Archives

GRAECA TERGESTINA STORIA E CIVILTÀ 1

Legal Documents in Ancient Societies www.ldas-conf.com Steering Committee: Sophie Démare-Lafont, Mark Depauw, Michele Faraguna, Éva Jakab, Dennis P. Kehoe, Uri Yiftach-Firanko

Con il contributo di: Ministero dell'Istruzione, dell'Università e della Ricerca PRIN 2008 – La burocrazia greca: definizione e funzionamento dei procedimenti amministrativi nel mondo antico Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici – Università degli Studi di Trieste

© copyright Edizioni Università di Trieste, Trieste 2013.

Proprietà letteraria riservata. I diritti di traduzione, memorizzazione elettronica, di riproduzione e di adattamento totale e parziale di questa pubblicazione, con qualsiasi mezzo (compresi i microfilm, le fotocopie e altro) sono riservati per tutti i paesi.

ISBN 978-88-8303-460-2

EUT - Edizioni Università di Trieste Via Weiss, 21 – 34127 Trieste http://eut.units.it

Legal Documents in Ancient Societies IV

Archives and Archival Documents in Ancient Societies Trieste 30 September-1 October 2011

edited by Michele Faraguna

EUT EDIZIONI UNIVERSITÀ DI TRIESTE

Contents

Michele Faraguna (Trieste) 7 Foreword Dennis Kehoe (New Orleans) 11 Archives and Archival Documents in Ancient Societies: Introduction

Ancient Near East Sophie Démare-Lafont (Paris) 23 Zero and Infinity: the Archives in Mesopotamia Klaas R. Veenhof (Leiden) 27 The Archives of Old Assyrian Traders: their Nature, Functions and Use Antoine Jacquet (Paris) 63 Family Archives in Mesopotamia during the Old Babylonian Period Susanne Paulus (Münster) 87 The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives

Classical Greece Christophe Pébarthe (Bordeaux) 107 Les archives de la cité de raison. Démocratie athénienne et pratiques documentaires à l’époque classique

127

Shimon Epstein (Tel-Aviv /Freiburg) Attic Building Accounts from Euthynae to Stelae

Edward M. Harris (Durham) 143 The Plaint in Athenian Law and Legal Procedure Michele Faraguna (Trieste) 163 Archives in Classical Greece: Some Observations

The Persian Tradition and the Hellenistic World Ingo Kottsieper (Göttingen) 175 Aramäische Archive aus achämenidischer Zeit und ihre Funktion

4

Laura Boffo (Trieste) 201 La ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

Thomas Kruse (Wien) 307 Bevölkerungskontrolle, Statuszugang und Archivpraxis im römischen Ägypten

Lucia Criscuolo (Bologna) 245 Copie, malacopie, copie d'ufficio e il problema della titolarità di un archivio nell’Egitto tolemaico

Rudolf Haensch (München) 333 Die Statthalterarchive der Spätantike

Mark Depauw (Leuven) 259 Reflections on Reconstructing Private and Official Archives

Uri Yiftach-Firanko (Jerusalem) 351 Conclusions 363 Index locorum

The Roman Empire Éva Jakab (Szeged) 269 Introduction: Archives in the Roman Empire Kaja Harter-Uibopuu (Wien) 273 Epigraphische Quellen zum Archivwesen in den griechischen Poleis des ausgehenden Hellenismus und der Kaiserzeit

5

Foreword

To Lisetta Brunner

The research group Legal Documents in Ancient Societies aims to investigate the legal and administrative systems in a variety of societies of the ancient world through a document-based approach, crossing traditional disciplinary boundaries and providing a locus for scholars who work in different but contiguous fields to discuss and compare the results of their individual research. The fourth meeting of the group was held at the University of Trieste on 30 September-1 October 2011 and focused on the study of archives and archival records and the different ways they interlocked with, and were functional to, the workings of the ancient administrative, and political, systems. Twelve papers were delivered at the meeting and are published in this book in a revised form. The papers are arranged in four sections dealing respectively with the Ancient Near East, Classical Greece, the Persian Tradition and the Hellenistic World, and the Roman Empire. Given that the themes touched upon by the contributors chronologically span from the astoundingly extensive records of the Old Assyrian traders in the early second millennium B.C. to the archives kept by provincial governors in the late Roman Empire and range geographically from Mesopotamia to the Western Mediterranean, including Asia Minor, Egypt and Aegean Greece, considerable effort has been made, first, to contextualise the significance of each essay within the scholarly debate of each discipline and, secondly, to bridge the gaps and highlight similarities and differences in the

foreword

7

archival practices and concepts of the societies examined. Each section is thus enriched by introductory comments or afterthoughts on the three papers, while the Introduction and Conclusions tie up the common threads and bring together the general methodological and conceptual concerns emerging from the casestudies analysed in the essays. In order to avoid modern anachronistic projections on ancient documentation, the working definition underlying the essays has been that an archive – in line with the Encyclopaedia Britannica – is ‘the organised body of records produced or received by a public, or private, entity in the transaction of affairs and preserved by it for its specific needs and purposes’. In other words, archives, whether public or private, are no doubt the physical spaces, the repositories where records are kept, but they are also the organised active ‘memory’ of the society producing them, thus reflecting the practical needs and administrative practices as well as the ideological models of that society, whose ‘world order’ they mirror and perpetuate to a significant extent. In the essays by I. Kottsieper and L. Criscuolo ‘archives’, conceived as collections of documents deliberately made for public or private purposes in antiquity, have been set apart from ‘dossiers’, assemblages of texts not originally kept in the same repository but successively brought together as a result of different circumstances. Only the former, archives in the technical sense, are hence studied in this volume. The archives dealt with in the essays are especially conspicuous for their variety, both in terms of quality and of quantity. The first element distinguishing them is whether they were of public or private nature, although such distinction is not always necessarily clear-cut and, as shown by K. Veenhof and A. Jacquet, it can hardly be applied to the Old Assyrian and Old Babylonian source material. Records were, moreover, written on a variety of materials, including clay tablets, papyrus, wooden tablets, but also on leather as well as bronze and lead plates, so that when they were kept on perishable materials and are now lost, as is normally the case for the Graeco-Roman world, their existence must be inferred from literary texts and epigraphic documents, which were copies of (or extracts from) archival records and, as shown by K. Harter-Uibopuu, sometimes established regulations regarding their upkeep and organisation. Other variables concern the life-time of archives and records. Documents were generally preserved and stored not for the sake of keeping a memory of the past but for their concrete significance for the present. At the public level, as illustrated by Th. Kruse, written texts testifying to the privileged legal and fiscal status of individuals in Roman Egypt could be consulted and quoted even 200 years later, while boundary disputes between Greek poleis in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor and the official correspondence between Greek cities and Hellenistic kings, once more often concerning the renewal of tax privileges, not rarely reveal, as highlighted by L. Boffo, that the relevant documents could be produced decades, if not centuries after the original settlement or award. Likewise, following E.M. Harris’ argument, written plaints in Classical Athens played

8

an important role in enforcing the principle of res iudicata, whereas the archivization of official manumission documents in Hellenistic and Roman Delphi was meant to provide permanent evidence of free status. Other detailed documents, as emphasized by S. Epstein in his contribution on Athenian fifth and fourth century building accounts, were, on the other hand, discarded when they were no longer of use and only shortened, recapitulative records were likely to have a longer life. At a private level, K. Veenhof, A. Jacquet and I. Kottsieper make a similar distinction between documents of unlimited and those of limited validity. Documents proving title of ownership, donations or inheritance rights were, as a rule, preserved for a long time, for several generations, while short-term contracts were generally discarded as soon as the obligation had been fulfilled. The keeping of loan contracts in an Old Babylonian archive beyond the expiry date can, as a consequence, be explained by assuming that the debts had not been paid and, in actual fact, remained outstanding. Notwithstanding such variety of individual cases, a number of common patterns also emerge in respect to the organization and the physical aspect of the storerooms where the documents were preserved, the classification of texts, the function of record-keeping and the role of seals. One further constant pattern is that archives, especially public ones, were rarely centralised and official information was stored in multiple repositories kept by different magistrates interacting with one another. This is the case, at a private level, with the archives of the Old Assyrian traders and, at a public level, with the local archives of Classical Athens and Hellenistic and Roman Egypt. Such a pattern furthermore entails, as shown by L. Criscuolo, that documents often had to be available in more than one copy. Leaving aside the complex and intractable question of whether these shared habits were the result of independent developments or represent a common trait to the entire Near Eastern and Mediterranean area, which far exceeds the scope of this volume, we are entitled to speak of a recurring ‘archival behaviour’. It appears that in the best documented areas and periods, such as Mesopotamia in the second millennium B.C. and in Hellenistic and Roman Egypt, the production of written records was impressively abundant and administrative and legal practices had reached a remarkable degree of complexity and sophistication. Each individual administrative act entailed the drawing of multiple documents and thus produced a true ‘documentary chain’. On this basis, it seems reasonable to assume that also where archival documents, with some important exceptions, have not been preserved but where sophisticated uses of writing were developed, as is the case of the Greek world, the functioning of the political, institutional, legal and economic system was largely dependant on the plentiful production of written documents and on extensive record-keeping. This book would not have seen the light without the help and support of many. I would like to acknowledge my sincere gratitude to Professor Roger S. Bagnall and to the Institute for the Study of the Ancient World at New York University for their generous financial contribution towards the organization of the meet-

foreword

9

ing in Trieste. Warmest thanks are also due to the Dipartimento di Storia e Culture dall’Antichità al Mondo Contemporaneo (now renamed as Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici) of the University of Trieste and to its Head Professor Claudio Zaccaria for providing further substantial funding. I am grateful for her help and collaboration before and after the meeting to my colleague Professor Laura Boffo with whom I share a long-term project on ‘Public archives in the Greek cities from the archaic to the early Roman age’. This volume was funded by the Italian Ministry of Education and Scientific Research (MIUR) as a part of that project (PRIN 2008 – La burocrazia greca: definizione e funzionamento dei procedimenti amministrativi nel mondo antico; Coordinatore nazionale: Prof. Lucia Criscuolo). I would also like to thank the participants for the stimulating discussion at the meeting and for the speedy revision of the texts for publication. The members of the steering committee of the group Legal Documents in Ancient Societies, Sophie Démare-Lafont, Mark Depauw, Éva Jakab, Dennis P. Kehoe, Uri Yiftach-Firanko, provided vital assistance with scientific and practical advice and with their ‘responses’ to the papers at the end of each session. Special thanks are moreover due to Dr. Mauro Rossi and Mrs. Gabriella Clabot at EUT for their competent and efficient handling of the production of the book. I would like to finally thank my dear wife Joanna and my family for their moral and emotional support over the years. This book is dedicated to my mother, Lisetta Brunner, without whom I would have never been what I am. Michele Faraguna Trieste, February 2013

10

Archives and Archival Documents in Ancient Societies: Introduction

dennis kehoe

The importance of archives, whether they consist of documents written on inscriptions, papyri, or cuneiform tablets, can hardly be overstated for the study of many questions in ancient history, including, among other things, law, especially as it affected family relationships, the ancient economy, and the administration of empires. The study of archives has long been a basic feature of ancient history, but in recent years, scholars have approached archives employing new methodologies adapted from other fields, particularly in the social sciences. This is certainly so in papyrology, the field represented in this volume with which I am most familiar, but it is also the case with epigraphy and cuneiform studies. This increasingly sophisticated use of archival material helps us to ask new questions in many fields in ancient history, and the sharing of methodologies across disciplines makes it possible for scholars in diverse fields to learn from one another, even though they often have little regular contact because of the specialized nature of their work. This was certainly the case at the Legal Documents in Ancient Societies meeting in which I participated, the conference in Washington in 2009 on transaction costs in ancient economies, which brought together Egyptologists, legal scholars, and ancient historians. The papers at the conference in Trieste now collected in this volume remind all of us how much scholars can learn from colleagues working in very different disciplines. In what follows, I would like to sketch out what I understand to be some important developments

archives and archival documents …

11

in the use of archival material, and then, on that basis, to try to place the papers collected in the present volume in a broader perspective. To begin with papyrology, collections of documents, perhaps, on occasion, inaccurately termed archives, have provided a basis for investigating many issues, from administrative and economic history in Ptolemaic, Roman, and Byzantine Egypt, to private family law and legal history. In the field of economic history, the Zenon papyri, the Heroninos archive, and the Apion papyri represent the most important sources of evidence for analyzing the development of estates and the political economy of Egypt in the Ptolemaic, Roman, and Byzantine periods. However, our understanding of the rural economy has been enhanced by other less heralded archives. Two important examples are the Soterichos archive (OMAR 1979), which documents the affairs of a small-scale tenant farmer in the Fayum in the late first century CE, and the archive of Aurelius Isidorus (BOAK & YOUTIE 1960), which allows us to trace the challenges affecting landowners and liturgists in Karanis in the Fayum at the turn of the fourth century CE. The chief advantage of private papyrological archives like these for studying the rural economy of Greco-Roman Egypt is that they allow us to trace in detail the individual situations of farmers, both tenants and landowners, particularly in terms of their relationships with landlords, laborers, and other landowners, as well as the state. Since archival material by its very nature concerns the affairs of discrete individuals, we cannot automatically generalize from patterns revealed in them. However, what we can do is trace basic economic relationships, which can add depth to or alter more overarching models of the ancient economy. The study of archives is especially valuable when their evidence can be placed in a broader historical context, one that is properly based on models developed from other ancient evidence and from comparative material from better documented pre-industrial economies. At the very least, comparative evidence allows us to appreciate what kind of economic relationships were likely to have occurred in antiquity, what levels of production might be feasible in an ancient economy, and how later societies confronted similar legal issues resulting from economic activity and familial relationships. We can see how our understanding of economic relationships can be changed by archival material by considering the Heroninos archive, a collection of some 450 letters, orders, and accounts that document in great detail the management of a large estate in third-century CE Roman Egypt. Dominic Rathbone, in his ground-breaking 1991 book, undertakes a detailed investigation of this material. Rathbone’s study traces to the degree possible the development of large estates belonging to Aurelius Appianus, an equestrian and councilor at Alexandria, thus a member of Egypt’s provincial elite, and other persons of his circle. But more important, the Heroninos archive allows us to trace the management of an estate to a degree of detail unparalleled elsewhere in the Roman Empire. Rathbone’s study shows that at least some landowners employed wage labor on a scale not heretofore recognized, and it also provides evidence for how such workers were deployed

12

and paid. In addition, the detailed accounts that Heroninos and other administrators submitted to the estate’s central administration suggest that the owners of this and comparable estates could calculate the profitability of the various crops they cultivated. However, when interpreted against a broader model of an agrarian economy with little annual growth and limited opportunities for investing large amounts of wealth, the evidence from the Heroninos archive provides evidence for how a landowner sought to profit under such constraints by, among other things, developing a rigorous management system to control the costs of producing basic staples such as wine and wheat, and thereby gaining economies of scale that gave them competitive advantages over smaller-scale farmers. Since Rathbone’s work on the Heroninos archive, a number of scholars have engaged in the intensive study of a comparable body of material from late antiquity, the documentary papyri concerned with the organization and management of the estates of the Flavii Apions in sixth-century Oxyrhynchus. Although the material connected with the Apions does not constitute a coherent archive in the way that many contributors to the present volume would define one, the fifth-century and sixth-century papyri do provide a coherent body of material that allows us to study in some detail the organization of a large estate belonging to a member of the Byzantine imperial aristocracy. We can also trace both how this estate grew over time and how its growth affected the agrarian economy in the surrounding Oxyrhynchite villages. Among the scholars who have studied this material in recent years are Jairus Banaji (2001), who has traced how aristocratic landowners took advantage of their role in tax collection to accumulate wealth, Roberta Mazza (2001), Peter Sarris (2006), and Todd Hickey (2012). The numerous papyri associated with the estate of the Apions make it possible to study not only the organization and management of the estate, but also the estate’s relationship with the surrounding agricultural communities, the villages in the Oxyrhynchite nome in which the Apions owned property. This is a subject that Giovanni Ruffini (2008) has taken up in his recent book, a work that suggests the possibilities of examining now familiar documentary material from a new theoretical perspective. In his study, Ruffini seeks to come to a better understanding of the economic and social role that the Apion estate played in the Oxyrhynchite nome, and on that basis to draw broader conclusions about the role of large estates in the Byzantine Empire. He does this by drawing on an emerging field in the social sciences, social network theory, to map the connections and relationships among individual persons associated with the Apion estate. This material allows Ruffini to test the hypothesis that the estate stood at the top of a centralized hierarchy in Oxyrhynchus, which would mean that the estate occupied a dominating position in the region. In an alternative model, associated with the Egyptian village of Aphrodito, contemporary with sixth-century Oxyrhynchus, which Ruffini also examines, small farmers and tenants seem to have established relationships directly among themselves, without having a large estate or an economically dominant house serve as the point of contact.

archives and archival documents …

13

Ruffini is one of several young scholars to use network theory to make sense of a vast array of data in order to ask new questions about an ancient society. Another scholar using this methodology is Caroline Waerzeggers (Leiden), who has applied social network analysis to neo-Babylonian cuneiform archives so as to map the relationships among elite in Babylon (Waerzeggers, forthcoming). In a very different field, my own colleague at Tulane University Margaret Butler is applying social network theory to an archaeological data base of burials from Macedon and other locations in ancient Greece. Butler uses changes in burial customs as proxy evidence for changing social institutions in fourth-century Macedon, and network theory allows her to determine how certain artifacts found in graves might cluster.1 Testing the strength of links between various burial practices enables Butler to trace changing burial customs in a rigorous rather than largely impressionistic fashion. It is interesting to see that a similar methodology can be applied both to interpreting material culture and to documentary evidence. To return to Caroline Waerzeggers, she presented a paper on network theory at a conference in 2008 organized by Michael Jursa of Vienna as part of his project on the “Economic History of Babylonia in the First Millennium BC.”2 For this conference Jursa sought out scholars working on various periods in Babylonian history as well as ones working in the Hellenistic and Roman economies. The Babylonian scholars, in my understanding, are confronted with masses of documents in numerous cuneiform archives, and so Jursa sought to establish a scholarly dialogue with Greek and Roman historians to offer both sides a broader perspective as they pursue their individual topics. The scholars presenting papers on the Babylonian world at the Vienna conference demonstrated a great deal of ingenuity in applying new methodologies to their evidence and in drawing compelling conclusions about the nature of ancient Near Eastern economies. The papers in this volume approach archives from a somewhat different perspective, with a focus on understanding them as coherent bodies of evidence and on that basis drawing historical conclusions, for example, about the governmental policies in ancient city states or empires, about economic relationships in the ancient Near East, or about the role of law in the administration of justice. Several of the papers are concerned directly with establishing criteria for defining an archive and on this basis interpreting one. Thus Klaas Veenhof, “The Archives of Old Assyrian Traders: their Nature, Functions and Use,” examines a collection of some 23,000 clay tablets kept by Old Assyrian traders in the city of Kanesh in southern Anatolia from about 1900 BCE until the city was destroyed in 1835 BCE. Many of the traders kept archives of documents in their houses in Kanesh, and they apparently had advance warning about the impending doom

1

In a book project titled The King’s Canvas: The Transformation of Ancient Macedon.

2 The conference Too much data? Generalizations and model-building in ancient economic history on the basis of large corpora of documentary evidence was held July 16-17, 2008 at the University of Vienna.

14

of their city, since they were able to take some documents, presumably ones concerning still outstanding obligations, with them when they abandoned their houses. The surviving archives are thus far from complete, but they do offer a great deal of information about the economic activities of merchants engaging in commerce far from the capital of the empire, in one of as many as forty trading stations in Anatolia. These archives seem to offer a great deal of evidence for how such merchants were able to enforce obligations and resolve disputes, which would have been absolutely vital to their being able to conduct business. Of particular interest is the governing body that loomed over the traders, the karum, a hierarchical organization that served to regulate relationships among traders. Did it also play a role in enforcing contracts into which the Assyrian traders entered with local people from whom they acquired gold and silver? The paper of Antoine Jacquet, “Family Archives in Mesopotamia during the Old Babylonian Period,” is part of a broad project to consider archives from the first dynasty of Bablyon, in the 20th to the 17th centuries BCE, in their context as they are discovered archaeologically, to learn what one can from the ensemble of documents rather than from documents considered individually. Jacquet’s paper describes the variety of people who kept archives, including many women. One of his important points is that one should distinguish between documents kept for the long term, often concerned with real estate sales, juridical decisions, marriage, inheritance, adoptions, and manumissions, and documents recording shortterm obligations, such as debt contracts, which would be destroyed when the obligation was completed or at least be eventually purged. Short-term arrangements, which might offer an insight into the scale of commerce in which traders would be involved, are likely to be under-represented in the archives. Moreover, both Veenhof and Jacquet raise the troubling point that it is difficult to see how ancient people navigated among their archives to retrieve important information in a timely fashion. To turn to papyri and Ptolemaic Egypt, Lucia Criscuolo, “Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio e il problema della titolarità di un archivio nell’Egitto tolemaico,” distinguishes between archives proper, that is, collections of documents deliberately collected and maintained and kept by an individual for a specific purpose, and other dossiers of documents, sometimes assembled in antiquity, but without the direct purpose of an archive. In her paper, Criscuolo emphasizes the importance of understanding the conditions under which documents were produced, especially copies of official documents, which may not display a professional appearance. Clearly the phenomenon of copying documents produced for official purposes was widespread, since it could be important for an individual to be able to have available the information from official enactments. From another perspective, in his paper on Aramaic archives from the Persian period in Egypt, Ingo Kottsieper explores the reasons why individuals maintained archives. In the case of Nakhtḥor, an official of the Persian satrap Arsames, the preserved papers concern Nakhtḥor’s duties and those of his predecessor, and their collection

archives and archival documents …

15

of documents served to establish Nakhtḥor’s political authority. Other archives that Kottsieper examines might serve to establish people’s personal legal status or rights, as is the case with the archives of Jedaniah and Anani. To return to the ancient Near East, Susanne Paulus, “The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives,” examines archival material concerning the Kassite dynasty to reconstruct landownership patterns, important both for the economic history of the period and for understanding the power of the king, which to a large extent derived from his capacity to bestow land on loyal or favored subjects. The archival material, however, does not permit drawing a complete picture of changes in landownership, and many documents remain unpublished. However, Paulus finds a promising way forward by examining stone inscriptions, or kudurrus. These stones, which invoked divine protection against anyone who might disturb the rights of the temple or individual who erected them, included texts recording land donations. So they help to fill in gaps in the incomplete archival material. For example, the king, as the highest judge, would adjudicate property disputes, but there is no royal archive documenting such decisions, since it fell to the individuals involved in the dispute to preserve their documents. The kudurrus provide an important source of information to reconstruct the economic history of this period. Preserving documents in public archives was a common activity for Greek city states, and Christophe Pébarthe, “Les archives de la cité de raison: démocratie athénienne et pratiques documentaires à l’époque classique,” examines the role of local and centrally maintained written records and the relationship between them to address the broader issues about the nature of Athenian democracy. One issue concerns the degree to which ‘rationality’ rather than traditional social ties characterized the organization of Greek city states. In addition, Pébarthe’s study raises questions concerning the degree to which writing (as opposed to orality) was central to classical Greek democracy. If, as Pébarthe argues, the use of writing was an integral part of a broadly rational organization of the city state, it is still not always clear precisely what purpose the publication of a document on stone served, or the relationship between an inscription that could be publicly viewed and the original documents maintained by the city. Shimon Epstein addresses this issue in his paper, “Attic Building Accounts from Euthynae to Stelae,” concerned with the inscriptions recording the public building accounts from the Periclean building program in fifth-century BCE Athens, the later construction of the Erechtheion, and fourth-century building accounts from Eleusis. By analyzing the information that was in all likelihood presented when the officials in charge of these building programs underwent their auditing process, but did not appear on the inscriptions, Epstein makes a convincing argument about the political purposes of the inscriptions. For Greek cities in the Hellenistic and Roman periods, Laura Boffo, “La ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche,” and Kaja Harter-Uibopuu, “Epigraphische Quellen zum Archivwesen in den griechischen Poleis des ausgehenden Hellenismus und der Kaiserzeit,” investi-

16

gate the preservation of documents concerned with both the administration of the cities and with private legal arrangements. Boffo examines the epigraphic archives kept by cities as a way of understanding the evolving relationship between city and king in the Hellenistic world. Her thesis is that the preservation of archives involving royal enactments was a sign of the king’s power. The kings exercised their power not only through imposing taxes on the cities and rewarding favored individuals with honors, but also through acts of generosity toward a city, such as funding cults or even the education of children. Harter-Uibopuu considers the well-known manumission documents from Delphi as well as grave regulations from Roman Asia Minor to address how cities changed their practices in preserving documents from Hellenistic times. This paper raises important questions for how people in Roman provinces sought to enforce private legal arrangements. Arranging the manumission of a slave as a sale to the god at Delphi carried with it a kind of protection that the owners of the slaves involved apparently did not expect to gain from the more conventional legal institutions of their cities. The publication on the temple wall, in abbreviated form, of the manumission document preserved in the archive was surely meant to emphasize both the validity of the manumissions and the authority of the god in enforcing them. In Asia Minor, by contrast, the grave regulations show that private individuals were confident of being able to call upon public authorities to enforce their wishes about the ways in which their tombs would be used over generations long after they were deceased. The prescription that a violator of the tomb would be compelled to pay a public fine is paralleled in Greek wills from Roman Egypt, in which the testators also include public fines for people who violate the terms of the will. Archives could play a much more basic role in resolving legal disputes, as emphasized by Edward Harris’ paper on the “The Plaint in Athenian Law and Legal Procedure.” Harris challenges the widely held belief that decisions in Athenian courts were reached more by rhetoric or social considerations than by following the strict requirements of the law. Roman civil procedure tried to limit the scope for going outside of the strict requirements of the law through the formulary system. Athenian law did this by requiring public and private actions to be drawn up specifically in accordance with existing statutes (Roman law did not require this, but instead required a remedy to exist), and the plaint carefully outlined the statute violated, the precise nature of the violations of the laws, and the amount of damages caused and sought. Harris’ focus on the plaint as a feature of Athenian law that brought order and predictability to the adjudication of disputes raises some broader questions. One is whether other Greek city states applied a similar requirement to court cases, or whether the Athenian court system applied a unique reform that made legal business qualitatively different from other Greek cities. A more fundamental issue concerns the difference between ways in which Greek law developed in the classical period, closely tied as it was with the legislation and thus the political processes of Greek democracy. In contemporary Rome,

archives and archival documents …

17

by contrast, as Aldo Schiavone (2012) emphasizes, the development and interpretation of Roman law remained largely in the hands of aristocratic legal experts, who struggled to remain independent from immediate political pressures. To return to Athenian law, a further incentive for trials to be conducted in accordance with the law consisted in the penalties that might be imposed on magistrates who allowed cases in violation of these prescriptions. That the administration of Athenian law, then, might be more predictable than other scholars, most notably Adriann Lanni (2006), would suggest, has important implications for understanding the Athenian economy in the fourth century, a period for which we also have substantial evidence for the development of commercial banking. Publicly maintained archives could play a crucial role in deciding legal issues that had wider implications for the administration of cities, as Thomas Kruse emphasizes in his paper “Bevölkerungskontrolle, Statuszugang und Archivpraxis im römischen Ägypten.” If Roman rule in Egypt to a large extent involved defining the population in terms of various legal statuses with corresponding privileges, it could be crucial both for the state and private individuals to have access to records that could prove status. In many areas of classical Roman law, it was not necessary to have written documentation to prove a case or enforce a contract, although written evidence would obviously be helpful. In the case of marriage, for example, the absence of documentation was not a hindrance to asserting that a marriage was legitimate, as the emperor Probus, in a constitution preserved in the Code of Justinian, responded in a third-century rescript, as long as there were witness who could verify that a marriage existed (C. 5.4.9). In the later empire, a series of constitutions by the emperor Justinian makes clear a growing preference for written documentation. In Roman Egypt, proof of status was greatly facilitated by the ability of cities to maintain public archives with epikrisis documents and other indications of status, such as the house-by-house census declarations. Rudolf Haensch offers a very different perspective in his paper on the types of archives kept by provincial governors in the later Roman Empire, “Die Statthalterarchive der Spätantike.” Haensch takes the view that, in the earlier empire, when it is generally assumed that provincial governors maintained extensive archives, the types of documentation to which governors could have recourse were limited. But the situation changed in late antiquity, as governors maintained for decades court protocols and other important records. These might be available in the provincial capital, as well as in a central store of archives in Constantinople. The best evidence for the long duration of extensive archives is the ability of Augustine to quote decisions made in the early fourth century when he discusses the relations between Catholics and Donatists. Haensch’s investigation has important implications for the administration of justice both under the principate and in late antiquity; an important question concerns whether the administration of justice in the Roman Empire was enhanced by the access on the part of provincial governors and other judges to relevant legal decisions,

18

or whether it was largely incumbent upon the litigants to produce the relevant documentation to support their cases. To conclude, the papers in this volume use comparable methodologies to address common questions in the field of ancient history writ large. The focus on the exact nature of archival material and the uses to which it might be put provide new perspectives to make more precise the types of conclusions that can be drawn in future work on this type of evidence. The papers in this volume point the way to new ways in which archives from the ancient world can be studied, as well as to the benefits of bringing together scholars working in diverse fields with common interests and methodologies.

archives and archival documents …

19

Bibliography

Banaji 2001 J. Banaji, Agrarian Change in Late Antiquity: Gold, Labour and Aristocratic Dominance, Oxford. Boak & Youtie 1960 A. E. R. Boak & H. C. Youtie, The Archive of Aurelius Isidorus in the Egyptian Museum, Cairo, and the University of Michigan (P. Cair. Isidor.), Ann Arbor. Hickey 2012 T. M. Hickey, Wine, Wealth, and the State in Late Antique Egypt, Ann Arbor. Lanni 2006 A. Lanni, Law and Justice in the Courts of Classical Athens, Cambridge. Mazza 2001 R. Mazza, L’Archivio degli Apioni. Terra, lavoro e proprietà senatoria nell’Egitto tardoantico. Bari. Omar 1979 S. Omar, Das Archiv des Soterichos, Pap.Colon. VIII, Opladen. Rathbone 1991 D. Rathbone, Economic Rationalism and Rural Society in Third-Century A.D. Egypt: the Heroninos Archive and the Appianus Estate, Cambridge. Ruffini 2008 G. Ruffini, Social Networks in Byzantine Egypt, Cambridge. Sarris 2006 P. Sarris, Economy and Society in the Age of Justinian, Cambridge. Schiavone 2012 A. Schiavone, The Invention of Law in the West, trans. Jeremy Carden and Antony Shugaar, Cambridge (Mass.) and London. Waerzeggers, forthcoming C. Waerzeggers, Mardukrēmanni. Local Networks and Imperial Politics in Achaemenid Babylonia, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta, Leuven.

20

Ancient Near East

Zero and Infinity: the Archives in Mesopotamia

sophie démare-lafont

«Glory (or shame) to the brick !» wrote Prof. G. Cardascia in an article introducing legal assyriology to beginners1. Indeed, Assyriologists are better off with the numerous tablets found in the deserts of the Near East, but this documentary wealth is not fully available nor completely usable, for many reasons. One of them is the dispersion of the archives2. By itself, a tablet gives a great amount of information, deriving from its content but also from its external aspect, the shape of its writing and the mention or the printing of seal(s). But a complete interpretation also requires knowledge of the archaeological context of its origin, and its possible connection to an archive. Whether this tablet was kept with others or not, how it was stored, in which room or part of a building, all this enhances and enlightens the historical comment. What to do for instance with a list of people receiving various amounts of grain or silver? A. Jacquet shows here how the archivistic point of view helps to rule out some hypotheses and suggest others. Such an approach implies

1

Cardascia 1954 = 1995, 15: «Gloire (ou opprobre) à la brique !».

2 On the notion of archive in Mesopotamia, and the scientific and methodological questions it raises, see Veenhof 1986, and especially his brillant introduction to the volume (1-36).

archives in the ancient near east: response

23

awareness of the Mesopotamian practices of conservation and utilization of the archives. The administrative services of palaces or temples on the one hand and those of the large households owning huge estates on the other hand worked in the same manner, though on a different scale: incomes and expenses were registered on notes, which were regularly copied on monthly or annual tablets; distributions of rations to employees and members of the family were carefully listed; some legal documents were kept, as well as letters dealing with political or administrative matters, or with current litigations in court. Taken on their own, these texts may look very disparate and the link between them does not appear at first sight. For instance, we know that royal or religious officers in Babylonia3 or in Syria4 used to put together at home documents concerning their official functions along with their own family archives or those belonging to other citizens. Had we ignored their common provenience, the idea of bringing these texts together would have not occurred to us. Taking into consideration their material unity changes the way we look at the criteria of classification and internal organization of an archive, and leads us also to reconsider the relevance or the distinction between official and private sectors. These pieces of information, which we consider crucial nowadays, were ignored or neglected for a long time. In the middle of the 19th century, during the relentless competition between European cultural diplomacies in the Near East, the excavators – usually diplomats themselves – were basically concerned with the quantity of findings: they wanted to send to their museums as many artifacts and texts as possible, even if this meant damaging the sites, scattering the archives and destroying small pieces considered ordinary or uninteresting. Many precious indications have been lost during the harsh diggings of the archaeological pioneers. For instance, no one would pay attention to the sherds sometimes found along with the tablets because they were seen as common fragments of pottery; but they could have been the remains of storage jars, and could have given information about the archival methods of the Mesopotamians5. In the same vein, the precise locus where the texts were found and their disposition on the ground were sometimes omitted, when in fact these data inform us about the classification practices and the activities of a building. Finally, the political circumstances, the increasing number of illicit diggings and the setting up of the museum collections have often led to the dispersion of archives which originally formed a coherent set. The case of the family of Ea-ilūta-bāni, in the 7th-6th

3 See for instance the texts from Dūr-Abiešuh, published by Van Lerberghe & Voet 2009, and the comments of D. Charpin, «Annuaire de l’Ecole Pratique des Hautes Etudes» 142, 2011, 17-21, esp. 21. 4 See the archives of the diviner Zū-Bala and his family at Emar (Démare-Lafont 2008, 213-14) and the archives from the house of Urtenu at Ugarit (Bordreuil & Malbran-Labat 1995). 5

Veenhof 1986, 13.

24

centuries B.C., is a good example thereof: their activities are reported during six generations in tablets kept in Jena, Istanbul, Oxford, Paris and at Yale University. A patient work aiming at regrouping the whole file was necessary in order to allow a global study of the matrimonial and economic strategies of this powerful family from Borsippa (modern Birs Nimrud, close to Babylon)6. Mesopotamian families themselves sometimes had to face the scattering of their own archives, because of marriages, commercial activities or uprootings after wars or economic crises. The Assyrian merchants, for instance, often had two homes and carried their archives from one house to the other, as K. Veenhof explains here. In Old-Babylonian times, exiled people from Uruk, in Southern Mesopotamia, moved to the North and settled in Kish, bringing with them their documents7. Finally, it sometimes happened that the tablets were destroyed, when they preluded to the drafting of official and monumental documents. Such is the case of the Medio-Babylonian kudurrus studied by S. Paulus in this volume: paradoxically, they testify to the existence of these “invisible” documents and raise the question of the purpose of such inscriptions engraved in the stone. Be they available or virtual, archives are the frame within which most of the Mesopotamian sources have to be interpreted and, in this respect, the three following contributions illustrate several aspects among the numerous avenues to be further explored.

6

Joannès 1989.

7

Charpin 1986, 402-18.

archives in the ancient near east: response

25

Bibliography

Bordreuil & Malbran-Labat 1995 P. Bordreuil & Fl. MalbranLabat, Les archives de la maison d’Ourtenou, «CRAI» 139/2, 443-51. Cardascia 1954 G. Cardascia, Splendeur et misère de l’assyriologie juridique, «Annales Universitatis Saraviensis» 3, 156-62 (reprinted in Hommage à Guillaume Cardascia, Méditerranées 3, 1995, 15-23). Charpin 1986 D. Charpin, Le clergé d’Ur au siècle d’Hammurabi (XIXe-XVIIIe siècles av. J.-C.), Hautes Etudes Orientales 22, Paris. Démare-Lafont 2008 S. Démare-Lafont, The King and the Diviner at Emar, in L. d’Alfonso, Y. Cohen & D. Sürenhagen (eds.), The City of Emar among the Late Bronze Age Empires – History, Landscape and Society, Proceedings of the Konstanz Emar Conference 25-26.04.2006, AOAT 349, Münster, 207-17. Joannès 1989 F. Joannès, Archives de Borsippa: la famille Ea-ilûta-bâni. Etude d’un lot d’archives familiales en Babylonie du VIIIe au Ve siècle av. J.-C., Hautes Etudes Orientales 25, Paris-Genève. Van Lerberghe & Voet 2009 K. Van Lerberghe & G. Voet, A Late Old Baylonian Temple Archive from Dūr-Abiešuḫ, CUSAS 8, Bethesda. Veenhof 1986 K.R. Veenhof (ed.), Cuneiform Archives and Libraries. Papers read at the XXXe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Leiden 1983, PIHANS 57, Leyde.

26

The Archives of Old Assyrian Traders: their Nature, Functions and Use1 klaas r. veenhof

The Old Assyrian archives are private archives. They were found in the houses of traders who in the early centuries of the second millennium BC lived in Kanesh, an ancient city in Central Anatolia, not far from modern Kayseri. The houses are situated in the commercial district of the lower town, called kārum Kanesh, which flourished for more than a century during the period of level II, which came to an end by destruction around 1835 BC (middle chronology). The Assyrian settlement in Kanesh is not only nearly the only source of our documentation, thanks to more than fifty years of excavations, it was also the administrative capital of an Assyrian colonial network that comprised ca. 30 commercial settlements and small trading stations, spread over the whole of Central Anatolia. The archives were kept in what they called the “sealed room” (maknukum) or “guarded room” (maṣṣartum), where also valuables were stored. They vary considerably in size and range from few hundred to a few times ca. 2000 cuneiform documents, variations that must reflect the importance and status of a trader, the history of the

1 See for general information on the excavation at Kanesh and on the Old Assyrian trade Larsen 1976; Özgüç 2003, and Veenhof 2008a, mentioned below in the bibliography, and see also C. Michel, Old Assyrian Bibliography (OAAS 1), Leiden 2003. In the following text I have simplified the rendering of the Assyrian names, not indicating long vowels and typical Semitic consonants, writing Ishtar instead of Ištar, Assur, etc.

the archives of old assyrian traders

27

house and presumably also the administrative habits of the owner. The archives consist of the written documents accumulated – drawn up, received, acquired, accepted for safe-keeping, or deposited there for other reasons – during the period of activity of a trader, which usually covered many, occasionally up to thirty years. In several cases the house had been taken over or inherited by his son, who added his own records to those left behind by his father and there are also a few examples of archives with records of three generations of traders. The archives brought to light by the excavations, first by the villagers and after 1948 by Turkish archeologists, reflect what they contained when the houses were destroyed.

1. Traders, archives and records Some general information on the traders, their archives and the types of records they contain is necessary before I can focus on the subject of this paper. This is not easy, because the archives of Kanesh have yielded more than 23.000 cuneiform documents (half of which are more or less known or accessible) of an at times bewildering variety, which reflect an extensive and very sophisticated overland trade, carried out by perhaps ca. 60 trading families. Moreover, most of the texts available were unearthed and sold by the local villagers, so that their archival background and coherence is unclear. Only the publication of officially excavated archives, in TPAK 1 and the volumes of the series AKT, offers better insights, but much work still remains to be done. Status, wealth and family situation of the traders vary considerably and their archives, all of which contain the usual variety of business documents, reflect these differences in the nature and numbers of commercial records and correspondence and to some extent also in the presence of certain types of legal documents. And most traders also had a family house in Assur, with an archive, but we know little from Assur, because the layers of this period in the lower town were not reached by the German excavators. In general, archives of traders whose family had stayed behind in Assur contain more letters of their wives and more correspondence with relatives, business associates and representatives, who took care of their legal and economic interests in Assur. Archives of traders living in Assur, whose grown-up sons lived and worked in Anatolia, include letters exchanged between them, while those of traders settled in Kanesh with their family comprise letters exchanged with their wives when they were traveling around. Important family documents – marriage contracts, testaments, title deeds, last wills, and joint-stock contracts that supplied the trader with his capital – were usually kept in the archive in Assur, but may turn up in Kanesh when a whole family lived there. Many of the older traders focused on the import of tin and textiles from Assur and their sale for silver and gold in Anatolia, so that their archives contain many letters and records relating to the caravan trade. Others were more involved in the internal

28

trade in copper and wool inside Anatolia, and we also meet traders who traveled a lot in Anatolia and were engaged in commission sale and agency for colleagues in Assur and Kanesh. For a good appraisal of the archives several facts have to be taken into account. The first is that several traders also had houses – apparently with archives – in other trading settlements in Anatolia, where they stayed temporarily and even could move. This can only be discovered by a comprehensive analysis of an archive and as an example I mention some features of the large archive of ShallimAssur and his family (more than 1100 texts), which has been analyzed in an exemplary way by Larsen. In the first volume of its edition (AKT 6a) he writes: «It seems clear that his main archive must have been stored in the city of Durhumit, 2 where he stayed during the last years of his life and where eventually he died and was buried. (…) The texts from the Kanesh archive, relating to his work and his actions are probably to be understood as a scattered sample that happened to end up here, presumably because he was staying in this house occasionally and received letters and engaged in other activities that led to the writing of texts» (AKT 6a, 8-9). His house also contained many documents of his elder brother Iddin-abum, although he must have had his own house with a separate archive. The dates and subject matter of these documents made Larsen conclude that «when he was a very young man he may have shared a house and archive with his brother» (from where his texts were never removed) and that, much later, after his death, «collected documents relating to his affairs were brought to the house of his brother, who was the executioner of his estate». Shallim-Assur’s eldest son, Ennam-Assur, probably was the main inhabitant of the house, but he was murdered only a few years after his father’s death, in ca. 1865 BC. 3 Next we have ca. 200 texts associated with the affairs of the latter’s younger brother, Ali-ahum, who «must have been the last person to use this house and to deposit texts here», several of which deal with attempts to obtain blood money for his murdered brother. But since none of them is later than ca. three years after this murder, while he must have lived considerably longer, «the later texts were not stored in this house, where he probably did not live, so that the documentation for his last years is no longer extant». In fact no dated records from the last 25 years, before Kanesh was destroyed in ca. 1835 BC, have been found and Larsen considers it likely that the house was in fact not lived in during this period and may have been used exclusively for storage. Fortunately, the texts it contained were not removed (AKT 6a, 11-13). 4

2 An important city and colony, ca. 250 km north of Kanesh, the center of the Anatolian copper trade. 3 The texts are dated, according to the Assyrian custom, by means of the name of an important eponymous official in the City of Assur, head and manager of the “City Hall”, who was elected annually. This institution was created during the first year of king Erishum I, according to the Middle Chronology ca. 1870 BC. 4

Concerning the archive excavated in 1993 in grid LVII/127-128, with texts from three

the archives of old assyrian traders

29

A second feature is that, as mentioned in some records, groups of texts for a variety of reasons could be taken out of an archive and brought elsewhere, frequently to Assur. A trader could move to Assur in old age and take records along, as shown by the witnessed record EL 141:1-10, “The containers with tablets of Enlil-bani and the containers with copies we entrusted to Iddin-Kubum and he brought them to Enlil-bani.” When a lawsuit, by appeal, was transferred from kārum Kanesh to the court of the City of Assur, records to be used as evidence were shipped there. EL 298:9ff. describes how in a conflict about a debt the authorities of kārum Kanesh entrusted to an attorney of the plaintiff a sealed box with ten sealed documents, including four formal letters (našpertum, “missive”) of kārum Kanesh, four missives of a trader sealed by the kārum and two records dealing with the debt in question, which (lines 35-36) “he will submit to the City and our Lord (the ruler)”. When a trader died and his business had to be liquidated and his inheritance divided on the basis of his last will – which was always kept in Assur – this had to take place after heirs and relevant records had been brought together in Assur, as a ruling of the City stated (Veenhof 1995, 1725-7). And we have seen in the previous paragraph how a large file on the affairs of a dead trader was brought to the house of his brother, who was the executor of his estate. In some cases, after a trader had died, particular records in his archive could be required to prevent unfinished transactions from being frozen and to pay or collect debts. In such a case formal authorization could be given to open his safe and take out assets and tablets. Two records inform us about what happened in this way with the archive of Elamma. CCT 5, 3 reports that after his death the sons of his partner “had opened the strong-room and taken out a sealed debt-note for 12 pounds of silver”, declaring: “We act at the order and under the responsibility of his investors”. They were, as usual in such situations, accompanied by a committee of impartial outsiders (ahiūtum), who looked on and afterwards sealed the door of the strong-room together with those who had entered. And in Kt m/k 145 people declare: “On the basis of a verdict of the plenary kārum the scribe seized us and we entered Elamma’s house and broke the seals of the strong-room, which we left there. Agua took two coffers with tablets.” In the deposition (BIN 6, 220+) that is part of a large file, studied by MatouŠ 1969, about what happened when the trader Puzur-Assur died, his sons state: “When our father Puzur-Assur had died the investors and creditors of our father, having entered his sealed strongroom, took 12 boxes with tablets and entrusted these to you”. The destruction of the houses in kārum Kanesh in ca. 1835 BC did not come as a complete surprise, no unburied skeletons were found, nor valuables (silver, gold, items of bronze) in the strong-rooms. This suggests that the inhabitants managed to flee in time and it is reasonable to assume that they took along a num-

generations of traders, Michel 2008b, 58 observes that the number of texts of the second owner, Ali-ahum, son of Iddin-Suen, is not substantial (ca. 50 letters, 11 loan contracts), presumably because he also had a house in Burushhattum, and one in Assur.

30

ber of records, in particular those recording valid debt-claims and investment contracts, perhaps also title deeds. This situation helps to explain why in general records of the last twenty years of kārum Kanesh level II are fairly rare. But there must have been other reasons too, perhaps the move of traders from Kanesh, the administrative centre of the trade, to cities and colonies in the north and west, which were the centers of economic activity. Larsen, in the introduction to AKT 6b points to «the apparent collapse in the commercial activities of the Assyrian businessmen [that] probably had its roots in legal and economic problems associated with the death of a whole generation of important merchants».5 Whatever was the case, there is no evidence that, when a number of years after 1835 BC the rebuilding of what became kārum Kanesh level Ib started, Assyrians tried to retrieve records from the earlier ruins. Finally, we have to assume that the enormous number of written records accumulating in the archives made traders from time to time decide to remove texts that were no longer valid or necessary. Most commercial transactions were finished in a few years6 and their records did not have to be preserved, as happened with title deeds or marriage contracts. Only in particular cases, such as with a joint-stock company that would run for ten years, did records have to be preserved for longer periods. This explains why records from the oldest period, when the scope of the trade was also more limited, are relatively rare, 7 but we know almost nothing about the removal of records, apart from returning debtnotes when they were paid. We occasionally meet references to records we would expect to find, but which are missing, but we do not know why. The archive of Kuliya (AKT 5) contained eight, in part overlapping lists (texts nos. 6269) that enumerated in all 50 tablets of various kinds, apparently present there; the biggest one lists “27 tablets placed in a big box”. Since none of these tablets was found in the archive, the list may have been drawn up to select and identify documents that were removed, but we do not know why and where. In general one gets the impression that outdated records were not systematically discarded and that much depended on the habits and zeal of the archive owner, who usually had room enough to store them, while reading and selecting them may have been a cumbersome task. Some old documents, such as large memoranda enumerating all outstanding claims, may have been preserved for their informative value, letters from relatives and wives for emotional reasons. The archaeological record unfortunately is not clear enough to show whether old, outdated records

5

The issue is studied in the framework of a monograph by Barjamovic-Hertel-Larsen 2012.

6 The terms of commercial loans, actually the consignment of merchandise given on credit to traveling agents, usually did not exceed one year. Also the notes and accounts of expenses paid en route by the leader of a caravan lost the value after the accounts had been settled. 7 The absence of early dated records (the oldest one preserved is from eponymy year 47) is not surprising, since nearly all are debt-notes and they were returned or destroyed when the debt was paid (see also below note 34).

the archives of old assyrian traders

31

may not have been stored in separate containers or even rooms. No hoards of discarded tablets were found outside the archival rooms and houses, used as fill or for paving a floor, as happened in Babylonia. Every archive also contains groups of records that cannot be linked with its owner or related to his business, which I have called elsewhere (Veenhof 2003, 115, § 5.2) “strange records”. Various explanations for their presence are possible. There were people without a house in the kārum, e.g. caravan personnel, traveling agents and relatives who stayed in Kanesh for some time. They may have deposited their records in the archive of their boss, as is clear for an employee of the trader Imdilum. Traders traveled a lot and might temporarily move to other places and in such cases they might give valuable records in safe-deposit (ana nabšêm ezābum) to a friend or colleague. The most impressive piece of evidence is a large tablet in New York (CTMMA I, 84), where a trader, whose strong-room had been emptied out by a partner, enumerates and describes 25 records of all kinds, including “tablets of others, which they had left in deposit with me” (l. 40),... “all contained in two sealed containers” (lines 60f.). 8 In several cases such deposited records were apparently never retrieved by their owners, who may have died or disappeared. As already mentioned above in connection with the archive of Shallim-Assur, traders did move and could live only temporarily in a house, judging from the presence of groups of records belonging to them alongside the more substantial archive of the owner or main inhabitant of the house. Cécile Michel observed that the archive edited in TPAK 1, basically that of Shumi-abiya, also contained 25 letters of a certain Assur-mutappil, some still in unopened envelopes, but not a single debt-note of his. She assumes that he deposited his letters with Shumi-abiya when he left Kanesh, but did not return; some letters addressed to him that had arrived after his departure were never opened and read (33-4).

2. Traders in different situations and contexts The circumstances under which traders lived and worked in Kanesh could be different and this had a bearing on their archives. We may distinguish the following situations: a) A trader as the head of a family who had moved to Kanesh, while leaving his family, that means his wife and young children, behind in Assur. All important family records are in Assur and this situation generates a correspondence between husband and wife. The lively business correspondence is with the trader’s male relatives, investors and especially his representatives in As-

8 That the victim could give a long, detailed description of all these tablets implies that he had kept a list of them.

32

sur, who take care of his interests, receive his silver, buy merchandise for export and equip his caravans. His sons in due time might join him, assist him in the business and when they are grown up develop their own commercial activities, to be continued after his death. A good example is Pushuken, father of four sons, who was active in Kanesh for more than 20 years and died there. His business was continued mainly by his son Buzazu, who lived in his house, where his father’s archive was left in place, 9 to which he added his own records. It contained i. a. letters sent to Pushuken by his wife in Assur and also many texts dealing with the division of Pushuken’s inheritance among his children, in which his eldest daughter, a priestess in Assur, played a prominent role. b) A variant to this type is the successful trader who after many years returns to Assur and leaves the business in Kanesh in the hands of his by now experienced son, whom he assists and advises in letters sent from Assur, while also carrying on some business of his own. The son took over his father’s house and archive, apart from the records his father had taken along when he returned to Assur, presumably records of affairs that still had not been finished, although this is not easy to prove, for we have no texts from Assur. The best example is the prominent trader Imdilum, – whose father Shu-Laban was already active in Anatolia, – who led the business there at least 17 years, returned to Assur around 1880 BC and was succeeded by his son Puzur-Ishtar. The latter is attested for fifteen years, the last seven after his father had died. The father in Assur kept writing letters to his son, which we have to distinguish from copies of letters written by him when he still lived in Kanesh. c) A young man who moved to kārum Kanesh to trade there in the service of or in cooperation with his father who remained in Assur. The latter, the boss of the family business, conducts a lively correspondence with him and also supplies him with merchandise, money, advice and information and in return receives the silver sent back from Anatolia, which he uses to pay debts and taxes and to equip a new caravan. A good example is Assur-nada, son of Assur-idi, whose archive was published in Larsen 2002. It shows us a father much concerned about what his son does, such as the latter’s failure to meet promises (of votive gifts) made to the gods, and also burdened with the task of caring for his son’s children, after the latter’s wife, who had stayed in Assur, had died. Another example is EnnumAssur, the oldest son of Shalim-ahum, a merchant and capitalist living in Assur and the main business associate of Pushuken (mentioned under a). He

9 All texts dealing with Pushuken were unearthed and sold by the local villagers early in the 20th century and there exists no general description of his (reconstructed) archive, although we can now identify almost 350 letters and dozens of legal documents that belonged to it.

the archives of old assyrian traders

33

lived, temporarily perhaps together with his brother Dan-Assur, in a house in Kanesh, whose archive was excavated in 1970 and partially published (without the tablets still in sealed envelopes) as AKT 3. The archive, not surprisingly, contained letters of the father to his son(s) and letters written by Ennum-Assur when he traveled and worked elsewhere in Anatolia, to his wife Nuhshatum. She had to take care of and “guard” his house and the archive and was occasionally instructed to retrieve documents from the archive for particular purposes. d) A grown-up son who had moved to Kanesh with his wife, when he had become independent or his father in Assur had died and he had inherited his share in his fortune. He started a business and family life there and his sons in due time would work with him and get married. In his archive we may also find contracts and records relating to their family life and the business correspondence is with male relatives, his representatives and his investors in Assur. A good example is Elamma, the younger son of Iddin-Suen, an energetic importer of merchandise from Assur (which he occasionally visited), whose archive, excavated in 1991 and 1992, I am publishing. He lived in Kanesh for more than thirty years (opposite the house of his elder brother Ali-ahum) and had a lively correspondence with his representatives in Assur. His business was carried on after his death by some sons and his energetic widow, Lamassatum, who continued to live in the house for several years and conducted some business of her own. The archive also contains records dealing with the division of his father’s, his own and his wife’s inheritance and records about and letters from various family members living in Kanesh or Assur, such as a file about the death, funeral and inheritance of a twice married daughter,10 and letters of his favorite daughter, who was priestess in Assur. e) In some cases an archive contains a number of records of the father of the trader, but this depended on his age and where he lived, in Assur or Anatolia. We have e.g. no records of Pushuken’s father Suejja, who lived in Assur, and only a few of Imdilum’s father Shu-Laban, of whom it is not certain that he lived in or visited Kanesh.11 In Ali-ahum’s house in Kanesh, excavated in 1993, with an archive of more than 900 texts, a few dozen letters addressed to his father Iddin-Suen were found, but no debt-notes. Cécile Michel12 assumes that these letters, which all have low excavation numbers, had been stored separately after his death, when his son Ali-ahum (active there since ca. 1895 BC) became

10 I studied this file in Veenhof 2008b. 11 Larsen 1982, 224 assumed that the father, who appears already in ca. 1910 BC (ICK 2, 104), died early and that Imdilum’s uncle Assur-imitti, who lived in Assur, took care of the interests of the family, before Imdilum himself is attested in the sources, 18 years later. 12 Michel 2008b, 58, footnote 1.

34

the owner of the house and the archive. This contrasts with the archive of Iddin-Suen’s second son, Elamma (who lived across the street in Kanesh), whose house, which he must have acquired or built when he became an independent trader,13 did not contain documents of his father. The archive of Shallim-Assur, son of Issu-arik contained a few letters to and records of his father, but no letters written by him after he had returned to Assur, presumably because he died there soon (AKT 6a, 6). After the death of a pater familias his inheritance was apparently divided and his “firm” liquidated, whereupon his sons could start their own business.14 In most cases one of the sons acquired the house in Kanesh, where his mother might continue to live, with his father’s archive left in place, to which his own and his mother’s records would be added.

3. The kĀrum organization The archives excavated, while clearly those of private entrepreneurs and their families, also reflect the fact that the Old Assyrian traders belonged to a community and organization of traders. They all originated from the same city, Assur, and had all settled abroad, far from home, in a completely different environment and society, without military protection. This stimulated forms of cooperation (mutual aid, business partnerships, representation, etc.), but it also took a more structural form. The totality of the Assyrian traders in Kanesh formed a kind of corporation, called kārum. This term originally meant the “quay, harbor district” that every Mesopotamian city had, where bulk goods arrived by boat, and then also the commercial quarter where traders met and finally its inhabitants as a group. A kārum could comprise foreign traders, who might organize themselves as a group, at times with a leader (called “its head”), to cooperate and to be better equipped to deal with the local powers. Kārum Kanesh was a well-organized, hierarchical organization, which comprised a plenary assembly, “the kārum great and small” that met as an “assembly” (puhrum), and knew a committee, designated as “the big men”, who ran the daily affairs. The plenary kārum appears frequently as court-oflaw to solve the many, mostly commercial conflicts between its members. The kārum as organization had a building, “the kārum house”, where meetings were held and its secretary worked, which housed a cella with the statue of the god Assur (by whose dagger members would swear), and had storage facilities and an archive. The kārum arranged and supervised the presumably semi-annual general “accounting of kārum Kanesh” (nikkassū ša kārim Kaneš), which involved both individual traders and the kārum as such. They were necessary because of

13 The oldest dated text in which he occurs, as creditor, is from ca. 1905 BC, much earlier than his elder brother, but the latter apparently first operated from Assur, before coming to Kanesh, perhaps after the death of their father. 14 See Larsen 2007 for this development.

the archives of old assyrian traders

35

the many credit operations and book transfers between members, for accounting the results of collective commercial transactions organized by the kārum to which its members could subscribe, and for settling accounts (on taxes and credit sales) with the local palace, whereby payments and transfers were regularly channeled via the kārum organization. Kārum Kanesh was also the administrative head of the colonial network that consisted of at least 25 other kārums and trading stations (wabartum), spread over central Anatolia. As such it functioned as an extension of the government of the City of Assur, to which it was responsible and whose directives it had to apply. It maintained the diplomatic relations with the many city-states and rulers in Anatolia, with whom treaties had been concluded, and stepped in when problems arose. It could also issue orders and rulings, and traders in other colonies could appeal to the authorities of kārum Kanesh for justice. The archive of the kārum probably contained records (or their copies) emanating from these activities, such as official letters and verdicts, and we have references to tablets of/in the kārum-house on which traders were “booked/ registered” for certain amounts, which they owed the organization or it owed to them.15 Since the “kārum-house” has not been found, we do not have the archives of kārum Kanesh, but many texts it produced and also received (letters from other colonies and from the City of Assur and its ruler) are known and give us a welcome insight into its workings. They are frequently referred to or quoted in the business correspondence and several (copies) of them were found in the archives of the traders. As a self-governing institution the kārum had its members perform various administrative, commercial and judicial tasks and in doing so they produced or were given records and letters, some of which (in part duplicates) ended up in their archives. The orders and verdicts of the kārum were sealed by members who administered them and acted as its court-of-law and special members (called līmū) could represent the kārum in financial transactions. Messengers in temporary service of the kārum, sent out to other colonies with official letters and orders, might take their copy of such texts home when they returned.16 The traders in whose cases the kārum intervened by letters, orders and verdicts apparently could acquire duplicates of these records. And this was also the case with official letters of the City, addressed to the kārum, which dealt with an issue that involved a particular trader. The texts of three treaties concluded between the Assyrians and some Anatolian rulers were all found in private archives, presumably

15 See Veenhof 2003, § 1.1. There is e.g. mention of a “big tablet of the kārum-house” and of a trader’s “deposits [booked] on the third and sixth tablet of the kārum-house”, but we do not know the system. 16 The role of the messengers of the kārum is described in Veenhof 2008c, 224-46, and there one finds samples of official letters carried by messengers. A large selection of official letters of the Assyrian authorities is offered by Michel 2001, Ch.1.

36

because their owners had represented the kārum when they were negotiated and concluded and had retained a copy of the text.

4. A classification of the texts The records in the archives can be classified in several broad categories: a) Letters, which comprise usually ca. 30-50% of the texts of an archive. The main types are letters related to the caravan system, letters that report on a variety of commercial and legal problems (frequently small files around a particular incident), letters from and to family members, and official letters, by the authorities in Assur or in Kanesh and their agents. An overview is offered by Michel 2001, who presents 400 of them in translation, divided into seven chapters, each with its introduction, dealing with the Assyrian and the Anatolian authorities, the caravan trade, smuggling, commercial partnerships and joint-stock companies, family firms (three samples), and the correspondence of women.17 b) Legal documents, usually ca. 30% to 40% of the texts, an important older sample of which (340 records) was published long ago in EL in a careful classification. They can be distinguished in two types. The first consists of contracts of various types, of which debt-notes, service contracts with personnel, transport contracts, contracts on settling accounts, and quittances are most numerous. Next there is a limited number of contracts concerning family life (marriage, divorce – especially when a trader married an Anatolian bride – and inheritance) and a large variety of other contracts, e.g. concerning securities, jointstock companies, partnerships, and contracts that served as title deeds, about the purchase of houses and slaves in Anatolia (frequently from defaulting debtors, whose pledges were forfeited)18. The second comprises a great variety of records that emanate from and reflect the administration of justice, such as protocols of private summonses, testimonies, oaths sworn, interrogations, agreements, records of arbitration, mediation and adjudication, together with protocols of lawsuits and of verdicts by the various colonial authorities. In addition verdicts by the City Assembly of Assur, which issued also “strong letters of the City (Assur)”, written to help a plaintiff whose case has been considered valid by the legal authorities.

17 Other collections of published letters are those related to the caravan system, studied in Larsen 1967, the letters in Prague, published in Prag I, those in the Assur-nada archive edited in Larsen 2002, and translations of letters in the recent volumes in the AKT-series. 18 See for such contracts B. Kienast, Das altassyrische Kaufsvertragsrecht, FAOS Beiheft 1, Stuttgart 1984.

the archives of old assyrian traders

37

c) Lists, memorandums and notes, usually ca. 20-30% of the texts, ca. 600 of which, mostly unearthed before the official excavations by the local villagers and therefore devoid of their archival context, were edited in Ulshöfer 1995. Alongside a variety of short notes about expenses, distributions of bread and meat, small payments, settlements, deposits, etc., the more important categories are: – lists of packets of silver and gold, the yield of the trade, but also gifts for various persons, entrusted for shipment to Assur; – large memorandums (tahsistum) that register all a trader’s transactions that had resulted in debt-claims that still had to be paid; – lists of records present in his archive at a particular moment, probably drawn up as inventory or because they were transferred.

5. The functions of the texts Old Assyrian documents are not only very numerous, but there is also no body of cuneiform texts that contains so many references to the writing, reading, sending, transfer, use and storage of written documents. That is because the success of the OA trade depended on them and they were indispensable for three reasons: a) In the system of overland trade based on a colonial network there was a constant need of communication, of passing on information between traders living or working at home (in Assur), traveling in the caravans (six weeks from Assur to Kanesh), living in Kanesh or in one of the many commercial settlements spread over Anatolia. Oral communication did take place, but the trade would have been very difficult and much less successful without this written communication. b) The trade was so sophisticated and “dense” – that is there were so many simultaneous transactions of an at times complex nature – that the human memory was unable to remember all the data. They had to be written down to aid the memory, to prevent problems and in the interest of good accountability. c) The nature of the trade and the value of the goods traded on many levels and in many situations required “valid records” (ṭuppum harmum), that is records whose contents are certified by the seals of parties and witnesses impressed on its envelope. By issuing “valid records” traders could obtain and use capital of investors and money-lenders, buy on credit from the City Hall in Assur, and they used them to contract caravan personnel, employ commission agents, sell on credit, and provide and obtain securities. They not only informed them on transactions, but also provided evidence to be used if problems arose that had to be solved by private summons, arbitration or formal lawsuits.

38

Written documents therefore had three partly overlapping functions, as means of communication, as aid to memory and as evidence. These functions must also have determined the preservation of the records, but here many things are uncertain. Many letters may have been preserved because they contained important business or other information, but others, such as letters from wives and family, presumably often for emotional reasons. Most letters of both categories must have lost their informative or evidentiary value after a few years and were or could have been thrown away, but we cannot establish to what extent that happened. The preservation of records with a lot of valuable data (e.g. the large memorandums) and records with evidentiary value (e.g. of contracts, investments, etc.) is understandable, but most of the commercial records too lost their value after the transactions recorded had been completed and accounts had been settled, for they are different from marriage contracts, title deeds, or records of the division of an inheritance. Such texts, including judicial records confirming rights that had been contested, had a lasting value, as OB archives show, which occasionally contain records more than a century old. Most OA loans and credits were for a year or less and only investment loans (ebuṭṭum) and contracts for joint-stock companies (in which traders used capital made available by investors) could have a longer duration, up to 10 years in some cases. And even though we find some very old debt-notes, possibly never paid and therefore preserved, and we meet a few references to credit not paid back for a very long period, this does not change the fact that the great majority of the records in the archives no longer had any practical or legal value. We have to assume that once deposited in an archive, as long as there was space available to store them, records had a good chance of remaining there. Sifting, which required reading and classifying them, presumably did not have priority. When a son succeeded his father and inherited his house or when a trader moved elsewhere, to Assur or another colony, their records (or at least part of them) would be left behind. It seems rather likely that groups of older records that were no longer needed and were not thrown away were stored in separate containers. Some of the inscribed (but not sealed) bullae may have identified them, such as AKT 6a, 16, “Tablets concerning our Iddin-abum’s debts”, which could be related to groups of records of Shallim-Assur’s elder brother, found in his archive (see above § 1). Unfortunately the excavation reports never identify the tablets that were found together in a particular container or as a group, nor where exactly such bullae were found.19 The three functions mentioned of course obtain whenever texts are written, but they apply in particular in the framework of the OA overland trade and its colonial system.

19 More such bullae were found in Shallim-Assur’s archive, e.g. Kt 94/k 879, “Memorandums concerning agents”, and Kt 94/k 1062, “Validated records of my witnesses concerning the sons of Iddin-abum”, see Özgüç-Tunca 2001, 347-9.

the archives of old assyrian traders

39

5.1. Communication The colonial system meant that members of the same family and firm were regularly and at times for long periods separated by considerable distances, not only between Assur and Kanesh, but also between the nearly forty colonies and trading stations spread out over the whole of Central Anatolia and Northern Mesopotamia. In this situation letters were of vital importance. We can distinguish business letters, private letters – especially those exchanged with wives and other relatives – and official letters, written by the Assyrian authorities, both in Kanesh and in Assur. Among the business letters an important category are those required by the system of overland trade by donkey caravans. They were called “notifying messages” and “caravan reports” by Larsen 1967. The first type – sent from Kanesh and from Assur – reports that a caravan with silver and gold or one with tin and textiles had left Kanesh or Assur and summarily mentions its load, the persons involved, also with instructions about what to do with the goods. Those dealing with caravans with silver and gold leaving for Assur must be archive copies kept in Kanesh. The second type reports on the arrival of the caravan at its destination. Those sent from Assur, Larsen’s “caravan accounts”, mention the arrival of the money and describe in detail how it was used to make various payments and in particular for equipping a new caravan: the purchase of merchandise and donkeys (with numbers and price) and the hiring of personnel; the Assyrians themselves called them “letter of purchases”. Those written in Kanesh, again archive copies, report on the safe arrival of the merchandise from Assur, its clearance in the palace (payment of taxes, etc.), the expenses incurred en route and the first sales made. Such letters may well have been sent ahead of the caravans they describe, to inform their recipients in time about what was coming. Known duplicates may indicate that a second copy was given along with the caravan. These letters must be used in combination with the transport contracts drawn up for these caravans and the detailed accounts of the expenses made by the leader of the caravan. The few cases where we have all four texts for one caravan are informative in showing to what extent requests and orders were or could be followed up. Such letters were also used to check whether the goods arriving matched the data of the caravan accounts. A nice example is TC 3, 36:16-23, “We opened the packet (with silver) in the presence of five traders and broke your seals. One took out of it the excise and checked the remainder of the packet: it contained 14 pounds and 37 ½ shekels, which is 1 pound less than your letter mentioned. They must have erred when weighing it there (in Kanesh)”. The bulk of the letters was written in a large variety of situations, usually to inform about business matters, to make requests or give orders, or to report on a variety of problems – political, economic, social, personal – that interfered with the trade. Many were exchanged between traders and their sons, agents or partners who traveled around in Anatolia or were based in another colony. They

40

could contain warnings for war, unrest, blockades, difficult customers, or problems with the market, stating that no silver was available, that textiles were in demand, or that there was too much supply of tin (which affected the price). It allowed the recipient to redirect a caravan or to keep merchandise for some time in store. Other letters, at times of a more personal kind, but always also with business information, were exchanged between a trader traveling in Anatolia and his wife staying in Kanesh. Many such letters received elsewhere or en route were apparently taken along when the trader returned to his base in Kanesh and ended up in his archive. A remarkable sample of communication via various channels is provided by the letter edited in Larsen 2002 as no. 18. On his journey in Northern Mesopotamia, heading for Hahhum, where caravans would normally cross the Euphrates, Assur-nada receives a letter from his father in Assur, who writes: If you are afraid to go to Hahhum, go to Urshu (more to the southwest, across the Euphrates) instead. Please, travel alone. Do not enter Mamma (across the Euphrates, northwest of Hahhum) together with the caravan. And in accordance with the orders of the City Assembly your brother’s caravan must be split into three. Then let the first leave Mamma and as soon as it has reached Kanesh, the second can leave Urshu, and then the third can leave in the same way.

This letter implies that information on the problems in the area of HahhumMamma had reached Assur, either directly from there or from Kanesh, where incoming caravans had told about it. This information then had made the City Assembly issue an order on the behavior of the caravans and when Assur-nada’s father learned about it he wrote a letter to his son, who must have received it en route and have taken it along to Kanesh, where it ended up in his archive. Interesting information on letters is found in CCT 2, 6:6-15, written when Imdilum is accused by an angry partner of constantly writing him heated, incendiary letters (himṭātum), which from now on he will no longer read. Imdilum reacts by writing: “If I have written you any incendiary letter of mine and you have preserved it, send it under your seals to your representatives to show it to me and put me to shame. Or show it to my representatives there so that they can put me to shame. I have copies of all letters I have sent you over time!” We know copies or duplicates, also of letters, but this statement is surprising and if Imdilum was not an exception or exaggerating, we may assume that most copies were in due time discarded, for few were found. While letters were indispensable, the long distances (it took at least five weeks to travel from Assur to Kanesh) and the time it took to receive a reply, let alone when the addressee was lax in answering, were at times felt as frustrating. One trader wrote in an unpublished letter “What? Must we be hurling big words at each other over a distance of many miles (as) with a sling?” Several traders complain of having written many letters without getting an answer and some even protest that “they have used up all the clay in the town” for their letters

the archives of old assyrian traders

41

without getting an answer, or ask “Is there no clay in GN that you do not keep me informed?” (see Veenhof 2009, 195, with Kt 94/k 497:15). Official letters played an important role in the administrative and juridical sphere. Official letters, at times circular letters of the kārum organization (“to each colony and trading station”) and of the City of Assur could impose regulations and order or forbid certain transactions. Kārum Kanesh could also order other colonies to take or abstain from certain actions. Official letters of standardized types served the administration of justice by ordering the transfer of a party or witnesses in a trial (Larsen 1976, 255-8; Veenhof 2008c, 230-4). So-called “strong tablets of the City”, sent from Assur, could grant rights to plaintiffs, e.g. to summon or interrogate an opponent, to engage an attorney, to get access to certain tablets in an archival room, etc. Official letters of the kārum were also instrumental in establishing or renewing agreements or “treaties” (“sworn oaths”) with local rulers or in solving problems, when caravans were detained, goods got lost, traders were apprehended or killed, or palaces delayed payment for merchandise bought. We know these official letters only because they were found in private archives, presumably because, as mentioned, people serving the kārum organization apparently did take such letters home after they had accomplished their job. This was e.g. done by “Kuliya, messenger of the kārum”, whose archive was published in AKT 5. It contained several such letters, some clearly circular letters, whose address not only mentioned the colonies and persons to whom it was addressed, but also Kuliya himself as “our messenger”, which turned such a letter into his credential, which he apparently took home. The address of AKT 5, 2:1-6 reads: “Thus kārum Kanesh, to the dātum-payers, our messenger Kuliya and the kārums of Durhumit, Hattush, Tamniya and Tuhpiya, all the way until Nenassa”, and 5:1-6 begins with: “Thus kārum Kanesh, to Kuliya, our messenger, the kārum Tegarama and wherever I. son of K. is staying”. Letters with decisions of the City Assembly in Assur, addressed to kārum Kanesh, must also have arrived in more copies, meant for the kārum and for the person with whom it dealt, usually a plaintiff whose case had been considered strong. Some were even found in unopened envelopes and since not opening such an important letter is unthinkable, it must have been a duplicate of a letter used by the kārum organization in the relevant lawsuit, meant for the party involved. ICK 1, 182 is a letter addressed to kārum Kanesh by the ruler of Assur, which communicated the decision reached by the City to grant Imdilum the right to hire an attorney and to send him to Kanesh to gain his case. The copy we know was found in the archive of Imdilum, whom it concerned, but there must have been another copy in the archives of the kārum.

42

5.2. Aid to Memory The importance of written records as aid to memory is obvious. Traders were usually involved in many simultaneous transactions, for their own family or firm, for investors, for friends and partners for whom they sold merchandise in Anatolia. They worked with representatives and agents, who were given merchandise in commission or sold on credit, and many were also involved in transactions with or via the kārum organization. It must have been difficult to keep track of all activities, to remember the size of debts, claims, and investments, due dates, rates of interest, names of debtors and witnesses. There was, moreover, a concern about whether agents would pay in time or had to be summoned and charged default interest. The best aid was drawing up a memorandum20 – whose Assyrian name, tahsistum, from the verb “to remind”, has exactly that meaning, – especially one that listed all a trader’s outstanding claims by excerpting his debt-notes. Since the claims were often on agents who had received merchandise on credit, one could also call them “memorandums of outstanding claims” (ša ba’abātim, CCT 3, 19b:3-4) or “memorandums concerning agents” (ša tamkaruttim), the term used on the bulla Kt 94/k 879. They were valuable as a means to collect outstanding debts, even in the absence of the original debt-notes, because they provided the essential data, including the due date and the witnesses, so that the debtor, confronted with them, would not normally refuse payment. In CCT 3, 19b:3-10, Pushuken’s wife complains, “your representatives have taken away and keep in their possession the memorandum with the outstanding claims that you have left behind in your house (in Assur, when leaving for Anatolia). I cannot get at anything and do not know at all whether they have paid your creditors or not. It is up to you!” The biggest such memorandum I know is a tablet with 113 long lines that registers in abbreviated form 62 different transactions from a period of 18 years. 21 Such memos were drawn up from time to time or updated and the fact that in most cases the original debt-notes excerpted in them are not present in the archive shows that the debts had been paid; only the contracts of a few bad debts remained. Memorandums could be kept in a strong room in a “box” (tamalakkum), as mentioned in BIN 6, 19:18, and some bullae attached to containers mention “memorandums” among their contents, e.g. Kt 84/k 878, “My tablets in sealed envelopes, my copies, and memorandums”. 22 While in general memorandums

20 The expression tahsistam nadā’um means “to draw up a memorandum”, or more simply “to note down”. Memorandums are frequently mentioned in surveys of available documents (see for references CAD T s.v.) and BIN 6, 18:18-20 asks: “Bring the boxes (tamalakkū) with memorandums along”. 21 See Veenhof 1985. 22 See Özgüç-tunca 2001, 347; note also Kt n/k 1460:24-26, “ṣiliānu-containers made of rush in which memos have been placed”.

the archives of old assyrian traders

43

as private records were not sealed – one calls them “open memorandum” (t. patîtum; AKT 6b, 375:11; 446:19-20), we occasionally also meet a memo with seals. In Kt n/k 176:4-10, I. asks B. “Does this memo not carry your seals? B. answers: ‘They are my seals’. They opened the memo and 45 shekels of silver proved to be written in the memo”. And BIN 4, 32:34-36 asks: “Encase a memo in an envelope (harāmum) and write in it …”. Though not a valid legal record a memo might contain important or confidential data, that had to be protected by a sealed envelope and therefore Ka 24b:31-33 asks to send a memorandum of witnesses under seal. Because most transactions concerned valuable goods or money and entailed liabilities it was customary to carry them out in the presence of witnesses and to record them in writing. But in some situations no witnessed record was drawn up, but a private note or memo in the first person singular (“I gave, entrusted, paid…”), where the mention of the witnesses in whose presence the action had taken place did suffice, since one could summon them when necessary. An example of how this worked is found in the letter Kt 94/k 769 (courtesy of M.T. Larsen): I left (as credit) 32 shekels of silver in city B. with E. When we met on the road I said to him: “Give me the silver I gave you!”. He answered: “I have sent it to you with A.” I then seized A. and said: “The silver E. gave you, give that to me!” A. answered: “E. did not give me any silver! If E. can produce witnesses that he gave it to me, I will pay you”. Now seize E. and let him give you the 32 shekels of silver. If he refuses to pay confront him with strong conditions. 23 If E. says: “I really gave it to A.”, then let him give you the name of his witnesses, assist him to get a tablet with (the testimony of) his witnesses in ‘the gate of the god’ and let him bring it to me.

“Memorandums” were drawn up in many situations, dealt with a variety of issues and could vary greatly in size and complexity. Archives usually contain groups of small tablets with up to a dozen lines of script (often only partially inscribed), that register one or a few transactions, usually payments (to be) made and transfers of goods, which were probably drawn up during a business trip, as aid to memory, presumably by the traders themselves, many of which were able to read and write; some of them exhibit a non-professional hand. The few groups I found in the archive of Elamma, judging from their excavation numbers probably were kept together and perhaps still had to be digested or submitted for accounting. A very small tablet, with only four lines of script (Kt 91/k 338) reads, “3 shekels of silver due from the man of Ebla, who took the wool”. That such texts were called tahsistum, “memo”, is shown by Kt 91/k 339 (an oblong tablet of only 1 ½ by 2 ½ cm and with seven small lines of script): “1 mina 2 shekels of tin S. borrowed from me; this tahsistum is a later one (warkiat)”, perhaps an addition to a previous lot. A particular type of memo is of the following type: “I am entitled to a share of 1 ½

23 They usually were that if the person refusing payment was proved wrong he would pay the double or triple of the disputed sum.

44

mina of silver in the ‘holding’ (and) and of 45 shekels in the ‘one-thirds-fund’ of the caravan of A and B.” (Kt 91/k 323, and variations). They state a trader’s share in the proceeds from a particular caravan (ellutum) and were no doubt submitted when the accounts were settled. 24 Why and when memos were drawn up is shown e.g. by the letter ATHE 30:17-23, written by a transporter: “22 ½ shekels of silver, the price of 2 ½ kutānu-textiles of D., which you charged to me, you have (already) deducted from the transport fee due to me. Do not forget it over there, draw up a memo about it”. 25 The writer of TC 3, 100 had promised to do so, saying “when the two textiles I gave you have been converted into silver, I will draw up your memo,” but has to confess “I forgot it when the caravan was leaving”. Apart from the big memorandums of outstanding claims, there were “memorandums of witnesses”, to all appearances a list of witnesses that had been involved in a particular case. Those “concerning the payment for the wool of Ushinalam”, mentioned in the bulla Kt 94/k 1664, must have been attached to a container that held the memos published as AKT 6a, nos. 91-103. Larsen describes them as «small, square tablets, ca. 3,5 to 4 cms in size (…) which give an amount of silver which has been received from the proceeds of Ushinalam’s wool and conclude with a list of witnesses» (AKT 6a, 17). 26 The use of a memo of witnesses is shown by CCT 5, 17a: “We gave our testimony before Assur’s dagger and I now send you a copy of the valid tablet drawn up in the Gate of the God. Read it and make up your mind and then submit a notification27 to the gentleman, which he has to confirm or to deny and also draw up a memo of your witnesses.” The testimony under oath, rendered by the writers, is sent to the addressee, who has to use it to force his opponents to accept or deny the claim. This is done in a formal confrontation, in the presence of (court) witnesses and the writers ask the addressee to send them a note on who they were (so that they could be summoned later, if the problem was not solved). Another example is in the letter CCT 4, 14b:15-18, where the creditor A. has to be paid: “He (Hanaya) still owes me [x] minas 15 shekels of silver. And when I departed on my trip I left you a memo with my witnesses, saying: Draw up a valid record (of their testimony), then intervene and take (it) from the silver of Hanaya and satisfy A.”

24 See for the system and the terminology used, Dercksen 2004, Ch. 9. 25 In Assyrian: ina libbika e ūṣi tahsistaka idi (correct the editio princeps). 26 These memorandums mention in all ca. 2 talents 18 pounds of silver, the proceeds from the sale of ca. 25 tons of wool, received by 13 different traders, which shows the size and complexity of this commercial operation. 27 The expression is nudu’am nadā’um, perhaps “to make a note, to serve somebody a notice” (one also finds “to give somebody a n.”). The noun, from the verb nadā’um that is used for “to put down, draw up” (e.g. a memorandum), occurs a few times in the combination ina tahsisātim u nudu’ātim, “among (a person’s) memorandums and notifications” (see CAD N/II 312 s.v. nudu’u), as the place where one has to look for a particular tablet, but we are as yet unable to differentiate the two types.

the archives of old assyrian traders

45

5.3. Evidentiary Value Most transactions, which frequently concern valuable merchandise or substantial sums of money, took place before witnesses and were recorded in writing, usually on a “valid tablet” (ṭuppum harmum). This term qualifies a tablet by the verbal adjective harmum, lit. “covered (by a clay envelope)”, which has the meaning “valid(ated)”, because the envelope carries the seal impressions of parties, witnesses, etc., that gives a record its legal, evidentiary power. 28 The inscriptions on the bullae, attached to various containers with tablets, mention among their contents “valid tablets”, 29 which were carefully preserved so that, if problems arose, they could be “produced”, “shown” or “submitted”. “Valid tablets” could record a variety of contracts concluded before witnesses, ranging from simple debt-notes to contracts about a joint-stock company (naruqqum), with many investors and a large capital. Others are settlements of accounts, agreements, records of deposit, acquisition of securities, sale of houses and slaves, etc. They were used during private summonses and lawsuits and could settle conflicts, unless it was claimed and proved that a record was no longer valid. 30 The awareness of their existence and warning statements such as “I have in possession a valid tablet” (ṭuppam harmam ukâl), scil. as proof of my claim, must have induced people to meet their obligations. The importance of such a “valid record” is also clear from Kt n/k 470 (courtesy of C.Günbattı), drawn up to “revive”, to replace a lost quittance as proof of the payment of a debt. Lines 1-9 presumably repeat the original text, stating that the debt has been paid, and they are followed by the phrase that the kārum organization summoned those who had sealed that record, who then “revived (l. 15, balluṭum) the tablet before Assur’s dagger” by their testimony under oath. 31 Various types of “valid records” were generated by granting credit and extending loans, due to complications met in collecting or paying them, in forcing

28 The verb is also used in abbreviated expressions, such “witnesses harrumum”, short for “drawing up a valid record of a testimony sealed by the witnesses”. 29 Ten occurrences in Özgüç-Tunca 2001, 319-50. Note Kt m/k 100, with the text “Copies of valid tablets of the debt of A. and I., whose originals are in the strong room of Ṣ.,” and Kt 93/k 273, “Valid tablet with the verdict of the kārum concerning S.” In AKT 3, 106:11-13, a trader asks his wife to send him “the boxes (tamalakkū) with valid records which A. left behind with you”. 30 OA expresses this by the stative of the factitive stem of the verb akāšum, ukkuš, not yet recognized in CAD A/I s.v., meaning 3, which mentions only one occurrence and translates “mislaid”. The now more than a dozen references leave no uncertainty about its meaning, e.g. in POAT 2:24-26, where as a result of a comprehensive settlement of accounts “all the earlier valid tablets of the debt of I. are (now) cancelled” (ú-ku!-šu), and such a fact can also be the consequence of a verdict (CCT 5, 18d:3-5). In Kt r/k 17:5-6 a man is accused of having given “invalid tablets” as pledges. In younger variants of the clause in quittances, that if the missing debt-note still turns up it is “invalid” (see below under b), ukkuš may replace sar, e.g. in Ugarit-Forschungen 7 (1975) 318, no. 4:15 (read: a!-ku-uš). 31 “Reviving” lost legal records is attested in other periods too, see Veenhof 1987, 49-50 for some Old Babylonian examples.

46

defaulting debtors to pay or provide a security. They were meant to safeguard the interests of the creditor, as is shown by some cases where in the objectively styled contracts in the third person singular clauses in the first person singular were inserted, (as) spoken by the creditor during the transaction and by which he had claimed (additional) security. 32 They occur in various types and situations and the most important types are the following. a) A debtor denying or disputing a claim, promising a (delayed) payment and in some other situations could be forced to accept a “binding agreement” (tarkistum) in which he promised to pay a fine (frequently the double or triple) if he was subsequently proved wrong or did not live up to his promise. A similar “contract” could be imposed upon a person who shifted a debt claim to somebody else and therefore had to “confirm” (ka’’ unum) this presumed debtor on penalty of a fine. The result in such cases was a witnessed “valid tablet of his binding agreement”, on which he impressed his seal. 33 b) If a debtor paid his creditor or his creditor’s representative and they did not have the original debt-note available to return it, the debtor received a “tablet of satisfaction”, a quittance (ṭuppum ša šabā’ē). It recorded the payment in the presence of witnesses and invariably stated that if later the debt-note should turn up it was invalid (sar; examples in EL nos. 191ff., and see above note 30). Letters mention that such a quittance could be exchanged for the original debt-note, whereupon both records could “die” (muātum) or “be killed”. This is usually interpreted as “be cancelled”, which was done by breaking the sealed envelope, which deprived the tablet inside of legal force34 (but allowed its preservation for administrative purposes, see below § 6 on “splitting a tablet”). That several quittances have turned up in archives suggests that the exchange and perhaps the return of the original debt-note did not always take place or perhaps at times was impossible. While it is true that a debt-note became harmless if its envelope was removed and the existence of a quittance

32 E.g. clauses where the creditor states “item/person x is my pledge” (Veenhof 2001, 127-8), or where he grants himself the right, if the debtor defaults, to borrow the amount owed at the latter’s expense with a money-lender (see below type c). 33 See for the procedure Kt 91/k 242:3’-11’, "They drew up a valid tablet of his contract(ual obligation), that he promised to confirm PN. If he does no confirm PN, he will pay in accordance with the contract of his valid tablet to the creditor […]” (remainder missing). An example of such a “contract” is TC 3, 262, dealing with a man who denied the accusation of not having paid his share in the purchase price of a slave. The envelope, after mentioning the seals, begins with “Contract (tarkistum) of S. …, that he will pay 12 shekels of silver for 6 shekels of silver”, hence a conditional penalty of 100%. 34 See for “dying tablets”, Veenhof 1987, 46-50, where some occurrences are discussed. In Prag I 446, an arrangement between the sons of debtor and creditor, states that if the former produces a sealed quittance, the latter will release the debt-note, whereupon “the one tablet will smash the other”. The exceptional use of this verb (mahāṣum) indicates physical destruction.

the archives of old assyrian traders

47

neutralized its validity, the debtor must have wanted his debt-note back to destroy it. c) A loan contract with the creditor as debtor, because, as he had stipulated in the debt-note, he was authorized to borrow the debt owed by a defaulting debtor at the latter’s expense with a moneylender and to charge the debtor compound interest (Veenhof 1999, 66-9). d) Debt-notes, usually for smaller debts, which are stated to be owed to “the tamkārum”, that is an unnamed creditor. This allowed cession of the claim and we have letters where somebody writes in such a case: “I have a record stating that I am the tamkārum”. In about a dozen cases we meet the clause stating that “the bearer [twice “the holder”] of the tablet is the creditor” (wābil ṭuppim šut tamkārum). It turned debt-notes into bearer’s cheques – the earliest occurrence of this device – and this made it possible to cede and perhaps to sell debts (see Veenhof 1997, 351-64). The procedure described under d) explains the existence of a particular type of debt-note and means that it may turn up in an archive without a (for us) obvious connection with its owner, and there are more OA devices that have such consequences. One is that debt-notes and similar records had a monetary value and could function as a kind of (clay) money. They could be handed over as pledges, alongside valuable property, 35 and at the division of a trader’s inheritance his widow and children could be assigned bonds, which they could exchange or convert into silver. Shares in a joint-stock company (formulated as a debt owed to the investor) could be inherited and sold, and I even found a case where a man was ready to draw up a (in my opinion fictive) contract whereby he owed to his brother’s creditor exactly the same amount of silver as his brother and so provided him a security. It is only in officially excavated archives that one can identify such “strange” tablets and search for an explanation of their presence. Alongside witnessed contracts also “testimonies” (šibuttum) play an important role in the OA commercial society as evidentiary records, for several reasons. One is that commercial transactions inside Anatolia could be cash, that in the trade promises and oral agreements were used, and that in general in trade not all payments, expenses and losses could be recorded in writing before witnesses. 36 Therefore they had to be accounted for by statements, oral declarations, not infrequently under oath. In OB commercial partnerships too the final settlement of accounts about yields, losses, and profit frequently took place by clear-

35 See for this feature, Veenhof 2001, 132-3. 36 Not necessarily because no writer was available, for there are indications that traders could read and write, as shown by less professionally written texts and the information that a son of a trader was learning the scribal craft in Assur.

48

ance (tēbibtum, ubbubum) in the temple of the Sun god, apparently under oath. Testimonies could become necessary if a trader died and not all his assets and debts could be proved, records turned up whose status was uncertain and if his sons and heirs had to declare “We are sons of the dead, we do not know …” In such situations oral witnesses are produced and testify and we have two verdicts of the City Assembly in Assur that refer to an existing procedural law, written on a stele, that states that a debt-claim on a dead trader will only be honored “if it is confirmed by witnesses”. 37 Most testimonies appear in the course of the administration of justice and this was a consequence of the judicial practice, because it was often not easy to recover the facts due to the complications of the trade and because parties, witnesses and evidence could be in different places. 38 One usually tried to solve conflicts, especially on the payment of debts and similar claims, first on a private level by summoning a debtor or opponent “before witnesses” or mediators. The latter were “seized” (at times by mutual agreement of the parties) in order to “finish, settle the affair” (awātim gamārum). Letters frequently mention these matters and ask “to set witnesses against” (šībē šakānum ana) a person who refuses to meet his liabilities. When such a private attempt failed or when the opponent did not stick to what he had promised, the plaintiff could appeal to the kārum court to obtain satisfaction. In such a case this court first made the witnesses and mediators who had been present at the earlier confrontations render testimony of what had happened and had been said. Occasionally the testimony of these witnesses and mediators had already been recorded in writing, in which case we read, “We gave our tablet”. In most cases they gave an oral testimony “before the dagger of Assur” or “in the gate of the god”, which was then recorded in writing in the form of a deposition in the first person, which the witnesses signed (by impressing their seals) and which was given to the court. To do so certain complications might have to be surmounted, because the usually two or three witnesses were expected to deliver a single testimony, one of “witnesses in agreement” (šībū etamdūtum; BIN 4, 70:17-18, “until I obtain a tablet of two witnesses in agreement so that we do not come to shame”). And this final testimony, recorded in writing, was at times apparently preceded by and based on drafts, which we find in the archives, alongside (provisional) copies

37 See Veenhof 1995, 1729, on the use of the verb kuānum, “to be confirmed”, as used in Kt a/k 394:17 and Kt n/k 1925:16f. This is not a general law applying in all situations, for the verb as such can be used of both oral and written evidence, as shown by another verdict of the City Assembly, quoted in AKT 6a, 294:16-17, which demands that a disputed debt, contracted in Anatolia, “shall be confirmed by his tablets or his witnesses”. There was no difference between the value and power of oral and written evidence, their use was conditioned by their availability and the situation. 38 See for the details and the variation in the procedures and testimonies the dissertation of Thomas Hertel, Old Assyrian Legal Practices, defended in Copenhagen in 2007 and to be published soon.

the archives of old assyrian traders

49

of testimonies, probably prepared for the benefit of the plaintiff or of those who had rendered it. The unique judicial record POAT 9, drawn up because one party contested a testimony given, describes how it had been drafted. In a formal appeal D. said to M.: I did not arrange to let you give testimony. Why have you given a tablet with your testimony?” M. answered: “I did not give the tablet at my own initiative. The gentleman (who needed the testimony) appealed for us with kārum Tawiniya and the kārum made us testify, whereupon we, I and my companion, gave the tablet (with our testimony)”. M. added: ”When we drew up the tablet in the gate of the god my companion reminded me of a few things (“words”) that I did not know. And after I had made him swear an oath (“made him raise his hands”) we added them”. D. repeated: “I did not arrange to let you give testimony!”

The administration of justice by formal courts also gave rise to a variety of records. The kārum authorities and the City Assembly could both issue “strong tablets” that granted plaintiffs whose case had been considered strong, the right to hire an attorney, who had powers that enabled him to search for the truth. Parties could be forced to swear an oath in which they had to confirm or deny a variety of facts. Such formal, substantive oaths were apparently carefully formulated and written down in advance by the court. They started with a formal invocation, “Listen, god/goddess of the oath”, followed by verbal forms in the mode (subjunctive) of the oath” (e.g. EL 284, and CCT 5, 14b). Such formal oaths were sworn while holding the dagger of the god Assur, in “the gate of the god”, and in such cases the court could appoint special witnesses to attend the swearing of these oaths. The tablet with the text of the oath sworn was put in an envelope, with the seals of the persons “who heard his oral statement” (ša pi/ašu išme’ū) to confirm its authenticity. It usually ended up in the archive of the party that had won the case. The complexity of the issues and the fact that persons and evidence could be located in Assur, Kanesh or elsewhere, frequently prevented a quick solution and verdict. It resulted in various so-called ‘procedural verdicts’, that prescribe steps to be taken to collect the evidence and find the truth, such as gaining access to tablets, summoning witnesses, interrogating people, making statements, and they can be conditional (“if… then…”). The final verdict, frequently passed many months later, is usually rather short and restricted to the main issue. OA did not produce verdicts of the Old Babylonian type, which present a short history of the case, describe the various steps taken to find the truth and even occasionally mention the reason for the verdict. Difficult cases, in particular those concerning the liquidation of a business after a trader’s death and the division of his inheritance, could generate large files of, at times, dozens of texts of different type, most of which are undated. The challenge to reconstruct such cases can only be met if such a file can be reconstructed or is found in an excavated archive.

50

6. Functional overlap The three functions of written records overlap. Information in letters, in particular in the long caravan accounts, is a valuable aid to memory and it can be used to claim that a caravan upon arrival proves to contain less that had been mentioned in the letter that also functioned as a kind of bill of lading. Long memorandums listing outstanding claims can be more than an aid to memory. CCT 2, 8-9, a letter of 75 lines written by Imdilum to his brother, his son and an agent, consists mainly of a long list of his outstanding claims, which quotes two memorandums we have (CCT 6, 9a and KTS 2, 42), but it ends with the request: “Please, make all these agents (tamkārē) pay!”. The data from the memorandum transmitted in the letter apparently enabled the addressees to dun the debtors, even without the original debt-notes at hand, because they must have been aware of their liabilities and knew that with the data available the witnesses could always be summoned to buttress the claims. Letters can also have evidentiary value, especially those called našpertum, “missive”. The word is very common, but refers especially to letters that are not simply communications, but in which orders and authorizations are given, facts are stated or acknowledged, or claims established. They have a kind of legal force and are sent under seal to the person (a partner, agent, representative) who can use them to realize something in the name of the sender. A našpertum can bring about the release of a tablet held as security for a debt and they play a role when more persons are involved in a transaction, e.g. when debts, claims, securities or merchandise have been transferred and an authorized “missive” is required to be able to proceed. In ICK 2, 150, where E. had probably ceded his debt-claim or entrusted its collection to his partner, we read: “If E. says: ‘I. owes ten pounds of copper to P.’ and if P. indeed brings a našpertum with E.’s seal stating that I. does owe 10 minas of copper to P., then I. will pay the copper to P.” The text adds that “if the našpertum is supplied I. shall not make E. swear an oath”, i.e. is not entitled to request further proof. Kt 91/k 368:20-25 states that “if A. (to whom E. had entrusted merchandise for transport) protests against releasing it to P. (the addressee of the letter), then let him hear the našpertum of E. that he must entrust the textiles in their sealed bags to you.” Because of their evidentiary value such missives were preserved in their sealed envelopes or in a packet. Archives have yielded more than forty inscribed bullae with the text “našpertum of PN”, apparently a label attached to such a tablet or a packet containing it, stored in the archive. They remind me of OB letters in which superiors give instructions, which at the end may state: ”Keep/guard this letter of mine as testimony / proof of me /my word”. It is not by accident that these words occur especially on a rare category of sealed Old Babylonian letters, called ze’pum, which may be compared to the equally sealed Sumerian “letter orders”, kept by administrators as proof of the discharge of an order, of the deliv-

the archives of old assyrian traders

51

ery of goods. 39 I also mention here that when the ruler of Assur wrote a letter to Pushuken to ask him for a favor (POAT 18) and promises that he will take action for him in a undisclosed matter, he adds in lines 17-21: “Now look, one brings you two tablets. Read one of them and keep the other with you”. The second must be POAT 18, found in its sealed envelope and I assume that it was preserved as proof of the promises made by the ruler. Legal documents, both contracts and judicial records, with a primary evidentiary function, of course at the same time can be valuable sources of information and this may have been a reason to preserve them, also when their legal value no longer mattered. This is particularly true of debt-notes, occasionally true loans, but more frequently recording the amount of silver an agent has to pay for merchandise received in commission. Upon payment of the debt they had to be given back to the debtor – they are called “his tablet” – to annihilate this proof of a discharged liability (see above, § 5.3, b). But for a trader, creditor or debtor, the information provided by a debt-note could be valuable for his administration, in particular if he had to render account of his business to investors or partners. I have suggested that, upon payment, one could break the sealed envelope (which gave it its legal force) and preserve the tablet inside, now devoid of any legal value. This would explain why so many debt-notes without envelopes are found in archives, not all of which we can simply consider proof of unpaid debts. This is now confirmed by a few occurrences of the verb laṭā’um, “to split”, with a tablet as object, e.g. AKT 6c, 561:7-15, “Pay this silver to E. and obtain the release of my tablet (debt-note) and split it and deposit it with A., among my tablets” (cf. AKT 6c, 671:14-16 and Larsen’s note on these lines). It means separating envelope and tablet, destroying the former, which carries the seal impression of the debtor and gives it its legal force, and keeping the tablet inside.

7. Copies and duplicates of records The preceding pages have made clear for which purposes written records were used, but some additional data must be added. Insight into the use of tablets is also provided by the many references to copies or duplicates (mehrum or mehertum). The inscription on the sealed bulla Kt 94/k 878 identifies the contents of the container it was attached to as “my valid records, my copies and memorandums”, and TTC 21:1-7 states “we entrusted the boxes with tablets of E. (and) the boxes with copies (tamalakkī mehrī)” for transport. Inbi-Ishtar in CCT 2, 17b:3-6

39 The OB letters write ṭuppī anniam ana šibūtia (variants šībūt awātia and qīp awātia) kil(lam) or uṣur, cf. Veenhof 1986, 33 note 125; see for ze’pum, F.R. Kraus, in: J.-M. Durand - J.-R. Kupper (eds.), Miscellanea Babylonica. Mélanges offerts à Maurice Birot, Paris 1985, 141f., § 7. An unpublished Old Babylonian letter order writes “preserve my tablet as (if it were) a sealed document’ (kīma kanīkim).

52

asks his correspondent to take along “both valid records and copies and memorandums that you have in your possession” and KTS 40:33 mentions “tablets of my witnesses and their copies”. We also read requests to make and send copies overland, 40 for which one used a specific term, mehram šubalkutum, as discovered by Larsen. It is used in AKT 6a, 231:8-17, “On the day my father left Assur he made his testament in your presence. Please, my fathers and lords, have a copy of my father’s will made, what he decided for us. Give this tablet, as it has been cleared (?), to A. and send him here with the first caravan”. We have to distinguish between copies and duplicates, although Old Assyrian does not have separate terms for them. A duplicate is a document that was immediately produced in more copies, an example of which is the letter of the ruler of Assur sent to Pushuken (POAT 18, see § 6), both copies of which apparently were in an envelope sealed by the ruler and hence “valid”. With “valid deeds” we can easily identify copies made later, because they can only reproduce the text on the envelope, which begins by listing the persons who had sealed it, while on the tablet inside they are mentioned at the very end, as those “in whose presence” (mahar) the contract had been concluded. An example is AKT 6a, 123, a copy of the text on the envelope of an original debt-note, referred to in other texts, but not preserved in the archive. Such copies of debt-notes (also of quittances and service contracts) make sense, because the sealed envelope usually reproduces the text of the contract inside, occasionally with minor differences, also due to limitations of space alongside the seal impressions. Of many “valid tablets”, notably depositions, the text on the envelope is usually short and limited to mentioning the witnesses and the so-called ‘procedural formula’, “for this affair the kārum gave us and we gave our testimony before Assur’s dagger”. Copies of such envelopes are useless, since they do not contain the substance of the testimony or agreement. If copies of such texts are needed they have to be made before the tablet is encased in the sealed envelope and this is indeed what we can observe. I mention some examples of copies of depositions from the archive of Shallim-Assur, now accessible in AKT 6a. First copies made from (indicated by =) tablets before they were encased in envelopes: 10 = 10a inside envelope 10b; 56 = 58 inside 57; 77 = 79 inside 78; 84 = 83 inside 82; 191 = 191a inside 191b; 194 = 195b inside 195a. Other tablets, on the basis of the identity of the witnesses and the “procedural formula” must be copies of tablets still inside their unopened envelopes: 46 and 47 = 48, 53 = 54, 104 = 105, 106 and 107 = 108, 118 and 119 = 117, 195 = 196a. And we also have copies of depositions whose sealed original is not preserved in the archive: 63 = 64 (settling accounts), 221 = 222 (summons), 227 = 228 (interrogation), 257 = 258 (interrogation), 270 = 271 (answer to an attorney, called “witnessed statement”).

40 See references in CAD M/II, s.v. mihru, 1, a, 2’, a’-b’. Cf. TC 3, 9:14-16, “send overland to me a copy of the record stating that my affair is terminated”; TC 3, 44:14’-19’, “they have removed the copy (of the caravan account), there is no copy of the textiles they have been depositing here. We have made and sent copies of the valid records and they are under seal in the house”.

the archives of old assyrian traders

53

The same applies to verdicts of a kārum, where the text on the envelope starts with “Seal of kārum GN”, while the (copy of the) tablet inside begins with “The kārum passed the following verdict: …” This applies to AKT 6a, 66 (copy) and 67 (unopened envelope), cf. the tablet 80 from the opened envelope 81. Shallim-Assur’s archive also contained three virtually identical copies of a contract for the transport of a large amount of silver to Assur, AKT6b, 478-480, whose purpose is not clear, but the background might have been a conflict. This is suggested by texts 495-497, three identical copies that start with the text of such a transport contract, but presented as testimony by the persons who had witnessed the transfer of the silver, given because, as the ‘procedural formula’ shows, the kārum had made them testify. I am not able to offer a general picture of the making and use of copies, which requires much more research and has to take into account the numerous references in letters. But I note that the edition of an excavated archive shows that copies, especially of depositions and at times several of the same record, were fairly numerous and apparently considered useful. Their presence in Shallim-Assur’s archive probably has to do with the long and at times bitter fights between members of the family, which generated and required a lot of written evidence, in addition to the presence of a large file concerning a dead brother, whose executioner Shallim-Assur was (see above § 1). All copies mentioned above were found in this archive and therefore had been kept in store. Copies certainly will also have been sent out to provide others, members and associates of the family/firm living elsewhere (including Assur), with records of evidentiary and informative value. Many letters do indeed mention the making and dispatching of copies and we have information on their uses during summonses and lawsuits. For the existence of copies of letters various explanations are possible and some reasons have already been mentioned in § 5.1. Copies or duplicates are also likely for important letters addressed to more than one person, if they did not live in the same place. While most copies we know are of legal documents, we cannot assume that every person who sealed a contract or deposition as witness received a copy of it. Copies of debt-notes are fairly rare, but they were occasionally made to allow a partner or representative to collect a debt. In CCT 2, 38:3-9, Puzur-Assur writes to Pushuken: “I told you that I wished to stay here one month longer in order to collect all my outstanding claims. But you said: ‘Leave me your copy, then I will collect the silver and send it after you’.” Such a copy therefore is comparable to a memorandum with excerpts of debt-notes. Some of the latter state why they were made, e.g. EL 225:47-48, “Copy of valid records (made because) they went overland”, similarly EL 224:37-38, ICK 1, 187:63, TC 3, 13:45-47, each time at the end of a long memorandum. It is understandable that this was done for reasons of security, considering the value of the original debt-notes. Security is also suggested as a reason for making a copy in CCT 3, 14-19, whose writer orders to bring all his belongings into a new house, “lock it up and give a copy (listing) all you left behind to the maid and leave a second one behind in the main dwelling”. Some

54

of the copies of testimonies or depositions must be due, as mentioned above (§ 5.3), to the fact that several witnesses together had to give one single testimony, which generated drafts and copies to be checked and approved. But they also appear in connection with important legal cases, apparently to provide witnesses with written evidence of what they had testified and for which they might be held responsible. An interesting example are the two copies of a long deposition in connection with a conflict between the kārum organization and an Anatolian ruler, who had accused and jailed an Assyrian trader for conspiring with a rival ruler. The deposition reports how the kārum negotiated with the ruler to obtain the release of its member, but we do not know how the affair ended. The deposition is given by five traders, apparently appointed to negotiate for the kārum organization, and they testify before the kārum of what had happened. That this was done “in accordance with a tablet of the City” (of Assur), shows that the matter was important enough to get the City involved. One copy of this long text was found in the archive of the family of the victim, Assur-taklaku, excavated in 1993 (see Michel 2008b), apparently supplied in order to inform his relatives. The second turned up in that of Usur-sha-Ishtar, excavated in 1962, who was one of the traders who had negotiated and testified. 41 One might expect other copies of this deposition, made for the other members of the delegation, for the archive of the kārum and one to be sent to Assur. This is a rare example, because we know the origin of the two copies, but it suggests that there were more such cases, also in less serious affairs, where copies of a deposition may have been made and distributed, but they are difficult to identify if we are dealing with records from illicit excavations, scattered by the antiques trade.

8. Finding one’s way in a large archive The use of a large archive with more than a thousand cuneiform tablets is only possible to somebody who knows what it contains, where particular texts are to be found and is able to read them. This was obviously in the first place the owner of the archive and we know that many traders could read. But others too had to be able to do it, e.g. if in the absence of the trader a debt-note had to be retrieved (šēṣu’um) to be returned to a debtor who had paid or to be shown to a reluctant one, when a tablet handed over as pledge or given in safe deposit was asked back, or when a trader had died and particular records needed to be inspected or used. The use of an archive by its owner is taken for granted and we regularly read that he inspects, selects, takes, removes and adds documents, which are “placed among his tablets” (ina libbi ṭuppēšu šakānum). More information is occasionally

41 See for the copy excavated in 1962, C. Günbatti, The River Ordeal in Ancient Anatolia, in: W.H. van Soldt (ed.), Veenhof Anniversary Volume, Leiden 2001, 151-60, where one also finds the data on the other copy, Kt 93/k 145.

the archives of old assyrian traders

55

given when an absent owner asks others, such as his wife, employee or partner, to do so and he gives some details, or when he shows his concern about the safety of his records. The writer of AKT 3, 112, hearing about A.’s departure writes: “I had entrusted to him the boxes with tablets under my seal and he was to guard my seals (....) Ask his representatives there whether he has left the tablets somewhere(?) or has taken them out personally”. Good examples of requests to wives are in the letters addressed by Ennam-Assur to his wife Nuhshatum, who is in charge of his house in Kanesh and has to guard it and its archive. “Do not give any tablet to anybody until you see me”, he writes to her in Kt 91/k 563:10-14. It is probably not by accident that in the address of his letters she usually figures alongside what must be his representatives, friends or agents, presumably because she has to allow them to find and identify the tablets he asks for, since she could not read them. He asks her and a certain Alaku in AKT 3, 84:4-23, “Look (plural) for the tablet in which I certified (the testimony of) my witnesses A. and E. in the gate of the god, which is placed in the container with the tablets of the gate of the god. Take it out of it, pack it, solidly, in leather, seal it and entrust it to H. or S. to bring it to me”. In AKT 3, 82:4-13 he asks her and her husband’s representatives: “In the hušālu-container42 a memorandum without envelope, listing the witnesses on behalf of P., has been deposited among the tablets. Inspect it and if the witnesses in question are staying there, lead them down to the gate of the god and validate the tablet with their testimony and inform me about it.” In AKT 3, 106:11-13 she is asked to send him immediately “the boxes with valid records that A. left behind for you”. These letters and many other texts show the existence of various containers, the most frequent one called tamalakkum/tamalākum, a word only attested in OA, whose meaning is unknown, perhaps a kind of wooden box, usually protected by sealings. 43 Such a box can be identified by its position in the archive (“the upper t.”, of a stack or on the shelve? Kt 93/k 69:18), by its size (we meet a small one with six tablets and a big one with more than twenty tablets; cf. also AKT 3, 104:17), and by its cover or encasing. Kt 93/k 69:18-27 (courtesy of C. Michel) states: “We opened the upper tamalakku’s that were covered by (or: encased in) leather (ina maškim harmū) and removed the tablet”44. But one also identifies boxes by their specific

42 Attested only in OA, also in Kt 91/k 446:18, which mentions the sealing of a hušālum. 43 See AKT 5 p. 174 and CAD T s.v. Other frequently mentioned containers used for tablets (and other items) are ṣiliānum and huršiānum, both only attested in OA, exact meanings unknown, see AKT 5, 175. BIN 4, 90:14-16 mentions “three t.’s with tablets put under seal in a ṣiliānum”, and according to Kt k/k 53:12-15, a huršiānum is to be taken out of a t. Both t. and h. are also used for transporting tablets. Note a ṣ. made of rushes (ša ašlātim) in Kt n/k 1460:26, which suggests a basket-like container. Kt f/k 11:5-6 mentions “small ṣ.’s” containing sealed records, and BIN 6, 218:5-6, 13 t.’s with tablets alongside a pouch (zurzum) with tablets. See for the rare hušālum footnote 42. 44 Kt f/k 11:23 (courtesy of L. Umur) mentions a ṣiliānu-container with a leather cover/casing (maškam harim), containing tablets.

56

contents and we meet “a t. with tablets with certified testimonies” (ša šibē), “t.’s with memorandums”, “t.’s with valid records“, “a t. with copies” (ša mehrē, TTC 21:1f.), “a t. with big tablets of the caravan(s)” (ša ṭuppē rabûtim ša harrānim, AKT 3, 77:7), “7 t.’s with tablets of agents (ša tamkārim, TPAK 1, 77:3), etc. Note also Kt 91/k 147:29-32, “In all 12 tablets, placed in a t. with new tablets, not in envelopes”. If tablets in an archive were stored and arranged in groups of various type, in different containers, one would expect the excavations to have revealed their material traces. This is true and in addition the archives have produced a large number of inscribed, frequently sealed bullae, originally attached to packets or containers with tablets, whose contents or nature they mention. 45 Most numerous is the designation našpertum, “missive” (already mentioned above), followed by the name of the person who had sent it or for whom it was meant. Some inscriptions start with the word “tablet(s)” followed by qualifications, such as “of PN”, “of the debt of PN”; other mention “valid tablets” (in sealed envelopes) or “quittances”. Fuller descriptions are: “copies of tablets by which I sent silver to PN,” “my encased tablets, my duplicates and my memorandums,” “certified tablets of my witnesses,” “tablets of the city,” “tablets of the testament of A.,” “tablets of native Anatolians,” “testimony of A. and B.,” “tablet of the gate of the god concerning A.,” and “memorandums of witnesses of the price of wool of A.” It would be too much to describe this as a classification system, but it is clear that groups of tablets, often files or tablets of similar type, were kept together, stored and labeled so that they could be found more easily. The excavator, Tahsin Özgüç, in several publications has described how he found the tablets and the bullae. On the archive found in 1994 (in the house in grid LXIV/LXV-130/131, now being published as AKT 6) he writes (Özgüç 2001, 370): «In the conflagration the thin partition wall between rooms nos. 5-6 fell down to its foundations and the tablets kept in the two rooms were mixed up. An archive of 947 tablets and unopened envelopes and pottery were found in these two small rooms. They were evidently kept on wooden shelves against the walls and the tablets found along the walls are those that fell off the shelves in the fire. The tablets that had been packed in bags, in straw wrappings and sacks were discovered in piles in the middle of the rooms. A group of tablets, as usual, were kept in pots. The pottery was set along the base of the walls». On the archive excavated in 1991/2 (in the house in grid LVI-LVII/128-129, the archive of Elamma, which I am publishing) he wrote: «The archive of the merchant was found along the base of the east wall of room 3 and in rooms 4-5 in groups once packed in boxes, bags, sacks and straw mats. On top of each group lay one or two bullae. Unopened envelopes were placed at the bottom, tablets on top. In contrast to other archives

45 The inscribed bullae were edited by O. Tunca, Inscriptions on the Bullae, in: Özgüç-Tunca 2001, 319-50.

the archives of old assyrian traders

57

here we did not find tablets stored in jars». 46 Elsewhere he mentions the discovery in a room of «two groups of 50 unopened envelopes, lying side by side» and observes that the shape of a rectangular pile of tablets and fragments of carbonized wood suggests that they were kept in some kind of wooden box. Unfortunately, these observations are rather general, with few photos of the tablets in situ (but see Özgüç 2003, 71-5, ills. 13-18) and the ground plans of the houses do not show the exact positions of the hoard of tablets. Moreover, we almost never learn the excavation numbers of the tablets found in such groups or in jars, so that it is impossible to identify them. The bullae attached to or belonging to containers or packets with tablets in most cases were numbered and published separately, so that it is extremely difficult to establish – in the few cases when the archive in question is published – to which groups of tablets or packet they belonged. It is regrettable that the unique opportunity to discover more about archival classification and storage is lost, also due to the absence of an epigraphist at the dig where every year so many written documents were found. One would expect that tablets in current use were stored on the shelves along the walls (on which the tamalakku-containers could have been placed) or on benches covered with reed mats, perhaps in open bowls, to be easily accessible. Since retrieving and selecting tablets stored in jars is rather difficult, jars may have contained older tablets, preserved but rarely used, but we cannot prove it. The excavator has suggested for the archive excavated in 1990, in the ‘Avant-propos’ (p. 8) of TPAK 1, that the position in which tablets were found in the ruined archival room might indicate that some groups were kept on a second floor. One part, whose excavation numbers he mentions, was found on the floor, the rest mixed with the debris that filled the room. But the distinction is not very convincing, for I have found that the envelope of text 10 was found in the debris, but the tablet it contained on the floor. That certain groups of tablets were kept on a second floor, where the living quarters were, is not impossible, but would be surprising, since the strong room on the ground floor, closed with a heavy, sealed door was better and safer. These last observations show that there are still many questions, but the potential of the material is huge. Because the textual data are so rich and diversified and their philological analysis already yields important insights, a good correlation between epigraphic and archeological data will yield more. Moreover, publication of the many still unpublished archives (with more than 12.000 texts) will help to solve some of the remaining epigraphic and lexical problems, including the precise nature of the various containers. This will throw more light on the customs of the remarkable Old Assyrian traders, energetic and creative businessmen and at the same time industrious writers of records and careful keepers and users of their archives.

46 T. Özgüç, A Boat-shaped Cult-vessel from the Karum of Kanish, in: H. Gasche et al. (eds.), Cinquante-deux réflexions sur le Proche-Orient ancien offertes en hommage à Léon De Meyer, Leuven 1994, 369-76.

58

Abbreviations

Abbreviated titles of text editions and assyriological journals are those used in the CAD. But note: AKT 3

Bilgiç, E. & Günbatti, C., Ankaraner Kultepe-Texte III: Texte der Grabungskampagne 1970. FAOS Beiheft 5, Stuttgart 1995.

AKT 4

Albayrak, I., Kültepe Tabletleri IV (Kt. o/k), TTKY VI/33b, Ankara 2006.

AKT 5

Veenhof, K.R., The Archive of Kuliya, son of Ali-abum (Kt. 92/k 188263), Kültepe Tabletleri V, TTKY VI/33c, Ankara 2010.

AKT 6a

Larsen, M.T., The Archive of the Šalim-Aššur Family. Vol. 1. The First Two Generations. Kültepe Tabletleri VIa, TTKY VI/33d-a, Ankara 2010.

CAD

The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago, 1956ff.

CTMMA

Larsen, M.T., Old Assyrian Texts, in: I. Starr (ed.), Cuneiform Texts in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, Vol. 1. Tablets, Cones and Bricks of the Third and Second Millennia. New York 1998, 92-142, nos. 71-98.

EL

Eisser, G. & Lewy, j., Altassyrische Rechtsurkunden vom Kültepe, I-II. MVAeG 33, 35/3, Leipzig 1930-1935. Quoted by text number.

Kt a .../k

Sigla of texts from Kültepe (Kt) found in kārum Kanesh (/k) from 1948 (=a) until 1972 (=z).

Kt 73 .../k

Sigla of texts from Kültepe found in kārum Kanesh since 1973.

OAA(S)

Old Assyrian Archives (Studies), Leiden 2002ff.

POAT

Gwaltney, W.C., The Pennsylvania Old Assyrian Texts, Hebrew Union College Supplements, 3, Cincinnati 1983.

Prag I + no.

Texts edited in K. Hecker – G. Kryszat – L. Matou⇧, Kappadokische Keilschrifttafeln aus den Sammlungen der Karlsuniversität Prag, Praha 1988.

TPAK 1

Michel, C. & Garelli, P., Tablettes paléo-assyriennes de Kültepe, 1 (Kt 90/k). Paris 1990.

the archives of old assyrian traders

59

Bibliography

Barjamovic-Hertel-Larsen 2012 Barjamovic, G. - Hertel, Th. - Larsen, M. T., Ups and Downs at Kanesh. Observations on the Chronology, History and Society in the Old Assyrian Period, OAAS 5 = PIHANS 117, Leiden Dercksen 2004 Dercksen, J.G., Old Assyrian Institutions, Leiden. Kryszat 2004 Kryszat, G., Zur Chronologie der Kaufmannsarchive aus der Schicht 2 des Kārum Kaneš, OAAS 2, Leiden. Larsen 1967 Larsen, M.T., Old Assyrian Caravan Procedures, Istanbul. Larsen 1967 Larsen, M.T., The Old Assyrian City-State and its Colonies, Mesopotamia 4, Copenhagen. Larsen 1982 Larsen, M.T., Your Money or Your Life! A Portrait of an Assyrian Businessman, in: N.J. Postgate (ed.), Societies and Languages of the Ancient Near East. Studies in Honour of I.M. Diakonoff, Warminster, 215-45. Larsen 2002 Larsen, M.T., The Aššur-nādā Archive. OAA 1, Leiden. Larsen 2007 Larsen, M.T., Individual and Family in Old Assyrian Society, «Journal of Cuneiform Studies» 59, 93-106. Larsen 2008 Larsen, M.T., Archives and Filing Systems at Kültepe, in: C. Michel (ed.), Old Assyrian Studies in Memory of Paul Garelli, OAAS 4, Leiden, 77-90.

Nachlass des Puzur-Aššur, «Archiv Orientálni» 67, 156-80. Michel 1995 Michel, C., Validité et durée de vie des contrats et reconnaissances de dettes paléo-assyriens, «Revue d’Assyriologie» 89, 15-27. Michel 2001 Michel, C., Correspondance des marchands de Kaniš au début du IIe millénaire avant J.-C., Littératures anciennes du Proche-Orient 19, Paris. Michel 2008a Michel, C., La correspondance des marchands assyriens du xixe s. av. J.-C., in: L. Pantalucci (ed.), La lettre d’archive. Communication administrative et personelle dans l’antiquité proche-orientale et égyptienne. Actes du colloque de l’Université de Lyon 2, 9-10 juillet 2004, IFAO, 117-40. Michel 2008b Michel, C., The Alāhum and Aššur-taklāku archives found in 1993 at Kültepe Kaniš, «Altorientalische Forschungen» 35, 53-67. Özgüç-Tunca 2001 Özgüç, N. & Tunca, O, KültepeKaniš. Sealed and Inscribed Clay Bullae, TTKY V/48, Ankara. Özgüç 2001 Özgüç, T., Observations on the Architectural Peculiarities of the Archive of an Assyrian Trader of Karum Kanesh, in: W.H. van Soldt (ed.), Veenhof Anniversary Volume. Studies Presented to Klaas R. Veenhof on the Occasion of the Sixty-Fifth Birthday, Leiden, 367-72.

Larsen 2010 Larsen, M.T., The Archive of the Šalim-Aššur F amily. Vol. 1: The First Two Generations, Kültepe Tableteri VI-a, Ankara (= AKT 6a)

Özgüç 2003 Özgüç, T., Kültepe Kaniš/Neša. The Earliest International Trade Center and the Oldest Capital City of the Hittites. The Middle Eastern Culture Center in Japan, Tokyo.

Matouš 1969 Matouš, L., Der Streit um den

Ulshöfer 1995 Ulshöfer, A.M., Die altassyrische

60

Privaturkunden, FAOS Beiheft 4, Stuttgart. Veenhof 1985 Veenhof, K.R., Observations on Old Assyrian Memorandums, with particular reference to Kt c/k 839, «Jaarbericht Ex Oriente Lux» 28, 10-23. Veenhof 1986 Veenhof, K.R., Cuneiform Archives. An Introduction, in: K.R. Veenhof (ed.), Cuneiform Archives and Libraries. Papers read at the 30e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Leiden 1983, Leiden, 1-36. Veenhof 1987 Veenhof, K.R., ‘Dying tablets’ and ‘Hungry Silver’. Elements of figurative language in Akkadian Commercial Terminology, in: M. Mindlin et al. (eds.), Figurative Language in the Ancient Near East, London, 41-76 (esp. 46-50). Veenhof 1991 Veenhof, K.R., Private Summons and Arbitration among the Old Assyrian Traders, «Bulletin of the Middle Eastern Culture Center in Japan» 5, 437-59. Veenhof 1995 Veenhof, K.R., ‘In Accordance with the words of the stele’: Evidence for Old Assyrian Legislation, «Chicago-Kent Law Review» 70/4, 1717-45.

(ed.), Ancient Archives and Archival Traditions. Concept of RecordKeeping in the Ancient World, Oxford, 78-123. Veenhof 2008a Veenhof, K.R., The Old Assyrian Period, in: M. Wäffler (ed.), Mesopotamia. The Old Assyrian Period. Annäherungen 5, Orbis Biblicus et Orientalis 160/5, Fribourg/Göttingen, Teil 1, 13-264. Veenhof 2008b Veenhof, K.R., The Death and Burial of Ishtar-lamassi in Karum Kanish, in: R.J. van der Spek (ed.), Studies in Near Eastern World View and Society Presented to Marten Stol on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, Bethesda, 97-120. Veenhof 2008c Veenhof, K.R., Communication in the Old Assyrian Trading Society by Caravans, Travelers and Messengers, in: C. Michel (ed.), Old Assyrian Studies in Memory of Paul Garelli, OAAS 4, Leiden, 199-246. Veenhof 2009 Veenhof, K.R., A New Volume of Old Assyrian Texts from Kārum Kanesh, «Jaarbericht Ex Oriente Lux» 41, 179-202.

Veenhof 1997 Veenhof, K.R., “Modern” Features in Old Assyrian Trade, «Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient» 40, 336-66. Veenhof 2001 Veenhof, K.R., The Old Assyrian Period, in: R. Westbrook-R. Jasnow (eds.), Security for Debt in Ancient Near Eastern Law. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East vol. 9, Leiden/Boston, 93-159. Veenhof 2003 Veenhof, K.R., Archives of Old Assyrian Traders, in: M. Brosius

the archives of old assyrian traders

61

Family Archives in Mesopotamia during the Old Babylonian Period1

antoine jacquet

The leadership exerted by the kingdom of Babylon under the rule of kings Hammu-rabi and Samsu-iluna, especially between 1764 and 1712 B.C., led scholars to call Old Babylonian the period spanning from the 20th to the 17th century. Excepted this short period, the whole four centuries are however rather characterized by a political parcelling out and Mesopotamia was most of the time divided into several kingdoms dominating larger or smaller areas (Isin, Larsa, Ešnunna, Mari, Ekallatum, Babylon, etc.). 2 The unity of this period has to be looked for on a cultural level. Semitic populations called Amorites had settled in the whole Mesopotamian plain as early as the end of the 3rd millennium. 3 During the first cen-

1 This study was written within the framework of the project “Archibab: Archives babyloniennes (XXe-XVIIe siècles)” directed by Dominique Charpin and supported by the Agence Nationale de la Recherche. D. Charpin read the present manuscript carefully and addressed me valuable remarks. I also benefitted from very fruitful discussions with S. Démare-Lafont. Unpublished texts from the Nies Babylonian Collection (NBC) are quoted here with the kind permission of B. R. Foster, Laffan Professor of Assyriology and curator of the Yale Babylonian Collection. It is my pleasant duty to thank all of them sincerely. 2

See in general Charpin 2004.

3 The early diffusion of Amorite traditions through Mesopotamia has been pointed out by specialists; see Sallaberger 2007, and, for another point of view, Michalowski 2011, especially Chapter 5: “The Amorites in Ur III Times”, p. 82-121.

family archives in mesopotamia…

63

turies of the 2nd millennium, they formed a real koinè characterized by common references and practices in many domains such as religion and cults or social and political organization. 4 One of these common practices definitely was the use of writing in a lot of activities and situations of everyday life, maybe after the model constituted for a long time by some great bodies present in every part of every kingdom (palace and temple administrations) and certainly related to the development of new institutions. The documentation of the Amorite period is actually characterized by a huge increase of archival texts, in number as much as in variety. 5 By studying political structures of ancient Mesopotamia, we are rapidly led to admit that we never have to deal with States or Cities ruled by formal constitutions comparable to Greek Cities. We often have to deal, on the contrary, with individuals and groups of people organized according to different coexisting local or tribal traditions, kingship being only one figure of authority among others. 6 The question of the relations between archival and institutional practices can hardly find an answer as for the Amorite period. However the obvious importance of writing implies a very profitable reflection on the use of producing, keeping, gathering and transmitting written records regarding authority. After a general presentation of the Old Babylonian archival documentation, this paper will come to the interesting problem of the function and motivation of family archives and archival documents. This will be an occasion to present some unpublished examples from the archives of Marduk-muballiṭ, resident of the city of Lagaba, now essentially kept in the Yale Babylonian Collection.

1. An Inventory of Old Babylonian Archives In this general presentation, the reader will be provided at first with some quantitative data about archival documents, then with some elements about who possessed archives in the Mesopotamia of the beginning of the 2nd millennium and finally with a tentative typology of archival documents and the question of utility of such an enterprise. The ARCHIBAB project is directed by Prof. Dominique Charpin and supported by the French Agence Nationale de la Recherche. Its purpose is to gather every Old Babylonian archival document presently published into a digital data base which

4 The idea of a widespread Amorite culture in Mesopotamia during the first centuries of the 2nd millennium was first brilliantly developed in Durand 1992. For political matters, see Charpin 2004, especially Chapter 8, “La vie politique au Proche-Orient vers 1765”, p. 232-316. 5 See in general Charpin 2008a, “Chapitre 3: Les documents d’archives”, p. 97-129 (English version: Charpin 2010, “Chapter two: The Archival Documents”, p. 68-114). 6

See Durand 2004; Charpin 2007.

64

can be freely browsed online. 7 We first had to count precisely how many texts we had to deal with, whose number eventually appeared to be much underestimated: there are 32092 archival documents currently published. 8 Among them, only 19585 texts have a well established origin thanks to regular excavations which provide us with, at least, the name of the modern site and, when it is known, the name of the ancient city, or, at most, a precise locus, a building and a room, a detailed archaeological context. These documents come from about 40 sites all over Mesopotamia, from the Mediterranean coastal area to the West to Iran to the East and from the Taurus to the North to the Gulf and Arabic Desert to the South. This undoubtedly represents a unique documentary situation regarding the whole Mesopotamian Ancient History.

Table 1: Distribution of published archival documents throughout Old Babylonian Mesopotamia9

1. Southern Babylonia

1.1 Ur (tell Muqqayair)

1250

1.2 Uruk (Warka)

793

1.3 Larsa (tell Senkereh)

972

1.4 Lagaš (al Hibar) and Girsu (Tello) 1.5 Kutalla (tell Sifr)

106 Total:

2. Central Babylonia

3148

2.1 Nippur (Nuffar)

1172

2.2 Isin (Išān Baḥrīyat)

1040

2.3 Kisurra (Abu Hatab)

477

2.4 Adab (Bismaya)

57 Total:

3. Northern Babylonia

27

2746

3.1 Babylon

113

3.2 Sippar Yahrurum (Abu Habbah)

246

3.3 Sippar Amnânum (Tell ed-Dêr)

445 Total:

804

7 For a general presentation of the project, see the PDF document “Présentation ARCHIBAB” to be downloaded at , which gives two more references to presentations by D. Charpin also downloadable at http://www.digitorient.com. 8

Data provided by the Archibab data-base (2012/5/7).

9 Table first drawn by D. Charpin (see Charpin in press a) with updated data according to the Archibab data-base (2012/5/7).

family archives in mesopotamia…

65

4. Diyala Basin

61

4.1 Ešnunna (Tell Asmar) 4.2 Nêrebtum (Ischali)

133

4.3 Tutub (Khafajah)

111

4.4 Šaduppum (tell Harmal)

194

4.5 Uzarlulu (Dhib‘ai)

5

4.6 Tulul Khattab

37

4.7 Mê-Turan (Tell Ḥaddad and Tell es-Sib) 4.8 Tell Yelkhi?

28 Total:

5. Susa and Elam

5.1 Susa (Shush) 6.1 Yabliya-al-kapim (tell Shishin)

116

6.3 Mari (tell Hariri)

8813

6.4 Terqa (tell Ashara)

106

6.5 Tuttul (tell Bi‘a)

377 Total:

7. Northern Mesopotamia 7.1 Ninive

9420 3

7.2 Šušarra (Shemshāra)

243

7.3 Nuzi (Yorghan Tepe)

1(?)

7.4 Qaṭṭarâ (tell Rimah)

342

7.5 Zamiyatum(?) (tell Taya)

2

7.6 Razamâ of Yussân(?) (tell Hawa)

1(?)

7.7 Šehnâ / Šubat-Enlil (tell Leilan)

559

7.8 Ašnakkum (Chagar Bazar)

351

7.9 Ṭabatum (tell Tabān)

1 Total:

8.1 Alalah (tell Atchana)

1503 278

8.2 Ebla (tell Mardikh)

2 Total:

9. Palestine

950 8

6.2 Harrâdum (Khirbet ed-Diniye)

8. Western Syria

739 950

Total: 6. Middle Euphrates

170

270

9.1 Haṣor

4

9.2 Hebron

1 Total:

5

66

family archives in mesopotamia…

67

Sites Dated to the Amorite Period Providing Archival Documentation

As for the 12507 remaining documents, they unfortunately come from irregular or ancient and non-scientific excavations in which diggers did not take pain to record the place where they discovered the tablets. The combined action of the looter and of the antique dealer caused not only to separate irremediably the documents from their archaeological context, but also to dismantle the archives which are then scattered all over the world in different public or private collections. Scholars often deal with isolated texts and first have to reconstruct the archives to which they belong. Computer-aided analysis is fortunately now very helpful and the precise origin of the tablets can often be deduced by crossing different pieces of internal evidence such as philological or epigraphical details, the typological or thematical situation of the document, chronological, topological or prosopographical data, etc.10

2. Who Possessed Archives in the Old Babylonian Mesopotamian Society? The question of literacy is one of the great issues of recent historiography about the Ancient Near East. The idea that reading and writing were not only a matter of specialists or professional scribes but an ability shared by a rather large part of the elite, at least from the beginning of the 2nd millennium on, now seems to be broadly accepted. 11 But archive keeping is another matter: on the one hand, obviously not everyone who wrote personally kept documents and, on the other hand, not everyone who kept personal archives at home did necessarily read and write cuneiform Akkadian: the production of archive documents and their conservation aimed at particular goals. 2.1. Great Organisms and Private Houses Archaeologists like to distinguish among their discoveries between palaces and temples, which have an aura of prestige, and simple houses, supposed to be less noble subjects of study; in the same way, epigraphists are used to oppose official

10 This is the category in which we are unfortunately forced to sort the texts supposedly coming from Damrum (68 documents), Dur-Abi-Ešuh (89), Marad (3), Dilbat (73), Maškan-Šapir (1), Sippar (1835 documents, without any indication of the very place of finding), Kiš (177), ṢupurŠubula (44), Tigunanum (2); some documents are assumed to come from an area, without being linked to a city: so are the 453 texts coming from “the vicinity of Nerebtum”, in the Diyala Valley, or those from “the vicinity of Nusaybin”. These data must be taken as a coarse evaluation of the documentary situation and are supposed to be refined progressively as the Archibab database catalogue will get completed. 11 See Charpin 2008a, especially “Chapitre 1: Une affaire de spécialistes?”, p. 31-60, quoting Vanstiphout 1995, p. 2188, and Postgate 1992, and developing his own argumentation; English version now published as “Reading and Writing in Mesopotamia: The Business of Specialists?” in Charpin 2011, p. 7-24.

