Hermus. Not enough of the inscription is preserved to enable us to determine whether the city was concerned in the regulation of the traffic because of a possible loss of revenue (cf. no. 128 where the ferry was a civic monopoly), or from a desire to keep the peace. 71. EPISTULA AQUILI PROCULI, PROCONSULIS ASIAE, AD EPHESIOS (104. p. Chr.) ILB.M. 481 (pt. 1v, p. 246, ll. 336 ff); Laum, Szftungen, 74. [Axovirrsos IpdxXos, 0 Naumrpo|tatos, Edeo[i]wv dpy[over, | Bovry, Snpas] yaipesv. | [OvetBcov Larourdprov dvr la trois Te ado les maci[v | worel’Tnv apiotov Kal Tpo|tepov év moA[Aol|s THs éav||[Tod purorewptas TroAAG TE Kal ov|y ws EtrvyEev Tape ]- oxnuévov | [rapadeiywata elds, dotrep|] Hv déEvov, év Tots [ 387 ] 25-2 Lon | 16) 345 poe She 360 305 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN [ote ]evorat[oss | nuwv etyov pirous: viv 8é, é|met tHy ev Tol AL mponip|ntrat | [weyiotous Te Kai aEtoNoyw|rdrots Swpor[s Koa ]- phoat pel[yarorpemas els Tern THs] Te érruparlectarn|s Kal peyia||[tTns Beds “Aptéuidos kat Tod] olxolv trav YeBaot |ov Kat THs | [vaerépas modews, Tols dé moreltas eis Stavoluas Kat KdH|[pous Kabcépwxe Onv. Sucpdpta, voulfw Kal Judas, | ed’ ots 7d | [cremroinxey Upetv Kal viv émravyédreTat ayabot|s, ypnvat THe Te | [prrorecuiar avtod avtarododvat Kal THe evpev|eias, a Tpos || [recuny avdtov endicate. Svvyidopar 8 vpety eis TO érrat|véoat te Tov | [avdpa Kai akidoat adrov Sixaias tap ety] papt- pias | [wpos TO Kal mrelous yevéoOar Todvs Kata ta] divata mpo|[@vpoupévous eis Ta Sora. Ta 8€ UT’ avrod Kate |povpeva xypy|[wata Kal Ta areixovicopata THs Oeod Kal Tas] eixovas 7 THOM eee a rates eee eee yep etek ss sea |. ] eravovde Bare eg Se lexpno[...... |. Je ovdéva BlovrAomar vulvt TpoT[we ovdevi oTE Tapevpéces ov|[d Jeusas wetLaBarety 7} wlaparral Ear TL T@OV UT avTov diaTeTaypélly wv: et S[E Tis émre|yerpylao lec 7 Nda[as 7) TapadrAdéar te THv | Vd vuely dia TolvTov tLod Wndicpatos cupwOncopéver | 7] eio[nynloacOai te TovoldTov meipacel, vToKeiaOw eis mpoo|xloo[u]now THs Kxupias ‘Apré- polos On. B w(uptows) € Kai eis Tov tep| |oTaTov dickov adrois bn. [dtouupiows mevtakioyetriots Kai || od]dev EXaTTOV éoTw dxoupov [arav To wapa THY] Kabtel[pwow. Svv|7]So(c)ula]e Sé avTa. eis TO Taow [viv havepav yevé|oOac t[Hv | Tle mpos THY Oeov evoéBeraly Kal Thy rpds Tovs Ye]|Bacro[vs | lal tiv mpds THY TOW €[Upmevetav avTov év TL] Oedtpar. | *"Epp[woGe]. From Ephesus. Of the great inscription which records the en- dowment founded by Vibius Salutaris for the benefit of his fellow- citizens at Ephesus, we have given only the letter of the governor ratifying the gift and naming the penalty imposed on anyone who should seek to void or disregard the provisions of the foundation. We rarely find a record of such ratifications by imperial officials (cf. Laum, op. cit. nos. 194, 162, 206), and the act was probably unnecessary, but the submission of the terms of the gift to the emperor or to the governor was inspired by motives of vanity and by a desire to bring the individual or the city to the notice of the central government. ‘This procedure gave an excellent opening for [ 388 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES imperial interference in municipal matters, and undoubtedly led to the development of paternalistic tendencies. In general, endow- ments which provided for the-distribution of money to citizens were deprecated (cf. no. 101; Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 116, 117). Since Salutaris provided that 450 denarii should be distributed annually to the senators at the rate of a denarius apiece, we learn that the Ephesian senate normally had 450 members at this period (cf. the commentary of the editors of the 1.B.MZ. ad loc.). Laum points out that fully half of the endowment assigned to provide a dole to the six tribes at Ephesus had disappeared or had been diverted to other uses within a few years after the foundation (op. czt. 1, 222. ft); 72. TTTULUS OPERIS PUBLICI (rrr p. Chr-) An. &p. 1904, no. 59. ! Imp. Caesar | divi Nervae f. | Nerva Traianus | Aug. Ger- manicus || Dacicus pont. maximus | trib. pot. xv imp. V1 cos. V | p. p. redacta in formam | provincia Arabia | Viam Novam a finibus || Syriae usque ad | Mare Rubrum aperuit | et stravit per C. | Claudium Severum | leg. pro pr. || CLXVI. This inscription and no. 103 record the completion of public works under the order of the emperor for the benefit of provincial communities. For a similar inscription of an earlier date, cf. no. 31. 73. SENATUS CONSULTUM ET EPISTULA TRAIANI AD PERGAMENOS DE LUDIS INSTAURANDIS (112-117 p. Chr.) CIL. 11, S. 7086; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 336; Alterthiimer von Pergamon, Vil, 2, 269. (Primi versus omisst sunt) We baritiseicisicysin oa carey. atpatnyot cal.|..]o[v] KXavdiouv LerAa- vod apxtepéws|..... COS uae eae las s. c. factum de postulatione Pergamenorum(?) | placere ut certamen illud, quod in honorem templi Tovis amicalis et | Imp. Caes. divi Nervae f. Nervae Traiani Au- gusti Germanici Dacici || pontzficts maximi est constitutum eicedac- TiKov in Civitate | Pergamenorum, eiusdem condicionis sit, cuius [ 389 ] Io T5 15 20 25 30 35 40 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN est quod in honorem Romae | et Divi Aug. 1bi agitur, ita ut ea impendia, quae propter id certamen | frert oportebit, cedant in onus Tuli Quadrati clarissimi viri. | ........eorumque ad quos ea res pertinebit. || [Kedanraiov éx r]@v Kaicapos évrok@v. | Cum secundum meam constitutionem certamen in civitate | Pergamenorum ab Iulio Quadrato amico clarissimo viro quinquennale, | quod dicttur eloeAacTLKOV, constitutum sit idqg. amplissimus ordo | ezusdem turts esse decreverit, Culus est quod in eadem civitate || 2 honorem Romae et divi Aug. institutum est, huius quogq. ise(l)as|tzcz zdem quod in altero certamine custoditur dare oportebit | victorzbus praemium. | [Adroxpatwp Kaicap @eot Nepova vilis Népovas Tpaiavos ~A \ \ / ’ N / ptatos | [SeBaoros Teppavixds Aaxcxos, ap]}xcepeds pméytoros, Snuapyixns || [éBovcias TO &., av’ToKpatwp TO.., Uma]tos TO / \ / a A a ‘ a / s', matnp matpioos, | [Ilepyaunvarv the Bovrne cat TH]t Snuor / ’ / e A / > / : le | y yaipew. | [EXGovens tua rpecBeias, arrodeEa]uevos avtis TO te d&iwpa | [kal Ta cuyypaupata, wept TavTwv ad év avT lois pb) 7 i / nEiooate cuyxatebéunv | [.....+eeeeeeeess MelT]acxouTe, eriTpéem@ ovv U||[wiv.......+e+e+-JAOvT@Y ev ayopaiols | [tHE cs or: ss. | TON GEM PLOY Dla Leu Gy le seer tn eae Sea! \ ‘ \ ¢€ Rigen TOD@ | Ole Kt TAS UT One ts nehel csi ele iar From Pergamum. This inscription deals with the relations of a senatorial province to the emperor and senate. When Julius Quad- ratus wished to establish games in honor of Trajan in Pergamum, the emperor was apparently consulted first. He referred the matter to the senate, and when they approved the request, the emperor issued the edict instead of the senate (secundum meam constitutionem). He also confirmed the senate’s action in making the games equal in rank to those in honor of Augustus. The letter of Trajan in Greek is too fragmentary to permit an accurate interpretation, but it apparently deals with some remission of the market-tax during the games. If so, the tax was probably an imperial one levied in a senatorial province. For Julius Quadratus, cf. Waddington, Fastes des provinces astatiques, 114. [ 390 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 74. EPISTULA PROCURATORUM AD COLONOS VILLAE MAGNAE (116-117 p. Chr.) Bruns, 114; Girard, p. 870; Riccobono, p. 352. Pro salute | Aug(usti) n(ostri) imp(eratoris) Caes(aris) ‘Traiani princ(zpzs) | totiusque domus divine | optimi Germanici Parthici. Data a Licinio || Maximo et Feliciore Aug(usti) lib(erto) procc(ura- toribus) ad exemplum | /egis Manciane. Qui eorum zntra fundo villae Mag|ne Variani id est Mappalia Siga habitabunt, eis eos agros qui su| dcesiva sunt excolere permittitur lege Manciana | .. .ita ut eas qui excoluerit usum proprium habellat. Ex fructibus oh e€0 loco nati erunt, dominis au¢ | conductoribus vilicisve eius f(undi) partes e lege Ma|nciana prestare debebunt hac condicione: coloni | fructus culusque culture quos ad aream deportare | et terere debe- bunt, summas deferant arbitratu || suo conductoribus vilicisve ezus f(undi) et si conducto|res viliczve eius f(undi) in assem partes col(on)icas datur|as renuntiaverint tabellisgue obsignatis...f s ca- vea|nt eius fructus partes, quas prestare debent, | conductores vili- cive eius f(undt) coloni colonicl|las partes prestare debeant. Qui in f(undo) villae Mag|nae sive Mappalia Siga villas habent habebunt | dominicas dominis eius f(undi) aut conductoribus vilicisve | eorum in assem partes fructuzm et vinearwm ex | consuetudine Manciane cuzusque gene||ris habet prestare debebunt; tritici ex a/ream partem tertiam, hordei ex aream | partem tertiam, fabe ex aream partem qu|artam, vinu de laco partem tertiam, ol|ez coacti partem tertiam, mellis in alve||zs mellaris sextarios singulos. Qui supra | quinque alveos | habebit in tempore quo vm|demia mellaria fust fuerit, | dominis aut conductorzbus vili||cisve eius f(undi) qui in assem par- tem... | d(are) d(ebebit). Si quis alveos, examina, apes, vasa | mellaria ex f(undo) villae Magne sive M|appalie Sige in octonarium agrum | transtulerit, quo fraus aut dominis aut || conductoribus vili- cisve eis quam fiat, alu|ez, examzva, apes, vasa mellaria, mel qui in eo f(undo) | erunt conductorwm vzlicorumve in assem ezus | f(undi) erunt. Ficus aride arboresve aliaeque extra poma|rio erunt, qua pomarium intra villam ipsam || sit, ut non amplius iusta vindemia fiat, colon|us arbitrio suo coactorum fructuum conducto|ri vilicisve Peckeid Col. 1 IO 15 20 Io 20 25 30 Col. 111 5 Io 15 20 Col. Iv Io T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN eius f(undi) partem tantam d(are) d(ebelit). Ficeta vete|ra et oliveta, que ante hance Jegem sata sunt, ex consuetu|dine fructum conductori vilicisve eius prestare || debeazt. Si quod ficetum postea factum erit, eius ficeti | fructum per continuas ficationes quinque | arbitrio suo e7 qui serverit percipere permittitur, | post quintam ficationem eadem lege qua s(upra) s(criptum) est | conductoribus vilicisve eius f(undi) p(restare) d(ebebit). Vineas serere || colere loco veterum permittitur ea condicione uf | ex ea satione proxumis vindemis quinque fructus | earum vinearum Is qui ita secuerit suo arbitrio per|cipzat itemque post quinta(m) vindemia(m) quam ita sata | erit, fructus partes tertias e lege Manciana conduc||toribus | vz/icisve eius in assem dare debe| zt, Olivetum serere colere in | eo loco qua quis incultum excolulerit permittitur ea condicione ult ex ea satione eius fructus oliveti q|uid ita satum est per olivationes pro|ximas decem arbitrio suo percipe|re debeat, item post olivationes (decem) olez | coacti partem tertiam conducto||ribus vilicisve eius f(und1) d(are) d(ebebit). Qui inserue|rit oleastra post o/ivationes guinque par|tem tertiam d(are) d(ebebit)........in f(undo) | ville Magne Varzanz sive Mappaliae | Sige sunt eruntve extra eos agros qui || vicias habent, eorum agrorum fruct|us conductoribus vilicisve eius d(are) d(ebe- bunt); custodes e|xigere debebumt. Pro pecorague intra f(undum) ville M|agne sive Mappalie Sige pascentur, in pectora sin|gula aera quattus conductoribus vilicisve do||minorum eius f(undi) prestari debebumt. Si quis ex f(undo) ville | Magne seve Mappalie Sige fructus stantem pen|dentem, maturum inmaturum caeczderit, ex- cider|it, exportaverit deportaverit conbuserit desequer|it sequentis ézenii detrimentum conductoribus vilicisve eius f(undi) | coloni erit ei cul de..,. | tantum prestare d(ebebit). 82 gui in f(undo) ville Mag|ne siv(e) Mappalie Sige arbores frugiferas se|verunt severint its e1us superfictet usum || quie legitimo....... fibestamen iS. 4 cee suplerficies...hoc tempus lege Manciana | ritu.. .fiducieve data sunt dabuntur. ..zd| . . ve ius fiduciae lege Manciana servaditur. . . Qui || superficiem ex inculto excoluit excoluerit zbique | .. .aedi- ficium deposuit posuerit zsve qui co/uit colere | desierit perdesierit eo tempore, quo ita ea superfices | coli desit desierit, ea quo fuit fuerit ius colendi dumtaxa|d biennzo proximo ex qua die colere desierit servatur || servabitur; post biennium conductores vilicive eorum. . . | [ 392 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Ea superficies que proxumo anno culta fuit et coli desi|erit con- ductor vilicusve eius f(undi) e cuius ea superficies esse dicit|ur denuntiet superficiem cultam...... | denuntiationem denuntiatur .., testa. ..,.— || o 1temque in sequentem annum perszstat ea sine quere|/a eius f(undi) post biennium conductor vilicusve co/ere de-| beto, Ne quis conductor vilicusve eorum inquilinum ezus | f(undi). Coloni qui intra f(undum) ville Magne seve Mappalia Sige habit-| abunt dominis aut conductoribus vilicisve in assem qgu\jodannis in hominibus szmgulis in arationes ope|ras n(umero) 11 et in messem op........generis | singulas operas binas prestare debebunt. Co- loni | inquilini eius f(undi) intra. . .anni njomina sua conductorzbus vilicisve....in Custo||dias singulas qu............. nent | ratam seorsum...um, | Stipendiariorum qui in f(undo) ville Magne sive Mappa|lieSige habitabunt.. . . uas cljonductoribus vilzczsve. . . cust-|| odias f(undi) servis dominic. . . nit est | (quae sequuntur quinque lineae legi non possunt.) Hec lex scriptaa Luro Victore Odilonis magistro, et Flavio Gemlinio defensore; Felice Annobalis Birzilis. I, ll. 16-17. daturas; daturos se, Rostowzew. I, 1. 17. sine fraude sua; f s, ¢ab/et. II, 1. 10. eis quam; usquam or eis qu(i) (in) a(sse)m, Gradenwitz. II, 1. 13. arboresve aliae que, Schulten; arborum earum quaeque, Ros- towzew, taking ficus aride as a genitive. ITI, 1. 12. in fundo, ¢sab/ez; Qui agri herbosi in fundo, Rostowzew. - IIT, 1. 23. desequerit = desecuerit, Touzain. III, 1. 24. fundi, tale; perhaps fundi prestare debebit, Schulten. IV, 1. 1. coloni, zab/et; Si culpa coloni, Schu/ten. IV, 1. 1. ei cui de...; ei cui debet partes colonicas alterum, H. Krier. IV, ll. 5-6. Gradenwitz remarks that the sense requires qui e legitimo iure ad hereditatem eius venient vel testamento instituti heredes erunt. IV, 1. 8. ritu...; pignori(s) t(itulo), Gradenwitz and Dessau; Schulten gives sense of passage: Si quae aedificia superficiesve post hoc tempus e lege Manciana pignori obligata fiducieve data sunt dabuntur eorum in biennium colono heredi eius fiducia e lege Manciana servabitur. IV, ll. 16-22. Schulten restores the sense as follows: Ea superficies que proximo anno culta fuit et coli desierit conductor vilicusve eius fundi el cuius ea superficies esse dicitur denuntiet superficiem cultam colen- dam esse; si post hanc denuntiationem denuntiatas cessare pergat itemque insequentem annum persistat, ea superficies sine querela eius post triennium conductor vilicusve eius fundi colere debeto. IV, 1. 19. after denuntiatur Schu/lten finds on stone essegabit or essechatis. IV, 1. 21. Schulten thinks eius fundi 4e/ongs after conductor vilicusve. E339 3s 20 25 30 So MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN IV, 1.23. after fundi Schulten conjectures that plus quam.. .prestare cogat has fallen out. IV, 1. 26. after messem Schulten proposes operas n...et in sarritiones culusque. : IV,1. 29. after vilicisve the words eius fundi edere et operas have been suggested. IV, 1. 30. after singulas the words quas agris prestare debent have been proposed. IV, 1. 33. after vilicisve the words eius fundi prestare debeant ave been suggested. The words Hec lex, etc., stand at the bottom of the first column. An altar found in 1896 at Henchir Mettich in Tunis. The inscription is written on all four sides of it. For list of articles bearing on it, cf. Bruns, Girard, Riccobono, and Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 322 ff. Trajan’s title of Parthicus fixes its date. It con- tains, after a dedication of the altar to the emperor (ll. 1-4), a letter of the procurators. At the bottom of the first column stand the words hec lex scripta, etc., here printed at the end. The letter is addressed to the co/oni of the villa Magna Variani sive Mappalia Siga (cf. col. 1, ll. 6-7), and settles certain disputes between them and the conductor. There are three main points at issue: What part of the produce is due from the tenants? How many days’ labor do they owe to the conductor each year? What rights have they in new land put under cultivation? Perhaps the general regulations of the /ex Manciana (cf. pp. 17 ff.) on these points are at variance with local usage, and need to be modified. More probably, however, as in the case of the sa/tus Burunitanus (cf. no. 111), the conductor has been demanding more than the law allowed. At all events the procurators settle the dispute in this letter, in which they set forth, in a form adapted to the purpose and perhaps modified for the locality, the pertinent regulations of the law mentioned above. This document is engraved by the local representatives of the colonz, the magister and the defensor (cf. p. 19). The lex Manciana, being intended for all the estates within a given district, covers both imperial domains and such private estates as still exist. The dominz, to whom frequent reference is made, are probably private owners, or possibly head-tenants (cf. Heitland, Agricola, 343). The con- ductores are agents in charge of imperial or private estates. The vilici are subordinate overseers. Outside of the administrative classes [i 39455) FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES the document speaks of co/oni, or regular tenants, inguilini, possibly landless residents on the estates (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 3413 cf. however, Seeck, R.E. 4, 496), and stipendiari, perhaps occupants ofan ager stipendiarius within thelimitsof the fundus (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 341). This ager stipendiarius may be identical with the ager octonarius (11, 1. 8), z.e. the land upon which eight denarii were to be paid for each acre (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 341). Licinius Maximus (1, ll. 4-5) seems to be the procurator tractus Kartha- giniensis, and Felicior, the freedman, is procurator of the local saltus. Of the names mentioned at the bottom of the first column, Lurius Victor, the son of Odilo, is the local headman. The full title of defensor would probably be defensor gentis, although this official is not to be identified with the later defensor civitatis (cf. Toutain, Nouv. rev. hist. d. droit fr. et étr. 21 (1897), 389 f). Whether Flavius Geminius or Felix, son of Birzil, and grandson of Annobal, holds this position is uncertain (cf. Toutain, op. cit. 23 (1899), 411-412; Schulten, bh. d. kénigl. Ges. d. Wiss. zu Gét- tingen, phil.-hist. Klasse, Neue Folge, 11, no. 3, p. 36). The main provisions of the document are these: The co/ont may put under cultivation the subseciva, or small tracts of land not already cultivated (1, ll. 6-9). In return they are to pay the part of the produce fixed by the /ex Manciana (1, ll. 10-20). Those who occupy farms, orchards, or vineyards, or keep bees must pay according to the consuetudo Manctana (1, |. 20-11, |. 6). Honey fraudulently taken to the ager octonarius (to avoid the usual payment?) will be confis- cated (11, 1]. 6-13). The rental in the case of dried figs and olives is determined by usage (11, ll. 17-20). ‘Those who set out an orchard of fig trees or a vineyard may have all the figs or grapes for five years, but after that they must pay rental (11, Il. 20-30). An olive orchard planted on uncultivated ground is free for ten years (111, ll. 2-10); wild olive trees, put under cultivation, for five years (111, ll. 10-12). For each head of cattle four denarii are to be paid (m1, ll. 17-20). If anyone damage or take away property, a penalty is fixed (111, ll. 20-24). Transfer of land is allowed on certain conditions (iv, ll. 2-9). After two years abandoned property goes to the overseers (tv, ll. 9-21). The co/ont must render a certain number of days’ work free, probably six, each year (tv, ll. 23-27). The zzguilinz, and [ 395 ] On Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN probably the stzpendiari, must register (tv, ll. 27 ff). From the fact that farms could be abandoned (rv, ll. gq—21), it would seem to follow that at the beginning of the second century tenants were free to leave an estate. The rental, including, as it did in most cases, one-third of the produce of the land (1, Il. 25 ff) and six days’ labor on the private land of the contractor, seems rather high, but on the other hand the privilege granted to sub-tenants of bringing waste land under cultivation and of enjoying the entire return from it for a period of five or ten years, seems to show a desire to keep the co/oni on the land and confirms the conclusion that they were at liberty to give up their holdings. ‘The small number of days’ labor exacted of the tenants each year seems to indicate that slave labor was freely employed on this estate, although there is only one reference to slaves in the docu- ment (iv, 1. 35), and although we should naturally suppose that there must have been a scarcity of slaves at this time in consequence of the comparatively small number of prisoners taken in foreign wars. For a fragmentary inscription dealing with the imperial domains, cf, 4n. ép. 1913, no. 72. 75. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS TRAIANI AD ASTYPALAEENSES (117 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR, 4, 1031; IG. xu, 3, 175. Avtoxpatwp Kaicap Qe0d Tpaiavod [IapOixod] | vios, Geod Nepova viwvos, Tpaiavos [ Adpravos] | 2eBactos, apyrepeds péyt- o7os,onulapxexns | €Elovoias, bratos 10 8’, ActuTran[ aréwr Tots || dpyoluc. kai tHe Bovarye cai THe Sypor yaip[ew. | Kal wa]pa Tov mpeaRevTod vuav Ie[tpwviov tod | ‘Hpdxw|vtos Kal éx Tov Wwndicpat[os vuav | Ewabov] dorras naOnte SiadeEapér[ou euod | THY Tat |porav apynv, éravécas S[é vuds || e¢ adNO]as thy édevbepiav v[ piv 0 TaTHp wou edwxev, avTHY KaTAaKUpoCAS... This inscription is engraved on the same stone as no. 36, and comes from Astypalaea. We have adopted the restoration proposed by Domaszewski (Ditt. Sy//.3 832, note). Apparently the privileges [ 396 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES granted to a state by any emperor were valid only during his reign, and had to be confirmed by his successors (cf. nos. 4.0, 130). Astypa- laea had once been an ally of Rome (Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d Asie, 114), but it seems that its freedom and immunity from taxation had been curtailed (cf. no. 76). : 76. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI AD ASTYPALAEENSES (118 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 19; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1032¢; IG. x11, 3, 176; Ditt. Sy1.3 332. Av’toxpatwp Kaicap, Geod Tpaiavod Ilap@ix[od] | vids, Oeod Nepova viwves, Tpaiavos ‘Adpsavos | LeBaotos, apysepeds pé- ytoTos, Onuapxixns | éEovoias, Uratos To 8’, AcotuTaratéor || dpyovat kai THLE BovaAnt Kal TH. Sypwwr yaipew. |’ Evrvyov vudv 5 To. Whdicpari, dre wev atrolpeiy dare Kai ov SivacOai Tereiv TO émayyeAd|TLxOv apyvpLov éwavOavor’ ov nv oTrd|cov TE TODTO ovdé éx mote héperv avTo HpEac[Ge.... From Astypalaea. The liberty of the Astypalaeans had been taken away by the Flavian emperors and restored by Trajan (cf no. 75). From this document we learn that the aurum coronarium was paid by free cities as well as by others. This tax had been re- mitted by Hadrian in Italy and lessened in provincial cities (Hist. Aug. Vit. Hadr. 6). Apparently the payment of the tax had been a serious burden for the Astypalaeans, and they sent an embassy to the emperor to ask for its remission. Cf. 4th. Mitt. 48 (1923), 99 f- 77. EPISTULA LEGATI AD POMPAELONENSES (119 p. Chr.) CIL, 11, 2959. Claudius Quartinus | 11 viris Pompe/(onensibus) salutem. | Et ius magistratibus vestri | exequi adversus contumaces || potestis et 5 nihilominus, qui | cautionibus accipiendis de|sunt, sciant futurum ut non | per hoc tuti sint. Nam et | non acceptarum cautionum peri-|| culum ad eos respiciet et quid|quid praesentes quoque egerint, | 10 id communis oneris erit. Bene | valete. Dat(um) non(is) Octubri- [:397)3] 15 Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN (bus) Ca|/lagori imp(eratore) Caes(are) Traiano || Hadriano Aug- (usto) 111 co(n)s(ule). Bronze tablet from Pompaelo in Tarraconensis. The last sentence fixes the date as a.p. 119. The writer’s name in full is Ti. Claudius Ti. f. Pal. Quartinus (cf. Boissieu, Jnscr. de Lyon, 284, no. 38). He was at this time /egatus of ‘Tarraconensis. The letter is written at Calaguris (or Callagoris) Nasica, the birthplace of Quintilian. Its interest lies in the fact that it seems to confirm the judicial compe- tence of the local magistrates in the matter of requiring a cautio (cf. no. 27). Mommsen would correct guogue to quique. 78, EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI AD EPHESIOS (120 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 23; Ditt. Sy//.3 833. [Adroxpatwp] Kali]oap, e0d Tpai(a)vod Ilap@cxod vids, | [Gcot Nepova v]iwves, Tpaiavos ‘Adpiavos XeBacros, | [apyvepeds bléytotos, Snuapyexns éEovacias to 8, | [Urratos T]0 x’, Edeciov THL yepovoiar yaipery. || [Méttvos] Modeotos 6 Kpatuctos ev érroinoey Ta Oix|[aca viv Katalveiwas ev THe Kpioes érrel Sé monrxrovs eonrAL@aate] | opletept |SecOar ypnuata vuérepa, ovoias Tov Sedavio[pée]|volv «latéyovtas, ob dacKkovtas dé KAnpovo- pty, Tovs [dé] | kal [ad]rods ypewotas dvtas, réroudha vuov TO avt[iypadgor] || Tob Wndicpatos Kopynrias Ipeioxwt tHe Kpatiatw: | avOuTratw., iva et TL ToLovTOY ein emridéEnTai Twa, | Os Kplvel Te Tapia ByTovpEva Kal eiompakes TavTa | doa av opeiAntat Tht yepovaiat. “O mperBevav jv | KaoKnédrXos I [ov]- TLUKOS, @L TO eod.soy So0OnTw, ef ye pr || TpotKa vréloxe|To mpeaBevoew. EKvtuyette. Ip(o) & x(aravdev) “OxtwBpior. | [T'pappatevortos Io |mrdiov “Pouteiriov Bacaou, From Ephesus. The members of the gerusza at Ephesus had lost money by bad investments and appealed to the governor for assistance in solving their financial difficulties. The former governor of the province had given them some help in this matter, but the properties of certain debtors had passed into the hands of new owners, and these claimed that they did not inherit the obligations of the former owners, as they were not their heirs-at-law. The emperor instructed [ 398 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES the present governor to appoint a judge to settle these cases and exact the amounts due to the gerusta. The right of tpwrompaéia, or first lien on property, was thus granted to the gerusza by the emperor. Trajan refused to grant this privilege to Bithynian towns to the detriment of private individuals, unless the city already had acquired the right from former emperors, who, apparently, had granted it freely (Pliny, Epp. ad Traz. 108, 109). 79. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) AD HERACLEOTAS (121-125 p. Chr.) B.C. Hear r8q7), 162. SETAE ot AevToupyeiTwoav’ ol O€ KEKTNMEVOL MOVOY Tats THE | [wronee € |rriBarXopévars Aectoupytass UrevOuvor Ectwoay: Tiva | [dé det tp lomov oropyvcbar Tas odovs, Kowa. Siatadyuwate édy- Awoa: | [Ke]Aevm kat ANTANOTS ocuvtereiy vpety eis ta avarkopata, || TO Tpitov cvvecadépovtas: 7 Sé cuverapopa ye- véo Ow atro | Trav é€v Maxedovias dvrav ANTANON. Euruyeire. | IIpo uy’ karavdav ‘louviwy: amo Avppayiov. This inscription is said to have been found on the site of Heraclea in Macedonia. Heraclea was a free state (Caesar, B.C. 3. 34; Strabo, 7. 7, p. 326). From this letter we learn that the citizens of this city, who owned property, were responsible for the main- tenance of that part of the Egnatian Way which lay within their territorium, or, possibly, of the roads which led from the main highway through their district, since the plural form oédovs is used. It is probable that the cévitates berae were required to keep in repair the state roads which passed through their domains (ef. Le Bas-Waddington, 2806). In the case of Heraclea the citizens were helped by the ANTANOI who were required to contribute a third of the expense. Perdrizet thinks that the reading of this word is incorrect, but offers no emendation. He assumes that it refers to some corporation of traders in Macedonia who were concerned in the proper upkeep of the roads (B.C.H. 21 (1897), 162 f). The reading ’Arivravot is suggested by Holleaux (Rev. d. ét. gr. II (1898), 273 ff). [ 399 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 80. EPISTULA LEGATI LYCIAE, VALERI SEVERI, AD RHODIAPOLITANOS (225 p.-Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 16; Lafoscade, 104. Ovarrjpios YeovAplos, w]pecBevtns YeBaorod | ‘Podsarrones- tov [ap]yovar, BovrAnt, dnuat | yaipev. ‘Os a€sod[ re], "Omrpapoar 5 A[m]oArwvilov dis tod Kada[iddolu, dvte caroe cal al|yabar Toneitne Kall ov] povov ths ald tuav paptupilas, ad]ra Kal Ths amd | Tov €Ovous érri[Bonoews TUXOVTL TELmas] | Duds Wdi- Ceo[Aar ndéws éritpérra. | “Eppa@oOar vulas evyouar. *A[ve- 10 yp]ad[y] || emi dpye(epéos) “Atrddov tod Paviov, Aciov a’. We have included a few (nos. 84, 87, 97, 99, 102) of the in- scriptions engraved on the walls of the mausoleum of Opramoas, a distinguished citizen of Rhodiapolis in Lycia. Before his death, Opramoas collected a series of honorary decrees and letters from the emperor and provincial governors and had them engraved on the tomb which he had erected. ‘They constitute an important record for the study of the relation of the central government to the municipalities of the province and to the co.vov. From them we learn that honorary decrees were submitted to the governor or to the emperor by the xowvov and by the cities, that the governor had the right of vetoing such decrees, and that an appeal could be made to the emperor over the veto of the governor. ‘This is the case with decrees conferring unusual honors. It was, apparently, the practice of cities to refer honorary decrees to the governor or emperor, probably through motives of vainglory or servility, for many of the documents on the monument of Opramoas are mere acknowledgments by the officials, and there is no indication that their sanction of the action of the city was required. In the docu- ment which we have given above, the Rhodiapolitani ask for the approval of the governor in conferring honors upon Opramoas. [ 400 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 81, RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) AD PERGAMENOS DE COLLYBO (125 p. Chr.?) Ditt. Or. Gr. 484; Alterthiimer von Pergamon, VitI, 2, 279. set © 8 @ ovUmEV TW S16 @2759 8 26.8.6 6 ®©6 0@© @ @ 8 6.673056 6.9 8 @ @ © peTemrep. |- Wapunv, Bovrnbeis pelv] pail|[verOar dixavos Kata THY euavTod avy |nOevav, pova é Tadta é€etaca | [Ta éykAnpaTa TOV épya- Coméver tr |i THS TOAEwS (U)u@v avdpar, Tepi wv || [0 dtoaTaneis vp wvuov mpecBevtns K]arovicios TAvKcwv édidakev nas. Ila|[petvar 8 éxéXevca avtovs, wa SArlov iv et te réyeuv éBovrovto. ‘O ody THs al[peirews TpoTros ov voutmos HY, AJ|A(A)a Tapa TO dikatoy Kal Tapa THY cuVadrayny | [wpdTTEW avTois élaétperrov. Ilapa yap Tav épyactay Kai KkaTydov Kal TOV o|[yrapromwmr@v elis Tov eTTOV Ewrodady EeiwHoTwY YadKOoV Sexaoxtw acaadpia || [To on |vdp[sov] AawBdvev odeirovtes Kal Tots TO Onvaplov Siadrdaocev Bov|[r louévos[s po |s [6 je[xa lerra Sid0vat ovK HpKodVTO THY TOV accapiwy apme|uv, adda Kal éav Snvapiwy apyup@v Tis ayopacnt TO ovpaptov, Kal” Exalatov dnvapiov eicétrpaccov accapiov év. “Kdokev ody jwely Karas ” > \ \ fa) lal / \ / a éyew | eis [T]o Aoutrov TodTO SiopOAcbat, iva wy) cvpPRaivne Tots avntais UT avtav || reXwvetcOat, Kal wv ovdeuiav avTots éEou- / / / e / nA lal > / ciav Sed0c8ar cvpRéBnxev. |"Oca pévtor TOY NeTTOY orapiwv oTaOua. TimpacKkopeva TYLaTaL LTO | TAY ayopavopwrv, TOUTwY, Kav THeElovas pvas @VHTwYTAl TIVES, Hpe|oTEV Tucty THY TYLNV avTovs S1ddvar Tpds Képwa, Bote aT avTav aewa|fecOae THe TOAEL THY EK TOV KONAVBOU Tpocodov. “Opmoiws Kai éav Trelollves cuvOéuevor apyupov Snvapiov ddEwow nyopaxévas eita Sd.at-| nr \ / \ é 5 / \ a > / pOVvTal, Kab TOUTOUS AETTTOV OLOOVAL YAAKOV TwL OvapLOTTeXAN, / > / p Ea," \ , ‘ 6 6 / be \ 5 \ iva avaldépntar ért tHv tpamelavs dvdovar Sé pds SexaeTTa dooapua, érrei|O1) 7) THS auerTTiKHs Epyacia(s) Soxet povots Tots épyactais Siaréyer|Oar. "H(A)E(y)xOncav peta TodTo Kal Erepa Tia ovVKEYwPNKOTES Eav||TOls KEpOaY OvoOM“aTa doTpaTovpay TE Kat TO Kadovpevoyv Tap avTots | tpocpaytov, dv ov émnpéalov padota Tovs TOV ixOvv TimpacKovtas. | Kal tadra ody édoxi- , A a \ \ ~ 7 en pacapev Si0p0Gc0ar* TreoventeicOat yap Tovs | OXrtyous va ’ An , (4 n S / \ n > \ avTav avOpwrovs 8(7r)ov nv, cvvéBawvev S€ Tac aicOn| THY ryelver Oar Tois MvoUpévols THY AOLKOY TOV TETpacKoVvT@Y En||ulav. AMA [ 401 ] 26 Io 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 oo 60 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 3 / \ J > / \ a > A > / HtiaOnoav Kal @s éveoptadia Tapa Tov épyacTav eioTpdo- cov|tes, dmep apvovpévav avtov Hdéws ériatevov, TOD 2) Odel- New | yelverPar TO ToLodTO KawBdvwv Kal Thy Tap’ avTav / / f ¢ / a c if cuveatabecw. | Movov pévtot @poroyouv ta. “TrrepBepetaiwr pnvi diSoc8at éav|tots TO eis TOV “Epuh Aeyomevov €x ToLavTns adhopuns' dpkov éautois || amatety cvveeywpnabat Tapa Tov évTOA@VT@Y TO AETTOV Kal | Tpds AUTOS avadEpovTwY TrEpl TOD pndev avtovs tapa tHv bia|takw tretounkévat. Tods ody dia To cuverdos ouvovat un Svvapé|vous dcddvat Te avTots, OoTE 1) THY A> / 3’ ‘ c if, A b] 7 7 ? Tov ouv¥vat avayKny UTopé|vetv* 0 ovK edoEeV Adoyov. ’AvTOL- yUvat MEVTOL Kat aUTOVS Tots Epy[ac |||Tals Trepl TOU pwNndev avTOVS NOLKNKEVAL EV THL TOV apyupovd vopio[wa]|tos Soces Kal avTO dixatov nynoaunyv. “ENéyovto Kai évexvpalai]las éavtots tovet- > / ¢t/ nm b] fal yA > lal cbav) émitpéme ONaS TE TOV Epyactav éo[O bte] | Kparety \ b ] / an fal 3 lal / > \ Tas €uTords, THS TvVarrAaY|h|s ov TOUTO curYwpov[ons |, | aAdXa emi TovS Tapulas avTovs TwapayelverOat Kedevovor[s, av] || > / / \ cee / / U lal aitidowvrTal Twa, Kal Tap éxeivov Snuocioy NauPBar[ey dod]|- Aor, iva vowipmws To@vTa THY évexupaciary, Wate [TO TPO THS| | Kpioews TOVTML THL TpoTaL ANPOEV pévew ToLis opetroue |s. | Kai a 5 yy ¢ an e/ > / / c/ TovTo ovv édokev nuciv otTas ddeirew yeir[ecOar, O7]ws al C10: \ \ nw / t 7 \ me|puetyev 1) Exdoats, Kal Oia TOD Snuootov pévTot [SovrAOV p17) / ss 2 \ b] } > VN AVE \ \ / ov |upe||tpov elvar Thy evexvpaciay, adra7) TO ixav[ ov po Kpic |ews ALa]uBa|vecOat, } éav Sodvat tis uy SbvnTar TO o[vuBora |tor, eivale Td élvéyupov bcov dv TO Tpayua Kal TO ew avTau [wpoc]tiuov ju. [Tas pévtloe xpiloes yeiverOar wy ert Tov n 2] 1259 \ lal b] f ’ lal = ’ an Taptalv, adr Ja ert TOV eotparn[ynK |oTwr | avdpav éE atroXoyhs evrAoL you ei |var vomit, ére dé Told]s pév Talluias petéxery THS / A \ AS id 3 ‘6 xpeltas «]aOjov, rolvs] dé éo[tpalryl[yn«loras | Kat éumetpous eiva[iKal.......olus tay rpayudt[@ |v [Kali we... .pov|tas To THS Tepluyryvouerns] ovalas adtods arrolot |e[pe liv Suvdpelvor, TOUNOC sa, xin 251 oe de Bae ae a hhh RAKED ENGL COUN TOU AL oe / > ry dh 7 la 3 \ \ b] Tehavars | eel Spevovtas éyvwpev rose icOas avtovs THY éveyu- DPUCINU AKG) tH. tic. ae eee veeeeeees | Tals ayopaios Timpacko- s7achithy i AAS, La rs oe seveceees+-@9 Otb0c8at TédoOs, GAD’ EAT Aspe fais 4 4-45). os a VO LEDRLUE gah y) eee From Pergamum. This rescript is assigned by von Prott (4th. Mitt. 27 (1902), 78 ff.) to the emperor Hadrian. The city of Per- [ 402 ] ——— rr —“‘—SOS— FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES gamum issued bronze coins and the right of exchanging them for the Roman denarius was given to contractors at a fixed rate of exchange on condition that a certain percentage of their profits should be paid to the municipal treasury. The contractors had changed the rate arbitrarily, so that both they and the city gained an increased revenue. The merchants protested by appealing to the emperor who summoned both parties to give evidence. In his rescript he reviews the evidence and gives his decision in favor of the merchants and traders. In this document we have evidence of a municipal monopoly. The Greek cities which retained the privilege of issuing coins apparently compelled local traders to con- duct business in the local currency, and the exchange of foreign money was regulated by municipal laws. From the exchange a certain amount of revenue was derived (cf. CIG. 2053). The right of exchange was either let to contractors, as in this case, or was conducted by the city with officials appointed for the purpose (cf. Reinach, B.C.H. 20 (1896), 523 ff, where the evidence for public and private bankers in the Greek states is collected). Cf nos. 132, 199. Fora full commentary, cf. von Prott, /oc. cit. 82. EPISTULA AVIDI QUIETI, PROCONSULIS ASIAE, AD AEZANITAS (125-126 p. Chr.) CIG. 3835; Le Bas-Waddington, 860-863; Lafoscade, 93; Ditt. Or. Gr. 502; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 571; CIL. ur, 355 and S. 7003; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 57. ’Aovidios Kouvijtos Aifavertav apyovot Bourne | Snowe yxai- pew. AudicBytyots rept yopas iepas, avalteDeions Tadar THL Avi, tpetBopévn Tod\rdOv ETaV, THLE Mpovolat Tod | peyiorov avToKpatopos TéXous éTUXe. “Enel yap éwéoteira avTas dn||NOv TO TpaypLa brov, Hpouny Te OTL Ypr) ToLelv, dVO TA | wadduoTa tv | Svahopav bpetv Kervodvta Kai TO ducepyés Kal duvcevpeTor tod | rpaypyaros Trapexopeva, pelEas THt HriavOperws TO Sixavov aKorov|Ows THe Tepl TAS Kpioes ETTLpEeretat Ty |v TOdVX[p ]ovcov twav paynv Kal vrrovpillav mpos addAndovs EdAvaer, Kaas eK THs émiatoAs iv erewev mpos me | pabnoerOe, Hs TO avTiypadhov bpety wétouba. “Enéctevra O€ “Korépws tw é7i|TpoT@s TOD [ 403 ] 26-2 4 nr 15 20 II Io III Io IV MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN YeRacrod, bras yeouérpas émitn(d)[elous] AcEdpuevos exeivors | Tpocxpnontar THY yopav SiapeTpav Kak [TovTOU ayado |v bpeiv yevnoerat. | Kal é« tav iepov Tod Katicapos ypaypatoly vpeiv SjedijrAw@Ka Stilo) Sei Tel\Netv brép éExdotov KAHpov KaTa THV [rod Kaicapos aro |pacuv é& 5 av 4|uépas NaBnTE THY éTLTTO- jv. “Exact[os dé To TéXOS THL| lepol tapyias THs] | yopas TerEceL, iva un madw tives aludsoBntodvtes Tept adtis Tod] | Bpddecov droradcar Thy TOMY Ths [pocnKovans mpocodov Tapaitiot] | yévovTas' apKel yap avTois TO méypt VL Ov amroNeAauKEVvaL TOUT, Ilévrop|||lba Sé cai ths pds” Korrepov éruato[Ajs TO avtiypapov kal 45" Eorepos é]|uol yéypadev. “Eppdabas buds evyo[ mar]. Exempl(ar) epistulae Caesaris scriptae ad | Quietum. | Si in quantas particulas, guos c/eros appellant, ager Aezanen|si lovi dicatus a regibus divisus sz#, non apparet, optimum est, || sicut tu quoque existimas, modum qul in vicinis civitatibus | clerorum nec maximus mec minimus est observari. Et si, cum | Mettius Modestus con- stitueret, ut vectigal pro is pendere|tur, constitit qui essent c/eruchici agri aequum est ex hoc | tempore vectigal pendi. Si om constitit, iam ex hoc tempollre vectzgal pendendum est. ft si quae morae quaerantur | usque dum pendant integrum, dentur. Exempl(ar) epistulae Quieti scriptae ad | Hesperum. | Cum variam esse clerorum mensuram | cognoverim, et sacratissimus imp(erator) con||stitutionis suae causa neq(ue) maximi neq(ue) | minimi mensuram iniri iusserit in ea re|gzone, quae Iovi Aezanitico dicata dicitur, | mando tibi, Hesper(e) carissime, explores qu|ae maximi cleri mensura, quae minimi zm || vicinia et zn ipsa illa regione sit, et id | per 4itteras notum mihi facias. Exempl(ar) epistulae scriptae Quie|to ab Hespero. | Quaedam negotia, domine, non ali|ter ad consummationem perduci || possunt, quam per eos qui usu sunt | eorum periti. Ob hoc, cum mihi in- lunxisses ut tibi renuntiarem, quae | mensura esset clerorum circa re|gionem Aezaniticam, misi in rem | praesentem ei. . . From Aezani. In this group of documents we have an example of administrative arbitration. Lands sacred to Jupiter had been confiscated by the Greek kings and parcelled out in allotments. The holders paid a rental to the municipality and also to the imperial fiscus. For this reason the governor refers the dispute, not to the [ 404 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES senate, but to the emperor. The dispute which had arisen is not clear, but apparently the tenants had acquired larger holdings in the course of time and continued to pay the same rental as on the original smaller leasehold. The emperor instructs the governor to find out the average size of such leaseholds in neighboring states and regulate those of Aezani accordingly. In the governorship of Mettius Modestus the question had arisen as to what lands were cleruchic. Apparently, some tenants had ceased to pay rental and had held the land as if entitled to absolute ownership (cf. no. 55). Mettius had been called upon by the city to reestablish the title of the state to the confiscated property. 83, EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI AD STRATONICENSES (127 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1156a; Lafoscade, 23; Ditt. Sy//.3 837; Riccobono, p. 325. Avroxpatwp Kaicap, Qeod Tpaiarv[od] | Hap@txod vids, Geod Nepova viwvo[s], | Tpaiavos “Adpsavos LeBactos, ap[xue]|peds péyltaTos, OnuapxiKhs é€o[ va t]||as T(0) ca’, Urratos T(0) y', Adptavo- m[Lo]|AecTOv Utpatoverre[w |v trois dpy[ov]|ov cat the BovrRe kab Tat Syuar yaipey]. | Aicaca a&tobv pou Soxeire Kal avayKxaia a[p || Teyervouévne Tore? TATEOdV TEAN TAELK]| || THS K@pas Sidmpe bpeiv, cal rHv oixiav Ti[8.] | KrXavdiov Lwxpdtovs thy otcav év tHe [mo]|dec émioxevalérm Lw@xpdtns 7) atrodd[a]|A@w Tivi TOV eTLY@plorv, ws wn xXpover [Kal | a]werdiae KaTapLpOein. Tadra éméoterrAa Kal [7dz || cplatiorw: avOvrdatrat Xteptivior Kovap[tiver] | cal tds érrutpotrast pov [Ilo ]urnios Leov[jpae |. | "EmpéoBevoev Kr. Kadvdcd0os, be To épodiLov] | d0OnTa, ef pr mpoika umécyntat. | Hutuxeite. Kaddvdats Maptiais azo ‘Po||[w]ns. KA. Kavdidos arédwxa tHv émiato|[A]yv Aoddtwr ‘Povatixas dpyovts The mpo a’ ida[v]| Matwv év tHe exxrAnoiar. From Stratonicea-Hadrianopolis. This city had been founded by Hadrian himself by the grant of civic status to a village on the site. The form of government is that usually found in Greek states, with archons, senate, and popular assembly. The calendar, however, [ 405 ] Oo Lal Io T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN was Roman. The city was unable to support itself and pay the requisite tribute to Rome. On appeal to the emperor, Hadrian remitted the taxes—ra TéAn Ta éx THs ywpas. It is possible that the mention of the imperial procurator in this connection should be interpreted as a reference to rents from public lands of the emperor (Weber, Unters. Gesch. Hadr. 136 f.), which he assigns to the new municipality. On the policy of creating new munici- palities in Asia, cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 100 ff. The second request of the embassy is an interesting example of the petty problems referred to Rome by the cities in this period. ‘The house of Socrates had fallen into disrepair, and the emperor gives orders that the owner should restore the building or sell it to some citizen of Stratonicea. There is no evidence that this house had been converted into a shrine because Hadrian may have resided there during his visit to the city (cf. Weber, op. cét. 138). 84, EPISTULA LEGATI LYCIAE, POMPONI VETTONIANI, AD COMMUNE LYCIORUM (128 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 143; Lafoscade, 103. [UW Joprer[ios ’A [tT ]eo[tvavos Povricovravo]s [Od]lertwv- avos mpecBe[utys Kal] avtiLotpat }n|yos, THe KowwHe Tod EOvous apxatpeciaxhe €x|KAnolar yatpew. Td texpav tors ayabods || avdpas Karov éotiv: pdrlilora eEarpét[w]s | avadaivere: aotep kal v[d]lv “AmroAXr@|viws Sis Tod Kadrrdudbdov, o[s] dpmetv apytepéa | Tov viov €GerXovt[w]|s mapléocxy |ntat, Kal ad|ros Tapa- yevouevos diroltemoluuévar Kat || aveévte vpety Tov éavt[od TrovTo |v, es Koo|ov THs Tod eOvous aéilas pap]|tupe@ | r[alis Tetpais Tats eis adtoly bd byov] S0|@ncopévats THY TE TpO- e6[piav éritpé|ro | kupwOAvat adtas Tov Tle eiovovta (?) apxee]- péa || viov [av]rod "ArroArwuvifov..... See note on no. 80. In this letter the governor approves in advance the honors which the provincial assembly proposes to confer upon Opramoas, and apparently ratifies the election of his son to the chief priesthood of the province. There is no evidence that the provincial assembly was required to submit their action in either [ 406 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES case to the governor or that he exercised veto powers in the elections of provincial officials. For the veto of the governor on provincial decrees cf. no. 97. 85, EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI AD EPHESIOS (129 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 26; I.B.M. 3, 487; Ditt. Sy//.3 838. Av[to]kpdtwp Kaicap, Qeod [Tpaiavod] | Uap6[t]xod vios, Geod Nep[olva v[ijwor[os], | Tpaialy]os ‘Adpsar[o]s SeRac[rés, ap |yteped[s] | wéyso[To]s, Snuapy[cKy |s éEoucilas 76 ty’, bratos 70 ¥, || matA[p mat ]pisos, Edlect |v tots a[p]yovo[s cal tHe BlovrAne xaipew: | A.”E[p]actos cai ror[et|rns t[w]adv [e]ivac d[now «jai rordd[axss] | wALedo Jae t[) |v Oddac[car, cat oloa ato Tov[ Tov duvlaros | ypnovulols yevéo[Oar tHe tarp isu, cal tov €Ov[ous Tt ]o[ds] Hrye|wovas del Sila ]xoulioar], é[ulol dé [ts] n6n aulvémrev joer, || TO pev mpetov eis “Podov aro Tis "E[éloou col pwefopé[vwr], | viv dé amod.’EXevoeivos pos buds adix[v Joupér[ ws, Bovr letale]| é BovrAeut ns yevéc Pac: Kayo t[ nv | pev [Soxelwacialy é]p’ vyety | mocoduar, ef Sé pndev évTrodav [eore kal doxet THs TL]uns aE[clos, | 70 apyvptov, bcov diddacuv ot BovActortes, [Soow THs apyat|pecias [élvexa. || Edrvyetre. From Ephesus. Hadrian requests the Ephesians to elect Erastus to the municipal senate. The scrutiny of the qualifications of the candidate is placed in the power of the city, while the emperor promises to pay the requisite swmma honoraria (cf. Pliny, Ep. ad Trai. 112, 113). Nothing is known of the method of election to the senate at Ephesus in this period beyond the indications given in this letter. If the word dpya:pecias is properly restored in ]. 14, it may indicate that senators were elected at the special meeting of the senate or assembly at which the usual magistrates were elected (cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. a’ Asie, 199). 86. PRIVILEGIA CONCESSA DIANAE EPHESIAE AB IMPERATORE HADRIANO (129 p. Chr.) Ditt. Sy/7.3 839. Avtoxpatopa Kaicapa, Geod | Tpaiavod WapOxod vidv, Oeod | Nepova viwvor, Tpaiavov ‘Adpiavov | LeBacrov cal ’Ordprroop, [ 407 ] On lanl 5 Io 15 Io T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Snuap||ycens éEovcias TO (t)y', Uratov | To y', TaTépa TraTpisos, | ) Bourn Kal o Shwos 0 Edecion | rov idtov KTictHY Kal owTHpA, dia | Tas dvuTrepBAHTovs Swpeas ‘ApTé||ucds, Sudovta TH Oe@ TaV KAnpo|vomwav Kal BeBAnkdTav Ta dixata | Kal Tods vomous avTns, cevtotrou[mias S| | am Aliyimrou tapéxovtTa, Kal ToOvS Auuevas | wolenoav|ra TAwTOUS, aTooTpéavTa Te || Kal TOV Bralirrovta tovs | ALypévas Totapov | Kdvotpov dia To. . From Ephesus. In visiting this city, Hadrian granted to the priests of the goddess Diana the right of receiving inheritances in the name of the divinity. Cf Ulpian, Frag. xx11, 6: deos heredes instituere non possumus, praeter eos, quos senatus consultis con- stitutionibusve principum instituere concessum est, sicuti Iovem Tarpetum, Apollinem Didymaeum Mileti, Martem in Gallia, Minervam Iliensem, Herculem Gaditanum, Dianam Efesiam, Matrem deorum Sipylenen, Nemesim, quae Smyrnae colitur, et Caelestem Salinsem Carthigini. Apparently those who violated the laws of the sanctuary were liable to condemnation, and their property was confiscated for the benefit of the temple’s treasury. 87. EPISTULA SUFENATIS VERI, LEGATI LYCIAE, AD LYCIARCHAM (igtp, CHE) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 18; Lafoscade, 105. [’Ezi] apyvepéo[s KrXavdiou Mapxiavod|......... Lou|d[nva Ov7 |p[os] Tol...... | Ave |idpyne yaipew. ‘Ompapoar ’Aro[)- Aw ||viov Sis tod Kadrrddouv kali avros a[o]||Séxouat eri tHe / ec ss \ Vd ” ¢ a > / piroTetpiat, iv mpos TO Aa[w]|potatoy EOvos bwov éredetEaTo, Sw|pnoduevos avtar Snvdpia TevTakis pv|pia mpos ols mépuct uTécynto eis THY KalTaddAaynv TOD vouicuatos Snvapiors || TevTaKkes yethiows. Tiv odv mpodnroupé|ynv adtod Swpeav Be- Pad emt te Tat aodrev|tov Kai awetaberov eis Tov adel ypdvov * \ pe a by cif > / ci|vac Kai éml rails ddAdas alpécecw, als émnv|[yetrlaro. "Eppada Gat ce evyouat. ’E800n || rpo[...] etSdv OxtrarBpiov. See note on no. 80. The governor ratifies the establishment of an endowment fund of fifty-five thousand denarii, the income of which is to be devoted to an annual distribution to the officials [ 408 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES and members of the provincial assembly (Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 20). The gift of five thousand denarii, made in the previous year for the exchange of money, is interesting. The exchange of local and imperial money was a form of taxation (cf. nos. 81, 133), and this gift was designed to relieve the people who attended the assembly and had to make purchases at the fair held in connection therewith (cf. no. 73). It appears, however, that his help had not been needed, and this sum is now included in the endowment fund. 88. TITULUS HONORARIUS (132 p. Chr.) CIL. 11, 8. 1, 7282; Dessau, 315. Imp. Caesari divi Traiani | Parthici f., divi Nervae nep., | Traiano Hadriano Aug. p. m., | tr. p. xvi, cos. 111, p. p., Olympio ob || multa beneficia quae viritim | quae publice praestitit, resti-| tutori coloniae suae, Troadenses | per legatos M. Servilium Tu- tilium | Paulum et L. Vedumnium Aulum. || Tpwadéor. A square base found in 1886 at Athens probably on the site of the gymnasium Hadriani. Lines 8-9 were added by another hand. The colonia Alexandria Troas was founded between 27 and 12 B.c. (cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 550). This inscription celebrates the restoration of the colony by Hadrian. For other inscriptions cut at the same time in similar circumstances, cf. CIL. ut, S. 1, 7281, 7283, and IG. 111, 472-486. 89. LEX PALMYRENORUM (1347. puChry Ditt. Or. Gr. 629; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1056, ll. 1-16. [Emi Avtroxpatopos Katcapos, Qed Tpaiavod Map |cot viold, Oelod [Nepova viwvod, Tpaiavod ‘ASdpiavotd YeBaacrod, Snpapyixns | eEovolias Td Ka’, avtoKpatopos 70 8’, vm ]atov TO y, TaTpos TaTpioos, Vrata[v A(ouxiov) Aidiov Kaicapos To 8’ II(orAtov) Kourou BarPivov]. | ”Erous nu’, unvds Bavdcxod on’, [ 409 ] nn Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Soypua Bovrns. | Ei Bevyéous Bwvvéous tod Aipadvou mpoédpou, fal A U / "AreEdvdpou tov "AdeEavdpou tod || Didotratopos ypapmpmatéews a A / A Bovans Kat dyuov, Mariyou ’Odaiods cal ZeBeidou Neca 3 / Lal , 9 , > / \ ¢ apyov|rov, Bours vopipou ayouevns, eynpicOn ta vTotetay- a a lal / péva. “Ererdn [ev lots marae xpovors | ev TOL TENMVLKOL VOMOL a a ¢ lal > ? / P) / \ b Treicta TOV VTOTEAY OvK avednuhOn, erpao[ceTtlo dé x A lal \ auvnbeias, év|ypahomévou tHe prcOedoce. Tov TEeXMVOdVTA THY mpakw troveicbar axkorovGws THL vopws Kal THe | cuvnOeiat, f \ 4 \ a / / acuvéBawev S€ TrEaTAdKIS Tepl TovTOV EnTHaELS yelverO[ aL uclra&d tév évrdpwv || mpos Tovs TeX@vas: Seddx9aL, TOS éverTt@tas apxovtas kat Sexatrpwtous Staxpeivovtas | Ta m1 avEerAnupéeva TOL vopor evypdrrat THL evytota picOwce Kal uTotaéar éxactwe eldee TO | €x ocuvnbelas TéXos, Kal émrevdav KupwOne TOL pLoOovpevor, Evypadhvat weTa TOD TpwToU v6| jou oTHAnL ALOivne THe ovane avtixpvs [i lep[ov] Neyouévou ‘PaBa- ceipn, é[ me ]uereto0ar 5é Tovs Tuyyalvovtas KaTa KaLtpov apxor- Tas Kal Sexatrpwrtous Kal cvvdix[ovs Tov] undeév Tapatpaccen || Tov praOovpevor. From Palmyra. We omit the Aramaic version recorded on the stone, and the register of taxes imposed by the decree, which is recorded in both Greek and Aramaic. The customs were usually under imperial control (Cagnat, Les impéts indirects chez les Romains), but Palmyra, in the midst of a desert, had no other revenue except that which she derived from her position as a way- station on the trade-route to the Orient. There is no evidence that the Romans collected portoria in Syria (Mommsen, E.E. 5, 18). This law is proposed by the Palmyran senate which authorizes the magistrates and decaproti to draw up the tariff in those particulars not specified in the existing law. After their proposed tariff was ratified by the firm of publicani which collected the tax, the schedule was to be posted in a public place where the traders could refer to it in case of a dispute with the collectors. Mylasa in Caria also had control of the tax on goods entering that port (CJL. m1, S. 1, 7151; Dessau, Hermes, 19 (1884), 436 ff; cf. p. 140). [ 410 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 90, LEX DE CERTA OLEI PORTIONE REI PUBLICAE VENDENDA (117-138 p. Chr.) IG. 1 and un (editio minor), 1100; de Ruggiero, L’arbitrato pubblico, 36. Ke, vo. Oe. “Adpsavod. | Of To éXatov yewpyodrTes TO TpiTov | KaTapepeTwoar, 7) TO dySoov oi Ta | ‘Immapxov ywpia Ta vd Tod dickov || mpabévta KexTnwévot: pova yap é|Ketva TO Sixasov ToUTO eye Katage|pérwoav 5é dua Tar dpEacOas cvvKo|[mid%s Klara pépos, mpos Novyov Told | cvvKoptl lowévov, Tois édedvails, | oitives del] rpovoodcw thls | Snuocias xpeials: droypadbécOo- [Causodtiny Gare ] THs cuvkomdys mpo[s | Tods tapias Kali TOD Uae OO PEL ua chan des |edovtes vrroypal|dnv: [9] dé am[oypad]) éotw peta dpkov | Kal mocov cuveKopicev TO TAY, | Kai bre b1a Sovrov Todd 7} atrerev|Oépov Tovde* éav Sé TaANHONE Tov | xaprov 6 Seamortns Tod xwpiov, % 6 || yewpyos 7) 0 Kap- TwVvns, arroypahé|cOw dé mpos Tos avTovs Kal 6 ém éEalywyie TiTpacKwy, Tocov mumpacKkes | Kal Tive Kal mod oppule]? To [7 ]Aotov. “O d[é] | arroypadis ywpis m[umpackwr] én é€a-|| yoyhl, Kav 0 wherrev He xaltevnvoyas] | tHe worer, oTepécOw Tov mpab[évtos]. | “O é yevdeis atroypadas mroimaals] | 7) Tas Tept THS cvveomohs [%) Tals mept] | tHs eEaywyhs 7) vaép A A \ \ / > , V5 € , Ny xw@plov, [0 un Tal|lpa dicxov érpiato un ‘Immapy[evol|y [|v / fy / \ A. ¢ ye dydoov KaTeveyxay, o[Tepé|oOw, TO dé Husov o wn |vicas Aap[Ba- , id aa pie ae \ > / , véto. |"Os & dv er’ éEayo|yiv avatoy[parta | mpinra.....] ELPEEL MW. ws. [Peteyacse Chane. tya. a cle tov am[olotep..... Rogtetbe Una aoe N AX of Xx / / \ > | Ree RE og autos 7 Gr tiva | av EAXnTaL, TWempacKé|tw wev EF ar[o- ypa|dis.......7]ns dé respns 70 [pe H | usov cateyéro, ef unto dédmxev 7) Nap||Bavéto, TO 5é Hutov ~ctw Snpdcov. | Tpadécbw 5é Kat o Ewropos, tt éEayer | kal Tocov map ExdaTtov* édv Oé j2) atro|yparyrayevos Pwpabhu éexmréwv, otepé|aOw* dav dé éxrA€v- cas POdone Kai pnvr||O7t, ypadécOw Kal The watpide adtov vd Tov | Sjpov Kdpuot. Tas dé epi tovtar Sdixas | wéypt mev TrevTn- KovTa appopéwy 7 Bov|dn pmovn KpewwéTw, Ta Sé vmrép TovUTO peta | Tov Syjpov. "Kav b€ Tay é« Tov mroiov Tus || pnvdons, émrdvayKes 0 otpaTnyos The EEns | Hwépar Bovanv abpoicadta, et [ 411 ] Io T5 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 ok, 60 65 79 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN S bmép tovs | mevtnKkovta audopels ein TO wewnvu|mévor, éx- Krnotav: Kal 6d0c0m Tat ér€y|EavTe TO Husov. “Hav dé éxxaré- ontat Tis 7) || ewe ) Tov avOdTaTov, yerpotoveitw auv|dixous o djuos. “Iva 5é amrapaitnta je ta | KaTa TOY KakoupyouVTwY émi[rletuila], res|uiis ts TO Snucotov KatadepécOw To édat|or, Hrs av év tHe Y@pae He. Ee 8é rote evpop[il|las €Aatov yevo- pévns wréov ein TO éx THY | TpiTwY 7) OYSdwV KaTahEepomEvoY THS els | Cdov zLo]lv évvauvrov Snpuoctas xpeias, é&éloTtw Tots plev yewp|yotow To éXaov % av | 1) pwépos Sevtépay aroypadyv Tomnoapé||vous Kal Snudcatov To Te dhethouevov | Tocoy eat ,++ +0 ol EXNaLavas 7 off] apyv|potapyia[s] od BovrAovTat Trap av- Tov NaBetv,| PurAd[TTEW........-. [Eerie einer ns. lorieaia 3 From Athens. In the first line Dittenberger proposed the re- storation Ke(Aever) vo(uos) Oe(od) and dated the document after the death of Hadrian. Premerstein proposed xe(badraov) vd(uov) Oe(ov) “Adptavod and would date the law in 124-125, the year of Hadrian’s first visit to Athens (cf. Weber, Unters. Gesch. Hadr. 165). Although Athens was a free city, allied to Rome, and free to enact her own laws, Hadrian was asked to devise new laws which he modelled on those given by Solon and Draco (Hieron., Chr., ab Abr. 2137). As Solon is said to have restricted the exportation of olives from Attica, it is possible that this document may contain one of the clauses of Hadrian’s legislation, although it seems to be a separate enactment. The law stipulated that the olive-growers must reserve one-third of their supply to be sold to the Athenian state at the market price, with the proviso that tenants on the estate of Hipparchus, formerly owned by the imperial fiscus, should reserve one-eighth only. Failure to declare the amount of oil pro- duced, or the amount bought or sold for export, or a false declara- tion, led to confiscation. The Athenian senate had jurisdiction over cases in which less than fifty amphorae were involved. Where greater quantities were in question, the case came before the popular assembly. Appeals could be taken to the emperor or to the governor, and in such cases the city was represented by advocates elected by popular vote. The special consideration shown to those on the estate of Hip- parchus is noteworthy. Hipparchus was the grandfather of Herodes [ 412 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Atticus and his lands had been confiscated by the fiscus because he had been suspected of revolutionary designs (Philostratus, Vit. Soph. 2. I. 2). If these lands had been sold outright, as seems to be implied, it is dificult to understand why the purchasers should be entitled to such favorable consideration in comparison with other landowners in Attica. We suspect, however, that the verb rpadévta is used here in the same sense as in the law concerning the disposal of the public lands of Thisbe (cf. no. 129 and commentary), and that the lands of Hipparchus formed an imperial estate within the territory of Attica in spite of the fact that Athens was in possession of the status of a czvitas foederata et libera. Although the law implied that the city must pay the prevailing market price (Il. 58-59), it is difficult to understand why there should be any difficulty in securing an adequate supply of oil in the open market under such circumstances. It is probable that the city fixed a price lower than that prevailing in the export trade, and this law virtually imposes a tax upon the olive-growers in so far as the price paid by the city for the third of their produce is below the current market quotations. QI. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) AD ATHENIENSES (117-138 p. Chr.) IG. 11 and ut (editio minor), 1103. ng tea oe hes peTpy[sS.....2+2++- [OE THY StoMeAtay........ Poy a noel 4 vets s .. Tots] | 5é év Enevoeive adiedow arérecav > St be / >’ 3 A b] A 5) ral Ve ixOv[wv eivar drav év’Enev]|ceive ev rie ayopas miumpdoKwouw, e f / \ b \ 3 / 7 > / ws péevni[......lva TO dia TA || eioaya@ryia Gheros eis péya Te atravTnon TLovs b€....- ...+]| Kal Tovs Wadw KaTnrEvOVTAS A 4 x » > an ? memavab[at...... ..