|
The Oxyrhynchus Papyri, Vol. 1, edited by Bernard P. Grenfell and Arthur S. Hunt (London: Egypt Exploration Fund, 1898)
Public and legal documents, Nos. 9 and 37-42. (AD 49-323) [1] [2]
_______________________________________________________________
No. 9, verso. List of Weights and Measures. 3rd -4th c. AD (p.77)
The recto of this papyrus contains the Aristoxenus fragment, pp. 14
sqq. On the verso is a list of weights and measures written in a
semi-uncial hand of the third or early fourth century AD. While some of
the weights and measures are specifically Egyptian, e. g. the copper
drachma and the artaba, the medimnus in line 9, and perhaps the mnaeion
in 15, appear to be on the Attic, not the Egyptian standard. It is more
probable that the list is an extract from some metrological writer of
the Roman period, than that it is a series of private memoranda, in
spite of the unusually bad spelling. Amid the paucity of authorities
for the metrology of this period in Egypt the papyrus is a welcome
addition, and one vexed question connected with the coinage is settled
by it. At the left-hand side of this list is a column of figures from
an account.
translation:
"A copper drachma has 6 obols, and an obol 8 chalki [1], so that the
copper drachma consists of 48 chalki, A drachma has seven, 7, obols,
and an obol has 8 chalki, so that the drachma consists of 56 chalki.
The talent has 60 minae, and the mina 25 staters or 100 drachmae, and
the stater has 4 drachmae, so that the talent consists of 1500 staters
or 6000 drachmae, or forty-two thousand obols. An artaba [2] has 10
measures, and the measure has 4 choenices, so that the artaba consists
of 40 choenices. A medimnus [3] has 12 hemihekta and the hemihekton
four choenices, so that the medimnus consists of forty-eight choenices.
The ell has 6 palms, and the palm 4 digits, so that the ell consists of
24 digits. The metretes [4] has 12 choes, and the chous 12 cotylae, so
that the metretes consists of 144 cotylae. The mina-weight [5] has
sixteen, 16, quarters, and a quarter has ...."
notes:
1. chalki: that the drachma in Roman times sometimes contained seven
obols instead of six was shown by Brit. Mus. Pap. CXXXI rec/o. But it
was doubtful whether two kinds of obols, silver and copper, were meant,
and the name of the coin containing six instead of seven obols was
unknown. Wilcken at one time thought of exobolos,
but has since withdrawn the suggestion. The papyrus now gives the name
of the coin representing six obols, 'copper drachma,' and shows clearly
that there is only one kind of obol, that of copper.
The drachma may contain six or seven obols according as it is a copper
or a silver drachma, but it is the larger unit which varies and the
smaller which is constant, just as the artaba and metretes vary while
the choenix and chous remain the same. With regard to the occasion when
a drachma was regarded as having six instead of seven obols, the state
of affairs in Egypt was probably much the same under the Romans as it
was under the earlier Ptolemies (Rev. Pap., App. iii, pp. 194 sqq.)
before the introduction of a copper standard ; i.e. copper was legal
tender for payment of sums below a drachma or perhaps a stater, at
their full nominal value of 1/2 of a silver drachma.
But when sums over a drachma were paid in copper instead of silver, the
obol was liable to be reckoned at its real value as a piece of metal,
which was 1/7 of a silver drachma ; cf. Brit. Mus. Pap. CXXXI
recto. This will explain those cases in which a sum is paid in mixed
drachmae and obols, but the number of the obols is above seven, e.g. G.
P. II. li., where the sum of 16 drachmae 16 obols is paid for some
goatskins. The drachmae were paid in silver and the obols in copper,
the two metals being kept distinct. Besides Roman copper coins
Ptolemaic copper continued to be largely used especially in the first
century (cf. xcix. 9), though in payments to the government it was
generally, perhaps always, taken at a discount (chalkos pros argurion; xlix 17, note).
2. The artaba of 40 choenices, which is the largest known, corresponds
with that (p.79) mentioned by Galen (Hultsch, Script Metrol. p. 224)
and the Tabulae Oribasianae {pp.cit. p. 245), both authorities stating
that the Egyptian artaba is equivalent to 5 modii (a modius is
elsewhere stated to be equivalent to the Attic hektias, which has 8
choenices; of. 10 below). There is much variation in the size of the
artaba, which in the Ptolemaic period could contain 36, 30, or 29
choenices (cf. note on Rev.Pap. XXV. 8), and in the Roman period still
fewer.