68

archives, the ones produced and kept by great organisms (palaces and temples) on the one hand and so called “private archives” on the other hand, with often the same distinction in terms of prestige. 12 As a matter of fact archives of great organisms are the mere consequence of the attention to economic bookkeeping. They appeared early during the 3rd millennium and kept on existing until the end of Mesopotamian Antiquity. They are no “State archives” but only the accumulation of personal and administrative archives: the archives of the King, especially his correspondence, are kept together with the records produced by the different administrative services of the Palace. The latter, private archives, increased in number during the OB period, although they already existed during the 3rd millennium. They range from small groups of tablets to huge collections of records of a finally larger typological richness than archives of great organisms. 13 In the following pages, attention will be especially paid to these private archives. 2.2. The mark of the elites We have to consider that accumulation and transmission of archival documents is generally a fact of members of the social and economic elite, private entrepreneurs or servants of the palace, merchants, farmers, priests, etc. These people owned houses and lands, slaves, silver or grain that they could lend at interest, and every kind of precious things. This also explains why the distinction between official and private archives is not as significant as this modern terminology might suggest.14 The very reason for the existence of archival documents is the existence of valuable goods that could be owned, acquired, sold, shared or claimed before a jurisdiction. The redaction of these documents is the result of acts that transfer or confirm authority on a good or a person. 2.3. Archives of men, archives of women? The use of written records is not only the fact of men but also of some women, either singles or widows or even married ones managing their goods without needing any man’s consent.15 Some special categories of women such as conse-

12 Official excavations actually often concentrated particularly on palaces and temples, as in the great sites of Nineve, Mari, or Ebla, and left apart whole districts of private houses and the private archives they must have contained. 13 For an example of the intense activity of scribes in some families, see Tanret 2004. 14 See Veenhof 1986, p. 9-11. 15 On women in Ancient Near East, see in general the papers read at the 33rd Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Durand 1987); sex and gender were at stake at the 47th Rencontre (see Parpola & Whiting 2002); see also Briquel-Chatonnet et al. 2009, especially the third part of the book “Femmes lettrées, archives de femmes dans le Proche-Orient ancien”, p. 215-332. A good presentation of the Old Babylonian problematics is in Barberon 2003.

family archives in mesopotamia…

69

crated women called nadîtum, who were vowed to the male deity of their city or of a renowned sanctuary of the kingdom (at first, the temple of the Sun God, Šamaš, in Sippar) were also free from any man’s control and could write, use and keep archival documents:16 these women received precious dowries and were in some cases even elevated to the status of heir. They were able to buy some real estate properties. They could lend silver. They were exposed to every kind of litigation. Then, they used written records just like the men of their family and neighborhood did. They had their own seal, which was extremely rare as for women. However, the existence of archives of women is discussed. Contrary to what was thought formerly, we are now aware that the main part of archival documents concerning the goods of nadîtum-women of Šamaš living in Sippar were not found in their own houses, in the cloister of Abu Habbah, but in various houses in tell Abu Habbah and the neighboring tell ed-Dêr. The archives of nadîtum actually were a part of the archives of their family, kept in the house of the family chief (the father, a brother or uncle).

3. A Typology of Archival Documents and their Function Regarding Authority Scholars often distinguish three types of archival documents: letters, legal documents and administrative documents (which are rather to be considered as bookkeeping documents, because they are not necessarily produced by an administration in the modern sense of that word). This typology used to be a guide for the publication of texts. As a result, students often have to look for documents belonging to one same archive and kept in one museum but published in different volumes because letters, legal and administrative documents were published separately.17 Although this typology is helpful to understand the sense of each text taken apart, it is an obstacle to the understanding of the meaning of the archives themselves, where documents of different nature were kept together in a same file because they only made sense (and can be now understood) together. This is the direction that scholars have to follow now, trying to reconstruct the

16 See Barberon 2009. 17 A large number of projects used to exist in the first half of the 20th century but are no longer living projects: see for example M. Schorr, Urkunden des Altbabylonischen Zivil- und Prozessrechts, VAB 5, Leipzig, 1913 or A. Ungnad, Babylonische Briefe aus der Zeit der Ḫammurapi-Dynastie, VAB 6, Leipzig, 1914, both aiming at publishing the entire corpus of legal documents (VAB 5) and letters (VAB 6) then known; cf. also the 6 volumes of the Hammurabis Gesetz series (Leipzig, 19041923), devoted to Old Babylonian legal documents. The Altbabylonische Briefe series founded by F. R. Kraus at the University of Leyden in 1964 now comprises 14 volumes providing editions of Old Babylonian letters; each volume is devoted to one collection or museum so that archives are dismantled and the lack of indexes prevents scholars from searching all letters sent by or to somebody.

70

original files and asking for each and every text why it was written, why it was kept, why in this archive, by this person, a.s.o.18 For this reason another typology may be more helpful, according to the status of the document whithin the archive where it was kept; two main categories have to be distinguished: first, documents that normally had a limited validity in time, and which should have been destroyed or at least discarded when they were no longer valid; second, documents with unlimited validity, which were supposed to be kept forever and came to constitute what is to be called family archives.19 I will add a third type to this distinction: archives containing a lot of texts written and kept only as aids to keep archives in order, by summing up the content of texts that are present in the tablet room, or gathered in a tablet box or, on the contrary, absent from the archives because they were momentarily useful out of the file they belonged to20. When we are lucky enough to deal with private archives found during regular and scientific excavations, we can almost always note that the final point of the accumulation of documents coincides with the abandonment of the house by the family, after a catastrophe such as the destruction of the house by fire or by invaders. Putting the whole archive in order, it is possible to note that the typology of texts is much more varied for the last generation than for the previous ones, which can be explained by the fact that a sort was regularly operated within the archive and discarded documents were destroyed or put aside. 21 3.1. Documents of Limited Validity Establishing Responsibility Documents that we are used to distinguish as administrative documents, legal documents or letters in our modern terminology were actually all preserved by the ancient Mesopotamians in their archives for the same reason: because they established and kept a trace of an individual responsibility before an authority. As will be seen below, limits separating types of texts are tight and we should rather distinguish, as the Ancients did, between documents without sealing and sealed documents. Ancient Mesopotamians indeed called documents by the generic name ṭuppum “tablet”, or kanîkum “sealed document” when the cylindar seal of the person whose responsibility was engaged was unrolled on it. For practical

18 For a good example of this approach, see Charpin 2000a, p. 77-78, dealing with a family archive of the Old Babylonian city of Isin: two brothers opposed each other in a trial. The final text, that was produced at the end of the case, can only be understood in the light of their exile, which is only shown by the rest of the archive. 19 See Charpin in press a. 20 See Tanret 2008. 21 See in general the papers of the round table “Les phénomènes de fin d’archives en Mésopotamie” edited by F. Joannès in the «Revue d’Assyriologie» 89 (1995), p. 1-147.

family archives in mesopotamia…

71

reasons, three types of documents of limited validity will be described in what follows: bookkeeping documents, legal documents and letters. Bookkeeping archives are usually considered as a useful tool to control and anticipate economic activities or to manage a material or human resource. 22 They are also a way of controlling individuals who work in any administrative service and have to justify before their superiors the management of the resource that they are responsible for. For example, a quittance, which can be used as a bookkeeping record by the one who is responsible for the disbursement, also serves as legal text as it is sealed by the recipient and can be presented as proof for a payment before an administrative hierarchy or a jurisdiction. This is true in large administrative services such as the palace of Mari, as it is in private houses where an intendant is supposed to manage goods (silver, barley, dates, etc) for the benefit of his master. The utility of bookkeeping texts rarely lasted more than one year and often expired after the annual submitting of accounts and tax collecting, usually fixed at harvest time or at the time of a religious festival; the text was normally erased and the tablet regularly recycled by the office that produced it. 23 In administrative services of the Palace of Mari for instance, some offices used to discard daily records as soon as their content was written on a recapitulatory tablet, unless they are sealed documents, supposed to be kept as legal or administrative proof of a payment: in that case, they used to mark them with a red ink line, so that they are not counted twice but not recycled either. 24 Short term contracts often contained the mention of their own expiry (loan contracts, hiring contracts, leasing contracts, etc.). They are by nature part of this first category of documents of limited validity. They were thus regularly taken out of the archives and either destroyed, when their validity had expired, or cancelled and marked with a cross scratched on the surface, when the dispositions changed whereas the expiry had not passed. 25 The utility of letters, finally, normally expired as soon as the message was delivered and most of them must have been rapidly destroyed or recycled after their reception. According to their content however, they could have been kept as memories of an act of communication. As the envelope was printed with the seal of the sender, a letter could be used as legal proof of a declaration of the sender or for an order given to the recipient: for example, a letter in which the master of a house orders his intendant to pay silver to a creditor will be kept by the intendant as evidence to justify an expense when he shall present his accounts. There even

22 Wilcke 1970, p. 166 and, on the Mari archives especially, Ziegler 2001. 23 Some of these tablets, discarded as superfluous, however survived as “dead archives”, in secondary contexts when they were used to fill benches or floors, such as in the well known Room 116 of the palace of Mari. 24 Charpin 1984, p. 258-259. 25 That was commented by Veenhof 1995, p. 320; three examples now in Archibab: BDHP 30, YOS 13 354, CBS 1153 [Stol Mél. Renger 1].

72

exist some letters containing this advice by the sender to the recipient: “Keep this letter of mine as a testimony of my words”. 26 The very reason to write and keep archival documents resides in the necessity for everyone to be in possession of every title establishing one’s rights or protecting oneself against a possible future claim. In every case, such a document is written in favour of the one whose rights might be contested, and kept by him. It is sealed by the one who abandons his right or whose responsibility might be engaged before an authority, should it be a jurisdiction or an administration. The writing of the tablet is not of much value in itself. The document has to be sealed to be valid before an administrative or legal authority. A document sealed in due form cannot be contested before a court. 27 Everyone who contracts and commits oneself to do or not to do something had to unroll one’s seal on a written document which was kept as a proof by the beneficiary of this commitment. In loan contracts, for example, as long as the responsibility of a debtor is involved, the creditor keeps the document as written evidence that could be produced before a court as an argument supporting a claim. Each time that the responsibility of the debtor is modified, a new sealed document is written in his favor. As soon as the responsibility is completely removed, the original sealed document is broken so that it cannot be produced anymore before any jurisdiction. 28 These principles help understand a lot of very allusive, albeit interesting, short notes that compose the major part of the Old Babylonian archival documentation. The following examples are taken out of the unpublished archives of Marduknaṣir, resident of Lagaba. NBC 8831 is a receipt of silver without any apparent interest; it reads:29

26 See the list of references established by Veenhof 1986, p. 33 n. 125, now to be completed with Charpin in press b, especially p. 52-54. 27 In the letter AbB 3 82, Ibbi-Sumuqan tries to dissuade Yahgunum from claiming a field that he had sold three years before, using the following argument: “he (= the actual owner of the field) brought me a tablet according to which he purchased the field from you. I saw it and it is without any ambiguity: your seal and (the name of) 5 witnesses are written on it. If he shows this tablet to judges, could they transgress the law in your favor?”. French translation and commentary in Charpin 2000a, p. 77. On the attention paid to the legal status of a text, and the richness of related vocabulary, whether a tablet is sealed or not sealed, whether it comprises a date or not, etc., see Charpin 2008b, p. 9 sq. 28 For that reason, we always have to wonder why a text was conserved, and thus discovered: every loan contract that has come to us corresponds to a debt that actually was not reimbursed, either because a catastrophe put an end to the activities of the creditor (and sometimes to the archive itself), or because a general remission was proclamed by the king. It is now clearly attested that kings of the Old Babylonian period could choose to cancel every debt in the country by proclaming an edict of justice (mîšarum) every time that the kingdom was confronted to a major economic crisis, and especially during the first year of their reign; in the latter case, loan contracts often were conserved by the creditor, even though the debts had been remitted and the tablet had no validity anymore; see Charpin 2000b. 29 NBC 8831: 1/2 GÍN KÙ.BABBAR, ŠU.TI.A ú-túl-(d)da-gan, KI (d)AMAR.UTU-mu-ba-lí-iṭ, ITI APIN.DU8.A U4 10.KAM, MU GU. ZA NISAG‫܉‬.A.

family archives in mesopotamia…

73

“1/2 shekel of silver: receipt of Utul-Dagan, from Marduk-muballiṭ. 10/viii/Samsuiluna 5.”

This text should have been sealed by the recipient, Utul-Dagan, as receipts usually are, but it is not. This receipt was certainly not kept by Marduk-muballiṭ for bookkeeping purposes only. Other documents in the archive, especially receipts of barley or wool, allow to imagine that this text actually records the partial reimbursement of a debt by Marduk-muballiṭ to his creditor, Utul-Dagan. The original contract, normally kept by the creditor, was not broken since the debt was not completely reimbursed. This is why it is important for Marduk-muballiṭ to keep this receipt safely as written evidence of his partial reimbursement of the silver, which could be presented before a court in case of a claim over that silver. A slightly different case can be imagined according to NBC 8908, which simply records a quantity of flour, written here without any key-word. In spite of the lack of explicit elements of description, this six-line record is extremely helpful to understand who is supposed to keep a document in his archives and for what purpose. The text reads:30 “40 liters of flour. (If) the sealed document (kanîkum) of Marduk-muballiṭ (re)appears, it will be broken. 1+/vii/Samsu-iluna 7.”

The seal of one Gimil-Gula is unrolled on the tablet. 31 This is certainly the sign that this record is a receipt and Gimil-Gula is the recipient, although his name is not written in the text and neither the verb “to receive” (akkadian mahârum) nor the noun “receipt” (akkadian namhartum or sumerian ŠU.TI.A) frequently used in the standard phraseology of Old Babylonian receipts are written. The short sentence l. 2-4, although very laconic, allows us to understand why this document was written, sealed by Gimil-Gula and kept by Marduk-muballiṭ: the flour was owed to GimilGula by Marduk-muballiṭ, which was recorded in an original loan contract, designated here by the expression kanîk Marduk-muballiṭ, literally “Marduk-muballiṭ’s sealed document”, to be understood as “the document sealed by Marduk-muballiṭ (and kept by Gimil-Gula)”. When Gimil-Gula came to recover his loan, he could not find the original loan contract, sealed by Marduk-muballiṭ, which he must have kept in his own archives as evidence of the loan. Marduk-muballiṭ accepted to reimburse him, certainly because they knew each other very well and were used to have business together. 32 In a normal procedure of reimbursement of a debt, the original loan contract should have been broken and no more text written. In this

30 NBC 8908 (Lagaba, 1+vii/Si 7): 0,0.4 ZÌ.DA, ka-ni-ik (d)AMAR.UTU-mu-ba-lí-iṭ, i-il-li-a-am, ih-he-ep-pi°, ‫ݯ‬ITI DU6‫ݰ‬.[KÙ] ‫ݯ‬U4 1+x‫ݰ‬.KAM, MU (giš)TUKUL ŠU.NIR. 31 Gimil-Gula, son of Šumum-libši, servant of Amurrum and Ninsianna gi4-mil-‫(ݯ‬d)‫ݰ‬GU.L[A] / ‫ݯ‬DUMU šu‫ݰ‬-mu-um-‫ݯ‬li‫ݰ‬-ib-š[i] / ÌR (d)MAR.T[U] / ù (d)NIN.SI4.‫ݯ‬AN.NA‫ݰ‬. 32 This Gimil-Gula is well known in other documents as a relative of Marduk-muballiṭ, the owner of the archive.

74

special case, the present receipt was written in favor of Marduk-muballiṭ and kept by him in his archives as evidence that he did reimburse the flour and that the original contract has been discarded even though the tablet could not be broken33. 3.2. Documents of Unlimited Validity and the Constitution of the Family Archives A second type of archival documents is composed of texts that have an unlimited validity. In this category can be classified legal documents establishing the status of goods and persons, such as titles of property, purchase or exchange contracts, donations, dowries, marriage contracts, adoptions, inheritance contracts describing parts of inheritance that were shared between heirs, etc. This category is hardly represented in the archives of great organisms, palace or temples, as if they did not have to justify their ownership, whereas they are a large part of the archival documents found in private houses. The use of written records of such legal acts seems to have largely increased during the Old Babylonian period, which may be related to the emergence of a professional justice in Mesopotamia during the Old Babylonian period, and maybe because, for the first time, it was felt necessary to make up for the mortality of the witnesses or loss of individual or collective memory, especially in legal procedures. 34 It is now clearly established that written titles of property were supposed to follow the goods every time they were sold, exchanged or shared. The texts were transmitted by the former owner to the new one along with the goods themselves and were accumulated to form family archives. 35 And then, the history of a private property can often be reconstructed on a large span of time, sometimes on about six generations and more than 200 years, as is the case with the amazing Ur-Utu archive. The archives of this religious dignitary of the city of SipparAmnânum (tell ed-Der), north of Babylon, were discovered during regular excavations by the Belgian team led by L. De Meyer. They had been abandonned there by the last inhabitant of the house after a violent fire during which he obviously tried to rescue them from destruction. Studying this wonderful archive (composed of almost 2000 texts), M. Tanret and C. Janssen were able to highlight what they called the “chains of transmission” of the property documents. 36

33 This practice has been pointed out for a long time as for purchase contracts of land or houses ; see Charpin 1996. What is interesting here is that this procedure is about a very cheap object (40 liters of flour), which is proof for a wide generalization of the use of writing in legal matters in the late Old Babylonian period. 34 See in general Charpin 2008a, “Chapitre 4: Le geste, la parole et l’écrit dans la vie juridique”, p. 131-158 (English version: Charpin 2011, “Chapter 3. Old Babylonian Law: Gesture, Speech, and Writing”, p. 43-52; see below for further developments and examples. 35 See especially Chapin 1986 (updated English version in Charpin 2010b, “Chapter 4. The Transfer of Property Deeds and the Constitution of Family Archives”, p. 53-69) as a starting point to a long series of studies. 36 The idea was elaborated and developped by the Belgian team of Ghent in charge of the

family archives in mesopotamia…

75

At the sale of a real estate property, the seller was supposed to give to the buyer every document justifying his ownership of the property, i.e. every former title of ownership. Generation after generation, because of the possibility for fields or houses to be gathered or shared, put into pieces or sold as a whole, the property documents accumulated in files called ṭuppi ummatim u ṭuppât šurdê (“the mother tablet and the following tablets”). Following the chains of transmission, it is then possible to go up to the original transaction that caused the property to be, for the first time, as it is sold in the present time, whether it was formed by gathering some different plots of land or one field was divided into different plots. 37 The “mother tablet” records the original acquisition of the good as it exists and the “following tablets” record each intermediary transaction between that first acquisition and the present time. Sometimes, one of these tablets is missing and the seller is asked to write a certificate establishing his own responsibility in case of a claim against the buyer about this missing document. The importance attached to the keeping and transmitting of these titles of property is a sign of how written evidence became important in trials about a property. 38 Complementarity of oral and written evidence is obvious in a lot of trial records. As a matter of fact, Akkadian language uses the same words to describe the one and the other and speaks of “the testimony” of a tablet (šîbûtum); it also speaks of the “mouth of the tablet” (pî ṭuppim) or of the “talking of the tablet” (awât ṭuppim) to designate its content. 39 During the Old Babylonian period, oral testimony only was no more felt sufficient as proof in a legal case and the collection of written elements was necessary. Judges can ask in the same case to hear witnesses and to have tablets read, so that it was felt dodgy to go to trial without any written evidence of one’s rights, as is shown by the lettre AbB 11 55:40 a nadîtum of Šamaš called Narâmtani who lived in Sippar chose to postpone a litigation about inheritance because she was not in possession of her tablets, which were kept by a male member of her family, and she knew that she could not defend her rights without being able to produce them: Speak to Šamšiya: Thus says Narâmtani, daughter of Ipqatum. May my Lord and my Mistress (= the gods Šamaš and Aya) keep you in good health for my sake! The inheritance of my paternal uncle’s daughter has been taken, and she gave me her tablets; but

publication of the Ur-Utu archives: see especially Janssen 1992 ; Janssen, Gasche, Tanret 1994, and Janssen 1996. 37 See Van Lerberghe & Voet 1991 for definitions of what Babylonians called ṭuppi ummatim and ṭuppât šurdê, and the very clear schematical view of chains of transmission published in Janssen 1996, p. 243, expecting the forthcoming M. Tanret, C. Janssen, L. Dekiere, Chains of Transmission: a search through Ur-Utu’s property titles, MHEM 2, Ghent. 38 See Charpin 2008a, p. 145-151 (English version: Charpin 2011, p. 48-52), with bibliography. 39 Charpin 2008a, p. 148 (English: Charpin 2011, p. 50) and the forthcoming Charpin in press b. 40 AbB 11 55: translation by M. Stol, revised according to the French translation and commentary in Charpin 2000a, p. 73-74.

76

as for Nûratum, who had taken her inheritance before me, who had acted against her, whose expenses had been paid back, and who also had drawn up a tablet renouncing (any further) claim, today the warkûm-official, interceding for him, is harassing me. Aliyatum, her sister, released one-half mina of silver from the lap of my paternal uncle’s daughter and I seized her, but, as I had nobody, she then escaped from me. So thus I said (to myself): “My tablets are in the hand of my father. As long as my father does not come here, I will not litigate”. Now, do not neglect me!

Another example of this new attention paid to written evidence is the case record CT 47 63 dated to the 14th year of Samsu-iluna’s reign in favour of the nadîtum Amat-Mamu: Amat-Mamu, nadîtum of Šamaš had been adopted by an older nadîtum called Belessunu; when Belessunu died, Amat-Mamu received the “mother tablets” (ṭuppât ummâtim) of the properties of Belessunu which proved, along with her adoption contract, that she was the legitimate owner of the properties. Thanks to these tablets, she could defend herself against her cousins who claimed her properties and were obliged to leave her a tablet renouncing any further claim. The whole file was kept, as usual, in the house of a man of her family, in that case, an uncle of hers. But then, the tablets were lost and Amat-Mamu had to come before the local court so that judges reconstitute the lost documents (Akkadian language says that they “made the tablet live again”). I quote here only an extract from this long text:41 By order of Sîn-išmeanni and the assembly of the merchants (kârum) of Sippar, one has made this tablet “live again”. The tablet of inheritance (tuppi aplûtim), the tablets of former possessions (tuppi ummâtim) and the tablet renouncing any claim (tuppi la ragâmim) that Amat-Mamu, daughter of Sîn-ilî, received from Bêlessunu, in the house of Ikûn-pî-Sîn or wherever they will be seen, they belong to Amat-Mamu, daughter of Sîn-ilî. In the future, according to the content of this tablet, Ikûn-pî-Sîn, his sons, and the parents of Bêlessunu, whether men or women, as many as they are, shall not lay any claim against Amat-Mamu, daughter of Sîn-ilî. They swore by Šamaš, Marduk and Samsu-iluna the king.

We do not know where and by whom this new record was eventually kept, but this example of “resurrection” of a lost tablet shows how important it was for Amat-Mamu to be in possession of a written title establishing her rights over her goods and protecting her against any further claim42. Things assuredly went the same way for anybody during the Old Babylonian period.

41 See Charpin 1986, p. 133-135 (revised English version now published as “The Transfer of Property Deeds and the Constitution of Family Archives”, Charpin 2010, p. 53-69), and, for a new translation, Charpin 2000a, p. 74-76. 42 See also Charpin in press b, p. 53.

family archives in mesopotamia…

77

3.3. The Organization of Private Archives and the Memory The last point of this brief survey of Old Babylonian archival documents is about a particular kind of texts without any sealing, witness nor date (and then assuredly invalid before a court) which people however used to keep in their archives. Most of them are lists and memoranda, often devoid of any key-word. Their motivation is difficult to understand when they are taken separately. They make sense only when they can be put back together with the archives to which they belonged. Their use actually was often to help organize the archives themselves. The filing of documents within an archive sometimes was the reason to write other documents. 43 The archives of Marduk-muballiṭ in Lagaba provide us with good examples of this common practice: NBC 8632 is a table listing diverse quantities of barley (measured in GUR) and silver (measured in GÍN [= shekels]) associated with 19 personal names, 9 of which are unfortunately missing, being lost in a large lacuna. It does not display any explicit formula, neither date nor validation mark (seal impressions, etc.). This text certainly has no legal value and it is difficult to give it some meaning at the first reading. The data are in Table 2. In absence of any context, this text could be interpreted either as a list of disbursements of barley and/or silver attributed to 19 persons or as a list of receipts of barley and/or silver brought by 19 persons. The absence of totals, normally calculated at the end of this kind of list, speaks against the identification of this tablet as an accounting document. Once put back within the archives to which it belongs and compared to another series of data, this recapitulatory list however sheds light on an interesting archival practice of the Old Babylonian period: 12 loan contracts have indeed been identified in Marduk-muballiṭ’s archive. They record loans of barley and/or silver by Marduk-muballiṭ to different people and were supposed to be kept by Marduk-muballiṭ until his debtors reimbursed the whole amount. They are quite regular legal documents, dated and sealed, mentioning the name of the creditor, that of the debtor, and those of the witnesses, the interest rate and the expiry date. Table 3 recapitulates the whole data sorted in chronological order. 44

43 On the methods of filing of archival texts in Mesopotamia and the various containers used for conservation of tablets, see the synthesis drawn by K. Veenhof as an introduction to the 30e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Leiden, 1983): Veenhof 1986, especially p. 11-18, with bibliography. 44 The content of these documents, first studied by O. Tammuz in his unpublished Ph.D. Dissertation (Tammuz 1993), was used as material for a study by D. Charpin on the influence of mîšarum-edicts on the archives of private entrepreneurs in the Old Babylonian period; see Charpin 2000b, especially p. 194 sq. The present table 2 however adds the data of two more documents: NBC 8533 and NBC 8534 and have been corrected according to collations of the texts: the date of NBC 8571 is 26/iv/Si 8; the name of the debtor on NBC 6798 is Imdi-Enlil.

78

Table 2: Data recapitulated in NBC 8632 Line Nr.

Barley

2

7 GUR

3

4 GUR

4

1 GUR

5

1 GUR

6

Silver

Personal name

2 GÍN

Imdi-Enlil Huzalum

1/2 GÍN

Ubarum son of Irra-naṣir […]

1/2 GÍN

[…]-tim

7

0,3.0 GUR

[…] the mayor (rabiânum)

8

1 GUR

[…] the intendant (šatammum) 1/3 GÍN 11+ ŠE […-mu]šallim the “gentleman” (awîlum)

9 10

1/2 GÍN […]

[…]-lum

11

3 GUR

12

2 GUR

13

0,2.0 GUR

[…]

14

0,2.0 GUR

Ipqu-Ištar

15

0,2.0 GUR

Addu-tayyar

16

0,2.0 GUR

Uṣi-ina-pušqi

17

0,2.0 GUR

Sin-imguranni

18

0,2.0 GUR

19-20 21

[…] 3 GÍN

[…]

Ubarum 1 1/2 GÍN

Sin-iddinam son of […]

1 GÍN

Addu-ilum

Table 3: Catalogue of the loan contracts of barley and silver in the archives of Mardukmuballiṭ of Lagaba (sorted by chronological order) Text

Barley

Silver

NBC 8570 3 GUR NBC 8874

1/2 GÍN

NBC 8564 2 GUR NBC 8744 1 GUR

1/2 GÍN

Debtor

Date

Ṭab-wašabšu

1/xi/Si 5

Ili-u-Šamaš

13/xi/Si 5

Ea-tukulti

23/ii/Si 6

Ubarum son of Irra-naṣir

17/v/Si 7

Šamaš-nur-matim son of Šamaš-naṣir 11/vi/Si 7

NBC 8568 3 GUR NBC 6798 7 GUR

2 GÍN

Imdi-Enlil

5/xi/Si 7

NBC 6752 2 GUR

3 GÍN

Šerum-ili son of Nur-Kabta

1/xii/Si 7

NBC 8768

1/4 GÍN

Huzalum

20/xii/Si 7

Ubarum

26/iv/Si 8

NBC 8571 1 GUR NBC 8533 0,3.2 GUR

Girni-isa

10/vi/Si 8

NBC 6827 2 GUR

1 GÍN

Huzalum

1/vii/Si 8

NBC 8534 1 GUR

1 1/4 GÍN

Gimil-Gula

-/i/Si 9

family archives in mesopotamia…

79

Comparing both series of data, several points can be underlined (highlighted in the tables above): – line 2 of NBC 8632 is an exact parallel to the data of the loan contract NBC 6798, recording the loan of 7 GUR of barley and 2 shekels of silver by Mardukmuballiṭ to Imdi-Enlil dated to 5/xi/Samsu-iluna 7. – the name of Huzalum recorded in line 3 of NBC 8632 appears as debtor’s name in two loan contracts of the same series, NBC 8768 (20/xii/Samsu-iluna 7) and NBC 6827 (1/vii/Samsu-iluna 8) with different quantities. – line 4 of NBC 8632 is exactly parallel to NBC 8744, recording the loan of 1 GUR of barley and 1/2 shekel of silver by Marduk-muballiṭ to Ubarum, son of Irranaṣir dated to 17/v/Samsu-iluna 7. – in line 12 of NBC 8632, the personal name is missing but the quantities are the same as in NBC 6752, a loan contract of barley and silver to Šerum-ili, son of Nur-Kabta (1/xii/Samsu-iluna 7). – other names lost in the lacunae of NBC 8632 might also have corresponded to people known as debtors in other loan contracts. These few parallels do suffice to state that we are dealing with a recapitulatory list of debts to be recovered by Marduk-muballiṭ. 45 It does not aim at substituting for the sealed documents, which were kept beside it. It must have corresponded to another purpose and may have helped Marduk-muballiṭ know in a glance the content of a coffer or basket of tablets in which he kept those texts. It remains to be seen why these texts were filed together and recapitulated once for all on that record without any indication of the nature of the recorded documents. It has to be noticed that the only loan contracts that have been identified with certainty as parallels to NBC 8632 were dated to the 7th year of Samsu-iluna (months v, xi and maybe xii). The loans they record are likely to have been cancelled by the edict of mîšarum of iii/Samsu-iluna 8. 46 NBC 8632 may thus be a recapitulatory list of the arrears of cancelled loan contracts that Marduk-muballiṭ knew he would never recover because of the royal edict. 47 He of course did not need to write down the nature of the texts: he knew too well what the basket or coffer contained, if, as

45 This is not the only known example of this practice in Old Babylonian archives; see for instance AUCT 5 99, a recapitulatory list of loans made by Ibni-Amurrum which D. Charpin managed to link with 5 original contracts (AUCT 5 41 and 43; BBVOT 1 38, 40 and 48); see Charpin 2005, p. 417 and 2008b, p. 11. 46 Charpin 2000b, p. 195. 47 Some of the loan contracts had apparently not been reimbursed at all, as it is clear for NBC 6798, 8744 and maybe 6752; some lines of NBC 8632 may however record total amounts of several contracts or arrears of loans already partially recovered, which would explain the differences in quantities, for instance, as for known loans by Huzalum.

80

I assume, he had lost 22 GUR of barley (maybe about 6600 liters) and about 10 shekel of silver (about 80 grams)!48 For the sake of completeness, a letter belonging to the archives of Mardukmuballiṭ has to be quoted. It was sent from Babylon by Sagil-mansum to Mardukmuballiṭ and mentions the existence of another recapitulatory list of loan contracts, probably to be also linked with the edict of mišârum of Samsu-iluna 8:49 (1-3) Speak to Marduk-muballiṭ: Thus says Sagil-mansum. (4) May Šamaš and Marduk grant you good health! (5-6) The basket of tablets for which I am responsible, open it before Apil-Ea and (7-11) the sealed tablet (that says): “1 mina and 1 1/2 shekel of silver, […] of gold, dated to ‘the year of the images of suppliants’ (= Samsu-iluna 6), ‘the year of the powerful weapon’ (= Samsu-iluna 7) and ‘the year of the royal stall’ (= Samsu-iluna 8), that is of 3 years, received by So-and-So, (12-15) that have been given to be recovered by Munawwirum, the chair-carrier” – that is how it is inscribed – (16-18) that sealed tablet, have it brought to me to Babylon.

A series of loan contracts have been accumulated by Sagil-mansum during years 6, 7 and 8 of Samsu-iluna. They were then entrusted by Sagil-mansum to Munawwirum to be recovered.50 This agreement led to write a sealed tablet, the one that Sagil-mansum speaks about in his letter, which was kept in a basket along with other business papers of Sagil-mansum and deposited at Marduk-muballiṭ’s as Sagil-mansum left Lagaba to reside, at least temporarily, in Babylon. One can imagine that, when Samsu-iluna proclaimed his edict in month iii of his 3rd year of reign, Sagil-mansum may have intended to get paid by Munawwirum who, as a recoverer (mušaddinum), had become responsible for the reimbursement of the loans. This is why Sagil-mansum may have asked that Marduk-muballiṭ had the sealed tablet brought to him to Babylon.51

48 Another question is about the status of loan contracts dated sometimes long after the proclamation of the mîšarum edict and whether they were not supposed to compensate the loss of former amounts, cancelled by the edict ; both dossiers (Marduk-muballiṭ around NBC 8632 and Ibni-Amurrum around AUCT 5 99) indeed contain texts dated to several months following the mîšarum of iii/Si 8, and in the case of Marduk-muballiṭ, even 10 months later (NBC 8534 dated to -/i/Si 9); the fact that these texts were found together with the discarded contracts would rather indicate that they were never recovered and were cancelled too; see the discussion in Charpin 2000b, p. 197, with other references. 49 YOS 15 38 (NBC 6290); see Charpin 2000b, p. 195 and n. 36. 50 Mari provides us with a nice parallel of such a recapitulatory list: M.15119+M.15287 is a list of unrecovered loan contracts found in the house of the princess Inibšina, that were entrusted to Šubnalu to be recovered. The list itself is not sealed, but it was established in presence of the king and it ends with these words (l. 58-60): “Šubnalu received 2 sealed tablets, copy of the present tablet, to be recovered”; see Charpin 2008b. 51 D. Charpin gives another explanation (Charpin 2000b, p.195): «Bien que la lettre ne le dise pas explicitement, il est évident que suite à la mîšarum du mois iii de l’an 8 de Samsu-iluna, l’affaire est annulée; d’où la demande de Sagil-mansum que le contrat avec Munawwirum lui parvienne à Babylone». I do not understand why, in case of a cancellation of the agreement with the mušaddinum, he would have needed to have his sealed document at hand: he could

family archives in mesopotamia…

81

Both examples show how filing and manipulation of archival documents caused to write other documents describing their content and containers. Letters themselves, at least in private context, could have been preserved as memoranda in order to give sense to a file of documents and keep a trace of a decision or of an order that led to write or preserve other texts. Both examples also help measure once again the gap that exists between the number of loans that were actually written and the number of those which have come to us: among 19 texts recorded in NBC 8632, 2 texts were identified with certainty and a third one according to an hypothetical restoration. As for the loan contracts of silver mentioned in Sagil-mansum’s letter, they never came to us. 52 Other loan contracts recorded or mentioned in both texts may either have been broken in antiquity after the debt had eventually been reimbursed, or destroyed in the ground waiting to be discovered, forgotten by the digger or scattered on the antique market. The representativeness of the samples we deal with always has to be questioned before using them as material for quantitative studies.53

Conclusion This paper has tried to demonstrate that, however important it is to refine typological distinctions in order to get a better understanding of archival documents taken separately, the major progress in assyriological studies will come from analysing private archives as a whole, when they have been luckily unearthed during regular excavations, or from gathering and (re)constructing them, file after file, by confronting and trying to make sense with documents of different natures. This is how the Archibab project intends to get a better understanding of phenomena that led to an increasing production, conservation, and use of private archives at the beginning of the 2nd millennium B.C. in Mesopotamia.

have simply let it sleep as a discarded document in his archives in Lagaba. The claim would anyway only be legal if the recovery had already been processed before the proclamation of the mîšarum for someone intending to recover a debt after the mîšarum would incur death penalty. 52 NBC 8723 dated to the 5th year of Samsu-iluna was surely not recapitulated in the tablet mentionned in YOS 15 38: by this contract, Sagil-mansum lent silver to Ṣilli-Šamaš so that he could buy him a female donkey within 10 days (18/vi-bis/Si 5). 53 It is also possible that not every loan recorded on NBC 8632 led to a written contract; small loans of barley recorded at ll. 13-18 may have for instance led only to an oral agreement beween people who knew each other. Studying AUCT 5 99 mentioned above, D. Charpin indeed notes (Charpin 2008b, p. 11): «Il convient de souligner qu’aucune des 13 créances en nature (…) énumérées dans la deuxième partie de AUCT 5 99 n’a été retrouvée; vu la modestie des montants en jeu (aux alentours de 1 qa), elles n’ont sans doute pas fait l’objet d’un contrat écrit. La conclusion est très importante; tant ce texte de AUCT 5 que le texte de Mari montrent que les prêts pouvaient très bien ne pas faire l’objet de la rédaction d’une créance. Cela limite encore plus les conclusions quantitatives qu’on peut tirer d’un point de vue économique des créances qui ont été retrouvées (…)».

82

References

Barberon 2003 L. Barberon, Le mari, sa femme et leurs biens: une approche de la dot dans les rapports patrimoniaux du couple en Mésopotamie d’après la documentation paléobabylonienne, «RHD» 81/1, p. 1-14.

Charpin 2000a D. Charpin, Lettres et procès paléo-babyloniens, in: F. Joannès (ed.), Rendre la justice en Mésopotamie. Archives judiciaires du Proche-Orient ancien (IIIe-Ier millénaires avant J.-C.), SaintDenis, p. 69-111.

Barberon 2009 L. Barberon, Les documents d’archives des religieuses en Babylonie ancienne. Usage, transmission et conservation, in: Briquel-Chatonnet et alii 2009, p. 273-288.

Charpin 2000b D. Charpin, Les prêteurs et le palais: les édits de mîšarum des rois de Babylone et leurs traces dans les archives privées, in: A. C. V. M. Bongenaar (ed.), Interdependency of Institutions and Private Entrepreneurs. Proceedings of the Second MOS Symposium (Leiden 1998), PIHANS 87, Leiden, p. 185-211.

Briquel-Chatonnet et alii 2009 F. Briquel-Chatonnet, S. Farès, B. Lion, C. Michel (ed.), Femmes, cultures et sociétés dans les civilisations méditerranéennes et proche-orientales de l’Antiquité, «Topoi» Suppl. 10, Lyon. Charpin 1984 D. Charpin, Une pratique administrative méconnue, «MARI. Annales de Recherches interdisciplinaires» 3, p. 258-259. Charpin 1986 D. Charpin, Transmission des titres de propriété et constitution des archives privées en Babylonie ancienne, in: K. R. Veenhof (ed.), Cuneiform Archives and Libraries. Papers read at the 30e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale Leiden, 4-8 July 1983, PIHANS 57, Leiden, p. 121-140 Charpin 1996 D. Charpin, Maisons et maisonnées en Babylonie ancienne de Sippar à Ur. Remarques sur les grandes demeures des notables paléo-babyloniens, in: K. R. Veenhof (ed.), Houses and Households in Ancient Mesopotamia. Papers read at the 40e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Leiden, July 5-8, 1993, PIHANS 78, Leiden, p. 221-228.

family archives in mesopotamia…

Charpin 2004 D. Charpin, Histoire politique du Proche-Orient amorrite (20021595), in: Mesopotamien. Die altbabylonische Zeit, (= P. Attinger, W. Sallaberger & M. Wäfler [ed.], Annäherungen 4), OBO 160/4, Fribourg/Göttingen, p. 25-480. Charpin 2005 D. Charpin, Données nouvelles sur la vie économique et sociale de l’époque paléo-babylonienne, «Orientalia» 74, p. 409-421. Charpin 2007 D. Charpin, Économie, société et institutions paléo-babyloniennes: nouvelles sources, nouvelles approches, «RA» 101, p. 147-182. Charpin 2008a D. Charpin, Lire et écrire à Babylone, Paris (English version now available as Charpin 2010a). Charpin 2008b D. Charpin, Archivage et classification: un récapitulatif de créances à Mari sous Zimrî-Lîm, in: R. D. Biggs, J. Myers & M. T. Roth (ed.), Proceedings of

83

the 51st Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale held at the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago July 18-22, 2005, SAOC 62, Chicago, 2008, p. 1-13. Charpin 2010a D. Charpin, Reading and Writing in Babylon, Cambridge [Mass.]. Charpin 2010b D. Charpin, Writing, Law, and Kingship in Old Babylonian Mesopotamia, Chicago/London. Charpin in press a D. Charpin, The Historian and the Old Babylonian Archives, in: M. Jursa et al. (ed.), Too much data? Generalizations and modelbuilding in ancient economic history on the basis of large corpora of documentary evidence (Wien, 17-19 July 2008) [French version “L’historien face aux archives paléo-babyloniennes” to be downloaded at http://www. digitorient.com/?p=190]. Charpin in press b D. Charpin, “Garde ma lettre en témoignage”. Le rôle de la correspondance dans le système juridique mésopotamien de la première moitié du deuxième millénaire av. n. è., in: U. YiftachFiranko (ed.), The Letter: Law, State, Society and the Epistolary Format in the Ancient World. Proceedings of a Colloquium held at the American Academy in Rome (28-30.9.2008), Philippika, Wiesbaden, p. 45-60. Durand 1987 J.-M. Durand (ed.), La Femme dans le Proche-Orient antique. Compte rendu de la XXXIIIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 7-10 juillet 1986), Paris. Durand 1992 J.-M. Durand, Unité et diversités au Proche-Orient à l’époque amorrite, in: D. Charpin, F.

Joannès (ed.), La circulation des biens, des personnes et des idées dans le Proche-Orient ancien, Actes de la XXXVIIIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 8-10 juillet 1991), Paris, p. 97-128. Durand 2004 J.-M. Durand, Peuplement et sociétés à l’époque amorrite. (I) Les clans bensim’alites, in: C. Nicolle (ed.), Nomades et sédentaires en Mésopotamie. Compte rendu de la XLVIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale (Paris, 10-13 juillet 2000), Amurru 3, Paris, p. 111-198. Janssen 1992 C. Janssen, Inanna-mansum et ses fils: relation d’une succession turbulente dans les archives d’UrUtu, «RA» 86, p. 19-52. Janssen 1996 C. Janssen, When the House is on Fire and the Children are gone, in: K. R. Veenhof (ed.), Houses and Households in Ancient Mesopotamia. Papers read at the 40e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Leiden, July 5-8, 1993, PIHANS 78, Leiden, p. 237-246. Janssen, Gasche, Tanret 1994 C. Janssen, H. Gasche, M. Tanret, Du chantier à la tablette. Ur-Utu et l’histoire de sa maison à Sippar-Amnānum, in: H. Gasche, M. Tanret, C. Janssen, A. Degraeve (ed.), Cinquante-deux réflexions sur le Proche-Orient ancien offertes en hommage à Léon De Meyer, MHEO 2, Ghent, 91-123. Michalowski 2001 P. Michalowski, The Correspondence of the Kings of Ur. An Epistolary History of an Ancient Mesopotamian Kingdom, MC 15, Winona Lake. Parpola & Whiting 2002 S. Parpola, R. M. Whiting

(ed.), Sex and Gender in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the 47th Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, Helsinki, July 2-6, 2001. Part I-II, Helsinki. Postgate 1992 J. N. Postgate, Early Mesopotamia. Society and Economy at the Dawn of History, London/New York. Sallaberger 2007 W. Sallaberger, From Urban Culture to Nomadism: A History of Upper Mesopotamia in the Late Third Millennium, in: C. Marro and C. Kuzucuoglu (ed.), Sociétés humaines et changement climatique à la fin du Troisième millénaire: Une crise a-t-elle eu lieu en Haute Mésopotamie, Varia Anatolica 19, Istanbul & Paris, p. 417-456. Tanret 2004 M. Tanret, The Works and the Days… On Scribal Activity in Old Babylonian Sippar-Amnānum, «RA» 98, p. 33-62. Tanret 2008 M. Tanret, Find the Tablet-box… New Aspects of Archive-Keeping in Old Babylonian Sippar-Amnānum, in: R. van der Speck (ed.), Studies in Ancient Near Eastern World View and Society, Presented to Marten Stol on the Occasion of His 65th Birthday, 10 November 2005, and His Retirement from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Bethesda, 2008, p. 131-147. Van Lerberghe & Voet 1991 K. Van Lerberghe, G. Voet, On “Quasi-Hüllentafeln”, «NAPR» 6, p. 3-8. Vanstiphout 1995 H. Vanstiphout, Memory and Literacy in Ancient Western Asia, in: J. M. Sasson et al., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East 4, p. 2181-2196.

84

Veenhof 1986 K. R. Veenhof, Cuneiform Archives. An Introduction, in: K. R. Veenhof (ed.), Cuneiform Archives and Libraries. Papers read at the 30e Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale Leiden, 4-8 July 1983, PIHANS 57, Leiden, p. 1-36. Veenhof 1995 K. R. Veenhof, Old Assyrian i̓urtum, Akkadian eṣērum and Hittite GIŠ.˚UR, in: Th. van den Hout & J. de Roos (ed.), Studio Historiae Ardens. Ancient Near Eastern Studies Presented to Philo H. J. Houwink ten Cate on the Occasion of his 65th Birthday, PIHANS 74, Leiden, p. 311-332. Wilcke 1979 C. Wilcke, Review of: A. L. Oppenheim, Letters from Mesopotamia, Chicago/London, 1967, «ZA» 60, p. 165-167. Wilcke 2001 N. Wilcke, Gestion et contrôle d’après les archives du palais de Mari (XVIIIe siècle av. J.-C.), «Ktèma» 26, p. 63-72.

family archives in mesopotamia…

85

The Limits of Middle Babylonian Archives1

susanne paulus

Middle Babylonian Archives Archives and archival records are one of the most important sources for the understanding of the Babylonian culture. 2 The definition of “archive” used for this article is the one proposed by Pedersén: «The term “archive” here, as in some other studies, refers to a collection of texts, each text documenting a message or a statement, for example, letters, legal, economic, and administrative documents. In an archive there is usually just one copy of each text, although occasionally a few copies may exist.»3 The aim of this article is to provide an overview of the archives of the Middle Babylonian Period (ca. 1500-1000 BC), 4 which are often

1 All kudurrus are quoted according to Paulus 2012a. For a quick reference on the texts see the list of kudurrus in table 1. 2 For an introduction into Babylonian archives see Veenhof 1986b; for an overview of different archives of different periods see Veenhof 1986a and Brosius 2003a. 3

Pedersén 1998; problems connected to this definition are shown by Brosius 2003b, 4-13.

4 This includes the time of the Kassite dynasty (ca. 1499-1150) and the following Isin-II-period (ca. 1157-1026). All following dates are BC, the chronology follows – willingly ignoring all linked problems – Gasche et. al. 1998.

the limits of middle babylonian archives

87

left out in general studies, 5 highlighting changes in respect to the preceding Old Babylonian period and problems linked with the material. Finally, it will be shown that it is possible to reconstruct lost archival records with the help of material from outside the archives. There is a complete break between the Old Babylonian and the Middle Babylonian archives caused by the downfall of the First Dynasty of Babylon. The end of the Old Babylonian Period came gradually. Starting in the 11th year of Samsuilūna (1653-1613), Hammu-rāpi’s successor, parts of the Southern kingdom broke away, including major cities such as Ur, Uruk and Larsa. This also marks the end of the archives in these places during his 12th year, while documentation in the cities of Isin, Nippur and Lagaba did not fall silent until the 30th year of Samsuilūna. 6 While the North stayed under Babylonian control, the South fell under the influence of the so called “First Sealand Dynasty”, with only a few, recently published texts documenting this period. 7 At the same time the Kassites, 8 a people possibly originating from the Zagros region, started to move into Northern Babylonia, settling down in the region around Sippar. Some of them were quickly integrated into Babylonian society, others fought against the Babylonian army. These encounters are mentioned in the late Old Babylonian year names. 9 Finally, during the reign of Samsu-ditāna, the Hittite king Muršili I. raided Babylon, putting an end to Hammu-rāpi’s dynasty.10 From recently published material it has been confirmed that the Kassites were directly involved in these final fights as well.11 It was also the Kassites who profited most from the situation, taking over the throne to rule Babylonia for the next 400 years. Information concerning the first Kassite kings ruling over Babylonia is sparse. Only a few royal inscriptions survived, often in the form of copies dating to later periods.12 With one exception – the archive of Tell Muḥammad which dates to the transitional period –13 the archival records14 do not resume until the reign of Kurigalzu I. about 1370, who founded a new capital in the North of Bab-

5

The Middle Babylonian archives are e.g. missing in Veenhof 1986a and Brosius 2003a.

6

Charpin 2004, 335-6.

7

Dalley 2009 and van Koppen 2010, 456-7.

8

On the Kassites, their history and culture see Sommerfeld 2000 and Zadok 2005.

9

Paulus 2011 with further references; add van Koppen 2010.

10 Charpin 2004, 382-3. 11 See Paulus 2011, 4 note 31. 12 Bartelmus 2010, 143-6. 13 Alubaid 1983; for recent proposals for the chronological classification of the material see Boese 2008 and van Koppen 2010, 457-62. 14 For an overview of the Kassite archives see Pedersén 1998, 103-19; Brinkman 1976, 35-49, and Sassmannshausen 2001, 3-4.

88

ylonia: Dūr-Kurigalzu.15 Sadly, only about 100 tablets16 of the official,17 palatial archives survived, most of them being administrative records that deal with the distribution of precious metals for building purposes and the redistribution of clothes.18 Only a fragment of a royal letter hints that an archive of international correspondence may have existed in Dūr-Kurigalzu, similar to the contemporary archives of Hattuša in Anatolia or Tell el-Amarna in Egypt.19 Most of the texts from Dūr-Kurigalzu are still unpublished. 20 The situation is even worse for the old capital Babylon: due to the high level of groundwater in the area it has only been possible to excavate the Middle Babylonian levels once, and only for a very limited amount of time. In the private houses of the Merkes quarter about 570 tablets were found: nearly all of them remain unpublished to-date. Pedersén was able to identify five private archives containing lists and legal documents, often sale and loan contracts. Sometimes the original storage places of the tablets – large clay pots – were discovered as well. 21 Such an archive-in-a-pot has also been found in the small settlement of Tell Imlihiye, located in the north-east at the river Diyala, from where 45 tablets have been published. Most of them contain rural administrative lists, but among them a slave sale and a letter have been identified. 22 There are also some archival rests from the nearby villages. 23 An important archive belonging to the brewers of the main deity Sîn has been unveiled in Ur. Most of the 75 texts, all of them published, are legal documents: mostly sale contracts, but also disputes and court records. 24 Nevertheless, 90% of all Kassite tablets, totaling at over 12000 pieces, came from the city of Nippur, provincial capital and seat of the highest Babylonian God of the Kassite period, Enlil. About 20% of the material has been published so far. 25

15 Modern ɣAqr Quf. For the recent excavations and new data from Dūr-Kurigalzu see Clayden 2012. 16 These figures are based on Clayden 2012, where a full list of all known tablets is given. Brinkman 1976, 43 speaks of ca. 250 inscribed objects from Dūr-Kurigalzu, but this includes building, votive inscriptions, etc. 17 For the distinction between “official” and “private” archives see Veenhof 1968b, 10-11. 18 See Baqir 1944; Baqir 1945, 1946; Gurney 1949 and 1953. 19 For the letter fragment see Brinkman 1976 no. J.2.18. For the international correspondence found in Tell el-Amarna Moran 1992; for Hatti see Beckman 1999. 20 See the list by Clayden 2012. 21 See Pedérsen 2005, 72 fig. 28 and 101 fig. 49. 22 The total of texts from Tell Imlihiye is listed 84, see Sassmannshausen 2001, 4. For the texts see Kessler 1982, 51-116. 23 Kessler 1985, 18 and 74-9; 1995, 281-8. 24 See Brinkman 1976, 44. For the texts see Gurney 1983. 25 Brinkman 1976, 41-2; add the material now published by Sassmannshausen 2001. For an overview see Pedersén 1998, 112-6 and Sassmannshausen 2001, 186-8.

the limits of middle babylonian archives

89

Most of the administrative documents belong to the archive of the governor of Nippur, the šandabakku:26 but his archive also contained letters and legal documents that show the activity of the governor in slave sales. 27 Part of this find was the archive of the granary, covering specifically the income and redistribution of natural produce. 28 While most material from Nippur is from official archives, in later excavations two small private archives with about 35 tablets were discovered. 29 With these archives being an exception, only a few texts are known from famous cities like Uruk, Larsa, Isin, Kīš and Adab30 together with the so called “Peiser archive” of unknown origin. 31 Not only the geographical, but also the chronological distribution is highly unbalanced. 32 Over 90% of the records originate from the time between BurnaBuriaš II., i.e. middle of the 14th century, and Kaštiliaš IV., at the end of the 13th century. 33 With only a few texts from the Nippur archives being dated earlier, most of them document the period between the 14th and 13th century, just as the archives of Tell Imlihiye and Dūr-Kurigalzu. 34 The reason for the break of the archives in the 13th century was the conquest of Babylonia by the Assyrian king TukultīNinurta I. in 1220. Some scholars even stated that Nippur was deurbanized after this period, but texts from outside the archives prove the contrary. 35 Only the archives of Ur and the unpublished material from Babylon cover the whole later Kassite period, with just the Babylonian tablets dating to the very end. 36 Due to the state of publication it is impossible to draw a complete picture of the legal matters covered by the Middle Babylonian archives. This article will

26 For an overview of the published Nippur material see Sassmannshausen 2001, 3 note 6. For the role of the šandabakku in Nippur see Sassmannshausen 2001, 16-21; cf. also the comments by Brinkman 2004. 27 For the letters see Radau 1908; for slave sales see Petschow 1983. For legal texts from Nippur cf. Petschow 1974. 28 Sassmannshausen 2001, 187-94. 29 For these archives see Pedersén 1998, 116 with further references. 30 Brinkman 1976, 40-9 and Sassmannshausen 2001, 3-4. 31 Brinkman 1976, 46; Sassmannshausen 2001, 4. 32 See Brinkman 1976, 35-40 and the graphical overview by Stiehler Alegria-Delgado 1996, 229. The material from Babylon must be corrected following Pedersén 2005, the dates for DūrKurigalzu following Clayden 2012. 33 Brinkman 1976, 36-7. 34 Nevertheless some tablets from Dūr-Kurigalzu date to Marduk-apla-iddina I., see Clayden 2012. 35 For example Gasche et al. 1998, 31: «Towards the end of the thirteenth century, most of Nippur was abandoned, and no early twelfth-century contexts have been identified at the site», while the kudurru MŠ 4 proves the contrary. 36 Especially the archive M8 has material dating to Zababa-šuma-iddina and Enlil-nādin-aḫi, the last Kassite kings; cf. Pedersén 2005, 94.

90

therefore focus on one topic: real estate sale contracts. So far only one of these contracts has been published, concerning a house plot in Nippur. 37 A few nearly identical documents are known, especially from the unpublished Babylon texts, 38 but surprisingly, as far as I know, none of them deal with larger estates or fields. 39 This is completely different from the situation in the preceding Old Babylonian period, where land sales were common, especially in Middle and Northern Babylonia, for example in Nippur. 40 Perhaps, one may assume, this is due to a coincidence, but at the same time sales of movable property, especially of slaves, are known from all Middle Babylonian archives. 41 Another explanation might be that there were restrictions to prevent and/or control real estate sales, as it was proposed for the end of the 3rd millennium in Babylonia. 42 Or, finally, could it be possible that private property on real estate did not exist at all because the king owned all the land?43

Material from outside the archives – The kudurrus To answer these questions we have the unique opportunity to use juridical material dealing with real estates from outside the archives: the kudurrus. 44 Kudurrus, in older literature often labelled “boundary stones” by mistake, are typical for the Kassite period. These 40 to 90 cm tall objects, made of dark limestone, were usually decorated with gods’ symbols and bore long inscriptions. They were set up in temples before the Gods with the purpose of securing real estate property from encroachment by the highest authorities of the state, such as the king and

37 Sassmannshausen 2001, no. 10; for comments on this text see Paulus 2008. 38 See Paulus 2008, 318 note 2 and Pedersén 2005, especially the archives M 1 and M 8. Parts of another real estate sale from Babylon have been published by Paulus 2009, 19-22. 39 Normally only qaqqaru kišubbû (in the city) “empty lot for building a house”, see Paulus 2008, 318-9 note 4, or bītātu (epšētu) “(build) houses”: see the examples in Pedersén 2005, archives M1 and M8. 40 See for example Renger 1987 or Stol 2004, 844-7. 41 Sassmannshausen 2001, 202-8. 42 See Neumann 1987, 33-7. 43 Cf. Schloen 2001, 297: «… that the king had rights over all of the land, so that in theory, at least, all landholdings were royal grants.» 44 kudurru is a Mesopotamian word used for these objects. Nevertheless, they were more often labeled as narû “stele” by the Babylonians. For the problematic terminology see Brinkman 2006, 6-8 and Paulus 2012a. The term kudurru is used as a science historical term in this article. Following the definition proposed in Paulus 2012a a “kudurru” is a stela made of stone or clay or a stone tablet, on which a juridical act concerning sale, donation, confirmation of rights and/ or exemptions of real estate property and/or prepends for a kings’ subject is both recorded and protected against violation with the help of the gods (curses and symbols).

the limits of middle babylonian archives

91

the provincial government. In other words, by means of the kudurru, the estate owner asked the gods for assistance to protect his property. 45 Interestingly, the geographical and chronological distribution of the kudurrus is not congruent with the archival material, but shows a lot of differences. Focussing only on the objects datable to the Kassite period – more than 60 objects date to the later Isin-II-dynasty and the Early Neo-Babylonian period46 – the chronological distribution for the Middle Kassite period is relatively even, showing no peak in the main period of the archives, while most kudurrus date to the reigns of the late Kassite kings Meli-Šipak and Marduk-apla-iddina I. during the 12th century. 47 This is due to a coincidence: When the Elamites conquered Babylonia they looted the temples, taking away precious objects including many of the newer kudurrus that still were in place. This is also the reason why a lot of kudurrus were not discovered in Babylonia but rather in the Elamite capital, Susa. 48 Apart from the more than 54, often badly damaged, kudurrus found in Susa, there are also Kassite kudurrus from Babylon, Ur, Dūr-Kurigalzu and Nippur, as well as from cities without Middle Babylonian archives like Sarol-e-Zohab in the upper Diyala-region, the important cities of Sippar and Kiš or the southern cities like Larsa. 49 The information from the kudurrus can thus be used complementary to the archival records to reconstruct parts of the legal system of the Kassite period. The aim of this article is to use the material from these objects and the archival records to answer the following questions: – Can restrictions on the sale of real estate property be reconstructed with the help of the kudurrus? – Can the legal information of the kudurrus be used to reconstruct documents that must have existed in the archives?

Restrictions on real estate sales Although all Kassite kudurrus deal with real estate property, the role of the sale50

45 For the art historical aspects see Seidl 1987; for the inscriptions see Paulus 2012a with a full edition of all known kudurrus. An English synopsis is in Paulus 2012b. 46 Cf. Paulus 2012b, fig. 1. 47 Cf. Paulus 2012a. There are only three kudurrus from the Early Kassite Period (ca. 15001328), while five kudurrus can be dated to the main period of the archives. 48 For the historical background see Potts 1999, 232-9. 49 Examples for Kudurrus datable in the Kassite Period: Babylon: MŠ 4; Ur: U19; Dūr-Kurigalzu: NM 3; Nippur: U4; Sarpol-e-Zohab: MAI I 4, Sippar: KaE I 1; MŠ 2; Kiš: Kassite fragments (see Clayden 1992, 149-51), Larsa: NM 1, KuE 1. 50 The definition for sale used is: Sale is the exchange for an amount of money or its equivalent. It is important to understand, that this does not always correspond with the Babylonian terminology; see above.

92

itself is minor. The king buys some land from the provincial governor and his subordinates.51 This proves that he was not the owner of all land in his state, nevertheless no sales of larger estates between private parties exist until long after the end of the Kassite period. The usual way property was transferred was the royal donation.52 To fully understand the donation system, we must first take a closer look at the system of landownership during this period. The rural landscape of Babylonia was dominated by small settlements alongside rivers and canals surrounded by fields. These fields could be private property often owned and cultivated by a family. Towns owed duties and taxes to the provincial government and, as head of all provinces, to the king. The king was able to give the complete income from one town to one of his loyal subjects, like a high official or a priest, in the form of a royal donation. This meant that the affected town was exempted from taxes and other duties owed to the province, with this income going directly into the coffers of the new owner, making the whole town effectively his private property.53 It is hard to find traces of this system in provincial archives, as for example in the governor’s archive in Nippur, because these towns are neither listed in the income list of taxes nor were the inhabitants subscribed for public labor. Nevertheless, some information can be found: some private structures were included on a sketchy map of the surroundings of Nippur;54 donations and problems concerning irrigation are mentioned in the letters, and disputes over the exemption from taxes can be found in court records.55 But the fact that the donated towns were no longer part of the provincial administration meant that the provincial archives did no longer record matters concerning them, especially since the separation from the provinces included an exemption that no official was allowed to enter a private town.56 Due to the fact that whole towns, including their hinterland, could become private property, the king necessarily had to control who exactly possessed land, since he would lose control of large parts of his empire otherwise. 57 As a solution,

51 See MŠ 3: The king buys a garden and other estates and gifts them to his daughter; and MAI I 1: The governor is labelled as nādinān eqli “seller of the field” and MAI I 5: the governor receives a payment for an estate. 52 For the legal institute of donation see Neumann, Paulus 2009, esp. 143. 53 For the reconstruction of this system see Paulus 2012a and 2012b; for land owned by the gods see also Paulus 2010. 54 CBS 13865, see Finkelstein 1962, 80 and pl. X, edition Paulus 2012a. 55 For example the letters CBS 19793 (Radau 1908, no. 24), CBS 4753 (Lutz 1919, no. 52), CBS 4663 (Lutz 1919, no. 23) and the court record CBS 12914 (Clay 1906, no. 39), all from the governor’s archive in Nippur. 56 The interdiction to enter the private towns was usually expressed in the exemption clauses or as part of possible violation listed in the curses at the end of the inscriptions. 57 So Charpin 2008, 77 : «On a donc affaire à une amputation du domaine royale.»

the limits of middle babylonian archives

93

transfer of property was only allowed by inheritance in the male family line.58 Only in case of a subject’s severe misconduct the king was allowed to expropriate him. If there was no legitimate heir, it was the king’s duty to give the land to somebody else, usually someone sharing the deceased one’s profession.59 At the same time the sale or donation of the land to a third party was definitely restricted and it is not by coincidence that no larger real estate sales, neither on kudurrus nor in the archival records, are known from the Kassite period. Like provincial governors, 60 the king was allowed to sell land, but even in this case the terminology of sale is avoided, as shown by the following example: NKU I 4: (I1) “[X hors]es (7) gave (iddinma) (2) [Adad-zēra]-šubši, (3) [son of Ad]ad-rīša, (4) the merchant, (5) [t]o the king, (6) Marduk-apla-iddina (I.) and (8) 81 ha land (9-10) in (the province) Bīt-Sîn-šeme, (11) 81 ha land (12-13) in (the province) Bīt-Sîn-ašarēd (…) (16) they surveyed (imšuḫū) and (20) established it permanently (ukinnū) (17) for (18) Adad-zēra-šubši, (19) the merchant.”61

While this is clearly a sale – horses are given in exchange for land – the Babylonian sale terminology is avoided62 and instead terms like “give” (nadānu), “survey” (mašāḫu) and “establish permanently” (kunnu), all known from the royal donations, are used. Although this is clearly no royal donation, the act is verbally disguised to better fit into the system of landownership, where a strong restriction on real property sale existed and only small estates like private fields around the towns, gardens or houses and building plots could be freely sold. 63 This restriction continued in following times: clay tablets from the archives, kudurrus and also stone tablets64 – hybrids between a kudurru and a clay tablet – prove this fact. The situation only slowly changed under Marduk-nādin-aḫḫē (1099-1082) during the Isin-II-period (1157-1026). An interesting example highlights that there were still restrictions:65 the text describes a transfer of property

58 The right of inheritance was secure, because the land was always donated „forever“ (ana ūm ṣāti). 59 See MŠ 4 and its discussion in Paulus 2007, 8-15. 60 See note 51. 61 NKU I 4, I1-20: (I1) [X ANŠE.KUR].RA.MEŠ (2) [m.dIŠKUR.NUMUN]-šub-ši (3) [DUMU m.d IŠ]KUR-ri-šá (4) [lú]DAM.GÀR (5) [a]-[n]a LUGAL (6) [dAMAR.UTU.IBILA.ŠÚMna (7) [Š]ÚM-ma (8) [10];0.0 GUR NUMUN (9) [10];0.0 GUR NUMUN (10) i-na É- (11) dXXX-še-me (12) 10;0.0 GUR NUMUN (13) i-na É- (14) dXXX.SAG.KAL (…) (16) im-šu- ḫu -ma (17) a- na (18) m.dIŠKUR.NUMUNšub - ši (19) lúDAM.GÀR (20) u-kin- nu . The restoration of the word “horses” ([X ANŠE.KUR]. RA.MEŠ) in the first line is very likely. 62 See Sassmannshausen 2001, 203-10 for an overview of the terminology. Typical are terms like ŠÁM “price” and šâmu “to buy”. 63 See note 39. 64 For example IMB 1, a very early Isin-II-period stone tablet, with a small estate sale, or ENAp 3, also a stone tablet. 65 See MNA 4.

94

from Bāltānu, who sells part of his paternal estate (about 56 ha), to one UrkātBurēa, thus concluding a “normal” private sale. 66 But when the king learns of this, he decides to return (turru) the land to Bāltānu, while any refund of the silver to Urkāt-Burēa is not mentioned in the text. 67 Bāltānu appeals to the king, who finally agrees to hand over administration of the land to Urkat-Burēa in form of a donation. 68 But it is clearly understandable that this transaction was not a real royal donation but rather a private sale, now approved by the king. In other similar situations the land sold or privately donated was always given the approving label of a royal donation. 69 Even in the following Early Neo-Babylonian period (1026-625), 70 when due to internal problems and the weakening of royal power it was no longer possible for the king to control the transfer of real estate, a phrase is written at the beginning of every real estate sale contract: “Together with the seller the buyer proclaimed to buy for the price X”. 71 With this standardized formula still a proclamation was made to the king asking for his permission for the transaction. 72 In reality, most properties were transferred without the control or even knowledge of the king proving that the restrictions on sale here reconstructed for the Middle Babylonian period did no longer exist.

The reconstruction of archival documents While the kudurrus explain the lack of real estate sale documents in the archives, at the same time they also point out that more types of documents must have existed than we actually know of from the archives. Part of the kudurru inscription was copied from a legal document: the property, usually large real estates, the parties involved and the transaction. Later in the Kassite period, a list of witnesses was added. Other important parts of the kudurru inscriptions are the narrative introduction, where reasons for the land transfer are given, and, even more fundamental, the protective part, where a list of possible aggressors and actions against the real estate is combined with curses from the gods against the malefactor. Both, introduction and protective part, are not part of normal legal documents, making the kudurru itself more than a mere

66 MNA 4: I1-19, sale terminoloy (ŠÁM) is used. 67 MNA 4: I20-23. 68 MNA 4: II2-5. Donation terminology is used: “to hand over administration” (pāni … šudgulu) and “to gift” (râmu). 69 niditti šarri “donation of the king”, see for example MNA 2: II7 in a private sale. 70 For an overview of kings, history and texts from this period see Frame 1995, 70-270. 71 itti seller buyer kî price maḫīra imbêma, see Petschow 1939, 9. 72 On this interpretation of the Neo-Babylonian sale form see Paulus 2012a.

the limits of middle babylonian archives

95

copy of a legal tablet. Nevertheless, we can use the information extracted from the legal part to reconstruct the documents behind it. 73 Sometimes it is even mentioned in the inscription that this part of the kudurru was copied from a special clay tablet. There are three important types of tablets mentioned. First of all the donation or, in Akkadian, the kunuk šarri ša šiprēti, the “the king’s sealed document of instructions”. With this act the land was given to the official, but real assignment occurred locally in the province and was documented in another sealed tablet, the ammatu or the “tablet of the land survey”. Finally, when the new land owner’s property rights were contested, the king judged the matter and his verdicts were recorded in form of kanīk dīni, the “sealed documents of the judgment”. In one example all three documents were listed: MAI I 1: “(III11) The tablet of the land survey and the tablet of the field, the sealed document of the judgment (12) he (= the king) sealed (…)”. 74

In this case the tablet of the donation and the tablet of confirmation during the law suit is one, because no original document of donation was issued by the former king leading to the contestation of ownership. 75 Normally only one or two different types of documents are recorded on one kudurru. Focusing on the examples from the Kassite period, an attempt will be made to restore content and context in the archives: Starting with the donation, these tablets contain a description of the land and the act of the donation itself which was witnessed by the highest officials of the empire, since the entitlement took place in the king’s palace and was sealed with the kings own royal seal leading to its specially name: kunuk šarri ša šiprēti, the “the king’s sealed document of instructions”. 76 This term is only rarely used in Kassite times, 77 but it is often noted that the king sealed the donation tablet himself. 78 Sometimes this was not possible and led to further litigation. 79 While no real donation tablet has been found, we do know of similar tablets found in the contemporary royal archives of Ugarit on the Levantine coast and Hattuša, capital of the Hittite State in Anatolia. 80 From these examples we also can learn, where

73 Paulus 2012a and 2012b. 74 MAI I 1: (III11) 1.KÚŠ ù ṭup-pi A.ŠÀ ka-nik di-ni (III12) ik-nu-uk-ma. 75 See MAI I 1: II13 with commentary by Paulus 2007, 5-7. 76 For a complete discussion of the term kunuk šarri ša šiprēti see Paulus 2012c, for older interpretations see Kienast 1987. 77 U7 II1. It becomes common in the later Isin-II-period. See Paulus 2012d. 78 See KuE 1: III22ff. and III42, MŠ 3: (text 4) 21ff. and (text 8) II9; MŠ 4: IV5 and U3: II1ff. 79 See MAI I 1: II12 (cf. note 75) and MAI I 6: I22’. The fact that the king did not seal the donation is often quoted verbatim as possible violation in the curses, cf. MAI I 7: IV2’. 80 For the Hittites see Riemschneider 1958 and Wilhelm 2005; for Ugarit see Márquez Rowe 2006.

96

we can expect to find donation documents within the archival structures of Babylonia. Being the most important proof of land ownership, these documents were kept in the private archives of the beneficiary for generations. 81 In case of doubts they could be presented in court. 82 From the kudurrus we know that the benificiaries of the land donation were high officials, like viziers, high priests etc. 83, while the archives we have come from “average townsmen”, like temple brewers, merchants and others. So the chances to find information on land donations in these archives are minor. 84 Copies of the documents should also have existed in the royal archives, similar to Ugarit or Hattuša, but as presented in the overview at the beginning of this article, no corresponding archives have been discovered so far. Regarding land surveys, the situation is almost the same. This act took place in the local provinces, where the land was finally given to the beneficiary. The act of the land survey was at the same time an act of publication, making the new ownership known. 85 Involved were a field surveyor, a royal envoy and provincial officers. 86 All of them witnessed the act and could be questioned on it in a later law suit. 87 The tablets, named ammatu, 88 were given to the new owner, so we should be able to find them in private archives. 89 An analogue procedure in the contemporary Middle Assyrian texts makes it very likely that copies were also stored in the royal and provincial archives90. As for the private and royal records, we lack any traces, for the same reason as mentioned for the donation tablets. Concerning provincial archives, which only have been discovered in Nippur, we lack the

81 For the practice of storage of real estate tablets in old Babylonian Period see Charpin 1986. A good Kassite example for the storage of real estate tablets is M1, see Pedersén 2005, 72-3. 82 The king asked for the tablet stored in the house of the proprietary (MŠ 4: III9ff.); the tablets are shown to the king (KaE II 1: II’4’ff. and Ka IV 2: II22’ff.), the tablet is contested (ŠŠ 1: I11ff.), the land is given according to the tablet (KaE II 1: II’7’). 83 A list of all beneficiaries is to be found in Paulus 2012a. 84 See above. 85 Sometimes it is noted that the king sealed this tablets by his royal seal (for example MŠ 3: text 8 I17), but the king is never listed as witness for the land survey. 86 For the procedure of the land survey see Robson 2008, 166-76; Baker 2011, 293-307, and Paulus 2012a (study of the sons of Arad-Ea). 87 MAI I 1: II21ff. 88 Written 1.KÙŠ; my interpretation follows Sommerfeld 1984, 304-5. Charpin 2002, 178-9 puts it in context with the old Babylonian ṭuppi ummatim “mother tablet” issued for the first owner (see Charpin 1986, 135-49), but in Middle Babylonian it was always issued in connection with the land survey to the actual owner. In addition the etymology of ummatum = AMA “mother” and ammatum = 1.KÙŠ “one cubit” is completely different. For a complete discussion see Paulus 2012a. 89 ammatu-tablets are mentioned in MŠ 3: text 8 I17; MAI I 1: III11, MAI I 3: I 21’, MAI I 7: IV20’ and U3: II1ff. 90 MAL §B6, cf. Roth 1995, 177-8; see also Jakob 2003, 70-2.

the limits of middle babylonian archives

97

land register tablets and concerning matters. Nevertheless, we find traces of the involved officials in ration lists. 91 Finally, for the court records it is more complicated to reconstruct a uniform document typology. The king’s role was that of the highest judge and he therefore treated all matters concerning real estates of high officials, 92 including border conflicts with neighbors or matters about hereditary succession. The tablets issued not only contain the final verdicts but also documents written during the trial, for example the ṭuppi ana ḫuršān, the “tablets for the water ordeal”93 that were required to send the parties to the evidence procedure, which took place in front of the gods. These sorts of tablet are also known from the private archives of the brewers in Ur as well as the archive in Nippur, where the king is mentioned, but that deals with animal theft, not questions of landownership. 94 Nevertheless, we thus have a direct correlation between the kudurrus and archival records. As for the final verdicts, none have yet been found for the same reasons mentioned before, because they usually are stored within the private archives of the beneficiaries with copies being kept in the royal archives. 95 To conclude, the rich but badly published material from the Middle Babylonian archives does not always correlate with the material from outside of the archives, thus showing important gaps in written records. But the situation is not as hopeless as it may appear. Especially one unpublished archive from Babylon is very promising. 96 It belonged to one Itti-Ezida-lummir, an āšipu “exorcist or evocator”, a title that is also known from the beneficiaries in the kudurrus. 97 About 100 tablets were discovered, a lot of them real estate sales concerning houses and house plots. Along with them a kudurru was unearthed. Sadly, it was highly damaged, with no inscription being left. 98 This situation makes it possible, that the

91 For the occurance of ša rēš šarri-officials, typical royal envoys see Sassmannshausen 2001, 45. 92 See Paulus 2007; Kassite examples are NM 3, MŠ 4, MAI I 1, perhaps also KaE II 1 and ŠŠ 1. 93 MŠ 4: IV38ff. and V14ff. 94 See Paulus 2007, 15-6 with further references. A detailed study is in preparation by the author. 95 At the end of MŠ 4: VI26ff. it is noted that the kudurru inscription is a copy (gabarê) of three verdict issued by the kings Adad-šuma-iddina, Adad-šuma-uṣur and Meli-Šipak. Because some time passed between the different verdicts, it is certain that there were copies in private hands. 96 M 8, see Pedersén 2005, 93-101. 97 An āšipu is the beneficiary in AAI 4, while bārûs are known from the Kassite kudurrus KḪ I 1 and MŠ 4. 98 For a beautiful photograph of this object see Marzahn, Schauerte 2008, 176. While kudurrus were kept usually in the temple and not in private archives (see Seidl 1989, 72-3), there are two possible explanations for this exemption: due to the state of preservation it is not possible to say, if the kudurru was already inscribed. So perhaps it was purchased by the family and waiting to be inscribed with the donation. Another more probable reason is found in the date of the archive to the absolute end (see note 36) of the Kassite period. So perhaps in these insecure days the family took the kudurru from the temple to avoid that the Elamite could loot it, like lots of other objects.

98

family of Itti-Ezida-lummir owned some houses in Babylon, as well as a land donation of a larger estate in this province or another. So it is my hope that this archive may help to understand how the system of landownership worked for the beneficiary himself. In order to overcome the limits of the Middle Babylonian archives, we have to further publish the known material and, at the same time, combine it with all the information from outside the archives.

Table 1 – List of kudurrus Kudurru Seidl’s number*

museum’s number

publication**

AAI 4

–

private collection

Paulus 2012a

ENAp 3

–

YBC 13522

Paulus 2012a

IMB 1

T1

BM 91015

King 1912 (BBSt no. 30)

Ka IV 2

3

Scheil 1900 (MDP 2, 92 ff.)

KaE I 1

–

Sb 30 BM 91036 BM 135743

KaE II 1

p. 229

KḪ I 1

–

KuE 1

King 1912 (BBSt no. 1)

Land of the Bible Museum Grayson 1981

YBC 2242

Paulus 2012a

p. 225

L 7076

Arnaud 1972

MAI I 1

61

Sb 26

Scheil 1905 (MDP 6, 31 ff.)

MAI I 4

p. 222

Teheran?

Borger 1970

MAI I 5

59

Sb 33

Scheil 1905 (MDP 6, 39 ff.)

MAI I 6

G3

Sb 169

Scheil 1905 (MDP 6, 42 ff.)

MAI I 7

p. 222

NBC 9502

Paulus 2012a

MNA 2

79

BM 90841

King 1912 (BBSt no. 7)

MNA 4

p. 223

IM 90585

Al-Adami 1982

MŠ 2

12

BM 90829

King 1912 (BBSt no. 4)

MŠ 3

23

Sb 23

Scheil 1908 (MDP 10, 87 ff.)

MŠ 4

25

BM 90827

King 1912 (BBSt no. 3)

–

private collection

Paulus 2012a

L 7072

Arnaud 1972

NKU I 4 NM 1

p. 221

NM 3

2

IM 49991

Baqir 1944

ŠŠ 1

57

AS 1335 (+) Sb 6430

Paulus 2012a

U3

9

IM 5527

Sommerfeld 1984

U4

8

VA 213

Hilprecht 1896 (BE 1/2 no. 150)

U7

18+19

Sb 6432 (+) Sb 791

Paulus 2012a

U19

84

IM 934

Gadd, Legrain 1928 (UET no. 165)

* Seidl 1989. Supplementary kudurrus added in 1989 are listed with the page no. in Seidl 1989. ** Usually the publication of the cuneiform text, sometimes an important edition.

the limits of middle babylonian archives

99

bibliography

Al-Adami 1982 K. Al-Adami, A New Kudurru of Maroduk-nadin-ahhe. IM. 90585, «Sumer» 38, 1982, 121-133. Alubaid 1983 I.J. Alubaid, Unpublished Cuneiform Texts from Old Babylonian Period, Diyala Region, Tell Muhammad, MA Thesis, College of Arts, University of Baghdad, 1983. Arnaud 1972 D. Arnaud, Deux Kudurru de Larsa: II. Étude épigraphique, «RA» 66, 1972, 163-176. Baker 2011 H.D. Baker, Babylonian Land Survey in socio-political context, in The Empirical Dimension of Ancient Near Eastern Studies, WWO 6. G.J. Selz, K. Wagensonner (eds.), Wien, Berlin 2011, 293-323. Baqir 1944 T. Baqir, Iraq Gouvernment Excavations at Aqar Qūf, First Interim Report 1942-1943, «Iraq» Supplement, 1944. Baqir 1945 T. Baqir, Iraq Gouvernment Excavations at Aqar Qūf, Second Interim Report 1943-1944, «Iraq» Supplement, 1945. Baqir 1946 T. Baqir, Iraq Gouvernment Excavations at Aqar Qūf, Third Interim Report 1944-1945, «Iraq» 8, 1946, 73-93. Bartelmus 2010 A. Bartelmus, Restoring the Past. A Historical Analysis of the Royal Temple Building Inscriptions from the Kassite Period, «KASKAL» 2010, 143-171. Beckman 1999 G. Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts, SBL Writings of the Ancient World 7, Atlanta 19992.

Boese 2008 J. Boese, “Ḫarbašipak”, “Tiptakzi” und die Chronologie der älteren Kassitenzeit, «ZA» 98, 2008, 201-210. Borger 1970 R. Borger, Vier Grenzsteinurkunden Merodachbaladans I. von Babylonien, «AfO» 23, 1974, 1-26. Brinkman 1976 J.A. Brinkman, A Catalogue of Cuneiform Sources Pertaining to Specific Monarchs of the Kassite Dynasty, MSKH 1, Chicago 1976. Brinkman 2004 J.A. Brinkman, Administration and Society in Kassite Babylonia, «JAOS» 124, 2004, 283-304. Brosius 2003a M. Brosius (ed.), Ancient Archives and Archival Traditions. Concepts of Record-Keeping in the Ancient World, Oxford/New York 2003. Brosius 2003b M. Brosius, Ancient Archives and Concepts of Record-Keeping: An Introduction, in Brosius 2003a, 1-36. Charpin 1986 D. Charpin, Transmission des titres de propriéte et constitution des archives privées en Babylonie ancienne, in Veenhof 1968a, pp. 121-140. Charpin 2002 D. Charpin, Chroniques Bibliographiques. 2. La commémoration d’actes juridiques: à propos des kudurrus babyloniens, «RA» 96, 2002, 169-191. Charpin 2004 D. Charpin, Histoire politique du Proche-Orient Amorrite (20021595), in Mesopotamien. Die altbabylonische Zeit, OBO 160/4, P. Attinger, W. Sallaberger, M. Wäfler (eds.), Freiburg/ Göttingen 2004, 25-480.

100

Charpin 2008 D. Charpin, Le roi et la terre dans le Proche-Orient du deuxième millénaire av. J-C., in La ricchezza nel Vicino Oriente Antico, Mailand 2008, 63-87. Clay 1906 A.T. Clay, Documents from the Temple Archives of Nippur Dated in the Reign of Cassite Rulers (Complete Dates), BE 14, Philadelphia 1906.

Fragment, in Archäologie zur Bibel. O.W. Muscarella, (ed.), Mainz 1981, 129-130. Gurney 1949 O.R. Gurney, Texts from DurKurigalzu, «Iraq» 11, 1949, 131-142. Gurney 1953 O.R. Gurney, Further texts from Dur-Kurigalzu, «Sumer» 9, 1953, 21-34.

Clayden 1992 T. Clayden, Kish in the Kassite Period (c. 1650-1150 B.C.), «Iraq» 54, 1992, 141-155.

Gurney 1983 O.R. Gurney, The Middle Babylonian Legal and Economic Texts from Ur, Oxford 1983.

Clayden 2012 T. Clayden, Dūr-Kurigalzu: new perspectives, in Karduniash. K. Sternitzke, A. Bartelmus, M. Roaf (eds.) (forthcoming).

Hilprecht 1896 H.V. Hilprecht, Old Babylonian Inscriptions Chiefly from Nippur, BE 1/2, Philadelphia 1896.

Dalley 2009 St. Dalley, Babylonian Tablets from the First Sealand Dynasty in the Schøyen Collection, CUSAS 9, Bethesda 2009. Finkelstein 1962 J.J. Finkelstein, Mesopotamia, «JNES» 21, 1962, 73-92. Frame 1995 G. Frame, Rulers of Babylonia. From the Second Dynasty of Isin to the End of Assyrian Domination (1157-612 BC), RIMB 2, Toronto, Buffalo, London 1995. Gasche et al. 1998 H. Gasche, J.A. Armstrong, S.W. Cole, V.G. Gurzadyan, Dating the Fall of Babylon. A Reappraisal of Second-Millennium Chronology, MHE/M 4, Chicago 1998. Gadd, Legrain 1928 C.J. Gadd, L. Legrain, Ur Excavation Texts 1. Royal Inscriptions, London 1928.

Jakob 2003: S. Jakob, Mittelassyrische Verwaltung und Sozialstruktur. Untersuchungen, CM 29, Leiden, Boston 2003. Kessler 1982 K. Kessler, Kassitische Tontafeln von Tell Imlihiye, «BaM» 13, 1982, 51-116. Kessler 1985 K. Kessler, Zu den „Tontafeln“ and „Die Tontafeln“, in Tell Imlihiye, Tell Zubeidi, Tell Abbas, BaF 7, R.M. Boehmer, H.-W. Dämmer (eds.), Mainz 1985, 18 and 74-79. Kessler 1995 K. Kessler, Drei Keilschrifttexte aus Tell Baradān, in Beiträge zur Kulturgeschichte Vorderasiens. Festschrift für Rainer Michael Boehmer, U. Finkbeiner, R. Dittmann, H. Hauptmann (eds.), Mainz 1995, 281-288. King 1912 L.W. King, Babylonian BoundaryStones and Memorial-Tablets in the British Museum, London 1912.

Grayson 1981 A.K. Grayson, Kudurru-

the limits of middle babylonian archives

Lutz 1919 H.F. Lutz, Selected Sumerian and Babylonian Texts, PBS 1/2, Philadelphia 1919. Márquez Rowe 2006 I. Márquez Rowe, The Royal Deeds of Ugarit. A Study of Ancient Near Eastern Diplomatics, AOAT 335, Münster 2006. Marzahn, Schauerte 2008 J. Marzahn, G. Schauerte (eds.), Babylon. Wahrheit, Berlin, München 2008. Moran 1992 L.W. Moran, The Amarna Letters, Baltimore/London 1992. Neumann 1987 H. Neumann, Zum Problem des privaten Bodeneigentums in Mesopotamien (3. Jt. v. u. Z.), «JBW/S» 1987, 29-48. Neumann, Paulus 2009 H. Neumann, S. Paulus, Schenkung, «RlA» 12, 2009, 141-145. Paulus 2007 S. Paulus, Ein Richter wie Šamaš – Zur Rechtsprechung der Kassitenkönige, «ZAR» 13, 2007, 1-22. Paulus 2008 S. Paulus, Ein Beitrag zum mittelbabylonischen Immobilarkauf, «AoF» 35, 2008, 318-322. Paulus 2009 S. Paulus, Blutige Vertragsstrafen in mittelbabylonischen Kaufurkunden, «ZAR» 15 (2009), pp. 15-30. Paulus 2010 S. Paulus, Verschenkte Städte – Königliche Landschenkungen an Götter und Menschen, in City Administration in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings of the 53rd Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, BB 5. L. Kogan,

101

N. Koslova, S. Loesov, S. Tishchenko (eds.), Winona Lake 2010, 191-206. Paulus 2011 S. Paulus, Foreigners under Foreign Rulers. The Case of Kassite Babylonia, in The Foreigner and the Law , BZAR 16. R. Achenbach, R. Albertz, J. Wöhrle (eds.), Wiesbaden 2011, 1-15. Paulus 2012a S. Paulus, Die babylonischen Kudurru-Inschriften von der kassitischen bis zur frühneubabylonischen Zeit – Untersucht unter besonderer Berücksichtigung rechtshistorischer Fragestellungen, AOAT 51, Münster 2012 (forthcoming). Paulus 2012b S. Paulus, The Babylonian Kudurru-inscriptions – treated with special regard to legal and social historical implications, in Karduniash. K. Sternitzke, A. Bartelmus, M. Roaf (eds.) (forthcoming). Paulus 2012c S. Paulus, Vom babylonischen Königssiegel und gesiegelten Steinen, in Organization, Representation and Symbols of Power in the Ancient Near East. Proceedings oft he 54th RAI. G. Wilhelm (ed.), Winona Lake 2012, 357-367. Pedersén 1998 O. Pedersén, Archives and Libraries in the Ancient Near East 1500-300 B.C., Bethesda 1998. Pedersén 2005 O. Pedersén, Archive und Bibliotheken in Babylon. Die Tontafeln der Grabung Robert Koldeweys 1899-1917, ADOG 25, Saarbücken 2005. Petschow 1939 H.P.H. Petschow, Die neubabylonischen

Kaufformulare, Leipziger rechtswissenschaftliche Studien 118, Leipzig 1939. Petschow 1974 H.P.H. Petschow, Mittelbabylonische Rechtsund Wirtschaftsurkunden der Hilprecht-Sammlung Jena. Mit Beiträgen zum mittelbabylonischen Recht, Abhandlungen der sächsischen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Leipzig. Philosophisch-historische Klasse 64/4, Berlin 1974. Petschow 1983 H.P.H. Petschow, Die Sklavenkaufverträge des šandabakku Enlil-kidinnī von Nippur (I). Mit Exkursen zu Gold als Wertmesser und Preisen, «OrNS» 52, 1983, 143-155. Potts 1999 D.T. Potts, The Archaeology of Elam, Cambridge World Archaeology, Cambridge 1999. Radau 1908 H. Radau, Letters to Cassite Kings from the Temple Archives of Nippur, BE 17/1, Philadelphia 1908. Renger 1987 J. Renger, Das Privateigentum an der Feldflur in der altbabylonischen Zeit, «JBW/S» 1987, 49-67. Riemschneider 1958 K.K. Riemschneider, Die hethitischen Landschenkungsurkunden, «MIO» 6, 1958, 321-381. Robson 2008 E. Robson, Mathematics in Ancient Iraq. A Social History, Princeton, Oxford 2008. Roth 1995 M.T. Roth, Law Collections from Mesopotamia and Asia Minor, SBL Writings from the Ancient World Series 6, Atlanta 1995.

Sassmannshausen 2001 L. Sassmannshausen, Beiträge zur Verwaltung und Gesellschaft Babyloniens in der Kassitenzeit, BaF 21, Mainz 2001. Scheil 1900 V. Scheil, Textes ÉlamitesSémitiques, MDP 2, Paris 1900. Scheil 1905 V. Scheil, Textes ÉlamitesSémitiques, MDP 6, Paris 1905. Scheil 1908 V. Scheil, Textes ÉlamitesSémitiques, MDP 10, Paris 1908. Schloen 2001 J.D. Schloen, The House of the Father as Fact and Symbol. Patrimonialism in Ugarit and the Ancient Near East, Studies in the Archaeology and History of the Levant, Winona Lake 2001. Seidl 1987 U. Seidl, Die babylonischen Kudurru-Reliefs. Symbole mesopotamischer Gottheiten, OBO 87, 2nd augmented edition, Freiburg, Göttingen 1987. Sommerfeld 1984 W. Sommerfeld, Die mittelbabylonische Grenzsteinurkunde IM 5527, «UF» 16, 1984, 299-306. Sommerfeld 2000 W. Sommerfeld, The Kassites of Ancient Mesopotamia: Origins, Politics and Culture, in Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, J.M. Sasson (ed.), Peabody 2000, 917-930. Stiehler Alegria-Delgado 1996 G. Stiehler-Alegria Delgado, Die Kassitische Glyptik, MVSt 18, München 1996. Stol 2004 M. Stol, Wirtschaft und Gesellschaft in Altbabylonischer Zeit, in Mesopotamien. Die altbabylonische Zeit, OBO 160/4,

102

P. Attinger, W. Sallaberger, M. Wäfler (eds.), Freiburg/ Göttingen 2004, 643-975. van Koppen 2010 F. van Koppen, The Old to Middle Babylonian Transition: History and Chronology of the Mesopotamian Dark Age, «Ä&L» 20, 2010, 453-463. Veenhof 1968a K.R. Veenhof (ed.), Cuneiform Archives and Libraries, PIHANS 57, Leiden 1986. Veenhof 1986b K.R. Veenhof, Cuneiform Archives. An Introduction, in Veenhof 1968a, 1-36. Wilhelm 2005 G. Wilhelm, Zur Datierung der älteren hethitischen Landschenkungsurkunden, «AoF» 32, 2005, 272-279. Zadok 2005 R. Zadok, Kassites, in EI Online, 2005, www.iranica.com.

the limits of middle babylonian archives

103

Classical Greece

Les archives de la cité de raison. Démocratie athénienne et pratiques documentaires à l’époque classique christophe pébarthe

Occupant une place centrale dans l’histoire ancienne, la cité grecque continue de faire débat, sur fond de tradition historiographique nationale différente, comme le résume Oswyn Murray. «Pour les Allemands, on ne peut parler de la polis que dans un manuel de droit constitutionnel; la polis française est une sorte d’eucharistie; la polis anglaise est un accident historique; la polis américaine, enfin, combine les pratiques de la Mafia et les principes de justice et de liberté individuelle»1. Deux grandes approches se distinguent toutefois. La première peut être qualifiée d’institutionnelle. Elle réduit l’étude du politique à celle des institutions politiques. Depuis une quinzaine d’années, elle oriente les travaux du Copenhagen Polis Centre autour de l’historien Mogens H. Hansen. La deuxième se revendique de l’anthropologie, invitant à dépasser la séparation entre société et politique. Naturellement, les nuances sont multiples et les nouvelles approches se succèdent à un rythme soutenu. Parmi celles-ci, il convient de distinguer la piste ouverte par Vincent Azoulay et Paulin Ismard, qu’ils nomment la cité en circulation2. Il s’agit de raisonner en tenant compte des différentes échelles du politique. Paulin Ismard a mis en œuvre une telle approche dans son récent ouvrage,

1

Murray 1992, 15.

2

Azoulay & Ismard 2007.

les archives de la cité de raison...

107

La cité des réseaux. Athènes et ses associations VIème-Ier siècle av. J.-C. (2010), se proposant de réfléchir «aux échelles de fonctionnement de la société civique athénienne»3. Selon l’approche traditionnelle, les associations, en particulier les dèmes et les phratries, sont des cités en réduction, diffusant auprès des citoyens la culture démocratique4. Dès lors, elles ne participent pas activement à la construction de l’identité civique. Or, des recherches récentes remettent en cause cette approche. Dans son livre sur Salamine, Martha Taylor établit ce qu’elle nomme la carte nonofficielle de l’Attique, à travers l’étude de cette île qui fonctionne comme un dème sans en être un5. Le citoyen habitant Salamine est à la fois un Salaminien et un co-démote sur le continent puisqu’il est inscrit dans un dème territorial comme tous ses concitoyens. Plus généralement, l’archéologie dessine «une cité décentralisée, ouverte, caractérisée par une grande fluidité entre différentes identités sociales qui, conjointement, participent à la définition de la citoyenneté. Les espaces et les pratiques du politique y trouvent une expression singulièrement élargie»6. Cette approche semble contredire le modèle défendu par Oswyn Murray, celui d’une cité de raison dont la cohérence institutionnelle témoignerait d’un haut degré de rationalité. Elle tourne ainsi le dos aux catégories weberiennes pour s’inscrire dans le holisme de Durkheim7. Les institutions politiques ne sauraient être comprises en dehors des interactions sociales. Il faudrait alors privilégier la fluidité des identités multiples à la rigidité du statut. Pour autant, les différentes réformes, à commencer par celle de Clisthène – qu’il en fut l’auteur, unique ou non, importe peu ici – dessinent une organisation qui n’est pas dépourvue d’une certaine rationalité. Elles sont sensées apporter progressivement plus de cohérence, en contradiction avec le modèle durkheimien qui postule un accroissement de l’incohérence correspondant à l’ajout de nouveaux critères aux anciens qui ne disparaissent pas. Cette cohérence est toutefois étonnante car elle semble procéder de la volonté du réformateur, comme s’il avait prévu les effets de sa réforme. Quoi qu’il en soit, elle serait la preuve d’un haut niveau de rationalité, tant dans les motivations du changement que dans ses conséquences. Pour Murray, la rupture est à chercher au VIème siècle avec les réorganisations des corps civiques8. Les réformes qui se produisent modifient le

3

Ismard 2010, 28.

4

Cf. en particulier Whitehead 1986 et Lambert 1998.

5

Taylor 1997.

6

Azoulay & Ismard 2007, 303.

7 Pour Max Weber (Économie et société, chap. 6), les cités grecques ont inventé le politique, au sens où elles l'ont distingué, rendu autonome par rapport aux autres sphères d'activité. 8 Globalement néanmoins, Oswyn Murray insiste sur la continuité. «La cité grecque est une cité de raison parce que l’homme grec est un animal politique, et cela dès Homère; nous pouvons retracer l’évolution, mais elle représente non pas un changement de nature, d’un type d’organisation social à un autre, mais l’évolution rationnelle d’un système dont le caractère fondamental n’a pas changé» (Murray 1992, 33).

108

nombre, la composition et les fonctions sociales des tribus. «Il est évident que les changements introduits par Clisthène à Athènes impliquaient une révision fondamentale des fonctions des institutions sociales à tous les niveaux, et un haut degré de rationalité pour élaborer un nouveau système d’unités corrélées; le fait que les noms paraissent traditionnels et que l’on invoque la sanction religieuse ne doit pas masquer la nature radicale de cette expérience de restructuration du corps civique tout entier»9. Le débat est donc loin d’être tranché et sans doute doit-il être abordé de façon différente10. Il sera ici discuté à l’aune des pratiques documentaires qui constituent assurément une perspective intéressante. D’abord, leur étude permet d’envisager une autorité collective durable et complexe sans bureaucratie professionnelle, sans fonctionnaires. Il ne saurait donc être question de s’en tenir à Max Weber sur ce point. Ensuite, l’insistance sur le fonctionnement concret de la polis interroge à nouveaux frais le degré de conscience des citoyens, en particulier lorsqu’il s’agissait de mettre en place de nouvelles institutions ou d’élaborer de grandes réformes. En raison des sources dont nous disposons, en raison également de la superficie de son territoire, Athènes paraît toute indiquée pour poser la question du degré de rationalité de l’organisation institutionnelle d’une cité. Avant de décrire dans quelle mesure les pratiques documentaires athéniennes permettent une interaction entre les institutions centrales, Boulè notamment, et les associations, en particulier les dèmes, il est cependant nécessaire de rappeler que la démocratie n’est pas le produit de l’écriture.

1. Le discours politique athénien associe-t-il l’écriture et la démocratie? La question mérite d’être posée tant les historiens ont eu tendance soit à considérer cette association comme un fait, par anachronisme incontrôlé, soit au contraire à réduire le recours à l’écriture comme une pratique de pouvoir, l’exercice d’une domination11. Cette dernière thèse fut celle, en son temps, de Claude Lévi-Strauss dans ses Tristes Tropiques12. Pour l’Antiquité, plusieurs travaux d’historiens ont repris à leur compte cette réflexion13. Deborah Steiner insiste sur le fait que l’écri-

9

Murray 1992, 27.

10 La réflexion de Cornelius Castoriadis, largement méconnue par la grande majorité des historiens, évite de nombreuses chausses-trappes épistémologiques (cf. Pébarthe 2012). 11 Cf. notamment Harvey 1966. 12 Chapitre 28: «Leçon d’écriture». 13 Steiner 1994, 242-251 analyse le rapport à l’écriture de Rousseau (Sur l’origine des langues et Le contrat social) et cherche des similitudes avec les Anciens. Les travaux de R. Thomas ont pris en considération cette association entre pouvoir et écriture sans toutefois intégrer les inscriptions. «Writing is perhaps most immediately connected with power in relation to

les archives de la cité de raison...

109

ture distingue les Grecs des Barbares, les démocrates des tyrans, ceux qui parlent de ceux qui écrivent14. Elle analyse l’œuvre d’Eschyle, Les Suppliantes, dans cette perspective. L’affichage des décisions populaires est opposé au rouleau de papyrus scellé, deux types d’écriture sont distingués15. La tablette écrite affichée est également pensée comme le résultat d’une parole libre. À l’origine de la décision, il y a une prise de parole que retranscrit la notice. «In a democracy […], speech is the primary means of conducting business»16. Cela s’oppose presque terme à terme avec la réalité orientale décrite par Hérodote. Par exemple, après chaque conquête, Sésostris faisait inscrire un pilier avec son nom, celui de son pays et le fait qu’il ait conquis cette terre par la force. Pour les peuples les plus couards, il fait ajouter une représentation d’organes génitaux féminins17. Par l’inscription, les monarques orientaux commémorent, mais aussi affirment, leur droit de conquête, leur possession. L’écriture sert à borner un territoire, à l’aide de horoi qui proclament l’asservissement des populations18. Pour autant, dans l’Athènes pré-solonienne, de telles bornes ont existé pour rendre publique la dépendance de certains paysans. La période tyrannique permet-elle une identique association entre écriture et pouvoir? La tyrannie des Pisistratides a semble-t-il engendré très peu de documents officiels. Selon la Constitution des Athéniens, Pisistrate se serait fait accorder un corps de gardes par l’assemblée19. Inscription ou tradition orale? Aucune source ne permet d’affirmer l’existence d’une publication des décisions prises par les Pisistratides. S’ils ont recouru à un tel affichage, il est concevable qu’ils aient lié leurs inscriptions avec les bâtiments qu’ils faisaient par ailleurs construire. Cependant, des documents épigraphiques de cette époque, c. 550, ont été retrouvés qui, sans être des décrets, sont bien des écritures publiques20. Ils concernent l’organisation des Panathénées. À ce titre, ils donnent le titre et le nom des magistrats. Ils sont une trace de l’administration de la cité à l’époque archaïque. Peut-on alors accepter que les documents épigraphiques évoqués ici ne constituent pas une mani-

the state and its records: one thinks, for example, of the state lists of citizens (…) or records of taxes» (Thomas 1994, 33). Toutefois, selon elle, cela ne concernerait pas directement la Grèce ancienne. «Records, if kept at all, tended to be slight, disorganised and in any case largely uncentralised» (Ibid., 34). Sans doute a-t-elle à l’esprit, l’utilisation des archives dans les monarchies orientales telle qu’elle apparaît dans le témoignage d’Hérodote (Steiner 1994, 142-149). 14 Cf. Steiner 1994, 127-185, particulièrement p. 166-174. 15 Cf. Steiner 1994, 168. 16 Steiner 1994, 169. 17 Voir Hdt. 2.102-106 et Diod. 1.55.7, avec le commentaire de Steiner 1994, 128-129. 18 Dans l’Athènes pré-solonienne, il semble bien que de telles bornes aient existé pour rendre publique la dépendance de certains paysans. Cela montre bien qu’il est réducteur de vouloir associer mécaniquement l’écriture à un effet social donné. 19 Arist., Ath. Pol., 14.1. 20 IG I3, 507-509 avec le commentaire de Stroud 1978, 28.

110

festation publique d’archives? L’entreprise de mise par écrit du droit entreprise par Solon et auparavant par Dracon, la conservation d’archives judiciaires par les thesmothètes inviteraient plutôt à répondre par la négative. Un type particulier d’inscriptions et de support est attesté pour l’Athènes des Pisistratides, des statues d’Hermès implantées dans toute l’Attique21. Celles-ci sont connues des lexicographes comme Hésychios et Harpocration. Toutefois, la source la plus ancienne et la plus complète sur ces Hermès, l’Hipparque, un dialogue apocryphe de Platon, date du IVème siècle22. Parmi les mérites du fils de Pisistrate, Socrate cite la volonté éducative, à l’aide d’hermès installés dans l’ensemble de l’Attique qui portaient des maximes delphiques: Il forma le projet de faire alors l’éducation des campagnards. Dans ce but, il fit dresser pour eux des hermès sur les routes entre la ville et les différents dèmes; puis, dans le trésor de ses propres connaissances, celles qu’il avait apprises et celles qu’il avait découvertes, choisissant les pensées qu’il jugeait les plus sages, il les mit lui-même en vers élégiaques et fit graver ses poèmes comme documents de sa sagesse; ainsi, tout d’abord, ses concitoyens n’auraient plus à admirer les sages inscriptions du temple de Delphes, comme ‘Connais-toi toi-même’, ‘Pas d’excès’ et d’autres de ce genre, mais ils estimeraient plus sages les préceptes d’Hipparque; de plus, dans leurs allées et venues, lisant ses maximes de sagesse et y prenant goût, ils multiplieraient leurs visites afin de compléter leur instruction. Il y avait deux inscriptions: sur celle du côté gauche de chaque hermès, une inscription fait dire à Hermès qu’il est situé entre la ville et le dème; sur celle du côté droit, il proclame: ‘Ceci est un monument d’Hipparque: marche dans des sentiments de justice’23.

Trois finalités distinctes apparaissent pour ces inscriptions: éduquer les paysans de l’Attique, transmettre un goût de la sagesse et une volonté d’améliorer cette dernière et louer la sagesse d’Hipparque en lieu et place de celle de Delphes. Le recours à l’écrit s’avérait indispensable pour une entreprise d’une telle ampleur. Nous possédons une borne qui daterait de cette époque, ce qui invaliderait la thèse des historiens qui mettent en question la véracité de cet extrait de l’Hipparque24.

21 Cf. Harrison 1965, 108-117, particulièrement 113-114; Lewis 1988, 292 et 293 fig. 29; Shapiro 1989, 125-132, en particulier p. 125-126, et Parker 1996, 80-83. 22 Plat., Hipp., 228b-229d. Arist., Ath. Pol., 18.1 donne des indications complémentaires. Rogue 2001, 245-249 a défendu le premier tiers du IVe s. comme date de ce dialogue apocryphe. L’Hipparque a souvent été vu comme un dialogue sans portée historique, par exemple Schnapp-Gourbeillon 1988. Mais sur le point qui nous intéresse à présent, les hermès, il convient de ne pas négliger ce témoignage. 23 Plat., Hipp., 228d-229a (traduction CUF). Sur la véracité de cette anecdote, cf. Jensen 1980. 24 IG I3, 1023: «À mi-distance entre Képhalè et la ville, le splendide Hermès». Cf. Shapiro 1989, 125-132; Lewis 1988, 292 et 293 fig. 29. La datation retenue, 525-514, procède d’une association directe entre ce document et les décisions prises par Hipparque telle que le texte du dialogue platonicien l’indique. Il convient donc d’adopter la plus grande prudence à son sujet.

les archives de la cité de raison...

111

D’autres documents sont associés à la tyrannie des Pisistratides. Hérodote mentionne une collection d’oracles sur l’Acropole. Leur origine n’est pas connue avec certitude. Oracles de la Pythie, prédiction d’Athéna? Quoi qu’il en soit, l’oracle écrit fondait le pouvoir du tyran. Une fonction analogue peut être prêtée aux poèmes homériques. Ceux-ci auraient été mis par écrit, par Pisistrate ou par l’un de ses fils, Hipparque: Entre autres preuves nombreuses et remarquables de sagesse, il introduisit le premier dans ce pays les poèmes d’Homère et obligea les rhapsodes à les réciter aux Panathénées, les uns après les autres sans interruption, ce qu’ils font encore aujourd’hui25.

Le texte ainsi établi devait être conservé afin d’être récité, ce qui faisait de ce document conservé la version officielle des poèmes homériques. Il est tentant d’associer cette édition et la réforme des Panathénées, du moins la fête en ellemême devenue un concours athlétique panhellénique. Dans ce cadre, la récitation de la version de référence des poèmes homériques prend tout son sens26. Elle était un signe indéniable de puissance. Les tyrans maîtrisaient la tradition et pouvaient surtout l’invoquer avec précision lors de contestations politiques. D’une certaine manière, ils apposaient leur sceau sur les poèmes homériques. À l’instar de Théognis de Mégare, ils scellaient un texte, c’est-à-dire un contenu et non l’identité d’un auteur27. Il est ainsi difficile de parler de tyrannie de l’écriture pour l’Athènes archaïque, même s’il y a un usage spécifique au tyran de l’écriture, une écriture des tyrans. De même, il n’est pas possible de relier l’avènement de la démocratie à la croissance de l’alphabétisation28. À Athènes, celle-ci est manifestement antérieure. Dès l’époque de Clisthène, avant donc la période démocratique stricto sensu, la pratique de l’écriture doit être considérée comme majoritaire dans le groupe des adultes libres mâles. La réforme censitaire de Solon impliquait sans doute déjà un recours, même faible à l’écriture, donc une alphabétisation minimale. Diodore fait mention d’une loi solonienne qui, à l’imitation d’une disposition égyptienne, exigerait des citoyens une déclaration écrite de leur fortune, le verbe utilisé est apographesthai:

25 Plat., Hipp., 228b (traduction CUF); voir aussi Ael., V.H., 8.2. Par cette citation tronquée, nous n’échappons pas à la critique faite par Schnapp-Gourbeillon 1988, 806-807 qui considère que si l’extrait concernant les poèmes homériques est souvent commenté, le reste est le plus souvent laissé de côté. On ne cherche pas à donner un sens à l’ensemble. Les historiens ne courentils pas alors le risque de négliger le contexte général? L’historienne le pense et préfère analyser le passage dans sa globalité comme «une fable certes, qui illustre une conception du Sage Autocrate, mais aussi comme un ensemble articulé sur la fonction de la poésie dans la cité, où Homère joue alors un rôle prépondérant, mais non unique» (p. 807). 26 Cf. Aloni 1997, 171-174. 27 Sur le sceau de Théognis et le parallèle avec la politique culturelle d’Hipparque, cf. Ford 1985. 28 Cf. Pébarthe 2006.

112

Il était enjoint à tout Égyptien de déposer auprès des magistrats une déclaration écrite sur les sources de ses revenus, et quiconque faisait une fausse déclaration à ce sujet ou se procurait des gains illicites devait être condamné à mort. On dit que cette loi fut apportée à Athènes par Solon à la suite de son voyage en Égypte29.

Il semble s’inspirer d’Hérodote: C’est Amasis qui imposa cette loi aux Égyptiens: que tout Égyptien, chaque année, fît connaître au nomarque ses moyens d’existence; que quiconque ne le ferait pas et ne justifierait pas de ressources honnêtes serait puni de mort. Solon d’Athènes a pris cette loi en Égypte pour l’établir chez les Athéniens; et ceux-ci l’observent à tout jamais, comme une loi parfaite30.

L’historien d’Halicarnasse utilise deux verbes, apophanein et apodeiknynai, qui n’impliquent pas nécessairement le recours à l’écrit31. Une déclaration orale devant un magistrat compétent serait donc une autre possibilité que l’écriture. À partir du moment où la pratique de l’écriture est répandue au VIème siècle, il paraît difficile de s'en tenir à la stricte oralité. Dès avant Clisthène donc, la réalisation de listes à finalité censitaire paraît hautement probable. Si l'on se tourne vers les discours athéniens anciens à présent, l'association entre écriture et démocratie n'est pas évidente non plus. Les sources ne mentionnent ainsi jamais l'accès libre et direct à l’information. Elles évoquent en revanche le droit écrit qui constituerait une garantie contre l'arbitraire. Lorsque Thésée compare la démocratie et la tyrannie dans son dialogue avec le héraut de Thèbes, il affirme: Pour un peuple il n’est rien de pire qu’un tyran. Sous ce régime, pas de lois faites pour tous. Un seul homme gouverne, et la loi, c’est sa chose. Donc, plus d’égalité, tandis que sous l’empire de lois écrites, pauvres et riches ont mêmes droits32.

Mais le même personnage rappelle: Quant à la liberté, elle est dans ces paroles: ‘Qui veut, qui peut donner un avis sage à sa patrie?’ Lors, à son gré, chacun peut briller… ou se taire. Peut-on imaginer plus belle égalité?33.

L’oralité serait-elle donc démocratique?

29 Diod. 1.77.5 (traduction CUF). 30 Hdt. 2.177 (trad. CUF). 31 Sickinger 1999, 35. Il en conclut qu’il n’est pas possible d’analyser ces deux passages. 32 Eur., Suppl., 429-434 (traduction CUF). De même, Cléon défend la fixité des lois (Thuc. 3.37). 33 Eur., Suppl., 438-441 (traduction CUF).

les archives de la cité de raison...

113

C’est alors Platon qui intervient pour apporter de la complexité à ce débat. Il oppose en effet dans le Politique la loi (nomos) comme droit écrit, à la parole vivante, la rigidité à l’évolution: La loi ne pourrait jamais embrasser avec exactitude ce qui est le meilleur et le plus juste pour tous au même instant, et prescrire ainsi ce qui est le mieux. Car les dissimilitudes sont telles entre les hommes et entre les actions, sans compter que presque jamais aucune des affaires humaines ne demeure pour ainsi dire en repos, que cela interdit à toute technique de prendre un parti simple qui vaudrait, en quelque domaine que ce soit, pour tous les cas et pour toujours34.

L’exposition de cette limite intrinsèque de la loi n’est évidemment pas destinée à valoriser le débat au sein d’une assemblée: Il est bien clair que, d’une certaine façon, la législation relève de la fonction royale. Mais ce qui vaut le mieux, ce n’est pas que les lois prévalent, mais que prévale le roi qui est un homme réfléchi35.

Autrement dit, pour Platon, l’écriture n’est qu’un pis-aller, permettant d’éviter les errements démocratiques. En l’absence d’un citoyen politique (aner politikos), c’est-à-dire d’un citoyen royal, la rigidité des lois écrites, dont la rédaction doit être confiée à des individus possédant l’epistemè politique, garantit à la cité une certaine stabilité36. L’oralité n’est valorisée que pour le basileus, qui peut, par son savoir, s’affranchir des lois, lorsque bon lui semble. Néanmoins, il convient de ne pas accorder une importance trop grande à la pensée platonicienne car comme le souligne Cornelius Castoriadis, «Platon a joué un rôle tout à fait considérable dans ce qu’on peut appeler la destruction du monde grec»37. Il faut donc abandonner toute relation univoque entre l’écriture et la nature du régime politique d’une cité. Le questionnement se déplace alors et porte sur le rôle des pratiques documentaires dans l’organisation de la cité athénienne, plus précisément dans la relation entre le centre (assemblée, conseil, magistrats) et les multiples périphéries (dèmes, phratries…). Dans la perspective de l’éventuelle mise au jour d’un processus de rationalisation institutionnelle, il convient d’analyser à présent le moment clisthénien en gardant à l’esprit la distinction sur laquelle Pierre Bourdieu a attiré l’attention, entre la logique pratique et la logique logique. Il privilégie la première car la seconde amène à appliquer un raisonnement extérieur à l’objet étudié. «Les logiques pratiques – des institutions, des pratiques humaines – doivent être constituées dans leur spécificité, une des erreurs

34 Plat., Pol., 294a-b (trad. Brisson et Pradeau). 35 Plat., Pol., 294a (trad. Brisson et Pradeau). 36 Nous faisons le choix ici de traduire aner politikos par citoyen politique. L’expression «homme politique» est assurément source d’erreurs, tant elle suggère un groupe, celui des professionnels de la politique, alors que Platon pose une question anthropologique. 37 Castoriadis 1999, 21.

114

scientifiques majeures dans les sciences historiques consiste à être plus rigoureux que l’objet, à mettre plus de rigueur dans le discours sur l’objet qu’il n’y en a dans l’objet, de manière à être en règle avec les exigences de rigueur qui sont de mise, non pas dans l’objet, mais dans le champ de production de discours sur l’objet»38.

2. À l’aune du chapitre 42 de l’Athenaion Politeia, permanence et centralité dominent la citoyenneté athénienne. Dèmes et phratries ne sont alors envisagés que comme des subdivisions civiques, et ce, dès Clisthène, sans évolution. Ce dernier apparaît alors comme un créateur dont les historiens prétendent mesurer le degré d’innovation – et partant de là, le degré de rationalité – en recourant à une approche dialectique, entre rupture et continuité. Selon Paulin Ismard, «[la réforme de Clisthène] organisait la hiérarchisation et l’articulation d’une série de communautés invitées à intégrer une architecture civique renouvelée»39. Ce point est d’autant plus important que la citoyenneté continue de reposer sur cette organisation communautaire jusqu’à la loi de Périclès (451/0). Le même historien qualifie alors la cité de corporatiste, «si on comprend par là que les instruments juridiques de contrôle de la citoyenneté par les instances centrales de la cité sont inexistants»40. Il n’y aurait donc pas de rupture à la fin du VIème siècle, les communautés anciennes ne céderaient pas leur place à une politeia rationnelle. Le processus de contrôle civique des associations serait progressif. L’octroi de la citoyenneté serait donc de la seule responsabilité des phratries et des dèmes. L’examen des pratiques documentaires amène toutefois à nuancer cette approche. À la fin de la tyrannie, en 510, un diapsêphismos fut organisé pour rayer tous ceux qui n’auraient pas dû être citoyens. L’Athenaion Politeia (13.5) rapporte que Pisistrate fut soutenu par des personnes appauvries par la perte de leurs créances et par des personnes dont la naissance n’était pas pure. Selon Paulin Ismard, la procédure a recouru à des listes communautaires41. Le vocabulaire utilisé serait anachronique, c’est-à-dire que l’auteur aurait plaqué sur des événements de la fin du VIème siècle la procédure de la révision des listes qu'il connaissait pour le IVème siècle42. Il est toutefois possible de tirer de cette remarque une autre conséquence. La motivation «parce que beaucoup jouissaient indûment de la politeia» est également anachronique. Elle fait référence à l’esprit des révisions des listes, la

38 Bourdieu 2012, 148. 39 Ismard 2010, 119. 40 Ismard 2010, 119-120. 41 Ismard 2010, 81-83. 42 Ismard 2010, 82 n. 180.

les archives de la cité de raison...

115

vérification que ne bénéficient des privilèges afférants à la citoyenneté que ceux qui sont citoyens43. En 510, il ne s’agit évidemment pas d’aller rechercher ceux qui, depuis plusieurs dizaines d’années, en l’occurrence leurs enfants ou descendants, vivaient comme des citoyens. Ainsi, il n’y a pas révision mais établissement d'une liste de citoyens, au moment où une nouvelle définition de la citoyenneté était établie44. Dès lors, le recours ou non à des listes associatives n’est pas la question principale. Comment un tel recensement a-t-il pu être organisé? Il n’est pas possible de répondre à cette question. Toutefois, ce premier recensement, qui est une prise de position institutionnelle, due à Isagoras et à son groupe, permet de comprendre la réaction de Clisthène, une fois parvenu à prendre le contrôle de la situation45. Quelles que fussent ses motivations, il proposa une nouvelle définition du corps civique, en prenant appui, d’une manière ou d’une autre, sur les Athéniens qui avaient assiégé l’Acropole sur laquelle Cléomène, Isagoras et leurs partisans s’étaient réfugiés46. Il est alors possible de proposer la reconstruction suivante47. Il fallait d’abord établir la liste des dèmes, puis la procédure d’enregistrement en leur sein. Les démarques dont l’existence est attestée en 508/7 paraissent tout désignés pour la mise en œuvre pratique de cette réforme48. Le rassemblement des noms contenus dans les différentes listes était enfin possible par le biais du Conseil, qui comportait au moins un membre de chaque dème en son sein49. Un document ad hoc fut-il créé à ce moment-là? Le registre de dème (lêxiarchikon grammateion) apparaît dans les sources au cours de la deuxième moitié du Vème siècle50. La première attestation figure dans un décret instaurant une taxe sur un misthos perçu par des hommes inscrits dans le registre. Parmi les hypothèses sur l’origine de ce document, l’une met l’accent sur l’étymologie. Ce document aurait reçu ce nom en raison de la lêxis, le patri-

43 Cf. Pébarthe 2006, 193-196. Le cas de la distribution du blé donné par Psammétique en 445/4 est de ce point de vue significatif. 44 Cf. Pébarthe 2006, 182. 45 Rappelons que peu après la chute d’Hippias, Isagoras aidé de Cléomène fait expulser sept cents epistia athéniens, souillés (Hdt. 5.72.1). 46 Hdt. 5.72-73. 47 Cf. déjà Pébarthe 2006, 182. 48 Arist., Ath. Pol., 21.5. 49 Nous reviendrons ailleurs sur l’analyse que propose Ismard 2010, 84-121 de la réforme de Clisthène. Disons simplement ici que nous ne partageons pas son modèle d’auto-organisation, à savoir le fait que «les différentes communautés de l’Attique archaïque sont certainement les propres acteurs d’une réforme qui n’a fait qu’intégrer dans une architecture administrative commune des groupes qui avaient souvent une existence très ancienne» (Ismard 2010, 119). Pour autant, il ne saurait être question de lui opposer «l’instauration d’une centralité civique» (p. 120). Cette alternative ne permet tout simplement pas de comprendre cette réforme. Les lecteurs de Cornelius Castoriadis y verront les conséquences d’une lecture qui en reste à la seule dimension ensembliste-identitaire (pour une première approche, cf. Pébarthe 2012). 50 IG I3, 138.

116

moine. N’y seraient inscrits dès lors que ceux qui disposaient d’une fortune minimale. D’autres préfèrent évoquer le lêxiarchos, un magistrat chargé de vérifier la qualité des participants de l’assemblée. Ces deux options ne sont pas irréconciliables du reste. La nature censitaire de la politeia impliquait un recensement régulier des fortunes. Il n’y a pas de raison a priori de considérer que les thètes n’étaient pas inscrits. Avec la mise en place de l’armée civique, celle qui combat victorieusement à Marathon, un recensement paraît essentiel. Le dème apparaît alors comme l’échelon institutionnel pertinent, dans une cité sans administration et sans fonctionnaires, pour mener à bien cette procédure et pour en transmettre le résultat aux institutions centrales. L’articulation entre les dèmes et la Boulè est vraisemblablement un élément déterminant pour en comprendre les ressorts pratiques. Dès avant 451 donc, l’octroi de la citoyenneté est l’affaire du centre51. Si la loi de Périclès donnait aux phratries la responsabilité de l’établissement de la filiation, l’inscription dans le dème demeurait indispensable52. Elle n’est pas déléguée sans contrôle aux associations. Il serait naturellement erroné de déduire une rationalisation de ce recours à l’écriture, puisqu’il manifeste au contraire une rationalité organisationnelle en acte53. Celle-ci est mieux connue pour le IVème siècle, notamment grâce aux plaidoyers attiques qui rapportent plusieurs tentatives de fraude dans les inscriptions dans les registres54. Deux registres apparaissent décisifs, le registre de dème et le registre de phratrie. Ce dernier est mentionné dans le Contre Léocharès: N’ayant pu obtenir d’être inscrit lui-même, il institue son fils au mépris des lois, comme fils adoptif d’Archiadès, avant que le dème eût procédé à l’examen; il ne l’avait pas introduit dans la phratrie d’Archiadès: c’est seulement après qu’il eût été inscrit au dème que, de connivence avec un des phratères, il le fit inscrire au registre de la phratrie55.

La procédure d’inscription est décrite longuement dans un discours d’Isée: Ces associations [génè et phratries] ont une règle uniforme: quand un homme leur présente un enfant né de lui ou adopté par lui, il doit jurer, en posant la main sur les victimes, que l’enfant présenté est né d’une citoyenne, mariée légitimement, aussi bien s’il s’agit de son propre enfant que d’un enfant adopté. Quand le père a prêté ce serment, les autres membres n’en procèdent pas moins à un vote; si la décision est favorable, on inscrit l’enfant sur le registre de la communauté, mais jamais avant le vote. Telles sont les formalités minutieuses qu’imposent les statuts de ces confréries.

51 Contra Ismard 2010, 122-128 sur la loi de Périclès (451/0). 52 Ismard 2010, 125. 53 Castoriadis ne pense pas que la cité est première, c’est-à-dire qu’elle précède la raison («fille de la cité», pour Vernant). «La constitution de la communauté politique est déjà de la philosophie en acte» (Castoriadis 2004, 59). 54 Cf. Pébarthe 2006, 203-206. 55 Dém. 44.41.

les archives de la cité de raison...

117

Or, tel étant le règlement, les membres de la phratrie et du génos, parce qu’ils avaient toute confiance en Apollodôros et qu’ils me connaissaient comme fils de sa sœur, m’inscrivirent sur le registre après un vote unanime et après le serment prêté par Apollodôros sur les victimes. C’est ainsi que, de son vivant, j’ai été adopté par lui et inscrit au registre de la communauté sous le nom de Thrasyllos, fils d’Apollodôros, lequel Apollodôros m’a adopté selon cette voie, comme les lois l’y autorisaient56.

L’hésitation concernant le registre, celui du genos ou celui de la phratrie, importe peu ici. Le caractère décisif de l’inscription dans un document est significatif. Du reste, le même Thrasyllos, après avoir pris un nouveau patronyme témoignant de son adoption (première inscription), tente de se faire inscrire dans le registre de dème dans lequel son père adoptif figure: Avant mon retour des fêtes de la Pythaïde, Apollodôros déclara aux gens du dème qu’il m’avait adopté et fait inscrire dans le génos et la phratrie, qu’il m’instituait son héritier et il leur recommanda, s’il lui arrivait auparavant malheur, de m’inscrire dans le registre du dème sous le nom de Thrasyllos, fils d’Apollodôros, et de n’y point manquer57.

Mais il est ici simplement question du dème ou de la phratrie. Quel rôle jouait les institutions centrales? Ces documents n’avaient-ils qu’une réalité locale? En raison de la conscription, de la fiscalité (eisphora) ou bien encore plus simplement de la participation à l’assemblée, le démarque, responsable de l’inscription dans le registre et responsable du registre lui-même, doit être considéré comme un agent des institutions centrales de la cité58. Le Contre Léocharès permet de décrire avec précision l’importance du lêxiarchikon grammateion. Le plaideur, Aristodèmos, dispute à Léocharès la succession d’Archiadès. Ce dernier, décédé sans enfant, a donné par adoption ses biens à Léocratès (I) qui les a transmis à son fils Léostratos qui, de son vivant, fait de même avec son enfant Léocratès (II). Celui-ci meurt sans enfant et la succession échoue à Léocharès, son frère. Dans l’épisode qui nous intéresse, Léocratès (I) tente à tout prix d’être démote à Otrynè ce qui lui permettrait de revendiquer à bon droit et au titre de l’adoption les biens d’Archiadès inscrit dans ce même dème: D’abord, s’étant présenté au dème d’Otrynè, il se disposait à se faire inscrire sur le tableau des membres de l’assemblée, lui qui était du dème d’Éleusis; puis, avant même son inscription sur le registre des démotes, à participer aux affaires du dème59.

Si Léocharès tente de se faire inscrire sur le pinax ecclêsiastikos, c’est parce que le registre de dème n’est pas encore ouvert. Il entend donc vivre comme un démote

56 Is., Apol., 7.16-17 (trad. CUF). 57 Is., Apol., 7.27 (trad. CUF). 58 Nous avons déjà développé ce point dans Pébarthe 2006, en particulier p. 206-222. 59 Dém., Leo., 44.35 (trad. CUF modifiée).

118

afin que son inscription, le moment venu, relève de l’évidence60. L’ouverture a lieu au moment des Grandes Panathénées, sans doute en présence de très nombreux démotes attestant ainsi la régularité de l’inscription et plus généralement la véracité des informations contenues dans le registre. À cette occasion, grâce à sa liste, le démarque vérifiait l’identité de ceux qui allaient percevoir le théorique (que Léocharès tente de toucher), ce qui constituerait une preuve effective de son adoption. Ensuite, il faut garder à l’esprit l’organisation des Panathénées au cours desquelles les participants se rendaient au Céramique pour le début de la grande procession par dème à la tête duquel se trouvait le démarque. Un complément d’informations peut être trouvé dans un décret de 335/4-330/29 qui réglemente les fêtes annuelles, les Petites Panathénées61. Les hieropoioi sont chargés de répartir la viande provenant du sacrifice ‘aux Athéniens dans le Céramique, comme dans les autres distributions de viande’ , et de ‘répartir les parts pour chaque dème en proportion du nombre de leurs participants à la procession’62. Cela signifie que chaque dème détermine le nombre des participants et que les démarques ont la charge de répartir la viande entre chaque individu. «The demarchs’ diakosmesis was doubtless necessary not only for the ordering of the procession but also to assist the hieropoioi in identifying by deme those who were to be allotted their meat»63. À cette occasion également, était versé le theorikon64. Dès lors, le passage du Contre Léocharès prend tout son sens65. L’ouverture du registre lors des Grandes Panathénées — ou des Petites — se faisait parce qu’une fois la liste originale révisée, le démarque distribuait le théorique et s’assurait du droit de chacun à la perception de la viande66. Par ses archives, il veillait donc à ce que la cité ne versât pas indûment une indemnité qui rendait effective la citoyenneté et plus important encore, il était le garant du droit des citoyens à partager le sacrifice et par là il assurait la cohésion civique. La procédure décrite met en évidence l’importance du registre et le rôle déterminant du démarque. Pour autant, l’articulation avec les institutions centrales peine à apparaître, sinon sous forme de déduction logique. L’étude de la réforme

60 On peut évoquer comme parallèle «l’anoblissement taisible», bien connu des historiens de la France moderne. 61 Rhodes & Osborne, n° 81. 62 Rhodes & Osborne, n° 81, l. 24-27: ne]movntwn ta; kreva tw`i dhvmwi tw`i jAqhnaivwn ejn [Kerameikw`]i kaqavper ejn tai`~ a[llai~ kreanomivai~: ajp[onevmein de;] ta;~ merivda~ eij~ to;n dh`mon e{kaston kata; [tou;~ pevmpon]ta~ oJpovsou~ a]n parevchi oJ dh`mo~ e{kasto~. 63 Whitehead 1986, 137. 64 Pélékidis 1962, 90-91 et Faraguna 1997, 15. 65 Dém., Leo., 44.37. 66 Cette idée de l’ouverture se retrouve dans Is., Apol., 7.27 lorsqu’Apollodôros fait savoir aux démotes son intention de leur présenter Thrasyllos comme son fils adoptif et de le faire inscrire. Cette question est traitée au moment de l’assemblée électorale du dème, c’est-à-dire au début de l’année civique.

les archives de la cité de raison...

119

fiscale de 378/7, corrélée avec celle de la réforme de Périandre (358/7), permet de saisir la place décisive qu’occupaient les documents provenant des dèmes dans le fonctionnement quasi quotidien de la cité. Une bonne partie du débat se concentre autour d’un extrait du Contre Polyclès dans lequel une procédure semble-t-il particulière est décrite pour 362: Vous aviez décidé que, pour chaque dème, les démarques et les bouleutes dresseraient la liste des démotes propriétaires et des citoyens soumis à l’enktètikon qui seraient appelés à payer d’avance pour les autres: je fus inscrit dans trois dèmes car ma fortune est bien visible67.

Trois éléments introduisent une différence avec le déroulement habituel du prélèvement de l’eisphora68. Les Trois Cents n’apparaissent pas et la désignation des proeispherontes ne semble survenir qu’au moment de l’eisphora69. L’orateur semble indiquer qu’en temps normal les dèmes jouaient un rôle dans la perception de cette taxe. Aucune mention de deux autres proeispherontes qui auraient versé une partie de la somme avec Apollodôros n’est faite. S’agit-il pour autant d’une procédure exceptionnelle? Observons d’emblée que le système décrit évoque très directement la procédure utilisée pour la conscription, en particulier l’association entre le démarque et les bouleutes. Une différence non négligeable réside néanmoins dans l’association de trois dèmes. Le déroulement semble avoir été le suivant. Une déclaration et/ou une estimation est faite à l’échelle des dèmes. Puis une centralisation permet de recouper les informations ainsi obtenues. Un passage de Démosthène laisse en effet deviner une déclaration faite par ses tuteurs en vue de l’eisphora, eij~ to; dhmovsion ejtimhvsasqe70. L’expression eis to demosion ne doit vraisemblablement pas être entendue ici comme l’enregistrement dans les archives civiques mais comme une déclaration faite devant le démarque. Bien entendu, tous les biens devaient être déclarés, ce qui implique que les démarches pouvaient concerner plusieurs dèmes. L’hypothèse d’un cadastre est en outre à prendre en considération71. Selon les lexicographes, les démarques faisaient du reste des apographai des propriétés dans leurs dèmes72. La centralisation serait le fait des démotes-bouleutes. Il n’en demeure pas moins qu’aucune référence n’est faite aux proeispherontes dans le Contre Polyclès, ce qui constitue l’argument principal de ceux qui refusent

67 Dém., Pol., 50.8 (trad. CUF modifiée). 68 Wallace 1989, p. 474. 69 De nombreux commentaires ont été faits à propos de l’absence des Trois Cents (cf. Brun 1983, 36 n.3). 70 Dém., C. Aphob. II, 28.8; cf. 11. 71 Faraguna 1997. 72 Dans la Souda comme dans Harpocration, s.v. dhvmarco~; scholie à un vers d’Aristophane (Nuées, 37).

120

d’y lire la description de la procédure habituelle. La thèse de Wallace est simple, «the proeispherontes were never a standing college but were always newly constituted at the time when an eisphora was required»73. Du reste, il était normal de mettre en place un système qui tenait compte des changements qui pouvaient intervenir dans les fortunes, dans un sens comme dans l’autre74. La mort également rendait caduque les listes permanentes75. À chaque eisphora, il fallait intégrer les exemptions qui avaient pu être obtenues entre temps. Enfin, le volontariat ne doit pas être négligé. Mais alors, quand la révision avait-elle lieu? Une procédure annuelle serait d’un intérêt limité, notamment avant 347, période au cours de laquelle il y eut moins d’une année sur deux avec eisphora. Il faut donc envisager une déclaration individuelle, sur le mode de celle qui est décrite par Démosthène. Une intervention des démarques, sur la base de leurs informations cadastrales, n’est de plus pas à exclure. En dépit du silence relatif des sources, il est intéressant de rappeler comment ces informations locales, et les documents qui les conservent, participent d’une organisation centrale. La réforme de 378/7 est en effet précédée d’un recensement des fortunes athéniennes, dont le résultat est mentionné par Polybe, 5 760 talents. C’est à partir de cette opération que les symmories sont constituées. Deux fragments d’Atthidographes nous renseignent à leur sujet. Le premier est de Philochoros (fin IVème siècle – début IIIème siècle): Les Athéniens furent pour la première fois divisés en symmories sous l'archontat de Nausinikos, comme le rapporte Philochoros dans le cinquième livre de son Atthis76.