+] | BovrAopat 7} évderEw adTav yetverOat mplos tlov x[nlpvea ths && “Alpetov mayou Bovrts: tov é eloayewv eis Tolds “A]lpeorrayeitas, Tods de | Tetuayv ote xp7) maGeiv 7) atroteicar’ Twimpacké|Tw|cay dé wdavta % avTol ot || KopLCovTes 7) OL TPATOL TAP aVTOV @vov[ mE |voL* TO Oé Kal TpiTOUS @|ynTas yewwopévous TOV avToV @viwv pel talmimpadcKew éTr- / \ / / \ > \ / 2 / reiver | Tas Tetuds. Tavtny thy érictoAny otnrne Ly ypawartes év Ilespaet | ornoate mpo Tov deiypatos. Evruyxeire. | [-413 J Io IO MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN "Esriperntevovtos THs morews T. “lovdAiov ‘Hpwdzsar[od] KodaAvréws. From Athens, In this letter there appears to be an interesting attempt on the part of the writer of the letter to reduce the high cost of living in Athens by suppressing the middleman. Merchandise brought into the city must be retailed by the importer, or by the first purchaser. Possibly the law dealt only with the importation of fish. ‘he arrogance of the fishermen at Athens was proverbial, and it is possible that the dealers in the fishmarket had combined to compel higher prices; cf. Wilhelm, Fahreshefte d. ést. arch. Inst. 12 (1909), 146f. Athens, though a free city, was unable to cope with her own problems, and appealed to the emperor (?), probably through the curator ret publicae, to devise legislation which would prevent speculation and consequent advancement in the cost of food supplies (cf. no. 65a). For a list of curatores at Athens, cf. R.E. s.v. curator. On the importance of the Areopagus as a court in Roman times, cf. Mitteis, Reschsrecht und Volksrecht, 86, n. 4. . 92. EDICTUM IMPERATORIS HADRIANI (?) DE VECTIGALIBUS (117-138 p. Chr.) IG. u and ut (editio minor), 1104. ate déyovtat TO apyvptov, émiTipscov opiléTwaayr | avTols Kata thv THS atre[s|Olas akiav: éLav] d[é] of ma|pado[ Oé]vtes elapépe pt Bovrwvrat, [el|ta | vrevOvvoe Ectwoav TPaTov bev ExatooTtiaiwv TOKa[V], || ad’ ob Séov ToimoacBat THY elcodov ovK éTroinoar|TO, MexplL wNVaV AAdwv SvVo THs TEAEUTALAs aTro-| ddcews, weTa 5é TOS pivas TovTOUS ef pévocev | fur) TreLOdpEvoL, atrob0cOwaar ot apyvpotapias peta | TOD KNpuKoS Tas UTOOHKaS, [you Jrwy avras éEouciay || Woacbas EEnxovta nuepav mpatov bev TOV SEd@KOT|wY, EiTa Kab TOV eyyUNTa@V olTLVes UTEevOvVOL tav | évdenodr[tw|jv OBEAOTTITETOA NOEITONENAEH- TATON | O¢ E€jKovta spwatpav opirovow éxtetoas. This inscription from Athens is assigned by Boeckh (CIG. 354) to the time of Hadrian. The document appears to be an imperial edict regulating the collection of taxes. These were farmed out to [ 414 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES contractors who were required to furnish securities for the proper fulfilment of their obligations. Those who failed to comply with the terms of their contract were fined. In case of refusal to pay the fine, interest was charged on the amount due on the defaulted payment. If, after two months, the contractor was still recalcitrant, the securities must be sold at public auction under the privilege of redemption. 93. SERMO ET EPISTULAE PROCURATORUM DE TERRIS VACUIS EXCOLENDIS (117-138 p. Chr.) Carcopino, AZélanges de Pécole frang. de Rome, 26 (1906), 365— 481; An. ép. 1907, no. 196; Bruns, 116; Girard, p. 874; Ricco- bono, p. 357. Colont.. .tuani rogamus, procuratolres, per providentiam ves- Col.1 tram, quam | zomine Caesaris praestatis, velitis nobis | et utilitatz illius consulere, dare no||bzs eos agros qui sunt in paludibus et | in 5 silvestribus instituendos olivetis | et vineis, lege Manciana con- dicione | saltus Neroniani vicini nobis. Cum | ederemus hanc petitionem nostram || fundum suprascriptum N|eronzanum | incre- 10 mentum habitatorum..... | (Desunt versus circa octo) RUT is te ee iubeas. Sermo procuratorwm im|p(eratoris) Caes(aris) Col. 11 Hadriani Aug(usti). Quia Caesar n(oster) pro | infatigabili cura sua, per quam adsi|due pro humanis utilitatibus excudat, om||nes partes 5 agrorum, guae tam oleis aut | vineis quam frumentis aptae sunt ex|coli iubet, itcirco permissu provzd|entiae eius, potestas fit omnibus etia|m eas partes occupandi, quae in cenf||wris elocatis saltus Blan- to diani et U|densis et in iis partibus sunt quae ex | saltu Lamiano et Domitiano iunctae | Thusdritano sunt nec a conductoribus | exercentur cet. Fructuum quam coloni ob summam Caes. cle|mentiam is qui loca Col. neglecta a conduc|toribus occupaverit, quae da|rz so/ent, tertias partes fructuum || dabit; de eis quoq(ue) regionibus qu|ae ex Lamiano et 5 Domitiano | sa/tu iunctae Tuzritano sunt | tantundem dabit. De oleis quas quisgue | aut in scrobibus posuerit aut oleastr||zs inseruerit, 10 captorum fructuum | nulla pars decem proximis annts exige|tur cet. ese Col. Iv MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Earinus et Doryphorus Primigenzo | suo salutem. Exemplum epistulae scrip|tae nobis a Tutilio Pudente egregio viro | ut notum haberes et it quod subiectum est || celeberrimis locis propone. Verri- dius | Bassus et Ianuarius Martiali suo salutem. | Si qui agri cessant et rudes sunt, s¢ gui si/|vestres aut palustres in eo saltuum trac|tu, volentis lege Manciana colere ne prohibeas. III, ll. r-2. fructuum...qui, Schulten, from the letters remaining. A stone inscribed on all four sides found at Ain-el-Djemala in Tunis in 1906. The upper and lower parts of the stone are lacking. ‘The principal commentaries on it are those of Carcopino, Joc. cit.; Mispoulet, Nouv. rev. hist. d. droit fr. et &r. 31 (1907), 5-483 Schulten, K/io, 7 (1907), 188-212; Carcopino, Kio, 8 (1908), 154-185. The inscription belongs to the time of Hadrian; cf. col. 11, 1. 2. Different explanations have been given of the contents of the document by different commentators. To follow the analysis of Rostowzew (cf. Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 334 ff-), which seems the most convincing, of the officials mentioned in the document, Earinus (or Carinus) is probably procurator of the sa/tus or regio concerned; Doryphorus, his adutor; Verridius Bassus, procurator tractus; Janu- arius, hissubordinate; Martialis, perhapsasecretary; Tutilius Pudens is one of the predecessors of Verridius Bassus in the office of procurator tractus. ‘The document then seems to be made up of the following parts: (1) a petition addressed to the procurator tractus Carthaginiensis (tuani. . .incrementum hatit.) by the colont of a certain saltus; (2) a letter from ‘Tutilius Pudens, a former procurator tractus, to Primigenius, of which only the word zubeas is extant. ‘This letter Primigenius had neglected to publish; (3) the sermo procuratorum, extending through exzgetur cet. The sermo procuratorum recited the apposite parts of the general statute, known as the /ex Manciana, with the proper adaptation to the sa/tus concerned; (4) a letter of the procurator saltus and his assistant to Primigenius, and (5) a letter to Martialis. Earinus and Doryphorus speak of sending a copy of a letter by Tutilius Pudens and a document appended to it (tt quod subiectum est). ‘Vhe appended document is of course no. 3 (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 334). The lex Manctana, to which the [ 416 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES petitioners refer, was a Flavian statute, drawn up perhaps by a legate of Vespasian (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 336). This law was modified in some respects by the /ew Hadriana. To the later law, however, the petitioners make no reference. In the general statute the maxima and minima of the contributions (partes) and the days’ work (operae) required of coloni were probably fixed. In the sermo procuratorum, within the ranges fixed by the law, the contributions and services required of the coloni of the saltus concerned were established. This became the /ex sa/tus, and, since it was under the protection of the zumen of the emperor, it was inscribed on an altar; cf. ara legis Hadrianae (Bruns, 115). By comparing the extant portions of the ara /egis Hadrianae with those of our inscription, we are able to fill out large lacunae in both documents. In this way the long italicized passages in cols. 11 and 111 of this inscription have been restored. In their petition the co/oni ask permission to bring waste land under cultivation. ‘heir request is granted not only for land never before cultivated but also for land which has been out of cultivation for ten years, with the further concession, that, for a fixed term of years, the tenants shall not be obliged to pay a part of the produce as rental (cf. col. m1). Whether the provisions of the lex Hadriana, upon which the procurator bases his decision (cf. col. 11), applied only to a specified number of imperial domains, to all those in Africa, or to imperial domains, wherever situated, is a matter of dispute. Probably the regulations applied to Africa only. For the organization of a sa/tus, cf. pp. 17 ff. 94. TITULUS HONORARIUS (117-138 p. Chr.) CIL. 11, 5941; Dessau, 6954. L. Aemil. M. f. M. nep. Quirina Rectus domo Roma, qui et Karth. | et Sicellitanus et Assotanus et Lacedaemonius et Baste- tanus | et Argius, scriba quaestorius, scriba aedilicius, donatus equo publ. | ab imp. Caesare Traiano Hadriano Aug., aedilis coloniae Karthagi., patronus rei publicae Assotanor. testamento suo |] rei pub. Assotan. fieri iussit, epulo annuo adiecto. Set up at Asso near Caravaca in Spain. Rectus was a Roman AMA [ 417 ] | 27 Io Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN citizen and also a citizen of five other municipalities, one in Africa, two in Spain and two in Greece (cf. no. 24), a municipal official in Carthage and patron of Asso. He probably owed these honors to the favor of Hadrian. g5. ITITULUS HONORARIUS (119-138 p. Chr.) GiP<11, 32230; Imp. Caesari divi | Traiani Parthici | f. divi Nervae n. | Vraiano Hadri||ano Aug., pont. max.,| trib. pot...... cos. | III, p. p.) Imp. opt. max. | q. principi restitu|tori munzcipit || Llugonenses d. d. Found at Ilugo in Tarraconensis. Whether we should restore restitutort, fundatori or conditori Mommsen considers uncertain. The importance of the inscription for us lies in the fact that it seems to record the elevation by Hadrian of a civitas stipendiarta to the position of a municipium. 96. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE NUNDINIS SALTUS BEGUENSIS (138 p. Chr.) CIL. vit, 270 = vu, 8. 114513; Bruns, 61; Riccobono, p. 236. S.C. de nundinis saltus Beguensis in t(erritorio) | Casensi, de- scriptum et recognitum ex libro sen|tentiarum in senatu dictarum Kari Iuni Nigri, C. Pompo|ni Camerini cos., in quo scripta erant Africani iura et id || quod i(nfra) s(criptum) est. Idibus Oct.... In comitio in curia Iu/(za) | adfuerunt Q. Gargilius Q. f. Antiq(u)us, TieCl: Ti... Pals Quartinus, | C:-Oppius (GC. of V el Severus, C. Herennius C. f. Pa/. Caecilianus, M. Iu/. | M. f. Quir. Clarus, P. Cassius P. f. Cla. Dexter q(uaestor), P. Nonius M. f. Ouf. Mac|rinus q. In senatu fuerunt c. || S.C. per discessionem factum. Quod P. Cassius Se|cundus, P. Delphius Peregrinus Aleius Alennius Maxi|mus Curtius Valerianus Proculus M. Nonius Mucianus | coss. verba fecerunt de desiderio amicorum Lucili Afrilcani c. v., qui petunt: ut ei permittatur in provincia Afric(a), regione || Beguensi, territorio Musulamiorum, ad Casas, nundinas | mr nonas Novemb. et xr k. Dec., ex eo omnibus mensibus mir non. | et xir k. sui cuiusq(ue) mensis in- stituere habere, quid fieri | placeret, [ 418 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES de ea re ita censuerunt: permittendum Lu|cilio Africano, c. v., in provincia Afric(a), regione Beguensi, || territorio Musula- miorum, ad Casas, nundinas 111 non. | Novemb. et xu k. De- cembr. et ex eo omnibus mensibus 1111 non. et xz k. | sui cuiusq(ue) mensis instituere et habere, eoque vicinis | advenisq(ue) nundinandi dumtaxat causa coire conve|nire sine iniuria et incommodo cuius- quam liceat. || Actum idibus Octobr. P. Cassio Secundo, M. Nonio Muciano, | Eodem exemplo de eadem re duae tabellae signatae sunt. | Signatores: T. Fl(avi) Comini scrib(ae), C. [uli Fortunati scrib(ae), | M. Caesi Helvi Euhelpisti, QO. Metili Onesimi, C. Iuli Perilblepti, L. Verati Phile(rotis), I. Fl(avii) Crescentis. Two stones, upon each of which the entire inscription was cut, were found in 1860 and 1879 respectively in Henschir Begar in Tunis. For a commentary on the inscription, cf. E.£. 2, 271 ff. ‘The inscriptions were perhaps cut in the third or fourth century. Permission to establish markets was granted sometimes by the senate (cf. Plin. Epp. 5. 4; Suet. Claud. 12) and sometimes by the emperor (cf. Dig. 50. 11. 1). The “ber sententiarum in senatu dictarum, from which this document was copied, is known more commonly as the acta senatus (e.g. Suet. Iu/. 20; Aug. 5. 36) or acta patrum (Tac. Ann. 5. 4) or commentarit senatus (Lac. Ann. 15. 74). On the senatorial archives cf. p. 233, n. 7. It is interesting to notice that parliamentary forms are still followed rather strictly, even in the manner of voting, of requiring a quorum, and of appointing a committee to draft the motion. 97. EPISTULA CORNELI PROCULI, LEGATI LYCIAE, AD COMMUNE LYCIORUM (139 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 28; Lafoscade, 108. "Ent apxvepéos “Idcov[os t]obv Netxootparov, | Tavnpolv] xa’, [Kopynr vos poxdos, | rpecBevtis avtia[tpatnyos a]vto- Kpatopos, ToL Kow[ ae Avetwv xaiper|y. Kai | rapev é[yvoxa, OTL as peta TrAELaTHS (2)] || c7rovdA[s mp ]los "Ompapoar [’ATroaA- AJoviov | dis told] Kaddsddov cal d[tre avrérlatrov | Temas [ 419 ] 27-2 20 25 Io 15 Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN ebndicacbe, TavTas viv Kal hvixa | Eertuv arrodobvat Bovrea be, TovTO cur|ywpnoavTos TOD peyloTov TaVTwY avTo||KPaTopos, Os EavOlous avixe tTHhv érrixkrnow | THY avTiKpUS TOUTMY YyEvomLevnD. Kat éuol | 8& done? cal Orpapuoas ravtwy evexev a|Evos érrau- veia Oat Kai TemdcOar mpds twov, | Kal PedoTELpos wY Kal Trept Tacav TOAW ws || TaTpida éaTrovdakws Kal Tots idtots ws KoL-| vols ypwmevos’ éTaw@ S€é Kal Uuas ad|tovs Tors Tas TELmas duddvTas 6Tt ac|....... (septem versus maxime mutili; in fine :) "Eppdcbat [tpas Bolvaro|[war. “Ed]o@n mpo ta’ Ka(ravdor) "O[kro |vB8p[iwr] | év Lardposs. See note on no. 80. In a.p. 137 the governor had vetoed the proposal of the provincial assembly to confer unusual honors on Opramoas (Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 24, 26). In the following year (c. 26) the Xanthians appealed to the emperor, and the pro- vincial assembly supported their action by passing a decree and sending an embassy to Rome. From the document which we have printed above, we learn that the emperor reversed the action of the governor in 137, and instructed the present governor to inform the assembly of his consent to grant the desired honors. 98. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE L. VENULEI APRONIANI AD EPHESIOS (ca. 138-139 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 94. OvevovaAmjios ‘Arpwvavoes avOvTato[s] | “Edeciwv dpyovor, Bova, Syums yaipelw]. | “Act cat wadrov émideixvvcbe THv mplos Tov] | méysotov avtoxp[d|ropa uav [A]iA[cov] || "Av- tovetvov LeBlacrov et[céBecav | maone Te (2?) yvl@pne Tis AauT[potarnys | worews bulov Kal vdv >ydiod[pevor ev | Tabs émripavelotdtass nuetv Kal aiwr[iows] | avto[d yeve]OALacs Hépacs kat Géas 7[pepa@r] || wévte émritedety kal Siavopny Tots | TroAe- Tals €K TOV Kadovpévwv eis Tas | Bucias ExdoTw. SnvdpLov diddvar. Kal | tadta pev vpetv dp0ds Kal Kadads Sorrep | (i) avTos elonynodpevos Etvx[oly || vevouobeTncOw. "Eppaabar bpas evyopar. An edict of Trajan had forbidden donationes from the municipal treasury to citizens (Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 110), but in this document [ 420 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES from Ephesus we see that, in the age of the Antonines, the town council proposed a distribution of a denarius to each citizen present at the sacrifices in honor of the emperor on his birthday, if his name was on the roll of invited guests. Endowments for such distributions were common in antiquity (Laum, S¢tiftungen, 1, 103 ff. cf. nos. 69, 71), but we seldom find record of a direct distribution of municipal funds as proposed at Ephesus. The approval of the governor was required, and we infer from his answer that he had the right to propose legislation in the municipal council, at least in matters dealing with the finances of the city. 99. EPISTULA CORNELI PROCULI, LEGATI LYCIAE, AD SCRIBAM PUBLICUM MYRORUM (140 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 34; Lafoscade, 110. Kopyjdwos Ilpoxdos, | mpecBevtns avti|otpatnyos adv[to- Kpa]|to[pos], “lovrtiws Kalzera]||Netvws [M]upéwr ypaypal| ret yaipew. [O]is 7 Bov|dy Kal o Shwos ovopalow érelt]unoev ‘Orpapo|av “ArrodN@viov dis || Tob Kaddrddov, Tod|Tows Kayo tovtov | mpocayopevecOar | cuvywpa, ef wn TodT eo]| tu b7e- vavtiov % Tots || vowoss » tots éeo[s]v | [Tots malp tpuel?]p. TEppdc]|Oat ce edxopar. “Avayé|ypartas él apyi(epéas) | [TIov Juydpy[ov ]. Cf. no. 80. The city of Myra proposed to confer certain honors on Opramoas, but first asked the provincial legate if he would sanction their decree. He replied that the city could do so, if their act was not contrary to their laws or customs. In submitting their proposal to the legate, the municipal authorities were probably animated by motives of vanity, but in this way they invited the interference of the imperial authorities in local affairs (cf. nos. 71, 114). To some extent the powers of cities were limited by the laws of the commissioners or governor 1n organizing the province. Edicts were also issued by various emperors regulating the internal affairs of the municipalities. For example, Trajan issued an edict forbidding the payment of money from municipal treasuries to private individuals as gifts (Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 110). ‘Treaties made between Rome and various cities also contained clauses which [ 421 ] Io T5 IO 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN gave Romans special privileges and apparently restricted the freedom of the city in giving similar rights to other aliens (cf. IG. vi1, 20 (Tanagra) [Seddc00ar].. Kal r[add]a wavt[a]...[wrnv et twa ddXws | tpootét[axrar nuiv ev Tats o luv[OjKars Tails yevouévats mpos | ‘Pwpaiouvs: Dio Chrys. 41, 103 cf. no. 19). 100. EPISTULA ANTONINI PII AD EPHESIOS (140-144 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 51; Ditt. Sy//.3 849. Avtoxp[dtap Kaicap, Qeod ‘AS |ptavod | vids, Geo[d Tpaiavod Tlap@cxod vier os, | Geod Nep[ova éxyovos, Tiros AiAuos “Adpt]- avos | ’Avtaveivlos YeBacrtes, apyeepevs pé |ytoros, || Snuapxexh[s éEovcias TO.., avToxpatwp TO P'], Urratos | To y', maTp Tal Tpl- 50s, Edeciwy tots [apyovor kat tH] Bourne | [kat Tas OH |uwe yaiplew]. | Iepyaunvolds amede|Edunv év tots [pos tpas yledupacw | xpnoapévolus tolis ovoulalouw ots eyo ypnoOar THv Tow || THv Hwerépav [arr led[n lvdunv. Oiwas dé cai Suvpvai- ous kata | Tvynv tapad[edlourévar TadtTa év TO rept THS cuvOuatas | Wndicpats, ToU Aowtrod O€é ExovTas evyv@morHceLy, éav | kal tpets ev Tois mpos avTovs ypdupacwy Ov [m7 lpoonKer | TpOTOY Kal KEKpLTAaL THS TOAEWS avTOV [haivyna O |e weuvy||[u ]évor. To Wydiopa ereprpev Lovarrixsos lov[ ra ]vo[s érit |pomos pov. | EKorvyeite. | [Td] dé wydiopa éroinaev ypappatevor Id. Odndxos ’Av[ rove |ivo[s ]. From Ephesus. This letter illustrates the rivalry between Greek cities in Asia Minor for preeminence which was characteristic at this period (Cassius Dio, 52. 37. 10; Dio Chrys. 34. 48). The emperor had determined the proper rank and titles for the three cities, Ephesus, Smyrna, and Pergamum. Neither Smyrna nor Ephesus accepted his decision, and in their communications to each other had neglected to use the proper titles of honor. The Ephesians complained to the emperor, and in his reply he attempts to allay their wrath with a mild rebuke, suggesting that they also use the proper titles of honor in addressing Smyrna. This dispute raged again some years later, and was once more referred to the emperor (Aristides, rept owovoias tats toXecww; cf. Chapot, La prov. rom proc. d Asie, 144 f.; Ditt. Sy//.3 849, n. 2). [ 422 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES IOI. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS ANTONINI PII AD EPHESIOS (145 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 543; Ditt. Sy//.3 850; L.B.W. 3, 491. [Avtroxpatwlp Kaio[a]p, Oefod *Ad]pifavo]é | [vics, Oeod Tpai|avo[d Iap@ |exo[d viw vos, | [Peod Nepotva é]xyov[os, Tiros] Aiduo[s “Adpslavos | [Avtwvetvos LeBaloro[s, apxveped]s plé- yiatos, dn |uapl||[ye]x[fs eEovcias] 7o 7’, aldvtoxpadtwp ro B’, tra[t]os [70 8, ra]|tip m[atpisos, “Edecijav trois [dp }yovar cat t[H] Bovrn cat | [to Syuw x Jaipelev. T]yv pirorepiar av dirotipletras | mpos bulas O[dydio]s ’"Avtwveivos éuabov ovy otta[s] é« | Tov dueTépaly ypayludtav ws éx Trav [éx]eivou: Bovropellvos yap map éwod Tvyetv BonOetas [eis TO]y Kocpov Tav | Epywv, ov vpelv érnvyerAaTto, éd7d[woev Ooa Kali HrALKa oi|Kosounpata tpoatiOnow TH mode, AN’ Uw lets of dx] dp|Oas amodéyerGe avTovs Kayo Kai or[vexopnoa alvTals do]|a n77- carlo], kal amredeEduny Ori [ov] Tov [cvrvyOy Tay Tro||XevTEVO- pévav TpoTrov, of tod [maplayphula evdsoximlety yxal[p]uv els Béals xlat dvavopas Kal ta To[v ayovov Oduata Sarav]alce | TH |v pu[roripliav, ara Ou’ ob pos TO [wéAXOV EArriber o Jeuvol- [répav troun |oewy THY TOALY TpOnp| nTaL. Ta ypadupara ere |uwer | [KX. “lov ]Asavos 0 Kpdtiotos avOv[matos. Evtuyeire. From Ephesus. ‘This letter reveals the undercurrents of municipal life at this period. Vedius Antoninus had secured assistance from the emperor in building the Odeum at Ephesus, and had contributed generously from his own purse. ‘he emperor rebukes the city for their lukewarmness in giving honor to Vedius because he had spent his wealth in an enduring monument instead of giving games or distributing doles to the citizens. (Cf. Hicks, .B.MZ. 3, 492, 493-) 102. EPISTULA RUPILI SEVERI, LEGATI LYCIAE, AD LYCIARCHAM (150 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 453 Lafoscade, 114. ‘Povridwos Seouvn[plos “Av[S]poBiwr Avecapyne xaitpe[er. ’Exre]l 4 xpaltict[n] Tod E@vous Bovdn éreBonaarto To Whdicpa Si[ay]paldyvac vrép “Orrpapoa “AmoAXwviov Tpds TOV péyLaToV [ 423 ] Ll 10) IO 15 II III MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN ai[tlo|kparopa, Stvacau trovetv 6 BovrovTat. "Eppacbai ce evyou[ ac]. Cf. no. 80. The provincial assembly of Lycia requests permission of the governor to send a copy of an honorary decree to the emperor. The lyciarch is given authority to carry out the wish of the assembly. 103. TITULUS OPERIS PUBLICI (re2paChiy) An. ép. 1904, no. 21. Imp. Caesar | T. Aelius Hadrianus | Antoninus Aug. Pius | pont. max. tribu\|nicia potestate Xv cos. 1111 | viam per Alpiis | Numidicas, ve|tustate inter|ruptam, ponti||dus denuo fac|tzs, paludibus | sic- catis, labibus | confirmatis, | restituit, || curante M. Valerio | Etrusco leg. suo | pr. pr. For similar inscriptions, cf. nos. 31 and 72. 104. TRES EPISTULAE ANTONINI PII AD CORONENSES ET THISBENSES (140-155 p. Chr.) TGPVIN2570. pay orae dt]|Kacov, omroTe vyets ovK [€]rreiPecOe Tols KpiOciowy, ANNA EionvErTe eis THY Exeivov yowpaly], | Kaxeivous (€)is TO pr) mep[ulopav vuds véuovtas tpétecOat. Ilocov dé éotw TO dde- NopL[e]|vov Tédos 7) Tiva eicly A KaTecyHKacw buav Kopwveis évéyupa, Aptat@vupos || 0 avTos Kpuvet. Evtuyeire. Avtoxpatwp Kaicap, Qeod ‘Adpiavod vids, Geod Tpaiavod Tlap61| Kod viwves, Geod Nepova éxyovos, Tiros AtAtos ‘ASpiavos "Avteveivos LeBacros, apxvepeds péytoTtos, | Snuapyixns é£ov- cias 70’, Uratos y', TaTip TaTpidos, Kopwvréwy trois dpyoucs Kat THL Boudhe kal Tat SH|uae yalpew. Kat tod Oe0d ratpés Mou OiKalws wenvnpévot Kal THs éuhs apyns KaTA TO Tpoah«or || erga Onwevor Kai UTép TOD viod wou TpoOdpws cuvnddpevor Tpé- Tmovta “EXAnow avOpe@rrots rovei|te. "EmpéoBevev Anpuntptos Avovuciou, dt TO €pdd.ov S007Ta, ef un Tpotka bTécyxeTO. Edrv- yelre. Avtoxpatwp Kaicap, God “Ad[pslavod vids, Ge0d Tpaiavod Ilap@tKod viwvos, Peov Nepova éxyovos, Ti|tos AiAzos ‘ASpravds [ 424 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES "Avtar[ellvos LeBactos, apyrepeds péeyratos, Snuapyixns éEov- atlas TO un’, avto|xpatwp To 8’, Uratos TO 8, mathp Tatpisos, Kopwvéwy tots dpyovot Kal THE Bovdne Kal TAL OHjpws yat| perv. Tis atoddcews Hv é[rjouncdunv petaéd tuadv Kal Orc Béwr atoypapov tmety émevwa, é|lréatetAa O€ kal Meortpiws Aps- 5 o[t]wvivpos amouetpnoa: Ta TAEOpa Orc Bedow, ad mpocétrakev autots 0 | Geds matHnp pov mapadobAl vat], THs dé &EwOev yopas el Tiva Ora Pets émuivéworev TreiOovtes bas, | Soooveory pev vowtov TéeALos, av] dé cal amobddaw, bcov av brép Tov ypovov Tod TaperOovtos ogfet]|Newy avTovs KplOns, Snrove[te] dpels Ta évéyupa avtois atrodwaete. EmpécBevov Aidwos TAvKo[v] | Kat Avoviiatos Atovucodapor, [ois To] épodvov S00nT aw, ef pur) TpotKa uTéaynvTat. Evruyeire. From Coronea. The people of Thisbe had been encroaching on the territory of Coronea. The dispute had been referred to Hadrian and a decision rendered, but the aggressions continued. Antoninus appointed Aristonymus to survey the land, ordering both Thisbans and Coroneans to pay the taxes to the respective cities to which the disputed lands might be awarded. 105. EDICTUM PROCONSULIS ASIAE DE FESTIS DIEBUS EPHESIORUM (ca. 160 p. Chr.) I.B.M, 482; CIG. 2954; Ditt. Sy//.3 867. [..[Lo]mirrcos Kapos [léda[v] | avOd7ratos Neyer. | ["E]uadov é« lal yA > > \ / c \ nm vs Tov TeupOértos [eis €]| we Wydiopatos vio THS Naptrpot[a]||tns 5 >, / A \ \ b] A fi > / Edeciwy Bovrns tovs mpo éulov] | kpatictous avOurdrovs e \ 7 \ e / lal He lal 9 ie[pas] | vopicas ras ijuépas tis [ra]vy[ydpews | t]Ov ’Aprfe- puciwv] Kal TovTo dvaTtal|ypats SednrwKévar’ Oey avayxail|oy 10 e / \ > \ > / y \ > / A A nynoadpny Kat avTos amoBré|Trwv eis Te THY EVaéBELav THs Beod | Kal eis THY THS NaptrpoTarns ‘Ede|ociwy Torews Teyunv havepov mrot|noas Siatdypate eoecOat Tas Hpépas || TavTas iepas Kal TAS 15 ém avtais éxe|yerpias pvraxOncecOar: mpoeata|tos THs Tavy- yvpews | Titov Aidtov Mapxcavod I picxov | tot aywvobérov, ¢ lal bn eta / > 5 \ 5 / \ / an bod Airiov || L[picxov, avdpos doxiuwtatov Kai | rmdons TeLpns 20 Kal amTodoyns akiov. [42.500] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN From Ephesus. The governor of Asia had, apparently, given offence to the citizens of this city by transacting public business— possibly holding court—on days sacred to Diana. The Ephesians lodged a protest, citing the edicts of former governors regarding their holy days. The second part of the inscription, omitted here, contains a decree of the city making the whole of the month Artemision sacred to the goddess. 106. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE CYZICENIS (138-160 p. Chr.) CIL. m1, S. 7060; E.F. 3, 156; Dessau, 7190; Bruns, 62; Riccobono, p. 237. S.C. de postulatione Kyzicenor. ex Asia, | qui dicunt ut corpus quod appellatur ne|on et habent in civitate sua auctoritate | am- 5 plissimi ordinis confirmetur. Scri||bendo adfuerunt M. Aelius imp. T5 Titi Aeli | Hadriani Antonini f. Pap. Aurelius Velrus,....s M. f. Gal. Verus, M. Hosidius | M. f A...Geta, M. Annius M. f. Gal. Libo, Q. | Pompezus Q. f. Hor. Bassianus, L. Fl. L. f. || Quir. Iulianus, L. Gellius L. f. Ter. Severus, | q(uaestores). Sen- tentia dicta ab Appio Gallo | cos. desig. relatione mir concedente | imp. Caesare Tito Aelio Hadriano An|tonzmo Aug. Pio. . 1111 re- latione sua || .. .. Kyzicenos ex Asia | ....qguos neos appellant.... A stone tablet found in 1876 on the site of Cyzicus, now in the British Museum. Cyzicus was a civitas Libera (cf. Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 115) in the senatorial province of Asia. As Kornemann has shown (R.E. 4, 408 ff:), the imperial policy in the matter of associations was determined by the /ex Iulia of Augustus (cf. CYL. v1, 2193). Under this law only useful organiza- tions were allowed, and a new association must secure the consent of the senate and the approval of the emperor. Under the early empire the senate took action even on requests from cities in imperial provinces (cf. CIL. v, 7881), but gradually its competence was restricted to Italy and the senatorial provinces, as in this case, and in the course of time, even in senatorial provinces, the consent of the emperor was the determining factor. In the cities of the East particularly the central government was chary of allowing the [ 426 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES formation of clubs, because of their tendency to develop into political organizations (cf. Plin. Epp. ad Trait. 33, 34). On the danger attending the formation of corpora neon (= iuvenum), Mommsen cites Dig. 48. 19. 28, 3, from the third century, solent quidam, qui volgo se tuvenes appellant, in quibusdam civitatibus turbulentis se adclamationibus popularium accommodare. ‘The emperor had the right to present the first four motions at a meeting of the senate, but in this case he conceded his right to the fourth motion (cf. 1. 12) to the consul designatus (cf. Mommsen, St. R. 2, 898, n. 4). The words sententia dicta show that the stone gives an extract from the Acta Senatus rather than the S.C. itself. After 11 B.c. the Acta Senatus were in charge of the quaestors. 107. TITULUS HONORARIUS (138-161 p. Chr.) CIL. x11, 594; Dessau, 6988. Pagani pagi Lucreti, qui sunt fini|bus Arelatensium loco Gargario, QO. Cor. | Marcelli lib. Zosimo mu11vir Aug. col. Tul. | Paterna Arelate ob honorem eius, qui notum (szc) fecit || inturiam nostram omnium saecu/orum sacra|tissimo principi T. Aelio Antonino Pzo, ..r© Romae | misit per multos annos ad praesides provinczae per- se|cutus est iniuriam nostram suis inpendizs et ob hoc | donavit nobis inpendia quae fecit, ut omnium saecu||lorum sacratissim1 principis imp. Caes. Antonini Aug. Pi | beneficia durarent permanerentque quibus frueremur | ....et balineo gratuito quod ablatum erat paganis | pag? Lucretz, quod usi fuerant amplius annis xxxx. Found at St Jean de Garguier near Massilia. The pagus Lucretius was an oppidum attributum, which had probably been taken from Massilia and given to Arelate, because of the resistance which Massilia offered to Caesar in 49 B.c., cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 263 f.; Herzog, Gallia Narbonensis, 171 and no. 358. On oppida attributa and their disputes with their suzerain states, cf. nos. 10 and 49; pp. 10 ff, 138 ff In ll. 6-7 Hirschfeld would read patienter Romae mansit. [ 427 ] Io Io I5 Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 108. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS ANTONINI AD MINOETAS (138-161 p. Chr.) IG. xu, 7, 242; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1010. [Mewanrav thu Bov]|Ane wal [rae Syyor yatpew]..... | TUNN@Y 5 Se ad ote [riv wmetépay mo]|Auw: Kal yap a..... lov émrihavels..... mpos Tov ‘Pw]|yaiwmy Shwov........ | dé THis TPOS TOV.....6% | edvolas, wariota [8 mpds Tov Tatépa ‘ASpsavov] | Oedv YeRa(c)rov, Os .....-.++5- || Scat peiyras Tap wvpeltvy TOAAM@Y ......-- ayabav] | Kat diravépwrev One TE |ra: bev kal rdt Wydic[pate Tau bwerépar évé]|- TUXov Hdéws, Kal Tolis map’ buadV TperBevTais] | Ocomoprrar SAVOKYOIU |e eee | otpatas éypnuatica: [dia Tadta ovv ipiv érev]|Oepiav cat avtovomilav Kal atérevav, caOws] | Tapa la / ’ / > / b] 7 Tav mpocOev alvtoxpatopav édaPel|te, ¢BeBaiwoa, eT.... From Minoa in the island Amorgus. The emperor, presumably Antoninus Pius, ratifies the gift of freedom, independence, and immunity, which the city had received from former emperors. The visit of Hadrian to the islands in the Aegean was made in 123 (Weber, Unters. Gesch. Hadr. 142 ff.). Cf. nos. 40, 75. 109. EPISTULA PRAEFECTORUM PRAETORIO (168-172 p. Chr.) CIL, 1x, 2438; Bruns, 714; Riccobono, p. 260. (1) Bassaeus Rufus et Macrinzus Vindex mag] (istratibus) Saepinat(ibus) salutem. | Exemplum epistulae scriptae nobis a Cosmo Aug(usti) lib(erto) | a rationibus cum his quae’ iuncta erant subiecimus, et admonem|lus abstineatis iniuris faciendis conductoribus gregum oviarico|rum cum magna fisci iniuria, ne necesse sit recognosci de hoc | et in factum, si ita res fuerit, vindicari. | (2) Cosmi Aug(usti) lib(erti) a rationibus scriptae ad Basseum Rufum et ad | Macrintum Vindic(em) pr(aefectos) pr(aetorio) e(minentissimos) v(iros).—Exemplum epistul(ae) scriptae mihi || a Septimiano colliberto et adiutore meo subieci, et peto tanti | faciatis [ 428 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES scribere mag(istratibus) Saepin(atibus) et Bovian(ensibus), uti de- sinant iniuriam | conductoribus gregum oviaricorum qui sunt sub cura mea facere, | ut beveficio vestro ratio fisci indemnis sit. (3) Script(ae) a Septimiano ad Co|smum.—Cum conductores gregum oviaricorum, qui sunt sub cura tua, in re presenti || subinde mihi quererentur per itinera callium frequenter iniuriam | se accipere a stationaris et mag(istratibus) Saepino et Boviano eo, quod in tramsitu | iumenta et pastores, quos conductos habent retineant di- centes fugitivos esse et | iumenta abactia habere et sub hac specie oves quoque dominicae | szbz pereant in illo tumultu: necesse habe- bamus etiam et etiam scribere, quietius ag||erent, ne res dominica detrimentum pateretur; et cum in eadem contumacia | perseverent, dicentes non curaturos se neque meas litteras neque si tu eis | scripserzs haut fieri rem, rogo, domine, si tibi videbitur, indices. Basseo Rufo | et Macrinzo Vindici pr(aefectis) pr(aetorio) e(mi- nentissimis) v(iris), ut epistulas emittant ad eosdem mag(istratus) et statilonarios........¢andiu temere (?) zrritum (?) factum est. Found on a stone at Saepinum. The cursus honorum of M. Bas- saeus Rufus is given in CYL. vi, 1599 (= Dessau, 1326). He was probably prefect of Egypt from 166 to 168 (cf. v. Rohden in R.E. 3, 103 f.; Meyer, Hermes, 32, (1897), 226). Subsequently he was made praetorian prefect. M. Macrinius Vindex was killed in 172 probably (cf. Prosop. 2, p. 313). Their joint incumbency of the praetorian prefecture therefore probably fell between 168 and 172. The situation which calls forth this letter is clear. The officials of Saepinum and Bovianum have illtreated the keepers of the imperial herds and wrongfully taken some of their animals. The attention of Cosmus, a rationibus, is called to this state of things by his adiutor, Septimianus, in a letter (Il. 10-24). Cosmus sends this letter with a brief superscription of his own (ll. 8-10) to the praetorian prefects, who in turn prefix a warning (ll. 1-7) to the document and send it to the magistrates of Saepinum. Our interest in the document lies primarily in the fact that it deals with a quarrel between municipal magistrates and imperial employees, and shows how such a difficulty was settled. The prefects take the action which they do in this case not as fiscal officers, but as officials charged with the maintenance of order in Italy, and this is one of the earliest [ 429 ] 15 IO MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN known instances of the exercise by the praetorian prefect of this function; cf. Mommsen, St. R. 2, 969, 1120. The stationarii (|. 16) are in this case of course members, not of the imperial, but of the municipal police force; cf. Lécrivain, Duct. Dar. 4, 1469. For the functions of the scrintum a rationibus, cf. pp. 240 ff. For its organization, cf. Hirschfeld, 31 ff On the imperial domains, cf. pp. 17 ff. 110. SENATUS CONSULTUM DE SUMPTIBUS LUDORUM GLADIATORUM MINUENDIS (176-177 p. Chr.) CIL. u, S. 6278; Dessau, 5163; Bruns, 63; Riccobono, p. 238. ....tantam illam pestem nulla medicina sanari posse. Nec poterat: verum nostri principes quibus omne studium est quanto lilbet morbo salutem publicam mersam et enectam refovere et integrae valuetudini reddere, in primis anima adverterunt quae | causa illi morbo vires daret, unde foeda et inlicita vectigalia ius haberent, quis auctor et patronus esset usurpandis quasi | legitimis, quae omnibus legibus et divinis et humanis prohibentur. || Fiscus dicebatur: fiscus non sibi, set qui lanienae aliorum prae- texeretur, tertia vel quarta parte ad licentiam foedae rapinae invi|ta- tus. Itaque fiscum removerunt a tota harena. Quid enim Marci Antonini et Luci Commodi cavendum fisco cum hare|na? Omnis pecunia horum principum pura est, nulla cruoris humani adspergine contaminata, nullis sordibus foedi quae|stus inquinata, et quae tam sanctae paratur quam insumitur. Itaque facessat sive illut ducen- tiens annuum seu trecenties | est; satis amplum patrzmonium imperio paratis ex parsimonia vestra. Quin etiam ex reliquis lanistarum, quae (sestertium) quingenties sul|pra sunt, pars lanistis condonetur. Ob quae, oro vos, merita? Nulla sane, inquiunt, merita, set prohibiti talibus grassaturis sola|cium ferant et in posterum tanto pretio in- vitentur ad opsequium humanitatis. | O magni impp., qui scitis altius fundari remedia, quae etiam malis consulunt, qui se etiam necessarios fecerint! Et iam fructus tan|tae vestrae providentiae emergzt. Legebatur etiam nunc apud nos oratio; sed ubi rumore delatum est questus lanistarum recisos, fis|cum [ 430 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES omnem illam pecuniam quasi contaminatam reliquisse, statim sacer- dotes fidelissimarum Galliarum vestrarum || concursare, gaudere, inter se loqui. | Erat aliquis, qui deploraverat fortunas suas creatus sacerdos, qui auxilium sibi in provocatione ad principes facta constituerat. Sed | ibidem ipse primus et de consilio amicorum: quid mihi iam cum appellatione? Omne onus, quod patrimonium meum opprimebat, sanc|tissimi impp. remiserunt; iam sacerdos esse et cupio et opto et, editionem muneris quam olim detestabamur, amplector. | Itaque gratiae appellationis non solum ab illo, verum et a ceteris petitae; et quanto plures petentur! Iam hoc genus causarum di- versam formam || habebit, ut appellet qui non sunt creati sacerdotes, immo populus. | Quae igitur tantis tam salutarlum rerum consilis vestris alia prima esse sententia potest, quam ut, quod singuli sentiunt, quod universi | de pectore intimo clamanf, ego censeam? | Censeo igitur in primis agendas maximis impp. gratias, qui salu- taribus remedis, fisci ratione post habita, labentem civitatium statum et prae|cipitantes iam in ruinas principalium virorum fortunas restituerunt: tanto quidem magnificentius, quod, cum excusatum esset reti||nerent quae ali instituissent et quae longa consuetudo con- firmasset, tamen olli peraeque nequaquam sectae suae congruere arbitra|ti sunt male instituta servare et quae turpiter servanda essent instituere. | Quamquam autem non nulli arbitrentur de omnibus, quae ad nos maximi principes rettulerunt, una et succincta sententia cen- sendum, | tamen, si vos probatis, singula specialiter persequar, verbis ipsis ex oratione sanctissima ad lucem sententiae translatis, ne qua ex parte pravis in|terpretationibus sit locus. Itaque censeo, uti munera, quae assiforana appellantur, in sua forma manegnt nec egrediantur sump||tu (sestertium) xxx (milia). Qui autem supra (sestertium) xxx (milia) ad Lx (milia) usque munus edent, is gladiatores tripertito praebeantur numero pari. Summum pre|tium sit—(v. 31-34 seguuntur pretia gladiatorum). Et haec sit summo ac formonso gladiatori defi||nita quantitas, Utique in omnibus muneribus quae generatim distincta sunt, lanista dimidiam copiam universi numeri promisque multitu|dinis praebeat [Pi 4d eu 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN exque his qui gregari appellantur, qui melior /acertatws erit duobus milibus sub signo pugnet, nec quisquam ex eo numero | mille nummum minore. Lanistas etiam promovendos vili studio questus: sibi copiam dimidiae partis praebendae negantes esse ex nu|mero gregariorum uti sciant inpositam sibi necessitatem de ceteris quos meliores opinabuntur transferre tantisper plendi nu|meri grega- riorum gratia. Itaque is numerus universae familiae aequis partibus in singulos dies dispartiatur, zeque ullo die minus quam || dimidia pars gregariorum sit ibi eo die dimicabunt. Utque ea opservatzo a lanistis quam diligentissime exigatur, intungendum | his qui pro- vinciae praesidebunt et legatis vel quaestoribus vel legatis legionum vel is qui ius dicunt c(larissimis) v(iris) aut procuratorzbus maxi- morum | principum quibus provinciae rector mandaverit; is etiam procuratorzjus qui provinciis praesidebunt. Trans Padum autem perque omnes Italiae | regiones arbitrium iniungendum praefectis alimentorum , si aderunt, vel viae curatori aut, si nec is praesens erit, iuridico vel | tum classis praetoriae praefecto. || Item censeo de exceptis ita opservandum, ut praecipuum mer- cedes gladiator sibi quisque paciscatur, elus pecuniae quae ob hanc causam excipijebatur, quartam portionem liber, servus autem quin- tam excipiat. De pretis autem gladiatorum opservari paulo ante censui secundum praescrip|tum divinae orationis, sed ut ea pretia ad eas Civitates pertineamt, in quibus ampliora gladiatorum pretia flagrabant. Quod si quibus civitatibus | res publica tenuior est, non eadem serventur quae aput fortiores civitates scripta sunt, nec supra modum virium onerent, sed hactenus in eundem, | ut quae in publicis privatisque rationibus repperientur pretia summa ac media ac postrema, si quidem provinciarum eae Civitates sunt, ab eo || qui praesidebit provinciae opserventur, ceterarum autem iuridico vel curatori provinciae vel classis praetoriae praefecto vel procura- tori | maxumorum principum, uti Culusque Civitatis potestasque ibi prima erit. Atque ita rationibus decem retroversum annorum in- spectis, exemplis | munerum in quaque Civitate editorwm conside- ratis, conserventur ab eo cuius arbitrium erit de tribus pretis: vel si melius ei videbitur | ex eo modo quem persequitur efficiat et tri- fariam pretia deducantur eaque forma etiam in posterum servetur. Sciantque v(iri) c(larissimi), qui procon|sules paulo ante profecti [ 432 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES sunt, intra suum quisque annum it negotium exsequi se oportebit, li etiam, qui non sortito provincias || regant, intra annum. | Ad Galliam sed et princeps........ » qui in civitatibus splendi- dissimarum Galliarum veteri more et sacro ritu expectantur, ne ampliore pretio | lanistae praebeant, quam binis milibus. Cum maximi principes oratione sua praedixerint fore, ut damnatum ad gladium | procurator eorum......... nisi plure quam sex aureis et nisi iuraverit. | Sacerdotes quoque provinciarum quibus nullum cum lanistis negotium erit, gladiatores a prioribus sacerdotibus sus||ceptos vel sibimet auctoratos recipiunt, at post editionem eodem pretio in suc- cedentes tramztfunt; neque singulatim aliquem | rei gladiatoriae causa vendat plure quam lanistis est pretium persolutum. | Is autem qui aput tribunum plebei c(larissimum) v(irum) sponte ad dimicandum profitebitur, cum habeat ex lege pretium duo milia, liberatus si discri|men instauraverit, aestimatio eius post hac (sester- tium) x1r (milia) non excedat. Is quoque qui senior atque inabilior operam suam denuo...... l. 50. provinciae; viae, Hirschfeld. ]. 54. oportebit ii for oportere eos. 1. 56. ad Galliam...civitatibus; ad Gallicas editiones quae in civitatibus, Hirschfeld. ]. 58. after procurator eorum some words have been Lost. At several points in this inscription, indicated by italics, emendations of scholars have been admitted into the text. Mere orthographical or gram- matical errors which do not obscure the sense have usually been allowed to stand. A bronze tablet, found in 1888 near Italica in Baetica, now in Madrid. Commodus was named imperator in Nov. 176. He was therefore the colleague of M. Aurelius until the latter’s death in 180. The inscription consequently falls between these dates (cf. 1. 6), but since M. Aurelius was absent from Rome on a campaign against the Marcomanni from 178 to 180, this document probably | falls in the year 176 or 177. The plays and games which were given annually in all the prin- cipal towns of the empire and the yearly games at the meetings of the concilia (cf. no. 155) constituted a heavy charge on the municipal budget. At Urso in Spain in the first century B.c., each duovir and AMA [ 433°] 28 is fe, 60 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN aedile was called on to contribute at least 2000 sesterces, and the city added from the public treasury 2000 for each duovir and 1000 for each aedile (cf. no. 26, chapp. 70-71). Pliny’s letters to “Trajan refer frequently to the large sums which were being spent by the cities in his province on theatres, amphitheatres, and baths (cf. Epp. 23, 39). The gifts and bequests made by private citizens (cf. Liebenam, St. Verw. 118, n. 73 119, n. 1) added materially to the sums spent each year. Some records of the cost of these entertain- ments are given by Guiraud, Les assemblées prov. 130. The central government was aware of the heavy financial burden which these festivals laid on the municipalities, and Cassius Dio (52. 30) makes Maecenas advise Augustus to forbid them outside of Rome, but this document contains the earliest formal action looking to economy in such matters of which we have any record. How serious the matter has become is indicated by ll. 23-24, /abentem civitatium statum et praecipitantes 1am in ruinas princtpalium virorum fortunas. The subject is brought before the senate in the form of an oratio principum (cf. \l. 13, 28, 47, 57). This would probably be read by the quaestor, and immediately put to vote by the presiding officer (cf. Mommsen, Sz. R. 2, 899; Abbott, 350). ‘The speech which Claudius made in a similar way de ture honorum Gallis dando has come down to us (cf. no. 50 and Tac. Aun. 11. 24-25). This in- scription contains a speech made by a senator sometime after the reading of the oratio principum (cf. ubi rumore delatum est, |. 13). The proposal of M. Aurelius and Commodus, like the speech of Claudius, and like the messages of the President of the United States, was probably cast in the form of a general recommendation. One of the senators, on the basis of this recommendation, proceeds to formulate a bill. His motion, following the preamble (Il. 1-22), consists of two parts: (1) a vote of thanks to the emperors (Il. 23—29), and (2) certain articles limiting the amount of money which may be spent on gladiatorial contests (Il. 29-63). The provisions of the measure are to be enforced by imperial officials (Il. 41-44, 50-55). On these officials, cf’ Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 509-511. To make the new arrangement easier for those who give the games, the emperors have already provided for the remission of the tax paid to the fiscus of one-third or one-fourth of the gains made by the [ 434 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES lanistae (cf. ll. 5-6). The sum of 2,000,000 or 3,000,000 sesterces which the senator estimates (cf. 1. 8) will be lost annually by the fiscus, in consequence of the remission of this tax, gives us some conception of the large amounts spent on these games. To the sacerdotes Romae et Augusti, upon whom fell the duty of arranging the games held at the annual meeting of the conci/ium, the imperial proposal appealed very strongly (cf. ll. 13-20). It is interesting to notice incidentally that M. Aurelius had apparently urged in support of the imperial measure the inhumanity of the gladiatorial contests (cf. ll. 3-8). On the salaries to be paid the gladiators, cf’ Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 521-531. III. RESCRIPTUM COMMODI DE SALTU BURUNITANO (180-183 p. Chr.) CIL. vit, 10570; cf. S. 14464; Dessau, 6870; Bruns, 86; Girard, p. 199; Riccobono, p. 361. .....intellegis praevaricationem quam non mode cum Allio Maximo adver|sario nostro, set cum omnibus fere con|ductoribus contra fas atq. in perniciem | rationum tuarum sine modo exercuit, || ut non solum cognoscere per tot retro | annos instantibus ac supli- cantibus | vestramq. divinam subscriptionem | adlegantibus nobis supersederit, ve|rum etiam hoc eiusdem Alli Maximi || conductoris artibus gratiosissimi | w/timo indulserit, ut missis militib. | 7 eundem saltum Burunitanum alilos zostrum adprehendi et vexari, alilos vinciri, nonullos, cives etiam Ro|lmanos, virgis et fustibus effligi iusse|r#t, scé/icet eo solo merito nostro, qu|od venientes in tam gravi pro modulo me|docritatis nostrae tamq. manifesta | imzuria im- ploratum maiestatem tul|am acerliore epistula usi fuissemus. Culzus nostrae iniuriae evidentia, Caes., | zde profecto potest aestimari, ads 8 quidem, quem maiesta|¢..... exsistimamus vel pro || AAS t';ommino; [cognos’s|tiivenie ee plane gratificati | Peete ss. mum inverierit [i\2.h.. . ste). nostris, quibus |...... Borpamusscognd |[ss.i%s) sii beret inte]. ..... .praestare operas | MAY, tats ....ret ita tot relfro.....ttu....(deficiunt quaedam). Quae res compulit nos miserrimos homi|es cam rursum divinae providentiae | tuae suplicare, et ideo rogamus, sa|cratissime imp., [ 485~] 28-2 Col. 11 5 20 25 30 Col, 111 Col. Io T5 20 25 30 Io 15 25 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN subvenias. Ut kapite le||gis Hadriane, quod supra scriptum est, ad|emptum est, ademptum sit ius etiam proccb., | nedum conductori, adversus colonos am|pliandi partes agrarias aut operar. prae|bi- tionem iugorumve et ut se habent littere || procc. quae sunt in tabulario tuo tractus Kar|thag., non amplius annuas quam binas | aratorias, binas sartorias, binas messo|rias operas debeamus, itq. sine ulla contro|versia sit, utpote cum in aere inciso et ab || omnib, omnino undig. versum vicinis nost. | perpetua in hodiernum forma praesttu|tum et procc. litteris quas supra scripsimus | ita confzr- matum. Subvenias, et cum homi|nes rustici tenues manwum_ nos- trarum opellris victum tolerantes conductor profusis | largitionib. gratlosismo (szc) impares aput procc. tuos simus, quib. igs vices successi|on. per condicionem conductionis notus est, | miserearzs ac sacro rescripto tuo n. ampli|jus praestare nos, quam ex lege Hadriana et | ex litteras proce. tuor. debemus, id est ter | binas operas, praecipere digneris, ut bene] ficio maiestatis tuae rustici tui vernulae | et alumni saltwzum tuorum n. ultr. a conduc||torib. agror. fiscalium Inquietemur (defictunt quaedam). Imp. Caes. M. Aurelius Commodus An|tominus Aug. Sarmat. Germanicus | Maximus Lurio Lucullo et nomine alliorum. Procc. contemplatione dis||cipulinae et instituti mei ne plus | quam ter binas operas curabunt, | ne quit per iniuriam contra perpe|tuam formam a vobis exigatur. | Et alia manu: scripsi. Recognovi. || Exemplum epistulae proc, e. v. | Tussanius Aristo et Chrysanthus | Andronico suo salutem. Secundum | sacram subscriptionem domini n. | sanctissimi imp., quam ad libellum || suum datam Lurius Lu- cullus accepit...... (defictunt versus sex) et alija manu: opfamus te feli|cissimum bene vivere. Vale. Dat. | pr. idus Sept. Karthagini. || Feliciter | consummata et dedicata | idibus Mais Aureliano et Corne|liana cos. Cura agente | C. Iulio Pelope Salaputi, mag(istro). Engraved ona stone found in 1879 at Souk-el-Khmis, the ancient saltus Burunitanus, in northern Africa. The inscription is in four columns. Of these the first is almost entirely lost; on the lower part of the second column, the lines are broken on the left side; the third and fourth columns are intact. Commodus took the title of Pius in 183. The inscription therefore falls between 180 and 183. [he most important commentaries on it and on related [ 436 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES subjects are those of Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 3, 153 ff; Esmein, Mélanges @hist. et du droit, 293 ff.; Fernique and Cagnat, Rev. arch. 41 (1881), 94 ff, 138 ff; Karlowa, 1, 616, 656 f,, 924 ff; Fustel de Coulanges, Recherches sur quelques problémes a’ histotre, 33 ff; Schulten, Die rémischen Grundherrschaften; Beaudouin, Les grands domains dans [empire romain; Schulten, Kio, 7 (1907), 195 f.; Hirschfeld, 122 ff}; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 332 ff. ‘The inscription is made up of four parts: (1) the /bel/us of the coloni of the saltus Burunitanus (col. 1, 11, 11); (2) the subscriptio of Commodus (rv, 1 ff:); (3) the epistula procuratoris tractus Cartha- giniensis (IV, 10 ff.), addressed to Andronicus, the procurator saltus Burunitant; (4) the date of publication and name of the communal oficial. Of the people mentioned in the document, Allius Maximus (11, 2) 1s a conductor; Lurius Lucullus (tv, 2) represents the peti- tioners; Tussanius Aristo (iv, 11) is the procurator tractus Carth.; Chrysanthus is his assistant; Andronicus (Iv, 12) 1s procurator saltus Burunitani; and Salaputis (1v, 29) the magzster of the saltus, who probably superintends the construction of the altar on which the stone containing the inscription is cut. The tenants complain that the procurators have been unduly influenced and bribed by the contractors, that soldiers have been brought in, that they them- selves have been seized and punished, and that their annual con- tributions of produce and labor have been raised beyond the limits fixed in the /ex Hadriana. Heitland (Agricola, 347) thinks that the phrase, a/umni saltuum tuorum, implies that their holdings had descended to the present tenants from their fathers. Not far from the place where this inscription was found, and probably within the limits of the saltus Burunitanus, a fragment of another rescript of Commodus, addressed to Lurius Lucullus, has been discovered (CJL. vit, 8. 14451). This document is also a reply to the complaints of the co/onz. In another /zbellus (CIL. vitt, S. 14428), addressed to the same emperor, the tenants on an im- perial domain complain of the wrongs done them, and refer to the fact that they are required to furnish twelve days’ work each year. Apparently there was concerted action among the coloni in Africa under Commodus. For similar complaints from the Orient, cf. nos. 141 and 142. ee 7 | -MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Sy, 40 For an imperial reply to a similar complaint from an imperial domain in Phrygia, cf. Bruns, 93. The appeal to the emperor in the document before us, probably through the procurator saltus (11, 20), was made by Lurius Lucullus, the representative of the tenants, and the emperor’s rescript is addressed to Lucullus. A copy of it is sent to the procurator tractus, who communicates it to the procurator saltus (cf. quam. ..accepit, 1V, 15). In their appeal the tenants rely on three documents, viz. the /ex Hadriana (111, 5), the litterae procuratorum (111, 9 f.), and the perpetua forma (111, 16). For the first two documents, cf. no. 93 and p. 16. The forma perpetua is the lex Hadriana (cf. Rostowzew, op. cit. 332 f.). The colont have not yet been reduced to serfdom. Some of them are Roman citizens (11, 14 f.). For the history of the imperial domains, their political organization, and the decline in the status of the coloni, cf. pp. 16 ff. For the form of an imperial subscriptio, cf. pp. 242 ff. The petition would go to the scrinzum a hibelhs. 112. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS COMMODI AD CHERSO- NESITANOS DE CAPITULO LENOCINII (185-186 p. Chr.) Latyschev, 4, 81; CIL. 11, 8. 13750; Cagnat, JGRR. 1, 860, ll. 32 ff. E(xemplum) e(pistulae). Tiva évéoresda “Arevrias I petpe-| [aves Kxal dd2Xo«s Tepl TOD TopVLKOD TEX lous, UToTayhvat éxéXevTA Tpovowy wHTE vas Tapa TA Sedoypéva éevoynré|[CecOar, pte Tovs Huety UTnpleTovYTas UTEepBaivery TOV TrEpiryEeypappéevor épov. E(xemplum) e(pistulae). || Ut sctas quae sint officta militum agentium in vexillatione Cher- sonessitana de capitulo lenocini quod sud.]....... , mist tibt exem- plum sententiae Arri Alcibiadis tunc trib(uni) praepositi eiusdem vexilla|tzonis..... .us tam intentionem eius quam manifeste de- terminatam partem ad ius per|tinentem..... et quoniam idem Alci- biades videri non potest sub tempus venturum(?).|......recu- perandae vectigalis quantitatis sponte suscepisse, cum sententiam sub iudi||cez forma....... pridem et dixerit et proposuerit et omnibus annis fisco pariaverit, dubium non est | debere et circa vectigalis [Ajo ee FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES quantitatem et circa discipulina(e) ratione(m) et observare et ob- tinere | volo, eius sententiae exemplum aperta manu scriptum, unde de plano recte legi possit iuxta | ........ positum esse cura. E(xemplum) e(pistulae). Quid scripserim Atilio Primiano trzbuno | LN rio commilitionum, quod ad me idem tribunus propter capitulum lenol|cimz...... secundum formam sententiae Arri Alci- biadis tunc trib(uni) dictae om..|..... causas ne quid adversus discipulinam vel cum iniuria aut contumelia paganorum commit- tatur. | E(xemplum) e(pistulae). Quid ad decretum Chersonessitanorum rescripserim, Co|gnoscetis ex 11s quade....... es subici praecipi, et rursum admoneo caveatis ne sub obtentu huzws|modi inquisttionts milites ordinatam iam pridem placitam ac custoditam cum dispendio vestrae exsistzma||tionis......... mquietent vel innovare quid temptent. [AveoraOn(?)......- ] et apxovtav Tey Tept M. Avp. Bacu- Nevovavov AreEavdpov: [’EmpéoBevor(?)....] Pr. ’Apiorav kai Ovarépios Teppavos. From the T’auric Chersonesus. We have omitted the fragmentary beginning of this bilingual document (Il. 1-31). The citizens of Chersonesus had appealed to the emperor Commodus in regard to the collection of the tax on prostitutes (I!. 13-31 in the part omitted). This was an imperial tax first instituted by Gaius (Suet. Gaz. 40), and collected by officers of the army. The evidence for this tax under the empire is collected by Domaszewski in editing the in- scription (CTL. 111, S. 13750). Apparently there had been some dispute between the municipality and the officials who collected the tax. The emperor, in his letter to Primianus the chiliarch and Valerius Maximus the centurion, bidsthem to collect the tax without offence to the citizens and without exceeding the amount pre- scribed. For the exactions of the soldiery, cf. pp. 136/., and nos. 68, 139-144. [ 439 ] 45 59 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 113. EPISTULA IULI SATURNINI, LEGATI SYRIAE, AD PHAENESIOS (185-186 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 609; Lafoscade, 117. ‘TovrAsos Laltoupvivo|s Pawnailow pntpol|copias tod | Tpa- xovos | xaipevv. | Edy tis viv | erodnunone || Bcaiws otpa| tiers H | Kai idv@arns, | értoteirar|tés prot éx||OuxnOnoec|Oar* ovTe | yap ovvero|popay tilva odetrel|re tots Eé|vous, nal &elvava éyov|tes od Ov|vacbe aval|veacOhlvar déEac|Oat tats oi|Kiass tovs | Eévous. Tad||ra wou ta | ypappata | év rpodyrlas Ths un|TpoKka@ps||as tuav x|@piwr mpoblete, uy tus | @s ayvon|oas - atroXo||lynontac. The date of this inscription from Phaena in Syria is determined by Harrer (Studies in the History of the Roman Province of Syria, 40). ‘The villagers complained to the governor that they had been com- pelled to furnish hoespitium to soldiers and others, although there was an official hostel in their village. For similar complaints, cf. nos. 139, 141-144. 114. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS LYCIAE ET PAMPHYLIAE AD SIDYMEOS (185-192 p. Chr.) CapnatiG RRi2, bogs tht acelin "El a[pxvepéos tTLadv YeBalotav Acoyér[ovs] y’ Tod Mntpo- dwpou, Aciou B’, eionyno[a]uévov Tod ypapu|watéws THs BolvArs An|uocbévous told Av ]|SpoBiov, érupndicapévou dé Tod lepéos tov YeBactav “AreEdv|dpov tod Avool[vos]. “Errel dua tovds [ev]tuyertdtous Katpods Tod Betotatou AvToKpatopos Kaica- OCW seals iG, 36" LeBactod EKiceBois Evtuyods, cal dia tHv Tod Kpatiotov || avOumratou Catov Uourrewviov Balol|oou Tepevtiavov Tepl Tas modes avEnow, Kal 7 tpetépa | ods éndicato CUTTNMLA YEpovTiKOV KATA TOV VOmoV, évydjou BovANS Kal ExAN- cias dyouélvns, éo€ev ypadhvar Widiopa TO Kpatiotw avOv- matw dv ov TapaxrAnOjvar Kal avTov auveTikup@cat | THY THs Bovrjs Kat Tod Sypou xpicw X Se a tbyn ayabyn dedoyPar Yu8upéov TH BovrAy cal TH Syuw | cuvyeypadpCat tode To [ 440 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES [W]ndioua 6 Kal avadoOnva. atte bro tod a€soNoywTaTou Avetdpyov, Tronei||rov judy, Tr. Kr. TyrXeuadyou Hav[O]iou Kai Lwdupéos. [loura(vios) Bacoos avOu(matos) Sidupéwy | dpxover BovrAyn Syuw yaipev. Ta cares yesvoueva érratvetobat wadrrov mpoa|nxer % Kupodobar, éyer yap TO BéBao[y] ad éavTar. "Eppdcbat twas edyowat. “ExopuicOn éri tod avtod | Aueidpxou "AmredXalov Ky, éveypadn bd EvérOovtos tod kat Evtuyéous Tereciov Lwdupéos | yupvacvapyncavtos THs yepouatas [7 ]po- TOU. From Sidyma in Lycia. The name of the emperor, erased in antiquity, was that of Commodus. He received the title of Felix in 185. The city of Sidyma had decreed the formation of a gerusia, in accordance with the laws which regulated such association. ‘This action was submitted to the provincial governor for approval and ratification. The proconsul replied that their action was more worthy of praise than of ratification; for worthy achievements carry their own confirmation. The phrase cata tov voor (I. 6) seems to imply that the action of the city required the sanction of the governor before the decree was valid, but it is also possible that the request for his approval was inspired by motives of vanity. The different theories of the purpose of the gerusia are discussed by Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 2.16 ff. The senate passed a decree authorizing the establishment at Cyzicus of a neon, or organiza- tion of young men (138-160 p. Chr., cf. no. 106). It may be noted that, in the later period, the Sidymeans did not think it neces- sary to refer the proposal for the formation of the gerusza to the senate. Cf. Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 327, 330. 115. TITULUS HONORARIUS (150-200 p. Chr.) ta An. ép. 1902, no. 164; Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bel. lettr. 1902, 38; Dessau, 6780. M. Servilio P. f. Quir. | Draconi Albuciano | m viro, flam. perp., | quod super multa in remp. || merita et amplissimum | muni- ficentiae studium le|gationem urbicam gratui|tam ad Latéwm maius 5 oO pe|tendum duplicem susce||perit tandemg. feliciter | renuntiaverit, 10 [ 441 ] T5 cn Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN ordo publi|ce ponendam censuit, et | cum is honore contentus | pecuniam rei p. remisis||set, populus de suo posuit. Found at Bou-Ghara (ancient Gigthi) in Tunis. The double cognomen and the form of the inscription make it probable that it belongs to the latter half of the second century. On Gigthi, ef. Reid, Municipalities of the Roman Empire, 293, and Constans, Nouv. arch. des missions, fasc. 14, 1916. On Latium minus and maius, cf. pp. 191 ff. and Reid, op. cit. 242. The legal distinction be- tween the two classes of rights was perhaps made by Hadrian. This inscription, with no. 95, illustrates the stages through which a village passed in its progress toward Roman citizenship. Gigthi, at first probably a cévitas stipendiaria, had already been made a municipium, since it had duovirs. Now it receives Latium maius. For another inscription from Gigthi, cf. no. 161. 116. TITULUS HONORARIUS (saec. I vel 11 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 634; T.4.MZ. 2, 291. XéEctov Mapxuiov | ‘AmroAXwvidov viov Kupetvas | ’Amor- Nwvidynv ['P]wuatov cat | HavOcov, rerele]unmévor || vd ths [B]ovArjs Kat tod Sypolv], | of averwévoe Tod éveveriov | ToTLKOD Téhous avéatnaav | é« Tod idtov Kata thy SiaOynKnv | amor- TOVTOS av| Tov] eis Tov || THS aTENELas AOyoU apyuptou | SnvdapLa TplamupLa. From Xanthus in Lycia. Sextus Marcius Apollonides, a Roman citizen and a Xanthian, left thirty thousand denarii as an endow- ment to provide funds for the munera or for some form of local tax in his native city. In Egypt we find 76 éyxvx«Avov TéXos as a ten per cent. tax on sales, and it is possible that a similar tax is mentioned here. ‘Those released from this burden set up a statue in honor of Sextus, and it is probable that a guild of merchants would render this honor, rather than hypothetical incumbents of a liturgy which might never be imposed. The sales-tax in the empire was usually one per cent. Cf. Hirschfeld, 73 ff. [ 442 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 117, HIERAPOLITANORUM DECRETUM DE PARAPHYLACIBUS (saec. I vel 11 p. Chr.) pitt nr Ges une ["Exi orpatnyod Geog |irov Tod B’ vewrépou, wnvos Sexarof v et AOE. , | 60£e 7H |p ‘lepatrodectav THe Bourne él Tov apxale]- peciav: [Tods trapapvralxas TO Row |ov am éavtdv év Ttais K@mats TroveicOas éridy[piav, ep’ were || wndev erep lov avrtois Tapexew 7) wovov Evra Kal ayvpa Kal wor[nv, ddXro Sé pndev | Kndevrt a]\AXwL wt av Tote TpoTar. "Edy 8€ tis Tapa Tadra Toone 7 é[Tépwe TovodvTse cuplmrpaén, élrevyOévta memoun- Kéval TpocTeipou ovowaTe eis [TO Snudcvov | katatLO |évas adTov doa ay édevyOne eiinrpas Tapa Twos, dti[pwov dé | evar. Kal Tovs | érevyOévtas trapadvrAaxas pt) NauBavew tas Tapa TALS Kons rods line te ows ee. ] ) Kopmdpyas akovtas oredhavovy Tapag| vAaka, aTrodovvat | avTov TO] apytptov, Hrus [8] av Kou BournOqe crepavacat trapal PUAaKA,.. 1... eee ee Pak Meee : \ A \ f ES \ / % ¢e / / Tapa Tav|ra wnOev [y letver Oat’ ef Sé fu}, TOV UTrEvaVTiws ToLno- \ / > \ nA 3 / > / 4 [avta pn TiOévar | eis TO TOD "Am ]oAXwVOS avabypata, bvTOS TovToOU Tov Whdicpato|s Kupiov | Kal] -éréyovTos. From a village near Hierapolis. ‘This document contributes some information on village-government under the municipalities. The villages of Hierapolis were provided with officials called comarchs. In addition police officers were sent from the city who had been guilty of making illegal exactions from the villagers. By this decree the paraphylaces are placed under more strict control, and are for- bidden to exact anything beyond a supply of wood for fuel, chaff for bedding, and housing during their stay. Other expenses must be met out of their own pocket. Honors must not be conferred by the village, especially under compulsion, and, apparently, if money is voted by the village to crown one of these officers, this sum must be restored. [443 ] Io n IO 15 20 25 30 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 118. EDICTUM AUCTORIS INCERTI AD BEROIAEOS (saec. I-11 p. Chr.) B.C.H. 37 (1913), 90f- SiNaeentas oe Oval A ]epear[os (2)..]........]va Tova?) eavar DAN ULGE ce 2 ois [eae nenes Ael iv] Tov épyoNaBov ws OTL pd- MotTla....|...] dav py Kalra) THY ev THe cvvypadhe cvpT- [voay (?)...||...cv]ugovou mpos éxrn(E)iv, Evoyos Extat ov mp[os (?)..|...7Td]v SeBactav eixovas éotedhavovpér[ as] PAI- PAMN[...|...79]v ypnudtav &odov tht twarpiou. SvotKnoes bmép (2)...|..(2 Kal tev THe] mONE TUmhepovT@Y, KaTaNuTeEtD dtenv tTnv [....|... GO0FE wos (?) TovT]we THe SvaTdypare Si0p- Odca érel Toivuy Kat[....||...... jatnv mpocdda. peyanra AuUTOvGaY, KeNEVW Tor[s...|..THY] Tpoppnaw apOAvat, «iTE heyerat, déka Sto Silautntas(?)...]....-- | cuvtnpyncews, dcat- poupévouv Tov éviautov [..... |... .dsaT ern tv hpovtida Tod Tpaywatos evar mpos[...|.... T]ov tdsov ypovoy ériperetas, éav KaTa THY ell..... |....] T@e 6é érradévts Kntrovpa. Kal oyeTnyourTse Sila ...|...] atoTdooe els THY TOD KaLvod Badra- vetov émif wéedecay (?)...|... lov odK oé(Ar)ne 7) yevér Pau: ei yap ToApnoes ev TT OL...| .... laxuryetrtoss els TO yUpVvacLapyXLKoV* mept welv ody (2)...|... damjavev wn wr€ov mpadttecPar TOU auvnbous i[rrép (2)... ||... alutais tuav mréova avvodov év éxdotat pnrit....[..... |rov Evreias: e¢ wey 0 Ypovos ETL LoL cuvexwpe[ito....|... émel otv] aprafetas tHe érretEer pov, KerAEVM TOdS yeplovctacTas(?)..|... Jesas, unde Sua TadTNs THS av0adias, Kai éve[pyeiy(?2)..|.... THs Tav] EVAwY yYpNoEws ws évoceatatTny Urns, Wore t...||...] wev yap TaYa Tepl TovUTOV be, Kat és Grav érei[yw(?)...|... T]as Tewpias aia ws THE ONULOL..... tHy extn Ew (2)..|...] adrtov cvvecyophabas: érret ovv Ta adda OvéTaka(?).... | Kal éropwpne |dunv Tos TODTO TOA- bovTas Tovey, avayp[awas(?)...|...-- | Tapetov: oyvpwotata TovTO TO didTaypa Be[Bara(?)..||....cKkavov] éotat Tacw evdiav écavayew. Kutvuyeire. | (vacat) Tye monet Bea "TJovrsavos dua THs ém[apyetas(?)...|...-- THS €Tl- pledelas THY oTHAANY yalpakas avéOnKev ex TOV] idiwv. [ 444 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES This inscription was found at Beroia in Macedonia, The marble is broken on the right and left sides, and the restoration of the document is extremely problematical. ‘The editors of the inscription suggest that it is an edict of an emperor, or the letter of a provincial governor. In brief, their interpretation of the contents is as follows: It treats of the friendly annulment of a contract which had been entered into between the city and a contractor who had undertaken some public work in which he had failed to fulfil the conditions. The suit is to be abandoned (1. 9), and apparently provision is made for some form of arbitration of claims (1. 12). The letter then takes up the case of a gardener who has diverted water from the New Baths, who is required to make amends or pay a fine to the gymna- siarch. Finally, hasty regulations are devised in regard to the supply of wood, which is becoming scarce, and the fines which are to be imposed for the violation of these provisions. It is unfortunate that the document is so fragmentary, for this might give us some informa- tion on the important question of deforestation in ancient times. 119. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD COOS (saec. I-II p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1044; Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, 26. [Aveis: ay TuOomevos Ex TOV bpeT lépov Wndhiopal[Tos OTv..... THV éxx now ero él | [Tov YeBaotov, ixavds joo |Oounv émn- petas | [ydps]v adtov [To lito mreronKévar: del|[dv 7 Jotvur, et wer émi tov YeBaarov | [7H ex]kAnouws yeiverar, mpot[elpov eye | Lefer ]doas tyv aitiav: et Oé éw epé, TO | [rrapd |v aEtoxypews Na- Bety rods a[p|paRav jas dnvapiov dicyerdiov [e]v||[TaKxo(ciwv) Kata] To mpote[O lév br” €[ujo[d] o[dv|ray]ua Sea rods huyods[c]-, xouvtras | [éav d]é wpos Tadta uny..... This inscription from Cos deals with the right of appeal. A citizen of Cos had lost his case in the local court, and threatened to appeal. ‘he Coans sent a memorial to the governor, and his reply is recorded in this document. If the appeal is to the emperor, the governor must first examine the case to decide whether it should be forwarded to Rome. If the appeal is made to the court of the [ 445 ] Io Io Col. 1 5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN provincial governor, the appellant must provide a cautio of 2500 denarii, which was required by an edict of the governor in order to guard against unwarranted appeals (cf. Hicks, /oc. cit.; Mommsen, Zeitschr. d. Savigny-Stift., Roman. Abteil. 24 (1890), 34 ff-3 nos. 36, 40, 90, 121). Nothing in this document implies that Cos was a civitas libera at this time, but the fact that appeals could be taken from the local court to the governor does not necessarily imply that Cos was a part of the province of Asia (cf. no. 90). On the status of Cos, see Chapot, La prov. rom. proc. d’ Asie, 115. 120. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS INCERTI AD PRO- CONSULEM SEU LEGATUM ASIAE (saec. II p. Chr.) Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 83. (Primi versus, maxime mutili, omissi sunt.) Hs gen ee de..as Ta peta|[TH]s cor mpoonkovens éru|[pe]- Nelas, dua TpovoovpeE| vos Kal TOV TA Operdopeva || TOY YpnUaToV elompattec|Pat THe TOdeEL, KaTeTréwrpalwev SE cot Kal TAS Tap’ nuav | év[to]Xas iva Kal THY Hyeté|pav | [cu]uBovrAnv ev roils tpa||[xO]noopévors éx[ne]s. “Eppaco. From Aphrodisias. This letter seems to refer to the collection of certain sums due to the city. Since Aphrodisias was a civitas libera (cf. no. 29), the governor could not interfere in her internal affairs without the consent of the civic authorities or the authoriza- tion of the emperor (cf. Pliny, Epp. ad Trai. 47-48). Reinach, who published the inscription, suggests that the document may also be interpreted as a letter from a governor to an agonothete as in C1IG. 2742. I2I. RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORIS AD LACEDAEMONIOS (saec. II p. Chr.) COL Fhe earth dé [rlov[t]ov éxalor.....|... ovder]omore repi ris > a / A xX fal \ / éuavto[D....|...] worepov mpabjvar i prcOodc8a Kat [7 ]o|- X\ [Tepov ovptravtas..Tlovs aypovs % KaTa pépos, Trapavar || [....mpoo]odous wéuvnuar modda@s metCovas | [....... |v wat [ 446 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Sedwpnpévov buiv alt[nlow |[...mpocodlovs érecOar, et ETéEpa picOwors ylévloul[to...... mlovety vas, k[at élav TO TpiTov TASVUD) | [ee erat TOU | TOLTOU.. . sue s éré[ pas] || cei ty) ee rela] | (vacat) o[vre tHv éx] Tov [er |I- KrAnoewv BonOevav [Tlodvs adsKovpé|vous otowar div aperpnabat ovTe ahopuny TavTny yelve|cOas Tots cUKOpaVTOVGLY WS TA TE Onpooia Kal iduwtixa || un TedXetoPat KaTa TovS Vvomous S10 dy Tept pev TOV audi|cBnTycEwr, aitives dv wow EXATTOVS {a Snvapiov Kal py|te KpiTnpiov % TpoKpyma Kepadixyns Sixns xX > / v4 > lal / X\ / a) H émitiplas EEovlow, émixareioGai pe 7) retO[e]oPar Tots > / £ \ \ > / a , émikarecapévors Kw|[A]d@s* Tas Sé érikAnoes, as [yletverOae émitpéeT@t, dvaxpivéTo||cav of avved|por, moTepov O(t)Kaiws / ee Vaal A si / / \ A yelvovtar }) ert Tat TLa]s di|[Kas....Tds TE 7 ]poBoras Troteta Pac CiSN Tie [LD MOLY I) [VLbae's Weer er es coe) a of octve|dpor TOL TraTpiws AICHE OM Sea Reiner ae 7 |wepa at. évt| OS. | « » &'s o's sabe ey Kpuv jérmoay. From Mistra near Sparta. The inscription is engraved in two columns, but the content of col. 1 can only be determined in a general way owing to the fragmentary condition of the stone. The document appears to deal with different problems. In col. 1 there is a reference to the rental or sale of public lands owing to a de- preciation in local revenues. In col. 1 the subject of appeal is considered. The emperor forbade appeals to his jurisdiction in cases involving less than a thousand denarii, and those which do not involve the death penalty or loss of civic rights. All appeals must be submitted to a board of synedri, who shall determine whether the appellant has just grounds for his petition or whether he is merely attempting to delay justice (cf. nos. 36, 90, 119). At Athens syndics, elected by the people, heard appeals before they were for- warded to the emperor (cf. no. 90), while at Cos the governor decided such questions (cf. no. 119). It is evident that the emperors were seeking to discourage the practice of appealing to Rome on trivial questions, but uniform legislation had not yet been devised in regard to procedure. A comparison of this document with no. go shows that the free cities received laws from Rome, and appeals from their local courts to the emperor had already become an established practice (cf. Mitteis, Rezchsrecht und Volksrecht, 87 f.). [ 447 ] Col. On Io on MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 122. TITULUS HONORARIUS POGLENSIS (saec. I vel 11 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 409. [I]o[wAc]o[v] Kair[e]lov [A]oux[cavov ... Jol... ayo ]|vobe- ThoavTa ayova Tevt[aeTnpiKoy avy | Te] avdpidow Kat BpaBetots Kal Tecun[Oévta 8(%), | Sledwxora Svavopas éreow Tod[itecas | || Bovrevtais Te Kal éxrno.actats [Kal 7a ]|ou TonelTass, KTLCovTAa epya The TOA, Kpel|vovTa ToTiKa SiKacTHpLa éTeT LW KoLV@|v[ Las |, Téuravta avvavav eis TO “Ade~av|dpéwv Ovos, mpon[y op[7- cavt ja xai || [rpecBevoa|vra v7e[p THs 76 |News, | [yévous T ]od mpeltevovT jos év | [rhe ma ]rpis.. This inscription from Pogla in Pisidia was first published by Rostowzew in ‘Fahreshefte d. ést. arch. Inst. 4 (1901), Bezblatt, 38 ff. The document ts important because it marks the development of a village on an imperial estate into a municipal organization. The reference in Il. 6-8: xpeivovta tomixd dtxactypia éTeow Kotv@vias, shows that Publius Caelius Lucianus acted as local judge when the community was still a xowvdv. On the quasi- municipal organization of the imperial villages and their develop- ment into towns, cf. Ramsay, Studies in the History and Art of Asia Minor, 305 ff.; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 288 ff. Cf. nos. 139, 140-1423; pp. 23 f. It should be noted that the citizens of the new city are divided into BovAeutai, éxxAnovacrai and moniras (cf. Levy, Rev. d. é. grec. 8 (1895), 209). 123. TITULUS HONORARIUS (saec. II p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 788; Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 2, 462. ‘H Sovd1) Kai o d4 mos Kai ot KatoiKody Tes ‘Pwpaior | éreiunoav TiBéprov KXavdcov TiBepiov Kravdiou Mz|@piddrov viov Kupei- vat Ietcwva MiOpidatiavor, tepéa | dua Biov Ards Kerauvéws, yupvaciapynoavta Sv ayollpalas Kai ayopavopnoavta 8. ayo- patas, kal épnBapynoarta, | Kat bTocyouevov brép Kravdiou Tpar{v)cavod Tod viod | yupvaciapyiav Sv ayopaias ék TOV idtov Kal yapiodpevov | The TONE TOV €E EBovs Siddpmevov iT’ adits [ 448 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES TOL yupvalorapxYodvTL TOpoy SnVvapLa pupLa TreVTaKLcyYEldLa Kal The pev || rparne éFapnven, év He Kat 7) ayopatos HYOn, Gévta TO | EXaov, Urrép dé TOV NoTraV pnvav bE SedoKdTa, | KaOws 1) TONS n&iwoer, Snvdpia pvpia évanioyel|\ua, wWoTe TMpooTEbévta Kal TOUTOV TOV TOpor | Tols LUPLoLS TEVTAKLOXELALOLS ONVapLoLs aw CeLr || Toxov Spayywaiov eis TO TOV KOVpATOpwY ETrL| CH uLoV TO KATA ETOS vr avtayv diddopevov, Bo|TE TOD RoLTrOY yYpdvoU pHKETL Elvat Koupato|pas, Kabws 7 Torts eyndicato, Su Grou | TOD ai@vos, THY avdotacw ToLncapéevor || ex TOV LOiwy TOV év Thr Oepmaias TATELAL. From Apamea in Phrygia. The nature and purpose of the en- dowment has been the subject of considerable dispute. Mommsen (E.E. 7, 436 ff-) believed that the city was enabled to dispense with the curator conventus Romanorum, but this is unlikely, for the city probably had no jurisdiction over this organization. Ramsay (/oc. cit.) believed that Apamea used the endowment to get rid of the curator ret publicae. Vhisofficial, however, wasalwaysstyled XoytorNs in the East, and there is no evidence that more than one ever held office in any city at the same time. Nor is it likely that a city which could spend so lavishly would need a curator. It is possible that an explanation may be found in a document from Cibyra (Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 914; cf. thd. 4, 259), where Quintus Veranius secured from the emperor the removal of Tiberius Nicephorus who exacted three thousand denarii annually from the city. It is, however, more probable that the endowment was devoted to defraying the liturgical expenses of certain officials in connection with the gymna- siarchy, and that curator is here used as an equivalent of liturgy (cf. Bérard, B.C.H. 17 (1893), 312). For similar endowments, cf. nos. 116, 150, 189. 124. EDICTUM SEU EPISTULA PROCONSULIS AD EPHESIOS (saec. II p. Chr.) B.C.H. 7 (1883), 5043 Inschriften von Magnesia, 114. .06 Kal KaTa cuvOnK[as......avT@OV...... py ees eg 2 Wd / > / \ A ? \ \ 7 .ooTe cvp|Bailvew éviote Tov Shpov is Tapaynyv Kai Oopv- > 4 » \ \ ? / fA) / a Bous évrimtw dia thv a[Kato(?)|N]oyov Kxa(r)a(P)paciav tov AMA [ 449 ] 29 10 15 20 Io 15 s) MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN aptokoTav él TH ayopa atacewr, ep ois éxyphnv [ad| ]rovs peTa- meupbévtas Hd Sixnv UTrocyxetv* érel S€ 76 TH TOAEL TUMPE[ por ||| THS TOUTMY TLLwplas MaAXOV TpoTiMaY avayKaiov, Hynoapny Siatdy[wate] | avtods cwdpovicar. “Obey arrayopevw pyre cuvépyerbar Tovs aptox[o]|mous Kat éTaipiay pte TpoeoTy- KoTas Opacivecbat, TePapxetv S€ mL av]|Tws Tots Urép TOU KOLA cuphépovtos émiTatTopévors Kal THY alvay]|xatay Tov aptou épyaciav avevden tapéyew TH mode. “Os av ado Tis av]||rov TO aTO Tove 1) TUVLMOY Tapa Ta SinyopevpEeva 71) Oop¥Bov TLVOS [kal ord ]|ocews &Edpy wr, wetaTreupbels TH Tpornkovon TeLpwpia xoracOn[ cera]: | éav S€ Tus ToAMNON THY TdALY evEedpEevoD atoxpt Wai avror, “dexvecp[tas” él mo ]|d0s tpoconutwOnoeTat, Kal 0 TOV ToLoUTOV be UTrobeEdmevos [TH] | adTH TYwwpia bTevOvVOS yevnoetas. || Eat mputdvews Kr(avdiov) Modéorov, unvos KrXa- peavos &' ia(rapévov), BovrAns ayouelyns Kat (?)| | adAo pépos, Mapkerreivos eitrev' THs 5€ amrovolas TaV épyacTnplapyelv péye||orov Setypwa Ges “Eppeias 0 mpos TH TPAMIAQMET.... RU hag eM T Sp NPA ANTH From Ephesus. ‘The first part of this inscription contains the proclamation of the provincial governor who had been compelled to settle an outbreak and riot of the members of the bakers’ guild at Ephesus. ‘he subject of strikes in Asia Minor is discussed by Buckler, Anatolian Studies in Honour of Sir W. M. Ramsay, 27 ff. ‘The municipal authorities were unable to deal with the situation and were compelled to appeal to the governor. Similarly in Per- gamum (Cagnat, /GRR. 4, 444) the proconsul interfered in a strike of the builders. Cf. Acts 19, 24 ff, where the riot of the silversmiths at Ephesus inspired fear of being called to account by the governor. 125. TITULUS HONORARIUS (150-200 p. Chr.) CIL. vi, §. 17899 = E.E. 5, 608. C. Annio Arminio Donato, clarissimo puero C. An|ni Flaviani, proc. patrimoni tractus Kar|thaginiensis, fi/io Anni Armini Do|nati, flaminis perpetuz nepoti, || concilium provinciae Africae. Found at Thamugadi. C. Annius Flavianus took part in one Ree tory FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES of the wars under M. Aurelius and Commodus (cf. CIL. vit, S. 17900), so that his son probably flourished toward the end of the second century. A tractus included several sa/tus, or imperial estates, and a procurator tractus held a post as important as that of a provincial procurator; cf. p. 19. This concilium prov. Africae seems to have been composed of representatives from the czvztates of both Africa Proconsularis and Numidia; cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 808. 126. TITULUS HONORARIUS (saec. II p. Chr.) Rev. arch. 3 (1916), 339; An. ép. 1916, no. 120. Sacerdoti omnium Caesar, T. Vetuiro T. fil. Gol. Campestir auguir II viro II vir q. q. I vir Ir panec rgrati anuon sacerdoti da. . Ircuri condtoir patriat H 11 misso lecmo...a colonai nurbemsike- viatco...semelouidemardivom Hadrianum....11 auem adopti- mum maximum oue...bisimpcaesar TI. Aelium Hadrianum... Antoninum Auc Pium ex d. d. vicuscopdy. Transcription Sacerdoti omnium Caesarum, T. Veturio T. fil. Collina Cam- pestri, auguri, II viro, II viro quinquennali, 1 viro tertium....et curatori annonae, sacerdoti Dei Mercuri, conditori patriae, quater misso legato a colonia in Urbem sine viatico, semel quidem ad divum Hadrianum, ter autem ad optimum maximumque...Im- peratorem Caesarem T. Aelium Hadrianum Antoninum Aug. Pium ex decreto decurionum vicus..... On a marble column, found at Sinope, on which had stood a statue. The mistakes in the text are due to the difficulty which the Greek copyist had with the Latin letters and words. That the position of sacerdos omnium Caesarum ranked higher even than the chief magistracy in Sinope is shown by the place which it has at the beginning of the inscription. Veturius like many other Asiatics belonged to the tribus Collina. The particular point of interest for us is the fact that Veturius represented his native city four times on missions to Rome. For similar cases, cf. nos. 53 and 115. [ 451 ] 29-2 Io 5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 127. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM SEVERI ET CARACALLAE AD SMYRNAEOS (198-210 p. Chr.) CIG. 3178; Lafoscade, 72; Ditt. Sy//.3 876; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1402. Oi Gevorato. adtoxpdtopes Xeounpos Kal Avtwveivos Kaicapes Spupvaioss. | Ei Kravdzos ‘Poudivos 6 rroreitns buav o dia THY mpoaipecw | 7 cvvertw éml maidcia cal Tov év NOyoLs TUVEXN Biov thv | mpoxetpmévny Tots codiotais Kata Tas Gelas TOV Tpo- yover || nua@v dSuatd&es aTEXELAV TOV AELTOUPYLaV KapTrOvpeEVoS | bmOv avTov Exovciw avayKy TpoKaroupévan Upéeaty THY | TTPATN- ylav KaTa TO Tpos THY TaTpida PirTpov: THY your eis Ta | ANG pévely atrpaywoovrny akelvntov avT@ SuxaoraTtov | éoTiv* ov yap a&iov T@ avdpl THv eis Uuas HiroTeplay yevél|cPat Eyuiar, Kal wadioTa TAUTHV UM@V alTovYTwY UTrép | avTOD THY yapiv. Kirvyetre. | EapécRevov Avp. Avtawveivos cal Aidos Xarnpatos. From Smyrna. The cities of Asia were classified in three groups according to wealth and population. A letter of Antoninus Pius to the provincial assembly gave permission to the cities in each group to grant immunity to a specified number of doctors, rhetoricians, and philosophers (Dig. 27. 1. 6). Apparently the Asiatic cities had been too lavish in their grants of immunity to the professions, and the emperor curtailed their power in this respect. The case of Rufinus is not clear. Apparently he had enjoyed the privilege of immunity, but had forfeited it by undertaking a liturgy voluntarily. The city, apparently, had not the power to renew the grant at this period and sent an embassy to the emperor asking for the reinstate- ment of Rufinus in his former privileges. 128. MYRENSIUM DECRETUM DE NAVIGATIONE (saec. II vel 111 p. Chr.) Le Bas-Waddington, 1311; CIG. 43024 (Add. p. 1136); Ditt. OF Gre 572. "Ayadie tyne. | “Edo tHe Bovrme | cal rads Sypor, | tpvTa- vewr yvo||un: émet dud TO | wn eEevpio|keww thy ért Ailuvpa 10 TopOul|Knv @vnvy thv akillavy ocvuyBaive. é(Na)o|codcbat Tas pOuilenv @viyy Tt [ 452 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES mpoa|odous, wn é€eivas | Erepov mrapatrop|Ouedoar pnder || unre amo THs Aac[ei]las unte ard Tob otd|uaTos THs Aiwvns | 7) azo "Avdpiaxis, | 7) dhevrnoes THe Sy||uwe Uarép Exdotov | TAOds XK at’, éEou|ciav éyovtos a(t)élp(n)ow amoypadec|Oaz || Tod THv @|vnv éyov|tos Tod Te TAOL|ov Kal THY oKev|av avTod. || IIhedoes dé | wova ta atro|yeypaupéva | mrola Kal ois | av cuvywpr|lone o Thy avny | éxwv, NauBa|vovtos mavTos | vavAov 70 8 | Kal Tov évBar||A\ouévwv. “Edy | 8€ tus avtécto|Nov vavrAwont, | mpocghoveitw | Kal dv0dTw travTos || ToD vavXov TO 8, | 7H UIT0- KeloeTat THL | Tpoyeypampévar | TpocTEiuar. From Myra in Lycia. The right to ferry across the river Limyra was leased by the city to contractors, and considerable revenue was derived from this source. Private boatmen, however, had entered into competition against the company holding the lease from the city, and by offering lower rates made the municipal lease so unat- tractive that the city could find no bidders and was thus in danger of losing a profitable source of revenue. In this law the municipality creates a monopoly by forbidding private carriers the use of certain routes over which most of the traffic was carried. For similar monopolies, cf. no. 70; CTL, 11, 7151, 7152. 129. EDICTUM M. ULPI PROCONSULIS. EPISTULA GEMINI MODESTI PROCONSULIS ACHAIAE AD THISBENSES (saec. II vel III. in. p. Chr. IG. vu, 2226, 2227, Add. p. 747; Ditt. Sy//.3 884. Mdapxos OvAmios [..avOvTaros Néyer]. | O Bovrouevos O.cBaiwv yopiov Sy[pdcctov 7) tepov .. pul|tedoar] Tay em’ éwod yewpyouuéevar [Tapadotw Tois oTpaTnyots THS Toews] | BiBréLov, ypawas €v avT@s Torov Te Ov Bol vAETat AaBeiv Kal hopov sv SHcer Kat || évleavTov virép Exdotouv TAEOpor[..| Bov]rAAs 77 éxxAnolas KaTa TO Sedoypévorv..|..@v> Kal] ef pév tus..|.. 77 éxx[Anoia ..|..0]@w ets .. ,.ulloxou kal af..|..«]owat: ypadérw [8] év e[..| «Jal typ moaétyta Tov dopov[..|.. Tot]s te dpyovowy Kai Sexat[evtais | ca{t..|..] t[)]v rpdcodov ryv éx [TovT]ov cal [..||..7]a Tod romrov. [Anwe]re dé [U]rép éExalotov ywpiov o KatadaBor] | [34 5:3ea| 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 Io 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN dveow tov hopov tav mpetwv [ér]av wévt[e: eresta 5é Kal” éxaotov éviavtov] | dwcer Tov Popov Tov étHotov Told x |aTa- NauBavopu[évov ywplov Tod punvos rod] | “AXadKopevaiov [7] Tevtekaloex| aTn |* of dé un 1rpakeavtes a[ Tpatnyol THY Tpoco || Sov vrevOuvor Ecovtar av ovK é[tplazéav. Ei dé tis NaBov [év]ros [THs mrev]||raetias un huTevoat, TO Te Ywplov [ pe |TaTTwAHcTOVELY e / ] \ Ned e /, a ol KatarauBar[ovtes] | otparnyol (K)al Ov bréaotn Teréce[y / / b] ’ a fol 2 ’ 5" id fo |pov rpadEovaow trap avtod ris [mevraetillas. Ei dé hutevoes Aaa, ) e 5 ” An / A / x ora \ \ év wépos os [iva] dEtov ToD dopov tav révte ét[ Ov, Tov per] | dopov un wpattécOw, timpackécOw [5é] TO ywpiov rodeiTn, Kal TO apyov Kall 76 wedu || Tevuévor, ert TO THY wev TELUNV TLOD / > A “a / \ \ f \ w leputevpévov eicxoutcOfjvat TH Tod et, TOV] || dé Hopov twavTos Terelo Bar Kal’ Exacro[y] éviavtov, dcov Ter€a[e]iv Kal 0 TpoTeE- pols wo ||hoynoev, cuyx@poupévou TO Tptal ev |w TOU hopov THS , € \ ‘en AH La) id / \ € / mevtaetias UTép [Tov ap ||youv wovov. AauBavéra &é[o model |rns isd \ / / > / ba , Exactos un Téov TACOpa[Y.. ]+| ef wévTOL TLS Pwpalein huTeEv- s l / ¢ \ A ees aas t[ov |rows mAéov, THAHTOVELW [ol oTpaTHyol | To Bova jouévw TOV ToONELTOV éTL TO Kal Ex TOUTOV c@lecOaL T[H TOA || .. f a 4 / e 4 Creek, Cars hopov| TocovTov dcov tledécety] Mpmoroynoev UIrép éExdoTo[v / By \ \ y ’ , \ mrEOpov. “Hv b€ pndels | BovrAnTat tpiacbat, mpakéove |v Tapa Tol[0 wpwtov AaBolvTos Tov yervouelvov Popov, | dcov bmép e Ig / / ¢€ / éxadoTou TAOpou Ter€cew VIrEdé |EaTo. | [.. wAé]@pov told ..|.. Jdwevos cat ..||..ov é& cov z[..|.. Tlapa tis Todew[s..|..]i@ Kal Ta adda xal..|.. mparT]o- pévov Tov phopou [..|.. wor ]eitn SavecoTH, @s xa[l..||.. Snw]o- ciov ywpiouv 7 o[..| S|nwociov KaW jyul..|.. alvros ypadéro ..|..v7..0¢ €xa..|.. TWocoy 7 OT. .||..aT0s U....... | [.... T]o te dvopa [rlo[d ..|..] e¢ 8€ tus eEarrarjcals TH] operdov[twv Eéva vrrobein | te TOY Xwpiov TOlv Snpwociwy Kal a > / 3 / ] \ \ / Meee \ id TodTO éXevyGein, apaipelicOw avtov TO | xwpiov TO brroTeOer] 7 ec \ \ ¢ / ? a bys / a mods, 0 b€ Savetatns o Eévos ex TOV AdALoV KTHUAGTOD || TOV a e / \ 7 / Ate? Va > Tov vob |evtos THY elomrpakiv troveicOw Tod ddetropuélvov. El dé tis | SiaOHx Jars Kataritror Eévp cuvyevel ) hitw TovTwr Ti tov [ywpiov, axupos | Ertw alvTod 7 Swped, ctw Sé THs TOAEWS To xwptov. Ee o[é tes un Katari|rrav dia]Onxas teNevtTHjoa, b py elo vopywoe KAnpovopor, [b]m[apyérw | Kat’ aud]orepa KANPOVomoS TOV EauTHs KTHu[LaT]os 7 TOALS. || [ 454 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES [Te]luivios Modectos avOtratos Orc Bléwv tots Te 55 apxyovaot kal] TH BovaAg cat TO dHyo xalperv. ‘Ixavov [wev odv ..| elvar] KUpta Ta SdEavTa bpeiv wept THs TpoTe[pov .|.. ] yeyevnwévns, kal ro Tod a&toALoywtarov ..|..é]m [a]d- TOV éeTLy@plou Kal .. From Thisbe. Dittenberger dates the document in the beginning of the third century, while Rostowzew is inclined to ascribe it to the reign of Hadrian, or a little later. In accordance with this edict of the provincial governor, the public (and sacred?) lands of Thisbe are to be sold in small lots to the citizens of the town subject to the payment of an annual tax (fdpos), which, however, is to be remitted for the first five years of occupancy. The purchaser is under obligation to plant (¢vtedcav) in vineyard or orchard during this period. If he fails to do so, the magistrates shall sell the property and exact the tax for the first five years. If only a part of the land is brought under cultivation according to the contract, the magis- trates shall sell the allotment to a citizen, the price of the cultivated portion being paid into the treasury in lieu of the yearly tax, while the new purchaser shall pay the stipulated tax for the whole plot annually thereafter. If any farmer occupies more than the legal allotment, the magistrates shall sell the portion held illegally, safe- guarding the payment of the annual tax. If, however, a purchaser cannot be found, they shall exact from the first farmer the amount of tax which he agreed to pay for his original assignment. The tenant may mortgage or bequeath his holdings, but not to a non- resident of the city. If he dies without heirs, the property reverts to the city. This document belongs to the class known as vopos morntixos (Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 386 ff.), and the form of perpetual leasehold instituted in the municipal territory of Thisbe is similar in all respects to that prevalent in Egypt. Several points of interest may be noted. The magistrates (orpa- Tnyol) are responsible personally for the exaction of the qdpos. The doctrine of orzgo is implied in forbidding any lease to be granted to aliens, and in the restrictions applied to mortgages and bequests to non-residents. ‘The legislation of the governor is, furthermore, in the interest of the small proprietor, and every attempt is made to prevent the encroachment of the capitalist and his /atifundia. [ 4550] Io T5 20 25 30 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Finally, it may be noted that the central government at this period does not hesitate to regulate in minute detail the internal affairs of the municipalities in the provinces. For a discussion of the legis- lation regarding similar tenure of land on the imperial domains, cf. pp. 15 ff, and nos. go, III. 130. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM SEVERI ET CARACALLAE AD TYRANOS (201 p. Chr.) CIL. ut, 781; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 598; Bruns, 89; Dessau, 423; Riccobono, p. 332. Exemplum eptstulae ad Tertullum. Misimus tibi epistulam ad Heraclitum, unde tntelleges quid sta- tuerimus de immunitate, quam Tyrani sibi concessam contendunt. Quam licet admittere non soleamus nisi privile|gii auctoritate per- pensa et origine immu|nitatis inspecta, quod usu receptum esse qua|qua ratione videbatur, cum iusta moderati|one servavimus, ut neque ipsi consuwetudi||ne diuturna pellerentur et in posterum | decreta civium adsumendorum consi/7s | praesidis provinciae c(larissimi) v(irl) per- penderetur. | Exemplum epistulae ad Heraclitum. | Quamquam Tyranorum civitas orzginem || dati beneficii non ostendat, nec facile, quae | per errorem aut licentiam usurpata sunt, prae|scriptione temporis confirmentur, tamen, | quoniam divi Antonini parentis nostri litte/ras, sed et fratrum imperatorum cogitamus, item || Antonii Hiberi gravissimi praesidis, quod attinet | ad ipsos ‘T'yranos quique ab lis secundum leges | eorum in numerum civium adsumpti sunt, ex prilstino more nihil mutari volumus. Retineant | igitur quaqua ratione quaesitam sive possessam || privilegii causam in promercalibus quoque re|bus, quas tamen pristino more profes- sionibus | ad discernenda munifica mercimoniorum eden|das esse meminerint. Sed cum Illyrici fructum | per ambitionem deminui non oporteat, sciant || eos, qui posthac fuerint adsumpti, fructum | immunitatis ita demum habituros, si eos legatus | et amicus noster v(ir) c(larissimus) iure civitatis dignos esse de|creto pronuntiaverit, Quos credimus satis a|bundeque sibi consultum, si grati fuerint, exi||stimaturos, quod origine beneficii non quaesi|ta dignos Boab cives fieri praeceperimus. | [ 456 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES ‘Oovivios TépturAros dpyxovat, Bovrns, dy|uwr Tupavav yai- pew. | Avtiypaghov Tov Oeiwy ypappatoy, trep||\bOévT@v jot v7rd TOV Kuplov nuaY avet|KnTOV Kal EVTUXETTATOV aUTOKPATOpOY, | TOUTOLS MoU TOS ypaupacw Tpoétaka, 6|mws yvovTes THY Oeiav eis Umas peyaro|Owpiay Th. weyarne avTav TUYnL evyapioT}||- onte. "Epp@obar vuds Kal evtuxety Twod|Aois ETEow EevYomaL. ‘AmedoOn mpo | uy’ karavdeav Maptiwv Anvedvos 7’. |’ AvertaOn emt Movetavod cat DaBravod | virdtav, év Tat eptr’ Eret, || apyns Il. Aidttov Kadzrovpviov. From Tyra in Lower Moesia. Tertullus was the provincial governor, and Heraclitus the procurator vectigalis Illyrict. The im- portance of the document lies in the fact that the Trans claimed immunity from certain taxes, especially the portorzum (Cagnat, Les impéts indirects chez les Romains, 20 ff.), and, since they had been rather liberal in granting citizenship to aliens, the imperial revenues had suffered. The procurator, apparently, had complained to the governor and to the emperors, with the result that the Tyrans were asked to submit the evidence on which they based their claim of immunity. This they were able to do only in part, and from the letter of the emperors we may infer that certain cities in the empire had claimed similar privileges without any right to do so, These claims had apparently been disallowed, unless the city had been able to show the reason for the gift and the original charter. The Tyrans had only been able to produce the letters of Antoninus Pius, and his successors; the letters of the governor, Antoninus Hiberus, had also been submitted. Accordingly the emperors confirm the privileges which the Tyrans claim, but the grant of citizenship conferred by the city is hereafter subject to the approval of the provincial governor. Since citizenship in a community which en- joyed any form of immunity would be highly prized, it is probable that Tyra had been guilty of increasing her revenues by this means, Similarly Athens, enjoying the status of a free city, had bestowed citizenship so lightly in return for a small payment in money that Augustus took away the right to make the grant (cf. p. 139). Tarsus sold the grant of citizenship for 500 drachmae (Dio Chrys. 345 23). [45 aha 45 Io 5 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 131. EDICTUM LEGATI IMPERATORUM, Q. SICINI CLARI, DE PIZO CONDENDA (202 p. Chr.) Cagnat, JGRR. 1, 766; Ditt. Sy//.3 880; Kalinka, Ant. Denk. Bulgar. 34. - "Ayady tixn. | ‘Tarép tis Tdv weyiotov Kal OevoTdtav avTo- xpa|topov A, Sertipiov Leunpou eptivaxos xé M. Advpn. | "Avtwveivou XeBB. xé [II]. Lert. Téta Kaicapos] xé || lovrias Adpuvns untpos Kadotpev veikns Kal aiwviov | diapovfs Kal Tov cvuTavTos avToV oikov Kal tepads ouy|KAnTOU Kal Syuouv Tod ‘Popaiwv cat iep@v otpatevpdtor, | éxticOn cata Swpedyv TOV Kupltwv évroptov Iifos, émt | bratev tév Kupiwv attoxpaTopwv A. Sem. Seounpou Tep||rivaxos xé M. Avp. ’Avtwveivov YeBB., Kat weTdKioay eis avTo | of UtroTeTaypmévor. | K (divros) Xexivycos KXapos | rpecB(euvtys) LeB(actev) avte- atpa|tnyos Néyet. || TH mpoowe: tév ctabOpov joG€[v]|tes off] Kvptor Hua@v pé- yeotor | Kal Oevdtator advtoxpdtopes | da mavtos Te Tod éavT@V aid|vos BoudnGévtes ev TH avdtH evrrpe||rreta Suapetvat THY avTOr | évrapxelav, tpocétakay Ta bv|Ta évirépia émipavéctepa vTap ]|- Ea, Kai TA ur) TROTEpoY dvTa | yevéoO[a]e* Kal yéyover. || [E]7et ovv Set Ta ex Ocias Swpelas oppwpeva evtuxéaTe|pa elvas Kal éx THS ToV éhelot@Tov TaEews, ovK évrroptlaxods SnuoTas, ara toTrdp||yous Boureutas éxédevoa | éxméutrecOat eis TadTa TA | [é]va[op]ca, Sods avtots nat 8’ émictol[Ans] onmavTipa Kai dixacodociayr | [kai évrei]Aas ur DBper unde Bia, || [Sera luocdvy dé cal evreckeia | [kp]a[t]etv rods évorxodvtas Kal | [U2 pd |vov avtovs tavta Tpaco|[ev, dAA]a[K]al aro TOV AAdX@V TO adsxety | v[ew- Te |pifeww rponpnuever pvellcO[ae xp letas Kal woduTAnOeias. | IIpos Tob civar evdaimovéotepa | tadta éwropia érre(t)Oounr, avdpalow [érc}ra[plevvetv evdoxipovryte[v] é[«] | tLav wé]orE Kopav, melBovtas Sé || o.. Kat petouxifer eis tad|ta [T]a év- Topla, Kal avTos S€ mpo|r[cO]é[wev]os kal tods Bovropévous | ExovTHnY TovTO TroLety &Eovtas | Oeias TUyns TaV LeBacTar || peydras Swpeds, Tovtéativ | ToXetTLKOD ceitov averohopiay | kai ovr[ter]eias Bovupyapiwyv xai| [dlpovpdv Kal dvyapevdv [ 458 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES aveow. | Kat tatta péev trept tis Takews || [T]od Tomapyou Kal mept THS aNevToup|[yno lias TOY évorxodyTaV 7 évorxn|[co]lvTHD. Ilept 8€ tev oixodopn|[yd]rov, bras émipereias Tuv|ydvovTa els del diapévor, || KeAXevw Tovs ToTapxYoUS Kal Tovs | érriaTdO- fous aotpatioras | [wla[p]a tév érimedntav traparal[r|B]a[ve]v Ta TpatT@pia Kal Ta BalNavela TavTayoOev OAOKAN||pa, TOUTET TLV éy Tols oikodoptxois | Kal €v Tols AeTrTOUpytKots Kai év | Tots Xpynatikots, mapadidovtas | tots pel éavtovs eyypad[o]s, wo- wep | taparxauBdvovow. [Oras S]é érru||weAectépous avTovs mapacKeu|dow mpos THv. mapalAnluww | Kal tHv wapddoowr, ml apaxe|Acv|w amo Tod ypovou THs [walparnu|pews wéexpe THs mapal[ doc |ea[s] || Ta brdpyovra tév ToTrdpxwvr | kal TOV apyor- Twv ods éxérXevoa | TO (dim KiWdvvV@ avTodrs TpoBdr|recOat, uTevOuva civar TO | Onwootw TAY TOAEwD, Tpds 5é S[tal|AV Jowao[e] avuTa Ta évtropia eis TO | [Te]TpaTAdaoLov Tod évdencor|Tos. From Pizus in Thrace. We have omitted in our text the names of the colonists who were settled in the new foundation. These are arranged in four columns under the villages from which they were drawn. In the fourth column there are nine names under the title vrratou oikntopes, probably one from each of the nine villages, who were chosen to act as magistrates in the new community (Seure, B.C.H. 22 (1898), 472 ff, 520 ff.). The number of colonists is 181. Pizus had the rank of an emporium or forum, and was established as a stato (ota@uos) on the imperial highway which led from Philippopolis towards Hadrianopolis. The edict was issued after a visit of the emperors to Thrace, and it apparently formed a model for the creation of similar stations along the highway and throughout the province. The settlers were drawn from nearby villages, and they were induced to settle in the new foundation under the promise of remission of various liturgies, the annona, the pro- vision of troops recruited for service in the durgz and garrisons, and angary, or the supply of animals and labor in the service of the public post. The residents are not called citizens but évo:xodvtes. The duty of administration and of dispensing justice is entrusted to a member of the senate from the toparchy, or administrative district in which Pizus is founded (cf. Cod. Th. 12. 1. 21). Apparently the government of fora had been given hitherto to ordinary residents [ 459 ] 55 60 65 70 75 80 Or ke Io Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN of the station (ll. 25 ff.). The chief magistrate has the title rovrapyos, and is assisted in his administrative duties by the nine daratou oixn topes mentioned above. ‘These officials are responsible for the care of the public buildings provided by the emperors, and their property is held as security by the municipality or toparchy, which is entrusted with the administration of the station. ‘(The management of the buildings is shared with the troops stationed at the post, but the soldiers are not placed under a similar bond. On the fora in the Roman empire, cf. pp. 10 ff. The reading oup[ted]eéas in |. 52 is suggested by Rostovtseff, ‘Fourn. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff, where he also discusses the liturgy of providing recruits for military service. 132. EDICTUM IMPERATORUM SEVERI ET CARACALLAE DE HOSPITIO (204 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 74; Ditt. Sy//.3 881; CIL. i, S. 14203%9; 1G. xu, 5» 132. ‘Tepa ypaupara. | [A]oxets jyety to Sdyua | [T]As cuvyeAnrov ayvo|[et]v, ds, édv wet eurrel||[p]ov cvvavTeBarnis, | [e]ione mn evat éerravary|[Kles cuyxrntixwe | [d]yuov “Pwpaiwy dxov|[re] Eévov vrobéxell[o]Oat. *ES00n | a’ car, louve. “Pépnt, | [Pa] Bior Kethou to 8’ cai | PA]vvios AiBou trator). | Sacrae /itterae. | Videris obis s. co. | ignorare gui si cum | peritis contu/eris || scies senatori p. R. | necesse mon esse | invito hospitem | suscipere. | Dat. prid. kal. lun. Romae || Fabio Cilone ix et | 4nnio Libone coss. From the island of Paros. This edict was issued in answer to a complaint lodged by a magistrate or private citizen on the island. The inscription seems to have been set up on the wall of the house owned by the senator who claimed immunity from the service of lodging officials or soldiers. There is no other record of the decree of the senate to which the emperors refer. The liturgy of furnishing hospitium was most severe, and complaints of the abuses which were inflicted by the members of the bureaucracy and army cha- racterize most of the documents of the third century. Cf. nos. 113, 139, 141-144. On the character of this document, cf. pp. 236 ff. On immunity, cf. pp. Io1 ff. [ 460 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 133. DECRETUM MYLASENSIUM DE TRAPEZITIS (209-211 p. Chr.) Hitt. Ors Garsns bea Basa Us ac. pier oh fr dea 'e)s\ systaenbete Ofte treed a « Foielsed tO EY Besa s hy S.oveT.........| THY Bovanly «jlali tov Sjpov...... eee Ko luv onodpova yvo[unv ....... joa BOY Tais vopipors nlwépars ...... rer ot Jov éravopbalca: Ore ere |.....] apopyrov maow dvtos Told .......].., od paty |nrat dé dtvac Oar tabfvat || wr]n[v] b1a [rHv 7 ov peyictov [xai Oesordtwy Kup|i lov judy Adtoxpatopwv Ao[uxiov Lente- piov Leou|y]oov EvoeBovds Leptivaxos «lal Mdpxov Adpnrlouv "Av|tw|vivov [EiceBots cal Homrdiov XSerripiov Téra LeBalo]- TOV TLYHY, Whdiopatte THs BlovARs Kal Tod Sypov ér||a vopbw- Gevra: Sed0yOarTHu[ BovrAni Kal THe dyn pos.’ Ea |v res ot@udnTweoby Tpomt, [elite EXevOepos eite | d lobNos, EEwOev Tod pewtcOwpl évov Kal épyallo|uévov tHv tpamelav, aperBdouer[os adau vomwiopa ) | mpt|auevos, mpos Tov tpatreleitnv [TodTOV dyer Oar || yer jo- pévns Tpocavyenias THe Bovaje [vireo Tod BovAopé|vov T]dv TOAELTOY, Kal EXevXOevTa éex[i TOY apxyovTwy Kal | THs] Bours, el ev Avev KoAAVBov TodT[O érroince, TOD apyupiou | Tpaé |v elva TOL TpaTreCeiT HL Kal TOL pnvUac[avTe Kat édXov|TL, E]yovTos TOU Tpameteitov Kai Kat avTov éfo[vaiay mpdatte||cOat xa |0a nopariotat, ef dé emi KoAAV Pat, TOY [ev EXEVPEpov atro|Tiver |v (e)is TO fepmtatov Tapeiov Tév Kupioly nudv OevoTa|twy | avTo- Kpatopov & ’, rau bé Snot & ov’, «Lai rae wnvd|cavt |exat érovre % p', cal To hdwpabey apyvpod[y vowio|ua mp laccopevor eivar oTEepéotpmov Ta TpaTreCe[itHL* TOV 5é SovAIlov Ed JevyDevTa ws Tpo- yéypartat, mapadobér[ta dé vd Tod Sea|7dToUu] Tois apyouce érrt [TH ]s Bovrrjs, pacteryovabals v' mAnYyas | Kal] EeuBdrreabar (e)is TO mpaxtopevov Kal eivas [adtov | él] THs (e)ipKeTHS Tac- copevov phnvas E> éav Sé [6 deotroTns pn | Troe|no[e]ve TadTa Tov SovAov, odeirery avTov Ta [yeypaupéva || éri|reswa ToL lepwTatat Tapelor Kal Tat Oyj pos [Kal TOL wnvicarTs Kal | Ed6 Jute. Tas dé tovavtas mpocavyenias cicdé[yecOat Tov ypapyparéa | Tov] apxYovTav, yevouevns meTa TO eTrLd[oOAvaL THY Tpoc|avye- N]iav mpoypadys épeEns eal tpets nué[pas ev tepois | Kal dn]- Moc tols TOToLS, pNTas THS Tpoypadhs [Aeyovans Ore || cuvay jeras [ 461 ] Io 15 20 25 390 a2 40 45 50 35 60 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN » Bourn S1a Tovto. ‘Eav dé ot apyovte[s 1) 0 ypaupateds | Tar én |btopévor Te Taparitwow 1 of Bovrevtal [un cvv| éXOw ow Suvatol dvTes Kal érridnmot, Tovs wev [apxovTas Kai | Tov ypap]- paréa atroteioas ExaoTov avtav (eis TO [tepw@ratoy Tapetor | Tdv LeBalorav avaX 7’, rovs d€ Bovrevtas [ava & .. avaypal|rar Se TO de TO Wndiopa év-oTyrn!L, Hy Kal avalotaOjvar | Senoes ev THe] ayopas ev THL ETLINMOTATwL TOTMwL, Wal TEP VOmOY Els TOY Tav|Ta ypovo |v KaTagTHaOV' canrever yap ws ady[Ods 1% cwTnpia | THs TOE |ws €k Kakoupyias Kal Travoupyias ori[yov Tidy | adThe érewBalwvovtav Kai atovoodilopévwr tla Kxowwa, bv vt || THS Suva jews KOANUBOS Tus EvTrehoitynKev eis [THY ayopay, | KwoNV@V Tv 176 |NLY Ta EerreTHO(E)La EXELY, ATTopovVTwY [TeV ToAA@Y | Kal Tov Kowod o|ravifovtos. Kat dvd rovto Kal 4 ev[mopta 1) | mpos \ / > / A / / Tous Kupious av|toxpatopas Tay hopwyv Bpadvve. ......... | De ti Ur tre et bar LEYAANS Hyewovias TOUTO TaGa 1).... at Se AR SP EA ee a EELS émavopOacat. Succlam(atum) est. (Hyistas@l vars) hustle Rchpices aA tay: J@v averxntois Tots Ku- plows, vaois’[.....* booed Oe KOrXA |uBov. To Env ov« Exouer, > + ee 4 / / / > GNXN md[Aus .....--- Ba ar. .. movn |pevouevol tives év7ro- pelas tap[accovow Kat | TO voutopa.... love TO apyupodr, ROU TOUTO |. sees ear utr aa 45 ee T ]ovs vopouvs ToAAaKLS 1) POL VAT aioe t 87% es Fs scorer. 5 lion. $502. }eqroNeony eee ee From Mylasa. As was the case at Pergamum (cf. no. 81), Mylasa derived a certain revenue from the exchange of local and foreign currency. The right of exchange was leased to a firm of bankers. Apparently private individuals had also engaged in the business to such an extent that trade had been demoralized and the revenues of the municipality seriously impaired. ‘The document is of interest because the fines and penalties are imposed by the city, and the local magistrates and senate administer the law. This is the latest evidence for the independent powers of municipal govern- ments in initiating legislation in the imperial period (cf, Mommsen, Rém. Strafrecht, 114). Vhe court is constituted by the magistrates and senate of the city. The secretary is empowered to summon the court on giving three days’ notice. A fine, payable to the imperial fiscus, is imposed on any member of the court who fails to attend the session when he is able to do so, Reinach (B.C.H. 20 (1896), 523 ff-) offers the following ex- [ 462 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES planation of the monetary crisis. “he municipal laws probably required the use of local coinage in the transaction of business within the city. As at Pergamum the rate of exchange was fixed, With the rapid depreciation of imperial coinage, traders and speculators purchased the undepreciated local currency and by holding it or by hoarding, it disappeared from circulation. There was a consequent rise in local prices and trade was seriously hampered. The law attempted to remedy conditions by confining all transactions in exchange to the municipal bank or to the firm which leased the privilege of exchange from the city (cf. nos. 81, 199). 134. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS CARACALLAE AD PHILADELPHENOS (213-214 p. Chr.) Ditt. Sy//.3 883; Lafoscade, 78; Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1619. "Avtwvelvos o exile. | Avtoxpatwp | Kaicap Mapxos | Adpnrwos Avtawveil|vos EiceBns SeBac|tos LlapOsxds péyeo|Tos Bpetavyrxes pé|yrotos Veppavixds | wéysotos Avpnrtat || ‘To[v- Mave |e TA Tims|@Tata@s yaiperv. | Ei Kal pdeis aipe? | Aoyos tov DiraderA|péa ‘Jovrcavov allo tév Yapdvavar | ets tHv THs matpi|dos weTabeivar pi|AoTEmiay, AAr’ Spas | onv yap 7déas || TOUTO TroL@, Ov dv Kat | THY VewKopiav avd|Tnv Tots Pidader| hed- a[wv dé |dwxa. |”"Eppwco lovaAc[ave]|| tows@taré wou cal pir|Tare. | "AveyvoaOn év tat | Oedtpws EtTovs cue’, wy|vos “AmreAXaiov €’. From Philadelphia. The letter is addressed to Aurelius Julianus who must not be confused with the Julianus about whom the letter is written. The latter was a native of Philadelphia who had become a resident of Sardis. Apparently he wished to undertake some liturgy for his native city—possibly in connection with the imperial cult—when the Sardians protested. Their motive was doubtless due to the rivalries and civic jealousies which so thoroughly inspired many of the cities of Asia under Roman rule. The Sardians had no legal claim to the exclusive services of Julianus, for by law the city of his birth took precedence over his place of residence (Dig. 50. 1. 1, 6, 16, 173 Cod. F. 10. 39. 1). When the Phila- delphians took up the dispute with the emperor he replied that he would gladly fulfil the request of his friend Julianus, even if he had no legal right to do so. [ 463 ] 20 25 Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 135. TABULA PATRONATUS (222 p. Chr.) CIL. vi, 1454; Dessau, 6109. Imp. Caes. M. Aur. Severo Alexandro | cos. eidib. Aprilibus | concilium conventus Cluniens. | G. Marium Pudentem Cornelia-|| num leg. leg., c. v., patronum | sibi liberis posterisque suis | co- optavit ob multa et egregia | eius in singulos universos|que merita, per legatum || Val. Marcellum | Cluniensem. Bronze tablet found at Rome. The patron in this case, Cor- nelianus, a /egatus legionis, belongs, as most patrons do, to the senatorial order. In Pliny’s time Hispania Citerior was divided into seven conventus (N.H. 3. 3. 18), one of which had its seat at Clunia; cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 805, 11773; Schulten, R.F. 8, 2037. The election of a patronus by this conczlium conventus seems to show that the conventus of Hispania Citerior was a political as well as a judicial division of the province. For a general treatment of the conczlia, cf. pp. 162 ff. 136. ALBUM DECURIONUM (223 p. Chr.) CIL. 1x, 338; Dessau, 6121. L. Mario Maximo II, L. Roscio Aeliano cos., M. Antonius Priscus, L. Annius Secundus rtvir. quinquenn. nomina decurionum in aere incidenda curaverunt. patroni cc. vv.: quinquennalicii: aedilicii: App. Claudiu s Iulianu s TT. Ligeriu s Postuminu s T. Flavius Crocalianu s T. Loreniu s Celsu s TT. Annaeu s Rufu s (et alia nomina duo- M. Aediniu s Iulianu 8s L.Abucciu s Proculu = s deviginti, in his) L. Didiu s Marinu s ‘T.Aeliu 8s Rufu 8 L. Faeniu s Merop s iun. (et alia nomina viginti T. Aeliu os Flavianu = s quaestoricii: septem, in his) M. Antonius Priscu 8 L. Ceius Asclepiodotianu s M.Statiu s Longinu s L.Anniu' s Secundu s (et alia nomina octo) C. Petroniu s Magnu s M. Statiu s Longinusiun. C.Galbiu s Soterianu s Q. Fabius Fabianu s patroni eeqq. RR.: L. Abucciu s Iulianu 8 (et alia nomina tri- P. Gerellanu s Modestu s_ C. Siliu s Anthu s ginta et unum) T. Ligeriu s Postuminus P.Aeliu ss Victorinu§ s praetextati: T. Munatiu s Feli x I1viralicii: T. Flavius Frontinu s T. Flavius Crocalianus A. Caesellius Proculu su C.JIuliu s Hospitalis iun. C.Galbiu s Soterianu s L.Faeniu s Merop sir L.Abuccius Proculu s iun. T. Aeliu s Rufu s L.Abucciu s Maximianu s (et alia nomina vi- T. Aeliu s Flavianu s Q.JIuniu- s Alexande ri ginti duo) Q. Coeliu Sabinianu s (et alia nomina viginti quingue) [ 464 ] allecti inter quingq.: pedani: FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES A bronze tablet found at Canusium, now in Florence. Such lists were drawn up by the quinquennales. ‘The regulations governing the revision of the list were usually stated in the /ex municipit. For the early period, cf. no. 24, ll. 83 ff In the later period the inter- ference of the emperor is evident (Dig. 50. 3. 2, qui dignitates prin- cipis tudicto consecuti sunt). Chis album shows the normal number of one hundred decurions (cf. no. 151). In it also appear the names of thirty-nine patroni and twenty-five praetextati. In the album of Thamagudi (CIL. vit, 2403; S. 17824; Dessau, 6122), of the middle of the fourth century, there are twelve patroni and fifty- nine decurions, and of the decurions a majority have been flamines perpetut, 1.e. they have been priests of the imperial cult and conse- quently officially connected with the central government (Jullian, Dict. Dar. s.v. flamen, pp. 1180 ff.). On M. Aedinius Julianus in the album of Canusium, cf. no. 140. On patronz, cf. nos. 42 and 135. The groups of active decurions are arranged in the order of their rank. At the end come the pedani who have held no magistracy, and the praetextatz, who were probably, for the most part, sons of decurions. However, all the sons of regular decurions cannot have been of age to wear the praetexta. Consequently the decurionship cannot have become hereditary as early as a.p. 223. Otherwise the names of minors would naturally appear in the list (Mommsen, Festschrift xu Hurschfeld, 4). “Vhe acceptance of the hereditary principle probably became the usage in the times of Diocletian and Constantine. It is explicitly laid down as a principle (Mommsen, op. cit. 5, n. 4) by Theodosius in Cod. Th. 12. 1. 20: Is vero ratio diversa est qui statim ut nati sunt curtales esse coeperunt. One group, whose presence in the album of Thamagudi a century and a half later and whose absence here is significant of a decline in municipal prosperity and of a desire to avoid the burdens which were being laid on the decurions as time went on, is that of the excusatz. ‘They were excused from the munera of the office. On the munera, cf. pp. 84 ff; ‘The name of C. Petronius Magnus has been erased from the album, but may still be read. Dessau conjectures that he was put to death by Maximinus; cf. Herodian, 7. 1. 5; Hust. Aug. Maximin. 10. 1. AMA [ 465 ] a MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 137. EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE AD APHRODISIENSES (222-235 p. Chr.) Rev. d. é. grec. 19 (1906), 86 f. .evT|uxets Syr[Ladn a]eorovdov éo[ts | maalas moneus Tas 5 Kadworwpévas | [T]7 weyadryn adtod TUXYN purely Te || Kal TELMar, Omep pe Toveiv Hdéws | K[a]l avTol tote, éEaipérws Sé Tas tet|unBelcas TH édevOepia bd THY Tpolyovev ToD KUploV HUOV 10 avtoxpatopo[s] | (AreEavdpov) BeBaobytos avto[d || avt]nv cal av€ovtos Ta Sixata oi[s | evOu|ucioBe kal 7déws EAXevoopal. | mpos] buds Kat éridnunow év TH Nap|[rpot |atn ToNEL Du@V Kat Th Tatpia vor | [Oca] Ovcw brép Te THS GwTnpias Kal aiall- 15 [v]tov dvapovits Tod Te Kuplov nua@v av|toxpatopos (’AreEdvdpov) Kal Ths Kup|[tas] yuav LeBaoths (Mapaias) untpos | Tod Kuptov 20 MOV Kal oTpaToTrébay, | Ec pujTE VOpoS THS TOAEWS Var || [w|nTE Soyua ouverntov pynte Ssdtaléis ponte Oeia érriatodr K@dVEL tov | [alv@v7atov émidnuety TH moder [tua]. | [E]? ydp te KwAvEL TOY Tpoyeypalupévar], | OUwv, ws Eos pot éotiv, Tots 25 [adraus || Oe lots vrép te THS TUYNS Kall cwTnpias | Kal aiwviou diamovns Tov Ku[piov nur] | avtoxpatopos (AreEavdpov) [Kal Ths] | wntpos avtod (Mapaias) YLeBacrils, xupias] | dé judr, 30 Kal THY TaTpLov Kuov [Oeav éy||x ladécouar. Tadra O€ amexpi- [vauny..|.... Tots MpwTots THS Naumpotdrns || budv ores. | [ Eppac ]Oat vuds edvyopar. Since Aphrodisias was a civitas libera, whose privileges had been confirmed and extended by Alexander (1. 10), it could not be sub- jected to the expense of entertaining the provincial governor and his staff. In free towns this immunity was secured either by the municipal laws, a decree of the senate, or an imperial edict or letter (Il. 18-22). The governor is evidently Sulpicius Priscus (cf. no. 138). ‘The name of the emperor has been erased on the stone. [ 466 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 138. TITULUS HONORARIUS (222-235 p. Chr.) Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 84. ‘O dfpos | THs Naptrpotarns | "Adpodeotéwy | 7rOkews Lovd- mix.ov || Ipetoxov tov dialonuortatoy avOvu|ratov Kata Tas Tod | peyiotou Kat Gevo|ratov Kxupiov nav || ad’ToKpatopos Yeou|[7 |oov (AnreEavdpov) [évrords (?) ]. This inscription was recorded on the base of a statue set up in honor of the governor. The name of the emperor had been erased in antiquity. Although the restoration of the last word is un- certain, it is clear that the Aphrodisians had asked the emperor for permission to erect this statue. Augustus forbade provincials to pass honorary decrees for a governor until sixty days after his departure from his office (cf. p. 164). The erection of an honorary statue to provincial officials seems to have required special per- mission, but this is the only example in Greek lands known to us. 139. RESCRIPTUM GORDIANI AD SCAPTOPARENOS (238 p. Chr.) CIL. 11, S. 12336; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 674; Ditt. Syl? 888; Riccobono, p. 371; Girard, p. 205. Bona Fortuna. Fulvio Pio et Pontio Proculo cons. xvir kal. lan. descriptum et recognitum factum | ex “bro /bellorum re- scriptarum a domino n(ostro) imp. Caes. M. Antonio Gordiano Pio Felice Aug. | et propositerum Romae in porticu thermarum Traianarum in verba q(uae) i(nfra) s(cripta) s(unt); | dat(um) per Aure(lium) Purrum mil(item) coh(ortis) x pr(getoriae) P(tae) F(elicis) Gordianae Proculi convicanum et conpossessorem. 