The statement that the artaba is divided into 10 metra is remarkable, for though
fractions of the artaba frequently occur in papyri and ostraca, the
fraction 1/10 is not found, and metra in this sense hardly ever occurs,
although metron phoinukos in cxvi. 11 is apparently a definite amount,
and a metron tetraxoinion (sometimes with the addition dromo or
dromoun) is often found, e. g. in ci. 40, for measuring corn. Possibly
these units of 4 choenices are due to the influence of the Attic system
of measures, which appears in the next list containing subdivisions of
the medimnus. That the artaba, though an Egyptian measure, was somehow
equated to the Attic standard appears e.g. from G. P. I. Ivii. 10: artabas hekaton ekousi Athenion metron. (A discussion of this complicated subject will be found in Wilcken's forthcoming Griechische Ostraka, and in the next volume of Kenyon's Catalogue of the British Museum Papyri)
3. This medimnus of 48 choenices is the Attic, not the ' Ptolemaic '
medimnus, which was 1 1/2 times as large as the Attic and contained 2
ancient artabae or 9 modii, i.e. 72 choenices (Hultsch, op. cit. p.
258).
4. The metretes containing 12 choes is of the usual size. A metretes of
8 choes is found in the Revenue Papyrus for measuring wine (cf. note on
XXXI. 5).
5. It is not clear whether the Attic or the Egyptian mina is meant
here. As both Egyptian and Attic measures are found in the papyrus
there is no a priori probability either way; but the fact that the
mnaeion is divided into sixteen parts, called tetortai, points to
its being the Attic, which according to metrologists corresponded to 16
unciae, rather than the Egyptian which corresponded to 18. The number
of thermoi in a tetortai would then be 72, the number of Keratia 144.
If the mnaeion were Egyptian, the corresponding numbers would be 81 and
162. It is difficult to fill up the lacunae in 16 satisfactorily, for
though "[de md] heka[ton o d]e" would suit what is left, such an order is scarcely possible, even for so illiterate a scribe.
_______________________________________________________________
No. 37. Report of a Lawsuit. 31 x 40.7 cm. AD 49.
A report of a lawsuit relating to the identity of a child. A woman
called Saraeus had undertaken to act as nurse to a foundling which had
been adopted as a slave by a certain Pesoiiris. According to the
nurse's assertion the infant died while in her keeping. Pesouris,
however, declined to believe this, and claimed a child which Saraeus
was nursing, and which she declared to be her own son, on the plea that
it was really the foundling. The judgement given was of the nature of a
compromise. The claim of Pesouris to the living child was rejected,
while Saraeus was ordered to refund the money she had received from him
in her capacity as nurse. It appears from No. xxxviii that Pesouris,
or, as he is there called, Syrus, was much dissatisfied with this
verdict.
translation:
" From the minutes of Tiberius Claudius Pasion, strategus. The ninth
year of Tiberius Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus Imperator,
Pharmouthi 3. In court, Pesouris versus Saraeus. Aristocles, advocate
for Pesouris, said : 'Pesouris, my client, in the seventh year of our
sovereign Tiberius Claudius Caesar picked up from the gutter a boy
foundling, named Heraclas. He put it in the defendant's charge. This
nurse was there for the son of Pesouris. She received her wages for the
first year when they became due, she also received them for the second
year. In proof of my assertions there are the documents in which she
acknowledges receipt. The foundling was being starved, and Pesouris
took it away. Thereupon Saraeus, waiting her opportunity, made an
incursion into my client's house and carried the foundling off. She now
justifies its removal on the ground that it was free-born. I have here,
firstly, the contract with the nurse ; I have also, secondly, the
receipt of the wages. I demand their recognition.' "
"Saraeus :—'I weaned my own child, and the foundling belonging to these
people was placed in my charge. I received from them my full wages of 8
staters. Then the foundling died, and 1 was left with the money. They
now wish to take away my own child.' "
"Theon :—'We have the papers relating to the foundling.' "
"The strategus :—'Since from its features the child appears to be that
of Saraeus, if she and her husband will make a written declaration that
the foundling entrusted to her by Pesouris died, I give judgement in
accordance with the decision of our lord the praefect, that she have
her own child on paying back the money she has received.' "
_______________________________________________________________
No. 38. Petition to the Praefect. Gizeh Museum, No.10,002. 36x13.2 cm. AD 49-50.