Le deuxième est rédigé par Kleidémos (milieu IVème siècle): Kleidémos rapporte dans son troisième livre que lorsque Clisthène institua les dix tribus à la place des quatre qui existaient auparavant, ils [les Athéniens] furent aussi divisés en cinquante groupes qu'ils appelèrent naucraries, de même que les cent groupes entre lesquels ils sont actuellement divisés sont appelés symmories77.

Les symmories apparaîtraient donc en 378/7 et seraient au nombre de cent78. La

73 Wallace 1989, 479. Dém., Phen., 42.3 et 32 montre simplement qu’un homme riche ayant déjà appartenu aux Trois-Cents est de nouveau intégré dans ce groupe, ce qui n’a rien de surprenant. De même, un autre passage de Démosthène (Dém., Cour., 18.103) qui évoque la continuité au sein du groupe, s’explique par le petit nombre d’Athéniens capables d’avancer les eisphorai n’entre pas en contradiction avec le fait que les Trois-Cents sont désignés à chaque levée. Voir Is., Philok., 6.60. 74 Cf. par exemple Lys., Diog., 32.25 qui cite un bénéfice de 2 talents sur une seule expédition maritime. 75 Plat., Lois, 785a-b envisage un système de correction permanente. 76 FGrHist 328 F 41. Trad. Mossé 1979, 32. 77 FGrHist 323 F 8. Trad. Mossé 1979, 32. 78 Ce point a fait l’objet d’importantes discussions.

les archives de la cité de raison...

121

cité pouvait alors exiger le versement des eisphorai en tenant compte du revenu des contribuables. À l’intérieur de chaque symmorie, un des membres était désigné diagrapheus79. Il avait pour charge de répartir entre les différents membres de la symmorie la charge financière relative à l’eisphora, en fonction de leur timêma respectif qu’il devait également contrôler, sinon estimer. Pour Matthew Christ, «if the symmories of 378/7 provided for the first time a mechanism for eliciting and checking timhvmata and for allocating tax burdens on this basis, this would have been more than sufficient justification for their establishment»80. À cette date donc, les Athéniens ont établi un recensement généralisé des fortunes, à partir duquel ils établirent une liste de contribuables répartis en symmories pour payer l’eisphora. Sans les dèmes et les registres que les démarques tenaient à jour, une telle opération eut été impossible. L’esprit de cette réforme se comprend mieux encore en regardant la loi triérarchique de Périandre de 357. Ce dernier avait introduit deux modifications principales, une liste de 1 200 contribuables, dits syntéleis et l’instauration de vingt symmories composées de soixante membres chacune. Les symmories de 358/7 s’incrivent-elles dans le même système que celui qui fut instauré vingt ans plus tôt pour l’eisphora? Vincent Gabrielsen a bien montré que le système reposait sur un principe de liste d’aptitude, une liste des contributeurs potentiels aux eisphorai et au financement de la flotte. La création de symmories n’intervient que dans un deuxième temps81. De ce fait, il y a bien un système unique reposant sur l’estimation du timêma de la cité et la création de symmories distinctes. Isocrate établit une seule et même catégorie lorsqu’il mentionne ‘les mille deux cents, ceux qui paient l’eisphora et assurent les liturgies’82. Les symmories proprement dites étaient constituées par les stratèges qui désignaient de même les triérarques83. En somme, il paraît pour le moins aventureux d’opposer la cité en circulation à la cité de raison84. Même si les sources manquent pour décrire le fonctionnement au Vème siècle, tout laisse à penser que la politeia athénienne, même avant la démocratie proprement dite, reposait sur un équilibre raisonné entre centre et périphéries. Dans cette subtile construction, les documents écrits jouaient un rôle décisif. De fait, cette circulation écrite garantissait une répartition équilibrée des pouvoirs, évitant une accumulation qui se serait produite soit au bénéfice des élites, dont l’assise patrimoniale aurait pu faciliter une autorité locale, soit au bénéfice de l’assemblée et d’un dêmos plus populaire. Mais ce constat, cette logique

79 Harpocration, s.v. diavgramma avec Christ 2007, 65-66. 80 Christ 2007, 67. 81 Cf. en dernier lieu Gabrielsen 1994, 182-199. 82 Isocr., Ant., 15.145. 83 Dém., C. Boeotos I, 39.8: ‘Comment les stratèges feront-ils pour nous inscrire s’il s’agit de constituer une symmorie ou de désigner un triérarque?’. 84 De notre point de vue (Pébarthe 2012), l’imaginaire permet de dépasser cette opposition, parce qu’il contient les intervalles dans lesquels Paulin Ismard voit le politique (2011, 172-173).

122

logique, ne doit pas masquer la logique pratique. Ces changements n’ont pas été faits par un spécialiste de géographie électorale et il est nul besoin de postuler un Clisthène géomètre pour parvenir à une telle conclusion85. Il suffit de rappeler l’importance de la circulation dans l’imaginaire politique athénien et la peur à l’égard de toute accumulation ou concentration. Autrement dit, le territoire de la cité était un espace de circulation, qui ne se réduisait pas à une polarisation qui relèguerait les périphéries à des fonctions subalternes. Toute l’originalité de la cité athénienne apparaît alors, celle d’une construction politique connaissant un centre et des périphéries, sans pour autant les inscrire totalement dans une hiérarchie qui se serait opposée à la conception athénienne de l’égalité. Ainsi, sans une bureaucratie professionnelle, les Athéniens sont parvenus à construire des institutions durables et complexes, permettant l’exercice d’une réelle autorité sur l’ensemble du territoire; sans bureaucratie professionnelle, mais non sans archives.

85 Pour des raisons différentes, nous suivons ici Paulin Ismard (2010 et 2011).

les archives de la cité de raison...

123

Bibliographie

Aloni 1997 A. Aloni, L’intelligenza di Ipparco. Osservazioni sulla politica dei Pisistratidi, «QS» 19, 109-148. Azoulay, Ismard 2007 V. Azoulay et P. Ismard, Les lieux du politique dans l’Athènes classique. Entre structures institutionnelles, idéologie civique et pratiques sociales, in: Schmitt Pantel & de Polignac 2007, 271-309. Azoulay, Ismard 2011 V. Azoulay et P. Ismard (éd.), Clisthène et Lycurgue d’Athènes. Autour du politique dans la cité classique, Paris. Bowman, Woolf 1994 A.K. Bowman et G. Woolf (éd.), Literacy and Power in the Ancient World, Cambridge. Brun 1983 P. Brun, Eisphora-SyntaxisStratiotika. Recherches sur les finances militaires d’Athènes au IVème siècle av. J.-C., Besançon. Castoriadis 1999 C. Castoriadis, Sur Le Politique de Platon, Paris. Castoriadis 2004 C. Castoriadis, Ce qui fait la Grèce. 1. D’Homère à Héraclite. Séminaires 1982-1983. La création humaine 2, Paris. Christ 2007 M.R. Christ, The Evolution of the Eisphora, «CQ» 57, 53-69. Faraguna 1997 M. Faraguna, Registrazioni catastali nel mondo greco: il caso di Atene, «Athenaeum» 85, 7-33. Ford 1985 A.L. Ford, The Seal of Theognis: The Politics of Authorship in Archaic Greece, in: Th.J. Figueira et G. Nagy (éd.), Theognis of Megara. Poetry and the Polis, Baltimore, 82-95.

Gabrielsen 1994 V. Gabrielsen, Financing the Athenian Fleet, Baltimore. Harrison 1965 E.B. Harrison, Archaic and Archaistic Sculpture. Athenian Agora XI, Princeton. Harvey 1966 F.D. Harvey, Literacy in the Athenian Democracy, «REG» 79, 585-635. Ismard 2010 P. Ismard, La cité des réseaux. Athènes et ses associations VIème-Ier siècle av. J.-C., Paris. Ismard 2011 P. Ismard, Les associations et la réforme clisthénienne: le politique ‘par le bas’, in: Azoulay & Ismard 2011, 165-174. Jensen 1980 M. S. Jensen, The Homeric Question and the Oral-Formulaic Theory, Copenhague. Lambert 1998 S.D. Lambert, The Phratries of Attica, Ann Arbor. Lewis 1988 D.M. Lewis, The Tyranny of the Pisistratidae, CAH2 4, 287-302. Mossé 1979 Cl. Mossé, Comment s’élabore un mythe politique: Solon, père fondateur de la démocratie athénienne, «Annales(ESC)» 34, 425-437. Murray 1992 O. Murray, Cités de raison, in: Murray & Price 1992, 13-39. Murray, Price 1992 O. Murray et S. Price (éd.), La cité grecque d’Homère à Alexandre, Paris. Parker 1996 R. Parker, Athenian Religion: A History, Oxford.

124

Pébarthe 2006 Chr. Pébarthe, Cité, démocratie et écriture. Histoire de l’alphabétisation d’Athènes à l’époque classique, Paris.

Taylor 1997 M. Taylor, Salamis and the Salaminioi. The History of an Unofficial Athenian Demos, Amsterdam.

Pébarthe 2012 Chr. Pébarthe, Faire l’histoire de la démocratie athénienne avec Cornelius Castoriadis, «REA» 114, 139-157.

Thomas 1994 R. Thomas, Literacy and the City-state in Archaic and Classical Greece, in: Bowman & Woolf 1994, 33-50.

Pélékidis 1962 C. Pélékidis, Histoire de l’éphébie attique, Paris.

Wallace 1989 R.W. Wallace, The Athenian Proeispherontes, «Hesperia» 58, 473-490.

Rogue 2001 C. Rogue, Sur une difficulté de traduction de l’Hipparque, «REG» 114, 242-255. Schmitt Pantel, de Polignac 2007 P. Schmitt Pantel et Fr. de Polignac (éd.), Athènes et le politique. Dans le sillage de Claude Mossé, Paris.

Whitehead 1986 D. Whitehead, The Demes of Attica 508/7-ca 250 B.C., Princeton.

Schnapp-Gourbeillon 1988 A. Schnapp-Gourbeillon, Homère, Hipparque et la bonne parole, «Annales(ESC)» 43, 805-821. Shapiro 1988 H.A. Shapiro, Art and Cult under the Tyrants in Athens, Mainz am Rhein. Sickinger 1999 J.P. Sickinger, Public Records and Archives in Classical Athens, Chapel Hill et Londres. Steiner 1994 D.T. Steiner,The Tyrant’s Writ. Myths and Images of Writing in Ancient Greece, Princeton. Stroud 1978 R.S. Stroud, State Documents in Archaic Athens, in: Athens comes of Age. From Solon to Salamis, Papers of a Symposium Sponsored by the Archaeological Institute of America, Princeton, 20-42.

les archives de la cité de raison...

125

Attic Building Accounts from Euthynae to Stelae1

shimon epstein

In this paper, I intend to explore the relationship between the forms of Athenian building accounts as presented by relevant officials at their annual euthynae, as deposited in a state archive on perishable materials, and as carved on marble in public places. Various forms and probable purposes of inscribed building documents will be discussed, with particular attention given to the factors behind preserving or omitting the names of workers. I will mostly deal with three groups of building accounts: those of the Periclean building programme from the third quarter of the fifth century, of the Erechtheion (409-405 BCE), and the Eleusinian accounts of the Lykourgan epoch (333-328 BCE).

1 This paper owes much to the lecture of Prof. D. Schaps, which I heard at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem in March 2007. I am grateful to him for showing me the yet unpublished text of a later version of his paper presented at the 13th International Congress of Greek and Latin Epigraphy in Oxford, September 2007. It is also my pleasure to express my gratitude to Prof. M. Faraguna for inviting me to the conference on Archives and Archival Documents in Ancient Societies in Trieste, and for his valuable suggestions during and after the conference. Other participants’ contributions and comments were very helpful, too. This paper was prepared during my Hans-Jensen-Minerva post-doctoral fellowship at Freiburg University. I would like to thank the Minerva Foundation for providing financial support, and Prof. Sitta von Reden, my host at Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

127

As is well known, the Periclean inscriptions (the statue of Athena Promachos – IG I3 435, the Parthenon – I3 436-51, the chryselephantine statue – I3 453-60, the Propylaea – I3 462-6, the golden Nikai from the Parthenon – I3 467-71, and the two statues for the Hephaestion – I3 472) mention no builders’ names and very few construction details. In contrast, minute recording of what was done and by whom is, on the face of it, a salient feature of the accounts of the Erechtheion (IG I3 475-9, mostly 475-6), whereas the Eleusinian documents (IG II/III2 1672 and 1673)2 mention dozens of names, but selectively, as will be shown. In this paper, I will try to establish the following arguments: a) While there may have been a particular reason for publishing each building account, there was a common purpose, too: the inscribed documents served as symbols and, to an extent, as a means of attaining transparency and accountability. b) While the form of each building inscription may have correlated with the purpose of its erection, it depended heavily on sources available. Due to the euthynae, financial accounts were always there, whilst no other relevant document may have existed. c) Accordingly, even if commemorating the builders’ names may have been one of the reasons for engraving the accounts from the Erechtheion and Eleusis (as well as from Epidaurus and Delos), this aim has been only partially achieved, as I shall argue. I argue that the anonymous workmen at the Erechtheion and most of builders left unmentioned in the Eleusinian inscriptions were unnamed in the original documents, and perhaps this was true for earlier projects, too. The authorities did not go out of their way to find out information, absent from financial accounts, even where it could have been obtained relatively easily. Finally, I will discuss broader implications of these conclusions as to the role of archives and documents in classical Athens. It is difficult to imagine more different building documents than the Periclean inscriptions on the one hand and the accounts of the Erechtheion on the other. The former parade huge sums but remain obscure as to technical, organizational and even financial details. In the latter, the sums are modest but we can see what was built in which prytany, how much did it cost, who performed the work and how he was paid for it. Here for the first time we have building accounts ordered by prytanies, and within each prytany – and this makes the inscriptions of the Erechtheion unique – by architectural elements. In addition, for the first time individual builders are named and their statuses indicated. Eighty years later,

2

See now Clinton 2005, nos. 159, 177.

128

some Eleusinian accounts are still ordered by prytanies, but others are not. Many workers and sellers are named in these accounts, but in spite of a clear tendency towards giving more information with the passage of time, the proportion of persons of undefined status is much higher in the Eleusinian inscriptions than in those of the Erechtheion. In what follows, I try to make sense of these differences and similarities. I do not pretend to know full answers: as we are all aware, Greek inscriptions are often haphazard in what they mention or omit. Not to mention the accidents of survival of various bits of information in various inscriptions. Still, I hope to have discerned a certain logic behind what is preserved and what is not in inscribed building accounts. It seems a natural hypothesis that the differences between various groups of building accounts as we have them depend, to a significant extent, on why these documents were inscribed in the first place. At the same time, whatever the purpose of an inscription might have been, it could include only the available information, though not necessarily all such information, of course. As already said, here I presume that financial accounts prepared for the annual euthynae were the main and often the only source of the relevant information. We do not know many details about the process of the euthynae, but the officials in question – in our case, primarily epistatai and the tamiai of the temples built – surely had to submit the records reflecting their activity during their term in office. The form of these records might have been loosely defined, but there were common elements, probably indispensable: almost every Greek account we have contains the names of the magistrates and the year in which they served, generally identified by an eponymous magistrate; what they received from the previous officeholders; and what they passed on and to whom. These records (presumably on papyrus, but perhaps on wax-covered wooden tablets or on whitewashed boards where texts were written with charcoal) could be subsequently deposited in an archive, though I am not certain. According to Ath. Pol., the tablets, indicating the payments due according to the various deadlines during the year, made by the poletai, were deposited with the council and then produced and wiped off when the payments were made. 3 Similarly, the records of at least some officials’ accounts could have been deleted after their examinations were finished, 4 especially if the records were inscribed. 5 Alternatively, these records might have been

3 Arist. Ath. Pol. 47.2-48. Cf. Rhodes 2001, 34. The contracts themselves were perhaps kept for future reference, at least when they were important for maintaining evidence of ownership. See Faraguna 1997, 12-3, and now Papazarkadas 2011, 51ff. Other examples of documents destroyed: Cohen 2006, 79; Sickinger 1999, 68-70. 4 This is perhaps why the famous ATL lists the aparchai rather than the tributes themselves: the inscribing probably began only in 432/1 (ATL I vii), and if the hellenotamiai’s accounts for the previous years were not preserved, but the temple inventories, with their obvious religious meaning, were, the Athenians may have simply published these inventories. 5 This possibility must not be assumed automatically for all types of documents: Sickinger 1999, 70 ff.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

129

deposited in a reduced form. Once the examination passed, not all the information may have been deemed worthy of preservation: whereas the data proving the officials’ integrity were perhaps no more relevant, the sums paid still were. Although, on the face of it, it would be easier simply to deposit in an archive the same table that was submitted for the audit, two considerations might have interfered: economy of space (we do not know how archives were organized) and perhaps more formal character of archives in comparison with the files presented for the euthynae. The euthynae were basically oral procedures, I believe, especially in the fifth century: the records prepared may have been rather loosely organized, because they were accompanied by oral explanations. We should expect more uniform requirements for the files deposited into archives. I see three basic possible reasons for significant differences in form and content between various building inscriptions: 1) while some inscriptions were based on the records submitted for the euthynae, others took information from the reduced form of these records, deposited in an archive; 2) evolution of the format of the records presented for the euthynae and perhaps of those stored in archives; 3) having similar information for all building projects, the Athenians in each given case decided to inscribe various parts of this information, depending on what seemed relevant for their purposes. Of course, these three possible factors are not mutually exclusive. 6 We will now consider the probability of each of these factors’ influence for every one of the three main construction projects of Classical Athens.

Periclean building documents I doubt that anyone could have passed his audit with only the data preserved in the inscriptions of the Parthenon or of Athena Promachos. This is especially true with regard to those who paid to individual builders rather than to official bodies: since no name is mentioned, who could check that no obol of the huge sums involved ended up in the coffers of those who pretended to give the money away to masons and sculptors? Since we know that individual workmen were named in the accounts of the Erechtheion and Eleusis, it is, on the face of it, the most economic hypothesis that these data were available to the authors of the texts of the Periclean building inscriptions as well, but were omitted – most probably for the sake of economy, but also perhaps because too much information would obscure the main messages of the inscription, to which we shall soon return. In any case, it was a relatively early stage in the development of the epigraphic habit, when inscribing too detailed accounts was not something the Athenians got

6 The fact that building inscriptions are often reduced versions of original accounts may undermine Burford’s theory of the evolution of the building contracts: Kuznetsov 2000, 119-23, 127ff, 166-7 with Epstein 2008, 110.

130

used to. But while this hypothesis – my number three – seems most economic, I would not altogether exclude two other possibilities. First, the Parthenon accounts seem not to have been inscribed until the project had been in full swing: the first five years are all inscribed in the same hand. 7 Likewise, the accounts of the statue of Athena Promachos, which span the period of at least nine years, may have been published at a single time. 8 If so, the records of the accounts for several years must have been kept in some archive, at least until they were inscribed, 9 but they may have contained a reduced form of the records submitted for the audit – the form we read today. By the time contemporary accounts were published, the epigraphic routine had already been established. Regardless of the delay in publication, the reduced form may have been the only one preserved in an archive, at least at that time. Another possibility is that the written accounts of the Periclean time, already at the stage of euthynae, were much less detailed than we would expect. Some data may have been privately recorded and produced only when required, i. e. when objections were raised during one’s audit. Thus, when the officials disbursed money to hundreds of workers witnesses presumably had to be present. To record the witnesses’ names could have been even more important than to write down all the names of the recipients, as many of them, being foreigners, would leave Athens by the time of the euthynae.10 Here we deal with one of the most important differences between the roles of documents in ancient Greece and in modern times. In our accounts, every entry about expenses and even receipts has to be balanced by a corresponding signed document testifying to the reality of the transaction. However, in ancient Greece witnesses and (public) oaths played the role of our signature. Even in fourth-century Athens, written contracts properly sealed and deposited were invalid without eyewitnesses of the agreement.11 This reminds us of destroying of documents concurrently with a party’s compliance with the obligations imposed by written arrangements, mentioned above.12 Accordingly, it would not be so surprising if the recipients of public money remained sometimes (or always) anonymous in the accounts of the Pentekontaetia. Surely, Pericles would not publicly point to Pleistoanax and Kleandridas in his famous audit in 446. 13 As for the eyewitnesses of the transactions, if they were ever officially registered (I doubt), it would serve no purpose to preserve their names on stone after the euthynae.

7

Sickinger 1999, 70.

8

Ibid.

9

Sickinger 1999, 70-1.

10 See Epstein 2010 for a probably high ratio of journeymen among the builders of Athenian temples and fortifications. 11 E.g. Dem. 34,35; cf. Cohen 2006, 79 with n. 40; Faraguna 2008. 12 See supra, n. 3. 13 Ar. Nub. 859 with schol.; Plut. Per. 23.1.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

131

Another interesting problem is the organization of the accounts by prytanies (or absence of such organization). Some payments were made once in a prytany already in the middle of the fifth century (I3 435.19, 26, 52, 77, 112), and, of course, the epistatai of Athena Promachos kept records of such payments before they submitted their accounts. However, other payments are made daily or as lump sums (misqoi; ajpovpac~, ibid., see also 472.186), and monthly payments (but not payments per prytany) are mentioned in the accounts of the Parthenon and Propylaia (katamenivoi~: I3 436.29; 443.231; 446.339; 447.361; 449.403; 462.51). For this reason, I would not be surprised to find out that the files submitted to logistai (or whoever examined the officeholders after their terms in the fifth century) were not ordered by prytanies. This ignoring of prytanies seems even more probable for the documents preserved in archives. After envisaging the possibility that the original documents from which the Parthenon inscriptions were drawn simply lacked many important data, we remain with the fact that some data were surely there and were omitted when the accounts were engraved. Thus, the names of the epistatai, recorded down to 438/7, are not given afterwards. As far as administration goes, it was not important: their secretary is named (strangely enough, his name is preserved even for the years when he was a syngrammateus, though the other grammateus’ name is unknown), so the board may be easily identified, but this was so from the start. 14 Whatever the reasons for dropping the names of the commissioners, commemorating these officials was hardly the purpose of inscribing the accounts. What was the purpose? It was once believed that the administrative accounts were inscribed for public scrutiny.15 We are more skeptical today.16 The fuller version of the epistatai’s accounts may have been exposed, on sanivde~, for scrutiny between their end of term and euthynae,17 but the Parthenon inscriptions as we have them are hardly a convenient tool for accountability. In particular, no worker could find himself in these documents and check whether all money allegedly paid to him had really reached his hands. And, of course, it would be pointless to check the rectitude of the officials who underwent their audits several years ago. Of course, the huge sums may have served as imperial propaganda,18 though one can wonder whether the buildings and statues themselves were not enough for this purpose. A partial answer is that the epigraphic propaganda could be launched before the constructions became impressive (but this does not seem to apply to the statue of Athena

14 Another example of haphazardness: the dating prescripts of the early years of the Parthenon accounts and of those of Propylaia omit archon’s names. 15 See, for example, ML, 164. 16 See, e.g., Hedrick 1994, whose case is perhaps overstated. See also Hedrick 1999; Rhodes 2001, 140-4 for a more balanced view. 17 On sanivde~, see Wilhelm 1909, 239-49; Fisher 2003. 18 Cf. Rhodes 2001, 140-1.

132

Promachos, as we have seen). There probably were other propagandistic points, besides the grandeur of the undertaking. One of them, I would suggest, is demonstrating that the sums, contributed by the hellenotamiai, are relatively modest. In the best preserved accounts for 434/3 (ML 59) the board is not mentioned at all, and in the Propylaia account of the same year (ML 60) it is only Athena’s aparche, a mina in a talent. The treasures of Athena seem to be the main paymasters. It is probably not a coincidence that the publication of the Parthenon accounts began the next year after the ostracism of Pericles’ main rival. The decision to commemorate the accounts on stone was probably taken in the year of Thoukydides’ ostracism, when the opposition to the Periclean building program seems to be maximal. In view of the accusations that the Athenians exploited their allies by using their money, taken for military purposes, for adorning their own city (Plut. Per. 12.2), Pericles and his supporters tried to demonstrate that the construction was mostly financed from Athens’ own resources. The aparche was presumably seen as legitimate. Which contention was closer to the truth is another matter.19 There may have been an administrative point, too. The year when the accounts of the Parthenon were first inscribed is the year when syngrammateis to the boards of the epistatai of the Parthenon and of the hellenotamiai are first securely attested. 20 Whatever the logic behind these reforms, it was perhaps deemed worthwhile to advertise the changes. 21 Last but not least, there was democratic propaganda, too. Though not very suitable as a check on the authorities, the inscribed accounts probably served as a symbol of accountability and transparency. When an Athenian looked at the stele with the Parthenon accounts, he understood that the magistrates involved had undergone audits whereby every willing citizen had been allowed to be present and even to challenge any official. Therefore, the technical details are not that important now. What matters is that it is we, the Athenians, who build magnificent temples and manage impressive sums. Our officials submit us annual accounts and publicize them. Every citizen who wishes may learn which board contributed how much to which purpose. As stated above, some information that we consider as important and that we find in later building documents may have not been easily available to the authors of the Periclean building inscriptions.

19 See Kallet-Marx 1989 versus Samons 1993. 20 See ML, on p. 164. 21 Michele Faraguna reminds, in his response to this paper, that the sheer fact that there were both a grammateus and a syngrammateus implies that the paperwork to be dealt with was not negligible. One could suggest that the appointment of a permanent co-secretary of the Parthenon commissioners was needed because the decision to publish the records increased the amount of paperwork. This seems seducing as far as the Parthenon accounts are concerned. However, the appointment in the same year of a permanent syngrammateus to the hellenotamiai, whose accounts remained unpublished at this stage (and perhaps at all, as we have seen: above, n. 4) should give us a pause.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

133

Even so, the Athenians could publish much more details, had they wished. What they included was probably deemed sufficient for the purposes suggested here. 22

The Erechtheion So much for the building accounts before the Peloponnesian war. As we have seen, the documents of the next construction complex attested, the Erechtheion, are mainly distinguished by three new features: they are ordered by prytanies; inside prytanies they are ordered by architectural elements; they contain detailed descriptions of how much was paid, to whom, for which tasks and by which method. Of these three features, the order by prytanies was already established by the time the construction of the Erechtheion was resumed (e.g. ML 77 and, more immediately relevant, ML 84 of 410/9; interestingly, an oligarchic decree known as ML 81 refers to months, not to prytanies). In contrast, the order by architectural elements is special for the Erechtheion. Besides the stringent financial and political situation, what was so special for this project is that the construction was interrupted (we do not know when, nor, for that matter, when it began). Schaps, in his yet unpublished essay referred to above, suggests that, when the project was renewed in 409/8, «nobody will have known exactly how much work remained to be done, and so nobody can have calculated precisely how much it should cost». 23 Hence the need to publish the survey of what was already done (I3 474), «so that the information would remain publicly available during the work and money could not be claimed for work that in fact had been done by the earlier commissioners». The survey was organized, naturally enough, by architectural item. For a further check on the commissioners, the annual accounts recorded precisely which work was done, organized in the same way. The explanation seems tempting. I would add another peculiarity of

22 The response of M. Faraguna justly emphasises the religious dimension of publicising the building accounts. It is true that most Greek building inscriptions preserved reflect the construction of temples. Not all the temples, however. We still have to answer, why the building accounts of some temples (and some secular projects, like Conon’s restoration of the Athenian Walls) were inscribed, whereas other public construction activity remained epigraphically unattested. To the secular projects named by Faraguna one might add the construction of the Pnyx (three times), of the Theater of Dionysus (twice, not to count local theaters), of the Tholos, of the Arsenal, and so on. However, we have no accounts for the first stage of the erection of the Erechtheion, either. One cannot assume, together with Humphreys 1985, that all these buildings were privately financed. In any case, there are no significant differences in this respect between the Lykourgan period and earlier decades, as we have seen. Of course, some building inscriptions may remain unknown to us, but this possibility does not save Humphrey’s theory. 23 This is especially true if no accounts of the corresponding commissioners survived. Of course, such possibility should have been an excellent argument for preserving the accounts, but surely, the Athenians, like any other people, frequently learned from their own mistakes. On the other hand, some accounts may have not survived in the stormy events of 415-410.

134

the project in question, following, too, from the interruption of the works: the epistatai had to deal only with relatively advanced stages of the construction. Neither transportation nor works in quarries were needed. Certainly, the accounts of these activities would not be ordered by architectural elements. The particular need to provide a check on embezzlement, due to the unique situation mentioned above, may have something to do with detailed indication of the workers, their tasks and their salaries. Together with order by prytanies and by architectural items, this feature surely made the accounts of the Erechtheion look more like accounts. And though we find most of these features in later accounts in Attica and elsewhere, only the Delian building documents can rival the inscriptions of the Erechtheion in their minute description of the tasks. It seems that the epistatai used for their accounts written specifications from which the builders read off (or heard) their instructions. The similarity between some lines of I3 475 – 476 and the inscribed specifications of the ships’ arsenal built by Philon (IG II2 1668.15ff), is striking. It is the most economic hypothesis that these specifications were included already in the records presented for the euthynae. Similar material seems to be available to the officials of Periclean Athens, too, 24 but they did not use it, at least for the inscribed accounts. As for the indication of the workmen’s status, the accounts of the Erechtheion remain unsurpassed in Antiquity. Various explanations were offered for this first appearance of the individual in building accounts. 25 Political and financial situation, administrative reforms and gradual development of epigraphical habits were proposed as causes. In fact, as individuals are named in later accounts, we should beware of too circumstantial explanations. As for the stringent financial situation, surely no time was so prosperous that the Athenians were ready to tolerate embezzlement. Some general factors surely were at play here. Thus, designation of metics through demes where they were registered and of slaves through their owner’s name in genitive is not attested before the end of the fifth century. As for the metics, Whitehead sees here a real reform of their status, 26 but a simple change of epigraphic practice seems at least no less plausible. And it looks like the only option for the change in designation of slaves. Similarly, as stated above, there is no telling when individual workmen make their appearance in the euthynae – the change may have been merely epigraphic. Even so, neither resident aliens nor slaves would be designated so precisely in any document before the end of the fifth century. While this mentioning of every worker, including a slave, and meticulous indication of his status is a (perhaps the) prominent feature of the accounts of the

24 Cf. Burford 1963, 25. 25 They are summarized in Feyel 2006, 16-7. 26 Whitehead 1977, 152.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

135

Erechtheion, 27 we will be surprised to understand that some workmen remain anonymous and probably even more are not even mentioned. The anonymous workers are the suvnergoi of Raidios (I3 475.57, at least two, only one working each given day28) and of Phalakros Paianieus (475.41-2, one man). They may be slaves (cf. Xen. Mem. 2.3.3; we know that Phalacros had slaves, but they are named: IG I3 476.81-3, 229-31, 313-4), or relatives, 29 or pupils. The unmentioned workmen are those who helped artisans employed on the basis of piece rate pay. The existence of such assistants is indicated by two facts. First, Raidios, already mentioned here, works with assistants when employed on daily basis, but alone when paid by piecework. 30 But he surely needs assistants when working with a two-hand saw, as he probably does. The difference between the employment methods is that it was pointless to mention assistants in the account when only the amount of work done was relevant (and the name of the recipient of the pay – Raidios in our case). In comparison, the number of workers was of course relevant for daily payment (but their names were not, since obviously the wage was taken directly by Raidios). Second, the possibility of artisans paid by piecework having unmentioned assistants (once more, probably slaves, but not necessarily) is sometimes implied by comparison of their earnings when working in a group (when every craftsman was recorded) and alone (cf., e. g., IG I3 475.31-51 and 476.192-218, 223-48). We may find it strange, that some workers are left unmentioned whereas in other cases no one is forgotten, not even slaves. In fact, what is unusual is not that one’s slaves or other assistants are ignored when the pay depends on the amount of work done, but that slaves are so often mentioned (and named) in these accounts. Let us see, then, when they are mentioned. This occurs in two cases: when slaves work separately of their masters, as slave carpenters do (IG I3 475.66-9, 233-4, 254-6, 288-93; and perhaps 476.119-23), or when they channel columns in brigades, together with free masons. When slaves have independent tasks, their names are relevant either as their owners’ title for the money earned, or as independent recipients of their wages. But why on earth should one mention slaves when they channel columns together with their masters (this is what most slaves attested at the Erechtheion do), while omitting them when they work, together with their masters, on stone blocks? The answer, I believe, lies within the collective character of the channeling. Channelling of each column was, in fact, a latent form of contract, 31 but still without a formal contract and accordingly without a formal contractor. Formal contracts for large sums are 27 In one instance, too diligent indication of status creates obscurity: Lusivai jAlkivppo Kefis (475.110-3). See Epstein 2010, n. 31. 28 See Epstein 2010 with n. 4. 29 Cf. IG XI, 2, 161.71: Nivkwni kai; tw`i uiJw`i ejrgasamevnoi~ ejpi; tou` kivono~ hJmevra~ duvo misqo;~ dracmai;… 30 Cf. Epstein 2009 with nn. 49-50. 31 Caskey 1927, 411.

136

avoided at the Erechtheion, for reasons that should be discussed separately. Accordingly, there was no one man who could receive the wage earned by the entire brigade. In addition, the composition of these brigades was always heterogeneous: never only members of one family, never only a master and his slaves. Accordingly, it was important to precise the contribution of each worker – or of his master, if we speak of a slave. The slaves’ names proved that their owner really brought such and such number of workers. 32 Now, if we believe, together with Burford and some other scholars, that the workers are named (mainly) for ideological purposes, 33 we should conclude that those unnamed did not work. However, we do have at least three unnamed synergoi. Moreover, the contractors’ workers are never mentioned in our inscriptions, including those of Epidaurus, on which Burford’s hypothesis is primarily based. Does it mean that commemorating the builders just was not the purpose of inscribing these accounts? Not necessarily. We must keep in mind the difference between the purpose of an account, and the purpose of its publication. The commissioners did not think of commemorating the workers when they prepared the file for their audit – they probably thought how to avoid severe punishment in case of accusation of abusing public trust. When they prepared the inscription, the names were not there. Of course, they could be restored, at least in some cases. Phalakros, for example, was an Athenian citizen; his assistant’s name could not be a great secret. But, apparently, this was never done. I am not surprised. If commemorating the names of those who contributed to the building of the temple had been the purpose of inscribing the accounts, why not simply publish a list of names, as, for example, in the casualty list of the Erechtheis tribe (IG I3 1147), or the list of those who participated in a naval battle (I3 1032 = II2 1951)? By inscribing the financial accounts, the Athenians achieved several aims: not only they commemorated the names, but the precise contribution of everyone involved. Beyond this, they provided an additional check on their officeholders. If the Periclean building inscriptions served as symbols of accountability and transparency, those of the epoch of Cleophon were a means of attaining these aims. I believe this step was taken, at least to an extent, consciously.

32 One Erechtheion account (IG I3 475.272-85) lists numbers of anonymous workers, from 19 to 33, (with unnamed functions) in several prytanies, and the sums paid. The sum in drachmas equals the number of men in each of the prytanies. Loomis 1998, 105-6, sees here «laborers, who did…unspecified work». The anonymity of these workmen induces Kuznetsov 2000, 52-3 to assume that they were slaves, public or private. I am not sure, and suggest that the sums registered are intended for the workers’ nourishment: one or two obols a day, during three or six days for a worker. See Epstein 2008a, nn. 2, 15. In this case, the anonymity was only natural. 33 See, e.g., Graham 1998 108: «citizens, foreigners, metics and slaves are engaged in some common enterprise». Cf. Burford 1971, 75.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

137

The Eleusinian Inscriptions In Lykourgan Athens the records for the euthynae were doubtless ordered by prytanies, as are the accounts of 329/8 (II2 1672). However, the accounts of transportation of marble drums to Eleusis (II2 1673) ignore prytanies. This is surely a case when not all information available was deemed relevant, probably because the work was undertaken between July and September. 34 II2 1672 is much more similar to the accounts of the Erechtheion: the order by prytanies; sometimes by architectural details; many workers are named and their status indicated. Before I proceed to differences between these accounts, I will highlight the differences between the conditions in which the works on the two complexes were performed, as well as between the contexts in which the accounts were prepared. First, II2 1672 reflects the activity of two boards: not only the Eleusinian epistatai, but also of the Treasures of the two Goddesses. As these boards had different euthynae, the accounts we have had to be composed for the publication, which provided good opportunity for editing. Second, contractors were widely used; we shall see some consequences of this fact for the form and content of our accounts. Third, the activity reflected is not actually construction of a temple where none existed. Some elements were built; some parts were repaired. Building debris was removed. Transportation and quarrying were performed. Like in Delos, but not as in the Erechtheion neither the works themselves nor the accounts could be totally ordered by architectural items. The description of the work done is typically less detailed than in the accounts of the Erechtheion. One of the reasons, I suggest, is that instead of using the written specifications as a basis for the accounts, as at the Erechtheion, the Eleusinian accounts use the contracts. This is one result of contracting the work out: after all, one of the supposed advantages of such contracting is that now it is the contractors, rather than the officials, who should mostly deal with the specifications. Another, more obvious result of the wide use of contracts is that the contractors’ workers – probably most builders involved – are totally unknown to us. I doubt that the authorities wanted to commemorate these workers, but had they wanted it would not have been easy – they surely did not know these workmen's names. What is more enigmatic is the complete anonymity of daily wagers in the Eleusinian accounts. As the workers employed on a daily basis are named in the accounts of the Erechtheion (except when they are assistants), we may suggest that the names of such workers were recorded in Lykourgan Athens, too. My guess is that these names were omitted when the accounts were prepared for publication. Since all daily workers of the same skill level got the same salary, their names seem to be considered irrelevant. At the Erechtheion, such workers were fewer and, especially in the first documented year, they did not work

34 Salmon 2001, 200.

138

by more than three together. Afterwards the habit to mention the daily wagers was already established. In comparison, at Eleusis we often see groups of ten misthotoi, so that significant space could be saved by suppressing their names. One result is that we ignore the number of daily workers in the Eleusinian construction project. Accordingly, as only a name gives out its bearer’s status in Athens, we cannot calculate the ratio of builders of various statuses on the Eleusinian building site. 35

Conclusion The Greeks were unique in inscribing financial accounts. We have seen how interplay between the available information and the purposes of its publication might influence the form and content of a particular subset of these accounts – building accounts. Though fuller versions of building documents may have existed in archives on perishable materials, the inscribed version was somehow considered the official one, in contrast to our present conception of the document. 36 It is remarkable to what extent this official document could have been shaped by contingent circumstances.

35 For such calculations, see Feyel 2006, 325. 36 Rhodes 2001, 136.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

139

Bibliography

ATL B.D. Meritt, H.T. Wade-Gery, M.F. McGregor, The Athenian Tribute Lists (American School of Classical Studies at Athens), I-IV, Princeton 1939-1953. Burford 1963 A. Burford, The Builders of the Parthenon, «G&R», Suppl. 10, 23-35. Burford 1971 A. Burford, The Purpose of Inscribed Building Accounts, in: Acta of the Fifth International Congress of Greek and Latin Epigraphy (Cambridge 1967), Oxford, 71-6. Caskey 1927 L.D. Caskey, The Erechtheum: measured, drawn and restored by G.P. Stevens; text by L.D. Caskey et al.; ed. by J.M. Paton, Cambridge (MA). Clinton 2005 K. Clinton, Eleusis, the Inscriptions on Stone: Documents of the Sanctuary of the Two Goddesses and Public Documents of the Deme, I, Athens. Cohen 2006 E.E. Cohen, Consensual Contracts at Athens, in: H.-A. Rupprecht (ed.), Symposion 2003: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Wien, 73-84. Epstein 2008 S. Epstein, Review Article: V. D. Kuznetsov, Organization of Public Construction Works in Ancient Greece (Moscow, 2000), «SCI» 27, 95-111. Epstein 2008a S. Epstein, Why Did Attic Building Projects Employ Free Laborers Rather than Slaves?, «ZPE» 166, 108-12. Epstein 2009 S. Epstein, Towards a Question of Slave Labor in the Athenian Public

Construction Projects (in Russian), «VDI» 4, 42-62. Epstein 2010 S. Epstein, Attic Public Construction: Who Were the Builders?, «Ancient Society» 40, 1-14. Faraguna 1997 M. Faraguna, Registrazioni catastali nel mondo greco: il caso di Atene, «Athenaeum» 85, 7-33. Faraguna 2008 M. Faraguna, Oralità e scrittura nella prassi giudizaria ateniese tra V e IV sec. a.C., in: E. Harris, G. Thür (eds.), Symposion 2007: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Wien, 63-82. Feyel 2006 Chr. Feyel, Les artisans dans les sanctuaires grecs aux époques classique et hellénistique à travers la documentation financière en Grèce, Athènes. Fisher 2003 J.E. Fischer, Sanides and Sanidia, in: G.W. Bakewell, J.P. Sickinger (eds.), Gestures: Essays in Ancient History, Literature, and Philosophy presented to Alan L. Boegehold, Oxford, 237-50. Graham 1998 A.J. Graham, Thucydides 7.13.2 and the Crews of Athenian Triremes: An Addendum, «TAPhA» 128, 89-114. Hedrick 1994 Ch.W. Hedrick, Jr., Writing, Reading, and Democracy, in: R. Osborne, S. Hornblower, (eds.), Ritual, Finance, Politics: Athenian Democratic Accounts Presented to David Lewis, Oxford, 156-74. Hedrick 1999 Ch.W. Hedrick, Democracy and the Athenian Epigraphic Habit, «Hesperia» 68, 387-439.

140

Humphreys 1985 S.C. Humphreys, Lycurgus of Boutadae: An Athenian Aristocrat, in: J.W. Eadie, J. Ober (eds.), The Craft of the Athenian Historian. Essays in Honor of Chester G. Starr, Lanham-London, 199-252 (reprinted with an afterword in Ead., The Strangeness of Gods. Historical Perspectives on the Interpretation of Athenian Religion, Oxford, 2004, 77-129). Kallet-Marx 1989 L. Kallet-Marx, Did Tribute Fund the Parthenon?, «CA» 8, 252-66.

Sickinger 1999 J.P. Sickinger, Public Records and Archives in Classical Athens, Chapel Hill and London. Whitehead 1977 D. Whitehead, The Ideology of the Athenian Metic, Cambridge. Wilhelm 1909 A. Wilhelm, Beiträge zur griechischen Inschriftenkunde (Sonderschriften des Österreichischen Archäologischen Instituts in Wien 7), Wien.

Kuznetsov 2000 V. D. Kuznetsov, Organization of Public Construction Works in Ancient Greece (in Russian), Moscow. Loomis 1998 W.T. Loomis, Wages, Welfare Costs and Inflation in Classical Athens, Ann Arbor. ML R. Meiggs, D. Lewis 1988: A Selection of Greek Historical Inscriptions, 2nd ed., Oxford. Papazarkadas 2011 N. Papazarkadas, Sacred and Public Land in Ancient Athens, Oxford. Rhodes 2001 P.J. Rhodes, Public Documents in the Greek States: Archives and Inscriptions, «G&R» 48, 33-44, 136-53. Salmon 2001 J. Salmon, Temples the Measures of Men. Public Building in the Greek Economy, in: D.J. Mattingly, J. Salmon (eds.), Economies Beyond Agriculture in the Classical World, London, 195-208. Samons 1993 L.J. Samons, Athenian Finance and the Treasury of Athena, «Historia» 42, 129-38.

attic building accounts from euthynae to stelae

141

The Plaint in Athenian Law and Legal Procedure

edward m. harris

When an Athenian citizen or other resident of Attica initiated a private or public suit, he began by issuing a summons to the defendant to appear before a magistrate on a certain day. 1 On this day he submitted a written document to the magistrate, which recorded his own name, the name of the defendant, the type of action he was initiating, and the charges against the defendant. 2 This might be called an engklêma (Dem. 32.2, 4, 27; 34.16) or graphe (Dem. 18.8, 9). 3 If the defendant denied the charges, he submitted a written statement to that effect called an antigraphe (Lys. 23.10; Dem. 45.46; Hyp. Eux. 31; Poll. 8.58). Each litigant swore

1

For the methods of initiating legal procedures see Lipsius 1905-15, 804-28.

2 Calhoun 1919, 190 believes that «in the time of the earlier orators complaints were still made orally and were written down by the court officials, and that the practice of handing them in in writing was introduced in the fourth century, probably not long before the commencement of Demosthenes’ career». 3 Engklêma appears to be the term used mainly in private actions (e.g. Dem. 34.16), but it is used for the plaint in a public charge at Lys. 9.8 and Pl. Ap. 24b-c. In the procedure of phasis the plaint was called the phasis – see [Dem.] 58.7. In the eisangelia procedure the plaint could be called the eisangelia – cf. Lyc. Leocr. 137; Hyp. Lyc. 3; Eux. 29-32. In the apographe procedure the plaint was called the apographe – see Lys. 9.3. Cf. Lipsius 1905-15, 817 with note 48 («Für die besonderen Formen der öffentlichen Klagen wird die Klageschrift selbst, wie eijsaggeliva, favsi~, ajpagwghv, e[ndeixi~ . . . »).

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

143

an oath that the statements in his document were true, and the document could therefore also be called an antômosia (Is. 3.6; 5.2; Lys. 23.13; Pl. Ap. 19b; Harpocration s.v. ajntwmosiva; Poll. 8.55). 4 If the magistrate accepted the case, he posted a copy of the plaint before the statues of the Eponymous Heroes in the Agora (Dem. 21.103).5 Before the trial began the secretary of the court read the plaint to the judges (Aeschin. 1.2). At the end of his speech the accuser might read out the plaint (Hyp. Phil. 13; Eux. 40) or remind the court of the main charges (Dem. 19.333; 23.215-18). Despite its importance in Athenian legal procedure, the main handbooks on Athenian law pay little attention to the plaint. 6 Several recent essays have discussed the plaint but only examine some of the evidence and do not provide an extensive analysis of its role in Athenian legal procedure. 7 The basic form of the plaint contained the name of the accuser, the name of the defendant and the name of the offense. A good example is the plaint submitted by Apollodorus in his case against Stephanus: “Apollodorus, the son of Pasion, from the deme of Acharnai, (brings a charge) of false testimony against Stephanus, the son of Menecles, from the deme of Acharnai. Penalty: one talent” ( jApollovdwro~ Pasivwno~ jAcarneu;~ Stefavnw/ Meneklevou~ jAcarnei' yeudomarturivwn, tivmhma tavlanton) (Dem. 45.46). The version Demosthenes (21.103) gives of the plaint written by Euctemon follows the same pattern: “Euctemon from the deme of Lousia has brought a charge of desertion against Demosthenes from the deme of Paiania” (Eujkthvmwn Lousieu;~ ejgravyato Dhmosqevnhn Paianieva

4

On this term see Wyse 1904, 294. Cf. Harrison 1971, 99.

5 Demosthenes (21.103) says that Euctemon brought a charge, which was displayed, then did not attend the anakrisis, which would indicate that the magistrate posted the charge before the anakrisis, not after. Pace Faraguna 2006, 205, note 34 («dopo l’anakrisis una copia dell’atto di accusa veniva esposta dal magistrato . . .»). Cf. Isocr. 15.237; [Dem.] 58.7-8. On the monument of the Eponymous Heroes see Shear 1970. 6 Beauchet 1897 contains no general discussion of the plaint. Lipsius 1905-15, 815-24 mentions only the plaints found at Dem. 45.46; Dem. 37.22, 25, 26, 28, 29; D.H. Din. 3; Plut. Alc. 22; D.L. 2.40 and does not discuss many of the passages examined in this essay. The index to his work contains no entry for the term e[gklhma. Harrison 1971, 91-2 mentions only those plaints cited by Lipsius and contains no extensive discussion of their contents and role in litigation. MacDowell 1978, 150-1, 201, 239 gives translations of the plaints at Dem. 37.22, D.H. Din. 3, and D.L. 2.40, but states only «the prosecutor or claimant gave the magistrate a statement of his charge or claim» and that by the time of Demosthenes it was submitted in writing. Todd 1993, 126 discusses briefly the possibility that the magistrate might not accept the indictment but has nothing about the indictment’s form or contents. Gagarin 2008, 112-3 discusses only the plaints cited by Harrison and has nothing to add to his discussion. Pébarthe 2006, 315-43 has a very good discussion of the documents used in litigation but has only three pages on the engklema, phasis, and paragraphe. 7 Faraguna 2006 discusses only the plaints mentioned by Lipsius and Harrison and the documents at [Plut.] Mor. 833e-834b (I am skeptical about the authenticity of this document). Bertrand 2002 and Thür 2007 only discuss some of the evidence and provide little analysis of the document’s role.

144

lipotaxivou). 8 The names of the accuser and the defendant are followed by the patronymic and the name of their demes (Demosthenes is probably abbreviating Euctemon’s plaint by omitting the patronymics). Demosthenes (21.87) says that the names of the kleteres, the witnesses to the summons, were also written on the plaint (cf. [Dem.] 53.14). 9 This information was important for the magistrate who received the charge for several reasons. The first was to establish the full identity of each party for all subsequent stages of the procedure. If the defendant lost the case and had to pay damages, the record of the trial would clearly indicate who had to pay. If the defendant were condemned to pay a fine or lose some political rights, the praktores who collected fines would know whom to record as a public debtor. 10 The second was to determine the status of the two parties; if both were citizens, the magistrate would send the case to one of the regular courts, but if one party was a metic, he would have to refer the case to the Polemarch and the prostates of the metic might become involved. If the defendant were a slave, the magistrate would have to make sure that his master would represent him in court. Lysias’ speech Against Pancleon illustrates the importance of establishing the status of the defendant. The accuser recounts how he summoned Pancleon before the Polemarch because he assumed he was a metic (Lys. 23.2). When he replied that he was a Plataean and belonged to the deme of Decelea, the accuser summoned him before the court of the tribe Hippothontis (Lys. 23.3). The fact that he was careful to select the right jurisdiction reveals that he obviously expected the magistrate to reject the charge if it was not brought in the right venue. Third, the magistrate had to know the precise nature of the charge so that he could be sure that the accuser was initiating a procedure contained in one of

8 The accuser in a public case apparently did not have to decide about what penalty he was going to propose at the timesis phase of the trial until after the court voted about the guilt of the defendant. This would explain why Demosthenes in his speech Against Meidias mentions several possible penalties for the defendant. See Harris 1989, 125-26. This would also explain why Euctemon’s plaint did not contain a penalty. See, however, [Dem.] 58.43 (Theocrines adds a penalty of ten talents in a graphe paranomon), Aeschin. 2.14 (Lycinus writes one hundred talents as penalty), Arist. Ath. Pol. 48.4 (the accuser at the euthynai writes the penalty (to; tivmhma ej[pigray]avmeno~) and the comic version of a plaint found at Ar. Vesp. 894-97: ajkouvet j h[dh th`~ grafh`~. ejgravyato/Kuvwn Kudaqhnaieu;~ Lavbht j Aijxwneva/to;n turo;n ajdikei`n o{ti movno~ kathvsqien/to;n Sikelikovn. Tivmhma klw/o;~ suvkino~. See also the law about archives from Paros, which required the accuser in a public suit against those who tampered with public documents to write the amount of the penalty in the plaint: tivmhma ejpigrafovmeno~ ¼ tiv crh; paqei`n h] ajpotei`sai (SEG 33.679, lines 27-32). 9 Lipsius 1905-15, 805 thought that this was not necessary because the names of these witnesses are not found on the plaints in the passages cited in note 6, but there is no reason to believe that these documents were complete. 10 For the praktores see Antiph. 6.49; IG I3 59 (c. 430 BCE), fr. e, lines 47-8; IG II2 45 (378/7), line 7; Agora 15.56A, line 34. For the importance of having the right name on the plaint see Dem. 39.15.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

145

the laws. All magistrates in Athens were forbidden to follow any unwritten law, that is, a law that was not found in the written lawcode of Athens (Andoc. 1.86).11 If a magistrate accepted a charge that did not follow one of the legal procedures in the lawcode, he would violate this rule and be subject to prosecution at his euthynai (Arist. Ath. Pol. 48.4). The Athenian magistrate did not issue an edict indicating what kinds of charges he would accept. He was not like a Roman magistrate who could make procedural innovations by applying standard procedure to new kinds of offenses or modify the traditional formulae; he could only accept charges in accordance with a particular law. Fourth, the plaint would enable the magistrate to make sure that the accuser had brought his charge in the correct jurisdiction. If the accuser had brought his charge before the wrong magistrate, the latter would reject the charge and could indicate to the accuser another magistrate to whom he should submit his case. This also served to protect the magistrate by helping him to avoid accepting cases that lay outside his jurisdiction. Fifth, in private cases the magistrate, the public arbitrator and the court had to know in private cases the exact amount of damages the plaintiff was requesting. The public arbitrator and the court needed to know so that it could determine whether the losses suffered by the plaintiff were roughly equivalent to the damages he requested. For instance, Demosthenes, when arguing his case against his guardians, had not only to prove that they had embezzled a large amount of his inheritance but also to show the exact amount that they had taken (Dem. 27.4-6). Sixth, if the plaintiff lost the case, the court had to know how much he had requested to determine the amount of the epobolia, a fine of one-sixth the amount he had requested. 12 Seventh, if the defendant were to charge the accuser with making a false summons (graphe pseudokleteias), it was necessary to know the names of the alleged witnesses to the summons so that they could be invited to testify. 13 For all these reasons, it was crucial to have a written record of all this information. But the plaint contained much more information than these basic facts. The accuser also had to indicate the illegal actions performed by the defendant. He could not just assert that the defendant had broken the law; he had to show what the defendant had done to violate the law. When describing the actions of the defendant, the accuser also had to follow the language of the statute under which he had initiated his procedure. In 343 Hyperides brought a charge of treason against Philocrates using the procedure of eisangelia. This law applied to three types of offenses: 1) attempts to overthrow the democracy, 2) treason (betraying [prodw`]/ the city, its ships, land or naval forces), and 3) speaking against the best interests

11 Note that several passages state explicitly that an action was brought in accordance with a specific procedure provided by law – see, for example, [Dem.] 59.66; Dem. 24.32, 34-8; 32.1; 33.2-3; 35.3; 43.7,15,16. 12 On the epobolia see MacDowell 2008. 13 On the graphe pseudokleteias see [Dem.] 53.14-18.

146

of the Athenian people while accepting money (rJhvtwr w]n mh; levgh/ ta; a[rista tw/` dhvmw/ tw/` jAqhnaivwn crhvmata lambavnwn) (Hyp. Eux. 7-8).14 When he wrote his indictment, he followed the wording of the third offense very carefully. The impeachment that I drew up was just and in accordance with the law, referring to him as “an orator giving counsel against the best interests of the people and receiving money and gifts from those working against them.” Even so I was not satisfied to bring in the impeachment before I had added underneath: “These proposals he made against the best interests of the people, because he had taken bribes.” And I wrote his decree underneath. And again I added: “These further proposals he made against the best interests of the people, because he had taken bribes.” And I wrote the decree alongside. Indeed this statement is written down five or six times because I thought that the trial and the judgment should be just (Hyp. Eux. 29-30).

Hyperides included the three key terms “public speaker” (rJhvtora), “not in the best interests of the Athenian people” (mh; ta; a[rista tw/` dhvmw/ tw/` jAqhnaivwn), and “taking money” (crhvmata lambavnonta, crhvmata labwvn) not just once but several times.15 He also included texts of the decrees Philocrates had proposed when he committed these offenses. The complete document must have been rather long. The charges in the eisangelia brought by Polyeuctus against Euxenippus contained the same terms from the statute: “speaking against the best interests of the people of Athens and taking money and gifts from those acting against the Athenian people” (Hyp. Eux. 39). After Lycurgus drew up his indictment against Leocrates using the same procedure, several people approached him and asked why he did not include in it the charge that Leocrates had “betrayed” his father’s statue dedicated in the temple of Zeus the Savior. Even though Lycurgus did not include this charge, it contained the key word “betrayed” (prodedwkevnai) from the statute about eisangelia (Lyc. Leocr. 136-7). When Lycurgus initiated the same procedure against Lycophron for seducing the wife of Charippus, he included in his plaint a statement of her relatives that during her wedding Lycophron followed her and tried to persuade her to avoid having sexual relations with Charippus (Hyp. Lyc. 12). He also wrote that Lycophron was making many women stay indoors and grow old unmarried, while forcing many others into unsuitable and illegal marriages. Even though his use of this procedure was highly unusual, Lycurgus still followed the language of the statute by stating that these actions undermined the democracy by violating the laws (Hyp. Lyc. 12: kataluvein to;n dh`mon parabaivn[on]ta tou;~ novmou~).16 When Theomnestus charged Neaira with wrongly claiming citi-

14 For discussion of the terms of the law in this passage see Whitehead 2000, 186-88. 15 Cf. Whitehead 2000, 236: Hyperides «had taken care there to echo the words and phrases of the impeachment law itself». 16 Lyc. Leocr. 147 may be a summary of the main charges in the indictment. A fragment from one of Lycurgus’ speeches against Lycophron (fr. 63 Conomis) indicates that the accuser’s argument was that breaking the law was equivalent to overthrowing the democracy because the laws protected the democracy. See Whitehead 2000, 129.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

147

zen-rights, he used the language of the relevant statute, which forbade foreigners to be married to an Athenian citizen ([Dem.] 59.17, 126). When Epaenetus brought an accusation before the Thesmothetai against Stephanus for wrongfully holding him as a seducer, he wrote a detailed justification of charges and quoted the relevant laws. The term moichos, which I have translated as “seducer”, refers to someone who has illicit sexual relations with a woman, usually the wife of another man or an unmarried daughter living under the protection of a male relative. 17 He began by citing the law that allowed him to bring this kind of public suit. 18 He then admitted that he had had sexual relations with the daughter of Neaira, but denied that he had seduced her in violation of the law. Next he presented his main arguments. First, she was not the daughter of Stephanus, but of Neaira. Second, Neaira knew that her daughter was having sexual relations with him. Third, he cited the law that did not permit anyone who has sexual relations with prostitutes to be taken as a seducer and argued that the house of Stephanus was a house of prostitution. Epaenetus closely follows both the law about the procedure he is following, presents the main facts he promises to prove, and the law about prostitutes he will use to support his case. 19 His plaint was clearly very long and detailed. 20 The plaint that Meletus brought against Socrates for impiety appears to have been shorter but still contained the main charges and facts alleged against the philosopher. Meletus alleged that Socrates was guilty because 1) he corrupted the youth; 2) he did not believe in the gods that the community of Athens recognized, and 3) he introduced new gods (Pl. Ap. 24b-c; cf. Euthphr. 3b). 21 In a public suit against an illegal decree, the plaint not only stated the charge against the proposer of the decree but also listed the laws that the decree contravened (Aeschin. 3.200) and the specific clauses of the decree that were illegal. 22

17 See Kapparis 1999, 297-8 for discussion with references to earlier scholarship. 18 Kapparis 1999, 308-13 does not discuss the nature of the plaint brought by Epaenetus. 19 To prove his statements about Epaenetus’ plaint, Apollodorus does not have the secretary read the plaint but calls the sureties and arbitrators who brought about a settlement ([Dem.] 59.70). This plaint was evidently not kept in the archives because Epaenetus withdrew his charge before the case came to court ([Dem.] 59.68-9). On withdrawing charges before the anakrisis, see Harris 2006, 405-22. 20 The charges mentioned by Demosthenes (19.8) in his prosecution of Aeschines were probably listed in the plaint: 1) Aeschines made no true report; 2) prevented the people from hearing the truth from Demosthenes; 3) his proposals were not in the interests of Athens; 4) Aeschines did not obey the instructions in the decree about the embassy; 5) Aeschines wasted time during which the city lost opportunities, and 6) Aeschines accepted gifts and payments. Demosthenes repeats several of these charges at 278-9. 21 I am skeptical about the authenticity of the denunciation of Alcibiades brought by Thessalus (Plut. Alc. 22.4; cf. 19.2-3). For a defense of its authenticity see Frost 1961; Stadter 1989, LXIX-LXXI, and Pelling 2000, 27. 22 Cf. [Dem.] 58.46: if Theocrines brought a graphe paranomon, he would have added the laws violated by the defendant in his indictment.

148

When Diodorus accused Aristocrates of proposing an illegal decree for Charidemus, he included in the plaint all the laws Aristocrates had violated: 1) the law about the Areopagus; 2) the law about convicted murderers; 3) the law about bringing convicted murderers to the Thesmothetai; 4) the law about just homicide; 5) the law requiring trials for all accused of murder; 6) the law about taking hostages; 7) the law about laws being the same for all individuals, and 8) and the law requiring that no decree take precedence over a law (Dem. 23.215-18; cf. 51). Demosthenes (18.56-9) says that Aeschines’ indictment of Ctesiphon singled out three clauses in his decree of honors: 1) that Demosthenes always speaks and acts for the public benefit; 2) that Demosthenes should receive a crown, and 3) that the award of the crown should be announced in the theater of Dionysus. 23 When Diodorus charged Androtion with proposing an illegal decree of honors for the Council, he included in his plaint the laws that he claimed Androtion had violated (Dem. 22.34). These included the law requiring all decrees of the Assembly receive prior approval from the Council (Dem. 22.5-7), the law forbidding honors for members of the Council who have not had triremes built (Dem. 22.8), and the law forbidding prostitutes and public debtors to propose motions in the Assembly (Dem. 22.21-24, 33-4). 24 The plaint in a private suit also included a description of the main facts the plaintiff had to prove and followed the language of the relevant statute. Dionysius of Halicarnassus (Din. 3) gives the text of a plaint brought by Dinarchus against Proxenus: “Dinarchus, the son of Sostratus, a Corinthian, (brings a case of) damage against Proxenus. Proxenus harmed (e[blaye) me by receiving into his house in the country when I had fled from Athens and returned to Chalcis, two hundred and eighty-five gold staters, which I had sent from Chalcis with Proxenus’ knowledge and which I had when I came to his house, and silver items worth not less than twenty mnai. He plotted against these.” As in the plaints brought in public cases, the charges contain the key word from the statute (e[blaye) and specify the facts the accuser seeks to prove. 25 The law about damage also contained different penalties for damage caused willingly, for which there was double compensation, and damage caused involuntarily, for which there was simple compensation (Dem. 21.43). This is probably the reason why Dinarchus added the phrase to show that Proxenus had acted willingly, which would have entitled him to double compensation. When Apollodorus brought his charge of false testimo-

23 Aeschines’ charges: Aeschin. 3.9-31 (Ctesiphon’s decree awarded a crown to an official who had not yet passed his euthynai), 32-48 (the decree provided for an announcement of the crown in the theater of Dionysus), 49-170 (the decree contains false statements). 24 The plaint in charges against inexpedient laws may also have contained texts of the laws violated by the new laws, but the two preserved speeches delivered in cases brought on this procedure, Demosthenes’ Against Leptines and Against Timocrates, do not discuss the plaint. 25 Compare the use of the word e[blaye in the plaints mentioned at Dem 36.20. For a plaint in a private suit for damages specifying the actions of the defendant see also Dem. 52.14.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

149

ny (yeudomarturivwn) against Stephanus, he stated in his plaint: “Stephanus gave false testimony against me (ta; yeudh` mou katemartuvrhse) by testifying to the written statements contained in the document” and added a copy of Stephanus’ testimony (Dem. 45.9-11, 46). When Theopompus made his claim for the estate of Hagnias, he was careful to include in his written statement that he was the son of a cousin, basing his claim on the precise wording of the relevant statute (Is. 11.18). When an accuser brought an indictment for homicide before the Areopagus, his sworn statement included the verb “killed” (e[kteine) found in the law about the jurisdiction of the Areopagus (Lys. 10.11; Dem. 23.24-5). The plaint that Pantaenetus made against Nicobulus also contains many details about the defendant’s actions. 26 First, it states that Nicobulus made a plot against him and his property and that he instructed his slave to carry out the plot. Second, Nicobulus placed his slave in his mining works and forbade him to continue working them (Dem. 37.25). The third charge appears to have been related to the slaves of Pantaenetus. The summary of Nicobulus does not allow us to determine the nature of the fourth charge (Dem. 37.28), but the fifth charge was that Nicobulus had violated the contract, probably by seizing the mining works (Dem. 37.29). At the end of the plaint were several additional charges including assault, outrage, violence, and offenses against heiresses (Dem. 37.32-3), but Nicobulus does not specify what actions Pantaenetus accused him of committing. Later in the speech, however, Nicobulus reveals that Pantaenetus charged him with entering his house and going into the rooms of his daughters (Dem. 37.45). In his plaint in a maritime suit Zenothemis stated that he had made a loan to Hegestratus on the security of a cargo and that after Hegestratus was lost at sea Demo misappropriated the cargo (Dem. 32.2, 4). 27 As in the plaints for public charges, those for private charges also contained the main facts the accuser intended to prove. The plaint in a suit for damages might contain a detailed list of sums. Demosthenes says that his plaint against Aphobus began: “Demothenes makes the following charges against Aphobus: Aphobus holds money belonging to me,

26 The inserted documents at Dem. 37.22 and 29 must be forgeries because the statements they contain are not consistent with the information found in the speech. First, the document uses the first person singular, but other examples of plaints use only the third person (Dem. 21.103; Ar. Vesp. 894-97). Second, the narrative states that Evergus seized the mining works of Pantaenetus and caused him to become a public debtor. This implies that Pantaenetus became a public debtor because he could not operate his mining works and earn the money needed to make his payments to the state. Pantaenetus also claimed that Evergus and Nicobulus violated their agreement by seizing his mining works (Dem. 37.6). The document at 22 however states that Pantaenetus became a state debtor because Nicobulus’ slave seized the money his slave was taking to make the payment for the mine. The document at 29 states that Nicobulus violated the agreement by selling the mining works and the slave, but this is at odds with the statement at Dem. 37.6. This casts doubt on the other inserted documents at Dem.37.25, 26 and 28. 27 Cf. the charges in the plaint summarized and read out at Dem. 34.16.

150

which he received as guardian, eighty mnai, which he received as the dowry of my mother according to the will of my father” (Dem. 29.31). He then listed all the items he claimed, “specifying the source of each, the exact amount, and the person from whom Aphobus received it” (Dem. 29.30). These items included 1) money from the sale of slaves for his mother’s dowry (Dem. 27.13-17); 2) money owed from the failure to return the dowry (Dem. 27.17); 3) thirty mnai from revenue of a workshop and the sale of slaves (Dem. 27.18-22); 4) money from twenty slaves given as security for a loan (Dem. 27.24-29); 5) the value of iron and ivory from the workshop (Dem. 27.30-33), and 6) cash left with the guardians and the interest accruing (Dem. 27.33-39). Demosthenes was also careful to mention that Aphobus received this money in his capacity as guardian (ejpitroph`~), using the key word in the statute governing the procedure he had selected. 28 Once again, the plaint must have been very long. The counter-plea might contain the basic facts the defendant intended to prove. In his reply to the charges of Apollodorus, Stephanus replied that his testimony was true (Dem. 45.46). When the half-brother of Astyphilus brought his case against Cleon, he not only claimed the estate of Astyphilus but outlined his main arguments and the facts he intended to prove: first, Astyphilus did not adopt Cleon’s son; second, Astyphylus did not leave his property to anyone; third, Astyphilus did not make a will; and fourth, he has the best claim on the property of Astyphilus (Is. 9.1). Even though Athenian law contained nothing like the prescribed phrases of the Roman formulary system, one should not exaggerate the difference between the two systems. When the accuser drew up his plaint he had to follow the language of the statute. 29 If the plaint did not contain the key words of the relevant statute, the magistrate who received the charge might compel the accuser to add them. When Dionysius used the procedure of apagoge to the Eleven against Agoratus, he charged him with killing his father. For one to use this procedure, however, one had to apprehend the defendant ep’ autophoro, that is, in circumstances that made his guilt obvious. 30 To make the plaint Dionysius submitted conform to the language of the statute, the Eleven insisted that he add the key term ep’autophoro to the charge (Lys. 13.85-87). One of the reasons for requiring the accuser to write the specific charges he intended to prove at the trial was to ensure procedural fairness for the defendant. The defendant needed to know not only the kind of action the accuser

28 Note that the key word ejpitrophv was also written in the plaint against Aristaechmus who was accused of misappropriating the property of his wards (Dem. 38.15). 29 Note that the diamartyria submitted by Leochares against the claim of Leostratus to the estate of Archiades followed the terms of the law ([Dem.] 44.46: o[ntwn aujtw`/ paivdwn gnhsivwn kai; kurivw~ kata; to;n qesmovn). 30 For the procedure and the meaning of the term ep’ autophoro see Harris 2006, 373-90.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

151

had brought but also to know what the accuser claimed that he had done. This would allow him to prepare a detailed reply to each one of the charges. T. Bingham rightly stresses the importance of informing the defendants about charges against them: The fair trial of a civil action is now held to require the parties to reveal their respective cases and almost all material relevant to them before the trial even begins. The point of the law is that litigation should be conducted with the ‘cards face up on the table’. This is achieved, first, by requiring the claimant to set out in writing in some detail the grounds on which he claims. He cannot appear at trial and present a case different from that which he has advanced in writing. The defendant in turn must set out in some detail in writing the ground on which he resists the claim. He cannot simply deny the claim and leave the claimant and the judge wondering what his defence is. Nor can he appear at trial and advance a defence different from that indicated. Thus the line of battle should be drawn with some precision before the first shot is fired in court. 31

The accuser was also required to provide at the anakrisis all the evidence he planned to present at the trial. 32 This evidence was then placed in a container called an echinos; the accuser could not present at the trial any evidence of documents not placed in the echinos. On the other hand, the reply of the defendant would also let the accuser know how he planned to reply to his charges. 33 Of course, there was always the possibility that at the trial the accuser might make charges that were not contained in the indictment. Hyperides (Eux. 32) describes how this tactic might put the defendant in a difficult position: if the defendant were to reply to charges not contained in the indictment, the court might reprimand him for discussing irrelevant matters, but if he were to neglect them, the court might assume they were true. Several defendants complain about this tactic. A soldier accused of slandering generals claims that instead of concentrating on the charges in the plaint his opponents are slandering his character (Lys. 9.1-3). When defending Ctesiphon, Demosthenes (18.9) criticizes Aeschines for using this tactic: “because he has spent the larger part of his speech on other topics and told very many lies about me, I think that it is necessary and correct to say a few words about these charges so that none of you be misled by irrelevant arguments and listen to my just points about the indictment in a hostile spirit.” For instance, Aeschines when prosecuting Timarchus complained that Demosthenes would attempt to distract the judges from the charges by talking about the recent peace with Philip and other irrelevant matters (Aeschin. 1.166-70). In the speech Against Androtion the accuser Diodorus complains that the defendant

31 Bingham 2010, 101. 32 See Thür 2007. 33 On the anticipation of arguments in Athenian courts see Dorjahn 1935, who may underestimate the amount of information obtained through the plaint and at the anakrisis.

152

is skilled in rhetoric and that he will deceive the judges and make them forget about their oath (Dem. 22.4). 34 Hyperides exaggerates the problem because there was a safeguard protecting the defendant. In their oath Athenian judges swore to vote only about the charges in the indictment (Dem. 45.50). 35 This meant that when casting their votes, the judges should consider only the facts that the accuser promised to prove and disregard all statements that did not bear directly on these charges (e[xw tou` pravgmato~). In fact, Hyperides (Eux. 35-6) reports that Lysander charged Epicrates of Pallene with digging his mine inside the limits of another man’s mine and tried to sway their decision by promising to bring in three hundred talents for the city’s budget. 36 “The judges paid no attention to the accuser’s promises but followed what justice required: they determined that the mine was inside its own boundaries and by that same vote made their property secure and confirmed the rest of their period for working the mine.” The accuser’s promise did not sway the judges; they paid attention to the law and the facts of the case. When they saw that the defendant’s actions did not violate the law and that he was not guilty of the charge of encroaching on another’s mine, he was acquitted. Another way of distracting the judges from the charges in the plaint was for the defendant to boast about his public service. Lysias (12.38) notes how some defendants make no attempt to answer the charges against them but “show that they are good soldiers, or have captured many ships from the enemy, or have made cities that were hostile into your friends.” Several passages however show that the courts ignored such statements because they were strictly irrelevant to the charges contained in the plaint. 37 Aeschines (3.195) says that the court that tried Thrasybulus on a charge of proposing an illegal decree did not take into account his role in restoring the democracy but convicted him because he was guilty as charged. When Aristophon charged Timotheus with bribery, the court paid no attention to his victories and conquests but convicted him on the charge Aristophon brought: “You did not allow public services like these to influence the trial or the oath that you obeyed while casting your votes, but you fined him one hundred talents because Aristophon said he received money from the Chians and Rhodians” (Din. 1.14). According to Demosthenes (21.143-47), the court did not allow the achievements of Alcibiades and his ancestors to affect their decision, but

34 See also Dem. 21.208, 211 where Demosthenes predicts some wealthy trierarchs will ask the judges to acquit Meidias as a favor to them and to pay no attention to their oath. Cf. Dem. 23.95, 219 for attempts to distract the judges. 35 This clause is mentioned or alluded to many times in forensic oratory: Aeschin. 1.154, 170; Dem. 22.4, 43, 45; 24.189; 30.9; 32.13; 37.17; Is. 6.51-2; Lyc. Leocr. 11-13. 36 For the nature of the charge see Whitehead 2000, 248-9 with references to earlier literature. 37 Pace Lanni 2005 and 2006, 46-64 who does not discuss the plaint and its role in litigation.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

153

sent him into exile for violating the law. 38 When Epicrates was accused of bribery and other offenses in the Assembly, Demosthenes (19.277) tells us that his service in restoring the democracy did not help him to win acquittal. The written plaint was an important way of checking this abuse. The plaint compelled the defendant to reply to the specific charges against him and prevented him from introducing irrelevant material. The plaint also served to keep the judges focused on their duty to punish those who had violated the law. 39 After the trial was over, the plaint was kept on file, probably in the Metroon. 40 According to Aristotle (Pol. 6.5.4.1321b34-37), the normal Greek city-state kept records about the verdicts in trials. Athens was no exception to this general rule. 41 Several passages show that documents containing the charges were kept in the archives after the trial was concluded. The first comes from Demosthenes’ speech Against Zenothemis. Zenothemis brought two separate suits against Protus and Demo in a dispute about loans made on the security of grain shipments (Dem. 32.4). Protus did not contest the charges brought by Zenothemis and lost his case by default. When Zenothemis brought his case against Demo, the latter charged that the suit was not admissible and brought a paragraphe action. At the trial he cited the statements made by Zenothemis in his plaint against Protus and used them as evidence in his own case (Dem. 32.27). 42 The second comes from Demosthenes’ speech Against Nausimachus and Xenopeithes. Nausimachus and

38 Demosthenes alters some of the details to make Alcibiades’ case resemble that of Meidias, but that does not alter his point that the courts paid no attention to public service. For examples of other men who were convicted despite their public service see Dem. 24.133-35 (Thrasybulus, Philepsius, Agyrrhius, and Myronides) and Hdt. 6.136.1-3. 39 Note Antiphon 5.11 – the judges are to consider only whether the defendant committed the crime. Compare also Lys. 16.9, which contrasts the dokimasia, at which it was permitted to discuss the candidate’s entire life, with regular trials, at which the accuser had to limit himself to proving the charges in the plaint. Rhodes 2004 observes that Athenian litigants generally keep to the point, but he does not discuss the role of the plaint. Rhodes never defines what he means by “relevant” and his judgment of what is relevant and what is not in the speeches is often arbitrary. 40 Pace Gagarin 2008, 195: «But verdicts in general were not officially recorded». In footnote 49 Gagarin claims «although speakers often mention the result of a previous case (…) no speaker mentions writing in connection with the verdict in a private case». The evidence cited below (overlooked by Gagarin) shows that the plaint, which presumably recorded the court’s decision, was in fact kept in the archives. Records of verdicts may have also been kept at the Aiakeion (see Stroud 1994). 41 Cf. the anecdote of Chamaeleon of Heraclea (fr. 44 Wehrli = Athen. 9.407b-c) about Alcibiades entering the Metroon and erasing the indictment against his friend Hegemon of Thasos. According to Diogenes Laertius (2.40) the indictment of Meletus against Socrates was still in the Metroon during the second century CE. Sickinger 1999, 131-33 is rightly skeptical about the veracity of Chamaeleon’s anecdote and the document in Diogenes Laertius, but this does not mean that other plaints could not have been preserved in the Metroon. 42 The accuser of Pancleon uses his statement in his reply to a charge made by Aristodicus in the same way, but, instead of having the document read by the secretary, calls Aristodicus as a witness (Lys. 23.13-14).

154

Xenopeithes had brought separate suits against their guardian Aristaechmus for damages when they reached the age of majority. They reached a settlement with Aristaechmus, who paid them three talents and was given a release (Dem. 38.3-4). After the death of Aristaechmus, however, Nausimachus and Xenopeithes brought separate suits against each of his four children. One of the children brought a paragraphe against this claim on the grounds that a release had been granted (Dem. 38.4-5). At the trial, the son had the text of the plaint in their earlier suit against Aristaechmus read out (Dem. 38.14). The third passage comes from Isaeus’ speech On the Estate of Pyrrhus. Pyrrhus had adopted Endius, who inherited his estate and survived him for twenty years (Is. 3.1). After he died a woman named Phile claimed that she was the legitimate daughter of Pyrrhus, and her kyrios Xenocles of Kopros, claimed the estate on her behalf (Is. 3.2). The sister of Pyrrhus also claimed the estate, but Xenocles challenged her claim with a diamartyria. In response to this diamartyria the son of Pyrrhus’ mother brought a charge of false testimony against Xenocles and obtained a conviction against him (Is. 3.3-4). He then brought another charge of false testimony against Nicodemus, the brother of Phile’s mother, who had testified about his sister’s marriage to Pyrrhus (Is. 3.4-7). At the trial of Nicodemus, the son of Pyrrhus’ mother had the clerk read out the diamartyria brought by Xenocles and used it as evidence to prove that the defendant had given false testimony (Is. 3.6-7). Even if the accuser did not follow through on a public charge, a copy of his indictment was still kept on file. For instance, Theocrines denounced Micon concerning a merchant ship using the procedure of phasis ([Dem.] 58.5). 43 Theocrines gave the denunciation to Euthyphemus, the secretary of the overseers of the port, who posted the charge in front of their office ([Dem.] 58.8). 44 Theocrines came to an illegal agreement with Micon, withdrew the charge, and convinced Euthyphemus to erase the denunciation just as the overseers were summoning Theocrines to the preliminary hearing ([Dem.] 58.8-10). Even though the copy that was posted before the office of the overseers was erased, the original copy of the plaint was kept on file and was read out by the clerk when Theocrines was later brought to trial for making an illegal settlement with Micon ([Dem.] 58.7-8). For the litigants there were two main reasons for keeping the plaint on file. First, it protected the defendant from any further charges. The laws of Athens provided that once a case was settled or decided, one could not bring another

43 On this procedure one can consult MacDowell 1991; Hansen 1991 and Wallace 2003. MacDowell and Hansen believe that there was one law about phasis, but it is more likely that this procedural term was found in several different laws and that in each law it had a slightly different meaning suited to the substantive context. To this extent I would agree with Wallace, but do not find convincing his general conclusions about Athenian laws. 44 On these officials see Din. 2.10; SEG 26.72, lines 41-44 with Stroud 1974, 180-81; Arist. Ath. Pol. 51.4.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

155

case against the same person on the same charge (Dem. 20.147; 37.18, 21). 45 If an accuser did attempt to violate this rule by bringing a second charge on the same grounds, it was important for the defendant to have a public document on record to prove that the case had already been decided. This is the way the son of Aristaechmus used the plaint in his case against Nausimachus and Xenopeithes. Second, if one initiated a public charge, then failed to bring the case to trial, the accuser lost the right to bring any more public charges. Therefore even if the accuser did not follow through on his prosecution, it was important to keep the plaint in the archives because it provided evidence for his partial loss of rights (atimia). This is the way the accuser who prosecuted Theocrines used the plaint. Third parties could also use the evidence of the plaint to establish facts that might support their cases. This is the way Demo used the plaint in his case against Zenothemis. The plaint was not the only record of trials in Athens. The poletai recorded the sales of confiscated properties and often included details about legal procedures and verdicts. For instance, in the records for the years 342/1-339/8 the poletai reported the confiscation of properties owned by Philocrates, the son of Pythodorus, from the deme of Hagnous. The document lists the properties confiscated, then adds “all the properties of Philocrates, son of Pythodorus, [of Hagnous, being confiscated] since Philokrates did not appear for [the trial] according to the public indictment which was brought against him by Hyperides, son of Glaukippos, of Kollytos, but was convicted in absentia by the court.” (trans. Meritt). 46 There is a more lengthy entry in the records of 367/6 for the property of Theosebes, who was convicted on a charge of impiety and did not show up at his trial. 47 In this case, several creditors came forward to present claims to his property, and the document records the amounts claimed and the decision to pay these claims. Most of the entries are much more brief and record properties reported by the apographe procedure. Even though these documents do record the verdicts of trials or other legal procedures, their main functions were different from the plaints that were kept in the Metroon. One function was financial: these records kept track of public revenues gained by sales of confiscated property. Another was to ensure the accountability of the poletai and to prevent embezzlement by these officials. A third function was to provide proof of ownership for those who purchased the confiscated properties. 48 The supervisors of the fleet also kept records that might include the verdicts of trials. Each trierarch had the duty to return the ship in good repair to the dock-

45 For this point see Faraguna 2006, 206. 46 For the text see Langdon, in Lalonde, Langdon & Walbank 1991, P26, lines 446-60. There appears to be another entry for property confiscated from Philocrates, which uses similar language: cf. P26, lines 399-402. 47 For the text see P5, lines 8-39. 48 On the documents about land ownership in Attica see Faraguna 1997.

156

yards of the fleet. 49 The Supervisors (epimeletai) of the dockyards in conjunction with a tester (dokimastes) inspected the triremes when they returned, classified them as in good shape or not, and reported their findings to the Council. 50 If there was damage to the ship or it was lost, the trierarch could be held financially responsible, and the case was heard before a court, which might impose a penalty of double the value of what was lost. 51 The trierarch could present an excuse (skepsis) and claim that the loss or damage was caused by a storm. If the court accepted his excuse, the trierarch was exonerated. 52 One entry in the records of the Supervisors for the year 325/4 states that the trierarchs Euthydicus, the son of Antiphanes of Phegai and Diphilus the son of Diopeithes of Sounion presented such an excuse and were acquitted (IG II21629, lines 771-80). In cases of acquittal like this one, these records would protect the defendant against any further legal action. Another entry is longer and more detailed (IG II2 1631, lines 350-403). 53 A treasurer named Cephisodorus had not returned the equipment for ten triremes (IG II2 1631, lines 357-59). After he died, the supervisors of the dockyards brought charges against his brother Sopolis in 325/4, and the court imposed a fine for more than double the value of the equipment (IG II2 1631, lines 353-60). Sopolis returned some oars, but all of his property was declared subject to confiscation and reported by Polyeuctus (IG II2 1631, lines 360-65). Polyeuctus however allowed Sopolis to keep his share of the reward so that he could retain his rights as a citizen (IG II2 1631, lines 365-8). He also passed a decree in the Council protecting Sopolis against any further claims on his property (IG II2 1631, lines 350-2, 368-403). A fourth kind of record recording the outcome of trials are the so-called diadikasia-documents. Evidence for these records is provided by eight inscriptions. 54 The headings of three of these inscriptions contain the phrase oi{de diedikavsanto (“the following men brought a diadikasia-procedure”). The heading of one of these inscriptions is dated by the archon Phanostratus and the secretary Cleidemus to the year 383/2 (IG II2 1930, lines 1-2). The heading of another inscription has the same secretary (IG II2 1931, lines 1-2). A third inscription contains the names of two archons (380/79) and (381/0) («Hesperia» 15, 1946, 160, no. 17, lines 1-3). Each list contains a series of entries beginning with a name in the nominative with a patronymic, followed by the preposition ajntiv (“instead of”) and a name in the genitive with the patronymic. One of the lists is organized by demes

49 For the duties of trierarchs see Gabrielsen 1994, 105-69. 50 For the role of the Council in supervising the fleet see Arist. Ath. Pol. 46.1 with Rhodes 1972, 115-22 and 153-58. 51 For references see Rhodes 1972, 154, note 2. 52 IG II2 1629, lines 746-49, 796-99; 1631, lines 115-20, 140-43, 148-52. 53 On this case see Gabrielsen 1994, 163-64. 54 IG II2 1928-32; «Hesperia» 7, 1938, 277, no. 12; 306, no. 29; «Hesperia» 15, 1946, 160, no. 17.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

157

(IG II2 1932) while another contains demotics as well as patronymics («Hesperia» 15, 1946, 160, no. 17). The obvious explanation for these entries is that the first person challenged the second person to undertake his duties in a diadikasia and that as a result of the trial, the second person replaced him.55 There has been some debate about the nature of the public duties at issue in these legal proceedings, but Davies has made a strong case for relating them to a group called the Thousand, who were liable for payment of the eisphora early in the fourth century BCE.56 Like the records of trials involving trierarchs, these records were kept mainly for financial purposes: their aim was to provide an authoritative list of those required to pay the eisphora. They also protected those who brought the challenge from further liability for the eisphora. As with the records of trials involving trierarchs, they served both the financial interests of the state and the legal rights of individuals. A fifth kind of document recording the verdicts in trials are the records of dedications of phialai made by metics preserved in a series of fragmentary inscriptions. The standard formula in these records is “x, living in [deme], having escaped (= escaped conviction by) y, phialê by weight 100” while the most detailed version of the formula is “x, living in [deme], [profession], escaped y, son of yy, of [deme], phialê by weight 100.”57 I give a sample of three entries: “Soteris, living in Alopeke [a pedd]ler(?), having escaped (conviction by) Sostratos of Hermos (and) Timarchides of Euonymon, phialê by w[eigh]t: 100.” “Eutychis, a peddler, having escaped (conviction by) Sostratus (and?) Mnesistratus of Alopeke, phialê by weight: [100].” “P(hi)linna, living in Pirae(us), having escaped (conviction by) Astynomos from Oia, phialê by weight: 100.”

The nature of these trials depends on how one restores the heading in the cymation of IG II2 1578. Meyer has recently restored the lines to read: “These dedicated. [All received or listed] when Demoteles, son of Antimachos, of Halieus, was polemarch, according to the law, from the graphai aprostasiou, on the fifteenth of Hekatombaion.”58 Many other scholars have however restored the private action dike apostasiou, and some have argued that these trials were legal fictions that were actually manumissions.59 This is not the place to enter into this controversy. 60 The only point I wish to make is that the primary purpose of these

55 On the diadikasia for liturgies see Harrison 1971, 237-8. 56 Davies 1981, 133-50. 57 See Meyer 2010, 12-3. 58 See Meyer 2010, 133-35. 59 For discussion see Meyer 2010, 17-28 and 43-7 with references to the views of earlier scholars. 60 My own view is that Meyer is correct to reject the idea that these trials were manumissions effected by the legal fiction of a trial on a charge of apostasiou. I am skeptical however

158

inscriptions is to record dedications, which make them similar to the records of dedications in the Parthenon and Erechtheum. 61 That is why they give the weight of the dedication and do not specify the nature of the legal action. They aim to prevent embezzlement by officials, not to provide a record of a trial. Even though the records of the poletai about confiscations, the naval inventories and the dedications of phialai report the verdicts in trials, they are really financial records that mention verdicts rather than records of trials. 62 If there was a trial in the Assembly and the defendant was found guilty, there was a decree recording the grounds for conviction and the penalty imposed. 63 At the trial of Aeschines in 343, Demosthenes (19.276-80) had the clerk read out the decree condemning Epicrates and other ambassadors to death. He quotes several of the phrases from the decree: “Since they conducted the embassy contrary to their instructions,” “and some of them were proved to have been making an untrue report in the Council,” “and sending untrue letters,” and “telling lies against our allies and accepting gifts.” The decree clearly contained the main charges against the ambassadors even though it did not provide precise details about their actions. 64 The final type of judicial document to be noted are the lists of those denounced for the desecration of the Herms and the parody of the Mysteries. At his trial in 400/399 Andocides mentions four denunciations about the parody of the Mysteries by Andromachus (Andoc. 1.12-13), Teucrus (Andoc. 1.15), the wife of Alcmaeonides (Andoc. 1.16) and Lydus, the slave of Pherecles (Andoc. 1.17). In the first two cases Andocides has the clerk read the documents containing their names and two lists of names are found inserted into the text. Andocides then

about the restoration polemarcou`n]to~ and the restorations grafai; ajpro]stasivou and divkai ajpo]stasivou at IG II2 1578, lines 1-2. A search through the PHI database yielded not a single parallel for any of these expressions in Attic inscriptions. I would tentatively suggest ejpi]stasivou (“office of epistates”) which is attested at IG II2 1635, line 71; 1651, line 10, and 1672, line 74. 61 On these see D. Harris 1995. 62 The trials mentioned in the financial records of the Amphictyons of Delos fall into this category. See IG II2 1641B, lines 22-33; 1646, lines 3-14 with Stumpf 1987, and IDélos 98, B, lines 24-30. Cf. Faraguna 2006, 202: «per una corretta valutazione del loro significato, è importante ricordare che essi ci sono invariabilmente tramandati in rendiconti di carattere finanziario e ciò in quanto gli atti giudiziari di cui conservano memoria avevano conseguenze, in termini di entrata o di mancate entrate, per l’amministrazione dei magistrati che li ‘allegavano’ nei loro lovgoi». 63 Cf. Sickinger 1999, 133: «If the Metroon preserved any records of a judicial nature, these will have been the records of trials that were initiated or conducted before the Boule or Ekklesia». He cites Kahrstedt 1938, 27. 64 At the trial of Leocrates Lycurgus had the clerk read out the decree about the trial of Phrynichus and the decree condemning Hipparchus and other traitors (Lyc. Leocr. 111-119). See also the documents at [Plut.] Mor. 833e-834b. The authenticity of all these documents however is questionable.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

159

mentions two denunciations about the desecration of the Herms by Teucrus (Andoc. 1.34-35) and Diocleides (Andoc. 1.36-47). Andocides has the clerk read both of these lists (Andoc. 1.13, 47). These documents appear to be genuine because they contain names not provided by the orator but confirmed by the Attic stelai (IG I3 421-422). 65 The nature and function of these documents are slightly mysterious. In his speech Andocides says that some of those denounced fled the country and were sentenced to death while Plystratus was arrested and executed (Andoc. 1.13), but the document inserted into the text gives only names and does not indicate the verdict or punishment. One wonders if these names were listed on a stele containing the names of all those condemned in the two scandals, which was similar to the list of traitors mentioned by Lycurgus (Leocr. 118-19) or the stele about the injustice of the Peisistratids set up on the Acropolis (Thuc. 6.55.1-2). What is important for our topic is that these documents were obviously kept in the archives and that Andocides uses these documents to prove that he did not commit the crime of impiety (Andoc. 1.10). Nothing could better illustrate the importance of writing for Athenian legal procedure than the written plaint. 66 Even though litigants made oral presentations to the court, the shape and content of their speeches was determined to a large extent by the contents of the written plaint. If the accuser wished to gain a favorable decision, he had to prove the exact charges contained in the plaint. The plaint also compelled the accuser to show that the defendant had violated a specific law or set of laws. If the defendant wished to be acquitted, he had to answer and refute all the written charges against him. The plaint also served to define and clarify the issues the judges would have to decide. After the trial was over, the plaint was kept in the archives, probably in the Metroon, and served as evidence for the court’s decision. In this way, the document played an important role in maintaining the principle of res iudicata. 67

65 The names Cephisodorus, Oionias and Hephaestorus, found in the documents but not in the rest of the speech, are attested in the Attic Stelai (IG I3 421, line 33 [Cephisodorus]; line 10 [Hephaestodorus]; 422, lines 217, 219, 375 [Oionias]). 66 On the role of writing in Athenian legal procedure see Faraguna 2008. 67 I would like to thank Michele Faraguna for inviting me to participate in the conference and all the participants for helpful comments and encouragement. I would also like to thank James Sickinger for reading over a draft of this essay and making several helpful suggestions. I have also profited from reading an unpublished essay of his on the publication of verdicts.

160

bibliography

Beauchet 1897 L. Beauchet, Histoire du droit privé de la république athénienne, I-IV, Paris. Bertrand 2002 J.-M. Bertrand, À propos de la Rhetorique d’Aristote (I 1373b11374b23), analyse du processus judiciaire (to; ejpivgramma – to; e[gklhma), «Dike» 5, 161-85. Bingham 2010 T. Bingham, The Rule of Law, London. Calhoun 1919 G.M. Calhoun, Oral and Written Pleading in Athenian Courts, «TAPhA» 50, 177-93. Cohen 2003 D. Cohen, Writing, Law and Legal Practice in the Athenian Courts, in H. Yunis (ed.), Written Texts and the Rise of Literate Culture in Ancient Greece, Cambridge, 71-89. Carey 1992 C. Carey, Apollodoros: Against Neaira [Demosthenes 59], Warminster. Davies 1981 J.K. Davies, Wealth and the Power of Wealth in Classical Athens, New York. Davies 2003 J.K. Davies, Greek Archives: From Record to Monument, in M. Brosius (ed.), Ancient Archives and Archival Traditions: Concepts of Record-Keeping in the Ancient World, Cambridge, 323-43. Dorjahn 1935 A.P. Dorjahn, Anticipation of Arguments in Athenian Courts, «TAPhA» 65, 274-95. Faraguna 1997 M. Faraguna, Registrazioni catastali nel mondo greco: il caso di Atene, «Athenaeum» 85, 7-33.

the plaint in athenian law and legal procedure

Faraguna 2000 M. Faraguna, A proposito degli archivi nel mondo greco: terra e registrazioni fondiarie, «Chiron» 30, 65-115. Faraguna 2006 M. Faraguna, Alcibiade, Cratero e gli archivi giudiziari ad Atene, in M. Faraguna and V. Vedaldi Iasbez (eds.), Duvnasqai didavskein. Studi in onore di Filippo Càssola, Trieste, 197-207. Faraguna 2008 M. Faraguna, Oralità e scrittura nella prassi giudiziaria ateniese tra V e IV sec. a. C., in E.M. Harris and G. Thür (eds.), Symposion 2007: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Wien, 63-82. Gabrielsen 1994 V. Gabrielsen, Financing the Athenian Fleet: Public Taxation and Social Relations, Baltimore. Gagarin 2008 M. Gagarin, Writing Greek Law, Cambridge. Hansen 1991 M.H. Hansen, Response to Douglas MacDowell, in M. Gagarin (ed.), Symposion 1990: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Köln, Weimar and Wien 1991, 199-201. Harris 1995 D. Harris, The Treasures of the Parthenon and Erechtheion, Oxford. Harris 1989 E.M. Harris, Demosthenes’ Speech Against Meidias, «HSCPh» 92, 117-36. Harris 2006 E.M. Harris, Democracy and the Rule of Law in Classical Athens: Essays on Law, Society and Politics. Cambridge and New York.

161

Harrison 1971 A.R.W. Harrison, The Law of Athens: Procedure, Oxford. Kahrstedt 1938 U. Kahrstedt, Untersuchungen zur attischen Behörden. II. Die Nomotheten und die Legislative in Athen, «Klio» 37, 1-32. Kapparis 1999 K.A. Kapparis, Apollodorus Against Neaira, Berlin and New York. Lalonde, Langdon & Walbank 1991 G.V. Lalonde, M.K. Langdon, M. Walbank, The Athenian Agora, XIX: Horoi, Poletai Records, Leases of Public Land, Princeton. Lanni 2005 A. Lanni, Relevance in Athenian Courts, in M. Gagarin and D. Cohen (eds.), The Cambridge Companion to Ancient Greek Law, Cambridge, 112-29. Lanni 2006 A. Lanni, Law and Justice in the Courts of Classical Athens, Cambridge. Lipsius 1905-15 J.H. Lipsius, Das attische Recht und Rechtsverfahren, I-III, Leipzig. Lambrinudakis & Wörrle 1983 W. Lambrinudakis and M. Wörrle, Ein hellenistisches Reformgesetz über das öffentliche Urkundenwesen von Paros, «Chiron» 13, 283-368. MacDowell 1978 D.M. MacDowell, The Law in Classical Athens, London. MacDowell 1991 D.M. MacDowell, The Athenian Procedure of Phasis, in M. Gagarin (ed.), Symposion 1990: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Köln, Weimar and Wien 1991, 187-99.

MacDowell 2008 D.M. MacDowell, The Athenian Penalty of Epobolia, in E.M. Harris and G. Thür (eds.), Symposion 2007: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Wien, 87-94. Maffi 1988 A. Maffi, Écriture et pratique juridique dans la Grèce classique, in M. Detienne (ed.), Les savoirs de l’écriture en Grèce ancienne, Lille, 188-210. Meyer 2010 E. Meyer, Metics and the Athenian Phialai-Inscriptions (= «Historia» Einzelschriften 208), Stuttgart. Pébarthe 2006 C. Pébarthe, Cité, démocratie et écriture: Histoire de l’alphabétisation d’Athènes à l’époque classique, Paris. Pelling 2000 C.B.R. Pelling, Literary Texts and the Greek Historian, London and New York. Rhodes 1972 P.J. Rhodes, The Athenian Boule, Oxford. Rhodes 2004: P.J. Rhodes, Keeping to the Point, in E.M. Harris and L. Rubinstein (eds.), The Law and the Courts in Ancient Greece, London, 137-58. Shear 1970 T.L. Shear, The Monument of the Eponymous Heroes in the Athenian Agora, «Hesperia» 39, 145-222. Sickinger 1999 J.P. Sickinger, Public Records and Archives in Classical Athens, Chapel Hill and London.

Silver Coinage, «Hesperia» 41, 157-88. Stroud 1994 R.S. Stroud, The Aiakeion and Tholos of Athens in POxy 2087, «ZPE» 103, 1-9. Stumpf 1987 G. Stumpf, Zwei Gerichtsurteile aus Athen. IG ii2 1641 B und 1646 A, «Tyche» 2, 211-15. Thür 2007 G. Thür, Das Prinzip der Fairness im attischen Prozess, in E. Cantarella (ed.), Symposion 2005: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Wien, 131-50. Todd 1993 S.C. Todd, The Shape of Athenian Law, Oxford. Wallace 2003 R.W. Wallace, Phainein in Athenian Laws and Legal Procedures, in G. Thür and F.J. Fernández Nieto (eds.), Symposion 1999: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Köln, Weimar and Wien, 167-82. Wallace 2008 R.W. Wallace, Response to Douglas M. MacDowell, in E. M. Harris and Thür (eds.), Symposion 2007: Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte, Wien, 95-98. Whitehead 2000 D. Whitehead, Hypereides: The Forensic Speeches, Oxford. Wyse 1904 W. Wyse, The Speeches of Isaeus, Cambridge.

Stadter 1989 P.A. Stadter, A Commentary on Plutarch’s Pericles, Chapel Hill. Stroud 1974 R.S. Stroud, An Athenian Law on

162

Archives in Classical Athens: Some Observations

michele faraguna

Through their different interests and approaches, the three papers of this session have presented an overview of the main questions in the current scholarly debate on archives and archival practices in classical Greece. To some extent, we can be reproached for only focusing on Athens – archives and corpora of archival documents are also known from other cities of mainland Greece (notably Argos, where a recently discovered “archive” comprising 134 bronze tablets dated to the early fourth century is still unpublished)1 and colonial areas such as Sicily and Magna Graecia2 – but this Athenocentric bias will be partially compensated by the contributions of Laura Boffo and Kaja Harter. Athens nonetheless remains unique in that – differently from other poleis – the role and organization of archives can be placed, and contextualized, within the larger frame of the institutional and administrative system. As it must have become apparent, compared to students of Ancient Mesopotamia Greek historians are placed in a more disadvantaged position for archi-

1

SEG 54,427. Cf. Kritzas 2003-2004 and 2006.

2 On the lead tablets from Kamarina (SEG 42,846) see Cordano 1992; Dubois 2008, 103-14 (no. 46). For the archive of the Olympieion in Locri cf. Costabile 1992 (for a recent review of the questions posed by the tablets and of the newest bibliography cf. Costabile 2007, 251-307 [SEG 57,935]).

archives in classical greece: some observations

163

val documents were normally written on perishable materials (whitewashed wooden boards, waxed tablets, papyrus) and are consequently now lost. The few exceptions are represented by records on lead or bronze, such as the “archive of the Athenian cavalry”, a group of over 600 lead tablets dumped in the area of the agora, which, according to the terminology employed by papyrologists (namely by Lucia Criscuolo in her paper), should however be technically defined a “dossier”, since they were discarded and did not all belong to the same period (nor they were all found in the same place)3. The existence of archival documents must therefore be largely inferred from the literary sources, as shown by Christophe Pébarthe and Edward Harris, or be traced back from references to other documents not meant for display on stone, from headings, formulae or variations in formulaic language (or contents) in inscriptions, as discussed by Shimon Epstein in his paper, sometimes even from the way the text was laid out on the stone (for instance when the text is organized in columns, presumably after a papyrus model, as it frequently happens in archaic and classical legal texts from Crete)4. The difficulties students of Greek archives must overcome are aptly symbolised by the image we have chosen for the cover of this book. It is a reconstruction of the Metroon – the archive of the Athenian Council and Assembly located in the agora – in Hellenistic times5. It is frequently assumed, on the basis of a passage in Aristotle’s Constitution of the Athenians (47,5), that this is what the public archive in the Metroon looked like also in the fourth century. Needless to say, Aristotle’s passage has been subject to different interpretations and, as a result, the proposed reconstructions of the “archive” vary accordingly6. As is well known, archives are not archeologically traceable and the site of an ancient archive can normally be identified only when a concentration of seals is found7. There is, however, also a more subtle reason accounting for the “immaterial” substance of ancient Greek archives, and this is the lack of a centralised repository of documents which is a recurring feature in the way polis administration was organized. Archeion, the Greek word from which our modern term “archive” is derived, until the Hellenistic period indicated the office of a magistrate, arche, where, no doubt, records were kept, but did not primarily identify the building as the place where documents were publicly stored. In other words, in a Greek city each public official had his own archive and, as a principle, there were as many public archives as officials. The Metroon in Athens, where the records of the Council and the Assembly were stored, was to some extent the central archive

3

Kroll 1977. Cf. Pébarthe 2006, 237-8.

4

Del Corso 2003, 32-5; Faraguna 2011, 14.

5

Valavanis 2002, 246-7 (figs. 10-11).

6 Sickinger 1999, 148 and 246 n. 50; Valavanis 2002, 249; Coqueugniot 2007; Papazarkadas 2011, 73-4. 7

Invernizzi 1996; Valavanis 2002, 236-44.

164

but this is true only in so far as the Council and the Assembly transacted the most important business for the community. Records which were outside the competence of these democratic bodies were preserved elsewhere8. Christophe Pébarthe’s paper is significantly built on this assumption. On the one hand, at a theoretical level, he has explored, and stressed, the wider implications of the study of archives and administrative procedures as a heuristic tool for our understanding of the Greek polis as, simultaneously, a “state” and a “society”, or, to use more concrete language, an original construction where «sans une bureaucratie professionnelle, les Athéniens sont parvenus à construire des institutions durables et complexes, permettant l’exercice d’une réelle autorité sur l’ensemble du territoire». On the other hand, in the second part of his paper, he has shown how, even in a community like Athens where citizenship was conceived as participatory and exclusive, citizen registers, since the archaic age and well before the establishment of democracy, were not centralised but, instead, were kept locally in the almost 140 administrative units, the demes (or villages), into which the Attic territory was divided. Full citizenship rights were acquired only after the new member of the community had been socially and ritually introduced by his father to the phratry and deme, the hereditary subgroups he was to belong to for the whole of his life9. The lexiarchika grammateia, the registers kept by the local magistrates, thus became the repository of the official information, both on personal and economic status, the polis needed for political, military and taxation purposes. When the army was to be mobilised, taxes and liturgies had to be assigned or the assembly pay had to be distributed, the local registers provided the hard data necessary to compile lists and carry out such operations at a polis level. The functioning of the administrative system and the ability to pool together human and material resources in other words hinged on the interaction between centre and periphery and on the circulation of the relevant information10. While Christophe Pébarthe has provided us with the broad picture, Shimon Epstein’s paper has offered us a valuable insight into the question of the relationship between the inscribed text of a document, what we can today read on the stone, and the original records kept on file by the magistrate, on the basis of which the inscription was prepared. He has focused on the Attic building accounts pertaining to the Parthenon, the Erechtheion and construction work in the sanctuary of Eleusis, spanning from the Periclean age (the Parthenon was built over fifteen years between 447/6 and 433/2 BC) to the 30s and 20s of the fourth century. The striking feature of these accounts is that they greatly differ in the

8

Faraguna 2005, esp. 72-3.

9

Whitehead 1986, 97-104; Lambert 1993, 161-89; Robertson 2000.

10 On this point see also my forthcoming article Citizen Registers in Archaic Greece: The Evidence Reconsidered.

archives in classical greece: some observations

165

amount and the quality of the information they provide. How are such differences to be accounted for? In order to offer some general background, it must be remembered that Athens was a democracy and that democratic procedures also governed the building process. On the basis of other relevant contemporary evidence, it must be surmised that the building of the Parthenon was first decided by the citizens’ Assembly, and following this act the written technical specifications (syngraphai) were commissioned to an architect and then approved again by the Council and Assembly11. Once construction started, a special board of magistrates, the epistatai, was annually appointed to oversee the development of the project, manage all the financial aspects and contract out the execution of each architectural element12. At the end of their term of office, the epistatai had to render the accounts of the euthynai. It is interesting to note that the administrative process I have described is perfectly reflected by the Erechtheion accounts, where we first encounter a reference to the decree of the demos authorizing resumption of construction, and then we find 1) a survey of the already existing architectural elements; 2) the specifications for the works to be continued; 3) lists of the individual pieces and of the workers to whom their execution was assigned, organized by prytanies (IG I3 474-479). The same organization is also to be found, more than a century later, in the inscription concerning repair works to the city walls (IG II2 463), where, again, we have the enabling decree of the Assembly (ll. 1-34), the syngraphai (ll. 35-118) and finally a list of the sections of the walls and of the contractors the work had been assigned to (ll. 120-130)13. As suggested by Shimon Epstein, this was the kind of documentation which we may expect was presented by the magistrates in charge on the occasion of their euthynai. Seen in this light, the Parthenon accounts indeed pose a problem, as they are very much unlike the other documents we have. In order to explain their different organization, I would like to add another possibile dimension to those explored by Epstein, in other words the religious dimension. The accounts of the Parthenon were inscribed on a single imposing stele, according to the reconstruction of W. Dinsmoor 1,60 meters tall, 1,80 wide and 0,20 thick, six years being inscribed on one face, seven on the reverse and two on the sides. It was clearly a monument resembling the lapis primus and lapis secundus of the Athenian tribute lists14 and this makes it very likely that it was conceived as an anathema, a dedication to Athena. It is striking that the building accounts we have both for the fifth and for the fourth century are mostly connected to construction for religious purposes. We do not have accounts for the Periclean Odeon or for the Long

11 Carusi 2006. 12 Marginesu 2010. 13 Faraguna 2010, 134-5. 14 On these monuments cf., most recently, Miles 2011. For their original location see Monaco 2008.

166

Walls. The objective in publishing the Parthenon accounts on a large monument was to show the goddess that her moneys were managed in a correct and pious manner. Given this objective, details were to some extent not necessary. As Epstein underlines, «the Parthenon inscriptions as we have them are hardly a convenient tool for democratic accountability». Records on perishable materials nonetheless there must have been and my guess is that they were not very different from what we get in the Erechtheion accounts. The board of epistatai significantly not only appointed a secretary (grammateus) who changed every year but also a syngrammateus, a co-secretary named Antikles who held this position continuously until 437/6 and was then “promoted” to the role of secretary until the project was completed. The presence of a permanent co-secretary shows that the amount of paperwork to handle must have been not negligible. In the fourth century magistates overseeing public building also had judicial competence and could impose fines as well as preside over the court when legal cases resulting from breach of contract ended up in a trial (Aesch. 3,14: oiJ de; tw`n e[rgwn ejpistavtai pavnte~ hJgemoniva/ crw`ntai dikasthvriou)15. It can therefore be reasonably assumed that the epistatai needed to keep detailed records of their activity. A fundamental issue that remains open to doubt however concerns how permanent such records were. The epistatai of the Parthenon were an ad hoc board specifically elected to oversee the construction of the temple and they finished their work when the project was completed. They must have had an office on the acropolis while building was in progress but what happened after that? We must assume that only accounts in a shortened form were preserved and the more detailed records were either discarded or privately kept. We have something similar in the fifth-century accounts of the deme of Rhamnous, where for each year we have records concerning the moneys belonging to Nemesis given out on loan and those in the hands of the hieropoioi (IG I3 248). These are obviously only the annual grand totals but, as shown by IG I3 247bis, a lead plaque recording the movements of money between the epistatai and the hieropoioi, more detailed records concerning each individual transaction must have existed. The tablet was found in a cistern and had obviously been discarded when it ceased to be of use16. The same question indirectly arises also from Edward Harris’ paper on the enklema, the “plaint”, and its function in Athenian legal procedure. Harris has convincingly shown that the written plaint submitted by the accuser when he initiated legal procedure to a remarkable extent contributed to ensuring procedural fairness and, more generally, to the good functioning of the judicial system. It recorded the information that the magistrate who received the charge needed to determine that the case was eijsagwvgimo~, i.e. could be lawfully accepted and

15 Marginesu 2010, 72-8. 16 Petrakos 1999, II, no. 181. Cf. also Petrakos 1984, 188-95.

archives in classical greece: some observations

167

had been brought before the correct jurisdiction. G. Thür had already stressed the importance of the plaint for defining the legal issue about which the popular judges would decide17. Harris shows that the charges against the defendant had to follow the language of the statute under which the action was brought. This ensured that the court would only decide whether the defendant had violated a specific law and that the judges would uphold their oath to vote “according to the laws”. Harris’ argument is important because he has not only investigated the function of the plaint in private and public charges, dikai and graphai, but also systematically extended the analysis to include other procedures such as eisangelia, phasis and paragraphe. As a result, we now have a much better knowledge of the elements the indictment consisted of and we know that it could be a rather elaborate document that had to be framed according to the terms of the law and specified in a detailed manner the acts through which the defendant had violated the law. More to the point for the topic of this volume, Harris has also shown that records of trials could be used after the case had been judged both as evidence in subsequent litigation and as a source of information for further administrative (mainly financial) documents, especially those presented by magistrates when they rendered their accounts (and then inscribed on stone)18. I agree with him that Arist. Pol. 1321b34-37 should be taken seriously and that krivsei~ dikasthrivwn, together with aiJ grafai; tw`n dikw`n, were as a rule preserved in Greek poleis19. What remains perhaps more controversial is where they were kept after the trial was over. Personally, I do not believe that all indictments were stored in the Metroon. For the reasons I stated before, I think it is more likely that only the plaints within the jurisdiction of the Council and the Assembly were kept there. The other indictments must have been stored in the archive of the magistrate who was responsible for the case20. The rich epigraphic evidence adduced by Harris also seems to confirm this conclusion. Again, however, the main question remains, for how long? Harris has mentioned two interesting passages in Demosthenes’ Against Zenothemis (32,27) and Against Nausimachus and Xenopeithes (38,14-16), where a legal argument is developed on the basis of the information provided by the indictment in a related earlier case. The second passage is particularly important as it appears that forteen years had elapsed between the two trials (38,6). I could add another passage from Demosthenes’ Against Aristogeiton: in this speech Aristogeiton is described as an evil person and is attacked, among

17 Thür 2007. 18 Cf. also Sickinger 2007, 204-6. 19 This has however been recently denied by Gagarin 2008, 195, according to whom, apart from some exceptions, «verdicts in general were not officially recorded»; cf. also Gagarin 2009, 86. 20 Faraguna 2006; cf. 2009, esp. 68-9.

168

other things, for having sold his sister by the same mother “as is stated in the indictment of the action which was brought against him on these grounds by his brother” (25,55)21. The indictment is then read to the judges. The impression is again that a long time had elapsed between the trials. Where did these documents come from? Were they retrieved from a public archive or did they come from some private, family archive? Previously, I had suggested that they must have come from the magistrate’s archeion. It is therefore rewarding to note that at the end of his thorough and enlightening examination of the evidence Edward Harris has reached the same conclusion.

21 On the speech, if genuine, see MacDowell 2009, 298-312.

archives in classical greece: some observations

169

Bibliography

Carusi 2006 C. Carusi, Alcune considerazioni sulle syngraphai ateniesi del V e IV secolo a.C., «ASAIA» 84 (s. III, 6), 11-36. Coqueugniot 2007 G. Coqueugniot, Coffre, casier et armoire: la kibôtos et le mobilier des archives et des bibliothèques grecques, «RA», 293-304. Cordano 1992 F. Cordano, Le tessere pubbliche del tempio di Atena a Camarina, Roma. Costabile 1992 F. Costabile (ed.), Polis ed Olympieion a Locri Epizefiri. Costituzione, economia e finanze di una città della Magna Grecia. Editio altera e traduzione delle tabelle locresi, Soveria Mannelli 1992. Costabile 2007 F. Costabile, Enigmi delle civiltà antiche dal Mediterraneo al Nilo, I, Reggio Calabria. Del Corso 2003 L. Del Corso, Materiali per una protostoria del libro e delle pratiche di lettura nel mondo greco, «Segno e testo» 1, 5-78. Dubois 2008 L. Dubois, Inscriptions grecques dialectales de Sicile, II, Genève. Faraguna 2005 M. Faraguna, Scrittura e amministrazione nelle città greche: gli archivi pubblici, «QUCC» 80, 61-86. Faraguna 2006 M. Faraguna, Alcibiade, Cratero e gli archivi giudiziari ad Atene, in: M. Faraguna-V. Vedaldi Iasbez (eds.), Duvnasqai didavskein. Studi in onore di Filippo Càssola per il suo ottantesimo compleanno, Trieste, 197-207. Faraguna 2009 M. Faraguna, Oralità e scrittura

nella prassi giudiziaria ateniese tra V e IV sec. a. C., in: E.M. Harris-G. Thür (eds.), Symposion 2007, Wien, 63-82. Faraguna 2010 M. Faraguna, Il sistema degli appalti pubblici ad Atene nel IV sec. a.C. e la legge di Agirrio, in: A. Magnetto-D. Erdas-C. Carusi (eds.), Nuove ricerche sulla legge granaria ateniese del 374/3, Pisa, 129-148. Faraguna 2011 M. Faraguna, Legislazione e scrittura nella Grecia arcaica e classica, «ZPE» 177, 1-20. Gagarin 2008 M. Gagarin, Writing Greek Law, Cambridge. Gagarin 2009 M. Gagarin, Response to Michele Faraguna, in: E.M. Harris-G. Thür (eds.), Symposion 2007, Wien, 83-86. Invernizzi 1996 A. Invernizzi, Gli archivi pubblici di Seleucia sul Tigri, in: M.-F. Boussac–A. Invernizzi (eds.), Archives et sceaux du monde hellénistique, «BCH» Suppl. 29, 131-143. Kritzas 2003-2004 Ch. Kritzas, Literacy and Society. The Case of Argos, «Kodai» 13-14, 53-60. Kritzas 2006 Ch. Kritzas, Nouvelles inscriptions d’Argos: les archives des comptes du trésor sacré (IVe s. av. J.-C.), «CRAI», 397-434. Kroll 1977 J.H. Kroll, An Archive of the Athenian Cavalry, «Hesperia» 46, 83-146. Lambert 1993 S.D. Lambert, The Phratries of Attica, Ann Arbor.

170

MacDowell 2009 D.M. MacDowell, Demosthenes the Orator, Oxford. Marginesu 2010 G. Marginesu, Gli epistati dell’Acropoli. Edilizia sacra nella città di Pericle, 447/6-433/2 a.C., Atene-Paestum. Miles 2011 M.M. Miles, The Lapis Primus and the Older Parthenon, «Hesperia» 80, 657-675. Monaco 2008 M.C. Monaco, Un’acropoli per l’impero: l’aparche per la dea come premessa al programma pericleo, in: Atene e la Magna Grecia dall’età arcaica all’ellenismo, «ACSMGr» 47, 61-92.

and Archives in Classical Athens, Chapel Hill-London. Sickinger 2007 J.P. Sickinger, The Bureaucracy of Democracy and Empire, in: L.J. Samons II (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to the Age of Pericles, Cambridge, 196-214. Thür 2007 G. Thür, Das Prinzip der Fairness im attischen Prozess: Gedanken zu Echinos und Enklema, in: E. Cantarella (ed.), Symposion 2005, Wien, 131-150 (reprinted in English as The Principle of Fairness in Athenian Legal Procedure. Thoughts on the Echinos and Enklema, «Dike» 11, 2008, 51-73).

Papazarkadas 2011 N. Papazarkadas, Sacred and Public Land in Ancient Athens, Oxford.

Valavanis 2002 P. Valavanis, Thoughts on the Public Archive in the Hellenistic Metroon of the Athenian Agora, «MDAI(A)» 117, 221-255.

Pébarthe 2006 Chr. Pébarthe, Cité, démocratie et écriture. Histoire de l’alphabétisation d’Athènes à l’époque classique, Paris.

Whitehead 1986 D. Whitehead, The Demes of Attica, 508/7-ca. 250 B.C., Princeton.

Petrakos 1984 B.Chr. Petrakos, jAnaskafh; Ramnou`nto~, «PAAH» 1984 [1988], 146-211. Petrakos 1999 B.Chr. Petrakos, O DHMOS TOU RAMNOUNTOS. SUNOYH TWN ANASKAFWN KAI TWN EREUNWN (1813-1998), Athenai 1999. Robertson 2000 B.G. Robertson, The Scrutiny of New Citizens at Athens, in: V. Hunter-J. Edmondson (eds.), Law and Social Status in Classical Athens, Oxford, 149-174. Sickinger 1999 J.P. Sickinger, Public Records

archives in classical greece: some observations

171

The Persian Tradition and the Hellenistic World

Aramäische Archive aus achämenidischer Zeit und ihre Funktion

ingo kottsieper

1 Einleitung1 An mehreren Orten in Ägypten und Palästina sind Papyrusurkunden in aramäischer Sprache gefunden worden, die aus der Epoche des achämenidischen Reiches stammen. Im Rahmen des Generalthemas dieses Bandes soll hier der Frage nachgegangen werden, welche dieser Texte antiken Archiven zugeordnet werden können und wozu beziehungsweise wem diese Archive dienten. Die Beantwortung dieser Fragen ist ein wenig komplexer, als man im ersten Moment annehmen möchte. Obwohl an den verschiedenen Orten jeweils mehrere Dokumente gefunden wurden, müssen die meisten von ihnen von dieser Untersuchung ausgeschlossen werden. Es fehlen in vielen Fällen ausreichende Informationen über die genauen Fundumstände der einzelnen Dokumente und damit auch darüber, mit welchen anderen genau sie bei ihrer Auffindung ein Cluster bildeten, das auf ein ursprüngliches Archiv hinweisen könnte. So geben die Ausgräber der Deutschen Expeditionen nach Elephantine der Jahre 1906-1908, der wir einen Großteil der aramäischen Texte von dieser Insel

1 Ich danke Herrn Dr. Harald Samuel, Göttingen, für seine Hilfe bei den Korrekturen meines Manuskripts.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

175

verdanken, keinerlei Informationen über die exakten Fundorte der einzelnen Texte. Lediglich ein sehr knapper und summarischer Hinweis wird von O. Rubensohn geboten: «Die ersten Papyri fanden wir schon am Abhang des Koms vor Mauer m 1, die größere Menge aber ist an der Mauer m 2 und an der späten Mauer m 3 aufgedeckt worden. Die Papyri lagen hier kaum 1/2 m unter der modernen Oberfläche im losen Schutt ... . [Sie] sind also nicht in einem Gefäß gefunden worden ... . Für die Anlage n gilt das gleiche wie für m; auch hier ließ sich ein fester Grundriß nicht mehr feststellen. Die Funde an Papyri waren übrigens hier im Verhältnis zu m gering an Zahl.»2 Aus dieser Anmerkung wird nur eins deutlich: Die Texte wurden nicht in Gefäßen gefunden – offenkundig auch nicht als zusammengebundene Bündel. Wie sie an ihren Fundort gelangten und welche Papyri exakt an welchem Ort gefunden wurden, ist völlig unklar, womit auch die ursprüngliche Funktion der Fundorte unklar bleibt. Handelt es sich um mehrere antike Archive – wobei dann immer noch die Zuordnung der einzelnen Texte zu diesen unbekannt bleibt – oder um eine Art von Genizot, in denen man nicht mehr gebrauchte Dokumente sekundär deponierte? Oder sollte dieser Fundkomplex nur eine Abfallhalde gewesen sein, an der die Dokumente der Söldner nach Aufgabe ihrer Kolonie von Späteren abgeladen wurde, wie es z.B. auch in Nord-Saqqara der Fall war?3 Natürlich kann man diese Texte entsprechend ihren Inhalten und/oder der in ihnen genannten Personen gruppieren, wie es z.B. B. Porten und A. Yardeni in ihrem ausgezeichneten Textbuch der aramäischen Texte von Ägypten getan haben.4 Dabei präsentieren sie drei dieser Gruppen ausdrücklich als Archive: Das Briefarchiv der Gemeinschaft unter der Leitung Jedanjas5 (A4.1-10), das Archiv der Mibtahja (B2.1-11) und das des Anani (B3.1-13).6 Die Fragwürdigkeit dieses Vorgehens, bei dem die archäologischen Daten völlig ausgeblendet werden, zeigt sich aber insbesondere im Hinblick auf das so erschlossene Jedanja-Archiv. So enthält es neben Dokumenten, die aus den schon erwähnten deutschen Ausgrabungen stammen (A4.1-4+6-10) mit A4.5 auch den Strassburger Papyrus, der 1898/99 in Luxor gekauft worden war. Da die übrigen Texte erst Jahre später ausgegraben wurden, erscheint es jedoch als völlig unwahrscheinlich, dass der Strassburger Papyrus mit diesen ursprünglich an demselben Ort in einer Art

2

Rubensohn in Honroth-Rubensohn-Zucker 1909, S. 29.

3 Die aramäischen Dokumente wurden dort neben demotischen, hieratischen und griechischen Texten auf einer Art Müllhalde gefunden, wohin sie wahrscheinlich erst bei der Errichtung der koptischen Siedlung verbracht worden waren, vgl. Segal 1983, S. 2. 4 Vgl. Porten-Yardeni 1986-1999 (= TAD). Die Texte werden in diesem Beitrag mit A, B, C oder D dem Band entsprechend zitiert, z.B. A4.1 für einen Text aus Band I. Auf Angaben aus den Einleitungen zu den Textgruppen wird mit TAD + Bandnummer und Seitenzahl verwiesen. 5 Im Folgenden werden die Namen in einer deutschen Adaption ihrer Transkription in TAD geboten, auch wenn diese linguistisch zuweilen fragwürdig ist. 6

Vgl. aber auch schon Porten 1968, z.B. S. 191, 278 u.ö.

176

Archiv deponiert worden war. Sollte der Finder dieses Archivs wirklich nur die Fragmente dieses Papyrus entnommen und dann die anderen Texte wieder mit einer 0.5m dicken Erdschicht bedeckt haben? Damit weisen alle Indizien darauf hin, dass A4.5 von einem anderen Fundort stammt. Auch bei den auf Elephantine gefundenen Dokumenten bleibt völlig unklar, ob sie als zusammengehörende Gruppe an das Tageslicht kamen oder von mehreren der genannten unterschiedlichen Fundstellen stammen. Die Rekonstruktion dieses «Archivs» beruht also allein auf dem Inhalt der Dokumente und auf der Vorstellung moderner Forscher, was ein solches Archiv enthalten haben könnte.7 Selbst wenn eine solche Rekonstruktion historisch korrekt wäre, so eignet sich ein auf diese Weise erschlossenes Archiv nicht für die Beantwortung der Frage, was wir auf Grund gesicherter Daten über Inhalt, Organisation und Funktion von antiken Archiven aussagen können. Eine Analyse dieser rekonstruierten Archive würde nur das ergeben, was von den modernen Forschern, die sie rekonstruiert haben, als maßgeblich für die Zugehörigkeit zu einem Archiv vorausgesetzt wurde. Von daher sind Archive, für die sich nicht auch eine äußere Evidenz auf Grund der Fundumstände erweisen lässt, aus rein methodologischen Gründen von der Untersuchung auszuschließen. Glücklicherweise lässt sich zumindest für große Teile des sogenannten Mibtahja- und des Anani-Archivs sowie für Dokumente aus dem Umkreis des Satrapen Aršames (A6.3-16) eine solche äußere Evidenz beibringen, so dass diese als Basis für eine entsprechende Untersuchung dienen können. Dazu kommen die in Ägypten gefundenen Reste von Schriftrollen, die eine Sammlung von einzelnen Dokumenten enthalten haben; auch diese lassen sich als eine Art Archiv ansprechen und können entsprechend mit in die Untersuchung einbezogen werden. Schließlich geben auch die Dokumente vom Wadi Dalije einige weitere Hinweise für unser Thema.

7 Dementsprechend weichen auch die Angaben zum Umfang der Archive der Mibtahja und des Anani bei Yaron 1961[a], S. 4-6, und Porten 1968, S. 200-263, voneinander und von den Angaben in TAD ab; vgl. unten zur Rekonstruktion dieser Archive. Auch hinsichtlich des Jedanja-Archivs besteht eine Diskrepanz zwischen TAD und Porten 1968, S. 278. Mit A4.6 wird ein neuer Text aufgeführt, der auf einer neuen Rekonstruktion aus Einzelfragmenten beruht. Dagegen fehlt in TAD nun die Abgabenliste für den Tempel Jahus (C3.15 = Cowley 22), die nach Porten 1968, S. 278, zu diesem Archiv gehörte. So bezeichnet auch TAD III, S. xiii, lediglich die «communal leaders» als Autoren des Textes, macht aber sonst keinerlei Angaben über die Zugehörigkeit des Dokumentes zu einem Archiv. Der Grund für dieses Schweigen könnte sein, dass von den im Jedanja-Archiv genannten Personen aus der judäischen Gemeinschaft nur eine einzige in dieser Liste, die am ehesten in das Jahr 400 v.Chr. datiert, erscheint (TAD III S. xvii) und Jedanja als führendes Mitglied der Gemeinschaft überhaupt nicht erwähnt wird. Die Texte, die TAD nun dem Jedanja-Archiv zuordnet, stammen hingegen, soweit erkennbar, alle aus der Zeit von 419 - ca. 407 v.Chr. Offenkundig liegt in TAD die Vorentscheidung zu Grunde, dass das rekonstruierte Archiv das «communal archive of Jedaniah» (TAD I, S. 53) sei, und nicht, wie man auch annehmen könnte, das Archiv des Tempels von Elephantine, in dem für längere Zeit Jedanja eine Leitungsfunktion hatte.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

177

2 Die Archive 2.1 Das sogenannte Archiv der Mibtahja 2.1.1 Rekonstruktion des Archivs Wie oben schon angesprochen, ordnen Porten und Yardeni die Texte B2.1-11 einem Archiv der Mibtahja zu. Auf Grund der unterschiedlichen Fundumstände können diese Dokumente drei Kategorien zugeordnet werden: 1

Der Hauptteil dieses «Archivs» besteht aus neun Dokumenten (B2.2-4+6-11), die von Einheimischen am Anfang des letzten Jahrhunderts als eine Einheit gefunden und dann auf dem Antiquitätenmarkt verkauft wurden. 8 Es handelt sich um sehr gut erhaltene Dokumente, die noch verschlossen und gesiegelt waren. Dem entspricht die Information des Händlers, der angegeben hat, dass sie in einem Holzkasten gefunden wurden. Dass diese Dokumente, obwohl sie an zwei verschiedene Personen verkauft wurden, zusammen gehören, zeigt sich auch daran, dass beide Käufer jeweils einen Teil ein- und desselben Dokumentes, das in zwei Teile zerbrochen war, erstanden. Wenn auch nicht zu klären ist, ob das Dokument erst nach der Auffindung zerbrach, so besteht hier ein materieller Joint zwischen beiden Sammlungen. Da alle diese offenkundig in einem Kasten gefundenen Dokumente auch mit den Angelegenheiten einer einzigen Familie befasst sind, darf man sie als ein sicheres Beispiel eines Archivs ansehen.

2 Mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit gehört auch B2.1 zu diesem Archiv. Es teilt mit den gerade beschriebenen Doku menten die Eigenschaft, dass es als gut erhaltenes, noch geschlossenes Dokument gefunden wurde und sich mit Angelegenheiten derselben Familie beschäftigt. Obwohl es erst später im Jahr 1904 oder 1905 erworben wurde und keine eindeutigen Informationen über die Fundumstände vorliegen, wurde es von Sayce uneingeschränkt als Teil des unter 1. genannten Fundes ediert.9 Man wird annehmen dürfen, dass es von demselben Händler stammt, der es als Teil desselben Fundes präsentierte. Dass der Händler diesen Fund an verschiedene Personen verkauft hat, zeigt schon die Tatsache, dass die unter 1. genannten Dokumente an zwei unterschiedliche Käufer gegangen sind. Wie dem auch sei, weder würde die Zuordnung dieses Textes zur 1. Gruppe noch seine Ausscheidung aus der Untersuchung an dem Bild, dass die 1. Gruppe ergibt (s.u.) etwas ändern.

8 Zu den Fundumständen und dem Erwerb der Dokumente vgl. A. H. Sayce in Sayce-Cowley 1906, S. 9, und die Bemerkung von R. Mond ebd., S. 7. 9

Vgl. Sayce in Sayce-Cowley 1906, S. 5.