5 IO Avtoxpdtops Kaicaps M. ’Avtaviw | Vopdiavd EvoeBet 1 na / \ lal an n Eirvye? LEB. dénous | Tapa kountov XKarToTapnvov TOV Kal | [Tpnoetav: €v tots evtuyeotatos Kai aiwvio || cod Katpois KatouKetoOar Kat BedtLlodcPa Tas Kapas Hrep avactatous | ylyverOat Tovs évorkodvTas TOAAA|K(ts) avTéyparras: Eat ye kal émt TH TOV | avOpeTav cwTnpia TO ToLodTO Kal éri || TOD £ / / > / c/ \ > bert e lepwratouv cou Tapelou wereia. |“Orep kal avtol évvopov ike- atav | TH Oecdtnti cov mpockopil flower, ed|yopevos iAéws érre- [ 467 ] 30-2 Io 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 a) 60 65 7O 75 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN vedoar huety | Seopévors Tov Tporrov Todtov. Oixodl|uev Kat KexTnweOa ev TH Tpoyeypau|uévn KON OvVoN eveTTepaoT@ Sia TO | yew vdatav Oepudv yphow Kal Kei|cOat wécov dvo0 aTpaTo- Tédov Tav dv|tav év TH of Opakn: Kal ef’ ov pév TO || Tad(A)at of KatTovKodyTes aoyAnToL | Kal aderdceraToL Euevor, avevdeas | Tous Te ddpous Kal Ta Aowtra | émuTayuwaTa ouVeTédovY* ETrEl OE kata Katpovs eis | [U]B[ps|y mpoxywpety tives nal Brateo Oar || npEavTo, ThviKadTa éXaTTodabat | Kal 7) Kon HpEatTo. “Aro ye petriov | dvo THs KOuNS HudY Travnyvpews | ErLTEAOUpEVNS dLa- Bonrov oi éxeice | THs Tavnyvpeas eiveev érriOnpmodr||TEs NuEepas mTevTexaloeca €v TH | TOT@ THs Tavnyvpews ov KaTapé|vovow, ANN’ atroduptravoytes érrép|yovtar els THY HueTépay KoOunV | Kal avayKkafovow ads Eevias || avtols wapéyew Kal étepa TAcioTa eis | dvdAnurpiy advtav dvev apyupiou xo|pnyetiv: mpos Sé TovTaLs Kal otpati@tat | adAaxXod Teumopevor KaTAaNLuTa|vovTEs TAs idStas odovds pos Huds Tallpayelvovtat Kal duolws KaTeTretyouat | Tapéxew avtois tas Eevias cat ta ériltidia pndepiay Tony kataBanrovtes: | eridnpotar 8& ws emt TO reloTov | dia THY TOV vdaTwoV XYphow ol TE iHyoUl|wevor THS émapyias, GAXA Kal of émt|tpomrot cov: Kal Tas pev eEovaias ov|v(ey)éotata Sexyspueba Kata TO avayKaior, | Tods (Se) Aourrods brrodépery uty Svvapev| oe eveTUYOMEV TAELTTAKIS TOIS HryellUdcL THS Opaxns, oitives axo- Aovdws | tais Oeiaus évTodais éxédevoav doxrr|Tous Huas elvat* eonocapev yap pn|xéte Huds Sivacbar bropéverv, dd|AA Kal voov éyew évykataditrety Kal Tovs || matp@ous Gewertous Sia THY Tov | érepyouevor nueiv Biav: Kat yap | ds ddnOds aid TOANOY oixodeoT0|T@Y eis ENaxioToUs KaTeANAVOa|uev. Kal ypove wév Tie iaxvoev || TA Tpoctaypata TaV Hyoupévav | Kat ovdels nuwety evoxdnoev ovte | Eevias [airy ]uarte ode rapoxns éu|rn- delwv, mpoidvtwy S& Tav ypovev | wddw éroOunoar éripverbat H\lmety TAcioToL Boot THs idiwTias | j\udv Katadpovodytes. "Exrel obv ov|xéte Suvdueba hépew ra Bapn | kal ws adrnOds Kivdv- vevopuev Orrep | of Aourrol [d5]de Kal rpets mporTrety || TOUS 7Tpo- yovixovs OeuedLous, Tov| Tov ydpwy Sedpueba cou, avixnte| SeBacté, (d)7ws Ova Oelas cov avtiypaldfs Kereton(s) &xactov thy iSlav to|peverOar oddov Kai pt) drrorumdvovtas || adtods Tas ddXas Konas ep nuas | épyerOar pire katavayKatew | judas yopnyetv [ 468 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES avTois mpoika Ta | émriTndia, ddAa pNdée Eeviav advrois | Tapéxesv ois un é€otiv dvayxn—OTe || yap of Hryotpmevot mrEovaKts éxé|- Aevoav pn Adrois trapéxecOar Eelviav ef pn Tots bd Tov nyoupélvov Kal émitpoT@v trep|Topévols els UMNpeciay, édv Te || / / 3 \ lal 2 ie \ / / \ Bap[@ |wePa, bevEducba aro Tar | oikeiwv Kal weytorny Enuiav TO | val i / > / \ \ F Tapetov TepLBANOnceTar— iva | érenOévtes Sid TV Oelav cov | mpovorav Kal peiva(vte)s év || Tots idtous TOUS TE Lepovs Pdpous | Kal Ta NOTA TerX / \ \ bY) \ \ ¢ / \ / AouTpa ov polvov pos Tppyny GNX Kat || dyetav Kal Oeparrecay | copatov éritndeorata, | TAnciov S€ Kai travyyupis | ToNNAKLS pev ev TO ETeL | cvvayopuévn, Trept Sé [x ]a[A]. || “OxrapBpias \ 3 / c A b) / / / % kal eis TevTe|Kaideca juepav at[érevay |: | cumBEBnxev Tolvuv Ta fa) nA A / Soxodv|ta THs Kopns TavTNS TeovlexTHpaTA TO Ypove Tepil|- / Cr: > b] / ‘A P) \ \ \ / ernrvbévar avths eis €ALat|t ]Ouata: dia yap Tas | mpoeipnuévas ravtas | mpohaces moAXol TodAd|Kis oTpaTL@TaL éveTLdy||- poovtes Tals Te émi€evo|ocor Kai Tats Bapnoeow | évoynrovat Thy Kopnv: | dua TavTas Tas aitias Tpd|Tepov av’THY Kal Tdov- oto\\Tépav Kal todvavOparror | [uadXov] odcav vov eis éoya| THV amopiav éknrvOéva. | “Enel tovtwv édeyOn|cav moddraKis Kal Tov Hyoulluévorv, adda Kal péxpis Tilvds loyvoev avToY Ta | TpocTaypata, weTa dé | TadTa KaTwrvywpnOy | dua THY cvVyAOELav Ths || rovadtns evoxAnaews: | dua TODTO avayKaiws Kat|épuyov érrl Tov Oevoratoy | [avtoxpatopa. . [ 469 | 80 85 go II5 I20 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 IV MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Imp. Caesar M. Antonius Gordianus Pius Felix Aug. uzkanis per Pyrrum mil(item) conposses|sorem: id genus quaerellae prae- cibus intentum ange iustitia praesidis | potius super his quae adlega- buntur instructa discinge guam rescripto principali | certam formam reportare debeas. Rescripsi. Recognovi. Signa. From Scaptopara in Thrace. The village was within the territory of the city Pataulia. The residents of Scaptopara had frequently complained to the governors of Thrace of the exactions made by soldiers, visitors, and especially officials of the province who de- manded the right of being entertained at the expense of the com- munity, although an imperial edict had exempted them from the liturgy of hospitium, or of furnishing supplies except on a requisition from the governor or procurator. This edict had been respected for a time, but the exactions had been renewed; the residents of Scapto- para had been reduced from affluence to poverty, and now threaten to abandon their property with consequent loss to the imperial treasury. After appealing in vain to the provincial authorities, the villagers presented their petition direct to the emperor through one of their number, Pyrrhus, who is also called a member of the praetorian cohort. He was probably a veteran who, on his discharge, had taken up his residence in this village. The emperor replied that petitions of this kind should be directed to the provincial governor, and Pyrrhus was sent back to this official with a copy of the petition and a recommendation to the governor that he enforce the edicts (ll. 110 ff). The action taken by the authorities is indicated in the statement of Diogenes, although the villagers did not take the trouble to engrave the whole of his letter upon the stone. It is therefore impossible to determine the nature of the remedies promised, but the answer must have been satisfactory or it would not have been engraved on stone. The position held by Diogenes is uncertain. The editors of the inscription have restored w[payuatixds] in 1. 101 but it is also possible to restore 7[payywatevtys], which is a Greek rendering of the Latin actor (Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 1, 281). The term m[paypatixos] is extremely rare in Greek inscriptions, and is found only in Magnesia where the magistracy was apparently im- portant (Kern, Inschriften von Magnesia, 189). Diogenes, however, [ 470 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES was a l’yrian and probably an imperial freedman in charge of the imperial estates in Thrace. If we restore m[payuarevrns] as the title of Diogenes, we must assume that Scaptopara formed part of an imperial property within the territory of Pataulia. Cf. no. go where the estates of Hipparchus had been confiscated by the em- peror and held for a time before being sold. Thus imperial estates might exist even within the territory of a free city. It is evident that the Pataulians were not concerned in the petition in any way, and Scaptopara acted on its own initiative without reference to the municipal authorities within whose territory the village lay. On the other hand the villagers do not call themselves tenants of the emperor, but property-owners in their own right, and Pyrrhus is styled as a compossessor. It is possible that the imperial estates in Thrace were organized on a different basis from those in other parts of the empire. In |. 116 Scaptopara is called the village of the soldier Pyrrhus and it is possible that he held some sort of a grant as a reward for his military service. In Il. 10 and 86 the villagers call attention to the peril of the imperial fscus which was threatened if further exactions were permitted. In this respect the complaint is similar to the petitions from Asia which clearly come from im- perial estates (cf. nos. 113, 141-144, Bruns, 93). In ll. 3 ff of the petition the villagers appeal to the emperors recalling their great concern in the depopulation and desertion of village-communities which they had already observed and had attempted to remedy by their edicts. For the interpretation of the terms rescripst, recognovt, see pp. 242 ff. Rostovtseff has recently put forward a new and interesting theory concerning the policy of the imperial government in the third century towards the municipalities and villages of the empire (AZus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233 ff.). In his opinion the reigns of Commodus and Septimius Severus marked a struggle, not between the imperial power and the senate, but between the army and the wealthier classes in the municipalities. The edict of Caracalla aimed at a political and social levelling of the classes. “The emperor Maximinus, chosen by the soldiers, acted as their representative in systematically persecuting the privileged classes especially in the municipalities, and the counter-revolution provoked in Africa was led by the [S47] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN proprietors or wealthy residents of the towns. The army and the military emperors had one aim—the levelling, politically, socially, economically, and intellectually, of the privileged classes. One of the prime factors in this policy was the change in the character of the army at the end of the second century. The citizen-soldiery had disappeared, and the army was composed largely of peasants drawn from provinces least Romanized or Hellenized, and the troops were conscripted largely from the most warlike and least civilized classes, The peasants resident in the country villages (pagant) were usually despised by the urban population and regarded, not as members of the body politic, but as subjects to be exploited. In the second century the emperors sought to create a sturdy class of peasantry in order to strengthen the dying municipalities. “hey only succeeded in intensifying the antagonism of town and country and in making the peasant realize his importance, for he now re- garded the emperor as his protector against the urban population. Moreover the peasant now had the army to enforce his will. Rostovtseff finds proof of his argument in the number of petitions addressed by villagers direct to the emperor instead of to the pro- vincial governor. Almost all of these complaints are directed against the system of requisitions and contain accusations charging the governors with indifference to the interests of the people. Finally, most of the appeals were transmitted by soldiers. While the author promises fuller proof of his theory in a forth- coming work, the evidence seems to contradict the main points of his argument. In the third century most, if not all, complaints of this character come from tenants on imperial estates, not from municipal villages, and are directed for the most part against the very soldiers who are supposed to have the interests of the peasants at heart. Besides the soldiers, the chief offenders are the imperial agents who might naturally be supposed to represent the policy of the government in their treatment of the provincials. In view of the fact that the provincial governors were powerless to control the undisciplined bands of soldiers scattered throughout their dis- trict, the tenants on imperial estates would naturally direct their appeals to the emperor when they found that the governors were [ 472 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES powerless or incompetent, or even conniving with other imperial agents in illegal acts. While we would agree with Rostovtseff in his claim that the army and military leaders exploited the wealthier classes, we believe that this was done through no higher motive than the need of raising money to replenish an exhausted treasury and to support a greedy and clamorous army. There does not seem to be any evidence for the theory that the army or the emperors were concerned in the elevation of the peasantry as a means of supporting the city or infusing new strength into the municipalities. The foundations in the early part of the second century were devoted to checking the decline in native stock, but the charitable endowments were neither far-reaching nor widely extended geographically, and most of them must have been dissipated as a result of the depreciation of money and the ravages of civil wars. In the third century the records of legislative achievement have disappeared for the most part, butthe general tendency of the peasant class was not in the direction of social or economic regeneration but rather downward, for the agricultural laborer appears in the legislation of Constantine bound by laws which regard him as a virtual serf. To attribute to the peasants of the empire anystirring of class-consciousness is anachron- istic. 140. TITULUS HONORARIUS (238 p. Chr.) CIL. x11, 3162; Desjardins, Géographtie de la Gaule romaine, 3, planches vit, vir, Ix. I Tito) Sennio Sollemni, Sollem|nini fil(io), duumvir(o)...| (de- ficiunt tres versus) | ...genus spec|taculorum. . .gladia|.. .quibus per qua|...mission. . .| (deficiunt tres versus) Cons...| in perp... staur. . .Sollemnis, || amicus Tib(erii) Claud(ii) Paulin(i), leg(ati) Aug(usti) pro pr(aetore) pro|vinc(iae) Lugd(unensis) et cliens fuit; cui, postea, | /eg(ato) Aug(usti) pr(opraetore) in Britan(nia), ad legionem sex(tam) | adsedit, guique et salarium militiae | zn auro aliaque munera longe pluris misszt. || Fuit cliens probatissimus Aedinii Luliani, | leg(ati) Aug(usti) prov(inciae) Lugd(unensis), qui postea praef(ectus) praet(orio) | fuit, sicut epistula, quae ad latus [ 473 ] 20 25 30 Io 5 20 Io 15 20 25 30 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN scripta est, | declaratur; adsedit etiam, in provincia Num(idia) | Lambense, M(arco) Valerio Floro, trib(uno) mil(itum) leg(ionis) tertiae Aug(ustae), || iudici arcae ferrar(iarum). | TRES PROVINCIAE GALLIAE | primo umquam, in sua Civitate, posuerunt. | Locum ordo Civitatis Viducass(ium) liber(ae) d(e)d(it). | P(ositum) decimum septimum k/(alendas) Ian(uarias), Pio et Proculo || co(n)s(ulibus). | I Exemplum epistulae Cl(audii) | Paulini, leg(ati) Aug(ust1) pr(o)pr(aetore) prov(inciae) | Britanniae, ad Sennium Sol/em|nem, —a Tampio. || “ Licet plura merenti, tibi, haec, | a me, pauca tamen, quoniam | honoris causa offeruntur, | velim accipias libenter: | chlamidem Canusinam, || dalmaticam Laodiceam, fibulam | auream, cum gemmis, rachanas | duas, tossiam Brit(annicam), pellem vitw/z | marini.—Semestris autem epistulam, | ubi propediem vacare coe- perzm, || mittam, culus militiae salarium, | zd est; sestertium viginti quingue millia n(ummum), in auro, suscipe. | Dis faventibus et maiestate sancta | zmp(eratoris), deinceps, pro meritis | adfectionis magis digna || consecuturus. Concordia.” | III Exemplum epistul(ae) Aedinzz | Iuliani, praefecti praet(orio), | ad Badium Comnianum, pro|cur(atorem) et vice praesidis agen- t(em). || “‘Aedinius Lulianus, Badio | Comniano, sa(lutem).—In provincia | Lugduness(i), quinque fascal(ia) | cum agerem, pleros- q(ue) bonos | viros perspexi, inter quos || Sollemnem istum, oriun- dum | ex civitate Viduc(assium), sacerdotem, | quem, propter sectam, gravitat(em) | et honestos mores, amare coepz. | His accedit quod, cum Cl(audio) Pauling, || decessori meo, in Concilio | Gal- liarum, instinctu quorundam, | qui, ab eo, propter merita sua, laed: | videbantur, quasi ex consensu provinc(iae), | accussationem instituere tentarent, || Sollemnis iste meus proposito eorum | restitit, provo- catione scilicet interpo|sita, quod patria eius, cum, inter ceteros, | legatum eum creasset, nihil de accussa|tione mandassent, immo, contra, laudasse||nt; qua ratione effectum est ut omnes | ab accussa- tione desisterent: quem | magis, magisque amare et comprobare | coepi. Is, certus honoris mei erga | se, ad videndum me, in Urbem venit. || Proficiscens, petit ut eum tibi com|memdarem: recte itaque feceris, sé | des¢derio illius adnueris. . .—et r(eliqua)...” | [ 474 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Found in the sixteenth century at Vieux in Normandy, on the site of Araegenuae, the chief village of the Viducasses. The stone was transported to Thorigny, where it remained for many years, and the document is commonly known as the inscription of Thorigny. It is cut on three sides of a block of marble which formed the pedestal of a statue. On the front of the monument there is a record (styled 1 here), somewhat fragmentary, of the offices and benefactions of Sollemnis, of his relations with distinguished men, of the action of the three provinces, Lugdunensis, Aquitania, and Belgica, in authorizing the statue and of the Viducasses in providing a place for it, and the date. The right hand side (11) contains a copy of a letter to Sollemnis from Claudius Paulinus, propraetor of Britain, written at an unknown place, Tampium, mentioning certain gifts which Paulinus makes to Sollemnis. On the left side of the pedestal (111) there is a copy of a letter from Aedinius Julianus, praetorian prefect, to Badius Comnianus, procurator, and therefore the interim governor of Lugdunensis, recommending Sollemnis to the good offices of Comnianus particularly because of a service which Sollemnis had rendered Paulinus at a meeting of the assembly of the Gauls. Aedinius Julianus was praetorian prefect about A.D. 235. This fact dates his letter as probably between a.p. 235 and 238. He had been governor of Lugdunensis about 230. His immediate predecessor in this province had been Cl. Paulinus, who, at the time of writing the letter on the left side, was propraetor of Britain. Therefore, after being governor of Lugdunensis and before receiving the post in Britain, he must have been consul, since the governorship of Britain was a consular office (Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 287). According to CIL. vir, 1045, he was probably in Britain about 232 (Desjardins, op. cit. 3, 204, n. 1), and the stormy scene in the concilium at Lugdunum occurred three years or more ‘before this date. He is one of the patronz in the album of Canusium (no, 136). Sollemnis was sacerdos Romae et Augusti at Lugdunum, the place of meeting of the concz/ium, but the statue was set up in his native village. All the cities of the three provinces, fifty-seven in number at the beginning of the empire (Carette, Les assemblées prov. dela Gaule rom. 119 ff.), had the right to send deputies. From the expression cum inter ceteros legatum eum creasset, it may be [parse MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN inferred with some probability that certain cities had more than one deputy. This conci/ium could evidently inquire into the conduct of a governor, and draw up an accusation against him. We have no other epigraphical record of the exercise of such power by a con- cilium unless indirect reference is made to it in no. 161. However, Tacitus and other writers mention nineteen cases in which such charges were made by conci/ia (Guiraud, Les assemblées prov. 173 f.). Several inscriptions mention resolutions passed in honor of a retiring governor (cf. CIL. 111, 14123 X, 1430-1432). For another possible instance of the exercise of important political functions by a Gallic concilium, cf. no. 50. Probably ex consensu provinciae (111, 18) means the same as wmiversi censuerunt (CIL. 1, 4248). This conclusion seems to be confirmed by the addition of guasi here (cf. Guiraud, op. cit. 109). On the legal meaning of consensus, cf. Leonhard, R.E. 4,906. The deputies would seem in some cases to have come with instructions from their native cities; cf. mzhil mandassent, Ill, 23-24. For the use of et re/igua at the end, cf. Hist. Aug. Firmt, ; I41. RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORUM DE QUERELLIS ARAGUENORUM (244-247 p. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 519; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 598; Rém. Mitth. 13 (1898), 231 ff; Riccobono, p. 373; Bruns, 93; CJL. m1, 8. 14191; Girard, p. 207. : "Ayadne tuyne| Imp(erator) Caes(ar) M. Iul(cus) Philtppus Aug(ustus) et M. Iul(tus) Philippus nobilissimus Caes(ar) M. Aurelio Eglecto | pe(r) Didymum miugenerum. Procomsule v. c. perspecta fide eorum quae scribis, ne | quid iniuriose geratur, ad sollicitudinem suam revocabit. 5 xa. || Avtoxpatopt Kaicaps M (apxa:) JouXi@s Pirirres EvoeBet Kiruyet LeS(acrar) «lal M(apear) lovrtw.] | Pirie ére- havertatw. Kaicaps dénois Tapa Adpnriov ’Eydéxt[ou virép Tod Koll|vod tHv “Apayounvey rapoikwv Kal yewpyav Tav vpwetépav, [pec Belas yevopévns Sam ]|avne Shou Kowvo(d T)o[T]- Teavov Lonvav THv Kata Dpvyiav tory dia T(étov) Od[eviou Awvpou] | otpatiétov.—llavrev év trois waxapiwratos buav Io Kalpots, evoeBéo[TaToe Kal arv]||\7OTaTOL TOV TwTOTE Baciréwr, [ 476 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Hpewov Kal yarnvov tov Blov salyovtwv, mo||vnpias Kal d:a- cevopov tel ljavpévov, wovor jpyels AAXOTPLA To |v eLUTUXETTA- twv] | Kaip@v TacyovTes THVOE THY ikeTeilav U ]luety TpoTdyopev exélyyvor Tod Sixaiov Ths de]|noews ev TovToss. Xwpiov twétepov eopev lepwotat[ov Kai wamrepet dF || wos orO- KANPOS, Ol KaTapevyovTes Kal ryevoOmevol THS Upmerépas [OesdTNTOS ixéTat, dia ||loevducOa dé mapa TO ddoyov Kai TapaTpaccbpmeba um éxeivov olds Hxiota adixetv Tov mAn||ctov d(e)irer.— Mecoyerou yap tuyyavovtes Kal p(n)Te Tapa otpata[pyou pte Tap adrov Kaka TraQovtes viv maa||youer adrOTPLA TOV UMETEPOV paKapLwTaTaV Katpav: [méfovor yap Has ot dtodev- ovtes| | To “Amrriavadv Kriwa TapadipuravovTes TAS NewPopous o[Sovs otpatapyat te Kal otpat||t@tar Kat Svvacra. TOV mpovyovtTwy Kat ]a thy rod [Karoapiavot te U |||wéTepos érreto- e[p |xouevor Katadiprravovtes Tas Aelwddpous od0ovs Kal aro Tov] | épyov huds adiotavtes Kal Tovs apoTthpas Boas avy[a- pevovtes TA pur Oder ||Nopeva avTols Tapatpdcacovaw, Kal ovV- Baive: od ta TuyOvTa Hpas ex T]|ovTOU adiKeta bar StacEevopevous’ Tept ov aralvTwv éypadn pos TO cov,|| LeGacré, wéyeOos, o7roTeE Thy émapyxov Oueire[v CEovciay..........|||vos, Kal Strws TeEpl TovT@y éxewv(n)On cod 1) Ocelot Ns, ) avtuypady Snrol 1) evtadda] | éytetayuevn: Quae libello complexi estis ut examinet praestdi mandavi, | qui da(b)it operam ne déutiuis querellés locus sit. | "Ezresd2) ody ovddév ddhero[s 1) luciv ex tavtyns THls avtuypadys éyéveto, cup Bé]|BnKev dé Nuads KaTa THY aypotKiay Ta pH Opel- [Adpeva tmaparpdaccec bar, é]||revRBawvoly |rav twev Kat cuptra- TovvT@V Has [Tapa TO SixaLor, émrevd7 6 ||é bd TOV Katoapiavav ov Ta TuyovTa bilac]|elec[Gar Huds cuvéBn Kal Ta HpéTepa | éEavanriloxecOas kai Ta yopia épnuodobar Kal ..av.......4. ».[.....9 Kab ov tapa t[nv o]ddv Kcatoixotrtlwy ....... | isl ceei ie etek POUPILET GA LAT AUT bas Chtae nee en From Aragua, a village on one of the imperial estates in Phrygia. ‘The tenants in this community were too poor to send an embassy to the emperor, but the expenses of the delegation were borne by the xowvov, apparently a union of the villages on the estate in a quasi-municipal organization. Aurelius Eclectus was probably magister vici of Aragua, who acts as spokesman for the community. [477s T5 20 25 30 Io 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Didymus was the ambassador sent to Rome. The title mzugenerum (I. 2) may stand for mil:(tem) (f)rum(entarium), although this in- terpretation is rejected by Dittenberger. The complaint of the Aragueni is similar to that of other villages in the third century (cf. nos. 113, 139, 142-144). They suffered from the exactions of soldiers and public officials, here especially the Caesariani (cf. R.E. s.v.), who demanded the services of the villagers and their oxen for transport duty (Rostowzew, K/io, 6 (1906), 249 ff.). The villagers had appealed once before to the emperors, and their complaint had been referred to the provincial governor with instructions to remedy the matter. Apparently the latter was powerless to curb the licence of the imperial officials and soldiery, or he may have connived at their exactions. At any rate, it may be observed that the bureau- cratic officials and soldiery could not be effectively controlled at this period either by imperial mandates or by provincial governors. Cf. pp. 15 ffs FHS. 17 (1897), 417 ffs 18 (1898), 340 ff Rém. Mitth. 13 (1898), 231 ff.; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 303 f.3 Kio, 6 (1906), 249 ff; Mus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233 ff. 142. EPISTULA COLONORUM AD IMPERATORES (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.) Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-15), 37 f, IDA \ / \ SS ...VTas loety KATA Slobov THY W......... 0l....|..VTOS Kab of / a / b a / 3 / iva d0&n Tis THS ToLAUTNS avTois O[palcdT|nTOs aTroNoyia KaTa- , 3 f ‘ \ > an / ALuwrraverOa, évéa a[vrA|AaBo]vTes kal ev Secpots Troincartes éback[ov || mwapam |éumew éml tovs Kpatiotous érutporolus | Tovs vuletépous Suérrovt(o)s Aidéov ’AyAaod [Tod | Kpatic |rou Kal Ta THS avOvTatelas pépn: Kall | TO]y wév Eva TOV Evvéa ap- f b] v € \ \ / 3 \ Vd n yuptov éextrpal[E|dwevor brrép Tas yetdias AtTiKas AUTpor || [T]7s cwTnpias apjnKay, Tovs dé NoLTrovs KaT[é]|cxav év Tots Secmois, Kal ovK iopev cadas, | Oevotator TOV avTOKpaTopaY, OTrdTEPOV Cav|tas TovTOUs TapaTréupovow Tapa T(0)v Kpatia|tov Aydaov (ip) Kat avTovs dtab@vrat TapaTrAnaillov tots hOavovew. “Hel? ]s 95 / =! \ > 7 > / > f \ ovv, Orep Hv Suvatov | aOALows av[O]p@rros apnpnpuévots Kal Biov kal | cuvyevdv ottws @uds, 0 SuvaTov npeiv jv, é|dnr\o- [ 473 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES capev Tadta Kal TO THS Takews ériTpo|Tw vuadv Ad[p(nrALa) | Mapxiave Kal trois év “Acia xpat[ic]||rous eretpoTois tuav: ixéTar O€ THs UpeTé|pas yesvopeOa, OevdTaTor TOV TwTTOTE AVTO- kpa|[r]opwr, Oeias cal avuTepBrAHTOV Bacireias, Kai | [To]is THs yewpylas Kauatows mpocéyey Kexwru|[pu lévor TOV KOAANTLOVOY Kal TOV avTiKabecTa||Twr aTeLNOUVTWY Kal HwEty TOs KATANEL- Topé|vous TOV Tept Wuyhs Kivduvov Kai wn Suvdpevot{s) | éx Tod Kwdverbas tHhv yhv épyalecOar pndé tats dello ]rotiKats éra- Kovey atropopais Kal Wndows mpos | [Tla é&fs, nat SeducOa every (sic) Vas Tpocéabar tiv || Sénow Hudy Kat émiBécOat TO éEnyoupévw tov | €Ovous Kal Tots kpatiarots err urpoTrots Umav €x|OtKnoat TO TeTON pm MeVOY, Kordoas dé THY els Ta | Xepia Ta deotrotixa &hodov Kal THv Eis apes év[o]|xAnow ryewvopenny Smo (r)e TOV KOAANTLOVOY? || Kal THY él Tpohacer APYa@v 1%) NELTOUP- ylav Tovs v|werépous evoyrovvTaV Kal cKvANVTOD (sic) yeo[p ]|- yous TO TravTa Ta HuéeTEpa éx Tpoyovev TpouTe|Y||Ouva civar TO iepwTdto Tapeiw TO THS yewpyilas] | dicaiw: TadnOH yap Tpos THY VuweTépay OevoTyTa || Hpnrar (sic). ((O)v éav pur) VO THS VpeE- Tépas ovpaviou Sel\Evas éxdixia tus emi Tots TorovToLs TeTOAMN- pélvors erraxOA Kai BonOia eis Ta pédAXovTAa, avay|Kn ToOvSs KATANEAELLMEVOUS HUGS, Ln hépovtas | THY TOV KOANHTL@OVOY Kal TOV évayTias (sic), eb’ als || mpoeupnxamev Tpopacecw, TAEovEeiay, Kata|Nelrrew Kai éotias Tatpwas Kal Tadouvs tpoyorxo[v]s | peTenety Te eis tduwmtixny yhv mpos TO StacwOfhvar— | petdovtas yap paddXov tov éxel KaToLKovvTwr of Toly] | tovnpov Savtes Biov ) TOV vuetépov yewpydv— || duyadas (Te) yevéo Par Tov deomroTiKay ywptior, év ols | (Kal éyevynOnuev Kal érpadnpev Kal éx mpoyover | Svapévovtes yewpyol Tas TlaTELs TNPODMEV TO | SEoTOTLK® OY. ‘This inscription comes from the modern village, Aga Bey, in the province of Lydia. It contains the complaint of the villagers on an imperial estate protesting against the exactions of imperial officials and municipal magistrates. The first part of the petition is lost, but it is apparent that the immediate cause of complaint was the arrest of nine of the tenants by officers who claimed to be acting under the authority of the procurator. One of the nine had been released under a heavy ransom, but the fate of the remainder could [ 479 |] 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN not be ascertained, and an appeal to Aurelius Marcianus had been ineffectual. The petitioners now set forth the fact that they had been tenants on the imperial estate on hereditary leasehold (ll. 38, 47, 51 ff.): that they were oppressed by collationes (cf. Garroni, Accademia dei Lincet, 25 (1916), 66 ff.) and by municipal magistrates who sought to compel them to perform liturgies and to hold office in the neighboring cities. Apparently residents of the cities had sought to escape their municipal obligations by taking up leases on the imperial estates (cf. Ramsay, Studies in the History and Art o the Eastern Provinces, 356 ff.; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 229, 398 ff.). Such tenants were exempt from municipal charges (Dig. 50. 6. 6, 11), but this method of evasion had become so common in the fourth century that Constantine issued an edict forbidding curzales the right to hold leases on imperial estates except under very strict regulation (Cod. Th, 12. 1. 33). The petitioners also threaten to abandon the imperial leaseholds and to take refuge on private estates, where, they claim, the villainous officials do less harm. This document is most important as it reveals the flight from the cities; the oppression of officials even on tenants of the imperial estates; and, finally, the power of patronage exerted by great land- owners at this time, who were able to protect their tenants where the emperor could not. Cf. pp. 214f,, nos. 113, 139, 141, 143, 1443 Zeitschr. der Savigny-Stift., Roman. Abtheil. 36 (1915), 157 ff. ‘The editors of this document are inclined to limit its date between A.D. 198-222. 143. EPISTULA VICANORUM AD IMPERATORES (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.) Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914), 25. ....[T9 |v tpoaipecw avtav AoyiSouévwv v[omobe|ciar (?)] LTE VOmimou KaTHYOpoU TLVds e&toT[Lapé|vou, w|nTE UTroKELpEeVNS aitias, undé pavepod tilvos éy|KAnpaT]os tdiov Tevds dvTos, ETLTPEXOVTLY Ob TOLOUTOL mov[oL H peTAa TAY (?) || Ternp Jevcouéevwry takewy is dvaceia pov THs KOuNs wovny ev d |o8@ Ta[de Tad| Trnv Bo]nO@vav érrevoncev mpodnroumévn Kopn ouv[de|nOei]oa Sd.’ EMovd THs weyadns Vuov Kal ovpaviou Kall fepw|tatn |s Bacirelas, [ 480 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES is ToUTO me Tpoxeiptcapevn Kal TH[v ixe|Telaly mpoceverxeiv. Kai rodto Seduce amiddvtas vulas, pél|yeor joo cal Oevoratos TOV TWTOTE AUTOKPATOPwY, Tpos TE TOL[S | UweTE |pous vouous TAY TE Tpoyovav Vuov Kal Tpos THY eLpnyiKn| Vv | Duo |v rept ravTas diKaLo- aun, peconoavtas 8é, ods det pelslonolate avTot Te Kal Tay TO THS Bacidelas tpoyourxoy vulav | yévols, TOUS THY ToLavTHY Tpoaiperiw éyovtas KoANynTiwval[s, Kel|k@A |upévous péev ael Kal KorabecOat Kedevomevous, ov[K arro|deEal|wévous 5é, adda ael Bapvrepov avtimaxopévor[s | tal|s buetépats vopobeciais, cite ppovpevtapiors mpoule|unvur jro, e’te opotais Takeow, KeAedoaL Kal Xpnpatioas vouw tilvi, | @s THY avlaidcay adTav avTots (1) Hryemovela Tpoaayel* e& Oé TLS, GEw TA[Y || ToL loVT@Y Aéywr eivas, Tpopacet KaTnyoplas Tivos emt (é)ox[eu|wévn |v THY KaKoupyiav emiTpéxol, wn Sud THS Hyewovias, a[ArAa | dia tév] tdEewv Bacavifwy, as of voor Oérovaew byov tle Kal | Tov mpoyover El [1) VOMLWOS KATIYOpOS, 17 Tpocée|[pxw@v|Tat Tpds TOUTO ai | THs Takews é€ovciat Kal........ This inscription comes from Mendechora (Ilévte ywpia) in Lydia. The editors (/oc. cet.) believe that this village lay within the territorium of, and belonged to, the ancient city of Philadelphia. It is also possible that the village may have become part of an im- perial estate before the petition was forwarded to the emperor, since there is no reference to the city officials, and the appeal appears to have been presented by someone designated by the village ¢f. Rostovtseff, AZus. Belge, 27 (1923), 233 ff.). As in similar docu- ments of this period the villagers protest against the exactions of officials; the col/ationes (cf. no. 142), the frumentaru, and similar agents (ouolais td&eowv). The villagers complain especially of illegal arrests by officials, apparently, without lodging any formal accusation (cf. no. 142). Such arrests were contrary to the law (Dig. 48. 18. 22), but the village-authorities were powerless. On the interpretation of the legal principles involved cf. Keil and Premerstein, /oc. cit.; Weiss, Zeitschr. der Savigny-Stift., Roman. Abteil. 36 (1915), 157 ff-; Garroni, Accademia det Lincei, 25 (1916), 66 ff; Rostovtseff, ‘Four. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff.; cf. nos. 113, 139, 141-144. AMA [ 481 ] 31 10 15 20 Io T5 20 25 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 144. QUERELLAE VICANORUM (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.) Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-15), 11. (Versus 1-9, 26 seqq., maxime mutili, omisst sunt.) eiwOora[v] tats [........------? otatiwval|piwy [x«(at) | dppovpe|vrapio ly wy..... ea fice rasta a Set RES ee HO ct tars Meier cin ede ae vya....|| [rats x]@mats émricetovtes CVE Ne Aas | dyaOod pev ovdevds yetvouevor aitt|or, avuTroiatots Oé dhoptiots K(al) Enuimpalow évoelovtes THY KO-UNV, OS TUpBat| vey éFavadovpévny avtnv els TA ApuelltTpa daTravnpata Tov ere dy |- povvtev | K(al) e[is tT]o wAHOos TOV KoAANTL@VOY a|TrolaTeLpeEl- aO(?)]a[c] ev Noutpod bu’ atropiay, | atroarerpeto[O]e [de (at) | Tov pos Tov Bilov a[ylavKé[w |v alr aly ]o[p eve. .¢.. pos || TUS Atay ER utesatins oupev... | KATOLKOY. This fragmentary inscription was found in the modern village of Ekiskuju in Asia Minor. As in nos, 113, 142-143, the villagers are harassed by the exactions of officials, the stationari, frumentarit, and others. Unbearable fines and burdens are imposed upon them, and the villagers have been ruined by the cost of entertaining officials and by collationes. ‘he document seems to record the reply of the governor to the petition of the residents. The editors suggest that Aurelius Marinus, whose name appears in the first line of the in- scription, is the provincial governor. For similar complaints, cf. nos. 113, 139, 141-143. 145. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM TRAIANI DECI ET HERENNI ETRUSCI AD APHRODISIENSES (251 p. Chr.) Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 1624; CIG. 2743. Avtoxpatap Kaicap [dios Méoovos Kvivtos Tpaiavos | Aéxwos], EiceBys, Eituyns, SeBacros, Snuapyixhs | éEovoias TO y', UTatos TO B’, atrodedevypévos TO TpiTov, | waTHnp TaTpioos, avOvratos, kal [‘Epévvios Tpaiavos || Aéxvos Kaioap], apyvepevs péytotos, Snuapyixns eEovaoias | TO wp@tov, bratos atrodedeuy- pévos, Adpoderotéwy tols | dpyovow Kai The BovdAne Kal Tae [ 482 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES SHwot yatpev. | Kixds jv twas Kal dua THY ém@vupoY THs TOAEWS Geov cai | dua tHv mpcds “Pwpaious oixevoTnTad Te Kal TioTiW noOhvas || wey ert tHe KaTacTace Ths Bactrelas THs nuetépas, | Ouaias 5é Kal evyas arodobvat Sixaias. Kal pets 5é | tHv Te éXevOepiav tpety dvrAaTTOMEV THY UTdpyoveay | Kal TA Gdra OE ocurtayta Sikata, oTdcwY Tapa TV TPO H|“aY avTOKpaTOpaV TeTUYHKaTE, TUVavEEW. ETOimws || ExovTES Uu@V Kal TAS TpOS TO MédXov ErrriOas. | "EmpécBevov Adpyrtos Oeddwpos kat ‘Ovjct- pos. | Kdtvyeire. From Aphrodisias in Caria. ‘he names of the emperors, erased in antiquity, were restored by Boeckh as those of Diocletian and Maximian. The difficulties of this restoration were pointed out by Waddington, and we have followed the text which he adopted. The title of pontifex maximus, ascribed to the son instead of the father, is undoubtedly an error on the part of the stonecutter. Aphrodisias is recorded as a free city by Pliny (N.H. 5. 29), and retained this privilege as late as the reign of Gordian (Waddington, note ad /oc.). Reinach corrects the readings of Waddington (Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 82). Cf. nos. 137, 138, 153. 146. DECRETUM DECURIONUM ET POSSESSORUM (256 vel fortasse 186 p. Chr.) An, ép. 1903, no. 202; cf. zbid. 1894, no. 61. PAE ah sti te of his, Viet Makel Gol wURt Ona Ars er bats EAS ES ELE Glabrione 11 cos... .pr(idie)... lanuarias(?). . .civitate.. .imcuria cum conventus haberetur decurionum et possessorum civium ibi Victor Gallitios(i) f. et Honoratus | .. .f(elius) sufetes verba fecerunt: cum audivissemus L. Titium et C.. Serum questos quod agri suorum pecoribus ovium devas|tarentur et in re praesenti constitisset et agros vastatos et arbores magnam partem Conrosas esse quod ipsum initium honoris nostri | zzstabat dominis pecorum ut servos iniuria prohibeant denuntiavimus....1...Sit facta etiam mentione sacrarum litte- rarum || ...2lt responderunt servos sua sponte iniuriam fecisse... on...#ostramque denuntiationem initium honoris | nostri ante- cessisse...cum...t ne..eat els contu...rum prodesse et aliter ea res | ...ef contra talem iniuriam iam pri...ss...undum sacras [ 483 ] 31-2 Io 15 Io T5 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN co...ones actum fuerit quae | ...rem vestro decreto subiciendam existimavimus. | Exemplum epistulae datae ab imp....ad..cum mihi desiderium vestrum videtur et exemplo adiuval||rz anteriorum legum...et per se tustum esse. Itaque veto quemquam in agrum vestrum invitis vobis pecora pascendi gratia indu|cere. . .re quod si ignorante domino servus induxer?t pecora | .. .2m zpsum servum procos. severe constituet si iusso domini |... pSyeeaa non solum servum ipsum sed etiam praetium servi ex forma censoria % d. dominus|....praestare debebit. Servi st sctente quidem domino sed sua sponte id admiserint a procos. flectentur ita ut in || posterum nemo audeat...elegentur.. .quit fieri placeret de ea re universi cen|suere . passim in territorio uniusculuscuwmque pecora pascendi | .. .iniu et cum etiam post ea constitutione...nu... Fragment found at Henchir-Snobbeur. The inscription has been restored and interpreted by Schulten, Festschrift xu Hurschfeld, 171 ff. It belongs perhaps to the year a.p. 256, when M.’ Acilius Glabrio was consul. The use of cognomina in place of nomina in the names of the two magistrates, and the peregrine patronymic of Victor, show that the place was a peregrine czvitas. Its magistrates would therefore be sufetes. It would appear that the flocks of certain residents of this village have been driven on the land of other citizens, and that the aggrieved citizens have laid the case before the local magistrates, who have forbidden further trespass. But the trespassers have persisted. In these circumstances the magistrates call a meeting of the decurions and possessores (1. 2). No parallel to such a meeting is known. The stone records the result. The re/atzo of the magis- trates begins with zz, and is given in the first person plural. It includes an imperial rescript beginning with mihi destdertum and ending with zta ut. . .audeat. ‘The decree of the decurions, of which only a few words are left, begins with gust ferz. The ordinary price ofa slave in Italy was 2500 denarii; cf. Kiibler, Festschrift f. Vahlen, 561. he proconsul referred to is the proconsul of Africa Procon- sularis, in whose territory the village lay. Our interest in the document lies in the fact that we find local magistrates, in settling a local legal question, applying a principle laid down in an imperial constitution drawn up for the guidance of a proconsul in a similar situation. ’ [ 484 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 147. EDICTUM IMPERATORUM VALERIANI ET GALLIENI (253-259 p. Chr.) Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 27204; Ditt. Or. Gr. 262; CIG. 4474. Imp. Caesar | Publius Licin|nius Valerianus | Pius Felix Aug. I et Imp. Licin|nius Cornelius Saloninus | Valerianus nobilissimus Caesar | Aurelio Mareae et aliis: || Regum antiqua beneficia consuetu|dine etiam insecuti temporis adpro|bata is qui provinciam regit remota | violentia partés adversae incolumia | vobis manere curabit. ’Emictonn Avtidxou Bactréas. | Baotnreds ’Avtioyos Eidjuas yaipev. "Ed00n 0 Kataxeyo- pta|wévos Urrouvnuatiouds* yevécOw ovv Kabore SednrAwTat Tepl Ov Set dua god | cvvterec Ova. UpocevexPévtos prot rept THs évepryetas Oeod Avds Bartoxaixns || éxpiOn cvvywpnOjnvar avTar eis dtravta Tov ypovor, GOev Kat 7 SUvapis TOD | Oeod KaTapxerTat, Kodunv thy BactoxalKnlynv, iv mpotepov éoxev Anuntptos | Anpuntpiov tov Mvacaiov évtoupimva ths mept Amdutav catpa- mTéeias, avy Tois | cuvKupodor Kal KaOjKovar TaoL KaTa TOvS TpovTapyovtas TepLoptapovs | Kal ody Tols TOD ever TATOOS ETOUS / YEVHMATLY, OTWS 7 ATO TAVTNS TPOGobOS || avadiaKnTaL cis TAS \ in , , \ ” \ \ v KaTa phvas cvvTeNoupévas Ovaias Kal TadXNa TA Tpds avEno| ww TOD Lepod cuVTEVOVTA UT TOU KaOLaTAamEVOU UTO TOU Oeod iepéws, \ ; na > a a ws el|Ocorar adywvtar b€ Kal KaTAa phva Tavnyvpels aTerels THe TevTeKaloekaTne Kal | TptaKdds* Kal eivar TO peév Lepov AovAo?, THv b€ KOpny avetric[taé |uov pndeutas | aroppnoews Tpocere- xOcions, Tov dé évavTimOnoopevoy Tis T@Y TpPOYe||ypaupévav ” Ye 4 b] / > a / \ \ > 4 b évoxov elvat aceBeiar. “Avaypaphvat te Kal ta avtiypada év | oTnAne ALOivyne Kal TEeOjvar ev TAL avT@L tepw@r. Aenoes odv Qn ® 7 (/ , ’ f al / ypaphvas ots el| Oro as, iva yéevntat akoXov0as Tots Snrovpévocs. | WVndicpa THs ToAcws TEUPOEV Peds AdyovaTar. | > , \ em 4 Me \ 4 \ lal b lal Exravavres 6€ avépyec@ar Tavta Ta wvera bia TOV évTadOa Kat éml yopas | ayopntév mpabnaopueva Kal? é[x ]aortnv lepo- pnviav mpos TO adiare(t)7[Ta] brapywv | waco Tots aviodcer Tpookuvyntais, emipedouevov TOD THS ToAEwS ayollonTodD pndé eTLXELPOUVTOS 7) OYAODYTOS Tpopdce. Tapoxns Kal Tédous | Kal emnpelias TWOS 7) ATraLTHTAaLwWS* avdpaTroda bé Kal TeTpaTroba | Kal [ 485 ] ° | Caesar Publius Licinius | Gallienus Pius Fel(ix) Aug. et 5 Io af Io 15 III I ° On To 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Aowra CHa opoiws TwreicOw ev THLTOT ML Ywpls TéEXOUS 7) ETrN| pElas TLWos } aTaLTnoaLas. Oi KaToYXoL ayo o’paviou ALos THs LTO TOV Le|Baorov els Te TOV Oeov evoeBetas Kal Tov TOTrOV EdEVOe||pE[/ las Thy Ociav avtiypadny bd TavT@Y TpocKLVOULEVnY TpoeTatav. This inscription, from Baetocaece in Syria, is of interest because of the regard for tradition shown by the Roman emperors even in the third century. King Antiochus had assigned the village to the temple of Zeus with the privilege of holding regular markets where the traders were not subject to the regular taxes imposed on the sale of goods, and the villagers were exempted from the obligation to provide hospitality (hospztium) for soldiers or officials. In later times the village was part of a municipal territorium (possibly be- longing to Apamea), but it still enjoyed its old privileges of immunity. ‘These were in danger of being lost, and the city appealed on behalf of the village to the emperors who confirmed the grant made by Antiochus hundreds of years before. Cf. Ditt. Or. Gr. 483. 148, EPISTULA PROCONSULIS ASIAE DE NUNDINIIS CONSTITUENDIS (260-270 p. Chr.) Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1381, ll. 1-17. Ah Sera os MakimirAdrsaves [avO]b7rartos | [ris “Acias] Aou- vilv los ‘Povdar tai Accalpyo lu [eve]p[y létov | cal “Aovapyne yalipew. | THe o]ne mpos tovs Oeovs, o[d]s idpva@ai dns [ev || the T lerparru[p |ytat, [Opn |oxeias [kai T]he Told y lévous évdd&| ov Naputporn[t |e cat the o[He pwlera THs evyev|ei[a]s Tév tpol 7 lov koopmi[o|tnte mlav]rt ryod|wac Ofrov ws teu lace Sixatos im[dap |yers ....|..T@ yodr Tols THS ayopaiou atro[ po |baww [Bon- LTS Are ars ie T]etpatrupyila d]ea thy e[is] oe Tov.auea....| ..Ta TELny ayéto T[nv] ayopalioly | [éxao|rne mrev[t Jexac- dexaltne] 0 TOv...|.... [Terpa }rupyevr[ & |v OnuWoS ... aloTa, Hn Jenids [rédv | rorNcwr] Tar xar[a] Tv Mao[vilav él av jov- TOMY wheter |.... [ev rladvrne le nucpat ayo[paliov ayovonr[s, Kal yew|noetat TlovTo Kal éxactov [uqlva av[lere|xorvtas. | “Elpploco. | (We have omitted parts 4 and c of the document as published by Cagnat.) [ 486 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES From Koula in Lydia. From this inscription we learn that a city or village must make application to the governor of the province for the privilege of establishing a market-fair in its district. Cf. Besnier, Dict. Dar. 1v, p. 1223 nos. 96, 147. 149. DECRETUM XV VIRUM DE SACRIS FACIUNDIS (289 p. Chr.) CIL. x, 3698; Dessau, 4175; Bruns, 75; Riccobono, p. 262. M. Magrio Basso, L. Ragonio | Quintiano cos., k. Iunis, | Cumis in templo divi Vespa|siani, in ordine decurionum, || quem M. Mal- lonius Undanus | et Q. Claudius Acilianus praet. | coegerant, scribundo sorte | ducti adfuerunt Caelius Pan|nychus, Curtius Votivos, Considi|jus Felicianus, referentibus pr. | de sacerdote faciendo Matris | deae Baianae in locum Restituti | sacerdotis defuncti, placuit uni|versis Licintum Secundum || sacerdotem fieri. | —xvV viri sac(ris) fac(iundis) pr(aetoribus) | et magistratibus Cuman. sal. | Cum ex epistula vestra cognove|rimus creasse vos sacerdotem || Matris deum Licinium Secundum | in locum Claudi Restituti defunc|zi, secundum voluntatem vestra (szc) | permisimus ei occavo et | corona, dumtaxat intra || fines coloniae vestrae, uti. | Optamus vos bene valere. | Pontius Gavius Maximus | promagistro suscripsi xvi kal. | Septembres, M. Umbrio Primo, || T. FI. Coeliano cos. Stone found near Baiae in 1785. It contains a decree of the decurions of Cumae announcing the election of a new sacerdos Matris deae to fill a vacancy and a letter of the guindecimutri sacris faciundis of Rome confirming the election. The interest of the inscription for us lies in the fact that, with the rapid extension of the cult of Magna Mater in the period following the Antonines, and with the admission of Roman citizens to its priesthood (cf. Wissowa, Religion u. Kultus d. Rimer, 265 ff.), the chapters in the cities were brought under the control of the xv viri of the city of Rome. Cf. also CIL. x, 3699, ex s. c. dendrophori creati qui sunt sub cura xv virorum, s. f. [eae ze 20 25 30 Io T5 20 25 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 150, TITULUS HONORARIUS (saec. 111 p. Chr.) Keil and Premerstein, Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914), 87. "Ayabje Toyne, | Eat rputaveas A. Derr (tuiov) Adp(nriov) | "Ayirretdn ve(wrépov) yun(vos) & Advp(yd10s) “Epyuoraos | “Pov- atixov éSwxev vrép apyns || AoyoTelas Kabas edoke Tois | Kkopntats (Snvapia) dvaxdota TwevTy|KovTa mpooxXwpHnaavTa ets THV TOV TELPOVWY TUVTENELAY. This inscription from Lydia is important for the study of village administration and for the history of recruiting in the third century. The sum of two hundred and fifty denarii was exacted as an initia- tion fee for the office of Noytarns and, by a decree of the villagers, the whole amount was devoted to the payment of the aurum tironicum in the village. For the history of this tax, cf. Mitteis, P. Leipzig, 54 (cf. ibid. no. 35); P. Oxy. 1103, and Rostovtseff Four. Rom. Studies, 8 (1918), 26 ff. 151. EPISTULA IMPERATORUM INCERTORUM DE CONSTITUTIONE CIVITATIS TYMANDENORUM (saec. 111 p. Chr.) CIL. 111, 8. 6866; Dessau, 6090; Bruns, 34; Riccobono, p. 338. OMI DENICIS 64 i, sean Tymandenis item | ....ad scientiam nostram|..... tua pertulit, contemplati sumus || T'yman- denos voto praecipuo, summo etiam | studio optare, ut ius et digni- tatem Civita|tis praecepto nostro consequantur, Lepide | carissime. Cum itaque ingenitum nobis | sit, ut per universum orbem nostrum civi|tatum honor ac numerus augeatur eos|que eximie cupere videamus, ut civitatis | nomen honestatemque percipiant, isdem | maxime pollicentibus quod apud se decu|rionum sufficiens futura sit copia, cre||didimus adnuendum. Quare volumus, | ut eosdem Tymandenos hortari culres, ut voti sui conpotes redditi | cum ceteris civitatibus nostris ea que | ipsos consecutos ius Civitatis con- pel|tit recognoscere, obsequio suo nitan|tur inplere. Ut autem sic uti ceteris | civitatibus ius est coeund7 zn curiam, | faciendi etiam decreti et gerendz ce|tera que iure permissa sunt, ipsa quo||que per- [ 488 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES missu nostro agere possit, et | magistratus ei itemque aediles, quaes-| tores quoque et si qua alia necessaria | facienda sunt, creare debebunt. Quem | ordinem agendarum rerum perpetuo || pro civitatis merito 30 custodiri conve|niet. Numerum autem decurionum | interim quin- quaginta hominum in|stituere debebis, Deorum autem in|mortalium favor tribuet, ut auctis || eorum viribus adque numero maior ejorum 35 haberi copia possit. This inscription was found by Sterrett (cf. Papers of the Am. School of Class. Studies at Athens, 3 (1884-1885), p. 384, no. 558) on the site of ‘Tymandus in Pisidia. The names of the emperors at the beginning are lacking, but the script seems to belong to the close of the third or the early part of the fourth century. The words deorum immortalium (ll. 33 f.) seem to fix the date before Con- stantine. Asin no. 154 the reply to the petition is addressed to an official. Whether Lepidus (1. 7) was governor of Pisidia, vecarzus of Asia, or praef. praet. Or. (Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5, 550), we cannot say. Like the people of Orcistus the T'ymandeni ask for the zus et dignitas civitatis (ll. 6 f.; cf. 11 f.). The granting of their request carries with it the privilege of establishing a curza, passing decreta, and the election of duovirs, aediles, and quaestors (Il. 22 ff). A normal municipal senate comprised one hundred members, but we find instances of smaller and larger numbers (cf. no. 136). The emperors plan to increase the number of members as “T'ymandus grows (Il. 34 ff). The statement isdem maxime pollicentibus, quod apud se decurtonum sufficiens futura sit copia (ll. 12 ff.) isa significant reference to the comparatively large fortune required for a decurion- ship, and perhaps to the entrance fee exacted in many cities (cf. pp. 142 f.). It would be interesting to know whether the imperial writers have in mind also the responsibility of the curza/es for the taxes due to the central government. The fact that Tymandus wished to have a curia would seem to show that membership in it was still prized; cf. pp. 113 ff. [ 489 ] MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 152. RESCRIPTUM DE OFFICIALIUM EXACTIONIBUS INLICITIS (saec. 111 p. Chr.) CIL. vi, S. 17639. ....et onerari se inlicitis. . .|mzlitum atq(ue) oficialium exa|ctz- onibus ratione halita decreti concili, quod susci|tavit has querelas cum 5 magno animi mei || dolore audivi; temporum illorum quorum |... fuit ad nunc quis aequo animo | ferat exactionibus inlicitis quibus | zmponunt fortunis alienis immi|”ere ruinam exauriant compendis © su||¢s....uam populi vel fisci debiti | reciproce requies non et mi|/tes parentium ac liberorum | swmma excipit oficiales munifi-| 15 centia...ne quasi quodam more consti||¢wto publici vectigalis pa- terentur | ze posthac admittant | aut poenae tis pro delicti qualitate in|rogentur...s de qua re et pro(curatoribus) meis | /¢teras mist 20 et rescriptum meum etiam provincialibus innotescere vol||/w... .clant L. Apronius Pius leg. Aug..... Benevolentia eius circa provinciam suam hic. An inscription painted in red letters on a stone tablet found at Ain Zui in the ancient province of Numidia. The left edge of the stone is broken off. Probably the last line begins the second part of the inscription which was continued on another stone. The uncertainty of some of the restorations made by Mommsen leaves us in doubt of the exact meaning at various points, but the main purpose of the emperor is plain. The document is an imperial rescript or edict from about the middle of the third century. The emperor intervenes to put a stop to the unlawful exactions made from the provincials by imperial officials and soldiers. Since his efforts to this end have been ineffective in the past, he does not content himself with giving instructions to his procurators, but he causes this rescript to be published (1. 19) in Numidia, probably by the legate L. Apronius Pius (1. 20), of whom we hear in other inscriptions (cf. E.E. 5, 669; 7, 7933 7, 395 = Dessau, 1196; CIL, vin, 8782). [ 490 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 153. TITULUS OPERIS PUBLICI (ca. 312 p. Chr.) CIL. vu, 210 = vit, S. 11299. (4) Coloniae Cillitanae | QO. Manlius Felix C. filius Papiria receptus post alia arcum quo- que cum insignibus colomzae | solita in patriam libertate erexit ob culus dedicationem decurionibus sportulas curiis epu/as ded. (2) Clementia temporis et virtute | divina DD. NN. Constantini et Licint inuc (sic) | semp. Aug. ornamenta /berta. restituta et vetera civi|tatis insignia curante Ceionio Aproniano c. v. || patro. civitatis. 5 ‘Two inscriptions found on an arch at colonia Flavia Cillium or colonia Cillitana. Inscription (4) is in smaller letters and of a later date than (a). The arch was probably thrown down when Maxentius invaded Africa in 311 and was restored after the victory of Constantine and Licinius in 312. In 1. 2 of (4) D.N. and et Lzcimi, according to Mommsen, were originally on the stone, erased in consequence of the quarrel between Constantine and Licinius, and restored later. Ornamenta lberta(tis) restituta would naturally imply that the town was restored to the status of a civitas libera. Cf., however, Henze, De civitatibus lberis, 80 f. 154. EPISTULA ABLABI PRAEFECTI PRAETORIO ET CON- STANTINI IMPERATORIS DE IURE CIVITATIS ORCIS- TANORUM (323-326; 331 p. Chr.) CIL. 111, S. 7000; Dessau, 6091; Bruns, 35; Riccobono, p. 341. Ut alia sic haec quae in precem contu/istzs et nominis | et digni- Col. 1 tatis reparationem iure quaerunt obtime|re. Proinde vicari inter- cessione quae fuerant mut\ilata ad integrum prisci honoris reduxit imp(erator) super omnes re||tro plus, ut et vos oppidumgue diligentia 5 vestra tui|tum expetito legum adque appellationis sp/endore zure decreti | perfruamini infrascribti. | [49n 4 Io T5 20 25 30 35 40 45 Io T5 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Have Ablabi carissime nobis. | Incole Orcisti, iam nuxc oppidi et || Civitatis, iucundam munificien|tiae nostrae materiem prae- buelrunt, Ablabi carissime et iucundissi|me. Quibus enim studium est urbes vel no| vas condere vel longaevas erudire vel in||termortuas reparare, id quod petebatur acce|ptissimum fuit. Adseruerunt enim vicum suum | spatiis prioris aetatis oppidi splendore florulisse, ut et annuis magistratwum fascibus orna|retur essetque curialibus ce- lebre et populo || civium plenum. Ita enim ei situ adque ingenio | locus opportunus esse perhibetur, ut ex qu|attuor partibus co totidem in sese congruant | viae, quibus omnibus publicis mansio ea medi|alis adque accommoda esse dicatur. Aquarum || ibi abun- dantem afluentiam, labacra quoque | publica privatague eorum, istatuis veterum | principum ornata, et populum commanentium | adeorcelebrem aa uit, ali ibidem sunt, | facile compleantur provisa ex decursibus || praeterfluentium aguarum,........ {rum numerum copiosum. Quibus cum omni|bus memoratus locus abundare di- catur, con|tigisse adseruerunt, ut eos Nacolenses sidz | adnecti ante id temporis postularent. Quod || est indignum temporibus nostris, ut tam op|portunus locus civitatis nomen amittat, | et inutile com- manentibus, ut depraeda|tione potiorum omnia sua commoda utilita|tesque deperdant. Quibus omnibus quasi || quidam cumulus accedit, quod omnes | zbidem sectatores sanctissimae religilonis habitare dicantur. Qui cum praecalrentur, ut sibi ius antiquum nomenque | civitatis concederet nostra clementia, || sicuti adnofa- tionis nostrae subiecta | cum precibus exempla ¢estantur, huiusmo|di sententiam dedimus. Nam haec quae in pre|cem contulerunt, et nominis et dignitatis | reparationem iure quae|runt obtinere. Proinde gra|vitatis tuae intercesszone | quae fuerant mutiata || ad integrum prisci honoris | reduci sancimus, ut et ipsi | oppidumque diligentza sua | tuitum expetito legum ad|gue appellationis splen||dore perfruantur. Par es¢ | zgitur sinceritatem tuam | guod promptissime pro tempo|rzs nostri dignitate concess7|mus, erga supplicantes fes||7- nanter implere. Vale, Abladz, | carissime et iucundissime nobis. | Exemplum Precum. | Ad auxilium pietatis vestrae | confugimus, domini impp. Con- stantine || AZaxime victor semper Aug. et Crispe, | Constantine et Constanti nobb. Caes. | [ 492 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES Patria nostra Orcistos vetustzs|szmum oppidum fuit et ex anti- quissz| mis temporibus, ab origine etiam|| cevitatis dignitatem obtinuit. | Id in medio confinio Galatiae perbe|nae situm est. Nam quattuor viarum | transitus exhibet: id est civitatzs | Pessinuntesium, quae Civitas dis||tat a patria nostra tricensimo fe|re /apide; nec non etiam civitates Afi|daitanorum, quae et ipsa est a patria | nostra in tri- censimo miliario; e¢ czvz|tatis Amorianorum, quae posita... (re- liqua desiderantur). Act. prid. | kal. Iulias | Constantinopoli. | Imp. Caes. Constantinus || maximus Guth. victor ac trium|fator Aug. et Fl. Cla. Constantinus | Alaman. et F/. Jul. Constantius nnbb. | Caess. salutem dicunt | ordini civit. Orcistanorum. || Actum est indulgentiae nos|trae munere, ius vobis civita|tis tributum non honore modo | verum libertatis etiam privi|legium custodire. Itaque Naj|colensium iniuriam ultra in|dulgentiae nostrae beneficia | per- durantem praesenti re|scribtione removemus, idque | oratis vestris petitionique || deferimus, ut pecuniam, quam | pro cultis ante solebatis in|ferre, minime deinceps dependa|tis. Hoc igitur ad virum praesta|ntissimum rationalem Asia||nae dioeceseos lenitas nostra. | perscribsit, qui secutus for|mam indulgentiae concessae | vobis pecuniam deinceps pro | supra dicta specie expeti a vol|bis postu- larique prohibebit. | Bene valere vos cupimus. | Basso et Abladzo cons. A large stone, with an inscription on three sides of it, which was copied in part by Pococke in 1752, by Hamilton in 1839, and in its entirety by Ramsay in 1886 (cf. Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5, 542— 544). It was found on the site of Orcistus in Phrygia Salutaris. The stone bears inscriptions of two different dates. In the first place we have three inscriptions of the same year containing (a) the last part of the letter of Ablabius to the Orcistani (col. 1, Il. 1-7); () the rescript of Constantine to Ablabius (col. 1, 8-11, 16); (c) the beginning of the petition of the Orcistani to Constantine and his sons. In the second place we have a rescript (d) of Con- stantine at a later date to the Orcistani (col. 111, 1-32). The date of (a), (4), and (c) falls between a.p. 323, when Constantius became Caesar, and 326, when Crispus died (Mommsen, op. cit. 5, 548). The last inscription (d) is dated June 30, a.p. 331. The first [eos are 25 30 Col, 111 5 Io 15 20 a5 30 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN petition of the people of Orcistus (c) was given to the vzcarius dioceseos Asianae (cf. 1, 3), transmitted by him to Ablabius, praef. praet. per Orientem, and then sent to the emperor. ‘he emperor sends his answer (2) to the prefect, who in turn communicates it to the Orcistani with a letter of his own (a). In the second instance we have only the rescript of the emperor (d) addressed to the ordo civitatis Orcistanorum (111, 9). The Dioecesis Asiana (cf. 111, 25) in which Orcistus lay was in direct charge of a vzcarzus (cf. 1, 3), who in turn was subordinate to the praefectus praetorio Orientis (cf. Abbott, 338; Kornemann, R.E. 5, 729). Ablabius was in high favor with Constantine for many years, and held the post of praef. praet. for at least six years (cf. Seeck, R.E. 1, 103). During one of these years (A.D. 331) he was also consul (cf. col. 111, 323 Palladiu Historia Lausiaca (ed. Butler), 2, 230, n. 102). What the people of Orcistus asked is clear from the two imperial rescripts. They begged (1, 43-44) ut sibi ius antiquum nomenque civitatis concederet. Vhis position the town had held in earlier days (cf. nominis et dignitatis reparationem, 1, 1-23 ad integrum prisct honoris reduxit, 1, 4 and 11, 5—6; cf. 11, 22-25). The town is now claimed as a vecus (cf. 1, 16) by the neighboring czvitas of Nacolia (I, 33-34). It has lost the right of self-government, and tribute for the aerarzum is apportioned among the people of Orcistus by the curzales of Nacolia (111, 14-23), and Orcistus probably has to pay a disproportionate share (cf. depraedatione potiorum, 1, 37-38). A decline in the prosperity of Orcistus may well have led to this change in her political status (cf. Isidore, Orig. 15, 2, 11, vici et castella et pagt sunt, quae nulla dignitate civitatis ornantur, sed vulgari hominum conventu incoluntur et propter parvitatem sui maioribus civitatibus attribuuntur). Mommsen in his comments on CIL. m1, 352 cites the similar case of Equus Tuticus (C/L. rx, 2165) which lost its independent status and was attributed to Beneventum. It was probably with a view to proving the prosperity of Orcistus that its people descant on its roads (11, 27), aqueducts, baths, and statues (1, 20-31). Furthermore they were ardent Christians (1, 39-42), and this fact may have enlisted for them the favor of Ablabius, who was a strong supporter of the new faith (cf. R.E. 1, 103). Oppidum and cevitas are used in all these documents in a semi-technical way [ 494 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES of a self-governing community (cf. 1, 53 1, 173 1, 363 1, 43-44 II, 233 11, 253 U1, 11), whose characteristics are defined in 1, 18-20. Civitas came to be the generic name for such a city and, after the promulgation of the constitutio Antoniana, crowded out colonia and municipium (cf. Kornemann, R.E., Suppl. 303). Legum...splendore (1, 6; 11, 8—g) suggests the phrase w#z suis legibus, used of the grant of autonomy, and /ibertatis privilegium (111, 13-14) suggests the same right, but the designation cruztas ibera would probably not have its old characteristic meaning at this time. It is interesting to notice that the Orcistani themselves in speaking of their town in its present status use the colorless word, patria (11, 22, 30, 32). Five years or more after the prayer of the Orcistani had been granted, Orcistus was still under the control of Nacolia. This situation called forth the second rescript, which, to make the zus civitatis of Orcistus effective, instructed the rationalis Asianae Dioeceseos (Hirschfeld, 35 ff-) to forbid Nacolia to require the payment of taxes from Orcistus. “These taxes, payable in kind in any form of produce receivable at the public granaries (speczes, cf. Mommsen, CJL. 11, 352), were commuted by a payment of money (cf. 1, 28-29). On the general form which these documents take, cf. pp. 237 ff. The first three, viz. the preces of the Orcistani, the decretum of the emperor, and the epzstu/a of Ablabius, are quite unconventional. No one of them bears a date. The letter of Ablabius has no znscriptio or salutation at the end. If Mommsen’s conjecture, decreti (1, 6), is accepted, we must take the word in a broad way of all kinds of imperial documents, rather than in the technical sense (cf. Hesky, R.E. 2289 f.). For adnotationis (1, 45), of. p. 241. Mommsen (CIL. 111, 8. 7000) surmises that the emperor’s adnotatio was on a stone now lost. In its contents the decretum follows very closely the preces of the people of Orcistus. “The last document is more systematic, with its zwscriptio (111, 1-9), the text proper (111, 10-30), and the subscriptio (111, 31). Rather exceptionally the place and the precise date are given at the beginning (11, 1-3). [ 495 ] Io 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 50 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 155. EDICTUM CONSTANTINI AD UMBROS (326-337 p. Chr.) CIL. x1, 5265; Dessau, 705; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 25. meas Imp. Caes. F]. Constantinus | max. Germ. Sarm. Got. victor | triump. Aug. et Fl. Constantinus || et Fl. Iul. Constantius et FI. | Constans. | Omnia quidem, quae humani gene|ris societate(m) tuentur, pervigilium culrarwm cogitatione conplectimur; sed pro-|| visionum nostrarum opus maximus (s7c) | est, ut universae urbes, quas in luminibus provin|ciarum ac regionum omnium species et forma dis|tinguit, non modo dignitate(m) pristinam teneant, | sed etiam ad meliorem statum beneficentiae nos||trae munere prove- hantur. Cum igitur ita vos Tuscilae adsereretis esse coniunctos, ut instituto | consuetudinis priscae per singulos (szc) annorum vilces a vobis adque praedictis sacerdotes creentur, | qui aput Vulsinios ‘Tusciae civitate(m) ludos || schenicos et gladiatorum munus exhi- beant, | sed propter ardua montium et iti|nerum saltuosa inpendio posceretis, ut indulto | remedio sacerdoti vestro ob editiones cele-| brandas Vulsinios pergere necesse non esset, || scilicet ut civitati, cui nunc Hispellum nomen | est quamque Flaminiae viae confinem adque con|tinuam esse memoratis, de nostro cognomine | nomen daremus, in qua templum Flaviae gentis | opere magnifico nimirum pro amplitudinem (szc) || nuncupationis exsurgeref, ibidemque zs | sacerdos, quem anniversaria vice Umbria deldisset, spectaculum tam scenicorum ludorum | quam gladiatorii muneris exhiberet, manente | per Tuscia (sec) ea consuetudine, ut indidem crellatus sacerdos aput Vulsinios ut solebat | editionum antedictarum spec- tacula fre|quentaref: precationi ac desiderio vestro | facilis accessit noster adsensus. Nam civi|tati Hispello aeternum vocabulum nomengq. || venerandum de nostra nuncupatione conces|simus, sci- licet ut in posterum praedicta urbs | Flavia Constans vocetur; in Culus gremio | aedem quoque Flaviae, hoc est nostrae gen|tis, ut desideratis, magnifico opere perfici || volumus, ea observatione per- scripta, ne ae|dis nostro nomini dedicata cuiusquam con|tagiose superstitionis fraudibus polluatur; | consequenter etiam editionum in prae|dicta civitate exhibendorum (szc) vobis || licentiam dedimus [ 496 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES scilicet ut, sicuti | dictum est, per vices temporis sollem|nitas edi- tionum Vulsinios quoque non delserat, ubi creatis e Tuscia sacer- dotibus memo|rata celebritas exhibenda est. Ita quippe nec || veteribus institutis plurimum videbitur | derogatum, et vos, qui ob praedictas causas | nobis supplices extitistis, ea quae inpen|dio postulastis, impetrata esse gaude|bitis. ]l. 21. et difficultates itinerum: zad/ez. Marble slab found at Hispellum in Umbria in 1733. For more than a century this inscription was regarded as a forgery, based in part on CIL. x1, 5283 (Dessau, 6623), another document found on the site of Hispellum. In 1850, however, Mommsen removed all doubt of its authenticity (Ges. Schr. 8, 24 ff.), and published a long commentary on it. Its authenticity was established largely by a comparison with Constantine’s epistle to Orcistus (no. 154) which it resembles in language, in form, and in the titles employed, by the appearance of such archaic forms as conplectimur (|. 8), aput (I. 19), and zmpendio (1. 22), as well as by the nature of the request and Constantine’s reply to it. It is of course a rescript, as the initial letters (E.S.R. = exemplum sacrt rescriptt) indicate, and is a reply to a petition, or, as Mommsen prefers to characterize it (op. cit. 8, 33 ff.), “ein rescriptahnliches Edict” or lex edictalis. It bears no date, and therefore seems to violate Constantine’s own law of 322 (Cod. Th. 1. 1. 1), which rendered an edict without a date invalid, but the date may well have stood on the dedicatory stone (Mommsen, op. cit. 8, 29). From internal evidence it was evidently composed between a.p. 326, the date of the death of Crispus, and before Constantine’s death in 337 (Mommsen, op. cit. 8, 32). Strangely enough the names of the persons addressed do not appear in the zuscriptio, but the docu- ment is evidently intended for the Umbrians. At this time Tuscia and Umbria had a common government under a corrector (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 236, n. 2), and from this inscription it would appear that the province had a concilium at Volsinii, although there is no direct reference to such a body (cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 821 f.). At the annual meeting in Vol- sinii priests were elected, and plays and gladiatorial games given (ll. 17-20), but for the Umbrians the journey to Volsinii was hard AMA [ 497 ] 32 35 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN and costly (1. 21). They therefore ask the emperor that they may not be required to go to Volsinii in the future (1. 24), that the emperor will give his name to Hispellum in Umbria, that they may found there a templum Flaviae gentis, choose a priest, and hold their annual plays and games, without interrupting the annual festival at Volsinii (ll. 27-34). The emperor grants their petition (ll. 36, 37) and allows Hispellum henceforth to bear the name Urbs Flavia Constans (ll. 41, 42). In Constantine’s decision con- cerning the proposed temple (Il. 44, 45) his half-Christian, half- pagan state of mind is evident. His tolerant attitude in this case is paralleled, as Mommsen observes (op. cit. 8, 37), by his permission to Africa to establish a templum gentis Flaviae. For the policy of his successors in such matters, cf. op. cet. 8, 21 ff. In defining gens Flavia as gens nostra, the emperor is of course distinguishing his own line from the Flavian emperors of the first century The particular interest which this document has for us lies in the fact that it illustrates the gradual substitution of the province for the municipality as the political and social unit in the empire, and may well bear evidence to the decline of municipal life. Under the republic and the early empire the city had been the recognized political unit, and it was with a city, or with a league of cities, that the senate or the emperor dealt. But from Constantine’s time on we see a distinct effort being made to establish direct relations between the provincials, especially through their assemblies, and the central government. The Codex of Justinian contains edicts of Constantine addressed ad Afros (12. 57. 1) of a.D. 315, ad Bithynos (11. 8. 1) of 317, ad Lusitanos (1. 23. 4) of 322, ad Afros (10. 21. I) of 327, and ad concilium provinciae Africae (2. 12. 21) of 315. There are three more addressed ad provinciales, one, provincialibus suts, two, ad universos provinciales, of which the earliest (8. 16. 7) is of the year 315, and eight ad populum. It is probable that every province was required to establish a concilium. At least this seems to have been the situation at the close of the fourth century (cf. Cod. Th, 12. 12. 13). The increase in the number of provinces from forty-five in A.p. 117 to one hundred and eight at the close of the fourth century (cf. Marquardt, St. Verw. 1, 489 ff-) meant a corresponding decrease in the size of each province, which made [ 498 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES it possible for the residents of a province to have interests in common and take common action to further them, and Diocletian and his successors may well have had this consideration in mind in de- creasing the size of the provinces (cf. Mommsen, ap. cit. 8, 32-333 Kornemann, R.E. 4, 822 f.). 156. TITULUS HONORARIUS (362-363 p. Chr.) CIL. v, 8987; Dessau, 755. Ab insignem singula|remque erga rem publicam | suam faborem | d(ominus) n(oster) [ulianus invictissimus prin||ceps remota provin- cialibus cura | cursum fiscalem breviatis mutationum spa|tiis fier iussit, | disponente Claudzo Mamertino v(iro) c(larissimo) per Ita| liam et Inlyricum praefecto praetorio, || curante Vetulenio Praenestio v(iro) p(erfectissimo) corr(ectore) | Venet(iae) et Histr(iae). l. 1. ab for ob. Found at Concordia, north-east of Venice. Cl. Mamertinus was praetorian prefect of Illyricum and Italy under Julian in 362 and 363; cf. Gensel, R.E. 3, 2730. On the cursus publicus in the early empire, cf. no. 51. ‘(Vhe wrongs which the municipali- ties in the fourth century suffered at the hands of those who managed the post are graphically described by Libanius (Orat. 20), cited by Hudemann in Gesch. d. rim. Postwesens, 34. Draught animals were commandeered for the service; they were exhausted by long journeys, ill-fed, and sometimes turned loose on the high- way. [he accuracy of his statements is confirmed by the sixty-six constitutions of Title 5 of Bk 8 of the Theodostan Code. From constitutions, nos. 12, 13, 14, and 16, addressed to Mamertinus by Julian, we learn that he limited the number of passes (diplomata or evectiones) granted, and restricted to the emperor, the praetorian prefect, and the governor of a province the right to give them. In the Itimerarium Hzerosolymitanum of A.D. 333 there were thirty points at which the animals were changed (mutatzones) in a journey of 371 miles, and the distances covered by a single team varied from five to twenty-four miles; cf. Seeck, R.E. 4, 1855. Although the post is called the cursus fiscalis, it would seem from the constitutions [ 499 | 322 Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN of the period that the cities were still obliged to furnish fodder for the animals, pay for the construction and repair of the manszones and stabula, and meet the expenses of the cross roads; cf. Humbert, Dict. Dar. 1, 1660. 157. RESCRIPTUM VALENTINIANI VALENTIS GRATIANI DE MOENIBUS INSTAURANDIS ET DE REDITIBUS FUNDO- RUM CIVITATIUM ASIAE (371 p. Chr.) Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 1905, no. 10; Fahres- hefte d. ost. archGol. Inst. 8 (1905), Berblatt, 71 ff.; zbid. 9 (1906), 4.0 f.; Bruns, 97a; Riccobono, p. 374. D.D.D. n.n.n. Auggg. Valentiniazus, Valens, Gratianus. Hab(e), Eutropi car(issim)e nobis. | Quod ex reditibus fundorum iuris rez publicae guos intra Asiam diversis quibusque civitatibus ad instaurandam moenium faczem,.... ...pro certis | partzbus habita aestimatione concensimus capere quidem urbessingulas beneficii nostri uberem fructum et pro temporum refers felicitate nostrorum a foedo | przorum squalore ruinarum in antiquam sui faciem nova reparatione consurgere, verum non in- tegram gratzam concessi ad urbes singulas beneficii || pervenire si quidem pro partibus praestitis reditus civitatibus potius quam ipsi cum reditibus fundi fuerint restituezdi et ministrandi, idem reditus ab actorzbus | pribatae rei nostrae et diu miserabiliterque poscantur et vix aegreque tribuantur adque id quod amplius ex zsdem fundis super statutum canonem | colligatur, et isdem civitatibus pereat eorundemque actorum fraudibus devoratum nihil tamen aerario nostro adiciat augmenti possitque | a curialibus vel excultione maiore vel propensiore diligentia nonnullus praestitionis cumulus ad gratiam concessionis accedere, igitur cuncta diligenti coram investigatione perspeximus. | —-Et primum Efesenae urbi, quae Asiae caput est, missa ad nos dudum legatione poscentz || partem redituum non fundorum advertimus fuisse concessam; unde illi interim quam esse omnium maximam nulla dubitatio est, in parte com|cessa cum eo fundo quem Leucem nomine nostra iam liberalitate detentat, tradz centum iuga promulgata sanctione mandavimus, ut elus exemplo quid adhoc | ista in reparandis moenibus profecerit intuentes an [ 500 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES reliquis praestandum sit similia, decernamus. Hac sane quia ratione plenissima, quod intra Asiam rei publicae | iuga esse videantur cuiusque qualitatis quantumve annua praestatione dependant, man- suetudo nostra instructa cognovit, offerendam experientiae tuae | credidimus optionem, ut, si omnem hanc iugationem quae est per omnem diffusa provinciam, id est sex milia sentingenta triginta sex semis opima || adque idonea iuga, quae praeter vinum solidorum ad fixum semel canonem trea milia extrinsicus solidorum annua praestare referuntur, sed et septingenta tria deserta | et iam defecta ac sterilia 1uga quae per illa quae idonea diximus sustinentur, susci- pere propria praestatione non abnuis, petitis maiestas nostra con- sentzat, | scilicet ut arbitrio tuo per curias singulas omni iugatione dispersa retracto eo redituum modo quem unicuique civitatum pro- pria largitate concenszmus | reliquam summam per officium tuum rei privatae nostrae inferre festines, ut et omnem usuram diligentia avidis eripiamus actoribus et si quid extrinsicus | /ucri est cedat rationibus civitatum. Sane quia rerum omnium integram cupimus habere notitiam et ex industria nobis tuam expertam diligentzam || pollicemur, plena te volumus ratione disquirere per omnem Asiam provinciam fundos iugationemque memoratam, qui in praesentem diem hadita | /cttatione possideant et quantum per iuga singula rei privatae nostrae annua praestatione dependant, qui etiam opimi adque utiles fundi | fisco gratz szngulis quibusque potentissimis fuerint elocati et qui contra infecundi ac steriles in damnum rei nostrae paenes actores | fuerint dere/ictz scilicet ut omni per idoneos ratione discussa ac (?) confectis quam diligentissime brevibus man- suetudini nostrae veri | fidem nuntzes, ut zmstructi super omnibus amplissimum efficacis industriae praestantiae tuae testimonium deferamus. Eutropius, to whom this rescript was addressed, was governor of Asia in A.D. 371 (cf. Ammianus, 29. 1. 36, and Schulten, ‘Fahres- hefte d. ost. archdol. Inst. 9 (1906), 43 f.). The cities in Asia had suffered severely from earthquakes in 358 and 365 (Ammianus 17. 7. 13 Libanius, 1, 621 (Reiske); Schulten, op. cit. 52). Further- more much of their land had been confiscated or reverted to the emperors and had been converted into imperial domains; cf. De- clareuil, Quelques problémes d’histotre des institutions municipales, [ 5or ] 15 20 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN 332 f. Probably reference is made to the recent earthquakes in ll. 3-4. The setting of the rescript is thus explained by Heberdey (Fahreshefte d. ést. archdol. Inst. 9 (1906), 192). In 365 Valens arranged that certain cities of Asia should receive a part of the returns from some of the fund: ret publicae for the purpose of rebuilding their walls. The dishonesty of the managers of the domains led the governor of Asia to propose that the cities should be allowed to manage these properties themselves. “he plan was first tried in Ephesus, and finally this rescript was sent to Eutropius directing him to collect the revenue and divide it between the cities and the res przvatae of the emperor; cf. arbitrio tuo. . . festines (ll. 17 ff). For a somewhat different explanation, cf. Schulten, loc. cit. "The actores in Asia were evidently as venal as the procurators in Africa; cf. no. 111. The emperors complain that most of the revenue from the public lands goes, not to the cities, nor into the public treasury, but into the pockets of the officials (cf. I. 7). Schulten notes (/oc. c#t. 58 f.) that Valentinian had already issued two edicts (Cod. Th. 4. 13. 73 15. 1. 18), in one of which he directed Constantius, the proconsul of Africa, to devote a third part of the revenues from the fundi ret publicae to public works in the cities, and in 395 a constitution of Arcadius and Honorius (Cod. Th. 15. I. 33) refers to the assignment of one third to the cities for the repair of their walls. Before Valentinian, Alexander Severus (Hist. Aug. Alex. Sev. 22, 44) and Constantius (Cod. Th. 4. 13. 5) had given a part of the vectigalia, in Africa one fourth, to the repair of the walls and public works of provincial cities. The central government took up the matter of repairing the walls of cities on the borders of the empire because of the barbarian invasions which began about this time; cf Ammianus, 26. 4. 5. For the canon, cf. Leonhard, R.E. 3, 1486; for the zugatio and iuga, cf. pp. 130 ff. In |. 15 probably vi or vir has been corrupted into vinum. [ 502 ] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES 158. RESCRIPTUM IMPERATORUM VALENTINIANI VALENTIS GRATIANI AD FESTUM PROCONSULEM ASIAE DE LUDIS PROVINCIALIBUS (375 p- Chr.) Bruns, 97. D.D.D.n.n.n. Auggg. Valentinianus, Valens, Gratianus. Habe (?) Feste car(isstme) nob(is). | Honorem Asiae ac totius provincige dignitatem, quae ex iudi- cantis pendebat arbitrio, exemplo Illyric? adque Jtalarum urbium recte perspeximus | esse firmatum. Nec enim utile videbatur, u¢ penpa conventus publici unius arbitrio gereretur, quam consuetz- dinis instaurata deberet solemnitas | exhibere. Ex sententiis denigue factum est, quod divisis officiis per quattuor civitates, quae metro- polis apud Asiam nominantur, lustralis cernitur editzo (?) || consti- tuta, ut, dum a singulis exhzbitio postulatur, non desit provinciae coronatus nec gravis cuiquam erogatio sit futura, cum servatis vicibus quzm|to anno Civitas praebeat editorem. Nam et z//ud quoque libenter admisimus quod in minoribus muwnicipiis generatis, quos popularis animi gloria maior | attollit, facultatem tribui edendi muveris postulasti, videlicet ut in metropoli Efesena ada e civitate asiarchae sive alytarchae procedan¢ ac sic | officiis melioribus nobili- tate contendamt. Unde qui desideriis sub seculi nostri felicitate ferventibus gaudiorum debeamus fomenta praesfare cele|brandae editionis dedimus potestatem, adversum id solum voluntatem con- trariam referentes, ne suae Civitatis obliti ezus in qua ediderint || munera curiae socientur, Feste carissime ac iucundissime. Laudata ergo experientia tua nostri potius praecepta sequatur arbitrii, ut omnes | qui ad hos hoores transire festinant, cunctas primitus Civi- tatis suae restituant functiones, u¢ peractis curiae muneribus ad honorem totius | provinciae debito fabore festinent percepturi postmodum, si tamen voluerint, senatoriam dignitatem, zta tamen, ut satisfacientes legi in locis sus | alteros deserant substitutos. Ceterum nequaquam ad commodum credimus esse iustitiae, ut expensis rebus suis laboribusque transactis | veluti novus tiro ad curiam transeat alienam, cum rectius honoribus fultus in sua debeat vivere Civitate. Io Thy texunv ths Acias kal bAns THS errapyias TO dkiwpua, Sep II ses) IO 15 MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN Kal ék THs érikplcews HpTNTO TOV apxovToS, €& UTrodlypwaTos TOD "Trvupixod Kal rév [t]js Itadias | rodewv opOds Aeiav Kare- vonoamev StaxexpicOa. Ore yap dAvatTedes evomifero THY “rout thls] cvvddov tis Snwootas évds yvoun rpat[re]oOar, | A[v] é« cvvnOias éravtpéyovTes of ypdvot amntovy. “Axorovbas Toivuv vyeyévntas err tpelp lic Onvas Tovs Kpovous eis TAS TEcoapas Tones, aiteves | untpotores év “Acia Wndilovtat, ws THY THS TevTaeTnploos éxdoalW TOLAUTHY EYXELV THY KATAOTACLY Kal UNdE- maote Suvacbat deElTrew || TOV KoTMOvMEVOY UTO TOD THS Acias atepavov. Ard ote érupoptifea bai Tis SUvaTat U6 TOU SaTravn- LaTos, éTav wardioTa aporBadov TpexXovTwv | TAY ypovev éExacTn TOV MNTPOTOAEWV META TEVTAETH TOV YpovoY OLOwaLY TOY ALTOUP- yjlolovra. Kairos idéms mpoonkapeda eri trep Tovs Te|yOévtas év Tals pkpals ToAEoL, éeTrav SnMmoTLKWTEpAS yevaduEVvoL WuXTs Tov émawvov Tov éx Tov dnuov fhavTdlwvte, eEovaiay avrTots | Tmapéyer bas Tod év TH Edeotov untporro[A Jet wovn THv acvapxtav THY aduTapyiayv avTov avvew Kal Tois KaOHKOLS TOs KANALOTLY ex THS émipavous | NevToupyias paiverbat. “OBev, erred ex THS EVLOLPLAS TOV KALpO@V TOV HuEeTepov at érLOvpiat ai TALOVa THY éopTnv éxovaat ofirovaw avé&eo Fat || Kal Tap nudy avTav éxevv THY oTroVonY, BovrAoMEvols avTOLs NELTOUPYEtY Tapéyopmev AOLaY, Els TOUTO ovoyv dtacharsGopevor Tovs ToLovTous, iva ply] | TOV idiwv Torewv érrtravOavomevot TavTn éauTOvs meTaypahova.y, Pjorte tiumotate Kal tpocpiréotate. “H érrasvetn évrecpia cov TOD nweTepor Oe |o| TiguaTos akoAOVONTAaTw TH yvoun Kal TavTaAs TOUS els TAUTHY THY TUnY ETLTPEYOVTAaS Tadaas TpOTEpoY TAS eTOUpyias TH éavTod TOAEL aTTOTANpOdY | TpocTaEaTo, TANPO- Oévt@y dé TOV ALTOUPYNMLATOV Els THY TLUNY THY piCova, TOUTéTTLY dAns THS [é]rrapyias omevdovew avTols ddiav TapexéTo, Suva- pévors peta] | tadta kal To TOV RautpoTaTtav akiwpa k[a]t[ad JévyecOar, ob tws pévToL, @S TPOTEpoY avTovs TO iKaVOV TOLovYTAS TH Vow Els TOV éaUT@V TOTTOY UTOKAabicTaV(TaL) rats ||| éavtav tatpacw érépovs. Odte dé Erépo[ Oe A JuouTErety vevopikapev avtots, iva avadwa(a)yTes Ta éavToy peTa TOvS Tovous TOV AELTOUpynuaTav aTralxOels| | @s veapos Tipwyr els étepov Bol vAeut |n[ pro |v EauTov petaypade: ohirov év TH (é)avtod (wa)AXov [|v Te Kal haiverOat TworeL. [eo 504%] FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES The provincial games at this period were held in four cities in the province of Asia, and the liturgy of asiarch or alytarch could legally be held only by residents of those cities. Citizens of other cities in the province were ambitious to attain these honors, and by this rescript the emperors gave them permission to hold these offices on condition that they first perform all the regular liturgies of their place of origin (cf. Cod. Th. 15. 5. 1). The performance of these liturgies in a metropolitan city did not confer citizenship in that city, and these aspirants for provincial honors from the smaller towns could not renounce their allegiance to their local curia (cf. Cod. Th. 12. 1. 106). In this period it is evident that citizens sought this method of escape from the obligations of their native place (Cod. Th. 12. 1. 176). Cf. Fahreshefte d. dst. arch. Inst. 8 (1905), Betblatt, 74 ff. 159. TITULUS HONORARIUS (376 p. Chr.) CIL. v1, 1736; Dessau, 1256. Hymetii. — | ...Iulio Festo Hymetio c. y., | correctori Tusciae et Umbriae, praetori urbano, | consulari Campaniae cum Samnio, || vicario urbis Romae aeternae, proconsuli | provinciae Africae, ob insignia eius | in rempublicam merita et ob depulsam | ab eadem provincia famis et inopiae vastitatem | consiliis et provisionibus, et quod caste || in eadem provincia integreque versatus est, | gvod neque aequitati in cognoscendo | neque iustitiae defuerit, quod studium | sacerdotii provinciae restituerit | ut nunca conpetitoribus adpetatur || quod antea formidini fuerit: ob quae eadem | provincia Africa, decretis ad divinos principes | dominos nostros missis | Walentem Gratianum et Valentinianum | perpetuos Augustos, || statuam unam apud Carthaginem sub auro, | alteram quoque Romae eidem sub auro | postulandam esse credidit, quod nulli | proconsulum vel ex proconsulibus | statuendam (szc) antea postularit. (Jn /atere) dd. nn. Valente V et Valentiniano coss..... Found in Rome. Hymetius’ proconsulship in Africa began in 366 (cf. Cod. F. 3. 61. 13 Cod. Th. 9. 19. 3). This inscription furnishes proof of a conci/ium in Africa Proconsularis in the fourth century. Several other references to this conctlium are found in Lins Osi Io T5 20 Io MUNICIPAL DOCUMENTS IN GREEK AND LATIN the Codices, e.g. Cod. F. 2. 12. 21; Cod. Th. 11. 30. 15. The steps which Augustus (cf. Cass. Dio, 56. 25) and Nero took (cf. Tac. Ann. 15. 22) to prevent provinces from passing complimentary decrees in honor of a governor were evidently ineffective. Several such decrees are extant, e.g. CIL. x, 1430-1432, 38533 I, 1412, 1741. On the concilia, cf. pp. 162 ff. 160. INDEX SODALIUM FAMILIAE PUBLICAE (saec. IV p. Chr. ?) CIL. xtv, 255; Dessau, 6153. Familia Publica: Ost. Herme _ s tab. Onesimu_ s Dionysiu — s ark. Ost. Callistu s Euaristu — s ark. Geminius Trophimianus Ost. Eutychu s Ost. Appianu s Ost. Asclepiade s Vetulenius Primion Ost. Liberali s Mamidia Hygia Ost. Primio n Ost. Sabinu S Ost. Polygonu s Mumius Luciu s Faustu ss Onesimu_ s Ost. Epafroditu s Ost. Sanctus $ (seguuntur alia nomina sexaginta et unum). Found at Ostia. Into this college even freemen (e.g. Geminius Trophimianus) were admitted. For the tabularius and arkarius of collegia, cf. Kornemann, R.E. 4, 423 f. 161 DECRETUM PROVINCIAE AFRICAE (saec. IV p. Chr.?) CIL. vu, S. 11017. Genio senatus | ob reparatam | iustitiam, | servata defen||saque p(rovincia) A(frica), | Gigthenses | publice ex | d(ecreto) p(rovin- ciae) A(fricae). Found at Gigthi in the provincia Tripolitana. It records the passage of a resolution in the concilium, probably of Africa Procon- sularis, expressing gratitude to the Roman senate, probably for the conviction and punishment of an unjust governor, against whom the province had made charges. On Gigthi, cf. no. 115. [ 506 ] II. DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 162. EDICTUM L. AEMILI RECTI DE ANGARIA (42 p. Chr.) P. Br. Mus. 1171; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 439. Nevdxuos Aipirrss ‘Pyxtos reyes. | Mndevt é&éorw evyapevew Tous emt THS ywpas | unde épddia 7) dAXO TL Swpeay aiteiv aTEp tod | éuold] durA@paros, Aap[Blavew S¢ Exac[to]y Tar || éy[dv- T lov épov ditrAwpa Ta avTaapKe: EmLdynTLa | TiunY atrodidovTas avtav. "Eav o€ tis | unvvOne 7) tév otpatevopévwy 1 TaV paxatpodopa(y) | 7 datis ody tov brypetav Taly év Tals Snpoaliais]| ypryais mapa t]o éwov dudtalyp la [or lerronnas 7 BeBiacl||uévos tiva TOV aTro THS Ywpas 7) apyuporoyiaas, | KaTa TOUTOU THL avVaTAaTML YpHoouar Terwptar. | ("ETous) B TiBepiou Kravdiouv Kaicapos 2eBactod Adtoxpatopos | Teppavixod 6. ]. 3. arep rov is a correction made by the scribe for arep. 1. 5. avradpxe. Wilcken; aira & dpxet Grenfell-Hunt, Archiv, 4, 539. 2 , > , eriOnTla= €TLTNOELA. Beginning with the edict of Germanicus in a.p. 19 (Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 3924), we find a number of edicts issued by various prefects of Egypt designed to check the extortions practised by soldiers and officials in the villages. Cf. nos. 163, 165. In spite of the fact that Egypt was under the direct supervision of the emperor, it is evident that the control of the soldiery in the outlying regions was a difficult problem in the very beginning of the empire. Although the severest penalties are threatened, the frequent repeti- tion of similar edicts shows that the penalties were not inflicted, and the abuses remained unchecked. It is probable that the imperial provinces where soldiers were stationed suffered in the same way, but documentary evidence is lacking until the third century. Cf. nos. 139, 141-144; Rostowzew, Kio, 6 (1906), 249 ff. [ 507 ] Io 15 20 25 30 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 163. EDICTUM CN. VERGILI CAPITONIS PRAEFECTI (49 p. Chr.) CIG. 3, 4956 (cf. Add., p. 1236); Lafoscade, 119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 665. lal \ A / TloowSevios otpatnyos. | Ths meupGetions pos 70 Tov KuUpiou A a \ Hryewovos | érruaToAns ody THL UTTOTETAYMLEVaOL TpoTTay|uaTL TA > / e a e / ene 80 > \ \ > Qn avtiypada tpmelv brotétaxa, tv’ €i6dl\[tes] adta Kat [evr JesOjre Kat pndev Urevavtiov Tols mpoa|[TeTaypévo lis troun[ te]. “Ent éro[us] évatrou TiBepiov KrXaviiou Kaicapos | [XeBactod Tep- pavi|xod Avtoxpdtopos Meyelp €’. | Ty[(atos) Ovepyiduos Katitav Locedavior, srpatnyar ‘Odcelaws | OnBaidos, yaipew.“O ért] THs worews [mp loeOnka didtaypa, || [trovTou avtiypadgor | éreuwra ol[ot]. BovrAouas odv [cle év | [rayes v] te THe untporore Tod vosod Kal Kal é[x|actov toro lv avTo mpobeivar cadbéct kal evonpors | [ypau- ~ \ av / \ ¢ S725 a / paow |, va [wav |ri [é« ]dnra yévntar Ta br? éuod [ctabévtal. | Tvatos Ovfepyi ]Avos Kazritov révyes. || Kai marae wev neovov twas Satavas adixous Kal Tapanroyto[Oei|o las bro Tay TeEO- VEKTLKOS Kal avatdas Tals éEovciats arro|ypwpuévav yeiverOar, \ lal N > a a / U by4 € / d/ kal vov de év tTHL TOY AtBv@v partota | éyvav trobéce, OTL avadioKeTal Twa apralovtwy ade|Os TaV él Tals xXpElats WS UmoKeimeva eis Satravas || Kat Eévia (€)avT@y Ta NTE VTA PTE b f 5 e / \ Agee A 2. A id odetrovTa eivat, | omoiws dé Kal avyaperdy ovomaTtt. Ato KerXev@(t) Tovs | dvodevovtas Sia TOV VvoMeV oTpaTLMTAaS Kal ites Kal | oTaTOpas Kal ExaToVTAapYas Kal YeLluapyYous Kal Tovs (No)L| TOS amavtas pndev NapBavew pnde avyapevew ei py || Tuves éwa SuTrA@paTa Eyovow* Kal TovUTous 5é oTéyne povov Oé|yvecOaL Tovs Ovepyouéevous, UrroKeiwevov Te undéva pndev Tpat|Tew éEw tov vT0 Makiwou otabévtav. “Kay b€ tis dat 7) @s Se|dopévov Noyiontat Kai eiompakéne Snuociat, TodToOv TO Sexatrody | éya(t) exmpaka(t) ob avtos érpakey TOV vouov, Kal THL pnvU- cavtt || TO TeTpaTAAG LOY Epos Swaa(t) éx THs TOD KaTaKpLOérTOS ovaias. | O[¢ pev odv BlacidtKol ypappartels Kal K@pmoypap- patels Kal ToTToypau|[ wart lets Kata vouov Tavta éca Saravarat éx Tod vomod, el twa | Trémpaxtat Tapadrdcyws 7) AXXO TL ava- , Nai? ¢e f ter > f e ’ ypagléc |Owcav kai é[v hyépars] | éEnxovta éridotwmcay oi § [ 508 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT é[v ros OnBaidos dia TeTpapnvou, [eis TA] || NoycoTHpLa Kal pds Baowdreldnv tov Kaicapos amedevOepov ta &€& éxaa|tov roye- oTnptov, Kal Tovs ékNoyioTAas TeuTréTwWaaY, iy éav TL Tapa TO di|Kacov NeAoyeupévoyv 7 TeTpayyuévoyv HL, ToVTO SiopPacopar: ‘Opoiws | S8[é] BovrAopar SnrotcGar........ (reliqui versus, maxime mutili, omissi sunt.) This inscription is engraved on the great temple at Girgeh. The prefect sent a copy of the edict to the strategus in command of the Thebaid with instructions to publish it in various places. “The tenor of the edict is similar to that of nos. 113, 139, 141, 162, 165; cf. P.S.I. 446. Here we have the confession of the prefect that complaints of the exactions of soldiers and officials had long been known to him, but apparently no action had been taken until the Libyans had appealed to him. In this edict the punishment is more explicit than that prescribed in no. 162. The prefect promises to exact tenfold from anyone who makes exactions without a requisi- tion, and a reward of fourfold is to be given to the informer. 164, EDICTUM L. LUSI GETAE DE IMMUNITATE SACERDOTUM (54 p. Chr.) Lafoscade, 120; Ditt. Or. Gr. 664; Milne, Greek Inscriptions, DELL Aotvowos [Téras] KrXavdios Avoa|vias otparnydés “Apowvoet- tov | xaipecy. Td brroyeypappévon | éxOewa mpodes ev ois KaOnxer || Tov vomov ToToLs, iva TavTes | (€)idaot TA UT éwod KEeevopera. | "Eppoco. | Aov«os Aovotos [Véras] Néyeu. | “Ered “Apowvoetrov tepets Oeod || Soxvorraiov évérvxov poe | AéyovTeEs els yewpyias dryecOat, | TovTovs pev atrodvat)> éav | bé Tis eEerXeyyOHe Ta tm éwod | admak Kexpyéva 7 tpootal|yOérvta Kewwvnoas 7) Bov- ANGels | audiBora troujoa:, cata [w]av | ) apyupixas 7) copatixas | coAacOnoeras. L 1d’ TiBepiov | KXavdiov Kaicapos LeBactod, || Pappovii cv’. This inscription is carved on a stone now in the Museum of Cairo. The edict of the prefect indicates the desire of the govern- ment to control the license of subordinates who had apparently [ 509 ] 35 La oO 20 Io §I DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT been guilty of disregarding the orders issued from the office of the prefect (cf. nos. 162, 163, 165). On the position of the priesthood in Egypt under the empire see the commentary on no. 178; Otto, Priester und Tempel, passim. 165. EDICTUM TIBERI IULI ALEXANDRI PRAEFECTI (68 p. Chr.) Ditt. Or. Gr. 669; CIG. 4957 (cf. vol. 3, ddd. p. 1236); Ricco- bono, p. 253; Girard, p. 174. Tovrvos Anpntpios, otpatnyos “Oacews @nBaidos. Tod meudhOévtos wot ScaTadypmartos UTr0 TOD KUpLoU HryEe“ovos | TuBepiou ‘TovAiou “AdXeEavopouv To avtiypadov tev vméraka, iv eiddtes aToNavnte Tov evepyectov. L B’ Aoveiov AtBiov YeBactod Lovamcxtou | Tara Avtoxpatopos Pawdi a’ ‘lovriar LeBacrHe. TuBépuos “lovrAos AX€Eavdpos Aéyet. Lldcav mpovotav trovov- pevos TOU SLapéevery TOL TpooHKovTL KalTacTHMaTL THY TOALWY atroNavovaay TOV EvEepyert@v as Eyer Tapa Tov YeBactay Kal tov thv Aiyurtov év evotabeiar dudyoucay evOvpws vmnpetety THe TE EVOnViaL Kal THL meylal||THL TOY viv KaLpOv evdatmovias, pnt) Bapvvopéevnv Kawvats Kal adixols eiomrpdkeat* oyedov bé && ov THs ToAEws eTEBNY KaTAaBowpmevos UTO THY évTUYYaVoYTwV Kal Kat odiyous Kal Kata TAHON(L) TOV Te évOade EVoynNMoveE- OTATOV Kal TOV YempyoUVTwV THY Kwopav pEe“pomevaY TAS eyyLoTA yevouévas émnpelas, ov StéXLTTIOV eV KATA THY EwavTod SvvapmLy Ta éreiyovta | emavopOovpevos: iva dé evOupmoTtepor Tata éXri- Ente Tapa Tov émiNapavTos tuely emt cwTNplaLt TOU TavTOs avOpeTrav yévous evepyétou LeBactod Avtoxpatopos 'aXBa ra Te Tpos cwTnpiay | Kal TA Tpos aTeXaVGLW,, Kal yLvVOaKNTE TL eppovtica THY pos THY bueTépay BonOeav avnKovTwr, Tpoé- ypara avayKkaiws Tept ExdoTOUTOY ETLENTOULEVOV, Ooa eEETTi LOL Kpel|vewv Kai Troveiv, TA dé weiCova Kal Sedpue(va) THs Tod avToKpa- TOPOS SUVAMEWS Kal MEyANELOTNTOS AVTOL SNAOT@(t) wEeTA TATNS arneias, THY Gedy Tamievoapévov els TOUTOY Tov || fepwTaToV Kalpov THY THS OlKOUpEVNS aohareav. ~“Eryvwy yap wpod TavTOsS evAOYwTaTHY ovoav THY évTevEwW UuoV UTép TOD pH(L) akovTas avOpa@trous eis TeN@veEias 7(L) GA|Aas prcO@cets OVTLAKAS Tapa To Kowdov [€|00s Tay érapxYerov mpos Biav ayerOat, Kal OTL OvK [ 510 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT or[iy ]o[c] EBrAaWe Ta mpaypata TO TrOAXOvS arretpous bvTAS a / a ? / THS Tovav|TnS TpayywaTtetas ayOnvas pet avayKns ériBrANOévtTwr a a A 4 , avutols Tov TeAoV. AtoTep Kal avTos ovTE Hyayov Tiva eis J x / A v TAN a 4 Terovetav H(t) picOwow ovte aEw(t) eid@s TodTo | supdépery Lal ~ / Kal Tals Kuptakals Wows TO weTa TpoOUplas ExovTAS Tpayua- / \ /, f Ve Cf ba we) > \ / teveo0as tovs dSuvatovs. Llémresvopas 56 OT ovd Ets TO wédXdOV dkovras tis der Terwvas | H(t) wtcOwras, ad\XrAA StapicOace Tois BovAropévors Exovaiws mpo(c)épxecGat, madAroV THY TOV TpoTépwv eTapyov aidviov cvvnleav duvrdoowr i(t) THY TpoC- Katpov Tivos adsxtay || petwnoduevos. "Erresd7(t) eveoe mpopdce, TaV dnuociwy Kat addAOTpLa Savera Trapaywpovpevot els Te TO TPaKTOpELoyv TLVas Trapédocay Kal eis GANAS duAakKds, as Kat Ov avto TodTo | éyvwy dvaipeOeicas, iva ai mpakeus TOV A / A Saveiwv €x TOV UTapYOVvTMY wat Kal p(t) eK TOV Tomato, éErropevos THL TOV Oeod YeBaatod BovrAnoer Kerev(t) undéva THe TaY Onhociwy mpopalce. Tapaywpeicba. Tap ad\Xr\ov Sdvera a pnt) avtos €& apyns edavercev, prt) & brAws KaTaKrElec bai > / 3 \ € la) > \ A > Tivas érevOépous eis huraKHY HYTLVODY, Et w(t) KAKODpYOV, wd els TO Tpak|Topetov, éEw(s) TOV opeirovTwV els TOV KUPLAKOV NOYOV.. ove cece cece ce ceceee EvetevyOny O€ Kal Tepl TOY aTe- lal \ lal > e > \ \ / > f NELMV KAL KOUPOTEAELWY, EV ALS EOTLY KAL TA TpocooLKa, a&vovvTav avtas puraayOjvat, @s 0 Beds Kravdzios | éypaer Toorop. aTroNvwY, Kal AeyovTaY VaoTEepov KaTaKkexpiabat TA UTO iOLwTav mpayOévta év TOL wéTwL Ypovar peta TO PrAdKKOV KaTaKpeEtvat x \ A \ \ / , la) >] x 5 \ Kat Twpo Tod Tov Bedv | KrAavdiov amrordaa. *Emel obv kai BarBiarndos Kal Ovnoreivos tavta amédvaav, auhotépwrv TaVv emdpyov émixplipata puraccat) Kal exelvov KaTNKONOVONKOTwY THe | rob Oeod KXavétov yapits, Mote aTrohedvaOat Ta pndérra(t) é& aitayv eiompayOévta, SnrovoTs eis TO AOLTOY THPOUMEVNS avTOIs THS ATEdElAaS Kal KOUPOTENELAS. 66... eee eee ee eee "Axorovboy dé eat Tais Tov YeBaotay | yapict Kai TO Tods n > a nn évryevets AndeEavdpets Kai év thi [y@l]pas dia direpylav Katou- fa) 3 / / yy ew i¢ a ff KovvTas els undeutay [NEecToupylay ayerOat, 0 Vues] | ToANAaKLS \ > 4 > Ni be / e/ , la) pev emelntncate, Kavtos b€ dvddoow(t), wate undéva TOV évyevov AreEavdpéwr els Nevtoupyias ywptxas ayecOar. Medjoes dé || wou Kal Tas oTpaTnyias peta Staroytopov Tmpos TpLEeTlay / a évy(e)epiferv Tots KaTacTAOnaopmevols.... 1... eee eee eee fl Ove Paste) 15 §2 §4 §6 $7 35 45 IO 50 she) DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT ayvoa(t) & OTt moAdnY mpovoravy oveicbe Kal Tod THY Aiyurrov év evotabetar Sralpéverv,] €E& ns [as ets tov Biov amavta| | yopnylas éyete, boa olov te nv érnvapOwoapnp. "Evérvyov yap pot moddaKis of Kal” 6Anv THY Xa@paVY yewp- yoovtes Kal €d4XwGaY OTL TOAAA KaLVas KaTEKpiOncal VY, KaiTrep SHrov dv dca Set | Pépesv] TeAéopata oitiKa Kal apyupiKd, \ b 4 lal lA > a A / Kat ovk é£ov Tots BouvNopevors evxepa@s Ka0orLKoy TL KaLviCerv. Tatra dé Kat Ta ToLadTAa KaTaKpimata ovK él THY OnBaida povnv [evpov éxrervopeva | ov dé él Tods roppa(t) vowods THs / / > \ \ \ , iad / + KaT@O(L) YMOpas, GANA Kal Ta TpoaaTLa THS TOdEews EbOacer / ? / / / \ \ / thv te AreEavdpéwy Kadoupéevnv yopav Kat tov Mapeortny [AaBetv. Ard Kerevw | Tolis Kata vowov otpatnyois va el TLVA KALWOS THL eyyloTa TEVTAETiaL TA [47)(L) TPOTEpOV TEAOVMEVA Kkaborixos H(t) TwANOcKaS vowav H(t) ToTraplyi@v 7) KoMev ceveececeeee || KalrexpiOn(s), TadTa ets THY TpoTépav Tdakw ATOKATACTHTWOW, TApEVTES AUT@V THY aTraitnow, A Kal éri \ \ > / e] lal > / Tov diaroyiopov ayOevta éx Tov [......... eEaipeOyto. | 5 , > ee a \ / \ \ 7 5] / A Eéj7 aca 8 éte Kal mpotepov Kal THY awetpov é£ovciay THY éyNoyioT@yv Ova TO Tapvtas avTov KataBoady éri Tet Trapa- , 9 \ a > a POL b] Q / > e / ypahew avtovs TAEloTa éx THs tdtas érvOu|uias:] éE ob cuvé- Bawev avtovs pev apyuplifecOar, Thy dé Aiyurrov avdotatov vA \ n na > tal A \ > ¢ / yeiverOar. Kal viv tots avtots tapayyéd\Aw undey && oporw- peal ros | ru lypadev ad[r layfe Addo Te TOV KAMONOV Ywpls Tod Kpetvar Tov érapyov. Kereva(s) O€ Kal Tois otpatnyots ponder Tapa éyAoyioTav peTadauBavery ywpis tH[s adetas | Tod] érdpyou. Kat oi addou 6€ mpayuatixol, éav TL evpeOdar vrevdées A(t) mapa To Séov mapayeypadotes, Kal Tois idudTats arrodd- covow dcov amnitnOncay Kal 76 [icov| || amort(e)icovew eis TO OnMmoglov.........+..+(reliqui versus omissi sunt.) From Khargeh. This inscription is most important for a study of the policy of the imperial administration in attempting to correct abuses in the government of Egypt. The large number of similar edicts found in Egypt show that the problem of good administration was difficult even in a country under the direct supervision of the emperor. ‘he edict is published in fifteen sections each dealing with a specific problem. In §1 the prefect forbids the practice of compulsion in contracting for the collection of taxes and in the [ 512 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT leasing of public lands (yA odavaxny). For the difficulty in securing contractors for farming the taxes, see no. 167. A similar law pre- vailed in other parts of the empire (Dig. 39. 4. 9, 13 49. 14. 3, 6), although in cases where no bidders were forthcoming former contractors were compelled to take the contract on the same terms as their original bid (Dig. 39. 4. 11, 5). In § 2 the prefect corrects an abuse which had developed in the capitals of the nomes where the local magistrates had been guilty of seizing the property of debtors and confining them in the public prisons, although the law forbade the distraint of a person for debt, unless he owed the imperial treasury. In § 4 we find that those who enjoyed immunity of various kinds and those who occupied lands such as the yf m@poaooou, on which there was a lighter tax than on other imperial property, were deprived of their privileges by former governors. To citizens of these classes Julius confirms their former rights. In § 6 we learn that citizens of Alexandria resident in other parts of Egypt were exempt from local liturgies. The full liturgical system was not introduced into Egypt until later, and it is probable that, when it finally became a part of the Egyptian administrative policy, the Alexandrians were released from all local, but not from imperial, liturgies (cf. no. 173; p. 103). In §§ 10 and 11 the prefect forbids the superexactions imposed by officials in the nomes. ‘The legal assessment and the quota of taxation was determined every fourteen years. Officials had arbitrarily increased the quota and had grown rich by appropriating the excess. They are ordered to restore the amount of their illegal extortions for the five years preceding the publication of the edict and to pay an equal sum to the public treasury. 166. DE CENSU é@dexadpdypov (86-87 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 258, ll. 4-26; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 216. Aiddvpou tov am’ Ofuptyy[ev modews ||| em’ auBodov Uvpeviris. Kara ra | xpidévta émt tév mpocBeBnkotor | is Tprskardexa- eTets, ef €E dugoré| pwr yovéwy pn[T |poTovert av da|dexadpax pov e[io liv, érayn él || Tob avrod audddov 6 v{[ids lov ...-.|os 10 AMA ; Pp srae | 33 On 5 20 25 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT untpos Oeweiros ths [Ac]dduou | mpocBéBnnev eis tpicKac- Sexaletet|s | Tt eveota@re. (Ete) AvdToxpat[opos] | Kaicapos Aopittavod YeBaorod || Vepyavixod. “OOev trap ja[yevoue ||vos is tHv TovTou én[ixptow (SnA@) ef ||vas éue KATA T........-. ... | eat tov tHALs pn |r[pos adtod warté]|pa Aidvpov ...... NERO || avaypadopevov evo........ | ea auodou PR PRS os Kat Te]|TeNeUTNKE TlOL...... éret Népw]|vos cal épvil[w Avtoxpdtopa Kaicapa] | Aousteavov Xe[Bacrtov Tep- pavixor | || adnOH eivar [ta mpoyeypaupuéva]. | "Etous éx[7]ou [Avroxpatopos Kaicapos] Aopitifavod SeBacrod Teppavixod From Oxyrhynchus. The documents which deal with the re- gistration of citizens, especially with the epzcriszs, or scrutiny of those who claim more favored treatment, are important for the study of the different gradations in the status of the residents of Egypt. Distinctions of a similar kind are traceable in Asiatic towns (cf. pp. 75 f.), but little is known of the status of the various classes outside of Egypt. he present state of our information in regard to the epzcrists is summarized by Grenfell-Hunt (P. Oxy. 1451, 1452. See the references to previous literature on the subject cited by them). ‘The favored classes were veterans, Roman citizens with their freedmen and slaves, Alexandrians, and Graeco-Egyptians. The epzcriszs in the case of Romans.was held before the prefect or some official delegated by him for the purpose. It was not confined to the question of remission of poll-tax, but was a determination of the legal status of the individual. From the document which we publish here we learn that certain citizens of Oxyrhynchus enjoyed a lower rate of poll-tax (twelve drachmae) than that exacted from the rest of the citizens (forty drachmae). In this declaration the lad is thirteen years old, and he was registered at this age because the poll-tax was levied at fourteen. Both parents were citizens of Oxyrhynchus, and the father and maternal grandfather belonged to the twelve-drachmae class. In other towns the rate of poll-tax for the privileged class varied (Wilcken, Grundziige, 199). From P. Oxy. 1452 it seems probable that of é« Tod yupvaciov, or those belonging to a gymnasium, formed a larger class, and within this group the members who paid twelve drachmae were those who seas DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT received a special remission for some reason which cannot at present be determined. The epicrisis of this class may be held before the strategus, the royal scribe, or others (P. Oxy. 1452,1. 2). Cf. Bell, Archiv, 6 (1920), 107 ff. 167. DE VECTIGALIBUS LOCANDIS (ca. 81-96 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 44; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 275. [Ila]vicnos ........dAas otpatnyos “Okvpu[y]y(irov) | PAc]xAnmidd[ne Baoidicxa ls ypappa(rel) Tod avtod vopod | yaipew. | Ent ris yevouévns Statrpacews THY TEeXWU||KOV VITO ToD Te €uovd Kal ood eri TrapovTov Kal| THv eiwOoTwr, SvctreOovv- TV TOY TO év|KUKALOV AoxYoNoUpEevaY Kal ((TOd)) TO ayo|pavdouLov Snuwociwvav ws tkava Bramto|uévov Kal Kwdvvevorvt@v peT- avaoTh||vat, doéav ipetv éypaira Tat Kpatiotas | Hryep~ove trepl Tov mpdyuatos. “Avtiypawav|tos obv avTov jot Trepl Tod éd- wdovra Tas|7[po |répas pic Owes Kata TO SuvaTor | [ava |eovdicat Tovs TeAwvas Umép Tov pun || duyla]das yevérPar tLo]vs mpds Bliav] al[yo]|uévous, cal mpotepov ca To avtiypladoly | tis émusToAns peTédwxa, tv eldhus, Kal | OTe atrodnmodvTds cov Kal TOV Over | un érridedeypevav UTO TOY TeNWVO? || wNde HV AANRV Tpocepx|ou évwv av|rots [[7oAXaKes |] roANaKts TpoKnpvxOer- adv | 2daBov yerpoypadetas THY Te TO év((KU))|KUKALOV Kal TO ypadetov acyoNoupévov......- < l. 15. pos B[iav] a[yo]uevous, Wilcken; zpooP[uB]a[lo]uevovs, Grenfell-Hunt. From Oxyrhynchus. This document furnishes a commentary on the edict of Tiberius Julius Alexander. ‘The tax on sales, which amounted to ten per cent., and the fee to the agoranomus for his services in drawing up contracts, etc. were farmed out to contractors, These had suffered such losses that they were likely to abscond when they were urged to renew their contract, since no bidders had appeared at the last offering. ‘hese contracts were let by the strategus and the royal scribe in conjunction. The strategus had written to the prefect concerning the present situation, and the latter had authorized him to examine the former contracts with a [ 515 ] 33-2 to T5 20 20 25 30 35 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT view to lightening the conditions in order that those who took the contract under compulsion might not be constrained to avoid the rigorous terms by voluntary exile (cf. no. 165). 168. EDICTUM GAI VIBI MAXIMI, PRAEFECTI (104 p. Chr.) P. Br. Mus. 3, 904, ll. 18-38; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 202. T[dios Ovi]Biols Ma€:uos éralpy[os] | Adydarz[ou réyer. | || Ths nat oi[kiav arroypadhs élvectaé[ons] | avayxaiov [éotiv macw toils Ka H[vteva] | Syrore ait[iav amodnuotow aro Tov] | vowav wrpocalyyéAre JoOas érra[ver]|Ociv els ta éav[ trav éldéoria, tv[a] || cal rhv cvvynOn [oi |eovouiay ry[s amo ||ypadns TANpecwoWw Kal THL Tpoa[HKOU ||ons avTOls yewpylat TpoTKap- tepjnowlow |. | Hides pévtol[e ]re éviwy tav [ard] | THs yodpas n TOS Huov exet Ype[Lav | || BovAop[ac] wavtal[s 7 Jods ed[A]oryov So[codr ||tal[s] eye Tod évOade émipéviy [ail|tiav atroypade- o[@lat mapa Bovr...... | Byotas érapywle] e’Ans, dv én tol[vtwe]| | éraka, ob Kai tas [b|roypadas of azrod[etl||Eavres avayk[aiav alitav tHv tapov[ciay] | Anovralt Kata t]od[T]o TO twapayyerp[a] | évros [THs Tpraxddos Tod évleo[T]@Tos EBT aL Ere thie onary ce mre élravenOety | we” A[so.....- Vas ay Wee eae (reliqua versus omisst sunt.) l. 20. [é]veora[ons], Wilcken; [ov]vecrw[ons], Kenyon-Bell. 1. 34. [d]roypadds, Wilcken; [a]roypadds, Kenyon-Bell. From Alexandria. In this edict the prefect orders all those absent from the place of their nativity to return for registration since the census was about to be taken. Many of these absentees were peasants, who had abandoned their farms and had gone to join the urban mob at Alexandria. ‘They are ordered to return to their farms. An exception is made for a few whose services were needed in the city and these are permitted to register with Festus. Cf. no. 193; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 205 ff.; Wilcken, Grund- ziige, 26 ff, 65. Other documents which deal with this subject are P. Gen. 16; P. Fay. 243 nos. 174, 193,194. Cf. Luke, 2, 3, fora similar law in Judaea at the time of the birth of Christ. This docu- ment is not only important for its bearing on the doctrine of origo [ 516 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT (‘ééa), but also furnishes our earliest evidence for the urban move- ment in Egypt under Roman rule. 169. DE SUMPTIBUS yuyvacvapyias MINUENDIS (114-117 p. Chr.) P. Amh, 2. 70, col. 1; Wiicken, Chrestomathie, 149. Col. 1, Fragment A PyrvKe KrXavdios Ovivdsxe tds Kpatioras ér[iotp(atnyar) | mapa apyovtwv | “Epyod oA(ews). Tod xpatiotov rryenovos “PoutiA[iouv Aolvm(ov) ceXevoavtos | cveTadnvat Ta TOAKG TOV avaropatav thls yuluvaciapylas, [a of] | caOcor[la|vapevos mpoOuporepov vropéelvao lt TO avddwpa, || Kal cod Snpociat > t A do , Woe? / Wn" émitpéavtos tov a[vara lualr los, a évedélyerto, [o luoradjvac Kal TaUTa EKOV..t....... s Tovs vov | yupvactapyelv pé[r]- OUT CHUTT IE's) ofa sit akan 50) Anupa Kal t[LO] | Badavetov Kal To cvyvnPe[s] dudou[e|v[o]v t[r]lep tw...va.[a]|7o Tod yupvaciov © els TO Onplo|ovo(v) yOua T..... a5. .ov.. || Avyvarpias, aorrep 0 Kata Tolv|s yupvact....p...€Kav..... | kata TO KayjKov avotan[jvat] ta m[Ae]i@ Tav bd Tov .. | EXaooovos yivopévou LUT rane: TaTos av..we.| éTépas ypelas edidou aro. ..... see av eal ape LO oe AU OLY Natials the OT ite meOUGI ae meat Fragment B ] Spaypat) E av? (dv) (kavai ciow [... Jrous (Spaxpal) TE, wovo[icav?... ].noae os érrupernt( ).al... Jwpats. vewxop.tas ovd.[... ] (Spaypal) T...ANs aArA(__) A€yomeLy || ] txavai (Spaxpat) +. [No ]um(al) (Spayuat) [... ] Aosrr(al) (Spaxypat) cf, cat bro Tov.[... ] (paypal) °A, artive...cv gil... | vireo ToD €..... Tou|.. From Hermopolis. ‘The gymnasiarch was a member of the college of archons in the metropolis. Evidently the cost of the office had become so great that it was difficult to fill it. Accordingly Rutilius issued an edict defining the amounts which should be Tyee a T5 20 15 20 30 se) DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT spent in the various duties connected with the position. Unfor- tunately the papyrus is so badly mutilated that it is only possible to decipher references to the baths and to torch-lighting. At this period the office was probably held for one year and was shared by two or more who took the duties alternately (Oertel, Die Liturgie, 316 ff). In the third century the office was held for a longer period, but each member of the college served only for short periods of a few days at a time (P. Oxy. 1413, 1418; Wilcken, Chresto- mathie, 39. Cf. Oertel, Joc. cit.; Preisigke, St. Beamtenw. 53 ff-; Jouguet, Vie munic. 166, 292 ff., 318 ff, 399 ff). 170. EPISTULAE PETRONI MAMERTINI ET STATILI MAXIMI DE IMMUNITATE CIVIUM ANTINOOPOLITANORUM (135, 156 p. Chr.) Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 26. I Iletpdvios Mapeptetvos “Opeiwm otpatnyat OeweiTou yai- pew. | “Avtiypadoly émr|ictoAns ypadetons [uloe vo Anun- TALOUPA Deh istete Tov is | tyv Avtifvoo]u KexrAnpopévor [ex This II[ro]\euaéw[v] morews Tov|tos Tois yplaw|uacw vréraka Bovropevos ce dpovtic[at, dlrs oft] te adlrod Kai of tov adrov tov ts tHv Avtivoov atrackio[pé|vov alvd |Bptc||rot cal aver[npléacro. Staywouw év tas vouwt. (“Erous) 16 Oe0d [SA ]8pcavod Dappod|Oc 10. : II Lrateihios MaEcpos “Opeiwv orpatnyar Oewveirou yaiperv. | "Evtuxe BcBrccdiws S00évte wou trapa Kacropos "Adpodiciou, bt éy|lyeypam[t las kat éruoToAn TOD KpatiaTns uynuns Mapepretvou, dc’ Hs | ovx Strws Tovs "Avtivodas, GANA Kal Tods avTav HOE- Anoev [av |uBpio|rous eiv[as, x lat to Os, e[¢ To ]codTov Krol 7 ef ov (?) mplaéas, Sntecavtd pe Tht Kpaltiotw Hyewov. (“Etous 16 Geot Athiou ’Avtwvivov Mecop? | érayopévev a. (2nd H.) Leumpovios ém(dé)dxa. || (3rd H.) Ei teva Sixara eyes, THe oTpaTnyat tapadod | kat ta Séovta moinoet. (4th H.) "Aodos. On the founding of Antinoopolis, cf. Jouguet, Ve munic. 115 ff. From this document we learn that citizens of Ptolemais were drafted by Hadrian for the settlement of Antinoopolis, and that the [ 518 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT selection was made by lot. As compensation for this compulsory change of residence, not only the Antinoopolitans, but their parents, were exempt from liturgies which might be imposed upon them outside of their place of residence. Both letters imply that there was a disposition on the part of local officials to forget the grant made by Hadrian, probably because the pressure to secure available candidates for liturgies was already becoming severe. It is also evident that Ptolemais, although a Greek city, did not enjoy the favored position in Egypt which Alexandria had, nor is there any evidence that the administration of Ptolemais differed in any way from that of the ordinary Egyptian metropolis (Wilcken, Grund- xiige, 48). At any rate its citizens were subject to the strategus of the nome in the matter of liturgies, as this document clearly indi- cates. Cf. no. 184. 171. DE VECTIGALIBUS EXIGENDIS A SENIORIBUS VICI (136 p. Chr.) P. Br. Mus. 2, 255; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 2.72. Yoxpnvis Loxunvews ral “Ariov | “Hpaxreidov [xat] “Atpis TleOéws cai Azror|A@vi0s Atodwpov cat Hacokss “Hparos | xat ‘Opiov ‘Opiwvos cai Urorrtwv || Xarpjwovos cal” Hpwv Kar- ov | kat “Hpwv “Hpaxreidouv cal Lapamads | MicOov kai of Noumr(ol) mper(BvTepot) Komns | Kap(avidos) rod x’ (érous) ‘Adptavod Kaicapos | tod Kupiov ‘Opiwv ‘Opiwvos ya(ipecr). || "Emi cuvectaxapév cor av? vuelv] | mpaxropevuy Kal yupitiv thv de | Surnpav kal dopov mpoB8atwv kal ar|Awv ciddy Tis avThs Kouns, | émpaxtopevaas Kal éyiptoas péll[ x Joe dws Daddu pnvos tod Ka (€Tous) | Kal avtod tod Daddy, [Tas pev Ths | turnpas éml tyv Snuociav tpate|Cav, tas Sé Tod hopov TaY mpoBa|twv eis [t])v eal tovTos Tparrefalv], || Kai ovdév [a Jou éveanotpev trept | rovtwv. Laccokis ‘Hparos dia tod | warp[ os] ‘Hp[a]s ovdev éxar@ xados m[pox(erras) |]. | “Aa[or]ALo ]y[ cJos Avodeépou ovde[y] | év[x]ar[@]. Amiwv ‘Hpaxretdou || odd[év] évKar@ xabeas mpo|[x« jecrar. l. 10. “Eri="Evel; tudv=npav. 1. 11. de=re. [ 519 ] 25 Io 15 20 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT From the Faytim. This document shows us that the elders of the village were required to collect certain taxes. In this case they have contracted with Horion to gather the tax on beer and the sheep-tax. At the end of his term he is given a formal release as prescribed by law. It is probable that the three men who give the release were those to whom the liturgy was assigned by the whole body of elders (Oertel, Die Liturgie, 146 ff; Jouguet, Vie munic. 217 ff.). The assignment of the duties of a liturgy is frequently recorded in Egypt (Wenger, Dze Stellvertretung im Rechte der Papyri, 75 ff.3 cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 263, 264), but in certain cases it seems to have been forbidden, cf. P. Fror. 382: p. 101. 172. DE CIVIBUS AD MUNERA SUBEUNDA NOMINATIS (Ca. 37) Dahon.) BGU. 235; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 399. [Ov]eyérws otp(atnyor) [Ap ]ou(voirov) ‘Hp[axr(etdov) pepé- Sos] | wap[a] I[e]Oéws [km |woy[p(auuatéws)..... Kal addowv | | copov.|’ Arf ri] Adpodd érrix[ adovpévov..... ll|evl ye lore wAn- poovtos eis Dapyevod «0 | cai Uf alo[i]wr[os] "Adpodsctou émi- «(arovpévov) Kévuis | cat S[a]Bivov ‘Aprdrovu 71a ]v B | &vytora mAnpovvtwy eis Iadr[e..] | cat “loyupiwvos Iletec[ovyou cal ....]|| coup[élos rere (eutnxorar) tov [B.. ]a+ ax[o]| edu(ns) IIroreuaidos Nélas avadisa |us tov[s] | vroyeyp(aupévous) dvtas eUTropous Kal émrtdnoto[ us] | yvoOune cal xwwdU[v]ov Tov amo Tis | Kons TOV Kal évyvope volus Kata TO ef Bos] || rEeumOncopuévous ToL KpalT(icT@r) ériotp(aTnyar) els KA(Hpov)]. | Eiol &é- | Laparaupov TeBovrovu éy[ wv mopov...... ] | Upovends Upo- Tenaou|, ] | Eicyvpas TeO[élos. .