The following letter is the sequel to the legal proceedings described
in No.37. It was written, probably a few months after No.37, by the
husband of the nurse Saraeus to the praefect, complaining that Pesouris
(or, as he is here
called, Syrus) refused to comply with the judgement of the strategus as
there recorded. The papyrus is written in a very cursive hand.
translation:
"To Gnaeus Vergilius Capito [1], from Tryphon, son of Dionysius, of the
city of Oxyrhynchus. Syrus, son of Syrus, entrusted to the keeping of
my wife Saraeus, daughter of Apion, in the seventh year of Tiberius
Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus Imperator, on my security, a boy
foundling named Heraclas, whom he had picked up from the gutter, to be
nursed. The foundling died, and Syrus tried to carry off into slavery
my infant son Apion. I accordingly applied to Pasion, the strategus of
the nome, by whom my son Apion was restored to me in accordance with
what you, my benefactor, had commanded, and the minutes entered by
Pasion. Syrus, however, refuses to comply with the judgement, and
hinders me in my trade. I therefore come to you, my preserver, in order
to obtain my rights. Farewell."
notes:
1. Gn. Vergilius Capito: cf. C.I.G. 4956. He was still praefect in AD 52, of. No.39. 2, 5.
_______________________________________________________________
No.39. Release from Military Service. Gizeh Museum, No. 10,001. 29-7 x 18-5 cm. AD 52.
Copy of a release from liability to military service granted by the
praefect Gn. Vergilius Capito to Tryphon (cf. the preceding papyrus),
on the ground of
defective eyesight.
translation:
"Copy of a release dated and signed in the twelfth year of Tiberius
Claudius Caesar Augustus Germanicus Imperator, Pharmouthi 29. Release
from service was granted by Gn. Vergilius Capito, praefect of Upper and
Lower Egypt [1], to Tryphon, son of Dionysius, weaver, suffering from
cataract and shortness of sight, of the metropolis of Oxyrhynchus.
Examination was made in Alexandria."
notes:
1. amphoteron: the two districts of Upper and Lower Egypt, which
were typified in the double crown of the Pharaohs. For another
reference to this division in the Roman period cf. C.LG. 4957, 48.
_______________________________________________________________
No.40. A Legal Decision. 18.7 x 14.8 cm. Late 2nd or early 3rd c. AD
Report of a judgement given in court by the praefect Eudaemon in the case
of a claim for immunity from some form of public service, on the ground that
the petitioner was a doctor. The judge demands a scientific proof of the
{p.84) assertion. This summary of legal proceedings is one of a series,
being preceded, and very likely followed, by a similar abstract. The
preceding case is too mutilated to be worth printing. It is however
evident that there too a doctor was concerned, and that his rights were
upheld; and it bears the date Thoth 1, the twenty-first year of
Hadrian. It may therefore be inferred that the name of the emperor lost
in line 2 of the following text was either Hadrian or Antoninus. The
present copy however seems from the character of the handwriting to
have been made a good deal later than the proceedings which it
describes. It is written on the verso of some late second century
accounts.
translation:
"Copy of a memorandum of Valerius (?) Eudaemon, praefect in the . . .
year of . . . Caesar our sovereign, Phamenoth . . Application of
Psasnis. Psasnis appeared and said :—" I am a doctor by profession and
I have treated these very persons who have assigned me a public
burden." Eudaemon said :—'Perhaps your treatment was wrong. If you are
a doctor officially practising mummification, tell me what is the
solvent, and you shall have the immunity which you claim.' "
_______________________________________________________________
No. 41.
Report of a Public Meeting. Gizeh Museum, No.10,073.
31.3 x 26.3 cm. Late 3rd or early 4th c. AD
The following text contains an account of a popular demonstration made
in honour of the prytanis at Oxyrhynchus on the occasion of a visit
from the praefect. It is not easy to gather from the disjointed
acclamations of
the (p.85) citizens with which the document is for the most part filled
what was the precise character of, or ground for, the honour which they
wished to see conferred on the prytanis. All that is apparent is that
they were anxious to have a vote immediately passed in his honour, and
that he himself wished it to be postponed for a more fitting occasion.