178

3 B2.5 jedoch kann in diesem Zusammenhang nicht als Teil des Archivs berücksichtigt werden. Dieses sehr fragmentarische Dokument ist Teil der Funde der deutschen Ausgrabungen und gehörte sicher nicht zum ursprünglichen Inhalt der Kiste, in der die 1. Gruppe und wahrscheinlich auch B2.1 gefunden wurde. Zwar versicherte Rubensohn, das einige Einheimische ihm den Ort gezeigt hätten, an dem die früheren Dokumente gefunden worden wären, und dieser nur 1 m von dem Ort entfernt war, «an dem wir später den großen Fund an aramäischen Papyri gemacht haben», 10 aber dies beweist nicht, dass auch B2.5 an diesem Ort gefunden wurde. Wie oben aufgezeigt, fehlt jeder Hinweis auf eine konkrete Zuordnung einzelner Dokumente zu den unterschiedlichen Fundorten, und die angeführte Bemerkung Rubensohns lässt auch nicht erkennen, um welchen Fundort es sich genau handelt, von dem aus in 1 m Entfernung die anderen Dokumente gefunden wurden – m 1, m 2 oder m 3? Zudem widerspricht die Aussage der Einheimischen der früheren des Verkäufers, dass die Dokumente in Assuan gefunden worden seien. 11 Sollte hier ein Missverständnis vorliegen und die Einheimischen den deutschen Ausgräbern nicht den Platz gezeigt haben, an der die Kiste mit den Dokumenten gefunden worden war – solche Kisten wurden auf Elephantine nicht mehr gefunden! –, sondern schlicht einen Platz, an dem man weitere solche Dokumente finden kann?12 Aber selbst die inhaltliche Zuordnung von B2.5 zum Archiv der Mibtahja ist fragwürdig. Sie beruht schlicht darauf, dass in Z. 2 ein Mahseja erwähnt wird, der im

10 Rubensohn in Honroth-Rubensohn-Zucker 1909, S. 14. 11 Vgl. Sayce-Cowley 1906, S. 9. 12 Die Formulierung des Berichts von Rubensohn in Honroth-Rubensohn-Zucker 1909, S. 14, erlaubt auch die Frage, ob er wirklich mit dem konkreten Händler und Finder der Kiste gesprochen hat: «Ein Besuch in Assuan noch im Jahre der Aufdeckung 1904 verschaffte mir die Bekanntschaft und das Vertrauen der in Betracht kommenden Händler und Sebbachgräber». Rubensohn hat somit mit mehreren Händlern gesprochen und, nimmt man die Formulierung ernst, keine sichere Kenntnis, wer von diesen genau die Dokumente verkauft bzw. gefunden hatte. Dass hier unterschiedliche Personen sich widersprechende Angaben machen konnten, hatte schon Sayce erfahren: «Different accounts were given to Mr. Howard Carter ... and myself as to the place of their discovery. On the one hand we were told that they had been found in the island of Elephantinê, and the actual spot from which they had come was pointed out to us; on the other hand we were assured that they had really been discovered in a wooden box by the workmen employed in making the new road which runs from the railway station at the southern end of Assuan to the English Church and Cataract Hotel on the top of the hill. That this latter was the true story seems to admit of little doubt ...» (Sayce in Sayce-Cowley 1906, S. 9). Wie wenig verlässlich die Angaben der Einheimischen sein konnten, zeigt sich auch darin, dass Maspero 1904 offenkundig durch Sayce (vgl. Sayce ebd.) den angeblichen Fundort eines anderen Dokumentes (B4.2) und zweier Ostraka (D7.3; D7.9) kannte und dort graben ließ. Zwar fand er dort weitere Dokumente, aber nicht aramäische, sondern nur griechische und demotische. Offenkundig bezog sich auch hier die Ortsangabe schlicht auf eine Stelle, an der man Dokumente finden konnte. Es ist auch kaum zu erwarten, dass die Sebachgräber genau Buch darüber führten, wo welche Dokumente bei ihren alltäglichen Arbeiten auftauchten – zumal dies schon die wissenschaftlichen Ausgräber unterließen.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

179

Kontext einer geplanten Eheschließung Geld erhält und so wahrscheinlich der Brautvater war. Zwar hieß der Vater Mibtahjas auch Mahseja, aber allein in den erhaltenen Texten aus Elephantine begegnen mit Mahseja b. Schiba (B7.1,2) und [M]ahseja b. Jesa[ja] (B5.3,6) zwei weitere Mahsejas, die auch Töchter gehabt haben können und wahrscheinlich zu anderen Familien gehörten. Es handelt sich offenkundig um einen dort verbreiteten Namen. Mithin kann die Zugehörigkeit von B2.2-4+6-11 zu diesem Archiv als weitgehend gesichert und die von B2.1 als sehr wahrscheinlich gelten, während B2.5 aus der Untersuchung auszuschließen ist.13 2.1.2 Inhalt des Archivs Eine Analyse der Dokumente zeigt, dass das Archiv in der vorliegenden Form nicht das der Mibtahja, sondern das ihres Sohnes Jedanja (I) war.14 Und es handelt sich nicht um ein allgemeines Familienarchiv, sondern offenkundig um eine Sammlung von Dokumenten, die direkt oder indirekt das Erbe betreffen, das Jedanja (I) von seinen Eltern erhalten hat. Dementsprechend besteht das Archiv aus zwei Teilen. Die jüngsten Dokumente B2.9-11 (geschrieben 420-410 v.Chr.) sind alle für Jedanja (I) selbst ausgestellt worden. So ist das jüngste Dokument von 410 v.Chr. (B2.11) eine Teilungseinverständniserklärung, die von Mahseja (II), dem Sohn der Mibtahja, für seinen Bruder Jedanja (I) offenkundig nach dem Tod ihrer Mutter verfasst wurde. Inhalt ist die Aufteilung der Leibeigenen Mibtahjas, die nach dem Tod der Mutter an ihre Söhne übergingen.15 B2.11 war somit niemals Bestandteil eines Archivs der Mibtahja. Mit B2.10 (416 v.Chr.) liegt ein Dokument vor, mit dem ein gewisser Jedanja (II) bar Hosea bar Uria jeden Anspruch auf ein Haus aufgibt, das seinem Onkel Jesanja bar Urija einst gehört hat. Diesen Anspruch hatte er gegen Jedanja (I) und Mahseja (II), den Söhnen der Mibtahja erhoben, die offenkundig in Besitz des Hauses gelangt waren. Mibtahja war in erster Ehe mit Jesanja verheiratet gewesen, ihre beiden Söhne stammten aber aus ihrer zweiten Ehe mit Eshor/Natan. Es darf angenommen werden, dass Jesanja nicht lange nach der Eheschließung

13 Vgl. schon Yaron 1961[a], S. 4-5; Porten 1968, S. 237-239. 14 Vgl. schon auch Porten 1968, S. 239; warum in TAD dennoch an der irreführenden Bezeichnung als «Mibtahia Archive» festgehalten wird, ist nicht nachzuvollziehen. Da in den Texten verschiedene Personen mit demselben Namen begegnen, werde diese hier mit I, II usw. unterschieden. Jedanja (I) und Mahseja (II) waren die Kinder von Mibtahja, der Tochter Mahsejas (I), und ihres zweiten Mannes Eshor/Natan. Jedanja (II) ist der Neffe von Mibtahjas erstem Mann Jesanja. 15 Wahrscheinlich wurde ein entsprechendes Gegendokument, in dem Jedanja (I) sich mit der Teilung einverstanden erklärt, in dessen Namen abgefasst und an Mahseja (II) übergeben.

180

verstorben war16 und Mibtahja sein Haus geerbt17 und Jahre später an ihre eigenen Söhne aus zweiter Ehe überschrieben hatte.18 Die Rechtmäßigkeit dieser Transaktion wurde von Jedanja (II), dem Neffen Jesanjas, bezweifelt. Aus den erhaltenen Rechtstexten lässt sich der juristische Hintergrund dieses Falls mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit erhellen.19 Die erhaltenen Eheverträge gehen auf die Frage ein, was mit dem Besitz der Eheleute geschieht, wenn einer von ihnen stirbt, wobei im vorliegenden Kontext insbesondere der Fall von Interesse ist, dass der Ehemann verstarb. Dabei sind drei unterschiedliche Regelungen belegt:

16 Dies ergibt sich mit großer Wahrscheinlichkeit aus folgenden Beobachtungen: Die Heiratsurkunde bezüglich Mibtahjas Ehe mit Eshor/Natan, ihrem zweiten Mann, datiert in das Jahr 458 v.Chr. Dies ergibt sich aus der Gleichung 26. Tishri = [1]6. Epiph eines Jahres der Herrschaft des Artaxerxes, dessen konkrete Zahl in einer Lücke stand. Dies war nur im Jahr 7 der Fall gewesen, wobei die entsprechenden sieben Einerstriche die bestehende Lücke perfekt ausfüllen würden. TAD gibt als zweite Möglichkeit die Gleichung 26. Tischri = [2]6. Epiph an, was auf das Jahr 20 = 445 führen würde. Jedoch wäre das Zahlzeichen für 20 nach ɰɦɯ in Z. 1 deutlich zu kurz für die zu ergänzende Lücke. Zudem würde man von dem Zahlzeichen 20 in der Tagesangabe «[20] + 6 des Monats Epiph» noch Reste vor den Einerstrichen erwarten, während von einer «10» solche Reste weniger wahrscheinlich wären. Auch sachlich passt diese Datierung besser. Ausweislich von B2.3-4 war Mibtahja 460 v.Chr. mit ihrem ersten Mann verheiratet, von dem sie dann aber keine Kinder hatte (vgl. unten zu B2.10). Hätte sie ihren zweiten Mann erst 445 geheiratet, so hätte sie ihre beiden Söhne aus zweiter Ehe frühestens mit Ende Zwanzig, eher aber in den Dreißigern bekommen, will man nicht davon ausgehen, dass sie schon mit zehn Jahren verheiratet war. Die Überschreibung eines Hauses an sie und ihren ersten Ehemann von 460 (B2.3-4) lässt sich gut im Kontext ihrer ersten Eheschließung verstehen, so dass dann ihr Mann kurz nach der Eheschließung verstarb und sie zwei Jahre später erneut heiratete. Dann könnte sie etwa 18-20 Jahre alt gewesen sein – ein gutes Alter um noch zwei Söhne zu bekommen. Da sie wahrscheinlich 410 gestorben war (vgl. unten, Anm. 18), wäre sie etwa 65-70 Jahre alt geworden. 17 Andernfalls müsste man entweder annehmen, dass Jesanja Mibtahja das Haus während ihrer Ehe ohne jede Einschränkung hinsichtlich einer Scheidung überschrieben habe, so dass es auch nach einer solchen in ihrem Besitz blieb. Dies wäre aber ebenso ungewöhnlich wie der Fall, dass das Haus bei der Scheidung an Mibtahja ging, was den entsprechenden Klauseln der erhaltenen Eheverträge widersprechen würde, nach denen der Besitz (und insbesondere Immobilien) grundsätzlich beim ursprünglichen Eigentümer blieb (B2.6,22-28; B3.3,7-10; B3.8,21-28). Auch ist kaum anzunehmen, dass Jesanja nach der Neuverheiratung seiner ehemaligen Frau mit einem anderen Mann dessen Söhnen sein eigenes Haus zukommen ließ. 18 Dass dieser Vorgang, in dem Mibtahja nur als Nebenperson erwähnt wird, voraussetzt, dass Mibtahja schon gestorben war (so Porten 1968, S. 256), ist nicht überzeugend. Zwei Beobachtungen sprechen gegen diese Annahme: 1. Die Verteilung der Leibeigenen Mibtahjas nach ihrem Tod findet erst 410 v.Chr., also sechs Jahre später statt (vgl. B2.11, s.o.). Man erwartet aber, dass dies relativ zeitnah nach ihrem Tod geschehen sein muss, da die Besitzverhältnisse bezüglich lebender Personen wohl kaum solange unklar blieben. Es gibt keinen Hinweis, dass diese Leibeigenen zwischenzeitlich einem anderen Erbe zugesprochen waren. Mithin dürfte Mibtahja erst 410 v.Chr. gestorben sein. 2. B2.10 aus dem Jahr 416 v.Chr. selbst erwähnt in Z. 7 ein «Haus der Mibtahja, der Tochter des Mahseja, das ihr Vater Mahseja ihr gegeben hat». Nach ihrem Tod wäre dies aber das Haus ihrer Erben und nicht mehr «das Haus der Mibtahja» gewesen. 19 Vgl. zum Folgenden auch Yaron 1961[a], S. 69-76.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

181

1

Die Ehefrau wird ohne Einschränkung als ɚɞɟɢɯ «Machthaberin, Inhaberin der Verfügungsgewalt»20 über den Besitz des Mannes eingesetzt (B3.3,10-13).

2 Diese Bestimmung wird an die Bedingung geknüpft, dass die Ehe kinderlos blieb. Dies findet sich im Ehevertrag der Mibtahja mit ihrem zweiten Mann (B2.6,17-19). 3 Die kinderlose Ehefrau darf das Eigentum ihres Mannes weiter nutzen, solange sie nicht wieder heiratet. Eine Wiederverheiratung wird analog zu einer Scheidung behandelt (B3.8,28-34).21 Die Übersicht zeigt, dass nach dem Tod eines Ehemannes der Verbleib seines Besitzes bei der Witwe nichts Außergewöhnliches ist, aber dass die rechtliche Ausgestaltung hierfür variieren konnte und auf der Vereinbarung beruhte, die bei der Eheschließung verhandelt und im Ehevertrag festgehalten wurde.22 Es war also für einen Außenstehenden nicht a priori ersichtlich, ob Mibtahja mit dem Haus ihres ersten Mannes frei und uneingeschränkt als ihr Eigentum verfahren konnte. Dies erklärt, warum Jedanja (II) spätestens zu dem Zeitpunkt, an dem das Haus an Mibtahjas Kinder überging, Einspruch erhob.23

20 Zu ɞɟɢɯ vgl. jetzt auch Botta 2009, S. 81-95, der auf S. 90 die Bedeutung dieser Aussagen «as a clause conferring a ‹right (...) to property, which may not be abridged without due process›, and that could be properly translated, ‹you have authority/control› » definiert. 21 Vgl. Botta 2009, S. 58; Friedman 1980, S. 427f. und die dort genannte ältere Literatur. Dass sich diese Passage auf eine Wiederverheiratung und nicht auf Polygamie bezieht, macht die Formulierung ɚɢ ɥɛəɗɨɟ «man wird ihr tun» deutlich. Normalerweise würde der Ehemann als Handelnder hier einschreiten, aber da er nicht mehr lebt, treten hier seine nicht näher bestimmten Rechtsvertreter bzw. die Rechtsgemeinde auf. Entsprechend wird die Ehefrau in diesem Fall nicht als ɚɞɟɢɯ, d.h. als diejenige, die die Macht oder Verfügungsgewalt hat, über den Besitz des kinderlos verstorbenen Mannes eingesetzt, sondern als «seine ɚɮəɝ> @ª (ɚɰɮəɝ> @ ɟɚ, Z. 29). Möglicherweise ist dies als ɚɰəɝ>ɖ@ im Sinne von «die an ihm festhält» zu lesen, was ein rechtlicher terminus technicus für eine Frau sein könnte, die nach dem Tod ihres Mannes so weiterlebt, als ob sie noch mit ihm verheiratet wäre und deswegen sein Besitz auch noch nicht an seine Erben übergeht (zur Ergänzung vgl. u.a. TAD). Durchaus erwägenswert ist aber auch die Lesung ɚɰɮɝ>ɖ@ im Sinne von «Nachfolgerin», vgl. Grelot 1972, S. 236. 22 Dass also der Neffe Jesanjas der «natural legal heir» seines Onkels war, wenn dieser kinderlos verstarb (so Botta 2009, S. 111), ist somit nur solange korrekt, bis dies durch vertragliche Vereinbarungen außer Kraft gesetzt wurde. 23 Warum er dies nicht schon bei der erneuten Eheschließung der Mibtahja tat, kann nicht mit Sicherheit gesagt werden. Möglicherweise aber wollte Jedanja nicht das Risiko einer Vertragsstrafe eingehen. So enthält B2.6,29-30 ausdrücklich die Drohung, dass jeder, der die Ehefrau aus dem Besitz verdrängen will, eine hohe Strafzahlung zu leisten hat. Solange der Ehevertrag der Mibtahja mit ihrem ersten Mann noch verschlossen war, konnte nur ein Eingeweihter wissen, ob ein entsprechender Passus in ihm stand. Damit war ein Vorgehen gegen Mibtahja ohne genaue Kenntnis ihres Ehevertrages sehr riskant. Aber in dem Moment, in dem das Haus an andere überging – sei es als Überschreibung oder sei es als Erbe (vgl. dazu Anm. 18) – war eine solche Klausel nicht mehr wirksam und der Versuch konnte sich lohnen.

182

Die Tatsache, dass die Besitzverhältnisse im Ehevertrag geregelt waren, könnte zudem erklären, warum der Ehevertrag der ersten Eheschließung Mibtahjas – im Gegensatz zu dem der zweiten – nicht erhalten ist. Zur Klärung der Sachlage musste er geöffnet werden und war danach in weiteren Prozessen nicht mehr verwendbar und daher wertlos.24 Die einzige rechtlich noch relevante Bestimmung eines solchen Vertrages hätte sich aber auf die Besitzverhältnisse nach dem Tode des Ehemannes bezogen, die aber nun durch die vorliegende Verzichtsurkunde geklärt wird, welche das Besitzrecht der Söhne Mibtahjas bezüglich Jesanjas Haus beurkundet. Dies erklärt dann auch die merkwürdige Einschränkung, die in dieser neuen Urkunde gemacht wird: der Neffe Jedanja verzichtet zwar für sich und seine Rechtsnachfolger auf jede weitere Ansprüche und Klagen, nimmt aber ausdrücklich Kinder des Jesanja aus (Z. 13 + 16f.). Wie oben gesehen, gab es Eheverträge, die das Eigentumsrecht der Witwe auf den Fall beschränkten, dass keine Kinder des Verstorbenen existierten. Und wohl kaum zufällig war eine solche Vereinbarung Bestandteil des Ehevertrages für Mibtahjas zweite Ehe. Die scheinbar überflüssige Klausel – woher sollten auf einmal diese Kinder kommen? – erklärt sich damit recht einfach als Übernahme einer entsprechenden Klausel aus einem entsprechenden Ehevertrag, dessen noch relevante Bestimmungen nicht einfach aufgegeben werden konnten. Eventuell noch existierende Kinder des Jesanja hatten und behielten das Recht, gegen die Übereignung des Hauses ihres Vaters an die Kinder seiner ehemaligen Frau aus zweiter Ehe vorzugehen, auch wenn dies wohl nur eine theoretische Möglichkeit war. Ebenfalls um die Rechtmäßigkeit des Erbes von Jedanja (I) und Mahseja (II) geht es auch in dem 420 v.Chr. abgefassten Dokument B2.9. Strittig war in diesem Fall nicht die Erbfolge, sondern die Frage, ob ihr Vater Eshor/Natan der rechtmäßige Besitzer gewisser Güter gewesen war und seine Söhne sie so zu Recht geerbt hatten, oder ob Eshor/Natan diese Güter nur für einen dritten aufbewahrt hatte, so dass sie von seinen Erben zu erstatten waren.25 Dass Jedanja und Mahseja die rechtmäßigen Erben sowohl ihres Vaters als auch ihrer Mutter waren, regelt der Ehevertrag ihrer Mutter Mibtahja aus dem Jahr 458 v.Chr. (B2.6), auf den schon oben verwiesen wurde. Die Bestimmungen in Z. 17-22, dass Mibtahja die Alleinerbin ihres Mannes sein wird, wenn er keine Kinder hat, und dass ihr Mann ihr Alleinerbe ist, wenn sie kinderlos stirbt, implizieren, dass ihre beiden Söhne Jedanja und Mahseja ihre rechtmäßigen Erben sind, wobei sie jeweils den Besitz eines Elternteils sofort nach dessen Tod erbten.

24 So auch schon Yaron 1961[a], S. 76. 25 Dies bedeutet nicht, dass Eshor/Natan erst 420 gestorben war, wie z.B. Porten 1968, S. 255 (vgl. auch TAD II, S. 15; Grelot 1972, S. 198), annimmt. Eshor/Natan hatte diese Güter vom Großvater (!) der Kläger übernommen. Mithin ist es ebenso gut möglich, dass 420 dieser Großvater gestorben war und seine Enkel als Erben die (vermeintlich?) ihm gehörenden Güter eintreiben wollten. Vgl. zu diesem Text auch unten, Anm. 31.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

183

Wie oben angesprochen, war dies eine durchaus übliche Regelung,26 so dass der Ehevertrag nur dann geöffnet zu werden brauchte, wenn jemand anderes diese Erbfolge bestreiten würde. Aber er behielt rechtliche Relevanz für die Erben als eine Art Testament, das auch in Zukunft den Erbanspruch belegen konnte. Mithin gehört dieses Dokument in das Archiv des Jedanja, das seine Erbansprüche beziehungsweise das von ihm Ererbte zum Thema hat. Ebenfalls von Bedeutung in diesem Kontext ist B2.8, ein Dokument aus dem Jahr 440 v.Chr., in dem ein gewisser Pia seine Ansprüche auf Besitztümer gegenüber Mibtahja und ihren Erben (Z. 7f.) aufgibt. Da Jedanja und sein Bruder die Erben dieser Besitztümer waren, schützte dieses Dokument auch sie vor etwaigen Ansprüchen dieses Mannes.27 Als Erben des Besitzes ihrer Mutter übernahmen sie natürlich auch die Dokumente, die diese als rechtmäßige Besitzerin von Immobilien auswies. In diese Kategorie gehören B2.1-4 und 7. Dabei bilden B2.1-4 ein eigenes Unterarchiv mit Bezug auf ein Haus, dass vormals Mibtahjas Vater Mahseja (I) gehört hat.28 Dessen Besitzrechte waren aber 464 v.Chr. zu Unrecht bestritten worden, worüber eine Urkunde ausgefertigt wurde (B2.2), die nun Mahsejas Anspruch

26 Auch B3.8 enthält diese gegenseitige Einsetzung als Erbe, vgl. Z. 28-30 + 34-36. 27 Wahrscheinlich handelt es sich bei Pia um den dritten Ehemann der Mibtahja, und das Dokument gehört in den Kontext ihrer Scheidung von diesem, wie schon Halévy 1907, S. 111, dargelegt hat, vgl. z.B. auch Cowley 1923, S. 41; Porten 1968, S. 245-248; Grelot 1972, S. 189; Muffs 2003, S. 32; Botta 2009, S. 128. Dafür spricht die Erwähnung eines ɛɰɦɖ ɮɪɧ, d.h. eines Ehevertrages, der offenkundig neben den verhandelten Gütern eine Rolle in dem von Pia angestrengten Prozess spielt. Dementsprechend wäre Z. 3f. wie folgt zu übersetzen: «(Pia sagte) ... in Bezug auf den Rechtsstreit, den wir in Assuan durchführten als eine Auseinandersetzung (?) in Bezug auf Silber und Weizen und Kleidung und Bronze und Eisen, allen Besitz und Güter, und in Bezug auf einen Ehevertrag». ɛɰɦɖ ɮɪɧ dürfte damit das letzte Glied der Reihe sein, die vom zweiten ɢɨ («in Bezug auf») abhängig ist. Die ganze mit ɢɨɰɮɪɦ («Auseinandersetzung [?] in Bezug auf») eingeleitete Phrase kennzeichnet also den Rechtsstreit als einen Prozess hinsichtlich der Gütertrennung bei einer Ehescheidung, dem der Ehevertrag zugrunde gelegt wird. Da nach solchen Eheverträgen normalerweise die Ehefrau alles von ihr in die Ehe eingebrachte wieder an sich nehmen konnte, konnte es leicht streitig sein, was dazu gehörte. Der Ehevertrag der Mibtahja mit Eshor/Natan belegt deutlich, dass der eigentliche Besitz der Frau nicht genannt wurde – Mibtahja war, wie B2.1-4 zeigt, Besitzerin eines Hauses auf Elephantine, das in diesem Ehevertrag nicht erwähnt wird. So konnte es bei Scheidungen zu Auseinandersetzungen über das kommen, was die Ehefrau an Kapital abziehen konnte. B2.8 belegt, dass es zu einer gütlichen Einigung kam und Pia entsprechend keinerlei Ansprüche an seine ehemalige Gattin hatte. Dass TAD II, S. 15 offenkundig nicht mehr davon ausgeht, dass Pia ein Ehemann Mibtahjas war, hat wohl seinen Grund darin, dass B2.9 aus dem Jahr 420 als Hinweis auf den Tod des zweiten Ehemanns verstanden wurde. Wie oben gezeigt (vgl. Anm. 25), ist diese Deutung aber nicht zwingend, sondern Eshor/Natan könnte durchaus einige Jahre vor 440 gestorben sein. Dass bei dem Prozess mit Pia der Ehevertrag eine rechtliche Grundlage war, erklärt, wie schon Porten 1968, S. 247, bemerkt, das Fehlen des Vertrages. Er wurde geöffnet und war danach rechtlich ungültig. Umgekehrt zeigt dann die Existenz des ungeöffneten Ehevertrages mit Eshor/Natan, dass diese Ehe nicht geschieden wurde, sondern Eshor/Natan gestorben war. 28 Vgl. dazu auch Szubin-Porten 1983[a], S. 39-41.

184

auf das Haus bestätigt. Dieser überschrieb 460 v.Chr. seiner Tochter Mibtahja das Haus (B2.3), wobei das entsprechende Dokument in Z. 23-27 auf den Rechtsstreit von 464 verweist und ausdrücklich das entsprechende Dokument (B2.2) nennt, welches Mahseja nun zusammen mit dem Haus seiner Tochter für den Fall übergibt, dass der Kläger von 464 seine Klage noch einmal aufnehmen sollte. Ohne dieses Dokument, das eine strafbewehrte allgemeine Klageverzichtsklausel enthält (Z. 12-15), hätte jedermann, einschließlich des Klägers von 464, risikolos erneut die Rechtmäßigkeit des Besitzes anzweifeln können. Mehr noch, Mahseja besaß offenkundig kein älteres Besitzdokument und konnte 464 die Klage nur durch einen Eid abwenden. Eine weitere Klage, dass er das Haus gar nicht als sein Eigentum hätte weitergeben dürfen, hätte nach seinem Tod ohne das besagte Dokument seine Tochter in Beweisnot gebracht. Dies illustriert in besonderem Maße nicht nur die Wichtigkeit des Besitzes solcher Dokumente, sondern auch die ihrer Übergabe an die folgenden Besitzer. Mit der Überschreibung des Hauses hatte Mahseja (I) auch zugleich Jesanja, dem ersten Mann seiner Tochter, als Gegenleistung für die Bebauung ein Wohn-, aber kein allgemeines Besitzrecht eingeräumt, was B2.4 dokumentiert. Das Besitzrecht der Mibtahja wird darin dahingehend eingeschränkt, dass sie nach einer etwaigen Scheidung das Haus nicht einfach an andere verkaufen kann, sondern es den gemeinsamen Kindern zusteht – andernfalls wird das Grundstück geteilt und Jesanja erhält die eine Hälfte, die aber wiederum an die Kinder mit Mibtahja vererbt werden soll. Indirekt schließt dies aber jedes Erbrecht einer anderen Person oder eine Klage eines dritten, dass Jesanja ihm das Grundstück übereignet hätte, aus: «Du hast nicht die Verfügungsgewalt, es zu verkaufen oder es aus Zuneigung einem anderen zu geben» (Z. 6f.). Damit bestätigt das Dokument indirekt, dass Mibtahja nach dem Tod Jesanjas uneingeschränkte Besitzerin auch dieses Hausteils wurde, und damit auch, dass es rechtmäßig an Jedanja (I) und Mahseja (II), die Söhne der Mibtahja, vererbt werden konnte. In diesen Kontext gehört auch B2.1, das auf Grund der «Fundumstände» wahrscheinlich ebenfalls Bestandteil dieses Archivs war und das Recht Mahsejas (I) an einer Mauer dokumentiert, die ein anderer auf seinem, Mahsejas (I) Grundstück, errichtet hat. B2.7 schließlich ist die Überschreibung eines weiteren Hauses an Mibtahja durch ihren Vater Mahseja (I), das damit ebenfalls zur Erbmasse gehörte, die Jedanja (I) und sein Bruder Mahesja (II) übernommen hatten. Dieses Dokument belegt, dass das Archiv offenkundig nicht vollständig vorliegt. Z. 6-7 erwähnt ein älteres Dokument, dass das Besitzrecht Mahsejas (I) bestätigt und an Mibtahja weitergegeben wurde. Dieses Dokument wurde sicherlich auch an die Erben weitergereicht,29 fehlt aber in der vorliegenden Sammlung.

29 Natürlich ist nicht auszuschließen, dass es zu einem Prozess gekommen war, bei dem das Dokument geöffnet worden war. In diesem Fall wäre aber zu erwarten, dass ein entsprechendes neues Dokument abgefasst und ausgehändigt wurde.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

185

Da der spätere Händler dieses Archiv aber an unterschiedliche Personen verkauft hat, ist es durchaus möglich, dass dieses Dokument an einen anderen Käufer gelangte und erst in der Neuzeit verloren ging bzw. in einer anonymen Sammlung der wissenschaftlichen Forschung vorenthalten wird.30 2.1.3 Zusammenfassung Die zehn Dokumente diese Archivs teilen alle den Aspekt, dass sie in einem Rechtsstreit über das Erbe, das Jedanja (I) und Mahseja (II) von ihren Eltern erhalten haben, als Beweismittel für dessen Rechtmäßigkeit dienen können.31 Dem entspricht, dass all diese Dokumente noch nicht geöffnet und damit als Beweismittel gültig waren. Damit ergibt sich für dieses Archiv eines Privatmannes eine klare Funktion, die auch erklärt, warum die Dokumente aus der überschaubaren Zeitspanne von 61 Jahren stammen. Da das Archiv auch ein von Mahseja (II) für seinen Bruder Jedanja (I) ausgestelltes Dokument enthält (B2.11), darf man Jedanja (I) als Besitzer des Archivs ansehen. In wieweit Mahseja (II), dessen Besitzansprüche die Mehrzahl der Dokumente ebenfalls betreffen, auf dieses Archiv zurückgreifen konnte, kann mangels Quellen nicht entschieden werden.32 2.2 Das sogenannte Archiv des Anani 2.2.1 Rekonstruktion des Archivs TAD II präsentiert die dreizehn Dokumente B3.1-13 unter der Überschrift «The Anani Archive».33 Dabei wurden B3.2-13 von Sebachgräbern auf dem Ruinenhügel von Elephantine gefunden und von Charles Edwin Wilbour zwischen dem 28.1. und 12.2.1893, also innerhalb von zwei Wochen, von drei verschiedenen Frauen gekauft.34 Auf Grund ihres Erhaltungszustandes können B3.2-13 in fünf Kategorien eingeteilt werden:

30 Vgl. auch schon Sayce in Sayce-Cowley 1906, S. 5. 31 Dies gilt auch dann, wenn man B2.9 mit Botta 2009, S. 130 (vgl. auch Muffs 2003, S. 30), dahingehend interpretiert, dass die Güter, um die es dort geht, wirklich nicht Eshor/Natan gehört hatten und entsprechend von Jedanja (I) und seinem Bruder zurückerstattet wurden. Das Dokument schützt in diesem Fall die beiden Brüder vor dem Vorwurf, doch noch unrechtes Erbe in Besitz zu haben. 32 Denkbar ist auch, dass er ein eigenes Archiv besaß, zu dem Dokumente gehörten, in denen Jedanja (I) ihm das Anrecht auf seinen Teil des Erbes bestätigte und zusicherte, in einem Rechtsfall die entsprechenden Urkunden vorzulegen. 33 Vgl. schon Yaron 1961[a], S. 5-6, der zu diesem Archiv nur B3.2-8 und 10-13 zählt. Ähnlich Porten 1968, S. 234, der zusätzlich B3.2 ausschließt. 34 Vgl. zur Fund- und Editionsgeschichte Kraeling 1953, S. 9-11.

186

1

Acht Rollen lagen Kraeling, der die Texte 1953 editiert hat, noch als geschlossene und versiegelte Dokumente vor. Leider nennt Kraeling nicht exakt, welche diese waren, aber mit Sicherheit gehören B3.3 und B3.10-13 dazu, die auf Pl. XXI in Kraelings Edition in diesem Zustand photographisch dokumentiert sind.35 Neben diesen Rollen sind nur für B3.4-6 auch die Umschlagsbereiche mit der Außenaufschrift nahezu unversehrt erhalten, so dass diese die übrigen drei noch versiegelt aufgefundenen Rollen waren.

2 B3.9 (= Kraeling 8) war offenkundig ebenfalls noch vollständig erhalten von Wilbour gekauft worden, aber wohl von ihm selbst geöffnet worden.36 Offenkundig ging dabei der äußerste Papyrusstreifen mit der Außenaufschrift verloren. 3 Opfer eines dilettantischen Öffnungsversuches dürfte auch B3.8 sein, das sich einschließlich des Umschlagsbereich mit der Außenaufschrift aus einem gesonderten Bündel an Fragmenten plus einiger davon getrennt aufbewahrter Fragmente37 nahezu vollständig rekonstruieren lässt. Offenkundig war das Dokument erst nach der Auffindung in seine Fragmente zerfallen, die dann gebündelt an das Museum gingen.38 4 B3.2 ist ebenfalls nur aus Fragmenten zusammengesetzt, von denen aber nicht bekannt ist, ob sie als gesondertes Bündel vorlagen. Jedoch ist nicht nur der Textbereich nahezu vollständig erhalten, sondern auch einige kleine beschriftete Fragmente, die dort nicht eingeordnet werden können und somit wahrscheinlich zur Außenaufschrift gehörten. So ist es wahrscheinlich ebenfalls nach seiner Auffindung das Opfer eines verfrühten Versuches, es zu öffnen, gewesen.39 5 Auch B3.7 ist nachträglich aus Fragmenten rekonstruiert. Im Unterschied aber zu den vorgenannten Dokumenten ist auffällig, dass der Beginn des Textes zwar völlig erhalten ist, dieser aber exakt mit dem oberen Rand des erhaltenen Papyrus zusammenfällt, so dass man den Eindruck hat, der obere Umschlagsbereich mit der Außenaufschrift sei abgeschnitten gewesen. Im

35 Die fünf Dokumente sind von oben nach unten B3.3, 10, 11, 13 und 12. 36 «One roll (No. 8) he [scil. Wilbour, I.K.] may have tried unsuccessfully to open, for it came to the museum in two separated, folded pieces», Kraeling 1953, S. 11. 37 Die Außenaufschrift wurde von Kraeling 1953 als Papyrus 15 ediert, einige Fragmente fanden sich auch unter den nicht eingeordneten Fragmenten von Pl. XVIII. 38 Vgl. Kraeling 1953, Pl. XXIII. 39 Vgl. Szubin-Porten 1983[b], S. 279, die, ohne ihre Quelle zu nennen, mitteilen, dass «[a]n early attempt to open it, probably by the purchaser of the Document, Charles Edwin Wilbour, miscarried, and it broke to pieces».

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

187

Unterschied zu den anderen Dokumenten fehlt auch ein großes Stück am Ende. Beides lässt sich dahingehend erklären, dass das Dokument schon in der Antike geöffnet und dabei der obere Teil entfernt wurde. Danach könnte das Dokument falsch herum aufgerollt aufbewahrt worden sein, was den größeren Verlust im unteren Bereiches erklären würde. Damit würde es sich um ein juristisch nicht mehr gültiges Dokument handeln, bei dem die Außenaufschrift und möglicherweise sogar die Zeugenliste entfernt worden war.40 Die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass innerhalb von vierzehn Tagen eine ganze Gruppe noch verschlossener Dokumente an unterschiedlichen Orten ergraben wurde, die sich dann noch alle auf dieselbe Familie beziehen, ist äußerst gering, so dass die Zugehörigkeit der Dokumente der ersten 3 Kategorien (B3.3; B3.4-6 und B3.8-13) zu einem Archiv kaum zu bezweifeln sein wird. Da es Indizien dafür gibt, dass auch B3.2 (Kategorie 4) erst nach der Auffindung zerfallen war, kann es ebenfalls mit recht hoher Wahrscheinlichkeit zu dieser Gruppe gezählt werden. Der abweichende Erhaltungszustand von B3.7 (Kategorie 5) lässt sich sachlich damit erklären, dass es sich hierbei um ein schon in der Antike geöffnetes Dokument handelt (s. auch unten), und ist somit kein Gegenargument gegen die Zuordnung dieses Textes zu dem vorliegenden Archiv. Da es zudem aus derselben Familie wie die übrigen Dokumente stammt und sogar zu einem Themenbereich gehört, der auch in anderen Dokumenten dieser Gruppe behandelt wird, darf daher auch für dieses Dokument die Zugehörigkeit zu demselben Archiv angenommen werden.41 Die Zugehörigkeit von B3.1 zu diesem Archiv, die TAD II, S. 53, nahelegt, ist jedoch nicht zu rechtfertigen. Zwar wurde es auch noch in aufgerolltem und versiegeltem Zustand gefunden, stammt aber aus der späteren deutschen Ausgrabung, was keine nähere räumliche Zuordnung zu dem Fundort der anderen Dokumenten erlaubt. Die Annahme, dass die Stelle, die schon 1893 von den Sebachgräbern abgetragen wurde, dieselbe sei, an der man über ein Jahrzehnt später in 0,5 m Tiefe wiederum ein solches Dokument fand, wäre doch zu unwahrscheinlich.42

40 Trifft dies zu, so ist Frag. d nicht an das Ende des Dokumentes zu lokalisieren, obwohl es am unteren Rand einen freien Zeilenabschnitt erkennen lässt. Ein solcher kann aber, wie z.B. B3.9 erkennen lässt, auch dadurch entstehen, dass die Zeugenliste in einer neuen Zeile ansetzt, die nicht ganz ausgeschrieben wird. Damit wäre aber die offenkundige Namensangabe @ɮɗɚɟ>auf diesem Fragment wohl dem Schreibernamen zuzuordnen. 41 Es sei aber betont, dass dies nur deshalb zulässig ist, weil die Fragmente von B3.7 offenkundig auch zur gleichen Zeit von der selben Gruppe von Sebachgräbern gefunden wurde. Die Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass dieses Dokument von einem anderen Ort stammt und sich nur zufälligerweise inhaltlich perfekt an die übrigen anschließt, ist äußerst gering. 42 Vgl. zu diesem Text aber auch Anm. 49.

188

2.2.2 Der Inhalt des Archivs Die Familienverhältnisse der in diesen Texten genannten Personen sind recht komplex. Mešullam bar Zakkur (I) hatte eine Leibeigene namens Tapemet, welche Anani (I) bar Asarja geheiratet hatte. Ihre leibliche Tochter war Jehoišma (B3.7,2-3.8.17; B3.10,2.27; B3.11,2.21; B3.12,18), die aber rechtlich als Tochter Mešullams, des ehemaligen Besitzers ihrer Mutter, galt. Dies geht nicht nur aus der Formulierung «Jehoišma ..., deine [scil. Tapemets, IK.] Tochter, die du mir [scil. Mešullam, IK.] geboren hast» in der Urkunde, mit der Tapemet und ihre Tochter aus der Leibeigenschaft entlassen werden (B3.6,4-5), hervor, sondern auch aus der Tatsache, dass nach dem Tod Mešullams sein Sohn Zakkur (II) rechtlich als Bruder der Jehoišma gilt und für sie den Ehevertrag abschließt.43 Ihr Ehemann war Anani (II) bar Haggai. Das vorliegende Archiv ist das des Anani (II) und seiner Ehefrau Jehoišma. Dies geht mit Sicherheit daraus hervor, dass die letzten beiden Dokumente (B3.12 und 13) aus dem Jahr 402 für bzw. von Anani (II) ausgestellt wurden. Dass dieses Archiv neben Urkunden, die den rechtmäßigen Besitz einer Immobilie durch Anani (II) (B3.12 [Jahr 402]) und seine Frau Jehoišma (B3.7 [Jahr 420], B3.10 [Jahr 404], B3.11 [Jahr 402]) belegen, auch den Ehevertrag der Jehoišma (B3.8 [Jahr 420]) enthält, entspricht dem Bild, das auch das sogenannte Archiv der Mibtahja ergab. Die in den Texten genannte Immobilie war dem Paar sukzessive von den Eltern der Jehoišma übereignet worden. Dementsprechend kam das Paar auch in den Besitz der Kaufurkunde, mit der Anani (I) das Haus erworben hatte (B3.4 [Jahr 437]), sowie einer Urkunde, mit der Anani einen Teil der Immobilie an seine Frau Tapemet überschrieben hatte (B3.5 [Jahr 434]). Im Kontext des vorliegenden Archivs belegen diese Dokumente, dass Anani (I) und seine Frau als rechtmäßige Besitzer die Immobilie an ihre Tochter bzw. deren Ehemann übergeben haben.44 Selbstverständlich gehört das Dokument der Freilassung Tapemets und ihrer Tochter Jehoišma durch Mešullam (B3.6 [Jahr 427]) als rechtlich höchst bedeutsam in das Archiv Jehoišmas und ihres Mannes. Dieses Dokument regelte zugleich auch das zukünftige Verhältnis Jehoišmas zu Zakkur (II), dem Sohn Mešullams. Sie und ihre Mutter haben verbindlich zugesichert, Mešullam und, nach dessen Tod, auch seinen Sohn zu unterstützen «wie ein Sohn oder eine Tochter ihren Vater» (B3.6,11-15). Dem rechtlich komplexen Status von Tapemet und ihrer Tochter Jehoišma entspricht, dass im Archiv der Tochter und ihres Ehemannes sogar die Heiratsurkunde ihrer Mutter Tapemet aufbewahrt wurde (B3.3 [Jahr 437]), die aus der Zeit vor ihrer Freilassung datiert. Das Dokument zeigt deutlich, dass die erb-

43 B3.8; in Z. 3, 4 und 5 wird Jehoišma ausdrücklich als Schwester Zakkurs (II) bezeichnet. 44 Vgl. auch Szubin-Porten 1983[a], S. 35.41-45.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

189

rechtlichen Implikationen einer Ehe zwischen einer Unfreien und einem Freien nicht a priori festgelegt waren, sondern einer besonderen, einvernehmlichen Regelung bedurften. Im endgültigen Text werden die Eheleute jeweils gegenseitig als uneingeschränkte Erben des gemeinsamen Besitzes eingesetzt, aber diese Bestimmung ist als Korrektur über eine andere Bestimmung geschrieben worden, nach der eine dritte Person Erbe der Hälfte des Besitzes sein sollte. Dabei dürfte diese Person wohl Mešullam, der damalige Besitzer Tapemets, gewesen sein, was, wie § 176 des Kodex Hammurapi zeigt, nicht ungewöhnlich gewesen wäre.45 Mithin bestand durchaus das Risiko, dass Erben Mešullams nach dem Tod Ananis (I) oder seiner Frau Tapemet Anspruch auf ein Teil des Erbes erheben konnten, der mit diesem Ehevertrag aber abgelehnt werden konnte.46 Dass dieses Dokument in das Archiv des Anani (II) und seiner Frau Jehoišma gelangte, legt damit auch die Vermutung nahe, dass Jehoišma die einzige Erbin ihrer Eltern war, und dass Pilti, der als Sohn der Tapemet (und wahrscheinlich Ananis [I]) in ihrem Ehevertrag erwähnt wurde (B3.3,13), relativ früh verstarb oder aus einem anderen Grund als Erbe nicht (mehr) in Frage kam. Dem entspricht auch B3.2 (Jahr 451), in dem ein gewisser Micha gegenüber Anani (I) bezeugt, dass er in Bezug auf eine Sache keinerlei Ansprüche mehr hat und entsprechend nicht mehr klagen kann.47 Auch dieses Dokument hat wohl Anani (I) an seine Tochter bzw. seinen Schwiegersohn vererbt, die damit sich als seine Rechtsnachfolger erweisen. Nur auf den ersten Blick scheint aber B3.9 keinen inhaltlichen Bezug zu den übrigen Texten zu haben. Es handelt sich bei diesem Dokument aus dem Jahr 416 um die rechtlich bindende Zusage eines gewissen Uria an Zakkur (II), der von Rechts wegen als Bruder Jehoišmas galt, dass weder Uria noch seine Nachfahren Zakkurs leiblichen Sohn Jedanja, den Uria adoptiert hatte, zu einem Leibeigenen machen können, sondern Jedanja als rechtmäßiger Sohn Urias gelten soll. Dass auch dieses Dokument in das Archiv der Jehoišma und ihres Mannes gelangte, könnte zwei Gründe haben. Zum einen dürfte die Zusicherung Urias, dass Jedanja sein Sohn wird (ɚɛɚɟ ɟɮɗ, Z. 5) implizieren, dass damit Jedanja,

45 Deutlich ist zu erkennen, das in Z. 11 ein ursprüngliches ɢɡɘɢɪɗɞɟɢɯ «(der) Verfügungsgewalt über die Hälfte von allem hat» in ein ɢɡɗɚɞɟɢɯ «(die) Verfügungsgewalt über alles hat» geändert worden ist. Entsprechend wurde auch in Z. 12 ein ɢɡɘɢɪɗ in ɢɡɗ korrigiert (vgl. Yaron 1961[b], S. 129-130). Z. 11 enthielt den Namen der männlichen Person, die zunächst die Hälfte erben sollte, der aber nahezu völlig ausgelöscht und mit ɟɚɰɤɰ «Ta(pe)met ist es, die» überschrieben wurde. Da sich die erhaltenen Schriftspuren am Schluss durchaus zu ɛɚɮɛɡ ergänzen lassen und der erste Name sicher ein ɢ enthielt, ist die von Porten 1968, S. 211 auf Grundlage des schon von Yaron angeführten § 176 des Codex Hammurapi vorgeschlagene Lesung ɮɗ ɣɢɯɤ ɛɚ ɮɛɡɜ «Mešullam bar Zakkur ist es, der» naheliegend. 46 Damit ist die Vermutung Porten 1968, S. 234, nicht zutreffend, dass die Aufbewahrung des Ehevertrages ihrer Mutter durch Jehoišma und ihren Mann «had little more than sentimental value since the dowry which usually went to the children was most meager». 47 Vgl. zu diesem Dokument auch Szubin-Porten 1983[b].

190

soweit keine andere Verfügung Zakkurs vorliegt, nicht mehr als Erbberechtigter Zakkurs auftreten kann. Angesichts der Versorgungsverpflichtung, die Jehoišma nach B3.6 auch gegenüber Zakkur übernommen hatte, war dies für sie durchaus von Bedeutung. Jedanja konnte eben keine daraus eventuell ableitbare Ansprüche an Jehoišma stellen – und wahrscheinlich auch keine Ansprüche mehr auf das Erbe seines leiblichen Vaters und Großvaters, von dem möglicherweise Jehoišma als rechtliche Tochter Mešullams und Schwester Zakkurs (II) profitiert haben könnte. Ein völlig anderer Grund aber könnte auch sein, dass Zakkur das Dokument an seine «Schwester» bzw. ihren Mann bei seinem Tod weitergegeben und sie somit als Rechtswahrer für seinen Sohn eingesetzt hat, um diesen vor einer späteren Versklavung zu schützen. Das Dokument direkt an Jedanja zu geben, hätte kontraproduktiv sein können, da sein neuer Vater es ihm wegnehmen konnte und somit kein Rechtsmittel mehr verfügbar gewesen wäre, eine nachträgliche Versklavung zu verhindern. Ohne weitere Quellen wird man hier keine endgültige Entscheidung für die eine oder andere Möglichkeit treffen können, wenn auch deutlich ist, dass es durchaus sachlich-juristische Gründe gegeben haben kann, dass auch dieses Dokument in Ananis (II) Archiv sich fand.48 Von besonderem Interesse ist B3.13 (Jahr 402), ein Dokument über ein Darlehen, dass Anani (II) aufgenommen hat. Solche Darlehensdokumente wurden für den Gläubiger – hier ein gewisser Pahnum – ausgestellt und verblieben bei diesem, solange die Schuld nicht beglichen wurde, damit dieser es gegebenenfalls in einem Prozess vorweisen konnte. Wenn dieses Dokument sich aber im Archiv des Schuldners Anani (II) findet, so bedeutet dies folglich, dass das Darlehen zurückgezahlt war. Dass Anani (II) dieses Dokument aufbewahrte, kann damit erklärt werden, dass eine Schuldurkunde in den Händen des Schuldners als Beleg galt, dass die Schuld bezahlt worden war.49 Die rechtliche Bedeutung von B3.7 aus dem Jahr 420, die dieses Dokument für Anani (II) und seine Frau Jehoišma gehabt haben könnte, ist unklar. Die Urkunde hat die Überschreibung von Rechten an einem Haus durch Anani (I) an seine Tochter Jehoišma zum Inhalt, die aber im Jahr 404 und 402 durch B3.10

48 Dies wurde von Porten 1968, S. 234, bezweifelt; vgl. auch Yaron 1961[a], S. 5-6.40. 49 Ein anderes Beispiel für eine zurückgegebene Schuldurkunde dürfte B3.1 sein, die aus dem Jahr 456 stammt. Sie beurkundet ein Darlehen von 4 Schekel Silber, dass Mešullam bar Zakkur einer gewissen Jehohen gewährt hat. TAD ordnet dieses Dokument dem Archiv des Anani zu, was aber, abgesehen davon, dass das Dokument wohl kaum an derselben Stelle gefunden wurde (s.o.), auch inhaltlich nicht plausibel ist. Träfe dies zu, so wäre die Urkunde ja immer im Bereich der «Familie» Mešullams bzw. seiner Rechtsnachfolger geblieben, was bedeuten würde, dass sie nie bezahlt und offenkundig auch nie eingefordert wurde. Daher ist es viel wahrscheinlicher, dass das Dokument aus dem Archiv der Jehohen stammt, die die Schuld bezahlt, die Urkunde ausgehändigt bekommen und als Beleg für die Rückzahlung aufbewahrt hat.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

191

und 11 erweitert und auf eine neue rechtliche Basis gestellt wurden. Damit war das Dokument von 420 (B3.7) prozessrechtlich obsolet, was erklären könnte, warum wohl schon in der Antike die Außenaufschrift und möglicherweise auch die Zeugenliste entfernt worden war und nur noch der Inhaltsteil aufbewahrt wurde. Möglicherweise war das Dokument im Kontext der Überschreibungen von 404/402 geöffnet und dann der Vollständigkeit halber oder zur späteren Information über den offensichtlich komplexen Vorgang mit den beiden neuen Dokumenten zusammen aufbewahrt worden. 2.2.3 Zusammenfassung Das Privatarchiv des Anani (II) und seiner Frau Jehoišma entspricht grundsätzlich dem Archiv des Jedanja. Wie jenes enthält auch dieses nur Rechtsdokumente, die einen Bezug zum Besitz und rechtlichen Status der Archiveigner haben und aus einer überschaubaren Zeitspanne von 50 Jahren stammen. Dies gilt auch dann, wenn die Urkunde in Bezug auf die Adoption des «Neffen» der Jehoišma (B3.9) an diese oder ihren Ehemann gegeben wurde, um den Personenstandstatus des «Neffen» als Sohn und nicht Leibeigener seines Adoptivvaters nach dem Tod seines leiblichen Vaters zu sichern. Damit hätten Jehoišma bzw. ihr Ehemann den Rechtsstatus eines Rechtswahrers, und auch dieses Dokument würde damit einen Bezug zu ihrer rechtlichen Stellung haben. Während die Dokumente des ersten Archivs aber alle noch geschlossen und für eine Verwendung in einem Prozess geeignete Urkunden waren, enthält das Archiv des Anani auch ein Dokument, dass wahrscheinlich schon in der Antike geöffnet worden und damit prozessrechtlich unbrauchbar war. Da es aber einen rechtlichen Vorgang dokumentiert, der eine Vorstufe zu späteren, durch geschlossene Dokumente bezeugte Vorgänge betrifft, ist seine Existenz in diesem Archiv durchaus nachvollziehbar. Die Tatsache, dass alle diese Dokumente entweder nahezu unversehrt erhalten sind bzw. sich sonst nahezu vollständig rekonstruieren lassen und es Hinweise gibt, dass sie erst nach ihrer Auffindung zerstört worden waren, lässt vermuten, dass sie ähnlich wie das erste Archiv ursprünglich in einem Kasten, oder, wie das nächste Archiv, in einem Beutel deponiert worden waren, wodurch sie weitgehend geschützt waren.

2.3 Das Briefarchiv des Nahthor 2.3.1 Rekonstruktion des Archivs Ein völlig anderes Archiv liegt mit dem Briefarchiv des Nahthor, eines Beamten des Satrapen Aršames, vor, das 1954 von Driver publiziert wurde (A6.3-16). Obwohl die Fundumstände völlig unbekannt sind, spricht die Tatsache, dass sie nicht nur zusammen, sondern auch mit einer Ledertasche und einer Sammlung

192

von Bullen gekauft wurden, dafür, dass sie ursprünglich in dieser Tasche aufbewahrt worden waren.50 2.3.2 Inhalt des Archivs Das Archiv51 besteht aus zwei unterschiedlichen Gruppen von Briefen. Die eine Hälfte (A6.10-16) sind Briefe, die an den Beamten Nahthor adressiert waren und alle mit seinen Dienstaufgaben in Verbindung stehen.52 Dies gilt dann auch für A6.9, der die Ausgabe für die Rationen regelte, die Nahthor bei seiner Reise im Auftrag Aršames’ nach Ägypten zustanden. Die übrigen Briefe handeln zumeist von Psamšek, dem Vorgänger Nahthors (A6.10,1), sind aber nicht an diesen addressiert (A6.3-4; A6.8). Dementsprechend stehen in diesen Briefen auch nicht die Dienstaufgaben Psamšeks zur Diskussion, sondern sie bestätigen die Autorität dieses Beamten in Ägypten. So weist Aršames in A6.4 einen anderen Beamten an, dass er Psamšek als Verwalter seiner Domäne in der Nachfolge des Vaters handeln lassen soll. A6.3 greift in einen Konflikt bezüglich früherer Leibeigener ein, die offenkundig die Zeit, die Psamšek brauchte, um sein Amt anzutreten, nutzten, unter Mitnahme von Diebesgut zu fliehen. Aršames spricht hier Psamšek als Nachfolger seines Vaters die Entscheidungsgewalt über diese Leibeigenen zu. A6.8 weist einen anderen Beamten rechtsverbindlich an, Psamšek in Bezug auf die Domäne und einen Truppenteil zu gehorchen. Mithin handeln alle diese Briefe von den Rechten Psamšeks bzw. seiner Autorität als Beamter und Verwalter des Aršames. A6.7, ein Brief, in dem Aršames die Haftentlassung einer Gruppe kilikischer Arbeiter fordert, so dass diese wieder auf seiner Domäne Dienst tun können, schlägt ein vergleichbares Thema an, obwohl in ihm Psamšek nicht erwähnt wird. Aber auch die stark zerstörten Briefe A6.5 und 6 handeln offenkundig von der Verwaltung der Domäne des Aršames in Ägypten.

50 Vgl. Driver 1954, S. 1-2. 51 Zu den Texten und insbesondere zu ihrer rechtlichen Bedeutung vgl. jetzt auch Kottsieper 2012. 52 A6.10 ist eine rechtsverbindliche Verwarnung Aršames gegen Nahthor, mit dessen Leistungen er nicht zufrieden ist; A6.11 teilt Nahthor eine Entscheidung in einem Rechtsfall mit, der entsprechend er dann handeln soll; A6.12 weist ihn an, einen Bildhauer eine Statue anfertigen zu lassen und ihm Rationen zur Versorgung auszugeben; A6.13 ist eine Anweisung, sich um die Angelegenheit einer anderen Domäne in Ägypten zu kümmern; A6.14 ist eine Aufforderung, dafür zu sorgen, dass die Einkünfte einer anderen Domäne nach Babylonien gebracht werden sollen; A6.15 ist eine Reaktion auf Klagen über Nahthor und sein Vorgehen gegen andere, und eine Anweisung, wie er sich korrekt verhalten soll; A6.16 ist offenkundig eine Reklamation über falsche Güter, die Nahthor gesandt hat.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

193

2.3.3. Zusammenfassung Aus der gegebenen Übersicht zeigt sich recht eindrücklich, dass das vorliegende Archiv unter dem Gesichtspunkt der Amtsgeschäfte des Nahthor zusammengestellt ist. Dazu gehören natürlich die Schreiben, die seine Amtspflichten betreffen und entsprechende Anweisungen enthalten, aber auch die Schreiben aus der Zeit seines Vorgängers, die die Autorität des Verwalters an sich bzw. das Dienstverhältnis von Untergebenen betreffen. Dass in diesem Archiv offenkundig keine direkte Dienstanweisung an seinen Vorgänger zu finden ist, zeigt, dass entweder Nahthor bei seinem Dienstantritt diese als für seine Aufgabe irrelevant ausgesondert hat, oder aber, dass Psamšek bei der Übergabe der Dokumente nur solche weitergab, die für das Tagesgeschäft seines Nachfolgers noch von Bedeutung sein konnten, wozu er sicher nicht die konkreten Dienstanweisungen, die er selber erhalten hatte, rechnete. Es handelt sich hiermit also um ein deutlich sachbezogenes Archiv, das im Wesentlichen nur die älteren Dokumente aufbewahrt, die für den aktuellen Archivinhaber von Bedeutung waren. Dem entspricht, dass auch hier wirklich alte Dokumente aus früheren Zeiten, etwa aus der Dienstzeit von Psamšeks Vater, nicht vorliegen und wir von diesem nur indirekt aus den Briefen aus der Zeit von Psamšeks Dienst erfahren (A6.3-4). 2.4 Die Texte vom Wadi Daliye 1962 wurde von Beduinen in einer Höhle im Wadi Daliye bei Jericho eine Sammlung von Dokumenten entdeckt, die dort offenbar im Zusammenhang mit den Wirren am Ende der Perserzeit von Flüchtlingen aus Samaria mitgebracht worden waren, die dann in der Höhle ihren Tod fanden.53 Die Texte selbst waren offenkundig noch alle aufgerollt und gesiegelt gewesen, wenn auch einige wohl schon vor ihrer Auffindung stark verrottet waren, andere möglicherweise durch die Beduinen geöffnet wurden. So fanden sich auch eine große Anzahl von Bullen, mit denen die Rollen versiegelt gewesen waren, sowie Reste der Schnüre, mit denen man sie umwickelt hatte. Soweit es die zum Teil erheblich zerstörten Texte erkennen lassen, handelt es sich bei diesen um Handels- und Rechtsurkunden, wobei die Mehrzahl sich auf den Sklavenhandel (WDSP 1-9, 18-20, 22, 26) oder den Verleih von Sklaven (WDSP 10, 12-13, 17, 27) beziehen. WDSP 14 und 15 handeln von Immobilien, WDSP 16 vielleicht von einem Weingarten, während WDSP 11, 21 und 23-25 das Objekt der Rechtsvorgänge nicht mehr erkennen lassen. WDSP 28-37 sind zu zerstört, um noch mit ausreichender Sicherheit ihr Thema und ihre Rechtsgattung zu bestimmen. Die Urkunden stammen aus der Zeit von 375 bis spätestens

53 Vgl. den Fundbericht in Cross 1963 und Anm. 56; die massgeblichen Editionen sind Gropp 2001 und jetzt DuŠek 2007.

194

332 v.Chr.54 Da in mehreren Texten, die aus der Zeit von 335 und früher stammen, ein gewisser Jehonur bar Laneri insbesondere als Käufer von Sklaven auftritt, in einer anderer Gruppe von Dokumenten, die etwa in die Zeit von 375340 datieren, Jehopadaini bzw. sein Sohn Netira in dieser Funktion begegnen, geht Dušek davon aus, dass zumindest ein großer Teil der Texte den Archiven der genannten Personen zuzuordnen sei.55 Dies ist möglich, aber nicht zu sichern. Dass alle Dokumente an einer einzigen Stelle in der relativ großen Höhle, die über hundert Flüchtlinge beherbergt hatte, gefunden wurden,56 kann man zwar damit erklären, dass hier befreundete Familien ihre Dokumente zusammen verborgen hatten. Möglich ist aber auch, dass solche Urkunden in einem zentralen Archiv einer Institution gesammelt waren, deren Aufgabe es war, insbesondere Transaktionen von Leibeigenen zu kontrollieren und/oder zu gewähren, dass der Status der Betroffenen als Unfreie nachweisbar war. In einer antiken Stadtgesellschaft spielte dies eine große Rolle.57 Trotz der großen Unsicherheit darüber, ob wir es hier mit einem oder mehreren Archiven zu tun haben und wem diese dienten, zeigt auch dieser Textfund grundsätzlich, dass solche Archive nicht beliebige Dokumente enthielten, sondern inhaltliche Schwerpunkte hatten. Und sie dienten nicht zur Aufbewahrung obsolet gewordener Dokumente, sondern, wie die kurze Zeitspanne von 40 Jahren zeigt, enthielten sie durchweg nur solche, von denen man annahm, dass sie noch geschäftlich oder juristisch gebraucht wurden. Im Hinblick auf Leibeigene waren Handels- und Freilassungsurkunden nach dem Tod des betreffenden Leibeigenen im Normalfall obsolet oder allenfalls noch für seine direkten Kinder von Bedeutung. Dies entspricht dem Zeitraum von ca. 40 Jahren aus der die Urkunden stammen. Dass ein Sklave länger als 40 Jahre lebte oder als Leibeigener von Interesse war, dürfte eher die Ausnahme gewesen sein. 2.5 Sammeltexte als Archive Ebenfalls als eine Art von Archiv können die Rollen angesprochen werden, die Abschriften oder Zusammenfassungen von Einzeldokumenten enthielten und wiederum in Ägypten gefunden wurden. Dabei sind folgende Formen belegt:

54 Vgl. DuŠek 2007, S. 441-445. 55 Vgl. DuŠek 2007, S. 458-466. 56 Vgl. Cross 1963, S. 113-114: «the cave of the papyri ... penetrates into the southern cliff-side for some 65 meters. ... The find spot proved to be in a remote recess of a deep passageway. ... The number of skeletons ... found ... was staggering. Dr. Lapp reports more than eighty recovered in the first campaign, and estimates that the full count ... may reach 200». 57 Auch die Rechtsurkunden hinsichtlich von Immobilien könnten bei einer solchen Institution hinterlegt sein, zumal die erhaltenen Reste nicht erkennen lassen, um was es bei ihnen im Einzelnen geht.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

195

1

Rollen, die Abrechnungen enthalten. Insbesondere eindrücklich ist hier die Erstbeschriftung des Aḥiqar-Palimpsests (C3.7). Dieser wohlbekannte Weisheitstext wurde auf eine Rolle geschrieben, die aus Blättern von mindestens zwei älteren Rollen zusammengesetzt war.58 Dabei enthielten diese älteren Rollen einzelne Reporte darüber, welche Schiffe man an welchem Tag bei ihrer Ankunft bzw. Abfahrt inspiziert hatte, was sie an Ladung mit sich führten und welche Abgaben man erhoben hatte. Die einzelnen Monate werden durch Summenangaben abgeschlossen, wie auch eine Zusammenfassung der Daten am Ende der Rollen zu finden war. Da diese Rollen offenkundig in einem Zug geschrieben und nicht Tag für Tag ergänzt wurden, kann mit Sicherheit davon ausgegangen werden, dass dem Schreiber einzelne Dokumente vorlagen, deren Angaben er hier nicht nur zusammenfasst, sondern detailliert dokumentiert. Solche Rollen ersetzen somit die Sammlung bzw. ein wohlgeordnetes Archiv der einzelnen Schriftstücke. Von besonderer Bedeutung ist aber auch, dass solche Schriftrollen nur für einen bestimmten Zeitraum aufbewahrt wurden. So wurde ihr Inhalt nach einigen Jahren gelöscht und der Papyrus für einen literarischen Text genutzt. Damit entsprechen sie den bisher behandelten Archiven in zwei wesentlichen Aspekten: Sie haben eine klare Funktion, d.h. sie sind keine beliebige Sammlung von Dokumenten, und sie sind nicht auf die Sicherung der Dokumente für einen beliebig langen Zeitraum angelegt, sondern werden offenkundig dann aufgegeben, wenn ihre Funktion erfüllt ist. Es sind also keine Archive für die Nachwelt, sondern funktionale Sammlungen für die Gegenwart.

2 Dass einzelne Dokumente als Abschriften in Rollen gesammelt wurden, illustriert auch C3.13. Dass diese Rolle Einzeldokumente archiviert, wird nicht nur darin deutlich, dass die einzelnen Dokumente zumeist deutlich durch eine Leerzeile und einen horizontalen Strich am rechten Rand voneinander abgesetzt sind, sondern insbesondere dadurch, dass die einzelnen Texte teilweise einen unterschiedlichen formalen Aufbau haben und sogar noch ihre Überschriften wie ɥɮɡɜ «Memorandum» (Z. 1, 10, 44, 50) oder ɢɨ ɥɮɡɜ «Memorandum über» (Z. 46, 48) enthalten.59 Es handelt sich also um eine Sammlung von Memoranden, die, soweit der erhaltene Text es erkennen lässt, alle den Transfer von Gütern zum Thema haben, so dass auch hier themenorientiertes Archiv vorliegt. 3 Schließlich sei auf die Sammlungen von Gerichtsprotokollen verwiesen, von denen sich mehrere in Saqqara gefunden haben (B8.1-12). Wie in C3.13 sind

58 Vgl. hierzu jetzt Kottsieper 2009, S. 152-156. 59 Vgl. A4.9 als Beispiel eines einzelnen Memorandums; dass die Einzeldokumente auch anders beginnen konnten, zeigt Z. 23, wo mit @ɐɝɗ möglicherweise eine Orts- oder Zeitangabe am Anfang stand.

196

dabei die einzelnen Fälle durch Leerzeilen (B8.2; B8.4; B8.7), Striche an den Seiten (B8.2) oder sogar durch ein stilisiertes ɖ in einer Leerzeile (B8.5) oder nur durch Absatzschreibung (B8.6) voneinander getrennt. Dabei belegen B8.7 und 8, dass die einzelnen Dokumente durchaus auch unterschiedliche Schritte bei der Rechtsfindung in einem einzelnen Fall betreffen konnten. So sind in diesen Rollen einzelne Vernehmungsprotokolle, die offenkundig sukzessive durchgeführt worden waren, mit Leerzeile und Strich voneinander getrennt. Solche Rollen sind Zeugen einer Art «amtlichen» Archivierung von Dokumenten über Einzelvorgänge, wobei auch hier die Ausrichtung auf eine bestimmte Funktion grundlegend ist. Es sind nicht einfach Dokumentensammlungen oder Urkundenbücher, die alle möglichen Dokumente und Urkunden beinhalten, sondern Rollen, in denen Dokumente zu einem amtlichen Aufgabenbereich in Abschriften gesammelt wurden. Dabei handelt es sich nicht um Rechtsurkunden, sondern um informative Dokumente, deren Informationen zu einem Thema oder Bereich auf diese Weise archiviert wurden. Offenkundig konnten aber diese Archivrollen dann, wenn ihre Informationen nicht mehr gebraucht wurden, anderen Zwecken zugeführt werden. Dies belegt nicht nur das AḥiqarPalimpsest, sondern z.B. auch B8.2, dessen Einzeldokumente in eine Rolle geschrieben wurden, die ursprünglich andere Verwaltungstexte enthielt.

3 Zusammenfassung Die Durchsicht der Textgruppen bzw. Texte, die mit hinreichender äußerer Evidenz als Zeugen ursprünglicher und nicht erst modern rekonstruierter Archive angesprochen werden können, ergibt ein erstaunlich klares Bild. Solche Archive enthielten Dokumente, die für den Archivbesitzer eine konkrete Funktion in der Gegenwart hatten. Sie dienten nicht der Aufbewahrung beliebiger Schriftstücke, die man möglicherweise aus «sentimentalen» Gründen behalten wollte. Dementsprechend enthalten die Archive der Privatpersonen Rechtsdokumente, die sich auf die Besitzstandsrechte und/oder den Rechtsstatus des Archiveigners beziehen. Es sind keine Familienarchive, die der Familiengeschichte dienen, sondern aus der Vergangenheit werden normalerweise nur solche Dokumente aufbewahrt, die noch für die Gegenwart in ihrer Funktion als Rechtsdokumente eine Funktion haben. Dies entspricht den Archiven mit einem institutionellen Hintergrund. Da es hier nicht darum ging, den Rechtsanspruch einer Privatperson zu sichern, sondern die Verwaltung mit Informationen über Abläufe zu versorgen, war hier eine sekundäre Form der Archivierung beliebt: die Abschrift einzelner Urkunden zu einem bestimmten Themenbereich. Der Vorteil liegt auf der Hand. Eine Rolle lässt sich leichter transportieren oder deponieren als eine größere Anzahl einzelner Papyrusblätter oder Dokumente – und in ihr lassen sich die Informa-

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

197

tionen auch gleich fest in eine sachliche oder zeitliche Ordnung bringen. Aber auch hier gilt der Grundsatz, dass ein solches Archiv nicht für die Nachwelt angelegt wurde, sondern für einen zeitnahen Gebrauch, nach dem es obsolet wurde und entsprechend entsorgt werden konnte. Das Archiv des Beamten Nahthor entspricht den Privatarchiven darin, dass es sich deutlich auf die Funktion und das damit verbundene Amt einer einzelnen Person bezieht. Möglicherweise belegen die Dokumente aus dem Wadi Daliye, dass insbesondere für Rechtsurkunden in Bezug auf Leibeigene im Palästina der ausgehenden Perserzeit auch zentrale Archive existieren konnten, durch die eine Institution den für eine Gesellschaft rechtlich und sozial konfliktträchtigen Bereich des Status von Freien und Unfreien kontrollieren konnte, in dem sie die entsprechenden Urkunden sammelte und so vor Zerstörung sicherte. Aber auch hier findet sich kein Hinweis darauf, dass solchen Archiven eine Funktion über die Gegenwart hinaus zugesprochen wurde. Falls diese Dokumente jedoch aus Privatarchiven stammen sollten, so würden diese den in Ägypten gefundenen funktional entsprechen.

198

Bibliographie

Botta 2009 A.F. Botta, The Aramaic and Egyptian Legal Traditions at Elephantine, Library of Second Temple Studies 64, Edinburgh. Cowley 1923 A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C., Oxford. Cross 1963 F.M. Cross, The Discovery of the Samaria Papyri, «The Biblical Archaeologist», 26, S. 109-121. Driver 1954 G.R. Driver, Aramaic Documents of the Fifth Century B.C., Oxford. Dušek 2007 J. Dušek, Les manuscrits araméens du Wadi Daliyeh et la Samarie vers 450-332 av. J.-C., Culture and History of the Ancient Near East 30, Leiden. Friedman 1980 M.A. Friedman, Jewish Marriage in Palestine, I, Tel Aviv-New York. Grelot 1972 P. Grelot, Documents araméens d’Egypte, LAPO 5, Paris. Gropp 2001 D.M. Gropp, The Samaria Papyri from Wadi Daliyeh, in: D.M. Gropp et.al., Wadi Daliyeh II: The Samaria Papyri from Wadi Daliyeh. Qumran Cave 4. XXVIII: Miscellanea. Part 2, DJD 28, Oxford. Halévy 1907 J. Halévy, Rezension zu Sayce-Cowley 1906, «Revue Semitique», 15, S. 108-112. Honroth-Rubensohn-Zucker 1909 W. Honroth, O. Rubensohn und F. Zucker, Bericht über die Ausgrabungen auf Elephantine in den Jahren 1906-1908, «Zeitschrift für Ägyptische

Sprache und Altertumskunde», 46, S. 14-61. Kottsieper 2009 I. Kottsieper, ‹Look, son, what Nadab did to Ahikaros...›. The Aramaic Ahiqar Tradition and its Relationship to the Book of Tobit, in: D. Dimant und R.G. Kratz (eds.), The Dynamics of Language and Exegesis at Qumran, Forschungen zum Alten Testament 2. Reihe, 35, Tübingen. Kottsieper 2012 I. Kottsieper, Briefe als Rechtsurkunden: Zu einigen aramäischen Briefen des Aršames, in: U. Yiftach-Firanko (ed.), Legal Documents in Ancient Societies (LDAS) I. The Letter: Law, State, Society and the Epistolary Format in the Ancient World, Proceedings of a Colloquium held at the American Academy in Rome 28–30.9.2008, PHILIPPIKA. Marburger altertumskundliche Abhandlungen 55/1, Wiesbaden (im Druck). Kraeling 1953 E.G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri, New Haven. Muffs 2003 Y. Muffs, Studies in the Aramaic Legal Papyri from Elephantine, HdO I/66, Leiden-Boston. Porten 1968 B. Porten, Archives from Elephantine, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London. Porten-Yardeni 1986-1999 B. Porten und A. Yardeni, Textbook of Aramaic Documents from Ancient Egypt, I-IV, Jerusalem (= TAD I-IV). Sayce-Cowley 1906 A.H. Sayce und A.E. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri Discovered at Assuan, London.

aramäische archive aus achämenidischer zeit und ihre funktion

199

Segal 1983 J.B. Segal, Aramaic Texts from North Saqqâra with some Fragments in Phoenician, Excavations at North Saqqâra 4, London. Szubin-Porten 1983[a] H. Z. Szubin und B. Porten, Testamentary Succession at Elephantine, «Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research», 252, S. 35-46. Szubin-Porten 1983[b] H. Z. Szubin und B. Porten, Litigation concerning Abandoned Property at Elephantine (Kraeling 1), «Journal of Near Eastern Studies», 42, S. 279-284. Yaron 1961[a] R. Yaron, Introduction to the Law of the Aramaic Papyri, Oxford. Yaron 1961[b] R. Yaron, Notes on Aramaic Papyri II, «Journal of Near Eastern Studies», 20, S. 127-130.

200

La ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

laura boffo

Gli studi recenti sulla storia e sulle pratiche dell’archiviazione nelle città greche dimostrano che la capacità delle poleis di organizzare degli archivi ai fini delle proprie esigenze gestionali e auto-rappresentative aveva trovato applicazione e sviluppo ben prima dell’epoca alessandrina1. Un corretto approccio al modo di gestione dei demosia grammata in età ellenistica deve dunque ancora una volta richiamarsi all’aspetto funzionale dell’archiviazione, che, nel trasformarsi delle circostanze storiche, politiche, istituzionali generali, ne adattava i caratteri, incrementando la quantità del materiale tradizionale, introducendo nuove specie e voci alle categorie usuali, inglobando nel sistema i documenti “esterni” che richiedevano la registrazione, articolando in maniera più idonea le diverse fasi e classi delle scritture da lungo tempo praticate2.

1 Per una sintesi, vd. Boffo 2003; Faraguna 2005; per considerazioni circa la necessità di rivedere l’idea ancora diffusa del «perfezionamento» del sistema archivistico dei Greci compiutosi in età ellenistica per il contatto «più diretto» con il mondo orientale, vd. Boffo 2011a; per aspetti specifici, vd. Faraguna 2000, 2003, 2011. I lavori indicati sono preliminari ad uno studio completo su Le poleis e i loro archivi (a cura di M. Faraguna per l’età arcaica e classica, di L. Boffo per l’età ellenistica), nel quale i diversi aspetti qui toccati solo tangenzialmente avranno più organica trattazione. Ove non diversamente indicato, le date s’intendono a.C. 2 In questa prospettiva la (ovvia) dialettica fra storia politica e istituzioni, sui caratteri della quale ha richiamato l’attenzione ad esempio Gauthier 1985, pp. 4-5, può trovare una definizione

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

201

Quello che era cambiato era il contesto generale, che da un lato aveva portato all’ampliamento delle relazioni amministrative e diplomatiche all’interno di un sistema poleico e interpoleico (preesistente e accresciuto dalle fondazioni e dalle promozioni di statuto) sempre più integrato, dall’altro aveva introdotto o accentuato nei circuiti documentali intra- e infra-cittadini le diverse forme della parola del re, con le sue esigenze e conseguenze politiche e amministrative3. In questa prospettiva, appare del tutto giustificato ricondurre gli inizi del periodo «ellenistico» all’epoca (almeno) di Filippo II, le cui lettere risultano aver ampiamente circolato e rappresentato materiale di opportuna conservazione negli archivi delle città4. Allo stesso modo, quasi all’altro capo della fase “alta” del periodo in questione, appare meritevole di considerazione per l’aspetto che qui interessa la nota di Polibio (21,45,2) che la sconfitta di Antioco III si prospettava per le poleis dell’Asia Minore come una liberazione, «quale dal tributo, quale dalla guarnigione, tutte dalle ordinanze regie» (kaqovlou de; pavnte× basilikw`n prostagmavtwn)5. La situazione che lo storico riferiva alle città che rientravano

più corretta, uscendo dai vincoli del mero rapporto di causa-effetto. La considerazione vale anche per le città di fondazione reale, le quali assumevano gli aspetti istituzionali delle poleis di tradizione: non sorprende che nel 202 ca. il trattato tra Filippo V e Lisimachia terminasse eij~ ta; d[hmovsia gravmmata], sigillato toi`~ dhmosiv[oi~ daktulivoi~] (Staatsverträge III, 549, ll. 3-6). Vd. anche quanto segue. 3 Una tipica espressione della interrelazione fra le poleis di vecchio e nuovo conio con ampia circolazione di documenti da conservare è costituita dalla cd. «diplomazia della parentela», la costruzione e pubblicizzazione organizzate delle «parentele» mitiche e storiche tra le città, desiderose di trovare e dichiarare la loro collocazione nel nuovo contesto allargato: vd. Curty 1995; Jones (N.F.) 1999; Lücke 2000; Sammartano 2008/9; Patterson 2010. Per «la parola del re» e il «dialogo» che ne conseguiva, oggetto di ampia considerazione in dottrina, vd. ad esempio Mari 2009, pp. 89 sgg.; Virgilio 2011, pp. 27 sgg. L’attenzione specifica alla prassi amministrativa e alle conseguenze archivistiche delle espressioni di quel dialogo, non valutate dagli studiosi, può consentire alcuni chiarimenti circa il rapporto tra i diversi «discorsi politici», a parere di chi scrive non soltanto riconducibile al rilancio delle opposte rappresentazioni (come invece rilevato ad esempio da Bertrand 1990; Ma 2004, pp. 136 sgg.; Bencivenni 2010, pp. 167168, nt. 91; ma vd. la stessa Bencivenni 2003, p. 280, nt. 68, a proposito della vicenda di Milasa citata più sotto). 4 Per un repertorio delle lettere di Filippo II ad Atene vd. Pébarthe 2006, p. 296, con note; cfr. anche Ceccarelli 2005, p. 357, con note; Bencivenni 2010, p. 154, ntt. 17-18 e, per altri destinatarî, Sickinger c.s., nt. 20; vd. anche la nota seguente. 5 La qualifica di prostagma non va qui intesa in senso “tecnico” (per il quale vd. Gauthier 1993, pp. 42-43; Bencivenni 2010, pp. 140 sgg.), quanto in senso generale di ordine ufficiale avvertito come espressione di un potere impositivo (cfr. Mari 2006, pp. 210-211). Benché si riconduca alla polemica, presenta per noi un significato generale anche il passo in cui Polibio, per rilevare la «malvagità» del piano di Apelle, tutore di Filippo V, il quale voleva «portare la lega degli Achei ad un assetto del tutto simile a quello dei Tessali», sottolineava la negatività della condizione di questi ultimi (4,76,2): «i Tessali sembravano… amministrarsi secondo le proprie leggi e distinguersi di molto dai Macedoni; invece non ne differivano in nulla, ma la loro situazione era simile a quella dei Macedoni e facevano tutto quello che veniva ordinato dagli uomini del re» (pa`n ejpoivoun to; prostattovmenon toi`× basilikoi`×; era quanto altrettanto polemicamente rilevava Demostene, III Phil., 33, a proposito di Filippo II, che

202

nella sfera di controllo del re si può estendere a tutte le poleis che furono a contatto più o meno diretto con un’autorità regale: «libere» o «soggette» che fossero, esse non potevano ignorare i messaggi dei re (in tutta la loro gamma di contenuti e di obblighi) e i documenti che li rappresentavano, e ad essi adeguavano, nei testi e nella loro articolazione, le risposte previste dalle proprie strutture amministrative, con le specifiche pratiche di scrittura e di memoria6. Sembra dunque opportuno, se pure in forma preliminare e sommaria, tracciare una rassegna dei diversi modi attraverso i quali il potere reale ellenistico, diretto o indiretto che fosse, entrava (o «intrudeva») e viveva negli archivi delle poleis. Data la multiformità della relazione, le occasioni per l’insediamento erano molteplici; date la pratica della «catena documentaria» generata dai provvedimenti amministrativi e l’articolazione degli archeia (gli uffici e [i loro] archivi) le forme della registrazione e della diramazione lo erano altrettanto7. E se naturalmente non possiamo ritenere che le poleis praticassero i sistemi e i processi ricostruibili tutte ai medesimi livelli, nelle stesse forme e per l’intero periodo, come per lo studio dei sistemi archivistici in generale siamo autorizzati a concludere di una capacità comunque posseduta ed esplicabile dalle comunità organizzate

gravfei... 4HWWDORLC× o}n crh; trovpon politeuvesqai: su genesi e caratteri dei passi, vd. Mari 1999, pp. 646-647; sulla situazione della Tessaglia in età antigonide, vd. ora Helly 2009, pp. 345-356). Non si entra qui nella discussa questione circa il termine «basso» dell’ellenismo, se non per indicare che, nella prospettiva dello studio delle pratiche archivistiche delle poleis, il passaggio fra II e I secolo sembra un ragionevole discrimine, collegato con un diverso sistema di rapporti istituzionali: vd., tra gli altri, Gauthier 2005; Vial 2005 e Coudry, Kirbihler 2010 (i quali ribadiscono il carattere «intrusivo» dell’autorità romana sin dal II secolo, ma propongono come momento netto di cesura istituzionale nelle città greche la riorganizzazione sillana dell’85/4, con conseguenze dirette sui documenti d’archivio). 6 La distinzione, tradizionale, fra città «libere» e «soggette» è da tempi recenti oggetto di riconsiderazione, anche in conseguenza di una valutazione attenta alle forme discorsive e documentali del rapporto tra re e polis di turno: vd. p. es. Hatzopoulos 1997, 2003, spec. pp. 60 sgg.; 2003/4; Mari 2006, pp. 215 sgg. (per il regno macedonico); Ma 2003, 2004, pp. 111 sgg. (principalmente per quello seleucidico); Müller 2003, pp. 427 sgg. (per il rapporto tra il re pergameno e la sua capitale); Sartre 2004 e Capdetrey 2007, spec. pp. 209 sgg. (per l’Asia Minore); cfr. anche Bertrand 1997, pp. 182 sgg.; O’Neil 2000; Debord 2003, pp. 301-302; Fernoux 2004, pp. 117, 165-166; Hamon 2009, pp. 371-373 e qui sotto. 7 Il principio della creazione di documenti complementari e concatenati, dell’articolazione delle pratiche archivistiche, della molteplicità funzionale e spaziale dei luoghi di produzione e/o di conservazione dei documenti è ormai riconosciuto nell’ambito degli studi sull’archiviazione nel mondo antico: per l’applicazione di esso al mondo delle poleis vd. Boffo 2003, p. 15; Faraguna 2005, pp. 72 sgg.; 2006a, pp. 202-203; 2006b, pp. 61 sgg. Al principio in questione è naturalmente correlato quello della gerarchia funzionale dei diversi documenti, che ha portato a ulteriori definizioni utili per l’analisi del mondo greco: i «documenti primari / provvisori» a fronte dei «documenti secondari / definitivi» per il V.O.A. e i «documenti a vita breve» a fronte dei «documenti a vita lunga» per il mondo romano, intesi come rispettivamente quelli strumentali ad una prima, parziale registrazione di dati e quelli, in genere cumulativi, destinati alla conservazione nella (più) lunga durata (vd. rispettivamente Ferioli, Fiandra, Fissore 2000, p. 357 e Moreau 2000, p. 719). L’importanza del presupposto emerge con evidenza anche dall’insieme dei contributi di questo volume.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

203

a gestire dei grammata in funzione della propria più o meno lunga e più o meno intensa vita politica. La comunicazione del re alle poleis, nella sua manifestazione scritta, si esprimeva in primo luogo in una serie di documenti recapitati a destinazione, quali «vettori del potere»8. Benché non se ne possa valutare il numero sulla base dell’attestazione epigrafica (che comunque riportava quasi esclusivamente i documenti favorevoli alla polis che la disponeva), proprio il fatto che quest’ultima abbia incrementato negli ultimi decenni in maniera vistosa il numero delle lettere reali induce a confermare l’idea dell’ampiezza del fenomeno e della necessità per le città di tenerne la gestione9. Con l’epistolografia si connetteva (anche per

8 La citazione da Savalli Lestrade, Cogitore 2010, Sez. II; sulle lettere come espressione del potere reale vd. anche Muir 2009, spec. pp. 90 sgg.; Virgilio 2010, spec. pp. 108-109; 2011, pp. 32 sgg. Singolare e significativa espressione del ruolo dello scritto del re nel sistema di relazione con la polis è il dossier epigrafico del 200 ca. riportato da Nisiro (IG XII 3, 91, lettera di Filippo V e decreto conseguente, ll. 1-8 e 9 sgg.): la concessione dell’uso delle leggi locali avveniva attraverso la lettera con sigillo del re – gravmmata... kai; sfragi`da ta;n basilevw~ – «portata» (fevrwn, in senso proprio) dal polites intermediario incaricato di riferire oralmente la volontà del re (ll. 7-8: ejntevtalmai aujtw`i ajnaggei`lai uJmi`n a} hjboulovmhn uJma`~ eijdh`sai; cfr. ll. 15 e 19). Era lo stesso sfondo del rapporto tra Atene e Demetrio Poliorcete, illustrato al meglio dal decreto del 304/3 SEG 36, 163, proposto dal partigiano Stratocle di Diomea: uno dei sostenitori del re riceveva la politeia nelle forme istituzionali consuete dopo che il re aveva mandato a conoscere per iscritto quali erano stati i meriti della persona nei confronti proprî e della città (ll. 10 sgg.: peri; ou| oJ basileu;~ ejpev[steilen] W•KCL boulh`i kai; tw`i dhvmwi, ajpof[aivnwn...; cfr. IG II2 486, ll. 11-13; 587, ll. 4-5, con Habicht 2006, pp. 89, 425). I documenti non andavano naturalmente disgiunti dall’intensa attività di legazione reciproca e dal connesso scambio delle «carte» che caratterizzò l’epoca e rappresentò uno strumento fondamentale del «dialogo» tra poleis e autorità reale: significativi sono ad esempio il caso di Xanto, che nel 243/2 inviava a Tolemeo III una legazione con grammata (l’accreditamento di dovere, il decreto civico da apodidonai) e una petizione aggiuntiva (peri; w|n hjxiou`te ta; uJpomnhvmata ejpevdwkan), riportandone – ejkovmisan – l’epistole di accoglimento (SEG 36, 1218, rispettivamente ll. 10, 18-19 e 4-5, con Bousquet 1986, pp. 27-29 e Wörrle 1988, p. 457, nt. 155) e, dall’iniziativa opposta, di Antioco III impegnato nelle trattative con Teo, il quale inviò alla polis una lettera di richiesta di una legazione con cui trattare e affidò ad essa di ritorno la lettera di esenzione fiscale, da illustrare al demos (SEG 41, 1003, I, ll. 29-36); una sequenza più completa di documenti trasmessi indica il dossier epigrafico milesio del 262 ca. che riproduceva una lettera con cui Tolemeo II confermava i privilegi fiscali riconosciuti dal padre, «portata» (ejkovmisen) a Mileto da un legato del re, il probouleuma che ne aveva stabilito la lettura e la discussione nell’ekklesia, il conseguente decreto onorario del demos, che a sua volta era stato inviato al re tramite legazione civica (Milet I 3, 139; cfr. Rhodes, Lewis 1997, pp. 378-379; Savalli-Lestrade 2003, pp. 22-23; Bencivenni 2010, pp. 161-162). Per una sintesi efficace della natura dei «documenti del potere» e sul loro effetto nelle città greche – per il regno seleucidico – vd. ad esempio Capdetrey 2007, pp. 340-341, 352. 9 Dall’opus classicum RC, del 1934 (1970) – peraltro riservato alla sola epistolografia epigrafica di diadochi ed epigoni rinvenuta in Asia e nelle isole prospicienti – alla raccolta che B. Virgilio cura in vista della pubblicazione di quella relativa all’Asia, il numero è salito da settantacinque a ca. quattrocentoquaranta attestazioni, dirette e indirette (Virgilio 2009, p. 401, con Virgilio 2010, pp. 118-119; 2011, p. 73; per una rassegna dell’epistolografia iscritta dei re di Macedonia, vd. Hatzopoulos 1996, II, B, con l’analisi in I, pp. 396-405, 411-414, 416-426; per un aggiornamento, vd. Hatzopoulos 2006, pp. 85-86, cfr. 87 sgg. e Tziafalias, Helly 2010, pp. 85 sgg.). Un caso di lettera reale incisa nella polis vincente è ad esempio rappresentato dalla missiva di

204

ragioni formali) la pratica delle ordinanze circolari, i diagrammata, i quali rappresentarono un importante strumento d’«intrusione» della volontà del sovrano nella vita amministrativa e nel sistema documentario delle poleis10. Nella forma con cui venivano indirizzati alla singola polis, o entravano nella sua amministrazione, gli scritti promananti dall’autorità regia passavano naturalmente nella sezione delle comunicazioni in entrata dell’archivio deputato alla conservazione degli atti ufficiali, configurandosi come nuovi crhmatismoiv11. Là essi venivano tenuti come documento di riferimento normativo – in conseguenza dei quali decretare e «in conformità» ai quali (kata; + acc.) procedere – variamente associato a quello delle norme civiche che essi ingeneravano, per tutto il tempo che le circostanze storiche e la necessità pubblica avessero previsto12.

Lisimaco del 283 ca. che, in una delle controversie territoriali fra Samo e Priene, decideva a favore della prima: il documento ci è pervenuto attraverso l’epigrafia della città insulare (IG XII 6.1, 155) e non attraverso l’«archivio epigrafico» del tempio di Atena Poliade a Priene (che la dovette peraltro inserire in quello riposto, facendone gli opportuni riferimenti/estratti nei documenti relativi all’applicazione della decisione arbitrale; diverse lettere regie conservate dai Prienesi costituivano documento di riferimento per l’arbitrato rodio del 196-192, Magnetto 2008, p. 43, l. 171, con pp. 110, 177 e 180 e sotto); sulle motivazioni delle poleis per l’iscrizione delle missive regali, vd. Bencivenni 2010, spec. pp. 161 sgg. Vd. anche la nota seguente. 10 Su natura, storia, diffusione del diagramma reale come istituto giuridico, ancora una volta da ricondurre a Filippo II, si veda l’eccellente sintesi di Bencivenni 2003, pp. 18-32 e 90-93, 115129, dove si considera anche il rapporto con la documentazione legislativa cittadina; vd. anche Mari 2006, pp. 211 sgg.; Maffi 2006, p. 310; Cassayre 2010, pp. 48 sgg. 11 Nel significato definito da Ph. Gauthier di documenti «donnant lieu à enregistrement» (BE 1995, 525, p. 526). Il medesimo messaggio poteva costituire naturalmente sostanza per la composizione da parte della cancelleria reale di una catena documentaria destinata a circuito misto, più o meno coeva: per un’attestazione concreta, vd. la versione epigrafica del dossier relativo all’attribuzione di dorea ad Aristodicide di Asso, nella quale la lettera figurava insieme con (parte del)la sequenza di trasmissione dell’ordine ai funzionari interessati (I.Ilion 33 con Bencivenni 2004 e qui sotto); per l’insieme dei documenti reali connessi con una disposizione del re che riguardava un personaggio di una polis ma che prevedeva un circuito più ampio, reale e poleico, vd. RC 66, ll. 16-17, la lettera del 135 con cui Attalo III comunicava a Cizico gli onori da lui attribuiti al suo cittadino Ateneo accludendo kai; ta; loipa; prostavgmata kai; filavnqrwpa ta; grafevnta uJfVhJmw`n peri; touvtou (essa è pervenuta in una sequenza epigrafica della capitale del regno Pergamo, OGIS 331, composta del decreto cittadino di recezione di quanto richiesto dall’ultima lettera iscritta, di una lettera di Attalo II del 142 ad Ateneo stesso, della lettera di Attalo III a Cizico, della lettera di quest’ultimo re a Pergamo, di tre giorni precedente, che comunicava la decisione di rendere Zeus Sabazio synnaos di Atena Niceforo e Ateneo suo sacerdote, ordinando che le lettere-prostagmata fossero «riportate (fevresqai) tra le leggi sacre» della polis, ll. 59-60; vd. anche sotto). 12 Il volere del re passava, nella città, attraverso la deliberazione del demos: si vedano, ad esempio, l’ordine di Filippo V nella sua prima lettera a Larisa del 217, krivnw yhfivsasqai uJma`~ o{pw~... (Syll.3 543, l. 6; cfr. l. 14), oppure la lettera con cui Eumene I nel 263-241 esprime la volontà che il demos pergameno onori i cinque strateghi usciti di carica e scrive ad esso o{pw~ ejn tw`i metaxu; crovnwi bouleusavmenoi timhvshte aujtouv~... (I.Pergamon 18 (OGIS 267), ll. 1819; la lettera è alle ll. 1-20; il decreto alle ll. 21-39). Quanto al rimando congiunto alle norme reali e civiche cui rifarsi, tra i numerosi esempi si ricorderanno: il decreto di Ereso RO 83, B, ll. 16-19 (nel 332, i tiranni sono processati [kat]a; ta;n diagravfan t[w` b]DVLOHYZ•a M$OH[DYQGUZ

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

205

Esplicito, benché riferito a località retta da un governatore reale, è il caso di Egina, che nel 159-144 onorava l’epistates pergameno Cleone per l’equanimità con cui aveva svolto la sua attività giudiziaria: quando necessario egli aveva rimandato alle disposizioni legislative prese dai re, da un lato contenute nelle «ordinanze (reali) registrate nell’archivio cittadino» di pertinenza, dall’altro lato assorbite nelle leggi civiche (ejpi; ta;... nenomoqethmevna hJmi`n uJpo; tw`[n ba]silevwn katav te ta; eij[~ to; dhm]oYV•LRQ ke[c]rhmatismevna p[ros]tavgmata kai; tou;~ novmou~)13.

kai; toi;~ novmoi~, ovvero in conformità con le procedure indicate da Alessandro e secondo le leggi della città, cfr. G § VI, ll. 13-15 e 23-25); il decreto di Colofone SEG 48, 1404, ll. 21-24 (III sec., nel periodo in cui la città era sotto controllo di un sovrano), un regolamento del contenzioso fra politai e appaltatori delle tasse il quale prevedeva che le citazioni si effettuassero kata; to;n novmon e i processi kata; to; diavgramma tou` basilevw~ (il documento peraltro probabilmente riguardava l’appalto delle tasse dovute al re: vd. Étienne, Migeotte 1998, p. 150 (= Migeotte 2010, pp. 382-383); Migeotte 2004, p. 224; Chandezon 2004, p. 142 e sotto); I.Iasos 82 (Tit.Cal., Test. XVI; SEG 44, 696), ll. 45-46 (nel decreto con cui Calimna, nell’orbita dei Lagidi, nel 250225 ringraziava i giudici iasî per aver operato katav te to; diavgram[ma tou`] basilevw~ kai; tou;~ novmou~; cfr. Cassayre 2010, p. 113, con Gauthier, BE, 1995, 449; Dössel 2003, p. 254; Bencivenni 2008, p. 189, nt. 9; Walser 2008, p. 271, nt. 241; in generale, per le forme d’intervento dei re ellenistici nelle crisi giudiziarie delle poleis e per le scritture che lo esprimevano, vd. Gauthier 1994, pp. 166 sgg. = Gauthier 2011, pp. 114 sgg., circa l’ejpistolav di Antigono Dosone a Caristo SEG 44, 710); IG XII 4, 1, 152, ll. 14-18 (il giuramento civico di Coi e Calimni uniti in homopoliteia, nel quale l’impegno è verso la democrazia vigente, l’accordo ripristinato kai; toi`~ novmoi~ toi`~ ejg Kw`i patrivoi~ uJpavrcousi kai; toi`~ dovgmasi ta`~ ejkklhsiva~ kai; tai`~ diagrafai`~ tai`~ uJpe;r ta`~ oJmopoliteiva~, secondo una sequenza che a ragione Bencivenni 2008, pp. 199, 201 sgg. propone di ricondurre alla compresenza della normativa locale e di documentazione ufficiale lagide relativa all’accordo); Le Guen, Associations, n. 47, III B, ll. 7-9, Aneziri, Vereine, pp. 387-391, D12 (nell’indicazione del re Eumene II, il tribunale congiunto di Teo e dei Technitai dionisiaci nel II sec. usava giurare di operare [kata; tou;~] novmou~ kai; ta;~ ejpistola;~ t[w`m basilevwg kai; ta;] yhfivsmata tou` dhvmou; sull’ingerenza del re nell’attività istituzionale della città vd. Le Guen, Associations, pp. 248 sgg. e Cassayre 2010, pp. 66-67; l’idea di Aneziri, Vereine, p. 100, nt. 450 che «die Reihenfolge entspricht hier dem Wert der aufgezählten Begriffe» non è seguita dall’apprezzamento dell’intrusione del volere reale nei dispositivi decisionali civici). I riferimenti alla sequenza lettera/e del re-decreto/i fatti nel dossier di Larisa (217-215), sia dalla polis (l. 47, cfr. ll. 17-18 e 52) sia dal re (ll. 26-27), nella forma attengono all’ordine procedurale di decisione. Anche a questo sistema di relazione si rifaceva il detto attribuito ad Antioco III secondo cui le poleis non dovevano tener conto dei suoi scritti quando questi ordinavano qualcosa «contro i [loro] nomoi» (a[n ti gravyh/ para; tou;~ novmou~ keleuvwn genevsqai, Plut. Mor. 183 F, su cui vd. Virgilio 2011, pp. 28-29). Per un tentativo di ricostruzione della posizione concreta delle ordinanze reali negli archivi cittadini si rimanda al volume in preparazione. 13 IG IV 2 2, 749, ll. 14-15 (ancora citato come OGIS 329; cfr. SEG 45, 233 e Virgilio 2011, p. 51, nt. 110). L’interrogativo di Savalli-Lestrade 1996, p. 156, nt. 25 circa la natura dei nomoi richiamati, suscitato dalla formulazione complessiva del passo e dalla condizione dell’isola di possesso personale degli Attalidi (dal 209), sembra risolto comunque dal confronto con i nessi espliciti attestati nei documenti citati nella nota precedente: anche se pesantemente condizionati dal controllo o dall’imposizione reale, i nomoi si configuravano come il versante civico del complesso giuridico di riferimento in Egina (fondamentale a riguardo è Gauthier 1993, pp. 44 sg., 48; vd. anche Savalli-Lestrade 2001, p. 90 e K. Hallof, IG, ad loc.). La polis del resto doveva anche incamerare altri documenti reali, dal momento che, nelle sue condizioni di controllata, doveva sottoporre al re i decreti che riguardavano i suoi agenti, per la convalida: se per Egina si conserva solo il dispositivo del decreto al riguardo (ll. 51-53), per la pisidica Olbasa si conserva

206

Ad entrambe le categorie, oltre che all’insieme dei documenti contabili connessi, si rifacevano evidentemente i «documenti» (uJpomnhvmata) esibiti dagli ambasciatori di Eraclea al Latmo incaricati dopo il 196 di richiedere ad Antioco III la conferma di un articolato insieme di privilegi fiscali concessi «dai re» precedenti14. Né è il caso di insistere sull’insieme dei chrematismoi contenuti negli archivi della città caria di Milasa (da gran tempo grecizzata), ricorrentemente impegnata con i sovrani di tre dinastie e i loro funzionarî a sostenere le proprie competenze amministrative e fiscali sul centro religioso di Labraunda e perciò sollecita nel conservare le lettere (redatte tra il 280 ca. e il dicembre 219) utili ad accompagnare la documentazione amministrativa interna e a suffragare la legittimità dei proprî argomenti15. E particolarmente indicativa (anche della tipologia dei documenti di garanzia che le poleis ellenistiche archiviavano) era la notizia che, dopo il 305, un fiduciario di Tolemeo I riportava in una lettera a Iaso: egli era stato raggiunto da ambasciatori della città che «recavano le vostre petizioni accolte da noi nelle quali era (riconosciuto) che la città era libera, autonoma e alleata» (fevronte~ ta; parVuJmw`n ajxiwvmata ejn o[i|~] h\n th;n povlin [ejleuqevran kai;] aujtovnomon ei\nai kai; ejn summacivai)16. Che del resto il rapporto tra l’autorità regale e l’amministrazione di una polis trovasse uno degli aspetti qualificanti nella corretta gestione dei documenti inviati e ingenerati appare dal regolamento del piccolo centro cario di Filippi-

di seguito a uno dei due decreti interessati la lettera di Attalo II di convalida (Virgilio, LDP2, n. 34, con SEG 47, 1759 e Savalli-Lestrade 2001, p. 89). 14 SEG 37, 859, C, ll. 12-13; il termine hypomnemata può richiamare sia documenti «originali» sia memoranda confezionati su e con essi per la contingenza (Montanari 1998, 813); nel contesto, sembra da preferire la prima opzione, già proposta, con cautela, da Wörrle 1988, p. 457, nt. 155 («vielleicht eher Akten aus dem städtischen Archiv», nella traduzione i «dossiers» ripresi da Savalli-Lestrade 2003, pp. 32-33, nt. 70 e Ma 2004, pp. 153, 391); per la seconda, cfr. Chankowski (A.S.) 2009, p. 102: «mémoirs fondés sans doute sur l’analyse de documents d’archives». Sulle vicende storiche di Eraclea, che non ebbe forse mai prima un controllo seleucide, vd. Wörrle 1988, pp. 433 sgg.; Ma 2004, pp. 53, 59, 61, 65, 89, 149, 263, nt. 63; Chankowski (A.S.) 2009, pp. 101-102; sulla complessa situazione amministrativa del centro sotto il controllo seleucide e sulla documentazione correlata vd. sotto. 15 Per il dossier epigrafico, che menziona o riporta le lettere/ i grammata in possesso della città inviati dal funzionario Sofrone, di Tolemeo figlio di Tolemeo II, del dinasta Olimpico (quattro epistole a Milasa e una a Seleuco II, inviata per conoscenza alla polis), oltre che due lettere di Seleuco II (a Olimpico) e due di Filippo V (a Milasa e a Olimpico) e il giuramento di quest’ultimo a favore della città, vd. Virgilio, LDP2, nn. 20-25, con le pp. 170-184 (cfr. Virgilio 2001); per un’analisi accurata della documentazione prodotta dall’intera vicenda vd. Bencivenni 2003, pp. 247-298, n. 9; per una recente illustrazione dei manufatti iscritti, indispensabile per la comprensione delle vicende dell’archivio, vd. Isager 2011, pp. 206 sgg. e sotto, con nt. 73. 16 I.Iasos 3, ll. 2-3. Appare chiaro il riferimento all’aspetto concreto del «portare» la documentazione utile (per il fevrein, vd. sopra, nt. 8). In questo caso si trattava degli ajxiwvmata, le domande scritte di concessione dello statuto indicato rivolte qualche anno prima a Tolemeo, le quali erano state accolte ed erano divenute di conseguenza documenti di prova (così giustamente Savalli-Lestrade 2003, pp. 32-33, nt. 70). Sulle vicende di Iaso sotto la signoria lagide, vd. da ultimo Vacante 2008, pp. 524 sgg.; vd. anche sotto.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

207

Euromo, conseguente all’“alleanza” stretta con Antioco III nell’agosto-settembre del 19717. «Tutto quel che concerne i documenti ufficiali» (ta; kata; tou;~ crhmatismouv~) diventava pertinenza della nuova, o rinnovata, magistratura principale dei prostatai del demos (ll. 10-11), mentre la redazione e la spedizione delle lettere ufficiali (gravmmata) che dovevano transitare formalmente dall’ufficio loro o da quello dell’altra nuova arche dei kosmoi incaricati della sicurezza dello stato (dia; tw`n ajrceivwn touvtwn) venivano sottoposte al controllo reciproco (ll. 12-15)18. Negli archivi poleici gli effetti del rapporto con i re si manifestavano oltre che con l’entrata e la conservazione dei messaggi esterni e della risposta diretta ad essi anche con la presenza delle più o meno numerose e articolate catene documentarie generate dai diversi provvedimenti e statuti giuridici, economici, fiscali imposti o negoziati e dalle loro conseguenze amministrative. Ormai saldamente attestata (e non solo per i periodi e per le località di più diretta sottoposizione ai sovrani) è la possibilità della compresenza nella polis degli obblighi fiscali «interni» verso il tesoro civico, il politikon, e di altri verso quello del re, il basilikon, nelle diverse categorie e forme richieste dalle circostanze19. Vie-

17 Cfr. Ma 2004, pp. 385-387, n. 30 (come «decreto costituzionale»; la traduzione omette la precisazione amministrativa menzionata nel testo, che figurava, come «by these magistrates» in Ma 2002, p. 340); vd. anche, da altra prospettiva, Savalli-Lestrade 2010b, pp. 138-140, con il testo alle pp. 147-148 e con la corretta lettura dell’espressione: «par l’intermédiaire de ces magistrats» (p. 148), risalente a Gauthier, BE, 1995, 525, p. 526. Il condizionamento da parte del re appare dal tenore del documento, benché la polis, pur sempre libera, avesse tentato qualche bilanciamento (vd. Ma 2004, pp. 121-122; Dmitriev 2005, pp. 210-211; Capdetrey 2007, pp. 215, 300-301, 378-379, 435; Fabiani 2010, p. 475; più critica appare Savalli-Lestrade 2010b, p. 140, che indaga soprattutto l’origine della magistratura «cretese» nella città caria); merita in ogni caso attenzione il rilievo che Virgilio 2010, pp. 104-105 (cfr. Virgilio 2011, pp. 27-28) pone sull’attenzione di Antioco III per le relazioni epistolari con le città. L’alleanza (Ma 2004, pp. 384-385, n. 29) era datata con l’anno di regno e il mese macedone (ll. 1-2; per il significato delle date reali nei documenti civici vd. sotto). 18 Le lettere dovevano essere redatte alla presenza dei due collegi (ll. 13-14) e non potevano essere inviate all’insaputa l’uno dell’altro (l. 15): giustamente Dmitriev 2005, p, 294 rileva insieme l’interesse del re alla soluzione amministrativa adottata e il controllo pur sempre esercitato dalla città sul proprio funzionamento; sulla medesima linea si pone Savalli-Lestrade 2010b, p. 139, la quale peraltro insiste sulle dinamiche politiche interne della polis e sul tentativo di porre fine all’uso di lettere segrete destinate ai sovrani operanti nella regione (il testo impone tuttavia l’obbligo solo per le lettere che dovevano «passare» per gli organi interessati, non per tutte le lettere); sulla vicenda, vd. anche Virgilio 2011, p. 39, con nt. 74. Sulla carica dei prostatai nelle città carie e sul loro rapporto con l’archiviazione, cfr. Fabiani 2010, pp. 472-476 e sotto, con nt. 50 (per il rapporto dell’ajrcei`on to; prostatikovn iaseo di SEG 51, 1506, ll. 8-9 con la conservazione dei documenti di pertinenza dei prostatai, in un contesto topografico e funzionale peraltro da precisare, vd. Fabiani 2001, pp. 95 sgg.; Haensch 2003, p. 192; Fabiani 2010, p. 475, con C. Brixhe, BE, 2002, 388). Sul senso dell’espressione dia; tw`n ajrceivwn, come riferita «auf eine aktive Mitwirkung der Behörde», vd. anche il contributo di K. Harter-Uibopuu in questo volume. 19 Per la distinzione tra le due casse, vd. ad esempio I.Mylasa 201 (III sec.), dove si precisava che i locatarî dei diversi tipi di terreno dovevano pagare [kai; ta;] prospivptonta ejk tou` basilikou` h] [poli]tikou` (ll. 8-9; cfr. l. 11; un decreto dello stesso periodo indicava che la polis relativamente alle tasse sulla persona poteva concedere l’ateleia solo w|n hJ povli~ kuriva ejstivn,

208

ne facile immaginare la necessità per la polis di tenere accurata registrazione di quanto era dovuto alla cassa reale, ai fini della trasmissione del relativo rendiconto annuale ai funzionari del re competenti e a testimonianza della propria lealtà contributiva, oltre che, nel caso opportuno, dell’attestazione di una situazione gravosa da alleviare o di una favorevole da confermare da parte del sovrano o funzionario di turno, oppure anche solo della documentazione dei limiti topografici delle aree considerate imponibili dalle rispettive amministrazioni (ed è facile immaginare che l’interesse alla corretta tenuta delle scritture era reciproco)20. Alle carte del sistema amministrativo delle città, la dioikesis, si erano aggiunte nuove categorie documentali, la cui «regolarità» doveva essere assai più ampia di quanto lascino intravvedere le fonti o considerino gli studiosi che si sono occupati dei vari aspetti e dei vari momenti della relazione fiscale tra poleis e sovrani. Significativo della molteplicità della documentazione necessaria per un

I.Mylasa 104, ll. 8-9; sul tipo di tassazione, imposizioni regolari od occasionali destinate o all’una o all’altra cassa, vd. Gauthier 1991); gli Iasî di Caria, nel 305/4 impegnati nelle già ricordate trattative con Tolemeo I, facevano dichiarare ai loro ambasciatori – presumibilmente con pezze d’appoggio – che, se da un lato essi pagavano la syntaxis per la propria difesa al re, dall’altro tw`n de; limevnwn kai; tw`n loipw`n prosovdwn... kurivou~ ei\nai (I.Iasos 3, ll. 5-6, cfr. 13-14, 24-25; vd. Migeotte 2005a, pp. 197-198, e, per la medesima situazione lungo il III secolo, I.Iasos 37, 38, 45, 54; SEG 57, 1069, 1070, 1084). Per una rassegna di casi di pagamento di tributi varî ai re delle diverse dinastie da parte delle poleis d’Asia Minore, vd. Migeotte 2004, pp. 214 sgg. (per il decreto milaseo citato, l’unico fra quelli esaminati che non appartiene a documento di esenzione, vd. p. 215); vd. anche (per il regno seleucidico) Chandezon 2004; Martinez-Sève 2004; Capdetrey 2007, pp. 398 sgg. (con la ricognizione delle attestazioni letterarie ed epigrafiche, pp. 398-407); Schuler 2007, pp. 384-401 (per l’Asia Minore, con la conclusione della «Invasion des königlichen Fiskus in die öffentlichen Finanzen der Poleis», p. 401, cfr. p. 399). Vd. anche quanto segue. 20 Sulle conseguenze documentali della situazione, cfr. Martinez-Sève 2004, p. 94 (per il regno seleucidico): «la cité devait tenir une comptabilité précise et détaillée des prélèvements effectués chez elle pour pouvoir rendre des comptes à l’administration royale» e già Corsaro 1985, quando rilevava il rapporto fra gli obblighi fiscali delle poleis nei confronti dei sovrani e le pratiche di archiviazione (p. 92). Si dà qui per acquisito (con Chandezon 2004, pp. 140-141) che la riscossione delle tasse dovute al basilikon fosse di competenza della polis e non dei funzionarî reali responsabili per l’area, per quanto evidentemente essi fossero implicati nell’operazione di ricevimento delle quote e dei loro documenti; era la città che si incaricava di conferire all’amministrazione reale il dovuto: cfr., per l’imposta collettiva, Étienne, Migeotte 1998, p. 155 (= Migeotte 2010, p. 388); Ma 2004, p. 97; Migeotte 2004, pp. 221 sgg.; 2005a, p. 196, nt. 22 (forse troppo cauto sul ritmo annuale di raccolta), e, per la tendenza tolemaica nei territorî d’oltremare «to act through the cities», Bagnall 1976, p. 242 (in parziale contraddizione con p. 110, a proposito della Licia, come giustamente rilevato da Wörrle 2010, p. 390, nt. 154; ciò non toglie la presenza di istituti reali anche all’interno delle poleis, come attestano il ejn JAlikarnassw`i gazofuvlax di PCZ 59036, l. 4, del 257, o i logeuthvria delle città licie indicati nel prostagma del 277/6 o 239/8 Wörrle 2010, p. 361, l. 12, con pp. 376 sgg., «Finanzkasse»). Anche per l’ambito attalide, se la vicenda del contenzioso tra la città di Metropolis di Ionia e gli appaltatori dei dazî sul porto del Caistro può essere indicativa (ed è intesa correttamente), la riscossione di versamenti per il re avveniva tramite il sistema civico (SEG 53, 1312 B, del 144/3, ll. 18 sgg., con Dreyer, in I.Metropolis, pp. 52 sgg., che pensa ad appaltatori locali, la cui attività «wurde von einem städtischen Magistraten täglich begleitet und kontrolliert», e Jones (C.P.) 2004, p. 477, con un meno convincente «probably royal»; vd. anche sotto, nt. 23).

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

209

versamento al re può essere quanto emerge dai lacerti di un documento di esenzione per una polis a noi sconosciuta fra III e II secolo, esonerata per sette anni dal pagamento al basilikon dei phoroi, e richiesta di provvedere a contribuire dall’ottavo una somma derivante «da tutte le rendite prodotte ogni anno» ([ejk] pasw`n tw`n gignomevnwn prosovdwn pa[rVe{kaston] ejniautovn): ogni anno produceva nella città registrazioni specifiche delle singole prosodoi, sulle quali operava l’amministrazione civica per la fiscalità interna e sulle quali si computavano le quote da riversare al titolo richiesto della cassa reale e, di conseguenza, nella scrittura cumulativa ad essa riferita tenuta nella sezione dei documenti fiscali della città, alla voce tributaria in oggetto (il tutto da consegnare in duplicato al funzionario reale responsabile, con eventuali allegati, insieme alla somma di denaro)21. Non sorprende che a Eritre, nel III secolo, fossero distinte le categorie di versamento intitolate «alla difesa della città, alla rimanente amministrazione e agli utili per il re» (ei[~ te th;n fulakh;n th`~ povlew~ kai; th;n a[llhn dioivkhsin kai; eij~ ta; tw`i basilei` sumfevronta), dove l’ultima espressione cumulativa può rappresentare, in parallelo a quelle tradizionali della polis, il titolo amministrativo generale che nella città ionica era riferito alla gestione e registrazione complessiva di quanto Eritre doveva pagare al re sotto varie voci22. Gravata da un’imposizione fiscale e finanziaria estremamente articolata su voci tradizionali e nuove, la città si trovava dunque a dover fare i conti con linee di documentazione e di registrazione aggiuntive ed “estranee”, che entravano negli ambiti d’archivio riservati ai vari tipi di imposte e tasse con le proprie catene documentarie (intitolate al basilikon invece che al politikon), quando non si integravano con le serie di informazioni raccolte dalla polis ai fini fiscali o di contabilità proprî (con doppia intitolazione, e con tutte le trascrizioni richieste dal passaggio tra l’una e l’altra categoria)23.

21 Ma 2004, pp. 403-404, n. 36, ll. 14-18, per una località non identificata (cfr. ivi, p. 97 e Capdetrey 2007, pp. 200, 406, 421; a motivo dell’esiguità della somma, Migeotte 2004, p. 222 ritiene improbabile che si trattasse dell’imposta collettiva). La tipologia della registrazione finale di trasmissione poteva essere dettata dalle esigenze e dalle forme dell’amministrazione reale ricevente. 22 I.Erythrai 28, ll. 29-31 (ca. 270), con la cauta considerazione ad locum per la terza voce «Dies könnte eine Art von Steuer gewesen sein» (p. 115); per il riferimento all’insieme dei contributi richiesti cfr. Bielman 1994, p. 85, con nt. 23 (la ripresa da Rostovzev 1966, p. 552 merita attenzione, se non per la traduzione «alcuni pagamenti graditi al re, di cui promuovevano gli interessi», per la corretta conclusione che «ta; s. è, naturalmente, un termine tecnico», nt. 551) e I.Erythrai 31, la lettera con cui circa un decennio dopo Antioco I o II concedeva che gli Eritrei ajforologhvtou~ ei|nai... tw`n te a[llwn aJpavntwn kai; tw`n eij~ ta; Galatika; sunagomevnwn (RC 15, ll. 26-28, cfr. Capdetrey 2007, p. 404, con Schuler 2007, p. 390, «ein… Blündel verschiedener Abgabe»). Sulla fulakh; th`~ povlew~ come categoria speciale di documentazione di molte città ellenistiche, vd. Boffo 2011b. Ai fondi per la phylake potevano contribuire, oltre che cittadini benefattori, come nel caso di Eritre, anche dinasti (per il caso di Filetero, e per la registrazione al riguardo, vd. qui sotto). 23 Per l’immagine dell’«estraneità» cfr. Ma 2004, p. 114 (a proposito dell’«intrusione» nelle poleis delle tasse a beneficio dei re, le quali generavano una «fiscalité parallèle à l’intérieur de

210

L’obbligo della registrazione valeva naturalmente anche per l’opposto all’impegno fiscale, l’esenzione concessa dal re, per periodi più o meno lunghi (computabili in annualità), su categorie di contributi o persone amministrativamente pertinenti alla città24. Se per il primo caso l’impegno della polis poteva limitarsi alla registrazione dell’esonero per la o le annualità del caso nelle diverse catego-

la cité, mais sur laquelle elle n’avait aucune autorité et qui bénéficiait à un corps qui lui était étranger»). Quanto all’articolazione della fiscalità regale nelle poleis – che fosse o meno un’avocazione di tributi pre-esistenti – vd. ad esempio la casistica di Eraclea al Latmo (sottoposta ai Lagidi, poi a Filippo V e ad Antioco III), sui terreni, prodotti, animali, transiti, attività portuale, importazioni (SEG 37, 859, del 196-193, B II, ll. 15-16; III, ll. 2-9; cfr. Wörrle 1988, pp. 458 sgg.; Ma 2004, pp. 98, 125, 149, 153, 175, 245, 263, nt. 63, 276, nt. 21, 387-394, n. 31; Migeotte 2004, pp. 216-219), oppure quella di Telmesso di Licia, sotto controllo lagide dal 279 (almeno, cfr. SEG 28, 1244), su alberi da frutto e su voci non specificate, su altri prodotti del suolo, sul cereale, sul pascolo (OGIS 55, ll. 13-21, con Bagnall 1976, pp. 89-102; Wörrle 1978, 1979; Domingo Gygax 2001, pp. 143-150, 167 sgg., 183 sgg.; Chandezon 2003, pp. 257-258; Migeotte 2003, pp. 306308; 2005a, p. 197 con nt. 30; il titolare della città come dorea, Tolemeo figlio di Lisimaco, nel 240 aveva provveduto ad alcune esenzioni, ma la polis doveva pur sempre al re una decima dei prodotti agricoli), della già ricordata Metropolis di Ionia (città sotto controllo attalide), sui transiti del porto del Caistro fino all’esenzione concessa da un sovrano (SEG 53, 1312, B, ll. 18 sgg., con Dreyer, in I.Metropolis, pp. 52 sgg.; Jones (C.P.) 2004, p. 477; Virgilio 2007, pp. 72-73; sulla restante fiscalità, cfr. Dreyer, pp. 50, 54, nt. 211) e, nella Macedonia antigonide, sulle transazioni commerciali legate alle kteseis dei singoli nelle città (Hatzopoulos 1996, II, n. 20, ll. 24 sgg., con BE, 2007, 373, p. 700) e in generale sugli oikoi (le leitourgiai menzionate in Hatzopoulos 1996, II, n. 39, l. 12 e sotto, nt. 26). Per una fonte di reddito particolare, collegata all’iniziativa dei re specialmente nelle città di più stretto controllo, Sardi fornisce l’esempio della presenza di ergasteria di costruzione e proprietà seleucidi, sui quali il basilikon esigeva l’affitto (SEG 39, 1285, ll. 8-10, ei[per kai; aiJ a[llai povlei~ mh; pravssontai; la formulazione della lettera reale lascia intendere che la presenza di beni del re in locazione alle città in questione non era un caso eccezionale; vd. Gauthier 1989, pp. 105 sgg.; Ma 2004, pp. 49, 97, 283, nt. 91). Le distinzioni delle linee documentali venivano probabilmente meno nel caso in cui venissero dichiarati imponibili dei beni già soggetti al fisco cittadino («ce genre de situation était peut-être plus courant que les sources ne le laissent entendre», secondo Migeotte 2004, p. 223, a proposito di th`~ prosepiblhqeivsh~ eijkosth`~ ejpi; th;n politikhvn, imposta, per breve tempo, da Antioco III a Sardi nel 214/3, SEG 39, 1283, ll. 5-6, con Gauthier 1989, pp. 33 sgg.; Domingo Gygax 2001, p. 198; Ma 2004, pp. 48-49, 98; Aperghis 2004, p. 165; contrarî all’idea di una doppia tassazione sulla stessa fonte di reddito sono invece Chandezon 2003, p. 330; 2004, p. 140; Martinez-Sève 2004, pp. 94-95). Altre forme di integrazione e di circolazione interna di documenti contabili si verificavano quando la città si vedeva restituito per certi scopi l’importo di tasse precedentemente devolute al re (ad esempio per l’acquisto di olio per il ginnasio: cfr. SEG 39, 1285, ll. 3-6, con Capdetrey 2007, pp. 424-425, a Sardi, a costituire un fondo speciale (uJpokeivmenon); SEG 37, 859, A, ll. 10-11, con Gauthier, BE, 1989, 277, p. 404, a Eraclea al Latmo, il limen civico, cfr. Wörrle 1988, p. 462), oppure quando si trovava ad agire come «agente contabile» del basilikon (come appare dal dispositivo di provvigione per i soldati di guarnigione di Palaimagnesia neo-politai di Smirna, per i quali il demos doveva pronoh`sai... o{pw~ aujtoi`~ didw`tai ejk basilikou` tav te metrhvmata kai; ta; ojywvnia ta\lla o{sa eijwvqei ejk basilikou` divdosqai aujtoi`~, I.Smyrna 573, III, ll. 106-107, con Bertrand 2005, pp. 43-45, o, come sembra ipotizzabile per il pagamento delle guarnigioni reali in loco, attraverso una quota di quanto dovuto al sovrano, Couvenhes 2004, p. 93, nt. 86). 24 Le annualità erano quelle del computo amministrativo centrale, cui il calendario cittadino si sarà dovuto adeguare: vd. anche quanto segue.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

211

rie di documento interessate dai momenti e dalle fasi di raccolta, per il secondo la cura delle scritture doveva farsi più capillare, comprendendo non solo liste di nomi aggiornate e distribuite ai vari “uffici” interessati, ma anche cancellazioni nelle catene documentarie che li riguardavano. Benché inserita in un contesto organizzativo particolare, indicativa di una situazione documentale complessa è la «lettera-proclamazione» con cui Antigono Dosone nell’estate del 222 comunicava a Berea che aveva concesso l’ajtevleia politikw`n OHLWRX•[r]giw`n, l’esenzione dalle prestazioni personali, ai sessanta comandanti delle truppe cittadine che avevano combattuto con lui nel Peloponneso25. La lista di nomi allegata, oltre che essere fissata sulla pietra con il messaggio del re, era entrata nel circuito delle registrazioni civiche (da quella generale degli ateleis a quelle relative alle diverse liturgie) e delle sue relazioni con l’archivio del distretto militare regionale di Bottia cui la città apparteneva e che riceveva per conoscenza26. Una situazione articolata di documentazione indotta – nel positivo di un incremento delle prosodoi e nel negativo della necessità di rendicontare ad altri – produceva anche l’intervento del re sull’estensione del territorio di una polis e sulla sua amministrazione economica e fiscale, mediato dalla concessione di terreno extra-poleico a un beneficiario e dalla contestuale «attribuzione» (prosfevresqai/prosorivzein) dell’area alla città27. Una parte almeno dei tributi che

25 I.Beroia 4, ll. 5-8 (la data in Tziafalias, Helly 2010, p. 108). La citazione è da Hatzopoulos 2001b, p. 51, nt. 31; per il provvedimento vd. anche Hatzopoulos 1996, I, pp. 438-439, 453-454 e, per il documento in questione, Hatzopoulos 2001a, p. 121; Faraguna 2006c, p. 125; Mari 2006, p. 219. Per il rapporto fra la monarchia di Macedonia e le città al suo interno, storiche e inglobate nel corso del tempo, considerato precisamente nella prospettiva di «forma e contenuto dei documenti ufficiali» a partire dal regno di Filippo II, vd. Hatzopoulos 1996, 1997, 2003, 2003/4, 2006 con Mari 1999, 2006: la conclusione che i centri ebbero struttura e dignità poleica caratterizza diversamente l’«intrusione» da parte del sovrano, ma naturalmente non l’elimina (cfr. Hatzopoulos 1996, I, p. 439: benché le liturgie in questione «are due within a civic framework, the ultimate beneficiary is the central authority»). Vd. anche nt. seguente. 26 Il re aveva inviato messaggio e lista anche ai responsabili del distretto (ll. 8-9); il medesimo procedere si ritrova l’anno seguente, quando il re scrive al koinon dei Tripolitai e a un personaggio identificabile nello stratego di esso, per informare dell’esenzione concessa a tre hetairoi e ad almeno cinque hegemones di una delle città membro, i quali avevano combattuto a Sellasia (Hatzopoulos 2006, p. 48; Tziafalias, Helly 2010, pp. 104 sgg., n. IV). Una situazione riferita a un solo personaggio, cittadino di Azoros, attesta un’altra lettera del re allo stratego (probabilmente) e a un imprecisabile «intermediario», mediante la quale si tutelano i diritti di un minorenne rimasto orfano di padre e si prescrive che a lui aiJ dwreai;... menevtwsan a}~ provteron ei\cen parV hJmw`n... kai; oJ oi\ko~ ajtelh;~ e[stw e{w~ a]n eij~ hJlikivan e[lqh/ (Tziafalias, Helly 2010, pp. 94 sgg., n. III, marzo 221, ll. 24-28; sul caso vd. anche sotto). 27 Per una discussione sui principî giuridici e sui caratteri del provvedimento reale nel sistema ellenistico di sfruttamento e gestione dei territorî, vd. Bencivenni 2004, pp. 167 sgg. Il fatto che la pratica sinora sia attestata in due casi nel regno seleucidico (ai tempi di Antioco I e II) nulla toglie al suo significato d’indicatore delle linee generali di un rapporto (anche a prescindere dall’interrogativo se il conferimento alle città fosse obbligato o meno); inoltre, il tenore delle disposizioni dettate a Ilio dal funzionario reale coinvolto nelle operazioni di assegnazione ad Aristodicide di Asso sembra riflettere un contesto amministrativo non ignoto (Virgilio, LDP2, n. 18, p. 265, ll. 13-15 e, per una forse eccessiva convinzione della «fréquence du rattachement aux

212

quei distretti sino ad allora avevano dovuto al re – direttamente o per tramite di altri concessionarî – doveva continuare ad affluire al basilikon (a meno di specifica esenzione fiscale), mentre al beneficiario dovevano toccare tutte o gran parte delle rendite pertinenti: alla polis e alla sua amministrazione, una volta concordati con il conferente il principio, le modalità, le percentuali per il servizio, dovevano toccare le operazioni di riscossione e inoltro per il conto del re (se richiesto) e del concessionario, con i guadagni comportati dalla mediazione e dalle ricadute fiscali dall’area che rientrava nei suoi confini, per quanto limitate dalle esenzioni riservate al conferente28. Oltre alla corrispondenza che si sviluppava nelle diverse fasi dell’operazione e che vedeva coinvolti diversi gradi dell’amministrazione reale (e, almeno in uno dei casi attestati, probabilmente dell’interessato), oltre alla definizione catastale dell’area entrata a far parte della chora, oltre alla consueta decretazione civica connessa, dunque, negli archivi cittadini dedicati entravano linee o voci parallele e poi consecutive di documentazione, riconducibili ai diversi ambiti della fiscalità e della sua gestione, interna e di relazione con altre entità, comprese le varie esenzioni29.

cités grecques de la côte égéenne de domaines concédés aux fidèles ou aux familiers du pouvoir royal séleucide», Capdetrey 2007, p. 151, seguito da Thonemann 2009, p. 375; 2011, p. 248). Vd. anche nt. 29. 28 Che la polis ne traesse vantaggio è esplicitato dalla «gara» per essere scelta dal beneficiario attestata dalla lettera del funzionario seleucide coinvolto dal donativo di Antioco I ad Aristodicide (Virgilio, LDP2, n. 18, p. 265, ll. 5-8); che il vantaggio rientrasse nella categoria delle prosodoi appare facile dedurre (vd. ad esempio Musti 1977, pp. 240-241; Gauthier 1980, p. 46; cfr. Sartre 2004, p. 168, nt. 15; Bencivenni 2004, pp. 177 sgg.; Thonemann 2009, p. 375; 2011, p. 248; all’incremento della disponibilità di prodotti agricoli pensa Aperghis 2004, pp. 105-106). Quanto agli altri interlocutori, il re otteneva di dimostrare la sua evergesia a philos, o familiare, e città (in una scelta che poteva essere orientata), senza probabilmente perdere troppo delle sue rendite (incrementandole in caso di mantenimento di un phoros civico proporzionale alla chora, o, nell’eventualità di aphorologesia, salvaguardandole attraverso (gli) altri tele) e affidando la gestione del territorio a enti interessati allo sfruttamento e incaricati della sua gestione fiscale; il beneficiato godeva comunque della titolarità di un bene che gli produceva delle entrate, al netto dell’eventuale contribuzione da conservare, direttamente o indirettamente, per il re e di quanto doveva versare alla città (dopo adeguate trattative): è anche in questa prospettiva che si deve valutare la condizione giuridica e fiscale del terreno inglobato nella chora di Gambreion che nel 326/5 o 325/4 il titolare Krateuas dava (in tutto o in parte) in affitto, specificando la produttività dell’area coltivabile (e dunque la sua imponibilità proporzionale per chi fosse titolato al prelievo) e il fatto che il kepos annesso doveva un phoros annuo (al re, nella persuasiva interpretazione di Thonemann 2009, spec. pp. 375 sgg., che non considera peraltro l’aspetto che qui si rileva). In generale, vd. Chandezon 2004; Aperghis 2004, pp. 106-107; Capdetrey 2007, pp. 149-153; cfr. Corsaro 1985, p. 88. 29 Per quel che riguarda il re, l’unico caso di comunicazione diretta attestato sinora, in un contesto differente, è quello di un sovrano a una città caria, nel III sec., il quale gevgrafen th`i boulh`i kai; tw`i dhvmwi o{ti pros[o]rivzei th`i povlei to;n tw`n Calkhtorevwn dh`mon, allo scopo di creare una sympoliteia (I.Mylasa 913, ll. 2-4: vd. Reger 2004, pp. 153-154); per l’insieme della corrispondenza relativa a un’operazione di prosorizein interna all’amministrazione reale, trasmesso alla città mediante lettera di accompagnamento del responsabile di essa, è esemplare il già citato dossier relativo ad Aristodicide, con le sue tre lettere di Antioco I allo stratego Meleagro;

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

213

Il ventaglio delle catene documentarie indotte non si limitava alla fiscalità. Appare ovvia la produzione documentale collegata con le multiformi manifestazioni di onoranza che le città, più o meno spontaneamente e frequentemente, riservavano ai sovrani, in loco o nei centri sede delle grandi feste dinastiche, dal decreto che di volta in volta dava inizio alle procedure e dalle lettere di comunicazione alle varie registrazioni contabili derivate, gli elenchi, gli estratti documentali... È sufficiente considerare nella prospettiva che qui si rileva una serie di dati contenuti in documenti ufficiali. A Teo, nel 203 ca., il denaro per la fabbrica e la dedica dell’agalma per Antioco III doveva essere fornito dai tamiai cittadini ejk tw`n timw`n tw`m basilevwn h] ejk th`~ dioikhvsew~, ovvero in prima istanza da un già costituito fondo riservato «Onori per i re», oppure, in caso di mancanza di denaro, da uno dei capitoli disponibili (o riservabili) dell’amministrazione civica tradizionale, comportando l’operazione, come quelle relative agli altri sovrani con cui la polis aveva a che fare, adeguata registrazione30. Così avveniva in caso di altra soluzione contabile, come per

l’esistenza di un periorismos dell’area trasferita è documentata dall’altro dispositivo connesso con la pratica, quello ordinato da Antioco II per l’area venduta a Laodice II (Virgilio, LDP2, n. 19, ll. 7, 15, 51; il documento da conservarsi nella cancelleria reale e da esporsi sulle cinque steli pubblicitarie doveva naturalmente entrare negli archivi della polis eventualmente interessata); a uno o più decreti si affidava l’«accettazione» da parte della polis delle condizioni del rapporto col beneficiario (Virgilio, LDP2, n. 18, p. 265, ll. 13 sgg.: il seguito della richiesta di Meleagro agli Iliei – kaqVo{ti a]n sugcwrhvshi [scil. Aristodicide] th;n ajnagrafh;n pohsavmenoi – faceva riferimento ai documenti della relazione diretta con Aristodicide e alla loro registrazione in archivio, come prospettò RC, pp. 70-71 e accoglie Bencivenni 2004, p. 163 e 2010, p. 166; del resto, un esemplare di psephisma di onore e beneficio fiscale è documentato dal (secondo) decreto prienese per l’ufficiale seleucide Larichos, I.Priene 18, ll. 20-27, benché in un contesto all’apparenza diverso: vd. Bencivenni 2004, pp. 179-180); seppure assai lacunosa e di difficile interpretazione, una lettera di ambito seleucide del 220 ca.-188 indirizzata a Seleucia/Tralles e menzionante una dekate al basilikon, sembra collegare la richiesta cittadina al riguardo a periorismoi che è suggestivo ricondurre alla situazione sopra indicata (RC 41 (I.Tralleis 17), ll. 4, 5, 8; per il suggerimento, vd. Corsaro 2010, p. 117; per ipotesi sulla paternità della lettera – Acheo, Zeuxis, un funzionario seleucide – vd. Ma 2004, p. 213). Assai minor margine di contrattazione, ma numerose conseguenze documentali avevano le poleis del continente greco che per ordine del re dovevano decretare l’incorporazione come cleruchi e cittadini di soldati già impiegati al servizio antigonide, secondo la convincente interpretazione presentata da Oetjen 2010 delle circostanze dei decreti di cittadinanza attestati in Grecia dalla seconda metà del III secolo (a cominciare naturalmente da quelli di Larisa in seguito all’intervento di Filippo V, di cui sopra, alla nt. 12). Com’è noto, un’ultima, significativa operazione di prosorizein reale si ebbe con la decisione testamentaria di Attalo III di lasciare a Roma la città di Pergamo libera, prosorivsa~ aujth`i kai; pole[itikh;g] cwvran h}n H>NULQ•[en] (OGIS 338, l. 6, del 133; per l’integrazione e interpretazione, vd. p. es. Virgilio 1993, p. 25, nt. 53 – «aggiungendole ai confini anche quel territorio che decise (fosse territorio) cittadino» – e Dmitriev 2005, pp. 78-79, con nt. 33). 30 SEG 41, 1003, II, l. 63, con Ma 2004, p. 145; nell’ambito della dioikesis era del resto previsto dallo stesso decreto la taxis di un fondo annuale per la celebrazione dei sacrifici per la coppia reale nelle simmorie civiche (ll. 17-21): cfr. Migeotte 2006, pp. 92-93; Rhodes 2007, p. 356, con nt. 40. I re in questione non erano necessariamente solo seleucidi (per l’occupazione lagide della città ai tempi della guerra laodicea, vd. Ma 2004, p. 36 e, per il successivo controllo attalide, ivi, pp. 47, 256, nt. 65; per i problemi di datazione dei documenti tei riferiti ad Antioco III, ivi,

214

i prestiti accesi dalla polis di Delo allo scopo di finanziare le statue e le corone per i sovrani di turno, sia presso una banca privata, sia presso il tesoro di Apollo, registrati dalle scritte (epigraphai) sugli stamnoi della cassa poleica e della cassa sacra conservati nel santuario e riportati nella contabilità degli hieropoioi31. Nella prospettiva dell’«intrusione» della presenza reale nella documentazione civica, non è particolarmente significativo che le spese per gli onori per i re (e la relativa documentazione) appartenessero a una voce finanziaria distinta e parallela rispetto alla dioikesis civica, oppure rientrassero in quest’ultima e in una delle sue attribuzioni interne32. Per quanto meno «autonoma», significativa era anche la presenza dei re ellenistici all’interno delle liste che registravano le operazioni religiose e rituali della polis di turno e che di volta in volta aggiungevano date, circostanze, nomi, modalità. E’ ancora la Teo impegnata a onorare Antioco III e la moglie a prescrivere che l’importante festa istituita allo scopo fosse «iscritta nel libro sacro» (ajnag[ravyai de; t]auvthn th;n eJorth;n eij~ th;n iJera;n buvblon), il registro ufficiale delle feste ci-

pp. 55, 66, 203-208, Appendice 2). Il nomos che Teo – verisimilmente non unica – si era data uJpe;r th`~ kataskeuh`~ tw`n timw`n (ll. 89-90) poteva riguardare i manufatti in onore dei benefattori in generale, e non soltanto quelli dei re (tanto più che il denaro previsto per il completamento della fontana per Laodice doveva essere prelevato senz’altro dalla dioikesis, ll. 87-88). Fondi riservati (apotetagmena) per gli onori «dei re e della regina», in questo caso limitatamente alla famiglia di Antioco III, sono attestati anche a Sardi, dopo il 209: vd. Robert 1964, p. 10, n. 1, ll. 1819 (con Gauthier 1989, pp. 58-59, 75-76, 152-153). Una partita di bilancio riservata agli «onori» per i re, nelle diverse loro forme e obbligatorietà, appare anche nella Samo lagide della metà del III secolo, dove il benefattore Bulagora interviene anche quando eij~... me;n tou;~ stefavnou~ [scil. di Tolemeo III e Berenice] kai; ta;~ qusiva~... periorismevna uJph`rchn crhvmata (IG XII 6.1, 11, ll. 27 sgg.); ad altro capitolo apparteneva oJ stevfano~ tw`i basilei` che Alicarnasso versava a Tolemeo II, tramite un deposito bancario che produceva ricevuta, PCZ 59036, ll. 25-26 (vd. Wörrle 2010, pp. 377-378; cfr. anche nota seguente). 31 Cfr. I.Délos 399A, ll. 21-23 (il conto del 192 che registra il recipiente della cassa cittadina contenente la somma presa a prestito dalla polis per le corone di Eumene II, oltre che di un re e di un demos non identificabili), ll. 36-38 (la registrazione del recipiente della cassa cittadina contenente la somma presa a prestito dalla polis nel 195 per le statue di Attalo I e del medico Filippo), ll. 47-49 (il recipiente della cassa cittadina contenente la somma presa a prestito dalla polis nel 194 per pagare le statue di Attalo I, di Antioco III e di Laodice); I.Délos 442A, ll. 25-26, 64-65 (il conto del 179 con la registrazione della restituzione alla cassa sacra nel 180 del prestito acceso l’anno precedente dalla città per le corone di Filippo V, Eumene II e il demos di Rodi), ll. 41-44, 66-67 (le restituzioni alla cassa sacra della somma presa a prestito dalla città l’anno precedente per le corone di Filippo V e di Massinissa). Per la natura delle epigraphai in questione, vd. ad esempio Nouveau Choix 2002, p. 154: «soit une étiquette soit… une inscription à l’encre sur la jarre elle-même». Sulle pratiche amministrative e contabili della polis di Delo in relazione alle spese «comportate dalla diplomazia» vd. ivi, p. 155; su quelle generali in età ellenistica, nelle diverse fasi, vd. Migeotte 2005b. 32 A Teo, la voce delle corone per Antioco III e Laodice era entrata all’elenco di quelle messe annualmente in aggiudicazione dai tesorieri civici (SEG 41, 1003, II, ll. 57-59: prospwlei`n de; th/` wjnh/` [th`~] stefanopwliva~ tou;~ eJkavstote ginomevnou~ tamiva~ th;n [par]avsceisin tw`n stefavnwn touvtwn). Per la problematica del rapporto, connessa con le diverse indicazioni nelle fonti epigrafiche, vd. in particolare Schuler 2005; vd. anche più oltre.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

215

viche e dei loro regolamenti33. E il risultato più in generale (oltre che probabilmente le forme redazionali dei registri ricapitolativi) si coglie negli esempi di calendario rituale civico o ginnasiale pervenuti nella trascrizione epigrafica34. A Pergamo, nella tarda età ellenistica, si trascriveva un calendario religioso che, nella forma del rimando al decreto apposito mediante estratto/riassunto dei considerando, manteneva nella sequenza mensile, esito delle trascrizioni susseguenti, la registrazione della festa connessa con le vittorie di Attalo I contro i Galati e Antioco Hierax più di un secolo prima35. A Eritre, dopo il 189, il calendario dei sacrifici trascritto vedeva inseriti nella sequenza dei destinatarî delle thysiai di ogni mese le voci «re» e «re Antioco (I)»36. Egualmente significativo delle conseguenze documentali dell’inserimento delle cerimonie per i re nella vita civica è il calendario dell’attività religiosa e atletica di feste nel ginnasio di Coo, polis libera dopo Apamea, redatto fra 158 e 145: di esso resta la trascrizione epigrafica per tre mesi consecutivi, con l’inclusione di Attaleia (per Attalo I, 240197), processioni per «il re Tolemeo (VI, 181-145)», per Eumene (II, 197-158), per «il re Attalo (II, 158-138)», per un altro basileus dal nome perduto37. Se tali onori erano conseguenti a donativi reali e se la trascrizione registrava la recezione di cerimonie di carattere civico nella serie di attività dell’istituto, com’è stato correttamente ipotizzato, la compresenza di serie parallele di liste, con le loro diverse modalità e fasi di redazione appare facile da dedurre38.