[ Vhs tates he Pee OVO] S24. siesse al Lines l. 13. lege xwdvvor. l. 14. lege éyyvopévwv. From the Fayim. This document reveals the method of appoint- ment to liturgies in the villages at this period. Candidates were chosen by the elders, who were legally bound as sureties for their nominees. ‘The list was drawn up by the village-scribe, who for- warded it to the strategus. From the latter official the names were forwarded to the epistrategus, who chose the candidates for the [ 520 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT various offices by lot. It may be noted that Petheus serves as secre- tary for several villages. For the capital required for various liturgies, cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie; Wilcken, Gr. Ostraka, 1, 507 ff.; P. Giess. 58. In some cases we find the liturgists appointed by the prefect (P. Amh. 64; P. Br. Mus. 1220). 173. DE STATU CIVIUM ROMANORUM ET ALEXANDRINORUM (139 p. Chr.) BGU. 747; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 35. COner ‘Avidios “Arf 10d Jopar tae xpatiotas jryepwov(c) | Iroreuatos Lo]r[p]arnyos Korz[et]rov yaipeuv. | Tov cupiaxov tpaypaton, nyeHov péytate, | émrifnrovvtwy éEaipetov ppovrida Kal cuvelly émripér[tjav cal dedouévwr eis tod[t]o ov plo]vov | a€toypéw[v], ada Kal aTiOnviov wariota av|Ppwrerv, [ov] duédsrrov, Kupte, tots €v Tais dnuoctars | ypelats Told vlopwod ovat ‘Pwpators Kat "Are Ea |vdpevor | xalt] wadla]e otpatidtais avtictatodar Tots mpay| lacey || rapawav reiOe[ oO lar tots KeXevopévors, Kal ot|o- [wlevos pelt avon crv jpetv eriyol[yv] cor Tat Ku|piwor dnrOcat. "Ex é]ule]vov 8€ [a]itdv xara 76 [a]vay|Kaiov éruyopevos bd THs xpelas avadép[e]oOa. | Tdv yap tpayudtov 76 péyilo |rov éotw Kat yvnl|lo[e|drepov [w]oAAns Te mpoe[O |pias Seopévwr | [ai a|raity[ ce lis THv OhtAopE|v lov Tt Kuptaxde| ALO }ywe. Av O[ 7 Jep érralylpuva® mpood[e|pouevos | tHe éexmpaker xal [v]ro yépa Kat mp[o]s rolv ..].c]...-- top[o]v ca[lta] pnva petal jeutro- pLev Jos || [rods rpaxtopas o[tlaxpeive m[p jos rov e[é ole lov[r]|a brép [T]hs idi[a]s mpaxtwpi[a]s Aoyo[v] afi|t]lovule]va m[r]n- [plodbopet]v err. «....uT...05 | [d]petrdw Tol..... €lE avralv. "Err |eyope. [a ]ploltpém..... Ue twa Col. - / ddrov ypelar Snpocias evyipiabévtes | He bTaKovoey dpirovow fa) \ \ or xapol | amattobvts TwiDectar yarpnodpevor | éavTold]s yr elvas a , vmod tHv otpatnytay || undé[7]o Kata TO ica Tots évywptots / ] } ~/ t xX > 9 > \ 5 mpaxtwpaw odetrewy totacbar Kav | érrityntos (?) avtol elvat Néyovtes | TO Goov OTL avTois Tas éextpdkers év|rrodi{Gover, >) lal \ \ lal ’ J @ \ Aor é rap S éviayod dé Kal ToAu@dow || avtictacOat Kai KaBoXov boot eicly | pb. SQ 5 20 Io 15 20 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Lal > “ / , ? / > A TotovTot év Tals AuTovpyiais péxps av|Oadias ér[s]yecpodow hOdvew ws | cali t]ots amd tod vopwod vrodiypa THs | atrecOlas Soke tly birotiPetar. ‘Eri ody || ovTws Ta Kupltaka Tpaypata évtro|diterar, Séopas, KUpLe, OVX OrLywV | éx TOUTOU KiVdUVEvO- f ae / & a \ sea Vie an {} pévov, éav | cot d0&nu, SvaraPetiv wept avtav Kal 0 av | doxima- [one|s orHoal, TOL TPOT@L Tpoa||épyer Oat avToi|s] déov éoTiv Els \ / \ ) / a / b] / To pyre | t[)]v araitnow Tov dnnocior éu|[708 |i[ Cleo Oar 7. . vakuptax[ am jpayplata.|...Klatpdcav....exfa]e...t.]..... Verso a b \ / / / \ x Tév is tas dnwoctas xpeias Katictavopéver | Kat un Bovro- “évOUS Omoiws Tois adXroLS TpalypaTiKois UTaKkovery StvacaL Tapactnoas | THs KpaTioTaL émicTpaTHywl, Os émlalvayKace || ’ \ \ / > na 2? a v D a iN avTovs Ta MpoonkovTa avTois éxterelv. | ("ETous) B Pappodh 6. From Coptus. The Alexandrians were exempt from ywpuxat NevToupylat (no. 165). It is evident that Romans resident in Egypt were also freed from similar liturgies, and their privileged position led these two classes to claim exemption from the imperial liturgies as well. Apparently Ptolemaeus was unable to compel them to undertake the duty of collecting the taxes due to the imperial fiscus, and their disobedience was demoralizing to the discipline of the nome. The prefect instructed the strategus to send the names of those nominated to liturgies to the epistrategus, who will compel them to discharge their duties. The only evidence for a Roman citizen discharging a liturgy in Egypt is found in BGU. 1062. In this case, however, he takes over the collection of a tax as a business contract from the holder of the liturgy. In P. Fror. 57 an Alexan- drian owning property in Hermopolis claims immunity on the ground of his age and not on the basis of his Alexandrian origin. His petition is dated in 223-225, or later than the edict of Cara- calla, and it is probable that the grant of Roman citizenship may have done away with the favored position which the Alexandrians held. The citizens of Antinoopolis, however, retained their privi- leges until later (Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 397 (A.D. 254). Cf. Wilcken, Grundziige, 345 f.). [ 522 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 174. DE IMMUNITATE MEDICORUM (140 p. Chr.) P. Fay. 106; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 395. Vinh ieee, vropyn ||ula]reouloly Zerx[ tywiov Mapxwvos émt||otpatnyou Kexporvle|ouévov [ets .. (€ros)] | “Avtwvir[o]v Tov Kuptov Dappot] Oz. . |, || “HAwodwpos etrev: Kéxpixelv.... | | atrodvaas. | Taiw. “Aovidias “Hrrodepa: ¢[rapy(ws) Aiy(Uarov)] | rapa Madp(xov) Ovarep[ié lov Tewérrov [iatpod]. | Tapa ta azrnyo- pevpéva ayO[els eis ére]|ltnpnow yelv]nua[tloypadoup[évor] | vTapxovT_av meélpt kopals Baxrx(iada)] | cat ‘Hdarotiada ris “Hpaxa[etdov] | wepidos tod ’Apouvolrou tletpae]|tet 75n ypovear év THe Xpletac] || rovovpevos éEnaOévnca [6rws(?)], | Kvpre, dOev a&i® cal Tov colthpal | édXehoai pe Kal Keredoas 7[dy pe] | atronvOnvat THS xpelas, drr[ws du]|vnOd éwavTov avaxtncalcbar allo TOv Kapatav, ovdéev S[é Sez.(?).] | Tov Kab ouotmp[ara] broraéa[t, ort] | TéXeov arrodvovtas Tév [NevToup]|yrav of THY iatpixny émiotn| unv] | wetaxerptfopuevor, war[elora [dé of Se]ll- Soxipacpmévot WaTrep Kaylo, iv] | & evepyernuévos. Acevtd[ yer]. From the Fayim. The petition of the physician Gemellus is directed to the prefect. Wilcken infers that the edict of Antoninus conferring immunity on a certain number of physicians in each town had not yet been promulgated (Dig. 27. 1. 6, 2; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 395), but Gemellus points out that he had been assigned to the liturgy contrary to law (rapa ta amnyopevpéva), and in ll. 29 ff. he adds that there is no need for him to submit copies of the law(?) that physicians, if registered (Sedoxtpacpévot), are absolutely exempt from liturgies (cf. P. Oxy. 40; Oertel, Die Liturgie, 391). It may be noted that the liturgy of guardian of the confiscated lands was held by Gemellus for four years instead of one, which was apparently the period of tenure of liturgies in other parts of the empire, and that the liturgy had cost him the loss of his personal fortune (¢€no@évnoa). For a general sketch of the classes which enjoyed immunity, cf. Jouguet, Ve munic. 98 ff. [ 523 ] On Io T5 2 ° n Io DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 175. EDICTUM M. SEMPRONI LIBERALIS, PRAEFECTI AEGYPTI (154 p. Chr.) BGU. 372; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 19. Col. 1 [Ma@]pxos [Seumpavios] AvBep[aXe]s errap[yos] | Adyuar[rou Neyer. | LlurvOavop[at tas] dia tHv yevouévnv dva|yvéperav [r]o[v] ..... [tiv] otxelav ar[onre]Aoutrévat adrally.ec(?) Ta TPOT| ss vie 6 |rropifovras, érépous Sé AtToup|[yela]s Tevas é[Kdv- yovtas] dia tHv [T]oTe wept av|tovs acbéveray év adrodarhe Ere kal vov Statpei|Bew hoBw. tév yevouévov tapavtixa mpol- yela]ldav. Lporpé[aropas] ody mavtas érav[erO]eiv || emi ra loca Kat Toly pev mlp@rov Kal péycot[ov] | x[La]pmov ths eve- t[nplas Klal THs ToD Kupiov nueov | A[VTo]Kparopos Tept TavTas avOpa@trous Kn[de]|wovias amrodépecOas [kal] un avectiovs Kal do[t]|«[ov]s ei Eévns adda Gale. “I]va Sé robro podup[ or jel|po[v] kali] ndcolv wlolunloolow, t]otwoav [wlév tLo]v w...4 | 7... &x taut[ns] THs ait[ias é]te catexopevor alic]|OjcecOas tH[s] Tod pleyio]rov Avtoxpatopos ev[ple|v[et]as «at ypnlo]rorntos, é[re|tperovons Kal plnde|uiav mpos alv]tovs Syrnow éoec Oa, arra pnd[e] || pds tods ad[Ao]us Tods e[E] Hs SHarore aitias tro | tév otpatnlyov] mpoypadévtas: Kat tovtouvs yap | RILEY A katépy[ecBar] eis tlovs To]mous ... reliqui versus, maxime mutilt, omisst sunt. Col. 11 ...ouT@... O€ éxd[v]tas am[o]dpaou tovn|p[ov xJa[t] Anco[T]pe- xov Biov [é]rou[Eé]voes pwetyvuc|O[ac]. “Iva 8é ur) wovov tol vr Joss, andra [«]at éré[plors | radra pe wapawwely Kal rpaccew wabwor, || iotwoay, t[v] x[a]i tots Kpatioroi[s] éruotpatyyots | Kal Tots a[tlparnyots Kai rots me[u]pOeior vr’ éeulod] | wrpos thy THs Yopas doparciayv kai apepiuviav | orpatidtats TapHyyer[T ass Tas wev apyouevas | épodous x[w]Avew, Tpoopdvtas Kal mpo- arav||tévtas, Tas [6€ ylevopévas traplalutixa éridie|Kew xalt] tolvs] AnupGévtas er’ avt[o]d[wp]oe Kxalxovpyous pln]Sév Tepattépwm Ta év avTHe THe | AntoTelat yevo[u]évov éFeralev, ddnrots 5 THY To|Te Tpoypad[élvT@V ovydlover Kal év THe oil|cetar THe yew[py tat mpocKxaptepodar pi évoyreiv. | Katepyé- [ $24. ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT [c]Owoav ody aplélpypvos cat goto | w[po]Oeopia [avrolis, é& ob ay TodT[o] pov To didtaly[ula év Exdlot]wr vowads tpoteOne, phves y.| ELaly dé tes [we]7a tv Tocavtny mov dirar|l6[p ]orriav [é]ml Eévns wravepevos havi, | ovtos ovKé[te] ws UoTTos, GANA WS oMoroyos | KaKkodpyos o[v]vAnuPOels mpds pe ava- meu|d[Onoe|rac. | ("Erovs) [t]n "Avtwvivov tod xupiov. || Ow8 a. 1. 16. Kaprepyé[o]$woar, in original copy. From the Fayim. This edict was issued after the revolt of the Egyptians in A.D. 153-154 had been crushed (Meyer, Kilo, 7 (1907), 124 f.). Some had left their homes because of the political upheaval, others had been driven forth because of the severity of the liturgies. The latter had been proscribed (srpoypadévtor), since they were liable to imprisonment (cf. no. 194). The document reveals the oppressiveness of the liturgies at this early period, since property-holders were abandoning their property and living in exile rather than face the burdens imposed upon them, cf. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 206 ff. 176. DE IMMUNITATE PATRIBUS ANTINOO- POLITANORUM CONCESSA (159 p. Chr.) Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bell. lett. 1905, 160 ff; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 28. "Avtiypa(pov) émurtoA(js) émiatpa(tnyov) OnBaisos. | Aidt0s Pavoteivos ctpa(tnyét) Aveor(oritov) | yaipe. | BuBridvov "AmoArAodavous ‘Opi((w))||avos onpiwoapevos teud|OAvai cor éxérevoa. “Emel | ody dynow matépa éavtov | dvta Taidwy "Avtwoirtxar | ka[t old ra [é]aixepadwa Tedodr||Ta KkexAnpoobat Kat ayvowlay tro Fewoxpatovs eis mpalxtopetav Ka[t laxpipd- [rw ]v | Kat vdv éridnunocarta...| mpds beépAwow Snpoctally kateaxjoO[ar..]toe...| xpelar. Dpdvticov, ei tadra [ob]|tws ” aren f YIP NS “4 fi fa) c/ éxyer, Kal’ & rapéer[o] | ép’ omotwy KexpicOa, 7[0d] | érepa ’ , 2 b] > A > \ / / > A / ovopwata avtT avrTov || ets THY ypéav Tréurva. | EppdcO(ai ce) evxo(uar). | (“Erous) «8 ’Avtwveivov Kaicapos | t[od] xuptov Ilayer 6. (525, )] mn La | Loa! N 10) , oO Nn Io 15 20 25 30 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT This document shows that parents of the settlers in Antinoopolis were exempt from the poll-tax and from liturgies which might be imposed on them in villages where they held property outside the limits of their native place (cf. nos. 170, 183). 177. DE IMMUNITATE VETERANORUM (172 p. Chr.) BGU. 180; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 396. mapa [Laliov ‘I[ov]A[tov ’AzoA]iva[pio]u ovfe]|tpavod ye[o]v- x[o]i[vros év] eeune Ka[pa]|vidc. [A]iatérax[ras, «]dpce, tod(s) oveTpal|vovs éyew peta t[nv amolAvow mevt[alllern ypo[vov avat[avoe|ws. Lapa 8) rav|rnv thy [SeJat[lal&w e[yo] éan- peaoOny | ule]ta Scetiav THs [amo]Avcews Kall] | alv]edoOnv kat émrn[ptalv eis NetToupyiay | Kal wéype TOD Sedpo [x]aTa TO és || év Necroupytas eiu[t] ddcareil wr las. | Tod rovovrov rav7[t] amnyopeu|uévou [€]ai trav év[y]wpiwy morAdt | mA€lov em” éuod cuvTnpetc Oat | dheirs Tod banpeTHcavtos Tov || Tocod[ Tov THs atpatetas xpovov. | Avorrep mpoadevryewy cor nvayKna|Onv dixatav dé[no]ev trocovpevos | Kai a&ta cuvtnphoal poe Tov THs | ava- TavacEews toov xpovey Kata (Ta) || Tept TovTou dvateTaypméva, iva duvndo@ | Kaayo t[|v err poe devay Tov idtav | motetcOat, a[y]- Op[ |rros mpeoBulrn]s kat | wovos tuyx[avlov, [klab tie toyne cou | eis del evyapsoro. Acevtvyet. || (2nd H.) Taios “IovAcos "Arrorsvaptos émrvdédax|xa. | (3rd H.) (Erous) iB" Meyelp «@. | (4th H.) Tou o[tpatn]y[ee] évtvy[e] nal ra a | mploonkolvra mounoes. || (5th H.) ’A[zddos]. From the Fayim. An edict of Octavian (Wilcken, Chresto- mathie, 462) and of Domitian (zbzd. 463) granted immunity to veterans apparently without restrictions. From the petition of Apolinarius we learn that veterans in Egypt at this period only enjoyed immunity for five years after their discharge. In his case, he had been beguiled into taking a liturgy two years after his release from the army and he had held it continuously without any vacatzo such as the natives had (Cod. F. 10. 41. 13 P. Guess. 59, where vacationes of three and seven years are recorded). ‘There is no [ 526 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT other evidence in any part of the empire for limitation of the period of immunity to five years. By an edict of Severus veterans were forever freed from all liturgies except those imposed upon their patrimony (Dig. 50. 5. 7). It is probable that Apolinarius, being a property-holder, enjoyed immunity from munera patrimoniorum for a period of five years. Under Severus this privilege was with- drawn (cf. pp. 106 f.). 178. DE MUNERIBUS SACERDOTUM (77 po Chr.) BGU. 194; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 84. Pralvei[w]e “AworA[A]@vios | “Apowvoeitov “Hpax(rctdov) wepioos | wapa ‘Hpd xapoypa(upatéws) Netrouv moreas. | Avi "Orrews *Evotvrrews xr[p]oO(évtos) || ex THs TOV evoxnpover ypadis | els mpaxtopiay apyupixay THs Kduns | yvwobérvTos poe eivat lepéws Tov dvTos | év THi Kaunt lepod Kal TOv NecTovpyLa@[r] | abeGévtwv, Kaba nkiwoay of ao THS Ke||uns avadeEdpevor éx cuveatabécews tas | NevToupyetas émuBadrovcas avTois éxTe- Aéoewy, a[Klorovdws | THs TapaxoutoO[élvTe cor BiBrALdios p[ov] érl wro|ypadns Tov Kpatiatou émictpa(THyou), we éviepset|- AnemTar avtiyp(ada) émictorAay Svo, pevds pev || Seovrios "AckAnTiadotas, THY Oé étTépay cod, | KaP ds avi Erépov lepéws atrodvbévro(s) | &repou eis KAHpov mewPOévTos exAn|pdOncar, Kal TOD éx cuvKaTabécews THY | aro [T]As KwOuNS yevouévou emi Ilotdpevos || otpatnyjoavtos vrouvnpaticpov didmpes | Tovs itroyeyp(aupevous) dvTos evmropous Kal éri|tndelous treupOn- couévous eis KAHpov Tat | Kpatiotas éerioTp(aTnyws). Hil dé: Lapatiwv Kar...v A, | Arooxopos NetA(ov) émtxand(oupévov) A O[....] A> |] (Erous) tn’ 0 ’“A@vp al . 1. 17. weupbevros=reupbertes. l. 21. dvros=6vras. From the Fayim. Rostowzew (G.G.4. 1909, 639 ff.) has pointed out that, under the Roman administration, the privileges of the priestly hierarchy were steadily reduced. From this docu- ment we learn that the priests were subject to certain liturgies, but they had made a private agreement with the village-officials of Neilopolis whereby the latter had consented to release them from [S270 Io 15 20 25 Io 20 30 35 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT certain burdens. The terms of the agreement are not stated, but we must assume that the priests had secured it by offering some form of compensation. Opeus had been included in the annual list of citizens submitted for the collection of tribute, and when the appointment had been made by the usual method his name had been drawn for the office. The matter was brought to the attention of the village-scribe, who wrote this letter to the strategus, notifying him of the error and submitting the names of two other men having an annual income of a thousand drachmae, one of whom was to be chosen by lot for the post vacated by Opeus. On the liturgy Tpaxtopia apyupixer, cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie, 195 ff, and for the immunity of priests, cf. zbid. 392, n. 3; Otto, Priester und Tempel, 2, 250 ff. 179. DE IMMUNITATE MULIERUM (ca. 180 p. Chr.) P. Teb. 327; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 394. [Ov]etriw: Tov[pSov]e tas | xpatiotras [é]riotpat[ynyar] | mapa Kpovodto[s] Zwid[ov] | t[o]é Herecotyou amd cons || [Te]8tivews Horéuwvos | we[pidos] tod “Ap[o]uvoeitov. | "Ere Tddat, KUpLE, TOD Tpoyeypam|uévou you TaTpos avado|OévTos eis emiTnpnow yell[v]nuatoypadou|ué]vev | [v]rapyovtwy cat peta tov | [@]piouévoy ypdvov ths | [é]aetnpnoews TeTeXevTy|KOTOS am[opouv] unde év xal\raXeit[ovto]s éte atro Tod | Tprcxardexatou Erous | Geod Avpnriov “Avtaviv[ou] | avty ExtoTe ov SeovTas | atvrattoduale] ta brép Tay || Urapyov[T@]v TeXovpeva | Snuocca. [Ke]xerevopevou | ody, xvpre, y[u]vatxas adet|oP@ar tay [010 |v- tov xpecov | avayxaiels] [yluv% otca a8on||Ontos mo[AXo lis éreot BeBalonuévy [xat] cuvduvedouca | dca todt[ 0 Kat jaXelreu tv | [é]diav [eri cé] catadevyw | [a€voidca ce x jenedoas Sn || [Ta €v ovowjate Tod matpos|......... OjvaceisTnv|.......-. y cai emt Gov |[7........ Jous ypovou ov|........ sevou Tots ev || ait) TL ape e. Atevtiyes. | (2nd H.) (“Erous) [.... M]ecopy) «. | Mnédevos [érre]yowévou | tau orpat[ny]ar évtvye. | (3rd H.) “Amrddos. From the Fayim. The father of the petitioner had been appointed to the post of superintendent of confiscated property, and in the [ 528 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT discharge of this liturgy his fortune had been seriously impaired. His daughter Cronous, as his heiress, complained to the epistrategus that continual demands had been made upon her since her father’s death for moneys to be paid in connection with this liturgy. It is not clear whether she was actually holding the liturgy, or whether these sums were exacted from her estate as obligations which her father had not fulfilled before his death. For the liability of heirs, cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 278, where the estate of a decaprotus is certainly liable for the obligations of the holder of the liturgy (cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie, 374, n. 4). It is probable that Cronous was purposely obscuring the issue in her petition, and that she was not actually discharging the liturgy, since she claimed that there was an edict which forbade the assignment of such liturgies to women. Women, however, were not exempt from munera patrimoniorum (Goda Frito. 4279} :10..64.1): 180. DE FUGA EORUM QUI MUNERIBUS OBNOXII SUNT (186 p. Chr.) P. Geneva, 37; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 4.00. "Arrod\roTa otpa(tnyot) “Apat(voitov) “Hpax(reidov) | pepi- dos | rapa Swrnpivov Ywrtov Kal Trav | Nour(Ov) mpecB(vtépav) dcadexo(uévov) Kal Ta Kata THY || K@poypa(upaTetav) Ko(~wNS) 5 Loxvor(aiov) Nycov. | ’Avti Tptidevos Leumpwviov | [x]at Tlaovftis Uexatos cat Ivedepato(s) | Sdrov Kal ‘Aprrancews ‘Apraydou | [r]av 8 €[v] A[j]owe mpax(ropias) apyups(kdy) || [T]hs mpoxes(uévns) Ka(uns) wn patvopévwr | didouev Tovs brro- 10 yeypa(umévous) dvTas evird|pous Kat émuTndetous, TeupOnaope- vous | eis KAHpov TAL KpatloTas emiotpa(THywL). | Eiot dé: || Sdrvpos “AckAntidbov éxa(v) two(pov) (Spaypov) 15 YSdtas Vdrtov émixar(ovpevos) ActapE o(uoiws dpaypyov) w IlaBods laBodros opoiws (Spayxuav) vv Lrotrontis YwTov rAakos o(wolws Spaypav) (and H.) Swrnpuyos (érav) v’ oddA(7)) weT@7(w2) || é& aptot(epov) 20 (ist H.) (“Erovs) es’ Mdpxov Avpndtov Koupodov ’Avtwvivov Kaicapos tod Kup(tov). ‘Ezreid xs’. AMA [ 529. ] 34 32 35 40 ‘DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT From the Fayim. This document reveals the great distress caused by the imposition of liturgies. Four men, chosen by lot for the collection of taxes in the village of Socnopaei Nesus, had fled to escape the liturgy. The village-elders submitted the names of four others to be sent to the epistrategus. It may be noted that no choice by lot is possible, and it is probable that the elders were unable to submit enough names to permit a choice (cf. pp. 112 ff; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rém. Kol. 206 ff.; nos. 189, 194). 181. DE NOMINATIONE MAGISTRATUUM (192 p. Chr.) P. Ryl. 77, Ml. 32-52. Kal avtiy[padov viro|uvnpwatos: wel..... 6 |woota Tpos TOL Bl npate] wapovtwy tally évap|ywv Aiov yup[vlactapyov Avo- vuotou|[To]d cal... vOeou éEnyntov, Orvp[ m0 |Sépou rpodixou, “AmoA[A@v]i[o]u ‘HpaxrXarodAdwr[os yu]uvacrapy(joavtos) Kat "Ayirl[rAéws] Kopynrdiov, tév mlaplectotwy amo Tis Toews éripwvy|[aolavtav: ctepécOw 'Ayirrevs Koopnteiav* uLod TOV ma[tlépa tov diroripov Tov [ylépovta Para. “Ayirre[d]s eitrev: TELOOMEVOS THL EMAUTOD TAaTpios ETLdéevomat oTEpal|[ vy ]popov éEn- ynTelay emi THL ETHOLA Eiodépety pe TadXaVTA bV0 Kal aTaNda- ynvae emiTnpnoews ScautaOovupévns ys. OdXuptrodwpos eiz(ev): 1) TUN TOD KUpiou Nudv | Ad[to]KpaTtopos apOdvas apyals] Tapéexer Kal THS TOA(ews) avEavelt] Ta Tpdypata, Ti T OvK HuEedrev Ertl THL eTrappobveitas nyewoviat Aapxiov Méuopos; Ei pév obv o "Ayirrevs | BovrAcTas ctehavwlhvar cEnyntetav, eioeveyKaT@ TO iontnpsov évreder, et S€ uy, (ovx) TTOV EavTOV EXELpoTOVnG EDV eis THY KaTETELyovcaV adpynyv KoounTetlav. “AytAXEds elm(ev): éyo avedcEaunv éEnyntetay éml tat Kat étos dvo TaXavTa elodépety, ov yap Svvapat Koopntetav. ‘Oduptriddwpos eizr(ev): avabeEauevos | tHv pelCova apynv ovK odethes THY éXNaATTOV atogpevyetv. “Appoviwy Atooxdpov trotuyav eim(ev)* tacns THs everTMONS ETUYE we 0 AYiAXrEvS Kal a’Ta TadTa || aopanré- copat bia TOV COV UTOMYNU“ATOD OTL Kal EVTUYYaVw TML NATTPO- TATML HYyEwovL Tept THS UBpews. “AytAdAEdVs elm (ev)* oUTE ETUYra avtov ote UBpica. | aparriwv o cal “AroAdA@vi0s oTp(aTnyos) elm(ev)* & ev elpnKkate yéyparrTat, weTaTrE“POnocovTas 5€é Kal of [58074 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Kocpntal wa ért mapodar avtois avta tadta elmnte. Mer orlyov | mpos tHe Kascapeiws Aroyévns nal AvocKopos Kat (of) ody avTois Koopntat mpoeNOortes TapovTos TOD Ayidréws Sia Tod évds avtav, Acoyévns eitr(ev): éudOopev tov “Axir|réa mpoBaromevoy éavTov eis é&ny(nTelav) aTrovTwy uav, TOUTO dé ovK é&fv, 0 yap Oevtatos “Avtwvivos Sia (da)Taypatos éxédevoev put) Tuyywpicbas dvev Tpid@v émidoy|xwv eis eEny(y- Telav)* TOAN@Y OdV éTrLAOyXoV (GvTwV) OpeireEL Els THY KaTETTEL- yo[voaly apxnv rapaBaivery, as dvayvdcopat cou TO didtaypa. Kat dvayvovtos avtiypa(dov) dvataypatos || Mapxov Avpnriov "Avrwvivov Kaicapos, “Aomidas tmatnp “Epua xoopnt[elv- (cavtos) wapav eir(ev)* idiws Kivdtvwr ctépw TOV AxirAréa THY Koopntelav. "Odrvptriddwpos eim(ev): | Exouev 57 havnv tod "Aomr16a 6Te (dias Kivdvvar avTov oréper. Kali] operas orepjvat, non yap 1) apxn adtaTTwTos éotiv THe TOA(EL). ‘O otpa(Tnyds) elm(ev)* Ta eipnuéva vropynuaticOh|var. “Avéyvav. Kat érépou emTLTTaApMAaTOS TO avTiypa(pov). “Apxov[tles “Epuod mod(ews) THS peyar(ns) Zapariove To. kal “AtroAXNovio. otpa(Tnyar) “Epporon (trou) TOL pid(rarot) Xaiperv. | "Ayirreds Neapxidou Tov Kat Kopyndiou ayopavopnaavros dry opevos [eles KoopnTetay UTO TLVOV KOTUNTaV UTréaxeTO emt cov éEny(nTevcev). “Hyav dé mpotpevopélvov avtov avadéEacOat Thy Koounteiav Sia TO fn TodXovs Exety THY TOA(LY) KOTUNTAS TAELOVOY OVTw@Y éTTI- Loyxav éEnyntav Aomidas Tatnp ‘Epya||koountevocavtos éare- vrev avTov (Oiws Kwdvvat THY Koo unt (Elav), KaOa Ov UTO“YnLaTwv gov aveiAnuTrrar. Ths ody apyns THe TON (EL) adtaTTT@TOV OVENS é& omroté|pou avtav émictédAETAal Gor OTwS aKodOVOa Tots ert cov ryevopevors Tpovoncar mpakéat, eis TO THY TOAW aTroNaPBetv THY apxKny. ¢ ‘Etovs) AB PappodOe uy. “Trréypatpar) | é&nyntys Kal yupvaciapyxos. From Hermopolis. The first part of this Blonent which we have omitted from our text, apparently dealt with a recalcitrant nominee to public office, but the fragmentary character of the papyrus makes it impossible to determine whether it treated of the nomination of Achilleus, or whether it cited precedents dealing with his case (cf. no. 183). It is probable that the two cases were not related. That part of the text which we have included in this ies ht 34-2 45 50 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT collection is our most important source of information on the obscure subject of appointments to public office in the Egyptian metropolis prior to the establishment of the municipal organization. ‘The problems which are presented in this document are discussed by the editors of the Rylands papyri in their commentary, by Jouguet (Rev. d. ét. grec. 30 (1917), 294 ff.), by Méautis (Hermoupolis-la- Grande, 118 ff), and by Van Groningen (Mnemosyne, 51 (1923), 421 ff). Achilleus, a wealthy citizen of Hermopolis, was nominated by the board of cosmetae to a vacancy in the college. The strategus was notified, and on a stated day certain officials of the metropolis, a group of citizens, and Achilleus appeared at the tribunal of the governor. When the citizens by their acclamations signified their approval of the candidate, Achilleus sought to evade the office by making a counter-proposal, offering to accept the position of exegete, to which he would contribute two talents annually if he were released from the liturgy of superintending lands under lease. Olympiodorus, the advocate of Hermopolis, protested against the action of Achilleus, claiming that, if the latter were permitted to enter the higher office, he should pay the entrance fee which was apparently exacted from those who entered the more advanced positions without going through the regular cursus (if this is the proper interpretation of évted@ev). Olympiodorus added that Achilleus, by offering himself for exegete, could not decline the lower office where there was greater need for his services. When Achilleus persisted in his refusal on the plea that he was unable to bear the expense of the office, the strategus summoned the board of cosmetae to the hearing. They refused to withdraw their nomina- tion, and when they heard of the counter-proposal of Achilleus, they cited a decree of the emperor Antoninus to the effect that, when there were sufficient members in a higher office, a candidate should accept office in a magistracy where the board was weaker in numbers and where his services were more urgently required. At this point Aspidas, father of Hermas who was an ex-cosmete, in- tervened by offering himself as guarantor for Achilleus. This ended the proceedings before the strategus at this time. Apparently an interval was allowed Achilleus in case he wished to appeal. When he Wares 0 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT took no action, the board of archons wrote to the strategus to take the proper steps to have the nomination and appointment of Achilleus or his surety confirmed. A copy of this letter was in- cluded in the minutes along with the records bearing on the hearing before the strategus. It may be noted that the strategus crowns the candidate for the gymnasiarchy at Elephantine (Wilcken, Chresto- mathie, 4). The edict of Antoninus is important as there is no record of a similar law elsewhere. Unfortunately it is cited so concisely that its meaning is not absolutely certain, and the word ézidoyxous appears nowhere else in this connection and its interpretation is obscure. Apparently there were two classes of members in the various colleges of the official cursus. Of these, one is known as évapyxou or ctehavynddpot, who are actively engaged in the duties of the office. The term ézriXoyxou is apparently applied to super- numeraries of an honorary character who share the expenses of the office with the working members of the board. It is probable that wealthy and patriotic citizens were willing to share the burdens in return for the glory of enjoying the distinction of a title, and if there were a large number of such honorary members the expenses of the magistracy would be considerably lightened. Naturally there would be a desire to enter the higher offices, and apparently there was a high entrance fee exacted as a summa honoraria, The edict of Antoninus provided a remedy for those communities where some boards were excessively large, while others suffered from a lack of regular candidates. If we understand the law aright, it provided that a citizen could voluntarily present himself for membership in a board if not more than three supernumeraries were already attached to that office. If there were four or more, the candidate should accept membership in that board where his services were required and where the burdens were disproportionately severe because they were distributed among a smaller number. 3 The procedure in nominating a cosmete or exegete in Hermopolis at this period may be thus summarized. A suitable candidate is coopted by the existing college and the nomination is sent to the board of archons who transmit it to the strategus. On a day ap- pointed there appear before the tribunal of the strategus representa- [ 533 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT tives of the college of archons, citizens of Hermopolis, and the nominee. Van Groningen (/oc. cit.) believes that the presence of the citizens indicates that the imperial government gave them a fictitious show of power in the election of magistrates, but we are inclined to believe that they had no formal or official: purpose in being present at the tribunal. When the citizens signified their approval of the candidate, he might signify his acceptance at once. In that case the strategus transmitted the notice of nomination and acceptance to his superior, the epistrategus, who makes the formal appointment, or instructs the strategus to do so. If, however, the candidate refused the nomination, the board which made the nomination was summoned. In the case of Achilleus, the cosmetae defend their action. The nominee might now appeal to the epistra- tegus or prefect on the ground of some illegality, or he might offer to surrender his property to his nominators, who would administer it for the term of appointment and discharge the’ expenses of the office from the revenue of the estate, possibly reserving a certain proportion of the income for the owner (cf. nos. 185, 198). Before Achilleus could act in either way, Aspidas offered to crown him as cosmete, thereby presenting himself as guarantor for Achilleus and liable to the obligations of the office in case Achilleus defaulted for any reason. According to law Achilleus became a cosmete-elect, and when the legal period for appeal had expired without any further action on his part the officials of the metropolis request the strategus to take the proper steps to confirm the appointment. It may be noted that, while the board of cosmetae makes the nomination, it is not responsible at this period for the obligations of the nominee, for these are voluntarily undertaken by Aspidas, who is a private citizen. Van Groningen advances the plausible theory that he offered himself as surety in order to relieve his son (who, however, is called ex-cosmete) from the burdens of office by ensuring the addition of another wealthy member to the board. If this is the case, it is possible that the board was responsible for their nominee and only escaped by the action of Aspidas. Van Gronin- gen’s theory leads to the further implication that the separate boards were constituted by acting members, honorary members, and ex- members who had not yet advanced to a higher grade in the cursus, [ 534 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT since Aspidas acts to relieve his son, Hermas, who is still an ex- cosmete, and, therefore, still liable for his share as a member of the college. It is clear that there were more than one in the membership of the boards of cosmetae and exegetae, and that the cost of these offices to the incumbents was very great. Achilleus voluntarily offered two talents as his share in the college of exegetae and sought to escape the lower office because of the greater expense, Since he offered this sum as an annual contribution, it may be in- ferred that the office was held for more than a year at a time, unless we accept Van Groningen’s theory that ex-officials remained as members of the board until they entered the higher grade. This document furnishes conclusive evidence that a citizen could hold a higher magistracy without having filled the lower (cf. pp. 85 ff). Voluntary candidacy for office was probably not un- usual (cf. Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 38), but the abuse of such can- didacy, which we may infer from the edict of Antoninus, is a new and curious phase of ancient municipal history. Incidentally the law could not have been issued unless public liturgies had become so burdensome that the wealthy class had sought this method of escape. For the office of cosmete, cf. Oertel, Die Liturgie, 329 ff. 182. DE MUNERIBUS VICANORUM (194 p. Chr.) BGU. 15, col. 1; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 393. "EE vrropynpaticpav “lovAiov Kouwrtiavod tod Kxpatictov | émistpatnyou érouvs devtépov Aoveiov | Semtipiov Yeounpov Ileptetvaxos LeBactod Mecopy B+ MeO (étepa). | KrAnOévtos an >) / Ara we / ef 2. Ilexdows Amrvyyews kai vrraxovoartos A:adén||\pos pytep eitrev. "Eav cou S0xnjt, cadecov Tov THs NetXov | wows KwMoypaypmartéa, e oe rf > aA / \ Se / >] 7 Ol 0 nueTEpos evKanrel, Krn|OévTos Kal wy Vraxovaavtos Aptepi- dwpos eim[e]v. | Kapoypapparéa ovx eye » Neidov modus, dAda mpeaButépous | Svadexopévous. Aradeddos pytwp eimev. Kexé- NevoTat VT || TOV KATA KaLpoY HYyEMoVwY ExacToYV is THY EaUTOD / \ \ > , ” /, > By / Ko|unv Kal wn am adds KOuNS els GAXNV petadaipecOar. | "Ort viv Kwpmoypapparers émnpedfer Tat acuvvnyopou|pulélvas, GvEOWKEY AUTOV TPAKTOPA apyupLKaV THs idias | Kopns els GAAHV Nertoupyeiav. “A€sol avayewookwv ta xel|kehevopéva pn adér- BOs Saio Io 15 On Io 15 20 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT a / KecOat amo ths idias eis adAoTpiav. | Kowvtiveavos eltrev. Stparnyos Starjuerat, 6 TOY éuav | wep@v KaTardBnraL, ér’ éue avatréurrev. From the Fayfim. In this document the procedure in cases of appeals from liturgies is shown. The appeal is heard before the epistrategus. The strategus is present, and the village-scribe is summoned to defend his nomination. Pekysis has an advocate, Diadelphus. The advocate cites a law, which he says had been regularly proclaimed by the prefects, to the effect that villagers should not be drawn from one village to another, but should remain in their own community. Wilcken points out that the law was imperfectly expressed, because there is no objection to a villager performing a liturgy in another district where he happens to have some property, but when he has already been assigned to a liturgy in his native village, he cannot be called upon to perform a liturgy in another district at the same time (Dig. 50. I. 17, 4). Cf. P. Giess. 58. 183. DE IMMUNITATE ANTINOOPOLITANORUM (196 p. Chr.) BGU. 1022; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 29. The kpatiorne Bovrre ’Avtwoéwv | Néwv “EXAnvor | rapa Aovxiov Ovarepiov Aouvxpy|tiavod Matiseiov tod Kat Wdorte- villov cat A[ouxio]u Aoyyetvou “Epevviov | HavrAeviov tod Kal Meyarerciov. Ov« al[y]voeire, avdpes xpdtictot, OTe Twacar | [Aev]roupy.a[v] ad((@))etOnuev Tov adrayod | [KaT]a Statakw Beod “Adpiavod (Tod) Kat otxiotod || [Tt ]}ijs uerépals 70 ]ALe Jos. "Exel ody yevope|[vole [e]is PecraldJerdiav x[@]unv tod ’Apou- vo|[et]tLo]u ths [[Hpa ]eretdou wepisos, évOa yeou|[ yoliuev, éx[t] Ths StopO[ aa lews Snufooliov |..... NOTwY, 0 THs mpox[er]uévns couns || [kouloypaypateds “Adpodds Oéwvos kat érn|[pralv érédmxev nuas emt THS KaTaywyNs | TOD celTOU Tapa Ta SLaTe- Taypéva, KATA TO avay|[ Kato |v, Kvptoe, [T]7v mpdcodo[v] mpos bmas tov|[ov]uev akvodvtes, éav byiv S0&ni, avellveyxety Ta. Kpatiorw. émurtpatnywt | Kadzrovpvims Koveéoows: repli tovtou, Omws | KaTa Ta UdpxovTa nuiy dixata Kedevoas | Erép[olus [essen DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT av? hav Katactabjvat Kal | A\oyov avtov UToayely T@V TETON- Kenpuellvov Kat eis TO mépav émKpedatous (sic) pudralyOjvar. (2nd H.) Avev[ru]yeire. ("Erovs) 8 Avtoxpatopos | Kaicapos Aovkiov Xearrejuiolvy | Lelouxnpov EvoeBods Lleptivaxos | YeBacrod ’ApaBix(od) “ASiaBnvix[(od) Mea]opy «. (3rd H.) Aovxzos || [O]varépios A[o]ux[p]ntiavos érridédoxa | cat éypawa uTrép ‘Epevviov ur [et ]Soto0s | yoa[upalra. From Antinoopolis. This appeal of citizens of Antinoopolis is of interest because of its mode of procedure. It is directed to the senate of their native city with the request that this body transmit their appeal to the epistrategus. Ordinarily an appeal was forwarded directly to the epistrategus. For the immunity enjoyed by the Antinoopolitans, cf. nos. 170, 176; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 397. 184. DE CONNUBIO ANTINOOPOLITANORUM ET AEGYPTORUM (saec. 11 p. Chr.) Compt. rend. de Pacad. d. inscr. et bell. lett. 1905, 160 ff.; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 27. Ki tots avayvwa Oetat Wndio|ualo]s brevavtiov Ti éotw Kalra , A \ / > \ ¢ / ? \ \ 4 vopov 7 Kata diatakwv. | Efi ya] varevavtiov éotiy 76 || walpa]- Sevypa ovK toyupov, tpolkpeilvlovtas yap mavtos ovTivoa|odv e / \ 4 . / > / \ ot voor Kal dvatdéers. | “Epuddwpos Kituyxidous Bou|Xeutis eirev. “Avayvocbé||trw 1) Statakis Lpoxdrov. *AvalyvooGel- a(ns) “Emi tod 6 (érous) Geod | Aidtov ’Avt[@]veivov ‘APdp Ka.” Nel|pectov “Appwviov Bovrev|[rs] edev. Ilept tovtov as é0||Ee[v], mpocdwrncdtw nuetv | 0 mputavixos. Aovxtos > / \ Ss ¢ > / O77 e ral Atrorwva|pios mputavixes elev. “H émrelyauia €d00n a)metv mpos | Adyur[ti]ou[s] car’ éEaiperov || bird Tod Oeod ‘ASdpiavod, nv\mep ((ov)) ove &éyovoe Navxpa((rt))|Telrat, wy Tots vopous xpa@|ueOa, kal Ta Tepl THs érruyalulas Tad avayevacke. || Kai dvayvovtos peta thv ((a))|avayvoow. ~Aptotaios Bov- ((re[v]))|AeuTHs elzrev. Todro ovy amalE évy...... KeKeL- pntat, | adAa Kal mrcovaxis, (di|los ex[plere[v] ucv tae | “EAAnvix[ Gt AO(?) you. “HOEAn|oa....v mepitpomny elt. veer. era Ke ars 7] [LEU a te Bistey ct! 25 30 20 25 30 Io T5 20 25 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT From this document we learn that Antinoopolis received the same code of laws as Naucratis on the occasion of its foundation by Hadrian. The Antinoopolitans, however, enjoyed the rights of intermarriage with citizens of other Egyptian towns—a privilege which the people of Naucratis did not possess. It is evident that the former city had a senate and prytanies of a form usual in other Greek cities. 185. DE MUNERE EORUM QUI VECTIGALIA EXIGUNT (200 p. Chr.?) P. Oxy. 1405. avert eh hae p.... mwapeyop[n|oas .......] evdnrov éotuv pn tot | [Tapet]os juov thy Tapaxywpnow | [yevéo |Oas adra TOL els THY RevToupyiay || ....mévml, bs avartaBav cod ta | urdpxo[tja ro Aoulrov Tov ..]ro...u|TeKo[ Dd] mapéEe Kal THY AeLTOUpyiav atro|TAnpwceEL. TO yap Tametov Huav | TOV ToLoUTMY Tapaxywpnoewy || ovK éepetetar. “H O€ érreTespia cov é|x TovTov ovdév BrXAaBNoeTAaL, ovdE eis TO | THua UBpercOnoer. IIpoeréOn ev "AreEav|Spetar n’ (tous) Dappod™. | Atpnriwt Aewvidnt otpa(tnyar) ‘Ofvpuyx(irov) || mapa Aip- iov Yreddvou “ArpHtos py|tpos Tacop[a]mi[os] amo Kopns Luyxéda. | The everrdone nuépar Euabov avtwvo|udcbar pe vd Avpnriov “Amoitos Ilatatos | untpds Anuntpodtos amo Tis avThs Kl @]||uns efs mpaxtopeiayv apyupixav Kopl yn ||TiKOY AnL- paTav THS avTHS Luynéha Tov | évertatos x (érouvs) ws evTopov kab émitn|Secov. Ouvx ava Adyar ody ovSEé pds [7T0(?)] | wépos THS NetToupyias, GAN €Evotavopevo| ¢ | || avTd Kata) THY TpoKeLpévny Geiav | [drataEw] dnf[A]O Eveww pe wopov émi &......... From Oxyrhynchus. The first part of this document appears to be an edict of the prefect issued in answer to an appeal from an Egyptian who offered to cede his property to the imperial fiscus for the year in lieu of his performing a liturgy to which he had been nominated. The prefect states that the government does not administer such estates, but that it goes to the man who nominated him for the office, and he administers the estate and defrays the expenses of the liturgy from the revenue. The recipient of this rescript is guaranteed against loss of status and corporal punishment. Ls B8) DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Unfortunately the document is badly mutilated and almost un- decipherable in ll. 5—6 (cf. commentary of Grenfell-Hunt, Joc. cit.), and the exact details of the law cannot be determined. It is evident, however, that liturgies as well as magistracies could be avoided in Egypt by appealing to the prefect with an offer to cede one’s property to the nominator. If we read [deyo]|uévar in 1. 5 (although the editors, who proposed [Sedo]wévar, note that the traces of the first letter do not suit this reading), we may have proof of the existence of a form of avridocus or exchange of properties similar to the earlier Athenian custom. In this connection a rescript of Antoninus may be cited (Cod. F. 10, 67. 1), which instructs a certain Basilides to plead his case (before the governor), if he thinks that some one else is more capable of performing the liturgy. Cf. no. 181, where there is, apparently, reference to a similar cession of an estate to avoid a liturgy or magistracy. Cf. Mitteis, Chresto- mathte, 375, for a copy of the edict dealing with this question, and no. 198, where, in a later period, the law appears to require that, in cases where the estate is surrendered by a nominee to the nominators, two-thirds of the revenue may be devoted to the expense of the magistracy, and the remainder is returned to the owner. The second part of the document is an appeal from a villager to the strategus. He had been nominated to the office of tax-collector _ of the village by his predecessor in that office as a suitable candidate and financially able to support the liturgy. Stephanus cites the proclamation of the prefect and offers to cede his property on the same terms as expressed in the edict on the ground, apparently, that his income is insufficient. The document is important because the method of nomination is different from the earlier practice, whereby nominations were made by the comarchs or other village-officials who sent a list of candidates to the strategus, and he in turn for- warded it to the epistrategus who selected the candidates by lot. We also learn that the villager sent his appeal to the strategus, although in the first document which he had cited the appeal was apparently forwarded to the prefect. Cf. pp. 99 ff- The document is dated in the eighth year of some emperor and the editors assign it to A.D. 200. It is contemporary with no, 188, [ 539 | IO T5 20 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT which must belong to the period after the introduction of the municipal organization and it is possible that both documents may belong to a later period, either to the eighth year of Alexander Severus or of Gallienus. Cf. Wilcken, Archiv, 6 (1920), 420 f. 186. DE VICIS DEMINUENDIS (ca. 200 p. Chr.) Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 8; Festschrift Hirschfeld, 125. PAP aa OG y(vovTat)). line see wtb (Spaxpat) wOFG y(ar«Kods) | eloa[v.]. 8..... (Spaypat) XO, y(lvovrat) (Spaypal) mnFG x(arxovs), || T.ay..., éb Hs 0 Kwpoypa(upareds) €dnd(woer) tovs | ém’ avtns advaypa(dhopévous) avdpas é« told] | mwreiorou éyNenNouTrévat, yeyovévat | yap THY KOuNV TO TdadaL, STE Ked[ d- Mara) | | dnow éorabn vd avtav [8t]||\SocOas, aro avdpav pKn, viv [dé] | carnvtnkévac eis wovous ..,| ad’ dv avaxeywpnKévat -e,| Kal ogelrAecy TO értBarrov | KoudicOAvac S| corx(noews) | || UTOKEL(EVOV) KwMoyp(aupmaTtelar) éb.. | AoylopMO.......--- ».|y(tverar) .. | eriotdtes hur.. (paypal) d..| wapava.r.. (TrUDOU) NGAOTEDAL ns || LEDs ae ert Boe, | rpo(cdtaypadopueva) (Spayywat) yp y(aAxol) y, | edodv..... Eb a8 The origin of this fragment of papyrus is unknown. While there are numerous documents in the third century and in the Byzantine period which portray the decline of village communities (Rostow- zew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 206 ff.), there are a few from the second century which reveal the same tendency (Wilcken, Festschrift Hirschfeld, 125 ff.). Wilcken connects the subject-matter of this document with the plague which was brought back from the Orient by the armies of Marcus and Verus. In BGU. 902, which apparently belongs to the same period, the village had decreased from eighty-five to ten. Here the original census had been one hundred and twenty-five, and of the remainder after the plague a number had deserted the village. The document is an appeal for a lightening of the taxes (cf. Wilcken, Joc. cit.). Cf. for similar documents of the same period, P.S.J. 101, 102, 105. [ 540 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 187, DE MUNERIBUS OXYRHYNCHI (201 p. Chr.) PP OxIASAS Lapariove THe Kal ‘Opiwve év[dp|yaxr | yupvacrdpyor Kata- Seovs THV HrL|kiav Sia Tod Kata Tatépa wdmov | ’Atiwvos yupvaciapynoartos, || Kal “AyiAdtwve évdpyws éEnynrhe | dia "AYARiwvos Tod Kal Lapatrap|uwvos viod cai diaboyxou, | Tapa Atoyévouvs Lapatriwvos Kai Aov|xiov “Epuiov, audorépov am "O£u||piyyov Torews, eicdobévtwy b|7d TOD THS TOAEwS Yypap- patéws | yvoune Tov Kolvod Tov apyovTwr | eis éerriuédecay émuskeuns Kal KkaltacKeuns “Adpiavdv Oepuar. || Aitovpeba ériuctanhnva. €x Tov | THs Toews Adyou eis TEeLUNY yel|vOv emt NOyou apyuplou TddavTa | Tpia, yi(veTar) Ary, OV NOyov Ta~oper | [as] déov éoriv. ("Erous) @ || A[v]roxparopwv Kaicdpor | Aovxiov Yertipiov Leounpov | EtceBods Leptivaxos ApaB.xod | "AdcaBnvixod UHapOtxod Meyiorov | xal Madpxov Avpnriov -Avtovivou || EiceBods LeBacrar [[xai | LovBAiov Serripiov Téra]] | Kaicapos XeBactod, Pappod&s. | (2nd H.) Acoyévns Lapar[t]wvos aitod|wa: ta tlo]d apyupiov tadrav||ra tpia ws mpokitat. (3rd H.?) Afov]|Kvos “Epytov cuvartodpat | ta Tod apyuplov Taravra tpia | a[s mpo]xras. From Oxyrhynchus. This document is our chief source of in- formation about the method of appointment to metropolitan litur- gies before the civic organization was introduced. ‘he names of candidates were given in (eiodo00évtwy) by the secretary of the metropolis after consultation with the council of archons (ef. pp. 27 ff; 99 ff). Itis probable that the lists were forwarded to the strategus and from his office to the epistrategus who made the appointments by lot as in the villages. In some cases, however, appeals were directed to the prefect, and he also received names of candidates for certain offices (cf. P. Amh. 64; P. Br. Mus. 1220, dated a.D. 202-207). [54-280] Io 15 20 25 30 Io T5 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 188. DE VECTIGALIBUS (ca. 202 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 890; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 280. Aovk«os Lertiptos Avpyrdcos | Sapariwv o cal ArroXwvaptos kal ws | xpnuatifm évapyos mpvtavs ths | “O€vpuyyertov movews Avpnriwt || Newvidne otparnyar tat prr|tatar yaipewy. | Tovs amrarteia[Oa]t wédrovtas ad’ ov | [6]p[eir]ovar rie wore] yopovvtwv | [eis dslaypadny tav éx Royou rs || [7oAE]os dvaypadouévav kal viv | [ypddouév] cor mpos TO pH éurrodil- [CecOar 7) \v elompakw tod iepwratov | [Tapeiov.] Eict 8é: Avpnarsor | [...-- kai ‘A]rrodd@vios kat Aowerreall[vos of tpets Slapariwvos tod cai |[......-s ayop |javouncavtos (Spaxpas) Uy NL si ye eee ur “Hp laxNas ovoparos ast. 0k ok + dis ae ce ane .QT From Oxyrhynchus. The prytanis of Oxryhynchus forwards to the strategus a list of citizens owing the city treasury. This was apparently a necessary preliminary to the proceedings about to be instituted against the defaulters. It would seem that the city paid a certain amount to the imperial treasury as tribute. There is no indication that the city council was liable for the deficiency at this period, but unfortunately we cannot determine where the liability would fall in case the proceedings against the defaulters failed. This document may have some bearing on the interpretation of no. 202. Cf. pp. 99 ff. The document is contemporary with no. 185, and therefore dates ca. A.D. 202, or immediately on the introduction of the municipal organization. ‘The unique character of the docu- ment is probably due to the fact that it comes from the transitional period. The strategus Aurelius Leonides served both before and after the reconstruction if this date is correct. It is, however, possible that he was in office ca. 230 (cf. no. 185, note) as he bears the name Aurelius in both periods. [ 542 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 189. EPISTULA IMPERATORIS SEPTIMI SEVERI AD AURELIUM HORIONEM (202 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 705, ll. 54-79; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 4.07. Adroxpatwp Kaicap Afolv«cos [Z]emrip[cos SJe[ou]fjpos || EiceS[7|s Heptivaé SeBacros ApaBixod AdiaBnuixos | TlapA- xov Meyio[tolu [«]at Avtoxpatwp Kaicap | Mapxo[s] Avpndtos ’"Avrwvivos EvaeBys LeRacros | AvpnrAtwr ‘Opetwv yaipew. | Arrodexopueba ce Kal TavTys THs érLdocews Hv || aEvois érrvoobvas Tais Képats TOV Ok€vpuyyertav | arrodidovs aporBnv éeveTHoEws. T[o] duocov 89 Kat | é[a]l tovtov gudrayOnoetar Kai Kador[e n]0éAncas apeltactpertov eis Erepov tu Oatravjo[ec]Oae THv yapw. | "Eotw 8é 4 akiwars. || Tots eveverrators Adtoxpa- tlolpce Selounp]ar cat “Avtaviver | tols mavtav avOpadrav cwThnpaww [Kat evepyerass | Avpydcos ‘Opeiwy yevdouevos otpa- tylylos Kat dpyidixac|tns ths Naulm|potatns ToAEws TOV "AreEavipéwy yaiperv. | Komal tives rod “O€upuyxeirou vopod, @® piravOpwrotal|ro. AvToxpatopes, év ais éyod Te (Kal) of vioi pov ywpia KexType|Oa, of[ 6 |dpa eEnoVevncay évoxrovpevat bd TOV Kat étos | NeLTOUpPYL@Y TOU TE Tapelov Kal THS Trapal > |v- [A]axhs THv | Tomwy, Kwwduvevovat TE TWL Mev TapEeiws TapaTro- ré|oOar, THY S€ twetépav ynv ayedpyntov KatariTreiv. || Evo [o]iv cai tod diAavOperov Kati Tov ypnotpov otoxalé| dpe |vos Bovrouat eis avaxtnow avtav éridociv | zt[wa] Bpayetav éxadoTnt tromaacbar eis cvvwvnv | x|wpilov, ob 1 mpdcodos KatateOnoetat eis Tpodas Kal | d[amd]lvas tav Kar eros NevToUp- YNTOVTOV ETL TOL eee ee eeeeees 1.78. x[¢prjov Grenfell-Hunt; x[wpijov Wilcken. From Oxyrhynchus. This is one of the few endowments known from Egypt, and is of interest because the consent of the emperors was obtained. The endowment was made to relieve villages in the region of Oxyrhynchus which had become impoverished because of the pressure of imperial liturgies. In]. 77 the expression cuvwyny is noteworthy, as it implies that Horion was contributing a certain sum to each village for the purchase of property whose income would be used to defray the expenses of the liturgies, and the remainder [ 543 ] 35 60 65 7O 75 Io DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT of the purchase price would be paid by the village. The endowment of a school at Como by Pliny was made along similar lines, and Horion apparently made his gift, actuated by the same motives as Pliny. 190. QUERELLAE VICANORUM CONTRA POSSESSORES (207 p. Chr.) Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 4284, ll. 1-17. Avovucias otp(atnyet) Apoww(olrov) ‘Hpaxd(eidov) peptd(os) | mapa ‘Eptéws XToTonTews pea Butépovu kat UaB8odros [Il jaBod- \ / > / pls / 4 \ [r]os untpos LeydOuos apyepodov Kat ‘Epséo[s Ua]etoews Kal ’ / ¢ f ob] / a \ a) Arbyxews “Opiwvos kai “Eootpews Llaovitntos | cai Anpua Anuaros Kai ‘Opcevovgews ‘Epte[ ws] cai Ilet[e]oovyou Yérovu Kai "“Opov pntpds Oatcatos cal Lwrnpixou amdtopos wntpds OepwovOews cal Ikdtos exd|cews cal Iatitos LataBodtos Kal IlaB8odros laBodtos cai Kavvetros Latitos cat Swra WaBodtos \ A lal x 4 / » Wee J , kal Ilaetros LataBodtos Kai Lexicews Verynovos cai Atrvyxews "Amvy||yews cai “ABodtos LataBodtos cai U[axtdloews “Epséws k[at] Iloygeiros Marairos xai Ilaxtoews ((Martaitos xa Ilaxtcews)) “Amvyyews cat Méravos Iakicews cal ’Aciletos Kav[ei]ros cat Amvyyews Lapariwvos tév Ke Kal TL @]v AouTrav Snpociwv yewpyov Kwuns Loxvorraiov Nyjcov. Oi Kvpsoe Huov Orotratot Kal ant tyros | AvToKpdtopes Leounpos Kab’ Avtwvetvos avateiravtes [é]v (Tht) éalv]ra@v Aiyirrra., we? bv TrEio(T)ov b] a > / > / \ \ > b) a f ayabev édwpycavto, nUéXncay Kai Tos év adAodaTrHL ScaTpi- Bovtas trav|tas Kattévar ets THY diay oixeiay ex KOYavTes Ta Biata [Kal dvlowa, kai Kata Tas lepds avtav év[Kerev]oess KateconrAOapev. “Eyouévwv ody yuav [tHe] Katepyacias | THe atroxanupbeions aiytaritu 6.) ye Exaotov Kalo Svvapts, Opoevs ’ \ r \ > 4 / > a 4 lal \ > Tus avnp Biavos Kal avOddns Tul yyav lov érArAOev Huiv ody aber- dois avtovd tétpace KL @]Av@v THY Kal|Tepyaciav Kal KaTacTropay moeiaOar Kal exhoBav nas, iW [éx To]v[ To ]v Kata TO TpdTEpon Eis \ > \ 7 \ / > / fal n tv] adXo[ Samy dvywopev Kat movot avtiroincovtas [Tt ]hs xfs, _Onrod| ev 5é cor, KUpLE, THY TOUT@Y Biav. OTE yap cvvEetapopor y[e]ivovtar THv Kata unva yeu vo lwévav év THe Kone ETLpEpla Lav Te Kal émtBorov oil T]iKOv Te Kal ap|yupiK@v TeXeoMaTOV, Gra Kal ovcia éotly brép is Kat étos Siaypad[opely povos nets Spaypas durxeiNias TeTpakoolas Kal MOVvwOY TOUTWY TA TETPATIOOA [ 544 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT TrE|oTa dvTa Tas v[o]uas Toettar. Kat ovderwrorte éduTolv |p- [ynolav é[x]poBodvres tods Kata xpovouvs KwpmoypaypaTews. “Odev kata 76 dvayKaiov rnv [éri] ce katadu|ynv trovovpmeba Kab a&vodpev, éav cou Th THY NL SOENL, KEAedT AL, AYOHVaL avTOL Vs] Erb o[o]u cal Siaxodaar jpav pos avTov Tpos TO ex THS ahs BonOetas exdixnbévres Suvy||Oamev THe yhe cxoralew Kal Tais érBalr]- Novoais Hueliv] Ypelats mpocKkaprepely, Tov b€ Opoéa Kal Tovs aderdlo]ds cuvershopas eivar Tots Snpwootous TeXéopacr Kal | Nut[olupyety tLas] dppolovcas avdtois ALTOUpyias Kal éy[ecOar €&] icov [) was mavtas Ths oropads THs atroxadud(Aeions ys, iy dev ev THe idtat cuppévovTes THe TUXNL cov | evyapicTety. Atevrvyeu. ) l. 9. éxdorov = éxdoTwv. i: 13. KWLOYPALUATEWS = KWLLOYPA[L[LAT EAS. ]. 15. ovveeopdpas = cvverrpdpovs. From the Fayim. The relations of the great landlords to the small proprietor and to the village community are clearly indicated in this petition. These villagers had fled from their homes and engaged in a life of brigandage. On the issuance of the edict of Severus and Antoninus granting amnesty to all fugitives, they had returned to the village of Socnopaei Nesus and taken up leases in the public lands along the shore. ‘Vhereupon a certain Orseus and his brothers attempted to drive the fugitives away, as apparently they had done before, in order that they might continue to pasture their flocks on the lands thus vacated. Furthermore these men were so powerful that the village-secretary was always terrified. Asa result Orseus and the members of his family paid no tribute or taxes and never performed any of the liturgies. Nor had they taken their due share of waste land to be cultivated which had been assigned to them. The petitioners apply to the strategus to bring these men to judgement in order that they themselves may not be forced to flee from their homes again and that Orseus and his party may be compelled to take their due share of public liturgies. This is the earliest documentary evidence for the encroachment of the wealthy landed proprietor on the holdings of the peasants and of the defiance of the local authorities by the rich (cf. pp. 203, 216 ff; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 354, 3553 Archiv, 3 (1906), 548 ff). AMA Gy eh 35 5 5 20 25 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 191. DE TRIBUBUS METROPOLEOS (212 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 1030; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 36. (5th H.) ae. | (Ist H.) Yepyvar apdodoypa(upartet) a pvr(js) B mep.od(ov) | mapa Acoyévous. (2nd H.) Iazrovra@rtos | tod Lwapta pntpos Tepedtos || adm’ Ofvpiyyov trorews. “O | euod Kat THS omoTratpias pou | adeAPHs Oanavos Sodros ‘Ioropy| Tos itepeTns atexX(vos) avaypado|uevos er’ audodov Iappévous || Ilapadeicou érer(evtnoe) THL Sed(PovTe) Eres. | Avo émrididw@pe To UTromynua | aEvdv ald]rov avaypadhvar év | Tht TOV [o]uolwv Takéet, Kai | duvide THY TOD Kuplov Mapxov || AdpnAiov [= Jeounpou "Avtwvivou | toynv un eredcOat. (“Etous) ca | Ad’toxpdz[o]pos Kaicapos Mapxovu | Avpnriov [Xe]ounpov Avtwvivor | IlapOtx0d Meyiorov Bpetavyixod || Meylatou EvaeBots LeRacrod | [[unvos ‘Adpsavod]] «. (3rd H.) Acoyévns | Ilatrovra@tos éridédmxa Kal 6uo@|wexa Tov 6pxov. | (4th H.) LepHvos aphodoypa(upareds) éxyov Tovl|Tov TO icov. From Oxyrhynchus. This declaration is dated shortly after the introduction of the municipal organization into Egypt by Severus. Oxyrhynchus was divided into tribes and circuits numbered numerically. The amphodon is a geographical division, each in- cluding a tribe (P. Oxy. 1119; Wilcken, Grundziige, 348 f.). The tribe had an archon and a secretary, and apparently there was a cycle according to which each tribe took the municipal liturgies in rotation (Wilcken, /oc. cit.). ‘The tribal secretary also received the registrations of deaths, and probably all similar records connected with the census in his particular district. In P. Br. Mus. 2, 281, the death certificates from the villages are forwarded to the village- secretary. Sometimes the royal scribe receives these declarations (cf. note ad /oc.). [ 546 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 192, EDICTUM CARACALLAE DE CIVITATE PEREGRINIS DANDA (212 p. Chr.) P. Guess. 4.0, col. 1 (vol. 111, p. 164); Mitteis, Chrestomathte, 377; Segré-Beltrami, Revista di Filologia, 45 (1917), 16 ff.; Meyer, Furistische Papyri, 1; Girard, p. 203. [Avtoxpatwp Kaicap Ma]lpxos Avpnrilos Leounjpos] Avto- vivo[s] S[eBacro]s rAéyes. | [Nuvi bé veenoavta yp]n wadrov avlaBaropuevoy tals aitias kali tolvs] A[eB]érAXAov[s | Enrezv, Omws av Tots Oleots tlot|s ablavlarous evyapioTyncayps, OTL THe tovauTne | [vixens ériunoav Kal odolv éue curfeTnlpnoav. Tou- yapodv vouilw [o]itw pel|[ yadompetas Kai evoeB las Ov[va]obar THL weyanel[ O|TnTL aVTOY TO ixavov Trol[ Ely, et TOdS Eévous, oo ]a- Kus av UL 7 ]ercéXO[ wa |tv Eis Tovs ewovs av[ Op |wzrous, | [eis Ta ya- peotnpia TO |v Oew@y cvverrevéy[Kotl|us. Aidwpe toi[y luv &rral[ ov Eévous Tols Kata T|nv oiKovpévny T[orcT jeiav Pwpaior, [u ]évov- tos | [wavtos yévous TodiTevplatav xop[is] Tv [ded]ectixiwv. "O[d]eires [y]ap ro || [wAjos wpoTay ov povovy cuptrolvety mavta a[rArA]a Hon «[a]i THe viene evrreprec|[AHbOar. “Ere be Kal tovTo TO Oidtlaypa o[ujadwoe: [THv] weyadevotnTa [Told ‘Pwpalilov Syuov dua to THY avtTny ak&iav] mepi tods [Eévolus yeyevnobar. (Reliqut versus omisst sunt.) l. 2. vuxnoavra, Segré. 1. 4. éripnoav Kai, Segré. 1. 7. Ta xaptorypia, Segré. l. 9. roditevularwv, xwpis, Meyer. 1. 10. [mpdmrav ob povov cvpzrolvetv, Segré. l.rr. [AjpOo. "Eri de Kai todro 76 duarjaypya é[pJaddoe, Segré; [AcioOar. "Eru dé Kal tovto ro mplaypa €[..].Awoe, Meyer. 1. 