Several specimens of Greek acclamations are found in inscriptions (cf.
Th. Reinach, Bulletin de Corr. Hell., 1897, p. 543), but the present is
much the most elaborate example, and the first, we believe, on papyrus.
Its Greek is rather debased—though here no doubt it does not
misrepresent the populace of Oxyrhynchus—and it includes a number of
strange words and expressions.
translation:
" ... . . when the assembly had met, (the people cried) ...'the Roman
power for ever! lords Augusti ! [1] prosperous praefect, prosperity to
our ruler
! Hail, . . . president, glory of the city, . . . Dioscorus [2], chief
of the citizens ! under you our blessings increase evermore, source of
our blessings, . . . Prosperity to the patriot, prosperity to the lover
of right ! Source of our blessings, founder of the city ! . . . Let the
president receive the vote on this great day ! Many votes do you
deserve, for many are the blessings which we enjoy through you, O
president. This petition we make to our ruler about the president, with
good wishes to our ruler, asking for the city's president, beneficent
ruler, for the city's founder, lords Augusti for ever,—this petition to
our ruler about the president, for the honest man's governor, the
equitable governor, the city's governor, the city's patron, the city's
benefactor, the city's founder, prosperous praefect, prosperous ruler,
beneficent ruler, beneficent praefect! We beseech you, ruler,
concerning the president ; let the president receive the vote, let the
president receive the vote on this great day ! This is the first
necessity.'
"The president said :—'I acknowledge with great pleasure the honour
which you do me, but I beg that these demonstrations be reserved for a
legitimate occasion when you may make them with safety and I shall be
justified in accepting them.'
"The people cried, 'many votes do you deserve . . . the Roman power for
ever ! Prosperous praefect, protector of honest men, our ruler ! We
ask, ruler, for the city's president, the city's benefactor, the city's
founder ! We beseech you, ruler, preserve the city for our lords !
beneficent ruler, we beseech you for the city's well-wisher, the city's
patriot !'
"Aristion the advocate said :—'We will refer this matter to the most high council.'
"The people :—'We ask, ruler, for the city's patron, the city's
founder, upright general, peace of the city ! O . . . Dioscorides [3],
chief of the citizens ! O . . . Seuthes [4], chief of the citizens,
equitable governor, equitable citizen ! True and upright advocates,
true and upright assessors ! Hurrah for all who love the city. Long
live the lords Augusti!' "
notes:
1. This was therefore a period of joint rule, Palaeographical considerations
make it probable that the Kurioi were Diocletian and Maximian. To Katholikos:
(p.87) cf. B.G.U. 21 III. 10. The Katholikos in writers like Eusebius
and Julian is a finance officer. Here, however, the word seems to be
used in a wider sense, as a title of the agemion.
2. Dioscorus seems to be the name of the prytanis.
3,4. Dioscorides and Seuthes were probably officials who were 'on the
platform,' unless the former is identical with Dioscorus mentioned
above.
_______________________________________________________________
No.42 Proclamation. 27.7 x 20.2 cm. AD. 323.
Proclamation by Dioscorides, logistes of the nome, with reference to an
approaching gymnastic display by the youths of Oxyrhynchus. Judging by
the number of alterations, this document is probably a first draft. The
date of the papyrus, which is written much smaller and more cursively
than the rest, is Tybi 33 (Jan. 18) in the sixth consulship of Licinius
Augustus, and the second consulship of a Caesar (whose name is lost,
but can be supplied from Corp.Pap. Rain, x as Licinius)... The
explanation of this curious addition is to be found in the unsettled
character of the Empire. The war between Constantine and Licinius took
place in the first half of AD 323, and until its conclusion there were
two sets of consuls, Severus and Rufinus, the regular consuls for the
year, in the West, and Licinius Augustus VI and Licinius Caesar II in
the East, as was first shown by the Vienna papyrus mentioned above
(Mommsen Hermes xxxii. p. 545) At any rate, for greater accuracy,
the scribe of our papyrus dated the year not only by the existing
consuls, but by the consuls-elect (apodeichthesomenoi) whom he does not
name, but indicates sufficiently by saying that they would be, when
elected, consuls for the third time, i. e. the Caesars Crispus and
Constantinus, who were actually consuls for the third time in AD 324.