33 SEG 41, 1003, II, ll. 28-29; su questo tipo di scritture, sulla loro organizzazione, sul loro contesto documentale vd. anche quanto segue. 34 Rileva giustamente la frequenza dei «giorni reali» nel calendario delle poleis, indirizzando all’esame delle conseguenze istituzionali dell’intervento sul «tempo della città», Savalli-Lestrade 2010a, spec. pp. 69-70 (per gli esempi qui sotto citati vd. p. 69, nt. 60) e 83; a Ma 2004, pp. 167-168 si deve la sottolineatura della pratica di inserire le disposizioni religiose connesse con la regalità nel sistema di riferimento preesistente (vd. anche Chaniotis 2007, p. 161; Wiemer 2009, pp. 127 sgg.). 35 I.Pergamon 247, I, ll. 1-6, con Virgilio 1993, p. 33. Per le altre voci ci si limitava alla nota kata; yhvfisma di un dato anno (cfr. II, ll. 2 sgg.). Sulla compresenza di mesi macedoni e «locali» nel documento e sulla durata del calendario, vd. oltre. 36 McCabe, Erythrai 61, rispettivamente ll. 28, [34], [48], [63-64] e 22, [29a], 36, 49, [62], [64], 7273, 93, cfr. 82, 95; in un mese figura destinatario di sacrificio anche Alessandro (l. 90), in un altro compare anche una basilissa (ll. 39-40, forse Stratonice); i «re» sono gli Attalidi. Dal momento che i sacrificî per i re e per Antioco erano qualificati come koinon, è lecito pensare che essi figurassero nelle registrazioni delle altre poleis della lega ionica. Per ulteriori «presenze» reali nella vita religiosa di Eritre, vd. più sotto. 37 IG XII 4,1, 281, rispettivamente l. 8, ll. 12-14, l. 27, ll. 40-41, ll. 47-48 (la datazione della lista è conseguente: vd. Habicht 2007, p. 145, nt. 158 e, per il contesto storico di buona relazione con le due dinastie implicate, pp. 145-146). 38 Per la prima ipotesi, in rapporto però al solo ginnasio, vd. Bringmann, Steuben, pp. 252-254, Kotsidu 2000, p. 569 (contra Aneziri, Damaskos 2004, p. 266 con nt. 135); per la discussione circa competenze civiche e competenze ginnasiali in fatto di cerimonie religiose per i sovrani e per l’idea che nel caso in questione si trattasse di «stadtische Feste», vd. Aneziri, Damaskos 2004, p. 262, nt. 107 (descrive giustamente il documento come «véritable tableau miniature

216

Naturalmente (e variamente) associati ai «libri» sacri erano i testi religiosi composti per i re e i loro familiari: il loro significato e la periodicità delle cerimonie cui erano collegati ne garantivano la redazione “ufficiale” e la conservazione nelle forme idonee ai diversi impieghi cui erano destinati. A Teo, gli onori per la regina Apollonide (moglie di Attalo I) prevedevano una volta all’anno il canto di un «inno presso l’altare» (parabômion) da parte dei paides liberi e di «un inno» da parte di fanciulle scelte: concluderne la conservazione in almeno un esemplare di riferimento (donde trarne le copie d’uso) diviene naturale39. E se la vicenda epigrafica eritrea dell’aggiunta nel 281 del peana per Seleuco I alla sequenza delle composizioni analoghe per Apollo e Asclepio incise nel 380-360 con il regolamento dei sacrifici per le due divinità può riflettere un comportamento di registrazione, viene altrettanto facile pensare ad analoga aggiunta al documento o al dossier d’archivio40. Allo stesso modo significativa diventava la presenza dei sovrani nella documentazione connessa con l’attribuzione dei sacerdozî, da quella più sintetica in una lista delle vendite a quella più ingombrante a generazione dell’apposito contratto per i titolari susseguentisi. Per il primo caso, basterà rimandare al registro delle vendite di Eritre, comprensivo di una quarantina d’anni (300-260) e progressivamente aggiornato anche sulla pietra: intorno al 270 viene riportata la voce relativa al culto per «il re Alessandro»41. Per il secondo, appare significativa la diagraphe stilata a Coo post 188 dalla commissione istituita peri; ta`n qusia`n kai; ta`n ajlla`n tima`n ai} sunteleu`n[t]D•L• basilei` Eujmevnei kai; ejfVoi|~ dei` ta;n iJerwsuvnan praqh`me[n], le cui vicende di redazione appaiono riflesse dall’esito epigrafico, che rileva una nuova aggiudicazione dopo qualche anno e qualche

de la vie religieuse de l’époque» Le Guen-Pollet 1991, p. 198, ma nella versione del testo è da correggere il nome dei mesi della prima e terza colonna in Gerastios e Agrianios e da eliminare la nota d’apparato n. 10 di p. 197; egualmente da emendare sono i nomi dei mesi di quanti riprendono le integrazioni dell’edizione Syll.3 1028, ora superata; vd. anche Bosnakis, Hallof 2005, p. 239); quanto alle fasi redazionali delle liste interessate, occorrerà segnalare che ad esempio Habicht 2007 non esclude che gli Attaleia fossero festeggiati già prima (p. 145). 39 Robert 1937, pp. 9-20 (cfr. Virgilio 1993, pp. 47-48, con nt. 175), ll. 8-10: correttamente Del Corso 2005, p. 20 ne rileva l’appartenenza al «bagaglio di testi legati a tradizioni locali, rituali, o eventi storici particolari, che eventualmente potevano essere fatti leggere e studiare nelle scuole». Mutatis mutandis, appare significativo per il lessico impiegato il riscontro del decreto del sinodo sacerdotale egizio del 238, nella sezione riservata alle manifestazioni del culto per Berenice III: degli inni composti in suo onore dagli scribi sacri e consegnati al maestro cantore ta; ajntivgrafa katacwrisqhvsetai eij~ ta;~ iJer[a;~ buvblou~] (Virgilio LDP2, pp. 211-221, n. 4, l. 59). 40 I.Erythrai 205 (LSAM 24), con l’aggiunta alle ll. 74 sgg. (subito interrotte dalla frattura della pietra). 41 I.Erythrai 201 (LSAM 25), a, l. 78, nella serie dell’anno di Zenodoto, nel mese Leneo, insieme col sacerdozio di Zeus Basileus. Il sacerdozio è attestato sino al III sec. d.C., senza che naturalmente si possa dire se ci sia stata interruzione: cfr. I.Erythrai 64, l. 7 e, sulla specificità del caso di Alessandro per il prestigio del personaggio, Frija 2012, pp. 25-26.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

217

adattamento di normativa, con conseguente accumulo di documenti42. Naturalmente poi i sacerdozî reali entravano come gli altri nelle diverse catene documentarie della polis, per le loro implicazioni diplomatiche e istituzionali e per quelle economiche e fiscali: per le conseguenze documentali delle seconde basti pensare, oltre ai registri di vendita, alle diverse linee di contabilità interessate (anche per le esenzioni fiscali concesse); al primo aspetto si riconducono quanto meno i decreti propositivi della vendita e della costituzione delle commissioni redigenti, a loro volta inseriti nel rispettivo insieme di documenti generato dalla catena diplomatica col re43. Neppure priva di conseguenze documentali era, tra le forme di onoranza per i re, la costituzione di nuove tribù poleiche a loro intitolate. Del caso più noto, l’ateniese, che nel 307/6 passò da dieci a dodici, nel 224/3 a tredici, nella primavera del 200 scese a undici per ritornare subito dopo (e sino all’età romana imperiale) a dodici, abbiamo indicazione nelle conseguenze sulla definizione e posizione istituzionale dei demi. La prima aggiunta alle dieci tradizionali delle tribù Antigonide e Demetriade (per Antigono Monoftalmo e Demetrio Poliorcete) sembra aver comportato il trasferimento ad esse di quindici demi ciascuna; quella successiva della Tolemaide (per Tolemeo III) il prelievo di un demo dalle precedenti e la creazione del nuovo Berenikidai; l’eliminazione delle due macedoni una riassegnazione di quelli svincolati alle phylai originarie; l’ultima dell’Attalide (per Attalo I) la ripresa di un demo per tribù e la creazione del nuovo Apollonieis44. La conclusione di conseguenze sui documenti connessi con l’organizzazione della polis attica diviene scontata: al di là del mutare di ruolo e peso delle strutture intermedie nel sistema amministrativo ateniese e delle ricadute di esso nei loro

42 Si tratta di IG XII 4, 1, 306, l’incisione della prima diagraphe, mantenuta e aggiornata con la sola sostituzione dei nomi dei commissarî e delle date (lacunosa della parte finale; la citazione nel testo alle ll. 2-3), e di IG XII 4,1, 309, l’incisione della nuova, stilata dalla commissione trascritta anche nel documento originario, con selezione delle disposizioni indicate nel primo documento e (apparente) aggiunta della durata epi biou. Anche se la lacunosità delle due epigrafi (più consistente nella seconda) non permette il confronto sistematico, è possibile concludere che il nuovo aspirante sacerdote poteva apprendere i propri doveri-diritti dai due documenti associati, l’uno «riciclato» e semplicemente ridatato, l’altro stilato per l’occasione (anche in considerazione dell’ulteriore iscrizione su pietra, sembra questa un’interpretazione più soddisfacente di quella di Bosnakis, Hallof 2005, p. 255, i quali pensano a «zwei Kopien ein und derselben diagraphe», come IG, ad nn.; il discusso problema del rapporto fra versioni iscritte e versioni d’archivio delle diagraphai sacerdotali in generale richiede un approfondimento, per il quale si rimanda al volume in preparazione). 43 Per un caso esemplare, vd. gli esiti documentali delle legazioni del milesio Irenia presso Eumene II e Attalo II, cui pertiene la redazione di una diagraphe per il sacerdozio del «dio Eumene»: vd. Herrmann 1965, spec. 113-117, con Milet VI 3, 1040 e commento di W. Günther a p. 24. 44 Sulle diverse conseguenze della creazione delle tribù reali nel sistema tradizionale ateniese, vd. Traill 1975, spec. pp. 25 sgg. Sul contesto storico delle iniziative, vd. Byrne 2010, p. 159. Sulla durata dei provvedimenti e le sue conseguenze documentali, vd. sotto.

218

archivi, risulta difficile non pensare anche a interventi sulle mappe territoriali, sulle liste di persone di pertinenza, sui diversi documenti della religiosità45. Anche nelle altre poleis è indubbio che l’istituzione di tribù regali comportò adeguate conseguenze nella vita locale e nei suoi documenti, da quelli ingenerati dall’atto di assegnazione dei cittadini a quelli poi connessi con la sua esistenza nel sistema amministrativo46. Un indizio, significativo per la sua risalenza (323312) e la sua esplicitezza può derivare da quanto stabilito dal decreto con cui la città di Latmo organizzava l’unione con Pidasa, indotta dal satrapo di Caria Asandro47. In essa era prevista l’aggiunta a quelle di Latmo della tribù Asandris, alla cui composizione dovevano contribuire per sorteggio Latmî e Pidasei, i quali poi avrebbero partecipato alle cerimonie religiose specifiche della nuova tribù e delle fratrie interessate48. Il rapporto di reciprocità e scambio tra poleis e sovrani naturalmente comportava anche dei beneficî per le prime, nella forma di contributi e aiuti di vario genere da parte dei secondi.

45 Per la diversa documentazione connessa con l’organizzazione civica ateniese di età classica, vd. Pébarthe 2006, pp. 173 sgg. L’unico catalogo di demi – raccolti per tribù – a noi giunto è una versione epigrafica della fine del III secolo, SEG 36, 230 (IG II2 2362), con la sezione, lacunosa, della tribù Tolemaide, II, ll. 54 sgg.; sul suo rapporto con le operazioni del 200 e sulla documentazione d’archivio ad esse correlata, di varia risalenza, vd. Stanton 1994, p. 194; per un mutato assetto della rete amministrativa interna dalla metà del III secolo e l’apparente venir meno del ruolo istituzionale di demi e fratrie dalla metà del II, vd. Ismard 2010, pp. 327 sgg. Naturalmente alle tribù reali erano connessi anche la pratica del culto per gli eroi eponimi e un sacerdozio specifico: vd. Habicht 1970, p. 154; Mikalson 1998, p. 81; Habicht 2006, p. 219 e quanto segue. 46 Per Demetrieis, forse con Antigoneis, a Samo, vd. Kotsidu 2000, pp. 257-259, n. 175 [E2]; per una Seleukis (Seleuco I) a Colofone e a Magnesia al Meandro, vd. rispettivamente Kotsidu 2000, p. 356, n. 241 [E] e pp. 368-369, n. 252 [E]; per Antigoneis (forse Antigono Gonata) a Tessalonica, vd. Kotsidu 2000, p. 184, n. 115 [E] (I.Thess 184); per un’Attalis a Ilio, vd. Kotsidu 2000, pp. 309-310, n. 213 [E], a Magnesia sul Meandro (Attalo I), vd. Kotsidu 2000, pp. 369-371, n. 253 [E 1,2]. A contesto diverso, ma con pari conseguenze, si riconducono le tribù regali connesse con la (ri)fondazione di una città e variamente attestate nel tempo: vd., forse, la tribù Alexandris a Ilio (Kotsidu 2000, pp. 300-301, n. 205 [E]); l’Antiochis (Antioco I) ad Antiochia al Meandro (Kotsidu 2000, p. 381, n. 261 [L]); le Seleukis, Antiochis, Laodikis, Eumenis, Attalis, Stratonikis a Hierapolis di Frigia, (Cohen 1995, p. 306); le Attalis e Laodikis di Laodicea al Lico (Cohen 1995, p. 309); le Seleukis e Antiochis di Nysa (Cohen 1995, p. 258); le Philetairis, Attalis, Eumeneia di Pergamo (Cohen 1995, p. 169); gli Eumeneis di Sardi (Cohen 1995, p. 231). A questi elenchi, noti da tempo, si aggiunga l’attribuzione a un re (forse Tolemeo I) della quinta tribù attestata a Iaso negli ultimi decenni del IV secolo (I.Iasos 59 e Maddoli Suppl., 5, su cui Fabiani 2010, p. 482), la Tolemaide (riferita al Filadelfo) dell’epigrafe caria SEG 51, 1495, l. 2 (Bargasa?), le Seleukis e Antiochis di Ege (Malay, Ricl 2009, p. 40, ll. 22-25, con P. Hamon BE, 2010, 522, p. 830). 47 SEG 47, 1563, su cui Bencivenni 2003, pp. 151 sgg., n. 6; Wörrle 2003a, 2003b, pp. 1373-1377: la volontà del satrapo sarebbe stata espressa e comunicata da un diagramma, o da un documento contenente la sua gnome (cfr. Hamon, BE, 2011, 526). Per la cronologia di Asandro, vd. Fabiani 2009, spec. pp. 62-65, 72. Per la durata del provvedimento (e per la sopravvivenza del decreto), vd. più oltre. 48 Ll. 4 sgg. Il passo con il dispositivo in questione non è del tutto chiaro per quel che riguarda l’organizzazione civica originaria dei due centri: vd. Wörrle 2003a, pp. 125-128.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

219

La città aveva interesse a tenere precisa contabilità di riscontro alle sovvenzioni che il sovrano decideva di assegnarle dal basilikon, come nel caso della Teo seleucidica di fine III-inizi II secolo, dove una parte del prezzo di un fondo che la polis donava agli Artisti dionisiaci doveva essere pagata dai tamiai dell’anno seguente «sui primi contributi che sarebbero stati loro conferiti dal tesoro reale per l’amministrazione civica» (ejk t[w`n pr]wvtwn doqhsomevnwn aujtoi`~ ejg basilikou` eij~ t[h;n th`]~ povlew~ dioivkhsin)49. Necessità e cura per la documentazione – interna ed esterna – comportavano i casi di elargizioni reali finalizzate, su più anni, o in perpetuo. Viene facile pensare alla documentazione prodotta da quella della regina Laodice a Iaso (195 ca.), in base alla quale il diecete per dieci anni doveva conferire alla città diecimila medimni attici di cereale, che i tamiai dovevano vendere (in toto o in parte) ad un prezzo fisso, così che i prostatai e quanti altri la città ritenesse utile coinvolgere procedessero ad assegnare una quota del ricavato (non superiore alle trecento dracme di Antioco) in dote alle fanciulle povere50. Più nel particolare, un puntiglioso decreto della polis di Delfi, che nel 159/8 regolamentava lo sfruttamento del capitale di fondazione conferito in perpetuo dal re (associato) Attalo II per l’educazione dei fanciulli liberi e per il finanziamento degli Attaleia, nell’attestare la ricaduta delle operazioni contabili e amministrative comportate dalla gestione dei prestiti quinquennali conseguenti indica le vie della catena documentaria che ne derivava51. La richiesta esplicita ai commissarî di depositare nel damosion

49 Le Guen, Associations, n. 39, ll. 15-18, con le importanti osservazioni sul possibile iter contabile all’interno della polis di Rhodes 2007, pp. 360-361: i sovrani in questione potrebbero essere i Seleucidi o gli Attalidi (vd. ivi, pp. 204 sgg., con l’opzione per i secondi, fra 218 e 204; per una sintesi delle posizioni, vd. Aneziri, Vereine, pp. 174 sgg., 376 ad D2). Allo stesso modo Eraclea al Latmo chiedeva ad Antioco III che divdwtai de; kai; ejk bas[ilikou` eij~ dioivkh]sin th`~ povlew~ mavlista me;n plevon, eij de; mhv ge tavlanta [c. 5 wJ]~ provteron (SEG 37, 859, C, ll. 1-2, con Wörrle 1990, p. 19, nota *; Migeotte 2004, pp. 218-219; Schuler 2005, pp. 401-402; in Ma 2004, p. 389 ancora erroneamente [… eij~ crh`]sin); il re concedeva anche ejk basilikou` per tre anni la somma necessaria per il ripristino dell’acquedotto (A, ll. 12-13; per donazioni finalizzate, vd. anche quanto segue). 50 Ma 2004, pp. 375-380, n. 26A, ll. 15-25; cfr. Ma 2004, pp. 134-135, 233-234, con Fabiani 2010, pp. 473-476 (i pr. erano allora i magistrati principali della città, detentori della demosia sphragis e, come a Euromo, connessi con pratiche di produzione e conservazione di documenti ufficiali, tenuti nel loro archeion; cfr. sopra con nt. 18) e Vacante 2011, pp. 43-45 (che propende per la vendita in quantità fissate). Giustamente Vérilhac, Vial 1998, p. 166, nt. 98 respingono l’idea di una molteplicità di simili fondazioni da parte della regina. Vd. anche la nota seguente. 51 Bringmann, Steuben, n. 94 [E], sul cui contesto storico vd. Murray 1996, spec. pp. 40 sgg. (ma per la data esatta vd. Mulliez 1998, pp. 237 sgg.); su alcune delle pratiche amministrative connesse vd. Dimopoulou-Piliouni 2007 e Migeotte 2009/10. Un analogo caso di costituzione di capitale di fondazione a partire da un dono regale indirizzato all’educazione dei bambini si ebbe a Rodi nel 161/160 grazie all’invio di 280.000 medimni di cereale da parte di Eumene II (Polyb. 31,31,1-3); lo stesso re aveva gratificato Delfi di un fondo di rotazione riservato per la sitonia (F.Delphes III 3, 237, ll. 5-7, Syll.3 671B, ll. 6-7: cfr. Migeotte 1991, pp. 34-35 = Migeotte 2010, pp. 320-322) e di una fondazione per gli Eumeneia (cfr. Syll.3 671A, il decreto di regolamento, inviato in copia al re), anch’essi naturalmente ricchi di conseguenze documentali. I giusti rilievi

220

grammateion l’elenco definitivo dei mutuatarî (con una parallela nel tempio) sottolineava l’importanza dell’operazione e il significato di riferimento del documento che conteneva i nomi di quanti permettevano al meccanismo di svolgersi. Essa non attestava che la lista era l’unico documento generato dalle operazioni e destinato alla conservazione nei luoghi della comunità52. Qualche dettaglio, almeno per una linea del complesso documentale, appare laddove è il sovrano che detta le procedure, come per la Mileto del 299 ca., che riceveva da Antioco (I) le entrate derivanti dalla stoa fatta da lui costruire allo scopo di contribuire alla ricostruzione del Didymeion: i tesorieri e magistrati cittadini (i pritani) dovevano «prendere in consegna» ([para]devcesqai) le prosodoi, «assegnarle ad un fondo speciale» (katatav[ssein de;] aujth;n kaq;;Vaujthvn) e procedere poi all’aggiudicazione dei lavori (mivs[qwsin] poiei`sqai)53. Lungo una linea più diretta dell’iter amministrativo, il nome del sovrano figurava in liste civiche riepilogative delle somme ricevute dall’esterno, la cui organizzazione – variamente costruita su uno degli elementi cardine, annualità, nome dell’evergete, scopo – e il cui rapporto con (le) altre sequenze potevano variare a seconda degli usi e della complessità della locale amministrazione54. Per quanto non sia chiaro se si tratti di redazione epigrafica costruita su dati raccolti da diverse serie d’archivio tematiche (col titolo specifico Tavde e[dwken Filevtairo~ jAttavlou dwrea;n tw`i dhvmwi) o della trascrizione di un elenco riassuntivo a nome del donatore, risulta indicativa appunto della registrazione e della varietà della documentazione generata una distinta delle doreai del dinasta Filetero alla

di Chankowski (V.) 2007b, pp. 106 sgg. e Gabrielsen 2008, pp. 117, 120-121 sui meccanismi amministrativi richiesti dal dispositivo finanziario della fondazione (come istituto) potrebbero estendersi alle conseguenze documentali di essi e alle diverse permanenze di elenchi e logoi nei sistemi archivistici. 52 Ll. 28-31: ajnªaºgravyante~ tou;~ dedaneismevnou~ kai; ta; ejnevcura aujtw`n ejm pivnaka~ leleukwmevnou~ duvo... kataqevntw de; to;m me;n e{na pivnaka ejn to;n naovn, to;n de; e{na pivnaka ejn to; damovsion grammatei`on (sulle procedure amministrative connesse con la redazione delle liste, preventivamente lette nell’assemblea, vd. Gauthier 2000, p. 121 = Gauthier 2011, pp. 392-393); la disposizione, espressa con l’aoristo del verbo, è riferita alla prima serie di operazioni e non è ripetuta nella descrizione del regime per il futuro (ll. 33 sgg.), ma il seguito del regolamento rende chiaro che la gestione del fondo continuava a comportare la redazione e conservazione dei due pinakes dei prestiti quinquennali, secondo i ritmi naturali di quel tipo di documentazione; vd. anche Migeotte 2009/10, pp. 211 sgg. 53 OGIS 213, ll. 19-23 (I.Didyma 479). L’intervento del sovrano non è naturalmente indicativo del fatto che la polis non sarebbe stata in grado di contabilizzare e gestire il fondo, bensì della volontà del re che il suo beneficio risultasse, nella distinzione, più evidente di quanto non avvenisse di solito con i fondi dovuti ai beneficî di singoli (come giustamente rilevato da Gabrielsen 2008, p. 123: «Nominally, the donor never became completely separated from his or her donation»). Per la pratica della ripartizione finalizzata dei fondi nelle poleis ellenistiche vd. Migeotte 2006 (per Mileto, pp. 79-83). 54 Per il richiamo alla loro esistenza vd. Bringmann 2004, p. 150, nt. 6, donde si traggono gli esempi che seguono.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

221

città di Cizico tra 280 e 27055. Anno per anno (ne sono conservati sei), sono indicati finalità/causale – gare, stato di guerra, rifornimento d’olio e banchetto per i neoi, approvvigionamento alimentare – e dorea specifica, denaro (forse anche per una fondazione), cavalli, esenzione fiscale sui beni in transito nel territorio dinastico, truppe spesate, cereali56. L’inserimento dei re in liste tematiche appare in altri documenti ricapitolativi trascritti in un dato momento su pietra. Esempio indicativo è l’elenco dei contributori alla ricostruzione di Tebe, re e città, distribuiti su una quindicina di anni fra 315 ca. e inizi III secolo57. Un titolo generale di scopo (che copriva due colonne di elenco) introduceva una prima sequenza di donatori per una decina d’anni, città e basileis (due volte quello futuro di Sidone, Filocle, e una Demetrio, nel 304), nella prima colonna variamente separati da spaziature funzionali; una seconda titolatura all’interno della seconda colonna, distinta da paragraphoi, introduceva i re che avevano contribuito successivamente (ma ante 293)58.

55 OGIS 748 (cfr. Bringmann, Steuben, n. 241 [E 1]): le ultime 7 linee sono lacunose; alla leggibilità epigrafica si deve probabilmente il fatto che per la prima annualità è indicato accanto al nome dell’eponimo anche la sua qualifica, assente nelle successive. Per l’inquadramento cronologico, e la possibilità che la sequenza temporale non sia continua, vd. Gauthier 2003, p. 13 (= Gauthier 2011, p. 581), nt. 14; sul contesto storico, Orth 2008, p. 493. 56 Alle diverse finalità e categorie corrispondevano naturalmente catene documentarie specifiche: per quella connessa ad esempio con la phylake del territorio (ll. 13-14), vd. sopra, con nt. 22. 57 Syll.3 337 (con Bringmann, Steuben, n. 83 [E 1]), privata del titolo e assai lacunosa nelle prime 17 linee; egualmente perduti sono i dati di contesto del manufatto. Per la lettura del documento è ancora fondamentale, per gli aspetti che qui si considerano, Holleaux 1938, pp. 1 sgg. A differenza dello studioso, tuttavia, non si ritiene che la ricapitolazione sia stata esclusivamente epigrafica, raccogliendo «le contenu de plusieurs listes manuscrites jointes bout à bout» (p. 6): se è vero che esistevano tali elenchi, corrispondenti a «plusieurs séries de versements, datant d’époques diverses, échelonnées sur une assez longue durée», non è escluso che esistessero, a scopo raggiunto o a periodi, liste ricapitolative d’archivio, con quelle caratteristiche formali d’intitolazione e ripartizione che compaiono nella trascrizione epigrafica (integrale e, come rileva giustamente Holleaux, pp. 4-5, effettuata in un’unica occasione). 58 Vd. rispettivamente l. 1 (integrata da Holleaux 1938, p. 39), [Tooi; creivmata e[dwkan th`/ povli th`/ Qeibhvwn ejn to;n sounoikismovn], e ll. 35-36, Toi; basi[lei`e~ tavde e[dwkan] th`/ povl[i ejn to;n sounoikismovn]. Ad organizzazione tematica può ricondursi la (lacunosa) trascrizione epigrafica di Argo SEG 32, 371 (Bringmann, Steuben, n. 47 [E]), che riporta in parallelo su due colonne rispettivamente il contributo finanziario dei re Tolemeo VI, Tolemeo VIII, Cleopatra II e quello di nove città cipriote, entrambi conclusi da un vacat: l’impaginato dell’iscrizione e la natura del manufatto non impediscono la possibilità dell’inserimento della sequenza in un elenco (epigrafico e, a monte, d’archivio) più lungo introdotto dall’indicazione di scopo (vd., a partire da una diversa interpretazione delle quote contributive delle poleis, Meadows 2005, con la conclusione che esse dovevano essere reiterate). La forma più «semplice» d’ingerenza reale nei documenti civici è rappresentata dall’inserimento del nome in elenchi più specificatamente civici, come quelli di sottoscrittori: quello accluso all’estratto di decreto istitutivo di epidosis per il restauro del ginnasio a Larisa nel 192-186 (SEG 33, 460, II, conservato solo in parte) vede indicati Fivlippo~ basileuv~ (alla l. 1 probabilmente come il più generoso) e Perseu;~ Filivppoi toi` basileivo~ (ll. 17-18; sul documento, vd. Migeotte 1992, pp. 90-93, n. 33).

222

Alla luce di quanto precede, appare comprensibile che alcune poleis, per periodi di tempo anche prolungati, ritenessero di dover riservare agli «affari relativi ai re» (ta; basilikav) una voce dell’agenda delle assemblee, in posizione di rilievo subito dopo i hiera59. Una possibile conseguenza di ciò era che, nell’organizzazione della raccolta dei decreti della seduta, quanto eventualmente suscitato dalla circostanza trovava una collocazione regolare e facilmente reperibile nelle sequenze delle ekklesiai60. In rapporto ai diversi tipi di documentazione introdotta e ingenerata dai re ellenistici nelle poleis e alle forme della loro gestione nel rapporto quotidiano con l’amministrazione e le cancellerie reali un ulteriore fattore merita attenzione: l’impiego di sistemi di datazione proprî a queste ultime, i quali, sotto diversi aspetti e con vario peso sulla vita amministrativa della polis, richiedevano ad essa un ulteriore impegno nell’organizzazione delle carte, e probabilmente anche un supplemento di documentazione, rappresentato da “tavole di conguaglio” e da liste parallele61. Significativi di un’esigenza e di una pratica (per quanto sinora limitata alla Caria seleucidica e a una città di dipendenza più diretta) sono i due decreti onorarî di Amyzon del 202 e 201 che recavano la data reale (indicazione del regno di Antioco III, anno dell’era seleucide, mese macedone, il nome del gran sacerdote del culto dinastico e di quello di Zeus Kretagenetas e Diktynna) e – introdotta dalla formula wJ~ de; oJ dh`mo~ a[gei («e come computa il demos») – la data locale, composta dello stefaneforo eponimo e del mese ionico in un caso, dello stefaneforo

59 Una rassegna dei decreti onorarî che comportano il privilegio dell’accesso all’assemblea «dopo (la trattazione de)gli affari sacri e reali» figura in Ivantchik 2007, pp. 105-107 (con il giusto rilievo dei «problèmes soulevés par le roi (par une lettre ou par une ambassade)»): si tratta di Samo, con una trentina di ricorrenze tra fine IV e metà III sec. (vd. anche IG XII 6,2, Ind. VIII, 38 a-b); Efeso, con cinque, ca. 325-275; Bargilia, con una, ca. 270-261. Ai dati proposti dallo studioso si deve sottrarre quello suggerito di Olbia Pontica (SEG 57, 723, l. 18: vd. i dubbi giustificati di A. Avram, in BE 2008, 399), ma aggiungere quello di Calimna, persuasivamente integrato alla l. 64 della versione iscritta I.Iasos 82, citata sopra per l’intervento di un re mediante diagramma nella richiesta di giudici stranieri (nt. 12). Per l’applicazione del principio della priorità istituzionale assunta dal rapporto con il re di turno, sono significative le disposizioni date nel testo dell’accordo di reclutamento fra un Antigono e la polis cretese di Eleuterna (IC II, xii, 20, con Guizzi 2001, pp. 385-389): una volta giunti gli ambasciatori del re, i cosmi devono convocare l’ekklesia entro dieci giorni, o comunque «al più presto», e, in essa, introdurli e «non trattare null’altro prima di aver dato loro una risposta» (ll. 11-17). 60 Per ipotesi circa l’organizzazione d’archivio dei decreti cittadini, si rimanda al volume in preparazione. 61 Da altra prospettiva, l’aspetto è stato meritoriamente rilevato nell’importante contributo di Savalli-Lestrade 2010a (vd. anche sopra, con nt. 34 e le note seguenti). Occorre naturalmente distinguere tra la versione iscritta e quella d’archivio (oltre che considerare gli usi delle varie versioni di un documento: vd. Meadows 2005, pp. 464-465); ad esempio la considerazione di Gauthier, Hatzopoulos 1993, p. 36, che in Macedonia «la datation par année de règne est loin d’être la règle sur les documents antérieurs à 168» nasce dalla considerazione esclusiva dell’epigrafia.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

223

e del sacerdote locale dei re (Antioco padre e figlio omonimo) nell’altro62. Un uso corrente nei documenti di accordi interpoleici, allora presumibilmente affidato alla rispettiva memoria degli incaricati delle poleis e a un conguaglio ad hoc, in una relazione più indiretta poteva trovare la formalizzazione scritta, di volta in volta tra la sequenza eponimica cittadina, l’anno del regno di controllo e, al caso, l’eponimia sacerdotale generale di turno (lasciando alle memorie civiche fissate all’inizio del contatto più stabile con le monarchie il conguaglio tra il computo mensile del tempo locale, civile e religioso, e il calendario macedone)63. Se l’archiviazione dei documenti si poteva mantenere (per praticità) per anno e mese poleico (quale che fosse), le necessità della corrispondenza con l’amministrazione

62 Rispettivamente Ma 2004, pp. 338-339, n. 9, ll. 3-4; pp. 339-340, n. 10, ll. 3-4, entrambi in integrazione sicura (per l’ovvia lettura vd. Buraselis 2010, p. 427; incomprensibile la traduzione di Debord 2003, p. 290: «dont le peuple [i.e. la cité] est maître [à l’initiative]»; vd. anche quanto segue). La polis era del resto stata abituata alla datazione con anno di regno e mese macedone dalla lunga sottoposizione ai Tolemei, quando peraltro l’eponimo locale era il neopoios dell’Artemision: vd. Robert, Robert 1983, p. 118, n. 3, ll. 1-3 (cfr. p. 127, n. 6, ll. 1-3); il fatto che nelle versioni epigrafiche non venisse riportato il nome del mese locale non autorizza a concludere che il calendario macedone al tempo dei Lagidi «a remplacé le vieux calendrier local» (p. 120; cfr. Savalli-Lestrade 2010b, p. 131), che ricompare nel 202; qualche anno dopo peraltro poteva apparire un’epigrafe con decreto onorario datato da anno locale e mese macedone (ivi, p. 235, n. 35, ll. 1-2; cfr. anche Savalli-Lestrade 2010b, pp. 131, nt. 29 e 132-133: l’ipotesi dapprima poco convinta che ci potesse essere stato «panachage» con i mesi macedoni diventa via via accreditabile; vd. nota 64). Per il demosion di Amyzon, vd. Robert, Robert 1983, p. 213, n. 26, l. 6; per una (nuova) lista di stefanefori dal 167, dopo il ventennio rodio, vd. ivi, pp. 244 sgg., nn. 51-54. 63 Tra i non pochi esempi della formulazione di conguaglio nei documenti intercittadini e intragreci, vd. il trattato di pace fra Mileto e Magnesia al Meandro, Milet I 3, 148 (185-180?: sulla datazione, vd. lo status quaestionis in Laffi 2010, pp. 78-79, nt. 7), ll. 89-91: esso doveva iniziare wJ~ me;n Milhvsioi a[gousin, stefanhfovron qeo;n to;n me[ta;---k]D•L mh`na Puanoyiw`na kai; e{kthn ejpi; devka, wJ~ de; Mavgnhte~ [a[gousin, stefan]hfovron A j risteva kai; mh`na A J gnew`na kai; pevmpth ejpi; devka. Per le eponimie sacerdotali annuali centralizzate lagidi occorre segnalare che la loro menzione nella data di alcuni decreti di Xanto – abbinata all’eponimia del locale hiereus dei Tolemei e non a quella civile – contiene solo i titoli, non i nomi (cfr. SEG 36, 1218, del 202/1); l’ipotesi di Bousquet 1986, p. 31, che essi non fossero conosciuti non appare sostenibile, anche alla luce del richiamo all’uso egizio di simili «gelichtete Formeln» fatto da Buraselis 2010, pp. 422 sgg. Diverso era naturalmente il caso delle eponimie pluriennali, come quella dell’archiereus introdotto da Antioco III e ripreso poi dagli Attalidi e dell’archiereia di Laodice: la ritenzione del nome era semplificata, ma la presenza – almeno nelle città di più diretto controllo – era intesa come invasiva, dal momento che per il primo il re aveva disposto di katacwrivzein de; aujto;n kai; ejn tai`~ suggrafai`~ kai; ejn toi`~ a[lloi~ crhmatismoi`~ oi|~ ei[qistai e per la seconda che le titolari ejpigrafhvsontai de; kai; ejn [toi`~] sunallavgmasi meta; tou;~ tw`n [progovn]wn kai; hJmw`n ajrcierei`~ (vd. rispettivamente Ma 2004, pp. 326-328, n. 4, ll. 44-46 e pp. 405-406, n. 37, ll. 26-28; cfr. pp. 232-233, con il rimando ai decreti conservati che applicano la prima norma nelle città di Amyzon e Xanto; la durata di un anno circa della seconda, legata al presunto ripudio di Laodice – vd. ad esempio Debord 2003, pp. 291, 293 – è da verificare: cfr. Ogden 1999, pp. 137-138; l’idea si connette con la convinzione che la norma, in assenza di altre attestazioni epigrafiche, non avesse trovato grande e diffusa applicazione: per un giudizio sospeso, vd. Müller 2000, p. 533, con nt. 81).

224

del re richiedevano un sistema di pronto reperimento, con liste cronologiche parallele di confronto (quando non di registrazione)64. Tali liste erano tanto più importanti quando si trattava di registrare le festività introdotte per i sovrani, che erano aggiunte o associate a quelle civiche, ma che rispondevano anche al calendario macedone della regalità. Dati i contesti e quanto si viene delineando sull’attività documentale nelle poleis, viene facile interrogarsi sull’esistenza di copie del calendario macedone con le feste reali, cui conformare la scelta dei giorni e dei mesi civici via via dedicati ai sovrani (e introdotti poi nel «libro sacro»)65. Com’è già stato notato, gli obblighi fiscali nei confronti dell’amministrazione reale prevedevano dei computi secondo le annualità di essa, che avevano il loro riscontro nelle cancellerie di rapporto. Le poleis variamente impegnate nella raccolta e nel rendiconto delle tasse dovute difficilmente avrebbero potuto esimersi dai calcoli e dalla registrazione conformi a quel ritmo. La precisione amministrativa, del resto, era funzionale anche alla tempistica delle esenzioni, come dimostra la già ricordata lettera di un funzionario seleucide del 197 ca. che fissava lo statuto fiscale di una città sconosciuta per gli anni a venire: essa non avrebbe pagato nulla al basilikon per sette anni, riprendendo dall’ottavo66.

64 Questo naturalmente non significa l’«uso parallelo di due diversi sistemi calendariali», che giustamente Daubner 2008, p. 177, nt. 24 esclude per Pergamo (senza spiegare la compresenza di mese macedone e mesi «eolici» nel già citato I.Pergamon 247 altrimenti che con la Sonderstellung della polis-capitale del regno). A facilitare le relazioni intervenne nelle poleis micrasiatiche il progressivo slittamento dell’inizio dell’anno dal solstizio d’estate all’equinozio d’autunno: vd. Savalli-Lestrade 2010a, pp. 63, 83 (cfr. Laffi 2010, p. 92; per la complessità della situazione nei possedimenti lagidi d’oltremare, vd. anche Bousquet 1988, p. 23, con i rimandi di nt. 6: il calendario macedone di Xanto e della Licia non corrispondeva a quello d’Egitto). Non si può qui approfondire il caso ateniese, che, al dire di Plutarco (Dem. 10,4), dal 307 al 287 avrebbe visto la sostituzione dell’eponimia tradizionale con quella del sacerdote dei Soteres Antigono e Demetrio (il cui nome essi ejpi; tw`n yhfismavtwn kai; tw`n sumbolaivwn proevgrafon), senza però trovare conferma nelle fonti epigrafiche: fra il tentativo di Dreyer 1998 di ricondurre il dato all’eponimia (aggiuntiva) degli anagrapheis tra 294 e 292/1 e la negazione di massima della veridicità della notizia di Buraselis 2010, si potrebbe richiamare l’ipotesi di un’eponimia secondaria che gli Ateniesi avrebbero variamente praticato nelle scritture correnti, ma non in quelle esposte; B. Dreyer (p. 27, nt. 15) pone l’accento sull’uso nel passo del verbo anagraphein per l’ascrizione dei due Macedoni agli theoi soteres (10,4: swth`ra~ ajnevgrayan) e per la registrazione nella serie dell’ultimo titolare del 287 (46,1: Divfilon, o}~ h\n iJereu;~ tw`n Swthvrwn ajnagegrammevno~): ciò non può documentare una coincidenza delle funzioni eponimiche di hiereus e di anagrapheus (come responsabile di scritture), ma può indicare la presenza di liste con, rispettivamente, l’anagraphe degli onorati e quella dei loro sacerdoti. 65 Col segnalarne l’attuale mancanza di attestazione, non evita di richiamare il problema Savalli-Lestrade 2010a, p. 68 («dans la plupart des cas, nous ignorons en règle générale si oui ou non le choix des jours et des mois consacrés localement à un roi ou une reine avait comme référent ultime une liste de fêtes royales dont les dates étaient établies d’après le calendrier macédonien»; il corsivo è della studiosa; cfr. anche ivi, p. 70). 66 Ma 2004, pp. 403-404, n. 36, ll. 14-18. Vd. Schuler 2007, pp. 395-396 e sopra, con nt. 33.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

225

All’aspetto della presenza reale negli archivi cittadini, nelle sue diverse e molteplici applicazioni, si collega naturalmente quello, speculare, della sua cessazione, attraverso lo scarico – eventuale – del materiale connesso con figure o regni non più praticati dalla polis (restando inteso che la documentazione reale connessa con la dinastia di governo o controllo doveva essere conservata in tutte le componenti principali e di lunga durata della sua filiera)67. Che ci potesse essere attenzione al riguardo da parte di un sovrano sembra emergere dalla richiesta di Attalo III alla propria città capitale di immettere nella sezione delle «leggi sacre» (iJeroi; novmoi) dell’archivio civico, ex officio e dichiaratamente di validità illimitata, i prostagmata reali circa la nomina di Ateneo a sacerdote ereditario di Zeus Sabazio, l’installazione del dio nel Nikephorion e le cerimonie da compiere, «affinché [gli onori per il dio e i beneficî per il personaggio] permangano per sempre non rimossi né modificati» (o{pw~ a]n eij~ a{panta crovnon ajkivnhta kai; ajmetavqeta mevnhi)68. Come s’è visto, il problema riguarda sostanzialmente la corrispondenza con le sue componenti e conseguenze normative, la documentazione fiscale, quella connessa con l’organizzazione istituzionale e religiosa. L’interesse della città a conservare comunque le missive di un re o della sua amministrazione che la riguardavano appare evidente per ciò che concerneva la definizione del suo statuto e delle sue relazioni con l’autorità rappresentata, in base al «principio burocratico-amministrativo del ‘risalire il più indietro possibile nella serie degli atti delle amministrazioni reali relativi alla questione’» riconosciuto dagli studiosi ai rapporti tra petenti e autorità69. E in questa prospet-

67 A prescindere naturalmente dai ritmi d’archivio riservati ai documenti a vita breve coinvolti nella relazione qui parzialmente delineata. 68 RC 67, ll. 14-16 (OGIS 331, ll. 58-60, cfr. sopra, nt. 11); Pergamo aveva compiuto l’operazione attraverso lo psephisma adottato all’uopo, come rilevano le linee finali, sole superstiti, che prevedono l’archiviazione anche di esso: ejggrav[y]ai de; kai; eij~ [to]u;[~ iJ]erou;~ novmou~ [tou;~ th`]~ [pov]lew~ [t]ovd[e to;] yhvfisma kai; crh`sqai aujtw`i novmwi kurivwi eij~ a{panta to;g crovnon (OGIS 331, ll. 2-4). Le ipotesi di C.B. Welles (p. 271) circa le ragioni dell’ultimo re di Pergamo per la richiesta – sostanzialmente l’incertezza del futuro – non sono dimostrabili (in ogni modo da sfumare è l’idea che «royal enactments… would not outlast the dinasty»). L’espressione nel testo era una variante retorica del formulario civico relativo ai decreti che passavano a leggi (sacre): cfr. il pressoché contemporaneo psephisma Virgilio, LDP2, pp. 246-251, n. 14 (con Hamon 2004) che doveva essere [k]uvrion... eij~ a{panta to;n crovnon kai; kat[a]te[qh`n]ai... ejn novmo[i~ iJ]e[roi`~] (ll. 61-62; la «deposizione» naturalmente aveva significato concreto) e, sempre per il II secolo, LSAM 13, ll. 40-43, il regolamento civico per il sacerdozio di Asclepio, con la variante ejggravyai de; kai; eij~ tou;~ novmou~ [tou;~ t]h`~ [pov]lew~ to; yhvfisma tovde kai; [crhvsqw]san aujtw`i novmwi kurivwi eij~ a{panta to;n crovnon. Per un’attestazione di basilikoi nomoi a Pergamo, vd. in fine. 69 Cfr., nello specifico per il caso di Labraunda, Virgilio 2001, p. 49 e Bencivenni 2003, p. 281, nt. 68, che riprendono le considerazioni di Habicht 1972, p. 168, via Robert, BE, 1972, 422, p. 462 (cfr. anche Bencivenni 2003, pp. 260-261, nt. 8, con Dignas 2002, pp. 277-278). L’eventuale incisione delle lettere promossa dalle città potenziava l’efficacia politica ed esemplare delle disposizioni impartite in esse, ma costituiva pur sempre una – ulteriore – «diramazione» documentaria della catena nella quale esse erano inserite, che garantiva nel suo complesso il fondamento giuridico dell’operazione specifica (la quale poteva essere «rappresentata» in misura più o meno completa attraverso la pietra: per un’analisi di motivi e aspetti della pratica,

226

tiva occorre considerare il fatto che la città conservava non solo i documenti che le riconoscevano dei privilegi (e che venivano sovente iscritti), ma anche quelli di contenuto meno favorevole (epigraficamente esibiti solo collateralmente e in contesti particolari). Basterà ricordare due casi, nei quali la procedura di resa epigrafica attesta una vita d’archivio trasversale alle diverse autorità di controllo. Com’è noto, Priene dovette gestire per molta parte della sua storia una situazione territoriale fatta di contestazioni e conflitti. Non sorprende che essa, in generale attenta alle carte civiche, tenesse via via memoria dei documenti reali che vi pertenevano. Nel 285 ca., impegnata a trattare uno status favorevole con Lisimaco, la città esibiva (per intero o per estratto) l’autorevole dispositivo di Alessandro, del 334, che aveva definito i suoi confini e concesso un’ateleia70. Nel 196191, in occasione dell’arbitrato rodio nella rinnovata contesa territoriale con Samo, Priene poteva aver ancora esibito un documento di Alessandro, oltre a ejpistolai; basilikaiv delle diverse dinastie coinvolte e le lettere dello stratego lagide Agesarco del 245 ca. 71. Ed è difficile pensare che, nel 135, quando legati prienesi e samî si recarono a Roma per un’ulteriore fase della contesa, i primi recassero soltanto il pur dettagliato testo dell’arbitrato, cui si richiamava il senato per la conferma72. Significativo, sotto diversi aspetti, è anche il dossier collegato alla già ricordata querelle fra il sacerdozio del santuario di Labraunda e la polis di Milasa in Caria, composto dalle lettere di re e amministratori lagidi, seleucidi, antigonidi redatte

vd. Bencivenni 2010, spec. pp. 165 sgg. e anche quanto segue). Dal canto loro, i Romani non mancarono di dichiarare la validità di provvedimenti giuridici e fiscali dei re di cui assumevano i territorî, come dimostrano ad esempio i senatoconsulti Popillianum e Licinnianum del 132 e 119 (riferiti rispettivamente agli Attalidi e a Mitradate V del Ponto: RDGE 11, con SEG 50, 1212, e 13, con Daubner 2003, pp. 231-235 per la data). 70 Un diagramma per Bencivenni 2003, pp. 8, nt. 12, 30, nt. 39; un insieme di tre documenti per Vacante 2010, pp. 220, 232 sgg. La versione significante del precedente (con la sua rubrica d’archivio, piuttosto che epigrafica, Basilevw~ jA[lexavnd]rou) e il dossier decreto civico-lettera di risposta venivano incisi contemporaneamente sul fronte dell’anta Nord del tempio di Atena Poliade: I.Priene 1 (con Vacante 2010, pp. 220-221), 14, 15, con Sherwin-White 1985, pp. 82-83; Magnetto 2008, p. 18. 71 Vd., rispettivamente, Magnetto 2008, p. 42, ll. 168-70 (con pp. 105 e 176), l. 171 (con pp. 110, 139 e, per una lettera di Antioco III, l. 167, pp. 140-141, con una datazione fra 213 e 197), ll. 131132 (con pp. 131-132); vd. anche Magnetto 2009, p. 9. Sull’archivio prienese, interessato dalla vicenda, vd. Magnetto 2008, p. 178 e Camia 2009, p. 91; i Prienesi, che citavano col rimando ad annum la legazione a Lisimaco del 283/2 ca. (p. 40, ll. 120-121), conservavano senz’altro copia della lettera del diadoco che aveva allora attribuito la vittoria a Samo (che l’aveva pubblicata: IG XII 6.1, 155). Per la data dell’arbitrato, vd. Magnetto 2009, pp. 10 sgg. 72 Camia 2009, p. 86 (già I.Priene 41, RDGE 10B; cfr. Famerie 2007, pp. 99-101, AEp 2007, 1428), l. 12. L’esibizione di documenti può essere indicata dal rimando come precedenti ai krithvria kekrimevna accettati da Roma qualche tempo prima nel senatoconsulto inciso nell’«archivio» del tempio di Atena (Famerie 2007, pp. 99-100 (AEp 1427), l. 5; cfr. Magnetto 2009, p. 16, con cui s’inclina qui a pensare che il documento, già I.Priene 40, RDGE 10A, fosse riferito sempre alla contesa con Samo; non toccate sono comunque le capacità documentali di Priene, che poteva forse anche rifarsi a un verdetto di Antigono Monoftalmo: vd. Magnetto 2008, pp. 109-110 e 2009, loc.cit.).

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

227

fra 280 ca. e 219, sette delle quali, databili o agli anni ’40 o agli anni ’20, ci sono giunte riprodotte su diversi supporti nel santuario e nella polis, o in immediata conseguenza dei fatti, o in epoca romana (alla fine del II secolo o nel I secolo d.C.)73. Che il dossier avesse anche e sempre una sua vita d’archivio parallela a quella epigrafica può essere suggerito dal recente rilievo che la lettera di Seleuco II a Olimpico del 242 ca. (e da questi inoltrata a Milasa), iscritta sia all’arrivo sia nella prima età imperiale romana, figurava con la lettera d’accompagnamento del funzionario solo nella seconda incisione74. Non iscritto nelle due riprese del documento cui era connesso (del 220 ca. e del tardo II sec.) risulta sinora anche l’antigraphon della lettera di Olimpico a Seleuco II suscitata negli anni ’40 dall’udienza conseguente alle prime decisioni del re, che lo stratego trasmetteva alla polis con la propria epistola di conferma del suo statuto e delle sue competenze75. Parte del dossier labraundeno trovava inoltre nella prima età imperiale ulteriore versione epigrafica a Milasa stessa, a giudicare dalla conservata trascrizione della lettera di Olimpico alla città del 22076. Quali che fossero le ragioni della rivalutazione dei documenti in diversi momenti dell’epoca romana, appaiono evidenti l’interesse e il valore riconosciuti dai diversi interlocutori ai precedenti amministrativi, di qualsivoglia origine, uniti alla pratica di usare epigraficamente atti “a disposizione”77.

73 Vd. sopra, con nt. 15. Gli archivi in questione dovevano essere due, quello dei sacerdoti e quello della polis, entrambi dotati della corrispondenza e della documentazione in oggetto. La considerazione di Isager 2011, p. 206 che la lettera di Olimpico a Milasa che concludeva in senso positivo la fase degli anni ’40 del III secolo «quite likely» fosse incisa circa vent’anni dopo può sostenere l’idea di J. Crampa (I.Labraunda, p. 52) che la (sinora) unica incisione contemporanea dei documenti del 240 ca., la lettera di Seleuco a Olimpico favorevole a Khorris, senza la lettera del funzionario alla città, derivasse dall’archivio sacerdotale e riflettesse il (momentaneo) prevalere dell’autorità religiosa (cfr. Reger 2010, p. 51). Rovesciando la prospettiva, si può anche ritenere che l’autorità che dettava l’iscrizione fosse Milasa, che pubblicava una lettera in fondo «possibilista» e taceva della trasmissione di Olimpico, che richiedeva l’«obbedienza» ad essa (I.Labraunda 2, l. 5). 74 Cfr. Isager 2011, pp. 206 con ntt. 25 e 27, 207-208 e 213: si tratta rispettivamente di I.Labraunda 1, 1B (Virgilio, LDP2, pp. 272-273, n. 20) e di I.Labraunda 2. A quanto si può giudicare attraverso le lacune, i testi delle diverse serie risultano identici nel dettato, fatta salva la monottongazione. 75 I.Labraunda 3 (Virgilio, LDP2, pp. 273-275, n. 21), ll. 24-25; 3B, ll. 7-8; cfr. I.Labraunda 4, ll. 6-7. Non escludeva l’incisione anche dell’antigraphon Crampa, I.Labraunda, p. 52. 76 I.Mylasa 23, con Virgilio 2001, p. 48, nt. 31 (cfr. I.Labraunda 4); la nota di Crampa, ad I.Labraunda 4, p. 24, nt. 1, che il documento milaseo «may have belonged to a collection of earlier documents» non chiarisce il rapporto con la documentazione d’archivio. 77 Per un’analisi delle circostanze storiche e del rapporto tra le diverse entità coinvolte, vd. (con qualche cautela) Dignas 2002, pp. 204 sgg. Per una rassegna dei documenti di età ellenistica iscritti a Labraunda in età romana, vd. Chaniotis 1988, pp. 248 (D32), 250-251 (D41), con l’idea del rinnovo di documenti già incisi, per contingenti ragioni politiche (pp. 256, 273-274). Si ricorderà che all’incirca alla stessa epoca avveniva la nota indagine tiberiana sui titoli dell’asylia micrasiatica, la quale riconosceva, accanto ai maiorum beneficia e ai sociorum pacta, anche regum… qui ante vim Romanam valuerant, decreta (Tac. Ann. III, 60).

228

Prova significativa dell’importanza dei documenti reali per l’amministrazione di una polis impegnata con i susseguenti poteri di controllo e anche del destino d’archivio in cui quegli atti potevano incorrere è quanto emerge da un insieme epigrafico dell’1 a.C. di Nysa, già fondazione seleucidica, che riferisce e riproduce l’esito di una vicenda documentale lunga quasi tre secoli, connessa con il riconoscimento di beneficî al santuario di Plutone e Kore entrato nella pertinenza della colonia. Esso vedeva incisi una lettera del 281 di Seleuco I e del figlio Antioco ad un funzionario (preceduta forse dalla lettera di accompagnamento di questi alla località allora interessata), una di re di altra dinastia impegnato a confermare quanto riconosciuto dagli e[mprosqen / pro; hJmw`n basilei`~ e altri documenti correlati78. A quanto si può dedurre dal documento civico che è all’origine della scrittura epigrafica, si trattava di ta; iJera; gravmmata, che la città aveva conservato in archivio, ma che aveva dovuto rimuovere in epoca romana, quando verisimilmente i privilegi erano stati revocati. Uno degli strateghi cittadini, che si era occupato (ejpimelhqeiv~) degli interessi del luogo di culto e della città presso il governatore romano, riportandone alla fine una lettera d’assenso, si era difatti curato di recuperarli, di «illustrarli» (ejmf[a]nivsa~) al magistrato e di «restituirli al (loro) archivio» (ajpokatevsthsen eij~ to; grammath`on), ricomponendo ufficialmente un dossier che la polis si premurava di riprodurre, per le parti significative, sulla pietra nel santuario79. Il medesimo principio del valore di precedente da confermare o da modificare, specialmente nel passaggio da un controllo all’altro, si può attribuire ai documenti fiscali – almeno quelli cumulativi e di trasmissione – che entravano evidentemente in causa quando si doveva dimostrare la consistenza di un contri78 RC 9 (lettera di Seleuco I e Antioco, per lo studioso forse già incisa a tempo debito), 64 (di re imprecisabile: per l’ipotesi di Mitradate VI, dopo l’88, vd. Rigsby 1996, pp. 402-403, n. 185; sui tentativi d’identificazione, che comprendono anche Antioco III ed Eumene II, vd. la discussione di Ma 2004, p. 214, che esclude Antioco III sulla base dell’uso del singolare, presupposto ora da rivedere, come segnalato da Virgilio 2010, pp. 119 sgg.; 2011, pp. 75, 224-230; il riferimento ai predecessori citato nel testo è alle ll. 7, 12, 13); per i frustuli di ulteriori documenti del dossier, compresa all’apparenza una lettera reale tardo-seleucidica che menziona Antioco «il Grande» e che precede RC 64, vd. Rigsby 1996, p. 401; Ma 2004, pp. 218-219, 311-312. 79 Syll.3 781 (RDGE 69), I, ll. 9 sgg.; al documento civico segue la lettera del proconsole (II), debitamente «consegnata» in patria dall’emissario niseo (ajpodouv~, l. 13) e registrata all’arrivo (vd. l. 14, la data di recezione): di essa si sono conservati solo la formula di saluto e l’inizio delle considerazioni, con il nome dello stratego (ll. 15-16). Alla ricostruzione indicata, che riprende le osservazioni di Rigsby 1996, p. 405 sui «papyrus documents» in questione, non sembra potersi opporre un’alternativa ragionevole (soprattutto non quella, pure considerata dallo studioso, «that grammateion here means the archival wall at the temple»). I tre mesi intercorsi fra l’arrivo della lettera del proconsole e la «verbalizzazione» epigrafica furono necessari per le eventuali verifiche dei documenti esibiti al magistrato, forse più numerosi di quelli iscritti, e per l’incisione del dossier (inevitabile è la conclusione di Rigsby, loc. cit., che i documenti o le loro copie «had been kept privately over the intervening years by interested parties»). Per un periodo mitridatico di Nisa, che giustificherebbe una crisi nei rapporti con Roma, vd. Rigsby 1996, p. 402 e Campanile 1996, pp. 162 sgg. Vd. anche, in generale sul rapporto fra autorità civili e santuario, Boffo 1985, pp. 287-293.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

229

buto per il quale si dichiarava l’entità imponibile e/o si richiedeva una forma di esonero. È lecito immaginare che le dichiarazioni generali di beneficio fiscale si fondassero in realtà su trattative specifiche, corredate dei documenti “storici” che riferivano alla nuova, o rinnovata, signoria, le aree imponibili, lo stato tributario, l’entità media delle prosodoi connesse. Il processo della relazione fra Antioco III e Teo illustrato dal primo dei due decreti civici in onore della coppia reale, al di là dei «filtri» del linguaggio diplomatico, è ricco di suggestioni80. Un soggiorno nella polis aveva reso edotto il re della «grandezza» (mevgeqo~) delle syntaxeis versate ad Attalo I da una quindicina d’anni, che egli prometteva di condonare nell’assemblea in cui dichiarava la polis sacra, inviolabile ed «esente dal phoros»; lasciati i particolari tecnici ad una successiva legazione della città richiesta per lettera quando era ormai lontano, Antioco alla fine confermò ad essa di aver esonerato Teo in perpetuo dei phoroi pagati al rivale81. Appare difficile escludere che l’operazione avesse implicato dei grammata con una registrazione della contabilità precedente, necessarî per le verifiche applicative di una rimozione che si configurava «per sempre» e che aveva le sue conseguenze nell’amministrazione e nelle entrate seleucidi82. E non mette conto qui di rilevare le componenti documentali del regolamento fiscale di Apamea del 188, per le poleis che avrebbero dovuto pagare a Eumene i tributi già versati ad Antioco83. Più sfuggente (a motivo dello stato delle nostre conoscenze sul fenomeno) è il destino dei documenti d’archivio connessi con le diverse forme di onoranza religiosa, o delle voci derivate nei documenti della città84. Una categoria che diviene semplice concludere come conservata in ogni modo è naturalmente quella degli atti amministrativi civici che richiamavano la figura reale soltanto attraverso la data, o la menzione di una tribù intitolata. Com’è stato di recente chiarito, anche in un caso di rimozione esasperata della memoria come quello dell’Atene del 200 a.C. contro tutti gli Antigonidi (in ogni caso avvenuta dopo ventinove anni di distacco effettivo), perfino le azioni mani-

80 Per la natura del linguaggio in questione e per l’immagine nel testo, vd. Ma 2004, p. 354. 81 Ma 2004, pp. 351-353, n. 17, ll. 14, 19-20, 29-34. 82 Per una valutazione «amministrativa» dell’operazione in due tempi, vd. Ma 2004, p. 92, con qualche forzatura; vd. anche Capdetrey 2007, pp. 418 sgg. (a sua volta, la decisione del re «n’avait de force et ne pouvait s’inscrire dans la durée que si sa formulation prenait une forme écrite»); non si entra qui nella vexata quaestio semantica e di sostanza del rapporto tra phoros e syntaxis, ricorrenti nelle fonti con apparente indifferenza e incoerenza, e in quella dello statuto della aphorologesia in relazione ai diversi obblighi contributivi di una città verso il re di turno: vd. a riguardo Chankowski (V.) 2007a, pp. 324 sgg., con giuste osservazioni circa la necessità di andare oltre la mera considerazione del «discorso ideologico reale» (e civico). 83 Polyb. 21,45,2. 84 E che ancora una volta deve essere valutata a prescindere dal destino epigrafico dei documenti, sinora l’unico a essere preso in considerazione nell’ambito delle ricerche sulla damnatio nel mondo greco. Vd. anche quanto segue.

230

feste di erasione epigrafica furono selettivamente concentrate nelle aree centrali della polis e in ogni modo non toccavano il contenuto dei documenti, liste, decreti onorarî per singoli o collegi85. Precisamente la finalità dimostrativa, a quanto pare limitata nel tempo, oltre che nello spazio, sembra contrastare con l’idea di un’indagine più o meno sistematica (e piuttosto impegnativa) negli archivi per l’abolitio nominis corrispondente. Naturalmente rimossi dovevano essere invece i documenti legati ad un’organizzazione tribale decaduta. Se esplicito è il caso di Atene, con le modifiche già segnalate, meno chiaro è il caso di altre poleis, sia ove non ci siano dati precisi sulla fine di un ordinamento, sia ove resti testimonianza delle phylai reali o dinastiche per epoche tarde. Ad esempio il destino dell’organizzazione legata alla tribù Asandris ci è precluso dall’incertezza circa la data di creazione e il successo dell’unione fra Latmo e Pidasa (comunque legata al decennio di governo del satrapo, 323-313) e il rapporto istituzionale tra Latmo e la successiva Eraclea al Latmo, fondata nei pressi negli anni del controllo di Antigono Monoftalmo86. Se è tuttavia vero che il permanere della stele nel tempio poliade di quest’ultima attesta l’inserimento del documento nella (almeno epigrafica) «lokalgeschichtliche Urkundensammlung», come una sorta di «Gründungsurkunde», e che ad Asandro, come «fondatore», era riservato un culto nell’ambito della phyle, non si può escludere che almeno quest’ultimo fosse rimasto e che nei hiera grammata della nuova città se ne conservasse documentazione87. Precisamente l’atteggiamento conservativo o di recupero delle memorie delle città si connette con il permanere o il riemergere del culto per un sovrano o per una dinastia, con tutte le sue manifestazioni pubbliche e le sue giustificazioni documentali, originali o rinnovate. Com’è noto il problema è complesso e condizionato dalla scarsità e natura delle fonti, ma è lecito attendersi, per periodi più o meno lunghi, una sopravvivenza attiva, oltre che, in alcuni casi, un recupero, con i suoi diversi riflessi nella documentazione d’archivio, via via conservata, ricopiata, creata88. I dies festi, sacra, sacerdotes che Atene nel 200 annullò per gli Antigonidi

85 Vd. Byrne 2010, spec. pp. 65 sgg.; vd. anche Culasso Gastaldi 2003, pp. 259-260. Ciò non escludeva naturalmente che la versione d’archivio di quei documenti andasse soggetta al «normale» destino degli atti civici col passare del tempo. Sulle vicende storiche ateniesi dell’epoca, vd. Habicht 2006, pp. 218-220 e Byrne 2010, p. 159. Vd. anche sotto. 86 Sulle incertezze legate all’operazione, variamente collocabile nel periodo di dominio di Asandro, vd. Bencivenni 2003, p. 166; Wörrle 2003b, p. 1376, nt. 61. Sui rapporti con la successiva fondazione, vd. Wörrle 2003b, pp. 1375 sgg. 87 Per le considerazioni sulle memorie della città di Eraclea evocate dal documento e dalla sua storia, vd. Wörrle 2003a, pp. 142-143, donde si traggono le citazioni nel testo, e 2003b, p. 1376. Quanto alla documentazione interessata, si può pensare, se non al decreto istitutivo, almeno a voce sul «libro sacro» della città (vd. qui sopra). 88 Si tratta naturalmente di cogliere la vitalità delle manifestazioni al di là del permanere delle epigrafi e dei monumenti, variamente investiti di un valore storico e dimostrativo che aveva vita propria: cfr. Savalli-Lestrade 2009, pp. 141-142; 2010a, pp. 68 sgg. Un caso per il quale l’apparente rimozione dei manufatti è stato visto corrispondere alla cancellazione di

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

231

si poterono mantenere senza disagio in luoghi ben più numerosi di quelli che sinora documentano per epoche anche molto più tarde giorni intitolati, mesi, tribù, festività e concorsi, sacerdozî, santuarî89. Allo stesso modo vivevano di vita propria i diversi istituti finanziarî connessi con capitali di fondazione erogati dai re, con il corredo di documenti correlati. Significativo è il caso di Colofone, che in età romana amministrava il fondo offerto dagli Attalidi per banchetti da offrire ai frequentatori del ginnasio dopo l’efebia, la cui celebrazione annuale richiedeva un decreto e la nomina di epimenioi deputati, con l’avviamento delle procedure di finanziamento per quel che doveva figurare, nei diversi luoghi, sotto la rubrica basilika; dei`pna90. È in questa prospettiva dei destini archivistici di documenti più o meno direttamente prodotti dall’amministrazione reale che occorre valutare il controverso caso del basilikos nomos pergameno – un regolamento urbanistico sotto la responsabilità degli astynomoi locali – fatto incidere in età traianeo-adrianea da

tutto il dispositivo in occasione del passaggio di dinastia appare quello di Teo, i cui decreti per Antioco e Laodice disposti su blocchi di parastas del tempio furono rinvenuti fuori sito presso il muro del temenos (Herrmann 1965, pp. 31-33, 89-93): se l’idea avanzata da Chaniotis 2007, p. 171, che Teo avrebbe avuto interesse a rimuovere quanto era collegato con un re che si era distinto per aver eliminato le syntaxeis pagate al rivale, è plausibile, occorre pur sempre riflettere sull’esistenza della lista dei Seleucidi divinizzati incisa nel II secolo OGIS 246 (Kotsidu 2000, pp. 473-474, n. *356 [E]; cfr. Ma 2004, pp. 192, 211). In generale sulla durata delle forme di culto reale nelle poleis, vd. ancora Habicht 1970, pp. 186 sgg.; per una rassegna delle attestazioni, vd. Kotsidu 2000 (Kultische Ehrungen, pp. 636-637 dell’indice, alle diverse voci). Vd. anche sopra, nt. 41. 89 Per le vicende ateniesi vd. ancora Liv. 31,44, 4: il decreto, oltre all’abolitio nominis, prevedeva diesque festi sacra sacerdotes, quae ipsius [Filippo V] maiorumque eius honoris causa instituta essent, omnia profanarentur. L’associazione dei Demetrieia con le Dionisie, iniziata nel 295/4, era terminata con la rivolta ateniese al re nel 288/7 (cfr. Le Guen 2010, pp. 506, 510). L’elenco delle attestazioni nel testo riprende quello (analitico) di Chankowski (A.S.) 2010, pp. 277-278, che è comunque suscettibile di ampliamento. Per il mantenersi del culto reale, inter alia inserito nel sistema dell’evergetismo, vd. già Robert 1966, p. 15 (ripreso in Gauthier 1985, pp. 48-49); per gli Attalidi onorati a Pergamo almeno sino al 60 a.C., con un possibile accantonamento al tempo della permanenza in città del re del Ponto, vd. Virgilio 1993, spec. pp. 69 sgg., 92 sgg.; per il mantenersi nella Sardi dell’epoca augustea degli Eumeneia e Panathenaia (per l’Atena di Pergamo) istituiti nel 166 ca., vd. Robert, Robert 1950, pp. 7-8, 18-25. 90 SEG 39, 1244, II, ll. 46-54: ejpiv te prutavnew~ Eujfravnoro~ yhfisamevnou tou` dhvmou ta; basilika; dei`pna toi`~ nevoi~ kai; presbutevroi~ suntelei`sqai, tw`n de; didomevnwn eij~ tau`ta crhmavtwn mh; diapoiouvntwn, ajlla; tw`n ajpodeiknumevnwn ejpimhnivwn oujk ojliva eJautw`n eijsferovntwn Mevnippo~ touv~ te mevllonta~ ejpimhnieuvsein ajpevluse th`~ dapavnh~, tav te didovmena crhvmata para; th`~ povlew~ ajnevpemye th`i povlei, thvn te tou` dhvmou proaivresin kai; ta;~ tw`n basilevwn ejth[si - - - - - -, su cui vd. Robert, Robert 1989, pp. 99-101 (per i quali si tratterebbe di una ripresa dell’istituto) e Bringmann, Steuben, pp. 303-304, n. 262a [E]; da circostanziare è la lettura di Fröhlich 2009, p. 83, nt. 122, che accenna al dato come a uno degli «examples d’évergètes prenant le relais des rois» (come per l’anonimo ginnasiarco pergameno che fornì l’olio [k]atanaloumevnwn [c]r[h]mavtwn... ejk tw`n basilikw`n ga[zw`n... ], esauritisi dopo la morte di Attalo III nel torno di qualche anno: P. Jacobstahl, «MDAI(A)» 33 (1908), pp. 381-383, n. 3 + H. Hepding «MDAI(A)» 35 (1910), pp. 419421, ll. 9-10, su cui vd. Hamon BE, 2009, 518 e, per la data del decreto al 129, Wörrle 2007, p. 509). Per i problemi di datazione, per la quale si propongono gli anni seguenti al 120 o al 90, vd. Eilers 2002, pp. 124 sgg.

232

uno di quei magistrati, a sue spese, nell’area dell’agorà inferiore della polis91. Il collegio, che doveva continuare ad avere un proprio ajrcei`on – ufficio e archivio – poteva ancora disporre di una copia (di cui si manteneva l’ortografia) di un regolamento che conteneva gli ambiti d’intervento e rappresentava la continuità delle funzioni della magistratura92. Non si può dire quali fossero i termini di applicazione di quel precedente “storico”, ma esso costituiva evidentemente un documento di riferimento per chi esercitava quella carica, degno di un’esposizione che dava rilievo al magistrato promotore di essa93.

91 SEG 13, 521 (alla l. 1, correggi ajstunovmwn in ajstunomw`n). Per i problemi di datazione dell’epigrafe – ad esempio ricondotta dai Robert all’epoca ellenistica avanzata (BE, 1952, 137; 1955, 188) – vd. Chandezon 2003, p. 189, nt. 33; sul problema del rapporto tra normativa risalente e attualità imperiale romana, vd. ad esempio Virgilio 1993, pp. 111-114 (di cui non si condividono tutte le considerazioni); vd. anche Amelotti 2001, p. 225. 92 Per il rilievo dell’ortografia vd. Robert, Robert, BE, 1952, 137. La menzione esplicita a un ajrcei`on è alle ll. 227-229, laddove si prescrive una multa per gli astinomi se essi mh; qw`ntai th;n ejf V eJautw`n grafh;n tw`n freavtwn eij~ to; aj., al termine della sezione riservata alle cisterne; la prima disposizione relativa al controllo di esse è che i magistrati ajnagrafovmenoi [la lista delle strutture nelle case] ejn tw`i Panqeivwi mhni; tiqevsqwsan th;n grafh;n pro;~ tou;~ strathgouv~ (ll. 206-208). Resta da chiarire se l’archeion in questione sia il medesimo, come sembra indicare una prima lettura e come pensano quanti lo intendono come «archivio» tout court (vd. ad esempio Allen 1983, p. 176); che la documentazione prodotta dagli astinomi avesse collocazione articolata, a partire precisamente dal loro ufficio, appare naturale dagli usi nelle poleis: la graphe in questione doveva figurare anche (almeno) negli archeia degli strateghi (per struttura e organizzazione degli archivi di Pergamo, si rimanda al volume in preparazione). 93 Ad «impliciti aggiornamenti» pensava Amelotti 2001, p. 225, in evidente riferimento al fatto che le multe nel documento originario erano conteggiate in dracme (per un caso analogo, sempre da Pergamo, vd. Wörrle 1969, con pp. 185-187 e nt. 99). Sull’importanza del documento per il collegio magistratuale, vd. ancora Wörrle 1969, p. 188.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

233

Abbreviazioni AEp

L’Année épigraphique, Paris 1888-.

Aneziri, Vereine

S. Aneziri, Die Vereine der dionysischen Techniten im Kontext der hellenistischen Gesellschaft, «Historia-Einz.» 163, Stuttgart 2002.

BE

Bulletin Epigraphique, a cura di AA.VV., in «REG», 1938-.

Bringmann, Steuben

K. Bringmann, J. von Steuben (a cura di), Schenkungen hellenistischer Herrscher an griechische Städte und Heiligtümer, I, Zeugnisse und Kommentare, Berlin 1995.

DNP

Der neue Pauly: Enzyklopädie der Antike, a cura di H. Cancik, H. Schneider, Stuttgart 1996-.

F.Delphes III

G. Colin et al., Fouilles de Delphes, III, Épigraphie, Paris 1929-.

I.Beroia

L. Gounaropoulou, M.B. Hatzopoulos et alii, Inscriptiones Macedoniae Inferioris, I, Inscr. Beroeae / EPIGRAFES KATW MAKEDONIAS, A', EPIGRAFES BEROIAS, Athenai 1998.

I.Délos

Inscriptions de Délos, Paris 1926-1972.

I.Didyma

A. Rehm, Didyma II, Die Inschriften, Berlin 1958.

I.Erythrai

H. Engelmann, R. Merkelbach, Die Inschriften von Erythrai und Klazomenai (IK 1, 2), I-II, Bonn 1972-1973.

I.Iasos

W. Blümel, Die Inschriften von Iasos (IK 28.1, 28.2), I-II, Bonn 1985.

I.Ilion

P. Frisch, Die Inschriften von Ilion (IK 3), Bonn 1975.

I.Kyme

H. Engelmann, Die Inschriften von Kyme (IK 5), Bonn 1976.

I.Labraunda

Labraunda, Swedish Excavations and Researches, III, 1, J. Crampa, The Greek Inscriptions, 1-12 (Period of Olympichus), Lund 1969.

I.Magnesia

O. Kern, Die Inschriften von Magnesia, Berlin 1900.

I.Metropolis

B. Dreyer, H. Engelmann, Die Inschriften von Metropolis (IK 63), I, Bonn 2003.

I.Mylasa

W. Blümel, Die Inschriften von Mylasa (IK 34, 35), I-II, Bonn 1987,1988.

I.Pergamon

Altertümer von Pergamon, VIII 1, Die Inschriften von Pergamon, a cura di M. Fränkel, Berlin 1890.

I.Priene

F. Hiller von Gärtringen, Die Inschriften von Priene, Berlin 1906.

I.Smyrna

G. Petzl, Die Inschriften von Smyrna (IK 23, 24.1), I-II, Bonn 1982,1987.

I.Thess

EPIGRAFIKA QESSALONIKEIA: SUMBOLH STHN POLITIKH KAI KOINWNIKH ISTORIA THS ARCAIAS QESSALONIKHS, a cura di P. M. Nigdeles, Thessalonike 2006.

234

I.Tralleis

F.B. Poljakov, Die Inschriften von Tralleis (IK 36.1), Bonn 1989.

Le Guen, Associations

Br. Le Guen, Les associations de technites dionysiaques à l’époque hellénistique I. Corpus documentaire, Nancy 2001.

LSAM

Fr. Sokolowski, Lois sacrées de l’Asie Mineure, Paris 1955.

Maddoli Suppl.

G. Maddoli, Epigrafi di Iasos. Nuovi Supplementi, «PdP», 62, 2007, pp. 193-384.

McCabe, Erythrai

D.F. McCabe, Erythrai Inscriptions, Packard Humanities Institute CD #6, 1991 (http://epigraphy.packhum.org/inscriptions/main).

Milet I.2, I.3

A. Rehm, Inschriften, in Milet. Ergebnisse der Ausgrabungen und Untersuchungen seit dem Jahre 1899, I.2, Das Rathaus in Milet, Berlin 1914; Milet. …, I.3, Das Delphinion in Milet, a cura di Th. Wiegand, Berlin 1914.

Milet VI.3

P. Herrmann et alii, Inschriften von Milet, 3, Inschriften n. 10201580, in Milet. …, VI.3, a cura di V. von Graeve, Berlin 2006.

Nouveau choix 2002

Nouveau choix d’inscriptions de Délos. Lois, comptes et inventaires, (Études Épigraphiques 4), a cura di Cl. Prêtre et alii, Athènes.

OGIS

W. Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci inscriptiones selectae. Supplementum sylloges inscriptionum Graecarum, I-II, Leipzig 1903-1905.

PCZ

Catalogue général des antiquités égyptiennes du Musée du Caire: Zenon Papyri, I-IV, a cura di C.C. Edgar, Le Caire 1925-1931.

RC

C.B. Welles, Royal Correspondence in the Hellenistic Period. A Study in Greek Epigraphy, London 1934 (rist. anast. Chicago 1970).

RDGE

R.K. Sherk, Roman Documents from the Greek East. Senatus Consulta and Epistulae to the Age of Augustus, Baltimore 1969.

RO

P.J. Rhodes, R. Osborne, Greek Historical Inscriptions 403-323 BC, Oxford 2003.

SEG

Supplementum Epigraphicum Graecum, Leiden 1923-.

Staatsverträge

H. Bengtson, H.H. Schmitt, Die Staatsverträge des Altertums, I-II, a cura di H. Bengtson, München-Berlin 1962-1969 (II2, 1975); III, a cura di H.H. Schmitt, München-Berlin 1969.

Syll.3

W. Dittenberger (F. Hiller von Gärtringen), Sylloge inscriptionum Graecarum, I-III, Lepzig 1915-19243.

Tit.Cal.

M. Segre, Tituli Calymnii, «ASAA», n.s. 6-7 (1944-45) [1952].

Virgilio, LDP2

B. Virgilio, Lancia, diadema e porpora. Il re e la regalità ellenistica, «Studi Ellenistici», 14, Pisa 2003.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

235

Bibliografia

Allen 1983 R.E. Allen, The Attalid Kingdom, A Constitutional History, Oxford. Amelotti 2001 M. Amelotti, Leggi greche in diritto romano, in Symposion 1997, Verträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Altafiumara, 8.-14. September 1997), Köln, Weimar, Wien, pp. 225-234 (= «MEP» 4, pp. 11-23). Aneziri, Damaskos 2004 S. Aneziri, D. Damaskos, Städtische Kulte im hellenistischen Gymnasion, in Das hellenistische Gymnasion, a cura di D. Kah, P. Scholz, Berlin, pp. 247-271. Aperghis 2004 G.G. Aperghis, The Seleukid Royal Economy. The Finances and Financial Administration of the Seleukid Empire, Cambridge. Bagnall 1976 R. Bagnall, The Administration of the Ptolemaic Possessions outside Egypt, Leiden. Bencivenni 2003 A. Bencivenni, Progetti di riforme costituzionali nelle epigrafi greche dei secoli IV-II a.C., Bologna. Bencivenni 2004 A. Bencivenni, Aristodikides di Asso, Antioco I e la scelta di Ilio, «Simblos», 4, pp. 159-185. Bencivenni 2008 A. Bencivenni, I Tolemei e l’homopoliteia di Cos e Calimna, «Simblos», 5, pp. 185-208. Bencivenni 2010 A. Bencivenni, Il re scrive, la città iscrive. La pubblicazione su pietra delle epistole regie nell’età ellenistica, in «Studi Ellenistici», 24, pp. 149-178. Bertrand 1990 J.-M. Bertrand, Formes de

discours politiques: décrets des cités grecques et correspondance des rois hellénistiques, «CCG», 1 (Du pouvoir dans l’Antiquité: mots et réalités, a cura di Cl. Nicolet), pp. 101-115 (già in «RHD», 63, 1985, pp. 469-481). Bertrand 1997 J.-M. Bertrand, Cités et royaumes du monde grec: espace et politique, Paris. Bertrand 2005 J.-M. Bertrand, À propos des pavroikoi dans les cités d’Asie Mineure, in Fröhlich, Müller 2005, pp. 39-49. Bielman 1994 A. Bielman, Retour à la liberté: libération et sauvetage des prisonniers en Grèce ancienne: recueil d’inscriptions honorant des sauveteurs et analyse critique, Lausanne. Boffo, 1985 L. Boffo, I re ellenistici e i centri religiosi dell’Asia Minore, Firenze. Boffo 2003 L. Boffo, Per una storia dell’archiviazione pubblica nel mondo greco, «Dike», 6, pp. 5-85. Boffo 2011a L. Boffo, Gli archivi dei Greci: premesse di metodo, in In ricordo di Dino Ambaglio, Atti dell’incontro di studio, Pavia 9-10 dicembre 2009, a cura di R. Scuderi, C. Zizza, Pavia, pp. 103-114. Boffo 2011b L. Boffo, I decreti «per difesa/ salvezza» della polis: una categoria d’archivio, in Studi in onore di Salvatore Alessandrì, a cura di M. Lombardo, C. Marangio, Lecce, pp. 25-40. Bosnakis, Hallof 2005 D. Bosnakis, K. Hallof, Alte und neue Inschriften aus Kos II, «Chiron», 35, pp. 219-272.

236

Bousquet 1986 J. Bousquet, Lettre de Ptolémée Évergète à Xanthos, «REG», 99, pp. 22-32. Bousquet 1988 J. Bousquet, La stèle des Kyténiens au Létôon de Xanthos, «REG», 101, pp. 12-53. Bremen, Carbon 2010 R. van Bremen, J.-M. Carbon (a cura di), Hellenistic Karia, Bordeaux. Bringmann 2004 K. Bringmann, L’économie royale au miroir de l’évergétisme des Séleucides, in Chankowski, Duyrat 2004, pp. 149-164. Buraselis 2010 K. Buraselis, Eponyme Magistrate und Hellenistischer Herrscherkult, in Symposion 2009, Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Seggau, 25.30. August 2009), a cura di G. Thür, Wien, pp. 419-434. Byrne 2010 S.G. Byrne, The Athenian Damnatio Memoriae of the Antigonids in 200 B.C., in FILAQHNAIOS / PHILATHENAIOS, Studies in Honour of Michael J. Osborne, a cura di A. Tamis et alii, Athenai, pp. 157-177. Camia 2009 F. Camia, Roma e le poleis. L’intervento di Roma nelle controversie territoriali tra le comunità greche di Grecia e Asia Minore nel secondo secolo a.C.: le testimonianze epigrafiche, Atene. Campanile 1996 D. Campanile, Città d’Asia Minore tra Mitridate e Roma, in «Studi Ellenistici», 8, pp. 145-173. Capdetrey 2007 L. Capdetrey, Le pouvoir séleucide. Territoire, administration, finances

d’un royaume hellénistique (312-129 avant J.-C.), Rennes. Capdetrey, Nelis-Clément 2006 L. Capdetrey, J. Nelis-Clément (a cura di), La circulation de l’information dans les états antiques, Actes de la table ronde Institut Ausonius, Pessac, 19-20 janvier 2002, Bordeaux. Cassayre 2010 A. Cassayre, La Justice dans les cités grecques. De la formation des royaumes hellénistiques au legs d’Attale, Rennes. Ceccarelli 2005 P. Ceccarelli, Forme di comunicazione e ideologia della pólis: discorso in assemblea, decreto ed epistola ufficiale, in Democrazia e antidemocrazia nel mondo greco, Chieti, 9-11 aprile 2003, a cura di U. Bultrighini, Alessandria, pp. 345-369. Chandezon 2003 Chr. Chandezon, L’élevage en Grèce (fin Ve-fin Ier s. a.C.). L’apport des sources épigraphiques, Paris. Chandezon 2004 Chr. Chandezon, Prélèvements royaux et fiscalité civique dans le royaume séleucide, in Chankowski, Duyrat 2004, pp. 131-148. Chaniotis 1988 A. Chaniotis, Historie und Historiker in den griechischen Inschriften. Epigraphische Beiträge zur griechischen Historiographie, Stuttgart. Chaniotis 2007 A. Chaniotis, Isotheoi timai: la divinité mortelle d’Antiochos III à Téos, «Kernos», 20, pp. 153-171. Chankowski (A.S.) 2009 A.S. Chankowski, Les souverains hellénistiques et l’institution du gymnase: politiques royales et modèles culturels, in L’huile et l’argent: Gymnasiarchie

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

et évergétisme dans la Grèce hellénistique, a cura di O. Curty et alii, Paris, pp. 95-114. Chankowski (A.S.) 2010 A.S. Chankowski, Les cultes des souverains hellénistiques après la disparition des dynasties: formes de survie et d’extinction d’une institution dans un contexte civique, in Savalli-Lestrade, Cogitore 2010, pp. 271-290. Chankowski (V.) 2007a V. Chankowski, Les catégories du vocabulaire de la fiscalité dans les cités grecques, in Vocabulaire et expression de l’économie dans le monde antique, a cura di J. Andreau, V. Chankowski, Bordeaux, pp. 299-331. Chankowski (V.) 2007b V. Chankowski, Les places financières dans le monde grec classique et hellénistique des cités, in Economies et sociétés en Grèce classique et hellénistique, Bordeaux, 30-31 mars 2007, a cura di P. Brun, «Pallas», 74, pp. 93-112. Chankowski (V.), Duyrat 2004 V. Chankowski, F. Duyrat (a cura di), Le roi et l’économie. Autonomie locales et structures royales dans l’économie de l’émpire séleucide, Actes de Lille (2003) et Orléans (2004), «Topoi», Suppl. 6. Cohen 1995 G.M. Cohen, The Hellenistic Settlements in Europe, the Islands, and Asia Minor, Berkeley-Los Angeles-Oxford. Corsaro 1985 M. Corsaro, Tassazione regia e tassazione cittadina dagli Achemenidi ai re ellenistici, «REA», 87, pp. 73-94. Corsaro 2010 M. Corsaro, Il nomos di Agirrio e la tassazione diretta del grano

237

nel mondo greco, in Nuove ricerche sulla legge granaria ateniese del 374/3 a.C., a cura di A. Magnetto, D. Erdas, C. Carusi, Pisa, pp. 99-128. Coudry, Kirbihler 2010 M. Coudry, F. Kirbihler, La lex Cornelia, une lex provinciae de Sylla pour l’Asie, in Administrer les provinces de la République romaine, Actes du colloque de l’université de Nancy II, 4-5 juin 2009, a cura di N. Barrandon, F. Kirbihler, Rennes, pp. 133-169. Couvenhes 2004 J.-Chr. Couvenhes, Les cités grecques d’Asie Mineure et le mercenariat à l’époque hellénistique, in Couvenhes, Fernoux, 2004, pp. 77-113. Couvenhes, Fernoux 2004 J.-Chr. Couvenhes, H. L. Fernoux (a cura di), Les cités grecques et la guerre en Asie Mineure à l’époque hellénistique, Tours. Culasso Gastaldi 2003 E. Culasso Gastaldi, Abbattere la stele. Riscrittura epigrafica e revisione storica ad Atene, «CCG», 14, pp. 241-262. Curty 1995 O. Curty, Les parentés légendaires entre cités grecques, Genève. Daubner 2003 F. Daubner, Bellum Asiaticum. Der Krieg der Römer gegen Aristonikos von Pergamon und die Einrichtung der Provinz Asia, München. Daubner 2008 F. Daubner, Der Pergamenische Monatsname Eumeneios, «EA», 41, pp. 174-180. Debord 2003 P. Debord, Le culte royal chez les Séleucides, in Prost 2003, pp. 281-308.

Del Corso 2005 L. Del Corso, La lettura nel mondo ellenistico, Bari.

documento da Iasos, «EA», 42, pp. 61-77.

Dignas 2002 B. Dignas, Economy of the Sacred in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor, Oxford.

Fabiani 2010 R. Fabiani, Magistrates and phylai in Late Classical and Early Hellenistic Iasos, in Bremen, Carbon 2010, pp. 467-482.

Dimopoulou-Piliouni 2007 A. Dimopoulou-Piliouni, Les garanties des dettes envers une fondation: le cas de Syll.3 672, «RHD», 85, pp. 437-453.

Famerie 2007 E. Famerie, Une nouvelle édition de deux sénatus-consultes adressés à Priène (RDGE 10), «Chiron», 27, pp. 89-111.

Dmitriev 2005 S. Dmitriev, City Government in Hellenistic and Roman Asia Minor, Oxford.

Faraguna 2000 M. Faraguna, A proposito degli archivi nel mondo greco: terra e registrazioni fondiarie, «Chiron», 30, pp. 65-115.

Domingo Gygax 2001 M.D. Domingo Gygax, Untersuchungen zu den lykischen Gemeinwesen in klassischer und hellenistischer Zeit, Bonn. Dössel 2003 A. Dössel, Die Beilegung innerstaatlicher Konflikte in den griechischen Poleis vom 5.-3. Jahrhundert v. Chr., Frankfurt am Main. Dreyer 1998 B. Dreyer, The Hiereus of the Soteres: Plut. Dem. 10.4, 46.2, «GRBS», 39, pp. 23-38. Eilers 2002 C. Eilers, Roman Patrons of Greek Cities, Oxford. Étienne, Migeotte 1998 R. Étienne, L. Migeotte, Colophon et les abus des fermiers des taxes, «BCH», 122.1, pp. 143157 (= Migeotte 2010, pp. 377391, con Post Scriptum, p. 391). Fabiani 2001 R. Fabiani, Un decreto ateniese riproposto a Iasos (IG II2 3 e Iasos 3926), «PdP», 56, pp. 69-100. Fabiani 2009 R. Fabiani, Eupolemos Potalou o Eupolemos Simalou? Un nuovo

Faraguna 2003 M. Faraguna, Vendite di immobili e registrazione pubblica nelle città greche, in Symposion 1999, Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Pazo de Mariñan, La Coruña, 6.-9. September 1999), a cura di G. Thür, F. J. Fernández Nieto, Köln, pp. 97-122. Faraguna 2005 M. Faraguna, Scrittura e amministrazione nelle città greche: gli archivi pubblici, «QUCC», 80, pp. 61-86. Faraguna 2006a M. Faraguna, Alcibiade, Cratero e gli archivi giudiziari ad Atene, in Duvnasqai didavskein. Studi in onore di Filippo Càssola, per il suo ottantesimo compleanno, a cura di M. Faraguna, V. Vedaldi Iasbez, Trieste, pp. 197-207. Faraguna 2006b M. Faraguna, Gli archivi e la polis (problemi nuovi e vecchi alla luce di alcuni recenti documenti), in Capdetrey, Nelis-Clément 2006, pp. 53-71. Faraguna 2006c M. Faraguna, L’economia della

238

Macedonia ellenistica: un bilancio, in Approches de l’économie hellénistique, a cura di R. Descat, Saint-Bertrand-de-Comminges, pp. 121-146. Faraguna 2011 M. Faraguna, Legislazione e scrittura nella Grecia arcaica e classica, «ZPE», 177, pp. 1-20. Ferioli, Fiandra, Fissore 2000 P. Ferioli, E. Fiandra, G.G. Fissore, Research into the Use of Cretulae in Ancient Administration Systems: Problems Regarding Orientation and Methods, in Administrative Documents in the Aegean and their Near East Counterparts, a cura di M. Perna, Roma, pp. 353-364. Fernoux 2004 H.-L. Fernoux, Les cités s’entraident dans la guerre: historique, cadres institutionnels et modalités pratiques des conventions d’assistance dans l’Asie Mineure hellénistique, in Couvenhes, Fernoux 2004, pp. 115-176. Frija 2012 G. Frija, Les prêtres des empereurs. Le culte impérial civique dans la province romaine d’Asie, Rennes. Fröhlich 2009 P. Fröhlich, Les activités évergétiques des gymnasiarques: la fourniture de l’huile, in L’huile et l’argent: Gymnasiarchie et évergétisme dans la Grèce hellénistique, a cura di O. Curty et alii, Paris, pp. 57-94. Fröhlich, Müller 2005 P. Fröhlich, Chr. Müller (a cura di), Citoyenneté et participation à la basse époque hellénistique, Actes de la table ronde de 22-23 mai 2004, Paris BNF, Genève. Gabrielsen 2008 V. Gabrielsen, The Public Banks

of Hellenistic Cities, in Pistoi dia tèn technèn. Bankers, Loans and Archives in the Ancient World, Studies in honour of Raymond Bogaert, a cura di K. Verboven, K. Vandorpe, V. Chankowski, Leuven, pp. 115-130. Gauthier 1980 Ph. Gauthier, Les honneurs de l’officier séleucide Larichos, «JS», pp. 35-50. Gauthier 1985 Ph. Gauthier, Les cités grecques et leurs bienfaiteurs (IVe-Ier siècle avant J.-C.), Contribution à l’histoire des institutions, «BCH», Suppl. XII. Gauthier 1989 Ph. Gauthier, Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardes, II, Genève. Gauthier 1991 Ph. Gauthier, jAtevleia tou` swvmato~, «Chiron», 21, pp. 49-68 (= Gauthier 2011, pp. 245-272). Gauthier 1993 Ph. Gauthier, Epigraphica II, «RPh», 67, pp. 41-55. Gauthier 1994 Ph. Gauthier, Les rois hellénistiques et les juges étrangers: à propos de décrets de Kimôlos et de Laodicée du Lykos, «JS», pp. 165-195 (= Gauthier 2011, pp. 113-144). Gauthier 2000 Ph. Gauthier, Les institutions politiques de Delphes au IIe siècle a.C., in Delphes cent ans après la grande fouille: essai de bilan, Actes du colloque international organisé par l’Ecole Française d’Athènes, Athènes-Delphes, 17-20 septembre 1992, a cura di A. Jacquemin, Athènes, pp. 109-139 (= Gauthier 2011, pp. 375-405). Gauthier 2003 Ph. Gauthier, De nouveaux

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

honneurs cultuels pour Philétairos: à propos de deux inscriptions récemment publiées, «Studi Ellenistici», 15, pp. 9-23 (= Gauthier 2011, pp. 577-591). Gauthier 2005 Ph. Gauthier, Introduction, in Fröhlich, Müller 2005, pp. 1-6. Gauthier 2011 Ph. Gauthier, Études d’histoire et d’institutions grecques. Choix d’écrits, Genève. Gauthier, Hatzopoulos, 1993 Ph. Gauthier, M.B. Hatzopoulos, La loi gymnasiarchique de Beroia, Athènes-Paris. Guizzi 2001 F. Guizzi, Hierapytna. Storia di una polis cretese dalla fondazione alla conquista romana, «MAL», s. IX, 13.3, pp. 275-444. Habicht 1970 Chr. Habicht, Gottmenschentum und griechische Städte, München2 (1956). Habicht 1972 Chr. Habicht, Recensione a Labraunda, Swedish Excavations and Researches, III, 1, The Greek Inscriptions, a cura di J. Crampa, Lund 1969, «Gnomon», 44, pp. 162-170. Habicht 2006 Chr. Habicht, Athènes hellénistique. Histoire de la cité d’Alexandre le Grand à Marc Antoine (2e éd. revue et augm.), Paris. Habicht 2007 Chr. Habicht, Neues zur hellenistischen Geschichte von Kos, «Chiron», 37, pp. 123-152. Haensch 2003 R. Haensch, Amtslokal und Staatlichkeit in den griechischen Poleis, «Hermes», 131, pp. 172-195.

239

Hamon 2004 P. Hamon, Les prêtres du culte royal dans la capitale des Attalides: note sur le décret de Pergame en l’honneur du roi Attale III (OGIS 332), «Chiron», 34, pp. 169-185.

Hatzopoulos 2003/4 M.B. Hatzopoulos, Quaestiones Macedonicae: lois, décrets et épistates dans les cités macédoniennes, «Tekmeria», 8 [ed. 2006], pp. 27-60.

Hamon 2009 P. Hamon, Démocraties grecques après Alexandre. À propos de trois ouvrages récents, «Topoi», 16/2, pp. 347-382.

Hatzopoulos 2006 M.B. Hatzopoulos, La Macédoine. Géographie historique, Langue, Cultes et croyances, Institutions, Paris.

Hatzopoulos 1996, I, II M.B. Hatzopoulos, Macedonian Institutions under the Kings. I, A Historical and Epigraphic Study; II, Epigraphic Appendix, Meletemata 22, Athens.

Helly 2009 B. Helly, La Thessalie au 3e siècle av. J.-C., in ARCAIOLOGIKO ERGO QESSALIAS KAI STEREAS ELLADAS 2, Praktikav episthmonikhv~ sunavnthsh~ Bovlo~ 16.319.3.2006, I, Qessaliva, Volos, pp. 339-365.

Hatzopoulos 1997 M. Hatzopoulos, L’état macédonien antique: un nouveau visage, «CRAI», pp. 7-25. Hatzopoulos 2001a M.B. Hatzopoulos, L’organisation de l’armée macédonienne sous les Antigonides. Problèmes anciens et documents nouveaux, Athènes. Hatzopoulos 2001b M.B. Hatzopoulos, La lettre d’Antigone Doson à Béroia et le recrutement de l’armée macédonienne sous les derniers Antigonides, in Recherches récentes sur le monde hellénistique, Actes du colloque international organisé à l’occasion du 60. anniversaire de Pierre Ducrey (Lausanne, 20-21 novembre 1998), a cura di R. Frei-Stolba, K. Gex, Bern, pp. 45-52. Hatzopoulos 2003 M. Hatzopoulos, Polis, Ethnos and Kingship in Northern Greece, in The Idea of European Community in History, II, Aspects of Connecting Poleis and Ethne in Ancient Greece, a cura di K. Buraselis, K. Zoumboulakis, Athens, pp. 51-64.

Herrmann 1965 P. Herrmann, Neue Urkunden zur Geschichte von Milet im 2. Jahrhundert v. Chr., «MDAI(I)», 15, pp. 71-117. Holleaux 1938 M. Holleaux, Études d’épigraphie et d’histoire grecques, I, Paris. Isager 2011 S. Isager, The epigraphic tradition at Labraunda seen in the light of Labraunda inscription no. 134: a recent addition to the Olympichos file, in Labraunda and Karia. Proceedings of the Intern. Symposium Commemorating Sixty Years of Swedish Archaeological Work in Labraunda, Stockholm, Nov. 20-21, 2008, a cura di L. Karlsson, S. Carlsson, Uppsala, pp. 199-215.

scythe de Skilouros, in Une koiné pontique, a cura di A. Bresson, A. Ivantchik, J.-L. Ferrary, Bordeaux, pp. 99-110. Jones (C.P.) 2004 C.P. Jones, Events Surrounding the Bequest of Pergamon to Rome and the Revolt of Aristonicos: New Inscriptions from Metropolis, «JRA», 17, pp. 469-485. Jones (N.F.) 1999 N.F. Jones, The Associations of Classical Athens. The Response to Democracy, New York-Oxford. Kotsidu 2000 H. Kotsidu, TIME KAI DOXA: Ehrungen für hellenistische Herrscher im griechischen Mutterland und in Kleinasien unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der archäologischen Denkmäler, Berlin. Laffi 2010 U. Laffi, Il trattato fra Sardi ed Efeso degli anni 90 a.C., «Studi Ellenistici», 22. Le Guen-Pollet 1991 B. Le Guen-Pollet, La vie religieuse dans le monde grec du Ve au IIIe siècle avant notre ère, Toulouse. Le Guen 2010 B. Le Guen, Les fêtes du théâtre grec à l’époque hellénistique, «REG», 123, pp. 495-520. Lücke 2000 St. Lücke, Syngeneia: epigraphisch-historische Studien zu einem Phänomen der antiken griechischen Diplomatie, Frankfurt am Main.

Ismard 2010 P. Ismard, La cité des réseaux. Athènes et ses associations, VIe-Ier siècle av. J.-C., Paris.

Ma 2003 J. Ma, Peer Polity Interaction in the Hellenistic Age, «P&P», 180, pp. 9-39.

Ivantchik 2007 A. Ivantchik, Une nouvelle proxénie d’Olbia et les relations des cités grecques avec le royaume

Ma 2004 J. Ma, Antiochos III et les cités de l’Asie Mineure occidentale, Paris

240

(ed. riv. di Antiochos III and the Cities of Western Asia Minor, Oxford 2002). Maffi 2006 A. Maffi, Studi sulla giurisdizione nei regni ellenistici, in Symposion 2003, Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Rauischholzhausen, 30. September-3. Oktober 2003), a cura di H.-A. Rupprecht, Wien, pp. 301-314. Magnetto 2008 A. Magnetto, L’arbitrato di Rodi fra Samo e Priene, Pisa. Magnetto 2009 A. Magnetto, La querelle territoriale entre Samos et Priène: propositions pour un débat, «Topoi», 16/1, pp. 7-17. Malay, Ricl 2009 H. Malay, M. Ricl, Two New Hellenistic Decrees from Aigai in Aiolis, «EA», 42, pp. 39-60. Mari 1999 M. Mari, Potere centrale e poteri locali nella Macedonia dei re: realtà istituzionali e immagine letteraria, «MedAnt», 2,2, pp. 627-649. Mari 2006 M. Mari, L’activité législative du roi et des cités en Macédoine, in Rois, Cités, Nécropoles, Institutions, Rites et Monuments en Macédoine, Actes des Colloques de Nanterre (Décembre 2002) et d’Athènes (Janvier 2004), a cura di A.M. Guimier-Sorbets, M.B. Hatzopoulos, Y. Morizot, Athènes, pp. 209-223. Mari 2009 M. Mari, La tradizione delle libere poleis e l’opposizione ai sovrani. L’evoluzione del linguaggio della politica nella Grecia ellenistica, in Ordine e sovversione nel mondo greco e romano. Cividale del Friuli, 25-27 settembre 2008, a cura di G. Urso, Pisa, pp. 87-112.

Martinez-Sève 2004 L. Martinez-Sève, La fiscalité séleucide: bilan et perspectives de recherche, in Chankowski, Duyrat 2004, pp. 81-104.

Migeotte 2006 L. Migeotte, La planification des dépenses publiques dans les cités hellénistiques, «Studi Ellenistici», 19, pp. 77-97.

Meadows 2005 A.R. Meadows, Ptolemy VI, VIII, Cleopatra II, Cyprus and Argos: an Enigmatic Monetary Transaction of the 2nd Century BC, «NC», 165, pp. 91-97.

Migeotte 2009/10 L. Migeotte, La fondation d’Attale II à Delphes: dispositions administratives et financières, «Dike», 12/13, pp. 203-217.

Migeotte 1991 L. Migeotte, Le pain quotidien dans les cités hellénistiques, À propos des fonds permanents pour l’approvisionnement en grain, «CCG», 2, pp. 19-41 (= Migeotte 2010, pp. 305-328, con Post Scriptum, pp. 328-329). Migeotte 1992 L. Migeotte, Les souscriptions publiques dans les cités grecques, Genève. Migeotte 2003 L. Migeotte, Taxation directe en Grèce ancienne, in Symposion 2003, Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Rauischholzhausen, 30. September-3. Oktober 2003), a cura di H.-A. Rupprecht, Wien, pp. 297-313. Migeotte 2004 L. Migeotte, La situation fiscale des cités grecques dans le royaume séleucide, in Chankowski, Duyrat 2004, pp. 213-228. Migeotte 2005a L. Migeotte, Iasos et les Lagides, in L'exception égyptienne? Production et échanges monétaires en Egypte hellénistique et romaine, a cura di F. Duyrat, O. Picard, Le Caire. Migeotte 2005b L. Migeotte, La DIATAXIS de Délos durant l’indépendance: un budget pour la cité?, «LEC», 73, pp. 27-38.

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

Migeotte 2010 L. Migeotte, Économie et finances publiques des cités grecques, I, Choix d’articles publiés de 1976 à 2001, Lyon. Mikalson 1998 J.D. Mikalson, Religion in Hellenistic Athens, Berkeley-Los Angeles-London. Montanari 1998 F. Montanari, s.v. Hypomnema, in DNP, 5, coll. 813-815. Moreau 2000 Ph. Moreau, Quelques aspects documentaires de l’organisation du procès pénal républicain, in La mémoire perdue, III, a cura di C. Moatti, «MEFRA(A)», 112.2, pp. 693-721. Muir 2009 J. Muir, Life and Letters in the Ancient Greek World, LondonNew York. Müller 2000 H. Müller, Der hellenistische Archiereus, «Chiron», 30, pp. 519-542. Müller 2003 H. Müller, Pergamenische Parerga, «Chiron», 33, pp. 419-445. Mulliez 1998 D. Mulliez, Chronologie de la prêtrise IV (170/69-158/7) et la date de la mort d’Eumène II, «Topoi», 8, pp. 231-241.

241

Murray 1996 G. Murray, Delphes et les Attalides. Un cas d’évergétisme royal en 160/159 avant J.-C., Québec. Musti 1977 D. Musti, Chora basilikè, stati sacerdotali, indigeni e pòleis libere, in Storia e Civiltà dei Greci, IV, La società ellenistica, 7, a cura di R. Bianchi Bandinelli, Milano, pp. 231-287. Oetjen 2010 R. Oetjen, Antigonid cleruchs in Thessaly and Greece: Philip V and Larisa, in Studies in Greek Epigraphy and History in honor of Stephen V. Tracy, a cura di G. Reger, F. X. Ryan, T.F. Winters, Bordeaux, pp. 237-254. Ogden 1999 D. Ogden, Polygamy, Prostitutes and Death: the Hellenistic Dynasties, London. O’Neil 2000 J.L. O’Neil, Royal Authority and City Law under Alexander and his Hellenistic Successors, «CQ», 50.2, pp. 424-431. Orth 2008 W. Orth, Der Dynast Philetairos von Pergamon als Wohltäter, in Vom Euphrat bis zum Bosporus. Kleinasien in der Antike, Festschrift für Elmar Schwertheim zum 65. Geburtstag, a cura di E. Winter, (Asia Minor Studien 65.2), Bonn, pp. 485-495. Patterson 2010 L.E. Patterson, Kinship Myth in Ancient Greece, Austin. Pébarthe 2006 Chr. Pébarthe, Cité, démocratie et écriture. Histoire de l’alphabétisation d’Athènes à l’époque classique, Paris. Prost 2003 F. Prost (a cura di), L’Orient

méditerranéen de la mort d’Alexandre aux campagnes de Pompée. Cités et royaumes à l’époque hellénistique, «Pallas», 62. Reger 2004 G. Reger, Sympoliteiai in Hellenistic Asia Minor, in The Greco-Roman East. Politics, Culture, Society, a cura di St. Colvin, «YCS», 31, pp. 145-180. Reger 2010 G. Reger, Mylasa and its Territory, in Bremen, Carbon 2010, pp. 43-57. Rhodes 2007 P.J. Rhodes, Dioikesis, «Chiron», 37, pp. 349-362. Rhodes, Lewis 1997 P.J. Rhodes, D. Lewis, The Decrees of the Greek States, Oxford. Rigsby 1996 K.J. Rigsby, Asylia. Territorial Inviolability in the Hellenistic World, Berkeley-Los AngelesLondon. Robert 1937 L. Robert, Études anatoliennes, Paris. Robert 1964 L. Robert, Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardes, Paris. Robert 1966 L. Robert, Monnaies antiques en Troade, Genève-Paris. Robert, Robert 1950 J. et L. Robert, Hellenica, Recueil d’épigraphie, de numismatique et d’antiquités grecques, IX, Inscriptions et reliefs d’Asie Mineure, Paris. Robert, Robert 1983 J. et L. Robert, Fouilles d’Amyzon, Paris. Robert, Robert 1989 L. et J. Robert, Claros I, Décrets hellénistiques, Paris.

Rostovzev 1966 M.I. Rostovzev, Storia economica e sociale del mondo ellenistico, I-III, Firenze. Sammartano 2008/9 R. Sammartano, Magnesia sul Meandro e la “diplomazia della parentela”, «Hormos», n.s. 1, pp. 111-139. Sartre 2004 M. Sartre, L’Anatolie hellénistique de l’Égée au Caucase, Paris2. Savalli-Lestrade 1996 I. Savalli-Lestrade, Courtisans et citoyens: le cas des philoi attalides, «Chiron», 26, pp. 149-181. Savalli-Lestrade 2001 I. Savalli-Lestrade, Les Attalides et les cités grecques d’Asie Mineure au IIe siècle, in Les cités d’Asie Mineure occidentale au IIe siècle a.C., a cura di A. Bresson, R. Descat, Bordeaux-Paris, pp. 77-91. Savalli-Lestrade 2003 I. Savalli-Lestrade, L’élaboration de la décision royale dans l’Orient hellénistique, in Prost 2003, pp. 17-39. Savalli-Lestrade 2009 I. Savalli-Lestrade, Usages civiques et usages dynastiques de la damnatio memoriae dans le monde hellénistique (323-30 av. J.-C.), in Mémoires partagées, mémoires disputées. Ecriture et réécriture de l’histoire, a cura di St. Bénoist et alii, Metz, pp. 127-158. Savalli-Lestrade 2010a I. Savalli-Lestrade, Les rois hellénistiques, maîtres du temps, in Savalli-Lestrade, Cogitore 2010, pp. 55-83. Savalli-Lestrade 2010b I. Savalli-Lestrade, Intitulés royaux et intitulés civiques dans les inscriptions de cités sujettes de Carie et de Lycie (Amyzon, Eurômos,

242

Xanthos). Histoire politique et mutations institutionnelles, «Studi Ellenistici», 24, pp. 127-148. Savalli-Lestrade, Cogitore 2010 I. Savalli-Lestrade, I. Cogitore (a cura di), Des Rois au Prince. Pratiques du pouvoir monarchique dans l’Orient hellénistique et romain (IVe siècle avant J.-C. - IIe siècle après J.-C.), Grenoble. Schuler 2005 Chr. Schuler, Die dioivkhsi~ th`~ povlew~ im öffentlichen Finanzwesen der hellenistischen Poleis, «Chiron», 35, pp. 385-403. Schuler 2007 Chr. Schuler, Tribute und Steuern im hellenistischen Kleinasien, in Geschenke und Steuern, Zölle und Tribute: Antike Abgabenformen in Anspruch und Wirklichkeit, a cura di H. Klinkott et alii, Leiden, pp. 371-405. Sherwin-White 1985 S.M. Sherwin-White, Ancient Archives: The Edict of Alexander, a Reappraisal, «JHS», 105, pp. 69-89.

Thonemann 2011 P. Thonemann, The Maeander Valley. A Historical Geography from Antiquity to Byzantium, Cambridge. Traill 1975 J.S. Traill, The Political Organization of Attica: a Study of the Demes, Trittyes and Phylai and their Representation in the Athenian Council, «Hesperia», Suppl. 14. Tziafalias, Helly 2010 A. Tziafalias, B. Helly, Inscriptions de la Tripolis de Perrhébie. Lettres royales de Démétrios II et Antigone Dôsôn, «Studi Ellenistici», 24, pp. 71-125. Vacante 2008 S. Vacante, Economia e territorio di Iasos nell’età di Alessandro Magno. Una rilettura di SIG3 307, «MedAnt», 11, pp. 509-531. Vacante 2010 S. Vacante, IPriene 1: un arbitrato di Alessandro Magno?, «MedAnt», 13, pp. 219-246. Vacante 2011 S. Vacante, L'euergesia di Antioco III in Caria: le testimonianze epigrafiche su Iasos (IIasos 4) ed Eraclea al Latmo (SEG 37.859), «MedAnt», 14, pp. 43-56.

Sickinger c.s. J.P. Sickinger, Greek Letters on Stone, in The Letter. Law, State, Society and the Epistolary Format in the Ancient World, Proceedings of a Colloquium held at the American Academy of Rome, 2830 September 2008, a cura di U. Yiftach-Firanko, Wiesbaden, c.s.

Vérilhac, Vial 1998 A.-M. Vérilhac, Cl. Vial, Le mariage grec. Du VIe siècle av. J.-C. à l’époque d’Auguste, Paris.

Stanton 1994 G.R. Stanton, The Trittyes of Kleisthenes, «Chiron», 24, pp. 161-207.

Vial 2005 Cl. Vial, Conclusion générale, in Fröhlich, Müller 2005, pp. 275-282.

Thonemann 2009 P. Thonemann, Estates and the Land in Early Hellenistic Asia Minor: the Estate of Krateuas, «Chiron», 39, pp. 363-393.

Virgilio 1993 B. Virgilio, Gli Attalidi di Pergamo. Fama, Eredità, Memoria, Pisa. Virgilio 2001 B. Virgilio, Re, città e tempio nelle iscrizioni di Labraunda, «Studi

la ‘presenza’ dei re negli archivi delle poleis ellenistiche

Ellenistici», 13, pp. 39-56 (= Roi, ville et temple dans les inscriptions de Labraunda, «REA», 103, pp. 429-442). Virgilio 2007 B. Virgilio, Sui decreti di Metropolis in onore di Apollonio, in Incontri tra culture nell’Oriente ellenistico e romano, Ravenna 11-12 marzo 2005, a cura di T. Gnoli, F. Muccioli, Milano, pp. 71-86 (= «Studi Ellenistici», 19, 2006, pp. 249-268). Virgilio 2009 B. Virgilio, Aspetti e prospettive della corrispondenza reale ellenistica, in Dallo Stirone al Tigri, dal Tevere all’Eufrate. Studi in onore di Claudio Saporetti, a cura di P.N. Scafa, S. Viaggio, Roma, pp. 391-408. Virgilio 2010 B. Virgilio, La correspondance du roi hellénistique, in SavalliLestrade, Cogitore 2010, pp. 101-122. Virgilio 2011 B. Virgilio, Le roi écrit. La correspondance du souverain hellénistique, suivie par deux lettres d’Antiochos III à partir de Louis Robert et d’Adolf Wilhelm, «Studi Ellenistici», 25. Walser 2008 A.V. Walser, Bauern und Zinsnehmer. Politik, Recht und Wirtschaft im frühhellenistischen Ephesos, München. Wiemer 2009 H.-U. Wiemer, Bild der Polis oder Bild des Königs? Zur Repräsentationsfunktion städtischer Feste im Hellenismus, in Stadtbilder im Hellenismus, a cura di A. Matthaei, M. Zimmermann, Berlin, pp. 116-131. Wörrle 1969 M. Wörrle, Die Lex sacra von der

243

Hallenstrasse (Inv. 1965, 20), in Die Inschriften des Asklepieions, a cura di Chr. Habicht (Altertümer von Pergamon VIII 3), Berlin, pp. 167-190. Wörrle 1978 M. Wörrle, Epigraphische Forschungen zur Geschichte Lykiens II, «Chiron», 8, pp. 201-246. Wörrle 1979 M. Wörrle, Epigraphische Forschungen zur Geschichte Lykiens III, «Chiron», 9, pp. 83-111. Wörrle 1988 M. Wörrle, Inschriften von Herakleia am Latmos I. Antiochos III., Zeuxis und Herakleia, «Chiron», 18, pp. 421-476. Wörrle 1990 M. Wörrle, Inschriften von Herakleia am Latmos II. Das Priestertum der Athena Latmia, «Chiron», 20, pp. 19-58. Wörrle 2003a M. Wörrle, Inschriften von Herakleia am Latmos III. Der Synoikismos der Latmioi mit den Pidaseis, «Chiron», 33, pp. 121-143. Wörrle 2003b M. Wörrle, Pidasa du Grion et Héraclée du Latmos: deux cités sans avenir, «CRAI», pp. 1361-1379. Wörrle 2007 M. Wörrle, Zu Rang und Bedeutung von Gymnasion und Gymnasiarchie im hellenistischen Pergamon, «Chiron», 37, pp. 501-516. Wörrle 2010 M. Wörrle, Epigraphische Forschungen zur Geschichte Lykiens VIII. Ein ptolemäisches Prostagma aus Limyra über Mißstände beim Steuereinzug, «Chiron», 40, pp. 359-396.

244

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio e il problema della titolarità di un archivio nell’Egitto tolemaico lucia criscuolo

Il recupero di testi da cartonnages ha posto gradualmente un problema che la ricerca papirologica sta affrontando ancora in questi anni: quello della definizione esatta non solo del concetto di archivio, ma anche della casistica che individua le forme differenti di aggregazione dei documenti e soprattutto della paternità o denominazione precisa di queste aggregazioni. Con il termine di aggregazione intendo qui comprendere sia la definizione di archivio vero e proprio, sia quella più ampia, recentemente affermatasi, di dossier. Alla definizione, come pure alla distinzione tra archivi e dossier pubblici o familiari, in particolare per l’epoca ellenistica, ma non solo, hanno contribuito principalmente gli scritti di Pestman, Martin e più recentemente Jördens, Van Beek, Vandorpe, Clarysse e ancora Heilporn1. Questi studiosi si sono impegnati a descrivere e connotare approfonditamente tale aspetto della ricerca papirologica, anche in relazione agli studi compiuti su insiemi documentali, principalmente di carattere contrattuale o fiscale e per lo più provenienti dall’Alto Egitto e quindi da contesti talvolta anche archeologicamente ricostruibili, come per gli ostraca tebani recentemente pubblicati

1 Mi riferisco naturalmente alle classiche definizioni fornite rispettivamente in Pestman 19902, p. 51; e più specificamente, per gli archivi familiari e per la distinzione con i dossier, Pestman 1995, pp. 91-92; Martin 1994, p. 570; Jördens 2001; Van Beek 2007, pp. 1034-1037; Vandorpe 2009, 218-219; Heilporn 2009, pp. 17-20; Clarysse 2010, p. 48.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio ...

245

da Paul Heilporn o per gli archivi familiari da Pathyris studiati da Vandorpe-Waebens2. Nel primo caso, cioè quello degli archivi veri e propri, com’è noto, si intende sottolineare il deliberato intento di raccogliere e conservare i documenti, mentre per i dossiers si tratta di raggruppamenti avvenuti ‘a posteriori’, talvolta anche nell’antichità, ma non necessariamente con l’intento primario di conservarli o di classificarli: come per esempio nel caso di ostraca gettati via in un certo momento o in un certo luogo e quindi riuniti arbitrariamente dalle circostanze di rinvenimento, oppure di papiri impiegati per confezionare cartonnages. Certo in casi simili molti dei testi potevano essere stati conservati congiuntamente anche prima di essere eliminati, ma nel momento del loro recupero non è detto che si possa constatare e definire facilmente né la natura del loro eventuale passato accorpamento, né l’autore o gli autori di tale operazione. In altre parole ciò che è avvenuto per l’archivio di Zenone, pur nella complessità della struttura e delle articolazioni che anche questo celeberrimo ‘archivio’ ha gradualmente rivelato, non è facilmente applicabile ai documenti recuperati dai cartonnages tolemaici3. Oltre al filtro rappresentato dal loro ultimo impiego da parte degli imbalsamatori in un certo luogo e in un certo momento, che di regola ignoriamo e che per lo più può essere anche lontano da quello di origine dei papiri, spesso con i papiri da cartonnages ci si trova di fronte a contenuti molto differenti per tipo e per genesi, che mescolano pubblico e privato, ovvero spesso a testi inviati e ricevuti da uno stesso personaggio ma, come vedremo, scritti dalla stessa mano. Inoltre di solito il numero di testi, apparentemente, è quasi sempre assai modesto. Ciò nonostante le esigenze di studio e talora forse anche una certa fretta hanno moltiplicato nelle edizioni la definizione di “archivio o dossier del signor X” semplicemente quando un nome, specie se di un funzionario, ricorreva più spesso. E questo fin dalle origini della moderna papirologia: è il caso dell’archivio di Menches, il comogrammateo di Kerkeosiris, pubblicato nei volumi dei papiri di Tebtynis, sul quale gli studi di Verhoogt hanno riportato l’attenzione riconducendone i documenti ad una raccolta pubblica e non privata, ancorché particolarmente

2 Heilporn 2009 ha infatti brillantemente tentato di ricostruire dei piccoli archivi familiari, che in origine avevano raggruppato ricevute che furono rilasciate a medesimi contribuenti e che poi, dopo essere state gettate, furono probabilmente ritrovate, insieme a molte altre, in uno stesso contesto archeologico, ma successivamente vennero distribuite, e talvolta pubblicate, in differenti collezioni. In pratica da dossiers di documenti fiscali ha identificato piccoli archivi, anche se ormai solo virtuali. Analogamente in Vandorpe-Waebens 2009, partic. pp. 53-79, le autrici hanno proceduto a collazionare tutti i documenti, ora dispersi, che in origine erano stati conservati come archivi di alcune famiglie di Pathyris, secondo un metodo definito di archeologia museale. 3 Un’estrema sintesi delle complesse ricostruzioni dei nuclei identificabili nell’insieme di circa 2.000 papiri che costituiscono il cosiddetto archivio di Zenone (meglio ‘archivi’ di Zenone) si può leggere nel volumetto altamente divulgativo, ma assai preciso di Clarysse -Vandorpe 1995, partic. p. 31.

246

degli scribi di Kerkeosiris4. In effetti credo si possa ormai ritenere assodato che la presenza di lettere o pro-memoria o conti di sicuro carattere privato, non sia inconciliabile con accorpamenti pubblici da parte dei titolari di cariche, sia di rango elevato sia di livello anche molto modesto5. In questa sede perciò vorrei affrontare il tema della titolarità di un archivio, cioè di un insieme di documenti deliberatamente raccolti e conservati in antico, verificando proprio alcuni casi di raccolte legate alla realtà amministrativa che sono state, per comodità o per fretta, attribuite a personaggi, i quali difficilmente invece ne sono stati i titolari o i responsabili. Lo scopo è proprio quello di dimostrare come la natura dei cartonnages, prodotti con materiali di scarto, abbia invece enfatizzato le caratteristiche dell’amministrazione tolemaica fissandola proprio nella sola fase finale, nel momento in cui l’oggetto del suo intervento non aveva più ragione di essere, anzi nel momento in cui i documenti diventavano ormai superflui, e sottolineare la necessità di porsi alcune domande, meno frequenti finora, ma indispensabili se si vogliono interpretare correttamente certi testi. Preliminarmente poi vorrei anche chiarire che è inoltre fondamentale cercare di attribuire una più corretta identità diplomatica a testi che sovente sono frettolosamente definiti “malacopie” o “minute” (drafts), piuttosto che, più semplicemente, “copie”, solo sulla base di una maggiore o minore eleganza calligrafica o correttezza ortografica nella loro stesura. Come si è detto, l’aggregazione di testi sotto la denominazione “archivio di” è stata infatti fondamentale non solo per orientarsi più facilmente tra i testi e all’interno di gruppi di essi, ma anche per analizzare i processi amministrativi. Tuttavia dopo questo primo passo è ora indispensabile operare un’analisi più accurata sotto il profilo diplomatico per verificare la correttezza delle definizioni e di conseguenza la corretta interpretazione ultima dei documenti: in sostanza, per ripercorrere più esattamente il procedimento e la trafila dell’amministrazione. È evidente infatti che se si considerano certi testi come prodotti diretti di un determinato autore, piuttosto che

4 Verhoogt 1998, pp. 24-32. Da quanto segue potrebbe essere utile in futuro un’ulteriore riflessione anche sull’insieme di documenti provenienti dai cartonnages trovati a Tebtynis da Grenfell e Hunt, molti dei quali, come quelli relativi ad Ossirinca, sembrano nel complesso provenire più genericamente dall’ufficio/archivio di alcuni villaggi tout-court. 5 Cf. Van Beek 2007, p. 1039, che però propone una lettura di questi insiemi documentari misti a mio avviso un po’ riduttiva: «A rigid distinction between public and private c.q. family archive, however, is not possible; officials often kept part of their administrative papers when retiring from office, merging them with their private correspondence». Una tale ricostruzione, peraltro non dimostrata (si potrebbe altrettanto plausibilmente sostenere che erano le carte private ad essere finite insieme a quelle pubbliche), comporta una valutazione dell’amministrazione tolemaica come di un sistema quasi dilettantistico, in cui da una parte ognuno poteva portarsi via i documenti, dall’altra ciascun singolo funzionario, detentore di un ufficio anche nel villaggio più piccolo, faceva fronte ai propri impegni a casa propria, anche senza avere a disposizione le carte necessarie lasciate dal predecessore.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio ...

247

copie di un altro, se ne può modificare la funzione o il significato6. Il fatto stesso che un documento pubblico possa essere stato conservato anche per decenni dopo la sua redazione comporta inevitabilmente la necessità di valutarne il perché, sia rispetto ai doveri che ogni funzionario doveva adempiere, sia rispetto alle forme di controllo che lo stato evidentemente poteva attuare. Per contro, la convinzione che un funzionario al termine del proprio mandato potesse portare via i documenti relativi al suo incarico, dà della dimensione amministrativa ellenistica un’immagine piuttosto approssimativa e quasi amatoriale e rappresenta un’oggettiva contraddizione con quanto sopra osservato. Vorrei pertanto soffermarmi su alcuni casi a mio avviso significativi e cogliere l’occasione per ringraziare pubblicamente i responsabili e i collaboratori delle iniziative che ci consentono questi ulteriori studi, vale a dire in particolare papyri.info (http://www.papyri.info/), e tutte le piattaforme di database, ormai ricchissime di testi e anche di immagini7. Il problema di partenza risiede nella scelta dell’espressione “malacopia” abitualmente utilizzata per connotare testi nei quali siano presenti errori, e soprattutto cancellature, soprascritture, correzioni. Questa parola però comporta due conseguenze: la prima è che attribuisce a chi scrive, implicitamente ed automaticamente, la qualifica di ‘primo autore’ del testo stesso, e la seconda è che non sempre è possibile giustificare il legame tra due testi, quando, come spesso avviene, la ‘malacopia’ si trovi insieme (e particolarmente sul verso) ad un testo diverso. Per le “copie” invece, il problema si affronta solo in quanto si conosca o si deduca l’esistenza di un testo assolutamente uguale ad un originale di partenza: per esempio dalla menzione in una petizione di altre copie della richiesta inviate a funzionari diversi, oppure dalla presenza o riferimento sullo stesso foglio di un altro testo chiamato “antigraphon” (“ti mando la copia della lettera che X ha inviato ecc.”). In quest’ultimo caso si può parlare naturalmente di “copia d’ufficio”, ovvero di una redazione che riproduceva, a cura di terzi, un originale, senza l’intervento o la consapevolezza, e forse nemmeno il consenso, dell’autore. Come si è detto i cartonnages spesso hanno restituito testi che per le modalità di scrittura sono stati considerati come “malacopie”, ma che ad un più approfondito esame, dovrebbero essere considerati invece come “copie d’ufficio”, cioè antigrapha, realizzati a cura di grammateis e per scopi di carattere burocratico.