12. [01a 76 riv adriyy dgiav] rept Tous [E€vo]us, Segré. The origin of this document is unknown, but it probably came from Heptacomia. The papyrus is unfortunately preserved in a seriously mutilated condition, and its restoration is an exceedingly difficult problem. We have followed the text adopted by Beltrami incorporating the restorations proposed by Segré (/sc. cit.). The document presents to us the only copy of the edict of Caracalla whereby he conferred Roman citizenship on the peregrini in the empire. This version is manifestly a Greek translation of the [547.2] 35-2 10 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT original edict published in Latin. he translator retained the Latin word dediticiz, apparently because there is no adequate phrase to express the meaning in Greek, and the discussion of the edict depends almost entirely on the interpretation of the word. Meyer, whom Wilcken follows, interprets dediticit as Naoypadhovpevor or those subject to the poll-tax (Meyer, doc. czt.; Wilcken, Grundziige, 55 f.). Wilcken estimates the population of Egypt at this period at about seven millions, and assumes that those possessing a fortune of 100,000 sesterces, or about two millions, received citizenship by this edict. It is probable that his estimate of the wealthy class is entirely too high, and if the same proportion prevailed in the rest of the empire, the use of the word azracz is a travesty (Archiv, 5, 426 ff.). Rostowzew (Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 222 ff.) identifies the Aaoypahovpevoe with the ouoroyor, and assumes that the latter is a translation of dediticiz. However, the terms ouoXoyou and Aaoypadhovpevo. must have been perfectly familiar to the trans- lator, and the scribe would undoubtedly have used one or other of them if they expressed the meaning required. The definition of dediticit in the legal language is also contrary to this interpretation, for Gaius (Inst. 1, 14) explains the term as applied to those who had fought against Rome and who had surrendered on defeat. It could not, therefore, be applied to the Egyptians without great difficulty. Moreover Justinian does not recognize the class of dediticiz, and certainly does not apply the term to payers of poll-tax (Cod. F. 7. 5. 1; 7. 6. 1). The interpretation of Segré (4tt della soc. it. per il progresso delle sctenze, Settima Riunione, Siena, 1913, 1013 ff.) seems worthy of consideration. He joins the phrase ywpis tadv dedevtixiwy with the genitive absolute construction to which it logically belongs and explains dedevtixiwy as civitates stipendiariae. The edict, according to this view, preserved the privileged position of federated states and colonies with Latin rights, etc., but con- ferred Roman citizenship on members of tribute-paying states, and removed the legal disabilities under which these people labored in the eyes of the law (Mitteis, Rezchsrecht und Volksrecht, 90 ff, 159 ff.). Latin rights were finally abolished by Justinian (Cod. F. 7. 6. 1, 6) as no longer having any meaning (supervacua adiectio Latinitas aboleatur). [ 548 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Wilcken properly discounts the motive for the edict cited by Dio (4rchiv, 5, 426 ff.), but his own theory that the edict was promulgated to foster the imperial cult seems equally wide of the mark. This cult first originated in the provinces where the gift of Roman citizenship was rarely enjoyed, and was especially fostered by the non-Roman element (cf. pp. 163 ff). His theory might be true for Egypt, but not for any of the provinces. In our opinion the edict was designed to relieve the peculiar situation which had developed in the municipalities at this period. In Egyptian cities both Romans and Alexandrians enjoyed a general immunity from local liturgies (cf. nos. 165, 173), and it is very probable that in the non-Roman communities throughout the rest of the empire the Romans enjoyed similar privileges. The veterans on discharge were granted Roman citizenship and general immunity from liturgies (cf. pp. 106 f-; no. 38) in the cities where they took up their residence. In many cities we find guilds of Roman citizens who form a corporation distinct from the general mass of the citizens, although there is occasionally cooperation. Most important, however, is the fact that in the great number of inscriptions which record liturgies, there are very few cases which indicate that a Roman discharged these duties for the municipality in which he resided. He was first and foremost a citizen of Rome, and by the law of orzgo this took precedence over any claim which the city in which he lived might exercise. In the few cases where Romans undertook liturgies, it is probable that such duties were discharged voluntarily or before the grant of citizenship was received. Under the empire Roman citizenship was granted freely to individuals and especially to ex- magistrates in communities which enjoyed major or minor Latin rights (cf. pp. 88, 191 f). The gift was hereditary, and there was, therefore, a constantly increasing class of residents in every non- Roman community which could claim immunity from local litur- gies. This class usually consisted of the wealthy members of the community, and the burdens of the city, which were constantly increasing, fell with greater severity upon a narrower circle of the community whose members were less able to undertake them. Under these conditions the municipal organization was in grave danger of complete disruption, and the imperial treasury was [ 549 ] 20 25 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT consequently faced with a serious problem. The legislation of Cara- calla gave the municipalities a new lease of life by distributing the burdens of residents in a more equable manner. The immunity of veterans was reduced to a period of five years, at least for a time (cf. no. 177). The guilds of Roman citizens disappeared in the non-Roman states, and the only class which enjoyed exemption from local liturgies were the members of the imperial nobility (cf. pp. 103 ff.). The edict of Caracalla was a piece of wise and just legislation, and might have been followed by far-reaching results had not the empire been swept by famine, plague, and civil war in the third century. The disastrous effect of these evils was augmented to such an extent by a great increase in the burdens of taxation and by the development of the bureaucratic system that the muni- cipalities were unable to recover financially, and their political development was stifled (cf. pp. 190 ff.; 228 ff). 193. EDICTUM CARACALLAE DE REDITU AEGYPTIORUM IN AGROS (215 p. Chr.) P. Giess. 40, col. 11, ll. 16-29; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 22. Ailyvrreloe raves, of eiow év “AreEavdpeiat, kal wadtoTa ly ]pocKot, otrives medel Vyacu] | dA[AoPev K]ai edpapas e[b]pi- o[xe]oOae Svvavra[t], ravtne TavTas éyBAHoLmol Eloy, of vx] | pl év ros ye yowpéutro[ poe Kal vadtac Trotd[ pw |cou Exeivoi Te oi Tues Karamov mplo|s to | vroxaieww ta Baralvetla xatadépovor. Tods dé &dXovs ey a], oftives THt TWANOe[e] Tae || (Siwe Kali ovlyt ypnoet Tapdooovet THY TONY. Vaparretots Kai ETEpats TLoly éop|taci[ wows 4 |wépars etwOévat Kataryewv Oucias eiverev Tavpous Kal ddra Twa | évrp[v]ya 4} Kal ddrras Al ulépars Acyumrrious pavOava: dia ToDTO ovK cio KwAUVTEOL. | ’E[Keivor] KwrALV]ecOar ode[t]Aovow, oltwves hevyouot Tas yopas Tas idias, iva pn | €.... AypolKov ToLdat, ovxXL pévTot, (oiTwves) THY TOALL|Y THY "AreEavdpéwy THY Aaptrpol|rat[nv] ((nv)) idetv Oéror[res ets avTny cuvépxYovTat 7) TroNeLTLKMTEpas Cons Eve|Kev [7 mp laypa- Teas Tpol a |xaipou évOdde x[a]répyovtra. Me &[rlepa. ’Emi- yewoone|c0at yal p] eis rods ALe]vovd[o]us of adnOwol Aiyvrrios Sivavt[a]: edpapas dove, 7} | aAdXwv [dyr]o? (adrods) exe [ 550 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Overs Te Kal oyHuas Ere Te Kal Col] Serxvver évavtia On | amo avaotpodys [mo]Nectuxns elvar aypoixovs A[i]yumtious. This edict of Caracalla is part of a letter addressed to the prefect of Egypt. Cassius Dio refers to the driving of foreigners out of Alexandria by Caracalla excepting only the merchants (77. 23). From the edict we learn that the terms were not as severe as the historian maintains. Dio finds the motive for this legislation in the hatred of the emperor and the extreme lawlessness of the city mob, but it is probable that the urban movement and the desertion of the leaseholds and farms by the peasants were the cause (¢f. no. 168; Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. 211 ff.). 194. DE SEVERITATE MUNERUM (216 p. Chr.) BGU. 159; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 408. ees sae eel i COTO) TE TOU ICU es oe eit alniel i CLG CE a Ter See [Aayavoloméppov apt[aBa@|y Tpiwy ...Tom....d... ypau|ufat..... olvx« é&édeT0 wor. Mera &€ radra avaédo[ bévTo|s pov | eis On[woo]i[a]lv Aevtovpyiav Baputarny oveav arréot[y |p THs Kons || ob Suvopevos UroatHvat TO Bapos THs NevToOUpytas. Tod odv | Naprporatou Hyenovos Ovarepitov Adtov Kedevo[av]- vA \ > x / / > \ O/ to[s] amavtas tovs | éml Eévns SiatpeiBovtas eis tas idias , A 3 \ ) e / e\ > / KaTeroépyer Oat, katerohnrOop. | Ezrel ov 0 tovTov vids Adpnrtos Lawrnpiyos [élEnynrevoas tis adtis | modews erHrOev por exTpdoowv TO TpLTAODY Tov dpeEtropévou, || erudidmper Kal aE@ aKovcal “ou Tpos avTovs Kal TO doKovY cot Kerevonts | yevé- aOar. Avevtvyer. | A[dp]jru0s Llaxdous ws (érHv) v ovA(}) yovaTe dpistepat. | ....0v | (‘Erous) xd Adro[kpdtoplos Kaicapos Madpxov Avpynriov Yeounpov Avta@vetvou Ilap@txod || Meyiorou B[petavycxod Meylicrov Veppavi[xod Melyiorov EvceBods LeBaorod avy ta. From the Fayim. The severity of the liturgy imposed upon Pakysis was so great that he fled from the village. When Valerius Datus published his edict in 216 promising amnesty, Pakysis returned. He was immediately requested to forfeit threefold the cost of the liturgy which he had defaulted. This appears to have Lie. 5e5 Sa | La! uo or Io DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT been the legal penalty in Egypt and if so, it was much higher than in other. parts of the empire (cf. Cod. Th. 12. 1. 16). Since the penalty was exacted by an ex-official of the metropolis, it is probable that Pakysis had been nominated to a liturgy in the city, although it is possible that, after the reorganization of Severus, the municipal officials may have been authorized to enforce the performance of the liturgies in the villages of the nome. Wilcken points out that the petitioner states the cause of his flight as if it were the customary method of escape from the burdens of public service (cf. pp. 112 ff-5 nos. 180, 186, 189, 190). 195. EDICTUM CARACALLAE DE SENATORIBUS (213-217 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 1406. Avtoxpatwp Kaicap M'adpxos Avpyrusos] | Seovnpos “Avta- vivo[s Tlap@txos Méyioros] | Bpetav(v)ixo[s Méytotos Teppave- Kos] | Méyeoros Elva ]eB[ns SeBacros] || Aéyes. | Kav Bovrevt2s Tov [wpvtavw % Bovreuv]|rnv tone } méur[nrale ........ -.+, | 0 wev Bovarle]luTns THs Bovreias almadra]|Eeras Kai eis atiuov yopav [katacty|||loeras. Ipoeré@n év BLaBvaAwvi(?)] | bro ot[olae Snuocia ér[dpyouv ap]|yovtos Avpnr(iov) ’AreEav- Sp[ov..... ]| amo “HXiou [a]orews From Oxyrhynchus. ‘This edict gives an interesting sidelight on the proceedings of the municipal councils in Egypt. It would seem that Severus had introduced municipal government before the Egyptians were ready for the responsibilities of it. The meetings of the town councils were marred by unseemly brawls and quarrels, and the emperor was forced to impose the serious penalty of exile on those members who forgot senatorial courtesy so far as to strike the presiding officer or a fellow-member. This document may throw some light on no. 181, ll. 39 ff, where the proceedings in a case of appeal are curiously interrupted by a charge of assault. 196. EDICTUM AURELI SERENISCI, ctparnyod, DE CENSU (226 p. Chr.) P. Teb. 288; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 266. [Avp]jALos Lepnvickos o Kai ‘Epunatas [ot ]pa(rnyos) "Apou- (voi'rov) Oc(uicrov) [kal] Llor(éuwvos) wepidos. | Tlapay(y)éAreTae [. 552 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Tots mpax[t oper Tod € (tous) Tov [ye ]wpy(dv) | Kal KANpovyoY emakorovOncar THe yewwouervne em’ al[y]aQots avapetpyoes TOU omopou Kal avaypdwacbas || racav thy éorappévny yhv év Te Tupa@t Kal adrows | y[éver]s Kai ta [dvdluata Tov Kata prow (ye)yewpyn|x[oT lov Snwoctwy yewpyav Kalb Kdrnp[o]v|yov mpds TO pndev érrl (arept)ypahne Tod iepwrdrov | tapuetov yevécOat UTO THY Naoypadwy || 7) TpayuaTiKOV, ws Tod KivdSdvoU Kal bpetv | [av]rois awa éxetvors Scoicovtos, édv te havye | [xe]xa- koupynpé|vo |v 1) ov Seovtas tremp| a |y| wévov, undeweras Tpopadews umety | UrroNevTropévns ert Ths amrautHcews || Evexev yvwpiopod* Kal THS pévTor yeu|[vlopéevns vd’ buav avaypadny tHv | tony émidore. | ("Erous) e Ad[toxpa]ropos Kaicapos Mdpxov | [Ad]- pnri[ov] Leounp[ov Are ]Eavdpov EvceBods|| Evtuxyots LeBacrov Meyeilp 0. 1. 16. lege dvaypadys. From the Fayim. The instructions issued to the collectors of the taxes in kind by the strategus of the district show that these officials had also to make a record of the seed distributed and of the land sown by the tenants on the public lands and by the cleruchi. Furthermore the collectors, the Xaoypados, and rpaypartuxoi seem to share joint liability if the treasury suffers any loss. ‘The Xaoypadou are officials connected with the collection of the poll-tax. The mpayywatixot occur but rarely in the Egyptian records and their duties are usually in connection with the allotment of the tax in grain. Cf. P. Ryl. 85; P. Amh. 107, 108, 109. In P. Gress. 58 the title is used as a general term for officials (a.p. 116). Oertel omits this group in his study of the liturgy. 197. DE MUNERE DECAPROTORUM (post 242 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 62, verso; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 278. ....as (éxarovrap)x(os) éml xtna(ewr) | [Oe0(d)(?) T]irov Svpwr diade|[ yo] uévar otparnyiav yat(pey). | PEEalurhs NaBav pov Ta || [yplaupata mréurpov | [ro]ds KAnpovouous ’Arro[)]|- Awviov Tod Sexarpot[olv | THs Opwoceho Torapy(ias), | wa un ex THS ons apel|relas evédpa mepl tnv | euBornv yévntar. [55831 - fe) 5 Io I n n DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT "Elreprya S€é eis totto tov | otatiwvdpiov adra | Kat Tovs Aourrovs Sexallarpwrous, iva duvn|Odpev, 60ev édv S(é)ne, | tHv éuBornv rrounoat | dia Taxous. (2nd H.) "Eppdcé ce ebyopau. From Oxyrhynchus. From this letter of the centurion in charge of the imperial estates we learn that the heirs of a decaprotus were liable for the obligations of the liturgy during the remainder of the term of the deceased. ‘This office was introduced into Egypt after the reorganization by Severus. ‘There were normally two for each toparchy. ‘There is some doubt as to whether they were members of the local senate or not (cf. Wilcken, Grundziige, 218; Kilo, 1, 147 ff.; Jouguet, Vie munic. 366 ff.; Oertel, Die Liturgie, 211 ff; R.E. s.v.; P. Oxy. 1410), but they were apparently nominated by the senate. The liturgy, however, is not municipal but imperial (Jouguet, op. czt. 360), and in this respect it apparently differs from its counterpart in the rest of the empire. Grenfell is of the opinion that the office was usually held for five years (P. Oxy. 1410), and the evidence seems to support the view that the office was held for a number of years in the later period, but this was not because of the normal tenure of the liturgy. The edict of Magnius Rufus (P. Oxy. 1410) merely forbids reappointment, and there is no implication that the legal period of the liturgy was longer than a year. 198. DE CESSIONE BONORUM EORUM QUI MUNERA DECLINANT (250 p. Chr.) C.P.R. 20; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 402. Col. 1 [Avpnrcos ‘Epyodelros ‘Opiwvos coountevoas “Epuov roXews THS wEeyadns apyaias Kal Nautpas Kal ceuvotdrns | [AvpnrAiws Kvdaipwjove rau Kai Oeodorwt yupvalorlapynoavte Kat apycepa- tevoavtt Bovreutht Svadeyouévwt THY mpv|[Tavetay THS avT]is TOAEWS TOL TYULLWTAT[ WL] Yaiperv. DOalolas péev éerécteira THe kpatiorns Bovrne dia cod | [ra d1a Tod é]mictddpatos tod Tod vouov otpatnyov AupnXtov lépwvos dia Adpndiou ‘E[ p ]uo0d orpa- Tnytx[o]d || [vrnpérov alytiypadévta wot bd TOD NawTpoTdrou Huav yyewovos “Ammiov LaPetvou, mpos a HEi\[ouv wap] avrod PREY Sea DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 5 , , e » A , \ es éEcoTavomevos TavTwv ov exw Tols TpoBaropevots TOV NLETEPOV eN\ > / e / \ \ re A 3 nt Fi A viov | [Avpnrvov ‘Opiwlva tov cal “Eppaiov eis Koounretay THs sae pe / pe ks Vi ? , TN > a avTns TorEwS EO HY UTroyves | [éEeTEXcCoa Uirép | euavTod eEava- AwGets, de dv HOéANoEY Tov Kivduvoy THs mpoBorHs eivas Tpos | [rods dvoudoart as, Tov dé [Tr ]od vowod otpa(tn)yov Biav yewvo- pévnv KorDoaL, et yelvo[t]To Tapa Ta UT avTod || [cwrnpiws SunyopevO lévta, adrrep érrevyvextat axorovOas THe éxdoVELane pot bm Tov eis TOUTO émictarévr|[ Tos UanpéTou U]roypadye emt THS bl v]as Kat eixddos Tod dvtos pnvos Ereid. "Eyes 5é Aris Hv KB | [Emeid, é&ed00n wos] dia Bovrevt[e]cod tarnp(éryou ériotadpa cov Tod Evéaip[o]vos tod Kal Oeodorov avro|[mpocwrws avt- emlictarévt[ols epi tyls aldtas apyns pet Exotacw Kat mapapopicbévta éx TaV vopowr | [Kal] THs [broypaldn[s] ér- d[O]oves tiva SnAdoavtos KaTa TO avayKaiov. Kai vov avt- eTLATEAAW GOL, || ém[e]vd[7mep THL] exoTdy7[e] Kal Tov idol t]ov apictapévos UTapKer ek TOY vopwv Kal TOV Oeiwy SiaTal|[ Elewv , \ , , , ee , »+..-9.[..-Bo]nOeva TO pndeptay Biavy twacyev [olis apwofo- ¢€ / e XN \ ye >) / pevos 0 ANaptrpoTatos Hryepov Kat |[«]aBocvo[ vu Jer[ os] HOEAncEeV [ro]v otpatnyoy Biav Kwdrdcat, Tpocbeis Tov Kivdvvoy THs A > \ \ > f b) \ »” \ mpoBorns eivas rept | [tov]s dvou[aloavtas. Ei 8 oles, od [av ]ros Ta mavra pov AaBe[v] avti Tod vevoyicpévov TpiTov Ta A > aA , , 5) , \ \ THe apxne [S]cadépovta | [wlavta alrlomAnpoces Kat [pu] évedpeverv py[[O]]te THY TOAW unde THY KpaTioTHY BovAnv. ’Ap- Keo On||[oo]uas yap Tatd[€] THs avTeTiL a |tadpare e[y] peyioTtwr , ished € , ¢ / , dixatopatt. Avpyrwos “Eppodiros ‘Opiwr[os] xoopntetcas | [eppadcb]ai oe evy[opu las, pirrare. | [(’Erous)] a’ Adroxpa[to]pos Kaicapos Tatov Meooiov Kvivtov Tpa:avod Aexiov EvaeBois Eitvyots XeBactod ‘Edeim xy. Col. 11 Avpnrio. Ania LaBeivwt TOt NaTpoTdata@. Hyewoue | Tapa AvpnAiov ‘Eppodinrou ‘Opimvos cocuntevoartos ‘Eppod roXews THs peyarns apyaias | Kal Aapmpds Kal cewrlol|ratns. *Emi- otadpa Siccoyv ypahev br ewovd mpos Tov THY mpvTalvetav Siadexopevov Avpn[rA]vov Evdaipova tov cai Oeddorov yupvaci- apynoavta Bovrevtny || tov [a]lit(ov) “Ep(uorrort adv) mpos a avros a[vt]e[m]léorevrév wou avToTpocwTws povos TEpl KoopN- [ 555 ] To 20 Io 15 20 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT / ’ A > / 3 / c Pie , ey > / telias | eis Nv @vopuacOn ov SedvTws Oo HuéTepos vids AUpndrtos e , ec Ae. a x oe 3 / ¢€ \ BI n Opiov o Kat ‘Eppatos wel” iv é&elréxeoa brép éuavtovd mpo- té[plav dtroyias POdcavros pou émiaretAavTOS THe KpatioTnt | Bovane db adtod ta avriuypadévta pot vTd TOD NapTpoTaTou e / A Le] / \ 3 > “4 / 3 HryEeu“ovos cov TOD SeatréTov | dynradn [e]E aEvdoeds pou pelt éxoTacews TAVT@Y, TOY UTapYoVT@Y fou Tpos THY avo||wov ovopaciav Kat un Sel[yo]uévov avTa ws Tepléyer aTroTiOeuat ev Tae évtav0a | YeBacteiws rapa Tots ei[y]verr Tod Kupiov nuav kat Geoptrectatov Avtoxpatopos | Tatov Meco[i]ov Kvivrov Tpaavod Aexiov EvaeBods Evtuyots YeBactod Kai “Epevvias | Kourpeconvas ‘Etpovoxidras XeBaotis awa Tae TH’ wapTu- / \ \ \ \ \ , / 3 f poTroinate Tpos TO undev | TO Tov wéyeOos NavOdvew, acparsfo- pevos THY Tept eue hpovpav dia varnpérov Bovdreu||TLKod Kal pvUNAKOS THS TpUTaveElas ETL ATO EiKaOOS TOD dvTOS uHVvos Emel Tapa Ta | Ud cod cwTnplws Sinyopevpéva, durAaccopévey poe @e + id / v ‘ 3 / / dv éyw tavtTolwy dix Jail|wv. | ("Erous) a’ Adtoxparopos Katcapos Taiov Mecciov Kvivtou Tpavavod Aexiov EvceBots Evtuyods | LeBactod “Evelh xy. Atvpnarsos “Eppodiros ‘Opiwvos Kxoopn- Tevoas amrebéuny || os mpoxertac. | (2nd H.) A(vpnAos) “Hpwdiev + yA ” /93 \ — / Ni 3 / éxyov icov. ("Erous) a ’Erveidh xy. Tovtayv ta ica arédov. From Hermopolis. The petition of Hermophilus is most im- portant for the study of municipal administration in Egypt after the reforms of Severus. Hermophilus had recently held the office of cosmete and claims to have been almost ruined by the expenses attached to this magistracy. Hisson was now nominated for the same office without his father’s consent and Hermophilus appealed to the prefect offering to cede all his property to the nominators according to the law. The prefect accepted his proposal and sent instructions accordingly to the strategus that Hermophilus should not suffer loss of citizenship or corporal restraint (cf. no. 185). This acceptance had been forwarded by Hermophilus to the civic council and he had surrendered his property according to law. ‘The council, however, was apparently free to accept or reject the proposal and it proceeded to order the arrest of Hermophilus in order to compel him to accept the liability for his son’s proper performance of the magistracy. ‘Thereupon Hermophilus writes to the prytanis or presiding officer of the council offering the whole of his income, without reserving [ 556 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT the customary third, to the prytanis if the latter will relieve him from the burden of undertaking the magistracy on behalf of his son, and will administer his estate on behalf of the liturgy. From this it is probable that the nomination had been made by the prytanis, though this inference is not absolutely necessary. In the second column Hermophilus lodges a copy of the correspondence in the shrine of the Augusti and appeals again to the prefect. In this case he characterizes the nomination as illegal although there is no implication of this charge in his previous correspondence. It is assumed that Horion was a senator although he is not de- signated by any official title in the petition. However, it is probable, although not certain, that only members of the council could be nominated to magistracies (¢f. pp. 89f.). The illegality may rest in the nomination to office of members in the same family without due regard to the law of vacatzo (cf. no. 177 and p. 88). ‘The law whereby two-thirds of the revenues of a surrendered estate were appropriated for the liturgy which the owner had refused to accept, and one-third was reserved for the use of the owner by the nominator or nominators who administered the estate for the benefit of the liturgy which they were compelled to undertake, is unknown elsewhere. Mitteis has brought together all the evidence which bears on this problem in his excellent commentary on the legal aspects of this petition (C.P.R. 20), although Grenfell has cast some doubt on his interpretation of the document (P. Oxy. 1405). Cf. pp. 89 f,, nos. 181, 185; P. Ry/. 77 notes; Hermes, 32 (1897), 651 ffs 55 (1920), 21 ff 199. DE TRAPEZITIS OXYRHYNCHI (260 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 1411. Avpyrzos [Itorepaios 6 cal Neweotavos,| ctparnyos ’Ofupuy- yeltov. Tay dnpociwr eis | ev cvvaxyOévtwr Kai attiacapévor | TOvS TOV KOAAUBLaTiKoY TpaTrelav || TpameleiTas MS TaUTAS 5 amokreroayv|t[o lv Tat wn BovrNec Oat tpoc((c))ierOat | TO Oetov TOV YeBactav vouropa, alvay]|kn yeyévntac tapayyéApate m[apay||yernvas traces Tots TAS TpaT elas KeKT[ ME |||vL0r]s TaVTAS 10 avotéarxaiTal[n]|v[[m]]vope|o[wlampocier barry parto[Ta]| Bee Geode 15 20 170 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Tapatvmouv Kal KiBdnrov Kal Katak[eppa]|rifewv, ov povots dé avtois adda [Tols] | cal dvtwa 82 tTpdrov tas cvva[dXa]||yas Tovoupévois, yewv@oKovat[v] | @s, ef un TrecOapynovay THe tHe map|layyeAiar, werpadnoovtar wv Td [pé]|yeO0s THs Hyepovias Kal éte dvol ev] | ea’ adrots [[T0 we] ]ye[[P0c]]véo Oar mpfoc]|lé- takev. “Konuevwoapnv. “Etouls mrpe]|tolv] "Advp[[e]] dydon K[[ev]]ai evxds. 1. 5. lege dmoxXeioartas. From Oxyrhynchus. The officials of the city accused the bankers of the city, who dealt in exchange, of closing their doors and re- fusing to accept the new imperial coinage. The strategus ordered the banks to open and to accept and exchange all coin except the spurious and counterfeit on the pain of suffering the penalties already prescribed in the past by the prefect for similar acts. For the banking problem in Roman Egypt, cf. Preisigke, Gzrowesen. ‘The importance of this document lies in its value in the economic history of the period rather than in its bearing on municipal institutions. The depreciation of the currency by successive emperors was apparently accompanied by laws compelling banks under state control to accept the new issue at the same value as the old, or at a value fixed above its real worth. Accordingly when a new issue came into circulation there was a rush to exchange it for the older and purer coinage. The banks of exchange would close their doors or refuse to part with their reserves, but they were again and again compelled to open and exchange money by the edicts of the prefects. Cf. NOSTOL Mt ee: 200. DE NOMINATIONE EORUM QUI MUNERA SUBEUNT (265 p. Chr.) P. Fior. 2, vu, ll. 166-201; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 401. (4th H.) [Bravos [la]vilox]os 0 cat Ad[yyo]s otpa(rnyos) “Epporron(eérov). | [Tod d00év]ro[s] woe mpoolayy]éXpuatos vie copapxav | [kopuns Ev]ced da tov Xnio[ ToT |tactav eiod.d6v|- [rev] tovs dv avrod éy[yeylpaupévous ets tyyv || [av]0 éavtadr copapytav [ic]ov dnuociat | [rploxertar, va Twavtes e[id]acr kal of eicay |yerévtes Exwvtar Tov [éyxer]prcOévTwy adTois | [ 558 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT byla@s Kal miotas eis TO élv pndlevi pweud[OA]vac. | (5th H.) "Eonpe[wod]unr. || (4th H.) ("Erous) 08’ rod Kupiov jpyav Tar[Ac]nvod SeBacrod | "Exret ¥. | (1st H.) Dravior Lavicnwt tat nat Adyywu [or ]patnyau ‘Epporrovcitov | m[apa] Avpnriwv Tupavvov ‘“Eppua[mo]AAwvos kat IlaQwrov|....... aupotépwy kopapyalv Kklouns “Kvoed de nuor, || Av[ py ]Atwy TloAX@vos Habaltou x Jal’ OQpov ‘Atphtos audoté|pav AnictoTiacTOV [Kali Tov [NouT]Ov Ov Hudv TaV mal|povtav. Aidouev cal mpocalyy]éAXopev tods troye|ypap- pévous Kopapyas, edb ae aldtlovs avTiralPécP lat ths | ypetas amo onuepov, Hts éativ [y T]od “Eeih told évert dros || +P" (érous), Ovtas evrropous Kai émi[ rn |deious Kivdv[ voc judv | Kab TavToY TOV KaTapevor[t lov év THe avTHe Kwo|une €E adrNrEY- yuns, ods Kal nulet|s eryyvemeba. Hic 8é. | Wafous Korrotfov pnt(pos) ...-ns | ws (éT@v) pe’, wopfov ély(wv) (Spayuav dioxtrALov) || Lorduwv Wanovos unt[pos..... |novos | as (err) Ne’, roplov é]y(wv) (Spaypav dvoxirALwv). | Avevt[vyer]. | (’Erous) uB’ Avtoxpatopos Kaicap[os Tovumrnijou Acciwviov | Parrdenvod Teppavixod Meyior[ov Evoe|S[ovs Evru]yots || SeBacrod "Erelg xy’. (and H.) O¢ w[poxetwevor xwludpyar | dv judy tov mapovtlwv AniotoTrial|oTa(v) | émidedm@xapev. A[vdprrLos.... ....|.. Jos éypawa trép avt(@v) [ypdupata pn eiddotor] |. (3rd H.?) “Eonp(erwoapny). || (6th H.) Tépavv[os tarnpérns Snpo- ciat Tpobeis Ka|te|yx@p(toa). From Hermopolites. This document is important for the history of the liturgy of the comarch. ‘This official replaced the village-elders in the control of the affairs of the village after the municipal re- organization. “There were usually two in each village and they were nominated by their predecessors in office. It is noteworthy that, in this period, not only the nominators, but also the citizens and the residents of the village were bound as sureties for the proper fulfilment of the liturgy (cf. Wilcken, /oc. cit. note on 1. 186; Oertel, Die Liturgie, 153 ff-; nos. 171, 196; pp. 99 ff). The epistra- tegus had no longer any connection with the appointment of officials in the villages as this document was issued by the strategus (cf. Wilcken, Grundziige, 349). [559 J 80 La] 185 Lan) gO Io 15 20 25 30 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 201. DE CONDUCTIONE AGRORUM PUBLICORUM (266 p. Chr.) C.P.H. 119, recto, col. vir; C.P.R. 39; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, S77: [T]he xpatiorns Bovarge Eppodtoreas ts weyarns]| apxatas Kat NapTpds Kal ceuvorat[yns dsa Avpnariov] | Kopedriouv "Ad2€avdpou iameKod aro otplatiay] | yunvacrapyou BovrcuTod évapyou mpuTavews || THS avTHs TodEews Kal @s xXpnuariter | [wraloa Avpnartov Meveraov Ilacyewodtos pntpos | ’Eyedros amo Kouns OerxBovbews. Bovropar | [é]eovoiws pwicbacacbar éx tod m[o]AectiKoD Aoyou | ert xpovoyv érn Téccapa amo TOD éveat@tos 16 (érovs) || mepl tHv alv]rnv OerBavOw éx Tod Diroxpartous | KAnpov apovpas &E eis (o)Topav wupod Kal ava- Tau|M“aTiK@V yeva@v KaT ETOS KaTa TO HuLov, éxpopilov Kal dopou Kat eros amrora[K]tov TALy OrAwr] | dpovpav wupod apta- Bav déxa oKT® Kal apyul||piov Spaxyav éBdounKovta Svo, as arobece | Kal wetpiow ev Tot Lladvi Kal Eel pnat car eros, | TO pev apyvptloly Soxcpuov, Tov dé mupov eis TO bn|uooLov TpwTNE petpnoe pialv] Soxinds avtt | pods “AOnvaiov kal *roicw péetpnow KalO]apay eis TO || ..actadjvat, Tov Onwocioy wavTwV THs ys | Kal émipeplopev OvTwY TpPOS TOV THs TOAEwS | NOYyoV. "Eav &€ 6 un) yelvorto aBpoyos yévntas aro To[d] | éEAs érov[s], érravay Kes érmavtAno@ K[al] TeXéow | TOY TpoKEmévov hopwv TO Hucov, émlGai||watos dé yewwouévou é£ov éErépows weTaptcOody | } kal adtoupy[ily Kai érepwt(ndeis) @por(oynoa.) ("Erous) 16’ Avtoxpatopo[s] | Kaicapos Iovmdiov Acewviov Tarrdinvod | Teppavixod Meyiorou [epatxod Meyictov KiceBods | Evtuxods Yel[Slacrov Xoiax yx’. || [A(p7Acos)] Mevéralos Hacyevodr]os pepicOwpat ws mpox(ertar). | A(dpdAcos) Korpi[s éyp(avra) i(mép) avt(od) w]7 €t5(oTos) yp(auparta). From Hermopolis. ‘This document gives the terms of a lease of the public lands of the city from the municipal council for a term of four years. The rental is paid partly in kind, partly in money. It is noteworthy that the lessee states that his contract is voluntary on his part, implying that compulsory leaseholds were not unknown at this period. In case of lack of water in any season the lessee pays [ 560 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT half the stipulated rental, but in case the city receives a better offer for the lease of the land during the term of the leasehold, it has the right to cancel the lease. From this document it is apparent that the municipality now controlled a certain amount of land in the nome, and it is probable that Severus transferred some if not all of the state lands in the nome to the municipality when he instituted the new organization (cf. pp. 29 f.; Wilcken, Grundziige, 308). 202. EPISTULA SENATUS HERMOPOLITANI AD otpatnyov (266-267 p. Chr.) C.P.H. 52; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 38. [‘Eppod morews THs peyaddns| apyaias [kal Naptpordrns] | [kal cepvoratns 7 Kpatiotn Bov]dA2 Auv[pnrios|....... sp orevaterane otplarnyer “Epuloronitov | rae pirtalrax [xaipes: ||....... ty ea FOR TOUM KU OLOU ss ac. 214d ase nee ae MELO LAN OIMOT Bal ci ite /a\cl oin\ omer. harem y mépos Tov ap[..... Meer stern Le oes Ho |poroyias: Kav wie elds « u- Bee ey Sib. epouv tavTns éyd[......-- [RSs ee Woes oy 0 Aapl|rporaTos TVEILO Peters \a.e « Petie e nae eo |raypa Grete wey is bs | Be WAY ae Kal SexatrpwmTov @s emlyelpno...........]...0. eat sts amawt[el|y To vromelm@Toy TpiTov wépos ......|.pas avayKkaias andi dpucba (xatapuyeiv) pos TO wéyeOo[s] || avTod [a]Ecodvtes mapadeyOjvar jpiv ta ply] | dedvTws amnutnpéva eis GAXa Hudy ohrAnpa|ta Kai [miloTevopev Kata THY éwhuToV b) fa) \ \ (4 / , \ \ \ val avtov | pos Tolvs va]|nxoous diravOpwriav Kal mpos Ta Oei[a] | evoéBe[tav] émuvevoesy Thu Senoes TOV Kowvod Auer || cuvedpiov. > \ \ ? lal 2 \ \ 3 VA / \ Ezrevd7) Sé avayxaiov jv be Kal oé émiotéA|NeoOar Kato Kal amTorxnt TovavTns | elo pakews, iy mapa Ta Oeiws Sinyopevpéva. | yetvoméevnv éueuato n weyanreLorns ToD | NawmpoTaTou nryELovos, axonrovdws tois év a||utv doEaciw éemictéAdopev coe €[id]oTe ws > \ ] Ul > / / > / / ov|devi axivdvvov Avtoxparopav yapite | [a]vti[ Br ]érrevy, Noyou duraccopuévolu T]ju more. | Kat The BovArne mept od exovar qmavtTos Sixatov: || axoN(ovOws) Tots év nu(iv) d0&(act) émiarér- [Nopév] coe adta tad|Ta, tv’ evdtjus K(al) m(epi)metvns tov (Hs) Hry(ewovias) dpov | as ovdevy axivduvvoy avToxpaTopiKas yapt|Te [avte]8rérresv. | ('Erovs) 16’ [Av]toxpdropos Kaicapos Tov- AMA [pROiN 36 Io 15 20 25 30 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 35 maAéov || Acwviov Tardunvod Teppavixod Meyiorou | Hepotxot Meyictov KiceBots Kvtuxots LeSdotou 1. 14. karapvyety supplied by Wilcken. LE2O. ‘Exedy oy corrected by scribe to ‘Ered dé: nv Kal to nv d€ Kal. Lets Kar’ e.d0 KaTw corrected by scribe to KaTw. ] ] . 29. Kal peivyis Tov THS Hyemovias dpov erased by scribe. . 30. e€iddre Ta corrected by scribe to atvra ravra. From Hermopolis. Unfortunately this piece of papyrus is very fragmentary and its meaning can only be made out in part. It is evident, however, that the city was heavily in arrears in its quota of tribute, and the senators appealed to the prefect to have certain sums illegally exacted credited to their indebtedness. The strategus had paid no heed to their protests and had continued his exactions in spite of the law—apparently an edict which forbade the strategus to collect arrears by confiscation or by fines until appeals were decided. The senate hereby warns the strategus to desist until the prefect visits Hermopolis on his next judicial circuit. 203. ACTA SENATUS OXYRHYNCHI (270-275 p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 1412. bat n kal pndicpa avTa@t éri TOVTOLS yLveTOw Els HuLY@pLOV THM TRS eit vd..... | «..+-as 6€ elonyodua. Lemripsos Lephvos o xal loyupiov éEnyntns ei[m(ev)]........ Perens ates kat w[....|...émrl tov]rous Tots Spots. Oi Bovreutat 3 > 7 >| / € 4 Sd \ a a eim(ov): wxeavé, €Enynta. | [o mpvtavis eiev* TO peya]diov Tov Kupiou nuav Avpnrtavod jeBactov. Ovopacate ody kai Bourev- 5 Tas Wa Ta OTETTLKA AUTOY Elo[....... || o¢ BouNevtat eizrov* » +a |t.O rpvtavs eir(ev): rpotpéacbe ot éEnyntai Tivas. Of b \ 2 / na > > / € / éEnynrtat eim(ov)* mpotpamnte [Xlepjvos eis eEnynteiav. ‘O mpv- TAVLS ei (ev) . Whos . 2a]Beivos Kal @S xpnpa(riger) TpuTaveb- aas eimr(ev)* o Tue TLV OTETTLKOD ETL OetrEL 5 aVEdéEATO ATO timav éEnynretas. ‘O mpuvt[avs | eim(ev): .... y]paupareds A 3 , ’ \ € \ / > \ TodeiTiKwy eiT(ev)* val. “lovAtavos 0 kai Atooxoupidns éEnyntis elir(ev)* Ildoutiwv odeiree oremti[Kov], oveovy [...|... O¢ er: a) yes A 7 f > s Bovreut lai eim(ov): 0 dvopacbels eri Tt dims TOpwL @voudo On. Lemrripustos Avoyévyns 6 kal’ Ayabos Aaiuwv yevomevos vroprnua- , \ id / / Ss toyp[a]gos cat .... |... [ds xpnmar(ifer) ovvdixos eim(ev) [ 562 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT > a ae d ? b / € 4 > / ephvo(?)]|s orev yupvaciapxos. ‘O mpvtavis eim(ev)* ovopacate A —/ xX \ >? \ an Cis \ s GdXous, va Kav TO eEnyntixoy avaotabHe. Oi éEnynrat eizm(or): mpotpatntw "lwy vids ...||..++ [els tHv eEnyntetlav tod ar- mov. Lexovvdos Yexovvdou apyrepevs eim(ev)* earitnpcicOw ovv 6 ovopacbels. ‘O mpvtams eim(ev)* aipotmas eis émoty|[pnow wee ese Didéay cai] Wrovuteivoy iva tiv wictiw aroTAnp@ecwo. A A ¢ \ 3 e \ \ / e \ \ THe BovrAne. Ov Bovrevtat cim(ov)* ayve micté Diréa, ayvé rice T1ho[v]tetve. Todtwy[..|... tareprePévrwvr eis rnv] EERs Bovarny,o mpvtavis eim(ev)* Kal ai dAXaL apxYalovouacdtwcav. Ovoydcate dé xai Bovrevtas. Oi aro tHs TpiTys pudr‘s elr(ov):....|...[O mpvtavis eim(ev): ére|tnpnoes Netdos Bovrevtys. Oi Bovrevtal eim(ov)* ayve mioté NeiXe, ael cadrws Netros, BonOeav avtau. Of aro thls Tlpitns purr[s | elm(ov)> Lemripos Aroyévns 6 kab "Ayabos Aaipov yevouevos UTouvnpatoypaddos Kai os Ypnpua- (rife) cdvdiKos elrr(ev)* ...]xaTeiknpa Topov, TouTécTiV yevn- para aroKetpeva év TOL Movimou, Kat dtav yywoOhs 4 TocoTns, mapate[O]noetas vuily. ... || ....]pos cal os ypnua(rifer) eimr(ev)* Scot viv mvopacOncay Vro Pedéov kal “Hpaxrdi@vos @voudcOncav. Oi Bovrevt[al]i eim(ov): amo Odrys .... | [rhs purjs(?).... ayve mua|re ‘Opiwv yeovyav év Necpeipi, ayve \ , A ? / ¢ \ \ 7 mucte Aewvidn yeovxav ev Awotléov, ayve tiaté Bylolapiov A > > , A J ig x "A 6a , yeou|[yav év......+. Lemripsos Aroyerns o kat Ayabos Aaipwv yevomevos vTrouynwatoypdgos Kat ws Ylpnua(tifer) cbvduKos elmr(ev)* Wa Tpotpdtwcw Kai apywow ot dvopalouevot, TO TPWTEVLAUTOV THS MeToupynatals eooee @ eosoeeenee | oee ese eve Ilrovcuatos yupvaciapyos cim(ev)* ......- eis TH[v Tpra]xdda tod Meaopy xpetoar. Thu mev Tpraxads ovK éxpetcer, AdArd THL Cen V4 5 aa a 5 éEAs veounviar dv ewod él y perce |v, rapadey[.......,||B.....+]s 6 Tov Pirocddov, y émeatates Meodwpos vids Uroreuaiov Kal ox éypetcev, GAN’ eyo &x mpoypetas [éypecla. “Edy odp e \ + > \ a > \ [.....|-...+ 06 Bovrevtai eim(ov):] @xeave IItorcuaie, oxeave 7 , ¢ ‘9 , > 7 ¢ yupvaciapye. wa Avoviatos o kai Apteuiowpos, 18 Apiotiwv 6 NY HES / 7A f / kat ’Avd[pover]xos “Ac[u]yxpi[rou....|...... yuuvaciapyos eim(ev)’ ...] 4 evadrAayh Tov nwepav. Oi Bovrevtai eiz(ov): 4 \ / =| \ \ e / Kupia Ta Wndiopata. wy Fievikos Kal ot wédAovTes yuulvace- Apel, s.s0a|ssecesee] Lephvos ’Awpoviov yupvaciapyos \ / > na elir(ev)* ny BXaTrTéeTH mov TOWHdio wa 7 evarrAayy Ths 7[u]é[pas [503 ic] 36-2 Io 15 20 25 30 35 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT see ceeceeceelenceee Gb] Kal py expevcer. Kn Yeounpos Kal "Exipayos ot tod Pidocddov. Ot Bovdevtai elm(ov)* wxelavé Lephve, @keave yupvaciapye ...-..||-... 6 MpvTavis elm(ev): 1.2] 0 reieTns ypuoot otepdvov Kai veikns Tod Kuptov MeV Atpadtavod LeB(aor)od “lo[vvAr........ | ...... TOU Kupiov nov Atpynralvod LeBactod Kat btt Kai 0 crépavos avrod Hd éyéveTo, Kal Eb fut) Ob TeyvetTar [.............|...7a TKJEUN TadTa Kat evyny yeivetar. “Adda Swdexa TaravTa S0OnTw Tots Texvelta[i|s .....-. |...... O&€ Bovrevral efr(ov): of adtol amaiteitwcav. BOéwv o kal “Opuyévns X[arpyjpyor(?)]os Kat ws t > Ve > x > yp[nwa(rifer) eim(ev)* ........|..... StvJacde adtods ama- Tica. Oi Bovrevtat eitr(ov)* ayvoi mictol atrattyntai. Kvrrop[os] o Kat Ayal@os Aaiwwr kal os ypnua(rifer) eim(ev):....||... ]var, éav [ 17; x, On ASS, ‘Oo re 5 ‘ \ ¢ / j]1) TeAXeLWOHL TO Epyov. mpuTaves eim(ev)* Kal 0 KpaTi- b] / # ¢ \. 39 \ a[tos] émeotparnyos O[....|......~. Evsropos 0 Kat Avalos Aaipayv Kxjai es ypnua(rifer) eim(ev) Stav obv evOéws édXOnt, érrevyOnoetar t[O élpyov. Ot Bovre[utal e]i[m(ov): ........| BA > / + ig , € \ ...+.]te Evzrope, evdsotxnre Kirrope. Yemripsos Avoyévns o kal "Ayabos Aaipwv yevoulevos b7rouvnwatoypadgos | cal os xpnua- (riGer) cuvdsxos eir(ev)* el TL TOL]s TeyveiTats ev TigTL avaXri- oKeTat, TapateOnoetar viv. | ..... ['O mpvtavs eim(ev): wees. .] TOV HV Kal eTETTAAN TOTE TO KOLVOV TAY KoouNTL av dia K]opynAcavod cat Uavoar[iov.......||.....~ Jos dedn[A@xév]ar mpl av. To wav avdropa Oob[je.......- |] MaEmov ev... d[.. wrfeseseecesee AbTOUPY(!)|nolay..... €ws Tod Tlayava.... Se) Sin 2 we BO so» e€¢e © @ 8 & 6,86 TOU> e@e3reft @ e@ @ e Oo e S aiTnow 2..e Re 6 167 @ ° From Oxyrhynchus. This record of the proceedings in the senate at Oxyrhynchus was written on an unusually broad sheet of papyrus. More than eighty letters have been lost from the beginning of the lines, and the part of the document still preserved can be interpreted only in part. Sufficient remains, however, to give valuable. in- formation in regard to the organization of the senate, the procedure in appointment to magistracies and liturgies, and details in regard to municipal administration. The first three lines give the con- clusion of a discussion about filling an official post, probably that of exegetes. The prytanis apparently brings the proposal before the senate in each case. In ll. 4-18 the topic is the appointment of [ 564 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT municipal magistrates, particularly the exegetae and their ézrurn- pntat. The latter are evidently official guardians of the officials elected, and apparently the senators are more interested in them than in the nominees to office. The relations of these guardians or supervisors to the exegetae are uncertain. They may have ad- ministered the duties of the office while the exegetae provided the funds, but it is more probable that they were responsible in some way for the person of the candidate, and were appointed to prevent his flight or avoidance of the liturgy and its obligations, Supervisors of gymnasiarchs (P. Oxy. 471) and of the office of agoranomus (Oertel, Die Liturgie, 239 f.) are also known, and the latter some- times replaces the agoranomus (P. Oxy. 1413, 1. 10 note). The relation of the magistrate, his supervisor, and his nominators be- comes a complicated problem which cannot be solved with the scanty evidence available. In |. 4 the prytanis opened the debate with a reference to honoring the emperor by the nomination of senators to magistracies in order that their payments for crowns of office should be available for the state. Evidently, at this period, only senators were available for magistracies (cf. pp. 89 f). The exegetae were asked to nominate candidates to succeed themselves or possibly to fill a vacancy in the college. They suggested a certain Serenus (?) for the post. The remarks of the prytanis, probably a request for more names, are lost. Sabinus now called attention to the fact that Plution had not paid his fee for the crown on entering the college of exegetae. This statement was confirmed by the secretary of the municipal treasury and the debate was continued, probably with a warning that the precedent should not be followed by Serenus. The senators made the statement that the nominee (Plution or Serenus) was named on the security of his own property. The syndic then apparently closed the discussion about Serenus with a remark of which the point 1s obscure, but which perhaps implied that Serenus was ineligible because he already held the post of gymnasiarch. The exegetae then nominated Ion and, on the proposal of the chief-priest, Phileas and Plutinus were named as Ion’s supervisors. Next comes a reference to business, probably concerning the supervisors, which is deferred to the next meeting. The prytanis then calls upon the other colleges to make nominations [ 565 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT for office, and he also asks for nominations to the senate. The third tribe, whose turn it was, apparently, to make nominations for litur- gies during the following year (cf. no. 191; Jouguet, Vie munic. 410 f.), now made a nomination for some office and the prytanis named a supervisor. In this case only one supervisor is named, and the office must be different from that to which Ion was nominated, as two éwutnpnrat were named for the exegetes. The third tribe then made another nomination, but the syndic intervened explaining that he had impounded the property of some individual (probably the person whose name had just been mentioned) and would report on its value later. ‘The meaning of Il. 15-17 is obscure, Grenfell thinks that objection was made to the previous nomination because only two names supported it. This was followed by the selection of candidates on the nomination of the senate collectively, and chosen from the whole body of the tribe or of the senate. The debate concluded with some remarks concerning the first year of their liturgy. This may imply that liturgies were now held for a longer term than one year which has hitherto been regarded as the normal tenure of office. In Il. 19-24 we find some new information about the gymnasiarchs. ‘They took turns in providing the oil, each furnishing the requisite amount for one day. The gymnasiarchs- elect also were required to share this burden, but in a body, not singly. From P. Oxy. 1418 (a.p. 247) we learn further that the office was often held for longer terms than a year, although the incumbent may have only been called upon to serve for short periods of a few days each time. In Il. 25 ff: the debate deals with the preparation of a gold crown due from the city, and the method of raising money to pay for it. 204. ACTA SENATUS OXYRHYNCHI (270-275 p. Chr.) P. Oxy, 1414. Poticn?, d]pire[ta]e [x]at rdd[alvta dexatéooapa. “H timr) trav po[te]yla]piwy tddavta éxatov reccap[dxovta|....... Jaréxo \ , a a > \ / a / aA v4 Ta Stadépovta THL vouml eis TO Mépos THS TWorEwS FE Hutcor. Myviatot arrodobvas éx ris dias arraiteicOwcay é[rrd nusov. . | -.+.)yiSerar. |....[O mptravs eim(ev): tH]v Tod lepod [ 566 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT yead|y]y xLatlecxéyacbat cal dpov Sed@xate kal érectandn(v) \ , e n nn A > \ e€ A \ \ Ta do-avTa vpely THL OTPATNYOL, ANNA [ot lepers py ||.....TOVS TO Ep}yov TovTO meTayerptcapéevous poe tals] yuvaixas avToy Svvac Gat kXwOeLv TO Neivoy TpoeBadovTO..|....+...0....0TWS \ \ rn (v4 A ’ 7 st An Ve >] a +3 fa! Kal Tepl TOUTO Gpov SHTE* OALye yap K@[pwal]i elowv al ev TaL A e A an \ 9 ” e \ + VOMOL ULOV TODTO TO Eldos Eyovow. Oi Bov[A]e[vTat eiz(or)- , / ¢ N43 \ / ius OD epe alee Jvat. Lemripsos Avoyévns o Kxat ‘Ayabds Aaipwv yevomevos UTouvnuatoypados Kat ws ypnpa(tifer) cuvv[ dios elmr(ev)* of Auvéutropou(?)..|...... Joa kal é[K] TexoapdKcovta évvéa Snvapiwv eivat TO Neivoyv TO oTHMoVLKOD, Evdexa Se Snvapla > a > / > \ Le) fa) / / avtois éEwdidcOn am[o Tod Tayutaxod Aoyou | ....ylevécOar. [Oc Bolureutai eim(ov): [de]xaevvéa Snvapiows apxeicOwoav ot NetvevTropou((s)) peta TO €Ewdial[o]uevov amd Tod talu]i[axod AOyou, Lemripsos Atoyévns o kal ’Ayalos Aaipay yevopevos || vVropuynuatoypa|pos Kai ws Kpnua(rifes) avvdixos eim(ev)* ec TovTo vplily [é]oo€ev emt tod otnpovixod, Telpay mMpocEveyKov- \ al / e f Ve / ¢e plelv cai tots wédrrovarly bdaive |..... ] ta€atwoay tiva ot ALvoUor of wéANOVTES Vpaivery THY OOdvNY TOU Lepod ava..,.| > re > , rn A 7 oh \ ...[avayvadbetons a€jtocews TA[v TH]s TOAEwS ALVOU'Pwr TreEph TOD weTa TAS Trépvow eEodiaceicay avTtots [viép...dpayuas SoOjvat GrAXras Spaxuas |.......dc]a [TH]v TrAEoTiiay [TA]v elO@v Kal THY TACOMLGOLaY TOV UTOUpy| av, weTAa THY aVayVacL 6 m[pvtaus eitr(ev)* SoOntwcap Tots ALwvoigols draL Spaxpat | ...Kolvta ets [o]luvmAnpwciw spaxpav diaxociwy dia THY TrEoTiiav ToYV Eldav. TodTo WndlicacGe || ...cuvte]Tywnpévou Tov KplKov Kal avUTaL TpooyevécOwoar. Oi TENOdYTES THY TLLHVY a / ? / CAL a CRA n rod [Aivov(?) | .......]a[a]pareOjoerar vyiv tie ERs Bourn. Oi Bovrevtal eiir(ov): oftw. | .......[avay]vaabévtos émuttan- patos Tepevtiov Apiov otpa(rnyod) Trepi Tov aipeOhvat exal....| edofev vrepteOHva|e[elis rv éEAs BovAny. | ...[avayvwobévtos émiotd|Apmatos tlov] oTpatnyov repli alipécews AdAXo[Y KaTta]- TopTav Cowv pelTa THY avadyywow Oo mpvTavis eizr(ev): || ..+-] paruota [de] trav x[Latlaropraév Tov Katadelpopér lov Coty Tots aya tlolis xatad[epopévors..|.......]umov cuvvatas Twas Tovs waplolyvras amo ths BovdrArs w@lvloudcapev &va , o \ / ¢ \ Lapan[iwva ... tva pn | .......] ylé]vnras. Of Bovrgeuvtal elmr(ov)* atiwnte TpUTaM, c@lou nuiv, mpvTari, KAAdS apyis [507%] 5 Io 15 20 25 30 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT Ka[A@>s ...... 6 mpvtTavs elm(ev)*...]..----- ] ev Tat Aoyto- tnptwor éotiv. Oi Bovrevtal eli(ov): émiecxds 0 mpvTaus. | ...+«[O rptravs eim(ev)* 6 vopjos KLe]Aever mpo EEaunvov Tov LeAAorpUTaviy dvonaterbar. “Trroutmvnok[w v]uads T..... || ....[of] Blovrev]rai efr(ov): peta oKérews % dvopacia yeiv[e|Tae 7[..... 6 mpuTavis elm(ev): |....-.- Ju yap ev) voows eiul Kal ths wreupas [Pléyyouas, ws érictacOat, Kal SSRI Fk |...[Oi PBovrevtat eir(ov): ....]dure mpvtav, evyev[és] mpv[tlave, ére edue UTrép Huov, Kae AEva TOD éerrav[w xpovov. ...|.... O mputavis eim(ev)*........ ] éoriv, kal ot hutlo]u rovt[lov] tod pépouvs [o]de[é]\[ov]res....eouTw... Seas wii atk [Oé Bouvrevrat eim(ov)........ [ye iets ih sla aeeke 0 mputavis elm(ev)* érrecd) o[nluepov mpoaoKxrAntov Bov[rAnv || Se pN WALDEN Abs Col aU aL WP 2 Jae w[povoltav troimontat atrav To... From Oxyrhynchus. This document is similar to no. 203. About sixteen letters are lost from the beginning of the lines and about fifty from the ends. The first question discussed deals with the textile industry which was apparently a municipal monopoly (cf. Grenfell-Hunt, Introduction to their commentary, and the refe- rences cited there). In Il. 1-4 some statement is made about debts and the value of garments. The receipt of six talents and a half of the fourteen talents from the nome on account of the city’s share is acknowledged. In Il. 4-11 Grenfell’s interpretation is as follows: The topic is the supply of yarn required for making the vestments of a local temple, which was under municipal jurisdiction, and the amount to be paid to the yarn-merchants. Owing to the difficulty of securing yarn the previous budget had to be modified. The village spinners had either refused or had been unable to carry out their engagements, and it had apparently been necessary to apply to the city yarn-merchants for the supply. Their price was considered too high by the senators and they reduced it from 49 to 30 denarii. In ll. 12-16 the weavers, who are organized in a guild, present a petition for higher remuneration in consideration of the increased cost of raw materials and the rise in wages of their assistants. The presentation of the petition to the local senate implies that the city controlled the industry rather than the state. In ll. 17 ff. reference is made to a communication from the [ 568 ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT strategus concerning the election of some official. Action on this was deferred until the next meeting. A further communication from the strategus dealt with the nomination of some one to convoy animals. The prytanis informed the senate that he had already nominated Sarapion with the approval of some senators who were with him at the time the communication was received in order that there might be no delay. The senate approved his appointment. From this it is clear that the prytanis did not make nominations on his own responsibility, but that he could act in an emergency and have the nomination approved at the next meeting of the senate (cf. pp. 89 ff; P. Oxy. 1412). In Il. 24 ff the prytanis calls attention to the fact that nominations for his office must be made six months in advance, and apparently asks for nominations from the senate. Apparently he was renominated by acclamation, but declined on the ground of ill-health. In this case the prytanis did not nominate his successor as was the case in certain other magistracies. Later the prefect appointed the prytanis (cf. no. 206), on the favorable vote of the senate. 205. DE EXACTIONE TRIBUTI (saec. 111 p. Chr.) P. Br. Mus. 2, 213; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 267. Ri ites CVO Bivins A stics A NG steer ns TATA Sse aie oats VOL. «TE Kal ...ecws Kal | ...dnr\@oai por a...TeK...evovoay | weed O1dbelor]y adrda xK[al] t[y]v wepull[ylevowévnv aa avtav mpocodov | call 7d] xa’ év SnrAdoai por. Ki yap |- §....wae. Te pos Yap TpaxGev | édéyyVOn, adtos éx[l] TA[Y] toTr@y | yevouevos OTs dv katadaPoupe ert || repuypadhe tov tapelov mpayOév, | rodTo Kata Tovs TOU Tapelou vomous | é« TE [[éx]] rév ody brrapxovtor | cal (Tov) b7revObvev KeXevaw aTro- cata|o[T]aPjvac. Eppad(c@ai ce) ev yo(uar). ||(’Erous) 8 Meyeip €. The origin of this piece of papyrus is unknown. It contains part of a rescript or edict of a strategus to the collector of taxes in one of the districts under his supervision. It is expressly stated that the law of the treasury rendered the property of a collector and of his guarantors liable for any fraud practised by him in the collection of the imperial revenues. Cf. Dig. 50. 6. 6, 10. [ 569 ] Io 15 20 25 DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT 206, DE MUNERE evOnviapxias (ca. saec. 11 fin. p. Chr.) P. Oxy. 1252, verso, col. 11. [Ilapa rod wlputdve[ws. | [Acé,] Hryeu@v déor7ror[ a] plolv, Tacav evOéviay bTapxew Tots TortTats,| | wddeoTa Sé THY TOD dptouv yopnytav. Kal viv etrvyds iv [......+.] | Kata tov mpoernrAvOota éviavTov avavéwolv TeToincat Tod ote pavou Tov] || evOnviapxiKovd Kal ayopavoplKod TOANBL Xpov@L TOVTwY 3 , > \ / > / ¢€ \ / c / [érriNeroe]|roTwv. Avtos Totvuy éyo, Hy[e]u@v Kupte, UL royvo]s yetpotovn[ Geis Sta] | THs evTUYods cou deklds els THY Tapa "O£upuyy[ettais] mputaveiav alopévas (?)] | wapedOov eri to avadncacbat Tov otépavoyv TovTov dpovTidla ovdepi]|av aAAnv TETOINMAL KALTOL....Va EXOV TA eTrLKElpEVa por avlad@pa]||Ta By \ / A v a \ > \ \ els Te THY Stoiknaw THY Snuociwy NOVTPa@Y Kal ets TA AloLTTAa ToAt||TiKa Satravnpata Kal TO cuveyas THL BovrAne mwepl THs TOV apyovTe[y amrodei]|Eews. Kal 89 To Taya TO TOV yupVa- atdpyov amédecEev [e]vOn[viapyas] | téws ard tpidy Tov > / / f / ¢ / x érnaiws Entroupévov povovs Svo [.......-] | “Hpdxrevov viov IIXoutdpxou cal Saparappova viov ....p..[...+..00]||Tuves \ \ \ \ al a / > / KATA wey THY TpoTpoTHY THS Bovrms twaperOovtes alvd]t[iKa Tv] | apxnv mapnitncavto, toTtepov dé Teva OévTes Kal ...oVTES aver d8ovro] | cal éx pépous eyopnynoav Thy evOnviapyelay iv + nw 5) / 9 A A / ede. maoalv.....é«] | KAnpouv amrodoOAvar THe wore. TeTpap- pévos yap eb éxaotov tétaxtas [éx KrAHpov] | Urép Tod avTods pn GOpows THY TeTPauNnvov YopnynoavTas D[.......] || éweTpl- ¢ > / if. ” BeoOat. Ipoetpewaunv “Appovioy IIroAXapio[vos évapyov] | yupvaciapyov yvwobévta odetre AOLTrOY Ava THS evOn[vLap- yeas] | éavtod év tee petak® arodotvar brép Tod TovToUS avaktnow ol ticavras] | evpapas kal TO brdXOLTOV THs apyns aE > a ’ \ > \ > , = auéurt@s amodovva. “A[AAA érel] | émictadévtes ovToL Kopnynoat Tas Tpopas THe TWoNEL TOU UrroXotrov [ypovov] || TAS APXNS AVTOV aVTLNYoVTES EppwYTal, KATA TO avayKatov [mpoc- hevyw] | eri thy ony idecxpiveray akidy 81d TOD otpaTnyod avrov[s] Tov..... From Oxyrhynchus. This document belongs strictly to the Byzantine period, but it has been included in this collection because [ 57° ] DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT we learn that the office of eutheniarch and agoranomus had been discontinued in Oxyrhynchus before the beginning of the Byzantine period and had only recently been revived by the prefect. At the end of the second century Oxyrhynchus had nine and probably twelve eutheniarchs. The office had lapsed like many of the other municipal offices in the third century as the increasing cost of the liturgies attached to the magistracies made all positions in the municipality undesirable and so burdensome that citizens sought to avoid public service at any cost, even by going into exile or surrender- ing their property (cf. pp. 112 ff. nos. 180, 194, 198). In the period of Diocletian’s reign it is evident that many changes in organization had taken place. The appointment of the prytanis was ratified by the prefect. ‘The order of gymnasiarchs nominated the eutheniarchs, apparently on their own risk; for they had only nominated two out of the three required. ‘These two had sought to evade the office, but were finally persuaded to undertake the position. Each served four months in order that the difficulties of collective liability might be avoided. ‘The two appointees, having filled the first two terms in a somewhat dilatory fashion, refused to act in the third period of four months, and the prytanis asked the prefect to instruct the strategus to compel them to fulfil their term. Los 7terl ABBREVIATIONS Works frequently cited are designated by the following abbreviations: Abbott = Abbott, Roman Political Institutions. An. &p. = L année épigraphique. Archiv = Archiv fiir Papyrusforschung. Beaudouin = Beaudouin, Les grandes domaines dans 1 Empire romain. BGU.= Aegyptische Urkunden aus den kiniglichen Museum zu Berlin Griechische Urkunden. Bruns = Bruns, Fontes iuris Romani antiqui. B.C.H. = Bulletin de correspondance hellénique. Cagnat, JGRR. = Cagnat, Inscriptiones Graecae ad res Romanas pertinentes. C1G. = Corpus inscriptionum Graecarum. CIL. = Corpus inscriptionum Latinarum. C.P.R. = Corpus papyrorum Raineri. C.P.H. = Corpus papyrorum Hermopolitanorum. Cod. F.= Codex Fustinianus. Cod. Th. = Codex Theodosianus. Dessau = Dessau, Inscriptiones Latinae selectae. Dict. Dar. = Daremberg-Saglio, Dictionnaire des antiquités grecques et romaines. Dig. = Digesta corporis iuris civilis. Ditt. Or. Gr. = Dittenberger, Orientis Graecae inscriptiones selectae. Ditt. Sy//.3 = Dittenberger, Sy//oge inscriptionum Graecarum, ed. ter. E.E. = Ephemeris epigraphica, CIL. supplementum. Girard = Girard, Textes de droit romain. Herzog = Herzog, Geschichte und System der rimischen Staatsverfassung. Hirschfeld = Hirschfeld, Die kaiserliche Verwaltungsbeamten bis auf Dio- cletian. I.B.M.= Ancient Greek Inscriptions in the British Museum. IG. = Inscriptiones Graecae. Jouguet, Vie munic. = Jouguet, La vie municipale dans l Egypte romaine. Karlowa = Karlowa, Rémische Rechtsgeschichte. Lafoscade = Lafoscade, De epistulis imperatorum magistratuumque Ro- mManorum . Latyschev = Latyschev, Inscriptiones antiguae orae Septentrionalis Ponti Euxini, Graecae et Latinae. [ 5734) ABBREVIATIONS Le Bas-Waddington = Le Bas-Waddington, Voyage archéologique en Gréce et en Asie Mineure: Inscriptions. Liebenam, St. Verw. = Liebenam, Stédteverwaltung im rimischen Kaiser- reiches. Madvig, Verf. u. Verw.= Madvig, Die Verfassung und Verwaltung des rimischen Staats. Marquardt, St. Verw. = Marquardt, Rimische Staatsverwaltung. Mitteis, Chrestomathie; Grundziige = Mitteis-Wilcken, Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde, Zweiter Band: Furisticher Teil. Erste Halfte; Grundziige. Zweite Halfte; Chrestomathie. . Amh. = Amherst Papyri. . Br. Mus. = Greek Papyri in the British Museum. . Fay. = Fayiim Towns and their Papyri. . Fior. = Papiri Fiorentint. . Giess. = Griechische Papyri im Museum d. Oberhess. Geschichtsvereins zu Giessen. . Oxy. = Oxyrhynchus Papyri. . Ryl. = Catalogue of the Greek Papyri in the Rylands Library. P.S.I.= Papiri della Societa Italiana. P. Teb. = Tebtunis Papyri. Prosop. = Prosopographia imperii Romani. R.E. = Pauly-Wissowa-Kroll, Realencyclopadie der classischen Altertums- wissenschaft. Riccobono = Riccobono, Fontes iuris Romani anteiustiniani. Rostowzew, Gesch. d. rim. Kol. = Rostowzew, Studien zur Geschichte der romischen Kolonats. Supp. Ep. Gr. = Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum. T.A.M. = Tituli Asiae Minoris. Tod = Tod, Lnternational Arbitration. Wilcken, Chrestomathie; Grundziige = Mitteis-Wilcken, Grundziige und Chrestomathie der Papyruskunde, Erster Band: Historische Teil. Erste Halfte; Grundziige. Zweite Halfte; Chrestomathie. Wilmans = Wilmans, Exempla inscriptionum Latinarum. = Sas Sola Ba = He = SEA, L 574 J Io. 12. 13. I4. LIST OF DOCUMENTS I. DOCUMENTS FROM ITALY AND THE PROVINCES . Epistula Flaminini ad Chyretienses (196-194 a. Chr.). IG. 1X, 2, 338; CIG. 1770; Ditt. Syll.3 593; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 1. . Decretum proconsulis Hispaniae Ulterioris (189 a. Chr.). CIL. ut, 5041; Dessau, 15; Bruns, 70; Riccobono, p. 248. . Epistula Spuri Postumi, praetoris, ad Delphos (189 a. Chr.). Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 10; Ditt. Syll.3 612. Epistula consulis ad Heracleotas (ca. 189-188 a. Chr.). CIG. 3800; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 3; Ditt. Syll3 618; Rev. é. an. 19 (1917), 237 f- . Senatus consulta de Thisbensibus (170 a. Chr.). IG. Vu, 22253 Ditt. Syll.3 646; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 113; Riccobono, p- 199; Bruns, 37. . Senatus consultum de Delo (164 a. Chr.). Ditt. Syl.3 664. . Senatus consultum de Tiburtibus (ca. 159 a. Chr.). CIL. 1, 201 = XIV, 3584; Dessau, 19; Bruns, 39; Riccobono, p. 204. Senatus consultum de Narthaciensibus et Melitaeensibus (159-147 a. Chr.). IG. 1X, 2, 89; Ditt. Syll3 674; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 8; Tod, xxxrv; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 12. . Epistula Q. Fabi Maximi ad Dymaeos (ca. 139 a. Chr.). CIG. 1543; Ditt. Syl/.3 684; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 4. Sententia O. M. Minuciorum inter Genuates et Viturios (117 a. Chr.). CIL. 11, 199 = V, 7749; Dessau, 5946; Bruns, 184. . Lex Osca Tabulae Bantinae (150-100 a. Chr.). Bruns, 8; Girard, p. 26; Riccobono, p. 130; Buck, Oscan and Umbrian Grammar, p. 230; v. Planta, Gramm. d. osk.