(p.88)
But why were the existing consuls ignored in Ix. 12, where the date is
only given by the consuls-elect? The explanation probably is that that
papyrus was written on Aug. 17, just after the defeat of Licinius. This
is borne out by a comparison of the Vienna papyrus, dated May 23, AD
323, where the consuls are given as the two Licinii, and Pap. de Geneve
110, written about August 8 (the exact day is uncertain), which is
dated by the regular consuls for AD 323 (Mommsen, 1. c). The writer of
Ix, being in doubt as to who the consuls for the year really were,
gives only the year of the consuls-elect.
The difficulty of this explanation is the necessity of supposing that
the scribe omitted the names of the consuls-elect, although he knew
them, and, secondly, that Crispus and Constantine were acknowledged so
long beforehand by Licinius as consuls-elect for AD 324. ...."
translation:
"Dioscurides, logistes [1] of the Oxyrhynchite nome. The assault at
arms by the youths will take place to-morrow, the 24th. Tradition, no
less than the distinguished character of the festival, requires that
they should do their utmost [2] in the gymnastic display. The
spectators will be present at two performances.[3]"
notes:
1. The logistes or curator reipuhlicae plays an important part in the
fourth century Oxyrhynchus papyri, cf. Ixxxiii-Ixxxvii. Originally a
special finance commissioner, he (p.89) was by this period one of the
chief civil officials (Marquardt and Mommsen Handb. IV. pp. 487 sqq.).
2. Proagousa: there appears to be no instance of proagein used absolutely in the
sense of 'excel' but if it means here advance in point of time, it merely repeats the idea expressed by ethos..
3. This document contains a very early instance of shorthand on
papyrus. In later papyri it is met with frequently, but the key has yet
to be discovered.
Footnotes:
1. [Editor's Note:] The original textual commentaries and notes provided by Grenfell and Hunt on
passages in Greek, and on some bibliographic references, have
frequently been abbreviated or omitted, if not essential to
understanding the content of the papyri documents. Any such omissions
are marked with "....", and any added words needed for clarity are
placed between brackets [ ]. These elisions are separate from those
used by Grenfell and Hunt in the translated text, which have not been
altered.
2. [Editor's Note:] References to all other papyri from the Oxyrhynchus
collections are given with their sequential number as "No. xx".
Abbreviations to other papyri collections and standard historical
references used by Grenfell and Hunt include the following:
Archiv.= Archiv fur Papyrusforschung.
B.G.U. = Aeg. Urkunden aus den K. Museum zu Berlin, Griechische Urkunden.
C.I.G. = Corpus Inscriptionum Graecarum
C.I.L. = Corpus Inscriptionum Latinarum
Cod. Just.= Codex Justianus
Cod. Theod.= Codex Theodosianus
C.P.R. = Corpus Papyrorum Raineri, by C. Wessely.
Marcellinus =The late Roman historian Ammianus Marcellinus.
P. Amh. = The Amherst Papyri (Greek), Vols. I-II, by B.P.Grenfell and A.S.Hunt.
P. Brit.Mus. = Greek papyri in the British Museum, vol.I-II by F.G. Kenyon.
P. Cairo = Catalog of the Greek Papyri in the Cairo Museum,by Grenfell & Hunt.
P.
Grenf. = Greek Papyri, Ser. 1 by B.P. Grenfell, and Ser. II by Grenfell and Hunt
P. Hibeh = The Hibeh Papyri by B.P Grenfell and A.S. Hunt
P. Leipzig = Griechische Urkunden der Papyrussammlung zu Leipzig by I Mitteis.
P. Leyden = Papyri Graeci Musei Antiquarii Lugduni-Batavi, by C. Leemans.
P. Tebt. = The Tebtunis Papyri, by B.P. Grenfell, A.S. Hunt, et al.
Perseus = the satirical ancient Roman playwright Perseus.
Wilcken, Ost. = Griechische Ostraka, by U. Wilcken.
[Continue to next part]
[Return to Table of Contents]
|
|