6 Per fare un esempio abbastanza banale: la famosa “lettera di istruzioni” di un dieceta ad un economo, P. Tebt. III, 703, giustamente definita “copy”, iscritta sul recto e sul verso di un papiro frammentario, ben difficilmente sarà stata quella redatta ad Alessandria per l’economo dell’Arsinoite, sebbene ovviamente il suo contenuto riporti quel testo. La scrittura e la stessa impaginazione sui due lati del rotolo fanno piuttosto supporre che essa sia stata ri-copiata in un ufficio periferico o per un ufficio periferico, ad uso anche di altri funzionari. 7 Un particolare ringraziamento devo anche a Todd Hickey, conservatore della collezione della Bancroft Library, per la cortesia, e la tempestività con cui, nel momento in cui predisponevo la prima versione di questo contributo, ha provveduto ad inviarmi le immagini di alcuni papiri di Tebtynis non immediatamente accessibili.

248

La necessità di affrontare questo aspetto dell’interpretazione dei documenti è sorta e si è presentata con evidenza allorché ho pubblicato gli ultimi papiri denominati P. Med. Barelli che la prof. Orsolina Montevecchi mi aveva assegnato8. L’insieme era stato acquistato alla fine degli anni ’70 del secolo scorso ed era stato denominato, forse addirittura dallo stesso venditore, come archivio di Pankrates. A mia conoscenza tutti coloro ai quali la Montevecchi affidò la pubblicazione partirono dal presupposto sottolineato dalla studiosa che i testi fossero «forse in origine incollati l’uno appresso all’altro a formare un rotolo»9. La frequente menzione di Pankrates, un oJ pro;~ th`~ suntavxei attivo intorno alla metà del II secolo a.C., come destinatario contribuì a orientare la comune opinione verso l’ipotesi di trovarsi di fronte ai documenti raccolti nel suo ufficio. Ad essi inoltre si dovevano aggiungere alcuni altri documenti frammentari conservati nella collezione di Lille e pubblicati all’incirca negli stessi anni da Boyaval10. I papiri più ampi e leggibili sono stati ormai tutti editi11. Ne restano forse due o tre di una consistenza apprezzabile, oltre a numerosi altri testi più frammentari, che però continuano ad attendere un’edizione, anche sommaria. Dei papiri da me letti due erano petizioni di un medesimo personaggio di nome Ptolemaios a Pankrates12, quasi a confermare la tesi che appartenessero al suo archivio. A proposito del primo caso però, un documento iscritto solo sul recto, osservavo: «in apparenza sembra trattarsi di una minuta per l’assenza della data, che però potrebbe essere andata perduta nella parte mancante del papiro»13; di essa però esisteva anche l’inizio di una copia, apparentemente della stessa mano, con un vistoso errore proprio nel nome del funzionario (Pegravtei, P. Med.Bar. 10, l. 1 = SB 18, 13096). Era anche questa una malacopia, dato il marchiano errore? Nel secondo caso invece mi trovai di fronte ad una realtà più complessa: il protagonista della petizione scritta sul recto, il cleruco Ptolemaios, compariva infatti, a proposito della stessa questione, anche in altri 2 documenti del cosiddetto archivio, scritti rispettivamente sul recto e sul verso di un altro papiro, e probabilmente era autore anche di una terza petizione14. Un altro elemento che pareva confermare l’identificazione dell’ufficio di Pankrates come luogo di destinazione e dunque di raccolta dei papiri era

8 Si tratta dei papiri editi in Criscuolo 2004, che concludono la pubblicazione dei testi più estesi tra quelli di questo gruppo acquistati dall’Università Cattolica. 9

Montevecchi 1981, p. 251.

10 Boyaval 1988, p. 105 e nota 2, con bibliografia precedente. 11 Si veda la lista in Criscuolo 2004, nota *. 12 SB 18, 13095 e P. Med. Bar. 3 recto in Criscuolo 2004. 13 Cf. l’editio princeps in «Aegyptus», 66, 1986, p. 24. 14 Si tratta di SB 16, 12721 (P. Med. Bar. 2v), petizione ad Apollodoro, epistates e grammateus dei cavalieri catecici, e dell’ancora inedito P. Med. Bar. 2r, petizione sempre a Pankrates. A questi documenti rinviava anche l’editrice di P. Med. Bar. 3v, SB 18, 13097, petizione di cui però manca il prescritto con l’indirizzo e il nome dell’autore.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio ...

249

che la mano di tutti questi documenti era la stessa15: il cleruco aveva evidentemente tempestato di missive Pankrates, che diligentemente le aveva conservate. Dunque che dubbi possono esserci su questa ricostruzione? A dire la verità molti: anzitutto uno dei documenti in questione, SB 16, 12721, iscritto sul verso di una petizione a Pankrates, non era indirizzato a Pankrates ma ad un epistates di nome Apollodoro. Certo Ptolemaios poteva aver copiato per Pankrates anche la petizione inviata ad un altro funzionario, ma come spiegare la sciatteria, pur nella correttezza grammaticale e sintattica, con cui entrambi i documenti erano stati scritti16? La risposta veniva in realtà da un altro testo dell’archivio, il P. Med. Bar. 14 = SB 16, 12722, la lettera accompagnatoria di Pankrates ad un certo Petesouchos, sfortunatamente un personaggio ignoto, che diceva “Ti abbiamo inviato la copia dell’hypomnema consegnato a noi da Ptolemaios…”. Certo gli hypomnemata erano stati più di uno17, ma evidentemente l’ultimo destinatario di questi papiri non era stato Pankrates e la mano che aveva scritto i testi che noi leggiamo non era quella di Ptolemaios, ma di uno scriba dell’ufficio dell’ oJ pro;~ th`~ suntavxei. Questo però poteva spiegare assai meglio perché nel cosiddetto archivio accanto a queste petizioni indirizzate a Pankrates e a documenti in cui egli veniva menzionato, ci fossero testi per contenuto totalmente estranei all’ufficio di questo funzionario militare: non era lui che aveva conservato i papiri e non era da lui che i papiri erano stati eliminati per finire in cartonnages, ma da coloro che li avevano ricevuti in copia, presumibilmente cioè i funzionari locali del villaggio che, questo sì, compare direttamente o indirettamente, in tutti i testi: Ossirinca. Ecco perché già nell’edizione del P. Med. Bar. 3r proposi di non considerare più come ‘minute’ i documenti, solo perché apparivano iscritti affrettatamente, con poca cura, e spesso utilizzando abbreviazioni proprio per le denominazioni dei funzionari, ed ecco perché soprattutto suggerii di identificare come luogo ultimo di raccolta proprio un ufficio di Ossirinca, una sede amministrativa di più funzionari con competenza su quel villaggio e su quelli ad esso collegati18. Alla luce di queste considerazioni può essere interessante saggiare, per casi

15 Cf. anche nell’editio princeps di SB 18, 13097, in «Aegyptus», 66, 1986, p. 31. 16 Sciatteria che naturalmente ha condotto a definire il papiro già edito, cioè il verso, come “abbozzo di una petizione”, cf. editio princeps in «Aegyptus», 63, 1983, p. 18. 17 Cf. sicuramente SB 18, 13095, P. Med. Bar. 3 recto in Criscuolo 2004, P. Med. Bar. 2r ined.; a cui forse si può aggiungere SB 18, 13097. 18 Cf. Criscuolo 2004, p. 11; ad una conclusione simile è giunto anche Clarysse 2008, p. 65, ma con Clarysse non sono d’accordo che ci fosse più di un ufficio per ciascun villaggio (per esempio un ufficio dei basilikoi georgoi, ibid., p. 68) ai quali tornavano in copia, da altri uffici per lo più di livello superiore, i documenti che da lì erano partiti, come le petizioni di singoli, o che ad esso erano relativi; penso che ci fosse una sede unica per le carte di tutti i funzionari di villaggio, e che da lì i fogli di papiri, forse dopo parecchi anni, venissero prelevati per finire nei cartonnages. Di recente, cf. Jördens 2008, è stata data notizia di un archivio, da cartonnage, relativo a Busiris che parrebbe, pur dalla sommaria descrizione, rappresentare una situazione abbastanza simile, con petizioni indirizzate a differenti funzionari del villaggio.

250

simili, se le descrizioni di papiri definiti come “malacopie” (drafts) possano corrispondere effettivamente a minute, e verificare le attribuzioni che sono state date ad archivi, quando i testi provengano da cartonnages: come si vedrà in qualche caso ci sono molte ragioni per rivedere queste definizioni o attribuzioni. Un caso piuttosto curioso è per esempio quello dell’archivio di Philô: si tratta di 4 papiri, i P. Koeln 5, 222-225, tutti collegati a questa donna, vedova di Hexakon, un amministratore della dorea di Galestes nell’Herakleopolites, anche in questo caso, come per i documenti di Pankrates, alla fine degli anni ’40 del II secolo19. Il fatto che tutti e 4 siano iscritti sul verso di papiri che non hanno altri testi iscritti sul recto, se non a volte “tracce di lettere” (probabile indizio del lavaggio), di per sé potrebbe trovare giustificazione proprio nella conservazione di copie per uso personale all’interno della famiglia di Philô. Ma solo il P. Koeln. 5, 223 è la petizione di Philô al dieceta (e tra l’altro non si tratta decisamente di una minuta, a meno di non considerare Philô come una scriba di alta professionalità), mentre gli altri tre sono chiaramente testi d’ufficio che la nominano e fanno riferimento alla sua situazione fiscale: come mai allora sarebbero arrivati tra le sue carte? Quanto prima osservato per i testi di Pankrates, penso sia utile anche qui: i documenti sono sì relativi alla questione sollevata da Philô, ma non sono mai stati tra le sue carte. Essi, copiati in uffici differenti (uno, il P. Koeln 5, 222, probabilmente proprio in quello del dieceta), sono poi stati messi insieme in quello del villaggio di riferimento, dal funzionario o dai funzionari che dovevano procedere all’applicazione di quanto deciso dalle autorità superiori. Analogamente, anche un altro piccolo gruppo di “malacopie” (drafts) che contengono lettere a funzionari, si può prestare a qualche osservazione. P.Tebt. 3, 732, 733 e 734 infatti sono stati tracciati, secondo gli editori, dalla stessa mano sul verso di altri documenti20 e sono indirizzati rispettivamente al dieceta Sarapion, all’epimelete Apollonios e di nuovo a questi (P. Tebt. 3, 734, fr. 1) e al suo successore Ptolemaios (P. Tebt. 3, 734, fr. 2), attivi nell’Arsinoites alla fine degli anni ’40 del II secolo e attestati da documenti rinvenuti sempre nei cartonnages di Tebtynis21. Anche questi papiri provengono dai cartonnages rinvenuti a Tebtynis, e in particolare dalla medesima mummia di coccodrillo n. 26. Da questa stessa viene inoltre P. Tebt. 3, 735, un resoconto di arretrati dovuti nel villaggio di

19 Per la figura di Galestes come detentore della dorea menzionata nei papiri cf. Criscuolo 1986; sull’archivio, per il quale già si prospetta un’attribuzione non imperniata sulla figura di Philô, vd. ora il sito http://www.trismegistos.org/arch/archives/pdf/265.pdf. Inoltre le fotografie dei 4 papiri sono ora accessibili nel sito http://www.uni-koeln.de/phil-fak/ifa/NRWakademie/papyrologie/Karte/band5.html. 20 Riproduzioni fotografiche, di quasi tutti i papiri editi e dei loro recto, sono consultabili direttamente da www.papyri.info; i testi, nella descrizione degli editori , «are closely connected, being draft reports on various subjects to superior officials, hastily written in the same rather coarse hand on the back of other documents». 21 Cf. Sarapion, Pros. Ptol. I, 46 e VIII, 46; Apollonios, Pros. Ptol. I, 935 e VIII, 935; Ptolemaios, Pros. Ptol. I, 955.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio ...

251

Areos Kome, parimenti indirizzato all’epimelete Apollonio, ugualmente definito come “draft”, ma scritto sul recto di un papiro precedentemente già utilizzato e lavato per essere scritto nuovamente. Sebbene gli editori non abbiano fatto osservazioni in merito, la fotografia permette di constatare che la scrittura è del tutto simile a quella dei tre verso ai numeri precedenti, come pure la particolare forma di abbreviazione del titolo di Apollonios22 . Il fatto di essere scritti su papiri nel loro secondo utilizzo ha portato a considerarli come “malacopie”, prime stesure di testi che avrebbero ricevuto una redazione più decorosa e corretta. Ma restano aperti due interrogativi: chi fu l’autore di queste “malacopie” e sono veramente “malacopie”? P. Tebt 3, 732 ha sul recto un documento inedito. Di questo si sa però che vi si menzionava un raccolto e una distribuzione di viveri. P. Tebt. 3, 733 ha sul recto invece il n. 956 (inedito descritto), un’altra richiesta o lettera, concernente forse un appalto, che si conclude in calce con la richiesta di fare indagini indirizzata forse ad un basilicogrammateo, che però dovrebbe essere stato in carica nell’Herakleopolites, nonché con l‘ordine impartito, forse ad un subordinato, di copiarla23. Infine P. Tebt. 3, 734 ha come recto il n. 1007 (inedito descritto), un testo assai frammentario concernente sementi, forse un conto che però menziona due villaggi della meris di Themistos. Il tenore delle 4 lettere ad epimeleti, P. Tebt. 3, 733, 734 (fr. 1 e 2) e 735, oltre ai testi nei recto, fa pensare ad un funzionario al livello di nomo che si rivolge ad un suo collega, epimelete. Gli editori ipotizzarono un basilicogrammateo24, si potrebbe proporre anche un economo, ma il vero problema è se i 4 testi siano veramente malacopie stilate dal basilicogrammateo o dall’economo, ovvero nel loro ufficio. Anzitutto le forme di indirizzo non corrispondono al modo con cui ci si rivolge tra funzionari, soprattutto se parigrado: solitamente infatti nella forma epistolare non si riporta il titolo, oppure, negli hypomnemata, il titolo compare in forma completa e soprattutto corredato dalla titolatura aulica, che qui manca completamente. È vero che in una malacopia non è detto che si rispetti del tutto quanto poi si scriverà nel testo definitivo, ma è comunque un dato significativo, dal momento che è costante. C’è infatti un’annotazione in testa al fr. 1 di P. Tebt. 3, 734 che, in questa forma, suscita qualche dubbio25: ajn(eivlhptai?) (e[tou~) kq Pac(w;n) h, “ricevuta l’8 di Pachon dell’anno 29”. Ma

22 A onor del vero in quest’ultimo papiro la prima linea, in cui ci sarebbe l’indirizzo con il nome del funzionario e il titolo, è attualmente del tutto illeggibile, e solo pallidamente, conoscendo la trascrizione, si può scorgere forse la sopralineatura della my con cui questo scriba abbreviava il titolo di ejp(i)m(elhthv~). 23 Cf. ll. 14-15: JAronnwvfrei. ]•KYW•KV•[on]. 7•X(C bi) L•a• {Wrwi. DMQW•L•YJU•(• ayai(?)). 7•X(C bi) i~. Secondo gli editori Aronnophris potrebbe essere il basilicogrammateo dell’Herakleopolites. 24 Peraltro il contenuto dei recto, si adatta molto bene anche ad un ufficio di funzionari legati all’amministrazione dei monopoli, come l’economo o, appunto, l’epimelete. 25 La foto non consente di vedervi una seconda mano, come riportato in www.papyri.info, né gli editori hanno fatto questa affermazione. La mano a mio avviso è la stessa, solo le dimensioni delle lettere sono assai più piccole.

252

perché si dovrebbe fare una simile annotazione su una malacopia? E perché concludere questa malacopia con un’altra annotazione abbreviata: “uJp(evtaxa) th;n ejp(istolhvn)”, “ho allegato la lettera”? Mi pare dunque che si possa dare un’interpretazione diversa di questi documenti. Si tratta piuttosto di ‘copie d’ufficio’ predisposte per conservare memoria di quanto era stato inviato, per le quali era importante mantenere l’indicazione anche abbreviata, sia dei destinatari, sia, come nel P.Tebt. 3, 734, degli eventuali allegati che avevano accompagnato l’invio. In tal caso l’annotazione in testa al P.Tebt. 3, 734 potrebbe forse essere interpretato come “ajn(tivgrafon)” oppure ancor meglio “ajn(evgnwstai26)”. E di ‘copie d’ufficio’ (questa volta presumibilmente allegate ad accompagnatorie e forse ritornate ad un ufficio periferico) si tratta per i due documenti che hanno reso possibile la ricostruzione dell’enteuxis di un basilikos georgos di Ossirinca, P. Tebt. 3, 771, di cui appunto sono state trovate nel cartonnage di provenienza due versioni danneggiate, ma integrabili: l’una tracciata con una scrittura estremamente elegante, accurata, quasi libraria e con un’impaginazione perfetta, l’altra scorrevole e sicura, ma decisamente assai meno curata. Un altro articolato insieme di documenti da cartonnage è quello che viene comunemente ascritto al basilicogrammateo dell’Herakleopolites Dionysios, documenti conservati principalmente ad Heidelberg e nella collezione dell’Università Cattolica di Milano. Mentre il primo gruppo è stato pubblicato recentemente nel volume IX della raccolta dei P. Heid. con il titolo Papyri aus dem Archiv des königlichen Schreibers Dionysios, il piccolo nucleo di Milano resta sostanzialmente inedito. Tuttavia da una rapidissima ricognizione a questo gruppo ho potuto constatare almeno un dato interessante27, e cioè che su 46 frammenti, alcuni molto piccoli, di documenti in gran parte amministrativi, 17 risultano scritti sul verso di testi che non hanno più scrittura sul recto28, il che corrisponde a più di un terzo circa: una percentuale piuttosto alta, che potrebbe trovare la sua giustificazione proprio nella pratica di redigere copie su documenti inutili o resi inutilizzabili, come nel caso dei documenti di Philô. Ma già i papiri della raccolta di Heidelberg presentano una casistica notevole: alcuni di essi infatti sono chiaramente indirizzati al basilicogrammateo Dionysios, altri fatti pervenire a lui già in copia

26 Cf. l’annotazione che compare oltre che in P. Heid. IX, 425, 428, anche in P. Berl. Salmen. 1012 e 15, 17; P. Mert. 2, 59; P. Ryl. 2, 65, UPZ I, 118. 27 Ringrazio la prof. Carla Balconi che mi ha concesso di vedere gli originali. Ho potuto quindi ispezionare i papiri che però sono ancora nella stessa situazione in cui si trovavano al momento dell’acquisto, cioè appoggiati a cartone, sotto plexiglas. Non è stato possibile quindi verificare il lato opposto di quello visibile, presumibilmente privo di scrittura. Solo tre documenti del gruppo sono finora stati editi, SB 22, 15213; 24, 15896 e P. Sijp. 10a. Sull’insieme dei testi vd. Daris 1995. 28 Solitamente nel caso i papiri avessero testo su entrambi i lati, venivano venduti in modo che fosse visibile, quindi dato che tutti questi sono appoggiati su cartoncino bianco non dovrebbero avere testo apprezzabile: va da sé che sarebbe auspicabile poter verificare se erano comunque stati utilizzati.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio ...

253

per conoscenza, e conservati, talora dopo essere stati a loro volta inoltrati ad altri funzionari29. In questi casi si tratta veramente di copie effettuate per l’uso del basilicogrammateo, come riferimento delle questioni sbrigate30. È interessante che spesso compaia, in calce ad una copia di testo di inoltro, anche l’indicazione degli altri funzionari ai quali doveva essere inviata una copia, o comunque notizia, dell’affare in questione31: ciò consente di avere un’idea ragionevolmente fondata sulla dimensione della produzione documentale che gli uffici tolemaici realizzavano: per esempio per ciascuno dei casi illustrati dai documenti che partivano da petizioni di singoli, si possono calcolare almeno altre 4 copie, inclusa quella conservata dall’ufficio, cioè tre altri funzionari (per esempio, lo stratego, l’epistates e l’archiphylakites). Se poi ciascuno degli altri funzionari a sua volta riproduceva almeno una volta lo stesso testo e come minimo dava riscontro o assenso al basilicogrammateo, si può arrivare facilmente ad un numero tra i 10 e i 20 testi che venivano generati dal sistema32. Naturalmente una revisione completa di tutta la documentazione proveniente da cartonnage, nella quale siano individuabili nuclei omogenei di testi pertinenti agli stessi funzionari o villaggi, potrebbe fornire ancora altri esempi delle pratiche d’ufficio, sia per quanto concerne le annotazioni, particolarmente attente alla cronologia dei documenti oltre che alla definizione dei contenuti, sia sulle modalità di espletamento delle pratiche, e consentirebbe forse di collocare anche meglio, nella filiera burocratica, alcuni di questi piccoli archivi. Per il momento in questa sede mi pare ci si debba limitare a due principali conclusioni. La prima è che la convinzione secondo la quale un documento pubblico e redatto da scribi fosse prodotto secondo alti standard professionali (senza cancellature, ripensamenti, correzioni ecc.) e debba essere valutato perciò come i documenti delle amministrazioni pubbliche moderne, va rivista, almeno per quanto concerne l’amministrazione a livello di nomo o più in basso. Gli scribi degli uffici avevano sicuramente una buona manualità e, sovente, una certa sicurezza nell’indicare anche con abbreviazioni e sintesi, aspetti più formulari, peraltro facilmente leggibili, ma non avevano nessuno scrupolo a correggere, aggiungere, cancellare testi perfino se questi venivano poi spediti al di fuori del proprio ufficio. Non basta perciò che un papiro si presenti sciatto o pieno di correzioni per considerarlo una ‘malacopia’.

29 Per esempio P. Heid. IX, 422, 423, 425, 431 in cui Dionysios è indicato come diretto destinatario, o 428 in cui invece si fa solo allusione, in testi indirizzati ad altri funzionari, a notifiche ricevute. 30 Così li interpreta l’editrice, P. Heid. IX, pp. 5 ss. 31 Cf. P. Heid. IX, 423, ll.23-24; 431, ll. 37-41. 32 Una serie di copie di documenti partiti dall’ufficio di un basilicogrammateo è stata identificata nei P. Berl. Salmen. 10-17, datati al I secolo a.C., che offrono anche alcuni aspetti diplomatici piuttosto simili a quelli dell’ufficio del basilicogrammateo Dionysios.

254

La seconda conclusione è che la produzione e l’archiviazione di documenti in copia (propria o altrui) è probabilmente un fenomeno più frequente e diffuso di quanto finora non si sia considerato nella ricostruzione dei processi amministrativi; questa pratica è stata spesso attribuita piuttosto agli utenti (autori di petizioni, coltivatori, contribuenti ecc.), mentre, come si è visto, molte di queste copie venivano predisposte all’interno degli uffici. Questo fenomeno per contro può complicare l’identificazione dell’ultima destinazione di un documento e quindi dell’archivio da cui ci è arrivato, che non necessariamente coincideva con quelli dei personaggi che compaiono al suo interno.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio ...

255

Bibliografia

Boyaval 1988 B. Boyaval, Papyrus ptolémaïque de Lille, «CRIPEL», 10, 1988, pp. 105-111. Clarysse 2008 W. Clarysse, Graeco-Roman Oxyrhyncha, A Village in the Arsinoite Nome, in: Graeco-Roman Fayum - Texts and Archaeology. Proceedings of the Third International Fayum Symposion, Freudenstadt, May 29 - June 1, 2007, edd. S. Lippert-M. Schentuleit, Wiesbaden 2008, pp. 55-73, 7 tabl., 1 fig., 1 carte. Clarysse 2010 W. Clarysse, Bilingual Papyrological Archives, in: The Multilingual Experience in Egypt, from the Ptolemies to the Abbasids, ed. A. Papacostantinou, Farnham 2010, pp. 47-72, 8 diagrammes, 2 figg. Clarysse-Criscuolo 2005 W. Clarysse-L. Criscuolo, Two Petitions in the Archive of Pankrates, «ZPE», 153, 2005, p. 168. Clarysse-Vandorpe 1995 W. Clarysse-K. Vandorpe, Zénon, un homme d’affaires grec à l’ombre des pyramides, Louvain 1995. Criscuolo 1986 L. Criscuolo, L’archivio di Philô (P.Köln V, 222-225) e la confisca dei beni di Galestes l’Atamano (Diod. XXXIII,20), «ZPE», 64, 1986, pp. 83-86. Criscuolo 2004 L. Criscuolo, Papiri tolemaici dell’Università Cattolica di Milano (P. Med.Bar. 3 recto, 8 recto), «Simblos» 4, 2004, pp. 7-23. Daris 1995 S. Daris, La serie P. Med.inv. 90.14-90.60, «Aegyptus», 75, 1995, pp. 17-25.

Heilporn 2009 P. Heilporn, Thèbes et ses taxes. Recherches sur la fiscalité en Égypte romaine (Ostraca de Strasbourg II), Paris 2009. Jördens 2001 A. Jördens, Papyri und private Archive. Ein Diskussionsbeitrag zur papyrologischen Terminologie, in: Symposion 1997, edd. E. Cantarella-G. Thür, KölnWeimar-Wien 2001, pp. 253-268. Jördens 2008 A. Jördens, Neue Texte aus der ptolemäische Dorfverwaltung. Ein bilingues Archiv aus Busiris, in: Graeco-Roman Fayum - Texts and Archaeology. Proceedings of the Third International Fayum Symposion, Freudenstadt, May 29-June 1, 2007, edd. S. Lippert-M. Schentuleit, Wiesbaden 2008, pp. 143-152. Martin 1994 A. Martin, Archives privées et cachettes documentaires, in: Proceedings of the 20th International Congress of Papyrologists, Copenhagen, 23-29 August 1992, ed. A. BülowJacobsen, Copenhagen 1994, pp. 569-577. Montevecchi 1981 O. Montevecchi, Un nuovo archivio papiraceo, in: Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Congress of Papyrology, New York, 24-31 July 1980, edd. R. Bagnall et al., Chico 1981, pp. 251-258. Muhs 2010 B. Muhs, A Late Ptolemaic Grapheion Archive in Berkeley, in: Proceedings of the 25th International Congress of Papyrology, Ann Arbor, July 29-August 4, 2007, edd. T. Gagos et al., Ann Arbor 2010, pp. 581-588.

256

Pestman 19902 P.W. Pestman, The New Papyrological Primer, Leiden 19902. Pestman 1995 P.W. Pestman, A Family Archive which Changes History, in: Hundred-Gated Thebes. Acts of a Colloquium on Thebes and the Theban Area in the Graeco-Roman Period, ed. S.P. Vleeming, Leiden 1995, pp. 91-100. Scheuble 2010 S. Scheuble, Quittung für Grapheiongebühren (grammatikav) (P.UB Trier S 78-12), «APF», 56/1, 2010, pp. 51-58. Van Beek 2007 B. Van Beek, Ancient Archives and Modern Collections. The Leuven Homepage of Papyrus Archives and Collections, in: Proceedings of the 24th International Congress of Papyrology, Helsinki, 1-7 August 2004, edd. J. Frösén et al., Helsinki 2007, pp. 1033-1044. Vandorpe 2009 K. Vandorpe, Archives and Dossiers, in: The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology, ed. R. Bagnall, Oxford 2009, pp. 216-255. Vandorpe-Waebens 2009 K. Vandorpe-S. Waebens, Reconstructing Pathyris Archives. A Multicultural Community in Hellenistic Egypt, Brussel 2009. Verhoogt 1998 A.M.F.W. Verhoogt, Menches, Komogrammateus of Kerkeosiris. The Doings and Dealings of a Village Scribe in the Late Ptolemaic Period (120-110 B.C.), Leiden 1998.

Copie, malacopie, copie d’ufficio …

257

Reflections on Reconstructing Private and Official Archives

mark depauw

The three papers in this session have covered very diverging aspects of archives and archive keeping, from found to reconstructed, from private to official, from original (in the sense of the archive document itself) to copy (in the widest sense of the word, including ‘publication’). Ingo Kottsieper has presented us some examples of private archives, which, as he has convincingly demonstrated, deal with very specific private matters. Rather than just ‘general papers’ they turn out to be collections of documents relevant for a legal problem of their owner. This problem often concerns money and property, of course. Thus we have seen the documents selected by Jedanja to prove that everything he inherited from his parents really belonged to him; or the couple Anani and Jehoišhma, for whom documents proving the legal status of the woman were an essential part of the archive, again because they could prove her right to possess property. The two cases illustrate nicely that it is essential for the study of a private archive to reconstruct the last owner, i.e. the person for whom the documents have meaning and legal value. It is in fact only when the last owner is identified by the historian (or philologist) that everything suddenly ‘fits’: one could compare it with a detective story which features a great multitude of clues. These clues do not actually make sense until the proverbial Hercule Poirot (a Belgian!) gathers everyone at the end of the book and in a lengthy exposé informs

reflections on reconstructing private and official archives

259

everyone who is the killer and why. As a matter of fact, there are more similarities between the detective and the scholar in this case: they also face similar problems in identifying what is evidence and what is not. It is clear from Kottsieper’s survey that identifying which documents are part of the archive and which are not is often problematic. In fact, this question runs parallel with the identification of the owner and purpose of the archive, just like the metamorphosis of a fact into a clue is essential when a detective determines who did it and why. This brings us to the longstanding discussion of the definition of an archive, 1 which was briefly touched upon by Lucia Criscuolo: ‘What is an archive? What is a dossier? Should we study one or the other?’. Here I think – and I hope to please everyone by saying this – that everyone is right. Of course a historian should use all available evidence when reconstructing a historical fact, and thus dossiers are essential. But on the other hand Kottsieper’s and Criscuolo’s papers have illustrated once more that reconstructing an archive – with its (last) owner and its ‘raison d’être’ – can give us a much deeper insight. In this case the archive suddenly becomes ‘alive’, and a ‘tranche de vie’ appears before us. Reconstructing such a collection of documents is often difficult. In the ideal situation the set is found during official excavations, nicely wrapped and otherwise protected, with perfectly preserved texts. This seems like an archival scholar’s wet dream, but once in a while it does in fact occur. Thus the Demotic archive of Totoes was found in Deir el-Medina as the content of two sealed jars. 2 Second best is the case of the archive now kept in Brussels, purchased in the early 70ies, with papyri still wrapped in linen. 3 A package with three large contracts concerning the sale of a specific house by a woman called Setjairetbinet alias Taba, and two packages with smaller documents, some of which concern the same sale transaction. Yet other of the smaller documents deal with very different matters by a necropolis worker called Djedher. In fact, it is only because we know from other sources that these two people were married and had children that we know this must be their private archive. The collection of papers only then makes sense. But even in this case, where we have ample background information, questions remain: thus the business papers of the husband do not form a coherent whole: they seem entirely unrelated to each other and to his wife’s papers recording the sale transaction. If we did not have the physical evidence that they belong together, scholars no doubt would have refrained from reconstructing them into a single archive. In this case, even with the physical evidence little ‘sense’ can apparently be made of this part of the archive. Why would a busy businessman

1 For a recent survey of the discussion and the terminology used, see Vandorpe 2009, esp. pp. 217-219. 2

Botti 1967, vol. 1, p. IX. See also Vandorpe 2009, p. 223.

3

Depauw 2000, pl. 1-5.

260

keep only a few receipts for different taxes and a letter apparently unrelated to it? It illustrates the inherent danger in reconstructing private archives which deal with a specific purpose, i.e. that scholars throw out other items because they do not fit in. In a way the scholar has to do this, because like the detective he needs a motive to solve the murder, and unrelated facts are useless to this purpose. But still the person who turned out to be guilty also had a life outside his crime. The writer of detective stories will not focus on that and perhaps even make abstraction of it entirely. But it was still there and may have left its traces. Even something that does not fit in can still be part of an archive. The Brussels archive is also interesting in precisely the opposite respect: i.e. the danger that documents which were physically not part of the archive but fitted in nicely are reconstructed as being part of the archive. Compare it to the detective who at the end finds the solution to the puzzle and identifies the killer, but suddenly sees clues everywhere, many of which may actually be facts totally unrelated to the crime. Paradoxically some of the facts which are not related to the crime – and are thus in a sense ‘false clues’ – can even help to solve the puzzle. 4 To come back to the concrete: the Brussels archive has been claimed by some to be incomplete in the sense that another document thought to be part of it was already known seventy years earlier, in casu the marriage contract of Setjairetbint and Djedher, known since 1900. 5 At first sight it seems inevitable that this item belongs to the archive, thus ruining its closed character and making the scholar wonder what other items may belong to it. But in fact a logical principle (reconstructed by Pestman on the basis of other archives) saves the integrity: a wife tends to keep her marriage contract, which contains commitments from her spouse, in a safe place where malignant husbands have no control over it, e.g. in the house of her parents or of other family members such as brothers. 6 This always reminds me of the novel The Quincunx by Charles Palliser, where the search for documents (the last will and a codicil modifying it) illustrates how important ownership of a document is in a system where claims were not centrally registered. Whoever owned a document could destroy it, thus effectively annihilating the claims and rights it contained. So in fact it is rather unlikely or actually very improbable that the marriage document was preserved in the Brussels archive after all. This again illustrates the importance of reconstructing an archive for the Sitz-im-Leben of the documents – and vice versa. What I have said so far relates mostly to private archives. But what about public archives? Are they similar? Or completely different? Well, first of all we must probably problematize the distinction private – public/official itself, at least to a

4 As William of Baskerville is led to the perpetrator by a false hypothesis in U. Eco, The Name of the Rose. 5

See e.g. Muhs 1996, p. 15 and n. 40, corrected in Muhs 2008, esp. pp. 38-39 n. 22 & 33.

6

See Pestman 1961, pp. 83-86; Muhs 2008, p. 38 n. 22; and Depauw 2000, p. 11.

reflections on reconstructing private and official archives

261

certain extent. It is true that everyone in antiquity – and each of us today – has a private side to his life and a public, ‘official’ one. We work as scholars for a university and everything which relates to our office is ‘official’. Yet we are also humans and our professional interaction is only one aspect of our social life. Often the two cannot be distinguished neatly in our lives, and we should probably not expect the ancients to be more ‘politically correct’ in this respect than we are. Perhaps letters in particular illustrate the problematic distinction between private and official: within a single letter people switch from business to official to private. So much so, that when my colleague Willy Clarysse urged me to make this distinction in my book on Demotic letters, 7 I tried but in the end decided against it. It is often almost impossible to draw the line (although it is good to try to draw it!). 8 For us, conflicts of the private and the official are often problematic and painful: imagine a hopeless student who turns out to be the son of a friend, or a judge who presides the trial of someone he knows very well. It is an interesting question whether in antiquity people were less strict in this. Probably hierarchy and ‘knowing someone’ were even more important than today – and caused less problems. A nice example of this mix of official and private, other than the Menches archive already mentioned by Criscuolo or the Nakhthor archive mentioned by Kottsieper, is the Zenon archive. Like the Aramaic Nakhthor archive, the Zenon archive includes the archive of Panakestor, his ‘official’ predecessor (as private manager!). But it also contains evidence for Zenon’s private business dealings ‘on the side’, which were probably not ‘illegal’ – and the term is very anachronistic here. Whether this lends the Ptolemaic administration something ‘approximative’ or even ‘amateuristic’ (in Criscuolo’s words) is an interesting question. An extra problem when dealing with official and public archives is that these apparently are far less likely to survive the tooth of time than their private counterparts. This is probably inherent to their nature: since they had to be public, they had to be in some way at least occasionally accessible to people who wanted to consult them, and thus could less easily be preserved in a safe place far away from every disturbance, surviving thousands of years. 9 In fact, with the exception of inscribed copies to which I will return later, in Egypt these more official archives indeed particularly seem to be preserved when they – paradoxically – were thrown away or recycled into mummy cartonnage.10 One can imagine the problems this gives for the scholar who wants to reconstruct their original Sitzim-Leben, as Criscuolo convincingly demonstrates: there are a lot of clues here,

7

Depauw 2006, pp. 106-109.

8

For a typology, see Vandorpe 2009, pp. 231-237.

9 It is instructive that most of the Demotic family archives preserved are those of undertakers and other necropolis workers, who have access to tombs to safeguard their papers! See Muhs 2008, esp. pp. 33-35. 10 See e.g. Cuvigny 2009, pp. 45-47.

262

but also a lot of suspects and no clear motive! One could even say that the scholar here is like a detective walking around in a battlefield, with bodies scattered everywhere: no wonder people get confused as to which crime they should investigate first. As a result people tend to group documents on the basis of similar names just as if they try to group bodies with similar wounds ... Criscuolo’s paper is somewhat of an antidote to this exclusively prosopographic approach. She presents documents which have long been considered drafts originally preserved in a private archive, but which are in her view ‘quick’ secondary copies for official purposes. In fact, she reconstructs not the archive of an official (Pankrates) or even a group of officials (such as the basilikoi grammateis of Areos Kome), but rather an official archive for all government officials in a particular locality. A similar study of the diplomatics of the documents involved, also shows the archive of Philo to be official rather than private, and again part of the village archive. That such archives did in fact exist, is also suggested by a set of documents which formed the subject of a paper at the congress of Demotic studies in Oxford in 2011. Cary Martin presented an impressive collection of rather large papyri with early Demotic letters which only recently appeared on the market. Although the texts are clearly letters starting with the appropriate epistolary formulae, there is something strange about them: they are written on large sheets, which is atypical for Demotic letters, something I had already noticed when I first saw the photographs. 11 But also, it turns out that on some sheets more than one letter is present, sent by different people but apparently written (or should I say copied) in the same hand. Here again it is an attractive hypothesis to suppose that these documents are copies which were part of an official archive, perhaps that of a village or town. As Criscuolo shows, examining the evidence very carefully can help to reconstruct the Sitz-im-Leben. It is not because a document is written in a rather careless hand and with spelling mistakes, that it has to be a preliminary draft written by the author. She shows how these drafts in some – and perhaps many - cases turn out to be rather the opposite: post-factum copies written by a third party for bureaucratic or archival purposes. Indeed this conclusion may warrant the reexamination of further archives to see whether the so-called drafts could not in fact be rather careless copies, e.g. for Demotic the archive of Hor or the archive of Medinet Madi, with the very long set of ostraca which has been identified by the editor Menchetti as a draft for a petition.12 Of course we should be very careful to abuse this new interpretation and let it become a panacea: no doubt we will find archives with drafts (all private?), just as others may turn out to be copies.

11 A photograph appeared in Pierre Bergé et associés. Vente aux enchères publiques Paris. Vente: Archéologie, Miniatures Orientales, Art de la Chine. Samedi 15 et Dimanche 16 octobre 2005, Paris 2005, pp. 92-93 no. 374. See www.trismegistos.org/text/105770 or Enchoria 29 (2004/2005), p. 156 no. 285 [DL 29.285]. 12 Ray 1976; Menchetti 2005.

reflections on reconstructing private and official archives

263

This raises the interesting question of standards of care (or quality control) in an archive. Indeed visual impact seems to be important in legal documents, at least in the original. Formal issues such as large format or careful layout enhance the appeal and thus probably also legal value of an agreement. A single mistake could apparently sometimes lead to the production of an entirely new copy (in the other English sense of the word this time).13 It may not be a coincidence that these formal aspects tend to become somewhat less important as the centralisation of evidence proceeds. Perhaps systematic registration and archive keeping by the authorities made it less important what the document looked like or indeed made ownership of documents less important. 14 On the other hand we should probably not underestimate the archive keeping of older societies. In the corridors of the Demotic congress I talked to Kim Ryholt about some recent research of his, and he pointed to archaeological evidence for large to very large official archives of documents, already in the Old Kingdom.15 It only makes us wonder how much there once used to be, but is now lost. The questions relating to standards of care and the no doubt immense amount of evidence which has disappeared in the course of time brings me to the third paper in this session, of Laura Boffo. She deals with what one could call ‘very’ official or ‘real public’ archives, which unfortunately are only known to us through extracts and copies (carefully executed this time) on stone. Her situation is not enviable. To continue my whodunnit-simile: she is a detective walking around on a battlefield where the bodies have long disappeared, and the only clue to the murder is a commemorative inscription at the entrance. Little hope of finding who is guilty of which crime here, but fascinating to see how big the battle must have been and why it took place ... To an Egyptologist it comes as no surprise that the king is present in these archives: in Egypt the pharaoh, like God, is everywhere (and probably knows everything), to such an extent that questioning his presence almost seems blasphemous. This of course is very different in Greece, where kings are what one could call with an oxymoron something of an atavistic novelty. Kings brought with them new types of documents which the archival administration in the poleis had to cope with. Here again money is important: fiscal obligations to the polis and to the king must have caused administrative problems. This is not very different in hellenistic Egypt, where similar distinctions between sacerdotal and royal taxes and perhaps military and royal taxes were made: it must have made life of officials

13 An example is P. Dem. Memphis 7 A-B (published in Martin et al 2009, pp. 145-152. See www.trismegistos.org/text/43705). 14 Compare Depauw 2012. 15 K. Ryholt, oral communication.

264

dealing with taxes in all these categories far from easy.16 Here also you see transfers from one category to the other and temporary exceptions, with all the discussions, conflicts and paperwork this entails. Expansions of the territory of the poleis may have caused similar problems, which may be compared to changes in borders of nomes in Egypt (e.g. because of the founding of a new city such as Antinoupolis), about which relatively little is known. But fiscality (taxes) was not the only area in which dealings with the king left their traces. Honours to the king and other expenses had to be paid, from a special account or not, and feasts for the royals could be registered officially, in ‘the holy book’ of each polis; royal priesthoods were created and corresponding lists were made; new tribes were created; etc.. Royal epistolography and royal diagrammata regarding all these matters entered the polis archives and changed legal life. Officials were now obliged to take both royal and polis legislation into account, and this may in many cases have been somewhat of a puzzle. Anglo-Saxon common law with its precedents spontaneously comes to mind. To make things even worse, royal dates were installed next to the local ones, probably another thing to keep track of. The administration probably stuck to the local calendar, but for correspondence with the king needed to keep track of the royal system. The debate about using BCE and CE instead of BC and AD illustrates how sensitive such symbols are, so no mistakes could be made here. On top of that long term commitments were demanded by king, and he could also ask for documents to be removed because privileges were revoked. Of course epigraphy is selective in what it preserves for eternity (or at least for long): favourable decisions are more likely to be inscribed than unfavourable ones, but they must also have been present in the archives. Although they only offer a glimpse, and not even an impartial one, these Greek inscriptions show us what there must once have been. So many crimes that scholars would never have had the time to solve them ...

16 For an introduction, see Falivene 2009, pp. 530-532.

reflections on reconstructing private and official archives

265

Bibliography

Botti 1967 G. Botti, L’archivio demotico da Deir el-Medineh (Catalogo del Museo Egizio di Torino. Serie Prima – Monumenti e Testi 1), Firenze 1967. Cuvigny 2009 H. Cuvigny, The Finds of Papyri: the Archaeology of Papyrology, in: R.S. Bagnall (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology, Oxford 2009, pp. 30-58. Depauw 2000 M. Depauw, The Archive of Teos and Thabis from Early Ptolemaic Thebes (P. Brux. dem. inv. E. 8252-8256) (Monographies Reine Élisabeth 8), Turnhout-Bruxelles 2000. Depauw 2006 M. Depauw, The Demotic Letter. A Study of Epistolographic Scribal Traditions against their Intraand Intercultural Background (Demotische Studien 14), Sommerhausen 2006. Depauw 2012 M. Depauw, The Evolution and Use of Demotic Contracts in Epistolary Form, in: U. Yiftach (ed.), The Letter: Law, State, Society and the Epistolary Format in the Ancient World Proceedings of a Colloquium held at the American Academy in Rome (28-30.9.2008) (Philippika: Marburger Altertumskundliche Abhandlungen), Wiesbaden 2013, forthcoming. Falivene 2009 M.R. Falivene, Geography and Administration in Egypt (332 BCE – 642 CE), in: R.S. Bagnall (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology, Oxford 2009, pp. 521-540.

of the National Museum of Antiquities in Leiden, the British Museum and the Hermitage Museum (Papers on Archaeology of the Leiden Museum of Antiquities, Egyptology 5), Leiden 2009. Menchetti 2005 A. Menchetti, Ostraka demotici e bilingui da Narmuthis (ODN 100-188) (Bibliotheca di Studi Egittologici 5), Firenze 2005. Muhs 1996 B.P. Muhs, The Administration of Egyptian Thebes in the Early Ptolemaic Period, Diss. Pennsylvania, Philadelphia 1996. Muhs 2008 B.P. Muhs, Archival Archaeology of Early Ptolemaic Theban Papyri and Ostraca, in: A. Delattre-P. Heilporn (edd.), Et maintenant ce ne sont plus que des villages ... Thèbes et sa région aux époques hellénistique, romaine, et byzantine. Actes du colloque tenu à Bruxelles les 2 et 3 décembre 2005, Bruxelles 2008, pp. 33-47. Pestman 1961 P.W. Pestman, Marriage and Matrimonial Property in Ancient Egypt. A Contribution to Establishing the Legal Position of the Woman (P.L.Bat., 9), Lugdunum Batavorum 1961. Ray 1976 J.D. Ray, The Archive of Ḥor (Texts from Excavations, 2), London 1976. Vandorpe 2009 K. Vandorpe, Archives and Dossiers, in: R.S. Bagnall (ed.), The Oxford Handbook of Papyrology, Oxford 2009, pp. 216-255.

Martin et al. 2009 C.J. Martin et al., Demotic Papyri from the Memphite Necropolis (P. Dem. Memphis) in the Collections

266

The Roman Empire

Introduction: Archives in the Roman Empire

eva jakab

The common desire for transparency and publicity can be considered as the main goal of setting up archives at all. In principle, two important areas of archival activities should be distinguished: those in the public and in the private context. Both public (communal) and private archives record highly relevant acts in a trustworthy manner, protecting against forgery or uncertainty in legal affairs. Public archives also serve as aims of a developed and bureaucratic public administration. In the present volume, three papers deal with different kinds of archival activity in the Roman Empire. R. Haensch, K. Harter and Th. Kruse open new perspectives on the topic – each from a specific aspect but with detailed research. Thomas Kruse investigates status-related affairs in Roman Egypt, Kaja Harter scrutinizes communal archives for private documents in Asia Minor and Rudolph Haensch focuses on archives in the Late Antiquity, drawn up about court hearings in the office of the prefect. In the first century AD, forgery seems to have been a general problem in the Roman world. Inscriptions, especially from the Hellenistic provinces, preserve evidence of a steady struggle of public authorities to counter it. Kaja Harter starts with the famous edict of Quintus Veranius from Myra (SEG 33,1177), from the first century AD, which introduced strict measures against forgery. Such laws were presumably passed because of widespread, dangerous manipulations in legal life, throughout the Roman Empire.

introduction: archives in the roman empire

269

Similar rules can be observed in ancient Italy, too. In the Roman Republic, earlier laws had already set heavy penalties for forgery of wills (testamentum). Later on, it suffices to mention Sulla’s criminal law before 70 BC – the lex Cornelia de falsis. In AD 5 or 6, a lex Iulia vicesimaria laid down the special circumstances under which wills were to be opened. This law also implied that all substantial property should pass through properly written and sealed documents. In AD 61, a decree of the Senate interfered in the technicalities how a document was to be drawn up and sealed by the parties and witnesses. Suetonius (Nero 17) gives a short description of the rule which became known as the Senatus Consultum Neronianum: It was then for the first time (devised) against forgers that no tabulae should be sealed unless they were bored through and a string passed three times through the holes …

A late antique passage of Pseudo-Paulus offers a more detailed treatment of the subject (PS 5,25,6): The Senate decreed that those tabulae, which contain the writing of either public or private contracts, are – once witnesses have been summoned – to be sealed in this way: the tablets, having been perforated on the top edge towards the middle, are bound around with a tripled string, and the seals of the wax placed on top of the string are impressed, so that the interior preserves the fides of the writing by means of the exterior. Tablets produced in another way provide no evidence.

Indeed, it is a surprising intervention into the world of “law in action” which normally used to function on its own terms. A new way of preparing documents was ordered by law – for the sake of general security. The fides (reliability) and textual integrity were protected by technical specification on how legal documents ought to be made. Tabulae written and closed otherwise were no longer accepted as evidence before court. Laws and decrees against forgery witness a strong public interest in securing reliability and transparency in private affairs, too. On the other hand it is surprising how few details are preserved about archival activities in Roman Italy. Some sort of archive for private documents can be assumed in the background of money transactions carried out through bankers (argentarii, faeneratores or nummularii). In a special edict, the Roman praetor ruled its details. He approached the problem from the aspect of litigation. Ulpian reports it as follows (D. 2,13,4 pr.-1): The praetor said: ‘Let those who operate a banking business produce accounts in matters relating to their business with the day and consul added.’ The reason for this edict is most equitable. For since bankers prepare the accounts of individuals, it was equitable that what he prepared on my account and the (relevant) documents, which in a certain measure can be deemed to be mine, be produced to me.

Apart from Ulpian’s theoretical treatment, legal documents about such activities of argentarii also exist. For example, it is well recorded in the Archive of the

270

Sulpicii (in a set of wooden tablets which were drawn up in the Mount Vesuvius country, in the first century AD) that bankers acting in financial affairs of their clients used to set up exact records (statements) regularly. Based upon this phenomenon, the praetor ruled that each banker should be obliged to produce his business accounts as evidence in a trial if required by one of the parties. TPSulp. 60 (AD 43, a draft of a bank account) seems to be such evidence about a loan granted by a Roman woman, Titinia Antracis, to a peregrine lady, Euplia. These and other texts may give a hint to further possible archival activities for private legal documents in Roman Italy. But let us return to the three papers of the present volume and introduce them in a more or less chronological order. Thomas Kruse offers a detailed description on how checklists of population might have worked in Roman Egypt. First of all, this sort of registration served taxation purposes. It is convincing how exactly the Roman authorities controlled and divided different groups of population by granting tax privileges. The census, carried out carefully every fourteen years, is well documented in papyrus rolls according to the place of residence. It can be reasonably assumed that each village and town laid down special archives for collecting the data and forwarding to the metropolis of the nomos. Kruse picked out especially the privileged group of metropolitai with reduced laographia rates – called dodekadrachmoi (paying twelve drachmas a year) in Oxyrhynchos, or oktadrachmoi (paying eight drachmas a year) in the Herakleopolites. The epikrisis, the registration with the Roman authorities of each young citizen after turning fourteen secured for him the access to this privileged status. Plenty of related sources are preserved: declarations of entitled persons by their parents, quarrels and trials with the authorities. The rich documentation enables us to reconstruct the whole procedure in a new light. Kruse’s thorough report of this special type of archival activity is a valuable contribution to our general knowledge of archives in the Roman Empire. Kaja Harter discusses two special types of archives: manumissions of slaves in a form of a (fictitious) sale from Delphi and funeral inscriptions from Asia Minor. The legal rules of both groups belong partly to sacred law (lex sacra) and partly to profane law. It seems to me an important feature, which should be considered in their interpretation. Furthermore, both types of legal acts create an obligatio unilateralis: there is only one party who declares his will (Max Kaser speaks of «einseitiger, rechtsschöpferischer Akt der juristischen Selbstgestaltung»). In Roman law, a funerary inscription and its terms are generally considered as acts of “Privatautonomie” – it is commonly accepted that there was no need of any arrangement with public authorities for its legal enforcement. Kaja Harter’s careful treatment of the sources leads to a possible reconstruction of internal registration methods in archives. It is very likely that a professional, a grammateus, drew up a new version for the register, using the original document and summing up its main terms. The mixed formula of the preserved documents is a strong argument for her thesis: a chirographum, a first-person narration is consequently

introduction: archives in the roman empire

271

combined with a third-person narration. The widely used public registration of funeral inscriptions, with privately fixed penalties for damage and for unauthorized burials, is a striking example for increasing public control and interference in private legal affairs. Rudolph Haensch looks at late antique documents of archival activities in every day practice of prefects. In particular, the scarcely known but valuable scripts of Johannes Lydus (De magistratibus) open a new perspective on the administration of the prefectus praetorio Orientis in the early sixth century. According to the testimony of Lydus, there must have been a huge storage capacity for legal documents in Konstantinopolis. However, the safekeeping of legal documents in archives must have existed already much earlier. For example, Theodosius I issued a law after his victory over Magnus Maximus (388), which declared that all verdicts which were passed by iudices appointed by the defeated should be void (Codex Theodosianus 15,14,8). Furthermore, such verdicts should be removed also from public archives (ex omnibus publicorum monumentorum scriniis). This report is a strong argument for the existence of detailed registers about court hearings and public affairs at that time. Furthermore, the careful dealing with petitions in the prefect’s bureau is well documented: the settlement was noted as a subscriptio on the very request, afterwards copied and handed out to the applicant. It is very likely that all originals were kept by the authorities – in some sort of archive. The sources quoted above may suggest the existence of developed and systematized archival activities – indeed, our knowledge of Late Antiquity is far from complete. Rudolph Haensch underlines the coincidental character of preservation and warns against hurried generalization. Summing up, it can be observed that the Roman administration took an increasing interest in archival activities in the whole Empire. State control over public affairs and over the relations between state authorities and citizens (e. g. taxation) was highly developed already at the end of the Republic, but it became more and more characteristic in the ensuing centuries. The essential growth on territory and population, the increasing migration and administrative structure required more control over private affairs. For publicity and security against forgery, the deposition of important documents (e. g. testaments) became common practice in the provinces and probably in ancient Italy, too.

272

Epigraphische Quellen zum Archivwesen in den griechischen Poleis des ausgehenden Hellenismus und der Kaiserzeit kaja harter-uibopuu

Für Marlene Valeria

Zu Beginn der römischen Herrschaft im Osten können die griechischen Poleis bereits auf eine jahrhundertelange Tradition des Archivwesens zurückblicken, wie andere Beiträge in diesem Buch deutlich zeigen. Dennoch lassen sich ab dem 2. Jh. v. Chr. Änderungen sowohl in der Struktur und Organisation der Archive, als auch in der Publikation archivierter Akten nachweisen. Auch die Rolle der städtischen Amtsträger und ihrer Archive im Rahmen der privaten Rechtsgeschäfte wurde angepasst. Im Mittelpunkt der folgenden Ausführungen stehen allerdings nicht Archive als Aufbewahrungsstätten öffentlicher Urkunden, also Staatsakte jeder Art. Vielmehr werde ich mich den privaten Rechtsurkunden im Rahmen des städtischen Archivwesens widmen. Dafür sind als Quellen zunächst städtische Dekrete und Edikte der römischen Provinzialverwaltung heranzuziehen. Im ersten Teil des Beitrages sollen im Detail zwei neue Texte aus Kos präsentiert werden, die in diese Gruppe von Texten gehören. Andererseits sind zwei weitere, wesentlich größere Gruppen von Inschriften für das angesprochene Thema aufschlußreich: Die Freilassungsinschriften aus Delphi und anderen mittelgriechischen Städten und die Urkunden über Graberrichtungen aus dem kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien. Diese beiden Textgruppen werden im zweiten und dritten Teil meines Beitrages behandelt.1

1

Die Forschungen zu diesem Beitrag werden vom österreichischen Forschungsfonds FWF

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

273

Zwei Dekrete aus Kos (IG XII 4,1,84 und 85) Über Struktur und Organisation von städtischen Archiven in hellenistischer Zeit sowie deren Umgestaltung informieren ausführlich städtische Dekrete wie das späthellenistische Reformgesetz aus Paros, das von Wörrle und Lambrinudakis ediert und kommentiert vorgelegt wurde. 2 Der Text enthält den Dekretentwurf einer Kommission zur Sanierung des öffentlichen Urkundenwesens, der wohl nach seiner Verabschiedung auf einer Stele im Hestia-Heiligtum der Stadt aufgestellt worden war. Während bis zu dieser Reform das Original der eingereichten Privaturkunden bei den mnemones verblieb, sollten nach der Reform autorisierte Abschriften der Urkunden in einem unabhängigen Archiv aufbewahrt werden, um im Zweifelsfall durch einen Textvergleich eventuelle Veränderungen des Originals nachweisen zu können. Ein ajpodevkth~ (Archivar) sollte dafür zuständig sein, die Vertragsabschriften im Heiligtum in eine verschlossene Kiste einzuwerfen, aus der sie nur in einem komplizierten und genau regulierten Verfahren wieder entnommen werden konnten. 3 Auch das Edikt des römischen legatus pro praetore der Provinz Lycia, Q. Veranius, das inschriftlich aus Myra erhalten ist, stellt die Sicherung der Originalurkunden in den Mittelpunkt der Anweisungen. Verwendung von Palimpsesten sowie, nachträgliche Zusätze und Rasuren werden ausdrücklich verboten und unter Strafe gestellt. Dabei werden vor allem die dhmovsioi, die Sklaven der Stadt, die in der Archiv-Verwaltung arbeiten, angesprochen. Ihnen wird ausdrücklich untersagt, Urkunden, die nicht den geforderten Ansprüchen entsprechen, entgegenzunehmen. Tryphon, ein Sklave der Stadt Tlos, der sich trotz mehrfacher Ermahnung nicht hatte belehren lassen, wurde

im Rahmen des Projekts „Funerary Fines in Greco-Roman Asia Minor“ unterstützt. Austrian Science Fund (FWF): [P22621] 2 Lambrinudakis-Wörrle 1983, 285-289 mit deutscher Übersetzung (SEG 33, 679). Die Inschrift ist auf einer 1.87 m. hohen Stele aus parischem Marmor angebracht und enthält einen Text von 90 Zeilen, der hervorragend erhalten ist. Sie wird anhand der Buchstabenformen und der Beamtennamen in das zweite Viertel des 2. Jh. v. Chr. datiert. Eine englische Übersetzung bei Arnaoutoglou 1988, Nr. 97 mit kurzen Literaturhinweisen. Vgl. auch Georgoudi 1988, 243-244; Boffo 1995, 113-114. 3 Ähnliche Sicherungsmaßnahmen sind vor allem aus dem Bereich der städtischen Verwaltung bekannt und werden von Lambrinudakis-Wörrle 1983, 348-349 und Fröhlich 2004, 270, erläutert. Sie sind unter anderem für Athen belegt. IG II2 1174 enthält ein Dekret des Demos Halai Aixonides über die Rechenschaftsablage des demarchos und der tamiai aus dem Jahr 367/6 v. Chr. Die Amtsträger sind angehalten, ihre Abrechnungen monatlich in eine verschlossene Kiste (kibwtov~, Z.6/7) zu werfen, aus der sie dann (unverändert) am Ende der Amtszeit zur Rechenschaftsablage entnommen werden (Z.10-13). Tit.Cam 110, Z.9-19 (Ehrendekret für Philokrates, Sohn des Philostephanos, nach 182 v. Chr.) beschreibt ebenfalls die doppelte Sicherung von Urkunden über Abrechnungen in den Handakten der zuständigen Amtsträger (provceira, Z.9-10) und einer verschlossenen Kiste (kibwtov~, Z.11-12). Nicht zuletzt war es den koischen tamiai, hierophylakes und prostatai vorgeschrieben, ihre Abrechnungen über die Einzahlungen an die Kasse des Asklepiostempels in eine derartige Kiste einzuwerfen, IG XII 4,1,71, Z.13-15 (LSCG 155). Ähnlich auch IG XII 4,1,343 (Paton-Hicks 33 und Iscr. Cos ED 237), Z.5 und Z.14.

274

ausgepeitscht und gab mit seinem Fehlverhalten den Anlass für das Edikt. 4 An die Seite dieser Texte muss man nun zwei neue Inschriften aus Kos stellen, die jüngst von K. Hallof ediert wurden. Ich möchte die Gelegenheit nutzen, die beiden stark fragmentierten Inschriften kurz vorzustellen und die dort verwendeten Termini näher zu erläutern. Wenn die beiden Dekrete auch nicht so gut erhalten sind wie die Inschriften aus Paros und Myra, können dennoch einige Hinweise auf die Praxis der Archivierung von Urkunden in Kos entnommen werden. Der erste Text stammt von einer Inschrift, die — der Schrift nach zu urteilen — wohl in das 1. Jh. v. Chr. zu datieren ist und von einer Reform der Aufsicht über das städtische Archiv handelt (Z.6). IG XII 4,1,845 ej p i; m o n av r c o ªu - - - c.7 - - - t oº u' M h n o - - c.5 - -, e[doxe ta'/ boula'/ kai; tw'/ dªavmw/, gnwvma prostºata'n kai; boªuleuta'nº Zwpuvrou newtevrou, v Timª- - - c.7 - - tou' - -ºidavmanto", - - - 4 tou' Deiniva, v¨$ULVWDLYRXWRX 3XžTRNOHYRXWRX EYR^SZž  WDYWHWD SRYOLRSUDYJPDWDNDWDEHYOWLVWžR•QGLRLNK WDLW to;" ajrceivou fuvlaka" ajsfaªlevsteron - - - ºnwnti mhdemiva - - - tajrcei'a, dedovcqai kurwqevªnto" touvde toºu' yhfivsmato" ªperi; tw'n crhmaº8 tizomevnwn ejpi; tw'n ajrceivwªn - - - nenoºmoqethmevna, to;" ªde; ajpodeicqhºsomevno" aiJrei'sqai kata; ª - - - - a[nºdra grammateva MHN - - - aJmevra" ta'" crhmatisqªeivsa": oJ de;º aiJreqi;" ajrcevtw mhªni;6 - - - - -º ma: ajpotetªavºcqw de; - - - - - - -o" grammatiko;" toªuvto" to;" crhmaº12 tismo;" ejn pleivos•LžURQH>IHURQWRLGHNHž crhmatismevªn - - - - - - - - - - pºrovteron to;n - - - - - - - - PARESEU - - - - - - - - - - - tw'/ ijdiwvta/ po- - - - - - - -  '($57$SDYQWHVR• Unter dem monarchos - - - S.d. Meno- -. Beschluss von Rat und Volk, Vorlage der prostatai und Ratsherren Zopyros d.J., Tim- - S.d. - -idamas, - - - (4) S.d. Deinias, Aristaios S.d. - - -, Pythokles II.: damit die Geschäfte der Stadt auf das Beste verwaltet werden - - - die Aufseher des Archivs ganz sicher - - - keine - - - die Ämter/Archive, möge man beschließen: sobald das Dekret über die (8) öffentliche Beurkundung von Rechtsakten bei den Behörden in Kraft gesetzt

4

Wörrle 1975, 255-257 mit deutscher Übersetzung (SEG 33, 1177).

5 Sieben Fragmente einer Marmorstele, a und b schließen direkt aneinander an und bilden die linke obere Ecke des Steins, c kann rechts an den Text angefügt werden. Fragment g gehört unter Fragment a, die Teile d, e und f sind nicht mehr zuzuordnen. Der Text entspricht der Ausgabe im IG XII, die auch auf den Scheden R. Herzogs aufbaut. 6 Z.10: Das Fragment ist an dieser Stelle schwierig zu deuten. Zwar findet sich die Angabe eines Monats vermehrt in Kos, allerdings im Dativ immer mit Präposition (und teilweise Artikel) in der Form ejm oder ejn (tw'/) mhni; oder ohne Präposition oder Artikel im Genitiv mhnov". Die erste Formulierung ist stets auf Zeitangaben in der Zukunft bezogen, etwa: „die Zahlung erfolgt im Monat Batromion“, IG XII 4,1,326 (Paton-Hicks 27), Z.12, oder „sie sollen die Prozession durchführen ... im Monat Gerastion“, IG XII 4,1,79 (Iscr. Cos ED 146), B Z.1-4. Der Genetiv findet sich in Datierungen zumeist in den Präskripten von Dekreten (IG XII 4,1,79 A Z.1-2: „Unter dem monarchos Tharsikrates, am ersten Tag im Monat Gerastion“). Wie die Nennung eines Monats hier syntaktisch erklärt werden kann, ist unsicher.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

275

wurde, - - - was gesetzlich verordnet ist, dass die künftig Ernannten für jeden [Monat?] einen Mann zum Sekretär bestimmen - - - für den eingetragenen Tag;7 der Gewählte soll sein Amt antreten ... - - - Ablegen soll - - - der grammatikos diese (12) Beurkundungen an vielen - - - trug. Die - - - bereits beurkundeten - - - vorher - - - dem Privatmann - - - alle - - -

Z.6 bezeugt, dass zur Aufsicht über das Archiv (oder auch die Archive, Z.7 und 8) „Wächter“, fuvlake~ im Amt waren, die in Zukunft einen grammateus einsetzen sollten, um die bestmögliche Verwaltung der städtischen Agenden zu sichern. Herzog hatte überlegt, ob dieser Sekretär monatlich bestimmt werden musste, in Z.10 sei schließlich vom Beginn der Amtszeit desjenigen, der bestimmt wurde, die Rede. 8 Möglicherweise hat man als seine Aufgabe die Erfassung und die Ablage der eingereichten Urkunden, die in Z.11-12 als crhmatismoiv bezeichnet werden, zu sehen. Jedenfalls macht die Erwähnung eines Archivs respektive einer entsprechenden Behörde (ajrceivou, Z.6) das Thema der getroffenen Regelungen deutlich. Auszuschließen ist — nicht zuletzt aufgrund der Position im Text — die Vermutung, dass es sich um eine allgemeine Publikations– oder Archivierungsklausel gehandelt haben könnte. Z.7-8 enthalten gleich zu Beginn des Antrages den Verweis auf ein bereits zu einem früheren Zeitpunkt beschlossenen psephisma, das zum aktuellen Zeitpunkt erst in Kraft gesetzt werden musste. Ich schlage vor, in der Lücke am Ende von Z.7 nach dem Vorbild des Edikts des Veranius aus Myra (Z.15-16) peri; tw`n zu ergänzen. Damit wäre als Inhalt des psephisma die öffentliche Beurkundung von Rechtsakten angegeben. 9 Möglicherweise musste eine entsprechende Reform des Leitungsgremiums herbeigeführt werden, nach deren Umsetzung die dann Ernannten erst einen Sekretär bestimmen sollten, dessen Kompetenzen im weiteren Verlauf des nun zu beschließenden psephisma erläutert wurden. Die Erwähnung eines Privatmannes in Z.14 weist vielleicht darauf hin, dass es im vorliegenden Text nicht nur um die Aufbewahrung von Staatsurkunden gegangen sein wird, sondern vielmehr — so wie auch in der nächsten Inschrift — um die Registrierung von Privaturkunden. An Stelle der vor allem in atheni-

7 Möglicherweise auch Akk. pl. (mit entsprechend geänderter Akzentuierung): die eingetragenen Tage. Insgesamt ist gerade diese Formulierung schwierig zu deuten, da ein attributiv gebrauchtes Aorist-Partizip „eingetragener“ keinen eindeutigen Sinn ergibt. In den beiden Parallelstellen hat das Partizip crhmatisqeiv" deutlich passive Bedeutung: IG XII 4,1,302, Z.18-19 (crhmatisqeivsa" eijswmosiva", eingetragene Eide); Iscr.Cos ED 229, Z.8-9. Zu denken wäre eher an den oder die „Tage der Eintragung“ oder, Hallof folgend, „den dazu bestimmten Tag“ (möglich auch in der Mehrzahl). 8

IG XII 4,1,84, kritischer Apparat zu Z.9: kata; ªmh`na.

9 Z.7/8 ergänzt Hallof folgendermaßen: dedovcqai kurwqevªnto" touvde toºu' yhfivsmato" ª- - crhmaº|tizomevnwn ejpi; tw'n ajrceivwªn ...] und übersetzt möge man beschließen: sobald das Dekret in Kraft gesetzt wurde, - - - was vor den Amtsträgern verhandelt wird, ... (zur Übersetzung siehe unten Anm.15). In SEG 33, 1177, Z.15-16 nennt der Statthalter Veranius seine eigene Anweisung hJ peri; tw`n crhmatizomevnwn diataghv. Die Wendung wird von Wörrle 1975 als Anordnung über (öffentliche) Beurkundung von Rechtsakten übersetzt und 258-261 erläutert.

276

schen Inschriften üblichen Bedeutung von crhmativzein „verhandeln“,10 wird man wohl auch hier von der in Archivangelegenheiten vorherrschenden Bedeutung des Verbums „dienstlich erledigen, eine Urkunde ausfertigen, registrieren“ ausgehen müssen.11 Parallelen zu dieser Verwendung bieten zumindest zwei weitere koische Inschriften. In der Vergabeurkunde für das Priestertum der Aphrodite Pontia vom Ende des 2. Jh. v. Chr. wird davon gesprochen, dass es die Pflicht der prostatai war, eine Abrechnung über den Inhalt der Schatzkisten und dessen Aufteilung in das öffentliche Archiv einzubringen.12 Auch ein fragmentiertes Sakralgesetz aus dem gleichen Zeitraum enthält einen Hinweis auf eine derartige Hinterlegung einer Abrechnung. 13 In diesem Sinne wäre der in Z.11-12 von Hallof überzeugend ergänzte crhmatismov~ mit Preisigke ein „von Privaten oder Beamten rechtmäßig vollzogener Akt und daher die darüber aufgesetzte Urkunde, Schriftstück, ...“. 14 Bereits diese wenigen Überlegungen müssen reine Hypothesen bleiben, sollen aber einen Anstoß dazu geben, das Dekret in die modernen Untersuchungen zum Archivwesen aufzunehmen. IG XII 4,1,85 ist deutlich jünger als der eben vorgestellte Text und wird in das 1. Jh. v. Chr. oder das 1. Jh. n. Chr. datiert. Die Inschrift weist aber im verwendeten Formular durchaus Parallelen zu IG XII 4,1,84 auf und handelt ebenfalls von einem öffentlichen Archiv. IG XII 4,1,8515 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -Ɩ - - - - - - - ª - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -DMQWLžJ•UDYIRL/- - - - - - ª - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -- -GDPžRY•VLRSHUL- - - - - - - - 4 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -LGDNDTKPH•Q• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - kataklagevtwi - - - - - - - - - ª - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - dºamosivou diakomi- - - - - - - - - ª - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -SžD•U¨H-NDYVWDWUDSHY]•D - - - - - - - ] 8 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - a tw'n loipw'n ta;n de;. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -R•LVXQDOODYVmV®RXVLQ•PKX--• - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -RGHNDWDNODJHYWZLWRLGHGD•- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - tan keimenan para; tw'i davmwi - - - - - 12 - - - - - - - - - - - - thtai: ejxevstw de; tw'i ijdiwvta/, ai[ ka dhvªlhtai - - -]

10 Larfeld 1902, 668-672 zur Verhandlungsformel (crhmativsai) in athenischen Dekreten, die von der Mitte des 4. Jh. an belegt ist, und auch in IG XII 4,1,129 (Iscr. Cos ED 71), A Z.9, einem athenischen Ehrendekret für den Koer Nikomedes aus dem Ende des 4. Jh. v. Chr. ergänzt wird. 11 Preisigke, Wörterbuch II, s.v. crhmativzw (2). Vgl. Wilhelm 1909, 291. 12 IG XII 4,1,319 (SEG 50,766), Z.20: kai; lovgon crhmatizovntw ej~ ta; damovsia gravmmata ... und sollen die Abrechnung in das öffentliche Archiv einbringen, Parker-Obbink 2000, 440. 13 IG XII 4,1,342 (Iscr. Cos ED 58), Z.10-11. Zu dem eng damit verwandten katacrhmativzein siehe sogleich. 14 Preisigke, Wörterbuch II s.v. crhmatismov~. 15 Stele aus weißem Marmor, gefunden 1905 im Südwesten des römischen Theaters, anschließend in das Kastell verbracht. Die Übersetzung folgt bis auf wenige Ergänzungen derjenigen von K. Hallof in der elektronischen Edition von IG XII 4,1 (http://pom.bbaw.de/ig/).

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

277

ª ª 16 ª 20 ª ª ª ª 24 ª -

-

- - - - - -Z•WZ LGDPRVLYZLR-GHHMSDYQDJNHDMSRGH[DYPHQR- - - - - - ] - - -WRžX P•HVVHLYWDR-GHDMQKUNDWDFUKPDWL[DYWZNDLORJ - - - - - - -] -R-žDMQKUNDLWRLžSURVWDYWDLWD GDPRVLYDVIUDJHL GLHMSDYQDJN•H - - - - -] - -T•KNDQX-SRWZ QLMGLZWD QHMSLWRSURVWDYWDDL>ND - - - - - - - - - - - -S•DUDJHQHYVTDLHMSLWRDMUFHL RQDL>NDNHYOKWDLYWL- - - - - - - - - - - -W•LTHYPHQRQH-SHYVTZR-GDPRYVLRR-WZ QFUHRIXODYNZQ - - - - - - -] - - ajpodeºxavmeno" katesfragismevnan para; tou' ijdiwvta - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ejpavºnagke": toi; de; fevronte" tw'n ijdiwta'n crhmat - - - - - - - - - - ej" ajnaºgrafa;n kai; katagorasmo;n teucevwn bublivnwªn - - - - - -] - - - - - kºataballevsqwi kai; to; me;n pleonavzon ajrªguvrion - - - - -] - - - - - toi; de;º tamivai prosdiagrafovntwi kataskeuavªxai - - - - - - ] - - - - - tou glwºssokovmou ta'" aJmevra" eJkavsta" a{ kªa - - - - - - - ] - - - - - - - - -DMUFHLYZLSURWLTHYWZLGHNDT¨H-NDVW - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -(ž$1GHY[KWDLFUKPDWLV•P•R - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - ONTWDª.ºT vacat? - - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - den Abschriften - - - der Archivsklave - - - (4) soll er verschließen - - - des Archivsklaven - - - von jeder Bank/von jedem Tisch - - - (8) der übrigen - - - denen, die Verträge schließen, nicht - - - soll er verschließen. Die - - - (12) Es sei dem Privatmann erlaubt, wenn er will - - - dem Archivsklaven; der aber soll zwingend nach dem Empfang (der Urkunde?) - - - des Vermittlers. Der „Mann“ aber soll beurkunden und (quittieren) - - - der „Mann“ und die prostatai zwingend mit dem öffentlichen Siegel - - - (16) von den Privatleuten bei den prostatai16, wenn - - - sich einzufinden bei dem Archiv, wenn es verlangt einer - - - soll (dem Verlangen) Folge leisten der Archivsklave der chreophylakes17 - - - nach dem Empfang der durch einen Privatmann untersiegelten (Urkunde) - - - (20) zwingend. Diejenigen Privatleute, die Urkunden mit sich führen - - - zur Registrierung18 und zum Kauf von Papyrusrollen - - - soll bezahlen und das überschüssige Geld - - - die tamiai sollen zusätzlich anweisen zur Instandsetzung - - - (24) des Archivschrankes für jeden Tag, der - - - dem Archiv. Festsetzen aber soll für jed- - - empfängt Urkunden (?) - - -

Auch die zweite Inschrift aus Kos ist so schlecht erhalten, dass jeder Versuch einer Interpretation nur Hypothese bleiben kann. Da keine Zeilenübergänge ausgemacht werden können, ist man auf die Stichworte angewiesen, die im erhaltenen Text einen Hinweis auf den Inhalt geben können. Meines Erachtens muss der vorliegende Text Vorschriften zur Archivierung von Urkunden enthalten haben, die Privatleute einreichten (Z.19, Z.21), darunter möglicherweise Urkunden über Verträge (Z.9). Für das Archiv agieren in diesem Zusammenhang sowohl ein damovsio", also ein Sklave der Stadt (Z.6, 13, 18), als auch ein Amtsträger, der schlicht oJ ajnhvr genannt wird.19 Zu den Aufgaben dieses Amtsträgers gehörte es, etwas zu registrieren, zu beurkunden oder allgemein unter die im Archiv hin-

16 Hallof: gegen die Vorsteher. 17 Verwalter des chreophylakion, des Schuldbucharchivs. 18 Hallof: zum Kopieren. 19 Dabei sei daran erinnert, dass auch die Aufseher des Archivs in IG XII 4,1,84 angewiesen wurden, einen ajnh;r grammateuv" zu bestimmen (Z.9). Von diesem würde man aber annehmen, dass er in weiterer Folge grammateus und nicht einfach ajnhvr genannt wurde.

278

terlegten Urkunden aufzunehmen (Z.14). Katacrhmativzein wird lediglich in Kos gebraucht und entspricht wohl crhmativzein. Sowohl in der vorliegenden Inschrift als auch in den beiden Parallelstellen wird katacrhmativzein eingesetzt, um die Handlungen von Amtsträgern zu beschreiben. 20 Gemeinsam mit den prostavtai sind sie verpflichtet, eine Handlung zu setzen, die das Siegel der Stadt involvierte (Z.15). Die prostavtai waren eines der wichtigsten Ämtergremien in Kos, dessen fünf Mitgliedern sowohl die Kontrolle über die Einhaltung kultischer und politischer Normen als auch die Kontrolle der Finanzgebahrung verschiedener öffentlicher Stellen und Heiligtümer oblag. Das koische Dekret über den thesauros im Heiligtum des Asklepios aus der Mitte des 2. Jh. v. Chr. sieht es als eine der Aufgaben der prostavtai vor, die Abrechnung über den Inhalt der Schatztruhe in das Archiv, namentlich in eine dort aufgestellte Kiste, einzubringen, mithin also für die Archivierung der Abrechnung Sorge zu tragen. 21 Auch die Aufgaben des damovsio" erschließen sich nur schwer, als sicher ist aber wohl festzuhalten, dass er nicht mit dem ajnhvr ident war. In Z.13 folgt der Nennung

20 Aus dem Jahr 202/1 v. Chr. stammen ein Dekret über eine Umlage und eine umfangreiche Liste der Spender. Jeder Bewohner und jede Bewohnerin von Kos die dies wollten, seien sie Bürger oder Fremde, konnten eine Spendenzusage (epangelia) abgeben. Diese wurde in der nächsten Volksversammlung verkündet, worauf das Volk den Wert der Spende beurteilte und diese annahm oder ablehnte. Die angenommenen Spendenzusagen sollten auf drei Stelen publiziert werden, deren Erstellung die poletai verdingten, die abgelehnten Spendenzusagen sollten ebenso erfaßt, wohl in einer Liste eingetragen oder auf andere Weise registriert werden. IG XII 4,1,75 (Paton-Hicks 10), Z.32-34: NDWDF•UKPDWLžV•DYQWZ de; kaªi;º | ei[ N•DYž W•LQZQ ajpoceirotonh|T•K •L• D-• ejpaggeliva: Sie sollen auch registrieren, wenn bei jemandem die Spendenzusage nicht bestätigt wurde. Da die ursprünglichen Listen der Teilnehmer am Kult des Apollon in Halasarna unleserlich geworden waren, beschlossen die Phylen von Halasarna, neue Listen anzulegen, und diese nicht nur auf leukomata auszuhängen und den jeweiligen Amtsträgern zur Verfügung zu stellen, sondern sie auch so zu erfassen, wie andere (wohl ebenso offizielle) Schriftstücke erfasst wurden. IG XII 4,1,103 (Paton-Hicks 367), Z.72-77: kai; to;" | ajpograyamevno" ka|tacrhmatizovntw | kaqovti kai; ta\lla | gravmmata crhmativ|zonti: Und die (Liste der) Aufgezeichneten sollen sie registrieren, sowie sie auch die übrigen Schriftstücke eintragen. Gerade diese Stelle legt die inhaltliche Gleichsetzung zwischen katacrhmativzein und crhmativzein nahe. Das Kompositum findet sich in der epigraphischen Überlieferung lediglich in Kos und scheint auch in der literarischen Überlieferung nicht auf. Für die papyrologische Evidenz gibt Preisigke als Bedeutung „ein Rechtsgeschäft vornehmen, rechtswirkend verfügen über etwas“, das Verb wird also in den Papyri zur Beschreibung von Tätigkeiten von Privatpersonen verwendet. Zur Unterscheidung dieser Varianten von crhmativzein als „registrieren, eintragen durch Amtsträger“ und „rechtswirksam verfügen durch Privatpersonen“ siehe Wörrle 1975, 259-260. Vgl. zu der verwandten Bedeutung „eine Antwort oder Entscheidung erteilen“, die im Verkehr mit Königen, Volksversammlungen oder aber auch römischen Behörden Verwendung findet, Buraselis 2000, 18-19 und Robert 1963, 381-382. 21 IG XII 4,1,71 Z.13-15: NDL• lovgon ej" kªiºbwto;n ejmballovntw tw'n crhmavtwn ªo{ssºa ka ej" to;n TKVDX•URQ ejmblhqh'i toiv te tamivai kai; toi; iJeroªfºuvlake" kai; toi; prostavtai: ... und die Abrechnung der Gelder sollen sie in die Truhe (scil. im Archiv) legen, wieviel in die Schatztruhe eingezahlt wurde, die tamiai, die hierophylakes und die prostatai. Zur kibwtov" vgl. oben Anm.3. Zu den prostatai im hellenistischen Kos umfassend Grieb 2008, 160-163 mit weiterführender Literatur. Hallof übersetzt die Phrase ej" kªiºbwto;n ejmballovntw in der elektronischen Edition von IG XII 4,1 (vgl. oben Anm.15) als in das Archiv legen.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

279

des damovsio" die Bestimmung, dass er verpflichtet sei, etwas zu übernehmen. Möglicherweise gehören auch Z.18-19 in einen engeren Zusammenhang. Während in Z.18 ein damovsio" der chreophylakes genannt wird, enthält Z.19 wiederum die Angabe, dass er etwas Versiegeltes, wohl eine versiegelte Urkunde oder aber auch Zweitschrift, von einem Privatmann übernehmen soll. 22 Die Registrierung der Urkunden blieb aber nach Ausweis des Fragments dem ajnhvr vorbehalten. Auf die Ausstattung des Archivs weist die Aufforderung in Z.5 und 10, kataklagevtwi „er soll verschließen“, hin. Am Schluß des erhaltenen Textes erfahren wir, dass es ein glwssokovmon gab (Z.24), einen Archivschrank, der eine ähnliche Funktion wie die in IG XII 4,1,71, Z.13 erwähnte kibwtov" gehabt haben könnte. 23 Ob sich allerdings die Restaurierungsmaßnahmen, für die die städtischen tamiai Geld zur Verfügung stellen müssen (Z.23), auch darauf beziehen, ist nicht klar. Zu den Aufgaben des Archivs gehörte möglicherweise neben der Aufbewahrung und Beurkundung von Schriftstücken, die von Privatleuten eingereicht wurden, auch der Verkauf von Papyrusrollen (Z.21). 24 Z.16-18 können möglicherweise auf Unstimmigkeiten in der Führung des Archives bezogen werden. Es ist vorgesehen, dass Privatleute sich an die prostatai wenden konnten (Z.16). Weiters wird bestimmt, dass jemand sich beim Archiv einzufinden hatte, wenn es verlangt würde (Z.17). Ob dieser Zwang allerdings einem Amtsträger, dem damosios oder einer weiteren Privatpartei galt, ist nicht festzustellen. Zuletzt musste auch der damosios der chreophylakes einer Aufforderung Folge leisten (Z.18). Den Anlass für die Regelung derartiger Vorgehensweisen könnten Vorfälle gegeben haben, wie sie auch am Anfang der Reformen in Paros oder in Lykien anzunehmen sind. Dabei wird deutlich, dass die Authentizität der eingereichten Urkunden stets in Frage gestellt und die Schuld für etwaige Misstände durchaus dem Personal des Archivs gegeben werden konnte. 25 Allerdings bleiben alle diese Überlegungen, wie einleitend festgehalten, Spekulation.

22 Die Nennung des damosios in Z.6 ist ohne Zusammenhang. Zwar könnte das Verb diakomivzein gefolgt sein, „hinüberschaffen“ oder auch „überbringen“ (von Schriftstücken etwa I.Olympia 52, Z.39-40; IG VII 2711, Z.83-87 und CID IV 127, Z.16), aber genauer läßt sich die Tätigkeit nicht bestimmen. Zum damovsio" tw'n creofulavkwn verweist Hallof auf IG XII 4,1,347, Z.6 und 104, Z.543-544, 637. 23 Auch in IG XII 4,1,354, Z.2 ist ein glwssokovmon erwähnt, allerdings wieder ohne erkennbaren Zusammenhang. Z.4-5 der selben Inschrift bestimmen eine Abgabe (?) von 10 Drachmen für die a[lloi crhmatismoiv, die anderen Urkunden. Deutlich geht aus der Nennung des glwssokovmon in IG XII 3,330, dem Testament der Epikteta, Z.277-279 und 283-284 hervor, dass es sich auf Thera um eine Einrichtung im öffentlichen Archiv handelt. 24 Für den in epigraphischen Quellen ungewöhnlichen Begriff führt Hallof I.Priene 114, Z.11, 30 als Parallele an. 25 Vgl. Wörrle 1975, 279-281 und Lambrinudakis-Wörrle 1983, 308-320, sowie Weiss 2004, 79-80 und 84.

280

Die Archivierung von Freilassungsurkunden in Delphi Von den theoretischen Überlegungen der Stadtverwaltungen zur Organisation der Archive und zu den Aufgaben der dort tätigen Personen kommen wir zu praktischen Beispielen der Hinterlegung und Beurkundung privater Rechtsgeschäfte. In Delphi belegen ca. 1200 Inschriften seit dem 2. Jh. v. Chr. die Entlassung von Sklaven in die Freiheit, durchwegs durch den Verkauf an den Gott Apollon. 26 Durch die Fülle der Texte und die kontinuierliche Aufzeichnung bis in die Kaiserzeit ist es möglich, das Aufkommen der amtlichen Archivierung und staatlicher Regelungen dazu zu beobachten. Gleichzeitig kann man einer der wichtigsten Fragen für Rechtshistoriker, die mit epigraphischem Material arbeiten, nachgehen — dem Verhältnis der Originalurkunde zur publizierten Inschrift. Von Anfang an scheint die Aufzeichnung der Freilassungsurkunden, die zuerst an der Polygonalmauer hinter der Stoa der Athener und dann im Theater von Delphi vorgenommen wurde, eine große Rolle gespielt zu haben. Albrecht geht — im Konsens mit einem Großteil der modernen Forschung — davon aus, dass in Delphi mit Ende des 3. Jh. v. Chr. ein Gesetz die Publikation derartiger Urkunden im Heiligtum zwingend vorschrieb, während in anderen mittelgriechischen Städten eine derartige obligatorische Einbindung der Öffentlichkeit nicht nachzuweisen sei. 27 Interessante Überlegungen zur Aufzeichnungspflicht präsentiert Kränzlein, der ebenfalls eine Pflicht zur inschriftlichen Publikation annimmt. Diese könnte auch in den letzten beiden vorchristlichen Jahrhunderten bestanden haben, obwohl eine gesetzliche Regelung für diesen Zeitraum nicht zweifelsfrei nachgewiesen werden könne. Das Interesse des Heiligtums an einer Publikation der Freilassungsakte, die im einzelnen dem Freilasser oder dem Freigelassenen überantwortet wurde, lag weniger in der Bewahrung der Urkunden und dem Schutz des Rechtsaktes. Dafür seien die Inschriften zu unübersichtlich und zu unzugänglich angebracht gewesen, darüber hinaus scheint es keinen speziellen Platz im Heiligtum für die Aufzeichnungen gegeben zu haben. Zunächst sei die Polygonalmauer herangezogen worden, dann waren es Sockel

26 Mulliez 1992, 31 mit Anm. 1 zu den älteren Zahlenangaben, vgl. auch Kränzlein 1983, 301-302. Mulliez bereitet ein Corpus der delphischen Freilassungsurkunden vor, das als CID V erscheinen und nicht zuletzt zu Fragen der detaillierten Chronologie der Freilassungsinschriften aus dem Theater von Delphi wertvolle neue Erkenntnisse bieten wird. Für meinen Beitrag beruhen die chronologischen Angaben auf den bislang vorliegenden Textausgaben. Zur Verkaufsfreilassung siehe jüngst Velissaropoulos-Karakostas 2011 I, 387-398 mit weiterführender Literatur; Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005, 208-222. 27 Albrecht 1978, 202-203 mit Anm. 8 zur Übersicht über die ältere Forschung. Obwohl die Publikationspflicht in den Urkunden nicht erwähnt wird, meint Albrecht, dass alleine die Fülle der publizierten Inschriften, die dem Freigelassenen keine Vorteile bieten, auf einen Aufzeichnungszwang zurückzuführen sei. Auch Mulliez 1992, 32, geht von einer Pflicht zur Aufzeichnung ab dem beginnenden 2. Jh. v. Chr. aus, wenn auch nicht nachzuvollziehen sei, unter welchen Umständen und aufgrund welcher geänderten Rechtslage die Setzung der Inschriften erfolgte.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

281

von Denkmälern bzw. das Theater. 28 Das Interesse des Heiligtums scheint also weniger den einzelnen Texten und ihren Klauseln gegolten zu haben, als der Menge von Texten. Das Ziel der Kundmachung sei es gewesen, hervorzustreichen, in welch großer Anzahl von Fällen Apollon zugunsten von Sklaven gehandelt habe, die eigentlich jetzt ihm gehörten, deren Freiheit er aber gewähre und schütze. Um Apollon zu preisen — und „Werbung“ für das Heiligtum zu machen — seien die Freilasser und Freigelassenen verpflichtet worden, die Texte aufzeichnen zu lassen. 29 Für die frühesten Freilassungsinschriften in Delphi ist nicht sicher belegt, ob es neben der Aufzeichnung auf der Polygonalmauer auch noch Urkunden auf vergänglichem Material gab, die bei den Parteien oder an neutraler Stelle verblieben. Trotzdem scheint diese Annahme sehr wahrscheinlich. 30 Erst im Laufe des 2. Jh. v. Chr. finden sich Hinweise auf die Aufbewahrung derartiger Urkunden. Diese Aufbewahrung lag in den Händen des Heiligtums ebenso wie bei privaten Zeugen oder Garanten der Freilassung. SGDI 1913, Z.14-19 (Delphi, 156-151 v. Chr.)31  %HEDLZWKYU3žDJNOK /DDYUFRX¨$P  ILVVHXYD-ZMQDHMQWZ L-HUZ NDLSDUDWRQQD 16 kovron Mevnhta kai; ajntivgrafon para; Pagklh'.  0DYUWXURLR-L-HUHX¨$QGURYQLNRNDLR-QDNRYUR ªMevºnh" kai; ijdiw'tai Pagklh'", Tivmwn, Dwrovqeo", ªQeovºtimo".

28 Vgl. zu den Mauern und Denkmälern in Delphi auf denen die Freilassungsinschriften angebracht waren Daux 1936, 81-82. 29 Kränzlein 1980, 82-83; 1983, 302-303. Meines Erachtens wurde die Aufzeichnung der Inschriften allerdings nicht von den Priestern, sondern wohl vom Rat der Amphiktyonie und den Amtsträgern, die für die Verwaltung des Heiligtums und seiner Finanzen verantwortlich waren, veranlaßt. Dabei wird man auch den finanziellen Aspekt nicht außer Acht lassen dürfen, die Aufzeichnungen werden wohl kostspielig gewesen und die Einkünfte dem Heiligtum zugute gekommen sein. Lefèvre 1998, 42 und 51 zur unsicheren Teilung der Administration zwischen Stadt und Amphiktyonie. 30 Mulliez 1992, 32 geht davon aus, dass die Publikation einer Inschrift lediglich die Kopie der Freilassungsurkunde darstellte. Ebenso argumentiert schon Kränzlein 1983, 302-303, dass es im Interesse des Freigelassenen gelegen haben muss, eine Urkunde über seinen Status zu erhalten, umsomehr als viele Freilassungen durch Fremde im Heiligtum des Apollon erfolgten und dort auch publiziert wurden. Im Fall eines Streits um den Status des ehemaligen Sklaven wird man sich — gerade im späten Hellenismus — nicht mehr nur auf die Aussage von Zeugen verlassen haben. Vgl. auch Lambrinudakis-Wörrle 1983, 360. 31 Der Text ist an der Südseite der Polygonalmauer angebracht (Pomtow 1889, Tafel III Nr. 248) und ist sehr schlecht erhalten. Die umfangreichen Ergänzungen wurden nach der vom selben Freilasser ausgestellten Urkunde SGDI 1912 (siehe unten Anm.32) vorgenommen. Wie ähnliche Texte auch ist die Urkunde nach dem archon in Amphissa und dem archon in Delphi datiert. Sie enthält den Verkauf der Sklavin Aristion zur Freilassung durch Lykopos, einen Bürger aus Amphissa an Apollon in Delphi für 3 Minen. Der Empfang des Kaufpreises wird quittiert, der ehemaligen Sklavin werden Freiheit und unberührbarkeit garantiert. (Z.1-14).

282

Garant: Pankles, Sohn des Laarchos, Amphisseer. Die Kaufurkunde (ist hinterlegt) im Tempel und bei dem nakoros Menes und eine Zweitschrift bei Pankles. Zeugen: Der Priester Andronikos und der nakoros Menes und die Privatmänner Pankles, Timon, Dorotheos, Theotimos.

Die Freilassungsurkunde wird im Text als Kaufurkunde (wjnav, Z.15) bezeichnet. Sie bestätigt aus der Sicht des Verkäufers Lykopos, Bürger der Stadt Amphissa, dass er die Sklavin Aristion dem Gott Apollon übergeben und den Kaufpreis von 3 Minen erhalten habe und ist in Form einer suggrafhv festgehalten. Diese Urkunde wurde im Heiligtum und beim nakovro" aufbewahrt (Z.15). Zusätzlich gab es eine Zweitschrift (ajntivgrafon) bei Pankles, dem Sohn des Laarchos aus Amphissa, der sowohl als Garant der Freilassung (bebaiwthvr, Z.14) als auch als einer der vier privaten Zeugen (Z.18-19) auftritt. 32 Auch die etwas ältere Urkunde SGDI II 1764 zeigt neben der Aufzeichnung im Tempel die Aufbewahrung einer Zweitschrift, wiederum bei einer Privatperson. SGDI 1764, Z.8-10 (Delphi, 168 v. Chr.)33 8 to; ajntivgrafon fulavsªsºei Kallivero". kuvrioi de; ejovntw oiJ paratuncavnonte" sulevonte" Swsw; kata; ta;n ajn{an}DJUmD®IDQNDLZMQDQWDQHMQWZ LL-DUZ LDMQDJHJUDQPHYQDQ Die Zweitschrift bewahrt Kallieros. Ermächtigt seien alle34, die zufällig anwesend sind, und Soso ergreifen gemäß der anagraphe und der Kaufurkunde, die im Heiligtum registriert ist.

Die beiden verwendeten Termini ajnagravfein und ajnagrafhv sind in diesem Text in ihrer Bedeutung nicht leicht voneinander zu unterscheiden. Beide können sowohl das Setzen einer Inschrift, respektive die inschriftliche Aufzeichnung als auch das Registrieren respektive den Eintrag in bestimmte Register oder Listen bezeichnen. Der Text von SGDI 1764 legt nahe, dass es sich um die inschriftliche Publikation (ajnagrafhv) und die registrierte und archivierte Kaufurkunde (wjnav ajnagegranmevna) handelt. Beide Exemplare, die Inschrift und die Urkunde

32 Vom selben Freilasser stammt auch SGDI 1912, eine Freilassungsurkunde für die Sklavin Physis, die ebenfalls im Heiligtum und beim nakoros aufbewahrt wird, zusätzlich befinden sich Abschriften (ajntivgrafa) wiederum bei Pankles. Auch die Zeugen sind die selben wie in SGDI 1913. Insgesamt sind ajntivgrafa aber in vorchristlicher Zeit selten belegt, der Terminus wird nur ca. zehn mal im Zusammenhang mit Freilassungsurkunden erwähnt, während er für Abschriften von Dekreten der Polis, die z.B. an andere Städte übersandt werden sollen, regelmäßig verwendet wird. Zu den Vergleichsbeispielen aus den Freilassungsurkunden siehe Calderini 1908, 62 mit Anm. 2 und 3. 33 Die Inschrift befindet sich an der Südseite der Polygonalmauer (Pomtow 1889, Tafel III Nr. 99). 34 Kränzlein 1984, 61, erläutert, dass sich die Ermächtigung des Freiwilligen (paratuncavnwn) nicht nur auf den formalen Akt des sulei'n beziehe, mit dem ein ehemaliger Sklave aus den Händen desjenigen, der behauptet sein Eigentümer zu sein, befreit werden konnte, sondern auch auf die damit verbundenen Rechtsfolgen. Zahlreiche Texte verdeutlichen, dass das Einschreiten für einen Freigelassenen für den Freiwilligen jedenfalls ohne Folgen wie Klagen oder Strafen bleiben sollte (u.a. SGDI 2216, Z.14-16; 2229, Z.6-9; 2322, Z.12-13).

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

283

können demnach als Referenz für die Ermächtigung der Freiwilligen und damit natürlich als Beweis für die Freiheit des ehemaligen Sklaven herangezogen werden. 35 Ein ajntivgrafon wird im 2. Jh. lediglich in SGDI 1764 erwähnt und nicht zu diesen möglicherweise streitentscheidenden Dokumenten gezählt. Derartige Klauseln über die Hinterlegung oder Aufbewahrung von Freilassungsurkunden verschwinden gegen Ende des 2. Jh. v. Chr. wieder. 36 Erst ab dem Ende des 1. Jh. v. Chr. enthalten die Freilassungsinschriften wieder Informationen zur Hinterlegung, erstmals taucht dabei eine echte Archivierung durch einen städtischen Amtsträger auf. FD III 6,20 informiert über diesen gesetzlich vorgeschriebenen Vorgang. FD III 6,20, Z.11-1437

ta;n wjna;n tiqev12 PHTDžNDWDWRQQRYPRQWDžQPHQHMQWžRL-HURQWRX ¨$SRYžOOZQR ejncaravxante", ta;n de; ta'i Zwi?lou ceri; gravyante" ejn to; damovsion grammatofulavkion dia; tou' grammatevw" Nikavnoro" tou' Lusimavcou. Die Kaufurkunde hinterlegen wir gemäß dem Gesetz, die eine inschriftlich im Heiligtum des Apollon, die andere von der Hand des Zoilos geschrieben im staatlichen grammatophylakion durch den grammateus Nikanor, Sohn des Lysimachos.

Der Kaufvertrag wird kata; to;n novmon hinterlegt, entsprechend einem Gesetz, dessen Inhalt wir wie bei den meisten Querverweisen nicht kennen. Dies geschieht einerseits durch die Setzung einer Inschrift (ejncaravxante", „eingeschlagen habend“, von den Freilassern) im Heiligtum. Diese Publikation der Freilassungsurkunden erfolgte nun nicht mehr an der Polygonalmauer sondern im Theater von Delphi. 38 Andererseits wurde eine Exemplar ta'i Zwi?lou ceri; gravy-

35 Mulliez 1992, 34 mit Anm. 17. Die gleiche Formulierung findet sich auch in SGDI 1743, Z.910; 1762, Z.4-5; 1763, Z.4-5, eine Variante bietet SGDI 1815, Z.5-6 mit folgender Formulierung: kuvrioi de; ejovntw oiJ paratuncavnonte" sulevonte" Swsw; kata; ta;n wjna;n kai; ajnagrafa;n ta;n ejn tw'i | iJerw'i ajnagegranmevnan. Dies zeigt wohl, dass Urkunde und Inschrift als Einheit gesehen wurden. Alle Texte stammen aus der IV. Priesterschaft (170-157 v. Chr.), SGDI 1762-1764 lassen sich sogar genau auf das Jahr 168 v. Chr. datieren, die Wendung scheint also nur sehr kurze Zeit in Verwendung gewesen zu sein. Wilhelm 1909, 263 sieht in beiden Begriffen einen Hinweis auf die Aufzeichnung im Archiv und verweist dazu auf die Listen von Freilassungen, die aus Nordgriechenland erhalten sind, u.a. IG IX 2, 17. 36 Eine Ausnahme bildet die Freilassungsinschrift SGDI 2327, wieder aufgefunden südlich der römischen Agora und neu ediert von Bousquet 1964, 388-391, die aus der Zeit zwischen 63/2 und 51/50 v. Chr. stammt und in Z.31-33 ein ajntivgrafon erwähnt, das bei drei Privatpersonen hinterlegt war. 37 Der gesamte Text der Urkunde findet sich unten bei Anm. 53. 38 Die vorliegende Urkunde wurde auf einem der Orthostaten, die rund um die Orchestra aufgestellt waren, angebracht. Inschriften finden sich im Theater von Delphi auch an der Terrasse über dem diazoma, im obersten Teil des Gebäudes sowie an den Außenmauern, Colin 1898, 3-4.

284

ante" „durch Zoilos’ Hand geschrieben habend“ (ebenfalls von den Freilassern) in das staatliche grammatofulavkion gebracht. Diese Archivierung erfolgte durch den grammateus Nikanor, Sohn des Lysimachos. Das Amt des grammateu;" th'" povlew" ist in Delphi in den Freilassungsurkunden des ausgehenden ersten Jh. v. Chr. das erste Mal erwähnt. Man wird aber sicher davon ausgehen können, dass er nicht nur für die Registrierung der Freilassungsurkunden zuständig gewesen war. 39 Ob der in der Inschrift genannte novmo" respektive die novmoi sich nur auf die Kaufurkunden der Freilassungen beziehen, oder allgemein die Mitwirkung der Stadt auch an anderen Rechtsgeschäften betreffen, ist nach der derzeitigen Quellenlage nicht zu entscheiden. 40 Wir haben kaum Anhaltspunkte dafür, wie das Beurkundungsverfahren in Delphi im Detail ausgesehen haben mag, einige grundsätzliche Überlegungen werden sich im weiteren aber trotzdem anstellen lassen. Die Freilassungsinschriften belegen das staatliche Archiv unter verschiedenen Namen. Neben dem eben schon angesprochenen Terminus damovsion41 grammatofulavkion, der vorwiegend in der ersten Hälfte des 1. Jh. n. Chr. belegt ist, findet sich etwa gleich oft auch die Wendung damovsia gravmmata. Schließlich treffen wir auch — häufiger in der zweiten Hälfte des 1. Jh. n. Chr. — dhmovsion teu'co" an, dieser Begriff ist wie die beiden eben genannten etwa zwanzig Mal belegt. 42 Die Formulierungen zur Hinterlegung der Urkunden variieren leicht, zeigen aber alle den selben Rechtsvorgang: ein Exemplar der Urkunde kommt in das Archiv, zusätzlich kommt es zu einer Publikation des Textes auf Stein. Hervorzuheben ist, dass in verschiedenen Texten deutlich darauf hingewiesen wird, wer die Kaufurkunde, die ja die Grundlage der Freilassung bildete, wohl auf Papyrus geschrieben hatte. Normalerweise tat dies der Freilasser selbst, wie in der eben zitierten Urkunde FD III 6,20. Die folgende Inschrift FD III 6,15 andererseits ist ein Beispiel für eine Urkunde, die vom Sohn der beiden Freilasser geschrieben wurde, da diese selbst des Schreibens unkundig waren.

39 Mulliez 1984, 374-379 argumentiert überzeugend, dass es sich um ein städtisches Amt handelt, das ebenso wie die anderen Ämter jeweils für ein Jahr ausgeübt wurde, wobei Iteration zwar belegt, nicht aber die Regel ist. 40 Mulliez 1992, 35 geht von einem allgemeinen Gesetz zur Archivierung von Vertragsurkunden aus; Gauthier 1972, 95 mit Anm. 83 referiert beide Möglichkeiten, hält aber ein Spezialgesetz für die Freilassungen für wahrscheinlicher (vgl. unten Anm. 60). 41 Neben den üblichen Formen der nordwestgriechischen Koine finden sich jeweils auch die entsprechenden Formen der attischen Koine in den Freilassungsinschriften, also neben damovsio" auch dhmovsio" usw. Auf eine getrennte Wiedergabe der Begriffe kann hier verzichtet werden. 42 Damovsia gravmmata: FD III 6,12, Z.10-12; 14, Z.13-14; 44, Z.12-13; 109, Z.25-26; 121, Z.19-21. Damovsion grammatofulavkion: FD III 6, 19, Z.15-16; 20, Z.13; 27, Z.14-15; 29, Z.12-13. Dhmovsion teu'co" (bis auf eine Ausnahme stets in attischer Koine): FD III 1,141, Z.10; III 4,78, Z.13; III 6,5, Z.18-19; 35, Z.17-19. Mit Wilhelm 1909, 262-263 ist anzunehmen, dass immer die selbe staatliche Institution gemeint ist.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

285

FD III 6,15, Z.13-18 (20-46 n. Chr.)43 ta;n wjna;n tiqevmeqa, ta;n me;n ejn to; iJero;n  WRX ¨$SRYOOZQRHMQFDUDY[DQ 16 WHWDQGHJUmDY®\DQWRWRX XL-RmX ®D-P•Z   QHMSHLDXMWRLJUDYPPDWDRXMNK>GHLPHQGLDWRX JUDPPDWHYZÑ$EURPDY cou tou' Xenagovra ejn ta; damovsia tªa'º" povlio" gravmmata: Die Kaufurkunde hinterlegen wir, die eine inschriftlich im Heiligtum des Apollon, die andere, geschrieben von unserem Sohn, da wir die Buchstaben nicht kennen, durch den grammateus Abromachos, Sohn des Xenagoras, unter den öffentlichen Schriftstücken der Stadt (im öffentlichen Archiv).

Die Freilassung der Sotericha durch ihren Herrn Paramonos, Sohn des Aristeas, aus dem 1. Jh. n. Chr. wird immer wieder als Ausgangspunkt für die allgemeine Aussage herangezogen, dass die Originalurkunde, das aujtovgrafon im Tempel aufbewahrt wurde, während die Abschrift oder Zweitschrift, das ajntivgrafon, ins Archiv gelangte. Vermeintlich ist hier eine allgemeine Qualifikation der beiden hinterlegten Exemplare einer wjnav zu finden. 44 FD III 6,43, Z.12-13 (1. Jh. n. Chr.) 12 tivqemai ta'" wjna'" to; me;n ajnªtivºgrafon ejn ªtºa; damovsia ta'" povlio" gravmmata   GLDWRX JUDP matevo" Qeoklevou" tou` Qeªokºlevou", tªo; dºe; aujtovgrafon ejpivsteusa tw'/ qew'/. Ich hinterlege die Zweitschrift der Kaufurkunde unter den öffentlichen Schriftstücken der Stadt (im öffentlichen Archiv) durch den grammateus Theokles, Sohn des Theokles, das selbst geschriebene (Exemplar) habe ich dem Gott anvertraut.

Da dieser Text allerdings den einzigen epigraphischen Beleg für ein aujtovgrafon darstellt, sollte ihm — angesichts der schon mehrfach angesprochenen Ausdrucksvielfalt der delphischen Inschriften — nicht allzu große Bedeutung beigemessen werden. 45 Vergleiche mit der Verwendung des Begriffes in literarischen

43 Die Inschrift, die die Freilassung eines Sklaven Soterichos betrifft, befindet sich teils auf dem fünften, teils auf dem sechsten Block an der Orchestra. Unklar ist, wo der Anfang der Freilassungsurkunde aufgezeichnet war, da der erhaltenen Text mit der Paramone-Klausel beginnt. Valmin betont, dass auch auf keinem der Steine der Umgebung der erste Teil der Urkunde gefunden wurde. Auch die Bedingungen der Freilassung (Übergabe des Kaufpreises erst nach drei Jahren aus einem Darlehen) sind ungewöhnlich. Vgl. zum Schluß der Inschrift Mulliez 1986, 454-456. 44 So vermerkt etwa Weiss 1923, 358 unter Angabe der vorliegenden Inschrift „Bleibt nämlich ein Exemplar der Papyrus- oder Pergamenturkunde bei dem Gotte zurück, ... während das andere der weltlichen Obrigkeit übergeben wird, so bezeichnet sich das erstere, namentlich in Delphi, als aujtovgrafon (Original).“ Ebenso Dareste-Haussoullier-Reinach 1898, 261; Wilhelm 1909, 262; Wörrle 1975, 264 mit Anm. 555. 45 Zur Vorsicht mahnen Klaffenbach 1960, 38 mit Anm. 2: „In der Tat begegnet einmal, aber auch nur dieses einzige Mal, die Angabe: ... (es folgt der griechische Text der Inschrift), die

286

Quellen legen nahe, dass damit der vom Freilasser geschriebene Vertrag gemeint ist, der in weiterer Folge stets als ceirovgrafon bezeichnet wird. 46 Dennoch führt die begriffliche Unschärfe uns zu der für Rechtshistoriker wichtigsten Frage: Sind die Freilassungsinschriften, die wir auf den Polygonalmauern und im Theater von Delphi vorfinden, getreue Abschriften der archivierten „Kaufurkunden“, so wie es einige Formulierungen vermuten lassen, oder wurden die Urkunden vor der Publikation redigiert?47 Sind uns die vollständigen Urkunden erhalten? Wenn es eine Überarbeitung gab, wo und von wem wurde diese vorgenommen? In Delphi war ab dem Ende des 3. Jh. v. Chr. nach Ausweis der umfangreichen epigraphischen Quellen ausschließlich die Verkaufsfreilassung gebräuchlich, die wohl zunächst von Bürgern anderer mittelgriechischer Städte dorthin gebracht wurde. 48 Die ältesten Urkunden überliefern diesen Verkauf als sungrafhv typisch objektiv stilisiert, wobei die Kaufurkunden nach Ausweis einiger Texte sowohl beim nakovro" im Tempel als auch bei privaten Zeugen hinterlegt sein konnten. 49 Ab dem 1. Jh. n. Chr. ist dann auch das ceirovgrafon als Urkundstyp für den Verkauf der Sklaven an den Gott und damit in die Freiheit belegt.50 Ty-

denn auch in der Regel als ein entsprechendes Zeugnis gewertet worden ist, ...“ und zuletzt Mulliez 1992, 35-36. 46 LSJ s.v. aujtovgrafon: written with one’s own hand, one’s own writing. In diesem Sinne App. Syr. 5,24; Plut. Sert. 27; Dion. Hal. 5,7. 47 Diese Frage werfen auch Weiss 1923, 357-358 und Kränzlein 1980, 82-83; 1983, 302-306 auf. Einen allgemeinen Überblick über die Publikation von Freilassungen bietet Calderini 1908, 254-257, bevor er 260-266 detaillierter auf die Verhältnisse in Delphi eingeht. 48 Albrecht 138-139 vermutet, dass zunächst eine nicht publizitätsbedürftige, daher rein zivile Freilassungsform angewandt wurde, die sich heute nicht mehr rekonstruieren läßt. 49 In dieser Art etwa die Inschrift SGDI 2117 (Delphi, 199 v. Chr.), in der die Freilassung der Sklavin Strato durch ihren Herrn Hagesias, Sohn des Polytimos, einen Plygonier, bestätigt wird. stratagevonto" Calevpou Naupaktivou mhno;" ¨$TDQDLYRX ejn Delfoi'" de; a[rconto" | ÔUbriva mhno;" ÔHraivou, ejpi; toi'sde ajpevdoto ÔAghsiva" Polutivmou Plugoneu;" tw'i ¨$SRYOOZQL | tw'i Puqivwi sw'ma gunaikei'on a|i o[noma Stratwv, tima'" ajrgurivou mna'n tessavrwn, ejfæ w|i|te aujta;n ejleuqevran ei\men, poievousan o{ ka qevlhi, kaqw;" ejpivsteuse Stratw; ta;n wjna;n |5 tw'i qew'i. bebaiwth;r kata; to;n novmon kai; ta;n sumbolavn: Sevleuko" ¨(SLQLYNRX Plugo|neuv". mavrture": toi; iJerei'" Eujklh'", Xevnwn kai; toi; prostavtai Mantiva", Aijakivda" | kai; oJ newkovro" Klevwn ¨2UHYVWD ijdiw'tai Kallikravth", Patreva", Kalleivda" | Delfoiv, ¨$JDVHYD Sivmwn, ¨(UJDVLYZQ Plugonei'", Filleva" Oijnoai'o". Unter dem Strategen Chalepos, Naupaktier, im Monat Athanaios, in Delphi unter dem Archon Hybrias im Monat Heraios: Unter folgenden Bedingungen übergab Hagesias, Sohn des Polytimos, Plygonier, dem Apollon Pythios einen weiblichen Sklaven mit dem Namen Strato, für einen Preis von vier silbernen Minen, damit sie frei sei und tun könne, was immer sie will, so wie Strato dem Gott die Kaufurkunde anvertraute. Garant gemäß dem Gesetz und dem Vertrag: Seleukos, Sohn des Epinikos, Plygonier. Zeugen: Die Priester Eukles und Xenon und die prostatai Mantias und Aiakidas und der neokoros Kleon, Sohn des Orestas; die Privatpersonen Kallikrates, Patreas, Kalleidas, (alle) Delphier; Agaseas, Simon, Ergasion, (alle) Plygonier und Philleas, Oinoaier. Calderini 1908, 265 wendet sich gegen die von Keramopoullos 1904, 27-28 geäußerte Ansicht, dass bereits in den älteren Urkunden eigenhändige Unterschriften, also subjektiv stilisierte Elemente zu greifen wären. 50 Wörrle 1975, 262, mit Anm. 540: während der Terminus in Delphi erst im 1. Jh. n. Chr. nachzuweisen ist, scheint er in den westlokrischen Städten Physkos und Amphissa schon im 2. Jh. v. Chr. in Verwendung gewesen zu sein.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

287

pisch für diese Urkundenform ist die subjektive Stilisierung. Es handelt sich um eine eigenhändig niedergeschriebene Erklärung, in der sich der Verkäufer (also der Freilasser) dem Käufer (also dem Gott) gegenüber verpflichtet. Die entsprechenden Inschriften im Theater von Delphi scheinen auf den ersten Blick eine echte Abschrift dieser neuen Form der Privaturkunde zu sein. Dabei findet sich der Terminus ceirovgrafon nicht nur als Bezeichnung für die gesamte Urkunde, sondern auch für die Erklärungen der Garanten des Verkäufers, die dem Käufer für das ungestörte Eigentum einzustehen hatten und somit dem Gott gegenüber die Freiheit der ehemaligen Sklaven sicherten.51 Betrachtet man die Inschriften genauer, zeigt sich allerdings, dass sie eine eigentümliche Mischform der beiden Urkundstypen enthalten. Zumeist handelt es sich um objektiv abgefasste Texte, die aber ihnen zugrundeliegende cheirographa in einzelnen, subjektiv stilisierten Formeln erkennen lassen und damit (scheinbare) Brüche im Urkundstext enthalten.52 Anhand der bereits oben (bei Anm. 37) in Auszügen zitierten Freilassungsurkunde für Zoilos sollen im folgenden die einzelnen Klauseln näher erläutert werden. FD III 6,20 (Delphi, 20-1 v. Chr.)53  D>UFRQWR(XMGZYURXWRX ¨(SLQLYNRXPKQR¨$PDOLYRXERXOHXRYQWZQ'LRGZY  URXWRX )LORQLYNRX'LRGZYUžRXWRžX ¨$QGURQLYNRX.ULWRODYRXWRX 'ZURTHYRX  DMSHYGRQWR=ZYL!OR¨$SROOZžQLYRXNDL'DPZ¨$QWLILYORXVXQHXDUHVWHRXY 4 VDGHYPRL'DPžRX mWD ®TXžJDWHYURžPRXHMS HMOHXTHULYDLSDLGDYULRQRLMNRJH  QHYZ_LR>QRPD=ZYL!ORWZ L¨$SRYOOžZQLWZ Lž3XTLYZLWLPD DMUJXULYRXPQD Q pevnte, kai;  WDQWLPDQDMSHYFRQWLSD VDQHMI Z_LWHžHMOHXYTHURQHL?PHQNDLDMQHYSDIRQDMSRSDYQ twn to;n pavnta crovnon kaªi; poiou'ºntªa o}º a]n proaivrhtai kai; cwrizovmenon o{pou   D@QERXY 8 lhtai. kaqestavkamen de; ªbebaiwth'raº Davmwna Polemavrcou. eij dev ti"   HMIDYSWRLWR=Z ªi?ºlªou ejºpi; katªadoulismw'/, bevbaion parecevtwºsan tw'i qew'i ta;n wjna;n oi{ te ajpodovmenoi kai; oJ bebaiwtªhvr. oJmºoivªw" de; kai; oJ paratucw;nº kuvrio" e[stw sulevwn ejpæ ejleuqerivai Zªwvi>loºn ajzavmªio" w]ºn ªkºai; ajnªupovdºiko" ªpavsºa" divka" kai; zamiva". ta;n wjna;n   WLTHY 12 PHTDžNDWDWRQQRYPRQWDžQPHQHMQWžRL-HURQWRX ¨$SRYžOOZQR ejncaravxante", ta;n de; ta'i Zwi?lou ceri; gravyante" ejn to; damovsion grammatofulavkion dia; tou'

51 Siehe v.a. Wörrle 1975, 262-263, der darauf hinweist, dass Texte aus Physkos und Amphissa die Verwendung derartiger Erklärungen bereits für das 2. und 1. Jh. v. Chr. belegen. Vgl. Keramopoullos 1904, 27-28. 52 Zu dieser Vermengung der Formulierungen Calderini 1908, 263; Weiss 1923, 358-359; Wörrle 1975, 263. 53 Der Text findet sich am elften Block des Podiums. H 0.42 – B 0.90 m., Buchstabenhöhe 1.31.5 cm. Die Schrift ist unregelmäßig und an einigen Stellen stark zerstört.

288

 

JUDPPDWHYZ1LNDYQRURWRX /XVLPDYFRXPDYUWXUHRL-HMSLJHJUDIRYWH'LRYGZ UR)LORQLYNRX'DYPZQ3ROHPDYUFRX1LNRYVWUDWRNDL(X>GZURRL-¨(SLQLYNRX Diovdwro" 16 NDL/DPHYQKm6®WUDWDYJžRXž)LORYQLNR1LYNZQžR)LYOZQ¡R‘WRX *ULYSRX uJpe;r Damw; parou'san kai; keleuvousan uJpe;r aujta;n gravyai, ejpei; oujk oi\de gravmmata. oJmologei' Damw; suneuarestei'ªnº ta'i progegrammevnai wjna'i. mavrture" oiJ aujtoiv. cei;r ªDavmºwno" tou' Polemavrcou.   R-PRORJZ JHJRQHY nai bebaiwth;" ejpi; ta'" progegrammevna" wjna'" katastaqei;" uJpo; Zwi?lou kai;   'DPRX PDYU 20 ture" kata; pavntwn oiJ aujtoiv. Unter dem Archon Eudoros, Sohn des Epinikos, im Monat Amalios, Ratsherren waren Diodoros, Sohn des Philonikos, Diodoros, Sohn des Andronikos, Kritolaos, Sohn des Dorotheos. Zoilos, Sohn des Apollonios und Damo, Tochter des Antiphilos, übergaben — wobei mir Damo, meine Tochter, zustimmte — zur Freiheit das Kind, das im Haus geboren worden war, mit dem Namen Zoilos, dem Apollon Pythios, für einen Preis von fünf Minen Silber. Sie haben den Preis zur Gänze empfangen. Bedingung ist, dass er frei sein möge und unberührbar gegenüber allen und auf alle Zeit und tun könne, was auch immer er will, und hingehen kann, wohin auch immer er möchte. Als Garanten haben wir Damon, Sohn des Polemarchos, eingesetzt. Wenn aber jemand Zoilos zum Zweck der Versklavung ergreift, so sollen die Freilasser und der Garant dem Gott Gewähr leisten für den Kauf. Auf die gleiche Art und Weise soll jeder, der zufällig anwesend ist, berechtigt sein, Zoilos zur Freiheit zu ergreifen, wobei er unbestraft bleiben soll und sich keiner Klage oder Strafe stellen muss. Die Kaufurkunde hinterlegen wir gemäß dem Gesetz, die eine inschriftlich im Heiligtum des Apollon, die andere von der Hand des Zoilos geschrieben im öffentlichen grammatophylakion durch den grammateus Nikanor, Sohn des Lysimachos. Zeugen (sind) die, die unterfertigt haben: Diodoros, Sohn des Philonikos, Damon, Sohn des Polemarchos; Nikostratos und Eudoros, Söhne des Epinikos, Diodoros und Lamenes, Söhne des Stratagos, Philonikos, Sohn des Nikon, Philon, Sohn des Gripos. Für Damo, in ihrer Anwesenheit und auf ihren Befehl, für sie geschreiben, da sie die Buchstaben nicht kennt: Es anerkennt Damo, zuzustimmen dem angeführten Kauf. Zeugen (sind) dieselben. Hand des Damon, Sohn des Polmarchos. Ich anerkenne, Garant geworden zu sein für den angeführten Kauf, eingesetzt von Zoilos und Damo. Zeugen für all dieses (sind) dieselben.

Folgender Aufbau der Urkunde lässt sich feststellen: Z.1-2 enthalten die genaue Datierung des Rechtsvorgangs, unter Nennung des amtierenden Archonten, des Monats und der Ratsherren, allerdings ohne Angabe eines Tages.54 Darauf folgt in Z.3 die Erklärung des Verkaufs, im vorliegenden Fall eingeleitet durch ajpevdonto, da es sich um eine von Zoilos, Sohn des Apollonios und Damo, Tochter des Antiphilos, gemeinsam vorgenommene Freilassung handelt. Wenn nur eine Person als Freilasser auftritt, lautet die Wendung natürlich ajpevdoto (etwa SGDI 1912, Z.2). In dieser Erklärung, die stets in der dritten Person wiedergegeben wird, wird auch der freizulassende Sklave genannt, ebenso Apollon Pythios als

54 Mulliez 1992, 37-38. In Inschriften, die Freilassungen durch Bürger anderer Städte in Delphi publizieren, ist stets auch eine Datierung nach dem lokalen Amtsträger vorgenommen, vgl. etwa SGDI 2117, Z.1 (oben Anm.49).

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

289

Käufer (Z.5). Einen ersten Hinweis auf den angesprochenen Bruch in der Syntax bietet Z.4: In die Erklärung des Verkaufs ist — durchaus üblich — die Zustimmung eines Familienmitgliedes eingeschoben, in diesem Fall die Zustimmung der Tochter der Freilasser, Damo. Auf einmal wird davon gesprochen, dass Damo, „meine“ Tochter, „mir“ (wohl ihrem Vater) zustimmt. Hierin wird man einen Teil einer als cheirographon eingereichten Urkunde zu sehen haben, der bei der Redaktion des Textes entweder bewußt im Original belassen oder aber übersehen wurde. 55 Zur ajpevdoto-Erklärung gehören die Bedingungen, unter denen der Verkäufer den Sklaven dem Käufer Apollon Pythios übergibt: der Sklave möge frei und unantastbar bleiben, das heißt jeglicher Zugriff auf den Freigelassenen zur Wiederversklavung soll untersagt sein. An dieser Stelle findet sich auch die Paramone-Klausel, wenn die Freilassung unter der Bedingung erfolgte, dass der Freigelassene eine bestimmte Zeit bei seinem ehemaligen Herrn verbleiben sollte.56 In der vorliegenden Urkunde wird aber auf eine derartige Beschränkung der Freiheit bewußt verzichtet. Zoilos ist frei, zu tun, was auch immer er möchte und seinen Wohnort zu wechseln (Z.7-8). Der Kaufpreis betrug nach Z.5 fünf Minen, gleichzeitig wird — in unserem Fall objektiv stilisiert — die Übernahme des Kaufpreises quittiert. Derartige Quittungen finden sich sowohl in der dritten Person als auch in der ersten Person. Dabei ist aber darauf hinzuweisen, dass die ersten Belege für Quittungen in der Form ajpevcw oder ajpevcomen aus dem ersten Jh. n. Chr. stammen. Sie sind wohl ebenfalls Beispiele für Textelemente, die den entsprechenden cheirographa entnommen wurden. Die objektiv stilisierten Belege ajpevcei oder ajpevconti bleiben wesentlich häufiger, das Verhältnis beträgt ungefähr 2.5 : 1. 57 In zahlreichen Freilassungsinschriften fehlen die Quittungen, die für einen echten Kaufvertrag aber ein unabdingbares Element darstellen. Kränzlein legt überzeugend dar, dass man daraus nicht darauf schließen dürfe, dass die Texte Belege für unentgeltliche Freilassungen seien, sondern vielmehr, dass die Bezahlung eines Kaufpreises (oder „Lösegeldes“ nach Kränzlein), kein konstitutives Element der Freilassungsurkunde gewesen sei und es daher auch nicht zwingend notwendig gewesen war, dieses in die ohnehin überarbeitete und gekürzte inschriftliche

55 Das gleiche Phänomen findet sich in FD III 6,42, Z.2-3. 56 Zur Paramone-Klausel u.a. Mulliez 1992, 38-39 mit Anm. 36 und weiterführender Literatur oder Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005, 222-248. 57 Einige Beispiele seien zur Illustration hier angeführt. ajpevcei: SGDI II 2042, Z.4 (196 v. Chr.); 1840, Z.5-6 (ca 150-140 v. Chr.); FD III 2,174, Z.11 (ca 118 v. Chr.); 2,131, Z.3 (ca 78 v. Chr.); FD III 6,135, Z.7-8 (ca 75-80 n. Chr.) und mehr als 100 weitere Belege. ajpevconti SGDI II 2146, Z.3 (150-100 v. Chr.); FD III 3,19, Z.4 (ca 53 v. Chr.); 6,20, Z.6 (ca 20-1 v. Chr.); 6,44, Z.5 (20-46 n. Chr.); 6,130, Z.11 (ca 90-100 n. Chr.) und etwa 60 weitere Belege. ajpevcw: FD III 6,114, Z.6 (49/8-40 v. Chr.); 6,115, Z.4 (20-1 v. Chr.); 6,19, Z.5 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,31, Z.6-7 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,8, Z.9 (20-46 n. Chr.); 6,33, Z.2 (47-66 n. Chr.); FD III 4,78, Z.5 (85 n. Chr.) und etwa 40 weitere Belege. ajpevcomen: FD III 6,27, Z.6 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,6, Z.9-10 (20-46 n. Chr.); 6,108, Z.5-6 (47-66 n. Chr.); 6,109, Z.8-9 (75-100 n. Chr.); 6,123, Z.6 (90-100 n. Chr.).

290

Publikation aufzunehmen.58 Gerade das Fehlen der Quittung ist ein gewichtiges Argument gegen die Annahme, dass die Inschrift eine wortgetreue Kopie des Freikaufes sei. Z.8 enthält einen neuerlichen Einschub in der 1. Person Plural: Die Freilasser versichern, als bebaiwthvr Damon, Sohn des Polemarchos, eingesetzt zu haben (kaqestavkamen).59 Kränzlein stellt fest, dass auch in den kürzesten Freilassungstexten die Nennung des Garanten nie fehlte, da sie nach dem Recht der Stadt notwendig gewesen war. Dies belegen expressis verbis Texte, in denen von einer Stellung des Garanten kata; to;n novmon oder kata; tou"; novmou" (ta'" povlio") „gemäß den Gesetzen (der Stadt)“ gesprochen wird. 60 Die im vorliegenden Text folgende Erläuterung der Garantiepflichten der Freilasser und des Garanten (Z.8-10) sowie die Freistellungsklausel, die jeden zufällig Anwesenden dazu ermächtigte, ohne Angst vor Strafe oder Verfolgung für einen von Wiederversklavung bedrohten Freigelassenen einzutreten (Z.10-11), waren nicht obligatorisch und können auch nicht in allen Texten nachgewiesen werden. 61 Die unpersönliche Nennung der Freilasser Zoilos und Damo als oiJ ajpodovmenoi weist meines Erachtens darauf hin, dass diese Klausel formelhaft ist. 62 In Z.11-14 folgt die Archivierungsklausel, die wiederum aus Sicht der Freilasser formuliert ist und bereits eingehend analysiert wurde (oben bei Anm.38ff.). Den Abschluß der Freilassungsinschrift bilden die Listen der Zeugen (Z.14-16) sowie persönliche Erklärungen eines Familienmitglieds (Z.16-18) und des Garanten (Z.18-20). Acht Zeugen, darunter der bebaiwthvr Damon, Sohn des Polemarchos, bestätigen das Rechtsgeschäft und können wohl in Zukunft als Auskunftspersonen zur Freilassung des Zoilos herangezogen werden. 63 Ungewöhnlich ist

58 Kränzlein 1980, 86-90. 59 Die etwa 60 Belege für personalisierte Angaben zur Einsetzung eines Garanten stammen alle aus dem 1. Jh. n. Chr. Vgl. etwa FD III 4,73, Z.11-12 (8 n. Chr.); 6,27, Z.7-8 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,31, Z.8-9 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,13, Z.9 und Z.22-24 (20-46 n. Chr.); 4,78, Z.13 (85 n. Chr.). 60 Etwa SGDI II 1760, Z.9-10 (156-151 v. Chr.); FD III 2, 122, Z.6 (126 v. Chr.); 1,297, Z.13-14 (90 v. Chr.) und einige hundert weitere Belege. Zu den personalisierten Einsetzungen mit einem Verweis auf die geltenden Gesetze vgl. FD III 6,19, Z.6-7 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,5, Z.10-11 (20-46 n. Chr.); 6,15, Z.10-13 (20-46 n. Chr.); 6,22, Z.11-12 (20-46 n. Chr.). Vgl. auch Gauthier 1972, 95, der annimmt, dass es sich bei den genannten Gesetzen um delphische nomoi über Freilassungen handelte (oben Anm. 40). 61 Kränzlein 1983, 304-305 zur Einsetzung des Garanten. Zum Schutz vor Wiederversklavung siehe v.a. Kränzlein 1984 und ausführlich zum Prozess um die Freiheit Rüfner 1997, 373-376. Siehe auch Calderini 1908, 222-234 mit Vergleichen zu Freilassungsakten aus anderen Teilen Griechenlands. 62 Vgl. Kränzlein 1983, 306-307 zur Frage, ob die Haftung der Veräußerer gegenüber dem Gott vereinbart werden mußte, oder ex lege bestand. Kränzlein entscheidet sich, ebenso wie Partsch vor ihm, für eine gesetzliche Haftung und erläutert, dass die Angabe dieser „offenbar unnötigen Klauseln“ durch das Streben nach Vollständigkeit zu begründen sei. 63 Normalerweise werden unter den Zeugen die Priester des Apollon von den ijdiw'tai (Privatpersonen) unterschieden, dabei werden die Priester stets an erster Stelle genannt (z.B.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

291

die Benennung der Zeugen als mavrture" oiJ ejpigegrafovte" (Z.14). Normalerweise wird ejpigravfein in Delphi nur verwendet, um „darauf schreiben“ auszudrücken und findet sich so etwa in Anweisungen zur Setzung einer Inschrift. 64 Auch die Tätigkeit der Zeugen wird erst ab dem 1. Jh. n. Chr. näher beschrieben und dabei mit uJpogravfein „darunter schreiben, unterzeichnen“ bezeichnet, etwa in dem eine Liste einleitenden Hinweis mavrture" oiJ uJpogravyante".65 Die vorliegende Inschrift zeigt deutlich, dass nicht nur die Freilassung selbst bezeugt wurde. Die selbe Gruppe von Männern bestätigt auch die Zustimmung der Tochter Damo und die Homologie des Garanten. Persönliche Erklärungen der Zeugen finden sich normalerweise in den Freilassungsinschriften nicht. Sie waren auch nicht notwendig, da die Zeugen lediglich im Streitfall angerufen werden sollten, um die Echtheit der Urkunde oder ihr Wissen um den Rechtsakt zu bestätigen. Eine Ausnahme bildet FD III 6,14, die eine interessante Unterschrift enthält. Zunächst bezeugen in Z.11 die beiden Priester Dionysios, Sohn des Astoxenos und Damon, Sohn des Polemarchos gemeinsam mit fünf Privatpersonen die Freilassung zweier Mädchen durch Iranion, Tochter des Nikandros, die Stellung eines Garanten und die Freistellungsklausel. Sie werden ebenfalls als Zeugen für die Archivierung des antigraphon des Kaufvertrages und die Bestätigung des Garanten genannt (Z.16). Von zweiter Hand sind Z.17-21 hinzugefügt, die sich im Schriftbild von der vorhergehenden Inschrift unterscheiden, aber nicht genau zu datieren sind. In ihnen bestätigen drei neue Privatpersonen in der 1. Person Plural, die Abschrift unterzeichnet zu haben. 66 Da wir nicht davon ausgehen werden können, dass die drei Zeugen ihre Unterschrift direkt auf den Stein im Theater gesetzt haben, liegt eine spätere Abschrift einer subjektiv stilisierten Bestätigung der Zeugen auf der Originalurkunde vor, die ansonsten auf den Inschriften stets objektiv stilisiert wiedergegeben wurde. Die Homologie des Garanten Damon, Sohn des Polemarchos, wird mit dem Vermerk ceivr eingeleitet (Z.18-19). Sie findet sich in dieser Form in weiteren delphischen Freilassungsurkunden und bildet eine notwendige Ergänzung zur Erklärung der Freilasser, den bebaiwthvr eingesetzt zu haben. Die folgende Passage war also auf der Originalurkunde von Hand des Garanten selbst geschrieben und

FD III 6,19, Z.17-20). Eine derartige Spezifizierung der Zeugen findet sich in der vorliegenden Inschrift nicht. Allerdings wissen wir von den beiden erstgenannten Zeugen, dass sie gemeinsam dem nicht angeführten Dionysios, Sohn des Aristoxenos, als Priester des Apollon tätig waren (unter anderem FD III 6,19, Z.17-20; 6,23, Z.11-12; 6,27, Z.21-23; 6,31, Z.17-19, alle 1-20 n. Chr.). Auch die privaten Zeugen sind zumeist auch in anderen delphischen Inschriften belegt. 64 Etwa FD III 3,239, Z.17 (160/59 v. Chr.); 2,48, Z.43-44 (97 v. Chr.); 1,263b, Z.4 (2. Jh. n. Chr.). Die Verwendung des Part. Pf. Akt. von ejpigravfein ist epigraphisch nicht noch einmal belegt. 65 FD III 6,19, Z.16 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,27, Z.15 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,31, Z.17 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6,29, Z.13 (20-46 n. Chr.). 66 Z.17-18: to; ajntivgrafon uJpoge|gravfameªn uJºpo; th;n ZM¼QKYQ mavrture" ... Das antigraphon unterschrieben wir unter dem Kauf (unterhalb des Kaufvertrags). Zur Unterscheidung der Hände Valmin, FD III 6,14.