-umbr. Dial. 2, 599; Conway, Exempla Selecta, z. Senatus consultum de controversia inter publicanos et Pergamenos (in. saec. 1 a. Chr.). E.E. 4, 213 ff.; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 15. Decretum Cn. Pompei Strabonis (go a. Chr.). CIL. 1”, 709; Dessau, 8888; Girard, p. 61; An. &. 1911, n0. 126; Bull. arch. com. 38 (1910), 275. Tlienses honorant Lucium Iulium Caesarem (89 a. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 440. Ry sda ey 16. 17% 18. TQ. 20. 2I. 22. eh 24. 25. 26. eh 28. 29. 30. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Tabulae ad memoriam libertatis restitutae servandam aptae (81 a.Chr.). CIL. 1, 587, 588, 589. Senatus consultum de ‘Tabenis (82 a. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 442. Senatus consultum de Stratonicensibus (ca. 81 a. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 441, ll. 1-129; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 16. Senatus consultum de Amphiarai Oropi agris (73 a. Chr.). IG. vit, 4133 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 18; Ditt. Syll.3 747; Bruns, 42; Riccobono, p. 209; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 25. Lex Antonia de ‘Termessibus (ca. 71 a. Chr.). CIL. 1, 204; Bruns, 14; Dessau, 38; Girard, pp. 68-70; Riccobono, pp- 105-107. Lex municipi Tarentini (ca. 88-62 a. Chr.?). Dessau, 6086; Bruns, 27; Riccobono, p. 132; Girard, p. 61. Lex Gabinia Calpurnia de Deliis (58 a. Chr.). Diirrbach, Chozx d’inscr. Délos, 163; Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 335. Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad provinciales (ca. 56-50 a. Chr.). Knackfuss, Das Rathaus von Milet, p. 101, ll. 38 ff. Pergameni honorant Publium Servilium Isauricum (ca. 46 a. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 449; Fraenkel, Alterthiimer von Pergamon, 413. Tabula Heracleensis, vulgo Lex Iulia Municipalis (45 a. Chr.). CIL. 1, 206; Bruns, 18; Dessau, 6085; Girard, p. 80; Riccobono, Pp. 109. Senatus consultum et epistula Caesaris ad Mytilenaeos (45 a. Chr.). IG. Xi, 2, 35, ll. 14, f-; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 33; Ditt. Syll.3 764. Lex coloniae Genitivae Iuliae seu Ursonensis (44 a. Chr.). CIL. 11, S. 5439; Dessau, 6087; Bruns, 28; Girard, p. 89; Riccobono, p- 142. Lex de Gallia Cisalpina, vulgo Lex Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina (49-42 a. Chr.). CIL. 1, 205=XI, 1146; Bruns, 16; Girard, p. 72; Riccobono, p. 135. Fragmentum Atestinum (49-42 a. Chr.). Notizie degli scavi, 1880, 213; Bruns, 173 Girard, p. 78; Riccobono, p- 140. Epistulae Antoni et Caesaris ad Plarasenses et Aphrodisienses (39— Ary Olid bs CIG. 2737; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 5; Bruns, 43; Ditt. Or. Gr. 453- 455; Riccobono, p. 217. Epistula Augusti ad Mylasenses (31 a. Chr.). Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 6; Ditt. Syll.3 768. [ 576 ] LIST OF DOCUMENTS . Titulus operis publici (31 a. Chr.). Notizie degli scavi, 1915, 139; An. ép. 1916, no. 60, . Epistula imperatoris, vel proconsulis, ad Mylasenses (ca. 30 a. Chr.). Le Bas-Waddington, 3. 442-443; CIG. 2695), 27008. . Edictum Augusti de aquaeductu Venafrano (17-11 a. Chr.). CIL. X, 4842; Bruns, 77; Girard, p. 186; Riccobono, p. 316; Dessau, 5743- . Decretum concili Asiae de fastis provincialibus (ca. 9 a. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 458, ll. 78 ff.; Inschriften von Priene, 105. . Epistula P. Corneli Scipionis, proconsulis Asiae, ad Thyatirenos (7-6 a. Chr.). Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 1211; Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 8. . Epistula imperatoris Augusti ad Cnidios (6 a. Chr.). Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 9; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1031; IG. xl, 3, 1743 Ditt. Syll.3 780. . Iusiurandum Paphlagonum (3 a. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1373; Ditt. Or. Gr. 532. . Res gestae divi Augusti (28 a. Chr.—6 p. Chr.). CIL. Ill, pt. 11, pp. 769 f.3 Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 158. . Edictum proconsulis Asiae de muro Ephesio (ca. 11 p. Chr.). I.B.M. 5213 Viereck, Sermo Graecus, 7; Ditt. Syll.3 784. . Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad Chios (5-14 p. Chr.). CIG. 2222; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 943; Ditt. Syll.3 785. . Titulus honorarius (ca. 14 p. Chr.). CIL. 111, 17413 Dessau, 938. . Titulus sepulchralis (p. 14 p. Chr.). CIL. Ul, 52323; Dessau, 1977. . Decretum centumvirorum (26 p. Chr.). CIL. X1, 3805; Dessau, 6579. . Tabula patronatus (27 p. Chr.). CIL. Vv, 4919; Dessau, 6100. . Fasti magistratuum municipalium (p. 33 p. Chr.). CIL. X, 1233; Dessau, 6124. . Lites inter Cierenses et Metropolitanos (11-35 p. Chr.). IG. 1X, 2, 261; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 31; Tod, XLt. . Turisiurandi Aritiensium in principem formula (37 p. Chr.). CIL. 11, 1723 Dessau, 190; Bruns, ror. . Decretum et iusiurandum Assiorum (37 p. Chr.). Bruns, 102; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 251; Ditt. Syll.3 797. . Edictum Claudi de civitate Anaunorum (46 p. Chr.). CIL. v, 5050; Dessau, 206; Bruns, 79; Girard, p. 188; Riccobono, p- 318; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 39. AMA heyy 37 50. 64. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Oratio Claudi de iure honorum Gallis dando (48 p. Chr.). CIL. xul, 1668; Dessau, 212; Bruns, 52; Riccobono, p. 228; Nip- perdey’s Tacztus!°, 2, 317-322. . Edictum Claudi de cursu publico (49-50 p. Chr.). CIL. 111, S. 1, 72513; Dessau, 214. . Decretum Rhodiorum de libertate (51 p. Chr.). IG. Xl, 1, 2, et corrigenda, p. 206; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1123. . Titulus honorarius (p. 54 p. Chr.). Compt. rend. de lacad. d. inscr. et bel. lettr. 1915, 396; An. ép. 1916, no. 42. Epistula imperatoris Neronis ad Rhodios (55 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1124; Ditt. Syll.3 810. . De praediis publicis Gortyniorum (64 p. Chr.). "Apxatodoyikov Aedtiov, 2 (1916), 6. . Oratio imperatoris Neronis de Graecorum libertate (67 p. Chr.). IGi Vu, 27133 Ditt. Sy 814. . Decretum Petroni et Pupi de finibus Sagalassensium (54-68 p. Chr.). de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 40; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 335; Ditt. OroGr, $38: ° . Decretum proconsulis Sardiniae de finibus Patulcensium et Galillen- sium (69 p. Chr.). CIL. X, 78523; Dessau, 5947; Bruns, 71a; Girard, p. 179; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 5, 325 ff-3 Riccobono, p. 256; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 43. . Rescriptum Vespasiani ad Vanacinos (ca. 72 p. Chr.). CIL. X, 8038; Bruns, 80; Girard, p. 190; Riccobono, p. 320. . Titulus sacer (76 p. Chr.). CIL. 1, 1610; Dessau, 1981. . Epistula Vespasiani ad Saborenses (78 p. Chr.). CIL. 1, 1423; Dessau, 6092; Bruns, 81; Girard, p. 190; Riccobono, p: 320, . Lex de officiis et honoribus flaminis provinciae Narbonensis (69- 79 p. Chr.). CIL,. x1, 6038; Dessau, 6964; Riccobono, p. 159; Bruns, 29; Carette, Les assemblées prov. de la Gaule rom. 445 ff. . Epistula Domitiani ad Falerienses (82 p. Chr.). CIL. 1X, 5420; Bruns, 82; Girard, p. 191; Riccobono, p. 321. Lex Salpensa (81-84 p. Chr.). CIL. 11, 1963; Dessau, 6088; Bruns, 30a; Girard, p- 108; Riccobono, p- 162. bo 573] 65. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Lex Malacitana (81-84 p. Chr.). CIL. ul, 1964; Dessau, 6089; Bruns, 306; Girard, p. 1123 Riccobono, p. 168. 65@. Edictum L. Antisti Rustici, legati Domitiani, de annona coloniae 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. rie 72. 73: 74: 75° 76. 77: 78. 79: 80. Antiochiae (ca. 93 p. Chr.). Trans. Am. Phil. Assoc. 55 (1924), 5 ff.; fourn. Rom. Studies, 14.(1924), 180. Titulus honorarius (81-96 p. Chr.). CIL. 11, 19453; Dessau, 1982. Titulus honorarius (96-97 p. Chr.). B.C.H. 44 (1920), 73; An. &. 1922, no. 30. Epistulae Laberi Maximi et aliorum de finibus Histrianorum (43- 100 p. Chr.). An. &. 1919, no. 10; Annales de l’académie Roumaine, 38, no. 15; Wilhelm, Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 59 (1922), 78 ff-3 Suppl. Ep. Gr. 1, 329. Decretum Chiorum de pecunia administranda (saec. 1 p. Chr.). Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 948. Smyrnaeorum Portaria (saec. fere 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). I.B.M. 10213 Ditt. Syl/.3 1262; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1427. Epistula Aquili Proculi, proconsulis Asiae, ad Ephesios (104 p. Chr.). I.B.M. 481 (pt. Iv, p. 246, ll. 336 f7.); Laum, Stzftungen, 74. Titulus operis publici (111 p. Chr.). An. &p. 1904, no. 59. Senatus consultum et epistula Traiani ad Pergamenos de ludis in- staurandis (112-117 p. Chr.). CIL. ut, S. 7086; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 336; Fraenkel, Alterthiimer von Pergamon, VII, 2, 269. Epistula procuratorum ad colonos Villae Magnae (116-117 p. Chr.). Bruns, 114; Girard, p. 870; Riccobono, p. 352. Epistula imperatoris ‘Traiani ad Astypalaeenses (117 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRRK. 4, 10323; IG. XII, 3, 175. Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Astypalaeenses (118 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 19; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1032¢; IG. XII, 3, 176; Ditt. Syl.3 832. Epistula legati ad Pompaelonenses (119 p. Chr.). CIL. 1, 2959. Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Ephesios (120 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 23; Ditt. Sy//3 833. Epistula imperatoris Hadriani (?) ad Heracleotas (121-125 p. Chr.). B.C.H. 21 (1897), 162. Epistula legati Lyciae, Valeri Severi, ad Rhodiapolitanos (125 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 104; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 16. [ 579 4 37-2 SI. 82. 83. 84. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Rescriptum imperatoris Hadriani(?) ad Pergamenos de collybo (125 p. Chr.?). Ditt. Or. Gr. 484; Fraenkel, Alterthiimer von Pergamon, VUI, 2, 279. Epistula Avidi Quieti, proconsulis Asiae, ad Aezanitas (125-126 p.-Cht.); CIG. 3835; Le Bas-Waddington, 860-863; Lafoscade, 93; Ditt. Or. Gr. 502; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 571; CIL. ul, 355, S. 7003; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 57. Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Stratonicenses (127 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 23; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1156a; Ditt. Syll.3 837; Riccobono, P+\325+ Epistula Pomponi Vettoniani, legati Lyciae, ad commune Lyciorum (128 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 143 Lafoscade, 103. . Epistula imperatoris Hadriani ad Ephesios (129 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 26; 1.B.M. 3, 487; Ditt. SylJ3 838. Privilegia concessa Dianae Ephesiae ab imperatore Hadriano (129 p. Chr.). Ditt. Syll.3 839. . Epistula Sufenatis Veri, legati Lyciae, ad lyciarcham (131 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 105; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, c. 18. . Titulus honorarius (132 p. Chr.). CIL. tI, S. 1, 72823 Dessau, 315. . Lex Palmyrenorum (137 p. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 629; Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 1056, ll. 1-16. . Lex de certa olei portione rei publicae vendenda (117-138 p. Chr.). IG, 11 and 11 (ed. min.), 1100; de Ruggiero, L’ arbitrato pubblico, 36. . Epistula imperatoris Hadriani (?) ad Athenienses (117-138 p. Chr.). IG. 11 and 11 (ed. min.), 1103. . Edictum imperatoris Hadriani (?) de vectigalibus (117-138 p. Chr.). IG. 11 and 111 (ed. min.), 1104. . Sermo et epistulae procuratorum de terris vacuis excolendis (117= 138 p. Chr.). Carcopino, Mélanges de l’école franc. de Rome, 26 (1906), 365-4813 An. ép. 1907, no. 196; Bruns, 116; Girard, p. 874; Riccobono, p. 357. . Titulus honorarius (117-138 p. Chr.). CIL. U1, 5941; Dessau, 6954. . Titulus honorarius (119-138 p. Chr.). CIL. I, 3239. . Senatus consultum de nundinis saltus Beguensis (138 p. Chr.). CIL, Vil, 270 = vill, §. 11451; Bruns, 61; Riccobono, p. 236. [ 580 ] 97: Too, IOI. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106, 107. 108. 109. It2. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Epistula Corneli Proculi, legati Lyciae, ad commune Lyciorum (139 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 28; Lafoscade, 108. . Epistula proconsulis Asiae, L. Venulei Aproniani, ad Ephesios (ca. 138-139 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 94. . Epistula Corneli Proculi, legati Lyciae, ad scribam publicum Myrorum (140 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 739, c. 343; Lafoscade, 110. Epistula imperatoris Antonini Pii ad Ephesios (140-144 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 513; Ditt. Sy//.3 849. Epistula imperatoris Antonini Pii ad Ephesios (145 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 54; Ditt. Syl. 850; I.B.M. 3, 491. Epistula Rupili Severi, legati Lyciae, ad lyciarcham (150 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 114; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 739, c. 45. Titulus operis publici (152 p. Chr.). An. ép. 1904, nO. 21. Tres epistulae Antonini Pii ad Coronenses et Thisbenses (140- 155 p. Chr.). IG. vu, 2870. Edictum proconsulis Asiae, Popili Cari, de diebus festis Ephesiorum (ca. 160 p. Chr.). I.B.M. 4823 CIG. 2954; Ditt. Syl/.3 867. Senatus consultum de Cyzicenis (138-160 p. Chr.). CIL. 111, S.7060; Dessau, 7190; £.E. 3,156; Bruns, 62; Riccobono, p. 237. Titulus honorarius (138-161 p. Chr.). CIL. X11, 594; Dessau, 6988. Epistula imperatoris Antonini Pii ad Minoetas (138-161 p. Chr.). IG. Xu, 7, 242; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, roro. Epistula praefectorum praetorio (168-172 p. Chr.). CIL. 1X, 2438; Bruns, 715; Riccobono, p. 260. . Senatus consultum de sumptibus ludorum gladiatorum minuendis (176-177 p. Chr.). CIL. 1, S. 6278; Dessau, 5163; Bruns, 63; Riccobono, p. 238. . Rescriptum Commodi de saltu Burunitano (180-183 p. Chr.). CIL, vu, 10570; cf. S. 14464; Dessau, 6870; Bruns, 86; Girard, p. 199; Riccobono, p. 361. Epistula imperatoris Commodi ad Chersonesitanos de capitulo leno- cinii (185-186 p. Chr.). Latyschev, 4, 81; CYL. ut, S. 13750; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 860, ll. 32 ff. [ 581 ] 113. 114. IIS. 116. LIy2 118. I1Q. 120. I2!I. 122. ro) 124. 126. 126. 127, 128. 129. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Epistula Iuli Saturnini, legati Syriae,ad Phaenesios (185-186 p. Chr.): Lafoscade, 117; Cagnat, JGRR. 3, 1119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 609. Epistula proconsulis Lyciae et Pamphyliae ad Sidymeos eh a 192 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 582; T.A.M. 2, 175. Titulus honorarius (150-200 p. Chr.). | An. &p. 1902, no. 164; Dessau, 6780; Compt. rend. de lacad. d. inser. et bel. lettr. 1902, 38. Titulus honorarius (saec. 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 634; T.A.M. 2, 291. Decretum Hierapolitanorum de paraphylacibus (saec. 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 527. Edictum vel epistula auctoris incerti ad Beroiaeos (saec. I-11 p. che ye B.C.H. 37 (1913), 90f- Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad Coos (saec. 1-11 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1044; Paton and Hicks, Inscriptions of Cos, 26. Epistula imperatoris incerti ad proconsulem seu legatum Asiae (saec. 11 p. Chr.). Rew. d. ét. gr. 19 (1906), 83. Rescriptum imperatoris ad Lacedaemonios (saec. 11 p. Chr.). IG. Vv, 21. Titulus honorarius Poglensis (saec. 1 vel 11 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 3, 409. Titulus honorarius (saec. 11 p. Chr.). Cagnat, JGRR. 4, 788; Ramsay, Cities and Bishoprics, 2, 462. Edictum seu epistula proconsulis ad Ephesios (saec. 11 p. Chr.). B.C.H. 7 (1883), 5043 Inschriften von Magnesia, 114. Titulus honorarius (150-200 p. Chr.). CIL. viu, S. 17899=E£.E. 5, 698. Titulus honorarius (saec. 11 p. Chr.). Rev. arch. 3 (1916), 3393; An. &. 1916, no. 120. Epistula imperatorum Severi et Caracallae ad Smyrnaeos (198 2.0 DACht.); CIG. 3178; Lafoscade, 72; Ditt. Syl/.3 876; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1402. Decretum Myrensium de navigatione (saec. 11 vel 111 p. Chr.). Le Bas-Waddington, 13113; CIG. 43024 (Add. p. 1136), Ditt. Or. Gr. 572. Edictum M. Ulpi proconsulis et epistula Gemini Modesti proconsulis Achaiae ad ‘Thisbenses (saec. 11 vel 111 in. p. Chr.). IG. vu, 2226, 2227, Add. p. 7473; Ditt. Syl/.3 884. [ 582 ] 139. 140. I4I. 142. 143. 144. 145. LIST OF DOCUMENTS . Epistula imperatorum Severi et Caracallae ad Tyranos (201 p. Chr.). CIL. 111, 781; Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 598; Bruns, 89; Dessau, 423; Ricco- bono, p. 332. . Edictum legati imperatorum, Q. Sicini Clari, de Pizo condenda (202. p., Chr’). Cagnat, IGRR. 1, 766; Ditt. Sy/l.3 880; Kalinka, Ant. Denk. Bulgar, 34. . Edictum imperatorum Severi et Caracallae de hospitio (204 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 743 Ditt. SylJ.3 881; CIL, 1, S. 14203%°9; IG. XII, 5, 132. . Decretum Mylasensium de trapezitis (209-211 p. Chr.). Ditt. OniGr: ere. . Epistula imperatoris Caracallae ad Philadelphenos (213-214 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 78; Ditt. Syl/.3 883; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1619. . Tabula patronatus (222 p. Chr.). CIL. vi, 14543 Dessau, 6109. . Album decurionum (223 p. Chr.). CIL. IX, 338; Dessau, 6121. . Epistula proconsulis Asiae ad Aphrodisienses (222-235 p. Chr.). Rev, d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 86 f. . Titulus honorarius (222-235 p. Chr.). Rev. d. ét. grec. 19 (1906), 84. Rescriptum imperatoris Gordiani.ad Scaptoparenos (238 p. Chr.), CIL. 111, S. 12336; Cagnat, JGRR. 1, 674; Ditt. Sy/.3 888; Riccobono, p- 3713 Girard, p. 205. Titulus honorarius (238 p. Chr.). CIL. X11, 3162; Desjardins, Géographie de la Gaule rom. planches VII, VIII, IX. Rescriptum imperatorum de querellis Araguenorum (244-247 p. Chr.). CIL. ut, S. 141913 Ditt. Or. Gr. 519; Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 598; Bruns, 93; Girard, p. 207; Riccobono, p. 373; Rém. Mitth. 13 (1898), 231 ff. Epistula colonorum ad imperatores (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.). Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 37/- Epistula vicanorum ad imperatores (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.). Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 25. QOuerellae vicanorum (ca. 200-250 p. Chr.). Denkschrifien der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 11. Epistula imperatorum ‘Traiani Deci et Herenni Etrusci ad Aphro- disienses (251 p. Chr.). Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 1624; CIG. 2743. [ 583 ] 146. 147. each 160. 16r. LIST OF DOCUMENTS Decretum decurionum et possessorum (256, vel fortasse 186, p. Chr.). An. &p. 1903, no. 2023 cf. ibid. 1894, no. 61. Edictum imperatorum Valeriani et Gallieni de nundinis (253- 259 p. Chr.). Le Bas-Waddington, 3, 27204; Ditt. Or. Gr. 262; CIG. 4474. . Epistula proconsulis Asiae de nundinis constituendis (260-270 p. Chr.). Cagnat, IGRR. 4, 1381. . Decretum xv virum de sacris faciundis (289 p. Chr.). CIL. X, 3698; Dessau, 4175; Bruns, 75; Riccobono, p. 262. . Titulus honorarius (saec. 111 p. Chr.). Denkschriften der Wiener Akademie, 57 (1914-1915), 87. . Epistula imperatorum incertorum de constitutione civitatis Tyman- denorum (saec. 111 p. Chr.?). CIL. 111, S. 6866; Dessau, 6090; Bruns, 34; Riccobono, p. 338. . Rescriptum de officialium exactionibus inlicitis (saec. 111 p. Chr.). CIL. vu, S. 17639. . Titulus operis publici (ca. 312 p. Chr.). CIL. Vill, 210=VIII, S. 11299. . Epistula Ablabi praefecti praetorio et Constantini imperatoris de iure civitatis Orcistanorum (323-326; 331 p. Chr.). CIL. 111, S. 7000; Dessau, 6091; Bruns, 35; Riccobono, p. 341. . Edictum Constantini ad Umbros (326-337 p. Chr.). CIL. XI, 5265; Dessau, 705; Mommsen, Ges. Schr. 8, 25. . Titulus honorarius (362-363 p. Chr.). CIL. Vv, 8987; Dessau, 755. Rescriptum Valentiniani Valentis Gratiani de moenibus instaurandis et de reditu fundorum civitatium Asiae (371 p. Chr.). Anzeiger der Akad. der Wissen. in Wien, 1905, no. 10; Fahreshefte d. dst. archaeol. Inst. 8 (1905), Beiblatt, 71 f.; ibid. 9 (1906), 40 f.; Bruns, 974; Riccobono, p. 374. . Rescriptum imperatorum Valentiniani Valentis Gratiani ad Festum proconsulem Asiae de ludis provincialibus (375 p. Chr.). Bruns, 976. . Titulus honorarius (376 p. Chr.). CIL. Vi, 17363; Dessau, 1256. Index sodalium familiae publicae (saec. 1v p. Chr.?). CIL. xv, 255; Dessau, 6153. Decretum provinciae Africae (saec. 1v p. Chr.?). CIL. virt, S. rr014. [ 584 ] 170, zt. 172. Lea: 174. res 176. Gae 178. LIST OF DOCUMENTS II. DOCUMENTS FROM EGYPT . Edictum L. Aemili Recti de angaria (42 p. Chr.). P. Br. Mus. 11713; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 439. . Edictum Cn. Vergili Capitonis praefecti (49 p. Chr.). CIG. 3, 4956, Addenda, p. 1236; Lafoscade, 119; Ditt. Or. Gr. 665. . Edictum L. Lusi Getae de immunitate sacerdotum (54 p. Chr.). Lafoscade, 120; Ditt. Or. Gr. 664; Milne, Greek Inscriptions, p. 11. . Edictum Tiberi Iuli Alexandri praefecti (68 p. Chr.). Ditt. Or. Gr. 669; CIG. 4957 (cf. vol. 3, Add. p. 1236); Riccobono, p. 253; Girard, p. 174. . De censu dwdexadpaxpwv (86-87 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 258; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 216. . De vectigalibus locandis (ca. 81-96 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 44; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 275. . Edictum Gai Vibi Maximi, praefecti (104 p. Chr.). P. Br. Mus. 3, 904; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 202. mee sumptibus yupvac.apxias minuendis (1 I4—I1I7 p. Chr.). P. Amh. 2, 70; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 149. Epistulae Petroni Mamertini et Statili Maximi de immunitate civium Antinoopolitanorum (135, 156 p. Chr.). Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 26. De vectigalibus exigendis a senioribus vici (136 p. Chr.). P. Br. Mus. 2, 255; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 272. De civibus ad munera subeunda nominatis (ca. 137 p. Chr.). BGU. 235; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 399. De statu civium Romanorum et Alexandrinorum (139 p. Chr.). BGU. 747; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 35. De immunitate medicorum (140 p. Chr.). P. Fay. 106; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 395. Edictum M. Semproni Liberalis, praefecti (154 p. Chr.). BGU. 372; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 19. De immunitate patribus Antinoopolitanorum concessa (159 p. Chr.). Compt. rend. de Vacad. d. inscr. et bell. lettr. 1905, 160 ff.; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 28. De immunitate veteranorum (172 p. Chr.). BGU. 180; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 396. De muneribus sacerdotum (177 p. Chr.). BGU. 194; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 84. fo stsn LIST OF DOCUMENTS . De immunitate mulierum (ca. 180 p. Chr.). P. Teb. 327; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 394. . De fuga eorum qui muneribus obnoxii sunt (186 p. Chr.). P. Geneva, 37; Wilcken, Chrestomathte, 400. . De nominatione magistratuum (192 p. Chr.). Po Ry 99k 4295 . De muneribus vicanorum (194 p. Chr.). BGU. 15, col. 1; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 393. . De immunitate Antinoopolitanorum (196 p. Chr.). BGU. 1022; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 29. . De connubio Antinoopolitanorum et Aegyptorum (saec. 11 p. Chr.). Compt. rend. del acad. d. inscr. et bell. lettr. 1905, 160 ff.; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 27. . De munere eorum qui vectigalia exigunt (200 p. Chr.?). PL OXY. 1405; . De vicis deminuendis (ca. 200 p. Chr.). Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 8; Festschrift Hirschfeld, 125. . De muneribus Oxyrhynchi (201 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 54. . De vectigalibus (ca. 202 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 890; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 280. . Epistula imperatoris Septimi Severi ad Aurelium Horionem (202 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 705, ll. 54 ff.; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 407. . Querellae vicanorum contra possessores (207 p. Chr.). Preisigke, Sammelbuch, 4284, ll. 1-17. . De tribubus metropoleos (212 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 1030; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 36. . Edictum Caracallae de civitate peregrinis danda (212 p. Chr.). P. Giess. 40 (cf. vol. 111, p. 164); Mitteis, Chrestomathie, 377; Segré- Beltrami, Rivista di Filologia, 45 (1917), 16 ff.; Meyer, Furistische Papyri, 1; Girard, p. 203. . Edictum Caracallae de reditu Aegyptiorum in agros (215 p. Chr. P. Giess. 40, col. 11, Il. 16-29; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 22. . De severitate munerum (216 p. Chr.). BGU. 159; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 408. . Edictum Caracallae de senatoribus (213~217 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 1406. . Edictum Aureli Serenisci de censu (226 p. Chr.). P. Teb. 288; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 266. [ 586 ] 205. 206. LIST OF DOCUMENTS . De munere decaprotorum (post 242 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 62, verso; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 278. . De cessione bonorum eorum qui munera declinant (250 p. Chr.). C.P.R. 20; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 402. . De trapezitis Oxyrhynchi (260 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 1411. . De nominatione eorum qui munera subeunt (265 p. Chr.). P. Fior. 2, vit, ll. 166-201; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 401. . De conductione agrorum publicorum (266 p. Chr.). C.P.H. 119, recto, col. vit; C.P.R. 39; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 377. . Epistula senatus Hermopolitani ad orparnydv (266-267 p. Chr.). C.P.H. 52; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 38. . Acta senatus Oxyrhynchi (270-275 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 1413. . Acta senatus Oxyrhynchi (270-275 p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 1414. De exactione tributi (saec. 111 p. Chr.). P. Br. Mus. 2, 213; Wilcken, Chrestomathie, 267. De munere ed@nvapyias (ca. saec. 111 fin. p. Chr.). P. Oxy. 1252, verso, col. II. [ 587 ] INDEX absentes rei publicae causa, 105 Achaea, 163, 166, nos. 8, 9, 46 Acraephia, no. 56 acta senatus, nos. 203, 204 actor, Nos. 139, 157 adiectio, 37, 211 adlectio of citizens, 58 adnotationes, 237 Adramyttus, no. 22 aediles, 59, 63, 89, nos. 20, 24, 26, 45, 63, 64, 65 Aemilius Paullus, 70, no. 2 Aetolia, nos. 1, 3 Aezani, no. 82 Africa, 15 f., 85, 119, 123, 182, 186, 210, nos. 96, 125, 146, 159, 161 Aga Bey, no. 142 ager Dentheliates, 156 ager privatus, no. 10 ager publicus, 31 f., 47, 179, 181, nos. I, 3, 5, 10: alienation forbidden, nos. 26, 55: disputes concerning, NOS. 55, 57» 58; 59, 63, 68, 82, 104: sale regulated, nos. 121, 129: con- fiscated, no. 157: octonarius and stipendiarius, no. 74 agoranomus, 25, 28, no. 206 Ain-el Djemela, no. 93 Ain Zui, no. 152 Alabanda, no. 22 album: ofsenate, 65, 202: of Canusium, no. 136 Alexandria, 71, 83, 103, 244f., nos. 165, 166, 168, 173, 192, 193 Amastris, 150 Ambracia, 45 n. 1 Amisus, 43 n. 2, 146, 160 amphodon, no. 191 Anauni, no. 49 Ancyra, 147, no. 38 angary, no. 131 Antinoopolis, 103, 192, nos. 170, 173, 176, 183, 184 Antioch, 24, 144: in Pisidia, no. 65 a Antiochus, nos. 1, 147 Antium, 3, 5, 177 Antony, 5, 39, nos. 26, 29, 38 Apamea, 52, 68, 151, NOS. 34, 123, 147 Aphrodisias, 39, 41 n. 4, nos. 29, 120, 137, 138, 145 Apollonides, 40 n. 3 appeals: from imperial estates, nos. 139, I41, 142, 143, 144: from pro- vincial assemblies to Rome, 172: regulated by law, nos. 90, 121: to Rome, 79, nos. 12, 14, 21, 36,63, 78, 81, 97, 100, 119, 121: to governor, nos. 35, 68, 90, 104, 112, 113, 139, 141: from nomination to office in Egypt, nos. 181, 182, 183, 185: from exactions of strategus, no. 202. See also under embassies Appius Claudius, 154 Apulum, 14 Aquincum, 14 Araegenuae, no. 140 Araguenl, 53 n. 3, no. 141 a rationibus, no. 109 arbitration, 152 ff., nos. 8, 10, 15, 18, 46, 57, 58, 82, 104 archephodus, 28 archiereus, 28 archiphylax, 170 archives, 244 n. 8, 245 N. §, Nos. 9, 22, 24, 26, 29, 36, 65, 96 archon, 56 Arelate, no. 107 Areopagus, 77, no. 91 Argos, 22 Aricia, 8 Aritium, no. 47 Arpinum, 138 Asculum, no. 13 Asia, 48, 119, 163 ff., 167, 168, 183, 185, NOS. 127, 157, 158 asiarch, no. 158 assemblies: local, 199; see also under comitia: provincial, 162 ff.; influ- ence in provincial government, 165; relation to municipalities, 166 ff.; of Africa, nos. 125, 159, 161; of Asia, nos. 34, 158; of Dalmatia, no. [ 588 ] INDEX assemblies (cont.) 41; of Gaul, nos. 50, 62, 140; of Lycia, nos. 15, 84, 87, 973; of Thes- saly, no. 46: privileges of flamen, no. 62: veto power of emperor, no. 62: method of voting and procedure, no. 62: asks governor for permission to forward copy of decree to em- peror, no. 102: cost of shows regu- lated, no. 110: regulation of liturgies of festival in Asia, no. 158 Assos, nos. 48, 94 Astypalaea, 41 n.4, 130 n.3, 161, nos. 75, 76 asylum, nos. 3, 17, 29 aréXera, IOI, Nos. 29, 139. See also under immunity Ateste, nos. 28, 31 Athens, 75, 139, 154 f., nos. 6, 21, 90, QI, 92, 130 Attalus, no. 12 attributi, nos. 2, 10, 16, 17, 25, 29, 49, 53, 107 augurs, nos. 26, 126 Augustales, no. 43 autonomy, 40 n.1, 82, nos. 3, 4, II, 16, 17, 19, 25, 40, 67, 108. See civitas libera Baetica, 48, nos. 60, 61, 66 Baetocaece, no. 147 Baiae, no. 149 banking, 139, nos. 81, 199 Bantia, na. 11 Beneventum, nos. 38, 154 Bergalei, no. 49 Beroia, no. 118 billeting of troops, nos. 19, 113, 139, I4I, 152 Bithiynia and Pontus, 74, 76, 150, 160, 163, 166, 182, 189 ovianum, no. 109 brabeutae, 25 Britain, no. 140 Brixia, nos. 38, 154 buildings in municipalities: destruc- tion forbidden, nos. 20, 65, 83 bureaucracy, 151, 165, 186, 219f., 228 f.: in Egypt, 36 bureaus: names and duties, 240 f. burgi, no. 128 Byzantium, 24, 68, 150 Caesariani, no. 141 Calaguris, no. 77 Calama, 142 Camerinum, 161 canabae, 10, 13f., 65: magister and curatores, 13 candidacy of magistrates: at Urso, no. 26: at Malaca, no. 65 Canusium, 65, no. 136 Cappadocia, 73, 185 Capua, 11 caput, unit of taxation, 130 Caranis, no. 177 Carnuntum, 14 Carteia, 7, 184 Carthage, 11, 46, 47, 66, 156 f., 184 Casae, no. 96 Casinum, 66 n. 4 castellum, 10 ff., 65, no. 27: prefect of, 12: Carcassonne, 13 n. 1 cautio: magistrates, nos. 20, 65, 77: tax-gatherers, no. 92: in appeals, no. 119 Celeia, no. 42 censor: in East, 76: in West, 59 f.: Bantia, no. 11: in Italy, no. 24 census: in Egypt, no. 166, 196: of Augustus, 120: of Diocletian, 132 centumviri, no. 43 Centuripae, 47, 138 Cercina, 45, n. 5 cessio bonorum, nos. 181, 185, 198. See liturgies charities: municipal, 208, 218. See endowments charters, nos. 11, 20, 24, 25, 26, 64, 65, 151: number granted by Vespasian, no. 60 Chersonese, no. 112 Chios, 40 n. 3, 82, nos. 40, 69 Chrysopolis, 24 Church Councils, 176: and municipal institutions, 224 f. Chyretiae, no. 1 Cibyra, no. 123 Cicero, 50f.,80, 121, 136, 149, 187, 202 Cierium, no. 46 Cilicia, 50 ff., 80, 119, 136, 149, 187, 202 citizenship: various classes in Asia, nos. 65a, 122: how attained, 58: decrees submitted to governor, 97, [ 589 ] INDEX citizenship (cont.) no. 130: sold, 139, no. 130: held in several cities, nos. 24, 94, see also under origo: Latin c. to Trans- padane Gaul, 6; to Spain, no. 60: Latins in Salpensa, no. 64: right of Latins to vote in provincial towns, no. 65, see also ius Latii: Roman citizens: privileges in colony, 5 f., 58; vote in colonies, no. 65: Roman citizenship granted to individuals, nos. 13, 423 to ex-magistrates, no. 64, see also ius Latii; to com- munities, nos. 49> 535 60; to Italy, 180; to peregrini, 188, no. 192: Romans exempt from liturgies, 1035 no. 1923; subject to laws of autono- mous states, nos. 25, 40; in Egypt, nos. 166, 173, 192; in East, 77. See also attributi, origo Civitas: general term applied to cities after A.D. 312, 192, no. 154: reduced in status, 13, 22, NO. 154: censoria, 47, 181: foederata, 40, 47, 160, 177 ff., nos. 7, 8, 10, II, 16, 17, 255 57, 64, 75, 90: libera et immunis, 39 ff., 128 f., 180, 201, nos. 15, 25, 30> 34, 36, 525 545 75> 79s 106, 108, 119, 120, 121, 145, 153, 154: stipen- diaria, 39 ff., 47 f., 71, 80, 181, nos. 64, 95, II5, 192: sine suffragio, 177 f. clarissimi, 104 Claudiopolis, 150 client kingdoms, 73, 185 Clunia, no. 135 Cnidos, no. 36 Cnossus, 154 coinage, 6, 80, 170: debasement, 20, 129: depreciation, 220 ff., 228: at Termessus, 45: exchange a muni- cipal monopoly, nos. 81, 133, 199 collationes, nos. 142, 143, 144 collegiality, 62, 89, nos. 181, 187: of officials, 56, 78: in Egypt, 28, nos. 181, 187. See also guilds, honores, priesthoods coloni, 75541731207 58,1107) ti tsetnts 206, 211, 217 ff., nos. 74, 93, III. See also under saltus: distinguished from incolae, no. 65 a colonia, 4 ff.: honorary title, 188: in Orient, 71: veterans, 7, 180, 184, no. 63: founded by Augustus, nos. 335° 38: Latin, 4 ff.,- 197f,, 184: Romian,) 4 ff.5) 277 £5797 278,485; NOS. 20, 27, 28, 49, 50, 65a, 126, 149: c. Alexandria Troas, no. 88: c. Caesaraugustana, 58, 66 n.4: c. Cillitana, no. 153: c. genetiva Iulia, see Urso: c. Mariana, 7, no. 59: c. Tarraconensis, 58 comarch, 21, 25, 29, no. 200 comes primi ordinis, 94. comitia, 64: election of magistrates, no. 65: at Tarentum, no. 20: in Italy, no. 24. See assemblies commentaril: principum, 244, no. 49; senatus, no. 96 commerce, 223 f. commissions, 72, 74, 200, nos. 4, 8. See provinces comogrammateus, 29, nos. 180, 183, 190 compulsion, nos. 165, 167. See also liturgies Comum, no. 49 conciliabulum, 10, nos. 24, 27, 28 concilium of Umbria and Tuscia, nos. 155, 159. See also assemblies conductor: taxes, 103, nos. 165, 167, 171, 185: saltus, 18, 20, nos. 74, III consilium principis, 241f., no. 63: proconsulis, no. 58 constitutiones principum, 233 ff., no. 86 consul in towns, 56 contributions of emperors to towns, no. 101. See also public works, gifts, endowments conventus civium Romanorum, 13, 77, 192, NOS. 1233 192 conventus: juridical and politica! in Spain, no. 135 cooptation, 65. See also honores Coptus, no. 173 Corinth, 22, 40 n. 1, 66, 70, nos. 9, 56 Coronea, nos. 5, 104 corrector, 81, 161, 201, nos. 155, 156, 159 Corsica, no. 59 Cos, no. 119 cosmete, no. 181, 198 172, 178, [ 59° ] INDEX courts: local, 43, 60f., see also juris- diction: ecclesiastical, 205: of pro- vincial assemblies, 172: of fora and conciliabula, no. 24 irete, 737,167} 170; nNowss Cumae, 11, no. 149 curator rei publicae: origin, 63 powers, 92 ff.: history, go ff.: gene- Pale S 51S Lite hh 27 1 Stet los aO%s 201, 204, 229: nominated to litur- gies, 98: title in Orient, 91, nos. gr, 123 Cures, 65, no. 43 curia, 85, 94, 207, 216 f., 225, 229: at Tymandus, no. 151: in villages, 23: elected officials, 85: responsibility for liturgies, 98: deserted, 110 ff., 198 ff. See also curiales, senate curiales, 113 f., 194 f., 202 f., 206 ff., 215 f., 222,225, 229 ff.: escape from liturgies, 106, see a/so liturgies: Jews and Christians in membership, r1of. See also decurions, senate cursus fiscalis, no. 156 cursus honorum, 59, 78, 84, 85, no. 10 cursus publicus, 137, 149, no. 156. See also post Cyzicus, no. 106 decaproti and decemprimi, 94, 113, 170, 222, no, 89: in Egypt, no. 197 decemvirl, 56 decentralization, 185 decline: municipal institutions, 198 ff., 226 ff.: village communities, no. 186: of democratic institutions, 186 ff. decreta, 235, 236, 239: of Roman magistrates, nos. 2, 13, 57, 58: of cities, NOS. 14, 23, 43, 48, 52, 66, 67, 69, 70, 72, 88, 94, 95, 115, 117; {22512 Ff 120; MAS ADs tks ThO, 149, 156, 159: Of provincial as- semblies, nos. 34, 125, 161 decumae, 39, 118, 127 decurions: in West, 65 ff.: in East, 76 ff.: honorary, 77: album, 65, no. 136: named by magistrates, no. 24: elected by comitia, no. 24: removal from office, no. 26: eligi- bility, 65 f., no. 24: in documents, NOS. 20, 24, 26, 33, 43, 61, 63, 65 a, 126, 136, 146, 149. See also curiales, senate dediticii, no. 192 defense, permission to levy local troops, no. 26 defensor: plebis, 78, 90, 92 ff., 112, 195, 201, 205, 229: on imperial estates, no. 74 deforestation, 212, no. 118 Delos, nos. 6, 21 Delphi, 39, 155, no. 3 demarch, 25 Demetrias, 21 democracy, 70, 75, 182, 186f., 195, 199, 227 ff.: ‘restored’ at Pergamum, nO. 23 Snpooi@vat, NOS. 12, 14, 17, 18 dictator in Italian towns, 56 diplomata, no. 156 domicile: required of municipal magis- trates, no. 26. See also origo dominium, 9 Dorylaeum, no. 34 duoviri, 11, 12, 56, 59, 60, 89, nos. 24, 26, 27, 28, 33, 45, 53, 64, 65, 65, 66, 77, 115, 126, 136, 140: election of emperor, no. 64 ecclesia: in villages, 25: in towns, 75 ecdicus, 25, 167 economic conditions, 209 ff. See also decline edicts, 232 f., 235 ff., 242, nos. 33; 39, 49, 51, 56, 92, 105, 118, 124, 129, 131, 132, 147, 155, 162-165, 167, 168, 175, 177, 181, 185, 190, 192— 195: provincial, 48 ff., 199: Cilician, 50 ff.: e. Siciliense, 50: tralaticium, 50: perpetuum, 239: Caracalla, 53, 57» 77) 103, 125, 161, 191 f., no. 192 Egypt, 27 ff., 33 ff., 83, 89 ff., 99 ff., 102, 118, 132/ff-,/ 139,285, 213; 244 ff., nos. 162-206 Ekiskuju, no. 144 election of magistrates: fifty days before beginning of year, no. 34: by popu- lar assembly, nos. 24, 26: at Nola on July 1, no. 45: at Malaca, no. 65 in the East, 78 f.: in Africa, 85: in local senate, 186f. See honores, candidacy, appeals [ 591 ] INDEX embassies to Rome, 186, 200, nos. 3-7, 10, 25, 26, 29, 47, 48, 53, 59, 78, 81; 83, 104, 126, 127, 139, I4I, 145. See also appeals emperors: policies re municipalities, 184 ff., see appeals, contributions, embassies, estates, governor, public works, edicts, epistulae, decreta, etc.: Augustus, 42, 59, 60, 62, 63,66, 72582) 86, 1204.,.125 £4 147.1.,161, THZt GIS GIRO, SL Eshea ote tO; NOS. 255 323 33> 36-38, 40-43, 52, 59, 61-63, 73, 130, 138, 147: Tiberius, 44, 60, 61, 63, 137, 147; 148, 211, 233, NOS. 45, 47, 49, 50: Gaius, nos. 47-50: Claudius, 137, 148, nos. 49-54, 68, 162-165: Nero, 16, 60, I2I, 129, 137, 148, 220, nos. 52, 54-57: Galba, nos. 59, 165: Otho, no. 58: Vespasian, 17, 109, 148, 161, 185, nos. 25, 26, 56, 59— 64, 67, 93: Titus, no. 64: Domitian, 167, 168, nos. 63-66, 166, 167: Nerva, 211, nos. 51, 67: Trajan, 66, 68, 91, 148, 150, 160, 168, 189, 200, 237, nos. 65 a, 68, 71-75, 168, 169: Fiadrian, 17,953) 7.551835 12,557547 1.5 161, 188, 192, 235, 239, 241, nos. 25, 51, 61, 76-86, 88-95, 104, 108, 129, 170, 183, 184: Antoninus, 58, IOI, 109, NOS. 97—108, 126, 127, 130, 170, 175,176,184: Marcus Aurelius, 197, NOS. I10, 125, 179, 181: Com- modus, 17, NOs. LIO-I14, 125, 139, 178-181: Pertinax, 211: Septimius Severus, 29, 83, 113, 134, 161, 194, 223, NOS. 127, 130-133) 139, 177, 183, 187, 189-191: Caracalla, see edicts, NOs. 127, 130-134, 139, 189- 195: Geta, nos. 131, 133: Severus Alexander, 44, 131, 147, 148, 221, nos. 135, 137, 138, 157,- 196: Maximinus, no. 139: Gordian, no. 139: Philip, no. 141: Decius, nos. 145, 198: Valerian, no. 147: Gal- lienus, 129, nos. 200-202: Aurelian, 80, 113, 220, 222: Diocletian, 82, 88, 124, 127 ff., 149f., 194, 204, 220 f.: Constantine, 20, 24, 91, 101, 105, 107, IOQ—-II, 208, 220, 222, 225, NOs. 153-155: Crispus, no. 154: Constans, no. 155: Constantius, 148, NOs. 154, 155, 157: Julian, 44, 131, 147, 225, no. 156: Valentinian, III, 116, nos. 157, 158: Valens, 27, nos. 157, 158: Gratian, nos, 157, 158: Theodosius, 105, 110, 124, 206: Honorius, 92, 99, 108: Ma- jorian, 92, 111: Justinian, 91, 92, 106,-117;°116;1226; Boz Emporia, 157 emporium, no. 131 endowments, 135, 169, nos. 69, 71, 87, 98, 116, 123, 189 Ephesus, 76, 158, 167, NOS. 15, 225 39, 71, 78, 85, 86, 98, 100, IOI, 105, 124, 157, 158 ephorus, 29 em BoAn, 37, 211. See adiectio epicrisis, no. 166 Epidaurus, 40 n. 5 em iNoyx Ol, no. 181 epistates, 28 epistrategus, 28, 101, nos. 169, 172-4, 179-183, 185, 187, 200 epistulae, 236 ff., nos. I, 3, 4) 9, 22, 253 29s 30; 32) 359 36, 40, 61, 63, 68, 71, 73-80, 82-87, 91, 93, 97-102, 104, 108, 109, 112-114, I18—120, 124, 127, 129, 130, 134, 137, 143, 145, 146, 148, 151, 154, 170, 189, 202 emiTNpyTal, NO. 203 Equus Tuticus, no. 154 estates: royal, 31: temple, 23, nos. 14, 18, 35: Church, 217: private, 203, 216 ff.: imperial, 23, 31 ff., nos. 49, 57> 74 83> 90, 93, 109, 125, 1395 I4l, 142, 143, 157. See also lati- fundia, saltus, territoria Eumenia, no. 34 eutheniarch, 28, no. 206 exactions of officials, 136, 186, nos. 113, 139-143, 152, 162-164. See appeals, embassies exactores, 131, 532, 222, nos. 167, 171, 185 excusati, no. 136 exegete, 28, nos. 181, 187, 194, 203 expenses of municipality, 143 ff. Falerio, no. 63 Faydm, nos. 171, 172, 174, 175) 178— 180, 190, 194, 196 [ 592 ] INDEX ferries a municipal monopoly, 139, nos. 70, 128 Fidenae, 187 finances, municipal, 138 ff. See under monopolies, vectigalia, taxes fines: a source of revenue, 141 ff., nos. 24, 26, 64, 65, 128 Firmum, no. 63 fisheries, 139, no. 68 flamens: of municipality, 64, nos. 53, 62, 115, 136: of province, 166, no, 62, 84, 87, 102, 110, 158, 159 Flamininus, 69, nos. 1, 5, 8 foedus aequum, r16o0f. See civitas foederata fora, 10, nos. 24, 27, 131. See em- porium Formiae, 8 Forum: Livi, 12: Populi, 12 freedom, nos. 15, 34. See civitates liberae frumentarii, nos. 142, 144 Fundi, 8 Gabinius, 72, no. 21 Galatia, 73, 163, nos. 38, 57, 154 Galillenses, no. 58 Gallia, 15, 119, 123, 164, 170, 185, 204, 210, NOS. 27, 50, 110, 140 games and shows, 145, nos. 26, 73, IIO, 155, 158, 169 gens, 10, 15 Genua, II, 139, no. 10 gerusia, 25, 77, nos. 78, 114 gifts, 142. See endowments Gigthi, nos. 115, 161 Girgeh, no. 163 Gortyna, 154, no. 55 governor: appeals, 99, see under ap- peals: approved municipal decrees, nos. 80, 98, 99, 114: veto, 168, nos. 84, 97: veto power overruled by emperor, no. 97: edict, see edicts: powers, 202 ff.; defined in Asia by lex Cornelia, no. 34: ratifies endow- ment, no. 71: regulates prices, no. 65 a: judicial power, 204 ff., nos. 64, 78: regulates municipal taxes, 130, no. 61: nominates to liturgies, 98: establishes market, no. 148: settles strikes, no. 124: oversight of municipal finances, 151, no. 98. AMA See lex provinciae, epistulae Gracchi, 7, 122, 179, 183f., 210, no. 20 guilds, 77: immunity from liturgies, 103, 107 ff., 207 f.: local and im- perial, 107 ff.; purpose, 194: here- ditary, 208: navicularii, 108: muni- cipal, nos. 124, 204. See also collegiality, gerusia, conventus c. R., neon gymnasiarch, 28, nos. 169, 181, 187, 198, 203, 206 assemblies, Halaesa, 47 Haliartus, no. 5 Halicyae, 47 Hastenses, no. 2 Helvetii, 15 Henchir-Snobbeur, no. 146 Heptacomia, no. 192 Heraclea: at Latmos, no. 4: in Mace- donia, no. 79 Heracleia, 49, no. 24 Hermopolis, nos. 169, 181, 198, 201, 202 Hermopolites, no. 200 Hierapolis, 24, no. 117 Hierapytna, 154 Hispellum, no. 155 Histria, no. 68 honores, 84 ff. passtm: in West, 56 ff.: in East, 77 f.: fasti, no. 45: in muni- cipal charters, nos. 11, 20, 24, 26, 64, 65: election in Asia, no. 34: ius honorum granted to Gauls, no. so: honores flaminum, no. 62. See also candidacy, election, and titles of various offices hospes, no. 26 hospitium, nos. 26, 113, 132) 137, 1385 147 hyparchy, no. 37 hypomnematographus, 28, nos. 203, 204 idia, see origo Igabrum, no. 60 Ilium, 24, 41 n. 2, 138, nos. 12, 14 illustres, 105 Illyria, 123, 185, no. 130 Ilugo, no. 95 [ 593 ] 38 INDEX immunity: from liturgies, ro1 ff., 20sf.: of philosophers, no. 127: granted by emperor, nos. 42, 158: by decree of local assembly, no. 43: from imperial taxation, no. 53; to Delphi, no. 3; to Mitylene, no. 25; to Delos, no. 213 see also under civitas libera et immunis: Trans, no. 130: settlers in Pizus, no. 131: pontiffs and augurs, no. 26: citizens of Antinoopolis, nos. 170, 176, 183: Alexandrians and Romansin Egypt, nos. 165, 173, 192: physicians, no. 174: veterans, nos. 177, 192: women, no. 179: priests, no. 178. See also appeals, liturgies, honores incolae, 58, nos. 26, 53, 65, 65a indictio, 129 inscriptio, 238 intercessio, nos. 11, 64 interrex, 56 intributio, 97 irenarch, 99, 170 Italica, no. 110 Itanus, 154 iudex as title of governor, 204 lugatio,no. 157 — . iugum as unit of taxation, 130, no. 157 iuridici, 204 ius Civitatis, nos. 151, 154 ius conubii, 6, nos. 53, 184 ius Italicum, 9, 72, 188, 192 ius iurandum, nos. 37, 47, 48 ius Latii, 7, 88, 188: maius, minus, 9, 192, nos. 60, 61, 64, 66, 115, 192 Jerusalem, 23 Jews, 110, 134 Julius Caesar, 5, 7, 14, 15, 59, 66, 68, 121, 146, 156, 184f., 210, nos. 24 (lex Iulia municipalis), 25, 26, 29, 50 jurisdiction: civil and criminal, 61, 64, 82, 183, 204f., nos. 10, 11, 25, 26, 27, 28, 33, 36, 40, 58, 64, 65, 65 a, 77, 131, 133. See also law, courts, appeals Khargeh, no. 165 kowov: Of villages, 21 ff., no. 141: of magistrates, 28, nos. 169, 181: of provinces, see assemblies Koula, no. 148 Lagina, nos. 17, 67 Lambaesis, 14. land: classification in Egypt, 33 ff. See ager publicus, estates, saltus, territoria Langensis, 139, no. 10 Lanuvium, 8 Laodicaea, 39, no. 15 Aaoypahovpevor, NO. 192 latifundia, 203, 213, 216, 228, no. 129. See saltus, estates, land Latin rights, see ius Latii law: given to Athens by Hadrian, no. go: alimentary, 211, 223, no. 65 a: administration in East, 82: Greek and Oriental versus Roman, 81 f., 204: extension of R. law, 179 f., 188, 193: autonomy, local, s.v. See jurisdiction, courts League, Latin, 177 f. leases: of public lands, nos. 5, 10, 24, 26,995,655 Sagetotnt20;21 57 enon temple land, no. 35: disputes con- cerning, no. 58: in Egypt, no. 201 Lepidus, 5 Lesbos, 130 n. 3 lex: Aemilia, 49 n. 2: Antonia, no. 26: Antonia de Termessibus, 42 ff., no, 1g: Atestina, no. 28: Bantina, no. 11: coloniae Genitivae Iuliae, 59 f., 67, no. 26: Cornelia, 72, no. 34: data, 233, NOs. £1, 13) 20, 265 27:3 de certa portione olei vendunda, no. go: de imperio Vespasiani, 161: de iudiciis privatis, no. 33: de officio flaminum, no. 62: Gabinia Calpurnia, no. 21: Hadriana, 17 f., nos. 93, 111: Hieronica, 47: Iulia, no. 13: lulia agraria, 60, 118: Iulia et Plautia Papiria, 8: Iulia muni- cipalis, 59 f., 86 f., 180, 185, no. 26: Malacitana, 17 f., 58f., 67, no. 65: Manciana, 17f., nos. 74, 93: Me- telli, 49 n. 2: organizing colony, 4f.: Palmyrenorum, no. 89: Plaetoria, no. 24: Pompeia, 47, 72, 74, 76: Porcia, 44, no. 19: provinciae, 17, 48 f., 52, 72, 82, 162, 181, 183, 202, 204, 233, 240: Quinctia de aquae- ductibus, no. 33: rogata, 232, nos. [ 594 ] INDEX lex (cont.) 13, 19, 24, 27: Roscia, nos. 27, 28: Rubria de Gallia Cisalpina, ro, 60, 184, nos. 27, 33: Rupilia, 49, 159: Salpensa, no. 64: saltus, no. 93: Sempronia, 46, 118 n. 3, 122: Ta- rentina, no. 20: Villia annalis, no. 11 libellus colonorum, no. 111 liturgies, 84 ff. passim: classification, 79, 94 f.: exemption, 101 ff., see also immunity and appeals: flight of incumbents, nos. 180, 189, 190, 194: provincial, no. 158: in Egypt, 37, 83,99 ff., see documentsfrom Egypt (nos. 165 ff.), pass¢m: imperial, 189, see angary, post, appeals logistae, 25, no. 150 Lucullus, 146 Lugudunum, 164, nos. 50, 140 Lusitania, 48, no. 47 Lycaonia, 164 Lycia, 164, 166, 169 ff., nos. 80, 128 Lydia, nos. 142, 148, 150 Macedonia, 117, 128, 171, no. I Maeonia, no. 34 magister: canabae, 13: saltus, 15, no. 74: Vicus, I§, NO. I41 magistrates, see honores Magnesia, 40 n. 3, 154 Malaca, 8, 58, 62, 67, 112, nos. 64, 65 mandata, 236 ff., 239 mansiones, nos. 51, 156 Mantinea, 22 Marius, 7, 184, no. 38 markets, 139 n. 9, see emporium, fora: in villages, nos, 147, 148: in saltus, no. 96: during games at Pergamum, no. 73 Massilia, 41, 138, 146, no. 107 Melitaea, no. 8 Mendechora, no. 143 Messana, 47 Messene, 1 56 metrocomia, 22 f., no. 113 Metropolis, no. 46 metropolis, 28 f. Miletus, 156, no. 22 Minturnae, no. 38 Mithradates, nos. 16, 17, 19, 21, 40 Mitylene, 42 Moesia, no. 130 monopolies: municipal, 139, 209, 224: banking, no. 81: ferry, nos. 71, 128: fishing, no. 68: weaving, no. 204 Mucius Scaevola, 158, 163 Mummius, 70, 156, 163, nos. 8, 9 munera, see liturgies municeps, 58 municipia: definition, 8f.: in Italy, 177 f., 180: in provinces, 9:fundana, 9, no. 24: charters, 8, see lex Iulia municipalis, Bantia, Tarentina: Fla- via, nos. 60, 61, 64, 65: developed from praefecturae, 11; from colonies, etc., nos. 20, 95, 115: at Volubilis, no. 53 Municipium Augustum, 58 Mutina, 7 Mylasa, 139, 154f., nos. 22, 30, 32, 89, 133 Myra, nos. 99, 128 Nacoleia, 24, no. 154 Narbo, no. 62 Narbo Martius, 7, 184, no. 38 Narthacium, no. 8 Naucratis, 83, no. 184 Neaetum, 41 n. 4 Neapolis, 148 negotiatores, 131 Neilopolis, nos. 178, 182 Nemausus, 138 neocorate, 81 neon, 77, no. 106 Neptunia, no. 20 Netum, 47 Nicaea, 68, 144, 150 Nicomedia, 68, 143, 150 Nola, no. 45 nomarch, 29 nomination of officials, 59 ff., 78 f., 85 ff., 202, nos. 24, 34, 65:in Egypt, nos. 172, 173, 181, 185, 198, 200, 203 vopwoypadpevs, 172 vopos T@ANTLKOS, NO. 129 Nuceria, 158, no. 11 Numidia, nos. 125, 140, 152 nundinae, no. 96. See emporia, fora Oath: of loyalty, nos. 37, 38, 47, 48: of magistrates, nos. 64, 65 [ 595 ] INDEX. octroi, 139. See portoria oligarchy: favoured by governors, 72, . 182, 183, 186 f., 229 f.: pro-Roman party in power, nos. 5, 9 dpdAoyot, no. 192 6povota, 161 oppida: definition, 4, ro: attributa, 138, nos. 16, 17, 27, 33, 107, 154 Opramoas, nos. 80, 84, 87, 97; 995 102 oratio principum, 234 ff., 244, nos. 50, 56, 110 Orcistus, 13, 24, No. 154 Orientalism, 26, 193, 227 ff. Origo, 194, 208, 211, 216, 226, nos. 129, 158, 168, 182, 192, 193 Oropus, 154f., nos. 12, 18 Ostia, 3, no. 160 Oxyrhynchus, nos. 166, 167, 185, 187-189, I9I, 195, 197, 199, 203, 204, 206 pagani, no. 107. See also villages pagus, ro, 14 f. Pagus Apollinaris, Lucretius, Martius, Valerius, Veronensis, 14 Palmyra, 44 n. 7, 140, no. 89 Panormus, 47 Paphos, 148 paraphylaces, no. 117 Parma, 7 Paros, no. 132 particularism, 195 Passala, 140 paternalism, 80, 189, 200, no. 71 Patrae, 42 patronage, patrocinium, 26, 113, 203, 215, 217, NO. 142 patroni: of senate, 65: at Asso, no. 94: at Brixia, no. 44: at Canusium, no. 136: at Clunia, no. 135: at Genua, no. 10: at Malaca, no. 65: at Stra- tonicea, no. 67: at Urso, no. 26 Patulcenses, no. 58 Pautalia, no. 139 peculation of municipal funds, no. 20 pedani, no. 136 peregrini: given Roman citizenship, no. 192: peregrine city made a municipium, no. 53 perfectissimi, 105 Pergamum, 163, nos. 12, 22, 23, 73> ‘ 81, 100, 124, 133 Phaenae, no. 113 Phazimon, no. 37 Philadelphia, nos. 134,. 143: in Egypt, no. 183 Philip of Macedon, no. 1 Phrygia, nos. 123, 141, 154 phylaces, 28 phylarch, 21 Pisaurum, no. 38 Pisidia, nos. 19, 65 a, 122, 151 Pizus, 26, no. 131 Plasara, no. 29 plebiscite, no. 19 Pliny, 53, 65, 68, 80, 136, 150 ff., 202, 215 Pogla, 23, no. 122 Pompaelo, no. 77 Pompeii, 143, 144, 158 f. Pompey, 23, 42) 49, 72, 76, 86, nos. 13520, 25, 26a 7 pontiff, 64, no. 26 populus: in West, 57: in East, 75 portoria, nos. 19, 39, 89, 130. See taxes possessores, 131, no. 146 post, imperial, 129, 136, no. 51. See angary, liturgies praefectura, 10 ff., nos. 24, 27, 28 praefectus: iure dicundo in muni- cipalities, 11, 15, 17, 59, 62f., Nos. 24, 26-28, 33, 64: of emperor in municipalities, 62f., no. 64: pagorum, 15: praetorio, 60, 130, NOs. 109, 140, 154, 156: urbi, 61: of Egypt, nos. 162 ff. praetextati, 65, no. 136 praetor in municipalities, 56 T payparevTiss no. 139 7 PAYLATLK OS» nos. 139, 196 prices regulated, nos. 65 a, 90, 91 Priene, 154 f., nos. 8, 14, 34 priesthoods: elected, 64: sold, 79: honor, 93: exemption, 109 f., nos. 164, 178. See also under augurs, flamens, pontiff primus curiae, 94 princeps, 234. See emperors principales, 94, 99 private ownership developed in Egypt, 37 [ 596 ] INDEX privileges of towns ratified by suc- ceeding emperors, nos. 40, 59, 75; 108: of free cities, see civitas libera procurator: regionis, 18: saltus, trac- tus, 17, NOS. 93, III 7 pwtompaégia; no. 78 provinces, see lex provinciae, governor Prusa, 75, 150, 151 prytanis, 25, nos. 184, 198, 201, 203; 204, 206 Ptolemais, 83, no. 170 publicani, 32) 73, 121 N. 2, 160, 199, 222, NOS. 5, 12, 14, 18, 19, 235 35 89 public works at imperial expense, 148, NOS. 31, 33» 729 103 Puteoli, 60, 159 quadrarius, 29 quaestor, 59, 89, nos. 64, 65 quattuorvirl, 11, 59, NOS. 20, 24, 275 28, 61, 63 quindecimviri, no. 149 quorum, nos. 11, 26, 33, 65 Ragusa, no. 41 recognovi, 238, 242 f. recorder, 25 redemptor, 121 regiones of Asia, no. 22 requisitions: in free states, 44: in tributary states, 53: in villages, 27: imperial, 117 ff., 136, 219, nos. 19, 131, see also angary, exactions, and taxes rescripsi, 242 f. rescripta, 236 ff., nos. 59, 81, III, 121, 139, I4I, 152, 155, 157, 158 res gestae, 147, no. 38 revenues, see under finances, taxes, vectigalia revocatio, no. 28 Rhodes, 41 n. 4, 155, nos. 52, 54 Rhodiapolis, 172, no. 80 rivalry of Asiatic cities, 81, 142, 218, NOS. 100, 134 Romanization, 188 Rusicade, 66 Saborenses, 53 n. I, no. 61 Saepinum, no. 109 Sagalassus, no. 57 Salamis, 183 salaries, 143, no. 26 Salpensa, 8, 62, no. 64 saltus: in Africa, 16: organization, 17 ff.: compulsory tenancy, 20: in Asia and Egypt, 31 ff.: Beguensis,, no. 96: Burunitanus, 19, no. 111: Domitianus, Lamianus, Neronianus, no. 93. See also estates, latifundia Samos, 155, no. 8 Sardinia, nos. 56, 58 Sardis, 158, nos. 22, 134 Saturnia, 7 Scaptoparene, 53 n. 3, 243, NO. 139 scriptura, 120 secretary of villages, 25 Segesta, 47 senate: in West, 56 f.: in East, 76 f.: decrees of Roman senate, 48: Hadrian nominates senator at Ephe- sus, no. 85: in Egypt, 83, nos. 195, 203, 204. See also curia senatus consulta, 232 ff., 241, nos. 5-8, 12, 16-18, 25, 55, 73, 86, 96, 106, 110 sententia, no. 10 sermo, NO. 93 Sicily, 46 ff., 117 ff., 121, 123, 128, 149, 158 f., 181 f.320%.f4 210 Sicyon, 154 f. Sidon, 41 n. 1 Sidyma, 171, no. 114 Sigkepha, no. 185 Sinduni, no. 49 Sinope, 150, no. 126 Sipylum, 40 n. 3 sitologi, 29 sitonae, 170 Smyrna, nos. 22, 70, 100, 127 sodales familiae publicae, no. 160 soldiers, 106 f. See also veterans Solemnis, no. 140 Spain, 15, 48, 123, 165, 185, 204, 210, nos. 2, 26, 60, 61, 64, 65, 94, 135 Sparta, 155 f., no. 121 spectabiles, 105 stabula, no. 156 oraOuos, NO. 131 stationarli, nos. 109, 144 stipendium, see taxes, vectigalia, civi- tas stipendiaria strategus, 36, 56, 78, 100 f., nos. 165— 205 passim E5924 INDEX Stratonicea, 146, nos. 17, 67 Stratonicea-Hadrianopolis, no. 83 strikes, no. 124 subscriptio, 236 ff., 244, nos. III, 154 sufes, 56, NOS. 44, 45, $3, 146 Sufes, 13 Sulla, 5, 72, 146, 159, 180, 184, nos. 15-18, 22, 34, 40 summa honoraria, 62, 76, 79, 87, nos. 85, I51, 181, 203: in villages, 25, no. 150 summa legitima, 142 susceptores, 131 f. syndicus, no. 203 Syria, 163, 213, no. 147 Tabae, 42 n. 1, nos. 15, 16 tabularii, 131 tabularium principis, no. 58 Tampium, no. 140 Tanagra, no. 99 Tarentum, 8, no. 20 Tarraco, 164 Tarsus, 75, 139 n. 6, no. 130 Tauromenium, 41 n. 4, 47 taxes, 117 ff. See vectigalia Teanum Sidicinum, no. 11 Tebtunis, no. 179 Tegea, no. 51 temple-lands, 33, 35, 135, MOS. 12, 14, 18, 35, 82, 129 temple-states, 22 f., 32 tenancy, 31, 33, 34. 37, 217. See estates, latifundia, saltus, coloni Teos, 50, no. 3 Termessus, 42 ff., no. 19 territoria, 10, 26, 73, 134, 138, 182, 210, 214, NOs. 27, 49, 59, 68, 82. See also ager publicus Tetrapurgia, no. 148 Thamagudi, 65, 91, 143, nos. 125, 136 Thebaid, no. 163 Thera, .130 n. 3 Thessaly, 168, nos. 1, 8 Thisbe, 50, nos. 5, 104, 129 Thorigny, 167, no. 140 Thrace, 185, no. 131 Thurreion, 40 Thyatira, no. 35 Tibur, no. 7 toparchies, 21, 36, no. 131 tractus, 17 ff., no. 125 Tralles, 130 n. 3, no. 122 transportation, 214. See angary, post treaties, 160 f., no. 99. See civitas foederata tresviri, 56 tribes, 178, nos. 10, 191 tribute, 39 ff., 117 ff.: t. capitis, soli, 11g. See vectigalia Tridentinum, no. 49 Tripolitana, no. 161 Troas, no. 88 Troezen, 40 n. 5 Tulliasses, no. 49 Turris Lascutana, no. 2 Tuscia, nos. 155, 1§9 Tymanda, 24, 74, no. 151 Tymbrianassus, no. 57 Tyra, 97, no. 130 Tyre, 41 n. 1, 42 Tyrus, 41 n. 4 Umbria, 155, 159 uniformity in legislation, 188, 193, nos. 22, 40 urban movement, 209, 211, 223, 228, nos. 168, 193 Urso, 5, 8, 66 ff., 95, 139, no. 26 Utica, 39 vacatio, no. 177. See immunity Vanacini, no. 59 vectigalia: annona, 122, 127 ff.: au- rum: coronarium, 221, nos. 38, 76, 150; negotiatorum, 131;oblaticium, 131, 2213 tironicum, 221, no. 150: capitatio plebeia, 119, 122, 128, 131, 209, 2213 paid by officer of pro- vincial assembly, 171: capitulum lenocinii, 122, 127, no. 112: cen- tesima rerum venalium, 122, 124; endowment for, no. 116: collatio lustralis, 122, 131: gladiatorial, 122, no. rro: house, r20: land, 117, see lugum: portoria, s.v.: salt, no. 14: vicesima hereditatis, 122, 124, 167, no. 192: vicesima libertatis, 122, 124, 1423 municipal, 140: vicesima quinta venalium mancipiorum, 122, 125:in Egypt, 132 f.; beer, no. 171; poll, nos. 166, 176, 196; sales, no. 167; sheep, no. 1713 collection, nos. 165, 167, 171, 185, 188, 196, 202, [ 598 ] INDEX vectigalia (cont.) 205: Diocletian’s reforms, 127, 221: Hiero’s system, 121: Sempronian law, 182 f.: paid in kind, 120, 221; in money, 120: remitted by Au- gustus, no. 38; by Hadrian, no. 83: applied to building of walls, no. 157: levy of new taxes by muni- cipality approved by provincial governor, no. 61: disputes re terri- torial tax, nos. 10, 82: collection at Athens, no. '92: Delos, no. 21: Aphrodisias free from any tax, no. 29: Greece freed from tribute, no. 56: Antani(?) at Heraclea, no. 79: Histriani, no. 68: Mitylene, no. 25: Mylasa, no. 32: Sulla determines amount paid by attributi to Strato- nicea, no. 17: Thisbe, nos. 5, 104, 129: water rates at Venafrum, no. 33: remission of imperial taxes for ten years at Volubilis, no. 53. See also ager publicus, banking, civitas stipendiaria, endowments, finances, fines, publicani, summa honoraria Veli, 65, no. 43 Veleia, no. 27 Venafrum, 140, no. 33 Verres, 202 veterans: colonies, 7, 13, 184, 211, nos. 33, 38: privileges, 106 f., no. 166 vicarli, 130 vicus, ro f., 14, 21 ff., 65 Viducasses, no. 140 villages: attributi, nos. 10, 17, 29, 117, 147, 154: On imperial estates, see saltus, estates: complaints from, see embassies, exactions: development into cities, 24, 32 f., 73 f., nos. 37, 83, 115, 122: depopulation, nos. 139, I41, 154: government, 21 ff., nos. 117, 131: Officials, 25 ff., no. 150: Egyptian, 27 ff.: taxes, 26 f., nos. I10, 154: cities reduced to villages, 24 ff., no. 154: markets, nos. 96, 147, 148: privileges con- ferred by Antiochus ratified by later emperors, no. 147. See also territoria, pagus, vicus Villa magna Variana, no. 74 Villa Mappalia Siga, no. 74 Viturii, no. 10 Vocontii, 15, 41 n. 4 Volsinil, no. 155 Volubilis, no. 53 voting in municipal elections, no. 65 Vulceii, 130 walls, no. 157 waste lands, no. 93 Xanthus, nos. 97, 116 Zela, 23 CAMBRIDGE: PRINTED BY W. LEWIS, M.A.» AT THE UNIVERSITY PRESS GAYLORD PRINTEDINU,S.A. a ty el x £ ayy , po ¥) Fi Al na \b he aA eee ay, mM i | ya en ¥ DG87 .A13 Municipal administration in the Roman ical Seminary—Speer Library iii 14 1012 00133 9730