292

enthält — entsprechend subjektiv stilisiert — seine Anerkenntnis der Übernahme der Verpflichtung, dem Käufer gegenüber für den Verkauf und damit die Freiheit des ehemaligen Sklaven einzustehen. 67 Die oJmologiva selbst wird wohl auch mündlich stattgefunden haben, die Abgabe der Erklärung des Garanten wurde wiederum von den Zeugen bestätigt (Z.19-20). Spannend sind nicht zuletzt Z.1619, die die Zustimmung der Tochter der Freilasser zum Verkauf enthalten. 68 Auch hier liegt wiederum eine oJmologiva vor, allerdings diesmal objektiv stilisiert und in der 3. Person Sg. überliefert. Damo war — wie die Freilassungsurkunde lehrt — selbst nicht in der Lage zu schreiben und konnte daher den Vermerk auf der Urkunde nicht eigenhändig setzen (oujk oi\de gravmmata, Z.17). Allerdings wird betont, dass sie bei der Errichtung der Urkunde anwesend war und den Vermerk der oJmologiva selbst anordnete (parou'san kai; keleuvousan uJpe;r aujta;n gravyai, Z.16/17). Wer das Schreiberamt für sie übernahm, wird nicht gesagt, möglicherweise war es der grammateus Nikanor, der in der Archivierungsklausel als handelnder Amtsträger angeführt wird (Z.13-14). 69 Die vorliegende Urkunde ist also eine Kombination aus objektiven und subjektiven Elementen und belegt darüber hinaus schriftliche und mündliche Vorgänge im Rahmen der Freilassungen. Betrachtet man die Freilassungsurkunden aus dem 1. Jh. n. Chr. im Überblick, fallen bestimmte Muster der Kombination auf. Objektiv stilisiert sind stets die Einleitung mit dem Vermerk ajpevdoto / ajpevdonto und die Paramone–Klausel, sowie die Strafklauseln, soweit sich das bei diesen Textbausteinen einwandfrei erkennen lässt. Subjektiv gehalten sind aus Sicht der Freilasser oft die Quittung, die Einsetzung der Garanten und der Archivierungsvermerk sowie schließlich verschiedene Zusätze zum Schluss der Urkunde aus der Sicht dritter Personen. 70 Wie hat man sich eine derartige Freilassung nun vorzustellen? Anzunehmenderweise waren die Parteien, also einerseits die Freilasser als Verkäufer, eventuell Verwandte, deren Zustimmung notwendig war und die Garanten, sowie andererseits Vertreter des Gottes als Käufer, wohl der manchmal namentlich genannte nakoros und Priester, zusammengekommen, um den Kauf abzuschließen. Ich würde jedenfalls auch mit der Anwesenheit des „Kaufobjekts“, also des freizulassenden Sklaven rechnen. Der Kaufpreis wurde übergeben, die notwendigen Erklärungen wurden geleistet und der Sklave war somit frei. Dazu wurde

67 Zur eigenhändigen Unterschrift der Garanten Keramopoullos 1904, 21-26. Zur oJmologiva Velissaropoulos-Karakostas 2011 II, 214-218 mit weiterführender Literatur. 68 Die Zustimmung von Familienangehörigen, die sich in Delphi in etwa 40% der erhaltenen Freilassungsurkunden ausmachen lässt, wird von Kränzlein 1964 umfassend analysiert. 69 Die oJmologiva konnte auch von einem Dritten geschrieben werden, wie dies etwa FD III 6,31 belegt. 70 Vgl. etwa SEG 34, 396 (BCH 108, 1984, 366 Nr. 4; 20-46 n. Chr.); FD III 6, 27 (1-20 n. Chr.); 31 (1-20 n. Chr.); 6 (20-46 n. Chr.); 29 (20-46 n. Chr.); 119 [2] + 120 (50 n. Chr.); 133 (75 n. Chr.); FD III 1, 138 (35 n. Chr.) und viele mehr.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

293

eine Kaufurkunde entweder in der Form einer syngraphe oder eines cheirographon errichtet. Diese Urkunde wurde dem grammateus zur Archivierung übergeben, wobei man darunter wohl nicht nur die Aufbewahrung, wie sie in älterer Zeit bei den Zeugen vorgenommen wurde, zu sehen hat. Die Formulierung dia; tou' grammatevw" weist auf eine echte Beteiligung der Behörde hin, ohne die die Freilassung wohl nicht rechtsgültig war. Man wird vielmehr von einer Beurkundung ausgehen müssen, wie sie in den eingangs angesprochenen Texten aus Paros, Kos, Thasos und Myra enthalten ist. Ich denke, dass dies der Moment der „Überarbeitung“ und Kompilation verschiedener Elemente zu einer Freilassungsurkunde war: Der Freilasser legte der zuständigen Behörde (dem grammateus) die Kaufurkunde vor, die mit einem Datum versehen und von Zeugen, deren Identität festgehalten wurde, bestätigt wurde. In Anwesenheit des grammateus wurden dann die notwendigen Erklärungen der Garanten und möglicher anderer Zustimmender aufgenommen und ebenso förmlich bezeugt. Auf dem Papyrus waren also jedenfalls verschiedene Hände zu erkennen, auf Stein wurde die Urkunde natürlich nur von einem Schreiber gesetzt. Aus diesen Elementen wurde die neue Urkunde zusammengesetzt, die schließlich sowohl auf Stein publiziert, als auch bei der Behörde hinterlegt, also archiviert wurde. Diese Annahme könnte erklären, warum einerseits subjektiv stilisierte Teile aus der Anerkenntnis eines Kaufes und andererseits objektiv stilisierte Teile aus einer Beschreibung der Freilassung miteinander verknüpft wurden. Für diesen Vorgang überliefert FD III 6, 133, Z.15 und Z.23 bildhaft den Begriff wjnanqesiva, also die Hinterlegung des Kaufes respektive der Kaufurkunde. Somit sind die Freilassungsinschriften des 1. Jh. n. Chr. keine reinen Kopien von Kaufurkunden, sondern Kopien neu erstellter, zumeist überarbeiteter und jedenfalls beurkundeter Versionen des Freikaufes, also der Freilassungsurkunden.

Die Archivierung von Urkunden zur Graberrichtung im kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien Aus dem kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien sind mehrere tausend Grabinschriften erhalten, die in unterschiedlicher Ausführlichkeit nicht nur über die jeweiligen Bestatteten berichten, sondern auch Verbote und Strafen zum Schutz der Gräber vor widerrechtlicher Verwendung enthalten. Zudem finden sich Angaben zur Eintreibung der Strafgelder und zur gesetzlichen Verankerung der Vorschriften sowie in manchen Fällen zum Erwerb der Grabstätte. Nicht zuletzt schließen zahlreiche Grabtexte mit einer Archivierungsklausel und informieren den Leser über die Hinterlegung der Vorschriften und Verbote im städtischen Archiv. Derartige Klauseln sind häufig aus Milet, Smyrna und Ephesos erhalten, um die größten ionischen Zentren zu nennen. In Mysien und der Troas finden sie sich eher selten, regelmäßig werden sie allerdings in Karien eingesetzt, vor allem in Aphrodisias, aber auch Bargylia, Herakleia Salbake oder Nysa. Die frühesten

294

Exemplare der Archivierungsvermerke stammen aber aus Lykien und Pisidien, wo bereits im 1. Jh. v. Chr. eine Mitwirkung der Archive an der Graberrichtung nachzuweisen ist. 71 In unterschiedlichen Formulierungen enthalten die Inschriften den Vermerk ajpetevqh eij" to; ajrcei'on oder ajpovkeitai ejn tw'/ ajrceivw,/ der als Zeugnis für eine einfache Hinterlegung der entsprechenden Urkunde im städtischen Archiv interpretiert werden kann. 72 Daneben findet sich aber immer wieder die Wendung dia; tw'n ajrceivwn, die auf eine aktive Mitwirkung der Behörde an verschiedenen Rechtsakten schließen läßt. Dies bestätigt wohl auch eine Gebührenordnung aus Ephesos aus der Zeit der Flavier, in der neben einer Gebühr katagrafivou auch eine Gebühr grafivou und di’ ajrceivou belegt sind. Gschnitzer sieht darin Beurkundungs- und Eintragungsgebühren für eine Registrierung durch das entsprechende Amt. 73 Deutlicher beschreibt diesen Vorgang die Gebührenordnung aus Thasos: IG XII Suppl. 347 III (Thasos, 2. Jh. n. Chr.)  HMSL1LNDYGRXWRX ¨$ULVWRGKYPRXWRE¨D>UFRQWHHL?SRQ  WRXH-NDYVWRWHPQKYPRQDSDUHYFHLQWDEXYEORXHMSDYQDJ ke" toi'" boulomevnoi" dia; tw'n dhmosivwn crhmativzein,  ODPEDYQRQWDSHQTHULYRXPHQH-NDYVWRXNDWDWRQQRY mon xഌ d xv misqwvsew" de; h] diagrafh'" misqwvsew" h] wjnh'" cwri;" th'" ejx ejnecurasmou' ajna; xഌ a xv WZ QD>O lwn grafomevnwn proi'ka. Unter Nikadas, S.d. Aristodemos, in der zweiten Amtszeit, die archontes stellten den Antrag: Die jeweils amtierenden mnemones sollen zwingend Papyrusrollen denjenigen zur Verfügung stellen, die durch die öffentlichen (Archive) Rechtsgeschäfte beurkunden wollen. Dabei nehmen sie für jede (Eintragung der) Mitgift nach dem Gesetz vier Denare, einer Pacht oder der Bezahlung einer Pacht oder einen Kauf — es sei denn aufgrund einer Pfändung — jeweils einen Denar, die anderen Schriftstücke ohne Gebühr.

71 Allgemein Wörrle 1975, 263-279, der in seinem umfangreichen Kommentar zum Edikt des Q. Veranius mehrfach auf die Archivierung von Urkunden rund um den Graberwerb und die Graberrichtung eingeht. Siehe auch Wenger 1929, 342-344 und Ritti 2004, 558-562, sowie Harter-Uibopuu–Wiedergut 2012, bei Anm. 55-78; Harter-Uibopuu 2012. Detaillierte Überlegungen zu den archivierten Urkundstypen und ihren Unterschieden, sowie zur Rolle der Behörden (archeia) im Rahmen der Errichtung von Graburkunden stellen einen zentralen Teil des Dissertationsvorhabens meiner Mitarbeiterin K. Wiedergut „Epigraphische Quellen zum Archivwesen in den Poleis Kleinasiens“ dar. Daher soll im folgenden nur ein kurzer Einblick anhand weniger ausgewählter Inschriften gegeben werden, wobei ich K. Wiedergut für ihre Unterstützung und die Möglichkeit, ihre Quellensammlungen zu verwenden, ausdrücklich danken möchte. 72 Etwa I.Smyrna 206, Z.9-11; I.Ephesos 3215, Z.5-6; I.Milet VI 2, 677, Z.1-4; IAph 2007, 2,309, Z.15-20; MAMA VI 83, Z.17-18 (Attouda); I.Iasos 635, Z.3; MAMA VI 133, Z.15-17 (Herakleia Salbake); AvHierapolis 216, Z.5-8; I.Kibyra 291, Z.5. 73 I.Ephesos 13, vgl. Gschnitzer 1989, 392-393 und 400-402.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

295

Den thasischen mnemones wird vorgeschrieben, bei der Errichtung einer öffentlichen Urkunde über ein privates Rechtsgeschäft gegen feste Gebühren tätig zu werden. Sie sollen denjenigen, die beurkunden wollen (dia; tw'n dhmosivwn crhmativzein) Papyrusrollen zur Verfügung stellen. 74 Darunter ist sicherlich nicht nur das Material an und für sich gemeint, sondern die Eintragung in die entsprechenden Listen und die Aufnahme der Urkunde in ein Konvolut von Abschriften. Wörrle setzt diese Tätigkeit mit derjenigen der Archivbeamten in Priene gleich, die eine ajnagrafhv in Papyrusrollen und auf Pergament vornehmen. 75 Derartige Aufgaben der Archive vermute ich auch als Hintergrund der Vorschriften aus Kos, die eingangs vorgestellt wurden. In den Grabinschriften lassen sich verschiedene, unter Einbeziehung des Archivs vorgenommene Rechtsakte nachweisen. Dabei handelt es sich einerseits um den Kauf oder die Vergabe von Berechtigungen an der Grabstätte. Andererseits sind auch Testamente, die dia; tw'n ajrceivwn errichtet wurden, belegt. Schließlich werden die Mitwirkung der Behörden bei der Absicherung der Urkunden und allgemein der Vertragserrichtung angesprochen. An einigen Beispielen soll diese Praxis nun kurz erläutert werden. I.Milet VI 2, 613 (Ende 2. / Anf. 3. Jh. n. Chr.)  WRK-UZ RQHMSULYDWRGLDWZ QDMUFHLYžZQ•7•LYWR 1ZYQLR .DU•S•RIRYUR  HMSLVWHIDQKIRYURX )DELDQRX ¨$JFDUKQRX PKQR KYH>VWDLWZ QHMNJRYQZQ  DXMWRX HLMGHYWLDMI H-D•X•WRX •TDY\HLGZYVHžLWZ 'LGXPHL ഌ a v. th'" 4 ejpigrafh'" aJplou'n ajpetevqh eij" to; ajrcei'on ejpi; stefanhf(ovrou) vacat Aijl(ianou') Popla', mh(no;") i v. Das Heroon erwarb T. Nonius Karpophoros durch die Archive unter dem Stephanephoros Fabianus Ancharenos, im achten Monat. Es gehört auch seinen Nachfahren. Wenn aber jemand außer ihm bestattet, soll er dem Didymeus 1000 Denare geben. Die einfache Abschrift der Inschrift ist hinterlegt im Archiv unter dem Stephanephoros Aelianus Poplas, im zehnten Monat.

Die Inschrift, die auf dem Türsturz des heroons angebracht war, bestätigt zwei Rechtsakte und unterscheidet deutlich zwischen dem Kauf der Grabstätte und der Errichtung des Grabes. Der Kauf wurde unter Mitwirkung der Behörden oder Archive vollzogen und wird nach dem Stephanephoren Fabianus Ancharenos im 8. Monat seiner Amtszeit datiert (Z.2). Der Erwerb des Grabes bildet die Grundlage für die Errichtung desselben, bei der die Berechtigungen zur Grablege ebenso vorgeschrieben wurden, wie eine Strafe für die Mißachtung der Vorschriften (Z.2-3). Die Registrierung einer Kopie der epigraphe erfolgte unter dem Stephanephoren Aelianus Poplas, im 10. Monat seiner Regierungszeit, mithin also zumindest ein Jahr nach dem Kauf des Grabes. Die Inschrift wurde in einem, wohl

74 Weiss 1928, 569 und Daux 1926, 229 weisen den mnemones lediglich eine untergeordnete Rolle zu, indem sie die Aufzeichnung gestatten. Dagegen sprechen sich LambrinudakisWörrle 1983, 328, Anm. 236, aus. 75 Wörrle 1975, 260.

296

erst nach der Graberrichtung, aufgezeichnet. Der ganze Text ist objektiv stilisiert wiedergegeben, vom Grableger wird in der 3. Person gesprochen. Da aus dem Kauf wesentliche Angaben, wie etwa eine genaue Bezeichnung des Kaufobjektes, der Verkäufer, oder der Preis fehlen, haben wir hier wohl nur einen Verweis auf die entsprechende Kaufurkunde vor uns. Auch die Urkunde zur Graberrichtung ist sicher nicht wortwörtlich wiedergegeben, sondern liegt in überarbeiteter Fassung vor. 76 Anders verhält es sich mit dem Beispiel TAM II 63, einer Grabinschrift aus Telmessos. Wiederum erfolgt der Kauf eines Grabmals (hier eines pyrgiskos) durch die Archive und es folgen ein Verbot und die korrespondierende Strafklausel. Der Text ist aber zur Gänze subjektiv stilisiert. TAM II 63, Z.1-8 (Telmessos, kaiserzeitlich) ShsaªmÙºma" Kerameu;" wjnhsavmhn  GLDWZ QDMUFHLY  ZQWRQSXUJLY skon ejmautw'/ kai; gunaikiv mou  ¨(OSLYGL Ich, Sesammas, Kerameier, kaufte durch die Archive das Grabmal für mich und meine Frau Elpis ... 77

Ein Registrierungsvermerk fehlt, wie in Telmessos durchaus üblich. An dieser Stelle muss davor gewarnt werden, aus dem Fehlen einer Archivierungsklausel in Grabinschriften auf das Fehlen der Archivierung selbst zu schließen. Es kann sich durchaus um eine lokale Tradition gehandelt haben, die Hinterlegung der Urkunde eben nicht zu erwähnen. Gerade das funktionierende Archivwesen in den lykischen Städten der Kaiserzeit, auch in Verbindung mit der Errichtung von Gräbern, ist eindrucksvoll nicht zuletzt im Edikt des Q. Veranius belegt, auch wenn in einigen lykischen Städten entsprechende Hinweise auf den Grabinschriften selbst konsequent fehlen. Neben dem Kauf wurde auch die unentgeltliche Weitergabe von Gräbern ohne Eigentumsübergang, die suncwvrhsi", oftmals unter Mitwirkung der Archive vorgenommen. 78 Interessant ist in diesem Zusammenhang auch ein Brief, der

76 Harter-Uibopuu–Wiedergut 2012, bei Anm.9 und 77. 77 ... kai; toi'ª"º | SHQTHUmR®L m® moªuº | Eujfrosuvnh/ kªai;º | ¨,DQRDULYZ kai; tev|12knoi" hJmw'n | kai; Swthrivcw/ | tw'n penqerw'ªnÙº | eJtevrw/ de; oujde|16ni; ejxevstai ta|fh'nai: ejpei; ajªpo|tºeivsei tw'/ ªiJe|rºwtavtw/ ta|20meivw/ ഌ Àafੴ. ... und für meine Schwiegereltern Euphrosyne und Ianoarios und unsere Kinder und Soterichos, (den Sohn?) der Schwiegereltern. Niemand anderem soll es erlaubt sein, bestattet zu werden. Widrigenfalls soll er dem ehrwürdigsten fiscus 1500 Denare zahlen. 78 Ein Beispiel dafür ist etwa die aphrodisische Grabinschrift IAph 2007, 11.103 (1.-3. Jh. n. Chr.):

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

297

auf dem Sockel eines ephesischen Sarkophags erhalten ist, und seinen Empfänger berechtigt, seine Grabrechte in einem Archiv seiner Wahl eintragen zu lassen. I.Ephesos 2121 (204 n. Chr.)79  $LMPLOLYZ¨$ULVWHLYGKWZ NUDWLYVWZ.O¨$QWZQLYD7DWLDQKFDLYUHLQVXJFZUZ VRL   NXYULHYPRXDMGHOIHYHMQK-UZYZWZ R>QWLPRLHMQ¨(IHYVZSURWK SXYOKWK    0DJQKWLNK WKQHMQGH[LD ÖVRURYQHMI Z_NKž deu'saiv se th;n gunai'kav sou. e[graya th;n ejpistolh;n dia; douvlou mou Dionusivou,   K_NDLDXMWKX-SHYJUD\DHMSLX-SDYWZQ)DELYRX.HLYOZQRWREYNDL¨$QQLYRX Livbwno", e[contov" sou ejxousivan ajntigravyaiº h] ajpoqevsqai eij" oJpoi'a a]n boulhqh'/" ajrcei'a kai; mh; parouvsh" ejmou'. Kl.   ¨$QWZQLYD7DWLDQKH>FRXVDWHYNQRQGLYNDLRQHMNHYOHXVDJHQHYVTDL kaqovtiº 4 progevgraptai: kai; e[rrwsqaiv se, kuvriev mou, eu[comai. kai; ajpetevqh eij" ta;   DMUFHL DSURLY.DODQGZ Q 'HNHQEULYZQ)DELYZ.LYOZQLWREY¨$QQLYZ Livbwni uJpavtoi".º Aemilius Aristeides, den vir egregius, grüßt Claudia Antonia Tatiane. Ich übertrage Dir, mein Herr Bruder, in dem Heroon, das mir in Ephesos vor dem magnesischen Tor gehört, den auf der rechten Seite gelegenen Sarkophag, unter der Bedingung, dass Du Deine Frau bestattest. Ich ließ den Brief von meinem Sklaven Dionysios schreiben, und ich unterfertigte ihn selbst unter den Konsuln Fabius Cilo II und Annius Libo, wobei Du das Recht hast, ihn gegenzuzeichnen und zu hinterlegen in welchen Archiven auch immer Du willst, auch ohne meine Anwesenheit. Ich, Claudia Antonia Tatiane, Inhaberin des ius liberorum, befahl, … dass geschehen möge … so wie es oben beschrieben ist. Und ich wünsche Dir, mein Herr, dass es Dir wohl ergehe. Und es wurde hinterlegt (sc. die Urkunde) in den Archiven am 22. November im Jahr der Konsuln Fabius Cilo II und Annius Libo.

Die Grabinhaberin, Claudia Antonia Tatiane, eine römische Bürgerin, überträgt ihrem Bruder Aemilius Aristeides das Recht auf einen Sarkophag in ihrem Grabhaus, damit er seine verstorbene Frau bestatten kann. Entgegen der bisherigen Meinung denke ich, dass es Tatiane nicht darum gegangen war, ihrem Bruder zu gestatten, die Archivierung der synchoresis entweder vorzunehmen oder das

oJ plavta" ejstin Tiberivou | Klaudivou Diadoumevnou | kai; mLM®GLYZQ aujtou' kata; th;n do|4qei'san aujtw'/ suncwvrhsin uJ|po; Salbivou ªtºoªu'º ÔErmogevnou" | dia; tou' ªcºreofulakivou w|n a[n | ti" metaªkiºnhvsei touvtwn ti|8na; mhvªteº hJ gh' karpofovroª"º mhv|te qavlªaºssa plwth; e[stªwº auj|tw'/ tw'/ ejpiªcºeirhvsanti. Unterbau (des Grabes) des Tiberius Claudius Diadoumenos und seiner Angehörigen, gemäß der ihm von Salvius, Sohn des Hermogenes, durch das chreophylakion erteilten synchoresis. Wer etwa einen von diesen wegbewegt, dem soll die Erde keine Früchte tragen und das Meer nicht schiffbar sein, ihm, der die Tat ausführt. Fast alle aphrodisischen Grabinschriften verweisen auf die Hinterlegung der Urkunden im chreophylakion. Vgl. etwa aber auch TAM II 171, Z.4-7 (Hippokome); TAM II 925, Z.6-8 (Rhodiapolis); TAM II 881, Z.3-6 (Akalissos); TAM II 353 (Xanthos). Allgemein zur synchoresis Ritti 2004, 481-482; Wörrle 1975, 270-272; Harter-Uibopuu–Wiedergut 2012, bei Anm. 15-22. 79 Stirnseite eines Marmorquaders (H 0.22 – B 1.89 – T 0.78), der mit einem weiteren, rechts anschließenden Marmorquader den Sockel eines der Sarkophage gebildet hat. Zur Grabanlage des Q. Aemilius Aristeides, in der drei Sarkophage aufgestellt waren, siehe ausführlich Rudolf 1992.

298

Schreiben einfach zu behalten. Vielmehr gesteht sie ihm zu, die Archivierung auch ohne ihre Anwesenheit durchführen zu können. Dies würde bedeuten, dass die Anwesenheit beider Parteien bei der behördlichen Eintragung eines derartigen Rechtsgeschäfts notwendig gewesen war. Ob allerdings die Archivierung für die Rechtskraft der synchoresis zwingend war, oder lediglich eine Möglichkeit des Schutzes darstellte, lässt sich anhand dieses Textes nicht eindeutig klären. 80 Die Bestätigung der Archivierung wird am Ende des Textes angeführt und datiert, dabei ist aber weder klar, ob es sich dabei um die Archive in Ephesos handelte, noch, welcher Rechtsakt von der Eintragung betroffen war. Auch unter den Grabinschriften sind Texte erhalten, in denen die für Delphi vorgestellten Brüche zwischen subjektiver und objektiver Stilisierung nachgewiesen werden können. Dafür steht etwa eine Inschrift aus Hypaipa in Lydien. Auf dem Grabmal des Arztes Basileides, S.d. Menodoros, das dieser für sich, seine Frau und die Nachkommen errichtete beginnt der Text in objektiver Stilisierung, lediglich der Vermerk der Absicherung durch die Archive in Hypaipa ist subjektiv stilisiert. 81 Viele Gräber weisen Inschriften auf, die durch verschiedene Schreiber — manchmal mit deutlichem zeitlichem Abstand — gesetzt wurden. Grabsteine wurden oftmals wieder verwendet, ohne die älteren Grabtexte zu eradieren. Manchmal wurden auch Teile dieser Texte bewußt stehen gelassen, um dem neuen Formular angepasst zu werden. 82 Interessant für den vorliegenden Beitrag sind Texte, in denen die Mitwirkung der Archive bei Nachträgen aufgezeigt werden kann. Als Beispiel sei hier eine Grabinschrift aus Olympos vorgestellt.

80 Zur Auffassung Wengers (1929, 341-343) siehe Harter-Uibopuu 2012, bei Anm. 17. 81 I.Ephesos 3829 (SEG 31,997, vgl. BE 1982, 352, Marmortafel mit tabula ansata): Basileivdh" Mhnodovtou ijatro;" ka|teskeuvasen to; mnhmei'on eJautw'/ kai; | gunaiki; kai; ejggovnoi", mhdeno;" e[con|4to" ejxousivan ajpallotriw'sai aujto; | kata; mhdevna trovpon: eij de; mhv, uJpeuvqu|non ei\nai ÔUpaiphnw'n boulh'/ prosteiv|mou ojnovmati *, bf v : tou'to de; kai; dia; tw'n ejn ÔUpaiv|8 poi" ajrceivwn hjsfavlismai. Basileides, Sohn des Menodotos, Arzt, ließ das Grabmal für sich, seine Frau und die Nachkommen errichten, wobei es niemandem zusteht, dieses auf irgendeine Art und Weise zu veräußern. Wenn aber doch, so soll er der Boule der Hypaiper unter dem Titel «Strafzahlung» auf 2500 Denare verantwortlich sein. Dieses sicherte ich auch durch die Archive in Hypaipa ab. Vgl. zu den Stilbrüchen auch: I.Nikaia 117; AvHierapolis 278; TAM II 68 (Telmessos, die Errichtung des Grabes ist in der 3. Person Sg. beschrieben, der Vermerk der Berechtigung durch das Archiv in der 1. Person Sg.); TAM II 1130 (Olympos). 82 Vgl. etwa SEG 48,1394; I.Ephesos 2218A; I.Ephesos 1655 und Harter-Uibopuu 2012 bei Anm. 58-61.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

299

TAM II 1028, Z.1-17 (Olympos, römisch)83 WRQWXYPERQNDWHVNHXY  D•VHQ¨,VRYFUXVžRKMOHRXTH rwmevno" uJpo; klhronovmwn 4 'LRWH•LYPRXGLH-DXWZ NDL¨$JDTKPH  ULYGLTXJD•WUL'KPKWULYD•K_DMQHTUHY yamen: eJtevrw/ de; oujdeni; ejxevstai  NKGHXTK QD•LK@RMI•H•L•OHYVH•L•T•H•Z • 8 ÔHfaivstw/ *IYNDLWHLYVHLGLYNDNDWDFTR nivoi" qeoi'". col I. VXQHFZYUK  VDGHNDL6H 12 UDSLYD1HLNH nevth" th'/ gunaikiv mou  NDLWRL HM[DXM 16 th'", h|/ kai; dia; tw'n ajrceivwn. Das Grab errichtete Isochrysos, freigelassen von den Erben des Diotimos, Sohn des Diotimos, für sich und Agathemeris, Tochter der Demetria, die wir aufgezogen haben. Niemand anderem sei es gestattet, bestattet zu werden, widrigenfalls wird er dem Gott Hephaistos 500 Denare schulden und den unterirdischen Göttern Strafen entrichten. Ich habe die Zustimmung auch erteilt der Serapia Nikenetes, meiner Frau und ihren Kindern; ihr auch durch die Archive.

Der Grableger Isochrysos, ein Freigelassener, errichtete ein Grab für sich und Agathemeris, die Tochter der Demetria. 84 Allen anderen wird eine Bestattung darin verboten. Dennoch zeigt col. I ab Z.10 das Zugeständnis der Grablege an Serapia Nikenetis und ihre Nachkommen, die nun ebenfalls in dem Grab bestattet werden dürfen. Die synchoresis wird dia; tw'n ajrceivwn erteilt, darauf verweist der in der ersten Person sprechende Grableger, der wohl Isochrysos selbst sein muß. Serapia könnte meines Erachtens die zweite Frau des Isochrysos gewesen sein, für die er seine ursprüngliche Beschränkung des Grabrechts aufhob. Zusätzlich

83 Die Inschrift stammt von einem Grabhaus in Olympos, oberhalb der Tür waren Z.1-9 angebracht, auf dem linken Türpfosten Z.10-19, auf dem rechten Türpfosten Z.20-26. Heberdey vermutet wohl zu Recht, das der Text ab Z.10 später angebracht wurde als der Haupttext. Die Annahme, dass Z.20-26 noch später gesetzt wurden, kann aus dem Inhalt der Inschrift nicht bestätigt werden. Ich nehme an, dass die nächste Bestimmung bereits in Z.18, also auf dem linken Pfosten, beginnt. Z.18-26 enthält die Berechtigung der Grablege für einen ehemaligen Sklaven, an dessen Freilassung die Archive von Olympos mitgewirkt hatten: sunecwvrh|sa |20 kai; Filivp|pw/ W•Z ž ND•L | Qeotivmw | ¨2OXQSKQZ  ªo}nº |24 kai; dia; tw'ªnº | DMžUFHLYZ•Q aj|SžKOHXT•HY•UZVDž Ich habe die Zustimmung auch dem Philippos erteilt, der auch Theotimos genannt wird, Olympener, den ich durch die Archive freigelassen habe. 84 Die Verwendung der 1. Person Pl. im Aorist deutet jedenfalls darauf hin, dass es nicht der Grableger Isochrysos war, der für Agathemeris gesorgt hatte. Sie wird möglicherweise ebenso eine Freigelassene gewesen sein wie er, die Errichtung eines Grabes für sich selbst und seine Frau wäre naheliegend.

300

wird auch dem ehemaligen Sklaven Philippos Platz im Grabhaus eingeräumt. Gerade aus Olympos haben wir weitere Beispiele, die aufgrund der Schriftführung und der Anordnung der Texte nahe legen, dass es auch nach der Errichtung eines Grabes und der Anbringung der Grabinschrift möglich war, durch synchoresis die Berechtigungen zu erweitern und die Rechtsakte auf dem Stein nachzutragen. 85 Die Mitwirkung der Archive wurde in manchen Fällen wohl betont, um die Rechtmäßigkeit der Vorgehensweise zu belegen. Zahlreiche Grabinschriften aus Olympos belegen, dass eine Berechtigung zur Grablege, die nach der Graberrichtung erfolgte, schriftlich ausgeführt werden musste, so z.B. in TAM II 1003, Z.5-7: eJtevrw/ de; oujdeni; ejxevstai khdeu'se, eij mh; ejgwv tini HMQ•JUDYIZ ejpitrevyw Keinem anderen ist es gestattet, zu bestatten, wenn ich ihm nicht schriftlich die Erlaubnis erteile. 86 Anzunehmenderweise ist mit der schriftlichen Ausfertigung der entsprechenden Urkunde auch eine behördliche Genehmigung verbunden gewesen. Wie bereits eingangs angesprochen, ist der Vermerk ajpetevqh eij" to; ajrcei'on in den Urkunden wesentlich häufiger anzutreffen, als derjenige, dass etwas dia; tw'n ajrceivwn durch die Behörden zu geschehe. In all diesen Fällen läßt sich die Rolle der Archive bei einer Hinterlegung, die durch das Verb ajpotivqhmi nahegelegt wird, nicht bestimmen. Dennoch gibt es Überlegungen, die auf mehr als eine bloße Entgegennahme bereits vorbereiteter Urkunden deuten, und eine Mitwirkung der zuständigen Amtsträger nahelegen. In seinem Kommentar zum Edikt des Veranius argumentiert Wörrle überzeugend, dass die shmeivwsi" eine subjektiv stilisierte Erklärung des Grablegers zu Berechtigungen, Verboten und Strafen im Zusammenhang mit seiner Grabstätte darstelle, die bei den zuständigen Archivbehörden zur Genehmigung eingereicht wurde. 87 Dass die Rolle der Archive bei der Errichtung der Graburkunden nicht zu unterschätzen ist, legen zudem die starken lokalen Traditionen in der Formulierung der Texte nahe. In den meisten Städten Ioniens und Kariens (mit Ausnahme von Ephesos und Smyrna) werden stets ähnliche Wendungen gebraucht, um Verbote zu setzen, Berechtigungen zu erteilen und Strafen anzudrohen. 88 Die Archivbeamten werden also vermutlich bei der Erstellung der Texte geholfen oder zumindest Vorlagen zur Verfügung gestellt haben. Schließlich gelang es der Stadt auf diese Art und Weise auch, den Überblick über Eigentumsverhältnisse an Grabstätten zu bewahren. Somit fügen sich die Urkunden, die von Erwerb und Veräußerung

85 Zusätzliche Bewilligungen nach der vollständigen ersten Grabinschrift enthalten TAM II 1026, Z.8-13; 1031, Z.9-24; 1042, Z.6-13; 1089, Z.12-16; 1134, Z.8-14; 1137, Z.7-14; 1142, Z.9-15 und weitere. 86 Vgl. in Olympos: TAM II 969, Z.4-5; 972, Z.5-7; 983, Z.4-5; 996, Z.3-5; 999, Z.4-6 und etwa 30 weitere Belege. Die schriftliche Erteilung von Zugeständnissen findet sich überall in Lykien in Grabinschriften, außerhalb Lykiens sind die Belege sehr spärlich, vgl. etwa I.Iasos 385, Z.5. 87 Wörrle 1975, 269-272. Möglicherweise wird man in der shmeivwsi" allerdings nicht eine Urkundenform sondern einen genehmigenden Rechtsakt von Seiten der Behörde zu sehen haben, wie K. Wiedergut mitteilt. 88 Zu Ephesos siehe Harter-Uibopuu 2012, bei Anm. 33-34.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

301

von Grabstätten sprechen, in die Registrierung von Grundbesitz, die aus früheren Jahrhunderten gut bekannt ist, ein. *** Durch die Mitwirkung der städtischen Behörden und Archive an den Freilassungen in Delphi im 1. Jh. n. Chr. und den Graberrichtungen im kaiserzeitlichen Kleinasien, sowie die Erläuterung der beiden koischen Inschriftenfragmente konnte angedeutet werden, dass die Stadt ab dem ausgehenden Hellenismus und verstärkt in der Kaiserzeit Interesse daran zeigte, private Rechtsgeschäfte durch ihre Zustimmung abzusichern. Die Archive fungierten nicht nur als Hinterlegungsorte für Akten und Urkunden, sondern auch als Notariate. Gleichzeitig hatte die Polis mit der oftmals obligatorischen Einreichung von Urkunden ein Mittel gewonnen, die Übereinstimmung dieser Rechtsgeschäfte mit den geltenden Vorschriften zu überprüfen.

302

Bibliographie

Albrecht 1978 K.-D. Albrecht, Rechtsprobleme in den Freilassungen der Böotier, Phoker, Dorier, Ostund Westlokrer, Rechts- und Staatswissenschaftliche Veröffentlichungen der GörresGesellschaft, N. F. 26, Paderborn. Arnaoutoglou 1998 I. Arnaoutoglou, Ancient Greek Laws. A Sourcebook, New York. Boffo 1995 L. Boffo, Ancora una volta sugli „archivi“ nel mondo greco: conservazione e „pubblicazione“ epigrafica, «Athenaeum», 83, 91-130. Bousquet 1964 J. Bousquet, Inscriptions de Delphes, «BCH», 88, 380-394. Buraselis 2000 K. Buraselis, Kos between Hellenism and Rome, Philadelphia. Burkhalter 1990 F. Burkhalter, Archives locales et archives centrales en Égypte romaine, «Chiron», 20, 191-216. Calderini 1908 A. Calderini, La manomissione e la condizione dei liberti in Grecia, Milano. Colin 1898 G. Colin, Notes de chronologie delphique, «BCH», 22, 1-200. Dareste – Haussollier – Reinach 1898 R. Dareste – B. Haussoullier – T. Reinach, Recueil des inscriptions juridiques Grecques II, Paris. Davies 2003 J.K. Davies, Greek Archives: From Record to Monument, in M. Brosius (ed.), Ancient Archives and Archival Traditions. Concepts of Record-Keeping in the Ancient World, Oxford, 323-343.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

Daux 1926 G. Daux, Nouvelles Inscriptions de Thasos 1921-24, «BCH», 50, 213-249. Daux 1936 G. Daux, Delphes au IIe et au Ier siècle depuis l’abaissement de l’Étolie jusqu’ à la paix romaine, 191-31 av. J.-C., Paris. Fröhlich 2004 P. Fröhlich, Les cités grecques et le contrôle des magistrats, Genève. Gauthier 1972 P. Gauthier, Symbola. Les étrangers et la justice dans les cités grecques, Nancy. Georgoudi 1988 S. Georgoudi, Manières d’archivage et archives des cités, in M. Detienne (ed.), Les savoirs de l’écriture. En Grèce ancienne, Lille, 221-247. Grieb 2008 V. Grieb, Hellenistische Demokratie. Politische Organisation und Struktur in freien griechischen Poleis nach Alexander dem Großen, Historia Einzelschriften 199, Stuttgart. Gschnitzer 1989 F. Gschnitzer, Beurkundungsgebühren im römischen Kaiserreich. Zu IvE I a 13, in G. Thür (ed.), Symposion 1985. Vorträge zur griechischen und hellenistischen Rechtsgeschichte (Ringberg, 24.-26. Juli 1985), KölnWien, 389-403. Haensch 1992 R. Haensch, Das Statthalterarchiv, «ZRG», 109, 209-317. Harter-Uibopuu 2012 K. Harter-Uibopuu, Tote soll man ruhen lassen ... Verbote und Strafen zur Sicherung von Gräbern am Beispiel der Inschriften von Ephesos, in J. Fischer (ed.), Der Beitrag Kleinasiens zur Kultur- und Geistesgeschichte der griechisch-

303

römischen Antike, Wien, im Druck. Harter-Uibopuu – Wiedergut 2012 K. Harter-Uibopuu – K. Wiedergut, Kein anderer soll hier bestattet werden – Grabschutz im kaiserzeitlichen Milet, in G. Thür (ed.), Tagungsakten des ZAA-Symposions „Grabrituale und Jenseitsvorstellungen“, Origines 3, Wien, im Druck. Hopkins 1978 K. Hopkins, Conquerors and Slaves. Sociological Studies in Roman History I, Cambridge. Keramopullos 1904 A.D. Keramopullos, Die eigenhändigen Unterschriften in den delphischen Freilassungsurkunden, «Klio», 4, 18-28. Klaffenbach 1960 G. Klaffenbach, Bemerkungen zum griechischen Urkundenwesen, «Sitzungsberichte der deutschen Akademie der Wissenschaften zu Berlin, Klasse für Sprachen, Literatur und Kunst», 1960, 6, Berlin. Kränzlein 1964 A. Kränzlein, Zu den Freilassungsinschriften aus Delphi, in A. Guarino (ed.), Synteleia Vincenzo Arangio-Ruiz, Napoli, 820-827.

Kränzlein 1984 A. Kränzlein, Die Fragen der Rechtsverfolgung in Delphi zur Zeit der Freilassungsinschriften, in P.D. Dimakis (ed.), Mneme G.A. Petropoulos, II, Athen, 59-68. Lambrinudakis – Wörrle 1983 W. Lambrinudakis – M. Wörrle, Ein hellenistisches Reformgesetz über das öffentliche Urkundenwesen von Paros, «Chiron», 13, 283–368. Larfeld 1902 W. Larfeld, Handbuch der griechischen Epigraphik 2.2. Handbuch der attischen Inschriften, Leipzig (Nachdruck 1971). Lefèvre 1998 F. Lefèvre, L‘Amphictionie pyléodelphique: histoire et institutions, Paris . Mulliez 1984 D. Mulliez, Notes d‘épigraphie delphique II-III, «BCH», 108, 1, 355-389. Mulliez 1986 D. Mulliez, Notes d‘épigraphie delphique IV-V, «BCH», 110, 1, 433-460. Mulliez 1992 D. Mulliez, Les actes d’affranchissement delphiques, «CCG», 3, 31-44.

Kränzlein 1980 A. Kränzlein, Bemerkungen zu Form und Inhalt der delphischen Freilassungen, «RIDA», 3. Serie, 27, 81-91.

Parker – Obbink 2000 R. Parker – D. Obbink, Aus der Arbeit an den Inscriptiones Graecae VI. Sales of Priesthoods on Cos I, «Chiron», 30, 415-447.

Kränzlein 1983 A. Kränzlein, Die Bedeutung der ajpevdoto-Aufzeichnungen im Heiligen Bezirk für die juristische Erfassung des Rechtsinstituts Freilassung in Delphi, in G. Kocher – G.D. Hasiba (eds.), Festschrift Berthold Sutter, Graz, 301-308.

Pomtow 1889 H. Pomtow, Beiträge zur Topographie von Delphi, Berlin. Ritti 2004 T. Ritti, Iura Sepulcrorum a Hierapolis di Frigia nel quadro dell’epigrafia sepolcrale microasiatica. Iscrizioni edite e inedite, in S. Panciera (ed.),

Libitina e dintorni. Atti dell’ XI Rencontre franco-italienne sur l’épigraphie, Roma, 455–634. Robert 1963 L. Robert, Noms indigènes dans l’Asie-Mineure gréco-romaine, Paris. Rudolf 1992 E. Rudolf, Der Sarkophag des Quintus Aemilius Aristides, OeAW Phil.-Hist. Kl. Denkschriften 230, Wien. Rüfner 1997 T. Rüfner, Eine nicht alltägliche Freilassung. Bemerkungen zur Inschrift FD III 2, 243, «ZRG», 114, 369-377. Thomas 1992 R. Thomas, Literacy and Orality in Ancient Greece, Cambridge. Velissaropoulos-Karakostas 2011 J. VelissaropoulosKarakostas, Droit grec d’Alexandre à Auguste (323. av. J.-C. – 14 ap. J.-C.). Personnes – Biens – Justice, I und II, Athen. Weiss 2004 A. Weiss, Sklave der Stadt. Untersuchungen zur öffentlichen Sklaverei in den Städten des Römischen Reiches, Historia Einzelschriften 173, Stuttgart. Weiss 1923 E. Weiss, Griechisches Privatrecht auf rechtsvergleichender Grundlage, Leipzig (Neudruck Aalen 1965). Weiss 1928 E. Weiss, Neue Urkunde aus Thasos über die Mnemones, «ZRG», 48, 567-570. Wenger 1929 L. Wenger, Eine ephesische Inschrift zum Grabrecht, «ZRG», 49, 328-344. Wilhelm 1909 A. Wilhelm, Beiträge zur

304

griechischen Inschriftenkunde mit einem Anhange über die öffentliche Aufzeichnung von Urkunden, Wien (unveränderter Nachdruck Hildesheim-ZürichNew York 1989). Wörrle 1975 M. Wörrle, Zwei neue griechische Inschriften aus Myra zur Verwaltung Lykiens in der Kaiserzeit, in J. Borchhardt (ed.), Myra. Eine lykische Metropole in antiker und byzantinischer Zeit, Berlin, 254-300. Zelnick-Abramovitz 2005 R. Zelnick-Abramovitz, Not Wholly Free. The Concept of Manumission and the Status of Manumitted Slaves in the Ancient Greek World, Mnemosyne Supplement 266, Leiden.

epigraphische quellen zum archivwesen…

305

Bevölkerungskontrolle, Statuszugang und Archivpraxis im römischen Ägypten1 thomas kruse

Zu den einschneidensten Maßnahmen, die die Römer nach der Übernahme der Herrschaft in Ägypten getroffen haben, gehörte sicherlich die Einführung der Kopfsteuer, die in Ägypten laografiva genannt wurde. Von ihr waren nur Römer, Alexandriner und die Bewohner der zunächst zwei (Naukratis und Ptolemais Hermiu) bzw. (nach der Gründung von Antinoupolis) drei poleis in der ägyptischen Chora ausgenommen. Ansonsten waren ihr alle Bewohner des Landes unterworfen, also auch die in der Chora lebenden Griechen bzw. derjenige Teil der hellenisierten Bevölkerung, der sich seinem Selbstverständnis nach als „Griechen“ sah, was diese Personen besonders hart getroffen haben dürfte, weil sie damit auf eine Stufe mit den Ägyptern gestellt wurden. Diese anfängliche Diskriminierung durch die Kopfsteuer wurde indessen durch fiskalische Privilegien wieder partiell differenziert, indem nämlich ein Teil der Bewohner der Gaumetropolen die Kopfsteuer zu einem reduzierten Satz bezahlte. Diese Gruppe wurde im Arsinoites etwa einfach als ajpo; mhtropovlew~ bezeichnet, in Oxyrhynchos hingegen als mhtropoli`tai dwdekavdracmoi sowie

1 Die Siglen der Papyruseditionen folgen der “Checklist of Editions of Greek, Latin, Demotic and Coptic Papyri, Ostraca and Tablets“ (http://library.duke.edu/rubenstein/scriptorium/papyrus/texts/clist.html).

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

307

im Herakleopolites als ojktavdracmoi, weil der ermäßigte Kopfsteuersatz dort bei 12 Dr. bzw. 8 Dr. lag. Für die Einreihung in diese von den Römern neu konstituierte Statusgruppe mußte von Vater- wie Mutterseite die Abkunft von Metropoliten nachgewiesen werden. Aus der metropolitanen Bevölkerung wiederum herausgehoben war ihre Elite. Sie ist in einigen Gaumetropolen unter der Bezeichnung ajpo; (oder ejk tou`) gumnasivou bezeugt. Für die Aufnahme in diese Statusgruppe war offenbar eine möglichst lange, lückenlose Reihe von gewissermaßen „gymnasialen“ Vorfahren gefordert. 2 Im Arsinoites, der das Gebiet der heute Fayum genannten durch den westlichen Seitenarm des Nil gespeisen Oase umfaßte, entsprach den ajpo; gumnasivou als hauptsächliche Träger hellenischer Kultur mehr oder weniger die Gruppe der kavtoikoi. Sie waren die Nachkommen der von den Ptolemäerkönigen dort in großer Zahl angesiedelten militärischen Kleruchen. Die offizielle Bezeichnung der Angehörigen dieser sozialen Gruppe lautete „Katöke aus der Klasse der 6475 (griechischen Männer) des Arsinoites.“3 Diese so seltsam technisch anmutenden Bezeichnung verweist deutlich auf den bürokratischen Akt der Konstituierung dieser Gruppe, demnach die Römer irgendwann einmal die „Griechen“ des Fayum gemustert, aus ihnen einen numerus clausus von 6475 Katöken gebildet und diese mit fiskalischen Privilegien ausgestattet haben müssen. 4 Über den Zugang zu diesen privilegierten Statusgruppen wachten die lokalen Verwaltungsbehörden mittels eines als ejpivkrisi~ bezeichneten Verfahrens der Statusfeststellung und Statuskontrolle, welchem die männliche Bevölkerung i.d.R. mit dem Eintritt der Volljährigkeit (und damit der Steuerpflichtigkeit) im 14. Lebensjahr unterworfen wurde. Für römische Bürger, Militärveteranen und (zumindest anfänglich auch die Alexandriner) wurde die Epikrisis hingegen vom praefectus Aegypti vorgenommen, wie einige diesbezügliche Aktenauszüge des Statthalterarchivs zeigen.5 Wegen der besseren Dokumentation für die Details des Verfahrens soll im Folgenden indes die Epikrisis der privilegierten Gruppen der enchorischen Bevölkerung im Mittelpunkt stehen. 6 Ebenfalls außer Betracht

2 Zur gymnasialen Klasse im Besonderen siehe auch Whitehorne 1982; van Minnen 2002; Ruffini 2006. 3 Siehe etwa SB VI 9145,5 (cf. BL X 196; 184-192 n.Chr.): NDYžW•RLNRa ajpªo; WZCžQ• ×žX•R•H• tou` ¨$UVLQRžHLYWRX« SB XX 14163,5 (= P.Tebt. II 566 descr.): NDYWžR•L•NRa (l. katoivkou) tw`n ejn ¨$UVLQRLYWK ajªnºdrw`n ÔEllhvnwn. 4

Zu den Katöken im Arsinoites siehe auch Montevecchi 1970, 1975; Canducci 1990, 1991.

5 Zur Rolle des Archivs des praefectus Aegypti für die Archivierung der Akten über die Epikrisis dieser Personengruppen siehe auch Haensch 1992, 290-293. 6 Die umfangreichste analytische Behandlung der Epikrisis ist nach wie vor Nelson 1979, seitdem ist zwar eine nicht unbeträchtliche Anzahl neuer Epikrisis-Dokumente hinzugekommen, die das vorher bekannte Bild von ihrem bürokratischen Prozedere indes nicht wesentlich verändert haben; zu einzelnen Aspekten der Epikrisis siehe ferner: Montevecchi 1974; Kruse 2002, 252-271; Yiftach-Firanko 2010.

308

bleiben im Folgenden auch die ägyptischen Priester, die als Personengruppe mit besonderer Funktion und teilweise ausgestattet mit fiskalischen Privilegien ebenfalls einer Epikrisis unterworfen waren, mittels derer die zuständigen Behörden den Zugang zu den diversen Priesterämtern und die Zusammensetzung der Priesterschaften in den ägyptischen Tempeln reglementierten und kontrollierten. 7 Nicht bereits die Geburt, sondern erst ein administrativ-bürokratischer Akt in Form der Epikrisis entschied also darüber, ob die männliche Nachkommenschaft denselben privilegerten Status beanspruchen konnte wie ihre Eltern. Die Epikrisis fällte mithin eine wesentliche Entscheidung über den künftigen Platz einer Person in der Gesellschaft und das Ausmaß des ihm von dieser zugebilligten Sozialprestiges. Diese hohe gesellschaftliche Bedeutung der Epikrisis wird in sprechender Weise etwa auch dadurch illustriert, daß die betroffenen Familien die erfolgreiche Absolvierung der Epikrisis ihrer jungen männlichen Nachkommen als einen Grund zum Feiern betrachteten wie etwa kleine Einladungsbillets zu Epikrisis-Feiern aus der mittelägyptischen Gaumetropole Oxyrhynchos zeigen. 8 Die erfolgreiche Absolvierung der Epikrisis führte dazu, daß die betreffende Person künftig in den offiziellen Akten als ejpikekrimevno~ geführt wurde. Als Beispiel seien etwa zwei Einträge in einer insgesamt 173 Einträge umfassenden Liste genannt, die der Vorsteher des Stadtviertels Apolloniu Parembole der arsinoitischen Gaumetropole Ptolemais Euergetis (Arsinoe) im Jahr 72/73 n.Chr. erstellt hat und die diejenigen in dem besagten a[mfodon ansässigen männlichen Personen umfaßt, die den ermäßigten metropolitanen Kopfsteuersatz zu bezahlen hatten. Die Liste ist Haus für Haus angeordnet und verzeichnet in jedem Eintrag neben dem Namen der betreffenden Person auch das Jahr ihrer Epikrisis und ob der Betreffende gegebenenfalls anläßlich dieser Überprüfung unter die 14-jährigen (d.h. also erstmalig unter die Kopfsteuerpflichtigen für den privilegierten metropolitanen Kopfsteuersatz) eingereiht worden war und schließlich sein Alter zum Zeitpunkt der Erstellung der Liste. Die beiden Einträge betreffen zwei junge Männer, die im Haus ihrer Mutter Tamystha wohnen: oijkiv(a) Tamuvsqa~: ¨$SROOZYQLžRa ¨$SROO•Z•Q•LY•RX WRžXC• ¨$SROOZžQ•LY•R•X• mh(tro;~) Tamuvsq(a~) ejpik(ekrimevno~) ejn (tessareskaidekaetevsi) d (e[tei) (ejtw`n) kq ¼ ¨:ULgevnh~ ajdelfo;~ mh(tro;~) th`~ aujth`ª~ ejpiºk(ekrimevno~) ejn (tessareskaidekaetevsi) z (e[tei) (ejtw`n) N× 9

7

Zu ejpivkrisi~ und ei[skrisi~ der ägyptischen Priester siehe auch Kruse 2002, 258-262.

8 Siehe etwa P.Oxy. XXXVI 2792: kalei` se ÔWreivwn (l. ÔWrivwn) eij~ ¼ th;n ejpivkrisin tou` ¼ uiJou` th`/ ie eij~ ¼ th;n ªijºdivan oijkivan ¼5 ajpo; w{ra~ K« LXVI 4541: ejrwta`/ se deipnh`sai Sarapivwªnº ¼ eij~ to; Kapitwvl(eion) eij~ ejpivk(risin) tou` ¼ uiJou` aujtou` ªajºpo; w{r(a~) q (beide 3. Jh.). 9

P.Lond. II 260 Kol. I Z. 1-2 (= SPP IV p. 62 Z. 507-508).

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

309

„Haus der Tamystha: Apollonios, Sohn des Apollonios des Sohnes des Apollonios, die Mutter ist Tamystha, im 4. Jahr (sc. des Nero = 57/58 n.Chr.) der Epikrisis unterzogen und in die Klasse der 14-jährigen eingeschrieben, 29 Jahre alt. | Horigenes, sein Bruder von derselben Mutter, im 7. Jahr (sc. des Nero = 60/61) der Epikrisis unterzogen und in die Klasse der 14-jährigen eingeschrieben, 27 Jahre alt.“

Die Statusbezeichnung ejpikekrimevno~ erscheint aber auch als Selbstbezeichnung in Eingaben an die Behörden, in denen die Angabe des Personalstatus von Relevanz war. Dies gilt etwa für die sog. „Zensusdeklarationen“ oder besser: Haushaltsdeklarationen (die NDW¨ oijkivan ajpografaiv), mittels derer jeder Haushaltsvorstand im Zuge des alle 14 Jahre stattfindenden Provinzialzensus, die in seinem Haushalt lebenden Personen den Behörden gegenüber zu melden hatte.10 So deklariert etwa ein Haushaltsvorstand in Ptolemais Euergetis in einer für den Zensus des Jahres 145/146 n.Chr. den Behörden eingereichten Deklaration, unter den in seinem Haushalt lebenden Personen einen 73-jährigen Mieter namens Chares, der den Katökenstatus besitzt, jedoch zu den sog. „Überjährigen“ (uJperetaiv) gehört, also demjenigen Personenkreis, der die Altersgrenze der Kopfsteuerpflicht von 61 Jahren überschritten hat, dessen Ehefrau und Schwester und sodann unter deren Kindern, den Sohn, der als ejpikekrimevno~ ejn katoivkoi~ bezeichnet wird, d.h. nach erfolgreicher Epikrisis in die Statusgruppe seines Vaters eingeschrieben worden war.11 Die Epikrisis schied mithin regelmäßig die fiskalisch-privilegierten Gruppen der Bevölkerung als ejpikekrimevnoi von der großen Masse der einfachen Kopfsteuerpflichtigen, den laografouvmenoi mit dem Ergebnis einer rigiden Klasseneinteilung der Bevölkerung. Die Auswirkungen dieser Art von Bevölkerungspolitik hat Hans-Julius Wolff treffend dahingehend charakterisiert, daß sie „das schon immer bestehende Gefälle zwischen jener (sc. hellenisierten Oberschicht)

10 Zum Provinzialzensus im römischen Ägypten siehe Hombert – Préaux 1952; Bagnall – Frier 1994; Kruse 2002, 63-139; Jördens 2009, 62-94; siehe ferner Bagnall 1991; Palme 1993. Gelegentlich erscheint der Terminus ejpivkrisi~ auch als Bezeichnung für die Haushaltdeklarationen im Zuge des Provinzialzensus, so etwa in P.Hamb. I 60,7-9 (Hermupolis, 90 n.Chr.): ajpogravfomai … eij~ th;n kat¨ R•LM•NLYDQž HMS•LYNUžL•VLQ (für weitere Zeugnisse siehe Bussi 2003, 162) sowie in Zusammenhang mit deren Überprüfung bzw. der auf der Grundlage der Überprüfung der NDW¨ oijkivan ajpografaiv erstellten Register, die mitunter unter der Bezeichnung pediako;n ejpikrivsew~ th`~ NDW¨ oijkivan ajpografh`~ erscheinen (siehe hierzu auch Kruse 2002, 264-265). Diese Verwendung des Begriffes ejpivkrisi~ beruht auf dessen allgemeiner Grundbedeutung als „Überprüfung“, „Inspektion“ etc. und ist von dem hier diskutierten Verfahren der Statusüberprüfung zu unterscheiden. 11 P.Meyer 9,6-8 (cf. BL X 121; Ptolemais Euergetis, 8. Juli 147 n.Chr.): tou;~ uJpogegra(mmevnou~) ejnoivkºou~, &DYUK•W•D ¨$WžDULYRX tou` Dªionusivoºu mhtro;~ ªCarºeitivou th`~ ¨$I•UžRGHLVLYRžX kavtoikon tw`n ײXRH uJpereth` (ejtw'n) ªoºg D>•VKP•Ra (l. a[shmon) kaªi; th;ºn ¼ ªtouvtou gunai`ka ou\san oJmopavtriºon ajdelªfºh;n ÔHroivda mhtro;~ Tertiva~ th`~ Diduvmou qugaªtro;º~ katoªivºkou DMSRžJHJUDPP•HYQKQž tw`/ Lו (e[tou~) T•HžR•XC• Ñ$GU•L•DQRXC• HM•SL ¼ ªtou` aujtou` ajmfovdou Dionºusiv(ou Tovpwn) (ejtw`n) ma a[shm(on) kai; ajmfot(evrwn) tevkna ¨$WDULYDQ (ejtw`n) ka a[shm(on) ejpikekrim(evnon) ejn katoivkoi~.

310

und den eingeborenen Massen durch soziale und steuerliche Bevorzugung der ersteren in eine politisch-rechtliche Diskriminierung der letzteren umwandelte und so zu verewigen suchte.“12 Das administrative Prozedere bei der Durchführung der Epikrisis kann wie folgt skizziert werden: Die Eltern oder der Vormund stellten bei den zuständigen Behörden – vor allem in Gest alt des Strategen und des basiliko;~ grammateuv~ des jeweiligen Gaus sowie gegebenenfalls ad hoc bestellter ejpikritaiv13 – den Antrag auf Aufnahme des Knaben in die relevante Statusgruppe, und diese überprüften anhand der eingereichten Unterlagen und der bei ihnen geführten Bevölkerungsregister die Berechtigung dieses Anspruches. War diese gegeben, wurde der Betreffende sodann in die entsprechende Statusgruppe eingeschrieben. Voraussetzung hierfür war, daß die Eltern (bzw. noch weitere Vorfahren) den beanspruchten privilegierten Personalstatus besaßen, wofür entsprechende Nachweise zu erbringen waren. In den Anmeldungen ihres Nachwuchses zur Epikrisis legen die Antragsteller Beweise für die Berechtigung ihres Anspruches vor bzw. berufen sich zu diesem Zweck auf öffentlich archivierte Informationen, denen zu entnehmen ist, daß sie selbst Angehörige der privilegierten Bevölkerungsgruppe sind, in die sie den eigenen Nachwuchs einschreiben lassen wollen. Betrachten wir zunächst eine Epikrisis-Anmeldung für die Metropolitenklasse aus der arsinoitischen Gaumetropole Ptolemais Euergetis (Arsinoe) aus dem Jahr 187 n.Chr. (P.Gen. I2 18), die das Standardformular für derlei Dokumente repräsentiert. Das Ehepaar Maron und Eudaimonis, beide Metropoliten (ajpo; th`~ mhtropovlew~) und registriert (ajnagrafovmeno~) im Stadtviertel Apolloniu Parembole, meldet den gemeinsamen Sohn Sarapion zur Epikrisis an. Begründung hierfür ist, daß dieser im laufenden Jahr in die Klasse der 13-jährigen eintritt und deshalb der Epikrisis unterzogen werden muß. Zu diesem Zweck fügen sie ihrem Ersuchen die erforderlichen Nachweise bei, uJpetavxamen ta; divkaia. Obwohl dieser Satz („wir haben die unseren Anspruch beweisenden Dokumente unten angefügt“) prima vista zu suggerieren scheint, als ob der Epikrisis-Anmeldung eine Zusammenstellung entsprechender Beweisurkunden angefügt sei, folgt indes nichts weiter als eine kurze Erklärung der Antragsteller, des Inhalts, daß sie sich in der Vergangenheit regelmäßig haben registrieren lassen (ajpograyavmeqa tai`~ kata; kairo;n ajpografai`~). Damit sind die Haushaltsdeklarationen

12 Wolff 2002, 112. Man vgl. diesbezüglich auch die einschlägigen Bestimmungen gegen Statususurpation im Gnomon des Idios Logos (BGU V 1210), so etwa § 44: Aijguptivou DMSRJUD\DPHYQR•Xž uiJo;n wJ~ HMIKEHXNRY•WžD• tw`n duvo tevtarton ajnalambavnetai (Z. 121-122) – „Von einem Ägypter, der einen Sohn als gewesenen Epheben schriftlich gemeldet hat, wird von beiden (sc. Vater und Sohn) ein Viertel (sc. des Vermögens) eingezogen.“ Zur Deutung des duvo tevtarton siehe W. Uxkull-Gyllenband, Der Gnomon des Idios Logos. Zweiter Teil: Der Kommentar (BGU V 2), Berlin 1934, 58. 13 Zu den für die ejpivkrisi~ zuständigen Behörden und Funktionären siehe ausführlich Kruse 2002, 252-271.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

311

NDW¨ oijkivan ajpografaiv) im Zuge des jedes 14. Jahr stattfindenden Zensus (siehe oben) gemeint. Ergänzend wird hinzugefügt, daß die beiden Ehepartner auch in der Haushaltsdeklaration des 14. Jahres des Marc Aurel (= 173/174), also im letztvergangenen Zensus, in dem besagten Stadtviertel gemeldet waren und bei Gelegenheit dieser Deklaration auch den nunmehr der Epikrisis zu unterziehenden gemeinsamen Sohn gemeldet haben (sunapograyavmenoi kai; to;n ejpikrinovmenon hJmw`n uiJovn).14 Dieser muß damals mithin etwa ein Jahr alt gewesen sein. Zum Beweis des Anspruches auf den privilegierten Metropolitenstatus für den Sohn genügte also offenbar der Rekurs auf die in Erfüllung der Deklarationspflicht bei den zuständigen Behörden archivierten Zensusdaten. Für die Epikrisis wurden diese Aufzeichnungen dann dahingehend überprüft, ob die beiden Ehepartner jeweils in die Gruppe der Metropoliten eingetragen sind.15 Auch in den Anträgen für die Aufnahme in die Metropolitenklasse von Oxyrhynchos berufen sich die Antragsteller auf Eintragungen in amtlichen Listen. Dies zeigt etwa die Epikrisis-Anmeldung für den Knaben Sarapion aus dem Jahr 127/128 n.Chr. (P.Oxy. XII 1452 Kol. I). Sie wird den Behörden von dessen Onkel eingereicht, weil der Vater bereits verstorben ist. Der Antragsteller begründet die Eingabe zunächst mit dem amtlichen Befehl zur Epikrisis der Angehörigen der Metropolitenklasse: „Gemäß dem Befehl über die Epikrisis derjenigen, die in die Gruppe der 13-jährigen eintreten, wenn sie von beiden Elternteilen her Metropoliten sind, die die Kopfsteuer zum Satz von 12 Dr. zahlen“ (eij ejx ajmfotevrwn gonevwn mhtropolitw`n dwdekadravcmwn eijsivn). Sodann verweist er auf die Registrierung seines Neffen Sarapion im Stadtviertel Kretikon (ejtavgh HMS¨ ajmfovdou Krhtikou`) sowie darauf, daß dieser im vergangenen Jahr in die Klasse der 13-jährigen eingetreten ist. Da nunmehr dessen Epikrisis ansteht, erklärt er, daß

14 P.Gen. I2 18 (Ptolemais Euergetis, 25. Jan. 187 n.Chr.): ¨$PPZQLYZž DM•JRUDQ•RPKYVDQžW•L kai; JžX•PQD¼VLDUFKYVDžQ•WL S•URža th`/ HMSL•NžULYVHL ¼ ªpara; 0DYUžZ•Q•R•a• 0DYU•ZQ•Raž tou` ¨,žVDC PK¼WUžRa 6DU•DCWRža• kai; th`~ gunaªiko;º~ (XM•GDLPR•¼5Q•LYžGRa 3W•RžO•HPDLYRX tou` ”Hrªwºno~, DMPIRWHY¼U•Z•Q DM•SR• ªtºh`~ mhtropovlew~, DMQDJ•U•DIRPHYQZQ ejp¨ DMP¼IRYGRX ¨$SROOZQLYRX Parembolh`~, th`~ GH• ¼ (XMGDLPR•QLYGRa meta; NXULYRX• DXMW•RXC• 0•DYU•Z•¼Q•Ra W•R•XC• J•HJRQRYW•Ra K-P•LC•Q ejªx DMOOžKY•OZQ uiJou` ¼10 6•DUDSLYZQRa SURVEDYQ•WR•a eij~º (treiskaidekaetei`~) tw`/ HMQHV¼WZCW•L• kªz (e[tei)º N•DL• ojfeivlonto~ HMžS•L•NžULTKCQDL N•D•¼WD ta; N•HOHXžVTHYQWD X-SHW•DY•[•D•PHQ ta; GLYNDL•Dž ¼ ajpegr(ayavmeqa) tai`~ kata; NDLURQ• DM•S•RJžUDIDLCa  th`/ GH• ¼ W•RXC id (e[tou~) ªqºeou` Aujrhlivou ¨$Q•WžZQ•HLYQRX DMP¼15IRY•WHUR•L ajºpograyavmenoi ejpi; th`~ prokeimevnh~\ajmfovdªouºÉ, V•XQ¼D•SRJ•UD\DYPHQRL NžD•L W•RQ HMS•L•NULQRYP•H•QRžQ hJmw`n ¼ uiJo;n ejn ªtºh`/ aujth`/ tou` id (e[tou~) kat¨ oijkivan DMSR¼JUDIKC  dio; HMS•LGLYGRPHQ ¼ (2. Hd.) ¨$PPZYQLRa ajgoronomhvsa~ kai; gumnasiarchvsa~ sesh(meivwmai). ¼20 (1. Hd.) (e[tou~) kz Mavrªkoºu Aujrhlivou Kommovdou ¨$QWZQHLYQRX ¼ Kaivsaro~ tou` kurivou, Tu`bi l. 15 Mitunter werden die Epikrisis-Anmeldungen für die Metropolitenklasse von Ptolemais Euergetis (Arsinoe) zwar etwas ausführlicher, indem sie für die Ehepartner wenigstens alle zurückliegenden Zensusanmeldungen mit ihrem jeweiligen Datum auflisten, wie etwa die Epikrisis-Anmeldung des Didymos und der Isis für ihren Sohn Anoubas aus dem Jahr 141 n.Chr. illustriert (P.Grenf. II 49 [= P.Lond. III 703]), wo die NDW¨ oijkivan ajpografaiv der Jahre 103/104, 117/118 und 131/132 n.Chr. genannt werden. Derlei Angaben aus den früheren Zensusdeklarationen erleichterten den Behörden zwar sicherlich die Arbeit, verpflichtend waren sie aber augenscheinlich nicht, da sie sich nicht regelmäßig in den Epikrisis-Anmeldungen finden.

312

sein Neffe ein dwdekavdracmo~ sei (dhlw` o[nta aujto;n dwdekavdracmon) und daß dessen Vater vor seinem Tod ebenfalls diesen Status besessen habe (to;n touvtou patevra … teteleuthkevnai to; pri;n o[nta dwdekavdracmon), weil er in der Kopfsteuerliste (GL¨ oJmolovgou laografiva~16) des 8. Jahres des Hadrian des Stadtviertels Pammenus Paradeison unter den Dodekadrachmoi verzeichnet war (dia; laografiva~ h (e[tou~) ÔAdrianou` ajmfovdou Pammevnou~ Paradeivsou). Das Register, auf welches sich der Antrag hier bezieht, ist also im Jahr 123/124 n.Chr. angelegt worden. In ihm erschien der Vater des Knaben offenbar zum letzten Mal als dwdekavdracmo~ und ist irgendwann danach verstorben. Der Statusnachweis für den ebenfalls verstorbenen Großvater ist nicht mehr vollständig erhalten. Der Hinweis auf das Jahr 89/90 n.Chr. in der letzten erhaltenen Zeile des Textes dürfte sich aber sehr wahrscheinlich auf eine Kopfsteuerliste dieses Jahres beziehen, in welcher der Großvater als dwdekavdracmo~ eingetragen war.17 In anderen Epikrisis-Anmeldungen für die Metropolitenklasse von Oxyrhynchos wird an dieser Stelle regelmäßig der Großvater mütterlicherseits genannt, weil über ihn der Nachweis für den Besitz des privilegierten Metropolitenstatus auch von der mütterlichen Seite her geführt wird. Im vorliegenden Fall waren die Eltern des Sarapion aber Vollgeschwister. Im Gegensatz zu den Epikrisis-Anmeldungen für die Metropolitenklasse von Arsinoe berufen sich die Antragsteller bei ihren Anträgen für die Aufnahme unter die mhtropoli`tai dwdekavdracmoi von Oxyrhynchos also nicht auf die Registrierung im Zuge der 14-jährigen Zensusperiode, sondern auf die amtlichen Kopfsteuerlisten bzw. Bevölkerungsregister des Stadtviertels, in welchen der Vater bzw. der Großvater mütterlicherseits des zum Eintritt in die Statusgruppe berechtigten Knaben in die entsprechende Statusgruppe eingetragen waren, was von den für die Epikrisis zuständigen Behörden zu überprüfen war. Der Knabe Sarapion wird nun aber von seinem Onkel zum selben Zeitpunkt wie für den Eintritt in die Metropolitenklasse auch zur Epikrisis für die Klasse

16 Zur Bedeutung von oJmovlogo~ in diesem Kontext siehe B.A. van Groningen, OMOLOGOS, «Mnemosyne» n.s. 50, 1922, 124-137. 17 P.Oxy. XII 1452 (127/128 n.Chr.; cf. BL III 137; IV 62; VI 102; VII 139; VIII 246; IX 186; X 142) Kol. I: ¨$JDTZC Daivmoni stra(thgw`/) kai; ¼ ÔIevraki basil(ikw`/) gra(mmatei`) kai; oi|~ a[l(loi~) kaqhvk(ei) ¼ para; Diodwvrou Ploutivw(no~) ¼ tou` Diodwvrou mhtro;(~) Tatreivfio(~) ¼5 ¨$PRYLWRa ajp¨ ¨2[XUXYJFZQ povlew~. ¼ kata; ta; keleusq(evnta) peri; ejªpiºkriv(sew~) tw`n ¼ prosb(ainovntwn) eij~ (treiskaidekaetei`~) eij ejx ajmfot(evrwn) ¼ gonevwn mhtrop(olitw`n) (dwdekadravcmwn) eijsivn, ¼ ejtavgh HMS¨ ajmfovd(ou) Krhtikou` ¼10 oJ tw`n oJmopatrivwn mou ajdel(fw`n) ¼ Sarapivw(no~) kai; Tnefersovito~ ¼ P•KWURa ž '•ZJ•XY•P•H•Z•a uiJo;~ ¼ Sarapivwn prosb(ebhkw;~) eij~ (treiskaidekaetei`~) tw`/ ¼ dielq(ovnti) ia (e[tei) Traianou` ¼15 ÔAdrianou` Kaivsaro~ tou` kurivou. ¼ o{qen paragenovme(no~) pro;~ th;n ¼ touvtou ejpivkri(sin) dhlw` HžL?•QDžL• ¼ aujto;n (dwdekavdracmon), kai; to;n W•RžXY•WRX ¼ patevra ejmou` de; R-PRSDY¼20trion ajdel(fo;n) Sarapivwna tetel(euthkevnai) ¼ to; p(ri;n) o[nta (dwdekavdracmon) di j oJmolovg(ou) laªoºgra(fiva~) ¼ h (e[tou~) ÔAdrianou` ªajmºfovd(ou) ªPammev(nou~)º ¼ Paªrºadeivsou, kai; to;n pªat(evra) tw`n R-PRž¼SDWULYZQ mou ajdelfw`n tou` ¼25 de; ajfhvl(iko~) pavppo(n) Ploutivw(na) ¼ Diodwv(rou) tetel(euthkevnai) to; p(ri;n) o[nta (dwdekavdracmon), ¼ ªo}ºn kai; T• (e[tei) '•RPLWLDQRžXC ¼ --------.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

313

der ajpo; gumnasivou von Oxyrhynchos angemeldet. Diese Deklaration ist nämlich in der zweiten Kolumne von P.Oxy. XII 1452 erhalten. Weil der Nachweis der Berechtigung zum Eintritt in diese gegenüber den dwdekavdracmoi noch höhere Statusgruppe auf anderem Wege geführt werden mußte als für die Epikrisis in die Metropolitenklasse, mußte die Epikrisis in die Klasse der ajpo; gumnasivou offensichtlich auch dann gesondert beantragt werden, wenn wie im vorliegenden Fall ein und dieselbe Person zum Eintritt in beide Statuskategorien berechtigt war. Wir lesen in P.Oxy. XII 1452 Kol. II zunächst wieder wie bei der Anmeldung für die Metropolitenklasse in Kol. I (siehe oben) die Bezugnahme auf den entsprechenden Befehl zur Epikrisis der ejk tou` gumnasivou, „wenn sie“, wie es hier heißt, „dieser Kategorie angehören“ (eij HM•N• tou` gevnou~ touvtou mHLMVLYQ® . Diese Voraussetzung ist erkennbar weniger präzise formuliert als diejenige für die Epikrisis in die Metropolitenklasse, wo gesagt wird, daß beide Eltern dieser Statusgruppe angehören (oder angehört haben) müssen (vgl. Kol. I). Der Grund für diese demgegenüber eher vage Formulierung in der Epikrisis-Anmeldung für die gymnasiale Klasse liegt wohl darin, daß diese Voraussetzung im Fall der ajpo; gumnasivou komplexer war und nur eine möglichst lückenlose und lange zurückreichende Ahnenreihe gleichsam „gymnasialer“ Vorfahren – gewährleistet durch die in dieser Bevölkerungsgruppe übliche Endogamie – zum Eintritt in die Klasse der ejk tou` gumnasivou berechtigte, was im weiteren Verlauf des Textes deutlich wird. Die Erklärung über den Statusnachweis beginnt mit der Feststellung, daß Plution, der Großvater des Sarapion im 5. Jahr des Vespasian (= 72/73 n.Chr.) der Epikrisis unterzogen worden ist. Dies geschah seinerzeit aufgrund von wiederum von dessen Vater Diodoros vorgelegten Dokumenten, aus denen hervorging, daß wiederum dessen Vater (also der Ururgroßvater des Sarapion, ein Mann namens Ptolemaios) in einer Liste aus dem 34. Jahr des Augustus (= 4/5 n.Chr.) eingetragen ist. Nach der Erklärung, daß der Großvater Plution mittlerweile verstorben ist, fährt der Text fort mit der Angabe über die Epikrisis des verstorbenen Vaters des Sarapion im Jahr 99/100 n.Chr., wonach der Text abbricht. In den Paralleldokumenten folgen hier üblicherweise Angaben über die gymnasiale Abkunft der matrilinearen männlichen Vorfahren, was indes im vorliegenden Fall nicht zu erwarten ist, da der der Epikrisis zu unterziehende Knabe wie bereits erwähnt einer Ehe von Vollgeschwistern entstammt.18

18 P.Oxy. XII 1452 (siehe auch o. Anm. 17) Kol. II: ¨$JDTZC Daivmoni strathgw`/ kai; ¼ ÔIevraki basil(ikw`/) gra(mmatei`) kai; oi|~ a[l(loi~) kaqhvk(ei) ¼30 para; Diodwvrou Ploutivw(no~) ¼ tou` Diodwvrou mhtro;(~) Tatreivfio(~) ¼ ¨$PRYLWRa ajp j ¨2[XUXYJFZQ povlew~. ¼ kata; ta; keleusq(evnta) peri; ejpikriv(sew~) tªw`nº ¼ prosb(ainovntwn) eij~ tou;~ ejk tou` gumna(sivou) eij HM•N• ¼35 tou` gevnou~ touvtou mHLMVLYQ® ejtavgh ¼ ejp¨ ajmfovd(ou) Krhtikou` oJ tw`n R-¼PRSDWULYZQ mou ajdel(fw`n) Sarapivw(no~) ¼ kai; Tnefersovito~ ajmfo(tevrwn) mhtªro;(~)º ¼ '•ZJXYžPHZa?)) uiJo;~ Sarapivwn prªosb(ebhkw;~)º ¼40 eij~ (treiskaidekatei`~) tw`/ dielq(ovnti) ia (e[tei) Traianou` ¼Ñ$GULDQRXC Kaivsaro~ tou` kurivou. ¼ o{qen paragenovme(no~) pro;~ th;n touvtou ¼ ejpivkri(sin) dhlw` kata; th;n genomev(nhn) ¼ tw`/ e (e[tei) qeou` Oujesp(asianou`) uJpo; Soutwrivªouº ¼45 Swsib(ivou)

314

Die Bezugnahme auf die Epikrisis von Vorfahren im Jahr 72/73 bzw. auf die Eintragung von Vorfahren in die Liste aus dem Jahr 4/5 n.Chr. findet sich bis in das spätere 3. Jh. regelmäßig in den Epikrisisanmeldungen für die gymnasiale Klasse von Oxyrhynchos. Besonders eindrucksvoll ist etwa ein Epikrisis-Antrag vom 25. Juli 269 n.Chr. 19, in dem ein Mann namens M. Aurelius Hermophilos die Aufnahme seines Neffen M. Aurelius Flavius in die Klasse der ajpo; gumnasivou von Oxyrhynchos beantragt und die Berechtigung seines Ersuchens dadurch belegt, daß er unter Angabe des Jahres der Epikrisis der jeweiligen Personen und Generation um Generation zurückschreitend den Stammbaum des Knaben bis auf einen Vorfahren namens Asklepiades, Sohn eines gleichnamigen Landvermessers, zurückführt, der im Jahr 4/5 n.Chr. – also 265 Jahre zuvor! – erstmals in die Liste dieser Bevölkerungsgruppe eingetragen worden war. Der aus den oxyrhynchitischen Epikrisis-Anmeldungen zu gewinnende Befund illustriert, daß die gymnasiale Klasse von Oxyrhynchos offenbar mehrfach einer Generalrevision unterzogen worden ist, bei der die Kriterien der Zugehörigkeit jeweils neu fixiert worden sein müssen. Die erste dieser Revisionen war die im Jahr 4/5 n.Chr. Mit ihr wurde sehr wahrscheinlich diese Bevölkerungsklasse zumindest in Oxyrhynchos überhaupt erst konstituiert. Eine weitere Generalrevision erfolgte dann im Jahr 72/73 n.Chr. Wo in den oxyrhynchitischen Epikrisis-Anträgen die Bezugnahme auf diese beiden Revisionen (bzw. die aus ihnen hervorgegangenen Akten fehlt), werden Vorfahren genannt, die im 3. u. 4. Jahr des Nero (= 56/57 u. 57/58 n.Chr.) in die Liste der gymnasialen Klasse eingetragen worden sind, womit zu dieser Zeit eine weitere Generalrevision dieser Statuskategorie bezeugt ist. 20 Es scheint, daß zwischen 4/5 n.Chr. und 72/73 n.Chr. auch Mitglieder in die Klasse der ajpo; gumnasivou aufgenommen worden sind, die keinen langen gymnasialen Stammbaum von beiden Elternteilen her

stra(thghvsanto~) kai; Nikavnd(rou) genomev(nou) baªsil(ikou`)º ¼ gra(mmatevw~) kai; w|n a[l(lwn) kaqhvk(ei) tw`n ejk tou` ¼ gumna(sivou) ejpivkri(sin) ejpikekrivsq(ai) to;n ¼ patevra hJmw`n tou` ¼ de; ajfhvl(iko~) pavppon Ploutivw(na) ¼50 ªejp¨ ajºmfovd(ou) Drovmou Gumna(sivou) ªajkol(ouvqw~)º ¼ ai|~ oJ pat(h;r) aujtou` ejn uJp(er)(etevsin) ejphvnegªk(en)º ¼ ajpodeivxe(sin) wJ~ kai; oJ auJtou` pat(h;r) ¼ Ptolemai`o(~(?)) ¨$PPZQLYRX 3N•D•KCWRYa ejstin ¼ ejn th`/ tou` ld (e[tou~) qeou` Kaivsaro~ gra(fh`/) D•••žL•  ¼55 ªtetºel(euthkevnai) to; p(rivn), N•DžL• ªto;n tºou` ajfhvl(iko~) pªat(evra)º ¼ ªejmou`º de; oJmopavtrio(n) ajdel(fo;n) Sarapªivw(na)º ¼ R-PRLYžZ•a ªejpiºkekrivªsºq(ai) tw`/ g (e[tei) T•HRXCž ¼ ªTraianou` uJpo; 'žLC•R•Q• stra(thghvsanto~) kai; Z_•Q a[l(lwn)º ¼ ªkaqhvk(ei) ejpºi; tou` prokeimevnou ¼60 ªajmfovd(ou)º Drovmou ªGumna(sivou)º ¼ --------. 19 PSI V 457 (cf. BL I 399; IV 88; VI 176; VII 235; VIII 398; X 240; XI 245); zur Datierung siehe auch D. Hagedorn, «ZPE» 12, 1973, 282 Anm. 22; R. Pintaudi, «ZPE» 27, 1977, 117-118. 20 Zu der Generalrevision unter Nero siehe etwa P.Oxy. XLVI 3279. Über die Kriterien, die zum Zeitpunkt ihrer Konstituierung in augusteischer Zeit für die Bestimmung der Zugehörigkeit zur gymnasialen Klasse in Oxyrhynchos maßgeblich waren, sind wir nicht informiert. Es ist jedoch zu vermuten, daß in die im Jahre 4/5 n.Chr. erstellte Liste v.a. diejenigen „Griechen“ Aufnahme fanden, die auf einen gleichsam „hellenischen“ Stammbaum verweisen und diesen durch entsprechende Dokumente (z.B. beim Gymnasium selbst geführte Listen) glaubhaft belegen konnten.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

315

aufzuweisen hatten, wobei die Kriterien für diese Aufnahme im Dunkeln bleiben. Nach 72/73 n.Chr. ist dies indes nicht mehr nachzuweisen. Mit der Revision im 5. Jahr Vespasians scheint vielmehr endgültig das Erfordernis eines patrilinearen gymnasialen Vorfahren väter- wie mütterlicherseits endgültig fixiert worden zu sein, welcher entweder in der Liste von 4/5 oder in der von 72/73 erscheinen mußte. In einem unlängst publizierten Beitrag21 zu den Epikrisis-Anmeldungen aus Oxyrhynchos aus Anlaß der (Neu)Edition eines solchen Dokuments22 vertritt U. Yiftach-Firanko die Auffassung, daß das administrative Prozedere bei der Anmeldung des volljährigen männlichen Nachwuchses zur Epikrisis in die Klasse der ejk tou` gumnasivou aus zwei aufeinanderfolgenden Verfahrensschritten bestanden habe: „The report (sc. die Epikrisis-Anmeldung) shows two stages. First, the boy is registered in one of the city amphoda. Then, usually in the same year or the year that follows, one of the child’s relatives issues a report to the nome’s strategos, the basilikos grammateus, the grammateus poleos, and the bibliophylakes in charge of the bibliotheke demosion logon, relating when and in which amphodon the registration took place. This report sets in motion the epikrisis: the heads of the nome’s administration examine if the evidence presented by the applicant to back his claims matches the information at their disposal, primarily that located in the bibliotheke’s files. It also stands to reason that both the registration in the city amphodon and the epikrisis by the nome officials had some bearings on the candidate’s gymnasial status. But what were the exact bearings of each of the two acts? Did the candidate become a full member of the gymnasion after the registration in the amphodon or only after the epikrisis?“23 Ich glaube indes nicht, daß die Registrierung im Stadtviertel als dem fiskalischen Domizil der betreffenden Person (also seiner ijdiva, wie dieses in den Papyrusurkunden regelmäßig bezeichnet wird) Bestandteil des Verfahrens der Epikrisis war. Vielmehr erfolgte die Registrierung im a[mfodon zu einem weit früheren Zeitpunkt vor der Einreichung der Epikrisis-Anmeldung an die zuständigen Behörden. Letztere fand, wie oben bemerkt, zum Zeitpunkt des Eintritts des männlichen Nachwuchses in das Volljährigkeitsalter statt, worauf die Epikrisis-Anträge etwa mit dem Bezug auf den behördlichen Befehl peri; ejpikrivsew~ tw`n prosbainovntwn eij~ (treiskaidekaetei`~) regelmäßig rekurrieren. Entsprechend wird dann etwa auch in der oben behandelten Epikrisis-Anmeldung P.Gen. I2 18 für die Klasse der Metropoliten von Arsinoe24 diese damit begründet, daß der Knabe SURVEDYQ•WR•a eij~º (treiskaidekaetei`~) (Z. 10). Man beachte den Gebrauch des Präsens - bzw. Aoristpartizips in den beiden Wendungen, der

21 Yiftach-Firanko 2010. 22 PSI VII 731 + P.Col. inv. 134 (nach 97/98 n.Chr.). 23 Yiftach-Firanko 2010, 58-59. 24 Siehe oben Anm. 14.

316

zum Ausdruck bringen will, daß die betreffenden Personen zum Zeitpunkt des Befehls zur Epikrisis im Begriff sind, in das Volljährigkeitsalter einzutreten bzw. zum Zeitpunkt der Einreichung des Epikrisis-Antrags soeben volljährig geworden sind. Die Registrierung im Stadtviertel des Wohnortes dürfte dagegen in der Regel schon sehr viel früher, mitunter schon kurz nach der Geburt erfolgt sein und mithin zum Zeitpunkt der Beantragung der Epikrisis bereits einige Jahre (wenn nicht gar mehr als ein Jahrzehnt) zurückliegen. Dafür spricht zunächst schon die sprachliche Formulierung dieses Tatbestandes mit einer Wendung wie ejtavgh HMS¨ ajmfovdou (wie etwa in P.Oxy. XII 1452,9 u. 35 f. 25), die auf einen in der Vergangenheit abgeschlossenen Vorgang verweist. Erwiesen wird die Registrierung im Stadtviertel schon im früheren Kindesalter aber beispielsweise durch die oben in anderem Zusammenhang bereits erwähnten umfangreichen und nach verschiedenen Statusgruppen gegliederten Bevölkerungsregister über die im Stadtquartier Apolloniu Parembole von Arsinoe ansässigen Personen, die dessen Amphodarch im 5. Jahr Vespasians (= 72/73 n.Chr.) zusammengestellt hat (SPP IV p. 62-78). 26 In diesen Akten findet sich unter anderem auch eine Liste noch minderjähriger Söhne von kopfsteuerpflichtigen Bewohnern. 27 Diese Knaben waren im Zuge des Zensus NDW¨ oijkivan ajpografhv) des 8. Jahres des Nero (= 61/62 n.Chr.) als zwei bis einjährige gemeldet und seinerzeit in die Bevölkerungslisten aufgenommen worden, d.h. die betreffenden Personen sind zum Zeitpunkt der Erstellung der Liste mittlerweile 12-13 Jahre alt und erreichen damit entweder mit dem Eintritt in das 14. Lebensjahr die Alterschwelle der Kopfsteuerpflichtigkeit oder stehen kurz davor. Ferner erfahren wir aus dem Präskript zu dieser Liste, daß auch alle diejenigen Knaben in sie aufgenommen worden sind, die den Behörden im Zeitraum zwischen dem 9. Jahr Neros und dem 5. Jahr Vespasians (= 62/63-72/73 n.Chr.) mittels separat eingereichter Geburtsanzeigen „als hinzugeboren angezeigt worden sind“ (shmanqevntwn ejpigegennh`sqai). 28 Daraus ergibt sich, daß die Registrierung der betreffenden Knaben im Stadtviertel Apolloniu Parembole vor 1-11 Jahren erfolgt ist. Ferner erfahren wir, daß Eltern den Behörden die Geburt ihres Nachwuchses auf zwei Wegen anzeigen konnten. Entweder im Zuge des nächsten fälligen alle 14 Jahre stattfindenden Zensus, wenn der Haushaltvorstand ohnehin alle in seinem Haushalt lebenden Perso-

25 Siehe oben Anm. 17 u. 18. 26 Siehe zu diesem Text auch ausführlich Kruse 2002, 272-276. 27 SPP IV p. 62-78 Z. 28-244 (= P.Lond. II 261 Kol. 3-17). 28 SPP IV p. 62-78 Z. 28-36: para; ÔHrakleivdou ajmfªoºdavrcou ¨$SROOZQLYRX Pare(mbolh`~) ¼ ajpologismo;~ ajfhlivkwn uiJw`n OžDRJžUD•IRXPHYQZQ ¼30 tou` e (e[tou~) Aujtokravtoro~ .DLYVD•U•R•a• Oujespasianou` ¼ Sebastou` tw`n GžL•D• W•KC•a ND•W¨ oijkivan ajpografªh`º~ ¼ tou` h (e[tou~) Nevrwno~ ajnageªgºrammevnwn (dietw`n) ¼ mevcri (eJno;~ e[tou~) ejpanakeimevnªwn kai; WžZC•Q ajpo; q (e[tou~) ¼ mevcri d (e[tou~) Oujespasianou` di¨ uJpomnhmavtwn ¼35 shmanqevntwn ejpigegennh`sqai ¼ ei\nai dev: (es folgen die Eintragungen der einzelnen Personen).

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

317

nen melden bzw. registrieren lassen (ajnagravfesqai) mußte oder – vielleicht insbesondere immer dann, wenn ihnen der Zeitraum bis zum nächsten Zensus zu lang erschien – auf dem Wege besonders eingereichter Geburtsanzeigen. 29 In beiden Fällen wurden solche Kinder dann „unter die Hinzugeborenen“ (ejn ejpigegenhmevnoi~)30 aufgenommen und waren damit im Stadtviertel bzw. im fiskalischen Domizil ihrer Eltern registriert und erschienen von nun an in den von den Behörden des a[mfodon geführten und regelmäßig aktualisierten Bevölkerungslisten. Die Registrierung im a[mfodon ist mithin m.E. kein gesonderter Akt im Epikrisis-Verfahren wie Yiftach meint, sondern es ist vielmehr eine notwendige Bedingung für die Durchführung der Epikrisis, daß eine solche Registrierung bereits vorliegt oder mit anderen Worten: Wollten die Eltern (oder sonst ein Verwandter) die Aufnahme eines Knaben in eine der privilegierten Statusgruppen beantragen, dann hatten sie nachzuweisen, daß dieser ordnungsgemäß in seinem Stadtviertel registriert (ajnagrafovmeno~ bzw. ejtavgh HMS¨ ajmfovdou) war. Die angesichts der geschilderten Problematik von Yiftach gestellte Frage – „Did the candidate become a full member of the gymnasion after the registration in the amphodon or only after the epikrisis?“ – ist daher im Sinne der zweiten Alternative zu beantworten. Dies entspricht wohl nicht zuletzt auch der fiskalischen Ratio hinter dem bürokratischen Verfahren der Epikrisis. Denn die Steuerprivilegien, die aus der Zugehörigkeit zu den ajpo; gumnasivou oder sonst einer der bevorrechtigten Bevölkerungsgruppen resultierten, wurden erst mit dem Eintritt in das Volljährigkeitsalter wirksam, da die betreffende Person erst von diesem Zeitpunkt an der Kopfsteuerpflicht unterlag, und aus diesem Grund stellen die Eltern ja auch regelmäßig erst mit dem Eintritt ihres männlichen Nachwuchses in das 14. Lebensjahr den Antrag auf seine Epikrisis. Ob mit der Epikrisis zugleich auch eine Zugehörigkeit zum Gymnasium als der maßgeblichen, gewissermaßen „hellenische Identität“ vermittelnden Kulturinstitution erworben wird, wie die Frage Yiftachs zu suggerieren scheint, möchte ich zumindest für zweifelhaft halten, da hierfür wohl noch weitere Kriterien (so vor allem die Ephebie) erfüllt werden mußten. 31

29 Zu den Geburtsanzeigen, die (im Gegensatz zur Zensusmeldung) wohl nicht verpflichtend waren, siehe Kruse 2002, 171-176 und jüngst Sánchez-Moreno Ellart 2010. 30 Man beachte etwa die Formulierungen in der Zensusdeklaration BGU I 115 (= W.Chr. 203; Ptolemais Euergetis, ca. 189 n.Chr.), wo einige Personen als ajnagegra(mmevnoi) ejn ejpigegenh(mevnoi~) bzw. als mh; ajnagegra(mmevnoi) ejn ejpigegenh(mevnoi~) klassifiziert werden. 31 Dieses Problem kann in unserem Zusammenhang freilich nicht im Detail erörtert werden. Der bürokratische Akt der Epikrisis in die Klasse der ajpo; gumnasivou gewährte indes wohl nur den Z ugang zu bestimmten fiskalischen Privileg i e n und präjudizierte m.E. nicht ohne weiteres die Zugehörigkeit zum Gymnasium als Institution. Wenigstens nicht, soweit dies aus den Epikrisis-Dokumenten selbst ersichtlich ist. Zum Eintritt in das Gymnasium gehörte aber zwingend die adäquate griechische Erziehung verbunden mit sportlichem Training bzw. die Ephebie. Die Zulassung zur Ephebie erfolgte indes in einem weiteren Verfahren durch

318

Eine andere Form als die bisher behandelten Epikrisis-Anträge aus Ptolemais Euergetis und Oxyrhynchos hatten diejenigen für die gymnasiale Klasse der Gaumetropole Hermupolis, denn diese rekurrierten nicht nur wie jene lediglich auf anderswo archivierte Akten bzw. Register, sondern enthielten sogar Auszüge aus solchen. Dies zeigt etwa der Epikrisisantrag P.Amh. II 7532 aus Hermupolis, von ca. 168 n.Chr. Der Text umfaßt insgesamt drei Kolumnen. Der Antrag selbst, von dem nur noch wenige Reste sowie der Kaisereid, mit dem er beschworen wird, erhalten sind, stand in Kol. I. Mit ihm beantragt Demetria alias Tereus für ihren Sohn Artemon die Epikrisis in die Klasse der ajpo; gumnasivou. 33 In den Kol. II und III folgen dann in chronologisch absteigender Reihenfolge die Nachweise über die Berechtigung dieses Anspruches, die aus Zensus und Epikrisisakten aus zum Teil sehr lange zurückliegender Zeit entnommen worden sind und die sämtlich „gymnasiale“ Vorfahren des Knaben Artemon betreffen. 34 Das erste Exzerpt (P.Amh. II 75,31-34) ist ein Auszug aus den Akten über den Zensus im Jahr 159/160 n.Chr. Er erwähnt unter Angabe der entsprechenden Fundstelle („Stadtviertel Östliche Stadt, 11. Amphodarchie, 2. Aktenfolge“) die Zensuseingabe (ajnafovrion) des minderjährigen Artemon, registriert im Stadtviertel „Westliches Phrourion“, der durch seinen Vormund vertreten wird. Nach der durch ein met’ D>•OOZQ gekennzeichneten Auslassung von Namen, die sonst

die städtischen Behörden in Zusammenwirken mit den Funktionären des Gymnasiums, welches in Ägypten erst in der römischen Zeit unter dem Namen ei[skrisi~ bezeugt ist (Zu ihrem Fehlen in der ptolemäischen Zeit siehe Habermann 2004, 341). Im Zuge dieses Verfahrens wurden die Knaben auf ihre Eignung hin überprüft. Was das Alter des Eintritts in die Ephebie betrifft, so spricht, soweit dies aus den auf die ei[skrisi~ bezüglichen Quellen im römischen Ägypten zu entnehmen ist, einiges für das 14. Lebensjahr bzw. die Zeit kurz davor oder danach. Die ei[skrisi~ der Epheben fand mithin ungefähr zur selben Zeit statt wie die ejpivkrisi~ in die Klasse der ajpo; gumnasivou. Allein schon aus der Existenz des speziellen Verfahrens der ei[skrisi~ der Epheben dürfte m.E. aber zu folgern sein, daß die Absolvierung der ejpivkrisi~ allein für eine Zugehörigkeit zum Gymnasium wohl nicht ausreichte. Zu Ephebie und ei[skrisi~ im römischen Ägypten siehe insbesondere Nelson 1979, 47-49; Whitehorne 1982; Bussi 2003, 163-164. Zum Gymnasium siehe auch Orth 1983. 32 Cf. BL I 2; 431; V 5; siehe auch Nelson 1979, 31-32. 33 ª ca.? para; Dhmhtriva~ th`~ kai; Tereu`to~ ÔErmºaivou mht(ro;~) Qeu`to~ ¼ ª  ca.? º ÔErmop(ol ) ajpo; g(umnasivou) ¼ ªojktadravcmou ajnagrafomevnh~ ejpºi; tw`/ ejnestw`t(i) ¼ • e[tei ¨$QWZ neivnou kai; Oujhvrou tw`n kurivwn Sebastºw`n oJ uiJo;~ ªmºou ¼5 ¨$UWHYPZQ  ca.? ºwno~ ¼ ª ca.? kai; ojfeivlei º ejpikri(qh`nai) ¼ ª  ca.? ºou P•••ž ª15 Zeilen fehlenº ¼23 ª  ca.? ž•H•L•GR P••••ž ¼ ª  ca.? º ajpo; WR•XC• gumnasivo(u) ¼25 ª  ca.? kai; RMPQXYžZ• th;n $XMWRNUDYWRURža• ¼ ªKaivsaro~ Mavrkou Aujrhlivou ¨$QWZQHLYQRX Sºebastou` kai; ¼ ªAujtokravtoro~ Kaivsaro~ Loukivou Aujrhlivouº Oujhvrou Sebastou` tªuvchnº ¼ ªmhde;n dieyeu`sqai. (e[tou~) id Aujtokravtoro~º Kaivsaro~ Mªavrkouº ¼ ªAujrhlivou ¨$QWZQHLYQRX Sebastou` kai; Aºujtokravtoªro~ Kaivsaro~º ¼30 ªLoukivou Aujrhlivou Oujhvrou Sebastou` Mesorº h; kd (Hervorhebungen von mir). 34 Siehe hierzu auch den unten in der Appendix reproduzierten Stammbaum der Familie des Artemon, wie er aus P. Amh. II 75 rekonstruiert werden kann. Die Lesung und Ergänzung einiger der in den im folgenden zitierten Aktenauszügen erscheinenden Abkürzungen ist zwar nach wie vor ungeklärt. Das Muster ihres Aufbaus wird jedoch ohne Probleme verständlich.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

319

noch in der Haushaltsdeklaration genannt waren, folgt der Eintrag über den besagten Artemon: „Er selbst, Artemon, Sohn des Artemon alias Agrippa, vom Gymnasium, 3 Jahre alt.“ Es handelt sich bei diesem Artemon um dieselbe Person, für die in Kol. I die Epikrisis beantragt wird. Er war offensichtlich bereits im zarten Alter von nur drei Jahren nach dem frühen Tod seines Vaters Vorstand des Haushaltes geworden und mußte daher bei der Abgabe der Zensusdeklaration von einem Epitropos vertreten werden. 35 Der zweite Auszug (P.Amh. II 75,36-40) stammt aus den Zensusakten des Jahres 145/146 n.Chr. Er betrifft nun die Zensusdeklaration des Vaters des Artemon, Artemon alias Agrippa und zitiert aus ihr die Meldung seiner eigenen Person mit der Angabe des Stadtviertels, in welchem er registriert war, seines Status als ajpo; gumnasivou und seines Alters, nämlich 53. Die zweite aus der Haushaltsdeklaration zitierte Meldung ist dann die seiner Ehefrau Demetria alias Tereus, ebenfalls ajpo; gumnasivou und damals 26 Jahre alt. 36 Diesem Muster folgen sodann auch die weiteren Aktenauszüge. Zunächst einer aus den Zensusakten des Jahres 131/132 n.Chr. (P.Amh. II 75,41-46) mit

35 P.Amh. II 75,31-35 (cf. BL I 2.431): kg (e[tou~) qeou` Aijlivou ¨$QWZQLYQRX Povl(ew~) ajphl(iwvtou) ia ajm(fodarciva~) b diadoch`~. ¼ ajnafov(rion) ¨$UWHYPZQRa ¨$UWHYPZQRa tou` kai; ¨$JULYSSD mhtro;~ ¼ Dhmhtriva~ th`~ k(ai;) Tereu`to~ ajpo; g(umnasivou) ajfhvlik(o~) ajnagr(afomevnou) ejpi; Fªrºo(urivou) lib(o;~) ¼ di¨ ejpitrovp(ou) Ptolemaivou Diduvmou DMWH•N• met¨ D>•OOZQ eJ(auto;n) ¼35 ¨$UWHYPZQD ¨$UWHYPZQRa tou` k(ai;) ¨$JULYSSD ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) g (Hervorhebungen von mir). – Übersetzung: „23. Jahr des vergöttlichten Aelius Antoninus (Akten des) Stadtteils “östliche Stadt”, 11. Amphodarchie, 2. Aktenfolge. Eingabe des Artemon, des Sohnes des Artemon alias Agrippa, von der Mutter Demetria alias Tereus, vom Gymnasium, minderjährig, registriert im Stadtteil “westliche Festung”, durch den Vormund Ptolemaios, Sohn des Didymos … nach anderen (sc. Namen): Er selbst, Artemon, Sohn des Artemon alias Agrippa, vom Gymnasium, drei Jahre.“ 36 P.Amh. II 75,36-40 (cf. BL I 431; V 5): q (e[tou~) oJm(oivw~) Povl(ew~) ajp(hliwvtou) ia ajm(fodarciva~) ª •ž diaªdoºc(h`~), ajnafov(rion) ¼ ¨$UWHYPZQRa toªu`º k(ai;) ¨$JULYSSD ¨$UWHYPZQRaž tou` ¨$VNO•K•S•LDYGRX DS•DGRX ) mht(ro;~) 7HUH•XCWRa ¨$SROOZQLYRX ž ajªpºo; g(umnasivou) ¼ ajnagr(afomevnou) ejpi; Fro(urivou) lib(o;~) aj •••N ) D• • ) eJ(auto;n) ¨$UWHYPZQD to;n ªk(ai;) ¨$JžULYS¼ ªpaºn ajpªo;º g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) ng, ¼40 ªmet¨º D>•OOZQ g(unaikw`n) Dhmhtrivan th;n k(ai;) Tere(u`n) ÔErmaivo(u) g(unai`ka) (aujtou`) ajpo; g(umasivou) (ejtw`n) mNa® – Übersetzung: „9. Jahr ebenso (Akten des) Stadtteils „östliche Stadt“, 11. Amphodarchie […]te Aktenfolge, Eingabe des Artemon alias Agrippa, Sohn des Artemon des Sohnes des Asklepiades ... von der Mutter Tereus, Tochter des Apollonios, vom Gymnasium, registriert im Stadtteil „westliche Festung: ... er selbst Artemon alias Agrippa, vom Gymnasium, 53 Jahre, nach anderen (sc. Namen) von Frauen: Demetria alias Tereus, Tochter des Hermaios, seine Ehefrau, vom Gymnasium, 27 Jahre.“ – Der Papyrus hat für die Altersangabe der Demetria alias Tereus in Z. 40 m (= 40), demnach sie im Jahr 106 n.Chr. geboren sein müßte. Sie hätte also ihren Sohn Artemon, für den sie 168 n.Chr. die Epikrisis beantragt im erstaunlich fortgeschrittenen Alter von mindestens 50 Jahren geboren. Außerdem ist diese Altersangabe inkonsistent mit Z. 61 (siehe unten Anm. 41), wo gesagt wird, daß Demetria alias Tereus im Jahr 132 n.Chr. 12 Jahre alt war. Dieser letzteren Angabe ist wohl Glauben zu schenken und die Altersangabe in Z. 36 entsprechend zu emendieren (siehe auch den Kommentar des Hg. in P.Amh. II p. 93). Vermutlich ist der Schreiber der Aktenauszüge beim Abschreiben in die falsche Zeile gerutscht, was insofern leicht erklärlich wäre, da es sich ja um Aktenauszüge handelt, die expressis verbis feststellen, daß Teile der Originalakten nicht mit abgeschrieben wurden.

320

einem Auszug aus der Haushaltsdeklaration des Großvaters des Artemon und seiner beiden Kinder, also des Vaters des Artemon, und dessen Schwester. 37 Die drei folgenden Aktenauszüge behandeln dann die Urgroßeltern von Vater- und Mutterseite (wohlgemerkt: in der patrilinearen Abstammungslinie) des Artemon. Zunächst in einem Auszug aus Akten des Jahres 64/65 n.Chr. (P.Amh. II 75, 47-49), der diesmal nicht den Zensusakten entnommen ist (denn in diesem Jahr hat kein Zensus stattgefunden), sondern auf ein Register aus dem 11. Jahr Neros rekurriert, in dem die Eltern des Großvaters väterlicherseits des Artemon, Asklepiades und Berous sowie deren Sohn Artemon eingetragen worden waren. 38 Dann folgt ein Auszug aus den Akten des Zensus von 75/76 n.Chr. (P.Amh. II 75, 50-53), und zwar aus der diesbezüglichen Haushaltsdeklaration des Vaters der Großmutter mütterlicherseits Apollonios, der auch seine Frau Didyme und seine 9-jährige Tochter Tereus, also die Großmutter des Artemon, meldet. 39 Darauf folgt dann wiederum ein Auszug aus dem bereits erwähnten Register aus dem Jahr 64/65 mit einem Eintrag über denselben Apollonios (P.Amh. II 75, 54-55). 40

37 P.Amh. II 75,41-46: L× (e[tou~) qeoºu` ÔAdrianou` Povl(ew~) ajp(hliwvtou) ia ajm(fodarciva~) […º tovm(ou) […º N•R•OOKYPDWRa rlh, ¼ ªajnºafov(rion) ¨$UWHYPZQRa ¨$VNOKSLDYGRX tou` ¨$FLOOHYZa ¼ ªmºht(ro;~) Bªeºrou`to~ ÔErmaivou ajpo; g(umnasivou) mDMQDJUDIRPHYQRX HMSL®?) Fro(urivou) lib(o;~) a  •  •ž  •HLVRQHUR ) ¼ ª •ž  • ajphl(iwvtou) VWD•TPRXC eJ(auto;n) ¨$žUWžHYPZQD ¨$VNOK SLDYG•RX ª  •žD• […º ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) pg, ¼45 ¨$UWHYPZžQD to;ªn k(ai;)º ¨$JULYSSDQ uiJo;n mhªt(ro;~) 7žH•UHXCWRa ¨$SROOZQLYRX ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) lq, ¼ ª •••žR•GZYUDQ th;ªn k(ai;) º Qah`sin qug(atevra) mht(ro;~) th`ª~º (aujth`~) ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) ma. – Übersetzung: „16. Jahr des vergöttlichten Hadrianus (Akten des) Stadtteils „östliche Stadt“, 11. Amphodarchie, […] te Aktenrolle … Seite 138. Eingabe des Artemon, des Sohnes des Asklepiades des Sohnes des Achilleus, von der Mutter Berous, Tochter des Hermaios, vom Gymnasium (registriert im?) Stadtviertel „westliche Festung“ … Wohnung: Er selbst Artemon, Sohn des Asklepiades […] vom Gymnasium, 83 Jahre; Artemon alias Agrippa, (sein) Sohn, die Mutter ist Tereus, Tochter des Apollonios, vom Gymnasium, 39 Jahre; […]dora alias Thaesis, Tochter von derselben Mutter, vom Gymnasium, 41 Jahre.“ 38 P.Amh. II 75,47-49: ia (e[tou~) Nevrwno~ Fro(urivou) lib(o;~) a tovm(ou) ko(llhvmato~) md, ¨$VNOKSLDYGKa ¨$FLOOHYZa ¼ ¨$VNOKSLDYGRX mht(ro;~) 7HZ•K  •  • ”Hrwno~ (ejtw`n) mq, ¼ g(unh;) (aujtou`) Berªou`º~ ÔErmaivou tou` Dwrivwnªoº~ (ejtw`n) md, ¨$UWHYPZQ uiJo;~ (aujtou`) (ejtw`n) iq. – Übersetzung: „11. Jahr Neros, (Stadtteil) „westliche Festung“, 1. Aktenrolle, Seite 44: Asklepiades, Sohn des Achilleus des Sohnes des Asklepiades, von der Mutter Teon[…], Tochter des Heron, 49 Jahre; seine Ehefrau Berous, Tochter des Hermaios des Sohnes des Dorion, 44 Jahre; Artemon, sein Sohn, 19 Jahre.“ 39 P.Amh. II 75,50-53 (cf. BL I 431; V 5): h (e[tou~) qeou` Oujespaªsºianou` Fro(urivou) lib(o;~) id ajm(fodarciva~) a[l(lo) DMQ•D•IRYULRQ ¨$•SROOZQLYRX ¨$SROOZQLYRX ¼ W•RžXC• ÔHraklhvoªu mºht(ro;~) Tere(u`to~) ¨$SROOZQLYRX ajpo; g(umnasivou) •••ž•••eJ(auto;n) ¨$SR•O•O•ZYQLRQ (ejtw`n) ma, ¼ g(unaikw`n) 'LGXYPKQ• ÔEªrmºaivou tou` Diosk(ovrou) g(unai`ka) (aujtou`) DMS•R• ªg(umnasivou) º (ejtw`n) m, ¼ ªTºereu`n qug(atevra) (aujtou`) ªajºpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) q. – Übersetzung: „8. Jahr Vespasians, (Stadtteil) „westliche Festung“, 14. Amphodarchie, eine andere Eingabe des Apollonios, des Sohnes des Apollonios des Sohnes des Herakles, von der Mutter Tereus, Tochter des Apollonios, vom Gymnasium […]: Er selbst Apollonios, 41 Jahre; von den Frauen: Didyme, Tochter des Hermaios, seine Ehefrau, vom Gymnasium, 40 Jahre; Tereus, seine Tochter, vom Gymnasium, 9 Jahre.“ 40 P.Amh. II 75,54-55: ia ª(e[tou~) Nºevrwno~ Fro(urivou) lib(o;~) a tovm(ou) ªko(llhvmato~) •žH

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

321

Mit diesen Aktenauszügen sind die Nachweise über den privilegierten Personalstatus eines ajpo; gumnasivou in der patrilinearen Abstammungslinie beendet und es folgen sodann ebensolche Aktenauszüge über die mütterliche Abstammungslinie des Artemon. Zunächst ein Auszug aus den Zensusakten des Jahres 131/132 n.Chr. (P.Amh. II 75,56-61), und zwar aus der Meldung der Großeltern mütterlicherseits, Hermaios und Theus, sowie deren Tochter Demetria alias Tereus (also der Mutter des Artemon), die damals 12 Jahre alt war. 41 Sodann ein Auszug aus den Akten des Zensus des Jahres 89/90 n.Chr. (P.Amh. II 75,62-69) mit dem Exzerpt der Deklaration des Ururgroßvaters mütterlicherseits Hermaios, der seine Kinder Areios und Thermuthion (also die Urgroßeltern des Artemon) sowie seine Enkel deklariert. 42 Es fehlt also in diesen Aktenauszügen über die matrilineare Abstammungslinie des Artemon (im Gegensatz zu den oben er-

¨$SROOZYžQLRa• ¨$SROOZ•QLYRX ¼55 ªtoºu` Ñ+UDNOKY•R•X• P•KWURa ž Tereu`to~ (ejtw`n) l. – Übersetzung: „11. Jahr Neros, (Stadtteil) „westliche Festung“, 1. Aktenrolle, [Seite .]5: Apollonios, Sohn des Apollonios des Sohnes des Herakles, von der Mutter Tereus, 30 Jahre.“ 41 P.Amh. II 75,56-61 (cf. BL I 431): L× (e[tou~) qeou` ÔAdrianou` Fro(urivou) lªib(o;~)º d ajm(fodarciva~) D>•OOR mDMQDIRYULRQ ® ÔErmaivou ¨$UHLYRX ¼ tou` ÔErmaivou mhtrªo;º~ 4HUP•RXYTLRa ÔErmaivou ajpo; g(umnasivou) ¼ ajnagr(afomevnou) ejpi; 3RY•OHZa lªiºb(o;~) stªaºq(mou`) met¨ a[l(lwn) eJ(auto;n) ÔErmai`on ¼ ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) P•G ¼60 g(unaikw`n) Qeu`n ajdel(fh;n) kai; g(unai`ka) tw`n (aujtw`n) gonevwn (ejtw`n) mg, ¼ Dhmhtrivan th;n k(ai;) Tere(u`n) qug(atevra) (aujtou`) ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) ib. – Übersetzung: „16. Jahr des vergöttlichten Hadrianus, (Stadtteil) „westliche Festung“, 4. Amphodarchie, eine andere des Areios, des Sohnes des Hermaios, von der Mutter Thermuthion, der Tochter des Hermaios, vom Gymnasium, registriert im Stadtviertel „westliche Stadt“, Wohnung, nach anderen (sc. Namen): Er selbst, Hermaios, vom Gymnasium, 44 Jahre; von den Frauen: Theus, seine Schwester und Ehefrau von denselben Eltern, 43 Jahre; Demetria alias Tereus, seine Tochter, vom Gymnasium, 12 Jahre.“ – Zur Altersangabe in Z. 61 siehe oben Anm. 36. 42 P.Amh. II 75,62-69: q (e[tou~) Domitianou` Fro(urivou) lib(o;~) d ajm(fodarciva~) ¼ D>•O•OR ªajºnafov(rion) ÔErmaivou ¨$UHLYRX tou` ne(wtevrou) ¨$UHLYRX mºhtro;~ ¼ ªQerºmouvqio~ ajpªo; g(umnasivou)º ajnagr(afomevnou) ejpi; Povl(ew~) ªlib(o;~)º stªaºq(mou`) P•H•W’• D>•O•OZQ ¼65 eJ(auto;n) ÔErmai`on ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) ng, ¼ [Areion uiJo;n mDMSR g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) kz. ¼ ÔErmai`on XL-RQ® ¨$UHLYRXž di  •  • mht(ro;~) Qermouvq(io~) ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) b, ¼ g(unaikw`n) Qermou`q(in) qug(atevra) (aujtou`) mht(ro;~) Tere(u`to~) DMG•HOIKCa ajpo; g(umnasivou) g(unai`ka) tou` ¼ ajdel(fou`) ¨$UHLYRX ajpo; g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) kd, ¼¼ (Kol. III) Qeu`n qug(atevra(?)) (aujth`~) ajpo; g(umnasivou) a (e[tou~). – Übersetzung: „9. Jahr Domitians, (Stadtteil) „westliche Festung“, 4. Amphodarchie, eine andere Eingabe des Hermaios, des Sohnes des jüngeren Areios des Sohnes des Areios, von der Mutter Thermuthion, vom Gymnasium, registriert im Stadtviertel „westliche Stadt“, Wohnung, nach anderen (sc. Namen): Er selbst, Hermaios, vom Gymnasium, 53 Jahre, Areios, (sein) Sohn des Areios […], die Mutter ist Thermution, 2 Jahre; von den Frauen: Thermuthion, seine Tochter, von der Mutter Tereus, (seiner) Schwester, vom Gymnasium, Ehefrau des Bruders Areios, vom Gymnasium, 24 Jahre; Theus, ihre Tochter, vom Gymnasium, 1 Jahr.“ – Im Exzerpt in Z. 66 hat der Schreiber offenbar eine Zeile des Originals ausgelassen, siehe hierzu auch den Kommentar der Hg. (P.Amh. II p. 93): „The person who makes the returns in lines 62-9 for A.D. 90 is Hermaeus who was born in A.D. 37. His son Arius was born in A.D. 63 (line 73), and it is his grandson Hermaeus son of Arius who was two years old in A.D. 90; cf. lines 56-8, which give the return of the younger Hermaeus himself in A.D. 132. We must therefore read [Areion uiJo;n mDMSR g(umnasivou) (ejtw`n) kz. ¼ ÔErmai`on XL-RQ® ¨$UHLYRXž.”

322

wähnten über die patrilineare) eine Zensusdeklaration des Urgroßvaters Areios. Möglicherweise deshalb weil entsprechende Akten für ihn gerade nicht auffindbar waren. Dafür erscheint der Urgroßvater dann allerdings bereits als zweijähriger zusammen mit seinem Vater Hermaios in dem letzten Aktenexzerpt des Textes (P.Amh. II 75,70-72) aus dem bereits erwähnten Register aus dem 11. Jahr Neros (= 64/65 n.Chr.). 43 Die oben behandelten Aktenauszüge in dem Epikrisis-Antrag P.Amh. II 75 zeigen übrigens daß die diversen zitierten Zensusakten aus früheren Jahren offenbar eine andere Form haben als die an drei Stellen erwähnte Akte aus dem 11. Jahr Neros, denn in den Auszügen aus den Zensusakten wird immer aus einer Haushaltsdeklaration (hier ajnafovrion genannt) zitiert, und für diese eine Fundstelle in den Aktenrollen über den entsprechenden Zensus angegeben, während aus der Akte aus dem Jahr 64/65 n.Chr. lediglich nur kurze Zitate der relevanten Namen angeführt werden. Das läßt vermuten, daß es sich bei den Zensusakten um tovmoi sugkollhvsimoi handelte, also Aktenrollen zu welchen die originalen Zensusdeklarationen zusammengeklebt worden waren. 44 Die Akte aus dem Jahr 64/65 n.Chr., für die keine Binnengliederung angegeben wird, scheint hingegen lediglich eine alphabetisch angeordnete Namenliste bzw. ein Register gewesen zu sein, aus der die die Vorfahren des Artemon betreffenden Einträge zitiert werden. Das Register aus dem 11. Jahr Neros, bei welchem es sich nicht um eine Zensusakte handeln kann und das noch in einer weiteren Epikrisis-Anmeldung aus Hermupolis erscheint45, war wohl ebenso Ergebnis einer behördlich angeordneten Revision der gymnasialen Klasse von Hermupolis46, wie es die oben erwähnten entsprechenden Register aus dem 34. Jahr des Augustus (= 4/5 n.Chr.), dem 3. und 4. Jahr des Nero (= 56/57 u. 57/58 n.Chr.) und dem 5. Jahr des Vespasian (= 72/73 n.Chr.) im Falle der ejk tou` gumnasivou von Oxyrhynchos waren. Im Zuge dieser Maßnahme sind vielleicht alle existenten gymnasialen Familien neu erfaßt worden und es mögen die Kriterien für die Zugehörigkeit der ajpo; gumnasivou von Hermupolis neu bzw. endgültig fixiert und sogar möglicherweise auch neue Mitglieder in diese Statusgruppe aufgenommen worden sein. Nach diesem Zeitpunkt war es dann vielleicht für die Epikrisis in die gymnasiale Klasse von Hermupolis erforderlich, daß ein männlicher Vorfahr von Vater- wie Mutter-

43 P.Amh. II 75,70-72: ia (e[tou~) Nevrwno~ Povlew~ lib(ov~), ª...º tovm(ou) ko(llhvmato~) rid, ¼ ÔErmai`o~ ¨$UHLYRX ne(wtevrou) ¨$UHLYRžX mht(ro;~) Qermouvq(io~) (ejtw`n) kq, ¼ [Areio~ uiJo;~ mht(ro;~) Tereu`t(o~) DM•GžHO•IKCa (ejtw`n) b. – Übersetzung: „11. Jahr Neros, (Stadtteil) „westliche Stadt“, […]te Aktenrolle, Seite 114: Hermaios, Sohn des jüngeren Areios des Sohnes des Areios, von der Mutter Thermuthion, 29 Jahre; Areios, (sein) Sohn, von der Mutter Tereus, (seiner) Schwester, 2 Jahre.“ 44 Zur Gestalt der Zensusakten siehe auch Kruse 2002, 129-139. 45 P.Ryl. II 102 (cf. BL I 388; 467; VII 172). 46 Die Hg. von P.Amh. II 75 erwogen bereits: „The eleventh year of Nero … was not a census year; but a revision of the ejpivkrisi~ lists seems to have been made by then“ (p. 93); siehe auch Montevecchi 1974, 229.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

323

seite her, in dieses Register aus dem 11. Jahr Neros eingetragen sein mußte. Das würde erklären, warum man sich, wie aus der Analyse von P.Amh. II 75 deutlich geworden ist, auch noch rund 100 Jahre später auf die Eintragung von Vorfahren in dieser Liste beruft. Auffallend ist, daß in Hermupolis offenbar auch die Ehefrauen in diese Liste eingetragen wurden47, was für die gymnasiale Klasse von Oxyrhynchos nicht bezeugt ist. Wir haben gesehen, daß aus Registern über die Epikrisis bzw. Zensusakten Auszüge angefertigt wurden, die dann (wie etwa im Falle der hermopolitischen Epikrisis-Anmeldungen) als Nachweis für einen privilegierten Personalstatus dienten und damit für die Berechtigung des Anspruches, in die betreffende Statusgruppe eingeschrieben zu werden. Aber nicht nur bei Gelegenheit der Epikrisis, sondern auch wenn irgendwann später Nachweise über den Status irgendwelcher Personen benötigt wurden, griff man auf solche archivierten Akten zurück. Ein solcher Fall liegt wohl auch dem im folgenden zu besprechenden Dokument zugrunde. Es stammt aus der arsinoitischen Gaumetropole Ptolemais Euergetis (BGU II 562 = W.Chr. 220) und datiert aus nachtraianischer Zeit. Es handelt sich um Auszüge aus den amtlichen Zensus- und Epikrisis-Akten, die ein Mann namens Sabinus, wie er sagt, „in Übereinstimmung mit den archivierten Akten“ (suvmfwna toi`~ ejn katacwrismw`/)48 angefertigt hat. Er könnte im Gauarchiv (der biblioqhvkh dhmosivwn lovgwn), wo wohl die Originale der Akten archiviert waren, tätig gewesen sein. Wir wissen nicht, zu welchem Zweck die Auszüge angefertigt wurden, weil der Anfang des Textes nicht mehr erhalten ist. Die Aktenauszüge betreffen aber ganz offensichtlich sämtlich Mitglieder ein- und derselben arsinoitischen Katökenfamilie, deren Oberhaupt ein Mann namens Tebulos ist. Veranlaßt wurden sie vielleicht von einem Familienmitglied, welches einen Nachweis über seinen privilegierten Status benötigte. Vom ersten erhaltenen Aktenauszug (Z. 1-5) sind nur noch geringe Reste erhalten. 49 Klarer sehen wir erst mit dem zweiten Exzerpt in den Z. 6-13. Er stammt aus dem eijkonismov~ des 7. Jahres des Traian, womit sicherlich die Akten des im Jahr 103/104 n.Chr. abgehaltene Zensus gemeint sind, wobei mit dem Terminus eijkonismov~ auf die Personalbeschreibungen, der in den Haushaltsdeklarationen gemeldeten Personen rekurriert wird. Der Auszug betrifft einen kavtoiko~ ejpikekrimevno~ namens Dioskoros, Sohn des Tebulos, der 20 Jahre alt ist, seine beiden Brüder, Eubulos und Theon, 22 und 14 Jahre alt und ebenfalls als kavtoi-

47 P.Amh. II 75,49. Es ergibt sich indes nicht nur aus den in Auszügen zitierten Zensusakten in P.Amh. II 75 sondern auch aus originalen Zensusdeklarationen (siehe P.Lond. III 936 [p. 30], 217 n.Chr.) u. 946 [p. 31]; 231 n.Chr. sowie P.Med. I 37 [= SB X 10437]; 217 n.Chr.) sicher, daß in Hermupolis sowohl Ehefrauen wie Töchter mit dem Statussignifikativ ajpo; gumnasivou qualifiziert wurden es also wohl auch offiziell führen durften. 48 BGU II 562, 20-21; siehe zu diesem Text auch Kruse 2002, 267-269. 49 ---------- ¼1 •••••••ž•RQ- ca.15 -º ¼ mhªtro;~ th`~ aujtºh`~ kavtªoiko~ ejpikekrimevno~ •••••••ž ¼ Qevwn a[llo(~) ajdel(fo;~) mhtrªo;~ - ca.13 -º ¼•••ž• eJtevra Bernivªkh - ca.17 -º ajdel(fh;) ¼5 qugavthr katoivkou ª(ejtw`n) •ž

324

koi ejpikekrimevnoi bezeichnet, sodann ihre Schwester Apollinarion (16 Jahre alt) und schließlich die Mutter der vier Geschwister Berenike (37 Jahre alt).50 Der folgende dritte Aktenauszug stammt aus den Akten über die Epikrisis der Katökensöhne, die im 8. Jahr Traians (= 104/105 n.Chr.) von den Epikritai Sotas und Papos vorgenommen worden ist. In ihm ist der Fall eines Katökensohnes namens Theon, Sohn des Tebulos, dokumentiert, der mit dem im vorherigen Auszug aus den Zensusakten des 7. Jahres (siehe oben) als 14-jährigen Katöken erscheinenden Theon, Sohn, des Tebulos, identisch sein muß. Von ihm heißt es nun in den Akten der Epikritai, er sei aus der Klasse der ajnepivkritoi in die der Steuerpflichtigen (der laografouvmenoi) des Dorfes Trano( ) eingereiht worden, also in die Kategorie derjenigen Einwohner die den vollen Kopfsteuersatz zu zahlen hatten, wohingegen er als kavtoiko~ eigentlich in den Genuß des ermäßigten privilegierten Steuersatzes für diese Bevölkerungsgruppe hätte kommen müssen. Außerdem ist Theon offensichtlich auch noch unter die Bewohner eines Dorfes eingereiht worden, nicht unter die der Gaumetropole, unter die er eigentlich gehört hätte, weil die Familie dort im Stadtviertel Tharapeias ansässig war. Den Grund für diese Epikrisis nicht nur in die falsche Bevölkerungskategorie, sondern darüberhinaus auch noch unter die Bewohner des falschen Ortes erfahren wir nicht. Vielleicht war Theon bzw. derjenige der seine Epikrisis zu veranlassen gehabt hätte, seinerzeit nicht anwesend. Wie dem auch sei: Irgendwann nach dieser fehlerhaften Statusfeststellung muß von Theon (oder einem anderen Familienmitglied) bei den Behörden dagegen protestiert worden sein. Es wurde nämlich, wie wir aus dem Aktenauszug weiter erfahren, vom Königlichen Schreiber des Gaus eine Untersuchung des Falles veranlaßt, mit dem Ziel, zu klären, wie es passieren konnte, daß der besagte Knabe unter die laografouvmenoi des Dorfes Trano( ) aufgenommen wurde. Dies läßt sich wohl mit einiger Sicherheit, dem (wenn auch leicht verstümmelten) Passus in Z. 17 entnehmen.

50 BGU II 562,6-13: ejx eijkonismou` z (e[tou~) qeou` Trai(an)ou` 4D•UD•S•HLYDa ejpi; Seknebtuvnei ¼ kol(lhvmato~) le oijkiv(a) dipurgiva kai; ai[q(rion) ×  kdæ (eJkto;n) (tetarto;n kai; eijkosto;n) mevro~ ¼ Diovskoro~ Tebouvl(ou) tou` Tebouvl(ou) mh(tro;~) Bernivk(h~) th`~ Tebouvl(ou) ¼ kavtoik(o~) ejpik(ekrimevno~) (ejtw`n) k, × (e[tei) (ejtw`n) iq ¼10 (X>E•RXORa ajdel(fo;~) mh(tro;~) th`~ aujth`~ ejpik(ekrimevno~) kavtoik(o~) (ejtw`n) kb, × (e[tei) ka a[sh(mo~). ¼ Qevwn a[llo(~) ajdel(fo;~) mh(tro;~) th`~ aujth`~ kavtoik(o~) ejpik(ekrimevno~) (ejtw`n) id. qhvl(eiai). ¼ ¨$SROOZQDYULRQ oJmopavt(rio~) kai; oJmo(mhvtrio~) ajdel(fh;) qug(avthr) k(at)oiv(kou) (ejtw`n) iz. Bernivk(h) Tebouvl(ou) ¼ mh(tro;~) ÔElevnh~ qug(avthr) katoivk(ou) ¡PKWURa th`~ DXMWKCa‘ (ejtw`n) lz. – Übersetzung: „Aus den Zensusakten des 7. Jahres des Traian (= 103/104 n.Chr.), Stadtviertel Tharapeia beim Tempel des Seknebtynis, Seite 35: Haus mit zwei Türmen und einem Innenhof, 1/6 1/24 (sc. von diesem Haus); Dioskoros, Sohn des Tebulos des Sohnes des Tebulos, von der Mutter Berenike, Tochter des Tebulos, der Personenstandsüberprüfung unterzogener Katöke, 20 Jahre; im 6. Jahr (= 102/103 n.Chr.) 19 Jahre. Eubulos, (sein) Bruder, von derselben Mutter, der Personenstandsüberprüfung unterzogener Katöke, 22 Jahre; im 6. Jahr 21 Jahre; ohne besondere Kennzeichen. Ein anderer Bruder, Theon, von derselben Mutter, der Personenstandsüberprüfung unterzogener Katöke, 14 Jahre. Frauen: Apollinarion, seine Schwester von demselben Vater und derselben Mutter, Tochter eines Katöken, 17 Jahre. Berenike, Tochter des Tebulos, von der Mutter Helene, Tochter eines Katöken, {von derselben Mutter}, 37 Jahre.“

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

325

Anläßlich dieser Untersuchung ist nun Theon vor den Epikritai im 8. Jahr erschienen und aus den von ihm vorgelegten Dokumenten (ejx w|n ejphnevgkato ajpodeivxewn), mittels derer er offensichtlich seine Abstammung aus einer in der Gauhauptstadt ansässigen Katökenfamilie beweisen konnte, schien es den Epikritai „offensichtlich“ (fanevn), „daß die Rechte bezüglich der Katöken (sc. in dem vorliegenden Fall) zu respektieren seien“ und Theon der Gruppe der im 7. Jahr Traians 14-jährigen Katökensöhne des Stadtviertels Tharapeia zugewiesen werden müsse.51 Dieses Ergebnis ihrer Untersuchung haben die Epikritai Sotas und Papos in den Akten über die von ihnen im 8. Jahr durchgeführte Epikrisis der Katökensöhne dokumentiert. Wie aus der von ihnen dann vorgenommenen Einreihung des Theon in die Gruppe der 14-jährigen Katökensöhne des vorherigen 7. Jahres hervorgeht, muß dessen falsche Epikrisis unter die kopfsteuerpflichtigen Dorfbewohner also in diesem Jahr stattgefunden haben. Die Angaben in den Zensusakten des 7. Jahres wurden dann aber offensichtlich aufgrund des Untersuchung im folgenden Jahr entsprechend korrigiert, denn in dem oben erwähnten vorherigen Auszug aus diesen Akten erscheint Theon ja völlig korrekt als 14-jähriger kavtoiko~ ejpikekrimevno~.52 Es ist anhand der in diesem Beitrag vorgestellten Dokumente hoffentlich deutlich geworden, daß die von den Römern in Ägypten etablierte Einteilung der Bevölkerung in abgestufte und regelmäßig auf ihre Zusammensetzung hin überprüfte Statusgruppen mit der damit einhergehenden Reglementierung und Kontrolle des Statuszugangs mittels des Verfahrens der Epikrisis nicht ohne eine differenzierte Aktenführung und eine systematische Archivierung der betreffen51 BGU II 562,14-22: ejx ejpikrivsewn uiJw`n katoivk(wn) h (e[tou~) qeou` Trai(an)ou` Swvtou kai; ¼15 Pavpou gegu(mnasiarchkovtwn) ejpik(ritw`n) kol(lhvmato~) ia. eJtevrou ajfhvliko~ uiJou` katoivk(ou) ¼ ajpo; ajnepikrivt(wn) eij~ laogr(afoumevnou~) ajneil(hmmevnou) kai; metadoqevnto~ uJpo; tou` aujtou` ¼ basil(ikou`) gr(ammatevw~) H•LM•a to;º ejxetasqh`ªnai • • • kºai; pw`~ HMS••••• HMSžL• t(h`/) kwvmh/ Trano( ) ¼ kai; ejpi; th`~ ejxetavsew~ paragenom(evnou) kai; ejx Z_Q• ejphnevgk(ato) ajpodeivxewn ¼ pefhnovto~ fane;n hJmi`n swvzein ta; pro;~ tou;~ katoivk(ou~) divkaia ¼20 kai; ojfeivl(ein(?)) paradecqh`nai Qarapeiva~ (tessareskaidekaeth`) z (e[tou~) Traianou` Kaivsaro~ tou` kurivou ¼ Qevwn Tebouvl(ou) tou` Tebouvl(ou) mh(tro;~) Bernivk(h~) ajdel(fh`~) patrov(~). (2. Hd.) Sabei`no~ ejxevlaba ¼ ta; prokivmena suvmfwna toi`~ ejn katacwrismw`/. – Übersetzung: „Aus den Akten über die Epikrisis der Katökensöhne im 8. Jahr des vergöttlichten Traian (= 104/105) der Epikritai Sotas und Papos, ehemaligen Gymnasiarchen, Seite 11: (bezüglich des Falles) eines anderen minderjährigen Katökensohnes aus der Gruppe der noch nicht der Personenstandsprüfung unterzogenen, der in die Gruppe der Kopfsteuerpflichtigen aufgenommen und von demselben Königlichen Schreiber übermittelt worden war, mit der Maßgabe, zu untersuchen […] wie […] im Dorf Trano( ); sowohl als dieser zur Untersuchung erschienen war, als auch aus den Beweisurkunden, die er vorlegte, schien es uns offensichtlich, daß die auf die Katöken bezüglichen Rechte zu wahren seien und er in die Gruppe der im 7. Jahr des Traianus Caesar des Herrn (= 103/104) 14-jährigen (sc. Katökensöhne) im Stadtviertel Tharapeia aufgenommen werden müsse: Theon, Sohn des Tebulos des Sohnes des Tebulos, die Mutter ist Berenike, die Schwester des Vaters. (2. Hd.) Ich, Sabinus, habe das Vorstehende in Übereinstimmung mit den öffentlich verwahrten Akten entnommen.“ 52 Siehe oben Anm. 50.

326

den Akten durchführbar war. Die Selbstdeklarationen der Bevölkerung im Zuge des in jedem 14. Jahr abgehaltenen Provinzialzensus wurden nicht nur in Aktenrollen gesammelt, sondern aus ihnen wurden nach Wohnorten, (d.h. Stadtquartieren und Dörfern) angelegte Einwohnerlisten bzw. Bevölkerungsregister angelegt, deren Binnengliederung wiederum nach Statusgruppen differenziert war. Evidentgehalten und aktualisiert wurden diese Listen einerseits durch die regelmäßigen Zensusmeldungen sowie gegebenenfalls durch Geburtsanzeigen, mittels derer die privilegierten Gruppen der Bevölkerung ihren männlichen Nachwuchs am Wohnort registrieren ließen. Dieser wurde infolgedessen künftig als ajnagrafovmeno~ bezeichnet. Ebenfalls in die Bevölkerungsregister mit ein flossen ferner die Ergebnisse der jährlich durchgeführten Epikrisis der in das Volljährigkeitsalter und damit in die Steuerpflichtigkeit eintretenden Mitglieder der fiskalisch privilegierten Bevölkerungsklassen, die in diesen Listen sodann mit dem Zusatz ejpikekrimevno~ bezeichnet wurden. Der Ort der Archivierung solcher Akten bzw. Register war zunächst sicherlich bei den Behörden des Wohnorts, wo die betreffende Person, welche zur Epikrisis angemeldet wurde, registriert war. Angelegt und geführt wurden die Bevölkerungsregister nämlich in der Gaumetropole von den Vorstehern dieser Stadtteile, den Amphodarchen, in den Dörfern vom Komogrammateus. Wir wissen ferner, daß Kopien solcher Register auch an andere Behörden, namentlich die Verwaltung der Gaumetropole und die Gauverwaltung gingen. 53 Von den Lokalbehörden wurden sodann Kopien der Akten insbesondere im Gauarchiv (biblioqhvkh dhmosivwn lovgwn) deponiert. Darüberhinaus erhielten aber auch die alexandrinischen Behörden der Provinzverwaltung diese Akten, und zwar über den für den jeweiligen Gau zuständigen ejklogisthv~ in Alexandria, der die Finanzen und die Administration des Gaus regelmäßig zu überprüfen und eventuelle Unstimmigkeiten aufzuklären sowie die jährliche Revision der Verwaltung des Gaus durch den Statthalter vorzubereiten hatte. So erfahren wir etwa aus einer eidlichen Erklärung an den Gaustrategen des Oxyrhynchites aus dem Jahr 93/94 n.Chr. (PSI X 1109), daß der Eklogistes dieses Gaus dem Strategen den Auftrag übermittelt hatte, zu überprüfen, ob ein gewisser Dionysios, Sohn des Komon tatsächlich „von beiden Eltern Dodekadrachmos ist“, er also diesen Status zu Recht beansprucht. Dieser Auftrag

53 So erklärt etwa der Amphodarch, der im Jahr 72/73 n.Chr. die oben besprochenen diversen nach Statusgruppen gegliederten Register über die im Stadtviertel Apolloniu Parembole ansässige Bevölkerung (SPP IV p. 62-78) zusammengestellt hat, daß eine Kopie der in seinem Stadtviertel ansässigen Liste der Römer und Alexandriner auch dem basiliko;~ grammateuv~ des Gaus und dem grammateu;~ mhtropovlew~ eingereicht worden ist (Z. 376-377). Da nicht alle Listen unten vollständig sind, muß unklar bleiben welche der sonst noch in SPP IV p. 62-72 versammelten Einwohnerlisten an übergeordnete Behörden gegangen sind. Es finden sich aber noch weitere solche Einreichungsvermerke für die drei ebenfalls in die Aktenrolle aufgenommenen Steuerabrechnungen, siehe hierzu auch Kruse 2002, 274-276.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

327

war wohl das Resultat einer Überprüfung der dem Eklogistes eingereichten Epikrisis-Akten bzw. Bevölkerungsregister, in denen dieser irgendwelche Unstimmigkeiten festgestellt haben muß. Den Prüfauftrag übermittelte der Stratege sodann an den Vormund des Betroffenen, der, weil der leibliche Vater wohl mittlerweile verstorben ist, in Reaktion darauf nun die eidliche Erklärung abgibt, daß sein Mündel väterlicher- wie mütterlicherseits von Dodekadrachmoi abstammt.54 Am Schluß des Textes findet sich sodann der wohl zu Beweiszwecken angefügte Auszug aus den Epikrisisakten des 9. Jahres des Domitian (= 89/90 n.Chr.), der anscheinend die Epikrisis des besagten Dionysios zum Gegenstand hat.55 54 PSI X 1109,1-27 (cf. BL VIII 406; X 246): Klaudivwi ¨$UHLYZL stra(thgw`i) ¼ para; Qevwno~ Dionusivou tou` /HYRQ¼WRa mhtro;~ ¨,VLZYQKa tw`n ajp¨ ¨2[X¼UXYJFZQ povlew~ frontistou` ¼5 Dionusivou .RYP•ZQRa pro;~ to; PHWD¼GRTHYQ soi uJpo; tou` ejglogistou` eij~ ¼ ejxevtasin ei\do~ tw`i ia (e[tei) ejn b tovm(w/) ¼ kol(lhvmati) n di¨ ou| ejpezhvthsen eij oJ ¼ progegrammevno~ Dionuvsiov~ ¼10 ejstin ejx ajmfotevrwn gonevwn (dwdekavdracmo~) ¼ DMSžR•IDLYQRPDL ei\nai aujto;n (dwdekavdracmon) ¼ ªajºnagrafovmenon ejp¨ ajmfovdou ¼ ÔIppodrovmou, kai; to;n touvtou patevra ¼ Kovmwna Dionusivou tou` Kovmwno~ ¼15 mhtro;~ Tiouda~ th`~ Koivntou DMQD¼JUDIRYPHQRžQ• ejpi; tou` aujtou` ajmfovd(ou) ¼ ª -ca.?- oJºmoivw~ de; kai; to;n th`~ ¼ ªmhtro;~ aujºtou` patevra Dionuvsio(n) ¼ ªto; pri;n (dwdekavdracmon)º R>•QWD ajnagrafovmenon ¼20 ªejp¨ ajmfovdouº Drovmou Qohvrido~ ¼ WHWHOHXWKNHYQžD•L• aujto;n tw`/ × (e[tei) ¼ ªDomitianou` tou` NXžU•LYRX ejn uJperetevsi. ¼ ªkai; ojmnuvw Aujtokravºtora Kaivsara ¼ ªDomitiano;n Sebaºsto;n Germaniko;n ¼25 ªou{tw~ ei\nai (2. Hd.?) (e[tou~)º ig Aujtokravtoro~ ¼ ªKaivsaro~ Domitianou` Seºbastou` Germanikou` ¼ ª -ca.?- º. – Übersetzung: „An Claudius Areios, den Strategen, von Theon, Sohn des Dionysios des Sohnes des Leon, die Mutter ist Isione, aus der Stadt Oxyrhynchos, Vormund des Dionysios, des Sohnes des Komon. Zu dem Dir vom Eklogistes übermittelten Auftrag vom 11. Jahr (= 91/92 n.Chr.) (niedergelegt) in der 2. Aktenrolle, Kolumne 50, mittels dessen er überprüft wissen wollte, ob der vorgenannte Dionysios von beiden Eltern her ein Dodekadrachmos ist, erkläre ich, daß er ein Dodekadrachmos ist, registriert im Stadtviertel “Hippodrom”, und daß dessen Vater Komon, Sohn des Dionysios des Sohnes des Komon, die Mutter ist Tioudas, Tochter des Quintus, registriert in demselben Stadtviertel [---], und ebenso, daß der Vater seiner Mutter (sc. des Knaben Dionysios) [der vormals Dodekadrachmos war], registriert im Stadtviertel “Dromos der Thoëris” im 6. Jahr Domitians (= 86/87 n.Chr.) in der Klasse der Überjährigen verstorben ist. Und ich schwöre beim Imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus, daß es sich so verhält. (2. Hd.?). Im 13. Jahr des Imperator Caesar Domitianus Augustus Germanicus [---].“ In Z. 17 ist am ehesten ein Hinweis auf den Status des Vaters zu ergänzen, man erwartet eigentlich ei\nai kai; auto;n (dwdekavdracmon), wofür aber nach dem Hg. (siehe den Zeilenkommentar) an der Stelle kein Platz ist, weshalb er ein verkürztes ei\nai (dwdekavdracmon) erwägt. 55 Der Text bzw. die vom Hg. gebotene Transkription ist mir an dieser Stelle nicht ganz klar: Sie lautet (PSI X 1109,28-29): ejx ejpikrivsew~ q (e[tou~) Domitianou` ¼ zh( ) • • kol(lhvmati) iz wJ~ (ejtw`n) ia ejpikekrim(evno~) (e[tei) ig. Rekurriert wird offenbar auf das 17. kovllhma einer Aktenrolle, was eigentlich erwarten läßt, daß davor die Nummer des entsprechenden tovmo~ genannt war. Man ist zwar zunächst versucht, diese an der vom Hg. nicht entzifferten Stelle vor kovl( ) zu suchen. Eine Überprüfung anhand einer mir von R. Pintaudi dankenswerterweise zur Verfügung gestellten Photographie des Papyrus ergab indes, daß die Lesung zh am Anfang der Z. 29 paläographisch recht plausibel zu sein scheint. Ich vermag indes ebensowenig wie der Erstherausgeber die folgenden Zeichen recht zu deuten. Sicher ist jedenfalls, daß es sich um eine Abkürzung handeln muß, wobei ich diese nicht schon nach dem Eta annehmen möchte, wobei das letzte Zeichen, wohl der Kürzungsstrich ist. Das zh..( )(?) ist vielleicht als Hinweis auf eine amtliche Überprüfung (zhvthsi~) des Falls zu deuten und daher vielleicht eine Form von zhtevw anzunehmen. So findet sich etwa häufig in amtlichen Dokumenten bzw. Listen neben einzelnen Einträgen der gegebenenfalls mehr oder weniger stark abgekürzte

328

Die oben behandelten Texte zeigen ferner, daß die diversen die Bevölkerungs- resp. Statuskontrolle betreffenden Akten über sehr lange Zeiträume, z.T. sogar über Jahrhunderte hinweg, archiviert und konsultierbar gewesen sind, damit man aus ihnen die entsprechenden Nachweise über den Personalstatus der Familie bzw. die Epikrisis der Vorfahren der bei der aktuellen Epikrisis angemeldeten Personen erheben resp. seitens der Behörden die von jenen unter Berufung auf solche Akten geltend gemachten Ansprüche überprüfen konnte.

Das System der ejpivkrisi~ der Statusgruppen der enchorischen Bevölkerung Ägyptens mit Hilfe der auf sie bezüglichen Akten hat nach Ausweis unserer Quellen bis zum Ende des 3. Jh. offenkundig reibungslos funktioniert. 56 Eine beträchtliche Organisationsationsleistung, die sicherlich nicht allein in dem Ziel der Konstitution einer lokalen Elite begründet war, sondern nicht zuletzt auch darin, die Gefahr ungerechtfertigter Steuerausfälle soweit als möglich zu minimieren. Denn, da im Prinzip die Einreihung jedes neuen Mitglieds in eine der fiskalisch privilegierten Statusgruppen der enchorischen Bevölkerung einer Minderung des Steueraufkommens gleichkam, konnte es in den Augen der Römer hier wohl gar nicht genug Kontrolle geben.

Randvermerk zhvtei („überprüfe!“), und zwar den Gegenstand des betreffenden Eintrages (siehe hierzu etwa P.Lond. Wasser Z. 42 und die diesbezüglichen Bemerkungen des Hg. Interessant auch P.Bouriant 42,298). Für PSI X 1109,29 möchte ich (mit aller Vorsicht) daher ]KYW•HL vorschlagen. Gegenstand dieser Untersuchung könnten die in dem 17. kovllhma dokumentierten Daten sein. Zu der auf das kol(lhvmati) iz folgenden Passage: wJ~ (ejtw`n) ia ejpikekrim(evno~) (e[tei) ig bemerkt der Hg. im Zeilenkommentar „Si è voluto, pare, annotare che nell’a. 13o di Domiziano il ragazzo sottoposto ad ejpivkrisi~ aveva undici anni.“ Es wäre indes ungewöhnlich, wenn die Epikrisis, bereits im Alter von 11 Jahren und nicht, wie üblich, mit dem Erreichen des 14. Lebensjahres vorgenommen worden wäre. Außerdem versteht man nicht ganz, wieso an dieser Stelle plötzlich von der Epikrisis im 13. Jahr (= 93/94 n.Chr.) die Rede sein soll, wo doch der Aktenauszug, wie in Z. 28 gesagt wird, aus den Epikrisis-Akten des 9. Jahres (= 89/90 n.Chr.) stammen soll. Könnte es vielleicht sein, daß die Überprüfung, auf die möglicherweise mit dem ]KYW•HL rekurriert wird (siehe oben), den Umstand betraf, daß der Knabe mit einer (irregulären) Altersangabe von 11 Jahren in den Akten aufschien, dann aber bei der Epikrisis des 9. Jahres in die 13-jährigen eingereiht wurde? 56 Die spätesten bisher bekannten Epikrisisanträge sind SB XXII 15626 (276-282) für die Metropolitenklasse und P.Turner 38 (274/275 od. 280/281) für die gymnasiale Klasse von Oxyrhynchos.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

329

Appendix: Der Stammbaum der Familie des Artemon, Sohn des Artemon alias Agrippa nach P.Amh. II 75*

* Reproduktion von P.Amh. II p. 91.

330

Bibliographie

Bagnall 1991 R.S. Bagnall, The Beginnings of the Roman Census in Egypt, «GRBS», 32, 255-265. Bagnall-Frier 1994 R.S. Bagnall-B.W. Frier, The Demography of Roman Egypt (Cambridge Studies in Population, Economy and Society in Past Time 23), Cambridge. Bussi 2003 S. Bussi, Selezione di élites nell‘Egitto romano. ¨(SLYNULVLa ed ei[skrisi~ tra I e III secolo d.C., «Laverna», 14, 146-166. Canducci 1990 D. Canducci, I 6475 cateci greci dell’Arsinoite, «Aegyptus», 70, 211-255. Canducci 1991 D. Canducci, I 6475 cateci greci dell’Arsinoite: Prosopografia, «Aegyptus», 71, 121-216. Habermann 2004 W. Habermann, Gymnasien im ptolemäischen Ägypten – eine Skizze, in: D. Kah u. P. Scholz (Hgg.), Das hellenistische Gymnasion, Berlin, 335-348. Haensch 1992 R. Haensch, Das Statthalterarchiv, «ZRG», 109, 209-317. Hombert-Préaux 1952 M. Hombert-C. Préaux, Recherches sur le recensement dans l’Égypte romaine (Papyrologica Lugduno-Batava V), Leiden. Jördens 2009 A. Jördens, Statthalterliche Verwaltung in der römischen Kaiserzeit. Studien zum praefectus Aegypti (Historia Einzelschriften 175), Stuttgart. Kruse 2002 Th. Kruse, Der Königliche Schreiber und die Gauverwaltung.

bevölkerungskontrolle, statuszugang und archivpraxis…

Untersuchungen zur Verwaltungsgeschichte Ägyptens in der Zeit von Augustus bis Philippus Arabs (30 v.Chr.–245 n.Chr.) (Archiv für Papyrusforschung, Beiheft 11), 2 Bde, LeipzigMünchen. Montevecchi 1970 O. Montevecchi, Nerone a una polis e ai 6475, «Aegyptus», 50, 5-33. Montevecchi 1974 O. Montevecchi, L’epikrisis dei Greco-Egizi, in: Proceedings of the XIVth International Congress of Papyrologists, Oxford, 24-31 July 1974, London, 227-232. Montevecchi 1975 O. Montevecchi, Nerone e l‘Egitto. Postille, «PdP», 30, 48-58. Montevecchi 2000 O. Montevecchi, Linguaggio tecnico e varianti locali nelle dichiarazioni per l‘epikrisis, in: Atti del IV Convegno Nazionale di Egittologia e Papirologia. Siracusa, 5-7 dicembre 1997, a cura di C. Basile e A. Di Natale, Siracusa (Quaderni del Museo del Papiro 9), 91-98. Nelson 1979 C.A. Nelson, Status Declarations in Roman Egypt (American Studies in Papyrology 19), Amsterdam. Orth 1983 W. Orth, Zum Gymnasium im römerzeitlichen Ägypten, in: H. Heinen (Hg.), Althistorische Studien. Hermann Bengtson zum 70. Geburtstag dargebracht von Kollegen und Schülern (Historia Einzelschriften 40), Wiesbaden, 223-232. Palme 1993 B. Palme, Die ägyptische NDW¨RLMNLYDQDMSRJUDIKY und Lk 2,1-5, «PzB», 2, 1-24.

331

Ruffini 2006 G. Ruffini, Genealogy and Gymnasium, «BASP», 43, 71-99. Sánchez-Moreno Ellart 2010 C. Sánchez-Moreno Ellart, ÔUpomnhvmata ejpigennhvsew~: the Greco-Egyptian Birth Returns in Roman Egypt and the Case of P. Petaus 1-2, «APF», 56, 91-129. Van Minnen 2002 P. van Minnen, OiJ ajpo; gumnasivou: ‘Greek’ Women and the Greek ‘Elite’ in the Metropoleis of Roman Egypt, in: H. Melaerts-L. Mooren (Hgg.), Le rôle et le statut de la femme en Égypte hellénistique, romaine et byzantine. Actes du colloque international, BruxellesLeuven 27-29 novembre 1997 (Studia Hellenistica 37), LeuvenParis-Sterling (VA), 337-353. Whitehorne 1982 J.E.G. Whitehorne, The Ephebate and the Gymnasial Class in Roman Egypt, «BASP», 19, 171-184. Wolff 2002 H.J. Wolff, Das Recht der griechischen Papyri Ägyptens in der Zeit der Ptolemaeer und des Prinzipats. Erster Band: Bedingungen und Triebkräfte der Rechtsentwicklung, hrsg. von H.-A. Rupprecht (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft X 5.1), München. Yiftach-Firanko 2010 U. Yiftach-Firanko, A Gymnasial Registration Report from Oxyrhynchus, «BASP» 47, 2010, 45-65.

332

Die Statthalterarchive der Spätantike

rudolf haensch

Einführung 2003 wurden die Reste einer umfangreichen, Mitte des 5. Jh. n. Chr. erlassenen Regelung von Gebühren publiziert, die bei verschiedenen Rechtsstreitigkeiten vor den Statthaltergerichten in der östlichen Hälfte des Römischen Reiches zu zahlen waren1. Wie viele andere spätantike, in griechischer Sprache abgefaßte, offizielle Dokumente aus diesem Reichsteil weist auch dieses Edikt eine Reihe lateinischer Lehnwörter auf. Neben den Bezeichnungen für bestimmte Mitglieder der administrativen Stäbe wie singulares (II 5) oder exceptores (III 2) und der Bezeichnung für die Gebühren selbst, sportulae (I 4), finden sich lateinische Lehnwörter auch für administrative Akte bzw. Dokumente: ta; kovmpleutra bzw. kompleuvsimo~ (completio) für die Ausfertigung von Urkunden, dhvkrhton kouravtoro~ für ein Dekret, das einen curator minoris einsetzte. Diese und zahlreiche andere, z. T. noch im heutigen modernen Griechisch nachweisbaren Lehnwörter aus dem Lateinischen2 sind ohne eine hoch entwickelte Kanzleipraxis der römi-

1 Di Segni-Patrich-Holum 2003; wichtige Korrekturen bei Feissel 2006 Nr. 718 (= BE 2004, 394); die Inschrift jetzt auch als AE 2003, 1808 und SEG 53, 1841 greifbar. Für eine sorgfältige kritische Durchsicht danke ich U. Ehmig (Wien) und R. Färber (München). 2

Mourgues 1995, 125-127.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

333

schen Administration und Rechtsprechung nicht denkbar. Von einer solchen berichtet auch Johannes Lydus, ein hochrangiges Stabsmitglied des praefectus praetorio Orientis, des wohl wichtigsten Amtsinhabers unterhalb des Kaisers, in seiner Schrift De magistratibus3 im ersten Drittel des 6. Jh. Man erwartet, daß derartigen Kanzleipraktiken ein entsprechend entwickeltes Archivwesen zur Seite steht. Diese Annahme ist auch so sehr in der Forschung verankert, daß im Gegensatz zur Hohen Kaiserzeit4 für die Spätantike, also die Jahre zwischen 284 und 640, m. W. bisher nie die Existenz umfangreicher Archive römischer Administrationsträger hinterfragt, geschweige denn bestritten wurde5. Sieht man sich allerdings die wenigen einschlägigen Werke der Sekundärliteratur6 an, so verschwinden derartige Vorstellungen in einem Nebel der Unsicherheit: Eine eigenständige Arbeit zu den Archiven des Römischen Staates in der Spätantike gibt es bisher nicht und auch die Hinweise in der sonstigen Literatur sind spärlich. In einer dieser wenigen Stellungnahmen heißt es zudem: „Wieder ist man am besten über das kaiserzeitliche Ägypten informiert“7. Nach der Sicht des Autors, eines der profiliertesten Papyrologen und Kenners der Spätantike, wissen wir demnach viel mehr über die Archive der Hohen Kaiserzeit – also der Periode, für die man die Existenz solcher Einrichtungen wegen des Mangels einschlägiger Quellen nicht selten bestritten hat – als über die der Spätantike. Das läßt ahnen, daß die Kenntnislage keineswegs so günstig ist, wie gerne angenommen wird. Um so wichtiger ist es, die verstreuten Quellen einmal zusammenzustellen. Was wissen wir also grundsätzlich über die Existenz von Statthalterarchiven in der Spätantike und speziell über ihre Zusammensetzung, ihre Nutzungsmöglichkeiten und über diejenigen, die sie betreuten? Die wohl wichtigste Nachricht zur Archivierungspraxis hoher Verwaltungsträger des spätantiken Römischen Reiches findet sich bei dem erwähnten Johannes Lydus. Von dem Archiv des praefectus praetorio Orientis berichtet er8, es gäbe im südlichen Teil des Hippodroms in Konstantinopel, unter der kaiserlichen Loge, umfangreiche Räumlichkeiten, die sich bis zur sogenannten Sphendone, der Kurve des Hippodroms, hinzögen. In ihnen würden die Unterlagen der Gerichtsverhandlungen vor den praefecti praetorio Orientis aufbewahrt. Man fände dort immer noch alle Protokolle seit der Zeit des Kaisers Valens, also spätestens

3

Schamp 2006. Eine ältere englische Ausgabe: Bandy 1983.

4

Zu dieser Kontroverse Haensch 1992, 214-219.

5

Die Bemerkungen von Nicolet 1994, IX sind bezeichnend. Vgl. Kaser-Hackl 1996, 557.

6 Ausbüttel 1988, 107; Gross 1950; Posner 1972, 205-223; Seeck 1921; Tengström 1962, 2830. Für die mittel- und spätbyzantinische Archivierungspraxis bei kaiserlichen Verlautbarungen s. van der Wal 1981, 307. 7

Palme 1999, hier 99 Anm. 72.

8 De mag. III 19, 1. Dazu Dagron 1974, 317 (der auch auf Const. Porphyr. Caer. I 20 – Vogt I 120 f. verweist).

334

seit dem Jahr 378, bis in das beginnende 6. Jh. Die Dokumente würden dort so aufbewahrt, daß sie jederzeit leicht konsultiert werden können. Jetzt aber – zum Zeitpunkt der Abfassung seiner Schrift – sei als eine der Folgen der Tätigkeit des völlig unfähigen Prätorianerpräfekten Johannes des Kappadokiers der Posten des instrumentarius, der dieses Archiv beaufsichtigte, nicht mehr besetzt (mit den entsprechenden Konsequenzen für das Archiv). Ein Archiv, das über 150 Jahre die Urkunden eines bestimmten Typs vollständig und leicht zugänglich aufbewahrt, stellt der betreffenden Administration ein gutes Zeugnis aus. Weiterhin möchte man meinen, daß das, was für den Vorgesetzten der Statthalter vieler östlicher Provinzen galt – der Zuständigkeitsbereich des praefectus praetorio Orientis umfaßte grob gesprochen alle Provinzen östlich der Dardanellen, außer den ägyptischen –, zumindest weitgehend auch auf diese zugetroffen haben sollte. Einer der wichtigsten Hinweise auf das Archivwesen höherer Repräsentanten der römischen Macht, aber auch lokaler Instanzen bildet die Praxis der sogenannten testificatio actorum, d. h. der Erklärung einer Partei zu den Akten einer Behörde9. Diese Praxis setzt nämlich voraus, daß die entsprechenden Protokolle bei den Institutionen zumindest für einen gewissen Zeitraum archiviert wurden. Daß das Recht der testificatio actorum auch von den Statthaltern neben anderen lokalen Institutionen ausgeübt wurde, bezeugen u. a. Cod. Iust. II 4, 28 vom Jahr 294, Cod. Theod. II 4, 2 vom Jahr 322, Cod. Iust. I, 2, 14, 7 vom Jahr 470, Nov. Iust. 15 vom Jahr 535. Speziell für den Fall der Erteilung einer procuratio zeigt dies Ps.-Paul. Sent. I 3, 1, für den Fall einer Schenkung ein Gesetz Konstantins aus dem Jahr 316, das in den Fragmenta Vaticana und im Codex Theodosianus erhalten ist (249, 7 f. bzw. VIII 12, 1, 1), ferner eine Regelung des Kaisers Leo aus dem Jahr 469 (Cod. Iust. I 57, 1). Wie wichtig diese Praxis auch noch zu Beginn des 6. Jh. war, belegen zwei Edikte des Aspar Alypius Constantinus, praefectus praetorio Orientis 502 bis 50510. Dem 19ten Edikt zufolge, mußte die Reinschrift einer vom Statthalter mit seiner Unterschrift bestätigten Urkunde innerhalb von 15 Tagen ausgefertigt werden. Das 18te legte fest, daß der, der die acta entgegennahm, aufbewahrte und gegebenenfalls den Parteien aushändigte, ein besonders zuverlässiger Mann sein mußte. Er sollte auch über angenommene und ausgegebene Urkunden ein Inventar führen. Daher sei er nicht alleine vom Statthalter und der Abteilung seines Stabes, die für die acta zuständig sei, auszuwählen, sondern auch vom Bischof und den führenden Honoratioren (des Statthaltersitzes ?). Das Edikt zeigt zum einen, daß es auch noch zu Beginn des 6. Jh. in jedem Statthalterstab eine Abteilung gab, die für schriftliche Unterlagen (acta) zuständig war. Zum anderen deutet es erhebliche Probleme bei ihrer Aufbewahrung und ihrem Zugang an. Offen bleiben

9 Dazu Bickermann 1933; Steinwenter 1915, besonders 30 ff. Vgl. Kaser-Hackl 1996, 557; Posner 1972, 217 f. 10 Zachariae von Lingenthal 1843. Zu dem Präfekten PLRE II 315.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

335

muß, ob man die Wahl des Zuständigen deshalb aus der Administration hinaus verlagern wollte, weil die Verwaltung in diesem Punkt nicht mehr zuverlässig funktionierte, oder weil sich eine entsprechende „Privatisierung“ in anderen Bereichen bewährt hatte; denn die Beteiligung des Bischofs und der honestiores an der Auswahl des Administrationsträgers gab diesem eine zusätzliche, moralisch fundierte Autorität.

Explizite Belege für spätantike Statthalterarchive Als zentraler Beleg für die Existenz spätantiker Statthalterarchive11 wird gerne Cod. Theod. XV 14, 8 genannt, eine Anordnung von Theodosius I nach dem Sieg über Magnus Maximus im Jahre 388. Nach dem Erlaß sollten u. a. die Urteile all derer, die von Maximus als iudices, d. h. also insbesondere als Provinzstatthalter, eingesetzt worden waren, in Zukunft keine Gültigkeit mehr haben. Dementsprechend sollten sie aus den Aufbewahrungsorten (scrinia) der öffentlichen Dokumente entfernt werden (ex omnibus publicorum monumentorum scriniis iubemus auferri). Sicher ergibt sich daraus ein Hinweis auf eine gewisse Archivierungspraxis bei den iudices; wie lange aber, wo und bei welcher Zugänglichkeit archiviert wurde, erfahren wir nicht. Dieses Zeugnis ist der einzige explizite und generelle Hinweis auf Statthalterarchive! Als Beispiel für ein einzelnes Statthalterarchiv wird in der Literatur immer wieder auf das der Africa Proconsularis hingewiesen. Augustinus bezieht sich mehrfach in seiner Auseinandersetzung mit den Donatisten auf die Unterlagen, die im Archiv des proconsul Africae eingesehen werden könnten. So betonte er z. B. im Zusammenhang mit der Diskussion um Bischof Felix von Abthugni, der eine wichtige Rolle beim Ausbruch des Donatistenstreites zu Beginn des 4. Jh. spielte, die Unterlagen der gegen ihn im Jahr 314 vom proconsul Africae durchgeführten Untersuchung seien in den proconsularia archiva zu finden (c. Cresc. III 61, 67). Dort könnte nicht nur der gesamte Wortlaut des Richterspruchs, der sententia, des damaligen Proconsuls Aelianus, nachgelesen werden, sondern sogar das gesamte Prozessprotokoll: Si tota gesta vis legere, ex archivo proconsulis accipe (c. Cresc. III 70, 80). In diesem Archiv fände man auch den offiziellen Bericht, mit dem der Vorgänger des Aelianus die Bittschrift der Anhänger des (donatistischen) Gegenbischofs Donatus von Carthago an Kaiser Konstantin übermittelt habe, die sogenannte relatio Anullini proconsulis ad imperatorem Constantinum (brevic. Coll. III 7, 8). Schließlich verweist Augustinus noch bei einem dritten Dokumentenkomplex auf das Statthalterarchiv der Proconsularis: Das Ergebnis eines Rechtsstreites zwischen den Bischöfen zweier verschiedener Glaubensrichtungen im Jahre 394 vor dem proconsul Flavius Herodes könne man

11 S. z. B. Seeck 1921, 901.

336

ex gestis proconsularibus, also aus den Gerichtsurkunden der proconsules Africae, erfahren12. Sicherlich ist damit zu rechnen, daß Augustinus tatsächlich als Quelle für sein Wissen und seine Zitate zumeist Abschriften dieser Dokumente benutzte, die innerhalb der katholischen Kirche weitergegeben wurden. Aber er konnte es sich gerade in diesem Streit, in dem von den staatlichen Autoritäten erstellte Dokumente (über das Verhalten kirchlicher Amtsinhaber während der Zeit der antichristlichen Maßnahmen der Tetrarchen) – und nicht theologische Probleme – eine so große Rolle spielten, nicht leisten zu behaupten, die Dokumente seien jederzeit in den entsprechenden Archiven einsehbar, wenn dies nicht der Fall gewesen wäre. Im Archiv des proconsul Africae müssen also tatsächlich Protokolle mindestens 100 Jahre lang aufbewahrt worden sein. Das Gleiche gilt für die Korrespondenz der proconsules mit dem Kaiser bzw. zumindest ihre wichtigsten Teile. Zu der durch Augustinus bezeugten Archivierungspraxis paßt die These O. Seecks13, nach der der Codex Theodosianus, also die erste große spätantike Sammlung kaiserlicher Gesetze, wesentlich auf der Basis der im Statthalterarchiv in Carthago archivierten kaiserlichen Konstitutionen entstanden sei. Seeck schloß dies aus den in diesem Codex gesammelten Gesetzen und speziell daraus, wo diese Regelungen ihren Angaben nach angeschlagen und an wen sie vor allem gerichtet waren. Allerdings sind die an die proconsules Africae gerichteten und in Carthago proponierten Gesetze keineswegs in einer solchen Überzahl, daß seine These als zweifelsfrei bewiesen gelten könnte. Zudem lässt sich der Befund ebenso gut mit der Gegenthese Mommsens erklären, es seien in Nordafrika ansässige Rechtsgelehrte gewesen, die das Material für wesentliche Teile des Codex Theodosianus geliefert hätten. Angesichts der Publikation des Codex Theodosianus im Westen des Römischen Reiches im Jahr 438 wurde im römischen Senat über die Empfänger der ersten vier Musterexemplare gesprochen. Zwei gingen an hohe Amtsinhaber in Rom, eins blieb das Musterexemplar für weitere Kopien und das vierte sollte nach Nordafrika gesandt werden14. Selbst wenn man das Archiv des proconsul Africae und nicht das des vicarius oder des Provinziallandtages für den wahrscheinlichsten Bestimmungsort dieses Musters des neuen Gesetzeswerkes in Nordafrika hält, wirft die entsprechende Textpassage ein zentrales Problem auf: Warum erfährt man nichts von entsprechenden Regelungen für andere Provinzen? Bzw. allgemeiner formuliert: Ist das, was für das Archiv der proconsules Africae nachgewiesen werden kann, auch für die der Statthalter anderer Provinzen typisch?

12 Vgl. auch Actes Conf. Carthago (SChr. 194) I 48. 13 Seeck 1889, insbesondere 4-8.; dagegen Mommsen 1900, 172 (390 f.); danach Posner 1972, 211 f; Lepelley 2002, 62-64. Doch s. auch Krüger 1877, insbesondere 82 f. Corcoran 1996, 12, 29 Anm. 31 läßt die Frage offen. 14 Gesta senatus Romani de Theodosiano publicando § 7.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

337

In den Statthalterarchiven: Amtstagebücher (commentarii/cottidiana) und Unterlagen aus dem Bereich der Rechtsprechung? Man möchte vermuten, wenn irgendwo, dann müsse man im Falle der ägyptischen Provinzen feststellen können, ob es Statthalterarchive gab und was sich in ihnen befand. Doch das erweist sich als schwieriger als vermutet. Man hat sogar im Gegenteil z. B. gerade auf der Basis der ägyptischen Dokumentation die These vertreten, in der Spätantike seien keine Amtstagebücher (commentarii/ uJpomnhmatismoiv)15, also ein besonders zentraler Typ von Statthalterurkunden16, mehr geführt worden. Verfahren vor Gericht seien nur noch in Form einzelner Protokolle, aber nicht mehr im Rahmen größerer, das einzelne Verfahren übergreifender Dokumentenkomplexe aufgezeichnet worden17. Wenn es keine Amtstagebücher und/ oder keine zusammenhängenden Aufzeichnungen von Gerichtsverfahren mehr gab, würde auch generell fraglich, inwieweit überhaupt noch geordnet archivierte Statthalterurkunden existierten. Grund für die These, Amtstagebücher seien in den Kanzleien der spätantiken Statthalter der ägyptischen Provinzen nicht mehr geführt worden, ist, daß in keinem der etwa 40 Protokolle von Gerichtsverhandlungen vor Statthaltern der ägyptischen Provinzen in nachdiokletianischer Zeit sich die Angabe findet, sie stammten ejx uJpomnhmatismw`n tou` dei`no~ tou` hJgemovno~, also aus den commentarii eines bestimmten Gouverneurs. Aus dem Fehlen solcher Dokumente folgerte man, daß Gerichtsverfahren nicht mehr in Amtstagebüchern protokolliert worden seien, sondern nur noch in der Form ausführlicher und detaillierter Einzelprotokolle. Gegen diese These ist zunächst einmal festzuhalten, daß es von Beginn der Kaiserzeit an stets auch ausführliche Einzelprotokolle gegeben hat18. Ganz zweifelsfrei hat der eine Typ von Protokoll nicht den anderen verdrängt, sondern beide haben zumindest 300 Jahre lang nebeneinander existiert. Auch bezieht sich das letzte Protokoll, in dem eingangs erwähnt wird, es stamme ejx uJpomnhmatismw`n tou` dei`no~ tou` hJgemovno~, auf eine Gerichtsverhandlung eines Statthalters aus dem Jahr 218. Alle Aufzeichnungen von Prozessen vor praefecti Aegypti mit späterem Datum weisen auch bei guter Erhaltung diese einleitende Formulierung nicht mehr auf. Man könnte also ebenso gut die These vertreten, die Amtstagebücher der Gouverneure seien bereits zu Beginn des 3. Jh., also vor der sogenannten Krise des 3. Jh. und den diokletianischen Reformen, abgeschafft worden. Daß das nicht geschieht, beruht neben dem Gewicht der angeblichen Epochengrenze der Herrschaft Diokletians wohl darauf, daß das besterhaltene

15 Zu diesem Dokumententyp jetzt vor allem Mourgues 1998. 16 Haensch 1992, 219-245. 17 Bickermann 1933, 346 vgl. 344, 348. Vgl. Coles 1966, 24; Kaser-Hackl 1996, 557 Anm. 23. 18 Haensch 2008, 123 f., insbesondere Anm. 41.

338

originale Fragment eines Amtstagebuches, das eines Strategen, also des wichtigsten Amtsinhabers auf der lokalen Ebene, in dem u. a. auch eine Gerichtsverhandlung aufgezeichnet ist, in das Jahr 232 datiert (W. Chr. 41). Daß Auszüge von Gerichtsprotokollen von praefecti Aegypti zwischen 218 und 284 mit der Angabe ejx uJpomnhmatismw`n tou` dei`no~ tou` hJgemovno~ fehlen, hat bisher keinen Vertreter der These von einem Ende der commentarii in der diokletianischen Zeit gestört. Muß es aber etwas etwas besagen, wenn sich unter 40 Zeugnissen aus dem 4. und 5. Jh. (für das 6. Jh. fehlt jedes Protokoll eines Verfahrens vor einem Statthaltergericht) kein einschlägiges Zeugnis findet? Mehreres warnt davor: Nach Johannes Lydus gab es im Stab des praefectus praetorio Orientis noch zu Beginn des 6. Jh. zwei Typen von Aufzeichnungen von Gerichtsverhandlungen – die sogenannten personalia und die sogenannten cottidiana19. Die cottidiana würden von den chartularii geführt, die aus den exceptores ausgewählt wurden. Diese Aufzeichnungen würden auch als regesta oder ephemer(id)ai bezeichnet. Sie enthielten das, was an jedem Tag geschehen sei, einschließlich des Vermerks, daß sich an einem Tag aus diesem oder jenem Grund nichts ereignet habe. Das entspricht genau dem Aufbau des Amtstagebuches des Strategen von 232. Selbstverständlich muß das, was für den praefectus praetorio Orientis noch zu Beginn des 6. Jh. typisch war, nicht notwendigerweise auch für die Statthalter dieser Zeit gegolten haben. Aber daß im Rahmen der Reformen Diokletians die Amtstagebücher keineswegs abgeschafft wurden, legen auch mehrere Neupublikationen von Papyri von Verwaltungsträgern unterer Ebenen nahe: P. Oxy. LIV 3741, anscheinend aus dem Jahr 313, dürfte den Rest eines Amtstagebuches eines unbekannten lokalen Amtsinhabers darstellen, bei dessen Tätigkeit offensichtlich beneidenswert häufig an einem Tag nichts anfiel. Bei CPR XVII A 18 vom Jahr 321 handelt es sich allem Anschein nach um die bisher spätest datierte Kopie aus einem Amtstagebuch, in diesem Fall eines Strategen ([ajntivgrafon uJpomnh]PDWLVPZCQ• 6Z•[st]ravtou Aijlianou` strathgou` h[toi HM[DY•N•W[o]ro~ JErmopoleivtou. jEpei;f l, pro;~ th`/ borinh/` puvlh/ th/` ejpi; WKQ• G•K•PRVLYDQ stravtan). P. Oxy. LIV 3758 ist ein umfangreiches, 227 Zeilen umfassendes und fast 3 m langes Dokument aus dem Jahre 325, also 20 Jahre nach der Abdankung Diokletians. Es enthält die Protokolle von mindestens sieben, in einem einzigen Monat durchgeführten Gerichtsverhandlungen vor einem logisthv~/ curator rei publicae. Wie auch immer man das Dokument bezeichnen möchte, es bezeugt durch seine Anlage und die Überschrift in den Zeilen 3 und 4 uJpomn(hvmata ?) mh(no;~) Fame[n]w;q t[o]u` iqȺv v qȺv v e[tou~ ejpi; Dioskourivdou logistou` (p)r(o;~) katacwrism[ov]n auch noch für das fortgeschrittene 4. Jh. die Praxis, Gerichtsverhandlungen in größeren Gruppen aufzuzeichnen. Wenn im 4. Jh. die höchsten Träger der Reichsadministration wie die praefecti praetorio und Funktionäre der lokalen Ebene wie die curatores rei publicae Amts-

19 De mag. III 20, 7 und 9; 27, 3 bzw. III 20, 4; 27, 3 und 68, 6.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

339

tagebücher führten, dann sollte dies auch für die Statthalter gegolten haben20. Tatsächlich dürfte das Fehlen von Angaben, die vorliegende Aufzeichnung eines Gerichtsverfahrens stamme ejx uJpomnhmatismw`n tou` dei`no~ tou` hJgemovno~, nicht darauf beruhen, daß es keine Amtstagebücher mehr gab, sondern ganz anders zu erklären sein. Dieses Formular war zumindest im Falle der Statthalterurkunden für verkürzte, auf Streitgegenstand und Urteil beschränkte Exzerpte von Gerichtsprotokollen typisch, die als Parallelfälle zitiert wurden. Diese Praxis des Zitates solcher Parallelen scheint im 3. oder 4. Jh. aufgegeben worden zu sein – entweder weil sie aus nicht mehr erkennbaren Gründen keinen Erfolg mehr versprach oder – eher – weil sie direkt untersagt wurde21. Eine offene Frage ist allerdings, wie lange in den drei nachdiokletianischen Jahrhunderten noch Amtstagebücher geführt wurden22. Nach Johannes Lydus endete diese Praxis bei den praefecti praetorio in justinianischer Zeit. Im Falle der Statthalter könnte dies schon früher der Fall gewesen sein. Dazu ist noch einmal auf die sogenannten Einzelprotokolle zurückzukommen. Entsprechende Dokumente bezeichnet, wie erwähnt, Lydus im Falle der Präfektenkanzlei als personalia23. In ihnen seien die Gerichtsverhandlungen noch bis vor kurzer Zeit von dem wortgewaltigsten adiutor mit solcher Sorgfalt und Genauigkeit aufgezeichnet worden, daß diese bis ins Detail rekonstruiert werden konnten. Das wisse er aus eigener Erfahrung: Als bei einem Rechtsstreit bestimmte Beweisurkunden nicht mehr hätten herbeigeschafft werden können, habe man diese vollständig aus dem personalium rekonstruieren können. Den Angaben von Lydus nach wurden in den personalia die diagnwvsei~ in lateinischer Sprache wiedergegeben (perievfrazen) – ob wirklich gemeint war, daß die gesamte Verhandlung ins Lateinische übersetzt wurde, erscheint fraglich. Eher ist daran zu denken, daß nur zentrale protokollarische Elemente (und der Urteilsspruch) in Latein abgefaßt waren24, so wie es auch ein jüngst publiziertes Beispiel eines solchen

20 Vgl. Schmidt-Hofner 2008, 87 Anm. 143 „die von ihnen verwalteten Amtstagebücher (diurna) mit den commentarii identisch sein, die es in allen Statthalterbüros gab“. Auch Posner 1972, 213 geht von der Fortexistenz von „daybooks“ aus. 21 Haensch 2008, 124. 22 Man sollte nicht übersehen, daß es auch im Falle des Urteilsspruches eigens eingeschärft werden mußte, daß dieser zunächst schriftlich formuliert werden mußte und dann erst verkündet werden konnte: Cod. Theod. IV 17, 1-5, s. dazu auch Kaser-Hackl 1996, 609 mit Anm. 20. 23 De mag. III 20, 7-9; 27, 3. 24 Feissel 2004, 327-333 versteht die Passage dahingehend, daß das gesamte Protokoll im 4. und beginnenden 5. Jh. lateinisch abgefaßt worden sei. Das ist aufgrund des Wortlautes zweifellos die naheliegendste Interpretation. Es gibt aber für die gesamte römische Zeit in den dokumentarischen Quellen kein Beispiel für ein rein lateinisches Protokoll eines nichtmilitärischen Gerichtsverfahren eines Vertreters Roms im Osten bzw. eines sich dort aufhaltenden Kaisers (bei der Rechtsprechung im Bereich des Heeres galt in der Hohen Kaiserzeit die offizielle Heeressprache, das Latein; für die Spätantike s. demgegenüber z. B. P. Oxy. LXIII 4381). Was es gibt, sind die bilingualen Protokolle, bei denen aber nur der Rahmen, also das Datum, die Nennung von Gerichtsherrn und Parteien sowie des Gerichtsortes und

340

Protokolls eines praefectus praetorio Orientis zeigt (AE 2004, 1410 = SEG 54, 1178; aus dem Jahr 533). Während aber aus dem späten 3., dem 4. und der ersten Hälfte des 5. Jh. insgesamt etwa 40 Einzelprotokolle (mit bilinguem Rahmen) von Verhandlungen vor Statthaltern Ägyptens bekannt sind, gibt es kein entsprechendes Zeugnis, das sicher nach dem Jahre 461 datiert werden kann, und auch keines, für das man eine spätere Datierung als in das Jahr 481 auch nur in Betracht gezogen hätte. Anscheinend brachte nicht erst der Arabereinfall von 640, sondern schon das spätere 5. Jh. bzw. 6. Jh. für die Kanzlei- und Archivierungspraxis der Provinzialverwaltung zumindest in Ägypten erhebliche Einschnitte mit sich25. Auf jeden Fall von diesem Zeitpunkt an wird für die ägyptischen Provinzen auch fraglich, ob Amtstagebücher noch geführt wurden. Für die aufgeworfenen Fragen läßt sich wenig daraus ableiten, daß in den spätantiken Statthalterstäben officiales mit den Titel commentariensis bzw. ab actis bezeugt sind. Man hat zwar immer aus dem Titel des commentariensis gefolgert, daß auch in der Spätantike dieser officialis die Amtstagebücher geführt und archiviert habe26. Den ab actis erklärt man seit Anton v. Premerstein in der Weise, daß sich seine Funktion Ende des 4. Jh. aus einem adiutor des commentariensis entwickelt habe. Der commentariensis sei für das Führen und das Verwahren der im Zusammenhang mit der Kriminalgerichtsbarkeit entstandenen Dokumente zuständig gewesen, der ab actis für diejenigen bei der Zivilrechtspflege. Diese These aber ist mehr als fraglich, da ihr zentrales Argument27 – eine Inschrift mit der Erwähnung eines com(mentariensis) ab actis civilib(us) (ILS 2384 = RIT 229) – nicht in die betreffende Zeit, sondern in die Hohe Kaiserzeit datiert. Zwar gibt es aus der Spätantike eine Reihe von Quellen, die belegen, daß der commentariensis bei Gerichtsverhandlungen tätig wurde28. Aber es fehlen für ihn wie für den ab

die Passagen zwischen den einzelnen Äußerungen, und schließlich zumindest manchmal der Urteilsspruch (so in P. Oxy. LI 3614 und in den Acta Pionii 19-20) lateinisch abgefaßt waren. M. E. drückt sich Lydus ungenau aus und bezieht sich auf das, was er in II 12, 2 anspricht, daß nämlich bis zu dem praefectus praetorio Orientis Kyros (439-442) die Urteile – und damit ein nicht standarisierbarer Teil der Protokolle – auf Lateinisch abgefaßt worden seien. Schon in II 12, 2 macht Lydus aus dem Verzicht auf lateinische Urteile ein völliges Verschwinden der lateinischen Sprache in den Dokumenten. Feissel äußerst sich nicht dazu, wie er das von ihm publizierte bilinguale Gerichtsprotokoll aus dem Jahr 533 in die Darstellung von Lydus einbindet. Seiner Interpretation nach müßte die Inschrift einen terminus post quem für das von Lydus scheinbar erwähnte völlige Verschwinden des Latein bieten. 25 Konzilsakten überliefern ein entsprechendes Protokoll für einen Statthalter der Syria II im Jahre 518: ACO III 92-106. Derart komplizierte Dokumente sind eigentlich nur auf Papyrus aufgezeichnet worden, so daß das Schweigen anderer Quellenarten nichts besagen muß. 26 Zuletzt Palme 1999, 109. 27 Premerstein 1900, 766. Vgl. Palme 1999, 109 Anm. 123. 28 Premerstein 1900, 766 f.; für die Kaiserzeit vgl. Haensch 1995. Besonders gut sind wir natürlich über den des praefectus praetorio Orientis informiert: Joh. Lydus de mag. III 4, 4; 8, 2; 9, 8; 16; 17. Von den Papyri s. insbesondere P. Oxy. IX 1204 und P. Lips. I 40 = ChLA XII 518 III 16 f.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

341

actis29 explizite Zeugnisse, daß sie die entsprechenden Unterlagen archivierten und gegebenenfalls zu ihnen Zugang gewährten. Direkt bezeugt ist nur, daß der commentariensis Ende des 4. Jh. eine Liste der Inhaftierten mit ihren jeweiligen Personendaten und Anklagepunkten zu führen hatte und diese jeweils innerhalb von 30 Tagen dem Statthalter vorlegen mußte30. Die im Stabe des praefectus praetorio Orientis tätigen officiales mit den Titeln commentariensis bzw. ab actis hatten jedenfalls nach den Angaben von Johannes Lydus nichts mehr mit einer Archivierung der von ihnen geführten Unterlagen zu tun. Dafür war dort der instrumentarius zuständig, für den wir in den Statthalterstäben kein Pendant kennen31. Der ab actis des praefectus praetorio Orientis hatte zudem überhaupt nichts mit Unterlagen der Zivilrechtspflege zu tun, sondern war mit den Dokumenten bei Prozessen aus dem Bereich der Finanzadministration betraut32. Alles das mag mit der großen Zahl der Stabsmitglieder dieses Amtsinhabers und der Ausdifferenzierung von Funktionen in seinem Stab zu erklären sein. Es warnt aber davor, eine Rolle dieser Amtsinhaber bei der Archivierung einfach aufgrund ihrer Titel zu postulieren.

Einzeldokumente aus dem Bereich der Rechtsprechung? Die Amtstagebücher sind die Dokumente, für die man insbesondere eine längerfristige Aufbewahrung in einem Statthalterarchiv erwartet. Generell gesprochen, möchte man eine langfristige Archivierung vor allem für die bei der Rechtsprechung des Statthalters entstehenden Dokumente annehmen33, also neben den cottidiana auch für die personalia/ die Einzelprotokolle und jene Dokumente, die im Rahmen der testificatio actorum ausgefertigt wurden. Daß gerade letztere beiden Dokumententypen keineswegs unverbunden nebeneinander stehen, zeigt sich daran, daß fünf oder eher sechs der acht Protokolle von Gerichtsver-

29 Den z. B. Posner 1972, 212 wegen seines Titels als „the person in charge of the custody of records“ betrachtet. 30 Cod. Theod. IX 3, 6. 31 Joh. Lydus de mag. III 19; 20, 5. Schief Kaser-Hackl 1996, 553 Anm. 59. In der Kaiserzeit gab es officiales mit dem Titel ab instrumentis oder ad instrumentum nur im Bereich der in der Finanzverwaltung tätigen familia Caesaris, s. CIL III 1315 (= IDR III 3, 364). 1470 = 7974 (= IDR III 2, 453). 1995; CIL VI 8854, cf. p. 3463 = 33753; CIL VIII 12898; AE 1903, 57. 32 Joh. Lydus de mag. III 4, 5; 9, 8; 20; 21, 1; 27, 2; 68, 6. 33 Auch die bei Cod. Theod. IV 16, 1 überlieferte Regelung setzt voraus, daß die Unterlagen zu Gerichtsprozessen längere Zeit aufbewahrt wurden. Vgl. auch P. Lips. I 40 = ChLA XII 518 II Z. 23. S. ferner die in einer speziellen Situation ausgesprochene grundsätzliche Regelung: Cod. Theod. XVI 5, 55 = Cod. Iust. VII 52, 6.

342

handlungen34, die mehr oder weniger präzise ins 5. Jh. datieren35, Aufzeichnungen über eine versuchte Prozeßeinleitung sind36. D. h. alle diese Protokolle berichten darüber, daß ein officialis nach Rückfrage und expliziter Anordnung des Statthalters eine Petition verlas, mit der ein Bittsteller darum bat, seinen Gegner, dessen Vergehen er erläuterte, vor Gericht zu laden37. Alle diese Protokolle bezeugen also lediglich die Einleitung eines gerichtliches Verfahrens durch eine amtliche Ladung. Ob es je zu dem Verfahren selbst kam oder man sich vorher einigte, bleibt offen. Unter den acht bilinguen Protokollen aus dem 5. Jh. ist nur ein einziges wirkliches Verhandlungsprotokoll38. Leider gibt es im Falle all dieser Urkunden keinen spezifischen Anhaltspunkt für eine Archivierung. Allein das juristische Ziel dieses Vorgehens, bestimmte Ansprüche zu sichern, macht eine Archivierung recht wahrscheinlich. Ein noch negativeres Ergebnis ist bei einem speziellen Typ juristischer Urkunden festzustellen, den bei Statthaltern eingereichten Bittschriften. In den 170er Jahren und dann erneut im ersten Jahrzehnt des 3. Jh. war ein Bearbeitungsverfahren für Petitionen eingeführt worden, bei dem die Originale der Bittschriften und der auf diesen erteilten Antworten, der subscriptiones, beim Statthalter und seinem Stab verblieben. Um die ihnen erteilten Bescheide umzusetzen, mußten sich die Bittsteller beglaubigte Abschriften von beiden besorgen39. Das Verfahren legt nahe, daß man die Originale der Bittschriften und der jeweiligen Bescheide archivierte, um gegebenenfalls auf sie zurückgreifen zu können. Der letzte sicher datierte Beleg für dieses Verfahren ist eine Petition des Jahres 328 (SB XVIII 13260). Schon von diesem Zeitpunkt an gibt es für diese spezielle Dokumentengruppe keinerlei auch nur indirekte Hinweise darauf, inwiefern sie im Statthalterstab archiviert wurde. Im Stab des consularis Numidiae40 ist zwar unter Julian noch ein libellensis und in den östlichen Stäben des beginnenden 5. Jh. ein a libellis bezeugt, aber inwieweit diese auch bei der Archivierung

34 In zeitlicher Reihenfolge: P. Oxy. XVI 1879 = ChLA XLVII 1409; ChLA XLV 1321; ChLA III 217 = P. Thomas 25; ChLA XLIII 1247; P. Oxy. XVI 1878 = ChLA XLVII 1408; P. Oxy. XVI 1877 = ChLA XLVII 1407; ChLA XLIII 1251; PSI XIII 1309 = ChLA XLII 1226 (ganz unsicher datiert; dazu auch u. Anm. 38). 35 Fraglich bleibt dies nur bei ChLA XLV 1321. Bei P. Oxy. XVI 1877 = ChLA XLVII 1407 handelt es sich eindeutig um einen sogenannten Libellprozess (und nicht eine litis denuntiatio). Zu diesem zuletzt Palme 2008, 66. 36 Vgl. auch die Liste bei Benaissa 2010, 279. 37 Vgl. dazu Kaser-Hackl 1996, 566-576. 38 PSI XIII 1309 = ChLA XLII 1226, das im Lichte der hier gemachten Beobachtungen auf jeden Fall nicht mehr ins 6. Jahrhundert zu datieren ist, sondern wegen der Statthaltertitulatur eher in die erste Hälfte des 5. Jahrhunderts. 39 Haensch 1994. 40 CIL VIII 17896-7 = Chastagnol 1978.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

343

und nicht nur der Bearbeitung solcher Bittschriften eine Rolle spielten, entzieht sich unserer Kenntnis41.

Die Korrespondenz? Neben den Unterlagen aus dem Bereich der Rechtsprechung erwartet man vor allem bei der vielfältigen Korrespondenz eines Statthalters – mit dem Kaiser, den Prätorianerpräfekten, aber auch untergeordneten Instanzen – eine Archivierung. Wie umfangreich eine solche Korrespondenz schon bei einem Vertreter einer dem Gouverneur untergeordneten, regionalen Ebene war, zeigen P. Beatty Panop. 1 und 2 aus den Jahren 298 und 300 für den Strategen: Die erste Urkunde, eine Zweitschrift der während 16 Tagen ausgehenden Korrespondenz, hat heute noch eine Länge von über 6 m. Das zweite Dokument, eine Abschrift der an den Strategen gerichteten, während des Februars des Jahres 300 eingegangenen Korrespondenz seitens des ihm vorgesetzten Statthalters, ist heute noch mehr als 5 m lang. Daß zumindest in der Africa Proconsularis solche Korrespondenzen über 100 Jahre hinweg archiviert wurden, belegt die von Augustinus zitierte relatio Anullini an Konstantin. Aber wiederum fehlt ein auch nur indirekter Hinweis aus den ägyptischen Provinzen. Es gab zwar in den Stäben der spätantiken Statthalter mit dem cura epistularum einen officialis, bei dem man aufgrund seines Titels vermuten möchte, daß er entweder etwas mit der Erstellung der Urkunden dieses Dokumententyps zu tun hatte oder mit ihrer Archivierung oder mit beidem42. Direkt zu belegen ist bis heute allerdings keine der drei Vermutungen.

Unterlagen aus der Finanzadministration? Als dritter großer Dokumentenkomplex ergaben sich aus der Arbeit eines spätantiken Statthalters die Unterlagen aus dem Bereich der Finanzadministration. Gerade auf diesem Gebiet wurden die Statthalter vergleichsweise intensiv kontrolliert. So hatten sie nach einer in Quellen des 5. und 6. Jh. zu fassenden Regelung43 alle vier Monate dem zuständigen Prätorianerpräfekten in Form von breves, zusammenfassenden listenartigen Aufstellungen44, über den Steuereingang zu berichten. Möglicherweise war diese Regelung der Rest einer im Jahre 319 für die Provinz Corsica bezeugten Anordnung, nach der alle sechs Monate breves omnium negotiorum ab officio tuo descripti ... ad scrinia eminentissimae praefecturae gebracht

41 Vgl. Palme 1999, 109. 42 Zu diesem Hagedorn-Mitthof 1997; Palme 1999, 109 f. 43 Cod. Theod. I 10, 7 (401); Cassiodor. var. XII 16. 44 Zum Begriff insbesondere Bonneau 1984.

344

werden sollten (Cod. Theod. I 16, 3). Umgekehrt wurde den Provinzstatthaltern selbst anscheinend im monatlichen Abstand von den lokalen Instanzen Bericht über den Steuereinzug erstattet45. Nicht nur solche Regelungen legen nahe, daß sehr genau Buch geführt wurde, und die entstandenen Unterlagen auch entsprechend archiviert wurden. Eine 428 in Ravenna verfaßte Konstitution (Cod. Theod. I 10, 8) erwähnt z. B. einen Vergleich zwischen den von den tabularii/ numerarii des Statthalters vorgelegten breves und den von Beauftragten der kaiserlichen Zentrale in die Provinz übermittelten gleichartigen Dokumenten. Er zielte darauf, die Höhe der tatsächlichen Steuerforderungen zu bestimmen. Ein Steuererlaß des Jahres 395 begründete einen Verzicht auf Steuern für 528.042 iugera der Provinz Kampanien u. a. damit, daß dieses Land nach einem entsprechenden Bericht und dem Zeugnis veterum monumenta chartarum unfruchtbar sei (Cod. Theod. XI 28, 2). Cod. Theod. XI 28, 3 (vom Jahre 401) ist der im Text umfangreichste Steuererlaß unter den 17 im entsprechenden Kapitel De indulgentiis debitorum, also „über die den Staatsschuldnern gewährten Erlasse“, des Codex Theodosianus exzerpierten Regelungen. Erlassen wurden Steuerrückstände bis zum letzten Jahr des vorausgehenden Indiktionszyklus, d. h. bis zum Jahr 386/7. Damit der Steuererlaß vollständig durchgeführt wurde, ordnete der Kaiser an, die entsprechenden Dokumente – seien sie in den Händen von Spezialsteuereintreibern (discussores), in Archiven der Städte, der Statthalter oder der Amtsinhaber am Kaiserhof – öffentlich zu verbrennen (chartas omnes, sive quas tabularii civitatum sive officia iudicum sive officium palatinum sive discussores habent, quibus tamen eius temporis et debitorum nomina et debita continentur, undique in medium congregatas palam flammis iubemus aboleri). Diese Anordnung ist typisch für die im betreffenden Kapitel angeführten Steuererlasse, ohne daß aber in den 16 anderen aufgenommenen Gesetzen noch einmal explizit gesagt würde, wo diese zu finden seien. Entsprechende Formulierungen könnte es ohne weiteres gegeben haben, da viele der im Codex gesammelten Konstitutionen gekürzt worden sind. Zentral zuständig in einem Statthalterstab für alle derartigen Unterlagen der Finanzverwaltung waren zwei sogenannte numerarii (die im 4. Jh. lange Zeit noch als tabularii bezeichnet wurden). Einer von ihnen war mit den Dokumenten betraut, die mit Abgaben zusammenhingen, die letztlich für die arca fiscalis des jeweils zuständigen praefectus praetorio bestimmt waren. Der andere sorgte sich um die Einnahmen, die unter die largitionales tituli des comes sacrarum largitionum fielen46. Im Falle dieser officiales ist in ganz exzeptioneller Weise ihre Tätigkeitsstätte sogar einmal im Falle einer Provinz archäologisch faßbar. Bei den Ausgrabungen des spätantiken Statthalterpalastes in Caesarea Iudaeae wurde nämlich an dessen Ostseite ein in sich abgeschlossener und über eine vorgelagerte Por-

45 Schmidt-Hofner 2008, 64-71 mit einer ausführlichen Diskussion von AE 1984, 250. 46 Zu ihnen Palme 1999, 110.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

345

tikus zugänglicher Komplex von sieben Räumen gefunden, der nach den dort angebrachten Inschriften den Erfordernissen verschiedener Stabsmitglieder des Gouverneurs dieser Provinz diente47. In diesem Zusammenhang wird in der Inschrift des zentralen Kopfraumes ein numerarius als zweite Person nach einem chartularius und vor anderen chartularii genannt48. Derselbe numerarius erscheint wohl auch als dritter in der Inschrift des zentralen Korridors dieses Teils des Statthalterpalastes49. Wenn man jetzt allerdings erwartet, daß der zentrale Kopfraum als Archiv diente, so irrt man sich. Nichts an den archäologischen Resten des Raumes könnte zu einer solchen These passen. Sicherlich schließt dieser archäologische Befund nicht aus, daß zum Aufgabenbereich der numerarii auch die Archivierung der entsprechenden Unterlagen gehörte. Der numerarius war nach dem Zeugnis beider Inschriften nicht der höchstrangige in dem Raumkomplex tätige officialis, sondern nur der zweite bzw. dritte in der Hierarchie. Die Raumgruppe mag auch vorwiegend dem Publikumsverkehr gedient haben – zwei der sieben Räume hatten nach dem Zeugnis dort angebrachter Inschriften50 sicher diese Funktion. Das Archiv mag sich ganz woanders befunden haben. Aber auch mit diesen Einschränkungen warnt der Befund von Caesarea davor, allzu selbstverständlich davon auszugehen, daß es ein eigenes Archiv der Unterlagen aus dem Bereich der Finanzverwaltung bei jedem Statthalter gab und daß dieses von den numerarii verwaltet worden wäre.

Schluß Selbst wenn man also alle möglichen Quellenarten heranzieht, bleibt das, was wir über spätantike Statthalterarchive wissen, recht wenig. Johannes Lydus, unsere wichtigste literarische Quelle, berichtet vor allem von dem Stab, den er selbst gut kannte, dem des praefectus praetorio Orientis. Dessen Verhältnisse sind aber wegen der umfassenden Vollmachten dieses Amtsinhabers und der dementsprechend großen Zahl seiner officiales nur sehr eingeschränkt auf die der Provinzstatthalter übertragbar. Wie immer in der Papyrologie, wissen wir entsprechend der Fundsituation der Papyri am besten über die Administrationsträger Bescheid, die vor Ort in den Dörfern und Kleinstädten tätig waren. Es ist auch durch die Charakteristika der papyrologischen Überlieferung bedingt, daß wir spätantike officiales vor allem aus Listen und privaten Dokumenten kennen, aber wenig von ihrer Tätigkeit erfahren. Obwohl schließlich mit dem praetorium von Caesarea Iudaeae wenigstens ein spätantiker Statthalterpalast recht gut bekannt

47 S. zu diesem Komplex Lehmann-Holum 2000, 96-102. 48 Lehmann-Holum 2000 nr. 90. 49 Lehmann-Holum 2000 nr. 91. 50 Lehmann-Holum 2000 nr. 88 und 89, jeweils mit Zitat von Rom. 13, 3.

346

ist und in situ erhaltene Inschriften sogar bei der Identifikation der wichtigsten Funktion ergrabener Räume Anhaltspunkte bieten, bleibt auch in diesem Falle unklar, was wo archiviert wurde, wie lange dies geschah und wer dafür zuständig war. So stellen denn die Bemerkungen von Augustinus über das Archiv des Gouverneurs der Africa Proconsularis die wichtigsten Nachrichten über spätantike Statthalterarchive dar, die aus relativ wenigen, sehr gestreuten Quellen ergänzt werden. „La mémoire perdue“ der spätantiken Provinzialadministration wieder zu finden, erweist sich keineswegs als leichter als die der Hohen Kaiserzeit.

Abkürzungsverzeichnis PLRE = A. H. M. Jones-J. R. Martindale-J. Morris (ed.), The Prosopography of the Later Roman Empire, 3 Bände, Cambridge 1971-1992.

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

347

Bibliographie

Ausbüttel 1988 F. M. Ausbüttel, Die Verwaltung der Städte und Provinzen im spätantiken Italien, Frankfurt am Main, Bern, New York, Paris 1988. Bandy 1983 A. C. Bandy, Ioannes Lydus on Powers, Philadelphia 1983. Benaissa 2010 A. Benaissa, Six Papyri of the Fifth Century from the Beinecke Library, «AFP», 56, 274-285. Bickermann 1933 E. Bickermann, Testificatio actorum, «Aegyptus», 13, 333-355. Bonneau 1984 D. Bonneau, Βρέουιον (Breve), „Liste fiscale“, dans les papyrus, in: Studi in onore di Cesare Sanfilippo, Milano, 109-123. Chastagnol 1978 A. Chastagnol, L’album municipal de Timgad, Bonn. Coles 1966 R. Coles, Reports of Proceedings in Papyri, Bruxelles.

Haensch 1992 R. Haensch, Das Statthalterarchiv, «ZRG», 109, 209-317. Haensch 1994 R. Haensch, Die Bearbeitungsweisen von Petitionen in der Provinz Aegyptus, «ZPE», 100, 487-546. Haensch 1995 R. Haensch, A commentariis und commentariensis: Geschichte und Aufgaben eines Amtes im Spiegel seiner Titulaturen, in: Y. Le Bohec (ed.), La hiérarchie (Rangordnung) de l’armée romaine sous le hautempire, Paris, 267-284. Haensch 2008 R. Haensch, Typisch römisch? Die Gerichtsprotokolle der in Aegyptus und den übrigen östlichen Provinzen tätigen Vertreter Roms. Das Zeugnis von Papyri und Inschriften, in: H. Börm u. a. (ed.), Monumentum et instrumentum inscriptum, Stuttgart, 117-125.

Corcoran 1996 S. Corcoran, The Empire of the Tetrarchs, Oxford.

Hagedorn-Mitthof 1997 D. Hagedorn-F. Mitthof, Ein kourepistoulavrio~ im Büro des praeses provinciae Arcadiae, «ZPE», 117, 187-189.

Dagron 1974 G. Dagron, Naissance d’une capitale. Constantinople et ses institutions de 330 à 451, Paris.

Kaser-Hackl 1996 M. Kaser-K. Hackl, Das römische Zivilprozeßrecht, München (2. Auflage).

Feissel 2004 D. Feissel, Un rescrit de Justinien découvert à Didymes (1er avril 533), «Chiron», 34, 285-365; auch in ders., Documents, droit, diplomatique de l'empire romain tardif, Paris 2010, 251-324.

Krüger 1877 P. Krüger, Über die Zeitbestimmung der Constitutionen aus den Jahren 364-373, in: Commentationes philologae in honorem Theodori Mommseni scripserunt amici, Berlin, 75-83.

Feissel 2006 D. Feissel, Chroniques d’épigraphie byzantine 1987-2004, Paris.

Lehmann-Holum 2000 C. M. Lehmann-K. G. Holum, The Greek and Latin Inscriptions of Caesarea Maritima, Boston.

Gross 1950 K. Gross, Archiv, in: Reallexikon für Antike und Christentum I, 1950, 614-631.

Lepelley 2002 C. Lepelley, Quelques aspects de l'administration des provinces

348

romaines d'Afrique avant la conquête vandale, «An Tard», 10, 61-72. Mommsen 1900 Th. Mommsen, Das theodosische Gesetzbuch, «ZRG», 21, 149-190; jetzt in ders., Juristische Schriften II, Berlin 1905, 371-407. Mourgues 1995 J.-L. Mourgues, Ecrire en deux langues, «DHA», 21, 105-129. Mourgues 1998 J.-L. Mourgues, Forme diplomatique et pratique institutionnelle des commentarii Augustorum, in: C. Moatti (ed.), La mémoire perdue. Recherches sur l’administration romaine, Rome, 123-197. Nicolet 1994 C. Nicolet (ed.), La mémoire perdue: à la recherche des archives oubliées, publiques et privées, de la Rome antique, Paris. Palme 1999 B. Palme, Die officia der Statthalter in der Spätantike, «AnTard», 7, 85-133. Palme 2008 B. Palme, Law and Courts in Late Antique Egypt, in: B. Sirks (ed.), Aspects of Law in Late Antiquity, Oxford, 55-76.

O. Seeck, Die Zeitfolge der Gesetze Constantins, «ZRG», 10, 1-44 und 177-251. Seeck 1921 O. Seeck, RE II 2 A 1, 1921, 893-904 s. v. scrinium. Di Segni-Patrich-Holum 2003 L. di Segni-J. Patrich-K. G. Holum, A Schedule of Fees (sportulae) for Official Services from Caesarea Maritima, Israel, «ZPE», 145, 273-300. Steinwenter 1915 A. Steinwenter, Beiträge zum öffentlichen Urkundenwesen der Römer, Graz. Tengström 1962 E. Tengström, Die Protokollierung der collatio Carthaginiensis, Göteborg. van der Wal 1981 N. van der Wal, Edictum und lex edictalis. Form und Inhalt der Kaisergesetze im spätrömischen Reich, «RIDA», 3 ser. 28, 277-313. Zachariae von Lingenthal 1843 K. S. Zachariae von Lingenthal, Edicta praefectorum praetorio ex codicibus mss. Bodleianis, Laurentianis, Marcianis, Vindobonensibus nunc primum edita, Leipzig.

Posner 1972 E. Posner, Archives in the Ancient World, Cambrige. Premerstein 1900 A. v. Premerstein, RE I 4, 1, 1900, 726-759 s. v. commentarii. Schamp 2006 J. Schamp, Jean le Lydien. Des magistratures de l’ Etat romain, 2 Bände, Paris. Schmidt-Hofner 2008 S. Schmidt-Hofner, Reagieren und Gestalten, München. Seeck 1889

die statthalterarchive der spätantike

349

Conclusions

uri yiftach-firanko

In an ideal world, the student of an archive would enter a room in which all the documents, where all the archived material would be found exactly in the same place and position as it was left in antiquity. The student of the archive would also find a document, left by the creator of the archive, in which he stated how and for what purposes the archive was created.1 Alas, this is rarely the case. With perhaps one exception, that of the Delphic manumission documents discussed by Kaja Harter-Uibopuu (recording on stone a detailed account of manumission documents deposited in perishable archives), 2 archives consist in the ancient world of perishable material, which under normal circumstances has not been preserved to our time. The consequent methodological problems are illustrated by papers focusing on particular archives that are now lost, 3 as well as on periods

1 Compare, e.g., P.Oxy. I 34v = MChr 188 (127 CE—Oxyrhynchos); P.Oxy. II 237 (8.27-43) = Jur.Pap. 59 (89 CE—Oxyrhynchos); and in this volume, Harter-Uibopuu, p. 274. 2 Naturally, even in this case the epigraphic documentation did not replace the documentation on perishable material. Cf. pp. 281-294, with an analysis of the relation of the text of the inscription to that of the perishable prototype. 3 As is the case, generally, with state archives of the middle Babylonian period, discussed by Paulus, and the public archive of the kārum of Kanesh, discussed by Veenhof. In both cases the archive is reconstructed on account of external related material: cf. pp. 36-37, 42, 129-131.

conclusions

351

and regions that in general yield no perishable material: this is especially the case with Classical Greece and the Hellenistic world outside Egypt. In his discussion of archival practices relating to court procedures, Edward Harris pinpointed the existence of a register of enklêmata, short accounts of the details of a case that were presented to the Athenian dikastêria before the case was heard. But the said register, located according to Harris’ account in the archive of the Metrôon, did not come down to us, and its existence is inferred primarily from references in the orators. For this reason we can only guess the shape or contents of the texts that were incorporated in that register. Shimon Epstein argued for the existence of a register of some written accounts of the scrutiny reports (euthynae) of former officials, but here too, the register itself did not come down to us, and its contents are only recovered from accounts on building inscriptions drawn up upon information taken from that register. 4 The same applies to the lists of Athenian citizens, as kept in the demes’ registers following the reform of Cleisthenes, a topic discussed by Christophe Pébarthe, 5 and to archives of Hellenistic city-states, an issue dealt with by Laura Boffo. Boffo discusses the existence of quite extensive archives, but the material she studies derives from indirect references on stone. 6 The same applies to archives recording private legal acts (purchases of graves) in late Hellenistic and early Roman Asia Minor, a topic discussed by Harter-Uibopuu. 7 In all these cases we can hypothesize on the shape of the archive or the forms of registration in it, but we do not know anything certain. In other cases, the material originally stored in the archive did come down to us, but it was removed from its original archival settings, and it is our duty to try to reconstruct these. I would like to draw a distinction between cases in which the archive was already dissolved in antiquity, and those in which the dissolution took place in modern times. The first case is discussed by Lucia Criscuolo. Material stored in archives of Ptolemaic village officials was removed and sold to embalmers, who used it as mummy cartonnage. 8 In their endeavor to reconstruct the archive from which the papyri originated, modern editors have relied on prosopographical considerations, a methodology naturally also applied by others (consider, e.g., the paper of Ingo Kottsieper9) as well as on some working hypotheses, such as the assumption that rough drafts (malacopie) were really drafts made within the office authoring them, and were meant to be disposed of

4 Cf. pp. 129-131. Paulus’ study of the kudurru discusses a similar evidentiary state of affairs and raises similar questions. 5

Cf. pp. 115 ff.

6

E.g., p. 204.

7

Cf. pp. 294 ff.

8

Cf. pp. 246-247.

9

E.g., p. 176.

352

once the final version of the text would be composed. Criscuolo shows that revisiting this hypothesis could alter our reconstruction of the documents’ archive of origin.10 The second form of dissolution, the modern one, is manifested in almost every paper dealing with the Ancient Near East and Greco-Roman Egypt. Sometimes the dissolution was caused by looting. Papyri, parchments and clay tablets were unlawfully excavated, and then purchased from dealers.11 These dealers may give some account of the provenance and the form of preservation of the documents. Thus for example, some of the documents of the Mibtahja archive, discussed by Ingo Kottsieper, were said by the dealer to have been found in a single wooden box, and those aiming at reconstructing the archive seem to rely on this piece of information.12 Sometimes the texts were unearthed in authorized excavations, but especially in earlier times they were removed from the site without taking into account their exact location, a piece of information that could be very useful for the reconstruction of the archive. An outstanding example, provided by Klaas Veenhof, is that of the archives of Assyrian merchants in Anatolian Kanesh. In one case, that relating to an archive excavated in 1991, Veenhof quotes the excavators’ account that groups of tablets were packed in boxes, bags, sacks and straw mats, and that at the top of each were found one or two bullae. But Veenhof also laments the general nature of this observation, the lack of adequate pictures, and the fact that the said bullae were published separately from the tablets themselves, without an adequate indication of the tablets they originally related to.13 Equally regrettable is the report prepared by the German excavators digging in Elephantine in 1906-1908. In this case, to cite Kottsieper, the excavators did not «give exact information about the finding of each document», so that «we have no reliable information which papyri were found at which spot and thus could form an archive with others».14 These two examples show the importance of the participation of documentarists in excavations of archives. A final problem relates to the pace of publication. As all of you know, the amount of documentary material — including that stemming from archives — that has not yet been published is immense. Thus, for example, of over 12,000 tablets stemming from the archive of the governor of Nippur only 20%, we are told by Susanne Paulus, have hitherto been published.15 Remarkably, similar figures can be provided by papyrologists, especially I think by those dealing with Demotic,

10 E.g., p. 250. 11 E.g., p. 172 n. 12 (Kottsieper); 28 (Veenhof). 12 Cf., e.g., p. 68, 178. 13 Cf. p. 39. See also p. 68 (Jacquet). 14 Cf. pp. 175-176, 179. 15 Cf. p. 89.

conclusions

353

Coptic and Arabic papyri, but certainly also by those publishing Greek texts. 16 Still, projects launched by present and past participants of LDAS, targeted specifically at publishing archives, may considerably improve this state of affairs in the near future.17 Among the archives discussed in this paper, a key distinction can be made between state and private archives, a distinction that is primarily valid in the case of the Greco-Roman documentation, not necessarily with regard to the old Babylonian or old Assyrian source material.18 The archives studied by Epstein, Harris, Boffo, Kruse, and Harter-Uibopuu are all state archives, that is they are managed and maintained by a state organ, while those studied by Veenhof, Jacquet, Kottsieper and Criscuolo were created and held by private persons, occasionally for an ad hoc purpose.19 As for public archives, in some cases, as those discussed by Kruse and Harter-Uibopuu, the same information was stored in more than one archive, each serving a different purpose. This was especially the case when more than one bureau was involved in processing the data, as is the case discussed in Kruse’s paper. 20 The types of documentation deposited in public archives varied. Some of the material deposited in Boffo’s archives relates to public interest, e.g., royal decrees entailing the extension of the city’s territory or bestowing upon the city other privileges, 21 while in other cases, as those discussed by Epstein, Harris, Harter-Uibopuu, Kruse and also other types of material discussed by Boffo, it relates to private individuals. 22 Within the latter category, some of the material relates to the person’s duties in office. This is most clearly the case with the records of the protocols of the euthynai, public investigations of Athenian officials after their period in office came to an end, a source material discussed by Shimon Epstein. 23 In other cases the archive kept record of the population’s civic status. Harter-Uibopuu, following inter alia epigraphic evidence published by Michael Wörrle, pinpoints the growing interest on the part of the state, in the late Hellenistic period, in recording property rights and contracts. 24 I think

16 According to papyri.info, the collection of the Rare Book and Manuscript Library at Columbia University contains 5754 texts on papyrus and ostracon. Less than 400 of these texts have hitherto been published. 17 Cf., in particular, http://www.archibab.fr/ and www.trimsmegistos.org. 18 Cf., in general, the cautious discussion by Antoine Jacquet, pp. 68-69. 19 The problem is discussed, e.g., by Criscuolo, p. 245 with n. 1 and repeatedly elsewhere in the same paper. Cf. also Kottsieper, p. 187. 20 Cf. p. 326. 21 E.g., p. 207. 22 E.g., pp. 211-212 (Boffo); 129 (Epstein); 154 (Harris); 274 (Harter-Uibopuu); 309 (Kruse). 23 E.g., pp. 129-131. 24 E.g., pp. 274-280.

354

that contemporary papyrological source material supports this conclusion (see below). 25 Other archives were set by individuals, sometimes in connection with their offices: this is the case with the archives discussed by Lucia Criscuolo, and one of the archives discussed by Ingo Kottsieper, that of Nahtḥor, a subordinate of the satrap Aršames in fifth century BCE Egypt. 26 I would like to mention, e.g., one interesting parallel, that of the register of in- and outgoing mail of the strategos Aurelius Apolinarius, in late third and early fourth century CE Panopolis, briefly mentioned by Rudolf Haensch, 27 recording a total of more than 200 letters and memoranda, and there are of course many similar cases. 28 These archives relate for the most part to the official activity of the owner of the archive (or in the case of Nahtḥor also to that of his immediate predecessor) and hence also to a relatively short period of time. Other archives were created for private purposes. In this case the occupation of the owner of the archive as well as the volume of his assets naturally affected the size, shape and contents of the archive. On the one extreme we place the old Assyrian merchants’ archives from Kanesh discussed by Veenhof and some old Babylonian archives discussed by Jacquet. 29 Many of these archives consist of many hundreds of documents, extend over several rooms, and allow us a glimpse (in Veenhof’s account) of the owner’s international economic activity. On the other extreme we place Kottsieper’s very small family archives of Achaemenid Egypt (in one case just nine documents in all), rolled together in a single wooden box, that do not even record a family’s entire economic activity, but focus rather on a narrower subject matter, namely titles to some private property and hereditary rights that are subject to dispute. 30 I wonder if the archive-in-pot discussed by Paulus should fall, in terms of its size, under this heading. 31 As to the contents of these private archives, we can generalize a distinction, made most explicit by Jacquet, but also discussed by Veenhof, between two types of archived documentation. Some types of documentation were commonly kept for a very long period, in particular those relating to rights to landed property, inheritance, and personal status. Other types of documentation were kept as a matter of course for a shorter duration, and were then sifted out of the archive: this would be the case with accounts, letters and loan contracts, which would be

25 Cf., e.g., P.Par. 65 = UPZ I p. 596 (145 BCE—Memphis); P.Ryl. IV 572 (II BCE —Arsinoitês). 26 Criscuolo, pp. 248 ff. 27 Cf. p. 344. 28 Comparable is naturally the archive of the governor of Kassite Nippur, discussed by Paulus. Cf. p. 90. 29 Cf., e.g., the archive of Shallim-Assur with more than 1,100 texts, discussed by Veenhof at p. 29, and the Ur-Utu archive discussed by Jacquet at p. 75, with almost 2,000 documents. 30 Cf. p. 180. 31 Cf., e.g., p. 89.

conclusions

355

kept only as long as the evidence provided by them was held relevant. 32 The same distinction may be drawn with regard to papyrological material from Egypt, especially when the format of the document is investigated. 33 I would like to mention another type of archive, which was not thoroughly discussed by any of the speakers, though alluded to by Veenhof. 34 I refer to what may be termed ‘communal archive’. A private person, a local respectable, keeps records belonging to members of his community, and ought to present the documents to the parties, or to a third person, at need. The practice is well documented by the orators, 35 and even more so in the source material from Ptolemaic Egypt: in the third and second centuries BCE, Greek double documents are kept after their composition by a private person in the position of syngraphophylax (“keeper of legal documents”), while the state creates a synoptic account reporting which syngraphophylax keeps what document. 36 This is a more economical solution than keeping private legal documents in a public archive, especially in an archival system that is just evolving, as was the case in the young Ptolemaic state. These archives cannot be defined as public, for they are not managed by the state, but they are not entirely private, for they serve the interest of their owners’ community, rather than the owners’ private ends. Many of the papers in this volume focus on the formation and inner organization of archives, 37 a question studied, for example, in Boffo’s paper. According to Boffo, the Hellenistic polis was required to collect (and naturally to record) not only its own taxes, but also those due to the hegemonic king. The result was the addition, within the city’s revenues records, of an additional chapter, documenting the king’s revenues, the basilika, alongside the old chapter documenting the politika, that is the city’s own revenues. 38 One can also find parallels in registers from Roman Egypt. An especially detailed account of different types of documentation within a public archive is provided by Thomas Kruse’s discussion of status-related material from Roman Egypt: in Roman Egypt we observe several methods of keeping evidence of archived information: the submitted documents

32 The same applies to letters and accounts, cf. Veenhof, pp. 31, 39 and Jacquet, pp. 71-77 . 33 Cf. U. Yiftach-Firanko, The Grammatikon: Some Considerations on Feeing Policies of Legal Documents in the Ptolemaic and Roman Period, in D. Ratzan, D.Kehoe, U. Yiftach-Firanko (eds.), Legal Documents in Ancient Societies II: Transaction Costs in the Ancient World. Proceedings of a Meeting Held at the Center for Hellenic Studies, Washington DC, 27-28.7.2009 (forthcoming), discussing the different feeing policies applied in the case of documents recording the conveyance of landed property, inheritance, or status-related matters, and those applied in the case of loans, leases, animal sales, and other transactions of short term significance. 34 Cf. p. 32. 35 Cf. CHR. Pébarthe, Cité, démocratie et écriture. Histoire de l’alphabétisation d’Athènes à l’époque classique, Paris 2006, pp. 94-103, with a discussion of the relevant sources. 36 Cf., e.g., CPR XVIII 1.12-36 (231/206 BCE—Theogonis). 37 Cf. Jacquet’s discussion, pp. 70-71. 38 Cf. pp. 210, 222.

356

themselves, sometimes put together in scrolls, i.e. the so called tomoi synkollesimoi, lists of extracts, and also (in the case discussed by Kruse) synoptic lists of persons. 39 I think that all of the larger archives presented in our colloquium exhibit some form of data processing and the resulting material. One of the nicest illustrations of the data processing mechanisms is provided by copies of petitions from the archive of the Roman governor of Egypt. Petitions embedding written responses issued in the prefect’s office carry the number of tomos (volume), and kollêma (page) within that tomos in which the response was kept within the prefect’s files. 40 Such a registration method seems common in other public archives as well. To be mentioned in this context is Venhoof’s short account of the organization of clay tablets in the merchants’ archives in early second millennium BCE Kanesh in ‘boxes’ (tamalakkum/tamalakkū), and the identification of the tablets by their size, cover, and specific contents, which is marked by means of inscribed bullae. 41 Tightly connected with the above question is the creation process of the individual entries. The study of this process is rendered difficult whenever (as is normally the case) we do not possess the original. Still, as shown by Harter-Uibopuu’s analysis of the Delphic manumission inscriptions, a cautious and patient analysis of the entries may yield results. 42 According to Harter-Uibopuu, the author of the inscribed text started out from a routine formulary, that of the Greek act of sale. Yet before the inscription was carved, he integrated into the routine text additional provisions, added for the benefit of the individual contracting parties, a task that undoubtedly required some scribal expertise on his part. We may also compare the formation process of the mid Babylonian kudurrus, a phenomenon discussed by Susanne Paulus. 43 I would like to end my discussion with a general note. The volume published here contains the proceedings of the fourth meeting of Legal Documents in Ancient Societies generously hosted at the University of Trieste in September-October 2011. Our young research group meets every year, aiming at discussing how different ancient civilizations dealt with a subject matter chosen as our topic of that meeting. We then try to draw some conclusions. The conclusions may be of a comparative, phenomenological nature: in the case of the subject matter of the present meeting, each archive may be studied on its own merits, and we may ask to what extent similar legal, social, cultural and economic conditions may explain the formation, structure and sphere of application of archives in the different societies studied in our meeting. As a student of archives in Ptolemaic and

39 Cf., e.g., pp. 309, 324-326. 40 Cf., e.g., P.Sakaon 38.33 = P.Flor. I 36 = MChr 64 (312 CE—Theadelphia). 41 Cf., in particular, pp. 56-58. 42 Cf. pp. 287-293. 43 Cf. p. 98.

conclusions

357

Roman Egypt I was intrigued to observe the application of data-processing strategies in old Babylonian archives that are strikingly similar to those applied in ‘my’ sources. But there is also another approach, the evolutionary one: trying to see if we can pinpoint development over time in the methods applied, and spheres of activity recorded in archives. Naturally, the material from the Ancient Near East should be excluded: Jacquet’s and Veenhof’s contributions illustrate the effective application of sophisticated methods in organizing immense archives of many hundred documents each, but they do not discuss the origin and formation of these methods. 44 Even with regard to the classical world, any endeavor to pinpoint evolution should be undertaken very cautiously, taking into account that the material preserved from the Greco-Roman world outside Egypt is markedly different from that excavated over the last century in the valley of the Nile. 45 Still, such an endeavor is worth undertaking, if only as a working hypothesis that may find in the future some corroboration, or eventually be abandoned. My current impression is that in Athens of the fifth and fourth century archives were used primarily for the documentation of spheres of everyday activity in which state interest was most direct: the records of the euthynai, discussed by Epstein present one such case, while the lists of citizens discussed by Pébarthe is another. 46 But as far as I know, documents of solely private interest where kept privately. 47 As shown by Boffo, the source material from the Hellenistic period exhibits change. The de facto subordination of the polis to hegemonic kingdoms required the sophistication of its archives, which now had to keep record of a wide scope of privileges granted and duties imposed by the new superpowers. In the same period, the state becomes increasingly inclined towards supervising private legal activity: in the first stage, roughly dating to the third century BCE, the state focuses on keeping track of documents preserved privately by preparing lists of the persons who have been entrusted with each document’s safekeeping. Then, by the mid second century BCE archiving methods become sufficiently advanced to allow the state to assume the safekeeping of private legal documents itself. The archival system finally matures in the Roman period. The two papers given in our colloquium relating to the Roman period, those of Kruse and Haensch, focus primarily on spheres of activity that were always of state interest: in the case of Kruse’s paper status and taxation. But the highly complex mechanisms used for archiving documents, by different instances, discussed in the two papers, is equally applied in public archives focusing on the preservation

44 Cf., e.g., pp. 68-69. 45 It would be intriguing to study, for example, the contents and structure of the archives incorporations of bankers or lenders, as those amply recorded in orations 32-35 of the Demosthenic corpus. 46 Pébarthe, p. 116. 47 See above n. 35.

358

of private legal activity. Best attested in this regard are the “acquisition archive” (bibliothêkê enkêseôn) and the village grapheia, but other archives, most conspicuously those located in the city of Alexandria are attested as well. Papyri stemming from early Roman Egypt bear evidence of the multiple safekeeping in archives of documents relating a wide scope of everyday, public and private activity: reports and surveys, petitions and minutes of court proceedings, not to mention every type of transaction and legal document. Archives of the early Roman period match, if not in quantity, at least in diversity and sophistication their old Assyrian and old Babylonian counterparts as discussed by Klaas Veenhof and Antoine Jacquet.

conclusions

359

Index Locorum

Cuneiform Texts

AbB 3 82 11 55

73 n. 27 76

AKT 3, 77:7 3, 82:4-13 3, 84:4-23 3, 104:17 3, 106:11-13 3, 112 5, 2:1-6 5, 5:1-6 5, 62-69 6a, 6 6a, 10 6a, 10a 6a, 10b 6a, 16 6a, 46 6a, 47 6a, 48 6a, 53 6a, 54 6a, 56 6a, 57 6a, 58 6a, 63 6a, 64 6a, 66 6a, 67 6a, 77 6a, 78 6a, 79 6a, 80 6a, 81 6a, 82 6a, 83 6a, 84 6a, 91-103 6a, 104 6a, 105 6a, 106 6a, 107 6a, 108 6a, 117 6a, 118

57 56 56 56 46 n. 29, 56 56 42 42 31 35 53 53 53 39 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 54 54 53 53 53 54 54 53 53 53 45 53 53 53 53 53 53 53

6a, 119 6a, 123 6a, 191 6a, 191a 6a, 191b 6a, 194 6a, 195 6a, 195a 6a, 195b 6a, 196a 6a, 221 6a, 222 6a, 227 6a, 228 6a, 231:8-17 6a, 257 6a, 258 6a, 270 6a, 271 6a, 294:16-17 6b, 375:11 6b, 446:19-20 6b, 478-480 6b, 495-497 6c, 561:7-15 6c, 671:14-16 ATHE 30:17-23 AUCT 5 41 5 43 5 99

53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 53 49 n. 37 44 44 54 54 52 52

45

80 n. 45 80 n. 45 80 n. 45, 81 n. 48, 82 n. 53

BBVOT 1 38 1 40 1 48

80 n. 45 80 n. 45 80 n. 45

BDHP 30

72 n. 25

BIN 4, 32:34-36 4, 70:17-18

44 49

362

4, 90:14-16 6, 18:18-20 6, 19:18 6, 218:5-6 6, 218:13 6, 220+

56 n. 43 43 n. 20 43 56 n. 43 56 30

CBS 1153

72 n. 25

CCT 2, 6:6-15 2, 8-9 2, 17b:3-6 2, 38:3-9 3, 14-19 3, 19b:3-4 3, 19b:3-10 4, 14b:15-18 5, 3 5, 14b 5, 17a 5, 18d:3-5 6, 9a

41 51 52 54 54 43 43 45 30 50 45, 46 46 n. 30 51

CT 47 63 77 CTMMA I, 84:40 I, 84:60f.

32 32

EL 141:1-10 191ff. 224:37-38 225:47-48 284 298:9ff. 298:35-36 ICK 1, 182 1, 187:63 2, 104 2, 150

30 47 54 54 50 30 30

42 54 34 n. 11 51

Ka 24b:31-33

44

84/k 878

43

Kt

index locorum

91/k 147:29-32 91/k 242:3’-11’ 91/k 323 91/k 338 91/k 339 91/k 368:20-25 91/k 446:18 91/k 563:10-14 93/k 69:18 93/k 69:18-27 93/k 145 93/k 273 94/k 497:15 94/k 769 94/k 878 94/k 879 94/k 879 94/k 1062 94/k 1664 a/k 394:17 f/k 11:5-6 f/k 11:23 k/k 53:12-15 m/k 100 m/k 145 n/k 470 n/k 176:4-10 n/k 1460:24-26 n/k 1460:26 n/k 1925:16ff. r/k 17:5-6 KTS 2, 42 40:33 Kudurru AAI 4 CBS 4663 (Lutz 1919, no. 23) CBS 4753 (Lutz 1919, no. 52) CBS 12914 (Clay 1906, no. 39) CBS 13865 CBS 19793 (Radau 1908, no. 24) ENAp 3 IMB 1 Ka IV 2: II22’ff. KaE I 1 KaE II 1

57 47 n. 33 45 44 44 51 56 n. 42 56 56 56 55 n. 41 46 n. 29 42 44 52 39 n. 19 43 39 n. 19 45 49 n. 37 56 n. 43 56 n. 44 56 n. 43 46 n. 29 30 46 44 43 n. 22 56 n. 43 49 n. 37 46 n. 30

51 53

98 n. 97 93 n. 55 93 n. 55 93 n. 55 93 n. 54 93 n. 55 94 n. 64 94 n. 64 97 n. 82 92 n. 49 98 n. 92

363

KaE II 1: II’4’ff. KaE II 1: II’7’ KḪ I 1 KuE 1 KuE 1: III22ff. KuE 1: III42 MAI I 1 MAI I 1: II12 MAI I 1: II13 MAI I 1: II21ff. MAI I 1: III11 MAI I 3: I 21’ MAI I 4 MAI I 6: I22’ MAI I 7: IV2’ MAI I 7: IV20’ MNA 2: II7 MNA 4 MNA 4: I1-19 MNA 4: I20-23 MNA 4: II2-5 MŠ 2 MŠ 3 MŠ 3 MŠ 3: text 8 I17 MŠ 4

MŠ 4: III9ff. MŠ 4: IV5 MŠ 4: IV38ff. MŠ 4: V14ff. MŠ 4: VI26ff. NKU I 4, I1-20 NM 1 NM 3 ŠŠ 1 ŠŠ 1: I11ff. U3: II1ff. U4 U7 II1 U19 Larsen 2002, no. 18

97 n. 82 97 n. 82 98 n. 97 92 n. 49 96 n. 78 96 n. 78 93 n. 51, 96, 98 n. 92 96 n. 79 96 n. 75 97 n. 87 97 n. 89 97 n. 89 92 n. 49 96 n. 79 96 n. 79 97 n. 89 95 n. 69 94 n. 65 95 n. 66 95 n. 67 95 n. 68 92 n. 49 93 n. 51 96 n. 78 97 n. 85, n. 89 90 n. 35, 92 n. 49, 94 n. 59, 98 n. 92 and 97 97 n. 82 96 n. 78 98 n. 93 98 n. 93 98 n. 95 94 n. 61 92 n. 49 92 n. 49, 98 n. 92 98 n. 92 97 n. 82 96 n. 78, 97 n. 89 92 n. 49 96 n. 77 92 n. 49

NBC 6290 6752 6798

41

6827 8533 8534 8564 8568 8570 8571 8632 8723 8744 8768 8831 8874 8908

81 79, 80 78 n. 44, 79, 80 n. 47 79, 80 78 n. 44, 79 78 n. 44, 79, 81 n. 48 79 79 79 78 n. 44, 79 78, 79, 80, 81 n. 48, 82 82 n. 52 79, 80 and n. 47 79, 80 73 79 74

POAT 2:24-26 9 18 18: 17-21

46 n. 30 50 53 52

Prag I 446

47 n. 34

TC 3, 9:14-16 3, 13:45-47 3, 36:16-23 3, 44:14’-19’ 3, 100 3, 262

53 n. 40 54 40 53 n. 40 45 47 n. 33

TPAK 1, 77:3

57

TTC 21:1ff. 21:1-7

57 52

Ugarit-Forschungen 7 (1975) 318, no. 4:15

46 n. 30

YOS 13 354 15 38

72 n. 25 81 n. 49, 82 n. 52

M. 15119 15287

81 n. 50 81 n. 50

364

Aramaic Texts

TAD A4.1-10 A4.5 A4.6 A4.9 A6.3 A6.3-4 A6.3-16 A6.4 A6.5 A6.6 A6.7 A6.8 A6.9 A6.10 A6.10-16 A6.11 A6.12 A6.13 A6.14 A6.15 A6.16 B2.1 B2.1-4 B2.1-11 B2.2 B2.2-11 B2.3 B2.3-4 B2.4 B2.5 B2.6,17-19 B2.6,17-22 B2.6,22-28 B2.6,29-30 B2.7 B2.8 B2.9 B2.9-11 B2.10 B2.11 B3.1 B3.1-13

index locorum

B3.2 176 176, 177 177 n. 7 196 n. 59 193 193, 194 n. 52 177, 192 193 193 193 193 193 193 193 n. 52 193 193 n. 52 193 n. 52 193 n. 52 193 n. 52 193 n. 52 193 n. 52 178, 179, 180, 185 184 176, 178 184, 185 180 185 181 n. 16 185 179, 180 182 183 181 n. 17 182 n. 23 184, 185 184 183, 184 n. 27, 186 n. 31 180 180, 181 n. 16 and 18 180, 181 n. 18 188, 191 n. 49 176

B3.2-8 B3.3 B3.3,7-10 B3.3,10-13 B3.3,13 B3.4 B3.4-6 B3.5 B3.6 B3.6,4-5 B3.6,11-15 B3.7 B3.7,2-3 B3.7,8 B3.7,17 B3.8 B3.8-13 B3.8,21-28 B3.8,28-34 B3.9 B3.10 B3.10-13 B3.10,2 B3.10,27 B3.11 B3.11,2 B3.11,21 B3.12 B3.12,18 B3.13 B4.2 B5.3,6 B7.1,2 B8.1-12 B8.2 B8.4 B8.5 B8.6 B8.7 B8.8 C3.7

186 n. 33, 187, 188, 190 186 n. 33 187, 188, 189 181 n. 17 182 190 189 187, 188 189 189, 191 189 189 187, 188, 189, 191, 192 189 189 189 184 n. 26, 187, 189 188 181 n. 17 182 187 n. 40, 188, 190, 192 189, 191 186 n. 33, 187 189 189 189, 192 189 189 189 189 189, 191 179 n. 12 180 180 196 197 197 197 197 197 197 196

365

C3.13 C3.15 D7.3 D7.9 WDSP 1-9 10 11 12-13 14

196 177 n. 7 179 n. 12 179 n. 12

194 194 194 194 194

15 16 17 18-20 21 22 23-25 26 27 28-37

194 194 194 194 194 194 194 194 194 194

Greek and Latin Literary Texts

ACO III 92-106 Acta Pionii 19-20

341 n. 25

341 n. 24

Aelianus V.H. 8.2

112 n. 25

Aeschines 1.2 1.154 1.166-170 1.170 2.14 3.9-31 3.14 3.32-48 3.49-170 3.195 3.200

144 153 n. 35 152 153 n. 35 145 n. 8 149 n. 23 167 149 n. 23 149 n. 170 153 148

Andocides 1.10 1.12-13 1.13 1.15 1.16 1.17 1.34-35 1.36-47 1.47 1.86

160 159 160 159 159 159 159-160 160 160 146

Antiphon 5.11 6.49 Appianus Syr. 5.24

154 n. 39 145 n. 10 287 n. 46

Aristophanes Nub. 37 and schol. 859 Vesp. 894-897

120 n. 72 131 n. 13

Aristoteles Ath. Pol. 13.5 14.1 18.1 21.5 42 46.1 47.2-48 47,5 48.4 51.4 Pol. 1321b34-37

115 110 n. 19 111 n. 22 116 n. 48 115 157 n. 50 129 n. 3 164 145 n. 8, 146 155 n. 44

Athenaeus 9.407b-c

150 n. 26

154, 168

154 n. 41

366

Augustinus brevic. Coll. III 7, 8 c. Cresc. III 61, 67 III 70, 80

336 336 336

Cassiodorus var. XII 16

344 n. 43

Chamaeleon fr. 44 Wehrli

154 n. 41

Clidemus FGrHist 323 F 8

121

Constantinus Porphyrogenitus de caer. I 20 334 n. 8 Demosthenes 9.33 18.8 18.9 18.56-59 18.103 19.8 19.276-280 19.277 19.278-279 19.333 20.147 21.43 21.87 21.103 21.143-147 21.208 21.211 22.4 22.5-7 22.8 22.21-24 22.33-34 22.34 22.43 22.45 23.5 23.24-25 23.95 23.215-218 23.219 24.32 24.34-38

index locorum

202-203 n. 5 143 143, 152 149 121 n. 73 148 n. 20 159 n. 60 154 148 n. 20 144 156 149 145 144, 150 n. 26 153 153 n. 34 153 n. 34 153 149 149 149 149 149 153 n. 35 153 n. 35 149 150 153 n. 34 144, 149 153 n. 34 146 n. 11 146 n. 11

24.133-135 24.189 25.55 27.4-6 27.13-17 27.17 27.18-22 27.24-29 27.30-33 27.33-39 28.8 28.11 29.30 29.31 30.9 32.1 32.2 32.4 32.13 32.27 33.2-3 34.16 34.35 35.3 36.20 37.17 37.18 37.21 37.22 37.22-29 37.25 37.26 37.28 37.29 37.32-33 37.45 38.3-4 38.4-5 38.6 38.14 38.14-16 38.15 39.8 39.15 43.7 43.15 43.16 45.9-11 45.46 45.50 52.14

154 n. 38 153 n. 35 168-169 146 151 151 151 151 151 151 120 n. 70 120 n. 70 151 151 153 n. 35 146 n. 11 143, 150 143, 150, 154 153 n. 35 143, 154, 168 146 n. 11 143, 150 n. 27 131 n. 11 146 n. 11 149 n. 25 153 n. 35 156 156 144, 150 n. 26 144 n. 6 150 150 n. 26 150 150 150 150 155 155 168 155 168 151 n. 28 122 145 n. 10 146 n. 11 146 n. 11 146 n. 11 150 143, 144, 150, 151 153 149 n. 25

367

[Demosthenes] 42.3 42.32 44.35 44.37 44.41 44.46 50.8 53.14 53.14-18 58.43 58.46 58.5 58.7 58.7-8 58.8 58.8-10 59.17 59.66 59.68-69 59.70 59.126

121 n. 73 121 n. 73 118 n. 59 119 n. 65 117 n. 55 151 n. 29 120 n. 67 145 146 145 n. 8 148 n. 22 155 143 n. 3 144 n. 5, 155 155 155 148 146 n. 11 148 n. 19 148 n. 19 148

Dinarchus 1.14 2.10

153 155 n. 44

Diodorus Siculus 1.55.7 1.77.5

110 n. 17 113

Diogenes Laertius 2.40 41

144 n. 6, 154 n.

Dionysius of Halicarnassus Ant. Rom. 5.7 287 n. 46 Din. 3 144 n. 6, 149 Euripides Suppl. 429-434 438-441

113 n. 32 113 n. 33

Harpocration s.v. ajntwmosiva s.v. dhvmarco~ s.v. diavgramma

144 120 n. 72 122 n. 79

Herodotus 2.102-106 2.177 5.72.1 5.72-73 6.136.1-3 Hyperides Eux. 7-8 29-32 31 32 35-36 39 40 Lyc. 3 12 Phil. 13

110 n. 17 113 116 n. 45 116 n. 46 154 n. 38

147 143 n. 3 143 152 153 147 144 143 n. 3 147 144

Isaeus 3.1 3.2 3.3-4 3.4-7 3.6 3.6-7 5.2 6.51-52 6.60 7.16-17 7.27 9.1 11.18

155 155 155 155 144 155 144 153 n. 35 121 118 118, 119 n. 66 151 150

Isocrates 15.145 15.237

122 n. 82 144 n. 5

Johannes Lydus de mag. II 12, 2 III 4, 4 III 4, 5 III 8, 2 III 9, 8 III 16 III 17

341 n. 24 341 n. 28 342 n. 32 341 n. 28 341 n. 28, 342 n. 32 341 n. 28 341 n. 28

368

III 19 III 19, 1 III 20 III 20, 4 III 20, 5 III 20, 7 III 20, 7-9 III 20, 9 III 21, 1 III 27, 2 III 27, 3 III 68, 6

342 n. 31 334 342 n. 32 339 342 n. 31 339 340 n. 23 339 342 n. 32 342 n. 32 339, 340 n. 23 339, 342 n. 32

Livius 31.44.4

232 n. 89

Lycurgus 1.11-13 1.111-119 1.118-119 1.136-137 1.137 1.147 fr. 63 Conomis

153 n. 35 159 n. 64 160 147 143 n. 3 147 n. 16 147 n. 16

Lysias 9.1-3 9.3 9.8 10.11 12.38 13.85-87 16.9 23.2 23.3 23.10 23.13 23.13-14 32.25

152 143 n. 3 143 n. 3 150 153 151 154 n. 39 145 145 143 144 154 n. 42 121 n. 74

Philochorus FGrHist 328 F 41

121

Plato Ap. 19b 24b-c Euthphr. 3b Hipp. 228b 228b-229d

index locorum

228d-229a

111 n. 23

785a-b

121 n. 75

294a 294a-b

114 n. 35 114 n. 34

Leg. Pol.

Plutarchus Alc. 19.2-3 22 22.4 Dem. 10.4 46.1 Mor. 183 F Per. 12.2 23.1 Sert. 27 [Plutarchus] Mor. 833e-834b

148 n. 21 144 n. 6 148 n. 21 225 n. 64 225 n. 6 206 n. 12 133 131 n. 13 287 n. 46

144 n. 7, 159 n. 64

Pollux 8.55 8.58

144 143

Polybius 4.76.2 21.45.2 31.31.1-3

202 n. 5 202, 230 n. 83 220 n. 51

Suetonius Nero 17

270

Suidas s.v. dhvmarco~

120 n. 72

Tacitus Ann. 3.60

228 n. 77

148

Thucydides 3.37 6.55.1-2

113 n. 32 160

112 n. 25 111 n. 22

Xenophon Mem. 2.3.3

136

144 143 n. 3, 148

369

Greek and Latin Inscriptions

AE 1903, 57 1984, 250 2003, 1808 2004, 1410

342 345 n. 45 333 n. 1 341

Athenian Agora 15, 56A.34 19, P5.8-39 19, P26.399-402 19, P26.446-460

145 n. 10 156 n. 47 156 n. 46 156 n. 46

AvHierapolis 216.5-8 278

295 n. 72 299 n. 81

Bringmann, Steuben 47 83 94 241 262a

222 n. 58 222 n. 57 220 n. 51 222 n. 55 232 n. 90

CID IV 127.16

280 n. 22

III 1315 III 1470 III 1995 III 7974 VI 8854 VIII 12898 VIII 17896-7

342 n. 31 342 n. 31 342 n. 31 342 n. 31 342 n. 31 342 n. 31 343 n. 40

CIL

Clinton, Eleusis 159 177

128 n. 2 128 n. 2

F.Delphes III 1,138 III 1,141.10 III 1,263b.4 III 1,297.13-14 III 2,48.43-44 III 2,122.6

293 n. 70 285 n. 42 292 n. 64 291 n. 60 292 n. 64 291 n. 60

III 2,131.3 III 2,174.11 III 3,19.4 III 3,237.5-7 III 3,239.17 III 4,73.11-12 III 4,78.5 III 4,78.13 III 6,5.10-11 III 6,5.18-19 III 6,8.9 III 6,6.9-10 III 6,12.10-12 III 6,13.9 III 6,13.22-24 III 6,14 III 6,14.13-14 III 6,15 III 6,15.10-13 III 6,15.13-18 III 6,19.5 III 6,19.6-7 III 6,19.16 III 6,19.17-20 III 6,20 III 6,20.6 III 6,20.11-14 III 6,22.11-12 III 6,23.11-12 III 6,27 III 6,27.6 III 6,27.7-8 III 6,27.15 III 6,27.21-23 III 6,29 III 6,29.13 III 6,31 III 6,31.6-7 III 6,31.8-9 III 6,31.17 III 6,31.17-19 III 6,33.2 III 6,35.17-19 III 6,42.2-3 III 6,43.12-13 III 6,44.5

290 n. 57 290 n. 57 290 n. 57 220 n. 51 292 n. 64 291 n. 59 290 n. 57 285 n. 42, 291 n. 59 291 n. 60 285 n. 42 290 n. 57 290 n. 57 285 n. 42 291 n. 59 291 n. 59 292 285 n. 42 285 291 n. 60 286 290 n. 57 291 n. 60 292 n. 65 292 n. 63 288-294 290 n. 57 284-285 291 n. 60 292 n. 63 293 n. 70 290 n. 57 291 n. 59 292 n. 63 and 65 292 n. 63 293 n. 70 292 n. 65 293 n. 69 and 70 290 n. 57 291 n. 59 292 n. 65 292 n. 63 290 n. 57 285 n. 42 290 n. 55 286-287 290 n. 57

370

III 6,44.12-13 III 6,108.5-6 III 6,109.8-9 III 6,109.25-26 III 6,114.6 III 6,115.4 III 6,119 [2] + 120 III 6,121.19-21 III 6,123.6 III 6,130.11 III 6,133 III 6,133.15 III 6,133.23 III 6,135.7-8

285 n. 42 290 n. 57 290 n. 57 285 n. 42 290 n. 57 290 n. 57 293 n. 70 285 n. 42 290 n. 57 290 n. 57 293 n. 70 294 294 290 n. 57

Hatzopoulos 1996, II 20.24ff. 39

211 n. 23 211 n. 23

«Hesperia» 7, 1938, 277, no. 12 7, 1938, 306, no. 29 15, 1946, 160, no. 17 15, 1946, 160, no. 17.1-3

157 n. 54 157 n. 54 158 157

201, a.78 205

217 n. 41 217 n. 40

I.Iasos 3.2-3 3.5-6 37 38 45 54 59 82 385.5 635.3

207 n. 16 209 n. 19 209 n. 19 209 n. 19 209 n. 19 209 n. 19 219 n. 46 223 n. 59 301 n. 86 295 n. 72

I.Ilion 33

205 n. 9

I.Kibyra 291.5

295 n. 72

I.Labraunda 1, 1B 2 2.5 3.24-25 3B.7-8 4 4.6-7

228 n. 74 228 n. 74 228 n. 73 228 n. 75 228 n. 75 228 n. 76 228 n. 75

I.Beroia 4.5-8

212 n. 25

I.Délos 98B.24-30 399A.21-23 399A.36-38 399A.47-49 442A.25-26 442A.64-65

159 n. 62 215 n. 31 215 n. 31 215 n. 31 215 n. 31 215 n. 31

I.Mylasa 23 104.8-9 201 201.11 913.2-4

228 n. 76 209 n. 19 208 n. 19 208 n. 19 213 n. 29

I.Didyma 479

221 n. 53

I.Nikaia 117

299 n. 81

I.Ephesos 13 1655 2121 2218A 3215.5-6 3829

295 n. 73 299 n. 82 298-299 299 n. 82 295 n. 72 299 n. 81

I.Olympia 52

280 n. 22

I.Pergamon 18 247 247, I.1-6

205 n. 12 225 n. 64 216 n. 35

I.Erythrai 28.29-31 31 64.7

210 n. 22 210 n. 22 217 n. 41

I.Priene 1 14 15

227 n. 70 227 n. 70 227 n. 70

index locorum

371

18.20-27 40 41 114

214 n. 29 227 n. 72 227 n. 72 280 n. 24

I.Smyrna 206.9-11 573, III.106-107

295 n. 72 211 n. 23

I.Tralleis 17

214 n. 29

IAph 2007 2,309.15-20 11.103

295 n. 72 297-298 n. 78

IC II, xii, 20

223 n. 59

IG I3 59.47-48 138 223-248 229-231 233-234 247bis 248 254-256 288-293 313-314 421-422 421.10 421.33 422.217 422.219 422.375 435 436-451 436.29 443.231 446.339 447.361 449.403 453-460 462-466 462.51 467-471 472 474 474-479 475-476

145 n. 10 116 n. 50 136 136 136 167 167 136 136 136 160 160 n. 65 160 n. 65 160 n. 65 160 n. 65 160 n. 65 128, 132 128 132 132 132 132 132 128 128 132 128 128, 132 134 166 135

475-479 475.31-51 475.41-42 475.57 475.66-69 475.110-113 475.272-285 476.81-83 476.119-123 476.192-218 507-509 1023 1032 1147

128 136 136 136 136 136 n. 27 137 n. 32 136 136 136 110 n. 20 111 n. 24 137 137

IG II2 45.7 463 486.11-13 587.4-5 1174 1578 1578.1-2 1629.746-749 1629.771-780 1629.796-799 1631.115-120 1631.140-143 1631.148-152 1631.350-403 1635.71 1641B.22-33 1646.3-14 1651.10 1668.15ff. 1672 1672.74 1673 1928-1932 1930.1-2 1931.1-2 1932 1951 2362

145 n. 10 166 204 n. 8 204 n. 8 274 n. 3 158 159 n. 60 157 n. 52 157 157 n. 52 157 n. 52 157 n. 52 157 n. 52 157 159 159 n. 62 159 n. 62 159 n. 60 135 128, 138 159 n. 60 128, 138 157 n. 54 157 157 158 137 219 n. 45

IG IV 2 2,749.14-15

206 n. 13

IG VII 2711.83-87

280 n. 22

372

IG IX 2,17

284 n. 35

IG XI 2,161.71

136 n. 29

IG XII 3,91 3,330 4,1,71 4,1,71.13-15 4,1,75.32-34 4,1,79 A.1-2 4,1,79 B.1-4 4,1,84 4,1,85 4,1,103.72-77 4,1,104.543-544 4,1,104.637 4,1,129 4,1,152.14-18 4,1,281 4,1,302.18-19 4,1,306 4,1,309 4,1,319 4,1,326 4,1,342 4,1,343 4,1,347.6 4,1,354.2 6,1,11.27ff. 6,1,155 Suppl. 347 III

204 n. 8 280 n. 23 280 274 n. 3, 279 279 n. 20 275 n. 6 275 n. 6 274, 275-277 274, 277-280 279 n. 20 280 n. 22 280 n. 22 277 n. 10 206 n. 12 216 n. 37 276 n. 7 218 n. 42 218 n. 42 277 n. 12 275 n. 6 277 n. 13 274 n. 3 280 n. 22 280 n. 23 215 n. 30 205 n. 9, 227 n. 71 295-296

ILS 2384

219 n. 46 219 n. 46 219 n. 46 219 n. 46 232 n. 88

Le Guen, Associations 39.15-18 47, III B.7-9

220 n. 49 206 n. 12

LSAM 13.40-43 24 25

226 n. 68 217 n. 40 217 n. 41

LSCG 155

274 n. 3

Ma 2004 4.44-46 9.3-4 10.3-4 17 26A.15-25 30 36.14-18 36.14-18 37.26-28

224 n. 63 224 n. 62 224 n. 62 230 n. 81 220 n. 50 208 n. 17 225 n. 66 210 n. 21 224 n. 63

Magnetto 2008

227 n. 71

Malay, Ricl 2009, ll. 22-25

219 n. 46

MAMA VI 83.17-18 VI 133.15-17

295 n. 72 295 n. 72

McCabe Erythrai 61

216 n. 36

Milet I 3, 139 I 3, 148 VI 2, 613 VI 2, 677.1-4 VI 3, 1040

204 n. 8 224 n. 63 296-298 295 n. 72 218 n. 43

341

Iscr. Cos ED 58 ED 71 ED 146 ED 229.8-9 ED 237

277 n. 10 277 n. 10 275 n. 6 276 n. 7 274 n. 3

Kotsidu 2000 115 175 205 213

219 n. 46 219 n. 46 219 n. 46 219 n. 46

index locorum

241 252 253 261 *356

ML 59 60

133 133

373

77 81 84

134 134 134

OGIS 55.13-21 213.19-23 246 267 329 331 331.2-4 331.58-60 338.6 748

211 n. 23 221 n. 53 232 n. 88 205 n. 12 206 n. 13 205 n. 11 226 n. 68 226 n. 68 214 n. 29 222 n. 55

Paton-Hicks 10 27 33 367

279 n. 20 275 n. 6 274 n. 3 279 n. 20

RC 9 15.26-28 41 64 66.16-17 67.14-16 RDGE 10A 10B 11 13 69

229 n. 78 210 n. 22 214 n. 29 229 n. 78 205 n. 11 226 n. 68

227 n. 72 227 n. 72 227 n. 69 227 n. 69 229 n. 79

RIT 229

341

81 81.24-27 83 B.16-19 83 G § VI.13-15 83 G § VI.23-25

119 n. 61 119 n. 62 205 n. 12 206 n. 12 206 n. 12

RO

Robert 1964 1.18-19

213 n. 30

Robert, Robert 1983 3.1-3

224 n. 62

6.1-3 26.6 35.1-2 51-54

224 n. 62 224 n. 62 224 n. 62 224 n. 62

13,521 26,72.41-44 28,1244 31,997 32,371 33,460 33,679 33,679.27-32 33,1177 33,1177.15-16 34,396 36,163 36,230 36,1218

233 n. 91 155 n. 44 211 n. 23 299 n. 81 222 n. 58 222 n. 58 274 n. 2 145 n. 8 269, 275 n. 4 276 n. 9 293 n. 70 204 n. 8 219 n. 45 204 n. 8, 224 n. 63 211 n. 23 220 n. 49 220 n. 49 207 n. 14 232 n. 90 211 n. 23 211 n. 23 211 n. 23 204 n. 8 214 n. 30 216n. 33 215 n. 32 214 n. 30 163 n. 2 206 n. 12 206 n. 12 206 n. 13 219 n. 47 207 n. 13 299 n. 82 206 n. 12 277 n. 12 219 n. 46 208 n. 18 209 n. 20, 211 n. 23 333 n. 1 163 n. 1 341 223 n. 59 209 n. 19

SEG

37,859 37,859 A.12-13 37,859, C.1-2 37,859, C.12-13 39,1244, II.46-54 39,1283.5-6 39,1285.3-6 39,1285.8-10 41,1003, I.29-36 41,1003, II.17-21 41,1003, II.28-29 41,1003, II.57-59 41,1003, II.63 42,846 44,696 44,710 45,233 47,1563 47,1759 48,1394 48,1404 50,766 51,1495.2 51,1506.8-9 53,1312 B.18ff. 53,1841 54,427 54,1178 57,723.18 57,1069

374

57,1070 57,1084 SGDI 1743.9-10 1760.9-10 1762-1764 1762.4-5 1763.4-5 1764 1815.5-6 1840.5-6 1912 1912.2 1913.14-19 2042.4 2117 2117.1 2146.3 2216.14-16 2229.6-9 2322.12-13 2327.31-33

209 n. 19 209 n. 19

284 n. 35 291 n. 60 284 n. 35 284 n. 35 284 n. 35 283, 284 284 n. 35 290 n. 57 282 n. 31, 283 n. 32 289 282 290 n. 57 287 n. 49 289 n. 54 290 n. 57 283 n. 34 283 n. 34 283 n. 34 284 n. 36

Staatsverträge III, 549. 3-6

202 n. 2

Syll.3 337 543.6 543.14 671A 671B.6-7 781 1028

222 n. 57 205 n. 12 205 n. 12 220 n. 51 220 n. 51 229 n. 79 217 n. 38

TAM II 63 II 68 II 171.4-7

297-298 299 n. 81 298 n. 78

index locorum

II 353 II 881.3-6 II 925.6-8 II 969.4-5 II 972.5-7 II 983.4-5 II 996.3-5 II 999.4-6 II 1003.5-7 II 1026.8-13 II 1028.1-17 II 1031.9-24 II 1042.6-13 II 1089.12-16 II 1130 II 1134.8-14 II 1137.7-14 II 1142.9-15

298 n. 78 298 n. 78 298 n. 78 301 n. 86 301 n. 86 301 n. 86 301 n. 86 301 n. 86 301 301 n. 85 300-302 301 n. 85 301 n. 85 301 n. 85 299 n. 81 301 n. 85 301 n. 85 301 n. 85

Tit.Cam. 110.9-19

274 n. 3

Tziafalias, Helly 2010, p. 94 ff., no. III.24-28

212 n. 26

Virgilio, LDP2 4.59 14.61-62 18.5-8 18.13-15 18.13ff. 19.7 19.15 19.51 20 21 34 20-25

217 n. 39 226 n. 68 213 n. 28 212 n. 27 214 n. 29 214 n. 29 214 n. 29 214 n. 29 228 n. 74 228 n. 75 207 n. 13 207 n. 15

Wörrle 2010, p. 361, l. 12

209 n. 20

375

Papyri and Tablets

BGU I 115 II 562 II 562, 20-21 V 1210

318 n. 30 324-326 324 n. 48 311 n. 12

P.Gen. I2 18

311-312, 316

P.Grenf. II 49

312 n. 15

ChLA III 217 XII 518 II, 23 XII 518 III 16ff. XLII 1226 XLIII 1247 XLIII 1251 XLV 1321 XLVII 1407 XLVII 1408 XLVII 1409

343 n. 34 342 n. 33 341 n. 28 343 n. 34 343 n. 34 343 n. 34 343 n. 35 343 n. 34 343 n. 34 343 n. 34

P.Hamb. I 60,7-9

310 n. 10

P.Heid. IX, 422 IX, 423 IX, 423, ll.23-24 IX, 425 IX, 428 IX, 431 IX, 431, ll. 37-41

254 n. 29 254 n. 29 254 n. 31 253, 254 n. 29 253, 254 n. 29 254 n. 29 254 n. 31

CPR XVII A 18 XVIII 1.12-36

339 356 n. 36

P.Koeln 5, 222 5, 222-225 5, 223

251 251 251

MChr 64 188

357 n. 40 351

P.Lips. I 40

P.Amh. II 75

319-324

P.Lond. II 260, I,1-2 II 261, col. 3-17 III 703 III 936

309 n. 9 317 n. 27 312 n. 15 324 n. 47

P.Lond. Wasser l. 42

329 n. 55

P.Beatty Panop. 1 2

344 344

P.Berl. Salmen. 10-12 10-17 15 17

253 n. 26 254 n. 32 253 n. 26 253 n. 26

P.Bouriant 42,298

329 n. 55

P.Dem. Memphis 7 A-B

264 n. 13

P.Flor. I 36

357 n. 40

P.Med. Bar. 2r 2v 3 3r 3v 10, l. 1 14 P.Med. I 37

341 n. 28, 342 n. 33

249 n. 12, 250 n. 17 249 n. 14 250 249 n. 12, 250 249 n. 14 249 250

324 n. 47

376

P.Mert. 2, 59

253 n. 26

P.Thomas 25

343 n. 34

P.Meyer 9,6-8

310 n. 11

P.Turner 38

329 n. 56

P.Oxy. I 34v II 237 (8.27-43) IX 1204 XII 1452 XII 1452, I XVI 1877 XVI 1878 XVI 1879 XXXVI 2792 XLVI 3279 LI 3614 LIV 3741 LIV 3758 LXIII 4381 LXVI 4541

351 n. 1 351 n. 1 341 n. 28 313-314, 317 312 n. 17 343 n. 34 and 35 343 n. 34 343 n. 34 309 n. 8 315 n. 20 341 n. 24 339 339 340 n. 24 309 n. 8

P.Par. 65

PCZ

V 457 VII 731 X 1109 XIII 1309

315 n. 19 316 n. 22 327 343 n. 38

VI 9145,5 XVI 12721 XVI 12722 XVIII 13095

XVIII 13260 XX 14163, l. 5 XXII 15213 XXII 15626 XXIV 15896

308 n. 3 249 n. 14, 250 250 249 n. 12, 2 50 n. 17 249 249 n. 14, 250 n. 15 and 17 343 308 n. 3 253 n. 27 329 n. 56 253 n. 27

IV p. 62-78 IV p. 62-78.28-36 IV p. 62-78.28-244

327 n. 53 317 n. 28 317 n. 27

PSI

SB

355 n. 25

253 n. 26 323 n. 45 355 n. 25

P.Sakaon 38.33

357 n. 40

P.Sijp. 10a

253 n. 27

index locorum

209 n. 20 215 n. 30

XVIII 13096 XVIII 13097

P.Ryl. II 65 II 102 IV 572

P.Tebt. 2, 566 3, 703 3, 732 3, 733 3, 734 3, 734, frg. 1 and 2 3, 735 3, 771 3, 956 3, 1007

59036, l. 4 59036, ll. 25-26

SPP

308 n. 3 248 n. 6 251, 252 251, 252 251, 252, 253 252 251, 252 253 252 252

TPSulp. 60

271

UPZ I, 118

253 n. 26

W.Chr. 41 203 220

339 318 n. 30 324

377

Roman Legal Sources

Cod. Iust. I, 2, 14, 7 I 57, 1 II 4, 28 V 4, 9 VII 52, 6

335 335 335 18 342 n. 33

IX 3, 6 XI 28, 2 XI 28, 3 XV 14, 8 XVI 5, 55

342 n. 30 345 345 272, 336 342 n. 33

2,13,4 pr.-1

270

D. Cod. Theod. I 10, 7 I 10, 8 I 16, 3 II 4, 2 IV 16, 1 IV 17, 1-5 VIII 12, 1, 1

344 n. 43 345 345 335 342 n. 33 340 n. 22 335

Nov. Iust. 15

335

Ps.-Paul. Sent. I 3, 1 V 25, 6

335 270

378

LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS

LAURA BOFFO, Professor of Greek History, Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici, University of Trieste, [email protected] LUCIA CRISCUOLO, Professor of Greek History, Dipartimento di Storia Culture Civiltà, University of Bologna (Alma Mater Università di Bologna), [email protected] SOPHIE DÉMARE-LAFONT, Professeur d’histoire du droit, Université Panthéon-Assas (Paris 2) – Directeur d’études à l’École Pratique des Hautes Études, section des Sciences historiques et philologiques, [email protected] MARK DEPAUW, Associate Professor of Ancient History, Research Unit of History, KU Leuven, [email protected] SHIMON EPSTEIN, Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Institute for Papyrology, University of Heidelberg, [email protected] MICHELE FARAGUNA, Associate Professor of Greek History, Dipartimento di Studi Umanistici, University of Trieste, [email protected] RUDOLF HAENSCH, Professor of Ancient History, Kommission für Alte Geschichte und Epigraphik des Deutschen Archaeologischen Instituts, München, [email protected] EDWARD HARRIS, Research Professor of Ancient History, Department of Classics and Ancient History, Durham University, [email protected] KAJA HARTER-UIBOPUU, Senior Scientist, Documenta Antiqua – History of Ancient Law, Institute for the Study of Ancient Culture, Austrian Academy of Sciences, [email protected] ANTOINE JACQUET, Chargé de recherches (projet ANR ARCHIBAB), École Pratique des Hautes Études, Section des sciences historiques et philologiques, [email protected] ÉVA JAKAB, Professor of Roman Law, Faculty of Law, University of Szeged, Hungary – Dsc (Doctor Scientiarum) at the Hungarian Academy of Sciences, [email protected] DENNIS KEHOE, Professor, Classical Studies, 2010-2013, Andrew W. Mellon Professor in the Humanities, Tulane University, [email protected] INGO KOTTSIEPER, Adj. Professor for Hebrew Bible, Department 1: Protestant Theology, Westfälische Wilhelms-University Münster / Göttingen Academy of Sciences and Humanities, [email protected] THOMAS KRUSE, Senior Researcher, Documenta Antiqua – Papyrology, Austrian Academy of Sciences, Vienna, [email protected] SUSANNE PAULUS, Research Associate, Institut für Altorientalische Philologie und Vorderasiatische Altertumskunde, University of Münster, [email protected] CHRISTOPHE PÉBARTHE, Maître de conférences en histoire grecque, membre d’Ausonius, Université de Bordeaux 3, [email protected] K.R. VEENHOF, Schubertlaan 50, 2102 EM Heemstede, Netherlands, [email protected] URI YIFTACH-FIRANKO, Senior Lecturer, The Department of Classics, Hebrew University of Jerusalem, [email protected]

LEGAL DOCUMENTS IN ANCIENT SOCIETIES

1. THE LETTER Rome, 28-30.9.2008 (Wiesbaden, Harrassowitz Verlag, forthcoming) 2. TRANSACTION COSTS IN THE ANCIENT WORLD Washington DC, 27-28.7.2009 (forthcoming) 3. IDENTIFIERS AND IDENTIFICATION METHODS Leuven–Brussels, 23-25.9.2010 (forthcoming) 4. ARCHIVES AND ARCHIVAL DOCUMENTS IN ANCIENT SOCIETIES Trieste, 30.9-1.10.2011 5. SALE AND COMMUNITY Budapest, 6-7.10.2012

Finito di stampare nel mese di aprile 2013 presso la Ripartizione Comunicazione Istituzionale e Organizzazione Eventi dell’Università degli Studi di Trieste per conto di EUT – Edizioni Università di Trieste